Quote: (10-14-2015 02:34 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:
Quote: (10-14-2015 12:56 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:
Quote: (10-14-2015 11:47 AM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:
They are radicalizing people with their agenda. The consequences will not be pleasant.
This is why this crap doesn't really worry me. They're doing our job for us.
The fact that I'm meeting so many regular people who even notice something is up amazes me.
If they do radicalise the proles, I don't expect the media and academic classes to survive.
No great loss.
AB, we'll just surround them, take all their gasoline and their women, and send them into the wasteland.
Then you can deliver a speech to them and say, "I am gravely disappointed. Once again, you force me to release my dogs of war. Look at what remains..."
I've seen their 'women', brother. They're not welcome in Boschtown.
Anyway, I was thinking about the 'Down Low' normalisation agenda, so figured I'd see if there'd been other articles about this stupid woman and her stupid work.
As expected, all the usual suspects.
Guardian:
Why can straight white men have sex with men without social consequences?
Huffington Post:
https://archive.is/boS8f
VICE:
https://archive.is/6j3Sp
NYMag:
https://archive.is/b5qoM
Gawker:
https://archive.is/fxLHV
There's also one at Forbes, but Archive Today can't capture it and I'm not about to give them clicks.
All of them are the standard affectation of intelligent, critical thinking whilst blindly-taking at face value what a 'smart person' has just told them, and repeating it that you get in the 95-115 IQ range that makes up Media, Psychology and Gender Graduates.
I'm increasingly becoming convinced of two things:
1) Non-Stem University Graduates can be convinced of anything, if they believe it makes them look intelligent.
2) The rise of marginalised voices makes me understand the cultural importance of keeping them marginalised: they are mentally-and-emotionally-damaged, and want to destroy the society that correctly identifies them as broken and dangerous.
Now, let's have a closer look at Jane Ward, the 'researcher' in question:
Quote:Quote:
“I find both heterosexual and mainstream gay culture distasteful and often pitiable; that my partner and I are not ladies and we don’t want our relationship described as beautiful; that if you think you would be happier as a dyke you could and should be one; and that I don’t want a good public image (at least not the kind for which mainstream gay and lesbian movement is striving); and that it is precisely because queerness refuses normalization that is meaningful to me and to other queers. The subversion is where the romance lies.”
No agenda there.
I'm honestly-shocked at just
how dumb modern university graduates are. It seems to never occur to them that people might have hidden agendas. I was greatly disheartened by the amount of 'educated' young Progressives who took Todd Nickerson's word that he was a 'virtuous pedophile' at face value: "He said he would never touch a child." They'd say this again and again, in a voice I imagined as being Brainy Smurf's. As if the mentally-abnormal are honest, reliable narrators.
I'm starting to think there's an exploitable-gullibility to them. I wonder if I could monetise it.