We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
So Christine got the idea from Bob. I suppose we can hope Bob got the idea from some Alice somewhere, otherwise we might be obliged to think that the world of dismissing climate sceptics as not only despicable deniers but also male, was itself male-led.
Well, all I can make of Ms. Ottery’s smogrified piece is that women are more gullible than men, at least when it comes to believing the propaganda about GW, AGW, CAGW! and the dangerous dreadfulness sure to ensue should Britain actually exit the EU.
(Should this latter occur, it would surely be the End of Life as We Know It. I mean, probably all of the ≥27,000 polar bears currently said to be swarming about the Arctic would immediately expire due to the shock of such an uncivilized, fascististic event.)
. . .
But speaking of desmogblog.com, which can always be trusted to push an especially nasty version of calumny against any statement, agenda, or idea emanating from anyone who gives any grounds whatever for being viewed as to the right of Lenin, see today’s top-of-the-fold, headline story, “Climate Science Deniers Have a New Hero and His Name Is Peter Ridd,” by a Graham Readfearn, posted March 28, 2018 at 14:36. It lights out after a Prof. Peter Ridd, “an academic who is suing his own university and thinks the multiple human threats to Australia’s Great Barrier Reef are overblown.”
The final section of the story (entitled “Ideological Bent?”) includes this:
I’m somewhat in the dark as to what science provides the linking, but then I’m just a girl, so “my” opinions are obviously those of my husband (I used to visit with him through the good offices of Miss Cleo, if anybody remembers her, but now I’m in the market for another reliable clairvoyant) and my boss. (That would be Samantha SlipperKitty, but I don’t know her position on the issue.)
Anyway, you can see for yourselves, if you care.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/03/28/climate-science-deniers-new-hero-peter-ridd-institute-public-affairs
I must say that the home page lists many stories, including such old standbys as “Exxon Knew,” and up-to-the-minute stuff like “Another Renewable Energy Basher and Koch Network Alum Joins Trump’s Department of Energy,” which discloses the unsavory history of Christine Harbin, whom Pres. Trump has appointed to a position in the DOE, Division of External Affairs.
Oh, it’s a laugh a minute when you watch the vermin barging about in the smog and frightening the sightless horses.
SNARK!
It wouldn’t have anything to with women being bat shit mad?
It may, but then one must bear in mind that it would have to include men’s mothers.
Very nicely played indeed, Alisa!
Just a thought but is Mr Ward, with his BSc in Geology, one of the ‘experts’ we should be trusting or Professor ‘hide the decline’ Jones with his extensive research on snails? And why has the Grantham Research Institute at the LSE always had a male director of policy and communications?
Moreover, I’d be a lot more open to their viewpoint if they didn’t keep manipulating the figures to suit their agenda.
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
🙂
Julie (and Natalie) thanks for confirming Desmog is real: some sentences in the OP-linked article had me wondering if it were a spoof. For example,
World ends: women and minorities hardest hit.
Unlike women in Telford, Rochdale and Rotherham, who should be more open to culturally-broadening experiences.
Women cannot think for themselves or act of themselves or lead – unless they agree with the narrative.
I’m not seeing much evidence of pity for ‘deniers’ in the article; a strong emotion is being directed at them, and there is self-pity, but I’m missing the cross-over.
Was it those vile male chauvinists calling you a snowflake that proved the last straw?
Apparently, “the impact would be much longer” than two weeks for
Why are muslim women less tough-minded than the writer? Is she alleging something about the upbringing muslim culture gives to women?
Brutal sexism is revealed by the fact that
elicited a reply titled ‘Ova the top’. Like the relation between oceanic C02 and temperature, could cause and effect be being inverted here?
One could go on – but why bother when it’s all just mansplaining?
Firstly, has anyone checked the sex balance amongst alarmists?
Secondly, where there is a preponderance of males in some activity the feminist view appears to be that women are just as capable and just as interested in that activity but are being kept out by men. This is not possible if women are indeed equally capable and interested- physical violence is clearly not being employed.
A better explanation is difference in interest and/or ability. Please note that a difference in interest will lead to a difference in ability in any field that requires practice or study.
Alisa, too true!
😀
–Niall, above
😆
Pat wrote, above:
‘Secondly, where there is a preponderance of males in some activity the feminist view appears to be that women are just as capable and just as interested in that activity but are being kept out by men.’
And, vice versa, when there is a preponderance of females in some activity, the feminist view appears to be either a) that women are more-capable, more-interested or just ‘better’ at the activity than men or b) that the imbalance is only right and some sort of redress for real or imagined past slights.
I was at the vet medicine school at Michigan State University recently. The students are, I would venture to suggest, 75+% female, and the staff (faculty, technicians, admins, support staff) perhaps 90% female. Except, oddly enough, for the ‘dieners’ and the laborers (mostly students from other parts of the university) who do the really-dirty work – shoveling the manure, hosing out the blood, hauling away the carcasses, manning the crematory. They’s all male.
I watched a consult where the lone male student in a group of 5 or 6 was treated like an amusing figure of fun, teased in entirely-predictable ways for his supposed technical interest in cats – it was not a cat consult. I would not have stood for it for a moment, but apparently this was considered entirely normal and proper. The teachers and professors present certainly did nothing to stop it. If the tables had been turned, and it was a lone woman student in a group of men, being picked on in this way, the marchers and protesters would have been lined up on the left.
It’s just one lone observation. But it makes me think that perhaps people like Milo and Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson have a point, that the ‘third-wave’ feminism now in vogue and being fed to young women, is no longer about equality and more about female superiority and marginalizing men. We could all it, oh, I don’t know – something like ‘the matriarchy’?
llater,
llamas
I see so if someone supports the independence of the United Kingdom they are a “sexist”. And if someone is unconvinced by the human emissions of Co2 cause Global Warming theory – they are also a “sexist”.
This Frankfurt School of Marxism stuff (call anyone who opposes state control a “sexist”, “racist”, “homophobe”) had been spread about.
If women are so superior, then why do they need Safe Spaces? What, we can’t look after ourselves? And if women are so superior, why are they so afraid that a male might get some positive attention? In fact, why are they so afraid of men in general?
Just sayin’.
Women? You mean Brit chicks?
Everyone has a problem with them. Face it, hardly spouse material.
Don’t be a dick. While I happen to me married to a wonderful USAian woman, I dated many marvelous British women prior to that. Attempting to categorize people like that is just another iteration of the identity politics that the left plays and doing so makes you look like an arse.
FFS, man! My late mother was a British woman.