&#8220;Checking my male privilege&#8221; is trending on Twitter this lovely Monday morning, and I want to blow my brains out.
It&#8217;s another <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/22408/metoo-slacktivism-disrespects-real-victims-michael-j-knowles">useless reaction</a> to the recent onslaught of accusations of sexual harassment and assault against women. This time it was New York Times columnist Charles Blow confessing his inherent sin of maleness and vowing to check his male privilege in order to combat perceived rampant sexism.
What a load of hollow garbage.
First, Blow cites dubious statistics from the <a href="https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/publications_nsvrc_factsheet_media-packet_statistics-about-sexual-violence_0">National Sexual Violence Resource Center</a> to paint America as some deeply misogynistic country overflowing with sexual harassment, assault, and rape. For the sake of Blow&#8217;s argument, let&#8217;s look past the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/george-will-college-become-the-victims-of-progressivism/2014/06/06/e90e73b4-eb50-11e3-9f5c-9075d5508f0a_story.html?utm_term=.b8bdb6e332d2">questionable</a> validity of these statistics and accept his premise: America is a hell hole for women.
Okay, it&#8217;s basically Saudi Arabia up in here, so how does Blow suggest we combat this problem? With the promise of checking his male privilege, being a &#8220;feminist,&#8221; and promoting &#8220;ally-ship.&#8221;
&#8220;I am a man. Six-foot-two, 200 lbs. Able-bodied, and physically fit. I move through the world with the privilege of never even considering the idea of being sexually assaulted or harassed,&#8221; writes the columnist.
&#8220;This is one of my male privileges, and I have to check it.&#8221;
He continues: &#8220;It is not sufficient to simply not be a sexist yourself if you are a man. You must also recognize that you benefit from the system of sexism in ways to which you may not even be aware.&#8221;
&#8220;Every man must become a feminist,&#8221; he adds. &#8220;Every man must work as hard as every woman to elevate gender equality and to eliminate gendered violence.&#8221;
Blow wants men to become male feminists, to empathize with women, to essentially throw up a trending hashtag to fight The Patriarchy. This is unsurprisingly hollow, and even counterproductive.
Accepting the premise that sexual assault is this prevalent, men must embrace their masculinity to combat the issue, not cower from and apologize for it.
We need to come to grips with the reality that men and women, while equal under the law, are different. Men must respect and work to protect women, not strip themselves of alleged toxic masculinity (or traditional masculine norms) to morph into Pajama Boys: passive, beta males trading in their responsibility to protect women for talking about their feelings cross-legged on a bed drinking hot chocolate.
Instead of emulating the creeps of Hollywood like Harvey Weinstein, who was praised as a male &#8220;feminist,&#8221; we need men to be protectors of women. As <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/450954/hurricane-harvey-heroes-show-toxic-masculinity-lie">noted</a> by Ben Shapiro at National Review, &#8220;all men must strive to be sheepdogs.&#8221;
&#8220;The sheepdog must be willing to do violence but must also ensure protection of the flock against all manner of horror. That’s the role of men in the social fabric. That doesn’t mean that women can’t participate in that task — but a society of men who refuse to protect will be a society that collapses in short order,&#8221; wrote Shapiro.
This collapse is not just the fault of men, of course. The feminist movement has worked tirelessly to blur the lines between male and female to ostensibly promote &#8220;equality.&#8221; It&#8217;s now looked at as patronizing for men to act as protectors, or for anyone to even acknowledge the innate differences between men and women.
Additionally, women are told that being empowered is to emulate a male jerk who sleeps with anything that moves. Instead, it would serve women well to embrace their biological differences and respect themselves enough to give themselves to only those worthy of them, ideally within the confines of marriage.
If you actually want to reduce misogyny and disrespect toward women, men should reject Blow&#8217;s shallow recommendations and embrace the traditional masculinity which the Left has condemned as &#8220;toxic.&#8221; We need more sheepdogs who respect women and are willing to act and fewer Pajama Boys only willing to virtue signal with a pathetic hashtag.

‘Checking Your Male Privilege’ Is Hollow Virtue Signaling. To Help Women, We Need More So-Called ‘Toxic Masculinity.’

Charles Blow

Gender

New York Times

Sexual Assault

Sexual Misconduct

<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/19/opinion/trump-isnt-hitler-but-the-lying.html">On Thursday</a>, the phrase &#8220;Trump Isn&#8217;t Hitler&#8221; began trending on Twitter. Now, before you begin wondering whether some semblance of rationality suddenly descended on the chaotic foodfight that is Twitter, understand that the phrase only trended because it was part of the title of an article claiming that, at root, Trump is sort of Hitler. That article came from Charles Blow of The New York Times, and was titled in full, &#8220;Trump Isn&#8217;t Hitler. But His Lies&#8230;&#8221;
The article isn&#8217;t merely flawed in terms of argument. It&#8217;s also one of the most brutally written major op-eds I&#8217;ve ever seen run in a major publication. It contains this paragraph, for example:
<blockquote>
Maybe I have crossed the ink-stained line of the essay writer, where Hitler is always beyond it. But I don&#8217;t think so. Ignoring what one of history&#8217;s greatest examples of lying has to teach us about current examples of lying, particularly lying by the &#8220;president&#8221; of the most powerful country in the world, seems to me an act of timidity in a time of terror. It is an intentional self-blinding to avoid offending frail sensibilities. I have neither time nor patience for such tiptoeing. I prefer the boot of truth to slam down to earth like thunder, no matter the shock of hearing its clap.
</blockquote>
Why are &#8220;boots of truth&#8221; slamming down to earth like thunder, creating a clap? What freshman writing seminar teaching assistant failed to train Blow not to write self-indulgent phrases like &#8220;ink-stained line of the essay writer&#8221;? Why would &#8220;intentional self-blinding&#8221; avoid offending others&#8217; sensibilities? Wouldn&#8217;t self-silencing better achieve that effect? Why must Blow constantly use the passive voice, turning each sentence into a useless thicket?
These and other mysteries of the universe go unanswered in Blow&#8217;s wretched piece.
But the really stunning thing about the piece is Blow&#8217;s trite connection between Hitler&#8217;s lies and Trump&#8217;s. After disowning any connection between genocidal Hitler and Trump, Blow proceeds to tie together &#8220;Hitler the liar&#8221; and &#8220;Trump the liar.&#8221; How so? By once again relying on the cliché of the &#8220;big lie.&#8221;
Now, I have been pretty clear that I think Donald Trump is dishonest on a routine basis. Hell, I cut a video during the campaign to that effect:
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe loading="lazy" allowfullscreen frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yX5dBzxKNOw" width="560"></iframe></div>
But is Trump a Hitler-style liar? Not even close. Hitler&#8217;s lies were clever and purposeful, not self-inflating verbal tics. Hitler didn&#8217;t succeed in his lies because they were big, contrary to common opinion &#8212; he succeeded because they were difficult to debunk, being broad claims about events behind the scenes, repeated by millions of others (see, for example, the stabbed-in-the-back myth about World War I).
The Hitlerian conceit that the big lie is always easier to promulgate than the small lie isn&#8217;t actually true. It&#8217;s the vague lie, often repeated, that is easiest to push. Big lies &#8212; lying that the sun is green or that government is turning the frogs gay &#8212; are notoriously difficult to push or maintain for any serious period of time.
But according to Blow, Trump follows the diktats of the Big Lie theory.
<blockquote>
Trump is no Hitler, but the way he has manipulated the American people with outrageous lies, stacked one on top of the other, has an eerie historical resonance. Demagogy has a fixed design.
</blockquote>
This gives far too little credit to the American people. Most Americans don&#8217;t trust Trump. In the 2016 exit polls, 64% of Americans said they didn&#8217;t find Trump honest or trustworthy. The reason Trump won isn&#8217;t because people think he&#8217;s honest; it&#8217;s because they think Democrats are just as dishonest or more so. But because Blow can&#8217;t concede the dishonesty of his own side, he is forced into the position of calling Americans fools, easily taken in by Trump&#8217;s Hitlerian dissembling.
Now, Blow is correct that Trump has some fascinating verbal tics that demonstrate when he&#8217;s fibbing, &#8220;a lot of people are saying&#8221; and &#8220;I was told&#8221; among them. But Blow then blows this small insight all out of proportion:
<blockquote>
This is not a simple fear of the truth; it is a weaponizing of untruth. It is the use of the lie to assault and subdue. It is Trump doing to political ends what Hitler did to more brutal ends: using mass deception as masterful propaganda. &#8230; Trump isn&#8217;t necessarily a direct threat to your life &#8212; unless of course you are being kept alive by health care that he keeps threatening, or if you&#8217;re in Puerto Rico reeling in the wake of two hurricanes &#8212; but he is very much a threat to your quality of life.
</blockquote>
This is where most Americans get off the boat. If we&#8217;re talking about weaponizing untruth, which is more damaging: Trump telling easily debunkable lies, or President Obama lying repeatedly for years that if you liked your doctor, you could keep your doctor? Which untruth was more &#8220;weaponized&#8221;: Trump stating that Obama wiretapped him, or Obama stating that racism was inextricably embedded in America&#8217;s DNA?
So no, Trump isn&#8217;t Hitler, even in his lies. And please, somebody at The New York Times, hire an editor for Charles Blow.

New York Times Columnist Writes Worst Op-Ed EVER Comparing Trump To Hitler

Adolf Hitler

Donald Trump

CNN’s Reliable Sources featured a number of notable claims this week from guests regarding the state and purpose of contemporary journalism. President Donald Trump was also cast by virtually all guests as uniquely mendacious relative to his predecessors, supposedly placing journalists in a historically unprecedented situation.
Charles Blow of The New York Times said the coin of the news media realm is veracity:
<blockquote>“Everyone in journalism, because what our business is, is truth. Without truth, without credibility, we don’t have anything to sell. There is no business. There is no journalism enterprise without truth. And when we see that the truth itself is being attacked, then we must defend the truth from whomever.”</blockquote>
Blow accused Trump of regularly undermining the truth: “We have to continuously say that the President is actually lying, and that is an assault on the truth itself.”
Watch Blow&#8217;s remarks below.
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uiOXtz1lTlQ" width="854" height="480" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor and publisher of neo-Marxist news outlet The Nation, implied that the news media landscape was overly objective and non-partisan in its conduct (emphasis added):
“Media malpractice played a role [in the election of Donald Trump to the presidency]. We need to find a way now to restore a blueprint of integrity and independence and trust in the media&#8230; The role of the journalist should be to cover fearlessly, fairly, accurately, and remind people why the media is called the Fourth Estate. There’s a role we play.
<blockquote>Trump has debased our political sphere and discourse with trafficking in conspiracy theories and his use of Twitter. We should cover his tweets less. It degrades and debases our work… He wants to destroy the infrastructure of democracy and media information… I think you need to jettison Olympian neutrality.&#8220;</blockquote>
Watch vanden Heuvel&#8217;s comments below.
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y1-H4uIQB4U" width="854" height="480" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
<div class="embed video fluid-video"></div>
<div class="embed video fluid-video">Jim Rutenberg, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/by/jim-rutenberg?action=click&amp;contentCollection=Media&amp;module=Byline&amp;region=Header&amp;pgtype=article">who covers news media</a> for The New York Times, echoed vanden Heuvel&#8217;s description of the news media landscape as overly objective and non-partisan. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html">In August</a>, he described the news media &#8211; including his own employer &#8211; as broadly committed to &#8220;balance&#8221; and opposed to &#8220;being oppositional&#8221; towards anything or anyone. Many journalists, he alleged, were heading into &#8220;uncharted territory&#8221; in dealing with an &#8220;abnormal and potentially dangerous&#8221; presidential candidate in the form of Trump.</div>
Brian Stelter, himself an alumnus of The New York Times and current host of Reliable Sources, asked professor of communication <a href="https://www.asc.upenn.edu/people/faculty/kathleen-hall-jamieson-phd">Kathleen Hall Jamieson</a> if journalism was somehow damaged by Trump’s presidency (emphasis added):
<blockquote>&#8220;Kathleen, how do you view this from the perspective of a communications professor. Does Trump essentially break journalism by saying something that’s outlandish, that has no evidence backing it up, and then calls in journalists to report on it like it’s any other claim by any other president?&#8221;</blockquote>
Watch Stelter&#8217;s inquiry below.
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe loading="lazy" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KgqVCWlz1u4" width="854" height="480" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
Jamieson praised left-wing and Democrat-aligned news media outlets such as The New York Times for inserting phrases such as “without evidence” <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/us/politics/trump-obama-tap-phones.html">into its headlines</a> regarding <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/14093/trump-obama-wire-tapped-trump-tower-james-barrett">the president’s allegations</a> of the Obama administration improperly surveilling Trump Tower’s communications.
Despite presenting himself as an objective and non-partisan analyst of the news media, Stelter regularly ignores and denies widespread left-wing and partisan Democrat political biases across his industry.
<a href="http://www.mediaite.com/online/you-can-be-quite-a-ridiculous-figure-michael-wolff-rips-stelter-for-lecturing-on-virtues-of-the-media/">Last month</a>, Michael Wolff of The Hollywood Reporter warned Stelter against his weekly sermonizing advocacy on behalf of the “virtues of the media.” He described Stelter as regularly bordering on becoming “quite a ridiculous figure” during his weekly monologues on Reliable Sources.
Stelter recites the following introduction for every episode of Reliable Sources: “This is our weekly look at the story behind the story. About how the media really works, about how the news gets made.”
CNN presents itself as an objective and non-partisan news media outlet. It markets itself in its promotional materials as “The Most Trusted Name In News.”
Follow Robert Kraychik on <a href="https://twitter.com/kr3ch3k">Twitter</a>.

Lefty Journos: ‘Our Business Is The Truth,’ We Must End ‘Olympian Neutrality’

Brian Stelter

Media

Media Bias

Reliable Sources

The Nation

When there is smoke, there is fire. Unfortunately for The New York Times, the dumpster fire known as its opinion section continues to get stoked with the words of unhinged leftists saying categorically insane things. Usually, Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/11714/nyts-krugman-republic-falling-and-its-all-ben-shapiro">throws coal</a> into the smoldering trash heap with his often unsubstantiated views, or Thomas Friedman peddles <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/3469/nyt-columnist-friedman-wishes-grover-norquist-hank-berrien">insufferable nonsense</a> that often triggers you slamming your face through a desk.
But this time it was Charles Blow, who wasted no time on this fine Monday morning by publishing a piece aptly <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/06/opinion/pause-this-presidency.html?smid=tw-share">titled</a> &#8220;Pause This Presidency!&#8221; This calls the question of why on earth Blow believes that Donald Trump&#8217;s presidency should endure an uncharacteristic &#8220;pause.&#8221; He kicks off the column with the following charge:
<blockquote>
The American people must immediately demand a cessation of all consequential actions by this &#8220;president&#8221; until we can be assured that Russian efforts to hack our election, in a way that was clearly meant to help him and damage his opponent, did not also include collusion with or coverup by anyone involved in the Trump campaign and now administration.
</blockquote>
Let us ignore for a moment that Blow placed the word &#8220;president&#8221; in quotation marks, alluding to his asinine belief that Trump is #NotHisPresident, and focus on his baseless charges. First of all, the charge that Trump and the Russians colluded to rig the election is <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/11546/4-reasons-russia-didnt-swing-election-trump-ben-shapiro">false</a>. There is no evidence of it; even the intelligence community acknowledged that it is such a fantasy that it makes Thomas the Tank Engine look real.
However, that does not stop Blow from alluding to the leftist narrative that the American public does not see Trump as a legitimate president and therefore, before Trump continues with his constitutionally-mandated duties and suggests policy to Congress, he needs to prove that he is innocent to the unhinged leftists who already find him guilty.
Here is an excerpt from Blow&#8217;s rant:
<blockquote>
Americans must demand at least a momentary respite from &#8212; my preference would be a permanent termination of &#8212; Trump&#8217;s aggressive agenda to dramatically alter the social, economic and political contours of this country.
America deserves to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that our president is legitimate before he issues a single new disruptive executive order.
America deserves to know that he is legitimate before he pursues a program to dismantle Obamacare.
America deserves to know that he is legitimate before he pushes through a budget that obscenely expands military spending while making dramatic cuts in other areas.
America deserves to know that he is legitimate before the Senate moves forward with confirmation hearings for his Supreme Court nominee.
</blockquote>
Blow then rips Trump for his comments regarding Barack Obama <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/14110/narrative-change-evidence-overwhelming-obama-spied-robert-kraychik">possibly wiretapping</a> him and his staff. Ironically, from this dumpster fire column, he also projects that the smoke is not coming from the unhinged pages of The New York Times and the rest of the mainstream media, but from the Trump administration!
<blockquote>
There is a helluva lot of smoke here for there to be no fire. Maybe all of these contacts with the Russians have some benign and believable explanation that escapes me at the moment. Maybe this is just the culmination of an extraordinary series of coincidences. Maybe.
I actually hope that&#8217;s true. The alternative explanation is nearly unfathomable in its ability to injure our democracy.
Whatever the case, we need answers before we simply pretend that there is some sort of political inertia pulling us forward and that the Trump agenda is an inevitable consequence of a suspect election.
No!
</blockquote>
Yes, Charles. It is very possible that meetings between Trump surrogates and Russian officials are completely benign and have nothing to do with the election. As Jeff Sessions <a href="http://www.dailywire.com/news/14048/sessions-recuses-himself-trump-russia-robert-kraychik">explained</a> during his press conference last Thursday, his meeting with the Russian ambassador was part of his senatorial responsibilities as a member of the Armed Services Committee. But Blow refuses to acknowledge the possibility that he may be overreacting (he is) and his views make him seem conspiratorial, unreliable, and deranged (they do).
He ends his column pretending to speak on behalf of all Americans.
<blockquote>
We must all demand without equivocation: Pause this presidency! 
</blockquote>
In short, The New York Times published an entire column that not only operates off the premise of guilty until proven innocent, but that also deliberately calls to obstruct the Trump administration based on circumstantial evidence, hyperbole, and conspiratorial nonsense. This is an article that one would expect coming out of Salon, not one of the most widely-read newspapers in the world.
No wonder President Trump loves to slap the &#8220;failing New York Times.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Somebody with aptitude and conviction should buy the FAKE NEWS and failing <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes">@nytimes</a> and either run it correctly or let it fold with dignity!
&#8212; Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/825690087857995776">January 29, 2017</a></blockquote>
It also comes as no surprise that Charles Blow does not enjoy being told that his moronic column was both unhinged and categorically insane.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Unhinged and categorically insane leftist <a href="https://twitter.com/CharlesMBlow">@CharlesMBlow</a> writes something unhinged and categorically insane. Shocker! <a href="https://t.co/Q6ip7mmD7V">https://t.co/Q6ip7mmD7V</a>
&#8212; Elliott Hamilton (@ElliottRHams) <a href="https://twitter.com/ElliottRHams/status/838737588768948225">March 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Hey <a href="https://twitter.com/bandlersbanter">@bandlersbanter</a>, cue the music! <a href="https://t.co/EBrAsiYoRS">pic.twitter.com/EBrAsiYoRS</a>
&#8212; Elliott Hamilton (@ElliottRHams) <a href="https://twitter.com/ElliottRHams/status/838755496530219008">March 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
Truth hurts.
Follow Elliott on <a href="https://twitter.com/ElliottRHams">Twitter</a> and <a href="https://www.facebook.com/ElliottRHams/">Facebook</a>.

MORON ALERT: NYT’s Charles Blow Calls To ‘Pause This Presidency’

Jeff Sessions

Trump Administration

Menu

Charles Blow

‘Checking Your Male Privilege’ Is Hollow Virtue Signaling. To Help Women, We Need More So-Called ‘Toxic Masculinity.’

New York Times Columnist Writes Worst Op-Ed EVER Comparing Trump To Hitler

Lefty Journos: ‘Our Business Is The Truth,’ We Must End ‘Olympian Neutrality’

MORON ALERT: NYT’s Charles Blow Calls To ‘Pause This Presidency’