Most conservatives understand and even value libertarian principles, yet grow increasingly skeptical of libertarians. Libertarians imagine a sane world of free, rational, autonomous people. We should all wish for the same. But the difference of visualizing the goal versus achieving the goal is no minor thing. When you hear a libertarians argue the evils of national borders, safely assume they have reached clinical levels of idealism. I'd recommend they take up mountain hiking, where it is easy to underestimate the effort required for a summit. After all, you can see the endpoint right in front of you. How hard could it be? It's often not until well underway that the scale and difficulties of the venture becomes apparent, or that an ascent is not feasible without knowledge of the proper route.
I don't give much attention to JQers, which are not in short supply among the dissident right, because they blame another tribe for what are really our problems. It's no different from SJWs with their endless complaining about white privilege, patriarchy, etc. Libertarians exhibit similar behavior in assuming all ailments are the work of government, which is all that stands between our dysfunctional society and sweet nirvana. True, they don't quite think that, but they act like they think that, just the same. Like the countless liberals who didn't actually leave the US after Trump was elected, like they promised, libertarians never disembark for far-off lands with truly limited governments, like Somalia.
Reactionaries believe that the government is largely a reflection of the society. Sure, our government and their media cronies lie to the people, but the people insist on being misled. So, unlike liberals and libertarians, we don't spend a ton of time obsessing over what laws the government should or should not pass, because it doesn't matter very much. It's like quibbling over the difference between Stalinism and democratic socialism, as if tyranny by autocrat is any different from tyranny by committee.
In Britain, the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP), an independent body which effectively regulates advertising in the country, has banned gender stereotyping in advertising. That is, an organization outside of evil, foul government, which instead was stood up by sweet, tender capitalism, is banning all advertisements that don't comply with their radical feminist worldview. (If someone finds a video of Ben Shapiro defending this in the name of western values, please do share.)
I don't necessarily want to send any of my dear reader to that dreadful site, or give that rag a single click more than necessary, so just believe me that these three bullet points make up the article byline.
- Advertisements that show boys as daring and girls as caring will be banned
- Watchdog to ban adverts with 'harmful' gender stereotypes such as housewives
- The proposals will outlaw depictions that suggest people may not be successful in love or life because they do not have what is considered an ideal physique
They provided some examples of the gender stereotyping that is no longer permitted. I've included screenshots for your convenience, and to shield you from that cancerous site.
That's adorable, but the caption is wrong, as the video shows the boy growing up to be an engineer. My daughter takes ballet lessons, but also sometimes says she wants to be an engineer like her dad. I'm not sure how to explain to my five-year-old that she better choose right or she's a bigot. But really, how is this not offensive to ballerinas, since the implication seems to be that the boy grew up to a serious profession and the girl did not? I tell my daughter, whose effort in class is mediocre, that if she really want to be a ballerina there is a lot of competition in the field for precious few spots. On the other hand (I don't tell her this part, yet), a good engineer can always find a company that's hiring, and a good female engineer can get hired even at companies that aren't hiring. So, in a way, becoming a ballerina is more prestigious, but good thing we have liberals to tell us otherwise.
The only way for companies to safely navigate the new rule, it seems, is to do market research to determine which gender is most represented in the depicted occupation, and then hiring actors of a different gender. [Serious question: how do the bigots at the CAP know that the "boy" in the ad isn't really one of the other 94 genders, like a non-binary otherkin? Did they even ask zyr?]
In the pursuit of progress, dish soap and kitchenware companies can now only market their products by depicting weeks old stacks of moldy dishes. Or by having a man wash them.
In the improved version, dad drags the brats to the store while mum shows off her exciting new bikini at the beach in Jamaica.
This will discourage Muslim men from migrating to the British feminist utopia. Do you suppose that the CAP is actually comprised of right-wing nationalists who read housewife blogs and are just playing the long con?
Who cares how ridiculous the plotline, this picture is kryptonite to feminists and progressives (same thing). All beautiful, all fit, all white, all straight, and not a not a tattoo, nose ring, pussy hat, or bull-dyke haircut to be seen. I'm so impressed by their audacity that I may just buy some Lynx deodorant as stocking stuffers for everyone I know.
In the latest version, mom is three beers deep blasting Slayer in the garage, and cussing up a storm because she just stripped out the fucking engine mount bolt on her Hog and the ass clowns at Fastenal can't get the god damned tap she needs in until next Friday. Meanwhile, father and son host a clothing swap.
I almost look forward to the inevitable knee-jerk reaction of the pendulum swinging the other way. Extremes are rarely desirable, but this is really becoming too much. The only good thing to come out of this is that British advertisements will become so utterly boring that perhaps their consumer-driven economy will collapse entirely.
No comments:
Post a Comment