Over at Return of Queens, a lady with dubs herself "Charity Love" (without apparent irony) has written a piece about "Envy." This is part of the Queens' series on the "Seven Deadly Sins," and I cannot wait to read each and every one. Miss Love is specifically targeting the indisputable envy that fugly "feminists" have of beautiful feminine women (like the gals at Return of Queens no doubt).
And guess who has popped up there in the comments section, not two hours ago?
"What I find is that gossip and unsubstantiated accusations are tools
that women sometimes use against other women of whom they are envious. I
suppose if we are honest, nearly all of us have engaged in such
behavior at one point or another, so we probably all have some room to
grow in this area, and I'm not too proud to say that I certainly need to
ask God to set a guard over my mouth sometimes." [italics mine]
Pardon me for taking the Lord's name in vain here, but Jesus H. Christ, it appears that SSM is blaming her recent (re) doxxing and character assassination on the envy of other women!
Proving, in case anyone had any doubts up to this point, that, as one parody blogger observed, "SSM has the self awareness of a taco." And I think the taco could sue for defamation in this case.
Saturday, April 19, 2014
Heavier Than Heaven
The fact that I can still vividly remember where-I-was-and-what-I-was-doing the first time I heard "Smells Like Teen Spirit" (and also where-I-was-and-what-I-was-doing when I learned of Kurt Cobain's suicide) is a measure of how powerfully the music of Nirvana moved me. I may be a "baby boomer," but I've always identified, culturally at least, with the Generation Xers.
I've been observing the twentieth anniversary of Cobain's death by reading Charles Cross's "definitive" 2001 biography of Cobain, Heavier Than Heaven. And trust me, this book is "heavy" in every sense of the word.
There are no great revelations here: Cobain was a sweet, sensitive child with artistic inclinations who grew into an incorrigible, depressed adolescent who was a complete pain in the ass to everyone who cared about him. What ultimately (and narrowly) saved him from becoming a professional homeless person was his commitment to his music. Cobain was, in fact, extraordinarily ambitious and driven. He was cunning, manipulative, conflict-avoidant, self-mythologizing, and had no qualms about taking advantage of anyone who lent him a hand.
None of which diminishes his musical legacy of course, or even makes this reader dislike him personally. In fact, I am in admiration of his monomaniacal quest to achieve popular success. The fact that this success did not, in the end, make him happy is the most tragic aspect of his life ("answered prayers" and all that).
Part of the reason I am finding the book an interesting, albeit predictable, read is that I have spent a lot of time in the places Cross describes. In the early nineties, I even considered moving to Aberdeen -- probably because the rents were so incredibly cheap there and I briefly fancied the romance of living in a modern ruin.
Anyway, I'm developing a lesson built around Nirvana for one of my classes next week. One of the perks of being a teacher is that I get to inflict my musical and literary tastes on my students (most of whom have never heard of Cobain, but all of whom will recognize the opening bars of "Smells Like Teen Spirit").
I've been observing the twentieth anniversary of Cobain's death by reading Charles Cross's "definitive" 2001 biography of Cobain, Heavier Than Heaven. And trust me, this book is "heavy" in every sense of the word.
There are no great revelations here: Cobain was a sweet, sensitive child with artistic inclinations who grew into an incorrigible, depressed adolescent who was a complete pain in the ass to everyone who cared about him. What ultimately (and narrowly) saved him from becoming a professional homeless person was his commitment to his music. Cobain was, in fact, extraordinarily ambitious and driven. He was cunning, manipulative, conflict-avoidant, self-mythologizing, and had no qualms about taking advantage of anyone who lent him a hand.
None of which diminishes his musical legacy of course, or even makes this reader dislike him personally. In fact, I am in admiration of his monomaniacal quest to achieve popular success. The fact that this success did not, in the end, make him happy is the most tragic aspect of his life ("answered prayers" and all that).
Part of the reason I am finding the book an interesting, albeit predictable, read is that I have spent a lot of time in the places Cross describes. In the early nineties, I even considered moving to Aberdeen -- probably because the rents were so incredibly cheap there and I briefly fancied the romance of living in a modern ruin.
Anyway, I'm developing a lesson built around Nirvana for one of my classes next week. One of the perks of being a teacher is that I get to inflict my musical and literary tastes on my students (most of whom have never heard of Cobain, but all of whom will recognize the opening bars of "Smells Like Teen Spirit").
Friday, April 18, 2014
They Walk Amongst Us
I've spent some time musing over whether certain prominent "manospherians" are psychopaths or sociopaths. I was recently referred to this link which distinguishes the two conditions.
One of the differences appears to be that sociopaths tend to act out in controlled, premeditated ways, to indulge in "calculated or opportunistic violence," and are "often social predators." Psychopaths, on the other hand, tend to be impulsive, and more likely to run afoul of law enforcement. So I will continue to use the term "sociopathic" to describe many of the behaviors I have observed by reading the manosphere.
We are learning that sociopaths are more common than previously acknowledged, and they often function at very high levels. I've read several articles or books in the past year written by people who identify as sociopaths. There is even considerable interest in whether, and in what ways, sociopaths serve society or whether sociopathy is an evolutionarily advantageous trait. It's a topic that the manosphereans themselves occasionally discuss, often with some anxiety.
Personally, I have known two people in my life that I suspect were sociopaths, one a (now deceased) member of my own family. Intelligent sociopaths perform "normalcy" so well that in the context of superficial relationships, their sociopathy is not detectable. So it is reasonable to assume that most of them walk amongst us unrecognized.
And that's probably true of many of the "manospherian" bloggers themselves. Some of the manospherian bloggers and their commentators make such chilling pronouncements, evince such utter lack of empathy and such endless wells of rage, that it's hard to deny they exhibit sociopathic tendencies. Of course, they're doing so, in most cases, under the cloak of anonymity. Part of the threat of being "doxxed" in this 'sphere is that the disparity between their online and offline personas is so great that they have much to lose by being attached to the opinions they fearlessly share online. They are well aware that by being doxxed, they will be exposed as freaks, objects of scorn, pity, and fear, to the very people they depend on most.
Of course, despite the handles they hide behind, the active participants inevitably drop clues when they refer to their "real" lives, and from these scattered crumbs it's clear that some of them occupy positions of considerable authority and public trust. (It's enough to keep a person up at night!)
On the other hand, the same anti-social traits that make them "scary" (or at least damned peculiar) as individuals also keep them immobilized as a social or political group. As the recent frenzy of doxxing and smearing proves, the most popular bloggers, despite being charismatic enough to generate followers, cannot form the kinds of strong alliances that would allow them to organize an effective campaign or exert much influence on society in general. They can only wreak havoc on each other, the unfortunate people in their immediate circle (i.e., spouses and children), or upon targets that they perceive are lone, weak, and unable to retaliate (although I think Paul Elam of AVfM may have seriously miscalculated when he decided to take on Prof. Mercier).
Is it possible that the "manosphere" is a symptom, not of some broad-seated social malaise, but of the internet giving the sociopaths who have always existed a loud (albeit rather impotent) "voice?"
Note bene: Now I am in no way suggesting that everyone who has taken "the Red Pill" is sociopathic. In fact, most of the traffic on those sites is probably coming from very young disaffected youth who are looking for answers, an outlet to safely vent their frustrations, or a forum in which to entertain their fantasies of dominance. A recent reddit survey indicates that the majority of respondents who characterized themselves as MRAs are between the ages of 17-20, white, and, while politically "extremely conservative," are not religious. Is it overly optimistic to trust that as they gain experience, intelligence, and find their paths in life, they will wander away from these dark recesses and integrate themselves into the mainstream?
See also Is Roosh a Sociopath?
One of the differences appears to be that sociopaths tend to act out in controlled, premeditated ways, to indulge in "calculated or opportunistic violence," and are "often social predators." Psychopaths, on the other hand, tend to be impulsive, and more likely to run afoul of law enforcement. So I will continue to use the term "sociopathic" to describe many of the behaviors I have observed by reading the manosphere.
We are learning that sociopaths are more common than previously acknowledged, and they often function at very high levels. I've read several articles or books in the past year written by people who identify as sociopaths. There is even considerable interest in whether, and in what ways, sociopaths serve society or whether sociopathy is an evolutionarily advantageous trait. It's a topic that the manosphereans themselves occasionally discuss, often with some anxiety.
Personally, I have known two people in my life that I suspect were sociopaths, one a (now deceased) member of my own family. Intelligent sociopaths perform "normalcy" so well that in the context of superficial relationships, their sociopathy is not detectable. So it is reasonable to assume that most of them walk amongst us unrecognized.
And that's probably true of many of the "manospherian" bloggers themselves. Some of the manospherian bloggers and their commentators make such chilling pronouncements, evince such utter lack of empathy and such endless wells of rage, that it's hard to deny they exhibit sociopathic tendencies. Of course, they're doing so, in most cases, under the cloak of anonymity. Part of the threat of being "doxxed" in this 'sphere is that the disparity between their online and offline personas is so great that they have much to lose by being attached to the opinions they fearlessly share online. They are well aware that by being doxxed, they will be exposed as freaks, objects of scorn, pity, and fear, to the very people they depend on most.
Of course, despite the handles they hide behind, the active participants inevitably drop clues when they refer to their "real" lives, and from these scattered crumbs it's clear that some of them occupy positions of considerable authority and public trust. (It's enough to keep a person up at night!)
On the other hand, the same anti-social traits that make them "scary" (or at least damned peculiar) as individuals also keep them immobilized as a social or political group. As the recent frenzy of doxxing and smearing proves, the most popular bloggers, despite being charismatic enough to generate followers, cannot form the kinds of strong alliances that would allow them to organize an effective campaign or exert much influence on society in general. They can only wreak havoc on each other, the unfortunate people in their immediate circle (i.e., spouses and children), or upon targets that they perceive are lone, weak, and unable to retaliate (although I think Paul Elam of AVfM may have seriously miscalculated when he decided to take on Prof. Mercier).
Is it possible that the "manosphere" is a symptom, not of some broad-seated social malaise, but of the internet giving the sociopaths who have always existed a loud (albeit rather impotent) "voice?"
Note bene: Now I am in no way suggesting that everyone who has taken "the Red Pill" is sociopathic. In fact, most of the traffic on those sites is probably coming from very young disaffected youth who are looking for answers, an outlet to safely vent their frustrations, or a forum in which to entertain their fantasies of dominance. A recent reddit survey indicates that the majority of respondents who characterized themselves as MRAs are between the ages of 17-20, white, and, while politically "extremely conservative," are not religious. Is it overly optimistic to trust that as they gain experience, intelligence, and find their paths in life, they will wander away from these dark recesses and integrate themselves into the mainstream?
See also Is Roosh a Sociopath?
Thursday, April 17, 2014
This Could Be Dangerous For Me
Here's a clip of Emily Davison throwing herself under the King's horse, an act of suicidal defiance that is credited with helping win the vote for women in the UK:
Tuesday, April 15, 2014
Studies Show Trolls Often Sadists
Well, that's hardly surprising, is it?
What surprised me is that that any psychological research had been done on internet trolls. Here's a link to a Mother Jones report published a few weeks ago.
UPDATE: And in related news, This Ruthless World explains why some people who make "stupid jokes" anonymously need to be identified and sharply brought to heel.
What surprised me is that that any psychological research had been done on internet trolls. Here's a link to a Mother Jones report published a few weeks ago.
UPDATE: And in related news, This Ruthless World explains why some people who make "stupid jokes" anonymously need to be identified and sharply brought to heel.
Monday, April 14, 2014
An Open Letter to Sunshine Mary
You may never see this, but I'll post anyway.
I know you gloated when I was doxxed and my name was smeared, and I know you think my blog is "batshit" (and you know I thought yours was too), but believe me when I say, with utmost sincerity, that I am sorry to read this attack on you.
Your attacker didn't reveal anything new to anyone, really. He certainly didn't "prove" you were a fraud and he sure didn't prove you were "dangerous" or merited a full frontal assault of this nature. By violating a basic tenet of internet discourse -- respecting people's rights to post anonymously, to have a voice on the internet without compromising their personal lives -- your attacker simply demonstrated once more his weak and ruthless character. Anyone reading his post can see that he is motivated by envy of your success, self-hatred, and (I am sorry to point this out to a Red Pill Woman), his own deep-seated misogyny.
Believe it or not, I hope you'll come back. Your blog was very popular and provided a lot of entertainment to people, regardless which side of the fence they were on.
I won't promise to read what you write, and I can't promise that if I do read your posts I won't gleefully shred them to pieces, but I absolutely support your right to express your beliefs without fear of reprisal.
CORRECTION: SSM did not describe my blog as "batshit" (see comment below). Although if she had, it would be entirely within her rights to do so!
I know you gloated when I was doxxed and my name was smeared, and I know you think my blog is "batshit" (and you know I thought yours was too), but believe me when I say, with utmost sincerity, that I am sorry to read this attack on you.
Your attacker didn't reveal anything new to anyone, really. He certainly didn't "prove" you were a fraud and he sure didn't prove you were "dangerous" or merited a full frontal assault of this nature. By violating a basic tenet of internet discourse -- respecting people's rights to post anonymously, to have a voice on the internet without compromising their personal lives -- your attacker simply demonstrated once more his weak and ruthless character. Anyone reading his post can see that he is motivated by envy of your success, self-hatred, and (I am sorry to point this out to a Red Pill Woman), his own deep-seated misogyny.
Believe it or not, I hope you'll come back. Your blog was very popular and provided a lot of entertainment to people, regardless which side of the fence they were on.
I won't promise to read what you write, and I can't promise that if I do read your posts I won't gleefully shred them to pieces, but I absolutely support your right to express your beliefs without fear of reprisal.
CORRECTION: SSM did not describe my blog as "batshit" (see comment below). Although if she had, it would be entirely within her rights to do so!
Sunday, April 13, 2014
Sunshine Mary and I Have Something In Common
It's not simply that we're both emotionally labile middle aged bottle blondes who look at least ten years younger than our chronological ages.
No, what Sunshine Mary and I have in common is that we're both absolutely flummoxed by the new technology.
Really, old bags like Sunshine Mary and me have no business on the Internet because we can't for the life of us figure out how the darned thing works. It's clearly all too much for our age-addled hamster brains to absorb.
When I read that the author of SunshineGary -- that arrogant sprout! -- had ridiculed SSM for having the internet skills of her 91 year old great-grandmother, I felt a certain pang of empathy for Mary. After all, if I had known anything, I wouldn't have gotten doxxed, would I? Some people are so mean, aren't they? Probably because they're jealous of our accumulated womanly wisdom. That's why I am going to take a leaf from Sunshine Mary's good book and start praying for them.
I didn't know Mary was renouncing her bloggingaddiction vocation until this morning, when I checked my oh-so-modest stats to discover a dozen readers popping in from a link on Sunshine Mary's blog. Since I've only mentioned Miss Mary a couple of times*, I was puzzled. Imagine my surprise when the link took me directly to her more "exclusive" Word Press blog in which she had posted an extremely lengthy and incoherent "farewell" to her most special fans. Embedded in this byzantine (and to an "outsider," incomprehensible) post was a link to a comment an anonymous reader, a former acquaintance of Mary's, had posted here on my (her words) "batshit blog" many moons ago.
It seems to have taken Mary a full day to figure out what she had done ("Oops!"), at which point she set her blog to "private," but the readers keep trickling in, now from a site called Get Off My Internets.
If I'd known most of my traffic would come from people so hungry to read about Sunshine Mary (and JudgyBitch), I'd have blogged more about them.
Lordy, lordy, the manosphere IS all about the red pill women, isn't it?
________________________________________________________________________
* I just can't get into that Christian submissive red pill wife melodrama! It's too kinky for a vanilla "hetero-flexible" feminist like me!
No, what Sunshine Mary and I have in common is that we're both absolutely flummoxed by the new technology.
Really, old bags like Sunshine Mary and me have no business on the Internet because we can't for the life of us figure out how the darned thing works. It's clearly all too much for our age-addled hamster brains to absorb.
When I read that the author of SunshineGary -- that arrogant sprout! -- had ridiculed SSM for having the internet skills of her 91 year old great-grandmother, I felt a certain pang of empathy for Mary. After all, if I had known anything, I wouldn't have gotten doxxed, would I? Some people are so mean, aren't they? Probably because they're jealous of our accumulated womanly wisdom. That's why I am going to take a leaf from Sunshine Mary's good book and start praying for them.
I didn't know Mary was renouncing her blogging
It seems to have taken Mary a full day to figure out what she had done ("Oops!"), at which point she set her blog to "private," but the readers keep trickling in, now from a site called Get Off My Internets.
If I'd known most of my traffic would come from people so hungry to read about Sunshine Mary (and JudgyBitch), I'd have blogged more about them.
Lordy, lordy, the manosphere IS all about the red pill women, isn't it?
________________________________________________________________________
* I just can't get into that Christian submissive red pill wife melodrama! It's too kinky for a vanilla "hetero-flexible" feminist like me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)