And: "Thanks to male feminist Jordan Hoffman for enlightening me."
Note: Hoffman's post is about the exclusion of men from a movie theater's showing of "Wonder Woman" (which is the topic of my last 2 posts).
२९ मे, २०१७
Some feminist logic.
After quoting something I said about body-slamgate, Instapundit says: "But personally, I’m now sufficiently woke to praise Gianforte for body-slamming rapist Ben Jacobs":
And: "Thanks to male feminist Jordan Hoffman for enlightening me."
Note: Hoffman's post is about the exclusion of men from a movie theater's showing of "Wonder Woman" (which is the topic of my last 2 posts).
And: "Thanks to male feminist Jordan Hoffman for enlightening me."
Note: Hoffman's post is about the exclusion of men from a movie theater's showing of "Wonder Woman" (which is the topic of my last 2 posts).
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०२ टिप्पण्या:
Well, no one can accuse Jordan Hoffman of thinking with his dick. can they?
... one the other hand, what does Jordan think with?
I've always assumed that it was a setup and that the Fox News people were in on it. It never was a body slam; it was a scuffle initiated by Jacobs and he deliberately went down to the ground dragging Gianforte with him. When all the facts are out you will see that I'm right.
The most common leftist logic: it is ok when WE do it.
There was no body-slam and no rapist, so I don't get it.
Oh yeah! Fake news, so "please look at my tweeters."
So not only do contemporary conservatives heap praise on a thug for assaulting a journalist, but they now call the victim a "rapist". Why? Oh, it's clever. It's fun.
Thanks for sharing that.
Quaestor said...
Well, no one can accuse Jordan Hoffman of thinking with his dick. can they?"
Actually, maybe he is. I think young males go along with feminist drivel because they think it will get them laid. Repeating the party line is easier than trying to make yourself appealing to women by, I dunno, being an interesting person with actual achievements.
It might work - but of course, if the woman decides the next morning or 6 months later that Jordan was a crappy lay, she can then claim she was raped.
When I read the email exchanges between Mattress Girl and the German student she accused of rape, I was struck by how PC he was. Another one who didn't grasp that the knife could be turned on him.
"So not only do contemporary conservatives heap praise on a thug for assaulting a journalist, but they now call the victim a "rapist". Why? Oh, it's clever. It's fun."
Of course, it depends on your definition of assault. In MT, grabbing a politician and shoving a mic in the face of a politician is very possibly the real initial assault, and Gianforte was merely using legally justified self-defense using non-deadly force. It is all about framing the debate and community standards (which the reporter more likely violated than did Gianforte's).
"Of course, it depends on your definition of assault."
Blah blah blah blah. Yes by now we're very familiar with the way conservatives defend thuggish behavior, even assualt, from their side. Very rational.
'Feminist logic'. Oxymoron?
Lefties don't understand that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
I really should say "Trumpian conservatives," or "conservatives on Althouse" as I know there are still conservatives who haven't thrown all their values and principles overboard. You might not realize that from the comments section here and at other conservative blogs I suppose. As usual the worst are full of passionate intensity.
"Lefties don't understand that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."
The Fourth Graders defense. Very admirable and well-thought out.
Lefties don't understand that when the rules change it takes a while for everyone to catch on to the new rules. And when the new rules apply to both sides, the lefties are non-plussed.
The Fourth Grade defense. Also known as human nature.
"Lefties don't understand that when the rules change it takes a while for everyone to catch on to the new rules."
Sure, I'm advocating all new values. Never heard of before. That's a good and reasonable excuse for what you embrace.
"The Fourth Grade defense. Also known as human nature."
Also known as Alt+Rt values.
Screw it. I can do this all day with people who no longer have character.
You're stuck with yourselves.
Actually, what Jacobs did comes under the definition of "assault".
Funny how Jacobs was "body slammed" and taken to the ER, but we have NO pictures showing his bruised, battered body or face.
Probably, because he didn't get a scratch or a bruise.
But he probably cried a lot.
"You're stuck with yourselves."
Yeah, we'll have to live with ourselves. Just like all the Liberals who didn't say squat about the attacks on conservatives by Liberal campus thugs or on Trump supporters are various rallies.
Leftists/Liberals have no problem with violence - until its directed at them.
Lefties are the ones crying for safe spaces. So I suspect that they are the ones who are worried about being stuck with the deplorables.
" I think young males go along with feminist drivel because they think it will get them laid. "
I think it's a quick and one-way ticket to the friend zone.
Though feminists may be loath to admit it, I suspect pajama boys are NOT high on the list of "Ooooh, I just gots to have me some of THAT!" for women of any political stripe.
Brookzene's insensitive remarks are creating a hostile environment.
"Brookzene's insensitive remarks are creating a hostile environment."
It's a good assumption that that's the extent of what you know about good character. People who advocate for it are "special snowflakes."
Probably, because he didn't get a scratch or a bruise.
But he probably cried a lot.
5/29/17, 9:16 AM
His glasses were broken!!
What thuggery! Clearly, this was a smackdown for the ages! Brookzene is terrorized!
Someone even set up a GoFundMe to pay for his new glasses.
Don't Guardian reporters have insurance to cover such expenses? Are their pay and benes that shitty?
"Though feminists may be loath to admit it, I suspect pajama boys are NOT high on the list of "Ooooh, I just gots to have me some of THAT!" for women of any political stripe."
I didn't say it would work, only that these pajama boys think it might work.
I remember the "sensitive males" of the '70's tried the same ploy.
How long before politicians wear body cams?
feminist logic - oxymoron.
Brookzene said...
Blah blah blah blah. Yes by now we're very familiar with the way conservatives defend thuggish behavior, even assualt[sic], from their side. Very rational.
This is pretty amusing since the supposedly objectionable comment only applies left wing values to a fact pattern where they "defend" someone on the right to highlight left wing hypocrisy. While left wingers have no criticism for the widely deployed values as long as they support the left they simultaneously act as if these values prove something about conservatives.
The lack of embarrassment from left wingers making such arguments proves they comment in bad faith. There's no way they could actually be so stupid as to not understand this, which means they consciously choose to apply their principles and gin up outrage based solely on who is speaking.
Somewhere there are reasonable left supporters but it sure isn't here.
"This is pretty amusing since the supposedly objectionable comment only applies left wing values to a fact pattern where they "defend" someone on the right to highlight left wing hypocrisy. While left wingers have no criticism for the widely deployed values as long as they support the left they simultaneously act as if these values prove something about conservatives."
Underneath this ridiculous mound of bullshit babble I'm pretty sure there lurks the Fourth Grader's Defense: He did it first!
He did it first!
Applying a judgement to a new set of circumstances to see if it is still reasonable is claiming "he did it first"?
Maybe he really is this stupid.
Sure. If you're saying (and it's really hard to say given the pretentious way you express yourself), "Those guys excuse it when it's their side, so it's okay for our side," then yes, that's just a childish argument. However much you dress it up in this playacting-academic verbiage of yours.
Brookzene said...
Screw it. I can do this all day with people who no longer have character.
5/29/17, 9:15 AM
😢
so it's okay for our side,"
Having a hard time distinguishing between reality and fantasy are you? Show me where I said this.
"Show me where I said this."
I don't think anyone could figure out what your are trying to say if that's not it. Try again without the pseudo-intellectualisms.
Brookzene, "tit for tat" is the only universally effective strategy in game theory, at least in Prisoners Dilemma. It's not sustainable that your hog forever feeds at the trough while convincing our hog to be high-minded instead of hungry.
Where is the part where you have agency?
Where is the part where you realize you've gone too far and ratchet it down *on your side*?
Where is the part where you say, oh s***, we lost?
As President Trump would say about your arguments: just words.
You had it all and then you threw it all away.
And you know what, it's not okay for our side. It's not okay. But it's necessary. You have made it necessary.
Look inward. The next insight you have will be your first.
I don't think anyone could figure out what your are trying to say if that's not it.
I seriously doubt anyone but you is having trouble. The inability to process information contrary to their worldview is a common failing of ideologues.
"The inability to process information"
You should be able to break that down in simpler language, right? Go ahead, talk to me like I'M the eighth-grader.
"a common failing of ideologues."
I'm sure that would score a point if I were an ideologue.
You know, if anyone can't stomach the bullying behaviors and childish justifications from the Trumpists and the alt+right, well, they must be "idealogues".
Brookzene is playing by Alinsky's rules. ""Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules"
Don't discuss the Left's violence, just keep harping on how the Right isn't living up to their rules. "Don't you believe in law and order"? "How can you justify violence?"
"You should criticize Gianforte, no matter what the Left does".
Of course, some suckers always fall for it.
Now at least we have a beginning premise from which we can understand one another.
We do?
talk to me like I'M the eighth-grader.
What grade do you have to be in before you realize the absurdity of the new application is a criticism of the original application rather than the new? I think most eight graders realize that.
I'm sure that would score a point if I were an ideologue.
So you're lying to yourself rather than everyone else? I'm don't think that matters to anyone but you.
"So you're lying to yourself rather than everyone else?"
At best you understand I don't like Trump and think that the values he embraces and that are embraced by his followers are childish bullshit. Therefore, you find me to be an "idealogue".
Tell me. What ideology do I adhere to? If you get this right, you get my quiet appreciation. If you fuck it up, then you are just as shallow as I suspected. But of course, those are just my valuees.
Go on. Let's hear it. What am I lying to myself about?
At best you understand I don't like Trump and think that the values he embraces and that are embraced by his followers are childish bullshit.
And we also know you have no objection to those same values when embraced by people whose politics you support - and who apply those values in far more egregious circumstances.
Personal space and the meaning of "no"...
To say "no-no", perchance to squirt. Down boy!
The Guardian should have sent Michelle Fields to cover the rally.
"And we also know you have no objection to those same values when embraced by people whose politics you support - and who apply those values in far more egregious circumstances."
Yes, yes. The ad hominem fallacy - embraced everywhere by, who... Idealogues? Intellectuals? Forward thinkers? Environmental scanners?
No, just your garden variety youtube commenter, for example.
"And we also know you have no objection to those same values when embraced by people whose politics you support - and who apply those values in far more egregious circumstances."
And you know this how? Oh, that's right. Because without making this assumption, you have nothing. Of course, even if you had this you still have nothing, although you might be able to fool people as foolish as you.
But you don't even have that.
Yeah, I think, in spite of being schooled here as I have been, I'll just stick to the idea that in politics, as in life, character matters, character counts. What applies to me should apply to you. You guys can work on different principles.
The Left didnt care about the "body-slam" per se, they only cared about it insofar as it might have led to a Dem victory in Montana => Ny Times articles on how the Trump agenda has been repudiated => a better chance of winning the House in 2018.
Alas, it did not come to pass. Putin must have had a phalanx of undercover Russians agents deeply buried within the political apparatus of the Grizzly State
The Dems will simply have to wait for the next (or 4th?) House special election representing a "do or die" referendum on the Trump White House. Or, in other words, I will keep rolling the dice until I win!!!!!!
I've read all of the previous comments from Brookzene et al., and I am at a loss as to finding any worthwhile discussion. Shall we begin again? I am a senior adult with independent political views - I voted for neither Trump nor Clinton. I have been active in politics and community affairs for more than 50 years. I was educated at both Ivy and non-Ivy schools after a K-12 public school education. My take on Ben Jacobs is that he has been an anti-Trump enthusiast, more than a journalist for some time. He is aggressive about what he considers his "rights" as a reporter and assumes that his rights trump those of mere "deplorables." I will let the authorities in Montana sort out what actually happened - assigning responsibility and punishment as they see fit. He may have been assaulted in the Gianforte case, but he was not "body-slammed" by any usual definition of that term. Using the term does raise the stakes from a case where only your glasses are broken. I've worn glasses for more than 60 years and know how easy even 21st century glasses can be broken. Let a discussion begin.
"I will let the authorities in Montana sort out what actually happened"
Killjoy.
"Screw it. I can do this all day with people who no longer have character."
You are. Every time you touch the keyboard.
And quite seriously Brookzene, the old "you can't judge me because you don't know me" schtick has to be one of the lamest of Internet commenting ploys. No one dragged you into the arena, you walked in. So don't be coy and don't be a pussy. You probably think you're being clever, but from the perspective of your ideological opponents, it just looks weak and trollish. I suspect you have more to offer than that but you're going to have to hang something solid out there. Yes, it's going to get the shit knocked out of it but, if internet commentary is a threat to your self-esteem, you're in the wrong place anyway.
"So don't be coy and don't be a pussy. You probably think you're being clever, but from the perspective of your ideological opponents, it just looks weak and trollish."
My views on virtually anything are an open book, unless someone's being a jerk.
Moral indignation at the baseness of your opponents is not a position.
"Moral indignation at the baseness of your opponents is not a position."
It was harsh but I wouldn't call it 'moral indignation'. Nor would I call him base. If I did I would probably walk it back unless I were dealing with someone really ugly - which actually isn't the case.
My position was appropriate low-level indignation for those who justified the assault on the journalist in Montana and then thought it was funny or clever to call the victim a "rapist."
So call me a snowflake. Do you think that would bother me?
Make me a decent counterargument and you get my respect, which might be more interesting even if you didn't care about my respect.
I guess Jordon didn't get the Valenti Memo - men are not allowed to talk about safe spaces. But he just plunges in without consent, ignoring Jessica's cries of "no no stop don't no". Seems very rapey to me. Jordon should be body slammed.
So call me a snowflake. Do you think that would bother me?
You're a snowflake. And we don't care enough about your feelings to care whether you care.
Someone wants to discuss character, LOL
I think it would be inerestkng to root out why the Left has no shame. Yesterday Comey was corrupt and should be fired, today he is a martyr for being fired. And they flip positions without any awareness they are destroying their credibility.
Yesterday, a congressman assaulting a reporter was a heinouscrime, but today when we discover the reporter assaulted the congressman, crickets. And they pick up a new fake scandal without a shred of embarrassment.
What's wrong with tbem? Is it something in the water?
Yesterday it's outrage that Trump may not respect the outcome of the election, today it's okay to support a coup because he is a meanie.
Brooke, some friendly advice:
1) if you want to troll us, don't come off as hysterical and frustrated, growing increasingly angry. You're making a fool of yourself. And making all the other trolls sad.
2) Most here regard you as a dishonest partisan with situational ethics. Any attempt by you to shame them will be met with laughter. So, not a wise tactic.
3) while we understand you guys needed to create a safe fake reality after Hillary lost, you can't bring that crap from your bubble back into the real world. Console yourselves with conspiracy theories of Russian hacking and evil reptilian shapeshifting conservatives all you want, but leave it in your mom's basement next to the bong.
According to what I read online and am trying to confirm, Trump called Mahmoud Abbas a liar to his face. We must keep this man in office!
Big Mike, keep us posted on that!
Brookzene,
Make me a decent counterargument and you get my respect, which might be more interesting even if you didn't care about my respect.
5/29/17, 12:50 PM
You are a liar. Pursuant to your entreaty I made cogent remarks in response to a post of yours and you completely ignored them.
"Yes by now we're very familiar with the way conservatives defend thuggish behavior, even assualt, from their side."
Don't like your own tactics being used against you? Tough.
Don't start nothing and there won't be nothing.
Got it?
"Don't start nothing and there won't be nothing.
Got it?"
Sure sure sure. I got it. This is you doing a street thug. Now do someone who deserves respect.
Jordan Hoffman isn't a "male feminist"; he's a feminist, full stop. I get so tired of this garbage. You aren't just a nurse, you're a "male nurse." You aren't even just an elementary school teacher, you're a "male elementary school teacher." No doubt we're due for "male English professor" next.
Welcome to the Brookzene show, where every topic will be hijacked by Brooky to satiate his narcissism. Today, as all days, we will talk about Brooky!
And now, our host and 1st and 2nd guest, Brookzene!
(applause)
Brooke "The fourth grade defense"
No, it's Newton's 3rd Law.
Try to keep up.
Welcome to the Brookzene show, where every topic will be hijacked by Brooky to satiate his narcissism. Today, as all days, we will talk about Brooky!
I suspect 'he' is really a 'she'. Very like another thread-monopolizer. Best thing is to ignore their posts.
today it's okay to support a coup because [Trump] is a meanie
An alleged meanie asserted by anonymous sources and the press.
I suspect 'he' is really a 'she'. Very like another thread-monopolizer. Best thing is to ignore their posts.
The pearl-clutching is a tip-off, you deplorable thugs.
Brookzene said...
And you know this how?
I read your commentary. While you jump on any opportunity to attack the right - in this case as in most misconstruing the argument to foster your attack - even as you ignore every opportunity to criticize Team Blue for more egregious examples of the same issue.
When your attacks and lack thereof are 100% predictable based solely on whether they help or hurt Team Blue it's not an assumption to understand your motivation.
" While you jump on any opportunity to attack the right - in this case as in most misconstruing the argument to foster your attack - even as you ignore every opportunity to criticize Team Blue for more egregious examples of the same issue."
This moral equivalence bullshit - or immoral equivalence - is the dumbest and least self-aware of them all. You don't have to be an idealogue to see how much damage Trump, the alt+right, and his conservative enablers (but not all conservatives - many are resisting him, and it's no joke to say some heroically resisting) have done to our country.
I don't even blame Trump. He does the only thing he knows how to do, he literally is incapable of acting any other way. But you who are still Trump supporters have no excuse other than your foolishness. Wish I could be there as others tell your grandchildren and their children what an ignoramus you were.
"What did you do in the 2010's great grandfather?"
"I voted and persistently advocated for an immoral slob who slapped our friends and allies and gave comfort to our enemies."
@Bad LT, I've found four or five articles, but nothing mainstream (doesn't mean much) however all the articles trace back to Israeli sources. That doesn't make them wrong, however there is a risk of them misinterpreting what was actually said. We shall see.
Brookzene: "damage Trump, alt right and conservative enablers have done to the country"
And we've only been in power 5 months. You better save some adjectives, and try to resist testing the limits of hyperbole, or you'll have nothing left by midterms.
You don't have to be an idealogue to see how much damage Trump, the alt+right, and his conservative enablers
The subject has nothing to do with Trump. The subject was your insistence others have low character for refusing to apply their principles universally even while this is obviously true of yourself. And when you can no longer pretend not to understand you whine Trump! to change the subject.
Brooky: "You Trump supporters have no other excuse than your foolishness"
The stone mason looks foolish to the retard.
And we have an excuse - they will impeach Trump for the things they will let Hillary get away with. Even Hitler would have been a better choice than Hillary, because as evil as he is, the Establishment and the media would have kept him in check.
Not so with Hillary. And here is the delicious irony.- you rant against the people who elected Trump while refusing to hold Hillary accountable for anything... which is exactly why we did not trust her with the Presidency.
It's kinda your fault. You refuse to hold Hillary accountable, but are then livid we rejected her because she is unaccountable.
You want to lash out, find a mirror.
Yes Brooke,YOU enabled Trump. Keep it up and you will get more Trump.
"The subject was your insistence others have low character for refusing to apply their principles universally"
Rick, I agree principles HAVE to be applied universally. I KNOW many Dems, many leftists have acted very poorly - Dems and Cons and everything in between always will. I don't have any interest in protecting anyone who does badly, although in all cases I believe a principle of mercy should be given some consideration. I just think as a people we're often so unmerciful to one another. But equal accountability, I believe in that.
What's coming out of this White House and this congress is unlike anything we've had before, and this is what I expect that everyone should see and agree on. I know they don't, but I've told you what I think of that.
The hypocrisy today is really a problem with the right, not with the left. Which isn't to say there aren't people on the left who aren't hypocrites - I know they are, call them out. But the real problem today is with the right.
You can prove this all day long to people who are Trump supporters, and of course they aren't going to say "Well I won't support him anymore!" It's happening gradually as we see his popularity decline but no matter what he does to prove he's unfit his hardcore base will not abandon him. Those are the people I have an issue with.
The issue shouldn't be personal, even if I wrongly make it that way sometimes. In my world we should be arguing like crazy over Trump and have a beer and share pictures of the family afterwards.
"Do I contradict myself? Very well I contradict myself." Walt Whitman
"The subject was your insistence others have low character for refusing to apply their principles universally"
It's not a good thing to accuse others of having a low character unless it is especially warranted. A wise person should say "You don't really know so-and-so or what good they may be doing in their world. Don't tell them they are low even if their values in one area aren't what you think is right."
I apologize for making a personal attack. I'm really pissed at Trump, particularly after the trip to Europe, but I'm not qualified to judge you nearly as well as I feel qualified to judge Trump. I'm sorry.
You are not qualified to judge hypocrisy. And you should consider that with your current rep, you take the wind out of the sails of any credible accusation of hypocrisy.
And what the hall did Trump do in Europe to kiss you off? Specifics please, not some vague analysis filled with adjectives of assertion cribbed from HuffPo.
"One comforting thing about the Trump White House is that you aren't forced to choose between malice and incompetence. It's always both."
- Garry Kasparov
Incomptetence eh? Trump just pulled off the most stunning political upset in American history. Must have been luck. Odd how Trump is always so lucky. It's Trump 49 Dems 0 and we're still in the 1st Quarter.
This alternate reality the Left has created will bring about their end.
And Kasparov should stick to his area of expertise. His political analysis carries as much weight as Robert Downey Jr. And "that little dude that was in something".
And I asked you for specifics, not snarky quotes from smug ignorant celebrities. And you wonder why you have little credibility in this blog.
Brookzene said...
"What did you do in the 2010's great grandfather?"
"I voted and persistently advocated for an immoral slob who slapped our friends and allies and gave comfort to our enemies."
5/29/17, 7:27 PM
Yes but thanks to merciful God, Obama finally left office. Then He gave us President Trump who is trying to fix all that.
Repeated Games.
Game Theory.
Why is it hard to understand?
Leftwing and progressive bullies getting roughed up by their intended victims in response to violent and threatening behavior is entirely appropriate and principled self defense. I support it wholeheartedly.
So would any fair minded person.
"What's coming out of this White House and this congress is unlike anything we've had before..."
Utter Bullshit. Your Walter Middy fantasies of battling Trump-Nazis aligned with Russia is based on lies and paranoia. You need to stop it and start acting like an adult.
Hilarious; I didn't see who posted that and assumed it was a slam on Obama too. lol
"You can prove this all day long...but his hardcore supporters won't abandon him. These are the people I have a problem with"
Well golly gee, since you put it that way, I feel silly. Why did I refuse to faithfully trust the people that have been sliming me as a racist sexist homophobe holocaust denying toothless redneck Nazi bitterly clinging to guns and god while fucking my sister in our doublewide in between dreams of nuking Mecca.
Why, it's almost...
Deplorable.
The hypocrisy today is really a problem with the right, not with the left.
This is false as your own comments prove. It's particularly amusing when the biggest hypocrites are intentionally misunderstanding others so they can allege hypocrisy.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा