Posts Tagged “infantile”

stop signI’ll have to ask you, Dear Reader, for another indulgence. I find I must address, for a second time, something that’s off-topic. But it’s something that urgently needs to be said.

A couple months ago, I said it was time for the mass media to enact a moratorium on reporting our Groper-in-Chief’s tweets. At that point, he’d already tweeted something that had triggered something of a crisis in the federal government, and sent people running to deal with it — even though what he’d tweeted was not based on any evidence, and turns out to have been untrue. It’s one thing for the insane and infantile GiC to tweet stuff; it’s another for the media to treat his drivel as though it’s worthy of being reported. Most of his tweets are not, and it was clear to me, then, that the media needed to act that way.

Well, they didn’t take my advice. Instead, they continue indulging the Apricot Wonder, treating his every utterance as worthy of being repeated, relayed, analyzed, and otherwise worthy of being read by Americans. The GiC, naturally — having been given so much deference by the media — managed to outdo himself in imbecility and immaturity. On Thursday he fired off a crude, childish tweet about a pair of cable-news hosts (WebCite cached article), and earlier today he tweeted a childish, manipulated video of him attacking “CNN,” the cable-news channel personified (cached).

The Groper’s deputy spokeswoman defended his nasty Thursday tweet as a natural, expected, “tit-for-tat” thing (cached):

“The president has been attacked mercilessly on personal accounts by members on that program, and I think he’s been very clear that when he gets attacked, he’s going to hit back,” [she] told reporters during the afternoon briefing.

The deputy spokeswoman lied. No one — and I do mean absolutely no one — “attacked” the Apricot Wonder. Have people criticized him? Sure they have. Of course! Why would they not? And why should they not? No one in the US, not even the president, is above critique! But even with that said, no one has “attacked” him … “mercilessly” or not. An “attack” would be if someone had punched him in the face, or held him up at gunpoint. Nothing of the sort has ever happened to the Groper. And it won’t — because the Secret Service would never stand for it. (And they shouldn’t.)

The “attacks” the GiC and his minion are complaining about, are simply the natural, expected consequences of his own immature words and actions. The Groper is not entitled to flattering press coverage. He is not entitled to never have his insanity or folly commented on. He is not entitled to never have to see or hear news reports, or commentary, he dislikes. No such entitlement exists — not even for the president of the US. It simply doesn’t.

Quite the opposite: As a public servant, the Groper’s job is to take criticism in stride, and react to it like a grown adult. That’s just how life is. He doesn’t have to like it, or be happy about it … nevertheless, he has to just take it, and walk away. That’s his fucking job!

The Groper himself laughably contends the media are actually trying to silence him (cached). Nothing, however, could be further from the truth! In reality the mass media actively comply with his wishes, by reporting on his every tweet instantly. They couldn’t do a better job of relaying and propagating his ridiculous, juvenile bullshit if he were paying them to do so.

The problem with the media relaying the GiC’s numerous tantrums, is that his fanbois in Flyover Country feed on them. They like that he tweeted a vile comment about two cable-news hosts (whom most of them have never seen or heard, but who somehow know — because they’ve been told so by their talk-radio and alt-right overlords — are dastardly commie Leftists deserving only of condemnation). They also thrive on the reactions they engender; they love seeing Democrats and “the Lame Stream Media” aka the “Bicoastal Media Elite” condemn the Groper’s childish bilge. They love seeing their ideological foes are outraged. They’re fueled by such things, which is why the GiC keeps spewing them. It makes them happy, which for him is the most important thing in the world.

The media could, if they wanted to, break this feeding cycle. By not reporting the Apricot Wonder’s juvenile tweets, his fanbois may not hear about them, but even if they do, there won’t be any reaction to them, so they’ll be deprived of the joy of watching that. A moratorium would starve the Groper for the attention he pathologically craves, and would starve his fanbois of the sanctimonious outrage they love to sense.

The time for a moratorium on the GiC’s tweets has come. It’s time for the mass media to grow some cojones, stop indulging the Groper-in-Chief, and get off his fucking payroll already.

Photo credit: Clover Autrey, via Flickr.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments 1 Comment »

Cry-babyA couple days ago, the Friendly Atheist blogged about a guy who calls himself “the Radical Reverend” going into a Target store, loudly (and annoyingly) preaching that Target’s bathroom policy had provoked “the vengeance of almighty god.” I posted a comment there, which — at the risk of appearing to brag — got a lot of upvotes, explaining why this sort of thing happens. I thought it would be good content for my own blog, since the theme is one I address so many times here, so without further ado:


Re [a quote from the F.A. post]: “The American Family Association, whose anti-Target petition is at nearly 1.2 million signatures, may not advocate these actions but they’re also not doing anything to prevent their followers from ruining the shopping and working experiences of people who have nothing whatsoever to do with the company’s policies.”

Exactly! Why should they do anything about it? This is just the sort of thing they intended to happen when they announced their “boycott.” Like a person who rolls a snowball down a hill, letting it grow as it does and hoping it becomes an avalanche, this is what they wanted to happen.

As for these militant Christianists “ruining the shopping and working experiences of people who have nothing whatsoever to do with the company’s policies,” that means nothing to them. They aren’t capable of thinking rationally enough to realize they’re annoying the crap out of folks who have no power here. It all boils down to just one thing:

They are monumentally angry people. At the same time, they’ve been terminally infantilized by their religionism.

Their sanctimonious outrage, and the anger it’s engendered within them, is something they’re only barely able to control. They’re too juvenile to comprehend that throwing tantrums like this won’t get them anywhere — because, quite honestly, they don’t give a damn. They’re convinced their precious Jesus gave them clear instructions, as well as a mandate to ensure that everyone — not just themselves! — lives by them. They’re enraged that there are people in the world who refuse to abide by those rules and that there are companies like Target that enable them to defy those rules.

So they pitch fits on the sales floor of stores. Because, quite simply, they can’t help it. They’re too immature to understand why it’s wrong. And they can’t be convinced to grow up, because their religion (as they see it) entitles them to remain as infantile as they wish.


Yes, religionism and immaturity are inextricably linked! Whether we’re talking about Muslims rioting over burned Qur’ans, or Religious Rightists in the US saying asinine and/or offensive things, it all boils down to the same core impulse: Childishness which has been reinforced, justified, and perpetuated by religious belief. This is not to say that the way people express this impulse is the same; oh no. It’s not. Barging into a store and screampreaching over bathrooms is not the same as burning and killing over the Qur’an. Those aren’t equivalent behaviors at all! But they do have one thing in common: Sanctimonious immaturity.

As I said in my comment, the only solution is for these people finally to grow up and stop acting like whiney toddlers. But as I also pointed out, so long as they have what they see as a religious entitlement not to have to grow up, they never will. They will, instead, tell themselves, and each other, that they must remain infantilized, because they think their deity has told them they must. Until they do grow up, they’ll remain slaves to their own dour metaphysics.

This is the psycho-social toll religion takes on humanity. The sooner everyone understand this, the sooner we can pry the locks off these fetters and provide people with freedom — real freedom to act like mature adults.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments Comments Off on The Real Reason Christianists Are Pitching Fits Over Bathrooms

This is one of those stories I have not seen mentioned in any major, independent mass-media outlets, and it’s not for lack of searching (using tools such as Google, Yahoo, Bing, and AOL News, and other online journalism searches). The one exception to this has been an op-ed piece by Jonathan Turley, which appeared in USA Today. Otherwise, this news has only appeared in Right-wing oulets such as the Weekly Standard. I’m not sure why this has gone unreported, but it has.

At any rate, Turley writes in the USA Today On Religion blog:

Perhaps in an effort to rehabilitate the United States’ image in the Muslim world, the Obama administration has joined a U.N. effort to restrict religious speech. …

Around the world, free speech is being sacrificed on the altar of religion. Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simple blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion. This growing movement has reached the United Nations, where religiously conservative countries received a boost in their campaign to pass an international blasphemy law. It came from the most unlikely of places: the United States.

While attracting surprisingly little attention, the Obama administration supported the effort of largely Muslim nations in the U.N. Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to free speech for any “negative racial and religious stereotyping.” The exception was made as part of a resolution supporting free speech that passed this month, but it is the exception, not the rule that worries civil libertarians.

In the process, the Obama administration has found an unlikely ally … the repressive Egyptian regime:

In the resolution, the administration aligned itself with Egypt, which has long been criticized for prosecuting artists, activists and journalists for insulting Islam. For example, Egypt recently banned a journal that published respected poet Helmi Salem merely because one of his poems compared God to a villager who feeds ducks and milks cows. The Egyptian ambassador to the U.N., Hisham Badr, wasted no time in heralding the new consensus with the U.S. that “freedom of expression has been sometimes misused” and showing that the “true nature of this right” must yield government limitations.

Turley goes on to cite a litany of recent cases of “blasphemous” speech that has been repressed in many otherwise-enlightened places, including Canada, the Netherlands, and the UK. I offered the following comment appended to this USA Today blog entry:

“The only purpose that laws against blasphemy serve, is to propagate immaturity on the part of believers. These laws give them the illusion that their beliefs are impervious to criticism … which is simply not rational. Rather than infantilizing believers by shielding religions from critique, we should instead send the message that believers ought to grow up, accept that there are people in the world who do not believe as they do, and steel them for that reality.

“If the Islamic world … or any other … is not mature enough to withstand criticism, the solution is not to abolish the criticism, but instead, for it to grow up. This will, no doubt, be a challenge, but it is one that is for the best. Continuing to infantilize Muslims, or any other kind of believer, serves no useful purpose. Encouraging them to grow up, will.

“Personal note: As a non-believer, I consider ALL religions and viewpoints about religion to be ‘fair game’ for critique. This includes even secular notions such as atheism and agnosticism, not to mention other recent metaphysical ideas such as New Age, neopaganism, and so on. All alike should be open to critique. We can ill afford to give the upper hand to those who aren’t mature enough to endure critique.”

I find it unconscionable that the Obama administration would actively work to continue infantilizing the Muslim world — along with all other religionists — by condoning this kind of policy. I had thought he would be a more enlightened president than this … but I guess I was wrong.

Finally, I honestly have to wonder why so many mass media outlets ignored this story. That also is unconscionable.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments 3 Comments »