Robby Soave: "Asia Argento Is Why I Don't Believe All 'Victims'"
Yeah, she's lying.
For one thing, lots of people lie about sex.
For another, she's obviously one of them.
This stuff illustrates what's crazy about contemporary progressivism and feminism pretty well. There are a whole lot of reasonable stopping-points between believe few women who claim to be victims of sexual assault and believe all women who do. Note that even the most far right righties never said believe no women who claim to have been sexually assaulted. It would have been the easiest thing in the world to have stopped before the point of maximal lunacy. But they just can't do it. It's not in the nature of the view. They only have two possible stopping points on their leftward journey: (a) at 11 and (b) never. The internal logic of PC makes stopping at a reasonable point anathema to them. It's an inherently extremist, totalitarian view. It's why they can't just say things like white racism is more destructive than non-white racism; they've got to say non-white racism is conceptually impossible. They can't say things like derogatory speech directed at certain groups can be harmful; they've got to say any speech critical of those groups constitutes violence. They can't just say It is permissible for men to represent themselves as women; they have to say they literally are women. Only the most extreme extremes of extremity are acceptable to such a view. Anything less is literally Hitler.
For one thing, lots of people lie about sex.
For another, she's obviously one of them.
This stuff illustrates what's crazy about contemporary progressivism and feminism pretty well. There are a whole lot of reasonable stopping-points between believe few women who claim to be victims of sexual assault and believe all women who do. Note that even the most far right righties never said believe no women who claim to have been sexually assaulted. It would have been the easiest thing in the world to have stopped before the point of maximal lunacy. But they just can't do it. It's not in the nature of the view. They only have two possible stopping points on their leftward journey: (a) at 11 and (b) never. The internal logic of PC makes stopping at a reasonable point anathema to them. It's an inherently extremist, totalitarian view. It's why they can't just say things like white racism is more destructive than non-white racism; they've got to say non-white racism is conceptually impossible. They can't say things like derogatory speech directed at certain groups can be harmful; they've got to say any speech critical of those groups constitutes violence. They can't just say It is permissible for men to represent themselves as women; they have to say they literally are women. Only the most extreme extremes of extremity are acceptable to such a view. Anything less is literally Hitler.
posted by Winston Smith at
1:09 PM
4 Comments:
OK, it is official: Jordan Peterson is off his rocker:
https://www.motherjones.com/food/2018/09/carnivorism-zero-carb-jordan-peterson-mikhaila-shawn-baker-andrew-torba-alt-right/
"I am going to spend a ton of money on food and make myself ill because it will *totally pwn the libs*!" Yes Jordan, we are not worthy. Also: ugh. I like red meat, but I like a bit of variety, like say a whole pile of tomatoes for lunch this time of year (preferably but not necessarily with cheese and basil.) Also, how about pulled chicken salsa verde? Or just a good roast chicken? Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.
It's nutty, but weird to pick this out...it's no nuttier than the plague of vegetarianism that pervades the left. And Peterson's no nuttier for doing it that the other dude in the article is for writing this:
A lot of conservatives are very worried about losing their status as a white person or losing economic status. And I think there’s maybe a similar current with practitioners of this diet—really feeling like, ‘Somebody’s going to take away my meat.’ It’s symbolic to them; it’s an element of their masculinity and their identity.
But, still...seems a bit nutty.
People are weird about food...and many have been for a long time (kosher, halal). I don't get it. People seem to *like* having principles that constrain their eating.
I do understand the right yanking the left's chain, though. To the extent that that's what this is, I'm ok with it. But dayum, it can't be cheap...
Also, all-meat diets apparently don't make you sick. I've got a colleague who told me about Peterson the other day because he's writing a book on food weirdness. He was telling me that many people have eaten nothing but meat for years with no notable ill effects. He himself ate nothing but meat for a couple of weeks, just to be able to write about it...but he was never gonna stick to it.
This does seem like a predictably Petersonian kind of thing, though.
I hope he doesn't go full Robert Bly. Somebody needs to carry the anti-crazy-pronouns flag.
Sure, I get the impulse to 'yank the left's chain,' but I don't see how this does it. The far likelier response is 'haha, see the funny man.'
I men really: ugh. I like food too much to eat only one kind.
Yeah I kinda tried eating low carb for awhile, and even that was difficult for me. Whatever makes people enjoy being puritans about food, I didn't get any of it.
Obviously I like yanking people's chains when they deserve it...but not enough to give up Pop Tarts.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home