White Women, Come Get Your People
In Part 6 we looked at some of the hateful results of what happens when white women behave like colored women do, in self-interest, and how because that does not immediately work in favor of colored women, white women are "gender traitors", because women are supposed to be voting based on what helps all women and not just themselves. White women, in making partner and lifestyle choices that do not benefit colored women, are selfish and playing a role in oppressing colored women. And they should just stop doing that right now.
If the theme sounds familiar and childish it's not an accident, because it's always easier to try and tear someone else down, to devalue their achievements and make excuses, than to try and accomplish something yourself. It's orders of magnitude simpler to be a critic than a creator, and so when even the very fabric of reality is demonstrating that some choices are better than others, and you can't change the past, you will work hard to change the future instead to try and mitigate the cost of bad choices you have made. This is natural, expected, and yet so often entirely self-destructive.
Let's finish up the article.
I’m sure he does “have” them; game girls will defend their privilege to the death.
Envious jab, and little more than that. Females naturally defend what is "theirs", whether we're talking about humans or animals, and so a woman accusing other women of doing so while trying to defend "what ought to be mine" is certainly hypocritical, but pointing that out is impotent at best.
This is why deceit and misdirection is required, because facts and data don't matter, so one must "dig deeper" to create the desired resonance that goes beyond intellect.
And that is why the article went where it did next.
But apparently that doesn’t include Ms. Murkowski anymore. Maybe it’s because she comes from a state with the nation’s highest rate of sexual violence, with a sexual assault rate three times the national average, where prosecutors just let a man evade jail time after he kidnapped a native Alaskan woman and strangled her unconscious, then masturbated over her body. Maybe.
The details don't need to be true for the narrative to appear convincing, and that's the point.
The statistics and data are reported out of context, because at face value this appears to be relevant given the nature of the accusations made against Kavanaugh. The emotional appeal is strong, but if you actually read the article linked:
Some 47 percent of suspects are Alaska Native. About one-third are white. Some 97 percent are male. Suspects and victims tend to be the same race, except for black suspects, whose victims most often are white, the analysis found.
Another data point:
Almost all the victims and suspects knew each other. Just 4 percent of the attackers were strangers, and for the youngest children, only 1 percent were targeted by someone unknown, the analysis found. Most suspects were acquaintances. Some were relatives. A few were boyfriends or girlfriends. In five instances, the suspect was the baby sitter.Rather different framing. Apparently people are lacking proper sexual outlets and, given that incest and rape are really only a moral issue for Christians, the problem doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with any of the national narratives at all,
Now, the article cites 1,542 "incidents involving felony sex offenses" for Alaska in 2016. California meanwhile had 13,695 rape cases in 2016. They used "national average" to try and make Alaska seem so terrible, because that relies on statistics per capita, and since California is a more highly populated state, even if the "rate" is low, the actual number of reported rapes is much higher.
The same way that, as we saw earlier, even if only 10% of white women pursue abortions, because that's 10% of a bigger population, that still results in more actual abortions for white women than colored women.
So, does Alaska or California have a bigger rape problem? And how are "whites" to blame for any of it when they're not the ones doing the majority of it in the first place?
Facts, details, boring boring boring.
And for the man who "evaded jail time"?
Schneider was charged with four felonies, including kidnapping and assault. He pleaded guilty to a single felony assault charge in the second degree in exchange for a sentence of two years with one suspended, plus three years probation. Schneider received credit for time served while wearing an ankle monitor and living with his wife and two children.Who cares about the truth when the story "feels right"?
The reason thus particular case was brought up was in an attempt to equate Trump, who is also entirely coincidentally also a white man, with this convicted felon. Trump was upset that a Republican congresswoman would not vote for the Supreme Court Nominee of a Republican President after hearing unfounded allegations brought forth by Democrats only after the nominee was announced. The attempt is to equate Trump's dismissal of the politically motivated and unfounded allegations with the judge "letting the evil white man go". Sneaky, but not very well hidden.
The intent is to make it look like Trump is an uncouth aggressor acting outside "civilized norms", sufficient to justify white women turning against him and to the "side" of colored women in solidarity against this oppressor who seeks to dominate all of them.
That asking for "proof" is the same as "excusing evil".
And yet this is all still falling under the "stop doing that" type of argument, not the "you should be doing something else and here's why", because the author and those who think like them rely on their opponents surrendering, never fighting back. If an opponent were to fight back, that would be "improper", and in this fashion did they so successfully manipulate those tempted by ideologically superiority.
"We'll win without fighting because we desire a higher path and none can denigrate the power of our ideals!"
"We may lose this election, but we'll still have our principles, and they can never take that away from us!"
Now let's see the contrast.
Meanwhile, Senator Collins subjected us to a slow funeral dirge about due process and some other nonsense I couldn’t even hear through my rage headache as she announced on Friday she would vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. Her mostly male colleagues applauded her.
The author couldn't be bothered to listen to how legal processes actually work from a woman who has actually tried to work hard to achieve something in a legal system that was crafted by men. The author was so overcome by emotion that she couldn't even listen to another woman! Such terrible men for causing her to sin against her "sister" in such a fashion, at least, so long as that sister quickly repents of her own sins of being a "gender traitor" first.
Even this, though, is a misdirection from the fact that the author doesn't want to understand how to affect actual change, because the author isn't actually capable of, or interested in, doing anything but trying to convince other people to surrender, to be worn down by nagging stupidity cloaked in intellectualism and activism. To throw a tantrum and push people to just throw their hands up in the air and say "fine, do what you want, just go away!"
It's this same childish stupidity that lets the author pretend that because a woman said it, it must be good, but if a man said it, it must be bad, because the path to truth is obviously in the vagina. Even woman agreeing with a man, that's bad because a woman is apparently supposed to be diametrically opposed to anything a man might agree with, unless that man got what he said from a woman, then he's just a liar and a creep.
It's this kind of simplistic ignorance wrapped in grandiose vernacular that prompts people to promote socialistic ideals, because they're simply too dumb to understand why those lofty ideals won't actually work. It's this kind of intellectual laziness that the readers are supposed to ignore because they're supposed to be drummed up into an emotional fit just like the author.
Is anyone genuinely confused as to why the author is still single?
The author is the stereotypical "bossy girl" on the playground who goes into an absolute fit whenever someone isn't playing in exactly the way she wants. The kind of girl that finds herself lonely and insecure, but with a chip on her shoulder, certain that the problem is everyone else and not her.
She never grew up because her parents didn't care enough to tell her "no", but instead shipped her off to be brought up by a soulless government system which only taught her to repeat, not to think.
The article finishes out with the same pathetic weakness that the author is desperately trying to hide behind the emotional misdirection.
The question for white women in November is: Which one of these two women are you?
I fear we already know the answer.
The author wants what white women have, and if she can't nobody can, and all without putting in the work required for stable relationships and families.
The author is angry at men, because she's been rejected for putting what she believes before what she is, and so men are being mean and must be diminished in value and significance for refusing to "play along".
The author is ignoring truth, preferring instead a fantasy where women are goddesses and worthy of your worship, and perhaps if you've groveled enough they'll deign to show you favor.
But pointing all this is out is simply stating the obvious. It falls flat, nobody is really surprised or convinced by any of it. So what's really the "proper response" to such an article?
Well, beyond the dissection for understanding to help those who aren't quite aware of all that's going on, saying nothing is usually best. Ignoring a tantrum can sometimes work because the individual throwing the tantrum will come to realize that their inputs are not achieving the desired outputs.
If you don't ignore? I am bad rhetoric, but perhaps something along these lines:
Fake women want lives that matter.
And then tell white women to vote for white interests, marry and then have white babies, and make a big deal about women who dress like sluts needing to spend lots of money on batteries.
No comments:
Post a Comment