Saturday, April 25, 2015

The sexes and more


  • Should be obvious but it's a mad world: 10 reasons why "Walk a Mile in Her Shoes" is wrong, especially when Army cadets do it. I'll add a manosphere point (red-pill, not necessarily pickup-artist): it's hard for the socially awkward to learn this, but we straight men trying to empathize with the women we love by doing these things don't get their love or respect. These lose them. Makes sense when you think about it. Women want strong men, and nobody respects a man who demeans himself like that (echoing Gavin McInnes' points). What makes this harder to learn is that liberalism is a Christian heresy; our Christian culture values humility and defending the underdog. Gestures like this are chivalry knocked off course. A manosphere point: mainstream relationship advice pushing these things is worse than useless. Stunts like this are why the Russians, the Chinese, and ISIS are laughing at us.
  • Chutzpah. Bruce Jenner to the still beautiful (America's Junior Miss 1963) Diane Sawyer: "I'm a woman." If she could speak freely: "Like hell you are!" Actually some radical feminists have round-tripped to reality, agreeing such demeans real women. As Steve Sailer has noted, what's with these older guys suddenly doing this? Testosterone drop with age? More likely a rare fetish, transvestism taken up a notch: "becoming" the women they love. But there's more to this poor man's story. The Left was all ready to pour their acceptance and tolerance on Bruce Jenner when he came out as a transgender. Now that he has come out as a Republican, he will be kicked to the curb. Just watch! OR the GOP will try to use him in another of its catch-up me-too marketing plans, sucking up to the liberals in charge, which always fails. (Same thing: real woman Carly Fiorina running for president. Another failed corporate head like Herman Cain.) Pictured: Miss Sawyer on top of the world, in the world's capital, March '63.
  • Hillary Clinton: Political cartoon from likely a distant cousin. I've met such. Same name? Pacific Northwest? Hey, cuz.
  • Matthew Weiner guest-edited Metro yesterday. Predictable liberal garbage. "Mad Men" is superior "Happy Days" to me but I know what he's up to: dancing on the grave of the golden era. Actually it's not dead; five years ago I realized I could bring much of it back and so I did. (I don't do kitsch.) Like the old joke about dogs: because I can. Anyway, Metro ran a typical piece about "unequal pay." If you didn't know better, you'd think women are paid on a lower scale because men are big meanies as bosses. (A proposed answer all the white knights and manginas are supposed to buy, literally: transfer payments in the form of more paid leave, etc. Nice-guy betas are still footing the bill but the women don't have to have sex with them. Communism doesn't work; take away incentive and your economy crumbles.) What they don't say: there is no real pay gap; of course women are paid the same wages. The difference is on average the sexes are different, wanting different things, so many women hate the rat race and quit it as soon as possible, ideally (to them; what most really want) marrying well (getting their MRS degrees) and having kids. So their average pay of course is lower. Men work longer and harder. Actual quote from a Metro mangina (metrosexual?): "testosterone-addled." If it wasn't for testosterone, women would be living in grass huts if at all, as Camille Paglia says. By the way, I know Metro because I do the crossword riding my commuter train.
  • Speaking of economics, of course McDonald's proposes more automation as an answer to the well-meaning folks who want to raise the minimum wage. Those jobs by nature aren't living wages.
  • "You are there": England in color, 1928, the world my late rector was born into, in London, a year earlier.
  • Predictable feel-good Catholic stuff but still nice. Catholic England would have been great today, writes one of us in a British Catholic journal.
  • Cultural conservatives have barely begun to fight. Answering Rod Dreher's surrender proposal. By the way, Est Quod Est gets at least one thing wrong about Dreher: he's not a Russophile. Indeed his blog has his objections to Putinism, for example, trying to prove Dreher's liberal bona fides. I don't think Dreher knows any Russians or other real Orthodox; his church is largely his creation, the Russians being his flag of convenience. What might be morbidly entertaining: if Dreher's ego clashes with ROCOR, as the Russians don't take too kindly to insubordination (imagine talking back to Putin; me neither).

No comments:

Post a Comment

Leave comment