Last night's episode of Q and A was a memorable one. As usual the panel was heavily stacked to the left. They usually have three lefties against two conservatives. But this was three on one. Needless to say Germaine Greer, Dan Savage and Hanna Rosin ganged up on fusty fighter Peter Hitchens, even chuckling together when he was speaking. (The photo chosen for the web page for the episode actually illustrates one of these moments. Must have pleased the producer, or something ...)
Dan Savage was particularly annoying. He's clearly a vapid gym junkie who hasn't learned much about life. But he's given respect as a public intellectual because he ticks all the right (on) boxes. Not only is he gay, he also has a husband -- or is that a male wife? (Hell, I'm not sure which is the politically correct term for him. If gender makes no difference in marriage anymore, then surely the terminology doesn't either ...) Savage's gay marriage alone gives him demigod status amongst the Oz squitterati.
Needless to say the show was chockas with examples of the leftie panellists being incoherent, rude, and hypocritical. Take Savage saying that he didn't like cunnilingus. The Germainiac and Hanna Rosin, along with snow cone Tony Jones, all found this amusing. But imagine if Hitchens -- or any other male conservative for that matter -- had said that. Every feminist bimbo in the joint would've been squawking up a storm and "misogyny" would have trended again on Twitter!
Speaking of the audience: It was heavily skewed to the left as usual, too. Near the end of the episode they all cheered some silly interruption by one of the luvvies while Hitchens was speaking. He nailed their collective stupidity by accurately labeling the event a rally. And while you're cheering, he said, I can't speak. (And we're supposed to believe that the Q and A audience contained a representative rage of political views. Yeah, right!)
That extended cheering (and jeering) is sooo leftist. They're always quacking on about how they're all for free speech. But what they really mean is that they support their own right to shout other people down. They know in their hearts they can't win the argument, so they try to intimidate their opponents into silence -- or demonize them so thoroughly that people cease listening to them.
An example of this was when the primitive Savage verballed Hitchens by saying the Christian was arguing that he was being personally oppressed by the gay gym junkie's lifestyle choices. But that wasn't his point at all. Hitchens was merely pointing out the obvious: that if nothing is sacred, people have no shame, and absolutely anything goes then you wind up with Darwinian chaos. People treat each other as things, not as human beings. And that's a recipe for social disaster -- or at the very least pervasive misery and dysfunction.
And an audience member touched on that issue in her question referring to children who spend a lot of time in day care. As a result of missing parental guidance and love, she said, they are becoming increasingly narcissistic.
Speaking of narcissistic children: Savage certainly is one of those. The vain activist even had the gall to say that his motives were entirely selfless. Well, if you believe that, you'd believe pretty much anything ...
But he knows just how stupid and gullible his acolytes are, which is why he lies so shamelessly to them and uses such slimy tactics to demonize his opponents. Hitchens deftly identified one of those: labelling disagreement as pathology. The Christian then added that this was a step in the direction of totalitarianism. Protesting too much as usual, Savage spluttered with indignation.
But what was the dangerous idea he offered at the very end of the discussion? Mandatory abortion for all women for the next three decades. Not only quasi-fascist, it was clearly misogynistic. I mean, why didn't he argue for enforced sterilization for the blokes -- starting with himself!
No chance of that, of course. Wouldn't be able to rent-a-womb and make a new living, breathing fashion accessory with his husband, er, wife, partner, significant other, or whatever the hell he's called -- now would he?
Bet he's also a warmist, banging on about what kind of a world this generation is leaving to the next (i.e. the unborn). What a silly spoiled brat Savage is.