Back in February of this year, a minor frenzy erupted online when I made an observation which in the ensuing months has proven ever-more obviously true: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, commonly known as “AOC,” is a highly skilled practitioner of “emotional manipulation
I believe that Phillip Rieff wrote in depth about the therapeutic state.
Since I am gay and something of a drama queen, I am tempted to play the queer card from time to time but don't because it's sleazy. Of course, it's now a huge asset to have some sort of minority card to play and we know that public and political discourse time and again is based on they playing of such cards.
AOC knows exactly the effect of her performances.......and they don't happen by chance.
I liked congress better when it was "Hollywood for ugly people" now it's High School for idiots. If not for the media covering for them more people would see how poorly served they are by these morons.
This was a big surprise, not the unconventional take which is expected from you, but the emotional manipulation perspective. It's like Congress is yielding part of its good ole boy, frat house to the self indulged Housewives who dwell on the suffering of every hang nail & unflattering remark.
In the "olden" days women were thought of as the weaker sex. They were accused of being manipulative in order to get their way. They were thought to be less logical than men. They were portrayed as being prone to emotional outbursts and purveyors of drama. Just an observation.
It’s fascinating that you say you believe she’s sincere. I think she’s one of those young people of privileged identities whose uncontrollable emotions always seem to coincide neatly with their personal self interest.
I've no doubt that AOC she experienced an assault, at some time in her life. Women are assaulted, that's an unfortunate fact. Men are falsely accused, that's another unfortunate fact.
But unless she reported that assault to the police, as an alleged strong role model who deals with injustices swiftly in order to prevent future victims, I'm sorry but I have reservations that the accusation was as serious as she seems to imply. Or that it caused to much trauma, that it triggered a physical manifestation during a protest that had no relation to the incident she's alleging.
I know for a fact that women are assaulted. More than half of my sisters were victims of either violent assault during a relationship, or of outright rape.
But high-profile allegations, specifically those which happen to present ancillary benefits to the accuser, are NOT representative of the tragic experiences of women at large. Nor does the reaction of skeptical onlookers to those high-profile allegations correlate with the attitude of men at large.
Also, historic allegations of ANY type, years later at a time when the defendent coincidentally happens to be in a position to aquire a position of power or wealth, should immediately invoke a 'wait and see' attitude. 'Wait and see' means wait until Due Process has run its course before taking sides.
I'm sure AOC was assaulted. Her accusation was very general, and covers many believable experiences. I just doubt how serious it was, if she didn't bother naming names in an official report to the police, while taking the initative to let Twitter react in predictable fashion.
There isn't a single thing sincere about AOC. A funded mediocrity who caught what's his face asleep at the switch, got into congress, and knows if she says "racism" and "misogyny" in every response she'll have a few million unthinking ahistorical normies tweeting in her defense.
The fact that it works is more of a testament of a broken country than anything else.
Subscribed because someone finally scratched my itch about AOC. (It’s like hearing someone describe a magician’s act, you know there’s a trick but you can’t figure out what it is.)
She's a woman who is easily panicked and knows how to play off other people's sympathy.
Haven't you meet women like her before? I sure have.
I resented like hell her use of the term trauma, especially when I learned that her office is 1/4 mile or more away (3 city blocks at least) from where the demonstration took place. Using the same term that people who have been shot, stabbed or in terrible car wrecks for her getting scared pretty much ended my esteem of her.
And I had admiration for her. I grew up and delivered papers as a kid to where she has her apt in the Bx. I loved watching the Netflix show that featured her.
But during the Force The Vote debacle in early Jan and afterwards, I started to see a different side of her.
Trump is grifting on his supporters, and she's grifting on hers. BFD
I feel so relaxed about her b/c I think she's risen as far as she's going to be able in politics. Maybe she'll land something at MSNBC/CNN or something down the road when a Josh Hawley type, or the Mayor of NYC decides to endorse someone else for her seat. Nevertheless, she's more a curiosity than a political powerhouse. I can't see her getting into the Senate, but hey, maybe I'm wrong...
Now having said that, there's a topic I'd LOVE for you to look into w/ the talents you have in spades. This one's gonna take work and digging tho'...won't be low hanging fruit like Ortiz.
What is the degree of influence that the Trust In News initiative is having on MSM? Don't you find it curious how when there's an issue that 'the MSM' takes a stand on, they all parrot the identical talking points? (See Rittenhouse)
Where does TIN work out of? Who are the people that run it? Where does their money come from? How pervasive is their influence?
I think there's something there. I think it's a wide open story for an enterprising reporter. Aaaand I think there's one hell of a story to be told.
I have ignored AOC completely. I must analyze her actions a bit closer from now on. You've certainly brought up some interesting characteristics, thanks.
Democrats are being idiots again. Instead of making a big deal out of it now, they should just wait until Gosar is up for reelection. All they have to say is "my opponent is a massive weeaboo."
This stuff is victimization in action, it is a game, and Michael is altogether correct to characterize it as manipulation. Do you want to be depressed - give this article to your children - they will read it differently than you. They have been marinated in this silliness, school and their piers reinforce the victim narrative. Your children are programmed to find transgressions and then descend into a world of dithering relativism.
I believe that Phillip Rieff wrote in depth about the therapeutic state.
Since I am gay and something of a drama queen, I am tempted to play the queer card from time to time but don't because it's sleazy. Of course, it's now a huge asset to have some sort of minority card to play and we know that public and political discourse time and again is based on they playing of such cards.
AOC knows exactly the effect of her performances.......and they don't happen by chance.
I liked congress better when it was "Hollywood for ugly people" now it's High School for idiots. If not for the media covering for them more people would see how poorly served they are by these morons.
This was a big surprise, not the unconventional take which is expected from you, but the emotional manipulation perspective. It's like Congress is yielding part of its good ole boy, frat house to the self indulged Housewives who dwell on the suffering of every hang nail & unflattering remark.
In the "olden" days women were thought of as the weaker sex. They were accused of being manipulative in order to get their way. They were thought to be less logical than men. They were portrayed as being prone to emotional outbursts and purveyors of drama. Just an observation.
It’s fascinating that you say you believe she’s sincere. I think she’s one of those young people of privileged identities whose uncontrollable emotions always seem to coincide neatly with their personal self interest.
I've no doubt that AOC she experienced an assault, at some time in her life. Women are assaulted, that's an unfortunate fact. Men are falsely accused, that's another unfortunate fact.
But unless she reported that assault to the police, as an alleged strong role model who deals with injustices swiftly in order to prevent future victims, I'm sorry but I have reservations that the accusation was as serious as she seems to imply. Or that it caused to much trauma, that it triggered a physical manifestation during a protest that had no relation to the incident she's alleging.
I know for a fact that women are assaulted. More than half of my sisters were victims of either violent assault during a relationship, or of outright rape.
But high-profile allegations, specifically those which happen to present ancillary benefits to the accuser, are NOT representative of the tragic experiences of women at large. Nor does the reaction of skeptical onlookers to those high-profile allegations correlate with the attitude of men at large.
Also, historic allegations of ANY type, years later at a time when the defendent coincidentally happens to be in a position to aquire a position of power or wealth, should immediately invoke a 'wait and see' attitude. 'Wait and see' means wait until Due Process has run its course before taking sides.
I'm sure AOC was assaulted. Her accusation was very general, and covers many believable experiences. I just doubt how serious it was, if she didn't bother naming names in an official report to the police, while taking the initative to let Twitter react in predictable fashion.
The Dems in particular have been taken over by a group of hysterical mediocrities in AOC, Bush and Tlaib. None would have IQs much above 110.
The explanatory rubric you're looking for here is: "histrionic personality disorder".
There isn't a single thing sincere about AOC. A funded mediocrity who caught what's his face asleep at the switch, got into congress, and knows if she says "racism" and "misogyny" in every response she'll have a few million unthinking ahistorical normies tweeting in her defense.
The fact that it works is more of a testament of a broken country than anything else.
Subscribed because someone finally scratched my itch about AOC. (It’s like hearing someone describe a magician’s act, you know there’s a trick but you can’t figure out what it is.)
“L'état, c'est moi!”
Does she really believe?
Or was she hired by the producers of the show to fill a bit-part?
Similar to the role Rachael Maddow was hired to play.
She's a woman who is easily panicked and knows how to play off other people's sympathy.
Haven't you meet women like her before? I sure have.
I resented like hell her use of the term trauma, especially when I learned that her office is 1/4 mile or more away (3 city blocks at least) from where the demonstration took place. Using the same term that people who have been shot, stabbed or in terrible car wrecks for her getting scared pretty much ended my esteem of her.
And I had admiration for her. I grew up and delivered papers as a kid to where she has her apt in the Bx. I loved watching the Netflix show that featured her.
But during the Force The Vote debacle in early Jan and afterwards, I started to see a different side of her.
Trump is grifting on his supporters, and she's grifting on hers. BFD
I feel so relaxed about her b/c I think she's risen as far as she's going to be able in politics. Maybe she'll land something at MSNBC/CNN or something down the road when a Josh Hawley type, or the Mayor of NYC decides to endorse someone else for her seat. Nevertheless, she's more a curiosity than a political powerhouse. I can't see her getting into the Senate, but hey, maybe I'm wrong...
Now having said that, there's a topic I'd LOVE for you to look into w/ the talents you have in spades. This one's gonna take work and digging tho'...won't be low hanging fruit like Ortiz.
What is the degree of influence that the Trust In News initiative is having on MSM? Don't you find it curious how when there's an issue that 'the MSM' takes a stand on, they all parrot the identical talking points? (See Rittenhouse)
Where does TIN work out of? Who are the people that run it? Where does their money come from? How pervasive is their influence?
I think there's something there. I think it's a wide open story for an enterprising reporter. Aaaand I think there's one hell of a story to be told.
I have ignored AOC completely. I must analyze her actions a bit closer from now on. You've certainly brought up some interesting characteristics, thanks.
Democrats are being idiots again. Instead of making a big deal out of it now, they should just wait until Gosar is up for reelection. All they have to say is "my opponent is a massive weeaboo."
This stuff is victimization in action, it is a game, and Michael is altogether correct to characterize it as manipulation. Do you want to be depressed - give this article to your children - they will read it differently than you. They have been marinated in this silliness, school and their piers reinforce the victim narrative. Your children are programmed to find transgressions and then descend into a world of dithering relativism.