‘Are those Elf Boots?’ Soyboy with tiny baseball bat models the latest in Antifa fashion

This is claimed to be one of the Antifa terrorists who surrounded Tucker Carlsons home while they knew he was away in order to scare his wife:

Notice how the press, such as CNN, is going nuts over the White House yoinking Jim Acosta’s press credentials for being an unutterable buffoon? They don’t seem to be expressing quite as much outrage over a political operative threatening to *jail* reporters for trying to cover the dubious goings-on with the Florida recounts and miraculous discoveries of new votes.

Florida Elections Supervisor Threatens To Arrest Reporters For Covering Ballot Counting

When someone threatens your life… believe them.

Former New Orleans EMS driver targets Trump supporters in FB post: ‘Ya’ll will die in my ambulance’

the man posted, “I’m utterly disgusted with any Trump voter. You are the most un-American. You are filth, You are slime.”

It goes on to say, “I’ll start asking if you are a Trump supporter — if you are, ya’ll [sic] will die in my ambulance.”

So the Black Panthers have taken to the streets to stump for a politician they like. Ain’t nuthin’ wrong with that. They are armed in public. Ain’t nuthin’ wrong with that, neither… on its own. But they are stumping for a politician and a party who would throw them all into prison for being armed as they are.

I do, however, wonder how the American news media and our cultural betters would respond to the sight of a white racist organization taking to the streets brandishing weapons like this. We’ve seen them freak out over college graduates with guns.

PHOTOS: Armed With Rifles, Black Panthers March For Stacey Abrams In Atlanta

(Images via The New Black Panther Party – Atlanta / Facebook) pic.twitter.com/9c7roRBdBa

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) November 4, 2018

Ummm…

Trump eyeing executive order to end birthright citizenship, a move most legal experts say runs afoul of the Constitution

On the one hand, it certainly makes sense to get rid of the idea that if you are here in the US illegally you can have a baby, the baby is automatically a US citizen, and now you cannot be deported. On the other hand, that’s pretty much the way the Constitution is written. Birthright citizenship in the US is based on the 14th Amendment, which says:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The first bit of that, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” would include babies born to illegal aliens. Where it gets squirrely is the second bit: ” and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” Some argue that this excludes illegals. But does it? I’m pretty sure that is an illegal alien breaks *any* law in the state of, say, Nebraska, they are subject to the jurisdiction of Nebraska. I think maybe the only people who might not be would be foreign diplomats, which is probably the point of the clause, as you don’t want ambassadors children being citizens of your own country.

If the Amendment is what I think it is, an executive Order won’t change it. And it *shouldn’t* change it, because then the next President, someone with different politics than Trump, could sign an Executive Order that re-writes the way the government understands any of the other Amendments. Pretty soon you’ll wake up with a religious test and British troops quartered in your apartment.

Birthright citizenship for illegals clearly needs to go away. But the way to do that is with a Constitutional amendment, not an Executive Order. If nothing else the Supreme Court will simply smack it down. In the mean time, the issue can be dealt with in a legal and fully Constitutional fashion: rapid and efficient deportations of illegal aliens.

Wikipedia has an interesting list of what nation does what when it comes to birthright citizenship (i.e. “Jus soli” in legal parlance). There is “unrestricted Jus soli,” which the US is *not* alone in (we are in a long list of mostly Latin American and third-world nations such as Pakistan and Venezuela); there is “restricted Jus soli” (which includes all of the EU nations, and puts requirements such as one of the parents needs to be a citizen, or the parents need to be in the national legally); and there is “no Jus soli for you,” which is everybody else.

You know, I *try* to be reasonably tolerant. But some people just take “individuality” so far over the edge into the Abyss Of Weird that I just throw up my hands and assume that what I’m looking at is actually a poorly-trained alien infiltrator who has given up on attempting to assimilate into humanity.

Ladies and gentlemen, behold… uh… this:

‘What quantum physics taught me about queer identity’

I got about three seconds in before my “WTF Am I Looking At” reflex kicked in. This is an officially sanctioned and produced BBC video. You know, the British Broadcasting Corporation, often perceived as the high water mark of culture.

See, it’s not the “trans” thing that sets my teeth on edge. I know full well that for a number of people biology played a dirty trick on them and stuck their brain into a body what ain’t quite right for ’em. This in fact covers a *lot* of territory, and there’s no moral complaint against such folk. But what sets off my Nope Node are people who display what can only be described as some kind of madness… then being *celebrated* for it, while at the same time cranking out the sort of bullcrap quantum mysticism you might expect to see out of a crank like Deepak Chopra.

This. Is. AWESOME.

Their project, including press releases and papers, is available on a Google Drive. From their “Project Fact Sheet:”

Who are we?
We are a small group of concerned academics who wanted to understand and properly criticize an
ongoing problem (described below) we see in gender studies and related academic disciplines. We see
this problem having negative social and political implications on a global scale, and we think constructive
conversation within academia has become nearly impossible. We hope that this project will reboot that
conversation and initiate necessary reforms. Because of the politicized nature of these disciplines, it bears
mentioning that all three of us would be best classified as left-leaning liberals.
Project summary
We engaged in a one-year immersive exploration to attempt to understand certain academic fields as
“outsiders within” and test their scholarship at its highest levels. To speak broadly, these include gender
studies and other cultural studies fields within the humanities and reaching into sociology, psychology,
and, perhaps most worryingly, education.

What they did: they wrote and submitted 20 “scholarly” papers that could best be described as “complete BS.” My favorite? They re-wrote a chapter of Mein Kampf to be an anti-male feminist screed:

Our Struggle is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice
Feminism
Accepted by Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, leading feminist social work journal
In the name of Maria Gonzalez, Ph.D. (fictitious) of the (fictitious) Feminist Activist Collective for Truth
(FACT)

Discipline/subdiscipline: feminist social work
Note: The last two thirds of this paper is based upon a rewriting of roughly 3600 words of Chapter 12 of
Volume 1 of Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler, though it diverges significantly from the original. This chapter
is the one in which Hitler lays out in a multi-point plan which we partially reproduced why the Nazi Party
is needed and what it requires of its members. The first one third of the paper is our own theoretical
framing to make this attempt possible.
Summary: Feminism which foregrounds individual choice, responsibility, female agency, and strength
can be countered by a feminism which unifies in solidarity around the victimhood of the most
marginalized women in society.
Purpose: That we could find Theory to make anything (in this case, part of Chapter 12 of Volume 1 of
Mein Kampf with buzzwords switched in) acceptable to journals if we put it in terms of politically
fashionable arguments and existing scholarship. Of note, while the original language and intent of Mein
Kampf has been significantly changed to make this paper publishable and about feminism, the reliance
upon the politics of grievance remains clear, helping to justify our use of the term “grievance studies” for
these fields.
Notes on Status:
Peer reviewed and rejected by Feminist Theory
Accepted by Affilia, August 21, 2018
Proofs approved, September 19, 2018
Selected Reviewer Comments:
“This is an interesting paper seeking to further the aims of inclusive feminism by attending to the issue of
allyship/solidarity.” Reviewer 1, Affilia
“I am very sympathetic to the core arguments of the paper, such as the need for solidarity and the
problematic nature of neoliberal feminism.” -Reviewer 1, Feminist Theory
“While I am extremely sympathetic to this article’s argument and its political positioning, I am afraid that
I cannot recommend publication in its current form.” -Reviewer 2, Feminist Theory
“The reviewers are supportive of the work and noted its potential to generate important dialogue for
social workers and feminist scholars.” -Co-Editor in Chief, Affilia, first review

But not to be missed is “Moon Meetings and the Meaning of Sisterhood: A Poetic Portrayal of Lived Feminist Spirituality,” which:

This paper utilizes a method called “poetic inquiry” to present a made-up depiction of feminist
spirituality meetings. No clear thesis. A rambling poetic monologue of a bitter, divorced feminist, much
of which was produced by a teenage-angst poetry generator before being edited into something slightly
more “realistic.” Interspersed with self-indulgent autoethnographical reflections on female sexuality and
feminist spirituality to describe a rather strange monthly girls’ night event (“Moon Meetings” held in a
“womb room” with a “Vulva Shrine”). Written entirely in slightly under six hours.

But where things get *disturbing:*

The Progressive Stack: An Intersectional Feminist Approach to Pedagogy
In the name of Maria Gonzalez, Ph.D. (fictitious) of the (fictitious) Feminist Activist Collective for Truth
(FACT)
Discipline/subdiscipline: feminist pedagogy (philosophy of education)
Summary: This is our most appalling paper, and it’s deeply concerning that how it is being treated at the
highly respected journal Hypatia. It forwards that educators should discriminate by identity and calculate
their students’ status in terms of privilege, favor the least privileged with more time, attention and positive
feedback and penalize the most privileged by declining to hear their contributions, deriding their input,
intentionally speaking over them, and making them sit on the floor in chains—framed as educational
opportunities we termed “experiential reparations.”
Purpose: Patently unfair, inhumane, and abusive treatments of students will be acceptable in educational
theory if it is framed as an opportunity to teach them about the problems of privilege.
Note: This paper insists that the most privileged students shouldn’t be allowed to speak in class at all and
should just listen and learn in silence throughout the term. Even more, it insists that students with high
privilege could benefit from adding on “experiential reparations,” such as sitting in the floor, wearing
chains, or intentionally being spoken over, as an educational “opportunity” within the class. The
reviewers’ only concerns with these points so far have been that (1) we approach the topic with too much

compassion for the students who are being subjected to this, and (2) we risk exploiting underprivileged
students by burdening them with an expectation to teach about privilege. To correct for this, the reviewers
urged us to make sure we avoid “recentering the needs of the privileged.” They asked us to incorporate
Megan Boler’s approach called “pedagogy of discomfort” and Barbara Applebaum’s insistence that the
privileged learn from this discomfort rather than being coddled or having their own experiences
(suffering) “recentered.” It also utilizes Robin DiAngelo’s now-famous concept of “white fragility” to
explain why students subjected to this treatment will object to it, and uses that to justify the more cruel
treatment suggested by the reviewers. The reviewers acknowledged that they believe this “fragility” is the
correct interpretation for student pushback against being told to stay silent and sit in the floor, possibly in
chains, throughout the semester.
Notes on Status:
Three times “reject and resubmit” at Hypatia
(This status means that the journal is interested in the paper but does not consider it successful enough to
put on track for acceptance. It’s weakly positive.)

I suppose it’s good that this steaming pile of fascism was rejected. But it was apparently seen positively enough, and part of the rejection was because it wasn’t horrible *enough.*

Another paper that wasn’t accepted *yet* suggested that “masculinist” astronomy should be supplanted by feminist “astrology.”

“For existing proponents of feminist science studies, this also makes sense as a next step—to cast a
feminist eye on scientific disciplines beyond the “soft” sciences of biology and environmental studies, and
to move increasingly towards critiques of and interventions into “hard” sciences, such as physics and
astronomy. The main goal is relevant and interesting” – Reviewer 2, Women’s Studies International
Forum
“This manuscript holds much promise and is interesting. The goal of a feminist astronomy is very
thought-provoking—one that I would be excited to read and learn more about….I wish them luck as they
move forward on this interesting piece and hope to someday see it discussed in classrooms, labs, and
plenary halls”- Reviewer 2, Women’s Studies International Forum

“The originality of the author’s contention is a success. Its contention at the most basic level—that
feminist astronomy is/should/could be a thing!—would be exciting to readers in feminist science studies,
women’s and gender studies, science and technology studies, and maybe even, hopefully, astronomy” –
Reviewer 2, Women’s Studies International Forum

If I was female, I’d be *really* P.O.ed at this reviewer that something good and honest like astronomy was considered necessarily masculine, and the idiot crackpottery of astrology was considered appropriately feminine.

So… excellent trolling. Congrats all around. And the fact that some of this *obvious* insanity was considered entirely reasonable is a good sign that civilization may be in a state of collapse.

Florida Man is back, this time facing down Hurricane Florence:

As always, the news media is stumped by why anyone would do anything fun:

He even has a GoFundMe to raise gas and coffee money to get him where he needs to go. It’s currently sitting at $902 out of the requested $150.

“Are we the baddies?”

‘First Man’ Director Damien Chazelle Defends Omitting American Flag Planted on the Moon

“First Man,” the forthcoming biopic about Neil Armstrong, *had* looked like a good movie. But even though it covers Armstrong walking on the Moon, the director and the actor portraying Armstrong felt that showing the American flag being planted on the Moon was somehow inappropriate.

The director once posted this to Twitter:

The Trump administration is openly endorsing Nazism and white supremacy. It's that simple. (2/10)

— Damien Chazelle (@DSChazelle) August 16, 2017

The director is a loon.

Hollywood is all about the dollar. So even though the place is swarming with leftists, you’d *think* at some point they’d get it through their skulls that offending half the potential audience is a bad idea. In this case, the movie is almost certain to have a potential audience that’s mostly American… I can’t see the Chinese market being all that excited to see a flick about an American historical figure. Or the Europeans for that matter. It *should* do well in the US… but not if it sets out to annoy not just half the American market, but the half of the market that was probably going to be most interested in this movie. Because it certainly seems to me that a movie about an American war and space hero would probably appeal more to people who actually feel positively about American patriotism than those who don’t.

“First Man” opens October 12. I expect I’ll have other plans that day.

UPDATE:

Possible hint as to what Buzz Aldrin thinks about this.

Always fun to visit my friends @KellySlater, John Moore & Co at their Outerknown clothing line party. Is it time for a space attire line yet?! 🚀😎 #spacesuitsaretrendy #roadtoapollo50th #5decadesofapollo pic.twitter.com/I34t42hbxf

— Buzz Aldrin (@TheRealBuzz) September 1, 2018