Author’s Note, 9/17/18 at 11:29AM ET: I put a lot of caveats throughout this piece because I wrote it relatively from the hip, and did something we’re not allowed to do: Questioned the character of the accuser. But now, a day later, I want to be very clear…
There is zero doubt in my mind that Christine Blasey Ford is a batsh*t crazy liberal lunatic who has spent her entire life immersed in drama that she creates. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if she’s spent as much time in therapy as she has giving it, and that if there were a way we could all magically look at every element of her entire life experience, there isn’t a single person [outside of Northern California] who wouldn’t deem hers to have been one of the most cushy, drama and problem-free lives on the planet. But for, that is, the drama she constantly creates for herself because it’s a full-on addiction for her. There isn’t a question in my mind about any of this. She’s just another unhinged liberal activist and the only difference between her and the psychopaths who were dragged out of the Kavanaugh hearings, is that she kinda went to school with him when they were teenagers.
I really wish more Republicans would have taken notes from President Trump, who refuses to bow down to dishonest media attacks. But of course none have. They remain a collection of mostly useless grifters and swamp parasites, exemplified best by the three who are most likely to let this 35 year old groping allegation — fraught with inconsistencies and political gamesmanship — sink yet another slam dunk that is sitting right in front of us thanks exclusively to President Trump. (And in case it’s not obvious, the three are Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski and Jeff Flake.)
I’m going to offer up two very controversial points in defense of Brett Kavanaugh (amid recent sexual assault allegations) that today will get me lynched or worse, but in a generation or two will be viewed as intellectually honest and courageously shared realities in the face of the fascist leftists who will read this and immediately start dreaming up ways to literally murder me.
PSYCHOLOGISTS IN PALO ALTO ARE ALL INSANE
First and foremost, anyone in the psychology profession within 100 miles of San Francisco is literally insane. All of them. Every. Single. One. More than half of the people who make a living in psychology, period, are batsh*t crazy. And so are more than half the people who live within 100 miles of San Francisco — with the most populous density being right around Shallow Alto. Couple those two points, and the science is settled: Literally every psychology professional in Palo Alto is clinically crazy.
Okay I’m joking mostly on that one, but there is some truth buried in it. Psychology professionals — apologies to those exceptions who are reading — do have a tendency to be unhinged in their personal lives. And if you’re a normal person who ever moved to Palo Alto temporarily for work, then you know that the people who enjoy their lives there are uniformly off their rockers. It’s just a crazy place. When you think of sheltered, terrified, entirely unadjusted and immediately litigious adult toddlers who couldn’t possibly survive in any other social/cultural climate…you’re thinking of Palo Alto. And I have no doubt that Kavanaugh’s accuser is among them. I remember thinking very early on in my time in Palo Alto that the only people who are even remotely “normal” are the immigrants who came from other countries, like India or China. The US-born residents were literally all terrifying in their perpetual states of social and interpersonal regress.
(Notably also: I’m a huge Grateful Dead fan, and was initially excited to move to the city where they got their start. I lived there for nearly three years and met one other Dead fan. And he was visiting from Pittsburgh. Don’t let the history fool you. The place, today, is awful.)
Moreover, I have no problem believing that a woman who built her career in psychology and settled down in Palo Alto, would spend years in therapy making mountains out of mole hills in an effort to justify the lifetime of grievance that she’s absolutely positive she bravely overcomes each and every day.
I’m sorry. But sometimes it’s just true: Liberal bitches be crazy. And the career psychology professional in Palo Alto has all the trappings of being the most deluded in every social, cultural and psychological way.
LEGAL PRECEDENT AROUND SEX AND ALCOHOL IS INCONSISTENT & SEXIST
Second and more legally substantive, if the allegations against Kavanaugh are to be believed — then he has a defense that, as of today, is used exclusively to lower the bar for women…
Per existing legal precedent, it’s entirely plausible that a woman can voluntarily drink so much alcohol that she’s no longer capable of consent. Much like banning racist speech or saying it’s okay to respond to speech with violence (i.e. “punch a Nazi”), it’s a nice sounding idea with terrifically regressive unintended consequences.
And one of those consequences, legally, is this: If Jane can drink so much alcohol that she’s no longer accountable for her at-the-time decision to consent, then John can drink so much alcohol that he’s no longer accountable for his inability to audit that consent.
Or, for example, John and Jane can both be absolved their decision to get in their car and drive. Because, based on the logical conclusion of the current legal precedent, simply and ultimately: They were too drunk to be responsible for what they did.
It’s the epitome of sexism. A woman can drink as much as she wants, but men must stay sober enough to judiciously determine when a woman is so drunk that her consent no longer counts as actual consent.
That’s insane. And ridiculous. And yes, in the “women only” context it’s currently used, sexist against women because it assumes their social inferiority.
(And it should go without saying, but won’t, so I’ll say it: Obviously taking advantage of someone who is drunk and doesn’t know what they’re doing is disgusting and merits felony-level prosecution. But it’s also wrong to teach young girls that they can drink all they want and use their intoxication as a defense if they regret their decisions while drunk. That lowers the bar. And, as noted, brings with it legal precedent that opens the floodgates to several related, unintended consequences. The better standard: Always be responsible for yourself and never look for excuses not to be. And as a society, certainly don’t eagerly hand those excuses out and pretend it’s a positive step forward!)
Again — I realize it’s social anathema to assert either of the above observations: That psychology professionals in Palo Alto are all insane, and that existing legal precedent dilutes the allegations, even if true, on the grounds that Kavanaugh himself may have been too drunk to be accountable for his own actions.
But while the first observation is offered up with tongue in cheek, the second is a legitimate legal conundrum that the courts will soon be forced to reckon with thanks to the wholly sexist standards being pushed by well-intended but wildly wrong liberals. (The same liberals who are desperately fighting tooth and nail to doom Kavanaugh’s ascent to the Supreme Court.)
And if not merely as a defense of Kavanaugh on both counts, I wanted to write about both of these observations because I firmly believe they both merit some legitimate consideration — and am yet to see them on paper anywhere.
And as noted at the onset, in a few generations it will be broadly accepted that both observations carry large degrees of truth and substance that we’re all worse off for ignoring now and will someday be better off for getting our arms around in the future.
UPDATE / DISCLAIMER
I shared this note with my distribution list while sending this piece out, and thought it should probably be included here as well…
To those of you who publish/share my stuff, totally understood if you take a pass on this one.
It’s pretty balls out in terms of f*cks not given with respect to a sexual assault allegation.
But I’ve lived in Palo Alto and they are all unhinged little freaks.
And I know many people in the psychology community who are unhinged little weirdos.
And the point about drinking and consent is a legitimately important one.
Put them all together, and you get me perhaps venting a bit more than writing.
I normally write more thoughtfully, and less from-the-hip than this. But what can I say? Like a lot of people in our nation, I’m a little out of patience for a lot of this bullsh*t.
Concrete Evidence That Google’s Anti-Trump Bias Is Coded Into Their Products
(“Related” because the anti-Trump psychosis in NorCal — e.g. Palo Alto — is basically an epidemic)
Make sure to check out WhatFinger News for all the best right-minded media content from around the web.