Coalition of the Sane: Leftists Can Do Nice Things Sometimes - Usually By Accident.

 

Some time earlier this year, I don't remember when, I ended up following a writer on this site I'm going to refer to as Charlotte. I don't know why I did this exactly because after three or four articles and even more appearances in various comments sections it was very clear to me that she is the kind of writer I've done my best in this same period to actively avoid, usually by blocking them the moment I read one such article and it becomes very clear that I'm basically reading the same article I've read on this site thousands of times during 2025 alone.

Charlotte, according to their author's bio, claims to be expressing the views of oppression by a series of cultural studies. Which is of course the exact thing the world has been crying out for all this time and is what we need more of to solve the problems of today. This particular work of art had a title that involved "Why Men Are Submissive if A Male Dominated Society'. 

I should have known better and blocked the author right then but sometimes you just have to know what you get when moral indignation and cherry picking  combine. This article was no different than any of the ones Charlotte has written over time in that it used thousands of words and several links to previous articles to basically say what could have been said in a hashtag or an Instagram post and probably have been. And by the end of it I was in the same place I almost always am after one of them. And as I sometimes too, I gave them one and a half barrels.

I'm going to quote verbatim what I said:

Seriously. Just write over and over. All western cultures are horrible. The west has destroyed everything. All men are bad and there's nothing we can do about it.

Just keep doing that. Every article. Don't bother with supporting evidence from some old book, don't bother with philosophy, don't bother with current events. Just do that. Over and over. Much quicker, saves your readers a lot of time Has the same intellectual affect.

Because if you're not going to come up with a way we can lead a revolution against our oppressors, step by step, including a place to meet and a way to do it, honestly you're wasting everybody's time. I've been hearing smashing the patriarchy in some form for decades on line. It was written by generations of feminists before you. And yet somehow you have yet to do it beyond this passive aggressive BS arguments to the faithful on sites like this.

Because honestly if this is your way of causing a revolution you're really, really, really failing the cause. I acknowledge fully how much worse things have gotten over the last decade in particular in society but all people like you've done has been to say, "Told you so" and then go back to writing the exact same articles you always do. I don't know what you're waiting for any more or if you're still waiting for everyone else to do the work for you.

All you people do here is talk, talk, talk and nothing else. Violence from group aligned with you outbreak, you passive aggressively condemn it, right does it you act with full fervor and still do nothing. Gilead could form overnight and you'd be putting on the gowns saying, "Somebody needs to do something." You and your colleagues do nothing. You march, you write angry letters, you run a few candidates in far left primaries , end of the day you have contributed nothing and changed nothing and yet you somehow think articles like these are valuable to the cause.

You are not winning the battle for hearts and minds because you never talk with anyone who doesn't give you anything but unvarnished praise. You think your followers on this site are a force when they're just part of the virtual ether. And trust me you can dispel all the cultural narratives you want. That doesn't solve a damn thing.

And if the only problem with patriarchy is drawback but you can live under it, then honestly it must be working out better than you think at least for you. Perhaps it's not working out well for women who are poor or struggling but since they don't have access to sites like this or free time to read them, I guess they don't matter.

Personally I'd appreciate you doing something to speed up the revolution. Any day now. And not by writing another angry article. Though I guess that involves less effort.

Was I being unpleasant? Yes. Was I being sincere? Completely.

Because I have been reading this exact article with the POV changed for race, sexual preference or gender identification on this site so many times. It is articles like these make me yearn for a hashtag or a simple black square. At least then we don't have as much pontificating and intellectual cherry picking and we can move on to other things.

I've been beyond clear and the left itself knows this all too well on what the right is doing and has been doing the last decade. You would think, considering that by this point many of these articles list the effective strategies of the right wing, somebody among them would say: "You know writing all these articles isn't changing anything. Maybe we should come up with a plan. Or at least change our approach."

I wasn't expecting a response at all or if I did it was going to be some kind of hate-filled creed. I got part of column B but the actual response was in its own way, insightful.

 Again I'll quote verbatim:

A) We can't solve a problem that we don't understand the properties of.

B) And how did you manage to miss the 5 citations to outside sources as well as the links to three other relevant stories that are themselves filled with citations to experts (like all my stories are)?

C) How did you manage to miss the entire paragraph where I talk about the other artificial stratifications that are a part of a dominance hierarchy system?

“It’s an artificial method for maintaining not just gendered hierarchies, but all sorts of other kinds of social stratification — related to things like race, religion, wealth, sexuality, education, able-bodiedness, etc. The gender aspect is a reflection of the larger cultural system and just one aspect of it.”

If you're not also angry about the subjugation of women, then you, my verbose friend, are a huge part of the problem, but it's pure projection that you find the tone of this piece to be angry. It's simply matter-o-fact. I think your emotions are getting the best of you.

If you honestly believe that any woman who writes online about women and society never encounters anyone who doesn't agree with her, you are more delusional than you previously appeared.

Why is it MY job to start the revolution for you? Grow up - you sound like a petulant child.

Now as you'll notice all the tendencies I gave from an earlier piece on how progressives handle criticism are here:

1. Stating a point of view in the loudest and most self-righteous way possible.

2. Using cherry-picked facts to buttress their argument.

3. Gaslighting any debate by saying the problem as you.

4. Calling you the worst name possible depending on the section of the left aisle they're stumping for (racial, gender, LGBTQ+ etc.)

Here's the most important difference and I think its critical. Charlotte feels no moral obligation to do anything to change her approach. As far as she's concerned the burden rests entirely on society to change despite the fact she regularly writes for a site which argues society is essentially incapable of changing itself.

This is remarkable. In all the years I've been reading these articles and taking the brickbats of the people I criticize I've never seen anyone basically say the quiet part out loud. The burden on society to change is on society. I don't owe it a damn thing.  Why should I take an active role in making the world a better place? The most I'm willing to do is write these cultural studies which prove to me my point of view. If no one else does anything despite this, well I've done my part.

Needless to say Charlotte all but confirmed what I was saying in my original criticism with her response but what I consider the worst possible sin Charlotte considers it proof of her own position.

This is what confirmed the worst part of her to be. First when she asked for contributions she highlighted it with "For the drawbacks of living under the patriarchy." Which I guess means shit sucks for society but I'm getting paid. And more damningly that comment in which I criticized her she clapped for it before giving her own response. So she either she looked at this criticism with the fervor of someone looking for their name in the pan of a play or she just saw it as another way to add to her brand. Either way Charlotte confirmed what a narcissist they are.

Now I admit I could have blocked Charlotte right then but I was curious what she'd do next. So I followed up:

You were, to be clear, less original in your 'takedown' of me, then in your original column. Outrage? Check. Gaslighting? Check. Not answering any of the suggestions I pointed out? Check. Saying it's not YOUR responsibility to do the work? It's usually just implied so thank you for stating it directly for once.

Tell me, just for the record, in all of your writing and research into the subject of these problems that you clearly understand, have you managed to come up with a solution yet? Something that ignorant people like myself might be able to do to help the world I live in. Because I must have missed that among the dozen other articles I wrote in which you essentially said the exact same thing.

And of course you're not angry. Just like this post was not angry but coolly and calmly thought out.

Honestly the only surprise I really have is that you answered my post at all. I guess you wanted more validation then your original article and your waiting for your legion of supporters to applaud you for your bold stand.

I'll be in the other room, doing phone banks trying to get a woman elected to the Senate in Alaska later this year. I'll also be trying to get other Democratic officials elected in letter-writing campaigns this year. Not for you and your supporters of course. I could give a darn what you actually thought of me. But because I want to make the world a better place and I don't think dispelling erroneous cultural narratives alone will do the job. But you do you.

My readers know that I'm being sincere in all of these facts, including my efforts to elect Mary Peltola this fall. (Primary's next Tuesday!)

I honestly didn't expect a response to that one. And yet less than an hour later:

Yes - I write about it all the time, but I'm not going to link them because you're not going to be around to read them. What part of understanding the problem before you can create a solution do you not understand? Also, I don't owe you articles about anything whatsoever. Where are yours though? All I see are stories about TV shows.

When I get to the place where I'm just shaking my head at what an idiot someone is, it's time to block them, so let's just say, that's on the horizon.

Toodles!

Note yet again the self-centered behavior as well as the fact Charlotte doesn't believe she doesn't owe anyone who doesn't completely agree with her an answer, even if it would solve society's problems. 

All that Charlotte has done was illustrate in a way that involves far more candor then usual how little so many leftists think they owe 'the cause'. The world owes them everything and they owe it nothing in return, not even if they have a solution that might solve the problems of today. For the record I'm skeptical that Charlotte has anything resembling an abstract solution to the problems she argues for, let alone one that would receive mass acceptance.

Not that I intend to find out. I blocked her after the most recent conversation. If she wants to think she got the last word, I'm not going to burst her bubble. As we all know people like her have no desire to venture outside in the first place and I have no desire to fight a battle of wits with an opponent who is so clearly unarmed. I do have more important things to do with my time.

Author's Note: While I've quoted verbatim 'Charlotte's' response to me and have vaguely restated the title of the article that caused this, I have no intention of revealing either the real pseudonym nor where her articles can be found.

Some of my readers might be able to figure out where and when they find them. I urge them in the strongest possible sense not to. It's not worth the time or brain cells you will waste doing so.