"Well, you wrapped yourself in an ivy vine
Now you're doomed to the sky
Always trying to reach a little too high"
Hurray for the Riff Raff - Dance with Death
So I was listening to a YouTuber on the topic of feminism a couple of days ago who made me postpone my next post by admonishing listeners that after all, many of those hurling spurious accusations against men must have gone through some terrible experience to fuel their abusive attitude.
It reminded me of the social justice activist literature "professor" I've mentioned previously, who cherry-picked her entire curriculum out of works of fiction with some degree of anti-white but especially anti-male spin. A couple of years later I passed her on the street walking and chatting with another woman. As soon as she saw me, she shrank, wide-eyed with terror, against her friend's shoulder until she passed me. As though... what? Did I suddently sprout horns and a barbed tail? Was I going to knock her down to the pavement and rape her right there in the middle of a noontime busy street amidst hundreds of passers-by? After I'd shown zero interest in her existence for years after our score's worth of class sessions?
Not that part of me wasn't flattered to find my mere presence can inspire such awe (I'm a skinny, flabby nebbish in real life, albeit perpetually unshaved) but remember that we had only ever interacted in a classroom context - her classroom context, with me sitting at my desk in the middle of twenty other students and her looming from her position of authority over us as faculty. Literally our only interaction had been one in which she had verifiable power over me. There was no instinctive, social, or other context by which I would gain any sort of threatening presence... except that from a socially inferior position I obliquely called into question her own bigotry. How the hell did her diseased mind leap from that situation to visions of Jack the Ripper?
Whatever our ethical, emotional, instinctive and legal reactions to actual, demonstrable cases of violence, we should remember empiricism is largely extraneous to mythopoesis. Anti-male or anti-white chauvinism requires no better proof for its assumptions than did older varieties. They don't need you to do anything in order to brand you a demon, any more than did the anti-Cathar or anti-Huguenot social activists of centuries past. These people stumble through their lives in a state of perpetual autohypnosis, character-acting their preferred role as blessed martyrs in contradiction to all observable evidence. They spend every day building up court cases in their minds, overlaid like augmented reality over the face of every person they encounter: "harrassment" - "sexual harrassment" - "hostile environment" - "microaggression" - "discrimination" - future alimony contributor.
I don't doubt that if we combed through history long enough we could dredge up at least one bona fide blood-drinking Jew... but the blood libel never required his existence, and feminists require no real-world experiences to fuel their absolutist good vs. evil alternate reality game.
____________________________________________
edit:
No comments:
Post a Comment