The Misanthropy Sector

Funding isn't evenly distributed across the philanthropy sector, claim philanthropy spokespeople. Of course not -- it isn't even a single sector. To fund any one organization within it is to anti-fund another, for they have conflicting aims. Aims change depending on which way the attitudinal winds are blowing: whether funding is taxpayer-based or private donation-based, it all depends on the dominant and competing social prejudices of the moment.

Whatever the "philanthropy sector" is doing, it has a twin, a hidden opposite doing the opposite. Look at the word "philanthropy": love of mankind. Some people don't love mankind; they prefer other species. The bumper-sticker is not  joking which says, "the more time I spend with people the more I prefer my cat". Or someone might secretly agree with the satirical tongue-in-cheek observation of a certain poet: "We are here to help others -- but why are the others here?"

There is, then, a philanthropy sector and a misanthropy sector (a loving-mankind ideal and a hating-mankind honesty). And this is not even mentioning the powerful misogyny sector. Many groups' aims are objectionable to other groups. Humanity itself is objectionable, most of the time. How so, you ask? 

Humans are

-- argumentatively unpleasantly combative  

-- they take up too much space (eight billion on this one planet?)

-- they create huge paved conurbations, destroy landscape, cut down trees, fill the ocean with evil inventions like plastic 

-- they bury other creatures' habitat under toxic cast-off wastes

-- they are noisy (who else would invent helicopters, chainsaws and leaf blowers?)

-- they are nosey, prone to spying on and stalking each other, and inventing mindless entertainment shows inviting others to watch them doing it

-- although noisy, they tell people with other opinions to shut up; many like censorship (and really love de-platforming)

-- they're okay with torture too, being cruel to other animals -- eating, trapping, hunting and performing savage laboratory experiments on them

-- their population doubled since 1970, while wild animal numbers declined by 68%

-- they're always asking others for money through charities and foundations

Clearly then, the "philanthropy sector" is a sector at war with itself, some parts being for free speech, others against it, some for hyper-urban growth, others for nature conservation, some for animal rights, others for animal-harming ethnic traditions, some for equality, others discriminating against "colonials".

Many people, even when feeling they should donate to a charity, are actually closet misanthropists. And that's quite apart from those misogynists …  

At the Pet Shop

Here we are at the pet shop, in the parrot section:

 

Customer: Do they talk?

Manager: Some do, some don't ...

Customer:  I want to hear one speak. How about his one? 

Customer to parrot: Polly wanna platform?

Parrot:  Feathered Lives Matter.

Customer:  Of course they do, Parrot.

Parrot:  Polly "takes a deep dive". Do you feel safe?

Customer:  I beg your pardon?

Parrot:  Do you feel safe?

Customer:  Uh … sure. Does Polly feel safe?

Parrot:  Polly's thirsty.

Customer:  Ah! Polly wanna drink?

Parrot:  Yes, something medium dry, with musky undertones and a fruity finish, please.

Customer:  What am I, the bartender? Polly's a bold old bird …

Parrot:  My name's not actually Polly. That's a girly name.

Customer:  Sorry. 

Parrot:  Misgendering Is Violence.

Customer:  Aren't they the clever parrot then. … Now what are they doing, Parrot?

Parrot:  Reversing their position on the perch.It's Re-versity For Di-versity. I'm pivoting. 

Customer:  Oh.

Parrot:  I'm changing the positionality of my performativity to make it more escalatory.

Customer:  Of course. But why do you keep hopping up and down -- it looks exhausting.

Parrot:  We're doing our Formal Air Acknowledgement.

Customer: You seem so human. 

Parrot:  We're not a human. Mis-speciesing Is Violence.

Customer:  Well you sure parrot like a human. 

Parrot:  Just "reaching out".

Customer:  Shall I reach in?

Manager to Customer:  Hey! Don't open that cage! If you stick your hand in there he'll peck you.

Customer:  Me? But we're friends. Allies. We've bonded.

Manager:  Yeah? So, you wanna buy a parrot? 

Customer:  No thanks.

Manager:  Because it doesn't talk enough? Maybe that one doesn't, but they can learn, you can compel their speech if you work at it. 

.

Strutting and Fretting on the BC Law Society's Stage ("compelled pronoun usage")

(See  https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/ian-mulgrew-b-c-lawyers-wont-debate-courts-new-pronouns-policy-as-hateful-resolution-fails )

Two resolutions have been presented at the Law Society of BC: one to force use of "gender inclusive" language in court, and another which alleges that this would endanger free speech and silence politically incorrect views. That's an attack on the equality of non-binary people, was the hyperbolic retort to that allegation. All this turns the courts of B.C. into "politically correct theatre", charge the supporters of Resolution number 2. 

No! Really? Law courts theatrical? They certainly provide comedy at times.

Courts of law have of course always been theatrical, filled with costumed actors playing strict roles, delivering grand soliloquy or clown-speak, strutting and fretting their hour on the stage and trying on different masks, like the defendant cited in the BC Law Society's showdown who has "already changed gender once during their case and they’re still at the bail segment". (see Vancouver Sun, above)

Of course this drama wasn't created by the Law Society, it was imported from the wider culture, where many folks remain bemused about whatever "misgendering non-binary people" through pronouns might mean. 

Many of us are just pro-noun. Here's a good noun: "farce". It means a type of drama designed "to excite laughter," and also means "an absurdly futile proceeding". No doubt we've only seen Act One of the Law Society Misgendering Comedy, and many characters still wait in the wings, still intending to demand their pound of flesh.

For more on "compelled pronoun usage", see https://quillette.com/2021/10/08/weekly-roundup-and-the-harassment-of-dorian-abbott-and-kathleen-stock/

.

City Life -- What do we want in a next door neighbour?

The Ideal Neighbour

-- never whistles

-- has a dog who doesn't bark

-- has a cute kid or two who wave over the fence but never shriek 

-- grows foliage in his garden 

-- has no surveillance cameras 

-- doesn't put an officious Neighbourhood Watch sign in the window 

-- keeps to himself which lives he thinks matter

-- doesn't put election signs on the lawn

-- waters the lawn

-- hates loud music

-- thinks "hip-hop" is what robins do on the lawn after he waters it

-- possesses no leaf blower, chainsaw or drill

-- has a good high hedge

-- doesn't keep saying we should get together

-- doesn't move away

-- continues never to whistle