The Friday Follies

What say we close the week with just enough societal dada to pole-vault the readership into a snifter of its favorite spirit.


The student government at UC Irvine has resolved to remove the American flag from its campus “inclusive space.” Now I’m not certain exactly how this term is defined, though it probably means a designated area where views expressed on this blog can receive a fair hearing. So I’m in support.

The bill, R50-70, was authored by Social Ecology Representative Matthew Guevara, and accuses all flags, especially, the American flag, of being “symbols of patriotism or weapons for nationalism.”

I would imagine this flag in particular grieves Mr. Guevara:


Flags construct paradigms of conformity and set homogenized standards for others to obtain which in this country typically are idolized as freedom, equality, and democracy.

The American flag doesn’t represent any defense of my interests, and we are equally unimpressed by empty invocations of freedom, equality, and democracy in lieu of those. Who could have guessed The Kakistocracy’s influence has even permeated the philosophy of revanchist mestizos?

What else is happening in the academy?


There’s a conservative student group at George Washington U that declined to absorb BLT sensitivity training. This conscientious objection wasn’t particularly well received by the acolytes of tolerance. Here’s a sample of considered rejoinders.

If GW YAF refuses to participate in safe zone trainings that are aimed at increasing safety and understanding, then they should be considered a hate group, and thereby, be revoked of all funding from the Student Association at The George Washington University.

Reflecting on its advance into formerly innocuous organizations, I smile at the realization there’s really nowhere hate can’t insinuate itself. Even milquetoast color-blind collegiate conservatives are succumbing. Soon enough the impotent avuncular toadies at National Review will be red-eyed haters. And then all republicans, then white democrats, then their infants, and then I win.

The Young America’s Foundation is a political organization, not a religious one, so they cannot seek a religious exemption. And their refusal to use preferred gender pronouns should be considered an act of violence and a violation of the non-discrimination clause required in all GW student organizations’ Constitutions.

This is how wars will be fought in the future: with asymetric gender pronouns. It’s largely what has constrained Russia and China’s ambitions to-date: our military’s qualitative advantage in advanced pronoun systems. Though there’s something that nags at the back of my mind. If hypothetically facing a band of machete-wielding Hutus, which pronoun should be used in defense? I’m sure young tolerants will supply the answer.

Allied in Pride also criticized the YAF chapter for inviting former-Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) to speak on GW’s campus. According to Allied in Pride, the YAF chapter invited Santorum the day before “Trans Day of Visibility” which “underscores [YAF’s] intolerance and pattern of hate.”

Alright, they have a point there. What supremacist bigot will they invite next, George Will?



Amore. Three homosex men have married in Thailand. I mean all three of them. Each to the other two. It would require a stone-hearted monster to not feel a pleasant frisson at that photo.

Do you recall the discredited “slippery slope” theories promulgated by old southern segregationists resisting miscegenation? Well that didn’t ultimately lead to gay marriage, which certainly won’t lead to what we see above, or any other of the innumerable permutations that our dreams may render. None of which will have any impact on the nuclear family structure supporting the whole of Western Civilization. So that’s as settled as banana farms in Boston once global warming catches up to the models.


Finally, here’s a video of some intrepid jesters with attenuated actuarial tables. Their shtick is to mildly tweak justgettingtheirlifetogethers while filming the interaction surreptitiously. I have no idea if it’s been doctored for amplified effect. But upon watching I’m sure you’ll agree the agents provocateur are going to draw few social security benefits. Though however in disregard of safety and decorum, it’s simply shocking to watch the blinding progression to violence from their victims. While white mores typically demand a structured escalation, allowing both parties ample opportunity to face-savingly disengage, for this cohort of blacks it’s simply step 1 question, step 2 attack.

Good White People (as Rev. Right characterized) are not going to contemplate this, but no modern society can function with this level of on-the-ground viscosity. Modes of informal conflict resolution are embedded into western behavior and act as never discussed cultural lubricant. Outliers are ostracized or imprisoned. Though when neither occurs, society deteriorates quickly. The sort of spontaneous blood-lust displayed in the video creates ambient friction that deeply degrades living standards, civic engagement, and of course The Economy.

Though perhaps if we could focus more on elevating black self-esteem they would be less inclined to flail at perceived slights. Yes, I’m sure that’s it.


9 thoughts on “The Friday Follies

  1. Let’s be honest. The gentlemen who made that video have a very poor understanding of the word “prank.”

    • Most of those look more like dares than pranks. The neighbor joke was funny, in a sad and pathetic way, but the rest deserve everything they get.

      • The video’s producers have the comedic flair of an Easter Island statue, which should be sufficient to get booked on a Bill Maher show. But the lacking lulz weren’t the point of calling it to attention.

        And I disagree that they got what was deserved. They got what was entirely predictable, though that is not a synonym. If an immediate physical beating (or worse) is considered the just response to such innocuously inane remarks, then civilized society is in the rear-view mirror.

        As, of course, it is.

  2. What is even more ridiculous is listening to to explanations given by the YAF representative as to why they should not have to follow the guidelines…it’s so obvious that the debate has been lost and the narrative has been taken by the left…sadly this has been the SOP at universities for 50 years

    • That’s an important point. Look upon the YAF’s barricades…and despair.

      Mandated training is not really being very tolerant of all religious beliefs,” Emily Jashinsky, the YAF chapter’s president, told the Hatchet. “The way that people who are deeply Christian behave is for a reason, and if you’re training them to change that behavior, there’s obviously a problem with that.”

      Jashinsky, a senior at GW, is also a correspondent for Campus Reform. She told the Hatchet that her organization, which is primarily made up of Christian and/or conservative students, is very inclusive of LGBT students and considers the group a “safe space.”

      Regard your position with righteousness and your enemies with contempt. Or go home. The fight is over before it begins.

  3. lol just LOL at UC Irvine students. Sorry you got rejected from UCLA, no need to take it out on the rest of us.

  4. Recognizing, of course, the absolute and total editorial control of The Administration, may I put in a vote on the contra side of “pictures of gay men on this site” issue?

  5. I laughed. It’s sometimes difficult to balance the question of “how many gay men to depict on your blog.” Are we showing too many or not enough? Perhaps we’ve erred to abundance. Expect greater restraint in the future.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s