Thursday, January 23, 2014

Jamila Rizvi, David Koch and the Sunrise sexism scandal

The infantile sanctimony of today's victim feminists knows no bounds. It just astonishes me what these smug, spoiled little princesses actually take offense at, and how. Then there's the jaw-dropping arrogance with which they appoint themselves as the official representatives of all chickdom, often over the protestations of the actual women involved in the allegedly misogynist outrages they weep, wail and gnash their teeth over.

Take this mind-numbingly puerile squawk-fest from cynical former Labor hackette Jamila Rizvi. See, David Koch, the somewhat daggy host of Sunrise, made a slightly naughty quip about reflective shoes while spunky co-host Sam Armytage yucked it up around a stripper pole. Any sensible, emotionally mature adult would have found it utterly benign. But not Rizvi, who is clearly on high alert for absolutely any situation that she can twist into that old fave of the twisted sisterhood: eeevil, sleazy white guy monsters powerless female underling.

Talk about a cynical meeja beat-up. (I'm almost tempted to invoke that ol' tabloid standby, "Storm in a D Cup!". But that would be too cruel.)

Anyhoo, David Koch fired back on air after Rizvi's online gargle. And Armytage herself said she wasn't humiliated by her co-host's japery. (Wonder how Rizvi's tiny, doctrinaire mind processed that rebuke ... Probably saw it as Armytage "participating in her own oppression".)

Now, after that Sunrise segment aired some social media snark, some of it vile and nasty, was hurled back at Rizvi and Mia Freedman, publisher of the vapid online mag in which Rizvi's rant appeared. The pair then reported that they had received "rape and death threats" as a result of Kochie's "aggressive" response.

Knowing the Left's propensity for exaggeration, I must say I'm a tad skeptical about whether these responses were so severe as to actually deserve that characterization. No other details regarding them have been released (at least as far as I know). So it sounds like just more hyperventilatin' hyperbowl from a coupla pinko prima donnas determined to wring as much sympathy from their gullible acolytes as possible.

The whole episode is as silly as it is cynical ... Still, you gotta admire Freedman and Rizvi's mastery of the dark arts of mainstream meeja manipulation. They created a sexism scandal out of thin air, used it to slime a hate figure, cast themselves as victims, and used that (fictional) status to slime him all over again!

Undeniably impressive, if you're into that sort of thing.

Monday, January 13, 2014

The hounding of "Corgi Barnyardi" on Twitter and elsewhere

Not surprised at all about the megalitres of puerile bile being directed at Senator Cory Bernardi over his book The Conservative Revolution. Needless to say, that ol' leftist double standard is in play here -- and to perhaps the most extreme extent so far.

They wouldn't like it at all if the same tactics they're using on the man they're calling "Corgi" and "Barnyardi" were employed against some of their, er, sacred cows. Many of the attacks, particularly on Twitter, are sexually tinged -- and some can even be described as rape fantasies. Imagine the outrage from the Left if, say, Penny Wong were mocked in this manner:
If this were the case, the very same sneering hipsters now chuckling at their iPhones would be squawking up a storm all over the net.

These social media muckdates clearly reveal a lot more about the sad, stunted psyches of those making them than they do about Bernardi himself. Sure, it's all just witless abuse from morally and culturally retarded twits. But much as the composition of gibbon droppings can tell us interesting things about the habits, diet, and behaviour of said apes, it's possible to glean some not invaluable insights into the tiny minds of these leftist howler monkeys from the content of their putrid online smearings.

For example, you have to wonder about their true attitude to minority sexual practices. I mean, if they're trying to imply that Bernardi is actually a gay man who hasn't admitted it to himself yet, and his book is an elaborate attempt to deny that reality, why are they so vicious? Hell, why even attack him at all? Shouldn't they be gently and sincerely encouraging him to come to that realization so that he can finally come out of the closet and proudly participate in the next Mardi Gras?

Or are those "satirical" photoshops only meant to humiliate him because gay sex is something he finds utterly revolting. In this case they're using gay imagery as a weapon of degradation. Doesn't sit well with their protestations of pride, now does it?

In both scenarios one thing comes across loud and clear. It's gutter stuff; hardly dignified. And it's hard to respect people with no dignity. If respect is something that Bernardi-hating gay rights activists and their fellow travellers want, they are certainly going about it the wrong way.

Speaking of which: If you want to win an argument then you should both know what your opponent's actually is, as well as have a counter to it. If you only ignore what he's saying and just try to demonize him, all you're doing is kicking own goals. That's why the score so far in this match is Conservative Senator: Ten; Leftist Trollective: A Big Fat Zero.

So listen up cool cats: Anyone who isn't a primitive, cowardly quarterwit will be absolutely disgusted by your reaction to his book. Which is why so many people (many of whom wouldn't have given it a second thought if you hadn't launched such a massive and sustained assault) are now buying it. Unlike you lot, they're actually curious about what it contains, and seek to educate themselves.

Keep at it kids. The more you slime him, the stronger he grows.

Wednesday, January 8, 2014

Councillor Norman Hewer in silly "racism" furore

Amazing how quickly people resort to claims of racism. Take this little ruckus over a Facebook page post made from a Wanneroo councillor's account. The post, which appears to have been written by the bloke's wife, read:

"On Jan 26, my countrymen and I will be flying our natioal (sic) flag with pride. If you feel this is going to offend you please feel free to pack up your s**t and F*** OFF."

The post provoked much criticism of Cr Norman Hewer, most of it along the lines that it was inappropriate, and racist.

Inappropriate, yes -- particularly if you consider the source. But racist?

Nowhere in that quote is there any mention of race. Of course the hand wringers would say there doesn't need to be any explicit reference; it's clearly what the writer of the post was thinking about.

But such accusations reveal another thing entirely, in my opinion. They show that those making them are often far more obsessed with race than those they condemn.

Not surprisingly, many such people subscribe to the fashionable view that Australia Day itself as a sinister celebration of the invasion of a nation. But that's how these "black armbanders" choose to characterize it, not how those who are proud of the day actually see it.

I wonder who made that accusation of the Facebook post anyway. Were they Anglos themselves? Probably ...

The racism! ranters really think they're mind readers, don't they? If they're as brilliant at divining the hidden thoughts of others they should be working for law enforcement, preventing crimes before they happen, a la the psychics in Minority Report ... 

The fact that something so insignificant qualifies as news illustrates a coupla things: firstly, how forensically journos trawl social media for any little faux pas they can beat up into a story. It also confirms that merely expressing patriotic sentiment is widely considered racist these days. What a stupendously petty state of affairs.