By Ann Coulter, September 26, 2018:
“They understand that you have all of these white men who would be questioning this woman … the optics of it would look terrible.” — Gloria Borger, CNN chief political analyst
“Women across this nation should be outraged at what these white men senators are doing to this woman.” — Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif.
“There has been some discussion of the GOP senators who happened to all be … white men.” — Jim Sciutto, CNN correspondent
“What troubles me is now there are … they’re all white men.” — Jennifer Granholm, former governor of Michigan, on CNN
”You’re seeing on display a metaphor for what this party is, which is basically ignorant white men.” — “Morning Joe” contributor Donny Deutsch
“All these white men … stumbling all over themselves asking her, you know, aggressive and obnoxious questions.” — Asha Rangappa, CNN analyst
“What are those — that collection of old white men going to do?” — Cynthia Alksne, MSNBC contributor
“If she testifies in front of the Judiciary Committee, where 11 members are white men …” — Susan Del Percio, Republican political strategist, on MSNBC
“Once again, it will be all white men on the Republican side of the Judiciary Committee.” — CNN anchor Poppy Harlow
“The optics for Republicans are going to be really tricky … You’ve got all white men on the Republican side here …” — Julie Pace, Washington bureau chief for The Associated Press, on CNN
“The Republicans, it happens to be 11 white men still on that side.” — CNN host John Berman
“The Republicans, it is 11 white men, talk to me about how you think the tone inside this hearing on Monday will be perceived?” — Berman, a few minutes later
“What hasn’t changed is the number of white men questioning, certainly, on the Republican side.” — Dana Bash, CNN chief political correspondent
“The Republican side on the Senate Judiciary Committee is all white men …” — Irin Carmon, senior correspondent for New York Magazine, on MSNBC
“Only this crowd of clueless old white guys …” — The Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin on Twitter
Let me begin by saying these commentators are making a brilliant and totally ORIGINAL point, the plain truth of which is outshone only by, as I’ve said, its sheer no-one-has-ever-made-that-observation-before-ness.
As the Supreme Court confirmation hearing resumes this week for Judge Brett Kavanaugh, it’s clear that the Republicans are simply too white to get the job done. I suggest the Republicans sign up some outside help, the way baseball teams make late-season acquisitions of pitchers and designated hitters for the playoffs.
Some suggestions (note: not all of the following individuals are Republicans, but none has any partisan profile that I am aware of):
1. The Rev. Al Sharpton (Tawana Brawley affair demonstrates that he believes women).
2. Bill Cosby (extensive, up-close experience with victims of sexual assault, albeit from a rapist’s, rather than a “rapee’s” perspective).
3. Keith Ellison (likely good rapport with committee Democrats; has own transportation to Capitol Building).
4. Matias Reyes (would undoubtedly throw himself into committee’s work as pleasant change of pace from prison).
5. Sorry, I don’t remember the gentleman’s name, but that guy who kidnapped and raped the Columbia student, poured bleach on her and Krazy-Glued her lips shut. (This one is sort of a “wild card,” I admit; he could be absolutely great, or, judging by his history of poor impulse control, he could be too emotionally unstable to handle the committee’s important work; definitely a Person of Color, though; that I’m sure about.)
6. Alton Maddox, attorney for black youth hired by Jewish landlord to slash a model’s face because she refused to date him. Maddox pioneered novel “she’s a manipulative slut who had it coming” defense. (Close relationship with the Rev. Sharpton a definite plus.)
7. Lakireddy Bali Reddy, entrepreneurial Indian immigrant with strong experience with underage rape victims, having brought little girls to the U.S. purchased from their poverty-stricken parents in India as his private sex slaves. (His presence may bring Asha Rangappa on board.)
Seriously, if feminists want to make the point that only female senators have any business conducting these hearings, they have a logical point, albeit an idiotic one.
Of course, the last time feminists bet big on women being certain allies in the fight against misogyny, they were the women of the O.J. jury.
Still, I get the logic of demanding women interlocutors.
But what is the thinking behind snickering at “white men” judging an accusation of sexual assault? Chuck Grassley is a big rapist?
You can be for rape or against it — I happen to be against it — but the idea that alleged sexual assault survivors need the loving care of black, Indian or Hispanic men to judge their stories flies in the face of crime statistics from around the globe.
In the history of the world, there has never been a more pacific, less rapey creature than the white male of Western European descent.
I realize it gives The New York Times’ editorial board (recent acquisition: Sarah Jeong) warm feelings every time someone throws in the word “white” as an intensifier, denoting extra hatefulness, but really, guys, it’s getting old.
Can we please, for the love of God, drop the painfully trite, mind-numbing cliche about “white men,” as if somehow their whiteness makes evil even eviler?
8 thoughts on “No More Mr. White Guy”
Your logic is impressive, I’m just surprised it doesn’t chafe more.
Yeah it’s certainly a tough gig to keep the logic and arguments consistently focused. Yet, any frustration over this is not much in comparison to what’s at stake.
Allow me to be more specific – several of your assertions are not corroborated (and patently skewed IMO). Basing your opinions in response to media folk just doing their jobs however thoughtlessly, makes you only marginally more thoughtful, and that win is balanced quickly by the smaller audience.
By way of example, you claim the white male of Western European descent to be the least rapey of peoples, and I would ask you to explain the history of Britain in that context. I claim the opposite, that the white male of Western European descent is historically the most ‘rapey’ (which by the way is baby-talk for “predisposed to commit rape” and makes you seem soft). If there is a difference in rate of rape by ethnicity in the modern world, I suspect it would disappear if cross-analyzed with socioeconomic data. All humans are capable of rape, all humans are more likely to rape when they perceive the future as bleak. This is why rape is more common in already at risk populations like poor folks, refugees, and addicts.
To be clear, this is the reposted work of Ann Coulter (which I referenced). You assert that differences in rape rates would disappear if socio-economic data was accounted for. I agree a correlation exists between bad socio-economic outcomes and the rates of rape (as well as crime generally). But what if these 2 trends emanate out of a more defining statistic that can accurately predict both individual and group outcomes? Here, there is such a statistic which influences human behaviour irrespective of socio-economic status. That is called IQ; perhaps you should consider an IQ chart for more information.
Oh, please keep mentioning it! It’s exactly what all we white guys need to wake us up from our leftist stupor of world (albeit white male-free) utopia. It was White Ribbon Day and it’s idiocy around pledges and ambassadors that finally snapped me awake to it all … and it just cannot be unseen.
You make a very good point there: “it just cannot be unseen.” This is precisely why many people swing from the left to the dissident right, but once you know the things we know, any swing in the opposite direction becomes virtuality impossible.
As usual, Coulter calls it correctly!
She is and she’s getting very based in recent times. Surely the age of the boomer conservativism is up and will soon be replaced by a Coulter-like nationalism. Perhaps a Buchanan/ Coulter ticket could win in 2024?