A couple of weeks ago I was asked about the hiring of a new medico, who has been as abrasive as I am politically, but bats for the other team: if I am heterosexual, conservative and religious: he is none of those things. My comment that was that it is immaterial. The question is can he do the job. For regardless of your orientation and whatever axes you decide matter, you will offended by patients. And it is your duty to suck that up and do your job.
Quotas? Discrimination. I usually write “New Zealander” in the ethnicity form, or refuse to answer [1]. But it looks like affirmative action is crippling Google. Which is stupid, for almost all geeks have a binary opinion to their co workers; their code is good or ungood. And if ungood, their programming needs to be purged from the meme pool.
SJWs don’t have principles, they have allies. Yes, they’re basically mindless robots, but their prime directive isn’t what you seem to think.
They’re not going to throw any tantrums for your or my benefit. A retarded hate-crazed left-wing dingbat can pretend to be an Indian all day long. A sane productive normal American isn’t going to get much help from those clowns.
At the cutting edge of any enterprise, the real issue is competence. It matters not a whit what colour you are. It does not matter if you are a team player, or liked. What matters is you carry your task out. The more the politically correct infest society the less this happens, and the more the competent flee, leaving but the effete lying on couches, and demanding that they are never challenged.
This is what those censorious Cambridgers meant when they kept saying they have the ‘right to be comfortable’. They weren’t talking about the freedom to lay down on a chaise longue — they meant the right never to be challenged by disturbing ideas or mind-battered by offensiveness. At precisely the time they should be leaping brain-first into the rough and tumble of grown-up, testy discussion, students are cushioning themselves from anything that has the whiff of controversy. We’re witnessing the victory of political correctness by stealth. As the annoying ‘PC gone mad!’ brigade banged on and on about extreme instances of PC — schools banning ‘Baa Baa, Black Sheep’, etc. — nobody seems to have noticed that the key tenets of PC, from the desire to destroy offensive lingo to the urge to re-educate apparently corrupted minds, have been swallowed whole by a new generation. This is a disaster, for it means our universities are becoming breeding grounds of dogmatism. As John Stuart Mill said, if we don’t allow our opinion to be ‘fully, frequently, and fearlessly discussed’, then that opinion will be ‘held as a dead dogma, not a living truth’.
No, we are supposed to be silent. And as a another person who is no friend of the kirk points out, if we dehumanize one group, we dehumanize all.
One of the most frustrating things about watching feminists deny that women can be and are violent in their personal relationships is that feminism is in essence denying that women are fully human. In order to perpetuate the narrative that men are violent monsters who must be controlled by women lest we all end up chained in basements, feminists deny the full humanity of men and women. The goal is undoubtedly to create a climate of fear that discourages women and men from creating loving, trusting relationships with one another beyond the control of the state or an ideology. But in dehumanizing men, feminism also dehumanizes women. Men are left with strength, power, agency and responsibility (which of course they abuse), and women are left with weakness, powerlessness, resignation and defeat.
The Duluth Model—which emphasizes that no matter what injuries a woman has inflicted on a man, the man should be considered the perpetrator—also reinforces the idea that women are equivalent to children who must not be held responsible for their actions because they lack the maturity and rationality to understand what they are doing. You don’t arrest a child for kicking her mother, but you do arrest a mother for kicking her child. When it comes to domestic violence, feminists consider the women children. Gee, that’s not infantilizing at all. The trouble with being human is that sometimes humans suck and they act like deranged, violent assholes and, sorry, feminists, but men do not have the market cornered on that at all
We are human. We are not angels. (And it is worth noting that angels. which have moral agency, also can rebel against God. Emphasized in Christ’s teaching about separating people into sheep and goats, but generally not preached about, because as humans we need to think about how we treat the vulnerable and broken, not as much about what fallen angels feel).
We cannot be made better by propanganda and legislation.
That is the role of true religion, and the worship of the Almighty is a human act, a human experience, in which one of the things we have to do is confront how we have violated the very laws of God.
But apparently that is now banned, because that involves guilt, and that means it is a trigger. As if we are still infants, ruled by our feelings.
Oh, I forgot. For the elite, infants we still are, and infants we must remain, lest we seek salvation, and forswear our idolatrous worship of their current ideological totems and fetishes.
___________
1. If they want all my affiliations… well English (Father) English, French, Polish, (Mother — who is a fourth generation NZer), Irish (birth mother), Chinese (20 year marriage and children who are Eurasian). Most English, like me and almost all New Zealanders, are mutts. We marry whom we love, and marry across ethnic divides. The question is stupid, but not as much as Hispanic/Caucasian/Black/Asian in the USA which lumps the Chinese and Indians (who hate each other) together.