i did vote for barack obama, partly because he's black. i wanted that emblem of my own and my nation's transcendence of racism. it's been a slow, disillusioning process to realize that barack obama is #stillnotblackenough. he's always compromising with white people. it's as though we elected colin powell or michael jackson! i mean what if you elected a woman and after awhile it wasn't at all clear that she was woman enough to run the country. maybe she didn't shave her armpits or something, and then you'd be left wondering whether you really elected a woman at all. you'd be all like: where can i find me a paradigmatic woman to president me? who will replace my high school principal in my consciousness? but really, i'm not sure anyone is black enough to be president. you need to be able to absorb 100% of the light. and mitt romey isn't gay enough; well, maybe just enough.
look i think it is a worthy goal to write something that the pc police will find offensive without quite being able to say why. just throwing around race and gender words in this careless happy reactionary way would no doubt be enough. but maybe i am being sarcastic or ironic or incomprehensible? or maybe i'm just a bully. anyway, i think you need to work out carefully why it is offensive before you report it to the authorities. no doubt you want to ban loretta lynn too. actually i think the best part about all these social distinctions is that they give you little baubles to play with. the solemnity with which the pc police treats them is part of what gives these categories a sorta-supernatural power; they are hedged around with wacky taboos, like the true names of secret gods, in academia more than anywhere else. indeed, academia is the center of sheer voodoo and superstition in contemporary culture: the idea that just saying words can beam destruction at people. talk about these matters more the way you do at home, unless you police yourself the same way there. loosen up!
though kansas is not, academia is what thomas frank says kansas is. people believe what they believe because of social pressures, like the community surrounding an evangelical church. they have precisely the same degree of unity, precisely the same degree of irrationality, precisely the same degree of certainty, precisely the same degree of intolerance of difference. both institutions drive all data into an interpretive machine that none of the participants created; when they are done, all data mean the same or take same form. but unlike academia, the evangelical church will encourage some degree also of humility. lord knows what the people embedded in the institution believe deep inside, if anything, but they all say the same words in the same order. this is the effect of the constant pc move: it enforces a gap between what you think and what you say, like some archaic, rigid ritual the meaning of which is lost to time. give them control of the legislature or enough guns (these are equivalent), and they will force everyone to mumble along as though what they were saying meant something.
look i think it is a worthy goal to write something that the pc police will find offensive without quite being able to say why. just throwing around race and gender words in this careless happy reactionary way would no doubt be enough. but maybe i am being sarcastic or ironic or incomprehensible? or maybe i'm just a bully. anyway, i think you need to work out carefully why it is offensive before you report it to the authorities. no doubt you want to ban loretta lynn too. actually i think the best part about all these social distinctions is that they give you little baubles to play with. the solemnity with which the pc police treats them is part of what gives these categories a sorta-supernatural power; they are hedged around with wacky taboos, like the true names of secret gods, in academia more than anywhere else. indeed, academia is the center of sheer voodoo and superstition in contemporary culture: the idea that just saying words can beam destruction at people. talk about these matters more the way you do at home, unless you police yourself the same way there. loosen up!
though kansas is not, academia is what thomas frank says kansas is. people believe what they believe because of social pressures, like the community surrounding an evangelical church. they have precisely the same degree of unity, precisely the same degree of irrationality, precisely the same degree of certainty, precisely the same degree of intolerance of difference. both institutions drive all data into an interpretive machine that none of the participants created; when they are done, all data mean the same or take same form. but unlike academia, the evangelical church will encourage some degree also of humility. lord knows what the people embedded in the institution believe deep inside, if anything, but they all say the same words in the same order. this is the effect of the constant pc move: it enforces a gap between what you think and what you say, like some archaic, rigid ritual the meaning of which is lost to time. give them control of the legislature or enough guns (these are equivalent), and they will force everyone to mumble along as though what they were saying meant something.
