To Freak or Not to Freak

by Brad Nelson6/9/15

There’s a kind of Hamlet mentality with me now: “To engage the culture or not engage the culture. That is the commercial break.”

I’d heard tell that Clint Eastwood made a joke about Bruce Jenner. Someone from Hollywood Life (whatever that is…like I say, I don’t stayed tuned in to most of this stuff these days) wrote “What she’s doing is so heroic, and it requires a lot of courage.” [She?]

Saving a stranger from drowning likely requires courage. But dressing up like a woman (outside of vaudeville) more likely requires mental illness, delusion, or the poison of a mass mind that calls “good” anything that pushes the boundaries of freakishness.

I write this not having a resolution to this question nor expecting one. I remember as a child visiting the old B&I store in Tacoma. It was one of the first mega-stores or themed stores. It was like a gigantic Sears combined with a zoo. They had the famous gorilla, Ivan, who (according to Wiki) spent the first 27 years of his life in a 40′ x 40′ concrete enclosure. Later he was given probation and moved to more humane confines and died in 2012 from complications during a medical procedure.

At the old B&I store they also had displays of monkeys behind glass in rather confined enclosures as well. And my brother and I loved visiting the monkeys because if you put monkeys (or human 5-year-olds, for that matter) in an enclosed space, lots of funny stuff will happen. In the case of the monkeys, shoving small pieces of straw up their urethra was one of their pastimes that I remember howling about with my brother. They seemed to do it with such care. But what else have you got to do?

Looking back, enclosing such relatively intelligent creatures like that in such a confined space is not a good or humane idea. Zoos (and other exhibitions) have progressed past that, and for the better.

And it makes me think of Bruce Jenner (pretending to be a woman) on the cover of Vanity. If you put a human being in the confined space of libtard pop culture, screwy things are going to happen. And I’m not even suggesting that this is so because we’re closely related to monkeys. I’m saying this is so because it seems to be a tendency for intelligent creatures to do really stupid stuff when they are bored.

I view Bruce Jenner with detached amusement. He’s crazy and probably deserves pity (my friends tend to disagree with this, saying that he deserves absolutely nothing, and I haven’t much of an argument to put against this). What I deserve is a break from this kind of insanity, which is exactly what my method is of late. But sometimes you just have to stop to watch the monkeys. And laugh.

Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author  Author Archive  Email

Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (1017 views)

Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.
This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to To Freak or Not to Freak

  1. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    I have read that if he plays his cards right, Jenner will earn something like $400 million over the next 5 or so years. Heh, that’s even better than the Kardashians.

    I believe this is due to the basic urge which possessed you and your brother as children, i.e. the urge to stand on the outside and watch the monkeys do strange things. Unfortunately, the fulfilling of this urge has become a very big business.

    As people become inured to even the most bizarre behavior rather quickly, the money men behind such freak shows must come up with even more bizarre and offensive behaviors to keep the money flowing. This constant flow of ever more degrading behavior has the disastrous result of debasing people’s moral and aesthetic senses as well as promoting deviancy throughout society.

    The entertainment industry is a major corrupter of our society and has much to answer for. They are even lower than trial lawyers and maybe worse than politicians as they have a more immediate and lasting effect on mush minds.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      This constant flow or ever more degrading behavior has the disastrous result of debasing people’s moral and aesthetic senses as well as promoting deviancy throughout society.

      There you go. Now go write a 1000 word essay on the subject, Mr. Kung. That is directly to the point. Not that a debased population could understand it.

  2. Timothy Lane says:

    The joke Eastwood told came when he was talking with an athlete-turned-actor and pointed out past examples of this: James Brown and “Caitlyn somebody”. This will be censored out by people who probably can’t explain cogently why (presuming they can explain anything cogently, of course). Was Eastwood saying that “Caitlyn” is an act (and, as KFZ points out, a very lucrative one), or referring to his appearances on the Kardashian “reality” show? Was the somebody a mockery of the ubiquity of his name? And why, regardless of the answers to these questions, is he being censored?

    • Pst4usa says:

      “Caitlyn somebody”, and for this he is censored? Now I see, oh the humanity, he was so mean, degrading and hurtful???? Thank God no one on the left would ever say anything about some Christians that was so hurtful; sure put a crucifix in urine and call it art, have an actual show called the Vagina Monologues, have Alec Baldwin or other leftist call for the death of conservatives and that is not hurtful but act like you forgot someones name, that is just too far. Thanks Brad, I think I’ll go to the zoo, the monkeys make much more sense.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    It used to be that courage was defined as overcoming difficulties to achieve a noble end. Usually self-sacrifice and much hardship was required. The hero emerged with his rough edges worn off by reality.

    Now “courage” is defined by mere audacity in breaking conventions. This is a juvenile culture, caught forever in the terrible twos, and nothing shows this better than the case of Bruce Jenner.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      An important element of courage was the defiance of fear. (Robert Heinlein once gave a perfect example of courage — a man doing what he believed needed to be done even though he was so fearful that he died of fright. Courage isn’t fearlessness, but acting in spite of one’s fears.) A few decades ago, Jenner’s behavior might indeed have been courageous, but the comparable courage today is the exact opposite. Once culture has been subverted, courage lies not in challenging the former conventions but in challenging the new ones (or absence of conventions).

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Well said, Timothy.

        One stipulation is that “right” (and thus courageous) isn’t measured strictly by whether something is in or out of fashion. Sometimes one is going against the crowd. Sometimes not. The way the Left and their juvenile mindset has operated is that “courageous” is defined by tearing down whatever is that status quo. Any kind of modest or restrained sexual morality was to be dashed upon the rocks of Progressivism. These are “courageous” acts even if in places (such as wacky California), this is the majority opinion on much of this bizarre stuff.

        It’s not without some reason that a conservative stands back (and well clear) while these spoiled children erect a house of cards which we know will fall upon them (and us…which is why standing back isn’t a viable long-term option…note to Establishment Republicans and other wimps).

        There’s also the conservative spectator sport of seeing what these freaks do when theirs is the predominant opinion. When you are the establishment, what then? I would say that most conservatives agree with me that the Left always has a habit of eventually eating their own. It will be sweet justice to watch this.

  4. Pst4usa says:

    I must admit to having sympathy for Bruce Jenner, I cannot imagine the demons he has lived with to do this to his family. He is sick, he has some hole in his life that just cannot be filled with normal life things, (I think the hole should have been filled with with Jesus, but that is me). The thing that drives me the most crazy is the leftist media and the cowardly people that call him courageous. Their agenda uber allis, so what if more lives are destroyed, that is what the left wants anyway, (they do want 13 out of 14 people on the planet dead as soon as it can be done).

    The thing I do not get, and I know this is a stupid comment, but to the left Gay is fixed and cannot be changed, period. But your gender, that is flexible, you are what you feel, go back and forth all you want. I must be the worlds biggest hater, cause I just don’t get it, your thoughts are not changeable, but your plumbing is???

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      He is sick, he has some hole in his life that just cannot be filled with normal life things

      Things to do when you’re feeling a little down, depressed, and/or alienated:

      + Take drugs
      + Change your sex
      + Text your private parts to a friend
      + Get a tattoo
      + Save a whale

      Or, as Pat recommended, you can find Jesus. That’s probably the better option when all is said and done.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      You’re quite right, it is strange that sexual preference is immutable but sexual identity is not. Needless to say, both represent the convenient belief for liberals, which is the basis for all their philosophy (such as it is). As Dick Armey pointed out years ago, “A conservative believes it when he sees it. A liberal sees it when he believes it.”

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      I must admit to having sympathy for Bruce Jenner, I cannot imagine the demons he has lived with to do this to his family. He is sick, he has some hole in his life that just cannot be filled with normal life things,

      I had this general conversation last year with some friends over spaghetti and meat balls.

      The biggest point for me was that for someone to mutilate himself in such a way, there must be a huge amount of pain and misery involved. It is still difficult for me to understand what would motivate someone to do this.

      But that in no way makes such action normal or even tolerable. While people may try to understand this, that doesn’t mean it should be praised.

      • pst4usa says:

        I do so agree Mr. Kung, I certainly hope I did not come off as attempting to praise him.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:


          I was not thinking of you when mentioning praise, rather I was thinking of the idiots and tools in the MSM and numerous nuts on the internet.

          And after re-reading my original post I should point out I when I referred to pain and misery, I meant mental anguish. The physical pain of the actual operation is something I don’t want to think about.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        There was an article by Ben Shapiro in the latest Conservative Chronicle on this subject. He pointed out, accurately, that this “transgenderism” was a form of mental illness. Sympathy and understanding are appropriate responses to it; celebrating it in any way merely encourages this sickness.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *