Antifa Canada (see the emerging consensus on how that first word is pronounced) is a ragtag batch of anarchists that makes the capital mistake of organizing via Facebook. (Its Web site doesn’t resolve, for example.) As such, Antifa Canada recapitulates the habits of every right-wing-asshole group that also organizes by Facebook and that is followed by our friends at Anti-Racist Canada, the latter of whom delude themselves that screencapping Facebook comments in some way counters white supremacy.

In the last week, Antifa Canada has posted or reposted quite a few statements that indisputably mean the group officially condones violence. I’d say Antifa Canada was egging on its members to violence. Antifa Canada’s only limit is murder, I determined by asking open questions on Facebook.

These kids eventually figured out it was unwise to answer such questions honestly and deleted the relevant postings. Yet after ragging at Anti-Racist Canada that screencapping Facebook is the wrong way to archive Facebook, it turns out most of my methods worked even less well. But here’s what Antifa Canada published, and the questions I asked that they did and did not answer. [continue with: Antifa Canada: Our only limit is murder →]

Last year, the U.S. Department of the Treasury released a report on married same-sex couples. It relied on income-tax data and dealt only with the year gay marriage became legal nationwide (2013) and the following year.

The data are frankly disturbing in that they verify a complaint I never took seriously – that same-sex marriage benefits well-off gays and lesbians and does nothing to improve the lot in life of the poor. Usually that objection was articulated in terms of race. But because every single objection to gay and lesbian life is now clad in accusations of racism, especially when levelled by transgenders, “queers,” and “LGBTs,” the race aspect can be discounted. The income aspect cannot.

That is because U.S. data show that married same-sex couples – even lesbian wives – are richer than married heteros on average and in almost every subgroup. Even gay and lesbian couples with kids are richer.

Because gay marriage is available across the board, even to the poor, the inescapable conclusion, which the authors are too decorous and cautious to draw, is that most gay and lesbian couples who get married were already doing well financially. In enough cases that they can’t be considered exceptional, married gay males are flat-out rich.

It turns out there really is an affluent dream demographic of “DINK” gays. The only place we can prove it exists is in the United States, and it consists mostly of married gays and lesbians.

☛ I added a new page to the Gay Money site that explains the findings and more.

Gay marriage: A bauble to add to your collection if you and your fiancé(e) are doing great already

Same-sex marriage had to be legalized on equality grounds. It was pretty obviously never going to be the same thing as opposite-sex marriage and, in the U.S., it definitely is not the same thing. Gay marriage in America is an accoutrement, a luxury good, a perq.

I sat here trying to come up with consumer trinkets that I could use as comparators. Nothing made sense except for these two: Gay cruises and a live-in boytoy. The function of both is to enable ostensibly married men to have epic amounts of sex that hetero males would find unthinkable. Monogamy is quite a joke when it comes to gay marriage.

At this point the whole thing strikes me as hypocritical.

DataLounge, the scabrous homosexualist discussion forum of two decades’ standing, is a hive of scum and villainy only some of the time. Here and there, pearls of wisdom emerge, like these arguments against transgenderists and their apologists. [continue with: Transgender wisdom from DataLounge →]

Citing only their usernames for a moment, here we have Mister James Is Alive as photographed by Myrkky.

I defy you to find a better headshot. [continue with: Best headshot ever →]

I’ve mentioned Camille Paglia’s aperçu that Madonna “thinks with her body” from time to time. Here is the closest I can get to an actual citation.

From an appearance on Imprint, a much-missed literary talk show on TVO, in 1992 (YouTube):

DANIEL RICHLER: What I’m getting at here is that you use academic language to explain something that you know perfectly well she cannot.

PAGLIA: Yes, yes. I believe that Madonna is at her weakest when she tries to explain herself in words.

— In fact you go so far as to say several times, referring to an interview with her on MTV: “Wrong answer.”

— Right! [laughs]

— You would like to be her… spokesperson.

— Well, yes, because I think that she does her deepest thinking, as I say in an upcoming review of her rather shoddy new book, uh, does her deepest thinking in music and dance. I think that music and dance are the oldest kind of thinking – thinking through the body, through the sensory language of the body.

That review, originally for Us but reprinted in Vamps & Tramps, did not mention thinking with the body. Later in that book, Paglia states that Princess Diana, like Madonna, “expresses herself best through dance, the universal language.”

1. Extract from the five-hour-long Red Ice Radio ten-year-anniversary livestream (“If you don’t subscribe to this Whites-first YouTube channel, we’ll kill this dog”):

   

2. Matthew Forney, speaking at Red Ice’s Identitarian Ideax IX conference (“Rising from the Ruins” [Kickstarter]):

   

   that we were destined to fail, that the future of our civilization was rainbows, unicorns, and chocolate-chip cookies – fruits Frenching their boyfriends in front of empty churches; neon-lit mosques eclipsing the cities our forefathers laboured to build; and finally, being finessed out of our neighbourhoods by swarthy foreigners who stare at our sisters, wives, and girlfriends the way lions stare at gazelles.

3. (UPDATE) Squatting Slav, responding to “Don’t shove your sexuality in my face and I won’t shove my fists in yours”: “We hold onto our traditional values, and, you know, um, yes, you know, it’s OK to be gay, this and that, but just don’t shove it down my throat, you know? Don’t come and tell my children that they need to be in this-and-this way, especially, you know, younger children who are impressionable. So I’m actually very happy that that regulation and those laws exist in Russia, because I think that, you know, children up until a certain age are the most vulnerable and who are the most susceptible to this kind of propaganda.”

4. Lauren Southern: “You’re all still fags.”

I’d still prefer to be stabbed in the front.

Matt May:

2005

Hmm. Someone seems to have studied at the Joe Clark School of Debate.

Matt, fuck off.

Don’t contact me again. Thanks[.]

2017

Being Right Is Not Enough: Critical Lessons for Accessibility Advocates (“How can we gain more advocates, and win more battles?”)

Summary

The consensus pronunciation of antifa is “an·TEE·fa” – like Queen Latifah.

Details

(UPDATED) You can pronounce antifascist any number of ways according to national dialect and idiolect. I use a nasal alveolar flap, hence [ˌæɾ᷈iˈfæʃɪst].

A shortened form now in common use is antifa. How do you pronounce it?

Logically you’d use your native pronunciation of antifascist and knock off the last syllable. But that’s a complete non-starter. It would leave me with [ˌæɾ᷈iˈfæ] – strong stress at the end of the word and the same vowel as in cat. Like a teenager leaving the nest, albeit with purple hair and no ability to bench-press, you have to look at antifa as a creature unto itself.

The problem here is the variability of words that begin with anti‑ (in various senses): antidote, anti-inflammatory, antigen, antithesis. I’ve heard antifa pronounced about half a dozen different ways. There seems to be a convergence on this pronunciation:

antifa

an·TEE·fa – Strong stress on middle syllable; start that syllable with T; end vowel is the same as in hut and is not [a:] or schwa†

IPA: [ˌænˈtiːfʌ]

Evidence from recordings

• I trimmed each clip down to a few seconds before the utterance and a few seconds after. Some clips contain two utterances; two utterances span two clips in one case. All clips are .M4A.

• I’m giving colloquial phonetic transcriptions (a joke – you saw how much explanation I needed above [see daggered† section]) and International Phonetic Alphabet.

• As ever, there are more right-wing sources than left-wing. Both sides’ pronunciations are converging nonetheless.

Updates

Antifa International gets it wrong

(2017.08.17) The so-called Antifa International, whose name designates it as a global rather than merely a domestic terrorist operation, gets the pronunciation wrong twice (first, second).

Much more use of “antifa”

(2017.08.23) Since I wrote this posting, I’ve heard a huge increase in American speakers using the [ˈæːnˌtifʌ] pronunciation (big stress on an). If that trend continues, that pronunciation and the consensus pronunciation will be in an effective dead heat and there won’t be a consensus pronunciation anymore. The two pronunciations will them be in free variation.

Trump uses consensus pronunciation,
i.e., “Make ‘antifa’ great again”

(2017.08.23) Donald Trump put a drawl on the end vowel (speech, 2017.08.22), but he too uses the consensus pronunciation (.M4A sample).

Thank Goddess that Canada had a right-wing-extremist mass murder of Muslims so that progressives’ and academics’ decades-long insistence of the danger of right-wing extremists could finally be vindicated. They were right all along, they can now insist. [continue with: Finally: A hate crime that progressives can get behind →]