Why Not?

So here’s the thing.  William F. Buckley once characterized conservatives as people “standing astride the course of history, shouting STOP!”  I, on the other hand, prefer to think of myself as someone standing astride the course of history, but instead of shouting “STOP!”, I prefer to shout, “GO BACK TEN STEPS!”

Yes, I have always preferred to go back to an earlier (and better) time, when things made sense (e.g. two genders — male and female — instead of the fifty-six flavors now apparently on offer).

Of late, however, I must confess to finding secret glee in not being so reactionary.  Nowadays, I seem to find pleasure in urging on The Great Insanity rather than attempting to fight it.  Here’s an example.

A British university has recently come under fire for allowing a rather different kind of career option in a recent jobs’ fair:

A university has been slammed after its freshers’ fair had a stand that advised new undergraduates on how to be sex workers.
Brighton University’s freshers’ fair last week had a stand run by the Sex Workers’ Outreach Project, Sussex.
SWOP describes itself as ‘A discreet and confidential trans inclusive service for women working in the sex industry who live or work in Sussex’,
Before the fair, the group tweeted: ‘1 in 6 students does sex work or thinks about turning to sex work. We can help.’
On A Level Results day, the group invited students to visit their stands for advice and information on sex work.
At the Brighton freshers’ fair, the group offered free condoms and lubricants for all students and invited to ‘play on our wheel of sexual wellbeing’.
Prizes from the wheel included underwear.

Amazingly (in today’s world), this has caused something of a negative reaction in social media:

One user commented: ‘Saddened to see this. Students should not be encouraged into prostitution.’
Another added: ‘What the f***? Are you seriously encouraging young people to sell their bodies to fund university? “Sex work”? Do you mention this to prospective parents at open days?’
A third simply said: ‘This is grotesque beyond words.’

Unsurprisingly, SWOP responded with the “If they’re going to do it anyway…”  liberal trope (see also:  handing out condoms to, and discussing anal sex techniques with preteens in Sex Ed classes):

‘Rising living and tuition costs mean that more students than ever are turning to sex work and SWOP believe that they deserve our help as well.
‘Sex work is work.’
‘SWOP have never idealised sex work. However, we understand why students may turn to sex work, and navigating the legal precariousness as well as potential danger mean that students are extra vulnerable and we will help.’

As I said earlier, this whole thing would once have brought from me a thundering denunciation of the decline of morality and the liberal-mindset catalyst that has enabled and encouraged it.

Now?  I shrug.  Because whenever I and other conservatives have have had this kind of attitude in the past, the response has often been that we’re being too judgmental, too harsh and too unforgiving.

So now I say:  Go on.  Tell these young girls that prostitution is a reasonable option towards funding their university education;  tell them how to set up “client lists” and draw up “business plans” for the exploitation of their vaginas, and tell them how best to advertise their wares vaginas and where best to set up operations.  Hell, given what’s being taught here, make it part of a business degree — it’s pretty much what’s taught in business schools these days, except that instead of using the hypothetical “widgets” so beloved of business-school professors, they can use real-life vaginas — their own vaginas withal, so there’s not even a need to set up a product manufacturing process!

I know this sounds cynical, and it is.  But my cynicism pales by comparison to that of the people who have re-labeled “fucking strangers for money” as “sex work”.

Fools, Idiots And Feminists (Some Overlap)

I think I’ve told the story before of how I was taking a Sociology class at college when the Commie / feminist professor [redundancy alert] asked the question of the class:

“Is gender a social construct?”

…whereupon I answered quickly:

“Yes it is… provided that one ignores completely all genetic study and research conducted on the topic since the 1970s.”

Icy silence from the professor followed.  (Incidentally, I got an A for the course because she never could dispute any of my papers’ theses.)

I was reminded of this happy little exchange when I read Heather Mac Donald’s latest article in City Journal.  Hie thee hither and read all of it, for verily (as always with Heather) it’s nothing but net, and will give you all the ammo you’ll ever need when debating some loony feminist [redundancy alert, again] on the topic.

Heather Mac Donald’s collected writings should be required reading in any Humanities course at university, which means that it will never happen because Commies hate any writing which places fact over dogma and disturbs The Narrative.

Asked And Answered

Question:

“Interestingly, this very segment [White men] produces by far the most of our engineers, and judging by what we have accomplished, they have done a damn good job,” he said. “Why do these ideologues want to run them down?”

Answer:  It is precisely because White men have produced this long, storied list of achievements, and the social justice warriors haven’t (and can’t), is the reason why they seek to run us down.

It’s the politics of envy, pure and simple — pulling the outstanding back into the herd — and there’s no accommodating or reasoning with this mindset.  The sooner we all recognize this — and crush these pathetic fuckers wherever we can — the happier and more successful we all will be.

At Last, Some Sanity

…even if it’s coming from the French, surely one of the loopiest nations on Earth.

Smartphones and tablets have been banned from all French schools ahead of the academic year, after a new law was voted through Parliament yesterday.  The phone ban will apply to all pupils in France up to the age of 15, as of the start of the new term in September.

I’ve always thought that giving kids smartphones was a recipe for disaster — similar to letting them go play all day and night in a mall, unsupervised.  And I don’t want to hear whines of “What about their securityyyy?” either.  If that’s so important to Mumsy (or actually, Madamesy), she can buy little Francine or Jacques a flip (dumb) phone.  Calls and texts only (and only a few of those, too).

Perhaps — and I know this is a radical thought — the schools can actually keep a closer eye on the little dears for a change.

And if the kids go all whiney at the indignity and the oppressive injustice of it all, we can call it a cheap life lesson.

Pushing Back

From Britishland comes this excellent news:

The University of Buckingham will become the first UK university to launch a ‘drug-free’ policy, where students will have to sign a contract promising not to take drugs on campus.
The move has been introduced in the wake of findings by The Sunday Times that reveal a 42% rise in the number of those being disciplined for drug use compared to 2015, among 116 universities.
Writing in the same paper, Sir Anthony Seldon, the University’s vice-chancellor, said that if students persisted in taking drugs, they would be expelled.

I await the same news from an American university, but I won’t hold my breath.

As an aside:  back when I was looking at studying at an overseas university, U of Buckingham caught my eye because of their excellent academic standards and reliance on a truly “classical” education. Now I wish I had gone there… and let’s be honest: could one expect anything less from a university which Margaret Thatcher helped found?