Two stories this week confirmed, for me, the commonly held suspicion amongst sane people that the progressive left simply invent their reality as they go along.
Firstly, the liberal media coverage of the ‘arab spring’, culminating in the brutal assualt upon Lara Logan. I still remember watching, as an idealistic teenager, the glorious events of 1989 unfolding upon my television screen. The year the Berlin Wall finally came down, and Western democracy and freedom was ushered in across half a continent for a people that had laboured under thought control and Soviet domination for a generation and more.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but I do not remember scenes of women clad in walking black coffins shouting for the muslim brotherhood to deliver ‘freedom’ from the government. I certainly cannot recall any uncovered blonde journalists being raped by anti-government supporters whilst screaming death to Israel, the only true and lasting democracy the middle-east is ever likely to know.
Of course, what is really sickening about the fantasy world the liberal media inhabits, is the furious reaction to those who state the obvious – that what happened to Lara Logan was hardly the shock of the century.
The great Ferdinand Bardamu has written the best piece on this ‘liberal feminist denial of reality’ : (excerpt)
A rational person would realize that rapists will always exist among the human population, and that a white woman reporter would be at a higher risk of rape in a place like revolutionary Egypt and would not have sent her there. The liberal feminist says something like “Women are raped and sexually assaulted every minute of every day in every country on Earth” and sends the white woman reporter anyway, then when a gang of a couple dozen undersexed men grab and use the reporter as an unwilling cum dumpster, she feigns shock and lashes out at the rational people who said “I told you so!” See these replies of Molly’s to a commenter who contested her “rape isn’t about sex, it’s about power” femgrrl shibboleths
Meanwhile, in another corner of the liberal feminist fantasy world, an Austrian court has convicted a critic of Islamo-fascism for the crime of ‘falsely’ claiming that Mohammad was a paedophile.
Seen at the Gates of Vienna :
On February 15, 2011, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was sentenced to a fine of €480 for “denigration of religious doctrines” by Judge Bettina Neubauer in the Vienna Regional Court. She was acquitted of the original charge of ethnic incitement.
The court based “denigration of religious doctrines” on the fact that Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff had characterized Mohammed as “pedophiliac” because — according to Islamic legend — he had sex with nine year-old Aisha. In the court’s view, this was “denigrating” because Mohammed did not have sex exclusively with children but also with grown women, and stayed with Aisha until his death when she was eighteen years old. So he was not inclined to pedophilia.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this. The feminist state now appears to be picking and choosing when and how they want to inflate and abuse the definition of paedophilia (the sexual preference for pre-pubescent children). Austria recently became the first country in Europe to lock somebody away as a ‘paedophile’ for looking at pictures of adults over the age of 20. Yet having sex with 9 year old girls is not paedophilia so long as you don’t pump and dump them, and so long as you spread your alpha male loving around in order that older women won’t feel left out. Under this definition, Josef Fritzel could sue anybody who has described him as a paedophile.
On a happier note, it will mean that people like the lonely Polo instructor, who was recently jailed for several years for having consensual sex with a 15 year old girl just below the age of consent, would be able to sue the police officer, and the newspapers who falsely described him as a paedophile, for slander. He might also have sufficient grounds for appealing against his barbaric sentence at the European Court of Human Rights if it is clear that he received such a harsh sentance, in part, because he was branded a paedophile by the police and the prosecution.
What happened to feminist arguments regarding ‘sexual innocence’ or ‘imbalance of power’, or ‘not mature enough to give informed consent’? Seems that this ruling pretty much confirms that such arguments are simply rationalist covers for two basic primitive fears that all women have written into their dna code – that of being impregnated and abandoned, and, certainly much greater for the older woman, the fear of living in a world in which no man looks at a female past peak nubility. The former concern has little moral weight, even when applied to teenage girls, not in a society which has granted women the right to a safe and easy abortion, as well as a welfare state that supports single mothers, and in which case has modern and effective methods of contraception. The second fear, that in a free sexual market every man would chase teenage peaches and no woman over 25 would get a look in, has absolutely no moral force as a basis for state legislation. Hypergamy, negrophilia, alpha cock hunting, all of these and other common sexual behaviours exhibited by the modern urban female leave vast swathes of the male population lovelorn and foresaken. I do not believe that this fact can ever be a matter for the state to correct through legislation. At least not in terms of criminalizing people’s behaviour. We have decided in a civilised secular society that the state has no business to regulate the sexual lives of its citizens, so long as all parties are consenting (and the point is, the court ruling above shows that the feminist/femiservative objection to men having sex with teenagers has nothing to do with consent issues).
Feminists do not have the right to criminalize men in order to correct the imbalances that a free sexual market produces. Socialism used to mean fighting to achieve dignity and equality for the working man. In the 21st century, it means creating paedohysteria, and the myth of sex trafficking, and potentially criminalizing millions of men, because otherwise, 40 year old women wouldn’t be able to get any loving. In other words, the once gloriously utopian ideal of socialism has now been degraded by feminists to mean the aged and unwanted vagina’s rape of the male.