House of Eratosthenes

And who is “they”? I’m picking up that there is a lot of feminist excitement about it, and I’m also picking up that there is a lot of liberal excitement; after all I’ve seen gone down this year and years past, I consider those two things to be opposites although I’m sure some self-identifying feminists might disagree with that. Be that as it may, our modern left has managed to put up, and win an election by means of, a message I find about as anti-feminist as any ever could possibly be. The whole “Life of Julia” thing. Summed up as “women can’t count on men and they’re completely helpless so they need free stuff.” Compared to that, Archie Bunker is a tireless crusader for female equality.

It is a plurality — more than one — of incoming female senators. Uh, well there’s nothing ground-breaking about this, we’ve had that before. What might be unprecedented is the lucky snapshot of twins. Twins in hairstyle, twins in apparel, twins in footwear, twins in body language.

Told that they are lawmakers, nobody with common sense is ever going to say “Well, that looks like more local control, strong defense, greater respect for individual liberty headed our way.” They look like a couple of bureaucrats. Huddled together, keeping bureaucratic secrets, within an opaque bureaucracy, with their anorexic bodies conditioned to the most effective posture for this by years and years of practice.

I’ve asked the question…will probably regret it…what if Sarah Palin was a third figure in the pic, as an additional freshman senator? Looking as ravishing as ever, loaded with man-appeal, in formal sensible shoes and a nice feminine skirt? Would that enhance the appeal by fifty percent?

From Palin’s America By Heart, p. 135:

The tragedy of contemporary American feminism is that it’s had the example of Margaret Thatcher to put forward as a model…and yet feminists have championed a very different type of female leader. Modern feminism’s idea of a “real” woman isn’t so much a woman as a liberal. “Real” women must be in favor of government-run health care, of restricting Second Amendment rights, of curtailing free speech in universities and in political campaigns, and other liberal causes. In the name of liberating women, modern feminism has wrapped us in a one-size-fits-all straight-jacket of political correctness.

This liberal ideology is so sacrosanct among feminists that they label women who don’t agree with them a not “real women.” Typical was a remark by a Democratic Tennessee lawmaker complaining that Republican women in the state legislature don’t share her liberal views. She snarked, “You have to lift their skirts to find out if they are women.”

To me, this picture says a lot more than “Hey look we managed to get a couple women elected to the Senate.” I see a lot of what brings about my distrust and cynicism against the centralized bureaucracy, by which I mean for the most part, the left-wing centralized bureaucracy. Looters elected to represent moochers. Shepherds getting ready to “manage” the sheep…but everlastingly sheltered, bringing no knowledge to the subject, knowing less about herding sheep than the sheep themselves.

And the twin hairstyles & fashion statements, along with Palin’s comments about her own experiences above, suggest to me a stultifying lack of diversity of thought. It looks to me like diamond-hard theories, ready to meet up with reality, determined that in any conflict that arises it is the reality that must yield to the theory. And it looks like being pretty & attractive to men, would be some kind of infraction against a protocol nobody would ever actually write down, because they’re too craven to do so…but they’ll enforce the code nevertheless.

It looks like a hot mess on four legs coming our way. And not just because they’re women. It looks like a big bundle of negative energy. I wonder what would ensue, should those who find something appealing about it, self-task to create a list of adjectives to describe it. I can’t envision any positive adjectives being applied. Just: Catty, jealous, sneaky, conniving, conspiratorial, unfeminine, feral, craven. There is great mystery arising from the situation that so many of my fellow countrypeoples, seem to find something attractive about the picture. And, I’m sensing that I will not manage to solve the mystery, or even make a dent in it, until such time as I find out more about how these people think than they know themselves. Because they’re hiding something from their own consciousnesses.

Update: Margot has responded. Yes, it is >1 senators of the female persuasion, that’s the low bar that has been met. And also as a by-the-way, she’s blown away at how sexist my comments are. Surprised?

Time to invoke Morgan Rule Number One — “if I’m gonna be accused, I wanna be guilty” — on this sexism charge. Let’s go for broke.

Taking into account the results of this election, along with the 2010 midterms, the reactions to all that has happened from people & pundits, there are some telling patterns emerging. I find two such patterns to be significant: The electorate responded in approving terms, two years ago, to female candidates who looked like women, and this year they have responded in approving terms to women who do not look like women. Because, to me, that hairstyle is just bizarre. I do not see it out in “flyover country” or in offices…for this, I’m glad. It’s terrible, just terrible. And regular readers already know how I feel about the Mao Tse Hillary pantsuit look. But yeah, that was the big winner here, women who don’t look like women.

This was a cultural conflict. Public policies weren’t very central to what we saw taking place, since the people who affiliate themselves with the public policies that emerged victorious, cannot state how those policies will lead to anything that anybody particularly wants. No, what’s more important is that a culture won out over other cultures. And that culture does not impress me as being terribly friendly toward or respectful to women. It would be more accurate to describe it as an urbanized, Occupy-Something, counter-capitalism, bureaucrats-run-everything, gender-neutral androgynous culture.

And you’d better not notice or point it out, or else you’re sexist, eleventy.

And meanwhile, here in California, we’ve had women senators for the last twenty years. And at least ours showed signs of having once been young and hot when they were elected.
- Rich Fader | 11/15/2012 @ 09:07
True. But we’re not going to get too many elected representatives like this one. And that’s our loss.
- mkfreeberg | 11/15/2012 @ 09:12
“Not a Real X” is an epidemic in the saggy minds of the left.

The problem is that they can’t prove you wrong. If they could, they would, and with glee in their hearts. They’ve been worsted too many times on that field, however, and so they choose mental terrain more suitable to their strengths: demagoguery, name-calling, story-telling, and Puritanical shaming. The “Not a Real X” tactic fits under several of those categories (if not all) so it’s a go-to staple.

I think the reason such large swaths of voters march in monolithic blocs to the Democratic tune is due to this tactic: if you don’t agree with me you’re Not Really (chosen group here) – Not a Real Black Person, Not a Real Woman, Not Smart, Not a Human At All… Nobody likes to be excluded from a group they feel a real affinity towards, especially when it reaches critical mass and the group at large starts enforcing this unthinking standard on its apostates.

This pressure, as much as any other, explains why it’s hard for Republicans to make inroads in certain areas. I seriously doubt that 92+% of black people, for example, are actually Democrats because they like the policies, any more than 99.893668% of the “voters” actually pull any lever for the various dictators of the many mock-democratic tyrannies of the world. As like as not, a significant portion of those 92% hate those policies, and realize what a disaster those policies are for their communities… but what they hate more is the thought that every single one of their friends and neighbors and family will hate them for voting Republican.

So why the 92%? Why not a lower actual percentage, with 92% merely reporting a D vote? Again, it’s human nature – we tend to become the company we keep. If we’re surrounded by the secular gospel, we will begin to internalize some part of it unless we are distinctly strong or have some kind of strong support, akin to the secret wireless the Underground Resistance used in WW2. Otherwise keeping up appearances becomes too hard and certain things start to slip. I’ve no doubt the actual number is actually lower than the reported number, but nothing like enough to swing an election at large.
- nightfly | 11/15/2012 @ 09:38
They look like a couple of bureaucrats. Huddled together, keeping bureaucratic secrets, within an opaque bureaucracy, with their anorexic bodies conditioned to the most effective posture for this by years and years of practice.

Well, yeah, there’s that. But they look more like “women in sensible shoes” to me. 😉
- bpenni | 11/15/2012 @ 11:52
They might look like something more than that, after ObamaCare gets done with ya.
- mkfreeberg | 11/15/2012 @ 12:35
Back in the day, when I was a liberal and bought into that feminist crap, I used to vote for every woman on the ballot with a D after her name. That’s all it took. Nowadays, I’m becoming convinced that women shouldn’t really be able to vote. Yeah, there are some sensible women out there that vote issues but most don’t. So feel free to call me sexist. I was a feminist because I was raised by a single mom in the 50s, when it was rare. I learned that those women had nothing in common with my mom.
- teripittman | 11/17/2012 @ 20:18
[…] like anything else, must be wrong. So everything has to emulate the model. Which ends up looking rather silly and cartoonish by the time they’re done with […]
- House of Eratosthenes | 07/21/2013 @ 13:21
[…] like anything else, must be wrong. So everything has to emulate the model. Which ends up looking rather silly and cartoonish by the time they’re done with […]
- Memo For File CLXXXII | Rotten Chestnuts | 07/21/2013 @ 14:29

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent

Items of Interest

Monthly Archives

What They Say

Links

Why Do They Love This Picture So Much?Thursday, November 15th, 2012

Why Do They Love This Picture So Much?
Thursday, November 15th, 2012