Here are some examples of what modern feminism has become:
"Woman deftly puts 'BBC Dad' to shame"These are all real headlines of various issues du jour being pushed by feminist/snowflake rags to their hopeless little followers. Notice the patterns. First, you have intensely minor issues -- no sense of perspective. Feminism isn't about legal oppression, genuine violence against women, denial of rights, denial of life-saving benefits or opportunities, or anything else that matters to the creation of a just society. It is about feeling bad. It is about not getting your way in minor ways. "That meanie principal stopped me from dressing like a slut! He's worse than Hitler!"
"Why this woman was fired will outrage you"
"Teen made best shirt to fight dress code injustice"
"Hillary Just Tweeted the Subtlest 'I Told You So' - and It's Glorious!"
"Curvy Model Sends Powerful Message With Photo"
Look at their causes: some woman claims that her life sucks worse than this one guy who made the news, and that makes her a hero... woman was refused a job for her poor choices, "how dare I be held accountable, I am a woman!"... tasteless teen writes nonsense on t-shirt... failed fat corrupt politician sends meaningless tweet at winner... fat model takes doctored selfie... Wow. Aim high, ladies. Those issues will change the world!
Secondly, notice how bitchy and catty it all is. The celebration of a "snarky comeback". The celebration of "shaming" a man who never said anything about woman trying to shame him... keep in mind too that "shaming" is a human rights violation to feminists now too, unless you shame a bully except when the bully was bullied as a child for being fat or too beautiful. This is gossip column bitch-speak used by little OCD gay men who like to criticize women and nasty women who wanted to be celebrities but never made it and decided to spread gossip about them instead. This is the kind of catty language women use to make their frienemies feel insecure. And now... now this is the language of feminism.
Third, notice the delusional hyperbole to boost self-esteem. The headlines crawl with words like "perfect", "powerful", "courageous" and "strong", all things these women are not. Indeed, let me remind you of the old saying: when you need to tell the world you are something... then you aren't. And these women can't stop describing pointless, failed and nonsensical whining-events as "perfect", "powerful", "courageous" and "strong", when the more appropriate words are "useless", "loser-speak" and "pathetic."
When did feminism stop being about laws and actions that affect women and become about whatever annoys bitchy gossip columnist wannabes? I kid you not, this was the never-true cliche of womanhood that thrived in sexist jokes pre-1970s. When did this become the reality? How utterly pathetic!
Thoughts?
21 comments:
Interesting. So now there are reports that Trump's team might have been "monitored" by the Feds.
1. It looks like Trump is right again.
2. It's funny how "wiretapping" (a bad evasive thing) can become "monitoring" (a supportive thing like oversight) when it's up to the MSM.
3. Expect the MSM to focus on the difference between the two words while trying to parse completely different meanings out of them.
4. It's funny how the left so casually sees "monitoring" as something that is just part of life. Aren't these the people who freak out when the FBI wants to look at the phone records of a dead terrorist? Who judge companies on their willingness to cooperate on "spying" on the public? Who think that it should take a full trial to "wire tap" anyone? Yet, the feds monitoring Trump was cool.
Yes. And now the wire-tapping is even more plausible because the FBI admitted that they tapped the 51st Floor of Trump Tower to get the goods on some Russian gambling ring...yeah, I know...RUSSIANS LIVING IN TRUMP TOWER!?! LINK
Oh, and the NYT published a front page story on Jan. 20, 2017 with the headline LINK
Actually, there is a term for this: Onanism.
Kit, LOL! Bravo.
Bev, That's fascinating. So in January, they were talking about "wire tap" data obtained from Trump and now they are claiming it doesn't exist. Interesting gymnastics!
Yes, Andrew, but we must ignore the NYT elephant in the room. Remember they promised they were gonna start speaking Truth to Power now...no, not this now, but the other now...oh, wait now!
That Islamic terror attack in England happened close to the Prime Minister. Fortunately the guy just had a vehicle and a knife rather than guns and bombs, though he still managed to kill at least three people and wound 40 more. My prayers are with the victims and their families.
To your original post. What is being marketed as feminism is just the modern left trying to fuel political anger; e.g. Resist. Dot org or whatever. I have lost all faith in our institutions of higher education. It is up to parents to try and instill in our kids the ability to resist.
As far as the wiretapping, I just have to wait to see exactly what they have. The press spin has been "Obama did not personally wiretap Trump." Probably true, but Trum using the term as euphemism makes sense. Second, the whole making thing kind of sucks. To much potential for abuse. I am sure POTUS got to see this material, but it would be hard to prove. But the whole move to quickly change the rules to make it easier to leak seems pretty clear.
This brings me to the link to the last part of the conversation. What happened in London mirrors what has happened throughout the west; Boston, Miami, Brussels, Paris, etc. It is hard to stop in an age of suitcase nukes, pipe bombs, etc. But it is foolish to do what the left is trying to do on Trump's immigration orders. Will his order stop terrorism? No; but it does mean we need to be more diligent in letting people into this country. I am not sure where modern surveillance and individual privacy find a happy meeting place or whether they even can
Masking thing .... sorry for that typo
Bev, Don't worry, they'll do speak Truth to Power whenever there's a Republican in Power, you can bet on that!
Anthony, Ditto. It was a despicable act and my prayers are with the victims.
Jed, I'm thinking it's a generational thing. The newer kids are polar opposites of the snowflakes, as were my generation, and as were the ultra-demanding Boomers. Even the Millennials seem broken into two groups -- the "failure to launch" first half and the second half "snowflakes". My kids are going to eat the snowflakes alive, they take no prisoners and are completely without empathy. Good times acomin'.
This is funny, and on topic. There's a story making the rounds right now of a company that has created a "snowflake test" to weed out the snowflakes:
------------------------
Kyle Reyes, CEO of The Silent Partner Marketing, told the FOX Business Network’s Stuart Varney, a “snowflake test” is used to vet job applicants.
“A snowflake is somebody who is going to whine and complain and come to the table with nothing but an entitled attitude and an inability to back their perspective,” he said.
According to Reyes, the company has eliminated 60 percent of interviewees through the application process.
“We used it to sort of weed out the people who were inundating us with resumes and didn’t even know what we do for work,” he said.
The test includes questions revolving around a candidate’s stance on America, police, and guns (some were asked to Varney, who passed the test), but Reyes said he’s not concerned about discrimination lawsuits.
“There’s no discrimination here because what this really is, is a glorified personality test. This is something that happens in interviews every single day,” he said.
Weeding out people for having the wrong politics is increasingly popular nowadays.
Anthony, Two points, however.
First, the snowflakes believe that people with bad views should be denied employment, but they simultaneously believe that they have a "right" to their beliefs and that it is "illegal" to fire them for their views. So the irony strikes me as funny.
Secondly, I doubt this is about politics so much as it is about weeding out an attitude.
As for weeding out snowflakes, I had a "conversation" with one of them a few years ago about internships and why they should be paid. Some snowflake with an attorney parent, sued Conde Naste for slave labor. I mean, instead of giving them a feature story to write, they were making unpaid college interns TO GET COFFEE & STUFF for meetings and stuff! How humiliating. Really, the point of an "internship" is to see how assertive you are and how well you listen and stuff. Like when you were allowed to stay and listen at those meetings to learn stuff about how magazines works and stuff. So they can see if they want to offer you a paying job and stuff.
Unfortunately the entire internship programs at magazines and corporations have had to be scrapped or much harder to get into because of this lawsuit. Pity because these kids don't know what they don't know and those internships were a foot in the door.
But this is a generational thing too. I did an unpaid internship too and would do just about anything they asked me to do as long as I could be allowed in the room. It also led to a job and lots of contacts for future employment.
Bev, That's the attitude with this group of people:
1. I should start at the top because I'm special.
2. You don't have the right to criticize me. You don't have the right to ask me to work my way up. You don't have the right to ask to do anything I don't want to do. You don't have the right to ___.
3. A job is about me giving my opinions... not work product, not satisfying clients, not getting things done... me giving my opinions.
Do you remember the girl who got fired for whining about some tech company not paying her "a living wage"? She whined that she thought the job would be "her writing snarky comments about stuff" and it turned out to be horror of horrors things like work and stuff.
There used to be a program in NYC public schools where students were given the opportunity to work at different kinds of jobs - corporate offices, law firms, and such. Being a law firm, we participated in the program. And we were tasked with finding appropriate tasks for them to do to learn what it was like to work at a law firm. Unfortunately we couldn't allow this one young man to actually litigate cases, but we did have some "logging in & filing" legal research materials that needed done. He actually said to me "Ugh, don't you have something more interesting for me to do?".
I responded, "Well, if you don't do it, I have to. And I have a college education. You don't even have a high school diploma yet. So, here's a lesson. Unfortunately not everything you will ever do in a job will be "interesting". But it still has to get done."
Andrew,
Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I'd be pretty weirded out if I was asked about when I last cried and why during a job interview. That is some cult stuff right there.
*Shrugs* Its a big world. If soul baring for a job works for some people, more power to them.
Arrogance is a part of youth. Part of arrogance is taking chances and making demands. Young people who rush in where angels fear to tread are hailed as prodigies/visionary geniuses when their shooting high succeeds, mocked as entitled fools when they miss their targets.
On a related note, the old model of joining a big corporation and slowly moving up the ladder over the decades has largely broken down. Nowadays corporations are fast to cut newer talent and quick to outsource or mechanize.
Anthony, I'd be more weirded out if someone had an answer other than "what? who cries in interviews?"
You are correct that arrogance is part of youth, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about arrogant entitlement. The idea these snowflakes have that they deserve to start at the top without having anything to offer to get there.
It's one thing for Steven Jobs to start Apple. It's quite another for Joe Flake to intern at Large Co. and whine about not being the role of senior manager and stuff.
Post a Comment