Elle magazine had a recent article on Jane Mayer and her disastrous article she wrote with Ronan Farrow for the New Yorker about Brett Kavanaugh, and it began with this propagandistic headline:
The New Yorker's Jane Mayer Is Holding the World's Most Powerful Men Accountable
The article sounds as if it was churned out by a publicist and has the usual drooling and fawning narative, but it is this passage that is very instructive:
Knowing this is why Ronan Farrow and I were so alert to the significance of other accusers, such as Deborah Ramirez. Her allegation showed that, if true, yes, there was a pattern of misconduct, and likely another side of the judge.
This is not an actual investigative journalistic spewing. This is a gambler hedging her bets, and this is an open admission of being a crusading propagandist.
Just because you have a series of accusations, you do not automatically assume every one is truth.
In my first book, I outlined numerous cases where amid the multiple accusations of victimization (not sexual assault or harassment, but other forms of abuse that struck at men and women, regardless of race) , there often was one case that was fabricated, but the person hoped to slip it in and thought no one would look into every accusation.
Middle Class Ideology is binary in nature: it is all or nothing. Either everything is to be believed, or none. It is The One Rule That Explains Everything, and you can never make assumptions about the whole until you look at each part to verify. This is the economic caste that recoils at independent and active critical thinking and expertise that may cause social humiliation if they are different or wrong, and merely wants a TORTEE so they can blend in and never be wrong. Yes, it always matters if there is a chance of someone being falsely accused, even if it is one percent. That is the reason we must dig for facts so that the right people are punished and that genuine victims do not have to shake because their attacker is free.
In my book, I went over case studies where there were a pat of genuine hate crimes, but then one person got it in their heads to stage it, thinking there could be a class action lawsuit, for instance, and then betting on being believed because there were real cases of it happening.
But then there was the Pepsi tainted can scare of the 1980s, where there were hundreds of reported cases of tainted cans, but then none turned out to be real.
Had the New Yorker been responsible, they would not have gone with the story as it stood. It was a big nothing because there were no facts or anchors. But this was a case of banking on Ronan Farrow’s past successes, but all of those stories were different in that he found corroborating evidence. This was a rush job, and the New Yorker hedged their bets as well, slipping a weak story hoping the previous strong one would prop it up.
What it did was draw attention to the weaknesses of the accusations. Contrast those accusations to those that of the women who were assaulted by Bill Cosby who drugged them. Even though there was variances in their stories, there were specific common threads. It is normal for there to be differences: when everything sounds alike, that is when a red flag suggests collusion and rehearsing.
The problem with the Kavanaugh accusations is that all had the same vagueness of details in the same places. There is something off, and I find it a peculiar common thread — that, and these stories all came out at the same time, even though Kavanaugh’s nomination had been publicized long before the hearings.
It is the reason I strongly suspect that #MeToo was hijacked, co-opted and re-imagined for political gain by people in power. This is no longer a grassroots movement, but war propaganda, and it warrants further examination. When a social movement becomes overtaken by an Establishment entity, it is misused with those trying to fight for equality first becoming exploited before being discarded and discredited.
I have said for a long time that women have a serious problem and that is twofold: (a) they have very little experience in holding power, meaning they are blind to nuances and can make bigger and more devastating errors because you cannot fake it as you have no experience and are tethered by the strategically illiterate Middle Class Ideology, and (b) there are no war manuals for women.
The Kavanaugh Hearings was an unmitigated disaster for #MeToo, made worse by the New Yorker article. Once cooler heads prevail, the fallout will even be worse: how did such irresponsible reportage be allowed to go unchallenged and unchecked prior to its publication and allowed partisan propaganda hijack the industry as well as a legitimate social movement?
If you had concrete facts, it would be one thing. Men such as Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Les Moonves, and Bill Cosby were all brought down by multiple legitimate accusations that were backed up by those predator’s underlings, witnesses, victim’s friends, family, lawyers, and colleagues — despite the predator’s wealth and resources were employed by his best efforts to cover up his sins.
The Establishment Democrats had no genuine feel for #MeToo, and thought they could grab an organic movement from the people, and repurpose it to have a surefire teflon weapon to take down a man they despise — not because of his view on women — but because he was part of Ken Starr’s legal team that went after Democratic president Bill Clinton.
One minute, #MeToo is all about empowering women to feel just like Rosie the Riveter.
The next, women are fragile and delicate children who have no voice and need protection.
The New Yorker has much to answer for here. Women who fight for equality have never had such a good narrative and always had to deal with garbage from the Establishment.
No one could imagine the worst thing to happen was for feminism to be co-opted by that Establishment in order to keep a status quo going.
Feminists also have a lot to answer for as well: why, in 2018, are they still placing all of their eggs in the Democrat’s political basket? Why haven’t they pushed into both parties to ensure their interests are taken care of regardless of which political party rules?
And why haven’t they created an original political party in tune with what women want and need?
If you want something off the table, you have better make sure you own part of that table to have a say of what is on it and what never get placed on it.
Feminists are approaching it the wrong way: marching in the streets and working the Troll Scroll do nothing in the long-run. It is just powerless venting.
Elle is a frivolous air-headed rag trying to cash in on the pseudo-feminist cottage industry and is pandering with a narrative not aligned with reality.
True feminism is not pretending you are holding powerful men accountable when you run speculation and unverified gossip. You are causing more harm than good.
Feminism can longer be dependent on the Dems because they have proven to be unreliable as allies — they must their own path and stop being at the mercy of exploiters who see them as nothing more than objects — pawns and political weapons — to be used and discarded…