Category Archives: Gender

Heartbreak Harvey & The Pale, Patriarchal, Pen-s People

Environmentalism & Animal Rights, Ethics, Etiquette, Gender, Race, The West

As hard as I try, I can’t help noticing that in every heartbreaking Harvey clip it’s the pale, patriarchal, pen-s people doing most, if not all, the heavy lifting. (Yeah, yeah, I know, America is a majority-white country, as John Daniel Davidson of the Federalist noted with trepidation.)

So I’ll pretend I didn’t notice, and you do the same, and let’s thank our brave men (and women Cute Wink | Symbols & Emoticons) rescuers, whatever your background (Cute Wink | Symbols & Emoticons). You are a magnificent, multicultural lot (Cute Wink | Symbols & Emoticons).

Give it up for Sheriff Sheriff T. Nehls

And for the Coast Guard:

James Damore Confronts The Hags of High Tech (& Loses)

Affirmative Action, Business, Feminism, Gender, Political Correctness, Technology

NEW COLUMN: “James Damore Confronts The Hags of High Tech (& Loses)” is the current column, now on Townhall.com. An excerpt:

Of the many men who toil in high-tech, few are as heroic as James Damore, the young man who penned the manifesto “Google’s Ideological Echo Chamber.” In it, Damore calmly and logically exposed the tyrannical ideological edifice erected to perpetuate the myth that, in aggregate, women and men are identical in aptitude and interests, and that “all disparities in representation are due to oppression.”

 …

… In high-tech, almost nothing is as politically precious as a woman with some aptitude. There’s no end to which companies will go to procure women and help them succeed, often to the detriment of technically competent men and women who must do double duty. Their procurement being at a premium, concepts such as “sucking it up” and soldiering on are often anathema to coddled distaff.

A woman in high-technology can carp constantly about … being a woman in high-tech. Her gender—more so than her capabilities—is what defines her and endears her to her higher-ups, for whom she’s a notch in the belt.

While male engineers—and, indubitably, some exceptional women—are hired to be hard at work designing and shipping tangible products; women in high tech, in the aggregate, are free to branch out; to hone a niche as a voice for their gender.

Arisen online and beyond is a niche-market of nudniks (nags): Women talking, blogging, vlogging, writing and publishing about women in high-technology or their absence therefrom; women beating the tom-tom about discrimination and stereotyping, but saying absolutely nothing about the technology they presumably love and help create.

Young women, in particular, are pioneers of this new, intangible, but lethal field of meta-technology: kvetching (complaining) about their absence in technology with nary a mention of their achievements in technology.

The hashtag “MicrosoftWomen” speaks to the solipsistic universe created by females in high-tech and maintained by the house-broken males entrusted with supporting the menacing matriarchy. Are these ladies posting about the products they’ve partaken in designing and shipping? Not often. Women in high-tech are more likely to be tweeting out about … being women in high-tech. Theirs is a self-reverential and self-referential universe. …

… Read the Rest. The complete column, “James Damore Confronts The Hags of High Tech (& Loses),” is now on Townhall.com.

This column can be read also on Unz ReviewDaily Caller, American Thinker, and others, where The Mercer Column usually appears. And it’s always posted, eventually, on IlanaMercer.com, under Articles. Please share.

Military Goes From Gender Neutrality To Gender Fluidity

Cultural Marxism, Feminism, Gender, History, Military

IN A NEW ESSAY, I argue that the entire debate about LGBTQ (“Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Questioning”) in the military is a fig leaf, camouflaging that the Army was neutered in the 1990s. The military is now making the transition from gender neutrality to gender fluidity. It’s a Brave New World.

The backdrop to these ideas is in “An X-Rated Conversation About LGBTQ & XX (Women) In The Military.” It’s on The Unz Review, America’s smartest webzine. An excerpt:

PREDICTABLY, the Joint Chiefs of Staff have already pooh-poohed President Trump’s July 26th LGBTQ directives, banning the politicized transgender production from the theater of war. …

… LGBTQ is a political program why? Central to the concept of “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Questioning” in the military is the idea of a group whose members have chosen to identify not as Private X or Private Y, but as a party to a political fraternity that promises and delivers an aggressive, noisy, sexual identity politics.

Evangelizing for the cause is implicit in the introduction of this political production into the military. Ditto payment for drastic elective medical procedures and the attendant hormonal maintenance. In other words, LGBTQ in the military isn’t about enhancing a fighting force, it’s about introducing another state-driven reformation program. Egalitarian access here aims, inadvertently (as always), to grow an arm of government and, at the same time, “re-educate” the country.

Moreover, LGBTQ in the military is but another “Draconian social policy [enforced] without showing any interest in—and in many cases actively suppressing—good-faith information about how those policies [are] playing out at ground level,” in the prescient words of Stephanie Gutmann, author of “The Kinder, Gentler Military: Can America’s Gender-Neutral Fighting Force Still Win Wars?”

Girls: It was about their presence in the military that Gutmann was warning, circa 2000, not “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Questioning.” As trailblazing as Ms. Gutmann’s shoe-leather investigation was, back then, into the way women had transformed the military, its morale and readiness—never could this author have imagined that from gender neutrality, the military would move into the even Braver New World of gender fluidity.

Gutmann saddled “Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton, Secretaries of Defense Richard Cheney, Les Aspin, and William Cohen, the Congresses who wrote and passed the bills they signed, and the Pentagon leadership who just grinned nervously and sat on their hands while all of this was going on.”

What were the fatal conceits of these leaders and their legislation?

“One of the projects mesmerizing the brass throughout the nineties was the integration of women. … [T]he nineties were a decade in which the brass handed over their soldiers to social planners in love with an unworkable (and in many senses undesirable) vision of a politically correct utopia, one in which men and women toil side by side, equally good at the same tasks, interchangeable, and, of course, utterly undistracted by sexual interest.”

…  READ THE RESTAn X-Rated Conversation About LGBTQ & XX (Women) In The Military” is on The Unz Review.

This column can generally be read also on Townhall.com, Daily Caller, American Thinker, and others, where The Mercer Column usually appears. And it’s always posted, eventually, on IlanaMercer.com, under Articles.

Share it.

Refugees & The Hysterical, Horny Swedes Who Love Them

Feminism, Gender, IMMIGRATION, Islam, Left-Liberalism, Pop-Culture, Sex

The erotica fueling the fascination with the tall, dark, Middle-Eastern young men smuggled into Europe is something I covered in “Left-Liberalism’s Homo-Eroticism” (3/14/2016) and again in “Are Liberals Turned-On By Turning The Other (Gluteus Maximus) Cheek?” (2/6/2017). In blog posts, too, going back to 2012.

The “Angry Foreigner” (very clever and terribly crude) exposes the horny, menopausal Social Justice Warriors (SJW) behind the fetish, calling this archetype a “Bohemian witch, tie-dye hag,” and worse. It is this horny SJW who’s lusting after young men.

I’ve made the point that it is the feel-goodism of do-goodsim itself that gives these idiots a sexual rush.

In any event, the horny SJW is in a position of power to (inadvertently, in my opinion) fuel the immigration, as she generally works for The State or for some related interest group that influences policy. She is particularly prone to hysteria.

At about 15:35 into the broadcast. European commenters are much wittier and daring than ours. Brighter. But this is definitely too risqué.