New York to launch taxpayer-funded 'shame campaign' against guys who sit wrong

Tell a woman to keep her legs closed, and you get a Slut Walk marching through your town.  Tell a man to keep his legs closed, and you're now a feminist hero in New York.

Yesterday, TIME Magazine published an article bemoaning some men's tendency to sit in subway cars with their legs spread out.  "It's like they have an imaginary sumo wrestlers sitting on the floor in front of them," Brian Moylan complains.  "The problem with leg spreaders is that they are breaking the social contract that we need to abide by to survive in New York City."

When a liberal brings up "the social contract," reach for your wallet.  In this particular iteration, residents of New York get to pay their government to "Target Seat-Hogging Jerks With New PSAs."

"[S]pace-hogging," says Margaret Elby at Brooklyn Magazine, "is one of those invisible trappings of privilege."  On Twitter, feminist Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti (of free tampons fame) can't wait for the "shaming campaign" to begin.

So calling out a style of dress that makes you uncomfortable unacceptably denigrates a woman's "presentation," but government programs to "shame" men who sit a certain way are A-OK.  Slut-shaming: bad.  Sit-shaming: good.

This is an example of how feminists and other liberals conspire to make even the most harmless human interactions mind-bogglingly state-managed.  "Affirmative consent" laws make it impossible for men and women to so much as touch each other without the looming threat of a witch huntCosmopolitan peddles loneliness, emptiness, and suspicion so hard that its columnists are exhorting their readers to pay men to be friends with them.  And now, the same women who wouldn't be caught dead sitting next to these men, regardless of their stance, are cheering for the government to step in where a simple "excuse me" would suffice.

Keep in mind that no one is complaining about the "gendering" of this campaign.  New York's MTA is perfectly comfortable targeting men exclusively for a behavior possible from members of both genders.  Men and women are exactly the same, in other words, except when feminists need them not to be in order to fuel the outrage train.

Sit-shaming.  Another stellar example of feminist priorities.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker's deputy editor.  Contact him at drew@americanthinker.com, and follow him on Twitter @DJB627.

Tell a woman to keep her legs closed, and you get a Slut Walk marching through your town.  Tell a man to keep his legs closed, and you're now a feminist hero in New York.

Yesterday, TIME Magazine published an article bemoaning some men's tendency to sit in subway cars with their legs spread out.  "It's like they have an imaginary sumo wrestlers sitting on the floor in front of them," Brian Moylan complains.  "The problem with leg spreaders is that they are breaking the social contract that we need to abide by to survive in New York City."

When a liberal brings up "the social contract," reach for your wallet.  In this particular iteration, residents of New York get to pay their government to "Target Seat-Hogging Jerks With New PSAs."

"[S]pace-hogging," says Margaret Elby at Brooklyn Magazine, "is one of those invisible trappings of privilege."  On Twitter, feminist Guardian columnist Jessica Valenti (of free tampons fame) can't wait for the "shaming campaign" to begin.

So calling out a style of dress that makes you uncomfortable unacceptably denigrates a woman's "presentation," but government programs to "shame" men who sit a certain way are A-OK.  Slut-shaming: bad.  Sit-shaming: good.

This is an example of how feminists and other liberals conspire to make even the most harmless human interactions mind-bogglingly state-managed.  "Affirmative consent" laws make it impossible for men and women to so much as touch each other without the looming threat of a witch huntCosmopolitan peddles loneliness, emptiness, and suspicion so hard that its columnists are exhorting their readers to pay men to be friends with them.  And now, the same women who wouldn't be caught dead sitting next to these men, regardless of their stance, are cheering for the government to step in where a simple "excuse me" would suffice.

Keep in mind that no one is complaining about the "gendering" of this campaign.  New York's MTA is perfectly comfortable targeting men exclusively for a behavior possible from members of both genders.  Men and women are exactly the same, in other words, except when feminists need them not to be in order to fuel the outrage train.

Sit-shaming.  Another stellar example of feminist priorities.

Drew Belsky is American Thinker's deputy editor.  Contact him at drew@americanthinker.com, and follow him on Twitter @DJB627.