Volunteer thought police

I remain fascinated by people who voluntarily work as thought police for the PC regime. As I’ve said before, totalitarian regimes have always had to pay or threaten people into doing their bidding. Today’s progressive regime has lots of people who are apparently willing to ruin the lives of others to enforce unwritten speech codes.

I can’t, in all honesty, understand such hatred of another person, especially one that I don’t know (let alone his family or other dependents).

Today’s incredible intolerable offense is making penis jokes. That’s right, it’s now a fire-able offense in America, the land of the free, to make a penis joke. Your speech is “free,” but if you find penis jokes funny, you’re unfit to work. Behold, the shining city on a hill!

Chuck has been all over the story (which weirdly now seems to have generated an orgy of firing people for reasons that are incomprehensible to me).

Imagine you’re at a conference, and someone keeps repeating the word “dongle.” If you’re not a queer, a non-native speaker, or a humorless douchebag, what do you do? (Frankly, that was unfair to the gay guys. I know lots of them who would be among the first to laugh). You laugh and make a dongle jokewith your buddy.

Every self-respecting man thinks someone saying dongle a lot on stage is sort of funny. I have a 2-year old who has already started making the occasional penis joke. I’ve heard men in the 80s make penis jokes.

Must every man with a sense of humor now lose his job?

Are we really this fscking lame?

39 Responses to Volunteer thought police

  1. Callowman says:

    We need to learn to fart on cue. They can’t take that away from us.

  2. Crank says:

    “I remain fascinated by people who voluntarily work as thought police for the PC regime.”

    It’s because they are attention whores who get constant validation from the like minded for their attention whoring. Notice how she took it public for the attention. I doubt she was even genuinely offended, since she seems totally capable of making a penis joke when it suits her. She just lives for the attention and affirmation.

    So far, there has been no pushback or consequences for attention whoring at the expense of innocent guys. Maybe this will change it, although the presitige media will undoubtedly leave out the details and portray her as a victim who got fired for standing up to “unbelievably crude jokes and misogyny”. How a joke about a dongle is misogynistic is beyond me, but whatever.

  3. Crank says:

    More accurately, I should have “In many cases, including this one, they are attention whores . . .” I guess sometimes it’s just pseudo religion for them, but I’ve noticed they rarely do it unless there is some sort of emotional reward from the like-minded.

  4. cassander says:

    I’m sure there were plenty of soviet citizens who happily enforced Marxist doctrine on the streets of Moscow, just as there were puritans who ratted out their neighbors as witches, or 14th Catholic gossips who spilled the beans to the local priest about who was sinning when no one was looking.

  5. PA says:

    This is war. The hatred of another person that you point out is the fruit of six decades of indoctrination and use of the word “racist.”

    Like I said, it is a war with one side in in full attack mode and the other side making humanistic pleas.

  6. VXXC says:

    Fascinating totalitarian behavior with little or no compulsion or rewards: It is an interesting question. I think the answer is our Schools in America are better at training drones then Stalin’s, Hitler’s and the rest could hope to be. Certainly they should have studied Watson more and Lenin less. Perhaps there’s something so nakedly brutal about force and threats that your Human Nature resents it no matter what you’ve been taught or what everyone else is saying.

    Soft Totalitarianism is more effective than the Hard Kind.

    • Red says:

      The ability to harm someone else for trivial reasons is real power. Humans monkeys like power.

      • VXXC says:


        So what about harm for justified reasons?

        Meaning throw William F. Buckley on the trash heap of History, where he’s left us…

  7. Handle says:

    It’s actually a great example of the difference between Reactionaries and Conservative/Libertarians. The latter are constrained by seeing censorship as being strictly a governmental affair, and are unable to sanction rules for private employers. (Progressive, naturally, have no such qualms).

    Imagine a Reactionary free-speech law to be the antithesis, equal and opposite reaction (naturally) to the Progressive PC speech codes.

    Copy and past all the language from your favorite progressive anti-discrimination labor law (say, your half-century old Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 USC 2000e-2) and, after “national origin” add, “or anything that individual ever thought, expressed, read, observed, or sensed.”

    The EEOC (with a favorable administration and an appropriately motivated workforce) becomes your new “Freedom of Thought Police”

    Now that’s Reactionary. Not being afraid to use sovereign authority to deal with a real social (progressive-created) problem, and create the kind of society you’d prefer to inhabit.

    In a way, this would not only liberate individuals as employees, but employers too. One reason employers, who otherwise couldn’t care less about some harmless, juvenile yukking it up, fire you if that, if they maintain the discretion, then the shaming scolds will pressure them into discharging an “at will” employee without opportunity for reasonable self defense. But if the employer were prohibited from doing so, then they can just give the, “Sorry, what can I do, my hands are tied!” excuse and get away with it.

    Look, ordinarily, I’d be sympathetic with letting private employers do whatever the hell they want. But you have to be realistic. Employers don’t do what they want at all – they are coerced into becoming the tools of these bastards and bitches. Comrades, let us liberate them from their slavery.

  8. PA says:

    Like I said, this is war. One side knows it.

    But this is new: the article does not conceal the race of those involved:

    • VXXC says:

      There’s a change in the air since the election about matters racial. Across the board. Apparently it’s not possible to relentlessly raise racial consciousness among all the groups but one [the majority] and not raise it amongst the majority. After screaming that anyone opposing Obama’s re-election was a racist prior to the election then Triumphantly announcing the pending demise of white America – suddenly everywhere White Conservative America woke up. I think the shock of the Asians voting to tax themselves was part of it, but of course you can’t scream racism forever and not expect Human Nature to rebel.

      By saying: I AM NOW.

      By across the board I mean Coulter, Limbaugh…and in general people are getting sick of it everywhere.

      Hell even the Daily Show copped to the Race Card being played out.

      Mind you – I’m still not. But I will insist on the equality I was sold on. As were Whites in General. I’m dubious others will be quite so discerning. But I have far too many loved ones and comrades that aren’t white…besides…I don’t buy it. And I’m not going to play the game the Progs want me to play.

      Asians BTW respect strength…not weakness. As does everyone but Progressive Whites. Mind you they like being in charge – it’s especially wonderful when there are never consequences.

      Minorities don’t really hate whites. Lily’s hate whites.
      Kindly LEARN to HATE them back.

      Then perhaps you can learn to DO something about it.

      And if you at long last learn to stand instead of crawl…in your own country for God’s sake…don’t worry. The rest fall in line, they just need to see Strength. Since the only place they see it is the Progs…well of course they’ll follow the “Strong Horse”.

      In the name of God, America, and our Race if you insist will you please look at what you cower and crawl before?

    • Anonymous Rice Alum #4 says:

      Hardly necessary when one perp is named “Demarquis”

  9. VXXC says:

    Well. If a man cost you your job by being a snitch…

  10. Ryu says:

    I applaud it and want them to double down. More PC, more repression!

    The way out is the way through. Don’t resist – that just makes them fight harder. Help them achieve their goals.

  11. VXXC says:

    They do it because there are no consequences. They do it because it’s power and harm over another. They do it because their prey IS WEAK. Mind you – Prey – your Tribunes have indeed betrayed you. So now what?

  12. SOBL1 says:

    It’s best to view them as members of a church. It’s not politics as many of them have given up on organized religion or are outright atheists. Their religion is progressivism. The only sin is being a heretic/non-believer. Their good deeds are spotting outsiders and reporting it. It is their mitzvah. They get rewarded with a pat on the head and bump for doing their job enforcing orthodoxy.

  13. Retrenched says:

    From the Tenets of Leykis…

    [Y]ou should not engage in any conversation with a woman at work unless it directly relates to work. Do not compliment them. Do not ask them out to dinner. Your conversation outside of work should be limited to Good (Night/Afternoon/Evening). If you go beyond this, you’re a lawsuit waiting to happen. … The courts are very hostile towards men in this regard as well, so just play it safe.If women want to be engaged in normal conversation, they can lobby the courts to be more lenient first.

    Sad but true. And now it’s been extended to include any conversation that a woman might happen to hear. For men, every word and gesture is now a potentially fireable offense whenever a woman is present.

    • Foseti says:

      And women wonder why they don’t get promoted

      • Handle says:

        Exactly. Or trusted, or befriended. If anything it exacerbates the “old boys network” or creates it where it might not have existed.

        I had a boss’s boss’s boss, a great leader, but very old school and who had come up working exclusively around men and who, while smart, simply hadn’t picked up as second nature the ways of the courtier class of our generation and the unwritten codes of interaction.

        Well, eventually the organization changed and he found himself with some young, pretty single girls on his staff. His crude but effective risk management strategy was to never be alone with any of them. If he had to talk to them, he kept the door wide open, or made sure someone else was in the room as a witness.

        Well, one of those women was an attorney who had to talk to the big boss about something very sensitive and confidential and therefore requiring a high degree of privacy. She asked to close the door, and he just told her his policy, “only if someone else comes in here.” And, obviously, he would have never done that to any male lawyer.

        And boy did she bitch about it to me later. Almost ironic, for an attorney, since no one should know more about, or have more sympathy for, why the old man felt compelled and justified in his practice.

        Naturally, she felt like making a bullsh*t complaint about his strategy to avoid having bullsh*t complaints made against him, because she felt “excluded” and “not treated the same way as everyone else.”

        It’s a rare woman who realizes that the reason that they’ll almost never be treated “just like one of the boys,” is the fault of other women and the laws and various negative social consequences that were constructed purportedly to make them “equals”.

        Finally, it’s amazing to me how little intellectual pushback there remains against the whole idea of being “offended” these days. If someone says they are offended, or that something someone else said to them was even inadvertently “inappropriate” or “insensitive” almost no one says they are completely wrong to be that way. As a state of emotion, it’s almost always “valid” and justified in itself, and if criticized, it is about whether it was at the appropriate degree.

        The speaker is always expected to apologize for “causing” such feelings, even when they are the result of irrational hypersensitivity, or even strained, purposeful misconstrual.

        I was once told by an “Equal Opportunity” representative, after I gave a little talk to a large crowd, that one person in my audience was “offended” because they thought I had used an analogy which they perceived as taking a serious matter too lightly. I told the rep that “Well, they’re clearly wrong to be that way, as you surely know. These kids today.” And the funny thing was that the rep did know, but was utterly stunned, wide-eyed, mouth agape, at my “unrepentant insensitivity.”

        But I never stopped using my analogy, and she never bothered me again. I think there’s something about “showing weakness” or “blood in the water” that spurs these people on. Every time they get even the tiniest bit of “corrective action” or feigned contrition out of someone, they are encouraged to go further and further.

        Never give an inch.

      • Retrenched says:

        Related, a blog post from a woman in tech who expresses many of the same concerns Handle wrote about:

        How have Adria’s actions hurt us? Because important networking happens in casual social situations and conversations, and as a woman in a predominantly male field, it’s hard enough to be included in these activities, and will be even more so when people are worried about whether or not they might offend the wrong vindictive bitch and she’ll have them sacked. Actions like Adria’s only ensure that the rest of us who actually know how to react moderately and with a sense of humor all get tarred with the brush of ‘possible vindictive bitch.’ And we’re excluded, to the detriment of team-building and our careers, because of fear.

        Every place I’ve ever worked, I’ve had to make sure the guys I work with know I’m not gonna get deeply offended by them goofing around and being silly, and that I can roll with it like an actual human being and not get all butthurt about my womynfeels.


        (Emphasis mine.)

  14. […] internet is buzzing with the Adria Richards dongle incident that demonstrates what everyone knows, but that until now […]

  15. reakcionar says:

    In my opinion, your way of approaching this issue is rather wrong. You should be looking at it as a religious, rather than a political thing. Someone in the comments mentioned Christianity and witches, and Marxists and Soviet Union – however, I think in USSR people were more fearful than honestly Marxist.

    PC has all the characteristics of religion – just to quote some guy from Takimag: “Modern atheists have their own saints, detailed taboos, purification rituals, demons, superstitions, and a deep sense of sin.” PC people are forced to suffer on this fallen Earth, whipped by white privilege, racism, sexism and homophobia, bombarded by evangelical fanaticism screaming from their TVs and trying to enter their bedrooms. So, now that they have power, instead of praying, drinking the blood of Malcolm X and eating the body of Marcuse, they are forming local inquisitions.

    Btw, I am living in the Balkans, and the PC religion got momentum just a few years ago. Quite fascinating things are happening – even mobsters who escaped punishment for a hundred times are being jailed for a wrong comment on someones nationality or religion.

    • Anonymous Rice Alum #4 says:

      @reakcionar, nice comment, but not all athiests are PC. Some are outright reactionary.

      • reakcionar says:

        Some truly are – such as myself. However, the term “atheist” has been so stained with leftist filth, that I prefer to call myself anything but that.

    • GFC says:

      Would you say the PC religion followed in behind the American bombs that fell on Serbia?

      • Foseti says:

        What does spreading democracy really mean?

      • reakcionar says:

        It certainly did, but it would probably anyway – with or without NATOs bombs. You don’t need violence to spread the religion, although fear must be omnipresent.

        Probably the craziest manifestation of complete submission of the westeners to spreading the PC gospel happened in Bosnia last year: http://www.radiosarajevo.ba/novost/83620/sarajevo-ambasadorica-i-lgbt-osobe-darovale-krv

        In case your google won’t translate it well: some nurse was unkind to a couple of hippie-dykes who protested the ban on gay blood donations, so some EU buearocrat marched in and showed the primitive peasants who’s the ruling class now. LGBT blood is now as good as gold.

  16. PA says:

    Without television, PC is powerless.

  17. PA says:

    I think in USSR people were more fearful than honestly Marxist.

    Same with PC. Nobody lives by it privately.

    Successful religions maximize their believers’ happiness, reproductive fitness, and sense of masculine pride. PC does just the opposite. It will not last.

    • reakcionar says:

      I disagree. First of all, no one defined religions as necessarily successful. The cult of Kali is a religion, but not a very productive one.

      The closest example of religion I can compare PC with is the snake cult from Conan the Barbarian. Worshiping selfdestructive hedonism is not enough – you must give up life, family, tradition. kill your parents and loose any surviving instincts.

      So, I’m not saying that Thulsa Doom is as good as Pope, I’m just saying it’s better to observe it as a weird cult than a political movement. It might last just enough to push the civilization of the cliff. Than we can greet our alien overlords from Alpha Centauri. Or Saudi Arabia.

  18. Piglet says:

    Only now, at the end, do you see. Just wait until the people for whom this seems normal and right are running the show for real.

  19. […] Related: The feminist media warps the story. Related: What kind of person volunteers as the thought police? Related: What a developer evangelist is. Related: Equality means women have a right not to be […]

  20. […] But if you suspect you’ll need information on protecting your anonymity and fending off Volunteer Thought Police, these are topics that this book – and only this book – covers […]

  21. Hey! I simply wish to give an enormous thumbs up
    for the nice data you may have here on this post.
    I will be coming back to your weblog for more soon.

  22. […] The tech industry is run by smart, independent-minded, somewhat nerdy White and Asian guys – in other words, the official public enemies of hyper-sensitive grievance-mongers like Nitasha. Crime-thinking men, public or not, be not above the petty joy of causing trouble for any members of the volunteer thought police who make their way into your life. Feel no guilt over a principled refusal to hire, work for, or award contracts to members of the volunteer thought police. […]

  23. […] self-appointed heads of the volunteer thought police (people who were previously known as “sports writers” in a more innocent time), have decided […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: