Thursday, October 12, 2017

Matriarchy Heal Thyself and other stupid stuff

With all of the stuff coming out about Harvey Weinstein, this is one issue that has gotten lost in the furor. Our former First Lady Michelle Obama stepped in it a couple of weeks ago when making a speech at some organization. Well, she had this to say about women who didn't vote for Hillary Clinton:
“Any woman who voted against Hillary Clinton voted against their own voice,”

Seriously, I am getting so tired of women tell other women what they are supposed to think and do. My response to this was this:
Listen up! I did not fight for equality with "the Patriarchy" only to be told I must swear total loyalty to "the Matriarchy".

Yeah, that is exactly what I think about all of this "if you didn't vote for Hillary, you are traitor to women" crap. Really, how on earth do these idiots think this is going to win women over? Again, I didn't fight for equality all of these years only to be told that I must kiss the ring of the matriarchy! I have a voice and it's mine! I own it! MATRIARCHY HEAL THYSELF!!

And that the Obama's awarded their daughter Malia with a cushy internship along side Harvey Weinsstein, well, enough said. Oh, wait, they had no idea he was a perve and are appalled! Not appalled enough to give all the money back that he has given them over the years, but appalled just the same. And as for all that money being returned, that's not exactly what is happening. All these Dems that lived large off his donation are making a big show of giving the cash to other Dem-affiliated "women's" charities only to get it laundered right back into their campaign coffers.

Okay, now on a couple a issue in New York City:

I know that Columbus Day is over, but Columbus Day is a huge deal in NYC. And an issue in the "Take Down Those Evil Statues" has taken a new twist here too. Yeah, in NYC because, let's be honest, there aren't many statues of Confederate generals around and the statue-haters in NYC didn't want to be left out, so they've shifted their focus to...Christopher Columbus. Not a great idea. You see, first and formost Christopher Columbus was Italian and the Italian-American community in NYC is very large and very proud of the fact that Christopher Columbus was Italian. Many, many things in NYC are named after him at the behest of the Italian-American community like Columbus Avenue, Columbus Circle, Columbia University, and many parades including the big one down 5th Avenue every year, and many, many Italian-American social clubs.

And these same Italian-Americans are very miffed at all the rhetorical and physical attacks on their beloved Christopher Columbus especially from someone whose has taken the Italian name of "DeBlasio" [real name: Warren Wilhelm Jr.]. In fact it has gotten so bad that the famous (and newly renovated) statue of Christopher Columbus in the equally famous Columbus Circle at Broadway and 59th Street now has a 24/7 armed guard to curtail growing vandalism directed at Columbus.

As you may remember from an earlier post, DeBlasio made a big splash during the "Robert E. Lee statue removal of 2017" controversy (there's no controversy to great in an election year) by appointing a special panel in NYC to discuss and decide what statues in NYC might not meet the very new, very stringent rules of what statues should get to stay and which ones should go 'cause it's a thing now. I mean, he is up for reelection in just a few weeks and the committee is meeting "out of the public eye and input" to decide these things and their mayor-imposed deadline for a proposal just happens to conveniently fall after the election in November. Pretty much every statue is up for grabs because, well, there is literally no person who can pass this new purity test of time and hindsight. No one, not even Theodore Roosevelt who is the newest target of our "New Puritans". Oh, and for obvious reasons, the Italian-American community is pobably not a group that you want to "miff", if you know what I mean.

Oh, not that, I mean they are a huge voting bloc. What did you think I meant??

And then there's this:
The famous Solomon Guggenheim Museum in NYC forced to remove art from show 'cause this is what we do now. The museum was going to exhibit some photographs in a group called "Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World" by various artists. However some activists took umbrage with at least 3 of the works being presented - 'Dogs That Cannot Touch Each Other' (2003), 'Theater of the World' (1993), and 'A Case Study of Transference' (1994) - because they showed animals being abused in some way. Unlike the whole Pissed Christ, Mapplethorpe, or Elephant Dung Virgin Mary issue, this isn't about public funding. This particular issue is about pure and simple censorship. Animal rights activist were going to violently (how ironic) protest the display, so the museum decided to pull them "out of concern for the saftety of its staff, visitors, and participating artists". Seriously, if we are going to start censoring artists who maybe could teach us about the bad things that humans do to animal then how are we supposed to learn about them?

Again this isn't about Henry Hyde-style public funding. The issue with the NEA in the '90's was never about censorship, it was who was going to pay for it. Even Rudy Giuliani when he wanted the dung-strewn Madonna removed from the publicly-funded Brooklyn Museum never once said it should be banned. Any private gallery that wanted to pick up that gaunlet was free to do so. None did, by the way. And it's not like there aren't hundreds of private galleries in NYC who couldn't have either. And if it only takes some nebulous threat of violence to get something banned these days, I have a list of a few sculptures I would like removed just 'cause they are ugly and pointless.

Okay, do your commenting stuff...

5 comments:

tryanmax said...

That's just it, Bev. The Right's attitude is and always has been "anything goes so long as you're paying for it." The Left's attitude is and always was "what we say goes and you're gonna pay for it!"

The draw of Leftism is "free" stuff, and lots of people are all to happy to go for what seems free even if it's not exactly (or at all) what they want.

BevfromNYC said...

Tryanmax - Yes, you are right. The NEA defund debacle of the '90's exposed that. Pulling Funding = Censorship with the Libs. Not forcing nuns to pay for other's BC and abortifacients is "WAR ON WOMEN'S HEALTH"!!!!! My thought on that is if you work for/with Nuns, you should know the drill about, ya' know, Catholic rules/regs and stuff. Heck, they have a centuries of "Thou Shalt Do's" and "Thou Shalt Not Do's" prolly available to anyone on the intrawebs.

But I must admit, the Liberals/SJW are trying to give the Catholics a run for their money in the "Thou Shalt Do's" and "Thou Shalt Not Do's" race to the bottom. Oops did I say "race"? Uh, please, please, please don't turn me in for "cultural appropriation"!!!!

Anthony said...

The Boy Scouts are taking girls now. As an Eagle Scout I never thought I’d see the day. I don’t see what was wrong with the Girl Scouts. It’s a very different thing but my daughters loved it. I’m not saying the Boy Scouts are ruined but it will be very different than what it was.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/10/12/eagle-scout-rip-boy-scouts-america-were-great-for-100-years.html

From the lifting of the ban on openly gay boys from joining the organization, to the sanctioning of openly gay adult leaders, to the encouragement of so-called “transgendered” boys to join, the BSA’s moral foundation has been rapidly and steadily eroding into dust.


As soon as the BSA changed the definition of the phrase “morally straight” in the generations-old Scout Oath back in 2013, allowing for homosexual membership, we all knew that this first compromise would not be the last. We all knew that it was only a matter of time before the BSA compromised itself into oblivion.

AndrewPrice said...

Bev, Liberalism is a mental condition that makes its victims extremely susceptible to the herd instinct. Hence, they become obsessed with the idea of everyone sharing the same views and beliefs and they become irrationally angry at dissent.

Critch said...

I was a scoutmaster for 20 years, all three of my sons are Eagles and my troop had probably close to 20 Eagles awarded...however, about the time my youngest son was finishing up his Eagle I was burned out from having to watch every little word etc because of the women in the camps.
My scoutmaster when I was a kid in the early 60s was an old WWII Army vet who seemed to know everything about the woods...we worked to get money for our surplus Army pup tents, mess kits, pocket knives, canteens, etc...but we were proud of them. Our camp outs were great...We all saw him smoking and occasionally taking a pull on a 1/2 pint of whiskey, so what...he would taken a bullet for us..and all the parents knew it.
I didn't mind the women in the Cub Scouts, but they made things very complicated in Boy Scout camps...and let me add this..a lot of women were doing the scoutmaster thing because the worthless *** men weren't in their kid's lives..
Letting girls into Boy Scouts is going to be an unmitigated disaster...

Post a Comment