Just Like Ann Coulter Said at Catallaxy Files

Just Like Ann Coulter Said

As Ann Coulter said to Ezra Levant, it is unsafe for a prominent conservative to walk the streets of American wherever lefties happen to be. This is yesterday’s tale of Glenn Beck’s personal experience:

‘These people were some of the most hateful people I have ever seen,’ said a distraught Glenn Beck this morning as he described an altercation he and his family had last night while watching a screening of Alfred Hitchcock’s The 39 Steps in New York’s Bryant Park. Explaining that a group of people yelled at his family, took pictures of them, and kicked a cup of wine onto his wife, Beck said that his security team feels that, had he reacted poorly, things might have ‘gone off.’

You should watch the video that is found in the attached story.

Written by Steve Kates

June 29th, 2011 at 8:38 am

Posted in Uncategorized

299 Responses to 'Just Like Ann Coulter Said'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Just Like Ann Coulter Said'.

It’s not that surprising that a movement (the left) which is bent on the de-civilizing of society and the use of force to regulate every aspect of life, no matter how arbitrary or petty, is fundamentally vicious. Everything they want is so intrusive, arbitrary and irrational that they know they can only be successful if dissent is dealt with ruthlessly. It’s a war on humanity, really. Sad, but true.

david nh

29 Jun 11 at 9:23 am
I think Catallaxy just jumped the shark.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 11:21 am
Compelling ad hom, Anna.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 11:26 am
So his family was attacked and he stood there? What a pansy. If Beck’s family was attacked he should have either ended up in hospital himself or one or more of the leftist mob should drinking through a straw.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 11:31 am
It’s interesting, by the way, that you were outrageously! outraged! by a policeman telling women to be careful how they dress so as to avoid getting unwanted attention from scumbags; but you’re unmoved by Mrs Beck being assaulted in public or Ann Coulter being mobbed in Canada by a horde of thugs intent on harrassment and violence.

But I guess conservative sluts have it coming, am I right?

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 11:32 am
It’s not that surprising that a movement (the left) which is bent on the de-civilizing of society and the use of force to regulate every aspect of life, no matter how arbitrary or petty, is fundamentally vicious.

Bollocks. What is happening is that there is a decadence on both side of basic civility. Just like Ann Coulter said? Really? Have you read her books. They are full of the most adolescent nastiness. The Left says exactly the same thing about the Right and they use people like Coulter to back up their claims. Point out a courteous conservative like, say, David Brooks, and they haven’t paid attention because they only notice the bile pushers.

It’s just a question of civility and tolerance of different points of view. And the distinction between mature discourse delivered in a civilized fashion and that that is otherwise. Draw that line and you’ll see things improve. Why? Because those people who make money and/or get noticed by behaving like pigs will face pressure from their allies to grow up.

Something Jesus said about logs in one’s own eye come to mind.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 11:36 am
Anna – I think Catallaxy just jumped the shark.

Well that’s real easy Anna. I remember at LP a couple of years ago I made a comment or two about this disgusting contribition from the American Left to the presidential debate.

Now, unlike many here, I think Palin is potentially a dangerous theocrat, but Berhard’s comments were VILE. And they should’ve been condemned. What happened. Well here’s one response:

Well it was all about whether Palin was a ‘sister’ or not. Apparently if you don;t advocate the right feminist views then it perfectly okay for some nutbag to threaten her with gang-rape.

Vomit!

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 11:42 am
Sorry the response:

Where does this fecking
ridiculous notion come
from that you can’t be

a feminist if
you condemn any other
woman, at all, for

anything at all,
ever? As someone once said
about the steely-

eyed M. Thatcher, she
may be a woman but she
is not a Sister.

Again Palin is not my ally. But threatening her with rape courtesy of ‘my black brothers’ is disgusting and any feminist who thinks that’s okay is full of shit.

It’s also racist. I got black brothers myself and the whole ‘niggaz are a pack of rapists riff’ pisses them off no end.

You want the level of discourse to rise then pull the socks on your own side up. After all it’s them that you have the most influence over.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 11:46 am
What is happening is that there is a decadence on both side of basic civility. Just like Ann Coulter said? Really? Have you read her books. They are full of the most adolescent nastiness.

Yes, that’s the exactly the point. She says things in her books. The left finds them nasty because she is uncomfortably close to the truth. But regardless, she doesn’t threaten violence. But then violence is the essence of the statist project.

david nh

29 Jun 11 at 11:49 am
I don’t support the idiots on either side. I don’t support threats of violence, I don’t support sexism when it’s aimed at non-lefties. What’s the point here? That some lefties do?

Libertarians have Graeme fucking Bird. And now, apparently they use Ann Coulter as source material.

Catallaxy, bring back Helen and Jason now, really, it’s for your own good.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 11:52 am
Anna

I read tig tog. Does that make me better than these reprobates.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 11:54 am
I don’t support the idiots on either side. I don’t support threats of violence, I don’t support sexism when it’s aimed at non-lefties. What’s the point here? That some lefties do?

No but do you gun against those that do. That LP thread really shocked me. I condemn Bernhard and the whole lot gang up on me for it. Again.

It’s not like I’m saying the Left do it and the Right don’t. After all Coulter’s not exactly an ideal avatar for free speech is she? Thing is if you maintain certain standards of discourse and make a point of reprimanding your allies if they fall below it it is much more effective then simply finger-pointing at the other side.

That’s our problem. We’re a bunch of gangsters. We do anything to kick our enemies and stop at nothing is assisting our friends. Then every now and then we stop and ask why everything seems to be falling to bits.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 11:59 am
And Graeme’s been banned here. It’s not like he’s the avatar of anything save his Hugh Jass.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 12:00 pm
Also, Adrien, We’re talking about Glenn Beck here, not Ann Coulter. I don’t listen to Glenn Beck much but I can say that, from what I have heard him say, there is nothing violent about him.

Unlike most of the media (and in fact most of the so-called intelligentsia), he is actually very interested in ideas, particularly those that have been flushed down the memory hole by the media and the academy. He shows an intellectual curiosity and bravery that is noticeably absent amongst those that think of themselves as his intellectual superiors. Is holding a contrary opinion and questioning the polite consensus sufficient justification for being threatened by an angry mob of self-satisfied, “good” (just ask them) people?

david nh

29 Jun 11 at 12:02 pm
I think Catallaxy just jumped the shark.

Really?

I think the Cat jumped the shark when Graeme started talking about panspermia and aquatic apes in the “A Carbon Tax for Australia?” thread.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 12:02 pm
The left finds them nasty because she is uncomfortably close to the truth

People with more than half a brain find them to be the trite, infantile ranting of a zealot & mostly ignore them. People who fall at or below the half brain mark are more inclined to lionise or lambast the egotistical huckster, depending on the slant of their affliction.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 12:04 pm
What happened to Beck is terrible, and not at all surprising considering how much he’s been reviled in some quarters.

Even so it doesn’t really prove Coulter’s thesis, as there’s no social trend of conservatives being threatened or denigrated in public. For example Sarah Palin, until she recently got called for jury duty, was on a bus tour of America, travelling through ‘deep blue’ states in the north-east.

daddy dave

29 Jun 11 at 12:07 pm
Adrien, you were trolling in that thread, and that they refused to take your bait. It’s all so boring and pointless… Condemn this thing that your side said! No! Condemn your side first!

A “distraught Glenn Beck”, accompanied by his “security team”, got yelled at while at the movies. On behalf of lefties everywhere I condemn it.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 12:08 pm
Is holding a contrary opinion and questioning the polite consensus sufficient justification for being threatened by an angry mob of self-satisfied, “good” (just ask them) people?

I think it’s self-evident, my answer to that.

Abusing people for a difference of opinion is discourteous, uncivil and illiberal all round. But one should not progress from there to labelling everyone who may share opinions with the abusive as abusive themselves.

For example I think AGW is a problem, unlike many here. Now people argue with me of course but they don’t abuse me for it. And despite me agreeing tat AGW is a problem I don’t endorse the proposition that ‘climate change denialism’ be made illegal either… the are many lines drawn not just Left v Right.

My view is that we should criticize this sort behaviour wherever it comes from, but most especially if it comes from allies because, by doing this, they reflect badly on one’s self. Yes?

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 12:08 pm
David

Don’t ever egg it.

Beck is a fucking clown.

But hey, if I had a chance of earning $50 million by going to a blackboard, writing crap on it and then reaching ridiculous conclusion I’d do it too.

In fact I’d go around the Rockefeller Center, look at some of the art work and suggest Rockefeller was also part of the Commie cabal at the time.

Oh hang on, Beck already did that.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 12:08 pm
I think the Cat jumped the shark when Graeme started talking about panspermia and aquatic apes in the “A Carbon Tax for Australia?” thread.

Really. So one commenter going off-topic in a discussion thread is jumping the shark? By that definition Tillman, you’ve caused the Cat to jump the shark numerous times.

daddy dave

29 Jun 11 at 12:09 pm
By that definition Tillman, you’ve caused the Cat to jump the shark numerous times.

He’s as mad as hell and is not going to take it any more.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 12:10 pm
People with more than half a brain find them to be the trite, infantile ranting of a zealot & mostly ignore them. People who fall at or below the half brain mark are more inclined to lionise or lambast the egotistical huckster, depending on the slant of their affliction.

That’s the great thing about the written word – you can ignore it. It’s not so easy to ignore a threatening mob when you’re in a public park with your family.

Here’s the problem: the Left is so convinced of its moral superiority that it gives itself license to be violent. The lack of self-awareness is really quite breathtaking.

david nh

29 Jun 11 at 12:12 pm
distraught Glenn Beck

Isn’t that a tautology?

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 12:13 pm
By that definition Tillman, you’ve caused the Cat to jump the shark numerous times.

No you are lying.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 12:14 pm
In fact I’d go around the Rockefeller Center, look at some of the art work and suggest Rockefeller was also part of the Commie cabal at the time.

Oh hang on, Beck already did that.

Serious? The inscriptions on the Rock Center are all about individual liberty and freedom etc. I’ve got photos somewhere. I’ll check.

Beck is a whack job.

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 12:14 pm
Adrien, you were trolling in that thread, and that they refused to take your bait.

That is nonsense Anna. Trolling is simply publishing abuse to stir the pot for it’s own sake. The points I made were apt.

It’s written down there. And so are the responses of the LP crew. They distort what I say – AGAIN. They refuse to condemn this disgusting rape threat ’cause Palin ain’t no ‘sista’. And they gang up on me – AGAIN. This is part of the culture over there. Individual dissent is smothered under soft ‘democratic’ centralism and rigid archais doctrines that only make sense to eople who’ve never visited the planet Earth. Shall we learn some lessons of the 20th century? #1 Democratic centralism does not work!

My criticisms are apt and your response which is, again, easy is that ‘I was trolling’. That’s unworthy of you, you’re better than that. You find one example of me simply trolling, making a comment without any worthwhile content I’ll give you a hundred bucks.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 12:15 pm
Also Anna considering the humungous amount of responses I got to I think the notion that they ‘refused to take my bait’ a little rich.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 12:18 pm
If you wanted to criticise you would have just done so. But you didn’t, you demanded that everyone else do so.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 12:22 pm
Inscription on Rockefeller Center:

Inscription at Rockefeller Center
“I believe in the supreme worth of the individual and in his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I believe that every right implies a responsibility; every opportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty.
I believe that the law was made for man and not man for the law; that government is the servant of the people and not their master.
I believe in the dignity of labor, whether with head or hand; that the world owes no man a living but that it owes every man an opportunity to make a living.
I believe that thrift is essential to well ordered living and that economy is a prime requisite of a sound financial structure, whether in government, business or personal affairs.
I believe that truth and justice are fundamental to an enduring social order.
I believe in the sacredness of a promise, that a man’s word should be as good as his bond; that character — not wealth or power or position— is of supreme worth.
I believe that the rendering of useful service is the common duty of mankind and that only in the purifying fire of sacrifice is the dross of selfishness consumed and the greatness of the human soul set free.
I believe in an all-wise and all-loving God, named by whatever name, and that the individual’s highest fulfillment, greatest happiness, and widest usefulness are to be found in living in harmony with His will.
I believe that love is the greatest thing in the world; that it alone can overcome hate; that right can and will triumph over might.”

John D. Rockefeller Jr. (Communist)

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 12:24 pm
Anna

Stop defending the indefensible. Lavatory Pronto is a estrogen soaked site filled with angry top hens and sad, hen pecked mostly unemployed beta males.

No opposition is tolerated there. That’s well known, so let’s move along.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 12:29 pm
…there’s no social trend of conservatives being threatened or denigrated in public.

Um, yes there is. Conservative commentators are routinely harrassed and threatened at university campuses, for example.

For example Sarah Palin, until she recently got called for jury duty, was on a bus tour of America, travelling through ‘deep blue’ states in the north-east.

Dave, she had a stalker move next to her in Wasilla, ffs. More recently, she was threatened with death by another liberal stalker, against whom she was forced to take out a restraining order.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 12:31 pm
IT

I don’t exactly recall but I’m sure it on the web. That lunatic Beck went around the Rockefeller center critiquing the art work, suggesting it was subversive commie art of some shit.

There was also his brilliant ‘ring of fire” segment where he began drawing borders around North Africa, the middle east and Europe. He then connected the dots suggesting something like the Muzzo world was going up in smoke and taking Europe with it.

He’s about as unbalanced as Birdie. In fact if Beck can get a show like that, so can birdie and earn more.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 12:33 pm
The one time I watched Beck he advised Americans to:

1. Pay off debt
2. Buy gold.
3. Start a fruit larder.

Excellent advice.

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 12:35 pm
And now, apparently they use Ann Coulter as source material.

This is another ad hom. Do you have an argument?

Must we start posting details on Brian Bahnisch’s ongoing series of end of the world posts? Or Lavartus Prodeo’s conspiracy theories about the ABC being in the pay of the Liberal Party?

Bring back EvilPundit and other banned commenters to LP. The responsibility of being house conservative is too much for Steve At The Pub to bear, surely.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 12:37 pm
Um, yes there is. Conservative commentators are routinely harrassed and threatened at university campuses, for example.

Dave, she had a stalker move next to her in Wasilla, ffs. More recently, she was threatened with death by another liberal stalker, against whom she was forced to take out a restraining order.

That’s all true.

Palin sends lefties into a different head space. That idiot Andrew Sullivan was suggesting she was wearing a plastic ball around her stomach to fake pregnancy because the kid wasn’t really hers and that it was her daughter’s.

Letterman thought A-Rod having sex with Palin’s under-age daughter was funny.

I don’t know what it is, but lefties really get more unbalanced about her and once the mob is set on that train of thought it’s hard to normalize them.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 12:38 pm
Or Lavartus Prodeo’s conspiracy theories about the ABC being in the pay of the Liberal Party?

ahahahaha Seriously? They believe that?

Gabrielle

29 Jun 11 at 12:41 pm
Other conservatives who have been assaulted or threatened on campuses include David Horowitz, Bill Kristol and Pat Buchanan.

Steyn (ad hom alert!) has observed:

The anti-Conservative violence in Canada that preceded Ann Coulter’s intended but canceled speech is not an oddity – there or here. It seems that free speech whether by private citizens, politicians, writers or members of the media is only free if it espouses principles that comport with far-left ideology. Many conservative speakers and politicians have been attacked or had their speeches disrupted or terminated by groups of the radical left yet little or nothing was mentioned in the “main stream” media. In the majority of these situations, it appeared that such disruptive behavior was officially countenanced and not adequately or expeditiously neutralized.

When was the last time a liberal speaker at a University had their speech cancelled by out of control conservatives? Can’t think of any.

If one unkind word is spoken against a far-left adherent, the media is in an uncontrollable frenzy. The reverse does not occur in that the media and our present government actually encourage wanton vicious attacks against the right.

“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”

- Barack Obama

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 12:49 pm
That lunatic Beck went around the Rockefeller center critiquing the art work, suggesting it was subversive commie art of some shit.

Quick, someone send him to Denver Airport.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 12:51 pm
Letterman thought A-Rod having sex with Palin’s under-age daughter was funny.

Yes, and we all remember the feminist response:

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 12:51 pm
Must we start posting details on Brian Bahnisch’s ongoing series of end of the world posts

They were fabulous. The best comedy on the web…..

Brian frightening the shit out of himself.

Didn’t he write a post about how scary the movie 2012 was and how he sort of related it back to glimate change?

JC

29 Jun 11 at 12:53 pm
Um, yes there is. Conservative commentators are routinely harrassed and threatened at university campuses, for example.

Yeah, okay, maybe there is.

daddy dave

29 Jun 11 at 12:54 pm
But you didn’t, you demanded that everyone else do so.

Anna, Bernhard threatened to make Palin a victim of GANG RAPE. Hello!

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 12:59 pm
ahahahaha Seriously? They believe that?

Of course they do, there are whole pages of posts all agreeing with each other on this very topic.

I think I may hold the record for being quickest banning at that site, something I reckon I may be proud of

See they see me as one of them der climate denier folk… if we cannot gas them or tattoo them YET we will censor them now!

Not much of a surprise really.

onthebus

29 Jun 11 at 1:00 pm
Anna

Just apologize to Adrien and move on FFS.

If anyone deserves to be banned, it’s Brian for writing atrocious scripts for horror movies.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 1:04 pm
The Left is not the only campus faction who behave badly.

My response to Palin’s daughter getting knocked up was that a. The marriage wouldn’t last (it didn’t) and b. The whole abstinence, chastity pledge bollocks of a sexual culture is CRAP.

Was that what the feminists said? I forget.

Sarah Palin? Amazing. Anyone spruiks her has no business whinging about free speech infringements. The woman’s a book burner.

No. I’m not proving it as I’ve already done so on three hundred and seventy-five previous occasions all to deaf ears. If you stand for that sacred right you should stand for those who exemplify it not distort it. Simple.

And now back to the footy club school of politics…

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 1:07 pm
Sarah Palin? Amazing. Anyone spruiks her has no business whinging about free speech infringements. The woman’s a book burner.

No. I’m not proving it as I’ve already done so on three hundred and seventy-five previous occasions all to deaf ears. If you stand for that sacred right you should stand for those who exemplify it not distort it. Simple.

Never fucking happened, you lying Berkshire Hunt.

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 1:09 pm
interesting link Adrien. So there’s now also a Conservative Club at Sydney Uni?

wow, how times have changed.

in my day the uni Libs were pinkos and the most hard right people I knew were in the ALP club

jtfsoon

29 Jun 11 at 1:11 pm
Notice how Anna Winter finds it very difficult, nearly impossible, to issue a straightforward condemnation of incitement to gang rape.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 1:15 pm
Of course the attacks on Beck should be condemned…

But still I find the line here amusing. Beck should be supported irrespective of what nonsense he delivers just as freedom of speech should be defended even if it is garbage from Lord M or CL or advocacy of sex with goats. Its one way of defending a position that’s lacks rationality.

I am not disagreeing at all with respect to the criticisms of Beck’s treatment but how about some commentary on what this lunatic says? He is a scary man who is stupid – just as were the foolish, aggressive lefties who disturbed his evening.

hc

29 Jun 11 at 1:19 pm
Sarah Palin? Amazing. Anyone spruiks her has no business whinging about free speech infringements. The woman’s a book burner.

One *single* shred of evidence to support that statement please.

You’re mindlessly parroting “soft left” US meme’s that originate in the bowels of the DailyKos and DU forums then bounce around on the internet as facts that everybody “knows”.

Nobody serious has *ever* has attacked her for being a relgious nutjob, except the same types of people who attack her for not terminating her disabled child, make up vast conspiracies about her etc.

She’s a pretty mainstream American conservative, pro-gun, anti-abortion, pro-american exceptionalism for a medium sized and constrained federal government.

Oh no, the sky is falling.

Yet Rudd wore his religon on his sleeve and he didn’t earn the ire of the “rational” left.

Some people really need to get out of the echo-chamber.

twostix

29 Jun 11 at 1:21 pm
Of course the attacks on Beck should be condemned…

But…

LOL. The left’s famous, Gillardian Big But.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 1:24 pm
Far left anti-Catholic bigot and goat fancier, hc, would like to shut down the right of free speech for those who don’t share his weird peccadilloes

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 1:25 pm
If anyone deserves to be banned, it’s Brian for writing atrocious scripts for horror movies.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

He should team up with Tim Flannery. That’d be some scary shit right there. Vincent Price meets Bela Lugosi.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 1:31 pm
Sarah Palin? Amazing. Anyone spruiks her has no business whinging about free speech infringements. The woman’s a book burner.

Really? Link? News report? Photograph?

Amazing how everyone missed Palin burning books.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 1:33 pm
So there’s now also a Conservative Club at Sydney Uni?

yeah. Amongst the Gen Y right the libertarians are now asserting themselves. So there’s a cleaving in the Young Liberals. Meantime the ALP Right is still the same, I think about 4 years ago they drove the Melb Uni Student Union broke. For them it’s all about getting ~~their hands on someone else’s money and spending it so they look like bigshots.~~ elected.

One *single* shred of evidence to support that statement please.

I’ve supplied several. No-one’s ever been able to come back to it. I can’t be bothered anymore.

You’re mindlessly parroting “soft left” US meme’s that originate in the bowels of the DailyKos and DU forums then bounce around on the internet as facts that everybody “knows”.

That’s how it all begins. They always say that and I always demonstrate otherwise. If you’re open to’t, have a look at Palin’s behaviour as an Alaskan small town mayor. The place was fundamentally libertarian then she came along with Bib Business connects, the GOP Apparatus and inquiries about book banning. This is not an avatar of classical liberalism.

Now it’s known that the Left buys idealistic talk of equality and change and then proceeds to elect meglomaniacs who’re just using the schpiel to acquire power yeah? What about ‘radical conservatives’ who spruik small government and then create the Patriot Act? If you want others to correct their errors you must practice what you preach otherwise it’s just talk.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 1:34 pm
The Left is not the only campus faction who behave badly.

Here I was expecting to read about a mob of frothing conservatives mobbing, assualting and attacking people that they don’t like.

Yet you post to some BS Liberal party club internal machinations.

What a joke.

twostix

29 Jun 11 at 1:38 pm
Amazing how everyone missed Palin burning books.

The phrase book burner is obviously hyperbolos. You know this.

Palin didn’t get very far with her proscription list for bad books ’cause the librarian told her to get stuffed. Raise a glass. Like Ann Coulter. She writes well-crafted lies designed to obfuscate the facts but because she doesn’t actually outright call for the repealing of the first amendment she’s an avatar of free speech.

That you don’t know. You consider it a matter of virtue not to.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 1:39 pm
Palin may not have a pure record on free speech, but Coulter does. So there will be no Leftist “pox on both their houses” tactics on this thread.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 1:41 pm
Yet you post to some BS Liberal party club internal machinations.

Look into it and you find a pattern of violence and branch stacking amongst the Sydney Uni Liberal factions. All political circles feature their uncompromising autocratic fascists.

But don’t worry. It’s ‘your side’ so don’t bother. Just whinge about the other side. Much easier.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 1:41 pm
The phrase book burner is obviously hyperbolos…

Ann Coulter… writes well-crafted lies designed to obfuscate the facts…

Epic lack of self-awareness.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 1:42 pm
Sorry, when was the last time a university conservative club forcibly shut down a left-wing meeting, speech, seminar, etc? It must have happened somewhere in the world, so can someone provide me a link?

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 1:45 pm
FactCheck-org:

Sliming Palin.

We’ve been flooded for the past few days with queries about dubious Internet postings and mass e-mail messages making claims about McCain’s running mate, Gov. Palin. We find that many are completely false, or misleading.

She did not demand that books be banned from the Wasilla library. Some of the books on a widely circulated list were not even in print at the time. The librarian has said Palin asked a “What if?” question, but the librarian continued in her job through most of Palin’s first term.

Not a Book Burner

One accusation claims then-Mayor Palin threatened to fire Wasilla’s librarian for refusing to ban books from the town library. Some versions of the rumor come complete with a list of the books that Palin allegedly attempted to ban. Actually, Palin never asked that books be banned; no books were actually banned; and many of the books on the list that Palin supposedly wanted to censor weren’t even in print at the time, proving that the list is a fabrication. The librarian was fired, but was told only that Palin felt she didn’t support her. She was re-hired the next day. The librarian never claimed that Palin threatened outright to fire her for refusing to ban books.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 1:46 pm
The leftist mob in full flight

Leftist brownshirts storming the stage to prevent people speaking

More leftists displaying their mob-rule and brownshirt credentials

No, but of course it’s Sarah Palin and conservatives who are the problem.

*eye-roll*

twostix

29 Jun 11 at 1:49 pm
Shouting leftie mobs… aren’t they just wonderful.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 1:53 pm
Yet you post to some BS Liberal party club internal machinations.

Sorry you’re not some “moderate” middle of the road zen master looking disapprovingly at both sides.

You’re screeching of absurd leftist caricatures regarding Sarah Palin and Anne Coulter, plus you describing what is possibly the most BORING event in the entire world: Liberal Party branch meetings in the dramtic terms that you have firmly cements you in the slightly unhinged internet, urban lefty camp.

Sorry.

twostix

29 Jun 11 at 1:54 pm
Once again, Adrien’s attempt to draw comparisons between a university club and a raging Leftist flash mob simply shows that his call for “impartiality” is bogus (but we saw that on a previous thread where he falsely accused Ann Coulter of being an enemy of free speech).

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 1:55 pm
So there will be no Leftist “pox on both their houses” tactics on this thread.

Won’t there Herr Kommandant? Says who?

Free speech isn’t just a protection against State power, it’s an ethos. It requires certain standards of discourse from the citizenry. When those standards fail, the freedom is threatened because in the event of chaos the State will always step on your freedom to maintain order and the Herd will let ‘em ’cause they’re scared.

It’s not about the Left and the Right it’s about asserting the freedom to speak. We are abusing it. When the fourth estate pays more attention to the iniquities of an ageing actor then to a very serious constitutional question about exactly where the power to declare war lies the freedom to speak is threatened.

Similarly when a lawyer writes a book of lies that obfuscates scientific fact and well-tried theory all in aid of creating an unthinking mass of loyal voters she is likewise abusing free speech. Mike Moore abuses the power of free speech. I read an article explaining the facts of ClimateGate from Mother Jones which played exactly the same game – it’s going on across the spectrum. You don’t stop it simply by using free speech infringements in the standard political ping-pong polkadance.

Let’s put it this way. On that LP thread what if one of the ‘sistas’ thought for herself and said ‘hey this ‘anti-feminist’ has a point. Bernhard is a crazy bitch for advocating the gang-rape of Palin.’

But they don’t want to cross the line, see?

And so, years later, we have a very reasonable person like Anna Winter failing to condemn a gross moral infringement on the part of her allies. Why? Because the culture of free speech is submerged underneath the footy fan school of political participation. We have been reduced to two competing mobs of deaf screechers.

But of course…

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 1:56 pm
It requires certain standards of discourse from the citizenry.

Does that include making false accusations against conservative public figures while issuing immoral equivalencies between violent gangs and peaceful organisations?

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 1:59 pm
Adrien, you aren’t impartial on this matter. You have made false accusations of censorship against Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter, and ludicrously compared violent leftist mobs to conservative campus organisations.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:00 pm
Notice how Anna Winter finds it very difficult, nearly impossible, to issue a straightforward condemnation of incitement to gang rape.

Actually, I just choose not to condemn anyone based on a re-telling of one line, without context. If it was an incitement then I condemn it, completely. But since I also doubt that Sandra Bernhard would actually incite anyone to gang rape anyone, then I also refuse to condemn her until I see evidence that she actually did.

Meanwhile, I don’t recall any anti-abortionists on this thread condemning the man who killed Dr Tiller.

See how stupid this is? And after we’ve all condemned everything that our “sides” have done in the history of everything ever, will anyone have changed their minds about politics?

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 2:00 pm
TwoStix/Michael – You have both failed to provide any substantial data in response to my assertions. Instead you have labeled me something inherently nefarious and therefore not worth listening to. It reminds me of a time in company with left-liberal literature postgrads who called me a fascist for criticize the contemporary at scene.

In both cases the irony is delicious. To refuse to deal with substance, to ignore the content of an argument and simply abuse the speaker as inherently contemptible is a fascist technique of rhetoric. It is the ONLY fascist technique of rhetoric and it is increasingly used by everyone.

My assertions:

The ‘Conservative’ wing of the Young Libs is using branch-stacking and sometimes even violence to marginalize the classic liberals in the ALSF.

Sarah Palin inquired about creating a blacklist for books in the public library in the early part of her tenure as the Mayor of Wasilla.

Ann Coulter twisted The Blind Watchmaker around and created a nasty lie with it in Godless

Substantial rebuttal please.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 2:02 pm
Meanwhile, I don’t recall any anti-abortionists on this thread condemning the man who killed Dr Tiller.

WTF is Dr. Tiller?

Tillers is she talking about you?

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:05 pm
I condemn Tiller’s in the strongest possible language.

Tillman, you have a lot to answer for.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:07 pm
The ‘Conservative’ wing of the Young Libs is using branch-stacking and sometimes even violence to marginalize the classic liberals in the ALSF.

Adrien

They’re both wankers. Alex Hawke used to be part of David Clark’s faction. he split off and now there’s an Alex Hawke wing. They’re all tossers. This is student politics. These ‘classic liberals’ wouldn’t know their Mill from Mills and Boon

jtfsoon

29 Jun 11 at 2:08 pm
Sorry you’re not some “moderate” middle of the road zen master looking disapprovingly at both sides.

No but that’s our dear Adrien’s schtich.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 2:09 pm
Adrien, you aren’t impartial on this matter.

No I have my opinions and stand by them. My opinions aren’t created by alliance. I try to come up with them all by myself.

You have made false accusations of censorship against Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter,

I have asserted no accusations of censorship against Coulter. My arguments viz her abuse of free speech is a little sophisticated however. It requires a grade 6 education n’ all. Sorry if it’s a little tough for you.

Palin inquired about censorship and was stopped. Prove me wrong.

and ludicrously compared violent leftist mobs to conservative campus organizations.

I said that anti-democratic behaviour is something you’ll find on the Right as well. In ‘my day’, as they say, the worst infringement of freedom of speech came from the National Party who illegally shut down a federally licensed broadcaster at 2am in the morning after several jugs of beer. I believe that’s a criminal offense and the offender was an unelected headkicker in the dominant faction who, btw, used branch stacking techniques to get elected.

No other faction abused free speech so badly while I was there (the Griffith Libs were actually pretty good). But the ALP and the Left both used political power to spread lies, obfuscate truths and distort the facts. And routinely. This is in the nature of political culture. What d’you think happens in a high power circle dominated by lawyers?

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 2:12 pm
Rosie’s Place – a charity that runs women’s shelters for women fleeing violence – banned Sandra Bernhard from involvement with their organisation following her call that Palin be gang-raped.

But Anna can’t bring herself to do so.

Sickening stuff.

In the same league as Lefty Kim’s plea that we not “too loudly condemn” female genital mutilation.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 2:13 pm
But since I also doubt that Sandra Bernhard would actually incite anyone to gang rape anyone, then I also refuse to condemn her until I see evidence that she actually did.

Given that Palin would have had bodyguards on the campaign trail, then yes it would have been hard to gang rape her.

But yes, Bernhard did say that if Palin ever came to New York she would be gang raped by an unidentified group of black men.

LP has never properly condemned this statement, presumably because they see nothing particularly wrong with calling for black men (and why were they singled out?) to rape people.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:15 pm
Sorry you’re not some “moderate” middle of the road zen master looking disapprovingly at both sides.

I’m not a centrist. You just don’t like it ’cause I won’t join the howling mob. Let’s have some substantial rebuttal ‘ey. And if not don’t be criticizing the Left you ain’t got the right.

The librarian has said Palin asked a “What if?” question

Again the standard defense by GOP PR Bots. To which I respond with the always unanswered: Why did she ask at all? You have to look at the early stuff in the local papers. The librarian stopped talking. The whole thing got killed from the backroom.

But like, well, whatever, nevermind.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 2:17 pm
Anna

Just apologize, condemn Sarah and lets move on. You’re being far too stubborn on this losing proposition.

While you’re there, you can also apologize for Leftie Kim, for being an idiot.

Take a deep breath and push down. Trust me, you’ll thank me in the end.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:18 pm
They’re all tossers.

Really? Who’d a thought I know a couple student libertarians, read Mises etc. They don’t get involved in campus politics at all.

This is student politics. These ‘classic liberals’ wouldn’t know their Mill from Mills and Boon

Glad to see that the Cult of Ignorance is alive and well across the spectrum. Like Trots and Marxism. And the ALP and whatever it is they believe in this week.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 2:19 pm
Adrien

Your incessant babbling is not helpful at this point in time. Give Anna a little space while she contemplates the best way to apologize.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:20 pm
Adrien, on a previous thread, in which the subject was the violent shut down of Ann Coulter, you said:

Ann Coulter is just as bad as any appachnik of the left. She must be one of the most intolerant and dishonest spruikers in the English speaking world!!!!!!!!!!!

It really is time for anyone who endorses the principle of freedom of thought and speech to break with any ally who is an enemy of same.

So no, your argument was not “nuanced”. It was frivolous.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:20 pm
LP has never properly condemned this statement, presumably because they see nothing particularly wrong with calling for black men (and why were they singled out?) to rape people.

At least those blacks aren’t coconuts, right LP?

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 2:20 pm
It schtik CL. Get yer Yiddish right boyo or ye’ll ne’er make it in the Diamond District.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 2:21 pm
At least those blacks aren’t coconuts, right LP?

It’s always black dudes doing the wrong thing over at LP. Always.

Skin color isn’t that important, Lp’ers. Don’t be so hung up about it.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:22 pm
Adrien, on a previous thread, you wrote:

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2011/06/26/ann-coulters-demonic/#comment-240043

For fuck sake!

Ann Coulter is just as bad as any appachnik of the left. She must be one of the most intolerant and dishonest spruikers in the English speaking world!!!!!!!!!!!

It really is time for anyone who endorses the principle of freedom of thought and speech to break with any ally who is an enemy of same. This finger-pointing goes nowhere.

In the context of a discussion about the forced shut down of an Ann Coulter speech, you urged us not to defend her but to blame her equally as an enemy of free speech, no better than the Left who actually have taken that away. You gave us no reason to believe that Ann Coulter has done anything to hinder free speech and your argument is not “nuanced” but frivolous.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:23 pm
Adrien, on a previous thread, you wrote:

For fuck sake!

Ann Coulter is just as bad as any appachnik of the left. She must be one of the most intolerant and dishonest spruikers in the English speaking world!!!!!!!!!!!

It really is time for anyone who endorses the principle of freedom of thought and speech to break with any ally who is an enemy of same. This finger-pointing goes nowhere.

In the context of a discussion about the forced shut down of an Ann Coulter speech, you urged us not to defend her but to blame her equally as an enemy of free speech, no better than the Left who actually have taken that away. You gave us no reason to believe that Ann Coulter has done anything to hinder free speech and your argument is not “nuanced” but frivolous.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:24 pm
Look at me for instance. I love black dudes so much I want one to be Fed Chairman.

Rick knows what fiscal stimulus is all about.

Rick Ross for Fed chair.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:26 pm
On that note, if one were to tell people “Don’t go to Redfern, because there are black men there and they will rape you”, would that attract any condemnation from the Left or not? It would seem that the answer were “no”.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:27 pm
Cut out the equivalency crap, Adrien. The left has a real problem with violence, anti-semitism, censorship and thuggery these days.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 2:28 pm
Palin inquired about censorship and was stopped. Prove me wrong.

No, why don’t you provide the evidence for it? I don’t have to prove a negative.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:29 pm
The left has a real problem with violence, anti-semitism, censorship and thuggery these days.

Not to mention burning down 200 houses and killing four people, wasting money like it’s going out of style. At least Rick Ross is wasting money the old fashioned and it’s his own mullah.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 2:30 pm
So, in summary, Adrien believes that an upper class dating agency called the “Young Liberals” is equivalent to mobs of enraged leftists invading lecture halls to shut down their enemies.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 2:30 pm
Yes the US left continue to go feral whenever Palin or Coulter are mentioned. However somewhat forgotten are the vicious, blatantly sexist attacks on Hillary Clinton when she looked to be a threat to Obama.

Left (and some right) commentators piled on as the following examples show. Misogyny still rules and politics trumps female solidarity as far as Democrat women are concerned. I know because I have argued with some of them long and hard about it.

Hillary was described “cold,” “flat” and “unwomanly” (National Review’s John Podhoretz); “angry” (Republican National Committee chair Ken Mehlman); a lesbian who conceived Chelsea after being raped by Bill (biographer Ed Klein); “Nurse Ratched,” “a castrating female persona” (Orlando Sentinel columnist Kathleen Parker on The Chris Matthews Show); “that buck-tooth witch, Satan,” “worse” than Osama bin Laden (Don Imus). Put “Hillary” into a search engine with “Lady Macbeth,” “dragon lady,” “ice queen,” “bitch” or “hag” and up come hundreds of thousands of hits.

From Fox News and MNBC:

“Men won’t vote for Hillary Clinton because she reminds them of their nagging wives.”

“When Barack Obama speaks men hear ‘Take off for the future’. When Hillary Clinton speaks men hear ‘Take out the garbage.’”

“When she reacts to Obama – the look, the look is like everyone’s first wife standing outside a probate court.”

“When she appears on television I involuntarily cross my legs.”

“You get a woman in the oval office – what’s the downside? – You mean apart from the PMS and the mood swings – right?”

Viva

29 Jun 11 at 2:47 pm
Palin herself shocked by film montage of leftist hatred…

Sarah Palin Slams Foul-Mouthed Hollywood Haters Outside Movie Premiere (Video).

Sarah Palin stared a bit uncomfortably at a movie screen Tuesday night watching a montage of Matt Damon, David Letterman, Madonna, Howard Stern, Bill Maher, Louis C.K. and other celebrities malign her, then asked The Hollywood Reporter: “What would make someone be so full of hate?”

Palin was in Pella, Iowa, at the premiere of a documentary about her called The Undefeated, which opens with several minutes of Hollywood entertainers using some of the most vulgar language imaginable to express their displeasure with the former vice presidential candidate. Some appear genuinely angry, and Steve Bannon cuts to news footage twice in the film of Palin being hung in effigy.

After the movie, as throngs of supporters and reporters clamored for attention, THR asked her: “In the first 10 minutes where all the celebrities are trashing you, how do you respond to something like that?”

Palin said she hadn’t seen or heard much of the TV and radio footage before seeing it in the movie, which bleeped some of the dirtier language, though it was easy to determine what the entertainers were saying, including lots of profane references to the female anatomy.

“This is the first that I’ve seen much of that. It kind of takes you back,” she told THR. “It makes you want to reach out to some of these folks and say, What’s your problem? And what was the problem? And what is the problem?

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 2:52 pm
I think making jokes about anyone being raped are horrible, because you never know whether someone in your audience has lived through that. I’m not for banning rape jokes, but I wish people would be more careful about making them, especially when the rape part is the joke.

However, there is nothing in the actual quote that suggests Bernhard is condoning or inciting anything. It’s ridiculous, and I condemn stupidity in politics.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 2:52 pm
“You get a woman in the oval office – what’s the downside? – You mean apart from the PMS and the mood swings – right?”

PMS hasn’t held Obama back.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 2:53 pm
However, there is nothing in the actual quote that suggests Bernhard is condoning or inciting anything.

No, she said that Palin will be “raped by my big black brothers”. She has declared her fraternity with Palin’s hypothetical black rapists. Which any reasonable person would take as approval. LP, by refusing to condemn Bernhard is really expressing its support for Bernhard and, by extension, rape.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 3:00 pm
Rape of conservative sluts asking for it, yes.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 3:02 pm
However, there is nothing in the actual quote that suggests Bernhard is condoning or inciting anything.

This is the kind of specious, evasive reasoning I constantly came up against when debating self proclaimed “feminist” Democrat supporters on another blog. You just can’t get past it.

Viva

29 Jun 11 at 3:03 pm
If feminists cannot even come out against incitement to rape, then there is no such thing as “feminism”. All that’s there is a bunch of female Leftists who are happy to endorse violence against women every now and then.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 3:06 pm
It’s interesting, by the way, that you were outrageously! outraged! by a policeman telling women to be careful how they dress so as to avoid getting unwanted attention from scumbags; but you’re unmoved by Mrs Beck being assaulted in public or Ann Coulter being mobbed in Canada by a horde of thugs intent on harrassment and violence.

Good catch there, CL. The common thread throughout is that anyone who advises women how to avoid rape is evil, but anyone who incites rape against women is not worth condemning too loudly, or at all.

Feminism: it just doesn’t exist.

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 3:09 pm
Imagine….

A FURORE engulfed Opposition Leader Tony Abbott after he suggested Julia Gillard’s unwillingness to join him at an Alice Springs crisis meeting would result in the Prime Minister being gang-raped by “my Murri brothers” when she did visit the troubled community…

Feminist commentator Anna Winter, however, defended Mr Abbott.

“It was just a joke. Not condoning it but, come on, there are more important things to worry about. Let’s move on.”

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 3:11 pm
Hahahahahahaha!

Michael Fisk

29 Jun 11 at 3:14 pm
It’s interesting, by the way, that you were outrageously! outraged! by a policeman telling women to be careful how they dress so as to avoid ~~getting unwanted attention from scumbags~~ getting raped; but you’re unmoved by Mrs Beck being assaulted in public or Ann Coulter being mobbed in Canada by a horde of thugs intent on ~~harrassment and violence~~ yelling and taking photographs at someone accompanied by a security team.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 3:19 pm
Actually, the emphasis above should properly fall upon a policemen warning women compared to a group of men (and women?) that assaulted a woman and you being moved by the former and unmoved by the latter.

dover_beach

29 Jun 11 at 3:41 pm
Adrien. FFS get over Palin. Then apologise for trying to compare that shit at uni with mad leftards unable to control themselves. Then get a job and pay some taxes. You got banned at LP because even they think you are bat shit mad and boring

tiny dancer

29 Jun 11 at 3:42 pm
My assertions:

The ‘Conservative’ wing of the Young Libs is using branch-stacking and sometimes even violence to marginalize the classic liberals in the ALSF.

Uhuh, those violent Liberal Party branch meetings, just crazy! Remember the one where old man Hughes was out there with his baseball bat threatening old Mrs Peters (who provided the lovely scones) that if she didn’t vote to pre-select his man “she was fucking dead”?

Me neither.

My “Assertation”:

You are an idiot.

My Thesis:
Adrien is a soaked through, dime a dozen Internet lefty, desperately trying to appear intellectual, “above the fray” and unique from the rest of us mindless plebs. Yet quite incredibly I seem to run into him, albeit with a different name, on every single lefty board I’ve ever been to!

Weird.

twostix

29 Jun 11 at 3:52 pm
Adrien is a soaked through

He’s usually pissed or suffering from having being.

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 3:56 pm
It’s interesting, by the way, that you were outrageously! outraged! by a policeman telling women to be careful how they dress so as to avoid ~~getting unwanted attention from scumbags~~ getting raped…

No. Constable Michael Sanguinetti was speaking at a York University safety forum. Policeman are not feminists or arts lounge theorists. They live in the real, gritty world. What he said:

You know, I think we’re beating around the bush here. I’ve been told I’m not supposed to say this, however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.

Victimised does not mean ‘raped’ – it can also mean harrassed, verbally assailed and just generally getting the attention, potentially, of rapists.

…but you’re unmoved by Mrs Beck being assaulted in public or Ann Coulter being mobbed in Canada by a horde of thugs intent on ~~harrassment and violence~~ yelling and taking photographs at someone accompanied by a security team.

The police officially advised Coulter and her bodyguards that their safety could not be guaranteed and that they should call off the speech.

Note two things: first, Anna approves of the latter harrassment and incitement to assault a conservative woman. Second, she compares a concerned copper’s brutally honest advice on how women can improve their chances of avoiding harrassment and sexual assault with actual harrassment, incitement, mob violence and a call for Sarah Palin to be gang raped.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 3:59 pm
Note two things: first, Anna approves of the latter harrassment and incitement to assault a conservative woman. Second, she compares a concerned copper’s brutally honest advice on how women can improve their chances of avoiding harrassment and sexual assault with actual harrassment, incitement, mob violence and a call for Sarah Palin to be gang raped.

Should I go back and double-check CL’s claims against what Anna actually said, or should I just proceed on the basis that the Currency Lad is up to his usual lyin’, quote-doctorin’ ways?

Yep, thought so.

Another shameful performance from Australia’s most-quote-doctoringest commenter.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 4:10 pm
Note too that when warmenist Anna-Maria Arabia got a sweary email, she rushed to the ABC and Fairfax which dutifully reported – in between treatment for the vapours – that the traumatic spam constituted a “death threat.” Lefties were Outrageously! Outraged!

But an actual, physically present mob threatening Ann Coulter… No biggie.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 4:13 pm
Good idea Tillman. CL is a much more accurate source of what I believe than I am.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 4:16 pm
Should I go back and double-check CL’s claims against what Anna actually said…

Speaking of Glenn Beck, Tillman’s doctored Beck video debacle remains one of this blog’s best-known and most hilarious examples of immediately debunked verballing.

Speaking of free speech and blacks, Tillman pleaded with Sinclair for that right after being temporarily banned for one of his customary race jibes. You’d think his rehabilitation (after much sooking) would encourage him to criticise his censorious fellows on the far left, but no…

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 4:18 pm
Seriously CL, did you suffer some sort of brain injury in the last few years, or were you just better at hiding your idiocy before that?

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 4:19 pm
It’s obvious to everyone on thread what you believe, Anna. You believe that non-leftist women are fair game for vilification, harrassment, threats of violence and even incitement to commit gang-rape.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 4:21 pm
That time of the month, Anna?

But please, do go on. I haven’t heard your boilerplate faux-triangulation about the good ol’ days of nice blog behaviour and good ol’ Jason and Helen since your last visit.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 4:26 pm
I of couse have always exhibited exemplary behavior on blogs… Being the gentleman…. Whether jase or sinc run the blog.

It’s made no difference to me. It’s the other reprobates I’m concerned with.

Jc

29 Jun 11 at 4:32 pm
Anna

Your theory that the Currency Lad has suffered a traumatic brain injury is interesting and plausible.

We here at the Cat have often noted that CL engages in behaviour consistent with a bizarre form of masochistic paraphilia.

He seems to enjoy telling outrageous lies that, because they are so outrageous, will never be believed but will only cause people to have contempt and scorn for CL himself. He seems to revel in deliberately making people dislike him – the only thing he seems to enjoy more is perusing Andrew Sullivan’s personal ads and constantly googling the latest activities of what he (CL) describes as “the Elton John set” and then telling us what he found.

He spends many hours of every day engaged in this non-productive – indeed, self-destructive – behaviour. Typically, he seems to roust himself at around 11am or midday and then he posts lies and slanders at the Cat until about three or four in the morning, cutting and pasting the same crap over and over again in an effort to attract attention and make people hate him.

This behaviour is obviously quite strange and totally irrational.

Traumatic brain injury affecting the hypothalamus is a plausible explanation for the Currency Lad’s conduct. It could be a brain tumor.

I hope for all our sakes that he gets medical attention before he goes all Charles Whitman on us. Even if there isn’t a physical cause for his odd conduct, I think he would certainly benefit from a heavy dose of aggressive electro-convulsive therapy.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 4:38 pm
Tillman

Grow up.

Jc

29 Jun 11 at 4:42 pm
Actually, CL might not go Charles Whitman. He might go Walt Whitman instead.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 4:52 pm
Or Walt Disney.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 4:54 pm
Is that long post an example of clown nose on or off, Tillman? It’s hard to tell because you seem livid and slightly anxious.

Speaking of brain injuries, perhaps you could relive for us the desire you once expressed here to bash septuagenarian Jew, Joe Lieberman, at an American train station.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 4:57 pm
Tillman? You have a desire to bash old people?
Fer shame.
And I thought you were such a funny little fellow.

Gabrielle

29 Jun 11 at 5:12 pm
so this entire slanging match started because Anna declared that Catallaxy had ‘jumped the shark,’ and Adrien replied by noting that Larvatus Prodeo jumped the shark long ago.

Game on!

But Tillman, why do you care? You don’t hang out at LP. Or Was the chance to joing the pile-on onto Currency Lad just too much to resist?

daddy dave

29 Jun 11 at 5:17 pm
Gab, if you believe the Currency Lad, I am so distressed by Bushitler’s policy on warming that I want to bash an elderly Jew every time I catch the train.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 5:17 pm
Olease don’t do that, T.

Maybe you should buy a car, hmmm? Much safer for the oldies.

Gabrielle

29 Jun 11 at 5:19 pm
so this entire slanging match started because Anna declared that Catallaxy had ‘jumped the shark,’ and Adrien replied by noting that Larvatus Prodeo jumped the shark long ago.

An accusation of jumping the shark is a more solid casus belli than you typically get around these parts.

Imagine if Anna had mentioned Keelhaul or fractional reserve banking. Then we would really have a stoush on our hands.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 5:19 pm
Anna

Come on doll, lift your game. Sure, you’re an irredeemable slut, but that doesn’t you have to aspire to be one of the LP meme-police Rosa Klebbs. Become a moll rodel for other deluded leftist wymyn.

Peter Patton

29 Jun 11 at 5:20 pm
Tillman’s not a Jew basher, but he plays one at Bird’s.

Infidel Tiger

29 Jun 11 at 5:21 pm
But Tillman, why do you care? You don’t hang out at LP.

C’mon – how long do you think it would take for them to ban my ass at that place?

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 5:23 pm
So who’s the slut* called ‘Anna’? Is she a LP type?

*perfectly acceptable usage after the Great Reclaiming protests.

Gabrielle

29 Jun 11 at 5:27 pm
Do we have to bicker all time people? Can’t we just agree, or as Shaun Carney said in the Age today (which is soon to close)… can’t we just debate contentious things like if the Carbin “ax” is 26 or 40 bucks a ton… We discuss it “at the community level” and then we all live happily ever after.

Jeesh. As a post-ideological feminist gentlemen I find this squabbling so , so low rent.

Bado, lift your fucking game as your the last one to be picking fights here you moron.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 5:30 pm
Tillman:

C’mon – how long do you think it would take for them to ban my ass at that place?

Good point.

So who’s the slut* called ‘Anna’? Is she a LP type?

She’s not a slut, and is the most reasonable person at LP.

daddy dave

29 Jun 11 at 5:30 pm
Did I miss a CL pile on while searching obsessively for the web’s best transsexual surgery post-op photos?

Re this blog. A few weeks ago I was looking at some old posts by Jason using the Wayback machine (some can still be found.) It was a different blog in those days, I can tell ya. (Although comments threads were unbearable due to one G Bird.)

I gotta say, though, that Jason’s thread comments now indicate he’s much crankier than he used to be and has swung further to the libertarian side.

I think a Labor government has made the blog passengers run so far to the starboard it’s in danger of capsizing the ship.

And if there’s any current poster who’s likely to tip it completely over, it’s Steve Kates.

steve from brisbane

29 Jun 11 at 5:31 pm
Although comments threads were unbearable due to one G Bird

No you are lying

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 5:32 pm
So who’s the slut* called ‘Anna’? Is she a LP type?

I agree with Anna on this, sorry.. All good looking females should dress like sluts. In fact it ought to be not just a human right, but the law of the land.

The Greens / ALP Alliance (with Conroy at the helm on this one) was perfectly right to be banning the depiction small breasts.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 5:33 pm
Fair enough, Daddy Dave. I’ll take your word for it.

But we women are all sluts apparently, according to the protests.

Gabrielle

29 Jun 11 at 5:33 pm
And if there’s any current poster who’s likely to tip it completely over, it’s Steve Kates.

As usual, you’re completely wrong.

dover_beach

29 Jun 11 at 5:34 pm
But we women are all sluts apparently, according to the protests.

No not exactly. They were agitating for the sluttishness of all women. Couldn’t agree more.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 5:36 pm
Gab

Anna the Slut is one of the LP gestapo, whose main job is packing off non-leftists to the gulag of “permanent moderation”. An estimated 223,000 people are in LP moderation. Anna is number 4 Slut in LP’s most efficient “Moderation Troop”, known as the The Rosa Klebb 4

Peter Patton

29 Jun 11 at 5:37 pm
As usual, you’re completely wrong.

WTF? That has no punch. You aren’t going to convince anyone if you beat around the bush like that.

What you should have said is:

No you are lying.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 5:38 pm
Okay, Peter, I’m sensing opinion is divided.

Unless of course daddy Dave was just yanking my chain.
For a stir.

Gabrielle

29 Jun 11 at 5:39 pm
Unfair, Peter. I’m number 3.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 5:51 pm
I thought there might have been a powder-room putsch, thus explaining the seeming-retirement of Lefty Kim. If this is so, you have a ways to go to deserve the Number 3 pozzie. You are nowhere near as racist as Lefty Kim.

Peter Patton

29 Jun 11 at 5:55 pm
Bado, lift your fucking game as your the last one to be picking fights here you moron

What’ve you got against Disney commie?

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 6:08 pm
What’s a disney commie?

JC

29 Jun 11 at 6:11 pm
Imagine if Anna had mentioned Keelhaul or fractional reserve banking

Not to mention that traitorous cad Campion.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 6:12 pm
No, why don’t you provide the evidence for it?

hjave and at length. I’m sick to death of it. Sarah Palin tmade an inquiry viz blacklisting books. She tried to intimidate and then fire the Wasila Library Director but found her to well aupported. The evidence is all over the net. The reason you don’t go looking for it is because it’s there.

In the context of a discussion about the forced shut down of an Ann Coulter speech, you urged us not to defend her but to blame her equally as an enemy of free speech,

No. What I asserted was that Coulter is not a suitable role model for free speech because she abuses it. I have, again, at length substantiated my claim the meat of which has not been any way addressed by you or anyone else.

You gave us no reason to believe that Ann Coulter has done anything to hinder free speech and your argument is not “nuanced” but frivolous.

Whatever reasons I give you and I’ve given you plenty would be lost because you are impervious to reason. You are simply attacking me because I refuse to be a team player. And I didn’t join your team. I wouldn’t Herr Kommandant. I look terrible in a helmet.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 6:31 pm
What’s a disney commie?

He was the eighth dwarf, he tried to unionize the others so they kicked him out.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 6:31 pm
CL:

…Anna. You believe that non-leftist women are fair game for vilification, harrassment, threats of violence and even incitement to commit gang-rape.

As well as being a moral and ethical coward and fashionable leftie poseur, Anna is both a hypocrite and an amoral monster, she has been from her first post at LP.

FGM? No probs for Anna, provided it happens to little brown and/or black people. Its cultural donchaknow. Support for murdering unborn babies? But of course! Vitriolic criticism of Israel? naturally – but no criticism of Assad, paleosimian terrorists, ‘palestinian’ attacks on innocent civilians.

A few years back, LP was a good blog, plenty of contrary opinions, lots of stoushes, high quality posts. It was very good fun.

Then more racist amoral far-left bigots – Anna among them – moved in. Now it’s barely worth visiting, numbers have collapsed, post quality is pure green-left-weekly and undergraduate and only those who agree with the circlejerk are permitted.

MarkL
Brisbane

MarkL of Canberra

29 Jun 11 at 6:33 pm
Imagine if Anna had mentioned Keelhaul or fractional reserve banking. Then we would really have a stoush on our hands.

Attention: clown nose on.

I meant to mention the Housewife Outrage earlier. Causing at LP what Anna’s sister feminist intellectual, Julia Gillard, might call high (or at least medium) dungeon, Tony Abbott, it will be recalled, referred to housewives and the ironing. There followed Mark B’s post no fewer than 151 comments.

By contrast, when it came to Sandra Bernard calling for Sarah palin to be gang raped, Anna expressed her outrage in the following passionate post (reproduced in full):

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 6:40 pm
[Anna] is the most reasonable person at LP.

Shocking, if true.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 6:42 pm
That’s it?

Obviously The lavatory was having hosting problems that day and then Anna forgot about it.

JC

29 Jun 11 at 6:42 pm
Come on. There’s really no need for that. Anna has always argued courteously and in good faith. Standards, yeah?

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 6:44 pm
This is what I mean. We’re on the verge of losing the ethos that underpins democracy after thousandfs of years trying to develop one that actually works and it’s all being buried under an avalanche of juvenile bullshit.

Exactly what ecvidence is there to assert that Anna is a hypocrite let alone a, ha ha ha, amoral monster.

Adrien

29 Jun 11 at 6:47 pm
Once again, MarkL of Canberra is “quaking to his marrowbones”.

Someone give the man some diazepam. Followed by a harsh dose of ECT.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 7:04 pm
CL and Sir MarkL of Canberra have been comparing me to Mengele since my very first post on LP. I’d be more shocked if they stopped, frankly.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 7:22 pm
Nice try at evasion Anna but you & the rest of the Bolsheviks at LP will get no rest until you completely denounce the disappearance of Amelia Earheart.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 7:34 pm
~~Nice~~ Hopeless attempt to disarm criticism with (yet more) ad homs, Anna, but the fact remains that you clearly resent condemning harrassment or incitement to violence where the victims are non-leftist women.

And I don’t recall your first posts at LP. I do recall that you used to frequently visit my blog to comment (almost exclusively) on abortion ‘rights.’ If you’d like to refresh my memory about my specific comparison of your views with Mengele’s, I’m sure we could resume where we left off, me confidently.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 7:35 pm
me ~~confidently~~ naked

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 7:37 pm
Memo for Baddy, Anna: it’s Tillman’s trick to save face with comedic caricatures of the arguments and interlocutors who’ve demolished them.

It doesn’t work for him either.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 7:38 pm
Someone give the man some diazepam. Followed by a harsh dose of ECT.

Why? It’s clearly had no effect on you.

daddy dave

29 Jun 11 at 7:41 pm
Did any of you guys know who Sandra Bernhard was, before she said that one sentence about Sarah Palin early 3 years ago?

AJ

29 Jun 11 at 7:47 pm
… nearly, not early.

AJ

29 Jun 11 at 7:47 pm
You wrote a post about my first post there, back when you were merely wrong, not a total loon. But your blog doesn’t exist any more, so I can’t link to it.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 7:48 pm
Did any of you guys know who Sandra Bernhard was, before she said that one sentence about Sarah Palin enarly 3 years ago?

Yes. But I didn’t know who lefty Jared Loughner was before he shot Gabby Giffords. Is my unfamiliarity exculpatory for Loughner in some way?

Good Lord.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 7:57 pm
I don’t remember your first post, Anna. I presume it was about abortion – a subject with which you were always obsessed. As for looniness, you’re a feminist who refuses point blank to condemn somebody for calling for the gang rape of Sarah Palin. Who happens to be, of course, an admired heroine of the pro-life cause.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 8:03 pm
Mass murder = saying shit about Sarah Palin.

AJ

29 Jun 11 at 8:03 pm
Did any of you guys know who Sandra Bernhard was

Yes, at Christopher Moltisanti’s suggestion she called Janeane Garafolo a buchiach in an episode of (I think) season 2 of The Sopranos.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 8:06 pm
Memo for Baddy, Anna: it’s Tillman’s trick to save face with comedic caricatures of the arguments and interlocutors who’ve demolished them.

Memo for Baddy, Anna: the Currency Lad admits defeat by claiming to have “demolished” people.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 8:09 pm
Its ten past eight on the east coast.

Which means we are in for about another six or seven hours of CL cuttin’ and pastin’ and quote-doctorin’ and claimin’ to have demolished people before he toddles off to bed.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 8:11 pm
Where the hell is Coz when we need her to inject a dose of sanity into this thread that is in grave peril of going well and truly off the rails?

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 8:13 pm
I believe the cast of Jersey Shore are buchiachs.

Thanks for the new slur, JC.

.

29 Jun 11 at 8:15 pm
Sandra also played the part of the other obsessed loon alongside De Niro in the King of Comedy. Jerry Lewis was also awesome in that film.

badm0f0

29 Jun 11 at 8:16 pm
She plays the “crazy bitch” role well. Very well.

.

29 Jun 11 at 8:19 pm
Tillman, could you clarify if the clown nose is on or off when you post, please? From about the Beck video doctoring affair (which was humiliating for you), you’ve never been very confident in the straight-out argument. Now it’s difficult to tell if you’re in a ‘funny’ mood or a Lieberman-bashing kind of mood.

Just a polite request. Don’t go all train station about it.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 8:35 pm
Thanks for the new slur, JC.

credit where credit is due, please, motherucker.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 8:37 pm
She plays the “crazy bitch” role well. Very well.

Ha ha, I get it, ’cause she’s a crazy bitch. That’s champagne comedy.

Anna Winter

29 Jun 11 at 8:56 pm
Let’s recapitulate theses and confirm their status:

1. That the left is increasingly given to violence and the trivialisation of violence.

Status: confirmed.

2. That Ann Coulter and other non-leftist commentators and personages are increasingly subjected to attack or threatened with attack, to an extent that far transcends anything faced by lefties.

Status: confirmed.

3. That Anna (weighing in of her own volition) is a case study in shameful hypocrisy when it comes to violence and incitement to violence, in the specific cases of Ann Coulter and Sarah Palin.

Status: confirmed.

4. That lefties, on losing an argument, invariably resort to personal abuse in order to shut down the continuation of their own polemical debacles and satiate an apparently indomitable need for psychic revenge (see, for example, the bitter interventions of Anna’s jockey-like bodyguard, “Scissorhands” Tillman).

Status: confirmed.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 8:58 pm
As well as being a moral and ethical coward and fashionable leftie poseur, Anna is both a hypocrite and an amoral monster, she has been from her first post at LP.

This is the same MarkL who describes himself as an ‘imperialist’, finds mass murder and famine amusing, and who openly fantasises about a second Holocaust. He also is a pathetic loser who piles on in threads where he attempts to suck up with the other gamma males and yapping poodles (think twostix, or low-rent boy, Patsy). Among other things, he’s continually telling everybody here about his supposed academic credentials, a sure sign that they consist, in reality, of a diploma in theatre sports at his local YMCA.

In short, he’s far too stupid to appreciate the irony of his calling somebody else an ‘amoral monster’.

He’s also a bit too stupid to grasp the irony

THR

29 Jun 11 at 9:09 pm
As well as being a moral and ethical coward and fashionable leftie poseur, Anna is both a hypocrite and an amoral monster…

Tough but fair.

C.L.

29 Jun 11 at 9:10 pm
Yup, her first post at LP sang the praises of murdering unborn babies.

She clearly demonstrated that this was a bedrock belief of hers. If that does not make her an amoral monster, what does?

For the record, I do not believe I have ever compared her to Mengele. If I have, I’d withdraw that comment: he was actively evil in a quite particularly awful and definitive manner. I have no evidence that Anna is actively evil in anything like the same way he was.

MarkL
Brisbane

MarkL of Canberra

29 Jun 11 at 10:07 pm
In following this thread on and off during the day I am reminded of my childhood. Back in the olden days things were pretty clear cut: lying, stealing, adultery, murdering, raping etc were wrong, full stop. Didn’t mean these things didn’t happen but there was no argement- they were wrong.

There was also the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do to you.

I also recall when ‘situational ethics’ started to rear its head. Gradually those clean boundaries became blurred.

Now the golden rule for some would be more like ‘I can do what I like to you but don’t you dare do the same back to me’. And now lying, stealing, adultery, murdering, raping etc maybe wrong in some circumstances except of course for the recipient/victim. But of course the victims have generally brought it all on themslves and are actually the true instigators.

Biota

29 Jun 11 at 10:21 pm
I have no evidence that Anna is actively evil in anything like the same way he was.

Pure class. Brilliant.

You are a solid guy, MarkL.

Tillman

29 Jun 11 at 11:19 pm
meanwhile the Lavatory jumps the couch

@PeeTiddy
Are you Tom Cruise?

Nanuestalker

30 Jun 11 at 1:55 am
AJ

Yes, before “Homey Rape”, la Bernhard was known as a bisexual Slut and trainee comedienne who bcame famous for licking Madonna’s pussy. Should you need more details on the lady, I’m here to help.

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 8:27 am
She clearly demonstrated that this was a bedrock belief of hers. If that does not make her an amoral monster, what does?

So everyone who believes a woman has a right to terminate pregnancy is an amoral monster. This includes me, Helen Dale, Jason Soon…

Come on. Compare us to Joseph Mengele why don’t you?

I look at the comments above and raise a glass to Ms Winter. She has behaved with grace in the face of some of the most ungentlemenly crap I’ve come across since forever. Should be ashamed of yourselves.

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 12:06 pm
ungentlemenly crap

But..but.. the Sisterhood doesn’t condone “gentlemenly” behaviour. They want to be treated as equals.

In which case the interlocutors above should be applauded for their support and recognition of equality between the sexes.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 12:12 pm
But..but.. the Sisterhood doesn’t condone “gentlemenly” behaviour. They want to be treated as equals.

yes indeed. And Anna took on the chin and came right back. Personally I think we should just update our ladies and gentlemen thang for a new world in which men and women work together etc. The Sisterhood at LP have labeled me anti-feminist for that and other stuff. But I don’t recall as Anna ever went there.

That said don’t we disagree with the Sisterhood on that issue. And should we not then behave according to our standards?

Slut? How original.

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 12:23 pm
And should we not then behave according to our standards?

Whose standards? Those of the fembots?
There is indeed a disparity when males are called to account for “ungentlemenly” behaviour. We’ll have none of that, thank you. Call to account female behaviour as well.

Better yet, in the interests of equality, call to account the behaviour, without mentioning gender.

Slut? How original.

Indeed.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 12:49 pm
So everyone who believes a woman has a right to terminate pregnancy is an amoral monster.

Not neccesarily. There is such a thing as invincible ignorance and it is morally exculpatory. But certainly in cases where ignorance is no excuse – for example, late term, “live birth” and eugenical abortions – proponents of the “right” are amoral monsters, no question.

C.L.

30 Jun 11 at 12:54 pm
There is such a thing as invincible ignorance and it is morally exculpatory.

Yes, and well the other thing is, societies frequently normalise immoral behaviour. I’d baulk at calling every Roman citizen at the time of the colliseum, unless they condemned gladiatorial sport, an ‘amoral monster’ even though the colliseum itself was an evil practice.
Similar comments apply to any number of practices from slavery to burning witches, etc.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 1:04 pm
Whose standards? Those of the fembots?

No they say ‘gentleman’ is a patriarchal concept. At the same time their men are expected to behave as gentlemen, except the bits about being good hunters and fighters. Obviously I was talking about ours. If you had a civilized disagreement with some of the lads here would you not object to the label? And what has Anna done exactly to earn it save being of a different political persuasion.

There is indeed a disparity when males are called to account for “ungentlemenly” behaviour. We’ll have none of that, thank you.

Really? So if you have adinner party and the fellas turn up, get drunk, vomit on the pudding and grope the hostess that’s okay? Wild times at your place then Gab.

Call to account female behaviour as well.

Sure. Tho’ exactly where that line is drawn is up for grabs which is something conservatives have trouble confronting. Truly the new conventions viz what defines good behaviour for women and men is something that today’s 20-somethings are sorting out themselves and it appears quite different from our Medieval traditions. The monkey is the same, but s/he’s got more choices.

We judge them harshly. But there’s an old song says: Where’s your shame you’ve left us up to our necks in it. It also says:

And these children That you spit on
As they try to change their world
Are immune to your consultation
They’re quite aware
What they’re going thru

Better yet, in the interests of equality, call to account the behaviour, without mentioning gender.

Yeah. And calling a woman a slut violates this.

The point I’ve been trying to make, which thus far has landed nowhere, is that there’s an ethical component to free speech. It’s a right that is underpinned by a duty. The duty is to use the speech responsibly.

And yet we do not. Freedom to speak means freedom to lie and abuse. The individual mind and its capacity for reason and dissent is getting lost in this. If you believe this to be of grave concern surely your obligation first is to exemplify, in your behaviour, the principles you hold sacred. How is this served by marginalising dissenting voices or calling those with a different worldview ‘sluts’?

That kind of thing is a violation of the spirit of free speech, it says if you say something against the group you will be intimidated and shunned. How far from there to jail? Not so far.

The laws that could put Bolt in prison are socialist ones. Exactly what utility in then behaving the same way?

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 1:19 pm
Adrien

Lovely sermon sparked by a comment questioning why you felt it necessary to expect “gentlemenly” behaviour and yet give a selective pass to the other gender.

If you had a civilized disagreement with some of the lads here would you not object to the label?

Nah. Apparently it’s now cool to be labelled as such.

You have admitted that Anna gives as good as she gets. So why then hold the males on here to a different standard?

Really? So if you have adinner party and the fellas turn up, get drunk, vomit on the pudding and grope the hostess that’s okay?

An insight into your behaviour and that of your friends. To answer though, that behaviour is unacceptable from any person at my table. What you do elsewhere is your business.

Tho’ exactly where that line is drawn is up for grabs which is something conservatives have trouble confronting.

Of course. Only conservatives have difficulty with this, the left are the epitome of genteel behaviour and thus know where that line is drawn. LOL.

As for the “new conventions” of the 20-somethings, it’s all about equality, innit?. What men can do, women can do. There are no differences based on gender. Haven’t you heard? There are no lines.

Yeah. And calling a woman a slut violates this.

Okay. You’re a slut too. Hope that helps.

surely your obligation first is to exemplify, in your behaviour, the principles you hold sacred.

Why that’s very true. But we also need to move with the times, lest we be run over by the fems. We’re all sluts, Adrien; it’s now deemed acceptable to be referred to as such. Why, people have protested globally in order to get the message across. Reclaim the ‘slut’. Viva the revolution! Don;t hold them back now, Adrien, after all their campaigns.

The point I’ve been trying to make, which thus far has landed nowhere,

Don’t be so hard on yourself. You have made a fair effort.

Why are you banging on about free speech? Who here has banned you from speaking freely? Let me know and I’ll defend your right to speak freely, why even refer to me as a ‘slut’ if you wish. I’ll defend your right to say that.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 2:26 pm
Oh Gabrielle, your black and white logic is so charming. Since feminists don’t believe in the old-fashioned chivalry, they must therefore want old-fashioned abuse instead.

Feminism must seem like such a confusing concept to you.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 2:36 pm
Why yes, Anna, they are a tad confusing.

Apparently it’s acceptable for them to use abuse towards males but the minute abuse is is levelled in their direction then it’s all so wrong. Just wrong.

Now that’s not in the spirit of equality, is it?

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 2:42 pm
Oh wow I never thought of it like that, I renounce feminism. o_O

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 2:53 pm
As you wish. Your choice.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 2:58 pm
I never imaged chivalry was considered by some to be excessive.

dover_beach

30 Jun 11 at 3:05 pm
Feminists criticise the theory behind chivalry that says that women need to be treated differently because they are weaker and more stupid. I haven’t met any that argue that women instead be called monsters and sluts. But even if feminists like that exist, since when did libertarians believe in treating people according to the group they belong to?

That said, while I thank Adrien for his kind words, I was not upset by anything said on this thread. I didn’t have much respect for the opinions of those people who called me a monster and a slut in the first place.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 3:28 pm
Lovely sermon sparked by a comment questioning why you felt it necessary to expect “gentlemenly” behaviour and yet give a selective pass to the other gender.

I do this? Where?

You have admitted that Anna gives as good as she gets. So why then hold the males on here to a different standard?

I don’t recall as Anna has ever used pejoratives or resorted to abuse, I’m not holding males to a different standard insofar as I expect them to behave well and give a free pass to women. It’s just that the males here are the ones who are acting badly.

BTW I don’t think it’s possible to fully evade ‘double standards’ as men and women are different and that won’t change.

An insight into your behaviour and that of your friends. To answer though, that behaviour is unacceptable from any person at my table. What you do elsewhere is your business.

Have you been taking rhetoric lessons from Currency Lad?

Of course. Only conservatives have difficulty with this, the left are the epitome of genteel behaviour and thus know where that line is drawn.

No the Left in my experience have absolutely no idea what goes on in the street.

As for the “new conventions” of the 20-somethings, it’s all about equality, innit?. What men can do, women can do. There are no differences based on gender. Haven’t you heard? There are no lines.

Not anymore.

Okay. You’re a slut too. Hope that helps.

I thought you’d never say it. Now whip me, beat me and call me trash.

Why are you banging on about free speech?

It beats working.

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 3:35 pm
I’m sorry you were offended at the slut label, Anna.

Hey, the slutwalk protests were all about reclaiming the word slut. “We’re all sluts” they cried.
Damn it, I was misled.

No need for chivalry in the fems code of behaviour.
Women can defend themselves. Even on the frontlines.

I have no respect for people who espouse double-standards; nor for people who refer to others as a “total loon”.

Did you suffer some sort of brain injury, Anna, or are you just hiding your idiocy? Oops, I shouldn’t say that. It’s only appropriative to say that to males. Apparently.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 3:56 pm
I don’t recall as Anna has ever used pejoratives or resorted to abuse

Then you have a memory glitch.

You give a free pass to some women

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 4:07 pm
Hey, the slutwalk protests were all about reclaiming the word slut. “We’re all sluts” they cried.

I fully support the sluts. More sluts means a happier world.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 4:22 pm
I have no idea if you’re really that clueless, Gabrielle, or if you’re just playing.

I fail to see, even in your shallow analysis of what Slutwalk is all about, how it can be read as women wanting the word slut to be hurled at them as a form of abuse.

As I said before, I wasn’t offended by you calling me a slut. I am, however, offended by stupidity. Surely there are plenty of things we can disagree on without resorting to idiocy?

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 4:35 pm
Feminists criticise the theory behind chivalry that says that women need to be treated differently because they are weaker and more stupid.

So, if we set aside some of the silly presuppositions we can be chivalrous nonetheless.

dover_beach

30 Jun 11 at 5:23 pm
I am, however, offended by stupidity.

Then why would you want to re-claim the word ‘slut’?

dover_beach

30 Jun 11 at 5:25 pm
So, if we set aside some of the silly presuppositions we can be chivalrous nonetheless.

Sure!

Then why would you want to re-claim the word ‘slut’?

Personally, I think the value of slutwalk is not in reclaiming, it’s about removing its power. So that whether women cover up or strip down, remain virgins forever or sleep with every second person, that they are simply treated as people.

Sure, everyone should be entitled to explain why their way of living is better, but we need to remove the power of the word slut to make women feel dirty, ashamed and less than human.

More importantly, police, lawyers, jurors, friends and family need to understand that a piece of clothing or enjoyment of sex does not make it OK to physically, verbally or sexually abuse a person. Surely this is not controversial in libertarian circles?!

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 5:36 pm
More importantly, police, lawyers, jurors, friends and family need to understand that a piece of clothing or enjoyment of sex does not make it OK to physically, verbally or sexually abuse a person. Surely this is not controversial in libertarian circles?!

Look, I agree with all of that. And so, the slutwalk in and of itself is a good thing, because it’s a demonstration of freedom (ie in this case, freedom for women to dress ‘sexy’ – I call it sexy not slutty btw).

I think where some people took a dim view was the putative reason for the slutwalk in the first place, which was some cop who was talking to a group of women about practical strategies for staying safe on the streets. And he said that dressing slutty in some locations, at certain times and places, can put you at risk. A lot of people said, “but that’s true! He was simply stating the truth!”

And it was taken out of context to make out like he was saying women deserved it or brought it on themselves or whatever, when – in context – he was saying nothing of the sort. So this cop was unfairly vilified.

So therefore.
Slutwalk: good.
Excuse for slutawalk: bad.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 5:41 pm
Sure, everyone should be entitled to explain why their way of living is better, but we need to remove the power of the word slut to make women feel dirty, ashamed and less than human.

The power of the word is entirely the consequence of the approval or disapproval of the conduct we associate with it. Why should women or men be able to indulge in such conduct without the consequent approval or disapproval?

More importantly, police, lawyers, jurors, friends and family need to understand that a piece of clothing or enjoyment of sex does not make it OK to physically, verbally or sexually abuse a person.

I agree, but reclaiming ‘slut’ really has nothing to do with this; and in the case that precipitated the rallies the police officer neither physically, verbally or sexually abused a person, nor did he suggest that being a slut justified such abuse.

dover_beach

30 Jun 11 at 5:53 pm
And he said that dressing slutty in some locations, at certain times and places, can put you at risk.

I think you’re adding qualifications that he didn’t make.

steve from brisbane

30 Jun 11 at 5:55 pm
(Mind you, I’m not suggesting that it was really worth a worldwide string of demonstrations to complain about a stupidly careless thing said by a cop in Toronto.)

steve from brisbane

30 Jun 11 at 5:58 pm
Dad

You’re so quick to agree with Anna.

Let me ask you something though.

Have you ever considered the male side of things and I draw particular attention to young males?

Young boys/men have huge sexual urges that is never considered in any discussions that the likes of Anna seem to peddle. It’s all about them and how they want to act out.

The fact is young males have enormous sexual urges and having gals parade around them in a state of semi undress is nothing other than what we used to call cock teasing in the old days.

I’m not suggesting in any way that we need to have dress code and dress code police by the way.

Men are never considered in these discussions and reality.

If females wish to dress like tarts, then more power to them, as I wouldn’t want to stop them. However if they receive unwanted “admiration” for wearing a skirt just up to the neck and breasts hanging out in full display then stiff cheddar. That’s how young men react.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 6:09 pm
Adrien:

So everyone who believes a woman has a right to terminate pregnancy is an amoral monster. This includes me, Helen Dale, Jason Soon…

No, extension of the argument from one facet. CL notes that: There is such a thing as invincible ignorance and it is morally exculpatory. But certainly in cases where ignorance is no excuse – for example, late term, “live birth” and eugenical abortions – proponents of the “right” are amoral monsters, no question.

In other words, look at the nuances and what the suspected monster says over time. It starts with that cold grue of intuition, but watch behaviour.

Be aware of moral frames of reference. One can believe completely in murdering the unborn and be morally innocent if one has been acclimatised to it by relentless pro-abortion propaganda and never been exposed to an alternative view. Could a North Korean abortionist be morally responsible for his actions if the party and state supported it, and viewed disagreement as an anti-state, anti-party thoughtcrime? Of course not. The moral responsibility for the murders he performs can actually lie with the state.

You cannot identify an amoral monster due to any one facet, but from the entire stated belief system and the way the monster conducts itself to support it. There’s the lot there (observable over time), a smooth self-assessment of innate self-superiority, narcissistic behaviour, elitist pretences, the usual innate racism and anti-semitism, a polished shell of intellectual lies, the usual anti Judaeo-Christian beliefs; pro-terrorist, pro-totalitarian, moral relativist, cultural relativist and many other such facets. It is a slick, polished internally consistent and wilful evil. The monster is that way because it wants to be.

The monster would make a fine senior staffer for someone like Khang Khek Ieu, a splendid chekist working for Felix Dzerzhinsky, able to easily rationalise the most bestial brutality of the regime.

All in the name of the party and the people, of course.

There are more such monsters around than one thinks. The more one studies them, the easier they are to identify. They are often – even usually – quite intelligent. They are normally well camouflaged. They exist on left and right: historically the weighting (and certainly the corpse count) is heavily on the left. But always they are in the end smooth and banal, always pretending that they effortlessly glide over moral issues.

Watch the behaviour.

MarkL
Brisbane

MarkL of Canberra

30 Jun 11 at 6:14 pm
OK, let’s look at it this way. As a man, do you have to constantly stop yourself from raping women? Is it so difficult for you, that a woman who seems like she enjoys sex is enough temptation to push you over the edge?

Do you really think that men are either too tempted, or too dumbstruck by the “yes” that supposedly comes from a short skirt that they are unable to hear the “no” that comes from her mouth?

These are simple questions. Unless the answer is yes to any of them, then explain why it is sensible advice for a policeman, a person who is supposed to be out there preventing crimes, to suggest that a short skirt plays any role in sexual assault. Explain the logic, because I cannot see it.

Because if there is no logic to it, then the only thing we achieve by “warning” women about the dangers of short skirts, is to re-inforce the culture that insists on believing it. The culture that stops women reporting their rapes, stops jurors finding rapists guilty, and ultimately leads to more rapists walking free to rape again.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 6:18 pm
MarkL, are you basically saying that I’m a monster because I know what I’m doing, but that Helen and Jason are not because they’ve just stupidly fallen for my propaganda? I’m sure they will both be quite happy to know that. Now for my next trick I will convert them both to communist baby-murdering.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 6:22 pm
Oh, the old ‘stay in one facet’ approach. Banal.

MarkL of Canberra

30 Jun 11 at 6:33 pm
In other words, look at the nuances and what the suspected monster says over time.

Indeed. Or maybe let’s just call her a slut, an amoral monster now and save time. To date I’ve seen nothing from Anna that says she’s amoral. There’s allusions to her nefarious views without citation.

There are more such monsters around than one thinks

About 4% of us, I believe. Contrary to your assertion I’ve read somewhere that they aren’t especially intelligent altho’ those that are are way more destructive. I’ve known at least three. I don’t think Anna’s one of them.

Kim? Maybe.

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 6:42 pm
OK, let’s look at it this way. As a man, do you have to constantly stop yourself from raping women? Is it so difficult for you, that a woman who seems like she enjoys sex is enough temptation to push you over the edge?

What a stupid comment. No, Anna I don’t.

Do you like cock teasing young men, even those you have no desire to sleep with? Is that how you get your kicks?

Do you really think that men are either too tempted, or too dumbstruck by the “yes” that supposedly comes from a short skirt that they are unable to hear the “no” that comes from her mouth?

Another stupid comment and nothing to do with what I suggested. It’s really stupid in having to say that it’s wrong for a man to rape or physically molest a woman.

But let me ask you again do you like cock teasing young men to the point of eliciting unwanted glances and wise cracks. Does that make you feel good?

These are simple questions. Unless the answer is yes to any of them, then explain why it is sensible advice for a policeman, a person who is supposed to be out there preventing crimes, to suggest that a short skirt plays any role in sexual assault. Explain the logic, because I cannot see it.

Because some men don’t restrain themselves and they rape or attack women. It’s that simple.

Because if there is no logic to it, then the only thing we achieve by “warning” women about the dangers of short skirts, is to re-inforce the culture that insists on believing it.

So continue cock teasing men, Anna. No one is topping you. If that’s how your kicks then keep right on doing it.

The culture that stops women reporting their rapes, stops jurors finding rapists guilty, and ultimately leads to more rapists walking free to rape again.

Stop talking incoherent irrelevant gibberish.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 6:42 pm
Do you really think that men are either too tempted, or too dumbstruck by the “yes” that supposedly comes from a short skirt that they are unable to hear the “no” that comes from her mouth?

Anna, you mightn’t like the name, but Camille Paglia once wrote that the ethos in feminist circles was that men were required to be more like women and women could be whatever they want. This was twenty years ago.

A lad about that age described gender relations amongst his peers, thus: They don’t really know what they’re doing, but the girls do all this stuff and drive the boys crazy.

Underneath whatever social mores and rituals pertinent to romantic matters that may exist there’s an animal. The animal has a nature. Human culture has always been organized to deal with our natures. This carries obligations of reproductive responsibility on the part of men and women. These duties are different for what should be obvious reasons.

For a long time now women have got the raw end of the deal for two reasons, both physical.

Now, after the 20th century gender revolution, after the effects of modern technology on culture, after Mick Jagger and Anais Nin all bets are off. But the animal remains the same just without customs to help it along.

Conservatives insist on resurrecting outmoded customs, progressives seem to think and rules a repression. Meantime boys and girls are driving each other crazy.

Sexual interaction is rarely contractural in nature. If 90% of communication

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 6:50 pm
I just wisj Anna and her fellow sluts would actually walk the walk instead of talk the talk, coz fuck you are boring on blogs. Please don’t pollute this blog with all that sophomoric crap you slutty LP coven insist of rewarming at least once a week.

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 6:59 pm
The problem with Anna, and even more so the really hard core oldies like tigtog and lefty Helen, is that they are fricking clueless about MEN.

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 7:00 pm
JC dude, as far as I know, the only part of me you’ve even seen is my eyeball. Calm down, dude.

I am perfectly happy to accept that short skirts can make men horny and may even make them call out rude and obscene things. What makes me angry, and the reason Slutwalk happened, is that the obscene comments and the raping keep being blurred together, so that it’s used to hint at “she deserved it”, but when called on it, people can say, “Oh no, I was talking about catcalls, not rape.”

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 7:01 pm
I am perfectly happy to accept that short skirts can make men horny…

Yeah, it’s the point.

and may even make them call out rude and obscene things.

Inspire us maybe but any idea that we ‘can’t help it’ is bollocks. It’s the Clinton Defense.

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 7:05 pm
The other fact you seem oblivious to is that denigrating of certain women as “sluts” is much a female hobby, than male. Just sayin’.

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 7:07 pm
PP – Your comments drip with hatred. Just sayin’.

Adrien

30 Jun 11 at 7:10 pm
Agreed, Adrien, on both counts.

That’s not what Slutwalk is for.

Slutwalk is about the non-reasonable people who move from that perfectly true thing to arguing that slutty clothes or slutty behaviour can lead to sexual assault or make you in some way responsible for it.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 7:11 pm
Peter, the Slutwalks are aimed at anyone with those attitudes. If you feel like they’re only aimed at you then I can’t help that.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 7:12 pm
…the only part of me you’ve even seen is my eyeball.

And I’ve often remarked on how cute and alluring it is, haven’t I? I love the eye. Is it yours, seriously?

Calm down, dude.

Anna.. I’ve had a great few days trading US refinery stocks. I can’t be calmer or more serene. Any more and I’d suffer cardiac arrest from a slow heart rate. Trust me. The only thing that concerning me is that wifey is out and I can’t decide between Chinese, Sushi or a pizza take out. Help me out here.

I am perfectly happy to accept that short skirts can make men horny and may even make them call out rude and obscene things.

That’s not even half of it. I love them , so don’t get me wrong.

What makes me angry, and the reason Slutwalk happened, is that the obscene comments and the raping keep being blurred together, so that it’s used to hint at “she deserved it”, but when called on it, people can say, “Oh no, I was talking about catcalls, not rape.”

Well they are easy to distinguish, no? Rape is rape and catcalls are what they are.

I don’t think it’s a case of deserving it. No one deserves to be attacked. But you also need to watch yourself out there and exhibit a little self preservation as there are evil people.

Having said that, I think making light of the fact that short skirts makes men horny is not treating this issue seriously. Male physiology is never really considered in these issues.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 7:14 pm
Anna, my point is I simply don’t care, who the SlutWalks are aimed at. And if they were aimed at attitudes like mine, oh honey, such a misreading of tactics! like I said, most of y’all are simply clueless about men.

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 7:18 pm
The only thing that concerning me is that wifey is out and I can’t decide between Chinese, Sushi or a pizza take out. Help me out here.

Sorry, it’s hard enough deciding what I want.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 7:44 pm
Certainly a lot of upset just to show you don’t care Peter.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 7:45 pm
Dad
You’re so quick to agree with Anna.
Let me ask you something though.
Have you ever considered the male side of things and I draw particular attention to young males?.

Yeah, what can I say. Social democracy rules! Greens, for the win!
No, seriously, I already held that opinion about the slutwalk. It’s great to get people empowered about freedom to dress how they like, it’s just a pity they had a worldwide demonstration against one well-meaning but not terribly PC policeman.

As for your question, it really comes down to a question of fact. Does dressing slutty increase the chances of being raped? (in any situations at all).
This is an empirical question. We can’t just dictate that the answer is “No” just because we want it to be “No.”

Steve, as usual, linked to an article that doesn’t prove what he was claiming (duh), but it did have this interesting nugget at the end.

Toronto Police spokeswoman Meaghan Gray said cautioning women on their state of dress is not part of any police training.

“In fact, this is completely contradictory to what officers are taught,” she said. “They are taught that nothing a woman does contributes to a sexual assault.”

Okay. So NOTHING that a woman does can increase her chances of being raped? Let’s ask the same question about a less inflammatory crime.

stealing cars is wrong. Let’s not blame the victim. But is it true that nothing you do can increase the chances of having your car stolen?

The corollary of course is that there’s nothing you can do to prevent it. Which is (a) fucked up, and (b) wrong.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 7:47 pm
Anna, I’m not upset, I’m just obnoxious.

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 7:53 pm
Well I am impressed it took so long for a woman to be compared to a car.

Except that you can prevent cars from being stolen by locking them up. Shall we suggest to women that they lock themselves up? Do smart people really think that a bit of extra fabric is the same as a deadbolt?

It’s not that we don’t there’s nothing women can do to try and prevent rape. It’s that smart people seem to think that clothes can do that.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 7:54 pm
Sorry, it’s hard enough deciding what I want.

Fine. I had to choose without you.
Went Chinese
1.Prawn dumplings
2. Peking Duck 1/2 serve (I’m no pig)
3. Special fried rice
4. Washed down with a coke zero.

Good choice no?

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 7:55 pm
okay, maybe it was a bad choice of metaphor.
My point was – there are things you can do to minimise your chances of being a victim of crime.

I’m not saying that how you dress is one of those things.

But to say that there’s nothing you can do is just a falsehood designed to make women feel better, at the expense of their own safety.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 7:56 pm
. She has behaved with grace in the face of some of the most ungentlemenly crap I’ve come across since forever. Should be ashamed of yourselves.

What? Me calling Sarah Bernhardt a crazy bitch? Just fuckin’ relax eh?

.

30 Jun 11 at 7:59 pm
I don’t think anyone is saying that. I think all they’re saying is that people should stop arguing that clothes are a preventative measure. If only…

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 8:21 pm
Yeah, at least Julia Gillard is not crazy!

Peter Patton

30 Jun 11 at 8:23 pm
Politicians should have to wear clerical or judicial gowns. There’s been some real contenders for appearing on The Swan in the Parliament.

.

30 Jun 11 at 8:29 pm
Since feminists don’t believe in the old-fashioned chivalry, they must therefore want old-fashioned abuse instead.

- Civilised Anna.

Apparently, yes:

You wrote a post about my first post there, back when you were merely wrong, not a total loon…

Seriously CL, did you suffer some sort of brain injury in the last few years, or were you just better at hiding your idiocy before that?

- Earlier Anna, arguing with her usual compelling rationality.

C.L.

30 Jun 11 at 8:31 pm
Prevent is the wrong choice of word, Anna. Of course clothes don’t prevent rape.

How about a-these-days well worn word like “mitigation”

The action of lessening….

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 8:32 pm
Anna:
I don’t think anyone is saying that.

Yes they are. Here is the quote again from Steve’s helpful link.

Toronto Police spokeswoman Meaghan Gray said cautioning women on their state of dress is not part of any police training.

“In fact, this is completely contradictory to what officers are taught,” she said. “They are taught that nothing a woman does contributes to a sexual assault.”

I have no opinion about whether attire has any effect. People should have the freedom to dress how they like, but this is a question of fact, not values.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 8:32 pm
nothing

a woman does contributes to a sexual assault

FFS this goes against everything good personal protection teaches. Sure, everything the perp does they are 100% liable for.

This overly PC attitude says pretty much don’t bother having home security, go into dodgy areas, hang out with dodgy guys, take whatever drugs you’re offered and even socialise with the attacker later. Hell, meet up with them after they’re released from gaol. It’s just insane.

.

30 Jun 11 at 8:36 pm
I didn’t have much respect for the opinions of those people who called me a monster and a slut in the first place.

The feeling was and is mutual, Anna. Of course, if you’d like to withdraw your support for something like late term abortion (infanticide), they might reconsider. You blog at a site that calls Noel Pearson a “coconut” and a “cane toad” and where female genital mutilation shouldn’t be “too loudly” condemned.

But let’s return to the key subject. It’s your thesis (I think) that Constable Michael Sanguinetti’s words were not merely offensive but also dangerously amoral as didactic intervention. And, right or wrong, his objective was to protect women from “victimisation” – which includes everything from verbal harrassment to assault. But when it comes to the words of Sanda Bernard – calling for a woman to be gang raped – you refuse point blank to acknowledge that they constitute both vilification and incitement to serious sexual assault. You also dismiss a mob bearing down on a woman (Ann Coulter) as just “yelling and taking photographs at someone accompanied by a security team.” She was advised by police that her safety could not be guaranteed. In both cases, you don’t care because the subjects are – to you – women who are ideologically incorrect gender traitors. One of them is even fecund (!) and the mother of one of the Down syndrome children whose eugenic extermination in utero is now the norm in the Western world (a norm you wouldn’t condemn, of course, because knocking off sub-humans is a woman’s ‘right’).

You are an appalling, morally discombobulated hypocrite.

C.L.

30 Jun 11 at 8:45 pm
Contributing to is not the same as prevention! But the huge focus on how women can supposedly prevent rape is a sign that we think they aren’t now. That they’re bringing it on themselves. If it was as simple as telling women that walking alone after dark is dangerous, then fine. We already know that, move on already.

The constant focus on how women can prevent rape is ridiculous though, since even the sensible advice (don’t walk through dark alleyways, don’t get into strange cars) only covers a small proportion of rapes. How can a young girl prevent a family member raping her? If a woman’s car breaks down and she has to walk alone to get help, what should she do to prevent rape?

The focus on women preventing rape as if we are somehow unaware that it’s a risk is as ridiculous as it is dangerous. Meanwhile it takes the focus away from the fact that stranger rape is the least common type of rape, and that all those prevention tips don’t help you when it’s a rapist that you know and trust.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 8:52 pm
Sanguinetti referred to victimisation, not rape per se. Does anyone doubt that a woman dressed like Cher on the USS Missouri is going to be taunted, verbally assailed and harrassed? Sanguinetti’s critics upped victimisation to rape in order to whip up another Outrageous! Outrage! festival.

FemBot response 101: But but, that doesn’t make it right or her fault!!!!!!

Reasonable respondent: Yes dear, the world is an awful place.

C.L.

30 Jun 11 at 9:03 pm
I’m not focusing on “how women can prevent rape,” I’m focusing on the factually false statement that “nothing a woman does contributes to a sexual assault”.

I’m not in the least suggesting they’re “bringing it on themselves.”

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 9:03 pm
Anna

I never raised the issue of rape until you brought it up.

I said that I think cock teasing especially young men/boys is a shitty thing to do and I also mentioned that little is ever said or conceded that young men/boys have strong sexual urges.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 9:06 pm
I was trying to explain the more nuanced thought behind slutwalk, although lord knows why, Catallaxy threads are not for nuanced argument.

Sluts are great, men are crap, rah rah rah. Who cares that women aren’t reporting rapes because they are too afraid of being judged and that rapists are going free. Who cares that women are blaming themselves for their rapes. Stupid feminazis.

Anna Winter

30 Jun 11 at 10:06 pm
Anna

If women aren’t reporting rapes how would you know that if they aren’t reporting it…. to sound circular.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 10:08 pm
And what pray tell has that got to do with with the price of Jimmy Choo shoes.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 10:09 pm
Anyhow I wonder if conservative women cop more crap than left leaning women.It would make an interesting study

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 10:23 pm
I have no idea if you’re really that clueless, Gabrielle, or if you’re just playing.

Nice hurl, with the “that clueless” shtick.

I fail to see, even in your shallow analysis of what Slutwalk is all about, how it can be read as women wanting the word slut to be hurled at them as a form of abuse.

Hurling abuse at anyone is not nice. Whether the word be slut or idiot or stupid or clueless. Using the now acceptable word “slut” in an enquiry is not abuse. Nothing was “hurled” at you, my dear. As for the sluts-in-protest. IIRC they said, among other things, that it’s time to reclaim the word slut; that it ought not to be used as a pejorative; that we all should release our inner sluts. (Yes, a shallow analysis, try to grin and bear it as best you can). Hey, I was just doing as the sisterhood were advocating. My bad.

As I said before, I wasn’t offended by you calling me a slut.

I used it as an adjective, not an accusation nor a judgement nor as abuse. Just using the lefty vernacular term. But *sigh*, your not offended, so why bring it up?
Are we now back to “slut” being a derogatory word? Okay. I’m hip to that.

I am, however, offended by stupidity. Surely there are plenty of things we can disagree on without resorting to idiocy?

Well we’re not exactly off to a good start are we? Quite obviously you judge me as stupid – which offends you – and my comments as “resorting to idiocy”. Thank God you and your condescension are above all that “hurling abuse”.

You’ll have to clarify for me (I know the stupid offend you but buck up and take a breath): why you consider ad homs acceptable form of argument.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 10:37 pm
Apologies for the html error.

I have no idea if you’re really that clueless, Gabrielle, or if you’re just playing.

Nice hurl, with the “that clueless” shtick.

I fail to see, even in your shallow analysis of what Slutwalk is all about, how it can be read as women wanting the word slut to be hurled at them as a form of abuse.

Hurling abuse at anyone is not nice. Whether the word be slut or idiot or stupid or clueless. Using the now acceptable word “slut” in an enquiry is not abuse. Nothing was “hurled” at you, my dear. As for the sluts-in-protest. IIRC they said, among other things, that it’s time to reclaim the word slut; that it ought not to be used as a pejorative; that we all should release our inner sluts. (Yes, a shallow analysis, try to grin and bear it as best you can). Hey, I was just doing as the sisterhood were advocating. My bad.

As I said before, I wasn’t offended by you calling me a slut.

I used it as an adjective, not an accusation nor a judgement nor as abuse. Just using the lefty vernacular term. But *sigh*, your not offended, so why bring it up?
Are we now back to “slut” being a derogatory word? Okay. I’m hip to that.

I am, however, offended by stupidity. Surely there are plenty of things we can disagree on without resorting to idiocy?

Well we’re not exactly off to a good start are we? Quite obviously you judge me as stupid – which offends you – and my comments as “resorting to idiocy”. Thank God you and your condescension are above all that “hurling abuse”.

You’ll have to clarify for me (I know the stupid offend you but buck up and take a breath): why you consider ad homs acceptable form of argument.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 10:40 pm
Catallaxy threads are not for nuanced argument.

No you are lying.

Tillman

30 Jun 11 at 10:53 pm
Tillman is in his happy place

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 10:55 pm
That’s bullshit. Total bullshit. We do nuance here. We do tons of that crap.

It’s such sophisticated nuance that nobody sees it.

Catters love nuance.

JC.

30 Jun 11 at 10:58 pm
True Joe there is so much nuance here that sometimes The Cat is misunderstood

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 11:04 pm
It’s your thesis (I think) that Constable Michael Sanguinetti’s words were not merely offensive but also dangerously amoral as didactic intervention. And, right or wrong, his objective was to protect women from “victimisation” – which includes everything from verbal harrassment to assault. But when it comes to the words of Sanda Bernard – calling for a woman to be gang raped – you refuse point blank to acknowledge that they constitute both vilification and incitement to serious sexual assault.

Spot on. Anna is fuming over someone giving advice that would reduce instances of rape by a certain percentage. But she goes into Keyser Trad mode about Sandra Bernhard’s incitement to rape. Both arguments together constitute running interference for rapists and advocates of rape.

Michael Fisk

30 Jun 11 at 11:14 pm
Ann Coulter on the liberal mob attack on Beck and family:

Liberals are not like most Americans. They are the biggest pussies on Earth, city-bred weaklings who didn’t play a sport and have never been in a fight in their entire lives. Their mothers made excuses for them when they threw tantrums and spent way too much time praising them during toilet training.

Beck and his family would have been fine at an outdoor rap concert. They would have been fine at a sporting event. They would have been fine at any paid event, mostly because people who work for the government and live in rent-controlled apartments would be too cheap to attend.

Only a sad leftist with a crappy job could be so brimming with self-righteousness to harangue a complete stranger in public.

A liberal’s idea of being a bad-ass is to say vicious things to a conservative public figure who can’t afford to strike back. Getting in a stranger’s face and hurling insults at him, knowing full well he has too much at risk to deck you, is like baiting a bear chained to a wall.

They are not only exploiting our lawsuit-mad culture, they are exploiting other people’s manners. I know I’ll be safe because this person has better manners than I do.
…
As long as liberals can’t be normal and prosecutors can’t be reasonable, how about a one-punch rule against anyone bothering a stranger in public? Then we’ll see how brave these lactose-intolerant mama’s boys are.

Believe me, liberal mobbings will stop very quickly after the first toilet-training champion takes his inaugural punch.

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2011/06/29/glenn_beck_vs_the_mob/page/full/

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 11:15 pm
We also love narrative, Chuck Brick and the nightly “No You’re Lying” report.

Anna you are totally wrong. The trial will be worse than any police report and in no way will women ever be judged. I doubt this was ever true, rapists used to be hanged.

.

30 Jun 11 at 11:23 pm
Say what you like about Coulter, that lady knows how to describe modern liberals!

Infidel Tiger

30 Jun 11 at 11:23 pm
See,yeah I don’t get that I loathe governments but I can’t imagine assaulting someone’s family

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 11:28 pm
I don’t believe Ann Coulter has embraced nuance in that article.

Gabrielle

30 Jun 11 at 11:32 pm
True Gab,we should get that girl and give her a lesson

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 11:42 pm
We do nuance here. We do tons of that crap.

absolutely, JC, and you are a master of it.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 11:45 pm
Daddy Dave,do you think the “slut walk ” achieved anything?
Honest question btw I don’t mean to attack you

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 11:50 pm
A clear death threat from Tal.

C.L.

30 Jun 11 at 11:52 pm
Well I am a knuckle dragging right winger Lad

Tal

30 Jun 11 at 11:53 pm
Yeah, sure. We can laugh, but freedom of attire is a dimension of freedom.
So there was an affirmation of that, as well as of the right for women to dress in a sexy way. This is important too. They weren’t celebrating being sluts, they were celebrating dressing like sluts, ie just wearing certain kinds of clothes. Supposedly, anyway – from the news photos it was all very prudish and staid. But still, that’s what they were marching for. It’s not much, I suppose, but it did affirm some values that we can all support.

The disappointing part was that they felt the need to create a foil, a bogeyman to proest again. The bogeyman was a supposedly widespread attitude that women who get raped ‘had it coming.’ But people don’t really think this. They were just demonising of a fictitious conservative cardboard caricature.

daddy dave

30 Jun 11 at 11:57 pm
Wow, my grammar and punctuation are down the tube. It’s too late at night for me.

daddy dave

1 Jul 11 at 12:00 am
Yeah DD good point,my youngest girl child(evil heathen)is cranky with the slut walk mob cause when her and her mates go out the guys yell things like “is this a slut walk” Bloody He’ll I hate moronic teenages

Tal

1 Jul 11 at 12:07 am
I agree Dave, it’s about freedom. Something I thought libertarians were all in favour of. And not even lefty, communist positive freedom, it’s proper, leave me alone freedom. It’s so sad that just because it’s only about women, so many people here miss that obvious aspect.

There are lots of ways you can avoid murder or being glassed at a pub. But we don’t have thousands of concern trolls in the papers, working in the justice system, talking about how we just need to educate young men on the dangers of drinking in pubs, or wearing the wrong sports team shirt. Because it’s clear then that we shouldn’t resort to telling people not to live their lives and have fun, simply to avoid violent crime.

That’s all slut walk is too. Telling society that, we already know the risks, but far too many of your “warnings” involve curbing our freedoms in a way you would never expect of young men.

Anna Winter

1 Jul 11 at 12:11 am
Thanks, feminists!

Get the irony.

The anti-Sanguinetti feminists have now caused females to be victimised and abused in the street.

C.L.

1 Jul 11 at 12:12 am
Dad:

There has never been any discussion in this country about the way women dress except the other way around: discussions for and against muzzo women wearing the burkha and other head gear.

In other words dress code has been essentially privatized.

The entire thing was bullshit in that they simply created a strawman.

Furthermore most of them I saw (though not all) were ugly brutes who seemed to think the men would be attracted to them in some way by wearing disgusing attire.

JC.

1 Jul 11 at 12:16 am
Anna, the name ” the slut walk ” lost me

Tal

1 Jul 11 at 12:17 am
That’s all slut walk is too. Telling society that, we already know the risks, but far too many of your “warnings” involve curbing our freedoms in a way you would never expect of young men.

Really?

Had enough? Enough of what exactly? When was the last time anyone ever heard of a discussion about how women dress in this country. I can’t recall.

JC.

1 Jul 11 at 12:24 am
But we don’t have thousands of concern trolls in the papers, working in the justice system, talking about how we just need to educate young men on the dangers of drinking in pubs, or wearing the wrong sports team shirt.

No education campaigns warning young men about drinking, Anna? Have you been inhabiting earth in recent years?

That’s all slut walk is too. Telling society that, we already know the risks, but far too many of your “warnings” involve curbing our freedoms in a way you would never expect of young men.

Who said anything about “curbing” their freedom to dress like tramps? Was there a bill presented to the Canadian Parliament? The UK Parliament? The Australian Parliament? The Congress?

Young men have the right to walk into a Blues-supporting bikey pub on State of Origin night dressed as Jamie Soward in a skirt too but most coppers would advise them not to.

Your Outrageous! Outrage! amp is always on eleventy.

Which means that a genuine offence – like that verbally and physically visited upon Sarah Palin and Ann Coulter – doesnt even register. Your interests are undergraduate and contrived. You need to grow up.

C.L.

1 Jul 11 at 12:26 am
Look at these pretty little things. Pleaze.

JC.

1 Jul 11 at 12:29 am
Joe,Joe.tissk tissk

Tal

1 Jul 11 at 12:32 am
“Stop slut shaming”. Hear, hear.
Nice alliteration too.

Why can’t people just get on all friendly-like?

Gabrielle

1 Jul 11 at 12:32 am
But we don’t have thousands of concern trolls in the papers, working in the justice system, talking about how we just need to educate young men on the dangers of drinking in pubs, or wearing the wrong sports team shirt.

Bullshit! A common factoid is that men aged 18-25 have a hell of a mortality rate. The Australian Story on Jock Palfreeman was highly instructive. What do you think the main day to day mission of the PCYC is? They drill young men (mostly) into law abiding citizens through martial arts (mostly). What do you think professional sporting bodies do when someone turns pro? They give them a course in personal safety and media skills! FFS Anna stop it with this sarcasm through playing dumb routine.

You are being the concern troll Anna. “Avoiding crime” doesn’t mean not having fun. If I told my friends not to drink at the Havana Bar (169 on Oxford before it turned gay), which had a lot of bikie related violence and was high on the NSW list of violent pubs – would I be a “concern troll”?

.

1 Jul 11 at 12:33 am
Gab ..little hug in your direction….

Tal

1 Jul 11 at 12:39 am
Who said anything about “curbing” their freedom to dress like tramps? Was there a bill presented to the Canadian Parliament? The UK Parliament? The Australian Parliament? The Congress?

Well, this is it. As JC and I noted, they set up a bit of a straw man, which unfortunately made the whole thing a source of amusement more than anything.
The confected outrage worked against them in the end because people found it hard to take seriously.

But I repeat that I agree with the message that women can dress how they like.

daddy dave

1 Jul 11 at 12:41 am
Hugs are always welcome, Tal.

I’m tipping poor Constable Sanguinetti could use a hug.

Gabrielle

1 Jul 11 at 12:47 am
Two other ironies:

1. As all men know, the most ruthlessly cruel and judgemental people vis-a-vis scantily clad women are other women. Long before internet-promoted Canadian policemen, there were other veritable constables of fascist sartorial standards. They were known as ‘mothers.’

2. Before there was Slut Walk, there was Bagfest. Islamic women – many frightened witless by fathers, uncles, brothers, suitors and imams – asserted their alleged preference for being as un-Western and un-sluttish as materially possible. And guess what? Feminists were in the corner of the Islamic Sanguinettis.

C.L.

1 Jul 11 at 12:52 am
…..there were other veritable constables of fascist sartorial standards. They were known as ‘mothers.’

Some still are. Thank God. In earlier times I often heard shouts around the house “Don’gt even think you’re going out in that”. It was pretty final.

JC.

1 Jul 11 at 12:57 am
I think calling it “slutwalk” demeaned freedom, played to the imaginings of the messed-up guys who really think that way, and offended a bunch of staid, middle-class males who while they might be sexist in the purest sense are generally very supportive and protective of women, and who are therefore potential and actual allies for women against those men who would do women harm.

wreckage

1 Jul 11 at 1:28 am
Good point, wreck.

I suspect, though, that androphobia rather than girl-power was the real actuating mindset.

C.L.

1 Jul 11 at 1:35 am
Yeah, I dunno. I know too many victims of various forms of sexual assault to go straight to the “shut up, stupid!” bit of the argument, I just think that if you’re working on the real and indisputably bad things that happen to women and girls you shouldn’t get distracted nor should you ditch potential allies.

wreckage

1 Jul 11 at 1:48 am
Nobody has told them to shut up, though.

Grow up, yes.

C.L.

1 Jul 11 at 1:51 am
That’s all slut walk is too. Telling society that, we already know the risks, but far too many of your “warnings” involve curbing our freedoms in a way you would never expect of young men.

Well, um, that’s true isn’t it?

Adrien

1 Jul 11 at 12:58 pm
Like we criticize the Iranian government because they’re, like, not free. But inside Tehran’s private sphere young Iranians practice freedom. How does it look?

And what do we say about the Iranian government’s attitudes to that?

What’s all this fuss about ‘Slutwalk’ again? They should have “Boganwalk” next. I need to add to my photo album of prize mullets.

Adrien

1 Jul 11 at 1:02 pm
Anna

From reading this thread, it is you who does not seem to “get” what the cultural significance of Slutwalk is. Let me give you a hint. The world does not stop turning because Anna and LP are loudly denouncing. You need to look beyond your own ego for real insight.

Peter Patton

1 Jul 11 at 1:18 pm

Catallaxy Files

Just Like Ann Coulter Said

299 Responses to 'Just Like Ann Coulter Said'

Leave a Reply

Liberty Quotes

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Archives

Pages

Blogroll

Meta