People I fucking HATE....
We've all got our pet peeves. Some of us are driven into fits of teeth-gnashing rage by stupidity, some by cruelty, some by narrow-minded bigotry, some by narcissistic self-entitlement. Me, I hate hypocrisy.
If you think about it, hypocrisy combines the worst of all sins. For example, hypocrites are inevitably stupid. If they weren't, they wouldn't be so fucking hypocritical. Also, hypocrites feel entitled to apply widely divergent moral codes to human behavior: one to themselves, one to everybody else in the world. Finally, hypocrites are sanctimonious, cognitively indolent cranium-rectum inverts who suffer from the narcissistic delusion that every droplet of intellectual bilge they produce is, in fact, a pearl of Yoda-esque wisdom. Even when I manage to shake off the Pythian trance into which hypocrisy propels me in order to point out the rhetorical flaccidity of the invert's argument, all I get in response is a long, quiet, placid stare. It's as if I'm speaking in riddles more bafflingly impenetrable than the enigma presented by the Sphinx of Thebes.
Today, some invert said to me, "I think that IVF is the most selfish and immoral thing in the world when there are so many children who need a loving home. If you're infertile then the moral thing to do is to adopt."
First of all, invert, how about using proper syntax and grammar so I can at least understand what the fuck you're saying before I dismiss it?
Second of all, invert, the beauty of adoption and the pain of infertility are two separate and distinct phenomena. Adoption is a good thing in its own right; it doesn't need infertility to "justify" it. Moreover, the pain of infertility isn't "solved" by adoption.
Third of all, moral codes are supposed to be universal. If adopting orphans is "the moral thing to do," then it's moral for everyone - including you. The idea that some people should incur additional or distinct moral obligations by virtue of their medical conditions is so unbelievably dense that light bends around it. According to your theory, only diabetics should be morally obligated to oppose the brutal working conditions on South African sugar farms, only cancer patients should be morally obligated to oppose the agriculture industry's excessive use of carcinogenic pesticides, and only people who wear limb prostheses should be morally obligated to oppose the use of land mines in military conflict. If - I - speak - very - slowly - do - you - think - you'll - understand - how - fucking - stupid - that - is?
If adopting is so "moral," then why haven't YOU adopted? I mean, it couldn't possibly be that you feel exempt from a sacrosanct ethical obligation simply because you're not infertile - could it? It couldn't possibly be that you feel entitled to sermonize about a topic with which you have zero personal experience instead of shutting your pie hole unless and until you step up to the "moral" plate and become an adoptive parent yourself - could it? It couldn't possibly be that you feel fully authorized to live your life wrapped tight in the pashmina comfort of self-absorption, lecturing to others about their Moral Duty while squeezing out a sprout or two, funneling your husband's investment banking income directly to DKNY Baby, pushing the Silver Stream stroller with a Seattle's Best in one hand and a Kate Spade bag over the other, addressing criticisms of Starbuck's labor policies by meeting the girls for more of those yummy maple scones, and making this year's Christmas celebration extra-special by splurging on Crate & Barrel ornaments (hand-crafted by Tibetan monks!) and Pottery Barn tinsel (hand-sewn by Namibian San shamans!) - could it? It couldn't possibly be that you would dare open your dumb-box to unspool a lecture about Moral Duty to someone who's suffered through the raging grief of recurrent miscarriage when you've never so much as lost your Land Rover keys, never mind a baby - could it?
So shut the fuck up, you useless parasitic pedant, before I impale you on the Williams-Sonoma roasting spit display.
If you think about it, hypocrisy combines the worst of all sins. For example, hypocrites are inevitably stupid. If they weren't, they wouldn't be so fucking hypocritical. Also, hypocrites feel entitled to apply widely divergent moral codes to human behavior: one to themselves, one to everybody else in the world. Finally, hypocrites are sanctimonious, cognitively indolent cranium-rectum inverts who suffer from the narcissistic delusion that every droplet of intellectual bilge they produce is, in fact, a pearl of Yoda-esque wisdom. Even when I manage to shake off the Pythian trance into which hypocrisy propels me in order to point out the rhetorical flaccidity of the invert's argument, all I get in response is a long, quiet, placid stare. It's as if I'm speaking in riddles more bafflingly impenetrable than the enigma presented by the Sphinx of Thebes.
Today, some invert said to me, "I think that IVF is the most selfish and immoral thing in the world when there are so many children who need a loving home. If you're infertile then the moral thing to do is to adopt."
First of all, invert, how about using proper syntax and grammar so I can at least understand what the fuck you're saying before I dismiss it?
Second of all, invert, the beauty of adoption and the pain of infertility are two separate and distinct phenomena. Adoption is a good thing in its own right; it doesn't need infertility to "justify" it. Moreover, the pain of infertility isn't "solved" by adoption.
Third of all, moral codes are supposed to be universal. If adopting orphans is "the moral thing to do," then it's moral for everyone - including you. The idea that some people should incur additional or distinct moral obligations by virtue of their medical conditions is so unbelievably dense that light bends around it. According to your theory, only diabetics should be morally obligated to oppose the brutal working conditions on South African sugar farms, only cancer patients should be morally obligated to oppose the agriculture industry's excessive use of carcinogenic pesticides, and only people who wear limb prostheses should be morally obligated to oppose the use of land mines in military conflict. If - I - speak - very - slowly - do - you - think - you'll - understand - how - fucking - stupid - that - is?
If adopting is so "moral," then why haven't YOU adopted? I mean, it couldn't possibly be that you feel exempt from a sacrosanct ethical obligation simply because you're not infertile - could it? It couldn't possibly be that you feel entitled to sermonize about a topic with which you have zero personal experience instead of shutting your pie hole unless and until you step up to the "moral" plate and become an adoptive parent yourself - could it? It couldn't possibly be that you feel fully authorized to live your life wrapped tight in the pashmina comfort of self-absorption, lecturing to others about their Moral Duty while squeezing out a sprout or two, funneling your husband's investment banking income directly to DKNY Baby, pushing the Silver Stream stroller with a Seattle's Best in one hand and a Kate Spade bag over the other, addressing criticisms of Starbuck's labor policies by meeting the girls for more of those yummy maple scones, and making this year's Christmas celebration extra-special by splurging on Crate & Barrel ornaments (hand-crafted by Tibetan monks!) and Pottery Barn tinsel (hand-sewn by Namibian San shamans!) - could it? It couldn't possibly be that you would dare open your dumb-box to unspool a lecture about Moral Duty to someone who's suffered through the raging grief of recurrent miscarriage when you've never so much as lost your Land Rover keys, never mind a baby - could it?
So shut the fuck up, you useless parasitic pedant, before I impale you on the Williams-Sonoma roasting spit display.