Toxic Femininity
We’ve all heard so much about toxic masculinity, it only seems fair to point out that if there is such a thing, it’s only logical to assume that there is a corresponding version of it if one merely takes the time to search for it.
We’ve all heard so much about toxic masculinity, it only seems fair to point out that if there is such a thing, it’s only logical to assume that there is a corresponding version of it if one merely takes the time to search for it.
Turns out it really wasn’t that hard to find. Consider the way that not only Christine Blasey Ford went after Brett Kavanaugh’s hide after President Trump proposed Judge Kavanaugh for a seat on the Supreme Court. Let us not forget Julie Swetnick, Mazie Hirono, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, Patty Murray, Dianne Feinstein, Patty Murray, Tammy Duckworth, Elizabeth Warren, Jeanne Shaheen, Lisa Murkowski and Heidi Heitkamp, all took part in a public lynching of an innocent man.
They did this even though they knew that Mrs. Ford lied when she claimed, for reasons nobody could ever figure out, that she’d been so traumatized by a rape decades earlier that she’d never again been able to board an airplane. Even when it was documented that she’d spent more time airborne than Charles Lindbergh, Howard Hughes and John Glenn, put together, these toxic females saw no reason to question her story.
I guess we’ll never know for sure how many of the sordid tales told by the ladies of #MeToo have been concocted out of whole cloth. What we do know is that there are a great many women whose attitude has been that so-and-so may not have assaulted or raped this particular woman, but he’s a man, so we know he’s assaulted or raped others.
The most recent example of toxic femininity took place in the pages of New York magazine. In a chapter culled from the pages of a book by E. Jean Carroll, “What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal,” she accuses Donald Trump of raping her in a dressing room at the Berghoff Goodman department store in Manhattan 20 years ago.
Although I had never heard of her before, Ms. Carroll, 75, has written a number of books and for several years wrote an advice column in Elle magazine.
If I got the story straight, Trump told her he was buying lingerie for someone and wondered if she would try the stuff on. She doesn’t say that she agreed to the arrangement, but she does state that in the dressing room, he pulled down her tights and did the deed.
Frankly, the story doesn’t ring true. Why would she allow him to get within a mile of her if she wasn’t looking for a quickie? By her account, the entire episode lasted about three minutes. She doesn’t even claim to have cried out or told him to stop even though they were supposed to be in the middle of a department store. She also doesn’t mention if he purchased any of the items.
It’s probably worth mentioning that in the same issue of New York magazine, the liar has an article in which she catalogues a lifetime of experiences with “hideous men.”
Maybe it’s just me, but she doesn’t come across as an impartial observer when it comes to the battle of the sexes.
One of my least favorite public figures was the over-rated playwright Lillian Hellman, who carted around enough toxicity for a dozen women.
A self-absorbed Communist, she was able to virtue-signal her saintliness by saying: “Since when do we have to agree with people to defend them from injustice,” even though she was unforgiving when it came to those who didn’t share her devotion to Stalin and the Soviet Union.
In fact, she wasn’t referring to people in general, but only to those who were facing hard times in the 1950s because they were card-carrying members of the Communist Party, people, like herself, who used their considerable influence to keep the U.S. out of World War II until that fateful day in 1941. No, not December 7th, but June 22nd, the day the Nazis launched Operation Barbarossa.
That was the day that Hitler broke his mutual non-aggression pact with Stalin, attacked the Soviet Union and sent Hellman rushing into a New York cocktail party shouting: “We’ve been invaded!”
For years, Republicans have watched one billionaire after another adopt the Democratic party, flooding their campaign coffers with millions of dollars in donations. The best the Republicans could do was to suck it up and say, “Well, at least we have the Koch brothers.”
To their credit, the Democrats would play along, pretending to hate and fear the brothers. But it was all a con.
The best one can say for the brothers is that they’re Libertarians. They favor open borders, no doubt because they’re in favor of an endless source of cheap labor; they favor decriminalizing illegal drugs; they not only opposed Trump’s tax cuts but prefer to see taxes raised; they are in favor of same-sex marriages and cuts to defense spending; and they oppose Donald Trump.
It should come as no surprise that the Republicans they tend to support are RINOs. After all, in 1980, David Koch not only opposed Ronald Reagan, but was on the ballot as the Libertarian V.P. candidate. In 2016, the Kochs not only didn’t support Donald Trump, they mused that Hillary Clinton might well be the better choice.
Political polls have been questionable for some time now. Especially after botching it in 2016, when they all agreed that there was no way for Donald Trump to achieve the 271 electoral votes to be elected, you would think they’d be extra careful this time around. I mean, if a poll can’t get the numbers right, what’s their purpose?
And yet, we saw that the Quinnipiac Poll just prior to the Florida gubernatorial election showed Andrew Gillum (D) defeating Ron DeSantis ® 50%-43%. DeSantis won the election. It was a close election, 49.6% to 49.2%, but even a Ouija board would have done a better job than the pollsters.
Now, we’re supposed to believe that not only is Biden leading Trump by 9 points, but Warren, Buttigieg, Harris and Booker, are all running ahead of the President.
For my part, I am highly skeptical of those poll numbers, partly because it makes no sense that people would be so anxious to dump the person who has done so much to improve the economy by lowering taxes and getting rid of job-killing regulations, but has done all he could do deal with the range of problems caused by open borders; and partly because, in the first 24 hours of announcing his candidacy, Trump raised $24.8 million, compared to Biden’s $6.3 million, Beto’s $6.1 million and Bernie’s $5.9 million.
Elaine Pitts passed along the latest two mock quotes attributed to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “We’re gonna make the Electoral College tuition-free” and “So what if I don’t know what Armageddon means? It’s not the end of the world.”
It can’t be easy being a liberal when, as is often the case, you’re faced with inevitable conflicts between two competing concerns.
Take the situation in California. On the one hand, liberals are in favor of drug addicts and the demented being free to live on the streets and use public spaces as their toilets. At the same time, even the most devout supporter of the Sierra Club has to keep his trap shut when it comes to calling attention to what all that untreated urine and fecal matter is doing to the environment.
Imagine how demented one has to be when one’s political stance requires a person to remain silent in spite of multiple cases of measles, tuberculosis, typhus and bubonic plague, breaking out in L.A., San Francisco and other sanctuary cities.
When I’m not worrying about coming down with a disease that had been pretty much eliminated in America until political correctness ushered in its return, I find myself wondering how trustworthy the translations of the French and Russian novels I’ve read have been.
After all, I grew up being told that dogs say “bow wow,” horses say “neigh” and pigs go “oink,” and I know none of that is true.
Speaking of porkers, why do we refer to piggy rides when the little jockeys always say: “Giddy-up, horsey”?
(Because Disqus refuses to let me reply to comments, anyone who wishes to make a comment or ask a question can reach me directly by writing to [email protected])
