At this moment, somewhere in an American University, latte-sipping womyn’s studies majors are demanding safe spaces where they will not be bothered by the alleged patriarchy of cis-male, cis-white, non-trans-species bigots. Meanwhile, real concern is rising about an actual rape culture in a physically unsafe space — namely an all-girl high school in Cologne. Yes, THAT Cologne.
Can you guess where this story is going? Of course you can, because now it’s so depressingly commonplace that it is hard to describe it without sounding repetitive. Yes, class, it’s that infamous Religion of Peace again (can we retire that name yet?) trashing an otherwise pleasant evening for some young German ladies.
The high school has cancelled Carnival for security reasons. More bluntly, they are afraid sexual predators will use the event to accost young girls. I can’t imagine what variable has changed over the past year that would introduce such a new risk, can you? Not Islam, or those “refugees” fleeing danger in search of a better life? Surely not.
While preparing to comment on the ongoing PC conspiracy of silence, the barbarism of an inferior culture, and the abject failure of men in their societal role of protector of women and children, I remembered something else. It was a connection I’d once noticed between the precious snowflakes in my first paragraph, and the squads of rape-gangs forcing these girls to cancel their party.
These groups share at least one root problem: and the burqa is the clue.
For all the fuss about the burqa, why do women need to wear them? Do you remember? Imams told us all about it while victim-blaming for those New Year’s Eve attacks right there in Cologne.
The explanation went something like this: Sex-crazed men could not help themselves. They saw female flesh, were overcome by lust, and instinct took over. They were like a lion with a gazelle. The inference was: “Who can blame the men for that — really?”
I can absolutely blame them for that. And so can you.
Those precious snowflakes in womyn’s studies and the rutting swine in Germany have the same problem. They are both “victims” in need of “safe spaces”.
The former demands safety from ideas believed outside their hermetically-sealed bubble. (read: reality) They need protection from anything that might disrupt their little pajama-boy world, causing indigestion. The rest of us must self-censor our own ideas so everyone can get along. That’s what passes for tolerance these days. Noncompliance will be punished.
The rutting swine of those attacks — from whose dirty hands even department-store mannequins are not safe from indignity — also hold a same “safe-spaces” mentality. There are certain ideas they simply cannot tolerate. (Ask any Danish Cartoonist.)
Both groups, when faced with a choice between engaging or silencing dissenting ideas prefer the totalitarian option. The burqa merely extends such censorship into the physical world. (Are you getting this, Feminists?) The men of this sect, have a similar choice. Rule their own passions, or wrap their women in burlap. They chose to not merely conceal their women’s curves, for modesty’s sake, but to cover their identity as well.
In so doing, these men play the victim card, to their own shame. By their behaviour, such “men” proclaim to the world they are inferior to the men of nearly every other culture and religion, of men well able to live honorably among women. The rest of the world has — as a basic expectation of manhood — self-mastery: knowing how to compose yourself socially, and how to self-regulate among the fairer sex.
What shall outsiders like ourselves conclude by what we see? My take-away is this: By wrapping their women in blankets, this culture demands a virtue of their women that their men are unable or unwilling to cultivate in themselves.
Which prompts another question: in their customs, why must women practice a more burdensome piety merely to compensate for the weakness in their own impious men?