Now, it's worth noting here that Trump has a badly misshapen sense of what being "masculine" actually is.
Why would that be worth noting even if it’s true? The person who was asked, who gave their opinion (“I think”), was not Trump.
He thinks being a man means being "tough." As I wrote back in June 2020:
"His idea of strength and toughness is deeply distorted, twisted and gnarled over many decades of grievance and bravado. See, for Trump, being strong and being tough is tied directly to winning, to dominating, to using overwhelming force to get a desired result.
This might be the one of the things that angers me the most about leftists: they’re all mind readers, and they’re the final authority about what you mean. (Or at least, they act like it.)
We’ve seen this all the time in GamerGate. We clearly say what we mean, and game journos among others claim we mean some fake bullshit they want us to have said.
But really, saying even that about this article is more attention than it deserves.
This might be the one of the things that angers me the most about leftists: they’re all mind readers, and they’re the final authority about what you mean.
I think it’s another aspect that’s reinforced in the college experience. Certainly in writing and English classes. If you can cite “sources” that agree with you, they’ll just rubber stamp it with a passing grade, and move on to the next one. Even if they think it’s trash. In other words, there’s no objective truth, just what you think, and if you can find a handful of people that agree.
The funny thing is, it’s not even necessarily an overt attempt at social engineering, just laziness, and the overall assembly line reality of your average liberal arts college. Get the students through, and collect their money.
We clearly say what we mean, and game journos among others claim we mean some fake bullshit they want us to have said.
They do not do this because they think there's a hidden meaning in what was said. They do this because they cannot have other people hearing what was said. They are not delusional they are protecting their bottom line.
Why would that be worth noting even if it’s true? The person who was asked, who gave their opinion (“I think”), was not Trump.
This might be the one of the things that angers me the most about leftists: they’re all mind readers, and they’re the final authority about what you mean. (Or at least, they act like it.)
We’ve seen this all the time in GamerGate. We clearly say what we mean, and game journos among others claim we mean some fake bullshit they want us to have said.
But really, saying even that about this article is more attention than it deserves.
I think it’s another aspect that’s reinforced in the college experience. Certainly in writing and English classes. If you can cite “sources” that agree with you, they’ll just rubber stamp it with a passing grade, and move on to the next one. Even if they think it’s trash. In other words, there’s no objective truth, just what you think, and if you can find a handful of people that agree.
The funny thing is, it’s not even necessarily an overt attempt at social engineering, just laziness, and the overall assembly line reality of your average liberal arts college. Get the students through, and collect their money.
They do not do this because they think there's a hidden meaning in what was said. They do this because they cannot have other people hearing what was said. They are not delusional they are protecting their bottom line.