Luke Ford

From the Chateau:

Reader Mister Bicks digs up a very old tune (originally written in 1917!) with a message that’s more honest than you’ll hear from any singer today.

Thinking about your assertion that looks aren’t as important as charisma (for lack of a better word at the moment), I think of a great song The Andrews Sisters called “Oh Johnny” (written in 1917). Please read the lyrics, noting especially that in the song, even though Johnny is NOT handsome, the girl wonders why she is so infatuated with him. Well, it’s because he’s “very very bad” and he knows about love.

People back then knew well what we try to avoid today.

***

Oh, Johnny! Oh, Johnny!
How you can love
Oh, Johnny! Oh, Johnny!
Heavens above
You make my sad heart jump with joy
And when you’re near I just can’t sit still a minute
I’m so, Oh, Johnny! Oh, Johnny!
Please tell me dear
What makes me love you so?
You’re not handsome, it’s true
But when I look at you
I just, Oh, Johnny!
Oh, Johnny! Oh!
Da-da-da

All the girls are crazy for a certain little lad
Although he’s very very bad
He could be oh so good if he wanted to
Bad or good he understood about love & other things
For every girl in town followed him around
Just to hold his hand & sing

Americans, and women in particular, from a century ago were a lot more aware of, or at least a lot less antagonistic towards, ugly truths about the sexes and romance. It seems as if there was this pre-post-America age when Realtalk™ wasn’t a rebellious act of defiance but a normal, gentle undercurrent governing the flow of human society.

The explanation for this is multivariate, but I’ll stick to one that I believe is a major contributing factor that doesn’t involve an endless stream of propaganda by the gynocratic hivemind: American women were more “red pill” a long time ago because their contemporaneous American men were less beta. When men are alpha and in control of their nation’s public spaces and curators of their nation’s heritage, they’re giving women more of what women want (whether they’re consciously aware of it or not). Women in that kind of sexual market have daily reminders of how admirable and yes even sexy men can be, as opposed to Thee Current Year when American women are getting daily reminders of how contemptible, effeminate and anhedonic their men have become.

Women (and men) have forgotten about sex differences partly because the sexes have shed their dimorphic sexuality to conform to a unisex amorphous androgynous blob of mood-killing homoplasm. Women are now the aggressors and men the deferential lapdogs. Our cultural messages reflect this sorry sexual devolution and, not coincidentally, our native stock birthrate plummets as we import less progressive barbarians to fill the womb void.

All the comments in my Twitter feed praised him.

I guess it all comes down to the question of whose side are you on.

Donald Trump Jr and Sr are on the side of non-Muslims. The MSM are on the side of the Coalition of the Fringe, which includes Muslims.

This article is one-sided, only quoting critics of Jr’s tweet (with the exception of Mike Pence).

New York Times:

Donald Trump Jr. is facing intense backlash on social media after he posted a message on Twitter Monday night that compared Syrian refugees to a bowl of Skittles sprinkled with a few that “would kill you.”

Mr. Trump, a top adviser in his father’s presidential campaign, appeared to suggest that the nation was faced with a blind selection process in which a few potentially poisoned pieces would be lurking among the thousands of Syrians fleeing a brutal five-year-old civil war.

The post, shared widely on Twitter, drew swift condemnation and comparisons to white supremacist memes. Social media users shared images of bombing victims in the region, including Omran Daqneesh, the bloodstained, dust-coated boy who was shown sitting in an ambulance after an airstrike and who became a symbol of the suffering in Aleppo, Syria.

This image says it all. Let's end the politically correct agenda that doesn't put America first. #trump2016 pic.twitter.com/9fHwog7ssN

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 19, 2016

Liberals love the first amendment until you say something they don't agree with.

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) March 12, 2016

Clinton gave State Department appointments to 194 donors https://t.co/x01VghfIHz via @DCExaminer

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 20, 2016

Ahhhh hindsight, always 20/20. Imagine what we could do if we just used some common sense before rushing into major decisions. https://t.co/HbiY1lnhGn

— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) September 20, 2016

Dennis Prager writes: The most famous American photo of World War II is undoubtedly that of the four Marines planting the American flag on Iwo Jima. The second most famous is probably the legendary photographer Alfred Eisenstaedt’s picture of an American sailor kissing a nurse in Times Square in New York City, when people were celebrating Japan’s surrender.
The kiss was not, of course, merely a peck on the cheek. If it were, no photo would have been taken. And if one were, no one would have remembered it. The sailor clearly grabbed the nurse. She is leaning backward, bent at the waist; he is holding her up with both hands around her waist.
The photo has been back in the news because the woman, identified as Greta Zimmer Friedman, died on Sept. 8, at age 92. She was 21 when the picture was taken.
The sailor, later identified as George Mendonsa, mistook Friedman’s dental assistant uniform for that of a nurse. He later explained that he hugged and kissed her because of his overwhelming gratitude for the work nurses had performed while he was in combat in the Navy, because of his elation over the war ending and because he had had a few drinks. As he put it, when he and Friedman were reunited in 2012 at the spot of their kiss, it was “the excitement of the war bein’ over, plus I had a few drinks, so when I saw the nurse I grabbed her, and I kissed her.”
Any American who looks at that photo today realizes just how different a time we live in.
If a man were to do that to a woman today, he would likely be charged with sexual assault, found guilty, be ordered to pay a serious sum of money to the woman, be sent to prison, be civilly sued and be labeled a sex offender — effectively ruining much of his life.
She, on the other hand, would be regarded as victim of sexual assault and labelled a survivor, and would seek psychological counseling.
Living in pre-feminist darkness, Friedman did not see it this way. As her son told the New York Daily News, “My mom always had an appreciation for a feminist viewpoint, and understood the premise that you don’t have a right to be intimate with a stranger on the street. …(But) she didn’t assign any bad motives to George in that circumstance, that situation, that time.”
One reason might be that she was a Jewish refugee from Hitler’s Europe, and, unlike feminists in America, she knew real evil.
Given the context, the act was essentially innocent. Reinforcing its innocence are the facts that the kiss was very brief and Mendonsa’s wife can be seen smiling in the background.
But in the feminist age of enlightenment in which we live, when it comes to any act of physical intimacy by a man with a woman, there is no such thing as “context.” Unless there is a verbal “yes” accompanying every act by the man, the presumption is that the intimacy was a sexual assault, a form of rape.
Thus, in today’s America, George Mendonsa is deemed to have committed an act of sexual assault. Context has no say.
On the Sarasota, Florida, waterfront there is a 28-foot statue of Mendonsa kissing Friedman. It clearly offends at least one Sarasota Herald-Tribune columnist. A few days after Friedman’s death, Chris Anderson acknowledged that the statue “represents euphoria, innocence, romance, nostalgia and a level of unity and pride this country arguably has not seen since V-J Day.” But as a someone who surely attended college and probably graduate school, he sees the darker side, saying, “Is it possible that thousands upon thousands of people over the last seven years have come to the Sarasota waterfront to unwittingly pose in front of a giant depiction of a sexual assault?”
Likewise, the writer of the New York Times obituary of Friedman felt compelled to note that “In recent years, some have noted its darker undertones.” Among the examples cited was Time Magazine, which in 2014 had written, “many people view the photo as little more than the documentation of a very public sexual assault, and not something to be celebrated.”