At the risk of sounding insensitive…
OK, I really don’t give a crap. You caught me. Sensitivity to me means simply that you have to be aware that some people are too weak, too cowardly, too fragile, or too dishonest to themselves to hear the truth, and frankly, I have no time for those people. So this is your warning: I’m going to be brutally honest and insensitive in this post, and if your delicate little ego can’t take it, I suggest you close your browser and go take an herbal bath, chased by a glass of boxed wine, or something.
I’ve written about feminism before in the context of victimhood. There aren’t a whole lot of people who have spent any amount of time reading this blog who don’t know how I feel about whiny, diaphanous snowflakes, who consider themselves heroes, because they somehow survived the insurmountable hurdle of people disagreeing with them, or even *gasp* doing so in a less than respectful way!
I don’t consider that heroic. I consider that part of life. Life is filled with challenges. Getting over them doesn’t make you a hero. It makes you a human being.
Lately, I’ve seen a video on my Facebook feed that is being perpetually reposted by feminist types, who find it appalling that a bunch of meat heads would catcall and harass a woman merely walking down the street.
There’s no doubt that the cave-dwelling Neanderthals who approached this woman on the street were utter knuckle-dragging cretins. After a couple of hours of that crap, I’d probably turn around and throat punch one of them. Hard. I’d also probably wind up in jail, but hey… I’m willing to face the consequences of my actions.
But of course, things are never that simple in feminism world! The video’s release resulted in reactions ranging from, “It’s appalling that women can’t feel at ease in public,” to “Why do men feel free to demand attention from a woman?” to “ERMARGERD! RACISM!” because the majority of the men depicted in this video are black and Latino.
All of a sudden “harassment” is a thing – a prevalent societal ill that oppresses women, instead of merely an irritant that would result in a dressing down of the offending savage. Gone are the days of simply turning around, offering a remark so caustic, that the imbecile in question slinks away with his dick between his legs, and going on one’s merry way. Today, we must necessarily have a public discussion about how this is just another example of how women are oppressed and harassed at the hands of men, and how this is an endemic societal problem, and how the poor oppressed women in question shouldn’t have to put up with this egregious abuse!
“It’s appalling women can’t feel at ease in a public place…” You know, no one is responsible for how you feel but you. Is it ridiculous that a woman can’t walk from point A to point B without being accosted by some barely literate, drooling ignoramus, wanting to have what in his own head passes for conversation, but in fact is an incoherent stringing together of grunts and barely-recognizable words? Sure it’s ridiculous. But your feelings of ease are your own. If you can’t shrug off the doofus and move on with your day without feeling like you’ve been assaulted, you might be a feminist.
“Why do men feel free to demand attention from a woman?” Maybe because it’s a free country. Maybe because some guys are driven by that great force that resides between their legs and saps the blood from their already deprived cerebellum. Maybe they were raised in a barn – without any manners or breeding. But mostly, because they are free to do so, just as you are free to ignore them, actively spurn their advances by administering a throat punch (although I don’t recommend this unless you’re willing to spend some time in a holding cell), or take them home for a night of naked Twister.
“Showing only black and Latino guys is RAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSSSSSSST!” This is my favorite. The video’s creator did admit that a fair amount of white guys engaged in imbecilic behavior as well, but mostly for technical reasons, they had to cut many out. Undoubtedly, there are a number of rude, irritating, cavemen out there who are white. I couldn’t possibly care less what color the cro-magnon happens to be. A jackass is a jackass. But apparently, some people are more concerned about how racially sensitive the piece is, than with the fact that the woman is getting harassed. Why the hell should it matter whether the harasser is black, white, purple, green or yellow?
Overall, here’s how I see this: this shit has been going on since the first caveman grabbed the first cavewoman by the hair and dragged her into his cave for some primitive humping. Sure, it has become more refined over time (and by refined I mean that the cavemen no longer physically drag the cavewomen by the hair, but rather use primitive attempts to communicate via grunts, clicks, and trolling to get their point across), but it’s pretty much been around forever.
Is it annoying? Yes.
Is it stupid? Yes.
Does it paint the ape in question as a drooling, troglodyte? Absolutely.
Should it be elevated to the level of a societal tragedy so deep that every feminist out there claims PTSD because she heard a wolf whistle from some unwashed, rude barbarian? Please!
There are all kinds of shitbags out there in the world. I guarantee that for every swine you encounter who treats you like the target of his overactive, inadequate excuse for a penis, there’s a guy who thinks he’s a douchebag.
The fact that this woman got harassed so much in this crowded city doesn’t mean she would encounter the same type of thing elsewhere. As many have mentioned, these ass weasels all were dressed like they were hanging out on the streets all day rather than actually working. Based on their shameful behavior, it’s certainly safe to assess with a certain amount of confidence that they’re likely not employed and come from a background that lacked any type of training or education about respect for others, or self. One certainly wouldn’t act like this in any respectable place of employment without getting shitcanned post haste. So we’re probably looking at a certain socio-economic class of shitbag in this particular case.
Is this a societal problem writ large deserving of the clamor it received, and the obvious efforts to make this into yet another thing that ostensibly oppresses women? No.
There will be assholes in this world, Cupcakes. You don’t have to like them. You don’t have to put up with them. You certainly don’t have to allow them to affect you! That choice is yours.
The only person who can make you into a victim in this case is you.
It had all the makings of a heartwarming victory for the little guy.
A horde of minimum wage workers campaigning for what they claimed they were entitled to: a wage high enough to live in pricey London, because they deserve… because a concession stand cashier selling overpriced sodas and popcorn is entitled to the Pound Sterling equivalent of $14/hour… because RICH CORPORATION IS MAKING LOTS OF MONEY AND SHOULD GIVE, GIVE, GIVE ME WHAT I WANT – EARNED OR NOT.
A famous film maker supported the workers in demanding the cinema owners fork over the outlandishly high salaries, and sniveling mediots called for support of the oppressed workers.
When the company finally gave in, the ecstatic staff celebrated until the job cuts were announced.
Picturehouse Cinemas said that the cost of increasing basic wages at the Ritzy Cinema in Brixton to £8.80 an hour would be absorbed by reducing the number of staff by at least 20, with a redundancy programme starting next month.
Two management posts will be axed along with eight supervisors, three technical staff and other front-of-house workers from its workforce of 93.
And now the workers union is crying that it’s retribution, that the company makes enough money and should not only pay workers more than their labor is worth, but also keep all of them in their jobs, whether they’re needed or not.
Apparently, these unskilled, barely educated, pierced, tattooed freaks feel themselves entitled to dictate to the executives of a company, who are ostensibly better educated and more experienced at running their business, how much profit is sufficient. So they’re demanding that their worthless asses keep their jobs at a higher wage, because their employer has enough profits.
Campaigners claim the Ritzy is the most successful art-house cinema in the UK and is owned by Picturehouse Cinemas, part of Cineworld, which is the largest cinema chain in Europe and has revenues of more than £400m.
Workers posted on Facebook: “This is nothing short of pure vindictive retaliation because we the workers showed that with determination and collectively, we could effect change to make our lives that tiny bit more comfortable.”
You know what makes lives more comfortable? Getting an education. Starting at the bottom and working your way up.
Forcing your employer to pay you more than what your labor is worth will get you only one thing: downsized.
Cross posted at Zelman Partisans.
A shooting at the Marysville-Pilchuk High School in Washington state has resulted in a familiar deluge of cries for MOAR GUNZ CONTROLZ from the gun grabber camp.
The Zelman Twitter feed is rife with #gunsense #notonemore #enough #stoptheNRA hashtags, and the Mad Moms Demanding Attention have once again robotically began to retweet their leader Shannon Watts’ snarky calls for more gun control.
— Shannon (@shannonrwatts) October 24, 2014
Note the dismissive, arrogant, sarcastic tone about the tragedy. Very much typical of Shannon’s normal MO.
And mind you, the calls started before anyone knew exactly what happened, who the shooter was, where he got the gun, or why he went on a rampage.
Soon, details began to emerge, and a picture is beginning to take form.
The shooter has been identified as 14-year-old Jaylen Fryberg, who took his own life after shooting several classmates, two of whom were his cousins.
Tweets he posted prior to his rampage show a kid who was obviously angry at a break-up, upset, and threatening others.
Jaylen was too young to legally buy the handgun he used to murder his classmates, so he took his father’s gun and proceeded to shoot his cousins and classmates.
Let’s put aside the obvious – that the “universal background checks” the Mad Moms are demanding would have done nothing to stop Jaylen’s actions. He stole the legally-owned gun from his dad.
The bigger question was: where were the parents?
Why were they not following their son’s social media posts?
And if they were, why were they not concerned about the violent nature of a number of his Twitter posts, and the pain this kid was obviously feeling?
And if they were concerned, why didn’t they get him some help, or at the very least lock up their firearms until the kid either explained his angst-ridden, violent statements or got some help.
As a mom, have full access to my son’s social media. We talk. We discuss his life. We find the time to chat each night, even if he’s working or swamped with homework. I guarantee you that if I suspected my son’s mental condition was deteriorating, the first thing I would do is get him help, and the second thing I would do is ensure his access to firearms was revoked until things were cleared up.
My house. My rules. He has full access to guns, and he is very proficient with them. But the moment I suspect something is wrong, that access goes away.
So where were the parents?
Why did this obviously depressed kid grab a pistol that belonged to his father and head on over to the school to commit murder and ultimately suicide?
Why are the Mad Mommies not discussing the roots of this problem, rather than trying to use the tragedy to push their political agenda?
Wouldn’t you think that if they were truly interested in helping kids, they would focus on the true causes of these shootings, rather than merely using them as agitprops in their senseless disarmament campaign?
Shannon Watts’ snarky tweet and the renewed drumbeat for more control and punishment for people who didn’t commit this senseless act of violence, once again confirms that the Bloombergian Stepford Moms’ mission has nothing to do with protecting children and everything to do with imposing Bloomberg’s nanny statism on their fellow Americans.
How many times have you heard the gun grabbers screech that we should be just like the UK, because they only have a few hundred murders per year?
I’m so sick and tired of hearing the shrieks and moans about how we should be more like the UK! Because no. Just NO!
My latest for the Zelman Partisans explores this “We should be like the Brits” meme.
The UK enacted its strict gun control legislation after the 1996 Dunblane massacre, which resulted in the deaths of 16 children and their teacher. The ban did not stop murders in the UK. As a matter of fact, they increased dramatically in the aftermath of the legislation, and reached their peak in 2003/2004.
That said, the nation has had historically low homicide rates to begin with, so the increase was definitely noticeable.
What also is notable are the low homicide rates prior to the enactment of the gun control legislation, which left most Britons disarmed and vulnerable to armed thugs.
So in a country with historically low homicide rates, one incident prompted a comprehensive infringement on the people’s right to bear arms, and said infringement had no appreciable effect on the already low homicide rates in this country.
Meanwhile in the United States, we finally got rid of the odious and worthless “assault” weapons ban, gun ownership rates have been climbing, and homicide rates have been declining steadily.
Further, the UK government has now decided that if you’re a gun owner, you no longer have rights. Apparently, you’re just not a full citizen – at least that’s what I’m getting from their latest legislation.
Registered gun owners in the United Kingdom are now subject to unannounced visits to their homes under new guidance that allows police to inspect firearms storage without a warrant.
The new policy from the British Home Office went into effect Oct. 15, permitting police and constabularies to conduct surprise home visits to legitimate gun owners.
Property rights? Screw you!
Privacy rights? Screw you!
The right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures? Not if you’re a gun owner.
And this is what the gun grabbers want to enact here to make us “safer”?
The stats prove that the Brits’ gun control legislation did nothing to reduce homicides. So now, they want to further punish gun owners, who are already registered and tracked like criminals, even further.
So go over to the Zelman Partisans and read my latest.
Then tell the gun grabbers shrieking about how we should be more like Britain to stuff it.
If you’ve wondered why I haven’t posted any JPFO articles lately, it’s because I’ve resigned. My days have been too busy to write on my own blog, let alone write an article for another organization every week.
But there is a new project – a new life – that has emerged from the ashes of JPFO. In the spirit of Aaron Zelman’s passion for freedom and life, the Zelman Partisans was born.
What is the Zelman Partisans? We are a group of Jews and friends who are dedicated uncompromisingly to preserving the right to keep and bear arms. We believe:
- That the right to keep and bear arms is a lifesaving civil right.
- That firearms are crucial genocide-prevention tools.
- That an armed and informed citizenry is necessary to prevent or defeat tyranny.
- That the right to self-defense is innate; that it was granted to us by G-d or Nature. It was not given to us by government, and it cannot rightly be taken away by government.
- That the U.S. Bill of Rights codified pre-existing freedoms owned by all men and women; that the Second Amendment guards the other nine amendments; but that all rights expressed in that great Bill are vital.
- That principles must never, ever be compromised. Compromise may be fine for strategy, but when you give up principles, you’ve already surrendered everything that matters.
We are friends. We are brothers in arms. We are dedicated to uncompromisingly defending our rights.