The Politics of Porcine Proclivities, Propensities, and Predilections

The Clinton campaign and cohorts are playing a foolish and dangerous game.

Guest post from Robert Gore at Straight Line Logic

Much of Donald Trump’s success stems from the weird fixations, taboos, and hypocrisies of those who oppose him. A country can’t control its own borders or decide to whom it will allow entrance. Terrorists acts by Muslims cannot be called Islamic terrorism. Allow members of that religion, an appreciable portion of whom have sworn to destroy us, to enter the country without determining if they are part of that appreciable portion. Restrictions on guns for the law-abiding will control violent crime. Call the leader of the second most powerful nation on the planet, which has a nuclear arsenal that could destroy our country, “Hitler” and that furthers the cause of world peace, but embracing negotiations poses a grave threat to US security. Every release of information damaging to the Democrats comes from Russia.

No weirdness is weirder than the preoccupation with sex and gender. We are told that men dressed as women must be allowed to use women’s bathrooms, the girls and women discomfited, enraged, or terrified by their new bathroom mates be damned. The right to an abortion, on the rationale that it allows women control of their own bodies, is the most important right found—scratch that—”implied” in the Constitution, but income taxes, which steal from the most successful women thirty to fifty percent of the products of their minds and bodies during their entire working lives, and for which there once was a Constitutional prohibition, should be raised. And there ought to be, never mind that First Amendment, laws banning hateful expressions against women, ethnic, racial, sexual-preference, and gender-fluid minorities.

A 2005 videotape has been released in which Donald Trump expresses sentiments about the opposite sex that many find hateful. He has apologized, saying that: “[T]hese words don’t reflect who I am,” a recitation that has become standard in these sorts of apologies. Actually, the words are probably a pretty good reflection of Trump’s attitudes on women and sex. Most men have joined in locker room (or other all-male venues) discussions of female attributes in which the level of discourse is no more elevated than Trump’s. However, the worthies who are shocked, shocked to find that men engage in outrageously vulgar and sexist banter amongst themselves have probably swung the pendulum of today’s sexual orthodoxy as far as it’s going to go.

SLL noted in “Tribes” that the law cannot eliminate prejudice. Nor can it eliminate hard-wired aspects of the human psyche, especially those related to sexuality. Our species, like all species, is built to propagate itself. If it weren’t there wouldn’t be seven plus billion of us. SLL’s expertise is limited to the male half of the species. In the interests of returning some reality to a subject that has become increasingly devoid of it, let’s talk about human, heterosexual males.

Notwithstanding the admiration men may express for female executives, politicians, lawyers, doctors, and the like, most have trouble resisting the head turn when a comely and well put together young woman strolls by. No man has ever fallen for a woman because she gave good Powerpoint presentation or oral argument on appeal, or because she wrote an insightful article, performed a difficult surgery, or built a multibillion dollar business. It may seem unfair to women, given the abolition of legalized discrimination against them and their undeniable progress in so many fields of endeavor, that most men are so heavily influenced by biological, instinctual forces. Women’s roles and their conception of themselves have changed, why shouldn’t men’s thinking?

Life and biology are seldom fair. It is a hilarious conceit that law and edicts can change fundamental human nature, but one with tragic consequences. That never stops the commanders and controllers from trying. Those who would shred the First Amendment to ban politically incorrect speech cannot ban politically incorrect thought; the former effort may well increase the latter result. There may come a day when women rule, where they fill every important position and make every important decision, and men are their absolute slaves. However, when the Queen of the Amazons pronounces her pronouncements to her assembled subjects, if she’s buxom and beautiful most males will be thinking to themselves: “I sure like the way she fills out that outfit, wonder what she’s like in the sack.”

So label males as pigs and Donald Trump as a prime porker. This is a f__k you year in politics, and women, particularly those who want to make their way in this world based on their talents, brains, hard work, and merit, not their physical attributes, cannot be blamed for deciding: “If that’s the way he talks about woman, then f__k him, I’m not voting for the bastard.” However, making porcine proclivities an issue, hoping to steer female votes to Hillary, the Clinton campaign plays a dangerous game.

Take every offensive thing the Donald has ever said or done and he’s still a piglet compared to Bill Clinton’s blue-ribbon, two-thousand-pound swine. Clinton has: been credibly accused of raping or sexually assaulting multiple women; allowed a star-struck younger women to have sex with him; demeaned the office of the presidency with his Oval Office sexual hijinks; had a semen-stained dress proffered as evidence against him; paid $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment law suit, and had to defend himself against impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice related to that suit. The release of the Trump video assuredly puts all that into play. Hillary brings a knife to this fight; Trump has a bazooka.

Hillary has been her husband’s biggest enabler and defender. The woman who once said, “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported,” vilified and defamed every woman who publicly accused Bill Clinton. The hypocrisy has been breathtaking, but well in keeping with what’s become a standard liberal trope: we love mankind (or womankind), it’s individuals we can’t stand and will treat like shit. Calling attention to Bill’s depredations, she also calls attention to her own less-than-honorable role in them.

Speaking of breathtaking hypocrisy, how about that of the media, commentators, and Republicans who are deserting Trump and calling on him to quit the race? Many of the males denouncing Trump are sanctimonious hypocrites who have said or done much worse. Many of the media figures are the same ones who, acting at the behest of Hillary, tore into Bill’s accusers. They demonized rather than investigated, then said the particular accusation had been investigated to death, then issued calls to move on past “old news.” When the Lewinsky affair and the blue dress surfaced, they airily dismissed it as private, consensual sex, until perjury, obstruction of justice, and impeachment emerged as properly public matters.

Trump’s vulgarity supposedly poses a threat to all that is good and decent in American politics. For at least the twentieth time his campaign has been declared dead by the political establishment, media, and his opponent’s campaign. But think about it. They’ve had months to dig up dirt on Trump and this is all they’ve got? The pettiness smacks of desperation, and the difference in scale between allegations made against Trump and the Clintons’ well-documented sleaze, corruption, and criminality is yet another instance of the overwhelming bias against Trump, which has already driven so many fed-up-with-the-establishment voters into his camp. The disclosure may well boomerang, but Trump has to hit hard on the Clintons’ depredations and refocus attention among supporters and potential supporters on his issues. If he can’t do that, he has no business being president.