Wednesday, August 09, 2017

An odd way to fight for equality

Leftists have strange minds.  They all seem to think that you fight racial discrimination by being racially discriminatory ("affirmative action") now one lot in Australia seem to think you fight for equality between the sexes  by treating men and women unequally.  Their devotion to equality is clearly nothing more than insincere propaganda.  It is a convenient pose, not a conviction

A MELBOURNE cafe that caused a social media storm after charging men a tax and seating women first insists it has had a stack of support. And not just from the girls.

Handsome Her, a vegan cafe in Brunswick, said it was charging men 18 per cent more in a bid to address the gender pay gap. The cafe, which clearly advertises its rules on a chalk board, explained men will be charged the premium — and the gap donated to women’s services.

However co-owner Alex O’Brien told Seven News the surcharge, which is in place one week out of every month, wasn’t compulsory. She also said none had so far refused to pay it and in a Facebook post overnight said the idea has been well supported overall.

"If people aren’t comfortable paying it or if men don’t want to pay it, we’re not going to kick them out the door," she said.
"It’s just a good opportunity to do some good."

The idea has caused a mixed reaction on social media, with some supporting the concept.

Others branded it hypocritical and said it would only further widen the gender divide.

Discrimination is illegal, regardless of the spurious intent. Do they hire male staff or do they discriminate there too?

Writing on its Facebook page overnight, the cafe insisted it was jam-packed with customers over the past few days who have supported the cause.

It also insisted it wasn’t just women who were backing the idea.
"We’ve had men travel across town to visit us and pay ‘the man tax’ and throw some extra in the donation jar — guys, you’re pretty neat," the post read.


A communist icon toppled in Ukraine is restored, in England

The symbolism is unmistakeable.  Britain is now more communist than the former Soviet bloc

MANCHESTER, England — After 147 years, Friedrich Engels is back in town. Statues of Engels, Karl Marx’s collaborator, may have been ripped down all over the former communist world, but he has returned here, to the city that made him famous.

His resurrection in Manchester, where he conducted research on the working class in the 1840s, is thanks to artist Phil Collins, who made Engels the centerpiece of his most recent project, “Ceremony.”

“I started working on this theme about 10 years ago,” said Collins. Immersing himself in the history of the Industrial Revolution and of socialism in Manchester, he stumbled upon a quote by a local civil servant, who raised the idea of transporting an Engels statue from Ukraine to Manchester.

Collins traveled for about a year across Eastern Europe before finally finding his prize in an agricultural compound in a district that he said was once named after Engels in the Poltava region of eastern Ukraine.

The 1917 Russian Revolution was inspired by Marx and Engels’s ideas in their “Communist Manifesto” of 1848. Much of their analysis was based on Engels’s own masterwork, “The Condition of the Working Class in England,” published three years before.


Canaanite Gene Study Actually Proves the Bible Right, But Don't Tell the Media

Last week, the American Journal of Human Genetics published a study connecting the DNA of ancient Canaanites to modern-day people in Lebanon. Various news outlets immediately reported that this study proved the Bible wrong, when nothing could be further from the truth.

To be fair, The Telegraph corrected the headline to "Study shows ancient Canaanites survived divine call in Bible for them to be wiped out."

As Klinghoffer noted, the Bible does not say the Israelites wiped out the Canaanites — in fact, it explicitly says they survived.

God commands the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites in Deuteronomy 20: "But in the cities of these people that the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance, you shall save alive nothing that breathes ... the Hittites and the Amorites, the Canaanites and the Perizzites, the Hivites and the Jebusites ... that they may not teach you to do according to all their abominable practices that they have done for their gods, and so you sin against the Lord your God."

But this is not the Bible's last word on the Canaanites. The first chapter of Judges says that Israel "put the Canaanites to forced labor, but they did not drive them out completely" (Judges 1:28). In fact, various tribes of Israel (Ephraim, Zebulun, Asher, and Naphtali, to be exact) allowed Canaanites to live among them.

God was not pleased. He told Israel that since "you have not obeyed my voice," God would "not drive them out before you, but they shall become thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare to you" (Judges 2:2-3).

Anyone with a basic familiarity with the biblical narrative of Israel's history should not be surprised by this. Throughout the narratives of the histories and prophets of Israel, God's people reject Him time and time again, worshipping foreign gods of ... whom? The Canaanites.

As The Telegraph noted in a correction, "The original version of this story erroneously said the Bible claimed the Canaanites were wiped [out]. However, elsewhere in the Bible, it says the elimination was not successful." That would be an understatement.

As of Monday, Ars Technica has not corrected its article. "First, God orders the Hebrews to destroy the Canaanites along with several other groups, and later we hear that the Canaanites have actually been wiped out," reporter Annalee Newitz wrote.

The Independent's Ian Johnston went so far as to quote atheist Richard Dawkins, who said the Old Testament God was "a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser ... a genocidal ... megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

Johnston quoted the book of Joshua, saying that the Israelites actually did slaughter all of the Canaanites. Joshua 10:40 says Joshua "left no survivor, but he utterly destroyed all who breathed, just as the Lord, the God of Israel, had commanded."

Here's the thing: Joshua 10 is talking about the conquest of southern Canaan. Ephraim, Zebulun, Asher, and Naphtali settled in the north. Joshua 10:40 is perfectly compatible with Judges 1:28 and Judges 2:3.

Science, a generally reputable journal that originally got the facts wrong, hilariously would not admit just how wrong they were. "This story and its headline have been updated to reflect that in the Bible, God ordered the destruction of the Canaanites, but that some cities and people may have survived," the update reads.

May have survived? Try, "emphatically did survive, and plagued the people of Israel for centuries."


Watch Out: If you Criticize the Women's March, You're a White Nationalist Patriarchy Apologist

Bari Weiss, a staff editor at the New York Times, courageously opposed the "feminist" narrative the Women's March "leaders" have been spouting, and now the collective is out for her.

Weiss penned a letter to the editor earlier this week in her own paper, pointing out the extreme messages and associations of Linda Sarsour, Carmen Perez, and Tamika Mallory, opining that maybe if the Women's March leaders are extremists who embrace anti-Semitic, anti-white, terrorist-accepting, and essentially anarchist views, they should be called out.

Bob Bland, co-president of the Women's March, wrote a keyword-filled rebuttal to Weiss' letter, labeling Weiss as "an apologist for the white nationalist patriarchy." While Weiss' letter gave examples, quotes, and links to back up her assertions about the march leaders, Bland's reply is simple rhetoric and a poor attempt at shaming Weiss.

Ms. Weiss is endorsing a sensational alt-right attack that aims to discredit the Women’s March movement and its leaders and to derail the progress we have made since January.
What progress??

The Women’s March united millions around the United States and demonstrated the collective power of women to create transformative social change.
What exactly did you do? What rights were threatened and how did your collective power stop it?

Her article is a distraction at a critical moment when rights are being stripped from vulnerable communities every day.
Any examples? How do you define "vulnerable communities"?

We are a movement made up of many people with different opinions, ideas and experiences.
No. No, you're not. You do not allow pro-life women. You do not allow people who support Trump. You do not like Israelis. You don't like women who value their Second Amendment rights. You don't embrace women who are against jihad and FGM. I'd wager there's not a more intellectually closed movement around. After feminists wept when Hillary Clinton lost the election, Women's March leaders didn't even name her as one of the reasons they marched.

You may not agree with one of us or any of us, and that’s O.K. But together we are weaving the social fabric so needed to protect us as the Trump agenda advances.
Is the social fabric needed to protect us made up of worshipping cop killers and marginalizing dissent?

Weiss's problem, Bland says, is that she's a "critic from the seats" and hasn't done the "work necessary" to understand other peoples' struggles. Bland admitted that while planning the January march she wasn't able to relate with others' point of view - presumably the views of Sarsour, Perez, and Mallory. But now she's able to "stand in solidarity" with a woman who took part in blowing up innocent college students.

Bland admonished Weiss, then labeled her in the exact way Weiss had predicted.

Until they get up, listen and do the work to understand those whose feelings have been shaped by injustices, they will remain apologists for the status quo, racist ideology and the white nationalist patriarchy.
Sick burn. Weiss is sure to stop pointing out the embrace of hate and rejection of dissenting voices now.



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: