This is No Country for Young Men

This is No Country For Young Men

 

The Kavanaugh Gang Rape

 

By Barton Cockey

 

September 30, 2018

 

Last week’s public spectacle in the Senate offers ample material for reflection. The last-minute revelation of a charge of sexual assault came as no surprise to me. I expected that if President Trump nominated a constitutional-conservative male to the Supreme Court, the Democrats would give the poor sucker the Clarence Thomas treatment: “He’s a sexual predator!” It seemed likely that more than one unsubstantiated accusation would be made, in the hope that the multiplicity of the charges would make them more credible. (If the nominee had been female, the plan of attack would have been to portray her as an extremist, a racist, a friend of deplorables.) So, I naively thought that most people would see Christine Blasey Ford’s performance as a crude political smear by a party that despises anyone who thinks of the U.S. Constitution as a binding legal document. I was wrong, of course.

 

An NPR poll showed 42% undecided before the hearings (a healthy number, actually reserving judgment), with 32% believing Professor Ford and 26% believing Judge Kavanaugh. Another poll, after the hearings, and reported in The Hill, found credence in Ford at 41% and in Kavanaugh at 35%. The split along party lines was clear; 73% of Democrats believed Ford, and 74% of Republicans believed Kavanaugh. Independents were evenly split, 33% to 32%. All the polls agree that women are more likely to side with the accuser than with the nominee.

 

My own limited survey of friends and acquaintances is consistent with the larger polls and also reveals a startling datum: the vast majority of women reported having been assaulted by a man, either physically or sexually. In most cases, when they reported the assault, they were not believed, even by their own family members. Worse, in some cases, they found that those who should have avenged them compounded the trauma by rejecting and humiliating them. Evidently, a large portion of the female population is primed to explode with the pent-up pressure of past injuries. This latent energy is primal and savage. There is a reason why the judge asks prospective jurors whether they have been victims of the sort of crime with which the defendant has been charged. It may be hard to weigh the evidence impartially in such circumstances. And when there is no evidence at all, beyond what he said and she said, all that’s left is subjectivity and personal bias.[i]

 

The Democrats have shown themselves to be adept at harnessing such energy to pull their political wagon. A stinking patent-medicine show-wagon it may be, but its anti-androgenic banner is pure genius. Woe to the clumsy Republican who speaks up to expose its fallacies! The pussy-hatted legions will hear only the hated voice of their old assailant. A recent poster circulated on the internet attempts to add balance to the discussion but only illuminates the hopelessness of achieving common ground. “Next time you don’t believe a rape victim, think of your mother, your sister, your daughter. Alright, and next time you ask us to believe an accusation without evidence, think of your dad, your brother, and your son.” Unfortunately, for too many women, male family members may have been the culprits, or at best, failed to avenge the wrong. Think of an abstract principle of law, like the presumption of innocence? Good luck.

 

This controversy is a double gift to the cultural Marxists. First, it reminds women of their own bad experiences with men; and the apparently high prevalence of such experiences reinforces the message that men (and especially “privileged” white men such as Judge Kavanaugh) are vicious victimizers, while women are virtuous victims, just like people of color and LGBTQ’s. The associated emotions run so deep that even some relatively bright women fail to see such the absurdly reductive good vs. evil narrative as an insult to their intelligence. Second, the collective demonization of men necessarily leads to the demand that males be removed from positions of responsibility. Equal representation is no longer sufficient. A local Democrat congresswoman remarked yesterday, in earnest, that all men should be voted out of office and replaced by women. We can expect more pronouncements of the same character.

 

The fact that the feminist left created a less safe environment has not been lost on conservative commentators such as Heather Mac Donald. In her latest book The Diversity Delusion, she disputes the claim of a rape epidemic on college campuses but suggests that if there is a rise in the rate of depression among female undergrads, the engineers of the sexual revolution and its hook-up culture are to blame for it. Not so long ago, within living memory, there were social structures and conventions in place to thwart the natural propensities of hormonally-driven teenage boys. Mothers used to tell their daughters that boys wanted just one thing. As a boy, I found that advice rather insulting, but I had to admit that it was true, if a bit simplistic. That basic insight was behind single-sex schools and dorms, chaperoned dances, and all the little inconvenient rules about how young ladies and gentlemen should conduct themselves.

 

Gentlemanly rules of conduct, and indeed the very idea of the gentleman, were under attack as atavistic vestiges of elitism when I started college in 1972. A decade later, when Brett Kavanaugh was finishing high school, chivalry was dead, and chaperones were scarce. Women were the equal of men and were perfectly capable of looking after themselves. At least that’s what the first wave of feminists claimed. Drive the hearth-keepers out of the home. Shame them into doing the same labor as the men who used to provide for them. Put their children in day-care. Throw female and male sailors together on submarines. The sexes are interchangeable. Re-engineer humankind! Like all really bad ideas, this one was bipartisan. After the total mobilization of World War II, with its expansion of industrial capacity, big industries needed more consumers to buy their gadgets. The solution was to put women to work.

 

The latest wave (Is it the third? I’m subject to motion sickness, so I’m not counting.), the latest wave sees women as victims of nasty, sexually predatory men. If that sounds a lot like what their grandmothers told their mothers, it is. The difference is that whereas their grandmothers saw the male’s aggressive sexuality as a natural phenomenon that could be manipulated to their advantage and managed through appropriate supervision and upbringing, the bitter feminists of today have reduced Yin and Yang to good and bad, oppressed and oppressor, in keeping with the dogma of the secular religion of the left. What’s the solution? The emasculation and disempowerment of the white male hierarchy!

 

In light of these developments, I am glad to be no longer a young man. The rules of engagement have become too confusing. The propriety of an amatory advance can be evaluated only in retrospect and after the female has had an opportunity to replay it over and over and over in her mind, preferably under the care of a mental health professional adept at recovering repressed memories. The return to a more realistic societal consensus on human nature may take a long time. A very long time. If the political opportunists succeed in their strategy of divide and conquer, we may never get there.

[i]One interesting observation on the Kavanaugh kerfuffle is that the “marriage gap” is wider than the “gender gap.” Steve Sailer, writing in the Unz Review (unz.com) and citing the blogger “Audacious Epigone,” noted that “The gap in support for Kavanaugh between married and never-married members of the same sex is more than twice as large as it is between men and women in general.” I interpret this finding as evidence that people who have achieved some reasonably well-adjusted modus vivendi with the opposite sex are more likely to favor Judge Kavanaugh. The data did not include self-reported political orientation, but it is probably safe to say that conservatives favor Kavanaugh, and liberals oppose him. The data are concordant with studies showing that conservatives are happier and better adjusted than liberals. In my own, unscientifically small, sample population of women who had been sexually assaulted, those with a conservative outlook were more likely to have “gotten over it,” independent of the severity of the assault.