Facebook recently launched Messenger Kids, a social media app that will reach kids as young as five years old. Suggestive that harmful persuasive design is now honing in on very young children is the declaration of Messenger Kids Art Director, Shiu Pei Luu, “We want to help foster communication [on Facebook] and make that the most exciting thing you want to be doing.”

I’d put these fuckers in jail. These are real evildoers.

I highly recommend the whole piece.

Few things are more ridiculous, immoral and dumb than the progressive approach to education. People like this DiBlasio fellow don’t care about students or education or anything but making themselves look good in the eyes of their idiot peer group.

This NYC school that I know nothing about and have no interest in learning is just a symptom. We are seeing this approach at work everywhere, and it’s extremely destructive.

I remember once driving such a progressive education freak to an attack of tachycardia by asking, “Is it possible that they didn’t pass the exam because they don’t know the material?” In his world, the only reason why anybody fails at school is because they are oppressed by evil forces and not given enough of a chance. The existence of students who simply are not prepared is utterly impossible for them to accept.

Unlike classical liberals or neoliberals, progressive liberals don’t openly support the truly stratospheric inequality of modern times. To the contrary, opposing the inequality is a large part of their platform.

Curiously, they achieve a whole lot in every area that matters to them but this one. Inequality grows. The reason why they are so unsuccessful at this task is that everything else they do undermines it. The easily uprooted, solitary nomads with fluid identities, who are their most protected class, are a guarantee of exploding inequality. And the worship of choice as the main tool of freedom is the guarantee that the environment will be depleted and the planet will be killed.

This is quite simply one of the best books I have ever read in my life. It’s fucking glorious, people. Drop everything and go read it because it matters.

I avoided Disgrace for years because every review and blurb presented it as a novel about a professor who had an affair with a student and lost his job as a result. And who wants to read something like that?

In reality, though, the novel is not about affairs with students. It’s about an abyss separating civilizations, it’s about a woman who immolates herself on the altar of post-colonial guilt, it’s about getting outraged over imagined oppressions and escaping from them into slavery, it’s about the motives of the author of the piece I linked in my post on the real #metoo, it’s about the ways in which the belief in the sanctity of emancipation creates the worst kind of bondage. It’s about everything that matters.

I’ve looked at the NYTimes reviews of the novel, and it’s clear that many readers are so blinded by the idiotic rhetoric of aggressive SJW-ing that they saw in the novel a glorification of dismantling feminism for the purpose of expiating postcolonial guilt. Which just tells us that Coetzee is not exaggerating or inventing anything in his novel.

I read the novel in under 24 hours. Which says a lot, given that I’m taking care of a toddler all day.

A funny article on the increase of crimes against women in Germany:

And yet it is important that feminists try to walk this line and start to take seemingly impossible positions: defending the religious freedom of Muslim women who want to wear head scarves, while helping girls who are forced to do so, and addressing the fact that some men newly immigrated from Arab countries hold misogynist views — while stressing this is probably not the key factor that leads to crimes against women.

The number of “and yets” and “buts” is off the charts. Of course, it’s all the fault of feminists who aren’t too good at contorting themselves into “seemingly impossible positions.” They just need to contort more actively, and it will all be fine.

It’s also funny that the difference between “Muslim” and “Arab” seems to elude the article’s author.