White Women's March Madness

In the epic film Titanic, actress Kathy Bates plays the role of Margaret Molly Brown. Of Irish descent, Molly is depicted as a straight-shooting, no-nonsense, wealthy Texan with a penchant for social climbing. However, the smug, condescending aura, exuded by the elites, never washes over her. After escaping the sinking Titanic in a one-third empty lifeboat, surrounded mostly by married women and a few male staff, Molly is appalled by her fellow survivors’ callousness. Molly wants to rescue nearby male passengers, fighting for their lives in the frigid sea. Her lifeboat is less than 200 feet from the men screaming for help. The crew refuse, stating that the suction of the sinking ship will drag them under; rather than rowing towards the men, they must get away as quickly as possible. Undeterred, Molly persists:

I don’t understand a one of you. What’s the matter with you? It’s your men back there! We got plenty a’ room for more.

In response, Molly is told that if she says another word, there will be one less occupant in the boat. None of the other passengers come to Molly’s defense. And so they leave; their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers knowingly betrayed and abandoned to await their cruel death.

The pejorative term “white privilege” has been hurled to date almost entirely against white males. This relatively new addition to America’s litany of purported sins is emerging as a core part of the left’s pantheon of victimization. Non-whites are now victims because Western European and American culture have extant societal structures conferring special privileges to white-skinned people. Especially, white-skinned male people. The only way to remedy this imbalance is to vilify white males and degrade their accomplishments. Concomitantly, income redistribution is justified and criminal behavior recharacterized and excused. J.R. Dunn summed it up aptly:

White privilege is a tactic rather than an idea, and to ask for a specific definition is to ask for something that has never been and can never be… But it does feature one basic element, not easily denied or set aside… That is the contention that benefits – social, economic, academic, and historical – are automatically conferred to an individual simply as a matter of being white.

While elements of this theory may have been true for small segments of the white population in the 1930s, when W.E.B. Du Bois first studied his theory of a global white supremacy, and during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, it is not true today. Yet these tropes have persisted and institutionalized unfettered from the petri dish of academia. The virus permeated mainstream society and exploded onto social media. The deleterious effects are far-reaching, and heretofore unchecked. Only with the 2016 presidential election have white men successfully pushed back.

All the while, instead of sticking up for their white male relatives, as Margaret Molly Brown attempted, many white women joined the assault. Motivated by decades of real and perceived oppression, feminists battled for education, jobs, government grants, and “breaking the glass ceiling” of executive positions and seats on corporate boards. In their zeal for winning at gender identity politics, they ignored the plight of their white male counterparts. The outcome is toxic.

In many of our universities and colleges, white young male students are mandated to endure white male privilege classes. They are being vilified for something they have not done. Hypocritically and paradoxically, they are being punished for the color of their skin. The classes begin with the students being told they must “leave their white privilege at the door.” Then, they must repent, acknowledge their unjust privilege and promise reformation for their white badness. Clearly this is the classic definition of racism, falling under the rubric of a hate crime. This curriculum is also humiliating and abusive. Why would any woman want a brother, son, grandson, or nephew to endure treatment which would be criminal if targeted at a non-white group? Where are the outraged moms? Where are the outraged parents paying up to one quarter of a million dollars for an educational system that assails their male child’s self-esteem?

This unchecked raw prejudice has permeated administrative response to on-campus social interactions as well. Repeatedly, we have seen that when a non-white female accuses a white male or group of white men of sexual improprieties, the guillotine of social injustice is instantly dropped. The males are deemed guilty, ostracized, and often stripped of privileges, before any investigation has been implemented.

Older white men are judged generically and unfairly, embodying Clinton’s basket of deplorable traits: racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and misogynistic. Why aren’t white women saying no? No! My dad and grandfathers and uncles do not possess these awful traits.

On January 21, 2017, one day after the upcoming inauguration of president-elect Trump, one million women plan to converge on Washington, D.C. Planned Parenthood is a co-sponsor. Originally slated as a protest of Trump’s election, the message has morphed into a warning to America. The protest is a mélange of fake fear, faux accusations, and self-entitled delusional self-importance. The organizers claim the march is a “show of solidarity”, at a time when America is marginalizing people of color, the LGBTQ community, rape victims, and abortion procedures. Not only are these claims preposterous, the participants’ angry presence may harm the grateful multitudes in D.C. for celebration.

In an ironic twist, the white feminist protest participants, who have historically done nothing to counter the unfair assault on white men, now find themselves under attack for their perceived white female privilege. White women conceived the protest. Other participants chafed and pushed for diverse leadership. Diverse leadership was achieved. But, many black participants advocated for a black woman only march. One African-American blogger wrote that white women should: “shut up and listen more.” Others chimed in stating that white women should acknowledge their white privilege and leave it at the door. Consequently, some white women have resigned from the march.

One can only hope that with president-elect Trump’s antipathy to political correctness, this madness will end. Diversity is the enemy of assimilation.

In the epic film Titanic, actress Kathy Bates plays the role of Margaret Molly Brown. Of Irish descent, Molly is depicted as a straight-shooting, no-nonsense, wealthy Texan with a penchant for social climbing. However, the smug, condescending aura, exuded by the elites, never washes over her. After escaping the sinking Titanic in a one-third empty lifeboat, surrounded mostly by married women and a few male staff, Molly is appalled by her fellow survivors’ callousness. Molly wants to rescue nearby male passengers, fighting for their lives in the frigid sea. Her lifeboat is less than 200 feet from the men screaming for help. The crew refuse, stating that the suction of the sinking ship will drag them under; rather than rowing towards the men, they must get away as quickly as possible. Undeterred, Molly persists:

I don’t understand a one of you. What’s the matter with you? It’s your men back there! We got plenty a’ room for more.

In response, Molly is told that if she says another word, there will be one less occupant in the boat. None of the other passengers come to Molly’s defense. And so they leave; their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers knowingly betrayed and abandoned to await their cruel death.

The pejorative term “white privilege” has been hurled to date almost entirely against white males. This relatively new addition to America’s litany of purported sins is emerging as a core part of the left’s pantheon of victimization. Non-whites are now victims because Western European and American culture have extant societal structures conferring special privileges to white-skinned people. Especially, white-skinned male people. The only way to remedy this imbalance is to vilify white males and degrade their accomplishments. Concomitantly, income redistribution is justified and criminal behavior recharacterized and excused. J.R. Dunn summed it up aptly:

White privilege is a tactic rather than an idea, and to ask for a specific definition is to ask for something that has never been and can never be… But it does feature one basic element, not easily denied or set aside… That is the contention that benefits – social, economic, academic, and historical – are automatically conferred to an individual simply as a matter of being white.

While elements of this theory may have been true for small segments of the white population in the 1930s, when W.E.B. Du Bois first studied his theory of a global white supremacy, and during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, it is not true today. Yet these tropes have persisted and institutionalized unfettered from the petri dish of academia. The virus permeated mainstream society and exploded onto social media. The deleterious effects are far-reaching, and heretofore unchecked. Only with the 2016 presidential election have white men successfully pushed back.

All the while, instead of sticking up for their white male relatives, as Margaret Molly Brown attempted, many white women joined the assault. Motivated by decades of real and perceived oppression, feminists battled for education, jobs, government grants, and “breaking the glass ceiling” of executive positions and seats on corporate boards. In their zeal for winning at gender identity politics, they ignored the plight of their white male counterparts. The outcome is toxic.

In many of our universities and colleges, white young male students are mandated to endure white male privilege classes. They are being vilified for something they have not done. Hypocritically and paradoxically, they are being punished for the color of their skin. The classes begin with the students being told they must “leave their white privilege at the door.” Then, they must repent, acknowledge their unjust privilege and promise reformation for their white badness. Clearly this is the classic definition of racism, falling under the rubric of a hate crime. This curriculum is also humiliating and abusive. Why would any woman want a brother, son, grandson, or nephew to endure treatment which would be criminal if targeted at a non-white group? Where are the outraged moms? Where are the outraged parents paying up to one quarter of a million dollars for an educational system that assails their male child’s self-esteem?

This unchecked raw prejudice has permeated administrative response to on-campus social interactions as well. Repeatedly, we have seen that when a non-white female accuses a white male or group of white men of sexual improprieties, the guillotine of social injustice is instantly dropped. The males are deemed guilty, ostracized, and often stripped of privileges, before any investigation has been implemented.

Older white men are judged generically and unfairly, embodying Clinton’s basket of deplorable traits: racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and misogynistic. Why aren’t white women saying no? No! My dad and grandfathers and uncles do not possess these awful traits.

On January 21, 2017, one day after the upcoming inauguration of president-elect Trump, one million women plan to converge on Washington, D.C. Planned Parenthood is a co-sponsor. Originally slated as a protest of Trump’s election, the message has morphed into a warning to America. The protest is a mélange of fake fear, faux accusations, and self-entitled delusional self-importance. The organizers claim the march is a “show of solidarity”, at a time when America is marginalizing people of color, the LGBTQ community, rape victims, and abortion procedures. Not only are these claims preposterous, the participants’ angry presence may harm the grateful multitudes in D.C. for celebration.

In an ironic twist, the white feminist protest participants, who have historically done nothing to counter the unfair assault on white men, now find themselves under attack for their perceived white female privilege. White women conceived the protest. Other participants chafed and pushed for diverse leadership. Diverse leadership was achieved. But, many black participants advocated for a black woman only march. One African-American blogger wrote that white women should: “shut up and listen more.” Others chimed in stating that white women should acknowledge their white privilege and leave it at the door. Consequently, some white women have resigned from the march.

One can only hope that with president-elect Trump’s antipathy to political correctness, this madness will end. Diversity is the enemy of assimilation.