Jonathan Kay may not have the ability to understand that women's chromosomes in no way prevent them from spewing man-aganda, but then again, that fourth and last stage of Jean Piaget's is a tricky one to reach.
The National Post thinks it has some sort of legitimate way of spewing misogyny without being called on the carpet for it.
No, only someone with bigoted filters would think there are intellectual, moral, or philosophical differences based on external features.
Memo to the National Post: if men can be feminists, then women can be self-loathers, too, especially those without talent who just do whatever the Big Boys tell them because courage and original thought take real guts, talent, and ovaries to pull off.
The suggestion that it is otherwise is a very bigoted assumption that convicts them of the charge, but no one could ever accuse anyone at the Post of being a deep thinker.
Maybe if you actually spoke to everyone and informed them with actual information and not dumb sophistry, you would not be reduced to whining in public about how you cannot make ends meet because people are not buying your product.
The Post is a man-agandist publication. Nothing else. They hold the trembling little gonads of those scared little boys who need to know they are not to blame for anything just to reassure them.
Fox News Channel perfected it, and it is something I took apart in my book OutFoxed: Rupert Murdoch's war on journalism.
Some men are men: they do not fall apart if their employers are women. They do not harm anyone, male or female because they have courage, compassion, intelligence, ability, morals, and bravery. They get ahead on the job because they are competent and innovative. They actually know how to behave and are fantastic people because their testosterone is not afraid of the presence of estrogen.
Others are little boys. They thump their chests, but run to mommy and daddy whenever someone sees their bullying is just to prevent those of quality from besting them. The Post enablers those men who hold society back and force the rest of us to waste time and resources cleaning up their messes.
And considering how badly the Post's fortunes have fallen, they are trying to hold on to as many little boys as they can. They give free front page advertising to Steven Galloway as if his self-pity was Very Important News. They are forever running around like irrational chickens, screaming #MeToo is a witch hunt ecause they are too thick to get it. The irrationality has gone overboard, and their propaganda blinds them to the obvious.
But they think they can fool people into thinking they are some sort of legitimate news outlet.
No, you're not. You spew man-aganda, even if you have a few chicks and broads willing to do the dirty work for you.
The sex of the one who spews propaganda is immaterial and does not legitimize your slop.
It is the content of your argument, the structure of your arguments, the scope of your vision, the facts you choose to ignore, and the inherent rigs of your work that actually determines whether or not you are a legitimate news source, or an apologist for incompetent men in power.
The race and gender of those puking out your sophistry is not some sort of protective force field. It is a misdirection, nothing more.
Christie Blatchford happens to be the Post's loudest man-aganda and gets a pay check regardless of how many lives get mucked up because of primitive thinking.
Like this piece of silliosity. I love the preface of that video:
Trudeau’s #MeToo moment has once again proved that if women are going to come forward with allegations, it should be in the courts not in newspapers, according to Postmedia columnist Christie Blatchford. The courts are the one place where both men and women can get due process.
Due process? You may cover the courts, but doubtful you have been sucked into that mindless machine and been eaten alive.
Child molesters get a couple of years when they are convicted of assaulting scores of children for years. The End to the argument of Due Process. No due process. Just a game of make pretend as we torture people and waste their lives and raise their hopes to get spat at with their own tax dollars. If there is any definitive proof that we allow society to become heartless psychopathic barbarians, it is how we run our courts when it comes to sexual assault trials.
Let's just take today's legal news and see how great the Post's theory applies. In this case, a judge dismissed a sexual assault case against four teenage boys who were accused of assaulting an intoxicated teenage a girl, and they were cleared because she was drunk at the time.
And according to Blatchford, this is reasonable because an Authority figure decreed it so.
Let's see: if you are intoxicated, your judgement is acknowledged by the law and scientific research to be so bad, that:
1. You cannot give consent to drive and if you do, you are arrested because you do not have the mental capacity to operate a vehicle.
2. You cannot operate a plane or boat, either.
3. Children's Aid will take your children away from you until you go into rehab.
4. A drunk police officer, judge, teacher, lawyer, doctor, and babysitter caught on camera while intoxicated on the job would cause a scandal.
Because your ability to make decisions is garbage when you are bladdered.
But the judge seems to set a double standard when it comes to teenage girls:
"The issues here focus on consent," O'Donnell said. "Was the complainant capable of consent? For example, did she understand the nature of the acts in the car to the degree that she could reject them or agree with them?
"This is an area in which judges have come under criticism in the past, but we must remember a drunk person can have the required capacity to consent to sex. The person can even be quite intoxicated and still have that capacity."
Okay, that is Authority decree, but let us replace some of his words with something just as important:
This is an area in which judges have come under criticism in the past, but we must remember a drunk person can have the required capacity to operate a bus full of schoolchildren and drive them home. The person can even be quite intoxicated and still have that capacity.
In fact, if that is the thinking, we should ban any law against drinking and driving entirely. I think police officers should be allowed to be intoxicated while handling firearms, too. They can even be quite intoxicated and still have that capacity to fire a loaded weapon.
The judge's Authority logic decreed it so; so, obviously, it must be true.
Let us make it all legal so that at least we can be consistent with our primative sanctioned lunacy.
So, we have, to put it mildly, a legal system that is run by whim that has no basis in evidence or fact -- but mostly on whatever lobby groups do a superior job to convince lawmakers to back off with certain laws or at least water them down.
And the National Post thinks this is a good and glorious thing, and too bad the populace is meddling by making some demand for rights or something.
No wonder the National Post's colour is Minion Yellow.
Appealing to Authority is what they do best, after all. No wonder they are upset that the current federal regime didn't give them money to enable their incompetency. They sucked up to them and everything!
Because that's how passive cowards navigate through the world. Whatever the Man tells them, that's good enough for them, male or female. Equality means equality.
Once upon a time, you had journalists risk their lives and cover dangerous things. Some would reject anyone who decreed to be an Authority, regardless of political affiliation.
But then came the dregs who thought appeasing Authorities and praising them was the way they could get ahead. Short cut your way into a "career" as a "journalist"!
They were the ones who had no talent, just a conniving nature, and they would in no way go out and do real and dangerous work, because they knew they could not handle it.
Like those hiding under the National Post banner.
But they are hardly the only ones.
#MeToo was a social media-based movement. It exploded among educated, white collar women in the US who endured the war strategies of incompetent men who distracted their competition by terrorizing said competition by various means that would do the most emotional damage.
Sex had nothing to do with it. Sexual harassment was not about the sex: it was the way of gaining dominance by creating an invisible barrier to make rivals hesitate and feel inferior enough not to go after the same brass ring.
So when the Post frames this issue that this is about sex, this is mere smoke and mirrors. This is about workplace terrorism and sabotage.
You had previous generations of women endure this degradation in silence because they thought if they did endure it and broke barriers, their daughters and granddaughters wouldn't have to put up with it, too.
That was a big tactical error.
These were the same women who wanted Hillary Clinton as their president. Clinton was a symbolic choice on many levels: she was an Endurer (but she was also an enabler, and the reason I never cared for her), and the reward for endurance and patience was to finally reach the top.
Except she got easily clobbered by Donald Trump.
But not just clobbered: her supporters leaked that infamous tape of him crowing about being able to harass any woman he wants with her blessing and impunity.
If all that dung-swallowing was actually worth it, people would have been outraged, not vote for Trump, and installed the first woman in the White House.
It didn't happen.
It didn't happen.
A lifetime of pretending getting abused on the job was the price to pay to pave the road for the next generation was proven to be a con game.
And those well-educated, white collar women who got abused, and even raped on the job and said nothing, snapped and revolted because they suffered a real and terrible shock that not Everything Will Work Out In The End.
All those affirmative sayings they plastered on their walls at home proved to be the same horse-dung they swallowed on their claw and crawl to break a glass ceiling that wouldn't break.
And so #MeToo exploded on the scene and resonated, but its epicentre was the US.
It is a legitimate movement. It is not a witch hunt. It is what happens when an entire generation without their own war manual get disillusioned and are forced to face reality when their own home-grown strategies prove to be worthless.
But in Canada, we are not in the same place because we are a nannied and sheltered people.
If we lose our safety net and are forced to survive on our abilities and wits for real, the shock will be far greater than what spurred #MeToo.
And we are there.
Canadian journalists are beyond there, but because their lens is that of a coward's, they are still in the denial stage.
Because if they saw reality for what it is, they wouldn't be supporting and begging governments for anything as they sucked up to Authorities, hoping for a paltry little patronage appointment.
They would be rioting on the streets.
Really, that sad and pathetic lot have nothing left to lose.
Because those Authorities they drool over so much have played those arrogant and oblivious empty-heads for the fools that they are. Fish in a barrel, nothing more.
The problem is they think they are still something special because they get invited to a cocktail party here or there, or because they hang out in the corridors hanging on the every word of some Authority to report about it to the little people.
But because #MeToo is a social media movement, journalists could not stop the movement from making damage to their own profession.
CBS had their Charlie Rose problem, and it should not be surprising that one of their bosses ran to a law firm that brags that they "kill stories" about the deeds of delinquent little mediocre boys pretending to be Great Men.
Oh, and the one of the principle members of that legal cabal doing the story killing is a woman.
Which is the go-to sex many sexual predators run to in order to make it seem that they are not predators. As if.
Journalism did not fare so good during #MeToo. Despite hiring legal enablers to sweep their sins under the rug, the tiny fraction that did slime out was ugly enough.
It was the biopsy that proved why the profession no longer had any credibility left.
They were no better than the people they labelled villains over the years.
They were never for the people.
They weren't for the poor, the sick, or the dispossessed.
They weren't for people with darker pigments, or people who toiled in blue collar jobs.
They weren't for people whose sexual orientation was not heterosexual.
They weren't for children as they never bothered reporting anything to them.
They weren't for over half the population who are women.
They weren't for foreigners.
They weren't even for most men.
Just the well-heeled ones.
And only if you were the right sort of man. Not the used up and broken souls who lost their health in factories.
They did away with Labour sections and called it Business, you sillies.
And when their snobbery got the better of them, they ran to those Great Men to bail them out.
Memo to the Post: they no longer have any use for you.
You relics went out with the trash years ago.
But when it is garbage your little boys and girls are spewing, it is very hard to notice the difference...