View Single Post
Old November 23rd, 2010 #7
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

slut-shaming - commonly used at Jezebel and other lefty female-oriented sites. in their terms, it means making women guilty for liking sex. in real terms, it amounts to 'women should be able to dress however they want but no one should ever judge them based on their choices/appearances.' meaning: women should be able to have things both ways at all times, and anyone who disagrees is 'sexist,' 'slut-shamer' or some other opprobrium-targeted heavy.

key insight: what do women want? to have it both ways at all times, and to be held at their own evaluation of themselves and their motives be accepted without questioning by all others. no matter how illogical, crazy, bizarre their beliefs or behaviors. women who go on and on about being liberated, empowered, 'strong,' free, etc., are always the ones who in the next breath are curled up in crying balls because of things others say about them, which damages their tender feelings and to which they tend to attribute responsibility for their bad choices. wanting to be one thing and be thought another is very common among women. it's common among men, too, but men at least recognize their hypocrisy. i think in fact very few of the women of the 'slut-shaming' community are self-conscious/intelligent/perceptive enough to realize the contradictions in what they say.

privilege or white privilege - it is very difficult to express what is meant by this term, but basically it is the idea that whites get some special benefits merely for being white. never is there any acknowledgement that whites are discriminated against by law, and routinely mocked in commercials and content throughout the mass media. nor is there ever any appreciation for the achievements of white men, even though they have basically created the entire world, including the leisure time and technical tools the feminists and coloreds use to disparage them. the complete absence of gratitude among feminists for the things men have done to help women is a measure of the average feminist's low character and weak brainpower. camille paglia is probably the only self-described feminist with even an inkling of the reality of things, as she has repeatedly said that civilization is a masculine product, and thanked men for providing the basis for a healthier and more comfortable life for all of us, men and women. finally, there is no jew-communist recognition of the fact that if whites benefit from stereotypical assumptions, it is because of their proven record of behavior. just as blacks are often treated as stupid violent criminals, because such a high percentage of them are those things, so whites are assumed honest, honorable and law-abiding, because so many of them are those things. what we see in the left is either the inability to perceive reality accurately, or the inability to accept the reality it perceives because it is humiliating. it amounts to the same thing. leftism, in whites or women, is the rejection of reality turned into a moral crusade and political cause. this reality-rejecting egotism is like an uncontained fire, it holds the potential to burn down the entire world because it isn't constituted the way the fantasist and character-defective thinks it should be. it is absolutely the wrong policy to humor women who entertain these fantasies, like they're cute or funny. no, they are dangerous to themselves and others, and their fantasy-insanity should never be humored, just mocked and ridiculed until they are in tears.

analogy: blacks and feminists complaining about 'white privilege' is equivalent to cockroaches (or moths) complaining about butterfly privilege. butterflies, complain the roaches, are treated everywhere with smiles and delight. they flit from flowers to flowers, making pretty dancing pictures in the air, harm nobody, add some grace and beauty to the world, so are generally well received. Cockroaches are ugly little thieves that steal our food and spread diseases and crap up a formerly clean place like nobody's business. People are naturally disgusted to see them, and expect the next one will do and behave like the last hundred million have. The cockroach privilege is to be hated, pursued, rejected and kept away from all clean and attractive human establishments. Makes sense, don't you think? 'White privilege' is a fancy way of saying people expect whites to behave like other whites have, just as they expect blacks to behave as other niggers have. leftism is a way to punish the reality-oriented community by trying to gang-press it into a verbal-political cult using social sanctions, laws, and, if need be, violence.

analogy: dolphin privilege. dophins are received warmly wherever human bathers find them. sharks are received hostilely. there's no proof that any given shark is going to attack bathers, but because sharks are known to attack, kill and eat men, men are prejudiced toward them, and generally exit the water whenever a large one appears. whereas bathers are likelier to swim toward a dolphin. this reprehensible dolphin privilege is the shame of the sea. does that make sense?

observation: it's hard to avoid saying lack of intelligence, but that's not really precisely it. it being what it is about women's thinking that's so remarkable - the thing that hits the observer almost every time, no matter what aspect of the question is being considered. it's just they seem to have a sexual proclivity, or anti-proclivity for having any perspective, depth or contextual grasp of things, resulting in abounding ironies they never notice.

example, granted this is subtle, then on to a super obvious one. in a post about Thanksgiving and the family turmoil that often ensues, you'll often find a feminist saying she gets into argument with her racist relatives, so she has to plan to get around that. and then you will find one inevitably saying she solves the problem by simply avoiding either the discussion topic, or simply staying away from the gathering. this works and preserves her sanity and everybody's happiness. never in a million years will this woman pause to bethink that her solution to not-getting-along is the same thing the racialist wants for incompatible races (blacks and whites): separation, or at least segregation. integration just leads to hate and endless bickering, so separate and preserve the peace, make everybody better off. it's smart and reasonable when the woman does it personally; its immoral when the racist relative would do it politically. again, this is fairly subtle, i would never expect a woman to puzzle it out. even to say puzzle it out is wrong, because the mind would have to be in a certain vein - seeking connections, new associations, contradictions - that women's minds never run in unless some man directs them into that particular channel.

now a more obvious example.

observation two: feminists are so bereft of irony, brains, whatever 'it' is that they lack that men often have, that you will often see feminists using Duke male students as the perfect example of those who enjoy white privilege. yet dozens of these creatures were accused by a nigger stripper-prostitute, literally a crazy whore, someone with no credibility on the face of it, yet her obvious lies were taken as gospel truth not only by the national media, but by those students' own professors and college administrators. now, even a blind hog ought to smell the incredible contradiction and hypocrisy, but by god, i've never seen a feminist even stumble into this Grand Canyon-sized gap between the leftist claims of white privilege and the white reality indicated by the Duke lacrosse imbroglio. these supposedly rich, young powerful white men, who out of of all the white race would be, by leftist claims, the very likeliest to be beneficiaries of white privilege, were nailed to the (la)crosse by press and professors, while the word of the powerless, overlooked sister was treated like a divine commandment.

it would actually be better if these feminists were simply corrupt, lying, hypocrites, but the special thing about women, compared to men, is they really aren't, suggesting a biological basis to their imperception and consequent irrational argumentation and strange behavior. none of the usual indices of corruption and chicanery and subterfuge are there - their cluelessness and obliviousness are real and unfaked, as best can be told. they are simply dim and humorless and impercipient to a level that is frankly hard to believe if one hadn't seen thousands of examples of it, certainly enough to draw a general conclusion. women aren't stupid. they're only a little less intelligent than men, overall. but they are flat-minded and myopic as hell, and pretty darn humorless too. women aren't creative or funny, they're the audience. they're the people with an absolutely unconsidered belief in the power of words over evidence. which is why they so blankly, so unthinkingly use adjectives like they mean something - "i am funny, creative, etc." with absolutely no grasp of what's wrong with this. it's not even faith, because faith implies doubt. it's 100% pure imponderation, so to neologize. to a woman, what is is, and is right, and it is unthinkable it could be otherwise. as paglia says if it were up to women, we'd still be living in grass huts. those who think women think must explain why it took a man to invent the bra. a practical, technical problem that must have troubled every heavy-breasted woman since time began, yet not a single one was ever inspired to come up with a solution. no one else around her ever said or did anything about it so why would she? that is how women think, but it's not a matter of thinking. that is how women are.

Last edited by Alex Linder; July 12th, 2012 at 03:22 PM.