Women in white

The women wore white at the State of the Union Address, allegedly in honour of the Suffragettes and early feminists generally, who are referred to (eg. by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) as the 'mothers of the movement'. The picture above sums up their reaction to President Trump's call for a ban on late-term abortion (i.e. when the baby is fully sentient and in many cases could survive outside the womb). They were unmoved, shall we say, except for those who actively shook their head in a 'no' response. They stolidly sat on the solid fact that early feminists were against abortion.
Here is the women in white's reaction to being Congresswomen:


Yay us, who have cushy indoor jobs that allow for perfect grooming, glossy hair and the symbolic wearing of white! Yay us, who are in no way going down sewers or mines, up scaffolding or electricity masts, or breaking up concrete on roads or being exposed to all weathers in a multitude of other jobs done by men to keep everything going, including our ability to stand here and high five each other in our specialness! No doubt the wearing of white was meant as a celebration of political progress. But morally and spiritually speaking there seems precious little to celebrate. Of what movement are these women the mothers? What are they pushing for except for numerical parity in only the 'tippy tops' of white-collar jobs - and at the expense of motherhood? Sadly, what they most look like in such photos is an illustration of Philippians 3:19: "their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things." An image of frivolity where seriousness should be.

12 Reasons why Nick Sandmann should be a Gillette poster boy

Why isn't Nick Sandmann a poster boy for Gillette? Tagline: The Best A Teen Can Be. He deserves it for:

1. Caring about the very weakest and voiceless among us.
2. Taking an over 1,000 miles road trip to attend a peaceful demonstration in honour of all life.
3. Enduring sustained verbal abuse, of the vilest sort, hurled at him (and his friends) by a group of adult strangers, for no reason except for the colour of his skin and his baseball cap.
4. Holding his ground when confronted by another group of adult strangers, who invaded his personal space to challenge him in a sustained way, again for no reason except for the colour of his skin and his baseball cap.
5. Doing what he could, in the moment, to prevent the situation from getting worse, though acutely fearing that it would. 
6. Accepting the leadership role foisted on him by the situation.
7. Helping his peers to remain calm and respectful against the onslaught of hostility from two groups of adult men. 
8. Enduring with meekness the multiple cameras focused on him, recording his every facial expression. 
9. Trying different facial expressions to cope with the weirdness of the in-your-face challenge of a  much older man and his constant drum-beating.
10. Having to withstand merciless abuse, threats, prejudice, hatred and calls to violence from news media, celebrities, politicians and everybody else who claims to be against those very things.
11. Keeping his cool during a shameful interview - by a star journalist on national television - in which he was portrayed as responsible for the initial situation and the subsequent vitriol.
12. Refusing to be bullied into apologising for existing.

So why isn't he a poster boy? Because the Gillette ad was about politics not behaviour. And the colour of his skin, his baseball cap and, as it also happened, his religion, were enough to bring the wrath of Social Justice down on Nick Sandmann, making a mockery of his commendable behaviour. Just a reminder, people: tests of character don't often come in the low-grade scenarios of the infamous Gillette ad. The most truthful tests come in situations of chaos and bewilderment, when things don't  make sense anymore and you lose most of your reference points. All you disgraceful adults who piled onto this poor kid because he stood and because he smiled awkwardly, if you think you would have done any better at 16 or 17, on a visit from Kentucky to D.C, confronted with unprovoked street hostility of this magnitude, with cameras and drum-beating in your face, you are lying to yourselves. To others of course too, but firstly to yourselves. Humble introspection and honest remembering of what it's like to be a teenager are strongly advised.

Respect for Elders?

It's lovely to see public opinion commenting about the respect due to an 'elderly' man, Nathan Phillips, who is 64. On the subject of an older elder, the President of the United States, aged 72, the reverse is true: the more disrespect, calumnies, slander and outright hatred, the better.

Januhairy for men

The best response to Gillette's morally incoherent ad for razor blades would be for as many men as possible to stop shaving. Men of the Western world, get bushy. Go full bearded, rediscover the patriarchal look; flaunt the one masculine advantage you have that women will never want to claim for themselves. Before the Gillette ad sucked up all the attention, we had 'Januhairy', whereby a pretty young female student challenged other women to grow out their armpit and leg hair as a form of liberation. But, as in the previous hairy-is-free feminist expression of the 1970s, this call does not seem to extend to growing out a good haircut (or indeed, getting rid of extensions). Nor, as far as I can tell, does it encourage women to let their facial hair proliferate annoyingly, or random nose hairs to dangle, or mole hairs to sprout unimpeded, or brows to recolonise the upper slopes every which way. It's a stunt that conveniently allows for feminine grooming where feminine grooming is most visible and looks good in photographs. For men to reclaim their maleness in the form of facial hair would be a far more honest protest.