There was a time when there was only one proper way to address bullying. There have always been other options to deal with this situation, then and now, but only one was considered honourable and courageous.
A telltale sign of a declining civilization is one where individuals are not held up to the same high standard as the preceding generation. I had previously written that the anti bullying crusade was merely a pretext at pushing self censorship on the masses in addition to expanding the powers of an intrusive nanny state. The message that society and the mainstream media disseminates today is that victims needn’t stand up for themselves, but rather that they should lean on authority.
Not too long ago, Porn star Christie Mack posted an online account of domestic abuse that she allegedly suffered at the hands of UFC participant War Machine (Jon Koppenhaver). The pictures were expertly gruesome and designed to maximize sympathy while downplaying the fact that she chose to stay with a man that had physically abused her in the past. Koppenhaver’s violent behaviour is also inexcusable and it was also his own fault for plunging into a relationship with a glorified prostitute. Since I’ve divided the blame equally between Mack and Koppenhaver and since feminism is (as we all know) all about equality, I suspect feminists should have no problem with my take on this issue.
Jokes aside, despite feminist whining about “victim blaming” the lamestream media rapidly rallied to the side of the battered porn star. Professional Mangina Frank Kobola of Cosmopolitan magazine writes: “Mack, a famous porn star with more than 570,000 Twitter followers, is extremely brave to post such an account, which could, sadly, negatively affect her career.”
There are two questions that remain unexplained:
- How does posting this account online risk damaging her ‘career’?
- How is complaining online a sign of bravery? Especially when it was Koppenhaver that was on the run because of it?
It’s unrealistic to expect a woman to stand up to a professional MMA fighter but complaining online with full foreknowledge that the nanny state and a feminized society would back her up is not bravery. It would have been braver if she would have fended him off with pepper spray. Women like her have every right to approach the police and courts for protection and justice; however, going public on social media is just an industrialized society’s equivalent of inciting a mob. That is not bravery, it is cowardice.
I had written about the feminist coward Anne Roy that made public a private Facebook conversation that was admittedly vulgar, but still private. The men involved in that conversation had their personal details made public and their reputations ruined. Yet despite this, by the sheer magical powers of feminist logic it was Roy that was the victim and the brave one. Liberals and feminists love to gang up on their opponents and then pat themselves on the back for ‘bravery.’ In his trenchant article “The Rabbits go to war” Matt Forney wrote:
If you blog pseudonymously, outing you will be the rabbits’ first tactic. They will start rooting through your blog, your Twitter account, your WHOIS records, anything to find out who you are, where you live, who you work for and so on. They’ll then plaster this info on Facebook, Pastebin, anywhere eyeballs can be found. The goal is to use the threat of social ostracism to shame you into falling back into line with the other bunnies.
Recall the Adria Richards incident last year. She decided to avenge her hurt feelings by publicly shamming two men on social media. One of them lost his job. Richards is the epitome of liberal courage. I’d pay money to see Richards try and pull such a stunt in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia, not that she’d have the courage to venture there.
So the next time some whiny, solipsistic, and entitled twitter twit feminist goes online to rally her fellow rabbits against the monster with an opposing viewpoint, try and remember that these individuals aren’t brave; rather, they are in the words of Schopenhauer : “childish, foolish, and short-sighted—in a word, are big children all their lives, something intermediate between the child and the man, who is a man in the strict sense of the word.”
Let’s not give these people more credit than they deserve.