I did not do too much research on the Duke List, except to google her name to see how cute she was — a solid 7.5, possibly an 8? will need to see again; I am possibly biased because I like brunettes with pale skin — and to watch a couple of the TV clips.
I did really enjoy Roissy’s take on it (“the tersely bitter send-off of one pissed and deeply wounded woman”). He nailed it in the way the msm did not. But of course, that is to be expected.
And now, I just read Tucker’s essay on the List, and I have to say, Tucker knows what he is doing. His analysis of Karen is dead on.
I also like what he says about honest writing. These are essentially two different essays jumbled together — even though there is some overlap, because Karen wrote honestly — but you could really extract an entire essay on writing from the Karen essay.
Here are some of my favorite parts.
—
She tried to make it sound like she was using these guys for her experiment, but that was only the explanation she tacked onto her actions afterwards. That’s not what was happening in the moment; no, at the time, it was the guys who were using her. Except she doesn’t understand that at all. The best evidence of that is her words:
“On the way out, we walked past Joe Tkac (lacrosse), who took one look at me, said ‘Oh heyyy, Karen…what are you up to tonight?’ and died laughing.”
They are laughing AT HER, because they all know something that see doesn’t: They see her as nothing more than a cum-dumpster. Pour beer down her throat for two hours, her legs open, shoot your load, and move on.
If you still don’t get it, and still think her actions were empowering, explain this paragraph:
“He was the first guy I have hooked up with that kept an intense level of eye contact throughout the hookup, which honestly brought the entire experience to a level of hotness that I had never before experienced.”
That’s describing the guy she gave the highest score too. Go look at the actual scores: The only two guys she gave a 12/10 to are the two that treated her the least like a whore. Pretty much all the rest used her like a dishrag and tossed her out, and she subconsciously graded them lower because of it. The guy she graded the lowest is that one who didn’t kiss her, fucked her quickly and then left the bedroom, treating her like a prostitute.
What do you think that means when the lowest score goes to the guy who treats her like a hooker, and the highest goes to the one who treats her like a human? It means she wants affection and connection from her sex, except she doesn’t even realize it. She thinks she’s a participant in this game, but she’s not–she’s the one getting exploited, but she doesn’t understand her own emotions enough to see it and change her behavior. That the the opposite of being empowered.
—
There is no double standard in how she’s being treated: The entire idea that she’s being criticized because of a double standard is complete bullshit.
If you don’t believe that, look at the difference in how the media treats me versus how they treat Chelsea Handler. She writes about doing the exact same things I do; I’m called a misogynist, she’s called empowered. Or Sarah Silverman, who makes rape jokes–and I don’t–yet I’m called a promoter of rape culture, and she is called a feminist. Get the fuck out of here with that double standard bullshit. If there is a double standard, it’s actually the other way around at this point; women can get away with much more in media than men can.
[…] I think Tucker is right. […]