Saturday, February 28, 2015
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Open-minded liberals and progressives
The idea that a Roman Catholic bishop should expect congruence with Roman Catholic teaching and behavior from the people --mainly women, of course-- who are paid to teach Roman Catholicism in Roman Catholic schools is...disturbing.And speaking of "strict morality codes", ever run into a nest of progressives who did not constantly ride herd on every possible departure from Approved Speech, Thought and Attitude? And the secular Kosher laws for Proper Disposal of Waste is not a "strict morality code" enforced by the State?
Once the Party of Progress decides in an issue, no further discussion, much less thinking, is allowed. Difference become H8. The notion that progressives are non-dogmatic and open-minded is utterly wrong. Laughably so.
Now that, for instance, gay marriage has been elevated to sacrosanct status and "transphobia" is a newly discovered Crime Against Humanity, will you find any open-minded critical thinker among the progressive who would dare to stop and say, "Let's assess this again. Is there anything other than Pure Progress and Virtue involved in our positions and policies? Any down sides? At all?"
Ain't never gonna happen.
Many people think that the current Archbishop of Chicago was being a drama queen when he said, "I will die in my bed. My successor will die in prison. And his successor will die a martyr in the public square."
Like any cancer, once Progress becomes more established --and now has complete hegemony, and in San Francisco, monopoly-- it becomes more, not less, invasive and virulent. Like cancer, it never stops until it has killed its host.
---
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
What if
the one thing that could save us is the one thing that we are absolutely forbidden to have?
---
---
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Eyes
During the years I lived with my Black partner, I learned to watch TV and movies and ads racially, like he did. For instance, he alerted me to the fact that, in the 90's anyway, it was almost always a Black guy who died first in films and shows. I thought he was kidding until I looked with his eyes. He was right.
Well, now, --alas, for the damage it does to my viewing pleasure-- I watch them with my own White and male (and "gay" and Gentile and Amurrican and Christianish and Righty) eyes.
And it ain't pretty. Ain't pretty at all.
Once you have the eyes to see The Narrative all over the place, it makes it harder find entertainment that does not offend.
I will not bore you with the details. It's a sunny day.
---
Well, I'll bore you with one. On an HBO series I just finished watching, the most evil character was a racist white woman. No humiliation was spared in damning her, by both blacks and whites. On the other hand, the black characters were allowed to make disparaging comments about whites to their faces and they responded with...nothing. This is part of the rules of The Narrative.
Reminds me of the time(s) my Black ex would come home upset at some racial thing or other (real or imagined) and opine that he'd like to kill all the White people, and then expect me to sit down to dinner with him. I, of course, was expected to be very circumspect about my racial comments.
---
Well, now, --alas, for the damage it does to my viewing pleasure-- I watch them with my own White and male (and "gay" and Gentile and Amurrican and Christianish and Righty) eyes.
And it ain't pretty. Ain't pretty at all.
Once you have the eyes to see The Narrative all over the place, it makes it harder find entertainment that does not offend.
I will not bore you with the details. It's a sunny day.
---
Well, I'll bore you with one. On an HBO series I just finished watching, the most evil character was a racist white woman. No humiliation was spared in damning her, by both blacks and whites. On the other hand, the black characters were allowed to make disparaging comments about whites to their faces and they responded with...nothing. This is part of the rules of The Narrative.
Reminds me of the time(s) my Black ex would come home upset at some racial thing or other (real or imagined) and opine that he'd like to kill all the White people, and then expect me to sit down to dinner with him. I, of course, was expected to be very circumspect about my racial comments.
---
Saturday, February 21, 2015
Sabbath evil musings
This should come under Hard Sayings.
If you put together Samuel Huntington's taxonomy of friends-and-enemies
and add to that the options open to you when confronting these groups, you come up with the following. If you are ExCathedra.
Once a group passes beyond C and is either antagonistic or inimical, the options become narrower.
To put it simply, your choices are composed of Domination and Separation.
If you are dealing with antagonists or enemies, you must either dominate them or you must separate (them from you or you from them). You can work with with friends, allies and even competitors. Beyond that, you can perhaps negotiate with antagonists (if you are powerful enough). But with enemies, you can only dominate or separate. And if you separate, you had better be powerful enough to dissuade them from attacking you or to resist them successfully if they do.
So here's the Hard Part.
Given the levels of bitterness and hatred between the Left and Right over the last half century, how do these two groups now see each other?
I incline, no surprise, to see them as inimical. So that contemporary politics in the US (and the West in general) is truly a zero-sum game. As I have said, an undeclared Second Civil War between two incompatible visions of society.
Whose options are Domination or Separation.
The component groups of Left and Right, if you use voting patterns as the norm, are pretty clear.
The Left is composed of Liberal Whites and Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, LGBTQs, Muslims and unmarried women. You can throw in the media and academia as well.
The Right is White, Gentile, Christian, straight, male and married female. Others in this group are distinct and tiny minorities.
And this group itself is hurtling toward demographic minority status itself.
Mainline Conservatives --whose ranks ExC has now left-- continue to believe that Left and Right are competitors, with a mixed relationship of common interest and clashing interest. The New Right, the neo-reactionaries of the Dark Enlightenment, see the Left (and most of the standard Right) as enemies who must be dominated or separated from. Otherwise they will dominate you.
Look at every action and every policy of the Democrats in the last half century and ask yourself which groups it has benefited to the detriment of what other groups and you will see the pattern. It now seems clear to me that every action and policy of the Democrats is designed to damage the groups that make up the Right. Every one. If this does not make them your enemy, what, aside from direct military attack, would?
So here's the Hard Saying as it seems to me this bright Sabbath spring morning:
Because the Left shows not the slightest sign of slowing, moderating or negotiating its vision (quite the contrary), unless the Right groups dominate or separate from the Left groups, we will be destroyed.
Now back to my coffee.
---
If you put together Samuel Huntington's taxonomy of friends-and-enemies
A. true friends who will be with us and we with them through thick and thin;
B. opportunistic allies with whom we have some but not all interests in common;
C. strategic partner-competitors with whom we have a mixed relationship;
D. antagonists who are rivals but with whom negotiation is possible;
E. and unrelenting enemies who will try to destroy us unless we destroy them first
and add to that the options open to you when confronting these groups, you come up with the following. If you are ExCathedra.
Once a group passes beyond C and is either antagonistic or inimical, the options become narrower.
To put it simply, your choices are composed of Domination and Separation.
If you are dealing with antagonists or enemies, you must either dominate them or you must separate (them from you or you from them). You can work with with friends, allies and even competitors. Beyond that, you can perhaps negotiate with antagonists (if you are powerful enough). But with enemies, you can only dominate or separate. And if you separate, you had better be powerful enough to dissuade them from attacking you or to resist them successfully if they do.
So here's the Hard Part.
Given the levels of bitterness and hatred between the Left and Right over the last half century, how do these two groups now see each other?
I incline, no surprise, to see them as inimical. So that contemporary politics in the US (and the West in general) is truly a zero-sum game. As I have said, an undeclared Second Civil War between two incompatible visions of society.
Whose options are Domination or Separation.
The component groups of Left and Right, if you use voting patterns as the norm, are pretty clear.
The Left is composed of Liberal Whites and Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, LGBTQs, Muslims and unmarried women. You can throw in the media and academia as well.
The Right is White, Gentile, Christian, straight, male and married female. Others in this group are distinct and tiny minorities.
And this group itself is hurtling toward demographic minority status itself.
Mainline Conservatives --whose ranks ExC has now left-- continue to believe that Left and Right are competitors, with a mixed relationship of common interest and clashing interest. The New Right, the neo-reactionaries of the Dark Enlightenment, see the Left (and most of the standard Right) as enemies who must be dominated or separated from. Otherwise they will dominate you.
Look at every action and every policy of the Democrats in the last half century and ask yourself which groups it has benefited to the detriment of what other groups and you will see the pattern. It now seems clear to me that every action and policy of the Democrats is designed to damage the groups that make up the Right. Every one. If this does not make them your enemy, what, aside from direct military attack, would?
So here's the Hard Saying as it seems to me this bright Sabbath spring morning:
Because the Left shows not the slightest sign of slowing, moderating or negotiating its vision (quite the contrary), unless the Right groups dominate or separate from the Left groups, we will be destroyed.
Now back to my coffee.
---
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
Surprised by the obvious
The Parquette at the corner of Castro and market is to be close down for several months. It has become hang out for drug nomads and homeless people off their meds. Verbal and physical violenceare not uncommon. The barbarians move in and take over a space that was designed as a pleasant outdoor mall. What I find humorous about this is it's order predictability. In the last 10 years every form of public seating has been removed from the neighborhood because these same barbarians set up camp. Why anyone thought this Parquette would be an exception is typical San Francisco blindness. Although most people resent this population, there are the endless advocates for the homeless and the mentally deranged who insist that we must accommodate them or consider ourselves bad people with privilege.
My normal excellent spelling and grammar has been reduced because I am making this post from my iPhone by voice.
Tuesday, February 17, 2015
IQ Stuff
IQ is a hotbutton panic issue for Social Justice Warriors, the cadre of True Believers in Equality For All.
In every test of general intelligence, the hierarchy is always the same: East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans), Caucasians, Hispanics, Blacks. The Caucasian average is 100. The Asians come in about 5-6 points higher, the Hispanics about 10 points lower and the Blacks 15 points lower.
SJWs who scream --unfoundedly-- that the tests are "culturally biased" because Blacks always come out last seem to ignore the fact that in these Caucasian-originated tests, East Asians always come out first.
Or they pivot and say that IQ doesn't matter.
Here's a bit of info that shows how much it can matter.
Ashkenazi Jews, the descendants of the Yiddish-speaking Jews of east and northern Europe, have the highest average group IQ of any ethnic body on the planet. Measured at 110-115, on average.
What does that mean? Here's an example, from a recent work on human genetics:
In a thousand European Jews, 23 such people.
Tell me that ain't significant.
And if you move it to the other end of the spectrum, how many such people will there be in a group whose average IQ is only 85?
What part of the progressive Potemkin Village is not based on the moralistic fallacy, the contrary-to-fact assertion that something is so because someone thinks it ought to be so?
---
In every test of general intelligence, the hierarchy is always the same: East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, Koreans), Caucasians, Hispanics, Blacks. The Caucasian average is 100. The Asians come in about 5-6 points higher, the Hispanics about 10 points lower and the Blacks 15 points lower.
SJWs who scream --unfoundedly-- that the tests are "culturally biased" because Blacks always come out last seem to ignore the fact that in these Caucasian-originated tests, East Asians always come out first.
Or they pivot and say that IQ doesn't matter.
Here's a bit of info that shows how much it can matter.
Ashkenazi Jews, the descendants of the Yiddish-speaking Jews of east and northern Europe, have the highest average group IQ of any ethnic body on the planet. Measured at 110-115, on average.
What does that mean? Here's an example, from a recent work on human genetics:
“…Ashkenazim have an average IQ of 115, one standard deviation above that of northern Europeans, although some measurements put it at only half a standard deviation higher. This is the highest average IQ of any ethnic group for which reliable data exist.
Such an advantage may not make much difference at the average, where most people are situated, but it translates into a significant difference at the extremes.
The proportion of northern Europeans with IQs greater than 140 is 4 per thousand but the figure for Ashkenazim is 23 per thousand, a sixfold difference.”
Nicholas WadeIn a thousand northern Europeans, 4 people with the extremely gifted IQ of 140+.
Before The Dawn: Recovering The Lost History Of Our Ancestors
2007
p.195
In a thousand European Jews, 23 such people.
Tell me that ain't significant.
And if you move it to the other end of the spectrum, how many such people will there be in a group whose average IQ is only 85?
What part of the progressive Potemkin Village is not based on the moralistic fallacy, the contrary-to-fact assertion that something is so because someone thinks it ought to be so?
---
A painful truth
As I have noted, Christianity is a "sign of contradiction" on both the Left and Right.
Feminists and other progressives see it as the source of violent masculine superiority and White civilizational arrogance, while the Angry Young White Men on the traditionalist Right see it as the emasculating root of the universalist egalitarianism supporting the White West's invasion by Third Worlders.
The former alliance between Altar and Throne has now become an alliance between Pulpit and Horde.
Sam Francis wrote, in a review, these words:
Seeing the enthusiastic collusion of Catholic institutions, to say nothing of the Protestant Mainline and most recently the Evangelicals, and the Pope and his ministers, in swamping the traditional Euro communities with aliens, I can't find much of a defense against Mr. Francis' assessment.
---
Feminists and other progressives see it as the source of violent masculine superiority and White civilizational arrogance, while the Angry Young White Men on the traditionalist Right see it as the emasculating root of the universalist egalitarianism supporting the White West's invasion by Third Worlders.
The former alliance between Altar and Throne has now become an alliance between Pulpit and Horde.
Sam Francis wrote, in a review, these words:
Whatever primitive Christianity or true Christianity or historical Christianity may or may not have believed and taught, what is indisputably happening today is the deliberate extirpation from Christianity of the European heritage by its enemies within the churches. The institutional Christianity that flourishes today is no longer the same religion as that practiced by Charlemagne and his successors, and it can no longer support the civilization they formed. Indeed, organized Christianity today is the enemy of the West and the race that created it.
Seeing the enthusiastic collusion of Catholic institutions, to say nothing of the Protestant Mainline and most recently the Evangelicals, and the Pope and his ministers, in swamping the traditional Euro communities with aliens, I can't find much of a defense against Mr. Francis' assessment.
---
Back from the Sierras
What's most surprising about Death Valley is how variedly colorful it is.
The Owens Valley
June Lake at sunset with snow
Some old style Amurrican dislike of the Obamanation.
Noticeable 2nd Amendment stickers in the area
and, oddly for an SF bubble resident,
old Romney for President stickers, too.
It ain't the Bay Area!
Elegant bar at one of the many upscale dives we visited
:)
A good time was had, as always with Mr B.
---
An ExC note:
the lodgings all had cable TV, which I do not have at home, and once again I was bowled over by the universal triumph of the lying Potemkin Village of racial and gender ideology: white men as idiots to their eye-rolling wife and kids, and the huge over-representation of non-whites in practically every image, including inter-racial couplings all over the place.
Pravda West.
--
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
Respite
Heading off to the grandeurs of Death Valley and the Eastern Sierras for a few days with Mr B.
Chronicles of the Decline of the West will have to wait til I get back on the 17th.
--
Chronicles of the Decline of the West will have to wait til I get back on the 17th.
--
Monday, February 09, 2015
Everything Left is ok
One of the drag queen orgs had the neighborhood posted with pictures of their candidate for "empress" this past weekend.
Apparently they think that the Khmer Rouge is funny.
And Che T-shirts are cool, I guess.
But even a hint toward the Right, well, that'd be beyond the pale.
-----
Apparently they think that the Khmer Rouge is funny.
And Che T-shirts are cool, I guess.
But even a hint toward the Right, well, that'd be beyond the pale.
-----
Trans-fusion
The ever insightful and ever offensive Jim Goad on the intra-progressive battle between cisgender feminists and transes.
Embarrassingly amusing.
---
Embarrassingly amusing.
---
Progressive virtue
Every time I hear someone start in about Palestine and Israel, I wait for their follow-up comments on Tibet and China.
Never happens.
Why, I wonder?
(ExC is being disingenuous. Of course he knows why. In the paradigm in question, Israel is a white* and Western country and the victims are Third World Brownies. Need I say more?)
My lifelong philosemitism has taken a serious hit in the last while. The taboo against "anti-semitism" is so strong a version of CrimeThink that even getting close to seriously critical info about Jews induces a kind of internal moral panic.
The long and the short of it is allowing myself to notice the hugely outsized role of the numerically tiny (2%) but other wise incredibly powerful Jewish community in promoting the Liberalism that is corroding my own country and the whole West. That fact, which I have been conditioned not to let myself see, took quite a bit of the bloom off the lily, regardless of the admirable individual Jews I have known in my life.
But that painful reality does not make me into a friend of the Palestinian cause. As I have said before, Israel is Fort Apache. If the Muzzies take it down, it will signal to them that the West has no guts at all and we will be seeing them ramp up their jihad in our own countries. As well, since it only makes sense that nations should have their own nations, Israel is the place where most Jews belong.
And as I pointed out to some hyped up anti-Jewish enthusiasts who were dreaming of the destruction of the Zionist entity, where the hell do you think that the millions of enraged and gunning-for-vengeance sabra refugees are gonna go if their country goes down?
Right in your backyard, all over Europe, America, Canada and Australia.
Whether you like em or you don't, it's in your best interest to wish Fort Israel well.
I still hear nothing against the Han for their invasion and absorption of Tibet. But then, they're Yellow, not White, so we won't have masses of mediocre Western musicians singing that they're not gonna play Beijing City.
----
*My own take is ambiguous on this question, but for this paradigm, Jews are white enough to hate.
Never happens.
Why, I wonder?
(ExC is being disingenuous. Of course he knows why. In the paradigm in question, Israel is a white* and Western country and the victims are Third World Brownies. Need I say more?)
My lifelong philosemitism has taken a serious hit in the last while. The taboo against "anti-semitism" is so strong a version of CrimeThink that even getting close to seriously critical info about Jews induces a kind of internal moral panic.
The long and the short of it is allowing myself to notice the hugely outsized role of the numerically tiny (2%) but other wise incredibly powerful Jewish community in promoting the Liberalism that is corroding my own country and the whole West. That fact, which I have been conditioned not to let myself see, took quite a bit of the bloom off the lily, regardless of the admirable individual Jews I have known in my life.
But that painful reality does not make me into a friend of the Palestinian cause. As I have said before, Israel is Fort Apache. If the Muzzies take it down, it will signal to them that the West has no guts at all and we will be seeing them ramp up their jihad in our own countries. As well, since it only makes sense that nations should have their own nations, Israel is the place where most Jews belong.
And as I pointed out to some hyped up anti-Jewish enthusiasts who were dreaming of the destruction of the Zionist entity, where the hell do you think that the millions of enraged and gunning-for-vengeance sabra refugees are gonna go if their country goes down?
Right in your backyard, all over Europe, America, Canada and Australia.
Whether you like em or you don't, it's in your best interest to wish Fort Israel well.
I still hear nothing against the Han for their invasion and absorption of Tibet. But then, they're Yellow, not White, so we won't have masses of mediocre Western musicians singing that they're not gonna play Beijing City.
----
*My own take is ambiguous on this question, but for this paradigm, Jews are white enough to hate.
Wednesday, February 04, 2015
Tales Unfinished
I listened through to the end of volume 8 of Tales of the City and it was ok. Maupin did manage to pull one of his right-angle hair-pin plot turns and surprise me. It was ok.
I started the final book but have lost interest. The characters who were so charming and compelling in the 70's and 80's are not so interesting now. Anna Madrigal, brought to life on film in the 90's by Olympia Dukakis, is not all that much of a draw in print, and in her own 90s, and in contemporary SF. Ancient dope-smoking transgenders have their limits.
As for the other characters, they just keep on keepin' on. And what was once kinda edgy and new has now achieved cultural hegemony.
So unless I am bit by some other bug, the last of the Tales will go unread/listened to by me.
It's not the 70's anymore.
---
I started the final book but have lost interest. The characters who were so charming and compelling in the 70's and 80's are not so interesting now. Anna Madrigal, brought to life on film in the 90's by Olympia Dukakis, is not all that much of a draw in print, and in her own 90s, and in contemporary SF. Ancient dope-smoking transgenders have their limits.
As for the other characters, they just keep on keepin' on. And what was once kinda edgy and new has now achieved cultural hegemony.
So unless I am bit by some other bug, the last of the Tales will go unread/listened to by me.
It's not the 70's anymore.
---
Liberalism as HIV
HIV is a retrovirus that hijacks the cells in the human immune system in order to create more copies of itself and render its human host defenseless against alien pathogens. Untreated, it is fatal.
Liberalism is an intellectual and spiritual HIV.
By its cartoon narrative of oppressors-and-victims and its privileging of certain Sacred Victim Classes, enforced by its language system, it renders successful Westerners --its target-- without any immunity to the attacks of alien groups. Indeed, the language and memes of Liberalism hijack the soul and mind of Westerners and recreate more Liberals.
And all the while, the Western host is dying, unable even to allow itself to fight back. It installs Crimethink.*
Liberal control of speech and language is nigh absolute. The paradigm case is "racism." This is the worst thing in the whole world, the most damning accusation (except perhaps, for the time being, paedophile, though that could change.)
It contains two parts: One, some beliefs/attitudes about the non-White group in question are wrong, factually mistaken, incorrect, if not outright lies, aka, stereotypes. So if you hold to these, you are clearly stupid. Two, these beliefs/attitudes, being lies, are unjustly damaging to the groups in question. So if you hold to these, you are clearly evil.
When someone calls you a racist, they always automatically assert that you are wrong and hurtful, therefore, stupid and evil.
The deeper meme inside this word is that group is question must therefore be, harmless at worst, and beneficial or specially blessed at most. The flip side of "racism" is that non-Whites must be accepted, praised and celebrated. It mandates applause. No matter what your stupid and evil self might suggest, they are nothing but positive. They can't be ambiguous, competitors, or hostile. And if you bring up instances where they are not unalloyed boons, it must clearly be the case that it is precisely beliefs/attitudes like yours that is visiting these apparent phenomena on them.
Racism is the father of all these linguistic viruses, but they are numerous: sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, looksism, transphobia, etc. etc.
The clear dogma inside each one of these is that there can only be acceptance, welcome, praise and celebration for women, Jews, gays, foreigners, Muslims, uglies, transgenders, etc. And by contrast, you, a member of the "dominant group", are guilty and responsible. Forever.
The victim minorites are canonized groups, new Chosen People, criticism of which is heresy and blasphemy.
And the whole thing is a lie and a fraud from beginning to end.
If you use this language at all--even, or especially, to exculpate yourself from its accusation-- then you are embedding yourself again in its deadly grasp by recognizing its legitimacy and further damaging the immunity that tries to protect you from your enemies. And in this case, from allowing yourself to recognize that you have enemies, and who they are.
--
Liberalism is an intellectual and spiritual HIV.
By its cartoon narrative of oppressors-and-victims and its privileging of certain Sacred Victim Classes, enforced by its language system, it renders successful Westerners --its target-- without any immunity to the attacks of alien groups. Indeed, the language and memes of Liberalism hijack the soul and mind of Westerners and recreate more Liberals.
And all the while, the Western host is dying, unable even to allow itself to fight back. It installs Crimethink.*
Orwell's Crimethink - To even consider any thought not in line with the principles of Ingsoc.PC. Doubting any of the principles of Ingsoc.PC. All crimes begin with a thought. So, if you control thought, you can control crime. "Thoughtcrime is death. Thoughtcrime does not entail death, Thoughtcrime is death.... The essential crime that contains all others in itself."
Liberal control of speech and language is nigh absolute. The paradigm case is "racism." This is the worst thing in the whole world, the most damning accusation (except perhaps, for the time being, paedophile, though that could change.)
It contains two parts: One, some beliefs/attitudes about the non-White group in question are wrong, factually mistaken, incorrect, if not outright lies, aka, stereotypes. So if you hold to these, you are clearly stupid. Two, these beliefs/attitudes, being lies, are unjustly damaging to the groups in question. So if you hold to these, you are clearly evil.
When someone calls you a racist, they always automatically assert that you are wrong and hurtful, therefore, stupid and evil.
The deeper meme inside this word is that group is question must therefore be, harmless at worst, and beneficial or specially blessed at most. The flip side of "racism" is that non-Whites must be accepted, praised and celebrated. It mandates applause. No matter what your stupid and evil self might suggest, they are nothing but positive. They can't be ambiguous, competitors, or hostile. And if you bring up instances where they are not unalloyed boons, it must clearly be the case that it is precisely beliefs/attitudes like yours that is visiting these apparent phenomena on them.
Racism is the father of all these linguistic viruses, but they are numerous: sexism, homophobia, anti-semitism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, looksism, transphobia, etc. etc.
The clear dogma inside each one of these is that there can only be acceptance, welcome, praise and celebration for women, Jews, gays, foreigners, Muslims, uglies, transgenders, etc. And by contrast, you, a member of the "dominant group", are guilty and responsible. Forever.
The victim minorites are canonized groups, new Chosen People, criticism of which is heresy and blasphemy.
And the whole thing is a lie and a fraud from beginning to end.
If you use this language at all--even, or especially, to exculpate yourself from its accusation-- then you are embedding yourself again in its deadly grasp by recognizing its legitimacy and further damaging the immunity that tries to protect you from your enemies. And in this case, from allowing yourself to recognize that you have enemies, and who they are.
--
Tonto's Razor again
Mangan's: What mean we, Kemosabe?:
Canadian reactionary Mangan catches Barry Hussein O asserting that he "still believes" that "we are one people."
Oops.
As he points out, if you have to affirm it, then you're not sure of it.
And I don't believe it any longer.
We are just a Second Civil War/War of Secession waiting to happen.
'via Blog this'
Canadian reactionary Mangan catches Barry Hussein O asserting that he "still believes" that "we are one people."
Oops.
As he points out, if you have to affirm it, then you're not sure of it.
And I don't believe it any longer.
We are just a Second Civil War/War of Secession waiting to happen.
'via Blog this'
Monday, February 02, 2015
Wayfaring
My distance from gaydom has grown quite large over the last few years. Mr Donovan put his irritating finger on the foundations triad that had come to shape and structure the once gay and now Yugoslavian "LGBT" identity: endless victimization complaints, feminist-driven bias against masculinity, and lock-step leftist politics. Once I saw that, I couldn't stop seeing it. It soured me.
And the increasing role of transgenders as the new stars in the propaganda and victimization lottery made me realize that the tribe I once felt a part of because of a shared same-sex eros was now really to be defined by gender deviation.
I resigned.
I only started looking at the HBO gaymale series "Looking" because of Russell Tovey. (And although the characters are mostly not cartoons, he is the primary draw.) Now I am listening on tape to the final books, one surmises, of the Tales of the City series by Armistead Maupin. Just to see how the story ends.
My last attempt at reading Maupin was deeply offputting. Even though his eye for detail remains, especially the complicated inner dialogues that can accompany seemingly simple actions, and he is not, in general, oblivious to some of the flaws of his characters' LGBT world, his attitude toward any person or group which does not buy into that religion is cartoonishly bitter. He lives in a cocoon completely dominated by gayness and transgenderism --both of which are sacrosanct states in SF-- but he still finds the very existence of religious conservatives or Republicans, even far way, an outrage against how the world ought to be. Namely, all about him.
Smallness of soul is what I think they call it.
Speaking of transgenderism, once All-American decathlete Bruce Jenner is apparently coming clean about his long slow descent into faux-feminization.
I shall refrain from declaring him a parable of American decline and simply list him as one more casualty of the Kardashian girls.
Now back to our regular programming.
--
And the increasing role of transgenders as the new stars in the propaganda and victimization lottery made me realize that the tribe I once felt a part of because of a shared same-sex eros was now really to be defined by gender deviation.
I resigned.
I only started looking at the HBO gaymale series "Looking" because of Russell Tovey. (And although the characters are mostly not cartoons, he is the primary draw.) Now I am listening on tape to the final books, one surmises, of the Tales of the City series by Armistead Maupin. Just to see how the story ends.
My last attempt at reading Maupin was deeply offputting. Even though his eye for detail remains, especially the complicated inner dialogues that can accompany seemingly simple actions, and he is not, in general, oblivious to some of the flaws of his characters' LGBT world, his attitude toward any person or group which does not buy into that religion is cartoonishly bitter. He lives in a cocoon completely dominated by gayness and transgenderism --both of which are sacrosanct states in SF-- but he still finds the very existence of religious conservatives or Republicans, even far way, an outrage against how the world ought to be. Namely, all about him.
Smallness of soul is what I think they call it.
Speaking of transgenderism, once All-American decathlete Bruce Jenner is apparently coming clean about his long slow descent into faux-feminization.
I shall refrain from declaring him a parable of American decline and simply list him as one more casualty of the Kardashian girls.
Now back to our regular programming.
--
Sunday, February 01, 2015
Dirty ol' man
Although Mr B remains, in real life, the object not only of my affection but my attraction, ---easily able to make me feel like a happy drunk in an electric storm, even after 7+ years--I do have a bit of a thing for one Mr Tovey. Russell, that is.
A TV actor. And a Brit. And literally half my age. And although I have seen him on the street when he's working in SF and even spoke to him once, he's mostly made of pixels. But, like Mr B, he's got that combo of a hunk of ordinary guyishness with a bit of boyishness that makes me want to be his playmate. For an afternoon, anyway.
I am not typically drawn to English accents, but in his case, yup. As you can see, not what you'd call conventionally handsome, but, well, the bloke turns my head and makes me watch Looking.
It's a testament to his charm that even though Scott Bakula is also in the series, I forget it.
I wish the young man well.
---
A TV actor. And a Brit. And literally half my age. And although I have seen him on the street when he's working in SF and even spoke to him once, he's mostly made of pixels. But, like Mr B, he's got that combo of a hunk of ordinary guyishness with a bit of boyishness that makes me want to be his playmate. For an afternoon, anyway.
In HBO's Looking, he plays the philandering boss who's cheating on his boyfriend with an employee. Russell is beefier than he used to be --a plus--, his ears still stick out at 90 degrees and he's by turns playful, lustful, untruthful and just a little soulful. But mostly playful and lustful.
I am not typically drawn to English accents, but in his case, yup. As you can see, not what you'd call conventionally handsome, but, well, the bloke turns my head and makes me watch Looking.
It's a testament to his charm that even though Scott Bakula is also in the series, I forget it.
I wish the young man well.
---
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
