The Antics of Anti-Feminist Feminists In the Trump Era

King Solomon once wrote the most annoying sound on the planet is a nagging wife. Obviously, he’d never heard what frothy-mouthed feminists sound like now that Judge Amy Coney Barrett will likely replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the U.S. Supreme Court.

After the first anti-Trump women’s march, I suggested everyday Americans take preventative action to keep the insane from driving us insane by investing in a good set of earbuds to drown out the whining.

Unfortunately, earbuds cannot erase certain scenes our minds would prefer to forget, like the time anti-Trump “women’s march” feminists ran around in idiotic pink protest hats – as if wearing female body parts on their heads would inspire intelligent women anywhere to join their cause. As they gathered, Madonna welcomed the sisterhood to their “revolution of love” and shot off a series of F-bombs amidst crazy talk about blowing up the White House.

Democrats bragged about the women’s march crowd numbers, but I secretly wondered if they really meant crowd size, given all the anti-Trump feminists going public about their hate-eating like Barbara Streisand who blamed Donald Trump for her overeating pancakes and weight gain. One could only hope that one of the smartest Democrats to ever run for office, Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA), certified the structural integrity of the bridges on which many of those feminists loitered. Johnson is the supercilious brainiac who once raised concern Guam might “tip over and capsize” from overpopulation.

During the marches, leftist news commentators predicted these outlandish displays were a glimpse of things to come. They were right. Trump’s presidency has been four years of pure misery for Ashley Judd’s “nasty” women crowd—who support the pro-Biden anarchist groups that kill police officers, chuck bricks, shatter glass, ignite fires and destroy personal property in Democrat-run cities across the United States.

And who can forget the larger-than-life outspoken feminist and self-righteous crackpot, Rutgers University Associate Professor of Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies Brittney Cooper.

Awhile back, Cooper showcased the jaw-dropping ignorance of leftist academia when she blamed Trump supporters (many of which happen to be women) for COVID-19 on Twitter:

“I am saying some obvious things this morning because as a country we are too good at skipping over the audience and we might as well say this to people as often as we can. F*ck each and every Trump supporter. You all absolutely did this. You are to blame.”

As I wrote in a previous column, Cooper’s comments made me question if competence is no longer a prerequisite for professors at certain universities. Maybe they get points based on the size of their coloring book collections. Or possibly they answer a one-question employment test like: “A purple-haired feminist on a three-wheeled electric bike has 40 candy bars. She eats 35. What does she have now?”

Leftist answer: “Coronavirus. Because of Trump.”

We all know the real answer is five candy bars, three flat tires and diabetes. And the only reason the purple-haired feminist can buy 40 candy bars and an electric bike (to save the planet and maintain social distancing) is thanks to Trump’s economy before the Wuhan virus hit.

Fast-forward to September 27, 2020. Lifesitenews.com reports an Amy Coney Barrett supporter was punched in the face by a pro-abortion activist in front of the Supreme Court Building. Lovely.

The alleged victim, Autumn Schimmer, who works for Students for Life, was holding a sign saying, “I can’t believe these ‘feminists’ are protesting a woman.” Apparently, she was having a conversation with a pro-abortion woman about what it means to be a feminist. Schimmer said, “So the woman basically got mad at me that I didn’t answer one of her questions, hit me in the face and ran into the crowd to hide like a coward.”

Law enforcement arrested the alleged perpetrator, and leftist-run media remained mostly silent. Silent, because Democrats are about as pro-female as they are pro-choice. They say they are pro-choice, but try to legislate everything including guns, fossil fuels, soda sizes, God, free speech, school choice, bathrooms, cake baking, salt and cigarettes.

For them, pro-choice is reduced to two options: Whatever they demand and abortions.

Otherwise, they run around like crazed lunatics. That, folks, is the ugly face of feminism as defined by a Democrat Party so controlled by extremists, it’s become the party of hate and oppression. Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation means it’s time to pull out the earbuds, folks.

SOURCE

Intelligence, Feeling, and Critical Thinking in the Age of the Great UnReason

About six months ago, the Age of the Great UnReason began to dawn. It brought with it the COVID Internment of America; the unabashed imperialism of Mask Empire, with its mandates that are as oppressive as they are ineffective; and the Corona Walker, a phenomenon that is at once as tragic as it is repellent.

The result has been incalculable devastation of every conceivable kind.

Recently, I had two conversations, one with a woman with whom I at one time had more than a platonic relationship, the other with my first cousin, who had always been more like a brother to me than a cousin. For reasons, I strongly suspect, that have less to do with a genuine fear of contracting a virus than either would be willing to admit, they were quick to dismiss my (demonstrably true, scientifically-based) claims that the hazardousness of COVID-19 has been wildly overblown and that masks for the general public are, at best ineffective and at worst, dangerous.

Despite my differences in worldview with both, I nevertheless had always respected their intelligence. I suppose I still do.

Yet intelligence, which is a raw, native endowment, and intellectual prowess, which is every bit as much a developed skill set as any other, are most emphatically not one and the same thing.

What is critical thinking and how can one become a critical thinker?

For starters, and most fundamentally, critical thinking is tough. It is eminently laborious, demanding thousands and thousands of hours, over the span of years and decades, of reading; writing; introspection; reflection; and analyzing, rigorously analyzing, arguments, both those that support one’s own point of view and, crucially, those that are designed to counter it.

Perhaps as important as any other requirement, critical thinking demands courage, the guts to risk defying the conventional wisdom, the prevailing dogma.

The critical thinker, though, because he is all about following the argument, must know the differences between the various species of discourse with which it is typically conflated. This, of course, demands that he first be familiar with the basic structure of an argument. He needs to further know the differences between deductive and inductive reasoning, between the concepts of validity and invalidity; soundness and unsoundness; strong and weak; cogent and uncogent.

The critical thinker should as well be acquainted with at least some of the more common logical fallacies that Aristotle, “the Father of Logic,” identified over 2300 years ago.

Take, for just one instance, a specific variety of the ad hominem attack known as “circumstantial.” This fallacy is routinely committed by the True Believers of the Mask Imperium against those who dare challenge both its decrees as well as “the Science” in the name of which those decrees are rationalized: “Well, you’re not a doctor!” Or, if the person actually is a medical doctor, the very fact that he or she dissents from the orthodox position of Big Science (government-funded, bureaucratic and quasi-bureaucratic hacks with doctorate degrees) is taken as proof that he or she is a quack.

This is flagrantly fallacious reasoning, for a person’s circumstances are logically irrelevant to whether their point of view is correct or not (And we can, for now, sidestep the fact that the Mask Imperialists aren’t deterred in the least from speaking with the authority of an Old Testament prophet by the fact that neither are they doctors!).

Most obviously—or at least it should be—the critical thinker needs to appreciate the basis of all thought, the Principle or Law of Contradiction. He must know, in other words, that a thing can’t both be and not be in the same sense and at the same moment. “A and not-A” is a necessarily false statement, false in every conceivable world, for it is a logical impossibility and whatever is logically impossible is unthinkable.

The critical thinker knows, then, that the statement, “Masks shouldn’t be worn by the public because they are essentially ineffective in preventing people from contracting ‘The Virus’ and masks must be worn by the public because they are effective in preventing people from contracting ‘The Virus’” is no less self-contradictory than the proposition, “She is pregnant and she is not pregnant.”

Critical thinking is not for the faint of heart. In the next installment of this series, we will delve more into this subject by considering the differences between the Critical Thinker and…the Feelers.

SOURCE

Good Jews and Bad Jews

Following-up on my article, Good Catholics, Bad Catholics, and White Colonizers, I didn’t realize it, but there are also good Jews and bad Jews. The recently-departed Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a very good Jew. Although nearly all of her judicial opinions were in direct opposition to the U.S. Constitution, nothing written about her points to her being a bad Jew.

Bernie Sanders, without question, is a good Jew, perhaps one of the best Jews on Earth. Sander leans so far to the left, that he would have been welcomed among Vladimir Lenin’s brain trust. That earns him high accolades with The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the rest of the mainstream media. If Sanders ever crosses the line, never to occur, and admits that even with all its faults free-market capitalism is the best economic system in the world, he will become a very bad Jew, and we don’t want that to happen. Senators Schumer, Feinstein, Blumenthal, Wyden, are all excellent Jews. And Rep. Adam Schiff, well, he’s special!

Joseph Lieberman, when he was Al Gore’s running mate in 2000 was a good Jew. Later, when he became more independent and outspoken, he became less than a good Jew. Suddenly, mainstream media outlets that once hung on his every word were no longer interested much of what he had to say. I wonder how he fell from grace?

Some very bad Jews in politics right now are too close to Donald Trump. This is a thorny problem. Jared Kushner, for example, who married the president’s daughter, Ivanka, and influenced her to convert to Judaism, is not a good Jew. He deserves bad press in The New York Times or The Washington Post, despite being off-the-scale brilliant, and having done yeoman’s work in helping to achieve historic Middle East peace agreements.

Ivanka Trump, who converted to Judaism, is a bad Jew: She converted and married a bad Jew. Worse, she’s the daughter of Donald Trump. Either way, it’s apparent that she’s not a good Jew and her three children will not grow up to be good Jews.

Attorney and best-selling author Alan Dershowitz has vacillated back and forth between being a good Jew and a bad one, depending on what opinions he espouses on current topics. Dennis Prager, who launched Prager University, is definitely a bad Jew. After all, his five-minute, illuminating videos about capitalism, liberty, history, politics, the U.S. Constitution, and foreign relations somehow miss the mark each and every time! Worse, the videos unduly influence a brainwashed generation to come back to reality. How dare the bad Jew Dennis Prager seek to win back these wayward souls.

Israeli Jews Are Bad

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel is an exceedingly bad Jew. Every other day, Israel’s Leftist press tells us so, proclaiming that Netanyahu is a menace to Israel and that he bears responsibility for everything bad that happens to Israelis. One recent editorial, in Nancy Pelosi-type fashion, proclaimed that Netanyahu might need to be “incapacitated” over his abuse of office.

The Jews in America, who reflexively vote Democrat in election after election, are good Jews, while ironically, most of the Jews in Israel are bad Jews. Maybe it’s because they’re surrounded by hostile neighbors on all sides and have successfully defended themselves for many years. Perhaps, it’s because they’re the best U.S. ally in the region, if not in the world.

Maybe it’s because Jews in Israel are so damn smart they deserve some kind of comeuppance. The breakthroughs they’ve achieved in science, medicine, literature, and the arts are outstanding. The number of Nobel prizes that they receive, per capita, boggles the imagination. In any case, Israeli Jews are mostly bad Jews.

Hollywood Has Good Jews

Hollywood is loaded with good Jews, in fact almost nothing but good Jews. Most of them are committed virtue-signalers, but who cares? Whether you’re talking Barbra Streisand, Sarah Silverman, Rob Reiner, Richard Dreyfuss, Steven Spielberg, or Seth Rogen there’s simply no end to the number of good Jews in Hollywood.

Steven Spielberg is both a good Jew and a non-colonizing parent of black children. TV talk show hosts of Jewish origin such as Seth Meyers, Jon Stewart, and Bill Maher are routinely good. In fact, it is hard to find a bad Jew on the big screen or on your TV set.

Those of us who lean right are blessed!

SOURCE

Australia: Pauline Hanson calls for a ‘Minister for Men’ to tackle soaring male suicide rates as she claims blokes are ‘overwhelmingly disadvantaged’ and targeted by feminists

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson says a new office needs to be established in the government to deal with high rates of suicide and homelessness among men.

The Queensland-based politician called for the appointment of a ‘Minister for Men’ on Friday.

‘Political parties have long called for equality across both genders, but only a Minister for Women exists across all levels of government,’ she said.

‘But as we focus on strengthening women’s economic security, their involvement in leadership positions, and ensure that women and their children are safe from violence, the plight of Australian boys and men is on the decline.’

Ms Hanson cited a 2019 report that compared the rates of suicide, homelessness and workplace deaths between men and women.

The number of men dying in workplaces outpaced women by more than 1,000 per cent.

For every 100 women who die at work there are 1,294 deaths among men.

There are more than 240 men living rough on the streets for every 100 homeless women.

There are also 1,000 men living in adult correctional facilities for every 100 women.

‘On the subject of alcohol, drug addiction, overdoses, suicide, murder, violent crimes, and incarceration, boys and men are again overwhelmingly disadvantaged,’ Ms Hanson said.

‘As a mother of three boys and one girl, this raises significant concern for my own children, let alone my young grandchildren.’

The study also showed an imbalance between the number of school boys and girls who are expelled and who suffer from emotional trauma.

For every 100 girls who are expelled, 291 boys are turfed out.

Around 355 boys also report an emotional disturbance for every 100 girls.

‘If we truly want equality in society, it’s time to drop the hardline feminist attack on men and start treating each other with the same level of support, based on need,’ Ms Hanson said.

SOURCE

---

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.
`