Category Archives: Women

Does this crazy bitch get paid for this?

A couple of weeks ago, I was walking to the office from the metro, when I saw a tiny little creature sprawled on the sidewalk next to a tall tree in LaFayette Park. It was a tiny black squirrel baby, and he was teetering around on his tiny little squirrel legs, apparently still too young to run around. I assessed he had fallen out of the tree, or was pushed out by his siblings.

I stopped.

He stumbled over to me and just sat in front of me.

I bent down to stroke his soft little back, and he didn’t run away.

I wasn’t sure what to do, so I called DC animal control, because I was afraid inattentive humans, whether walking with their noses in their phones or riding their bikes would run the tiny little guy over. The nice man on the other end of the line was probably amused at my near-panicked concern about this teeny creature, and told me to pick him up and place him near the tree out of the way of pedestrians and bikes. (Yes, I assumed the squirrel’s gender, and in my head I named him George)

While I was on the phone with animal control, George decided to clumsily climb onto my foot and play with the buckle on my shoe! George was obviously a very brave baby squirrel.

This is George. He looks much bigger in this photo than he actually was. He was roughly the size of my palm.

After hanging up with animal control, I scooped George up into my hands and carried him to the tree, away from uncaring humans and speeding bicyclists. George sat in my cupped hands and made little squeaky squirrel noises. He sniffed me and may have taken a tiny little nibble of my thumb. He didn’t break the skin; I think he was just trying to figure out what I was. I looked closely at George’s tiny little face, resisted the urge to take him to the office with me wrapped in my suit jacket, and placed him next to the tree.

George was a black squirrel, or an eastern fox squirrel, apparently native to eastern and southeastern United States.

I never considered George’s color, nor what he ate. I thought about bringing him some nuts. I know we have all kinds of squirrels in LaFayette Park, including ginger, grey, and black ones. He looks grey-ish in this photo, but he actually was a little black critter.

But apparently, I should have noticed, because eastern fox squirrels are ostensibly the victims of RACISM! The media is apparently biased against black squirrels!

How do I know this? Because some bored, attention-seeking, perpetually aggrieved sow of an “associate professor” (emphasis mine) at California State Polytechnic University says so, and has done an entire research paper on the topic! No, I’m not kidding. I wish I was. Get a load at this word salad.

Drawing on feminist food studies and feminist posthumanist theories of intersectionality and performativity, this article draws out the implications of a feminist posthumanist politics of consumption for animal geography and feminist geography.


By juxtaposing feminist posthumanist theories and feminist food studies scholarship this article demonstrates how eastern fox squirrels: (1) are subjected to gendered, racialized, and speciesist thinking as a result of their feeding/eating practices, their unique and unfixed spatial arrangements in the greater Los Angeles region, and the western, modernist human frame through which humans interpret these actions (Deckha 2012; Hovorka 2015; Lloro-Bidart 2016) and (2) ontologically defy society’s boundedness as they demand the freedom to eat whatever they choose in the city.

This is how far the Covenant of the Chafed Cunt is willing to dig to find offense, racism, marginalization, and other “evidence” of just how depraved our society is. This “professor” dug through 18 months’ worth of news articles, blogs, government publications, and other sources to find evidence for her contention that eastern fox squirrels are the victims of RAAAAACISM in California, when viewed through the feminist lens.  She claims that because most of the popular news articles maligned these little guys for their feeding habits, she figured she’d focus her lens of feminist rage on this particular issue.

…eastern fox squirrels’ consumption of bird eggs and baby birds and mammals has similarly made them the target of conservationists in southern CA. In this case, instead of ‘concerns about cruelty’ related to the killing of animals for food becoming ‘a vehicle for ethnocentrism and even imperialism,’ (Kim 2015, 83), such concerns become a vehicle for conservationists to displace their own concerns about species loss in the greater Los Angeles region onto the eastern fox squirrel.


These connections between the eastern fox squirrel’s eating of ‘everything’ and the fecundity of the [nonnative] squirrel resonate with what Subramaniam calls the ‘oversexed female’ narrative, where ‘[f]oreign women are typically associated with superfertility – reproduction gone amuck’ (2001, 31).

In other words, this perpetually aggrieved, constantly searching for offense, word vomit spewing bobblehead is claiming her funhouse mirror feminist telescope is showing her that poor eastern fox squirrels are being discriminated against on the West Coast.

In the process she disgorges SJW buzzwords such as “intersectionality,” “feminism,” “power,” “ethnocentrism,” and “resistance” in order to show how our views of fat women color Angelinos’ views of darker squirrels… because they’re gendered, racialized, and speciesist… or something.

Really. Is this freak pickle getting paid to spew this shit?

Interesting note: I wanted to see what else this creature has spewed, but her social media and her website have all mysteriously disappeared.


Screeching Harpies Claim Another Scalp

Former Senator Jim Webb last night announced he would not be accepting a Naval Academy Alumni Association award because of recent protests from other alumni. At first, I thought Webb, whom I always respected as a military officer and politician (if that’s at all possible), had done something egregious, causing his fellow Naval Academy alumni to consider him undeserving of the award. And then, I find out that the “protest” was lodged by a horde of females because of an essay Webb wrote nearly 40 years ago.

That’s right. Apparently in the eyes of these shrews, Mr. Webb doesn’t deserve an award that honors lifetime service to the country, personal character, and significant contributions as leaders in business or government, because of an article he wrote nearly 40 years ago, claiming women shouldn’t serve in combat.

Now, this isn’t a debate about whether women can fight or not. It’s a completely separate issue here. I can see comments getting contentious already, so I’m saying this up front. In those days, the view that women have no place in combat was not an uncommon one. Women in many developed nations did not begin to integrate into combat roles until the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Germany opened all combat units to women in 2001, resulting in increased recruitment for female soldiers. By 2009, 800 female soldiers were serving in combat units.

The Australians didn’t start integrating women into combat roles until 2011.

A British Ministry of Defense study in 2010 concluded that women performed the same as men in land combat roles.

Israel and Denmark started exploring these options early – and by “early,” I mean in the mid- to late-1980s. In 1985, Norway became the first country to allow women in combat, but few of them were attracted by the opportunities.

Whether or not you agree with this report is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. Whether or not I agree with it is also beside the point. The point is that Jim Webb wrote an article stating his opinion that women do not belong in combat roles in 1979, when such views were nothing uncommon, and the raging, squealing shrews who represent today’s “feminism” are now claiming that his lifetime of service has been invalidated, because he wrote something which they disagree nearly 40 years ago, when most other military leaders agreed with him.

But let’s put all that aside for a moment. Let’s pretend Jim Webb is a misogynist beast, who wants to keep women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, making sammiches for men. From what I gather, he is no such thing, but for the purpose of this exercise, let’s just say he is. The question is: does he deserve the United States Naval Academy Distinguished Graduate Award?

The Distinguished Graduate Award (DGA) program started as a concept first envisioned by Rear Admiral Ronald F. Marryott, USN (Ret.), Class of 1957, when he was president and CEO of the United States Naval Academy Alumni Association. Rear Admiral Robert McNitt, USN (Ret.), Class of 1938, helped develop the concept to its current structure. The Alumni Association’s Board of Trustees approved the DGA proposal and in May 1998 the selection committee met under the chairmanship of Admiral Carlisle Trost, USN (Ret.), Class of 1953 to determine the nominating process. Distinguished Graduates are the embodiment of what we strive to achieve in the U.S. Naval Academy’s mission:

“To develop midshipmen morally, mentally and physically and to imbue them with the highest ideals of duty, honor and loyalty in order to graduate leaders who are dedicated to a career of naval service and have potential for future development in mind and character to assume the highest responsibilities of command, citizenship and government.”

As an institution, we honor our Distinguished Graduates because of their:

  • Demonstrated and unselfish commitment to a lifetime of service to our nation
  • Personal character which epitomizes the traits we expect in our officer corps
  • Significant contributions as Navy and Marine Corps officers, or as leaders in industry or government

Each of them serves as a beacon, lighting the way for our midshipmen as they begin to chart their naval careers. They also serve by example to motivate those alumni serving in the Fleet and Fleet Marine Corps. Our midshipmen can take away much from learning about our distinguished graduates. All the Distinguished Graduates honored – lived the traits of lifetime commitment to service, personal character and distinguished contributions to our nation.

Does Jim Webb check the boxes?

He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1968 and received the Superintendent’s Letter for Outstanding Leadership.

He was a combat veteran, who graduated first in his class from the Marine Corps Officer Basic School, earned the Navy Cross for heroism in Vietnam, has a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, and two Purple Hearts, and was medically retired from the Marine Corps due to injuries received in Vietnam. Whatever else he may be, there’s no denying Webb is a war hero.

He graduated from Georgetown Law School with a JD, where he received the Horan Award for excellence in legal writing.

Webb worked as a staffer on the House Committee on Veterans Affairs, and also as an attorney represented veterans pro-bono.

Webb 1984-87 served as the nation’s first Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs and was the first Naval Academy graduate to serve as the civilian head Navy Secretary in 1987.

And, let’s not forget that while the perpetually offended harpies are still crying about an article Webb wrote nearly 40 years ago, other females who served honorably, defended him – even back in 2006 when he was running for the Senate.

“He recognizes the crucial role that women have in the armed forces today, and the sacrifices that they’re making alongside their male counterparts in the toughest assignments in Afghanistan and Iraq,” said retired Army Lt. Col. Kate Wilder, a Democratic activist.


The military women yesterday said the television ads Mr. Allen is airing that criticize Mr. Webb for writing a 1979 magazine article questioning a woman’s place in the U.S. Naval Academy are “powerful” but “bogus.”

“American military women have moved beyond Jim Webb’s … article,” Navy Capt. Barbara Brehm said.


The military women yesterday stressed that Mr. Webb’s point of view 27 years ago mirrored the sentiment that most men held at that time. They also think that Mr. Webb’s perspective changed, saying that in 1987 Mr. Webb opened more operational positions for women in the military than any other Navy secretary in history.

Wait… that sounds familiar. Didn’t someone closely resembling me say exactly this above?

In a characteristic show of class, which is something I’ve seen several times from Jim Webb, he declined to accept the award. “I am being told that my presence at the ceremony would likely mar the otherwise celebratory nature of that special day, and as a consequence I find it necessary to decline to accept the award,” he said.

Meanwhile, Kelly Henry, a 1984 Naval Academy graduate, wrote the letter to the alumni association asking the organization rescind Webb’s award, instead of graciously accepting her hollow victory, decided to double down on the cunt. After hearing his announcement Tuesday night, Henry said she was “absolutely stunned that he did the right thing,” as if she personally knew Webb to be a first class jerk with no honor or integrity – something I have never heard from anyone who has met him or worked with him.

Henry claimed Webb’s essay was highly-circulated while she was in Annapolis and it caused “harm” to many of her classmates, but interestingly enough didn’t have problems herself, so her offense is really on behalf of others. (On a related note, the other day a friend told me he saw a bunch of Black Lives Matter protesters downtown – all white kids.) Let’s also not forget that at the time, women at the Naval Academy were still a very new thing. The first class only graduated in 1980, and change, in general, is never easy, so laying the blame on Webb’s shoulders for the ostensible difficulties faced by a batch of brand new mids at the Academy for an article he published that likely reflected the common views of the times, is a stretch.

“The women will tell you that article was like throwing gasoline on the fire,” she said.

Henry said she was one of the “lucky” ones during her time at the academy and was in a company that welcomed the female mids. She said she was surprised to see Webb honored with the award, since 2016 marked the 40th year of women attending the Naval Academy.

She attended the academy’s celebration in the fall.

“At that celebration I felt we were embraced in the community,” Henry said. “We are no longer seen as something that tainted it, but now to see this? It completely takes away that feeling.”

So she was triggered by the Academy honoring a man who has dedicated his life to service, and who as Navy Secretary helped implement policies that actually created more opportunities for women in the service, because of an article he wrote in 1979, and when he graciously declined the award, because he didn’t want to mar the celebration with controversy, she went on to malign his character by claiming she was “stunned” that he did the right thing.

Really? Class. Do you haz it?

I may not like his politics. I may think he’s sometimes a petulant child, careening between political parties after they do something of which he disapproves. But do I consider him someone who is undeserving of an award that recognizes graduates who have “personal character which epitomizes the traits we expect in our officer corps” and have made “significant contributions” as officers or leaders in industry or government, all because he held and published a commonly-held view 40 years ago that is no longer popular? No.

I’m just not that petty.

Kelly Henry and her Sisterhood of the Glittery Hoo Ha apparently have long memories and embrace and nurture their grudges like Gollum embraces his precioussssssss.

Modern Woman – A Response to the NYT’s “Modern Man” List (UPDATED – TWICE)

A feshow-my-boobs-nice-personality-funny-memew days ago, the New York Times published a list by Brian Lombardi, dicksplaining to the rest of the apparently substandard guys out there what a “modern man” should be, own, wear, read, and feel, as well as where he should sleep and park. If you heed Lombardi, the modern man is apparently a metrosexual, contradictory dick pickle, whose purpose in life is to do dishes, buy shoes, and plug in electronic devices for his woman. It was an article so ridiculous, that several of my author friends fisked it, including the Fiskmaster himself, Larry Correia, who savaged this sniveling manchild in his own inimitable style! You should go read Larry’s piece. It’s hilarious and informative.

I won’t try to outdo Larry on this one, because that fisk was beyond perfect, but I did get inspired, as I often do by my writer pals, to write my own advice to my daughter on how to be a modern woman. A real modern woman, not the whining, sniveling version of today’s feminist who wraps herself in a warm cloak of victimhood anytime life doesn’t hand her the success she feels she deserves merely because she owns a vagina and a set of tits.

I will parallel Lombardi’s piece, but there’s more to being a modern woman than kitchen utensils, shoes, and flowers. So here we go.

  1. The modern woman does not need her spouse or significant other to buy shoes for her. She knows what size she wears, she knows what style she likes, she goes out and buys it without expecting her man to do it for her.
  2. The modern woman gains her confidence from her accomplishments and her abilities. She never allows others to destroy her self-esteem, because her courage, determination, and tenacity do not depend on what others think of her.
  3. The modern woman chews with her mouth closed. She does not shove mouthfuls of food into her maw, and masticate food all over her shirt. She is comfortable using a knife and fork, chowing down chicken wings with her hands, or using chopsticks to grab bites of sashimi. And she does it all with panache.
  4. The modern woman does not tell others what they should eat and how they should eat it. She realizes that everyone’s tastes are their own, and she doesn’t need to pad her ego by chastising others to show how sophisticated her palette is and how inferior others are.
  5. The modern woman knows how to change a flat tire, change her oil, and perform a basic maintenance check on her car. And if she doesn’t, she knows where to find advice and help.
  6. And speaking of cars, the modern woman doesn’t wait for her daddy or her man to buy her a cute Miata for her birthday or for Christmas and doesn’t complain when she doesn’t get it or gets the wrong color. She saves her money, goes out, and gets what she wants.
  7. The modern woman takes care of her family and loved ones, which includes teaching them how to plug in their own fucking electronic devices, how to safely use the tools of self defense in the home, how to survive in the event of a zombie apocalypse, how to make a basic meal, budgeting, writing a resume, and dealing with self-important assholes who want to tell you how to live your life with aplomb.
  8. The modern woman doesn’t presume to tell others what kitchen gadgets to buy, what kind of food to eat, what kind of beverages to drink, what kind of vocabulary to use, or what kind of shoes or clothing to wear. She lives her own life as an independent human being – with or without a significant other – without making judgments on others’ choices if they don’t impact her own life.
  9. The modern woman can take constructive criticism without claiming grievances against her womanhood or dignity. She certainly doesn’t claim that criticism on social media gave her PTSD or made her bedridden and in fear for her mental state.
  10. The modern woman refuses to be treated as a victim. She understands her vulnerabilities and weaknesses and works to overcome them, instead of using them as excuses for her lack of achievement and success.
  11. The modern woman does not rely on her plumbing to help her succeed. She relies on her intellect. And she certainly doesn’t blame alleged hatred for said plumbing on her failures. She doesn’t use her tits in lieu of smarts and abilities.
  12. The modern woman knows how to defend herself and doesn’t hide behind her man. She complements his firepower with her own.
  13. The modern woman strives for knowledge. She understands she has a lot to learn, and is willing to learn it from any source available. She doesn’t shun knowledge because it comes from the wrong gender or skin color. She does not take offense at being wrong. She takes it as a learning opportunity.
  14. The modern woman takes responsibility for her own actions and accepts the consequences. She does not blather about privilege. She merely acknowledges her mistakes, corrects them, and moves on. The maximum effective range of an excuse is and always has been zero.
  15. The modern woman doesn’t suffer in cripplingly uncomfortable clothing and shoes, so that others will ooh and aah about how hot she is. She knows how to be comfortable and look her best without wobbling around in stripper heels like a clumsy newborn calf. And by the way, she also knows appropriate clothing styles for the office, the home, the party, or the wedding without trying to wear spandex skirts short enough to show off her labia to work.
  16. The modern woman doesn’t complain if a man opens a car door for her. She’s capable of doing so herself, and secure in the knowledge that he is being polite, not condescending.
  17. The modern woman doesn’t choose a man who wants to whip out a yard stick to prove how manly he is. She doesn’t need him to shield her, to coddle her, or to pay her way. She wants a partner, not a daddy. She wants a best friend, not a leech. She wants him to appreciate her intellect, her femininity, her wit, and her humor, but doesn’t try to alter the best in her to fit his perceptions. Same goes for lesbians, but sans yard stick.
  18. The modern woman can drive a stick shift and kill her own spiders.
  19. The modern woman doesn’t draw validation about her worth from others’ opinions.
  20. The modern woman is realistic. She knows she is physically and mentally different from men, and doesn’t get offended when others acknowledge that fact.
  21. The modern woman isn’t afraid of bad words, but she uses them as a supplement to her point, not as a substitute for it.
  22. The modern woman doesn’t want to be a protected class or a special interest group.
  23. The modern woman doesn’t view sex as something sinful and embarrassing to titter ashamedly about with her friends. She embraces her sexuality and her desires, she’s proud of being a sexual being, but doesn’t try to use sex to boost her self esteem, mitigate her feelings of mediocrity, or manipulate her partner.
  24. The modern woman isn’t afraid to show off her body, but doesn’t dress like a cheap whore to do so. And she knows and understands the difference.
  25. The modern woman respects the man who reads news and knows what’s going on in the world. And she doesn’t give a rat’s flying ass whether he reads said news on his phone, his e-reader, or in paper form.
  26. The modern woman enjoys spending time with her significant other, discussing any topic they both find interesting, and not worrying about whether or not his Kenneth Cole oxfords make noise on whatever floor they both decide is best for their home.
  27. The modern woman cries if she feels the need to do so, but doesn’t use those tears as a weapon against the world, a tool of manipulation, or a way to gain attention. Emotion is a deeply personal thing, especially when it involves tears – be it of joy or sorrow. To use those tears to manipulate others into doing your bidding is reprehensible.

Feel free to add your own points in the comments and send this to those who may need some practical advice.

UPDATE: The beautiful and talented Cedar Sanderson crowdsourced her article about the modern woman, and the replies are glorious to behold! Go. Read. Enjoy.

UPDATE ZEE SECOND: I just found out Chicks on the Right also linked to this piece, as well as Larry’s. Thank you, ladies. I’m honored!

Amen, Sista!

I haven’t been involved in the Sad Puppy “controversy” manufactured – maybe too strong a word – but certainly promoted by the shrill, shrieking shrew K. Tempest Bradford of “The Social Justice Warrior Racist Reading Challenge”. If you haven’t 40558488@N00_rread this bit of pompous spew, do yourself a favor, and don’t – unless, of course, you like having your blood pressure rise so quickly and so high, that your brain explodes out of your eyeballs. The bottom line of this porcine twunt is: stop reading literature written by straight, white males. You’ll be better off. (translation: Talent and writing ability don’t matter. Choose your reading list based on the plumbing, color, sexual orientation, and gender identity of the author, because RACISM… or something.)

Given how many of my friends are authors, I figure this manufactured “controversy” deserves at least a mention here.

The Sad Puppy campaign, according to one of its creators author Larry Correia, “was a campaign to get talented, worthy, deserving authors who would normally never have a chance nominated for the supposedly prestigious Hugo awards.”

I started this campaign a few years ago because I believed that the awards were politically biased, and dominated by a few insider cliques. Authors who didn’t belong to these groups or failed to appease them politically were shunned. When I said this in public, I was called a liar, and told that the Hugos represented all of fandom and that the awards were strictly about quality. I said that if authors with “unapproved” politics were to get nominations, the quality of the work would be irrelevant, and the insider cliques would do everything in their power to sabotage that person. Again, I was called a liar, so I set out to prove my point.

Notice the campaign wasn’t meant to get straight, white males nominations for the awards. It was to get TALENTED, WORTHY, DESERVING AUTHORS recognition. The background to all this is in the link I provided above, so if you want to read it, that’s a great place to start – from the keyboard of the talented, worthy, deserving author who started the campaign.

And guess what! It was a resounding success! Authors supported by the Sad Puppies got a ton of nominations in an arena that for a long time has been dominated by exclusionary social justice warrior types, who are now spitting, crying, and wringing their collective hankies that talented authors that weren’t approved by their clique have gotten nods. Because dog forbid the nominations include anyone other than their approved pet victims!

Tempest over there went on an obscenity-laced Facebook tirade about it. Not that I mind obscenity. Please. I revel in it… if it’s creative and appropriate. Unfortunately it was neither in her case – surprising, considering that she’s supposedly a writer or something. Witness the lack of originality, and revel in the teeth gnashing!

Here’s a thing: I need people to stop responding to this Sad Puppies/Hugo thing with “well, if you want to change things, you should have voted.”

First: Fuck you.

Second: Has your ass been paying attention to the conversations in this community for the past 5, 10, 20, 30 years on this topic? because, if you haven’t, I invite you to shut your damn mouth.

You see, if you had been paying attention you’d know that lots of people do and did nominate. And in the past few years more and more people who care about diversity in SFF have been making an effort to join the WorldCon voting ranks.

THIS IS WHY SAD PUPPIES EXISTS. Not because some people just happened to decide, but because the mostly white mostly male contingent of whiny assholes saw that there was a shift happening toward a more diverse Hugo slate and away from their ilk and decided to work against it. And bring in people fro outside of the community to help them.

If you don’t fucking know this then you should keep your opinions in your head.

Third: If you can’t or don’t attend WorldCon, the only way to vote is to become a supporting member. That costs $50. Does everyone have $50 to spend on this? No, no they don’t. As I said, in the past few years there has been an upsurge in people willing to do so because they feel it’s important. But again, the mostly white mostly men who are involved in Sad Puppies and the mostly white, mostly men brought in from gamer gate have money to spare (this is often a result of said whiteness and maleness). For them $50 is no big deal. For others it is not.

So fucking cut it out acting like “Oh, you can just vote”. It’s not that simple.

This is a class issue, a race issue, a gender issue. In other words, it’s intersectional. And I know some of you have a hard time with that concept. I don’t care. You’ve had plenty of time to figure it out. I’m real tired of your inability to understand these things,

Speaking of “whiny assholes…”

I won’t bother fisking this cunt nugget’s dull-witted rant, but Sarah Hoyt did a fantastic job doing just that, so I would urge you to read it. And she does it without all the creative invective I would have used.

Here’s the thing, boys and girls. Tempest and other teeth gnashers lie. They refuse to acknowledge that the Sad Puppy slate this year included women and minorities, as well as white males. They refuse to acknowledge that the Hugos and any other awards aren’t a bloody affirmative action program, and they shouldn’t be. And when whiny social justice warriors drool about the unfairness of using objective criteria rather than just handing an award to a black-pansexual-illegal-alien-transgendered-paraplegic because they happen to be a black-pansexual-illegal-alien-transgendered-paraplegic and not because they’re a talented writer, you have to wonder about their ability to reason and comprehend.

Stuff it, SJWs. You lost. Deal with it.

Buck up, Cupcake! Life is tough.

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.

%d bloggers like this: