In which we learn that I am a 'sexist' of that ilk

The shriekers at Victor Reppert's blog just can't seem to get enough of agreeing amongst themselves that I am wicked vile evil! Consider this -- B.Prokop:

Dan,
I slammed Ilion, et.al., for their sexism nearly two years ago on this very website in one of my finest rants ever - a real classic:

"Papalinton and his fellow-travelers, who are forever going on about religion's so-called 'Bronze Age thinking' were aiming at the wrong target. They should have set their sights on the Stone Age thinking of the likes of Ilion, 'Gimli', et.al.

What nonsense! Worse, what slop, what filth! You people should crawl back under your rocks.

I'm sorry, but I can't muster up even a modicum of politeness here. These were the most insulting, degrading comments ever to grace this website - far worse than anything Loftus ever dreamed of spewing out. I felt sullied even reading them. I will not even try to engage with such idiots! What's the point when they have amply demonstrated that there's nothing to engage with?"

Damn, but it makes me feel good just to re-read that tirade! (and that's just a sampling of the full posting [as far as I can see, it's the entirely of the post]) I don't often get to indulge in a justified bout of good ol' fashioned righteous anger.

The thing about "good ol' fashioned righteous anger" is that far too many persons conflate self-righteousness (and self-righteous hypocricy) with it, as we shall see.

B.Prokop:

... and you know what's funny? I can't even find the original comments that led to that gem of an outburst (and I've looked). I believe it was early in 2011. I just remember that Ilion and company had crossed the line in their disparagement of women, and I couldn't sit still for it.

So, a mildly amusing point -- this shrieker, this advocate of mass-murder (for to advocate leftism *just is* to advocate mass-murder), this wicked fool who likens me to Satan because I forcefully oppose the leftism he espouses, claimig it to be Christianity, keeps a record on his PC of his "classic" slams of me ... and isn't bright enough to also record the URL with the slam.

Fortunately, the ever-helpful 'Crude' -- who had decided a couple of years ago to hop onto the band-waggon (what I mean is, long before the deal about Rush Limbaugh supposedly calling Sandra Fluke a 'slut' or 'whore', I recognized where 'Crude' was going, even if he didn't) -- supplied the link to that righteous rant

I must be really terrible, right! I must really be a wicked, evil, vile [caution: Magickal Word ahead] sexist, who crawled out from under a rock, right?

Well, let's see how wicked, evil, vile I really am, shall we? I had made two posts, the second and third in the thread; the leftist's "righteous rant" is the fourth.

My post #1, addressing Victor Reppert's OP

"I have never held a job a woman couldn't do as well or better than me."

Really? None at all? Not even your current job?

"When your survival is under constant threat, the question of "How can we survive" comes before the question of "What is fair?" With industrialization, this changes."

Ah! In other words, if men invent and build machines so that the sort of physical strength natural to men (in contrast to the sort natural to women) is no longer so necessary to get the public work of society done, then women can be egalitarianly "equal" to men.

"With industrialization, this changes."

Are you sure you don't mean "post-industrialization"? You know, offices and bureaucracies and such? Rosie-the-Riveter (my grandmother was one) was an anomaly.

The truth is, women are "equal" to men in the egalitarian sense you're talking about precisely because men are constantly holding their hands and constantly trying to protect them from the consequences of their own ill-advised decisions … while everyone pretends that women, in general, are strong and independent.

My female relatives, going back for generations, tend to be strong and independent … and in the present age, they no more “fit in” than I do.

"When your survival is under constant threat, the question of "How can we survive" comes before the question of "What is fair?" … So, I'm not inclined to be too hard on past cultures for their sexism. But I am hard on people who want to carry sexism into the present day."

Dude! Our society is dying of all these “strong and independent (pseudo) women” and “sensitive, supportive (*) (pseudo) men” … whom, together, never seen to get around to either themselves becoming adults, nor of rearing up a new generation of adults to take their places.

(*) concerning “supportive” (so-called) men - why is it necessary that men be “supportive” if women are so “strong and independent”? Does not the role designated to modern-day men give the lie to the whole egalitarian myth?

The thought behind the first question (Really? None at all? Not even your current job?) was something like this: then why doesn't that institutionally sexist university fire your gold-bricking ass and hire -- for less money -- a woman who can do the same, or better, job?

My post #2

Gimli: "Intellectually, both sexes are equally capable."

Even that isn't accurate. Women cluster toward the middle of the intellectual curve ... a lower proportion of women are either idiots or geniuses ... or, in other words, there are proportionately more male than female geniuses, and more male than femal[e] idiots.

Thus is my wicked vile evil thoughtcrime laid bare for all to see. That's it! That's my wicked, evil, vile [caution: Magickal Word ahead] sexism -- simple truth that runs counter to the current leftist dogma/narrative. For, indeed, my wicked vile evil thoughtcrime, my "disparagement of women", wasn't even about women ... it was about the set of leftist lies and hypocrisies known as feminism, and about the un-men who peddle feminism.

Nevertheless, "[W]hy is it necessary that men be “supportive” if women are so “strong and independent”? Does not the role designated to modern-day men give the lie to the whole egalitarian myth?"

Further, why do the very women who most loudly assert how "strong and independent" they are *always* run to mere men to remediate the consequences of their own ill-advised choices?

The truth is, it's "Neanderthals" like me who treat women as equals, while the "sensitive and affirming" types, like B.Prokop ... and Victor Reppert ... constantly patronize the entire sex.