Skip to main content

something smells rotten

Breibart News editor Milo Yiannopoulos is irreverent and funny but he is also dangerous. He is disarmingly witty, unabashedly and flamboyantly gay and yet is strongly white nationalist, Catholic, anti-feminist and pro-Trump. He is also hard to pin down and uses humor as a way to disarm and avoid being cornered.

Watch how Bill Maher tries and then grudgingly finally agrees to disagree. Kudos to Bill for having him on regardless.

Like many in the alt-right they don't come out at you as blatant racists but instead spin things around to say that the political correctness has gone to far and that white people shouldn't be made to be apologists for the suppression of other races.

Milo is smart and dodges questions with jokes but just watch one of his talks and how he puts people in their place when they criticize him and his platform.

Like Steve Bannon and Richard Spencer they form part of a dangerous movement that tries to wrap white nationalism in a another guise only that at the end of the day you can only use so much air freshener to no avail on the smell of rotten fish.

Comments

  1. No Kusos from me. I like Bill Maher, and generally enjoy his irreverence. But his defense of shtick compels him to give a pass to anyone whose tone is jocular, no matter the contest or underlying purpose for the delivery. I'm sure school yard bullies get in some witty zingers on their victims; no need to defend such "comedy."

    Maher enjoys his position as an iconoclast, and went out of his way to treat Milo as but a fellow comedian with whom he has minor disagreements. He treats Ann Coulterr the same way. He seems even to find Kellyamne Conway hilarious.

    And, as usual, when these vile provocateurs go after the trans community, Maher is all-too-happy to join. Watch the after-show clip. Milo says that he doesn't want confused men who think they're women in the bathroom with little girls, and Maher says that's reasonable. Milo says that trans women disproportionately commit sex crimes, and Maher doesn't question it. He instead, turns to the other panelists, and asks what they think of "weirdos" going to the bathroom.

    The other panelists included two African Americans, both of whom got so fed up with Milo that they told him to "f*ck off." whoch is another effect bullies and trolls like to have. To push decent people to the point of indecency so they can turn and point a disdainful finger back at them.

    Nah, no kudos to Bill. His point was to defend Milo as but a comedian unfairly targeted by people for harmless humor. That's not who Milo is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are correct that Milo is dangerous which is what I say but I think Maher is trying to give fair chance which is why he also invites the odious Anne Coulter. It often does not play well and here it's a disaster because Milo does not bite and play his usual foul self. He couldn't afford to.

      Delete
    2. To Whatever, yeah's point, here's a link to an article on NYT today: https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/02/18/us/ap-us-tv-maher-yiannopoulos.html?_r=0

      And a humorous quote: "...Yiannopoulos said that "the worst people on the far left and far right all hate me."

      Retorted Wilmore: "I think you're leaving out a lot of people."

      So true.

      Delete
    3. I must respectfully disagree here. I watched Maher. His goal was to defend Milo, and demonstrate that people who are offended by him are over sensitive whiny liberals.

      Delete
    4. You have a point whatever but I know that Maher tries to have guests on that vehemently disagree with him and admittedly having Milo on was pushing the envelope. I am not sure I would have handled him the same way mind you..

      Delete
    5. I had missed disgusting Milo's attack on trans people but will cover that in tomorrow's post....

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

prejudice disguised as objective rectitude

So here is Professor Jordan Peterson perhaps justly calling out the excesses of political correctness gone mad. But then he extends it to not indulging transgender people the basic dignity of being addressed in their preferred pronoun. To do so for him would cost nothing and to stand on literal principle seems to serve little use other than to send a message of disdain.

If you have transitioned or even live as the opposite gender is costs me nothing to address you in your preferred pronouns. What difference does it make to me and what am I trying to tell you when I don't?

Peterson wants to stand on his rights to call reality what it is except that in this case the exact objective escapes me. But of course the right wing Federalist is in love with him because he calls a spade a spade.

If I see a rock I can call it that but then the rock doesn’t have any feelings. To address a transgender woman "her" and "she" is not undermining my rights as a person in any way b…

"Oh please its 2016!"

I have mentioned before that I have a lovely young couple living above the unit next to mine. Well the other day as I was getting in the door, she and I overlapped for the first time with me dressed as a woman.

We had a nice conversation and at some point I mentioned the obvious which was that I had told her future husband that they might see me in a different guise from time to time so they wouldn't wonder about who the strange woman was. She just looked at me almost rolling her eyes while smiling from ear to ear and said:

"Oh Please it's 2016!"

For the record she was also very complementary regarding my choice of attire.

I could care less at this point in my life what people think but it is still lovely to see the millennial generation's freedom of spirit and acceptance so lacking in previous generations. Yes they have their own foibles, as does every generation, but this area certainly isn't one of them.

the pseudoscience behind gender dysphoria

The real science as to what causes gender dysphoria still awaits.

Harry Benjamin was on to something except he didn’t have the scientific evidence to back up his suspicions hence, like a true scientist, he negated to draw conclusions. His hunch, based on treating so many patients over his lifetime, was that one is born with a predisposition to be gender dysphoric.

However, with inconclusive brain scans and no DNA marker (as of yet) we are left with believing the word of people who need help and only want to lead happy and productive lives.

The best we have been able to muster since Benjamin's death in 1986 was to amass statistics on who gets a boner imagining themselves as a woman which is in equal parts pathetic and disappointing. For this is not really science at all but is instead playing with interview data that doesn't point to anything definitive or conclusive. I have dealt with this problem at great length in my blog.

The whole thing started with Kurt Freund's obses…