I’ve written a lot lately, but I haven’t published it. And some of the things I get to write daily are only seen by a few on the “outside” who need to approve it. Anyway, the following was prompted by an old work acquaintance’s facebook status that begged people not to put their elderly loved ones into a traditional nursing home. I started to write a long-winded comment in response detailing some of my own experiences in nursing homes as a worker, but then I realized that was kind of rude — bad netiquette if you will (this is apparently a word now).
Content warning: discussion of rape and abuse
Trigger warning: rape, pedophilia, child sexual molestation
I’m much less harsh these days on terms like “be a man”. Usually when people say this, they are talking about how a physically mature male should grow up and act like an adult and not in reference to some ridiculous ideal of masculinity even if it comes off as “bad form”. More recently I’ve heard people say “woman up” when speaking to women who make a litany of convenient gendered excuses for their bad behavior. Though I think such an inverse of a masculinized phrase is fraught with problems, it’s amusing enough and perhaps reflective of where we should be at as a society. For all the cooption and intelligence meddling in feminist movement in the west — not to mention how many women its victorious liberal variant has left in the dust — women are largely viewed culturally and in everyday transactions as competent adults. Whether they receive all the material benefits that are usually attached to competence is a matter of class, race, and often body and beauty standards.
Liberal feminists are here to remind us for eternity it seems that incompetence is determined by one fact alone: sex. Privileged liberal feminists can move in and out of social networks proving their cred with hyperbolized tales of male assumptions about their abilities, having their bonus slimmed due to the existence of a married male coworker with children, or any number of things that just don’t rate among the many struggles that most of the women on the planet have to deal with daily. That’s not to say that these occurrences aren’t sexist, it’s just that they are magnified within a spectacle that simultaneously allows for a greater perception of feminine ability while cutting more women off from the tools and resources they need to simply exist.
I don’t know where my mind is lately friends. Caught somewhere between trying to take the processes of bourgeois law seriously (I am taking some courses) and extricating myself from so many fake and toxic people as far as how they present themselves online. So that is my excuse for not posting my follow-up piece on mass shootings, though I have not left it behind.
I have this happen every so often, this overload to the point of not being able to sift through the daily crap. Bombs, drills, and shootings to the point the random conspiracy groups are also on overdrive trying to analyze them, and with entryist fascoids in the mix, it’s all the more exhausting to process. I can pinpoint exactly what is or isn’t disinfo, but the depressing part is seeing this “conspiracy manufacturing” for the commodification it is.
Mass shootings as packaged by the western corporate media are not designed to have a long shelf life as far as our attention paid to them goes. We are to sit in shock and awe as the latest controlled media reports roll in but only for a specified period before we are allowed to mourn, forgive, and forget. That “the public” is supposed to play this part of the act is very important with all the prepackaged narratives because opinion for the sake of opinion on the flavor of the day means ruling out what those close to them, or affected by them, may have witnessed and sensed during any given melee without vetting by the approved outlets. Making them a matter of public opinion as delivered by various outlets safely allows stories deviating from the chosen narratives to be tucked into the realm of conspiracy theory.
Mandating public opinion is important for shaping public policy from these conditioned reactions so that the courts and other institutions can socially engineer the direction of our “civilized” society. This is not something I have made up out of thin air or gleaned from one of my various, dastardly “infowars left” sources, nor does my language differ from how this process is set out by those who make the decisions. Judges and high-powered law firms with ties to states within states, intelligence agencies only crazies care about, boast about this ability for protecting the “greater good” all over the net and in the law books themselves. Why shouldn’t I or anyone else believe them? Any working class person understands that the law of the land serves bourgeois interests even if they do not explicitly express it using such a descriptor.
In this age of siege, it’s no longer enough to simply state how few own the media. Perhaps Chomsky’s gravelly tone has lulled a lot of us into a sort of a cognitive dissonance where we can on one hand acknowledge its tight control but on the other cry about those who challenge the narratives at work. Even though this examination isn’t much more than a clearing of the cobwebs, I think it’s useful when considering what the media has turned grief into — sound effects, mandated mourning, and very few facts that we aren’t even supposed to think about.
Sampled track: the unmistakable “Highway to Hell” by AC/DC.
If you have paid attention to my blog at all, you might have noticed that I’ve done some exploration into what I’ve called “weaponized narcissism”. I won’t rehash it all right now, but this is a very infantile state that has been cultivated among the western population in a number of ways. Not everyone “catches” it, if you will, but it definitely gets one ahead in situations where social status is paramount in maintaining any sort of relevance or respectability.
In western politics, it’s safe. It’s avoiding certain topics in order to not be ridiculed, as if the worst thing to happen would be mockery from other bobble heads on twitter or other platforms while NATO burns the world down for the benefit of the very few.
Continuing from part one, I take a look at the polarization caused by the Obama effect that’s been important in shifting focus away from him and onto Trump with regard to immigration. I try not to complain about an odious Jacobin article too much and who they represent instead moving on to who is really being represented in the faux pro-immigrant spectacle that is coalescing around Trump.
Mass and spree shootings are now an accepted regular occurrence in the US. The news will be sure to tell us each time another is reported that we are in danger of reaching some tipping point that we are still not yet at despite all the handwringing done over “why are we okay with this? When will we say enough is enough? Why are we killing each other?” These meaningless questions are repeated over and over between the clips of “live coverage” given by spineless robots who ask what the witnesses or survivors (or actors) were feeling at the time of the assault. Drugged-out seeming family members are paraded before glaring studio lights and tell us they are ready to heal, to move on, to forgive, and that they feel nothing but love for “the community” coming together.