Damascene moment on supposed crazies?

At different times, I, like many of you, have been watching keenly and have unsubscribed from Woke rags such as the openly far left media, e.g. CNN, Guardian, BBC, NYT ... but there are also publications which those of 'the still sanely unreconstructed' are still going to as 'gospel truth', even though we're already way past that point.

Snopes has long been debunked by many sites, also Politico ... Buzz Feed was party to a scandal a few years back which saw it off most people's reading lists.  There was the Chik-fil-A business where the faithful patriots swung their fast food loyalties that way, only for the CEO to go Woke.  

Trouble was, vast numbers never got the message and so there was this fragmentation where half the faithful were still seeing C-f-A as good and the other half had done due diligence and had long dumped the chain.

This is the sad reality of what often turns out to be misplaced loyalties in rapidly changing circumstances.  A recent example was the seemingly innocuous Bored Panda, the travelogue and quirky item site which appears to be apolitical.  When I say no site is apolitical, that there ain't no such thing, those with flawed perceptions due solely to not having done due diligence jump onto that and guess who is the one attacked, rather than those outlets investigated, scrutinised?

And always, those persisting with this 'that's your opinion' bollox, only needed to do due diligence and view corroboration beyond the point of reasonable dispute, e.g. that there are health issues with vaxxes, also e.g. that Biden is not the kindly old Uncle Joe in the least, let alone that son.

False perceptions, vehemently held, from fragmented knowldege bases.  

But it's not just Wokeness at issue, not just misplaced perceptions ... it's also practices and procedures.  Example is when I unsubscribed from Bored Panda and Epoch Times, different sides of the political divide but both refusing to unsubscribe me unless I gave them a list of personal details.  

Then there's the 'would I like the 'security' of two factor authorisation?  Just give us your phone number and bank details.

You don't do anything so foolish of course, so they go quiet for some months, then try again from a different angle meant to make life 'easier'. 

And of course, it hardly makes one popular for calling out things like that. Those who do normally do due diligence have learnt to at least wait to see.  

Many of us have been saying be careful of McCarthy, Pence, Cameron, Clegg, either side of the pond, and have been looked at askance for calling it out.  Anyone can see a Blair or a May for what each is, a Pelosi or a Clinton ... but far harder it is to have picked up, say, Cameron in 2007, yet a look at his Chatham House, Tavistock, Demos, Internet of All Things, Media Matters connections paints a very different picture.

Historical question - why did Kim Philby get away with it for so long? Answer - because he was 'one of us', a regular chap, urbane, a lush, charming.  Well of course he was, wasn't he?

So, Bored Panda whom I've unsubscibed from, still sent me this morning's mailing about Rose McGowan, the American 'actress', with a most surprising journo headline about 'those we all thought were crazy turn out to be right after all'.

Immediate red flags for me, knowing that publication for its deep Wokery and yet, and yet ... here they were running the pic of her shaven head, a la Sinead O'Connor and so, silly me, I went in half hoping that there'd been some epiphany on the writer's part.

What there was was a feminist trope about how right Rose had been on Me Too.  

The complication is this ... and how can I put this?  Were it completely black and white, cut and dried, then fine ... she's crazy.  However cases such as Weinstein undermine this view of her craziness.  I, who have written such posts as Cry Rape, backed by footage and various cases, still must acknowledge she's right on some points and that's where the blurring of lines comes in.  

See, people don't adopt false positions because the catalyst was 100% wrong, they adopt them because the bait was supportable at that time, it really was a demonstrable injustice, thus they're onside with the victim ... therefore, all similar victims' cases are alike.  

But as we saw with that woman Ford on Kavanaugh, she was finally debunked, therefore Kavanaugh must have been guiltless, no?

Not according to accounts I've read, similar to Cliff Richard and Dolphin Square connections.  All that happened there was plod messed up at the critical moment.  Now why would plod suddenly go ultra-incompetent on that one case, just as the West Midlands had?  Enough of such things.

Back to Rose McGowan, have a look at this from Wiki:

In 2015, McGowan criticized [Bruce] Jenner for stating that "the hardest part about being a woman is figuring out what to wear", after Jenner had been named "Woman of the Year" by Glamour. 

McGowan stated, "We are more than deciding what to wear. We are more than the stereotypes foisted upon us by people like you. You're a woman now? Well fucking learn that we have had a VERY different experience than your life of male privilege."   

In response to accusations of transphobia, McGowan stated, "Let me take this moment to point out that I am not, nor will I ever be, transphobic. The idea is laughable. Disliking something a trans person has said is no different than disliking something a man has said or that a woman has said. Being trans doesn't make one immune from criticism."

I actually agree with her on working out what to wear, far more of an issue for her, as my own choices are more limited and easier to make.  My own gf in days of yore was almost traumatised by choice and if it was a bad hair day, she wasn't going out. Crazy?  Maybe in many ways but not on that point ... that is very real to a woman in the spotlight.

McGowan and rape claims?  Remember she was part of Children of God for sometime.  Question there of course was which god?  But it backgrounds her a bit.  

I'd like to think that men, basically of good will, might even sympathise with a lady, were it not for the countless cases of being taken to the cleaners ourselves by unscrupulous females and observing the monstrous regiment of harpies and their 'refugees welcome' signs, welcoming boat people who've recently been cheering on gays being thrown off roofs and women being lashed in public squares.

And so it goes on.  So ... had Bored Panda had an epiphany, a Damascene moment?  Not a bit of it, they were with McGowan that every rape and mistreatment accusation was valid, that the female, by definition, can do no wrong.

Which does not let the feckless gang rape culture boys off the hook, no way ... but let's just say the harpies do themselves no favours in pressing their cases.