Several Reasons Why We “Resist” Political Correctness

Many on the Left are still puzzled as to why conservatives like myself and many others are so resistant to their new PC “innovations”. After all to them, being politically correct is simply common courtesy, or not being offensive or disrespectful. Why would people not care if they hurt others’ feelings or are callous and indifferent to people’s struggles? Are conservatives just a bunch of big bullies? Of course that that isn’t true, and countless conservatives are just as kind and considerate as the rest of humanity! So why then, aren’t we just going along with every declaration the Left throws at us in terms of what’s socially acceptable?

Among several answers that come to mind, a major explanation is an inherent criticism into political correctness in itself as a “moral” thing to do. Political correctness asks us to be considerate of other’s feelings, and be conscientious of how our words and actions affect others. However, this lofty moral aim only applies to select groups which the Left chooses, and not everyone. Is it really just me, or does anyone else with some observational skills notice how it’s a-okay to mock, belittle, demonize and deride men, white people, and old people, especially if all three are combined into being an old white male in ways completely unacceptable to do so if the genders and races were reversed? Why is it acceptable to say there are too many white people or too many men, yet not for minorities or women? Why does no one bat an eye when people openly declare they feel threatened by white people yet a white person saying such a thing about a racial minority is a racist bigot? Why are men told to shut up about issues affecting women yet women face no such restrictions on issues pertaining to men? This hypocritical double standard of reverse discrimination chips away at any moral high ground political correctness presents itself as and many see it as dishonest and lacking integrity. 

Another reason also relates to practicality and safety. Many politically correct edicts are simply dangerous, to put it bluntly. The idea that cis-gendered male predators who will prey on women won’t take advantage of now transgender laws allowing trans women in bathrooms or locker rooms for women won’t happen is absurd. I’m not saying that genuine trans women committed to living as women are the threat, but regular men can pretend to identify as a woman merely to gain access to women and no one is allowed to question their true motives. Not acknowledging the risks to women and children in these spaces puts countless people at risk for being leered at and harassed, not to mention sexual predation and molestation! Another major example is how we treat rape prevention advice to women.

Any attempt at safety tips for women is construed as victim blaming, despite the fact the same tips generalized for other non-sexual crimes is something no one equates with victim blaming nor bats an eye about. The idea we can teach young women to brazenly and carelessly get completely wasted, walk alone in sketchy areas, wear revealing clothing and not be sending the wrong message if they don’t want sexual attention and live in the world as it should be rather than as it really is, no matter how unfair or unjust puts them at immense risk for victimization. Of course we shouldn’t live in a world of predatory men hurting women any chance they get, nor does a woman ever “deserve” to be assaulted, but the reality of the situation is there will always be rapists no matter how much “education” you give the male population, just as we teach our kids not to steal, and yet there are still thieves. “Just don’t rape” isn’t the one all encompassing answer to preventing women from becoming victims, and the idea that it’s now socially unacceptable to acknowlege that truth is a direct assault on women’s safety.

An additional reason relates to matters of identity and culture. I’ve heard it argued before by the Left that if something is fairly inconsequential to you, that is you personally have nothing to lose in changing something you do or say, and it matters a great deal more to someone else if you do, then why not just do it? For example, if changing a term you use is of no tangible consequence to you, but means the world to someone else for you to change, why not just do it rather than make a mountain out of a molehill? On it’s face that sounded fairly reasonable. It seems like, okay? Why not? Got to pick your battles sometimes…

The issue in this type of politically correct issue is based in more abstract ideas, so I’ll give a concrete example of a case. One such case was over the renaming of a place in Arizona called “Squaw Peak” to another name because some consider “squaw” to be offensive, thus politically incorrect. There was major push back against this however by the locals of the area, a they have always known it by its original name. Other similar examples involving re-naming include changing namesakes for colleges, buildings, streets etc… from historical figures now deemed “un-PC” for their historical views. Or going beyond places, what about those sports teams the Left decided needed a re-do? On its face, these name changes seem inconsequential. Admit it: What tangible harm will that do to you personally? Unlike many of the safety issues or moral hypocrisy targeting you personally, changing the name of something unrelated to your direct life is not the same as targeting you. Having the sign read “Piestewa Peak” instead of “Squaw Peak” is not the end of life as you know it. Thing is, maybe there are some more significant implications…

It’s really not so much that isolated incident in of itself, is it? It’s really about a much bigger idea: Changing the name changes some of the essence of that place, what its significance is, and part of that community’s identity. Places are meaningful. Imagine the name of your town were changed. Or this entire country for example! Does it matter to you if we change the name of your favorite spots, or places that signify a part of your community’s identity? What about your favorite sports team? Would you root for it under another name? Even if you did, would it feel exactly the same? If you’re honest with yourself, probably not. Changing the name of something significant to your life or your community changes the essence, the identity of that place or thing figuratively as well as literally, which in essence, changes the culture. Even speech is a huge example. The way we talk is a direct reflection of our culture, and in that light, changing one term to another speaks volumes. For many, a seemingly insignificant change implicitly sends the message, you need to change who you are as our culture is superior to yours… 

The last but certainly not the last example I want to bring up as to why conservatives are very critical and resist political correctness is obvious, but not as thought of: We’re simply tired of never being able to please you no matter what we do. Yep. Even if an issue truly is inconsequential in the truest sense of the word for us, maybe we’re just tired of being in a society constantly telling us everything we do is offending someone, and no matter what we may do to fix it, there’s always the next thing, and the next, and the next etc… We address one issue, it’s onto the next, or even if we come up with some solution, it in itself is considered offensive! For instance, people of color complain white people don’t give them a voice on racial matters. Then when white people ask them about a racial issue they are often met with the angry retort “I’m not the spokesperson for all people of color! I’m tired of everyone asking me this stuff…” But, wait a second! Isn’t the reason a white person asked you about your perspective on the issue because you’re a person of color, thus better suited to give an answer on racial issues as opposed to the white person just assuming what you might think??? In essence, you’re given a voice on an issue relating to your race, then get offended because someone asked you because of your race… This just highlights the catch 22 of the Left’s edicts, as well as that many are just plain ridiculous! Banning saying “holding down the fort” because it might be vaguely offensive to Indians is absurd, when there’s no definitive evidence it’s referring to Native Americans for just one example. You know, maybe if it were like one to two major issues that were declared solved and case closed once something was done, many conservatives would have been more willing to oblige the PC ideas. It’s when it’s complaint after complaint after complaint our ears get numb to it and our patience drains away completely.

Overall, an environment where breathing is probably offensive in some way, not being un-PC is an impossible challenge to anyone who has common sense, reason, and a sense of fairness! What’s not to “resist” about it? To leave you with one final thought: Is political correctness really about doing what the Left sincerely thinks is the right thing to do, or is it just yet another tool to push their agendas? 

Image result for political correctness conservative cartoon"

The Left’s Annual Thanksgiving Guilt Trip: A Guest Post by Time Foolery

Every year for awhile now, instead of thoughts of delicious food and giving thanks for our blessings, Thanksgiving brings up the usual standard SJW arguments about the persecution of First Nations tribes and before you know it, your happy annual dinner has devolved into a verbal fight, and worse, possibly a food fight!

It’s understandable for those who aren’t fully educated in the history of Thanksgiving to completely misunderstand the holiday and what it commemorates. They’ve been taught that the landing of the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock was the beginning of 400 years of native oppression. But with a bit of education about the holiday and what it actually stands for, it suddenly becomes clear what they’re sorely missing.

I have the good fortune of being a direct descendant of Governor William Bradford, the first Guest of Honor at the first Thanksgiving, so the history of the Pilgrims is also my family history. My 11th great grandfather was the man who led the Pilgrims from England in search of a land where they would be free to practice their Puritan religion, which was frowned upon in England. Plus, they sought a place where they could live free of the decadent influences of their homeland. After trying out life in Amsterdam first, a lack of money led to the Pilgrims taking an offer of free transport and funding if they’d come to the New World and begin taming the wild land that would become the United States of America.

Unused to roughing it and trying to scrabble a living from virgin land, and supply missions from England being subject to delays, they found a friend in the Wampanoag Indians, who taught them what crops they could grow in the New England soil and helped them to hunt for food. In recognition of the great cooperation that had begun between the two cultures, they held a great feast of Thanksgiving for all the blessings they’d found, including their new allies. They even struck a treaty to protect each other against other raiding tribes!

So, how did a holiday built upon the cooperation of two cultures become the symbol of genocide? Especially after the colonies relied on some native tribes for their assistance in the Revolutionary War, and even more so after settlers began intermarrying with Indians! For all intents and purposes, the two cultures seemed destined to continue this great relationship.

For that answer, we need to fast forward a few centuries till we get to the first ostensibly Democrat president named Andrew Jackson. He and his party, the Democrat-Republicans (which became just Democrats after the Civil War), created the Indian Removal Act of 1830 that began forcing Native Tribes off their ancestral lands and onto reservations. This was done in an effort to give the government more land they could sell to settlers, and there was nothing they wouldn’t do to make a buck, including doing such dirty, underhanded tricks as giving tribes blankets that carried the smallpox virus. So not only did the Democrat Party start the genocide against First Nations peoples, but they did it for MONEY.

In light of the actual history of America’s treatment of Native Tribes, it is clear that the people who established the holiday of Thanksgiving had no responsibility for the choices our government made two centuries AFTER the inaugurating event. The first Thanksgiving was exactly what it was called, a day of giving thanks for your blessings, which the Pilgrims considered the Wampanoag to be one of their greatest gifts from God and thus honoured them by having them be full participants in the day. It was an event that never would’ve happened that first year without their help.

Thanksgiving was established as a national holiday by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863 following the pivotal, and very bloody, Battle of Gettysburg. He wanted to give America a day in which they could join with their families and give thanks to Providence for all their blessings. It was an chance for the country to heal following the end of the war, not to mention the former slaves who had been freed from bondage. Ultimately, Thanksgiving was created as an equal opportunity holiday that was built upon the idea of different peoples coming together to create this great country. It was intended to not just bring families together, but to bring the entire country together after so much strife.

It is easy to blame the past for not being more “woke”, and to load up all national events with sinister intentions based on the cumulative outcome of another generation’s actions, but the new relationship that had begun between the two cultures that gathered to give thanks that original day in 1631 had nothing to do with what happened later on. Anyone who assigns such evil portents on a day when we, too, might show our appreciation to Providence for all we have received, is merely looking to destroy the most positive of holidays that actually highlights the spirit of cooperation between two 17th Century cultures, not the eventual result of 19th Century Democrat expansion.


Excellent points Time Foolery! I’ve mentioned time and time again how it’s not really about getting some form of restorative justice, but merely push an agenda using cherry picked history as an excuse. They do that with Columbus Day too, despite Columbus never having any direct contact with any Native Americans in the present day US! Then again, the Left is often the epitome of ingratitude when it comes to appreciating America and its values…

Image result for thanksgiving conservative cartoon

(I’m 99.9% sure this is what went down 😉 )

Don’t be a Prisoner of Your Past

I’m sure everyone has heard this one! We all have things that happened to us in the course of our lives that were negative, unpleasant, sad, even deeply traumatic for some. However, the saying goes, don’t let your past define you. The legacy you inherited doesn’t have to be your children’s legacy. How the schoolyard bully treated you does not have to define the rest of your life. You don’t automatically have to be a drunk because that’s what mom or dad was. Or never find love because your parents couldn’t with each other. If you’ve been through some tragedy or trauma, you can get help to move on with life and not allow whatever happened to define who you are today.

For some people however, this “past” goes beyond what they’ve been through as individuals, but also includes what was done to your racial or ethnic group or even gender for example. I think we can all admit this country has some moments we aren’t so proud of. Slavery, conquest, racism, sexism, discrimination, exclusion, ostracism, etc. of certain groups historically. However despite the many social strides towards equality this country also has made to atone for and help eradicate the past hatred, prejudice and discrimination, some still argue that members of these historically oppressed groups have literally inherited the past trauma of their ancestors despite they themselves not having the same negative experiences as the previous generations. They call this “trans-generational trauma”, arguing the legacy left behind by historical oppression has somehow traumatized today’s generations.

Now here’s the thing: I understand about epigenetics and wondered if they are arguing that somehow a gene could have been turned off or on altering the next generation’s genetic makeup somehow due to the previous generation’s direct experience of trauma, but apparently that wasn’t necessarily the case that trans-generational trauma is biologically inherited. I also wondered if they thought a factor like the parent’s or grandparent’s experiences would reasonably influence what they told or how they raised the next generation who hadn’t been there as it is plausible. You will be affected to some degree by what a parent or other family member tells you growing up about what they went through or in how they raise you. That isn’t the whole of this “trans-generational trauma” thing either though! Apparently, the main factor cited was the younger generations are “traumatized” by guess what? Society!

Yep. The argument is the history of oppression by society in the past and alleged oppression today “traumatizes” people of historically oppressed groups. To give an example, one supporting the trans-generational trauma theory could argue that members of the black community are “traumatized” by slavery in the US that was abolished over a century ago, or that more recently, a millennial generation black person is somehow personally traumatized by the lynchings their great grandparents witnessed in the Jim Crow era despite never having any personal experience with lynchings other than in 2nd period US History! Now, I can agree that knowing your people were treated so heinously in the past would be very unsettling and disturbing. However to claim you have the same or comparable trauma as your great grandparent who was actually there? Is that reasonable?

Another example would be Native Americans. The US historically had many unfair policies and practices such as assimilation at boarding schools that wiped much of their own languages and cultures out. The reservation system was very corrupt. Sadly, many Native Americans today have many issues such as alcoholism, poverty, child abuse etc… May do claim trans-generational trauma. They say all their issues hearken back to historical policies that now have been overturned, such as boarding schools for them, or forcing them onto reservations although many choose to live on them now. They claim their history of oppression has led to their current poverty, alcoholism, health problems, etc… and left them traumatized. Only thing is, the younger generations have not personally been forced into boarding schools, have not been at historical events like Wounded Knee, have not been forced onto reservations preventing them from hunting the buffalo for example. No. They like most of America’s youth mourn the loss of their phone privileges more than the fact they as a people can no longer live a nomadic lifestyle on the plains! (Yes, before you cry “not all Indians were…” I know I’m talking mostly about the Plains Indians specifically  for the sake of brevity!).

Another point: Why is the past a valid reason to excuse poor behavior in the present? A community wants to improve and break the cycle, yet does nothing themselves because it feels historical oppression cursed them to a life of misery! To me, it’s like saying “I’m a drunk because my parents were drunks” as an excuse not to get treatment for your own addiction! “The white man oppressed me so I’m destined to act this way…” is the logic behind this.

Why can’t the past be in the past? Of course the past shapes our future, but it doesn’t define it! We can’t change what happened to us, but we can shape our future to be different learning from our past. We can choose to break the cycle. Choose to leave another legacy than oppression, poverty and victimhood to pass on to the next generation of our community. Your parent’s divorce doesn’t mean your marriage will end in divorce. You have no excuse to abuse another because you were abused. Most an agree with those statements. So why is it hard to make the leap to say your ancestors’ oppression is no excuse to not move forward as a community and make a clean slate for your children free from the baggage you may have carried in your past?

Honestly, I find it incredibly insulting and dishonoring to the struggles your ancestors had to claim that you too are traumatized by those events! Why? You were not there! My great-grandfather fled Armenia due to genocide by the Ottoman Empire. My Dad was his grandson, however he does not and has no right whatsoever to claim he was also a victim of the genocide his grandfather endured! My grandmother was relentlessly ostracized for being Armenian in her all Irish neighborhood yet I am not the one who has been traumatized and forever changed because of it because it was HER experience, NOT mine! Step back for a moment and think, isn’t it utterly belittling and disrespectful to those who have actually endured the worst history had to offer and claim it as your trauma? Your burden? To have the audacity to say it changed you? 

You are not the one who was a slave.

You are not the one in an internment camp.

You are not the one who was segregated all your life.

You are not the one killed at Wounded Knee or forced in a boarding school.

You are not the one who was forced to see your family killed in a genocide.

You are not the one who was denied their humanity in the worst ways.

Overall I find it incredibly insulting and disrespectful anyone dares to capitalize off their ancestors’ suffering to claim oppression for themselves. Frankly it’s sad anyone also would see themselves as a victim with only a legacy of oppression and victimhood to pass on to their children. No, contemporary society is not a utopia and prejudice still exists, but being focused in the present is a whole other story than being stuck in the past. Why not make the legacy you pass on to the next generation after you one of resilience, perseverance, independence and determination instead of perpetual victimhood and trauma from past wrongs done generations before their time? What child wants to sit on your lap and listen to how society hated them and always will and be taught certain people hate them? Leave a legacy of “victor-hood”, not victimhood!

Lastly, what sort of trauma might a generation of white people have over being the historical “oppressor” and “bad guy” when countless white people want to genuinely make change and leave their own legacy of love and acceptance rather than their ancestors’ alleged legacy of oppression and subjugation? Must they be defined by the sins of their forefathers? What about the historical oppression against other groups? Why don’t Italians, Germans, Irish etc… have this so called “Trans-generational trauma” from their history? After all, this isn’t about current trauma, but your ancestor’s trauma.

Image result for candace owens quote

Another Angle in The Appropriation Debate: Imagination and The Empathy That Comes With It

Halloween may be over, but the issue persists year round. The Left and cultural appropriation debates pop up especially around costumes which in one era were once innocuous fun, but now deemed as socially inappropriate, even dehumanizing! The main argument is that dressing as a culture not your own, especially if you’re white, stigmatizes and dehumanizes a culture as a caricature. Also, the argument one can simply take off a costume whereas the culture lives with the stigma and cannot simply stop being what they are is unfair to minorities.

I disagree with this stance in the majority of circumstances however I will say if a costume is deliberately meant to be insulting and degrading, mocking the culture on purpose then it is inappropriate. If you’re mostly doing it to be a jerk, then yeah, not cool… Thing is, the majority of circumstances are more complex or simply not at all about denigrating anyone even remotely! Most may not go so far as to “honor” a culture out of some deep personal respect, although some may be, but the majority simply wants to dress up as something they’re not; like every other trick or treater. After all, why dress up as something you are already every other day of the year? Some may feel highlighting a difference in one culture from another may not come off as flattering, but the fact is, another culture is different from your own or else it wouldn’t be considered a separate thing! And why is being different or “exotic” necessarily a negative thing in a society that wants to emphasize “diversity”? Why does wanting to feel like or be someone different than yourself for a bit a bad thing necessarily?

The perspective I want to being to the debate sounds corny, but I think is significant: Imagination. What child doesn’t want to imagine they are something different than what they are in real life? Reads a story about pirates and wants to imagine what it would be like abroad a pirate ship as part of the crew. Reads a fairy tale and wonders what life as a princess would be like. What it’s like to wear a gown to the ball, or reads about some far away land and wants to imagine being there too. To taste their cool foods, hear their music, wear what they do, if only for a daydream. Why is it not just as innocent for a child to dress up and pretend to be an Indian as it is a pirate? One can argue Indians were historically treated as inferior whereas pirates don’t have that history in the US. But how does that change the fact the kid simply wants to imagine being someone else, devoid of a desire to subjugate and denigrate those the child imitates momentarily?

As a child, I was very into different historical periods and various cultures. When I studied ancient Rome I wanted to know what it felt like to be a Roman and wear a toga, or a stola just to have that experience. When I was into the middle ages I dressed up as a medieval person for Halloween. When I liked the ancient near east, I dressed up as a Mesopotamian, when I liked bog bodies from ancient Europe I dressed as one too another year. Heck, I dressed as a dinosaur or caveman when I liked them as well! Notice a pattern? It had zero to do with race or singling out anyone beyond my own interest in that culture regardless of phenotype of geographic location. There was no distinction between the now un PC costume choices and the socially okay ones in motivations to choose them. I believe the same for most children who aren’t raised obsessed with political correctness.

I feel sad for a generation of kids who will never get that experience. One of being whatever they imagine themselves to be. Many adults can attest to the magical times they had pretending to be something they weren’t. However in a society that forbids one from being anything but what they were born as in terms of other people, they will never get to imagine what it’s like to be from a different place or imagine themselves as someone very different from themselves. I argue that we try to teach out kids inter-cultural empathy yet how can they truly empathize without putting themselves in the shoes of the other, and thinking what would it be like if I were them? It’s too abstract for young children to abstractly ponder the implications of the Indian Removal Act on Native Americans in a dry classroom lecture without an emotional experience of imagining being an Indian, and children can express that through pretend play. In elementary school our class pretended to be slaves being sold on slave ships then escaping slavery although none of us were black. Were we doing something wrong “appropriating” that pretend experience? After all, we could stop being slaves after the lesson was over. Or did it help us personally empathize with those who went through slavery?

Is it really some gross oppression that you have to be something I dressed up as past October 31st and I don’t? That’s the grounds for the ban on cultural costumes? What about contexts where one dresses up as a specific person in a different culture or race but it’s because YOU ADMIRE THEM AS A ROLE MODEL? Is that racist??? For example, what about a white child dressing up as MLK because he’s their personal hero? What about a kid dressing up innocuously as a fictional cartoon character of a different race or ethnicity? How far does it have to go? An Aztec or native print is now a sin, or a poncho? What about European stereotypes like an Italian with pasta or Lederhosen on non-Italians and non-Germans? Why can’t people imagine and pretend to experience positive things of a culture and have that motivate them to care on a more personal level for the real members? Is that impossible? Even more simply, why can’t someone choose a costume for Halloween without having to feel like they’re a bad person for wanting to use their imagination?

Image result for cultural appropriation costumes meme

This wouldn’t surprise me if it were real! I weep for the next generation….

We May Live in Scary Times, but We Can’t Succumb to Fear

The spooky season is upon us yet again, and like last year, the Left has caused much to fear from censoring the media, open borders, corruption, witch hunts, politically correct censorship of basic facts, and indoctrinating a generation to carry on the torch of divisiveness in the country. Parents are worried about what their kids are learning in school as new “woke” issues are being taught that families should decide when and how to teach, not the school board and its agenda. Men are worried about a climate where one allegation spells the end of his reputation. Women worry about predators masquerading as women in their private spaces all in the name of transgenderism.

People worry about getting shot down as they live their lives but will have no means to fight back. Communities worry about an infiltration of illegals committing crimes, a justice system that lets criminals off the hook if they’re one of the Left’s protected groups they deem “oppressed”, not to mention Antifa rioters the police are told to turn a blind eye to. Police are worried about having their whole life ruined making that split second call whether or not to pull the trigger. Fathers worry about what society deems allowable to tell his daughters about protecting themselves when out for the night lest they be branded a “rape apologist”, or his sons about what real manhood is. Academics worry about what they dare research as an unfavorable conclusion could cost them their career. The silent majority in America worry about a climate were they feel compelled to be silent at all. And I could go on and on and on…

It’s always been a scary world out there, but the decisiveness and polarization of the country had only made it worse. We are becoming a country run on fear more than unity the more and more we are divided over every issue known to man. In fact, many fear even opening their mouths to speak in case some word has been deemed not-woke or politically incorrect as of one minute before it was uttered! Common sense conclusions are now intolerant bigotry. Stating the facts gets you branded a heretic. Even having a personal opinion that you agree others don’t need to have necessarily, but is unpopular makes you an immoral tyrant.

And there is indeed much to fear if you dare speak up: Losing your job, getting demoted, social ostracism, labeled bigot, racist, misogynist, homophobe, xenophobe, ignorant, and yes, outright cruel if you dared to vote for Trump in the 2016 election. Now be honest: When was the last time saying anything deemed “woke” and Left-leaning brought down such harsh condemnation on your head? When did those opinions get you ostracized at work, school and among your friends and family? When have you seen any prominent figures in the news or TV fired and have their shows cancelled becuase they said a Left- leaning slogan? Anyone in Academia censored for publishing a paper concluding a Liberal policy was effective? The Left says they have much to fear from us, but just look around and you’ll see they have the reins on society.

Does that mean we have to curl up in a ball like Snowflakes and crawl into our safe spaces? Does this give us an excuse to duck our heads in the sand and be a sell-out? NO. We can’t afford to if we want a more balanced country. I’m not saying “let’s take over and only allow conservative ideas and censor theirs”, but the Left can’t have their way 100% of the time and their voice be the only voice heard anymore than we are entitled to such an outlandish claim. We can’t afford to have a generation brainwashed to take our country for granted, deny facts for the sake of feelings, pick and choose who has special rights and who is to be reviled on a whim, think convenience is more important than inconvenient integrity and morals, fall apart at any hint of adversity, demand what others needed to work for and hate, revile and condemn anyone who are thinks different than them.

We, as a society and as Americans need to be courageous. We need to have the courage to speak out when things are wrong and misguided, even if it means being “unpopular” and “politically incorrect”.  However, courage does not mean you have to save the world and be Superman. In a society where what you think is condemned and derided, sticking to your principles is a great act of courage! There are other ways though, one can show the small acts of courage that while seemingly insignificant in the bigger picture, collectively speak volumes. Among them:

Being a white male. Period.

A woman saying “#NotMe” and rejecting man-hating culture.

A father daring to protect his daughters in the era of radical feminism.

Teaching your kid the other side of the issue the school’s agenda is pushing.

Coming out as a conservative of color only to be told they are a race traitor.

Presenting the other side of an unpopular argument in class.

Publishing research with that contradictory conclusion even at the risk of being ostracized by your colleagues.

Buying conservative supporting “boycotted” brands, shopping at “boycotted” stores or eating out at “boycotted” restaurants.

Believing that whether or not a life is worthy should be more than a “choice”.

Concluding biology trumps ideology and facts over feelings.

Voting for a conservative President.

We may live in an increasingly scary world to be out as conservative, but we won’t be run by fear!

Image result for ben garrison halloween

A Columbus Day PSA: There are Two Sides to Every Story… Good AND Bad!

Dear Columbus Day Haters,

I heard your arguments about how Columbus Day allegedly celebrates the genocide of Native Americans, and that celebrating it is a “form of white supremacy”. Honestly I can’t say I agree with such extreme views, but I also understand history is a messy thing, and Columbus was no saint either! Let’s get something cleared up:

I don’t celebrate the destruction of any culture, much less genocide! I don’t agree with the historical practice that forced many Native Americans to abandon their own cultural heritage, yet also don’t oppose the idea of them learning Euro-American ways as well so they could have been in both worlds. Nor do I agree with everything the government did in the past in regards to them. I honestly find it sad so many native languages are extinct and are becoming extinct as well as culture due to the past policies of assimilation.

However, I ALSO don’t agree with Native Americans historically killing, raiding, raping and scalping settlers either! I condemn the barbarity of their side as well, and it is documented that many tribes were just as bloodthirsty and imperialistic as the Europeans! In Columbus’s day and in the “Wild West” of US history. Many argue European colonizers, including America treated the Natives as if they were sub-human and say that Columbus Day strips them of their humanity by portraying them as “savages”. I agree with you that “Native Americans are human too”, but that goes both ways: Being fully human means having human nature. For good and bad. The other side of the extreme is pretending the Native Americans were on some moral high ground just because white people with better technology conquered them. Better technology does not mean greater moral evil though in terms of intentions. Yes, you could kill more with the “guns, germs and steel”, but it does not make your intentions more evil simply because you can produce a higher body count! Native American tribes were ruthless conquerors who while showing occasional mercy on a captive, more often tortured them and enslaved them, whether White or Native. No, they did not have the same technology as Europeans or Americans, but they had that same all too human lust for conquest, land, prestige and yes, power.

Columbus and future conquerors of the New World were brutal conquerors who did enslave and oppress their weaker adversaries. No one is denying that and saying they were some “woke” culturally sensitive saviors! But you know what? That is the nature of conquest. Political and social oppression and a more powerful conquering group. That’s how it’s been for all of human history. The ugly truth is, EVERY HUMAN GROUP did it to their fellow man. I do not deny the ugliness of the European conquests on the New world peoples. But it is a blatant double standard to condemn Europe and America for doing it, yet turn a blind eye to the indigenous peoples who conquered and oppressed their fellow natives of other tribes. In fact, many native endonyms mean “the people” or “Human Beings”, implying they alone are the real people, everyone else is sub-human! Maybe you’re right we shouldn’t necessarily celebrate or gloss over all the bad Columbus did, but don’t paint Native Americans as some “noble savage” when they too have lusted for land, resources and power and oppressed their adversaries to take their land away from them. History is too nuanced and messy to honestly be reduced to black and white, good vs. evil scenarios. If you want to re-name Columbus Day “Indigenous People’s Day”, you’re merely replacing one conqueror for another. 

Another thing: Much of the issue revolves around Native Americans in the US complaining about their treatment by the government in the 1800’s. However, what land Columbus discovered was not part of the continental United States at all and we’re talking about the 15th century, not the 19th century! So what do current Native American grievances with the US have to do with some 15th century Italian who never clapped eyes on a US Native American tribe? Yeah yeah…. He was one of the first to introduce Europeans to the New World leading to other conquests, but don’t act like it’s a personal grievance when he never was within thousands of miles from your “native” lands your tribe (which may have not even existed yet) conquered from some previous one! If you do that it comes off like you are in it to push an agenda more than historical relevance.

Last point, I find these anti-Columbus day sentiments to be part of a wider troubling trend to condemn any historical figure for not having modern views, or acting according to how we would. In addition, the troubling double standard where Western Civilization in general is condemned and derided without also seeing the positives yet other cultures get off the hook for similar atrocities. Both are flawed and detrimental for anyone who wants a fair and balanced view of the good and bad of history and examining our own culture. No people, person or society is solely good as every country and human group has skeletons in their closets. However, no one is all bad. Including historical figures like Columbus or Western Civilization. It is possible, I will argue to celebrate the good of the West, such as the foundation of a country in North America built on democracy and freedom, as well as great leaps of science and technology and better standards of living today, while also acknowledging that brutality and oppression were done on both sides and no one is truly “innocent” or “guilty” in the big picture for history and the human condition.

Not to mention, we act within our cultural matrix. What we find acceptable to do is determined by our culture and so was Columbus and all the other New World conquerors. It was a brutal world, void of (gasp!) wokeness and “diversity training”, and conquest and assimilation was the accepted practice of the day in the 15th century, just as ideologies of cultural tolerance are for the 21st century. Is it fair to condemn a person for doing what was acceptable in their own culture and time frame? We do not by any means, have to personally agree with what they did or how they thought, but think about this: Who will condemn some attitude YOU have centuries in the future and would you find it fair for them to hold you to their future standards posthumously???

Columbus day is not about celebrating violent genocide and oppression, despite the fact it happened, but about celebrating the discovery of a new land full of new possibilities. The negatives do not have to negate the positives worth celebrating. I understand that may not be your side of the story, but we are celebrating ours. Columbus Day doesn’t have to be your holiday if you find nothing worth celebrating, but don’t demand those who do find something to celebrate in it to stop just because you don’t. England is not entitled to force us to stop celebrating the 4th of July just because it was their defeat. There are two sides to every story, including our side.

Happy Columbus Day,

—A Lady of Reason

Image result for columbus ben garrison

We All Have Our Challenges, So Why are Yours More Important?

It’s old news and stating the obvious by now: The Left loves to point out all the alleged obstacles women and minorities face unlike the “privileged” white men. They say that white men are the pinnacle of society, nothing holds them back while everyone else faces insurmountable challenges to equality and success in society. They label white men as “pale and stale” and in my assessment, label themselves as “brown and down” The Left also loves to capitalize on dwelling on past oppression, even when the pendulum has swung the other way going so far in many cases as reverse discrimination.

In the face of any backlash against these views, comes the argument that the “privileged”, those who are white, straight, conservative, men, or all of the above have no right to an opinion because they haven’t been in the so called “oppressed’s” shoes. Now, I have to admit one thing: They are right that we don’t have the same life experiences as people who are different from us. We can’t speak our opinions on their situations from our direct experiences if we’re not them. There are factors in our lives that determine how the world treats us, and our life circumstances that are beyond our control.

However, does that mean that an outsider to someone’s plight has no right to an opinion of their own or an outside assessment of the situation? Who says that the only people who are allowed to have an opinion about someone’s circumstances are the people in the middle of them? Yes, the insider knows intimately what they feel about it, but that same intimacy strips them of any impartiality about their situation in life. Someone may feel they live in an environment of rampant harassment, or discrimination and ostracism, but is one’s personal perception always 100% accurate? What if outside sources didn’t corroborate your perceptions? As I wrote about before many times, your reality is not always the reality! Of course, we should find out what makes them feel a certain way to see if there’s something we do need to change, but it needs to be done in a non-biased way by outside sources as well as insiders.

I want to propose another more unique point though to consider. Imagine some of the challenges women and minorities for the sake of argument are in fact, true as the Left says it. I’m sure some may be as society while not as dismal as the Left loves to paint it as, is also not a utopia by any means! Bias and prejudice intentional and unintentional, do exist, and I can agree that such inequality needs improvement. However, and here’s my new insight, why do your challenges matter more than mine? Why is it when the “majority”, whether it be white people, men, conservatives etc… say they have obstacles they face in life that need improvement they’re dismissed as over-privileged whiners?

Everyone has obstacles, challenges, inequality they experience in their life no matter what race, gender, sexuality, etc… they are. What you look like does affect how the world perceives you and treats you. No, I honestly can’t say I know what it feels like to face life as a black person. Men can’t know intimately what it’s like to be women in society.  However…. A black person doesn’t know what a white person faces in life either. A woman doesn’t know the social pressures men face that hurt them. A biological male (who is a trans woman) has never had to feel the fear a girl or woman does when a man enters her private spaces such as a women’s restroom. And why is it limited to just race or gender for instance as categories of challenges? What about a big overlooked factor? Socio-economic status. A poor white family faces challenges a middle class family of color may not despite racial differences.

Of course, many will ask, “What about stereotypes?” Well, what about them? Is it not a stereotype to assume all white people are privileged and snobbish due to some sense of racial superiority? Is it not a stereotype to assume men are insensitive towards women and think of women only as sex objects or property? Stereotypes do affect how we are treated, but there is a stereotype for EVERYONE, so why are the hurtful stereotypes you face more important then the hurtful stereotypes I do?

The answer to this double standard seems clear: selective outrage and virtue signaling. This has become a superficial war not about true equality and fairness, but which group can vie for the most attention in the “Oppression Olympics”. The excuse is “but we faced more struggles than you ever did!”, but isn’t any inequality and unfairness detrimental to society? Am I saying that women and minorities never faced unfair challenges? No! What I’m saying is why are some people’s obstacles deemed more important and noteworthy than others, to the point of invalidating theirs? To try to illustrate more clearly:

The family of color might face less opportunity related to racial discrimination, but does that negate the white family down the street who face lack of opportunity due to poverty?

A woman may have to be more wary of sexual assault in public than a man would, but a man has to be more wary of the accusation of such!

A white man may feel he faces his own challenges getting hired due to his gender and skin color too due to affirmative action programs and a rhetoric of “dismantling” his “privilege”…

A woman might feel constrained by unfair gender roles and expectations while men have more freedoms than her in some areas of life, but has she considered the ways in which men are expected to conform to their own set of rules?

Does it matter more having all your achievements doubted due to a “minority” race or gender than having all your achievements invalidated and deemed handed to you for the same exact reason only difference being you’re white or male?

The list could go on and on and on…. My point is, my counterpoints to consider don’t invalidate the original claims to obstacles by people of color or women or instance, but are presented to illustrate the point that no one is obstacle free, (even white men) and raise the question; why do the challenges of some matter more than the challenges of others? Why the selective outrage? And this doesn’t even begin to touch upon other factors like family upbringing and one’s health for example!

My last insight into this is everyone has their own unique set of advantages and disadvantages that can be due to things out of our control and circumstances like socio-economic status. There is no way that your life will be challenge-free no matter who you are or what you look like. So, why incessantly whine about it instead of accepting that life can be unfair and you have to find ways to work with your obstacles?

It’s a great thing when people try to change things for the better, other times though, you have to pick your battles and accept your life will be different from the next person’s whether it involves looking out for your personal safety more than others, realizing you don’t look like those around you most of the time, having to work harder than others to prove your merit, having to rise up out of poverty others don’t face, having your own crushing pressure to conform to what society expects of you as a man or woman, having to show others you’re NOT who they think you are among a myriad of other examples. Yes sometimes, you just have to suck it up and work around what holds you back…

Do I advocate for a lack of empathy for the challenges others face? Absolutely not! We should all be conscientious of how fortunate we are and how others may not be. Every one of us has their own life journey and struggles that go along with it, so why are your life challenges more important than mine?

Image result for conservative cartoon triggered SJW's