Credulousness and Doublethink
This is the most brilliant example of Victimhood poker from a leftie I've ever seen. Basically Laurie Pennie, (this post should get a mention in dispatches here too) argues that Straight white men cannot be discriminated against, even when they're in a minority and SOAS's student union should not therefore be appointing a Straight, white man's officer. Or at least that's what I thought she was saying through the double think and bollocks.
...white, straight males do not face discrimination on the grounds of race, sexuality or gender – and that to suggest they do marginalises the experiences of oppressed groups. SOAS students’ union women’s officer Elly Badcock said: “Women have a women’s officer because we’re fundamentally disadvantaged in society, and liberation campaigns exist for those who have been systematically and structurally discriminated against, specifically because of their sexuality, gender or race.
“Straight white men have never been discriminated against on these fronts, so claiming that they are an oppressed group smacks of whingeing.”While we're on the subject of double think and bollocks, here's a brilliant post from Counting Cats dealing with Psychic TV.
I used to think the art of the con was saying what people wanted to hear. It can be and I suspect that is very much the art of the personal one-on-one con but when dealing with masses you just make-up something utterly incredible. You won’t hook in everyone but you will hook-in the sort of people who will then believe the next thing. And the next… And that’s the brilliance of things like Sat TV and the internet. They cast out their lies to a crowd that is atomised. Not a real mass where there might well be a small boy prepared to shout, “But I can see his willy!”This is applicable to socialism and left-wing group think as it is to spiritualism. Mention Gramsci or Marx to give your prejudice an intellectual veneer and ignore the evidence. Shout louder to get the credulous onside.
But, then crowds can be manipulated too. And they can also be manipulated by telling them utter bunk so what do I know
Go read both.
10 immoderate opinions:
Kibbitzing at the victimhood poker table is, of course, the "comedienne" Jo Brand.
can you give me a couple of examples of when straight white men are prejudiced against? I am not saying there are not occasions but would be interested to know what you see as prejudice. While you are at it, can you text me your number as i have a new phone.
thinking about it in a cold philosophical level, simply saying there is no prejudice against straight white men is implicit prejudice. Young people, men in particular, are prejudiced against as a consequence of exaggerated societal fears of crime. Furthermore, young men starting working life are likely to be prejudiced against in favour of white women. This is, of course, a reaction to prejudice against women.
Having said this, i cannot think of any other section of society which faces less prejudice overall than straight white men.
Peace loving white, heterosexual men were press-ganged into wars in order to accumalate more wealth for wealthy white women. Alpha males plundered so they could buy the affection of women.
When the titanic and other ships were going down, women were given preferential treatment.
Feminists were handing out white feathers in the first world war. White heterosexual males were overwhelming victims, dying in order to protect their women folk.
White heterosexual women have been privileged and protected. They have latched onto victim status so they can by-pass the reality of their collective guilt. If the white male has stolen and pillaged, it was for the benefit of the white woman.
All heterosexual white women should give up their wealth to ethnic minorities to atone for their guilt. White heterosexual males in the British Forces make up the majority of dead and injured. White women have not made proportional sacrifice yet expect to reap the rewards of what their slave males bring them.
White males are castigated for being dead-beat dads, yet when they seek contact with their children are deemed to be 'controlling'. Seek too much and they are controlling, seek too little and they are dead-beat.
White women have seized upon feminism because it's idiocy absolves them of any humanity. They cannot experience true compassion or humanity because they have to blame someone for life not being fair to them. Disregard for the suffering of white heterosexual men puts them in the same bracket as any other racist or sexist. There are none so blind as those who cannot see.
I will not tolerate abuse because i am a white, heterosexual male. Women have disarmed us by demonising any act of male physical force whilst retaining their armoury of spiteful words and deceit.
Thank god not all women have fallen under the spell of feminism and work together with their men in making a better and safer community for all.
White heterosexual men have been driven from the teaching profession. Universities have womens studies, to indoctrinate hate against white men. Men have no diploma to wave to show their victimisation. I would not defend this country to protect feminists aginst any invader. Stand down white hetero men, let the Taleban in !!!
Jackart, I'm a bit disappointed at this.
I was looking forward to real world-class Victimhood Poker, like, if a disabled Jewish man makes a disparaging comment about a coloured woman who refuses to serve him, or something - the excitement is seeing which way Comment is Free will jump and who is perceived as 'aggressor' and who is 'victim'.
I disagree, mark. I think the mark of a great poker player is being able to play a weak hand well. I think straight white males getting a straight white male officer at SOAS is the equivalent of bluffing with nothing but Ace King, when there's a potential straight in the flop.
NBH. You don't get it. We're not applauding the appointment of a straight white men's officer, but ridiculing the concept of a LBGT officer of Wimmin's officer.
Anon@ 8:39. I think you're taking this all a bit too seriously.
Forgive the juvenile nature of my comment, but "Elly Badcock" commenting on the impossibility of discriminating against straight, white men?
Please tell me it's a figment of the author's imagination...
No Jackart, you don't get it. The entire reason why such positions are justified is the level of prejudice against the gay community and women. I'm afraid simply ignoring this, laughing at it, mocking it, is simply outdated and sexist. You talk of the free market and libertarianism, but again you revel the cosiness of your position, wanting a free market for those in positions of power and privilege, to the detriment of those who lack such advantages.
Women and Homosexuals are not discriminated against in any meaningful way, and even if they were, a Wimmin's officer at a student union will make fuck-all difference. These jobs represent all that is wrong about the Labour group identity politics which has so poisoned public life. They are expensive wastes of money.
And yes. They are ridiculous.
And no. Libertarianism and free markets are not about entrenching privelege. Labour's state education does a pretty good job of that.
@Anonymous 8:39
Agree 100%.
Post a Comment