David Thompson


Blog powered by Typepad

« Technique | Main | When the Onion is Redundant »

April 15, 2014



the day-to-day psychodramatic angst that these young elites feel are their own versions of the world of the Wal-Mart checker, the roofer in Delano who nails in 105 degree August heat,

What, no trigger warning? Why don't you respect my FEELINGS? Racist.


What, no trigger warning? Why don’t you respect my FEELINGS? Racist.

I know, I know. I’m rubbing salt into my eyes in an attempt to atone.

But as dicentra once pointed out, it’s all a bit Princess and the Pea. Stoicism becomes anathema, and pretentious hypersensitivity becomes a marker of virtue. And so, for instance, merely questioning the assumptions of Marxoid identity politics is deemed a “micro-aggression,” one that creates a “hostile climate” for the intellectuals of tomorrow. It’s right up there with insisting that grad students use punctuation correctly when writing dissertations. In their hallucinatory world, being stoical or realistic or keeping things in proportion is a sign of insensitivity, or even bigotry. To not join in with the competitive whining is to risk being denounced as an oppressor. In psychological terms, it’s practically Maoist.

Tom Foster

'To not join in with the competitive whining is to risk being denounced as an oppressor.'

But David – don't you realise that these students are 'victims of hate'?




Yes, I saw. Poor Mr Longhi seems curiously vague on the details of his oppression. There just isn’t enough cossetting in the world for some people. Even the Guardian’s commenters are less than sympathetic. Though I suspect around a third or so of the Comment Is Free readership is now made up of visitors from elsewhere who’ve come to laugh at the locals.


It reminds me of the middle-class film curator Omar Kholeif, who banged on length about how much he deserves special favours, including taxpayers’ money and racial favouritism. Mr Kholeif was careful to imply that some terrible systemic injustice had to be corrected, though he never actually explained what injustice he was suffering.


Poor Mr Longhi seems curiously vague on the details of his oppression.

If Longhi's roommate had actually been threatening or broken the university's rules why doesn't he say so? The fact he doesn't say what hurt his feelings speaks volumes.


The fact he doesn’t say what hurt his feelings speaks volumes.

Well, you’d think a personal example of grievous treatment might add some heft to his rather grand and improbable claims. But despite his pantomime of oppression, it seems Mr Longhi can’t quite muster one. Presumably, then, the “harm” he experienced is too slight to carry much weight, or any weight at all, even in the Guardian. It’s worth bearing in mind that Mr Longhi and his fellow occupiers were also extremely upset by the fact their own written threats of “further physical action” were described as, well, threatening. And by the fact that no-one had censored the university’s library catalogue for potentially offensive words, as defined by them. They also wanted the university purged of “white supremacy and maybe capitalism.”

Jeff Wood

I fancy all here will enjoy this:


Oh, Aye, it's satire. I think.

The original Mr. X

Leftist wants to set up a series of anarchist communes to show up the evils of capitalism, demands capitalist's money to do so:


Kevin Donnelly

As far as Arun Smith goes, what's frightening is the way that reason is abused by this person. He isn't honest enough to say "Look - this is my world and I only want my views represented, and I'll punish anyone who doesn't agree." Instead there is a use of logic, proposition, conclusion. It slightly makes me feel I am being epistemologically cheated. Hey - I said "makes me feel"!! I'm a victim! Brilliant.



He isn’t honest enough to say “Look - this is my world and I only want my views represented, and I’ll punish anyone who doesn't agree.”

No, Mr Smith isn’t honest at all. In fact, his dishonesty is quite breath-taking. But that’s what happens when you spend seven years imbibing Marxoid identity politics. Honesty and realism are rapidly corroded, perhaps irretrievably. And if someone’s definition of “oppression” extends to uncensored library catalogues, the words “traditional marriage is awesome” and the mere existence of capitalism, I think we may have to recalibrate our definition of the word into Impossibly Precious Lunatic territory.

Again, I’m reminded of another hothouse flower, Wahneema Lubiano, a tenured professor at an elite university, who also claims to be “physically traumatised and psychologically assaulted” by global capitalism. By just the fact that it exists.

Ted S., Catskill Mtns., NY, USA

Blame the cupcakes.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

David, shame on you. You've been neglecting us Laurie Penny fans of late.

This week, Laurie has mostly been upset about an advert for depilation lotion and a web-log with pictures of women snacking:


For the last five years the question on everybody's lips has been: "when will Laurie Penny weigh in on the body hair debate?".

On this frabjuous day, the wait is over!

Laurie teases us as coquettishly as ever...

"in five years of feminist blogging I have avoided weighing in on the body hair debate"

Before - BAM! - she squeezes those juicy feminist mind-grapes and allows the fruity goodness to slip down our eager gullets.


Turns out it's all about "race, class and gender status". Plus adverts for Veet prove women are oppressed like in North Korea. Or something.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

I'd be traumatised if my name was Wahneema too.

Couldn't his parents have given him a more dignified name, like Wahncornetto or Wahntanamera?


Couldn’t his parents…

Her parents.

Steve 2: Steveageddon



I haven't been this confused since the ending of "The Crying Game".

Except this time I'm not aroused. :(

Are you sure that isn't the guy who played Morn in DS9, or a cosplayer dressed as Jabba the Hutt?

This has been a shock. Excuse me while I pull my knees up to my chest, rock myself gently, and chant my mantra "I am a leaf on the wind..."


Universities should consider armbands with numbers on them signifying everyone's level of victimhood so that we all know the pecking order. Anyone giving offense (in the broadest sense possible) to someone of a higher rating would be guilty of oppression crime and be subject to discipline and re-education. The victim would, of course, be offered counciling to help them through the traumatic episode.

I, am afraid, would sport a very low value, although there is a rumour that that my grandfather was part Indian, and thus so am I. Or perhaps I could claim I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body. That might bump me up a notch or two.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

Rabbit - "perhaps I could claim I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body"

You and your cishuman anthropohegemony. I'm a cat trapped in a man's body, so I'm more oppressed than thou.

For generations, my fellow cats have been subjugated by the slavering beasts you call man's best friend, by stupid humans taking forever to open doors, and by those laser pointers that tantalise us with darting red prey that inexplicably can't ever be caught.

Those days are drawing to a close. We cats are a proud, warrior race. We will no longer be mocked by your LOLcats. We won't put up with your threatening hate speech about how "curiosity killed the cat". And we will bite the crap out of you the next time you administer us ear medicine.

No justice, no purrs!


Concerning that Andrew Longhi article: Have you noticed how no one blinks an eye when heterosexism and ableism are included among the injustices that we need to fight against?


As I’ve said before, this kind of narcissistic behaviour is generally regarded – by the people who indulge in it - as somehow self-validating, something to be proud of. It’s what elevates them within their own immediate peer group. It’s how they display their credentials to each other. And they’re achieving their in-group status, their imagined radical chic, by imposing on others, people about whom they simply don’t care or for whom they show outright contempt. Hence the ‘occupations’ and intimidation, the imaginary martyrdom, and the threats of “physical action” if their preposterous demands aren’t met.

It’s more than a little symbolic that the disruption and clearing up are usually, if not always, at someone else’s expense. I’ve yet to see a news story in which the occupiers offered to pay for any damage and inconvenience, or even apologised for the disruption. Because that’s who they are. Despite the guff about “social justice,” their behaviour is fundamentally parasitic. As a use of tuition fees and a rare opportunity, one that many others would love to have – and as a message to potential employers - it’s less than optimal.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

Dom - my parents are heterosexual and flaunt it with their baby pictures and family reunions. The bastards. Yours are probably the same way.

They are probably racists too, because they're both white, and all of their kids are white. I mean, how depressingly obvious is that? Hello? Diversity? Ever heard of it? They could have at least had the decency to kidnap some African children like what Madonna did.

And think of the disadvantages they passed on to us when we were born with the usual number of limbs, eyes, and chromosomes. Every time I go for a post lunch nap in the disabled toilet, or park in a handicapped space, I feel guilty. Thanks, Mum and Dad!

At least I never learned to read. That'll show em.


Once again, I count as my greatest accomplishment the fact that I made it through seven years of graduate school, in Literature, five of them at an Ivy, and I never drank the Kool-Aid.

Haven't even come CLOSE to those lofty heights of accomplishment since then.


perhaps I could claim I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body. That might bump me up a notch or two.

Silly you.

Male lesbians are pond scum on the victimhood scale, especially if they go all tranny. Co-dependent lesbian cis-women who marry them have the higher score by far.


Chagnon has been called worse by better...


Chagnon's book "Noble Savages" is a fabulous read.


Though I suspect around a third or so of the Comment Is Free readership is now made up of visitors from elsewhere who’ve come to laugh at the locals

Yes, that or folks like yours truly who earnestly think perhaps we better try and make things a little bit clearer for these muppets. One of them might end up as Director General of the Beeb (more than likely)

Even though resistance is futile and all that.

Have typed "Noble Savages" into the Amazon thingy up there...


Meanwhile we learn that Britain is the world's most sexist country


Thomas Sowell on the “gender pay gap” myth and the people who propagate it.


More sexist than Rashida Manjoo's home country: South Africa

..more sexist than India

..more sexist than Democratic Republic of Congo

..more sexist than Saudi Arabia
any link



Meanwhile we learn that Britain is the world’s most sexist country

And don’t forget there are those, among them feminist “scholar” Joni Seager, who want us to believe that women in the United States are just as oppressed by “patriarchal assumptions” as women in Somalia, Uganda, Yemen, Niger, and Libya.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

Dicentra - impressive, but was it Diet Crazy Kool Aid, or the new Cuckoo Bananas flavour?

When I was a lad, pushing my bike up steep cobbled streets to deliver bread to Old Ma Peggarty, academic fruitloopiness was mainly about putting a happy face on the Soviet Union, agitating to unilaterally disarm our atomic detterent in the teeth of said peace-loving Soviet Union, and proving that Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was an evil baby-eating bogeywoman who strangled a bunch of dalmatian puppies to make a fur coat.

While that was all cobblers, it was at least generally on speaking terms with rational argument. The hard Left loved communism and deployed Jesuitical feats of mental jujitsu to defend it, while the mainstream left professed not to love communism while agitating for nationalisation, price, wage and capital controls, the welfare state, and other policies that brought us closer to communism (as did the useless Conservative Party pre-Margaret Thatcher).

I don't even understand what the Left wants anymore, and I'm not sure they do either. Laurie Penny squawks about how hair removal cream and snack treats are all about "race, class and gender status". Well, isn't everything these days? Including hairstyles and cupcakes, not to mention shoes and ships and sealing wax, and cabbages and kings?

It would save time if we established what *isn't* about racistsexistpatriarchophobia. Fluffy little kittens frolicking with a ball of twine? The nape of the neck, perhaps?

And if everything is all so achingly political all the time, what does it all mean? Assume the Dartmouth Dunces got their way, if their confused and meandering 72 point manifesto could somehow be put into action. OK, so half of them would immediately be expelled to make way for more fashionable minorities. The faculty would be liquidated to make room for womyn of colour with no formal education to share their folksy, homespun racism. The curse of speciesism would be lifted and higher primates would be allowed to teach classes under Professor Dunstan on flinging poo and throwing barrels at moustachioed Italian plumbers.

Assuming we did all that and banned vajazzling and Kit Kat shaming to appease Laurie Penny and had all men sent to death camps to satisfy Witchy Wind, THEN would the Left be happy?


One of them might end up as Director General of the Beeb

I recently came across the following statements all made by one and the same individual, and all of which are taken verbatim from an online (audio) discussion (my emphasis):

    I'm more interested in asking the question why so many men assume that they have a birthright to buy and sell the bodies of women, young men and children.
    I believe [prostitution] is a symptom of a patriarchal and unequal society. […] a society that is scarred by the masculinization of power and wealth*
    It is right to have nervousness and cautiousness around giving more power to a state that is inherently capitalist and patriarchal
    I live in the real world** and until the Revolution, I want the law to make positive changes for women. I don't want women to be commodified as goods for sale.
    It's not Feminists that have victimized women or turned women into victims, it is those people that choose to buy and sell women, that choose to rape and harm women, that turn women into victims. I would prefer the term 'resisters', we are all 'Patriarchy Resisters' and we have to negotiate our way through a sexist society every day.

*The terrifying Gulag trying to mendaciously pass itself off as a liberal democracy referred to here is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

**On the evidence here, that seems to be somewhat open to debate.

Who is this person and is it possible that they have any influence in any way?

The speaker of these statements is one Dr Finn Mackay of the Centre for Gender and Violence Research at the University of Bristol.

As the Centre's home page explains, it developed "out of the Women’s Liberation Movement" and was originally "established as the activist-based Domestic Violence Research Group" (my italics). Obviously the centre continues to promote activism as this quote from an anonymous Phd student at the centre shows: "The links to practice and activism are especially important to me …".

In addition to its research activities, the Centre's aims also include the following:

    To work alongside movements and organisations challenging violence against women in different countries and contexts.
    To apply feminist understandings of gender and power in relation to personal violence. We attempt to inform all our research, training and advisory work with broad feminist principles …
    To work where appropriate to inform government policy and service provision.

I am not trivializing the misery or complexities of domestic or sexual violence and neither am I suggesting that Dr Mackay should not be able to freely express herself or her beliefs.

I am, however, a tad concerned that the good Doctor may not be the best person to carry out research in this field precisely because she is so clearly upfront about her belief in a coming Revolution and about her insistence that those men who abuse women are in part encouraged to do so as a result of living under a Capitalist regime.

Is it really advisable to have someone with such partisan and questionable views on reality informing government policy?

Answers on a postcard please.



These guys probly go on CiF to poke the bedlam residents.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

Nikw211 - you had me going for a minute there till I saw the pic you linked to of this supposed "Doctor Mackay":


You can't fool me. That's obviously a 16 year old boy called Riley covering Peter Andre's hit song "Mysterious Girl" in a doomed bid to impress the judges on the X-Factor.

If it was an animated gif it would immediately cut to Simon Cowell with his head in his hands and Louis Walsh giving that sad puppy eyed expression he does when he is about to let a contestant know not to give up their trolley collecting job at ASDA.

Patrick Brown

"Meanwhile we learn that Britain is the world's most sexist country"

Yeah, I noticed that reported in the Times this morning. I don't know if it's just me, but feminism is getting more and more transparent. Appease me, or there'll be drama. The kind of bullying works much better on someone who's trying to please than on someone who doesn't care.

Feminism depends on trolling the (biological or learned?) male desire to protect women. But women in the modern developed world are probably the safest human beings that have ever lived, so the only way to trigger that protective instinct is to inflate the problems women face, whether that's serious but rare things like rape, or common but trivial things like peer pressure and social discomfort. We're now at a stage that Victorian manufacturers of smelling salts would roll their eyes at, where we are expected to believe asking a woman out and taking no for an answer is misogynist because you've made her momentarily uncomfortable.


The speaker of these statements is one Dr Finn Mackay of the Centre for Gender and Violence Research at the University of Bristol.

As so often, the person telling us that women aren’t taken seriously is someone you can’t take seriously. I wonder if Dr Mackay appreciates the irony.


Macro-Agressive artist.


present & correct

the shape-shifting PeeCee Left can never be sated...


Britain is the most sexist country in the world. While South Africa is the rape capital of the world and women aren't allowed outdoors without being wrapped in a body bag, we have 'Carry on Nurse'.

Patently such left wing student agitprop that only the real crazies rose to the bait.


The body bag comment was referring to the more vibrant and undiverse parts of the Muslim world.

Kevin Donnelly


As far as the Arun Smith case goes, of course you are right. But it is the way they abuse reason, turn obvious oppressions into acts of "resistance", label the freest countries and places in the world as repressive, and generally invert everything that is true that is frightening. There are two reasons for this: 1) Because it makes people engage, and when they engage, they get swept up in the misuse of language and reason; and 2) because, as I've said, it hides the lust for power beneath a veil of concern for rights.

The only way around this surely is savage, unrelenting mockery. Refuse even to engage on the same level or using the same language.

In a gentle but persistent way, this is what you do so well.



But it is the way they abuse reason… that is frightening.

I don’t know that it’s frightening, at least provided such people don’t have power over you. I think it’s more a matter of being faintly dismayed at the learned unrealism and learned dishonesty. Though it is interesting to watch the ways in which reason is deformed in a funhouse mirror. There are recurring patterns.

Remember our would-be philosopher king Tom Whyman, a man schooled in Marxoid “critical thinking” and, not coincidentally, unmoored from reality? If you can plough through the needy verbiage - no small feat - his thinking is bizarre. There’s so much projection and it’s so terribly dogmatic. And laughable as Mr Whyman is, he’s not a random aberration. He speaks the mannered language of his peers, begs the same questions, shares their conceits, and very much imagines himself an intellectual leader. An egalitarian mind, one superior to ours. Like Arun Smith, he’s a man made absurd by his own education.


In a gentle but persistent way,


Kevin Donnelly

Well, not sweary.

I think I get frightened by it because of the dreary certainty I have that it's people like this, not the engineers or mathematicians, who will be running the world.


Steve 2: Steveageddon

you had me going for a minute there


A case of fat fingers / small keys no doubt.

By the way, I forgot to thank you for your tip about avoiding the Islington branch of KFC the other week.

He's a right Royal wrong'un that Owen "OJ" Jones.



I wonder if Dr Mackay appreciates the irony.

I can't say for certain but I suspect a sense of irony doesn't number among Dr Mackay's more noteworthy talents.

I on the other hand was highly amused by LP's comments on smoking.

Amanda Marcotte's Tweet sounds like it was written by Grant Morisson.


Amanda Marcotte’s Tweet sounds like it was written by Grant Morrison.

[ Sounds of chortling ]


Well, not sweary.

I did once use the phrase “arrogant little shitstains.”

Steve 2: Steveageddon

Present & correct - I get that feeling. The Old Testament warns against the ancient practice of sacrificing your children to appease Moloch. Moloch was greedy and rarely satisfied, and the general consensus among historians and anthropologists is that he was a dickhead.

There's a lesson in there somewhere.

Nikw211 - You are welcome. I wouldn't wish running afoul of OJ on my worst enemy. Especially when his beloved Sheffield United lose and he's tanked up on Stella.

I must apologise to you for misunderestimating the reality of this "Doctor Finn Mackay" person. It turns out he is real, or maybe a new Leigh Francis comedy persona, and his tweets are priceless:

"Prostitution is less about sex and more about sexism, capitalism, and racism" (So true. Kerb crawlers frequently remark "Corr! Look at the potential for free market patriarchal exploitation on that coloured lass!")

Doc M braves the lion's den: I'm in the Question Time audience 2night. I know they try & get a mix. That means there could be daily fail readers around me right now.

The good doctor tries to understand human biology:is it accident, freak of nature tht rapists male & most victims female? Gender is a problem.

The doctor is trolled by his bankGot a letter frm bank re the Feminist Archive account addressed to "Dear Sirs"...

Doc bemoans only being paid for the hours he, ahem, 'works':Indeed, I'm an hourly paid teacher in Uni myself so unfortunately know all about it...

And finally, Doctor Finn offers sound career advice to the young:Thinking of going 2 Uni? Interested in why society is th way it is & wot we can do about it?! Study Sociology at UWE!

Hold me back!

Kevin Donnelly


So you did. I think we can say that you were provoked by some "microaggressions" though. The way you embed links to previous posts is very annoying - how am I supposed to get work done, or avoid a heart attack, if I'm always having to follow these links? - Indeed, is this not a microaggression in itself?

Everything you say is true - these people talk gibberish, project, they indulge in bizarre psychodramas at the public's expense, expect unlimited support, and generally act like spoiled brats. But - I think the thing nagging at me is this - this is how dictators behave. They are maladjusted sociopaths (I heard this phrase on Doctor Who once, believe it or not) yet they rise to control continents, given the right mix of a passive population, economic troubles and people wanting to be led.

I wonder if Arun Smith is going to rule us all one day.

Steve 2: Steveageddon

"I wonder if Arun Smith is going to rule us all one day."

I, for one, welcome our neckbearded chubster overlord:



When reality outdoes satire.


Dicentra - impressive, but was it Diet Crazy Kool Aid, or the new Cuckoo Bananas flavour?

Organic Eschaton Immanentazation Suspension, with a dash of Narcissistic Onanism.


The speaker of these statements is one Dr . . . .

. . . given the totally blatant diploma mills, and the multiple sources of wallpaper desperately claiming that one should be considered one of the uber-mega-executive-deluxe-hyper-masters-in-business-administration, I've come to the following conclusion;

If one is a doctor, one practices medicine.

If one is elite, one is a demonstrable master of mathematics.

All else is merely decorative wallpaper with massive fees that often involve student debt and zero guarantees of any employment or anyone having any care what you do.

Actual practitioners of anything will just do, and demonstrate in the doing, and never bother waving a title about.


I'm more interested in asking the question why so many men assume that they have a birthright to buy and sell the bodies of women, young men and children.

OK, if we're talking about actual sex slavery, then by all means, let's get to work saving those poor souls who've been kidnapped and pressed into such awful "service."

For example, Operation Underground Railroad (ourrescue.org), which consists of those burly he-men who are former Navy SEALS or federal agents and junk. (You know: That Kind). They infiltrate the child sex trade and rescue as many kids as possible from as many countries as possible.

But those prissy little piss-pots in Academia would never sully their precious selves by associating with ::whisper:: conservative men ::whisper:: who also have demonstrated their unworthiness by appearing on Glenn Beck's program and being supported by same.

Posturing is ever so much better than Getting Involved With Burly Men.

Who might not even have voted for Obama.


Further to the Dartmouth “micro-aggression” saga, Victor Davis Hanson notes . . . .

. . and it took me long enough to look something up, and having done so, I'm inclined to think that the WSJ, et al, doth protest a bit too much . . .

According to The Huffington Post, More than 30 students were part of the protest, with fewer than 10 staying overnight in Hanlon's office and another dozen outside of it in the administration building. The rest rejoined in the morning, and around 75 participated in a protest in front of the building Wednesday afternoon.

Sooo, giving the protestors a bit of support, let's say that's 75 for the total protest, rather than merely the 10 that actually stayed in the office. At the same time, according to Dartmouth, the Fall 2013 student population was 6342, thus ah, demonstrating the protestors to be a campus shakingly massive approximately one percent. Or, from the other side, the issues being stated are of such total and absolute importance that approximately 99 percent of the student body that is allegedly being threatened somehow managed to not show up.

Now if this Dartmouth Hasty Pudding Club could manage to get at least 600 to show up for their performance, then they might have a claim to an audience . . . .

In the meantime, all that is happening is that once again the one percent is being accused of all sorts of horrible, horrendous, and miserable malevolence, when after all, all that this one percent is managing to inflict is---literally---micro aggression.

Patrick Chester

Hm. Came across a link to this article from the Guardian:

A bit silly, especially since he made claims about author Larry Correia and oddly enough never included a link to the article he was making claims about. Never fear, Larry gave his own reply, with links:



Heh. The Guardian’s Damien Walter says, “The best science fiction literature explores a future of fluid gender identity.” As a measure of what makes a science fiction novel good, indeed “best,” “fluid gender identity” seems a rather narrow and improbable criterion. Somewhat limiting, even.


Is Damien Walters very small and reading a normal-sized book, or normal-sized and reading a very large book?

What does it all mean?

Patrick Chester

I especially like the part where he presumes a male playing a female character in a game is "exploring female gender roles" when seeing a pretty lady running around kicking butt is more likely.

Chris K.

The Atlantic has the bravery to ask the pressing questions of our day: Does Traditional College Debate Reinforce White Privilege?


The answer, as we've all come to expect, is yes it does. Luckily, the noble young minds of tomorrow are shifting paradigms and challenging this privilege, mostly by not actually addressing the central point of the debate and still managing to win the national championships.

From the article:

"...the resolution asked whether the U.S. president’s war powers should be restricted. Rather than address the resolution straight on, Ruffin and Johnson, along with other teams of African-Americans, attacked its premise. The more pressing issue, they argued, is how the U.S. government is at war with poor black communities."

Other gems include spoken word hip-hop poetry and explicit cursing when asked to yield the floor to their opponents. Remember, these are the championships for national collegiate debate - one can only imagine what the qualifying rounds must've been like.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon Link