SATURDAY, JUNE 6, 2026
Helen Lewis, superb again: As you may recall, it's the cover report in the June edition of The Atlantic. On the magazine's somewhat bluer than pale blue cover, the essay is described this way:
THE MEN WHO FEAR WOMEN
By HELEN LEWIS
We wrote about Lewis' essay last week. Online, it appears beneath this dual headline, and begins in the manner shown:
THE MEN WHO WANT WOMEN TO BE QUIET
A virulent form of misogyny has become the single most important force holding together the American right.
By Helen Lewis
Douglas Wilson has a modest proposal to improve American life: He wants to repeal the Nineteenth Amendment, which gave women the vote. In his ideal system, “we would do it in our politics the same way we do it in our church structure,” he told me recently. “And that is, we vote by household.”
Wilson is a co-founder of the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches, based in Moscow, Idaho. Over the past five decades, he has built a small empire there, dedicated to disseminating his theocratic vision for the United States: a publishing house, a school, a liberal-arts college, and a video-streaming service. His denomination, which has about 170 affiliated churches, counts Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as a member, and Wilson was invited to lead a prayer service at the Pentagon in February. So when the pastor casually suggests disenfranchising half of America, people listen.
That's the way the essay begins.
People have written about Pastor Wilson before—about the pastor whose denomination includes the perpetually furious Secretary Hegseth as a member. In her essay, Lewis goes into substantial detail, first about Pastor Wilson, but then about an array of pastors, podcasters and streamers, not excluding "a loose collection of trolls known as Groypers," all of whom are part of a burgeoning gender-based movement.
As you may recalls, Lewis is writing about a loose affiliation of millionaires and other furious men. They're sometimes said to belong to the movement she starts to describe in this passage:
Wilson is a prominent voice in what is sometimes called “masculinism”: a movement to fight back against the advances of feminism and reassert the primacy of men. His version is religious, influenced by the notion of male “headship” of the family and Saint Paul’s belief that godly women should “be quiet.” There are also plenty of secular masculinists, as well as nominally Muslim ones, such as the streamer Sneako, the self-proclaimed pimp Andrew Tate, and the podcaster Myron Gaines. Woman-bashing plays well on social media and sells lots of ads for crypto, sports betting, and supplements. You can make good money telling men that they’re the truly oppressed sex.
Masculinism! For ourselves, we'll go ahead and take a guess—the attitudes which Lewis goes on to describe are deeply bred in the bone. Some men are condemned to have a bit too much of the neural wiring which inspires them to loathe women in a significant way.
The chemicals float around in their brains, perhaps in slightly excessive volume. Such men are thereby inspired to a dimwitted loathing they may find it hard to quit.
The invention of podcasts and similar technologies have helped these afflicted parties find each other and become angrier still. They may end up going on the Fox News Channel and offering ugly insults posing as jokes—such self-revelations as this:
And finally, the New World screwworm, which eats animals from the inside out, has been finally found in America, inside a cow.
Scientists say this is just the latest of many reasons to avoid sex with Joy Behar.
[PHOTO of Joy Behar]
AUDIENCE: Cheering, applause
The Republicans Who Impugn Talarico’s ManhoodAttacks on the Democratic Senate candidate in Texas show the GOP’s narrow, anxious definition of masculinity.By Helen LewisThe attacks on James Talarico have not been subtle. In the weeks since the 37-year-old state representative won the Democratic U.S. Senate primary in Texas, Republicans have been describing him as “Low-T Talarico,” “James Talafreako,” and “Six-Gender Jimmy.” On May 28, the White House immigration czar Stephen Miller said on Fox News that it was “brave, courageous, that the Democratic Party would choose Texas, of all places, to nominate their first transgender Senate candidate.”The Republicans have long marketed themselves as the manlier party, but the anti-Talarico blitzkrieg is both obviously coordinated and unusually overt. The overarching strategy here, as the Democratic presidential hopeful Rahm Emanuel has previously pointed out, is to associate the entire left with being “weak and woke.” Not manly, in other words. Talarico’s aw-shucks niceness and youthful looks are reframed as the result of low testosterone, and his (admittedly mawkish and over-egged) statements of concern for gender-nonconforming children make him a “freak.” Worst of all, according to the Florida Republican Dan Weldon, Talarico looks as though he “couldn’t name a single obscure wide receiver from the early 2000s.” Supporters of the Republican candidate, state Attorney General Ken Paxton, portray Democrats as wusses, cucks, soy boys who don’t follow sports. One commentator mused about whether Talarico wears “frilly underwear.”
Mostly, the attacks on Talarico have taken the form of 99,999 dog whistles implying that he is gay. On Fox News, Jesse Watters laughingly observed that the Democrats had rebuffed rumors that Talarico is vegan by posting photos of him “swallowing large sticks of meat.” He added: “He’s also 37 and not married.” When the New York Post confirmed that Talarico’s girlfriend exists by revealing her identity, the attack line mutated—did you know that she’s vegan? Pretty gay.By the way, I recommend watching the clip of Watters and [Stephen] Miller in full, because Miller has the kind of natural comic gifts that usually persuade people to forsake a career in stand-up and become a funeral director instead. Watters underlines the pathos by providing what I can describe only as live-action canned laughter. And yet, Miller must have some sense of humor, because his (vegan) roast of Talarico concluded with the assertion that the people of Texas, “some of the toughest, roughest, strongest men and women” in America, would never vote for “somebody with that much soy to be a U.S. senator, compared to a real conservative, patriotic, God-fearing, and truly beloved statewide figure in Ken Paxton.”
Ken Paxton? Truly beloved? Now, that’s comedy. Ken Paxton is not even truly beloved in Ken Paxton’s own party...
"In fairness, he didn't invent the brain chemistry, the chemical torrent, which leads some men, even today, to succumb to such acts of loathing"
ReplyDeleteTrue enough. Gutfeld didn't invent this or any other sort of brain chemistry.
What he does is he goes on Fox nightly to reassure men who are thus afflicted that they needn't make any effort at all to cope with such conditions--they can feel free to let their behavior be as juvenile and offensive as it can possibly be.
It used to be that part of growing up was learning to moderate one's impulses as a way to join a wider community filled with different kinds of people.
That, apparently, is woke. Go ahead children. Indulge yourselves. Let your inner toddler have his tantrum. That's what real men do.
News headline: “Wall Street ends sharply lower as chips slide, jobs data fuel rate hike fears”
ReplyDeleteThe stock market tanked yesterday due to rising inflation, stagnant wages, and weak employment - a complete and total reversal from where we were headed back in 2024.
Yeah but the reflecting pool has been painted blue and Ghislaine Maxwell has been sent to a summer camp
DeleteNever forget, we also lost our war with Iran on day one and we have no cards and Preznit is bored of the whole dum(b) thing.
DeleteTrump can be rightfully proud of the big rise in the stock market since he took office. Faulting him for a big one day drop is naive.
DeleteThis is the first drop of many. Trump has been involved in a pump and dump scheme where he artificially increases the value of specific stocks by making public statements or engaging in acts that influence the stock prices. Then he has associates buy large amounts of the stock whose price he has manipulated. I fault him for that stuff. It is corrupt.
DeleteNo, not the first drop.
DeleteThe NASDAQ today is up 30% from its highs in 2024.
Delete"The Nasdaq Composite tumbled 4.2% (down 1,121.53 points) to close at 25,709.43 on Friday, June 5, suffering its worst selloff since April 2025. The drop was triggered by a surprisingly strong May jobs report that reignited fears of Federal Reserve interest rate hikes and was exacerbated by a massive sell-off in AI and semiconductor stocks.Because Friday was the final trading day of the week, this remains the current status of the market heading into the weekend."
DeleteYou can pick any date for comparison to suggest that the NASDAQ is doing well, but it too fell yesterday.
10:46 picked 2024 as a point of a comparison.
DeleteAre you making an argument that the NASDAQ is not doing well?
DeleteI am saying that it tanked on Friday. 2024 was a long time ago, at the end of Biden's term. I don't think it is easy to compare markets with then because of Trump's blatant manipulation of markets. We haven't yet experienced the longer term consequences of Trump's incompetence, so I don't think you should brag yet.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI'm not bragging. I just misunderstood your argument. You're 100% correct that it tanked on Friday.
DeleteIt returned to the same levels it was last month, when they were at a historical, all-time high.
The number of Republican voters who aren't bigots is holding steady at zero.
DeleteSome days, like today, Bob claims it’s bred in the bone, other days he says it’s due to upbringing; in reality, Bob hasn’t a clue but that doesn’t stop him from mouthing off his ignorant nonsense with a distinctly masculine unearned confidence.
ReplyDeleteThink he is pissed he is too old to make bank as a choad influencer.
Delete"For ourselves, we'll go ahead and take a guess—the attitudes which Lewis goes on to describe are deeply bred in the bone. Some men are condemned to have a bit too much of the neural wiring which inspires them to loathe women in a significant way."
ReplyDeleteIt must be comforting to Somerby and to men who hate women to believe that their social problem arises from too much testosterone, but that isn't the case. Somerby also believes that dominance is bred in the bone, his term for innate, physiologically based.
Unfortunately, psychological science does not support this view. Boys who are bullies are disliked. They are ostracized and do not become leaders. They tend to have no friends in childhood or manhood. The ability to coerce others does not lead to satisfying male or female relationships. Men dosing themselves with testosterone because they think it will make them alpha males are not helping themselves but may create health problems.
Some of Trump's health problems are similar to what happens when men take too much testosterone: (1) thick blood leading blood clots, stroke and heart problems, (2) heart muscle damage, bad cholesterol, elevated blood pressure, (3) low sperm counts, shrunken testicles, and can lead to impotence, prostate enlargement and cancer; (4) acne, oily skin, baldness; (5) fluid retention, swollen legs and feet, man-boobs; (6) uncharacteristic aggression, extreme mood swings, irritability, and impaired judgment; (7) severe insomnia and worsened sleep apnea, (8) liver damage.
Compare these testosterone-related risks to Trump's recent medical exam results. Trump takes excessively large doses of aspirin daily because he doesn't want "thick blood." How does he even know that term unless he is concerned about testosterone supplement side effects? His latest report mentions prostate concerns. He has swelling of his extremities and manages his cholesterol using drugs. He has unexplained skin problems. He displays the psychological symptoms of irritability, mood swings, aggression and impaired judgment, and he has severe insomnia.
While there can be other causes of each of these symptoms, the pattern is there. It seems probably that Trump may have been taking extra testosterone for years. Now there is a men's movement forming that may encourage other men to follow that same path. The last thing we need is a bunch of socially inadequate men hyped up on drugs that make them more aggressive and less reasonable. This seems like a really bad idea, especially when these men are being placed in positions of power.
Just as corporations have routinely administered drug tests to job applicants, testing largely for recreational drugs and street drugs that may impair their job performance, it seems time for men in power to be administered tests for these hormone altering drugs, explicitly testosterone supplements. And they can test for ketamine and adderall while they're at it.
Somerby doesn't seem to understand the difference between "neural wiring" which refers to interconnections among neurons in the brain, and hormones, which are released by the brain communicating with the pituitary gland and hypothalamus but circulate in the blood stream to control functioning of other organs in the body.
DeleteThere are some good books on the subject of how the brain and body work, but I doubt Somerby will ever read one. He could have taken a psychology course at Harvard, where they also each this stuff, but he obviously didn't bother.
"Some men are condemned to have a bit too much of the neural wiring which inspires them to loathe women in a significant way. "
DeleteThe ignorance in this statement, even if you accept the brain as a metaphor.
Does a person who dislikes dogs have too much anti-dog neural wiring?
Most scientists accept evolution as a theoretical framework for explaining how our species (and others) developed its characteristics. What would be the survival advantage of men hating women when it is necessary to reproduce and propagate the species? Some men argue that rape evolved for that reason, but is there an advantage to force rather than cooperation? Is there no pleasure in relationships that would serve the purpose of glueing together a couple for the advantage of the children (who need care until they can survive independently). And what about the huge amount of evidence that positive social interactions (encouraged by smiling and talking not hitting) are bred in the bone, not violent conflict?
Somerby is an idiot. He is unable to introspect on the ways this explanation appeals to him in his own personal life so that he can evaluate masculinism objectively. He knows very little about social science and even less about how his own mind works. But that doesn't stop him from pontificating -- much the way Trump does when he explains that magnets won't work if you get them wet.
Hm. Sounds to me like 11:06 replied to themselves in these replies. I will scientifically name this phenomenon Slab-mogrification.
DeleteLeroy
"You can make good money telling men that they’re the truly oppressed sex."
ReplyDeleteSomerby appears to have bought this message hook, line and sinker himself. Gratuitously adding the adjective "furious" before the word "men" is a symptom of where Somerby stands on this issue. He thinks men have a lot to be angry about, based on his essays over the past 10 years.
Not only can a conman make good money off men's entitled sense of grievance, but men can be manipulated using this same message. People are making a bundle selling supplements on the internet, but Trump gained office telling white men they were unfairly treated and should be the rightful owners and rulers of our planet. Women are being presented as the symbol of men's impotence. A woman who is "allowed" to work, much less be successful emasculates her husband. A woman who speaks out is an embarrassment to the man she is attached to.
Feminists understand the men's movement and they have analyzed and written about it. Hannah Lewis didn't invent this stuff -- she is reporting on it. Somerby obviously feels like she "gets him," but he has obviously not been reading any feminist writing on the subject of patriarchy and misogyny or even men blaming women for the problems in their lives (scapegoating).
Women have been ahead of the curve on this subject. That is partly why women now favor Democrats by 20 points and have been among the first to abandon MAGA on the right. Women can see the dangers for themselves in this encouragement of male whining at their expense. If there is any protection for women, it is on the left, not the right.
Does Barney Frank understand that? I don't think so.
You can make money by telling anyone that they are oppressed. It’s like our national sport.
DeleteSome people actually are oppressed while others clearly are not. How much money do you believe civil rights activists make compared to Trump?
DeleteNo one has ever had to tell black people or women that they have been historically oppressed. The writing about oppression from the times when civil rights were forefront were written by black people and women themselves, not by white men trying to make money off of them.
DeleteBut David, your racism and sexism are showing again.
“You can make money by telling anyone that they are oppressed.”
DeleteJust ask Grand Wizard John Roberts
"The Atlantic has thereby decided to bite the bullet and join the human race! That said, the New York Times still seems to cower in fear. So do the silent stars at MS NOW, from Rachel and Lawrence on down."
ReplyDeleteThis is Somerby's big lie. The Atlantic publishes controversy in order to get clicks. It does not stand behind the ideas of its authors. This was not an editorial by Lewis.
It is a joke to claim that Rachel Maddow has never talked about feminism or the men's movement -- long ago, before it became the operating philosophy of the Trump regime (in 2015, not just lately).
Jeffrey Epstein surrounded himself with sociobiologists like Pinker in order to provide a pseudo-intellectual justification for their abuse of young girls. That too is part of this masculinism and it goes way back, even if Somerby is just discovering it.
Trump is the least popular president in history and MAGA is splintering as increasingly Dems are finding their spine.
ReplyDeleteIt’s looking pretty gloomy for those of us in the Republican Party.
We had a wild party all night fueled by the drug of dominance, and now are waking to the worst hangover ever, stumbling out into the bright sun as we do our walk of shame.
Sure thing bud.
Delete"That said, our own Blue America, as a group, has never had a sexual politics."
ReplyDeleteWe have another long time North/South ideological split when it comes to women's rights. Democrats finally supported women's suffrage back in the day:
"Democrats had a highly divided relationship with the women's suffrage movement. While the party eventually provided key support to pass the 19th Amendment, this backing was largely driven by Northern Democrats and President Woodrow Wilson, as a powerful faction of Southern Democrats strongly opposed the measure."
Since the Southern Democrats slithered over to the Republican party, the remaining Democratic party has supported women's rights consistently, including pro-choice, equal pay, and various women's issues in its ongoing party platforms during each presidential election. Democratic candidates on the state and local levels also have tended to support women's civil rights and health issues.
Somerby has never used the term "sexual politics" in the way it was defined by its originator Kate Millett. Her definition is:
"Sexual politics refers to the power dynamics and social hierarchies embedded in relationships, gender roles, and sexuality. It highlights how cultural norms, societal structures, and institutions dictate who holds power in romantic, social, and professional spheres based on sex and identity."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_Politics
In order to claim that someone like Rachel Maddow has never discussed sexual politics, Somerby himself needs to understand what that term means. Somerby has no idea. He refers to the rapes and murders of women in The Iliad as sexual politics. His ignorance while appropriating a serious term and topic is itself insulting and an example of attempted mansplaining.
But we already know he is an asshole on this topic because of the many ugly things he has said in this blog.
Here is Tiedrich's view on too much testosterone:
ReplyDelete"here’s a sure sign you’re trapped in the shittiest timeline ever: every single thing has to be dumbed down and cartoonized.
[AI enhanced photo of Mike Rogers]
that’s Mike Rogers. he’s some low-wattage Republican yutz running for Senate in Michigan.
Mike’s a big ball of who fucking cares, am I right?
he can’t run on his record as a member of the House, because — like all MAGAfied Republicans — his record sucks. so Mike’s handlers had to figure out some way to make their underwhelming nobody stand out. look at what they did: they used AI to beef him up, and turn him into some garish cartoon version of himself.
how annoying is it that we live in the dumbfuckiest nation on the planet, where Republican shitwits see something like this, and go ‘yeah, absolutely. let’s vote for Mister Beef.’"
The memes of Rogers are hilarious:
https://www.jefftiedrich.com/p/this-week-in-stupid-june-6-edition
This one is also funny:
Delete"here are a couple more reasons why you should never let the six-fingered plagiarism robot crank out your bigoted propaganda.
when using the Holy Umbrella of Righteous Hatred to keep your family from being soaked by all the gayness pouring down from the sky, it always helps to have three hands."
You have to look closely at the image to see that there are actually three hands, because how else can the dad hold that umbrella?
Symbolically, it does seem unfair that all of the duty to protective wife and kiddies falls on a guy who may not be up to the task, given the complexities and dangers of our modern world. That is why people evolved the ability to work in groups, something Somerby has never mastered and does not recognize is important, based on his diatribes here.
If we create a brave new world in which men are back to being the one responsible for all that happens to his family, no safety net and no help (on pain of being a wuss) that is going to create huge stress on the guys experiencing the results of job loss due to AI, invasion of the US by Russia, another Great Depression, and unbridled violence by other male predators who might like to concubinize that pretty young daughter (see image). Gays are not the biggest threat.
Correct, in fact, I am the greatest threat.
DeleteThe last time Somerby mentioned Helen Lewis (before this current article came out), was a year ago. She was talking about Louis C.K. in Saudi Arabia at the Riydah Comedy Festival. No wonder he thinks she is superb.
ReplyDeleteI misread "Republican" as "Reptilian" - or maybe not...
ReplyDeleteSame thing, take a close look at the lizard women of Mar-a-Lago. Scary shit man!
Delete"If misogyny is what's fueling the GOP's ongoing destruction of democracy, then we should recognize that women's voting rights have gone too far." -- Barney Frank from the grave
ReplyDeleteHa!
DeleteTrump has been praising men's physical attributes lately. At the Agriculture Roundtable on Friday he referred to the farmer next to him as "one hell of a specimen" saying "I thought I was big until I met you!" He also referred to Olympic speed skater Jordan Stolz: "I forgot to touch his leg. His leg is like a rock."
ReplyDeleteDo Republicans understand how gay this sounds? It is like their personal way of celebrating Pride Month.
This isn't new with Trump. Last week he was asking if some man was a male model, since he look so beautiful. Did someone perhaps suggest to Trump that it was inappropriate to comment on beautiful women around him, and he misunderstood the instruction? His obsession with no fatties at his 250th rally is pretty weird too. Is it an attempt to show dominance?
I suspect he thinks he is praising them by commenting on their physical attributes, size or leg hardness. Or he may have been confused about what he was fondling.
DeleteThere was that time when Trump publicly told a story about Arnold Palmer’s giant schlong…
DeleteWhy is our president acting so gay? Did he decide to celebrate Pride Month after all? Doesn't this make his accomplices feel uneasy?
DeleteWhy is the narcissist who wears orange makeup caked on and spends hours arranging the bird’s nest he wears on his head acting so gay?
DeleteHis body is failing fast, and he is admiring what he doesn't have.
DeleteOther elderly men do not go around saying and doing stuff like this, so this also shows Trump's dementia that he says what he is thinking out loud, without shame and in such an undignified way.
Delete"It's twue! It's twue!" the President rasped.
Delete"Sir, you're licking my leg," the skater responded.
Turns out, the proper reaction to Republican's whining about Joe Biden's inflation was to tell them to go fuck themselves with a rusty saw.
ReplyDeleteWho knew?
Simon Rosenberg explains that Trump has the worst jobs record of anyone since Hoover (with data):
Deletehttps://www.hopiumchronicles.com/p/reality-check-trump-has-the-worst
Trump has negative job growth across his two terms (so far). Comparing Democratic presidents to Republican presidents, Democrats have 84.5 million new jobs compared to 32.5 million for Republicans.
Rosenberg says:
"As of this morning my bottom line on the week - Trump is in profound political and physical decline; we have the wind at our backs and strong candidates running all across the country; they are going to fight like hell and do “whatever it takes” to stay in power; and we must fight like hell every day to beat them this November and ensure there is a peaceful transfer of power in January.
Trump got a goods job report yesterday and then the stock market tanked. So that little bit of good news the White House got was tempered by the broader damage their domestic policies - tariffs, health care cuts, mass deportation, tax cuts/bigger deficits - and his failed war have done to the economic lives of Americans and our overall economy - soaring inflation, slowing GDP growth, real wage decline, rising health care costs and reduced access to care, struggle for farmers and small businesses.
It’s was a powerful and sobering reminder that there is no easy way out for Trump and the Rs from the historic failure of their government, and even the one thing that has gone right - the stock market - may be on shakier ground than they understood."
As Krugman explains, the stock market tanked because the jobs report (and other indicators) do not justify cutting interest rates. Instead they are likely to rise, which the market did not like.
DeleteMeanwhile, the bond market continues to tank.
DeleteSomerby acknowledges that there is misogyny, although he tends to localize it to specific instances like Gutfeld and Watters. He never acknowledges that “blue America” has generally fought against it, preferring to claim that “blue America” has no sexual politics. (I still have no idea what he means when he says this.)
ReplyDeleteWhat he misses is that misogyny is part of the straight white male dominance ethos. He dislikes and rarely discusses racism and homophobia, attacking liberals when they notice, and telling them they need to stop.
If he thinks blue America is lacking a sexual politics, and his “proof” is that people on MSNOW ignore Gutfeld and Watters, is he asking liberals to make broader attacks on misogyny, or just on Gutfeld and Watters?
"What he misses is that misogyny is part of the straight white male dominance ethos."
DeleteI have no idea what you mean when you say that.
Leroy
Straight white males believe they are and should remain dominant, and actively try to dominate gays, blacks, and women. It’s an ethos. It’s going on right now, the misogyny that Somerby is telling you about is part of this culture, but it also includes suppression of any non-heterosexual, and non-white people, as well as women. The vicious anti-trans sentiment is part of this too. Surely you haven’t been living in a cave, Leroy? It’s been the norm for hundreds of years. Why do you think homophobia is so widespread amongst the misogynist bro-culture? Remember that Gutfeld was trying to ridicule Talarico by calling him gay, effeminate, and ridicule Michelle Obama by saying she’s really a man. I can’t believe this is a mystery to you.
DeleteWhite males? Not sure they have a monopoly on what you're describing. Try omitting "white." Men, being the dominant sex in our sexually dimorphic species, have always had the upper hand. Just ask James Brown.
DeleteLeroy
"SATURDAY: The Atlantic joins the human race!"
ReplyDeleteSomerby has a lot of nerve presuming to define who is and is not a member of the human race. That was the road the Nazis went down. It led to genocide.
It is interesting that Somerby has been calling Trump crazy without noticing the sexual-politics implications of using that term against a man such as the president.
ReplyDeleteAs feminist philosopher Kate Manne notes, the word crazy is usually applied to women and has a disproportionately negative impact on women when it is used against them.
Manne says:
"What is someone saying when they call you crazy? They’re saying you’re so unreliable and erratic in your habits of mind and your behavior that you should be written off as a person. They are saying that you are a threat, a liability, and a danger to yourself and others. The application of the term “crazy,” when it gets uptake, can serve to cancel a person in one fell swoop. The term is not just descriptive of an unspecified kind of mental illness and deviant behavior: it functions as a pejorative, and also a kind of warning label. Calling you crazy tells others not to tangle with you. You are at best to be managed, and likely simply avoided.
But the term “crazy” can also serve to justify violence: arrests, incarceration, institutionalization, and forced sterilization are the fates that have often befallen people tarnished with this label. If you’re crazy, it’s for your own good and vital for the protection of others.
Disability scholars have done fascinating work on reclaiming the terms “mad” and “madness,” which are linked to the controversial possibility of embracing rather than trying to assuage certain forms of mental illness. But I don’t know of any efforts to do this with the word “crazy.” I suspect it is a term that really cannot be revived—you can’t breathe new life into a term that marks you for social death, to use Orlando Patterson’s notion. When pop culture flirts with any ambivalence about craziness, it’s usually in a circumscribed form: we are crazily in love or are crazy about someone or something. The primary acceptable way of losing our minds and acting erratically is in service of heteronormatively-sanctioned romantic narratives. And there’s always a danger of being written off in the process—as a crazy ex, a crazy stalker, a crazy fan, and so on."
This is clearly not what Somerby intends when he has called Trump crazy. He has used the term to rehabilitate Trump, to excuse him. But what does it imply when a man who is a sociopath and criminal is instead described using a gendered term mostly used to control women? It weakens the seriousness of Trump's illness and can be dismissed since Trump is not female or feminine but has a cultivated image of manliness that conflicts with the term. Is that deliberate, to mock the idea that Trump is insane, or is it his way of deflecting all criticism, or both?
https://katemanne.substack.com/p/when-youre-called-crazy
DeleteHere is an excerpt from Katie Johnson's testimony against Donald Trump:
ReplyDelete"[Trump] ripped off all my clothes and he started to basically have sex with me and I was screaming. I’d never had sex before, it was my first time and [Epstein’s handler] Tiffany was yelling at him too. She was saying I was a virgin and he told us to just shut the fuck up and just basically took my virginity while I was crying and telling him to stop and basically begging for him to just stop...
[Afterward] I was crying and Tiffany was consoling me and she was apologizing. She told me that she would never put me in that situation again. But he comes over mad because I was crying and he said that I should be thankful that someone like Donald Trump took my virginity. Well, he didn’t say took my virginity. He said, I should be glad that someone like Donald Trump popped my cherry and not some pimply little 14 year old. And I just was like, “What if I get pregnant?” Not even talking to him. I didn’t want to talk to him. I was talking to Tiffany and he said, “Well you’ll get an abortion then, bitch.”
These are the acts of an evil person, not a crazy person. This is misogyny, not calling Joy Behar a cow. This is why Congress needs to release the unredacted Epstein files and bring men like Trump to trial. It is wrong that these men have escaped prosecution for their crimes.
https://katemanne.substack.com/p/the-actual-conspiracy-theory-surrounding
If Somerby wants to use the word "furious," women are furious about what was done to the Epstein victims and are not going to forget Republican obstruction of justice. I do not forgive Somerby's efforts to defend Trump from his own actions by calling him insane, by ignoring this issue while reducing misogyny to trivial bad jokes and too much male wiring. He isn't fooling anyone with this garbage.
DeleteManne: "trans people are currently fighting a major political battle to not be labeled crazy (or delusional) for simply being who they are and demanding social recognition"
ReplyDeleteI am not sure what you mean by "social recognition." If you mean that trans people should be accepted and not discriminated against, most Americans would agree. But, trans people demand more. They demand that various age-old institutions designed for people with female chromosomes and female body parts be revised to include people with male chromosomes and body parts. Institutions like athletics, locker rooms, and prisons. By comparison, other minorities, like Jews, Mormons, left-handers, and Asians demand acceptance, but do not demand that our institutions be changed.
DeleteRonny Jackson wants to forcibly institutionalize trans people. He’s a member of your party. It has been proposed to take away their right to bear arms. They are not allowed to enlist in the military. The government wants to kick currently serving trans troops out of the military. The government wants to declare transgender people a terrorist threat. Federal funding is cut off for institutions that mention transgender people or issues, or treat transgender people. The president and your party demonize trans people constantly. So, no, most republicans and right wingers do not accept transgender people. But thanks for not acknowledging any of this, DiC.
DeleteThese are the same arguments that used to be made against gay people.
By the way, DiC, at one time black people did indeed demand that institutions change. Or were you aware of a thing called Jim Crow? Acceptance sometimes involves change.
DeleteRepublicans do not agree that trans people should be accepted. You don’t. In Europe and Mexico, public restrooms have private cubicles available to men or women intermixed, surrounding unisex sinks. It works fine. Other institutions have both common spaces and privacy cubicles. This is a non-issue that the right clings to.
DeleteFrom an economic POV, private sector jobs are good: they create wealth. Government jobs are bad: they consume wealth. Trump has done pretty well at increasing private sector jobs and reducing government jobs.
ReplyDeletePeople with govt jobs spend their salaries in the economy just like people with private sector jobs. The jobs report includes 55,000 local govt jobs, that is nearly 1/3. 70,000 were tourism jobs likely related to the World Cup. Those two sources account for 72% of job growth.
DeleteGovernment worker salaries are paid from taxes on businesses and their workers. Without businesses, there is no money for government or anything else.
DeleteWho suggested eliminating all businesses? Not me. When businesses are taxed, they contribute to the infrastructure needed to run their business. Workers pay taxes in order to receive govt services too.
DeleteI think it was very bad when Trump let DOGE do away with important govt services that businesses and taxpayers depend on. That is bad for our economy.
People in democratic socialist countries, who pay extremely high taxes, wouldn't give up their free health care, plentiful vacations, free child care, free higher education for their kids, pensions, and other govt benefits, to be taxed less. They are happy with the tradeoffs.
Delete@3:24 - yes, people in some socialist countries are happy with the system. But there are many socialist countries where people are not so happy. E.g., Cuba, Zimbabwe. The problems with socialism isn’t just high taxes. The problem often is that it leads to poverty instead of wealth.
DeleteSpoken like someone who has never been outside of the USA. A real moran.
DeleteYes, it helps to be wealthy under any system. Socialism does not lead to poverty. There is no consensus on that, and when socialism is combined with an authoritarian system, as it was in the USSR, it is difficult to identify what failed.
DeleteNo, I agree. Government jobs are bad. Get rid of the military, the FBI, the CIA, the DOJ, meteorologists, scientists, statisticians, etc,
Delete"People in democratic socialist countries, who pay extremely high taxes, wouldn't give up their free health care, plentiful vacations, free child care, free higher education for their kids, pensions, and other govt benefits, to be taxed less. They are happy with the tradeoffs."
DeleteWhat makes you say this? What is your basis for saying this? Do you even know what the trade-offs are? What are they? Do you know?
polls in such countries, also conversations with people in Denmark and Sweden.
DeleteWhat are the trade-offs?
DeleteMoney for security and quality of life.
DeletePolling shows people who live in social democracies are happy to trade money for security and quality of life? Are you sure about that?
DeleteCan you describe the conversations you had in Denmark and Sweden when people told you they were happy to trade money for security and quality of life?
DeleteThis stuff is easy to look up, unless you’re a troll, 9:44:
Delete“For the eighth consecutive year, the World Happiness Report on Thursday found that the countries with the happiest people are those that use their resources to invest in social welfare—and documented a precipitous drop in satisfaction among people in the United States, where President Donald Trump is pushing to destroy public services in the interest of further enriching the country’s wealthiest people and corporations.
The top four happiest countries in the world were the same this year as in 2024, with Finland taking the top spot followed by Denmark, Iceland, and Sweden.“
https://www.commondreams.org/news/finland-happiest-country
(Honestly, that sounds like something an American who has never lived in Europe would pretend a European would say. Or think that a European would say. Ask all the people at the protests on May Day how happy they are trading their money for security. They didn't come across as being super happy. But maybe your interactions in Sweden and Denmark were with people that were happy about it. And maybe there are polls that described this happiness people are feeling. I having lived in Western Europe for years, am little surprised to learn that people are happy to trade money for security. It's a really complicated issue. I can't really see happiness as being a dominant emotion regarding that trade-off for most of the people in these countries.)
DeleteYou said they were happy with the trade-off. That just says they are happy.
DeleteBut I'm just wondering about your specific interactions with the people in Denmark and Sweden. What exactly did they say about the trade-off?
DeleteI think if you lived there for a number of years you wouldn't see it in such a simple way. You may not believe that the happiness comes directly from the social services. It's a complicated issue. I think it's a little more complicated than you see it, but I hear where you're coming from. I see what you're saying. And I'm glad you got to spend time in Nordic savannah and interact with the people that live there.
DeleteThe comparison from common dreams and the conclusions they draw are a little naive, in the same way Americans in an ivory tower will make judgments about test scores in Finland and how they can compare and be relevant to test scores in the United States.
DeleteIt's a really complicated issue. Happiness. I'm not sure if that's really the dominant feeling people have when trading money for benefits. That doesn't really track But maybe.
DeleteWhen you're an American living in Europe or in Canada, you start to notice a lot of the trade-offs. It's not really simple. And some of them are just small and might not really mean anything, but as an American, it's just kind of weird. Like only having one phone company. That's a trade-off. You can't choose from three different phone companies competing on price. There's no choice. Not really having a choice about stuff like that. Or not encouraging people to be entrepreneurial. Or being treated differently in different bureaucracies or businesses. Because the people that work there won't get fired. So what do they give a fuck about you? Imagine getting treated at Target the same way you're treated at the post office. So you just don't see the same kind of dynamic life as there is in America. And then there's just human nature. People will always bitch about things. If you lived in Western Europe, you would be very unhappy and bitching and resentful all the time. Believe me! You would just be bitching about something different. Jesus. All the workers do in Europe is fucking bitch and complain. They're not sitting around super pleased with how their social democracy is operating.
DeleteThere are competitive esims. Tourism is a huge chunk of their economies so they definitely care about pleasing you. People in Denmark & Netherlands & Germany are much more conscientious than in US. They are blunt & say what they think though. I didn’t notice all that complaining.
DeleteScandinavians top the happiness surveys they do worldwide. Icelanders gripe about weather not each other.
Delete"Without businesses, there is no money for government or anything else."
DeleteWithout government, there are no businesses or anything else.
"Masculinism! For ourselves, we'll go ahead and take a guess—the attitudes which Lewis goes on to describe are deeply bred in the bone."
ReplyDeleteLewis herself suggests, immediately before Somerby's idiocy, that there is good money in telling men they are oppressed, selling crypto, betting markets and supplements. SHE is not saying these attitudes are "deeply bred" in anyone's bone. She is saying the manosphere is a grift.
Somerby hears what he wants to hear and puts words into Lewis's mouth that she clearly did not say. No one believes that being a male supremacist is a biological function.
This is akin to saying that white people are racist because they are so obviously better than black people, so racism is the natural outcome of living alongside black people.
Somerby is implying that it is natural to hate women when a man is so well-endowed or hormonally sexy he just can't help but feel that way, bonewise. Some men are born to dominate, Somerby hints, and he claims that hating women is the natural outcome of being so deeply male. What a crock!
This bred in the bone stuff is Somerby's confession that he is a consumer of manosphere propaganda. Not a surprise given his Fox News addiction. These things go together.
DeleteWhen a man holds noxous attitudes toward women, women are repelled by those ideas and will reject him and treat him poorly. That creates a vicious circle where the rejection fuels the hate, justified and supported by the bros online who share that experience.
DeletePart of fatherhood used to be teaching a son about how to interact with women in order to form positive relationships, as friends and romantic partners, wives and daughters. Somerby had no father to speak of (according to himself) so he perhaps missed out on the advice and the example of a man interacting positively with his mother. That is no excuse. Most boys will week out other positive role models. Somerby seems to have transferred his resentment toward his mother to women in general. The manosphere tells him it is OK to hate women. But holding such views is ultimately self-defeating if a man is heterosexual. He has no choice but to avoid women or abuse them. That is perhaps sad, but there is no one to blame except Somerby himself, if only for not visiting a shrink at some point. Meanwhile, the manosphere keeps damaged men trapped in a vicious circle that benefits no one but their gurus. To the extent that the manosphere feeds violence against women, it is evil and bad for society.
In fact, there is plenty of scientific research that shows women are attracted to dark triad traits -- what people call "toxicity" and the like. Not understanding, or refusing to admit, that women and men are fundamentally different -- not unequal, but different -- is the single biggest contributor to the divergence of the genders.
DeletePlease cite some of that research. Dark triad traits have nothing to do with similarity or differences.
DeleteIt is a myth that women are attracted to abusers. There is a lot of wrong info circulating in the manosphere. Rapists & pedos always say the victim wanted it.
DeleteJust search "women attraction to dark triad traits"
DeleteAnd yes, there is. The idea that women are "repelled" by men who exhibit these traits is simply false. Men who believe the socially promulgated idea that what women really want is a "nice guy" who will treat them with respect, and then find out the hard way they actually don't, end up on the bitter edges of the manosphere.
No, you said there were studies. Cite one.
DeleteIf you're unable to do a simple search and read the results, you're not worth the effort.
DeleteThose search terms produce nonsense not research findings.
DeleteStudies show most women want to be raped.
DeleteWeirdo.
DeleteTest that idea and you'll go to jail.
DeleteI'm sorry. I phrased that wrong. Studies show most women have rape fantasies.
DeleteEg:
Deletehttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18321031/
Ari Melber talked about it on MSNOW.
Thank you. This article explores why some women have rape fantasies when they don’t actually want to be raped. You said women are attracted to dark triad men because they want to be abused. This study does not support that idea.
Delete27% is not “most women”
DeleteIt says:
Delete"... 57% of women have fantasies in which they are forced into sex against their will".
I wasn't the one that said that about dark triad men. I don't even know what that means. I will say that women have been attracted to dominant, risk-taking and even dangerous men throughout history and literature. But maybe that has all changed in our lifetimes. It's hard to say.
None of my women have tears in their eyes.
DeleteAnd what percentage of men fantasize about dominatrixes?
DeleteI don't see how that is relevant.
DeletePeople have fantasies.
DeleteA lot of strong virile men want to be dominated and emasculated. Maybe there’s a “dark triad” on the other side.
DeleteReducing things to rape is just a way of avoiding the actual issue, and a sign that the people doing it don't want to face reality. The manosphere is populated by some angry, dumb people, but its core message -- men and women are fundamentally different -- is correct, which is why it reverberates with so many men who end up on the short end of that difference. And speaking of dumb, angry people, there are plenty of feminists who are as bottom of the barrel as any manosphere keyboard warrior -- but the kind of person who is inclined to sneer at the manosphere and blame men for all the world's problems can't see that.
Delete"A lot of strong virile men want to be dominated and emasculated. "
DeleteHow many strong, virile men want to depend on a woman, and how many strong, virile women will allow a weak man to depend on them? It's not about sex.
I’m no expert in this matter. I find the whole discussion meaningless.
DeleteThis stuff about being dominated by strong men is a male fantasy. Women want a reliable, honest man, respected who is fun to be with.
DeleteLook at relationship choices not sex choices.
Delete"I find the whole discussion meaningless."
DeleteDo you find voting choices by the genders meaningless? Because Trump is partially the product of angry men who feel alienated from the system, and so have no problem with seeing it burned down.
Trump is partially a product of white women, a majority of whom voted for him over the cackling alcoholic in a pantsuit.
DeleteWomen are not equal to men.
DeleteThey are better than men, you mean.
DeleteI wouldn't say better but they have a special relationship to nature and an ability to literally create life, a profound experience that man could only dream of understanding.
DeleteNot all women become pregnant.
DeleteBetter because they have empathy and a moral sense.
Delete"This stuff about being dominated by strong men is a male fantasy. Women want a reliable, honest man, respected who is fun to be with."
DeleteThe word "respected" is doing a hilarious amount of work here.
It's not that they want to be dominated (although many do, just -- paradoxically -- on their terms) by a man, but they want a dominating man. This ought to have been obvious by now.
Why should domination be part of a relationship? Men want to dominate then tell themselves that women want to be subordinate. Then they wonder what went wrong when a woman gets tired of being pushed around.
DeleteIt's women themselves who do the telling. They do it with their selection of men.
DeleteDonald Trump could divorce Melania tomorrow, and there would be millions of women who would want to marry him that day, and count themselves lucky if they could. Donald Trump is a vile pig. But he's a rich, high status pig.
Not any more. It demeans women in general to suggest women want to be trophy wives or sell themselves. Yes, there are transactional women (like Melania) but most women want an emotionally satisfying partnership with a man in order to form a family and help each other be happy. Men who think women select men for money, status or power are generalizing from the few to all women, and those men populate the manospere.
DeleteWhether she agrees or not, Melania is an Epstein victim sold to Trump. The sterotype of the insatiably greedy woman who pushes a man to do evil things (Lady Macbeth) is fictional and portrays evil and damaged women. They are abnormal.
When you look at research studies of what women want and who they marry, it isn’t gold diggers seeking wealthy old men (sugar daddies). Incels are cynical about this because they don’t want to believe they are being rejected for their personalities, so they portray women as materialistic or only concerned with looks or money. Incels fail with women because of their thinly concealed hostlity.
Trump can hire a nurse and leave her all his money for being kind to him when he doesn’t deserve it.
DeleteMelania would be replaced by literally millions of other Melanias given the chance. The idea that it's just some small number of women who are like that is the product of willful blindness. There is research of what women SAY they want, and then there's the real world evidence of what they want. Women find 80% of men unattractive. Women are passionately interested in a man's earning power and earning potential, whereas men tend not to care about a woman's. When a woman makes more money in a relationship, she is much more likely to leave it. Women with a college degree file for divorce an incredible 90% of the time in failed marriages. I could go on and on. But the funny thing is, all this is blamed on MEN, because they are "unable to meet a woman's emotional needs." Women are always painted as the innocent victims of men's inadequacies. If only there were better men!
DeleteHere's a fact that really cemented the way I think about relationships: the group with the highest rate of divorce (and the highest rate of domestic violence, while I'm at it) is lesbians. The lowest divorce rate is male homosexual couples. Are lesbians "unable to meet the emotional needs" of other women? Are there a lot of "incel" lesbians? Or is something else at work? If you aren't committed to the "men suck, poor women" mindset, it's pretty obvious something more is going on, and it has nothing to do with "incel" men.
Perpetrators of domestic violence are overwhelmingly male and victims are female. Perpetrators have a sense of entitlement and seek power and control. Yes, men suck and women with the ability to support themselves are more likely to leave bad marriages.
DeleteNeither Trump nor Melania is normal. Trump is a sexual predator and Melania is a Slovenian rent-a-wife.
DeleteMen are unable to meet their own emotional needs when they consider marriage transactional (money exchanged for sex and submissiveness). If women only care about money, why do they leave men who have it? Yes, Melania has left Trump.
DeleteLesbian marriages have more stress than male gay marriages because women in general have less control over their life circumstances than men do. More stress = more divorces.
Why do so many more women leave lesbian marriages if it's men who suck?
DeleteAttitudes like those are why all those "sucky" men vote for people like Trump. They are treated with contempt, ignored except when they're needed for physical labor, told they are always the problem even when it's pretty clear they aren't, and then watch women chase after the same small group of (well off, tall, good looking) men who have a huge array of options, and so treat them like shit. Then women blame all men for being "narcissists" and the beneficiaries of some "patriarchy" (ask your garbageman -- and it WILL be a man-- what he thinks of "the patriarchy.").
Those men are Trump people, and most women would rather self-righteously stew in a pot of victimization and call them names than figure out solutions -- or even admit THEY are part of the problem. And then stew even more as their rights erode away.
Women don’t want to be with misogynists because who would want to be with a potentially abusive person. Incels have a sense of entitlement and don’t want to treat women as human beings but try to use money and force to control them. Then they blame women for being materialistic and seeking to be dominated, when women like that are the only ones who will tolerate their behavior. Incels would do better to spend their money seeing a therapist. The kind of women who would love a man for himself won’t go anywhere near an incel because they won’t allow themselves to be mistreated by a man who doesn’t respect women.
Delete“ then watch women chase after the same small group of (well off, tall, good looking) men”
Deletetall for men is like thin but stacked as an expectation for women
"Incels have a sense of entitlement and don’t want to treat women as human beings but try to use money and force to control them."
DeletePlease, tell me where you got your expertise on "incels." Define them. Tell me how many there are. Tell me what influence they have. Or, as I think is obvious, are "incels" simply any man who finds the current state of gender relations unfavorable to most men?
"tall for men is like thin but stacked as an expectation for women"
DeleteThat's incorrect. Men are attracted to all kinds of women, although they do have a strong preference for thinner -- not necessarily thin, but just not overweight -- women. For women, next to money (when they can) height is the first thing they judge, and disqualify, a man on. A fat woman has more dating options than a short man. There are actually men who fetishize fat women; I've never heard of a woman fetishizing a short man.
"...women in general have less control over their life circumstances than men do."
DeleteThis is one of the most astonishingly stupid and pathetic whines I've ever seen.
Women have the option of being stay at home mothers and keeping out of the workforce. Almost no men do.
Men are expected to provide; those who can't are called "brokies," and shunned by women and considered losers by society in general. There is no such thing as a female "brokie."
Men are 3x as likely to be murder victims.
Men are 3x as likely to commit suicide.
70% of the homeless population is male.
A man who wants to date better show up with something. A woman merely has to show up -- and she usually EXPECTS something.
Women have less control and more stress? JFC. The victimhood is sickening. It's causing ME stress.
It's causing YOU stress?
DeletePoor incel. Go watch some Andrew Tate videos and chill out.
Do the name David Futrelle ring a familiar bell?
DeleteIncels assume women apply the same standards as men apply to each other: height, money (ability to dominate and control others).
DeleteDavid Brooks wrote his last column for the NY Times last January and he is going to work for The Atlantic. No wonder Somerby now thinks they are human.
ReplyDeleteIs there a chance that Brooks will be replaced by a real conservative -- someone who supports Trump?
DeleteWhy wouid a real conservative support Trump?
DeleteThey all admire how hard they cheat the IRS and respect just how much they all, reluctantly, just have to hate, at some level, brown people.
DeleteWhy woud a real conservative support Trump? Because, although Trump does not have pure conservative views on every issue, he is actually implementing some key conservative things, such as ending DEI, shrinking government and closing the Southern border.
DeleteAnd now I shall attempt to reverse fannyburp.
DeleteHe sure didn’t shrink the deficit/debt. “Conservatives” used to care about that. He also didn’t eliminate fraud and corruption; he is the most corrupt president in history. Again, “conservatives” used to oppose that.
DeleteMaybe conservative “principles” weren’t what anyone thought they were.
@2:20 says eliminating fraud and corruption are conservative issues. I think that's correct. E.g., Nick Shirley's anti-corruption efforts got more support from conservatives than from liberals. But, shouldn't liberals be equally committed to this issue?
DeleteYou all notice what a true dickhead DiC is?
Delete"eliminating fraud and corruption are conservative issues."
DeleteIs that what they taught you at Trump University?
Tim Walz, the bisexual governor of Minnesota, has eliminated hundreds of millions of dollars of governmental waste in his state.
DeleteConservative Republicans used to win elections without publicly enlisting help from the Russians.
DeleteDickhead crawled naked through broken glass over white hot coals to vote 3 times for the orange abomination and then comes here to tout conservative values - fuck off dickhead
DeleteFrom the great Driftglass:
DeleteStupid Is The Fire In Which We Burn
Lest you think Trump's manifold acts of corruption, extortion, treason and unhinged racist lunacy are penetrating the MAGA groundwater, let me disabuse you of that notion right now.
Third, and of more importance, is to put the cast-iron obstinance and denialism of the GOP base in its proper context. They didn't suddenly get this way yesterday. They've been this way for decades and, year after year, they've only gotten louder, stupider and more intransigent. They can no longer metabolize reality. It's poison to them, so, marching under Trump's banner, they make war on it, and only get more berserk with fury the more Reality leaks into their lives.
So, while irrefutable evidence of Trump's madness and venom rage all around us like a hurricane, and we're shouting at these idiots as loud as we can, "Can you see it now? Can you see how bad it is now!" -- inside the shuddering hovel of their media bubble, they're busy grabbing anything they can to nail up over the windows to keep the storm at bay.
https://driftglass.blogspot.com/2026/06/stupid-is-fire-in-which-we-burn.html?m=1
Polemics can be valuable but one must be careful not to think they are proof of something or what they say is true.
Delete(they exist to emotionally stir you, not as any kind of serious argument.)
Deletedriftglass writes truth
DeleteEmotionally, it's true. But their claims and reasoning are weak. One has to be careful not to confuse these differences.
DeleteFuck off
DeleteSorry, but it's true. It's emotionally rewarding, but it would be a mistake to interpret it as accurate. I totally agree with the emotional thrust it. But it's a polemic. It doesn't explain the entire situation. Polemics are not designed to do that.
DeleteIt’s not a polemic, maggot
DeleteFor entertainment value 12:25 can tell us his/her definition of “polemics” and how that word applies to any comment upstream of 12:25.
DeleteThe post by driftglass is a polemic. It's not a serious analysis. But if you don't think it's a polemic, that's your business.
DeleteA polemic can be serious and accurate. Look up the word’s definition. I admire driftglass and rude pundit.
DeleteIt's not a serious analysis. It can be serious though you're right. It can be accurate in some ways, but the post by driftglass isn't completely accurate. It's full of overstated claims and cartoonish moral judgments. That's what polemics do. It feels good emotionally. That's what it's for. You can admire those people but don't mistake what they write for serious analysis or evidence. Their polemical posts make serious, valid points with over the top often illogical reasoning and rhetoric. That's what polemics do. They're not serious, evidence-based analysis.
Deletelol. Driftglass could bury you in evidence.
Delete7:38: you are at a blog where the blogger constantly says that Trump is mentally ill, and also claims that no one in the media will discuss that. You have DiC here who rejects the very notion that Trump is mentally ill. He also never acknowledges the objective fact that Trump is corrupt as fuck. It’s clear that MAGA in general does not and will not believe this. This matches what driftglass said. Are you prepared to accuse Somerby of unserious analysis too?
DeleteLet's try to test one of your hypotheses.
DeleteDiC, do you admit or deny that Trump is corrupt as fuck?
Why, Hector? Just the other day DiC agreed that Trump politicized the DoJ but not nearly as much as Biden. Now, that is fucking insane, but nevertheless that is what DiC actually believes.
DeleteI would say Somerby is often attempting analysis, though he has his own biases and assumptions. And there's a frustrating quirkiness that is not a typical, straightforward analysis. I don't see it as purely polemical as driftglass's straight ridicule and contempt. I think that's pretty obvious. There's some overlap, but no, it's not a straight "one-sided, aggressive " polemic as you see with driftglass.
DeleteI think it's kind of embarrassing that you can't see the difference. It's obvious. What's up with that?
Delete"E.g., Nick Shirley's anti-corruption efforts..."
DeleteHe made a video of himself trying to break into a day care.
Here is an example of the EVIDENCE demanded from Driftglass: If you had bothered to read the entire article at the link, you would have seen it was much more than a polemic.
DeleteTwo local examples.
First, there is the case of the Illinois Democratic legislator who, this last January, proposed giving local municipalities the authority to charge people a $5 permitting fee in unincorporated areas if they want to have an "open burn", and the flexibility of levy stiff fines if anyone conducts an "open burn" without a permit. Important fact: this legislation -- which, I'll remind you, was proposed by one lone state congressperson in January and has gone nowhere since -- would in no way affect barbequing in your back yard, or having a cozy little marshmallow-toasting fire in a firepit in your back yard.
State Rep. Briel: New bill is not targeting your campfire
The local MAGA meatheads went absolutely ballistic. Jackbooted this and overreach that and the gummit telling you it's gonna slap you with a $100,000 fine if you have a weenie roast with the kids in the yard. And of course the fact that this legislation would do none of those things was irrelevant to the ginned up firestorm (pun intended) that was whipped up on the Right. Because all they fucking care about is having something scary and Liberal to shriek about to drown out all the actual catastrophes their Dear Leader is inflicting on this country in their name.
How bad is it?
It's worse than ballroom!
As I said, if you want evidence, Driftglass could bury you with evidence. He has been at this for decades.
Let us just note that DiC did not respond to Hector…
DeleteFeminism is not the female equivalent of toxic masculinity. Tradwife & Mar a Lago bimbos are toxic femininity.
ReplyDeleteLizard people if I ever saw one!
DeleteI am Fanny Bunz. My superpower is having the fastest fanny in the west.
ReplyDeleteHegseth said this:
ReplyDelete“ it’s past time we remember what they knew. their legacy demands far more than quiet reflection. it requires our active vigilance. sadly, today, different European beaches are stormed by different, dangerous ideologies. beaches in Spain, Italy, Greece and Bulgaria, boats and men arrive. when will European capitals do something about that invasion, or is it too late? I pray not, and I believe not.”
It is as if Hegseth doesn’t know that WE stormed the beach to liberate France from German occupation. This is like watching Die Hard and not knowing that Bruce Willis is the hero.
Immigrants are not invaders any more than tourists are. Our soldiers on D-Day were liberators not invaders, unless you adopt the Nazi German perspective. Is that what Hegseth went to Germany to proclaim? Ich bin ein Nazi?
Trump quits his interview: “You’re either crooked or you’re stupid…Your elections are crooked. You’re crooked. Meet The Press is crooked. And so is ABC, and CBS, and CNN…Alright, let’s call it quits because I’ve had enough. Thank you, darling. Have a good time.”
ReplyDeleteThe fucking president of the United States, today. Lord, how much longer?
2 years and 6 months.
DeleteYou gotta do better than that, dear Lord
DeleteCrazy Old Man Explains Case for Election Fraud
DeletePRES. DONALD TRUMP:
In California, it’s, no they’re not. They’re dropping fast because it’s a rigged election. Let me tell you, it’s four days and they aren’t even close to coming up with the –
KRISTEN WELKER:
That’s how they count the votes in California.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
Do you know why they’re doing that? Because they’re cheating on the election.
KRISTEN WELKER:
There’s — What? Do you have evidence to support that?
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
It’s-- all I have to do is look. All I have to do is look.
KRISTEN WELKER:
But that’s not evidence.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
And I listen. And I listen to people. And let’s see what happens.
And I listen to people, very smart people. Did I not mention that they are very smart?
DeleteDumb is spelled with a B. Many people are saying.
DeleteDonny had a temper tantrum, much to the approval of his base.
DeleteKudos to Welker?
DeleteAnd exactly what is polemical about Driftglass’s description of the person exhibiting this behavior?
DeleteBig tough King Chickenshit beats down on a female journalist.
DeleteCalling D. Trump human garbage is polemical but factual.
DeleteScott Pelley says Bari Weiss demanded he lie about Renee Good.
ReplyDeleteCBS had a business plan based upon the concern that if they didn’t change they would lose Fox viewers.
Delete