It’s hard for many of us to grasp what goes on in the minds of our opponents. After all, these days it’s difficult to comprehend how people can be perpetually offended at anything and everything.
Yet sometimes we get lucky. They give us a glimpse behind the curtain and we can see exactly what we’re dealing with. Thanks to Campus Reform, for example, we get to see this:
Amherst College is offering a course this semester exploring why “some women become right-wing leaders” while others “fight for the rights of women.”
According to the course description, the seminar will explore “the consequences of neoliberalism, cultural conservatism, Islamophobia, and anti-immigrant sentiments for women of different social and economic strata as well as women’s divergent political responses.”
The description then elaborates on the nature of the divergence, saying that some women gravitate toward the “right-wing”—about which it provides no additional context—whereas others join “progressive forces,” whose activities it charitably describes as “anti-racist” and focused on defending the rights of others.
“Why have some women become prominent right wing leaders and activists while others have allied with leftist, anti-racist, and other progressive forces to fight for the rights of women and other marginalized groups?” the description asks.
“How have transnational forces influenced both forms of women’s activism?” it adds. “To what extent are there cross-national similarities in the impact of the far right surge on women, gender, and sexuality?”
The implication is clear. If you’re a woman and you’re right-leaning politically, you are apparently OK with racism and trampling the rights of others.
Now, keep in mind that recently we’ve had to fight the left over freedom of speech, gun rights, and bringing due process back to school campuses. But they are the ones fighting for people’s rights? Seriously?
These people are completely and totally delusional.
The American left does actually sometimes fight for people’s rights, but it’s almost an accident these days. There’s almost nothing they do that seems to really be about anyone’s rights.
Make no mistake, the course description from Amherst is the most condescending claptrap I’ve seen from a university yet, and I have no doubt the “brain” behind it would read this assessment and think, “What’s the problem?”
For their edification, I’ll explain and I’ll try to use small words.
Saying that liberal women are for the rights of women and minorities means conservative or libertarian women aren’t, and that’s stupid. Just because they believe different things regarding what actual rights are doesn’t make them anti-anyone or anti-anything, you pompous twit.
Yes, I threw that last part in there because it amused me, unlike anything coming out of Amherst, apparently.