Analysis of Liberal Oppression VII
I've previously set forth some of the oppressions that the liberal ruling class has committed. As I wrote,
To paraphrase Marx, it is high time that the ordinary middle class sets forth an indictment of the current ruling class, and enumerate the vile oppressions and dominations and injustices it has created during its rule of about 100 years.
So I have discussed its injustice committed with respect to socialism, big government, the war on the middle class, the war on religion, education, welfare, government pensions, housing, the homeless, transportation, money and finance. Now let's look at:
Women’s Liberation. One of the base notes of the modern culture is the idea of liberating women from their age-old subordination to the patriarchy. A central idea of progressive culture is to free women to live a life just like men: to work outside the home in a career, to be free to love how she pleases, to emerge from domestic shelter into the public square. This, in my view reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of women: their natural instincts and the culture they choose for themselves.
My views are based, first of all, on the nature of honor for men and for women as described by James Bowman in Honor: a History. Bowman proposes that honor in men is courage and honor in women is chastity. I interpret chastity in a general way to mean that a good woman conducts here life so that it is blameless.
I develop this by arguing that men have a Culture of Insult, where men rehearse each other’s lack of courage, and women have a Culture of Complaint, where women rehearse each other’s failings.
Moreover, I suggest that the nature of courage require that
Men know they are expendable.
And the expectation of a women whose behavior is spotless?
Women expect to be protected.
Transgenderism. Yesterday, June 29, 2021, the US Supreme Court voted not to review a transgender bathroom case in which a transgender high-school student (girl turned boy) had sued and won in federal court to be allowed to use the boys' bathroom. MSNBC :
Grimm’s right to use a boys bathroom was upheld in rulings by lower federal courts, which had ruled that he was protected by a federal law that bars school programs from discriminating against students on the basis of their sex.
But I would suggest to my liberal friends that this development runs afoul of two principles that, in my opinion, trump the holy writ of non-discrimination.
The first is the Mrs. Patrick Campbell principle. It is is said to be in answer to a young actress that complained to Mrs. Pat about two male actors being a bit too friendly with each other. Said Mrs. Pat:
Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses!
I would say that the whole point of current LGBT politics and activism is precisely to frighten the horses in the street: and not in the sense of frightening them into stampeding, but to frighten them into shutting up or else they will lose their jobs. Which suggests one of my main maxims:
There is no such thing as justice. Only injustice.
In other words, when you have climbed into the ruling class power seat and you start to have the power to reverse decades, or centuries, or eons of injustice, I tell you that the people on the receiving end of your "justice" will experience it as "injustice."
The other important point is that gender specific bathrooms are not there in order to discriminate against transgenders. They are there to protect women from male harassment. Why in the world should we worry about that, you may ask? Because of Freud's famous remark (which I had thought was made by Oscar Wilde):
The great question that has never been answered, and which I have not yet been able to answer, despite my thirty years of research into the feminine soul, is 'What does a woman want?'
I say, Siggie, that you are asking the wrong question, you silly boy. It is not what women want, it is what women expect. And what women expect is:
Women expect to be protected.
So, you LBGTs and liberals and wokies and judges and nice liberal ladies and all the ships at sea. With this bathroom thingy you are heading right into Trouble, with a capital T, right here in River City. Because biological women really don't like biological men in the women's bathroom. I mean that women really don't like men in the girls' bathroom!
You will notice that the LGBT activists chose a biological woman acting as a man in order to demand the right of transgenders to use the bathroom of their choice. Of course they did. Because when you want access to the other guys' bathroom you certainly don't want to go to the court system on behalf of a biological male wanting to use the girls bathroom. Whatever the civil-rights laws may say about discrimination, you wouldn't want to be persuading judges to permit biological males in the women's bathroom. Not yet. Not this week.
On this subject I am a true Leninist: The worse the better.
The fun thing about this is that, back in the day, liberals were bellowing from the rooftops about "legislating morality" and protecting women from the male gaze, and liberating women. Today, everything that liberals do amounts to legislating their morality and forcing it upon the rest of the world.
And also parading a battalion of fake victims before the world.
And this issue also attaches to my concept on women in the public square. The public square, according to German sociologist Georg Simmel, was created by men for men. So women coming into the public square a century ago could be expected to transform it to suit "a more feminine sensibility."
What women in the public square do not like — do not like — is the idea of men coming into the women's bathroom. Because "women expect to be protected."