Milo Yiannapoulos is Breitbart's superego lacuna for misogyny

Superego lacunae is a time-honored psychoanalytic construct wherein an otherwise conscientious and moralistic individual has lacunae, or holes, in the superego that enable circumscribed forms of bad behavior without guilt.

Milo Yiannopoulos is a brave man.  He is placing his life on the line for what he believes in.  Nonetheless, the lad is serving as Breitbart's superego lacuna.

The double standard of behavior for homosexual (hm) and heterosexual (ht) people is indisputable.  Hm people can use vulgar or bigoted language that ht cannot.  When Breitbart's über-darling "dangerous faggot" opens a talk to a college audience, he makes jovial remarks about hoping to fornicate with the swains in the audience – remarks that would simply not be tolerated from an ht man.  If Stephen K. Bannon opened a college talk by saying to a chick in the front row, "Hey, you're a hot piece of coed.  I'd love to hook up with you," he would be escorted out of the building, then fired, if not involuntarily committed.

Breitbart should not use an anti-feminist rage muffin as its war correspondent in the battle of the sexes.

Yiannopoulos's misogyny overflows in his 7/5/16 piece, "The solution to online 'harassment' is simple: women should just log off."  This article is not just "gays will be gays."  It conveys a liability of hm consciousness: the incapacity to imagine the need to respect, honor, welcome and protect the opposite "useless sex" as a group.

Milo opens with the amusing self-importance of famous, foolish youth:

Women are – and you won't hear this anywhere else – screwing up the internet for men by invading every space we have online and ruining it with attention-seeking and a needy, demanding, touchy-feely form of modern feminism that quickly comes into conflict with men's natural tendency to be boisterous, confrontational and delightfully autistic.

Yes, Milo, you are the very first homosexual man who has suggested it might be nicer if "we" didn't have to deal with all those superfluous females.  Milo faults the "horrendous bloody bitches" (his term) for making up what he calls "this 'bizarre online harassment' craze – or "cyberviolence as they sometimes bizarrely call it."  Milo has no basis for understanding women's psychology of vulnerability; it's all bizarre to him.  Of course, his prose is purposefully over the top, but even so, his fundamental dislike of women pervades it.  He writes:

Here's my suggestion to fix the gender wars online: Women should just log off. Given that men built the internet, along with the rest of modern civilisation, I think it's only fair that they get to keep it. And given what a miserable time women are having on the web, surely they would welcome an abrupt exit. They could go back to bridge tournaments, or wellness workshops, or swapping apple crumble recipes, or whatever it is women do in their spare time."

The useless sex never built anything?  Women didn't have a hand in creating the aggregate of culture and society termed civilization?  What happened to the notion that got President Reagan in hot water, that women are the civilizing sex?  Milo didn't get the yin/yang memo: men are barbarians, and women are civilizers.  The civilizing balm of woman has no purpose where there is faint ht life force.  Milo admits he really doesn't know what women are good for.

Milo's piece reads like Henry Higgins: "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"  Why can't women stop lying about abuse; why can't they be smart like men, technologically competent?

Milo observes that women are vicious to each other.  He concludes, "Society doesn't work when men and women are thrust together."  There is a faint bilious glow to the piece from the eyes of the green-eyed monster.  "Your vagina is not qualification for a job ... [women] should only post lots of selfies if you are as hot as me."

"I, Donald Trump and the rest of the alpha males will continue to dominate the internet without feminist whining."  Is Milo a dominant alpha male?  If domination is his calling, he needs to be careful about being the approved provider of salaciousness or misogyny for the right wing.

Mr. Yiannopoulos is a courageous person with a talent for mixing high ideals with the humorous vulgarity that young people enjoy.  But does Breitbart need to create a politically incorrect space – even one humorously perverse – just to insult women?

We are all standing on the tarmac in the last scene in Casablanca.  Evil is closing in.  It's too late for smallness, no matter how cleverly phrased.  It doesn't take much to see that reworking cliché resentments against women doesn't amount to a hill of beans compared to the need for all men and all women who love freedom to stand together. 

Superego lacunae is a time-honored psychoanalytic construct wherein an otherwise conscientious and moralistic individual has lacunae, or holes, in the superego that enable circumscribed forms of bad behavior without guilt.

Milo Yiannopoulos is a brave man.  He is placing his life on the line for what he believes in.  Nonetheless, the lad is serving as Breitbart's superego lacuna.

The double standard of behavior for homosexual (hm) and heterosexual (ht) people is indisputable.  Hm people can use vulgar or bigoted language that ht cannot.  When Breitbart's über-darling "dangerous faggot" opens a talk to a college audience, he makes jovial remarks about hoping to fornicate with the swains in the audience – remarks that would simply not be tolerated from an ht man.  If Stephen K. Bannon opened a college talk by saying to a chick in the front row, "Hey, you're a hot piece of coed.  I'd love to hook up with you," he would be escorted out of the building, then fired, if not involuntarily committed.

Breitbart should not use an anti-feminist rage muffin as its war correspondent in the battle of the sexes.

Yiannopoulos's misogyny overflows in his 7/5/16 piece, "The solution to online 'harassment' is simple: women should just log off."  This article is not just "gays will be gays."  It conveys a liability of hm consciousness: the incapacity to imagine the need to respect, honor, welcome and protect the opposite "useless sex" as a group.

Milo opens with the amusing self-importance of famous, foolish youth:

Women are – and you won't hear this anywhere else – screwing up the internet for men by invading every space we have online and ruining it with attention-seeking and a needy, demanding, touchy-feely form of modern feminism that quickly comes into conflict with men's natural tendency to be boisterous, confrontational and delightfully autistic.

Yes, Milo, you are the very first homosexual man who has suggested it might be nicer if "we" didn't have to deal with all those superfluous females.  Milo faults the "horrendous bloody bitches" (his term) for making up what he calls "this 'bizarre online harassment' craze – or "cyberviolence as they sometimes bizarrely call it."  Milo has no basis for understanding women's psychology of vulnerability; it's all bizarre to him.  Of course, his prose is purposefully over the top, but even so, his fundamental dislike of women pervades it.  He writes:

Here's my suggestion to fix the gender wars online: Women should just log off. Given that men built the internet, along with the rest of modern civilisation, I think it's only fair that they get to keep it. And given what a miserable time women are having on the web, surely they would welcome an abrupt exit. They could go back to bridge tournaments, or wellness workshops, or swapping apple crumble recipes, or whatever it is women do in their spare time."

The useless sex never built anything?  Women didn't have a hand in creating the aggregate of culture and society termed civilization?  What happened to the notion that got President Reagan in hot water, that women are the civilizing sex?  Milo didn't get the yin/yang memo: men are barbarians, and women are civilizers.  The civilizing balm of woman has no purpose where there is faint ht life force.  Milo admits he really doesn't know what women are good for.

Milo's piece reads like Henry Higgins: "Why can't a woman be more like a man?"  Why can't women stop lying about abuse; why can't they be smart like men, technologically competent?

Milo observes that women are vicious to each other.  He concludes, "Society doesn't work when men and women are thrust together."  There is a faint bilious glow to the piece from the eyes of the green-eyed monster.  "Your vagina is not qualification for a job ... [women] should only post lots of selfies if you are as hot as me."

"I, Donald Trump and the rest of the alpha males will continue to dominate the internet without feminist whining."  Is Milo a dominant alpha male?  If domination is his calling, he needs to be careful about being the approved provider of salaciousness or misogyny for the right wing.

Mr. Yiannopoulos is a courageous person with a talent for mixing high ideals with the humorous vulgarity that young people enjoy.  But does Breitbart need to create a politically incorrect space – even one humorously perverse – just to insult women?

We are all standing on the tarmac in the last scene in Casablanca.  Evil is closing in.  It's too late for smallness, no matter how cleverly phrased.  It doesn't take much to see that reworking cliché resentments against women doesn't amount to a hill of beans compared to the need for all men and all women who love freedom to stand together.