Thursday, February 6, 2014

Statue of sleepwalking man at Wellesley College is "a source of apprehension, fear, and triggering thoughts regarding sexual assault"

At Wellesley College, a statue of a sleepwalking man has got the feminists in a conniption.

If someone actually thought this inanimate object was a real man even for a few seconds,would they assume he's a rapist? A rational person would not. He's groping around almost naked in the snow, unable to keep his eyes open. More likely someone would think that he's (a) drunk, and (b) not a threat to anyone but himself. But presumably because he's a man in his underwear, that's enough for hysterical young women to assume he's a rapist.

The reaction reminded me of the Harvard women in the snow phallus story.

A reader sent us his reaction to the sleepwalker, and I laughed out loud, so I repeat it here:
"[It has] become a source of apprehension, fear, and triggering thoughts regarding sexual assault... It has already become a source of undue stress... People see this as assaulting... It's making students on campus feel unsafe." 
Read those words. Over and over and over. And then tell me that, even if I gave you a thousand tries, you would guess that they were describing a statue. 
A statue, Pierce. 
A fucking statue. 
If the guy in the statue were black, it would be racist and dehumanizing as well. 
If the statue were a woman, it would surely be misogynist and demeaning.
If the statue were a red-throated loon, it would be a Wellesley student.
Now that's funny.

The overreaction to the statue is sick and unhinged. To the extent this story is seen by middle America, the overreacting women are seen as a laughingstock, as man-haters, and as a coddled mess.

And they actually wonder why so few people -- including so few women -- identify as feminist? Seriously?

If this were a statue of a life-like bear that provoked fear and alarm on campus, would objections to it carry the same politically correct weight?  If this were art that mocked Christianity, would objections to it be respected? I don't have to tell you the answer to those questions.

But make the statute look like an average looking guy in his underwear, and feminists have an absolute conniption.

We are stranded in an era where feminists can find "rape" in the snows; where rape hysteria trumps the First Amendment; and where art is only deemed appropriate when it discomforts mainstream sensibilities, irrational feminist sensibilities are protected at all costs.

Let's only hope these young women don't ever take a field trip to Florence. There's no underwear on the male statues in the Piazza della Signoria, and they would have a stroke if their sensitive eyes accidentally glimpsed the Rape of the Sabine Women.