Could gay terrorists be suppressing sales of Dreher's Ruthie Leming book?
Are gay terrorists working secretly behind the scenes to suppress sales of Rod Dreher's The Little Way of Ruthie Leming? We know from Rod's own lips that sales have been disappointing, if not disastrous, and his fragmented tour of odd and isolated venues only confirms that. What other explanation could there be?
I saw this hysterical post on Dreher's blog today, and I immediately thought what he was desperately hoping to be was Bluto rallying the troops in Animal House:
Maybe it really is over, ya mo-rons. Maybe this time Wermer really has dropped the big one.
The only problem is that corporations, even liberal outfits like Mozilla, just don't work that way: it simply isn't the case that a few rinky-dink protests pop up on social media, and the board of directors then gather, pull their knives, and put Caesar down to please Pinkus, the one gay Roman who thought he dressed unfashionably.
No, in the real world populated by critically reasoning adults (which may, admittedly, exempt many of the adjunct professors populating Dreher's blog) this sort of action, reaction, and follow through only really happens if things are much more problematic at Mozilla and the gain from pleasing Pinkus is already greater than or at least equal to the loss from sacking Eichus Caesar.
So who wins with Eich stepping down? Everyone, probably Eich most of all.
For this to ever have come close to happening, Eich would have had to have been on thin ice as CEO already, for whatever reason. Corporations just don't change CEOs the way Dreher changes religions; they are actually too valuable to them to add or subtract frivolously. But now Eich can leave as a martyr instead of as a publicly humiliated failed CEO. Mozilla wins by looking even more progressive. And Pinkus wins by walking away with the delusion that his robe stayed on the floor where he dropped it because he commanded it to. Pinkus may come to learn that things don't always work that way.
And how does Dreher win with this post? Obviously it's good red meat, always good for blog hits. But in the time-honored Dreher tradition, it's also something else: the wrapper concealing a different payload.
Despite Dreher claiming "Yeah, it’s personal for me", it's nothing of the sort. He's already retreated back to his boyhood home, a boomerang child with jarringly age-inappropriate thinning hair, where no one can get to him to pull his pants down, and he's already abandoned any real interest in corporate journalism with his confessional wildings on his TAC blog over the past year. But most of all, as we've all pointed out here time and again, Dreher has never gone fully on the record against SSM in any way that could seriously get him in trouble: he already carefully OKCupids himself in advance of every blog post.
If you are already good with first getting the permission of others before speaking freely as the passive-aggressive Dreher does - the assumption underpinning this whole post - you are already their bitch.
Willingly.*
So how does Dreher win? The subliminal, implicit payload inside the wrapper.
This Eich thing is so historically hideous, second only to the fall of Constantinople - no, wait, the fall of France is a much better analogy - that it can logically only be the tip of the iceberg, so there's probably already a vast Pink Illuminati stalking Dreher in order to thwart everything he attempts.
Which is the only way to explain the inexplicable. Given his obvious talent as a writer and the obvious draw of spilling the beans on his dead sister, the poor sales of The Little Way of Ruthie Leming can only be explained by mystical evil forces implicitly, invisibly already at work.
And Eich's resignation is why you should begin to think so. Dreher doesn't need to tell you so outright; you can already figure it out for yourself, ya mo-rons.
Because it's only logical.
*Keith's Law of Permitted Free Speech, minions. Spread it far and wide throughout all lands. I'm a little behind on the internet meme-coining scale, you know.
Dreher also apologizes to the gay agenda every time he tosses out that forced "Error Has No Rights" catch-phrase, because it implicitly (or not so implicitly) labels the anti-SSM view as the "Error".
ReplyDeleteAn interesting and thoughtful analysis, Keith. I think you are definitely on to something with this.
ReplyDeleteFor this to ever have come close to happening, Eich would have had to have been on thin ice as CEO already, for whatever reason. Corporations just don't change CEOs the way Dreher changes religions; they are actually too valuable to them to add or subtract frivolously. But now Eich can leave as a martyr instead of as a publicly humiliated failed CEO. Mozilla wins by looking even more progressive. And Pinkus wins by walking away with the delusion that his robe stayed on the floor where he dropped it because he commanded it to. Pinkus may come to learn that things don't always work that way.
ReplyDeleteKeith, this is absolutely correct. I mean, when I heard about this it just seemed scripted. I thought "No... OKCupid? Really??"
The whole thing seemed to be scripted.
ReplyDeletewow, really? obviously you people haven't spent any time on either coast. your eagerness to prove Dreher wrong on *every single point* is getting ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteand by the way, I'm really irritated that you are ignoring me on the other thread. seriously, shame on you, Pauli. You spout all this crap and then when I call you on it you are totally unwilling to defend yourself. Coward.
ReplyDeleteis it not bad enough already that Mozilla feels this is a valid public explanation for letting go of a CEO, regardless if those were their true reasons or not? why shouldn't anyone with traditional values take that personally?
ReplyDeleteIndeed, Kathleen, which is why Erin Manning has fired her Firefox.
DeleteIf even more people got rid of their free browsers and then spent the time to learn to use new ones instead, maybe Mozilla would finally wise up.
Keith
plenty of people are doing the same. so what's your point?
Deleteplenty of people are doing the same. so what's your point?
DeleteOnly that, if it makes them feel better inside to use a browser different from the one they had chosen to use for many years until yesterday and to embrace the learning curve required to do so, by all means they should do so. But that's the only effect that will result.
Even better, no one will really know whether they did or not, and Mozilla won't be publishing any figures on dropoffs in their downloads or upgrades, so it's probably a win-win all the way around.
Otter didn't become president of the Deltas by not knowing the nature of the gesture (2:20+) that was required at this juncture, and neither did Dreher. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? I think not.
Keith
But let me see if I can be a little more specific, Kathleen.
DeleteBy declaring that they're dropping Firefox (whether they actually do or not), such people are
- leading people who agree with them to believe they are the decisive moral leaders among them
- underwriting Eich's opportunistic martyrdom (even though it might be the case simply that the guys who invent the Javascript don't necessarily make the best CEOs and vice versa
- underwriting Mozilla as an even more progressive organization than it was regarded as yesterday; whatever you do, don't throw Mozilla into that briar patch
- leaving the LGBT community believing that these sorts of efforts are results-getters
Keith
You seem to be making the claim that Mozilla loses nothing by fewer people using its browser. On what basis do you make the claim? that it's free? because that would be stupid.
Deleteso Keith, born and raised in what, Nebraska? seriously, I want to know. have you ever even seen either ocean? "Eich's opportunistic martyrdom" LOL
DeleteKathleen, post the number of people who've stopped using Firefox right here
Deleteand then we'll talk further.
Keith
Kathleen, let me put it differently: if I were CEO of Mozilla, I'd hire Erin Manning as my PR front tomorrow.
DeleteBecause the one thing that would be PR gold in my particular market would be to become even more broadly thought of as the liberal browser conservatives hate: for every Erin Manning I'll pick up 10 new, young liberal users. Not the briar patch; anything but the briar patch.
Keith
Hey Keith, what's Eich's big "opportunity" now? he gets to work for the Anita Bryant foundation like he clearly always wanted, inventing javascript and creating a career in sV was just a ruse?
Delete"Kathleen, post the number of people who've stopped using Firefox right here"
Deleteum, where would I get that information? and why would it matter? Seriously, i want to know. because I still don't know what your point is. at all.
Neither the atlantic or the pacific? ... tsk tsk that's kind of sad
Kathleen, I think the guy who invented Javascript will be able to write his own ticket anywhere he pleases.
DeleteNow, if it's okay with you, I'm not going to give you any more personal attention today, 'kay?
Keith
"I think the guy who invented Javascript will be able to write his own ticket anywhere he pleases." UH, NOT REALLY. THAT'S THE POINT, EINSTEIN.
DeleteOK...at this point if you decide to dump Firefox, here are your choices for modern (HTML 5 compliant) browsers:
DeleteChrome - check out Google's record on SSM support
Internet Explorer - marginally compliant at best, but then Microsoft is soooo much better on SSM support
Opera - from Opera Mediaworks, another stunning supporter of SSM
Safari - if you own an Apple computer, you have no room to complain about Mozilla unless you toss your Apple out the window as well
Which leaves what as a free Internet browser that is fully standards compliant, reliable, and supportive of traditional values?
{crickets}
Precisely. Nothing.
So, the whole Eich thing is outrage porn, a junior high kid stomping his little feet in frustration while he screams in his shrill little voice "this isn't fair". My answer...no, it's not fair. Where were you ever told that life is to be fair? Build a bridge and get over it.
But then, this attracts hits for Dreher and funds his wonderful Lenten fasts.
Aw, now this just isn't fair!
ReplyDeleteDreher's meme picture for his self-aggrandizing meme-Law has a penguin. A cute little penguin!
I want a kitty cat for my competing self-aggrandizing meme Law of Permitted Free Speech. Or maybe a bunny.
Keith
At least this issue gives Rod a chance to get in some brownie points with Andrew Sullivan.
ReplyDeleteOne thing the Eich incident teaches us above all else: why some people are ranchers, and why so many more people are their willing livestock.
ReplyDeleteKeith
Keith,
ReplyDeleteYou are just plain wrong about this. Eich was brought down by a witch hunt against those who supported Prop 8. Mozilla being a non-profit entity is a sketchy operation as it is and Eich was a good guy to lead it. Don't think for a second that this is all that unusual. There is (and has been for years) a gay mafia in silicon valley that conspires to hire their own and get rid of or limit those they oppose. 15 years ago I worked in just such an environment and lesbian that I worked with (who didn't agree with the program) took me out for beers and laid it all out and she warned me to get out. She got out herself. I took her advice and moved to another group and my career soared. From a distance, I saw the conspirators rise with each others help and their opponents get back stabbed.
On a lighter note: I worked with Mike Judge at my first start-up during his short stint in silicon valley some 26 or 27 years ago. He has stated that his new show takes some inspiration from that time and I'll be watching with a small amount of fear that I will appear as a caricature.
OK, well I'll believe you Steve because you're out there.
DeleteBased on stuff you've said, you might know my Aunt and Uncle.
Steve,
DeleteOh, I don't question at all that Eich was targeted for his support of Prop 8.
But if what you're saying is true, then you're confirming, not refuting what I'm saying: Eich was ousted from Mozilla because the values of the gay mafia in power there trumped his net value to Mozilla as CEO.
I'm not saying there isn't Machiavellian politics in the corporate world, just that, all other things being equal, it's simply not possible for an OKCupid to kill off Mozilla's CEO.
Nor is there the sort of universal Manichean war of cultures of the sort Dreher trades in to add to his herd, your lesbian being a case in point: unless she bowed to the program, she would have been targeted as well, gay or not.
Even so, all this being said, even Mozilla gay mafias must ultimately answer to market Darwinism, and if their cultural choices lead them to subsidizing those cultural choices at the expense of market success, they'll drive themselves into extinction.
Keith
Pauli, so until today you believed that all this talk about a gay mafia was conservative hysteria a la Dreher, and you only changed your mind today because someone who lives in Silicon Valley confirmed it for you? For real?!!
DeleteKeith, you've contradicted yourself so many times in this thread it's comical.
Who might your aunt and uncle be and how might I know them? Hmm, has my retirement brought on one more visitor from my misspent youth? Enquiring minds want to know.
Deleteand Pauli, thanks for the ongoing dissing. If Silicon Valley Steve says it, well, it must be right, but if I say it there's radio silence. noted.
ReplyDeleteI think this link from stillaninterestedobserver at Dreher's blog adds some much needed three dimensionality to this situation, namely, does Eich fall somewhere on the autism spectrum, as those extremely gifted in math and science can?
ReplyDeleteThis doesn't contradict Silicon Steve, but it might explain why even in the absence of a gay mafia entrenched at Mozilla Eich would have an uphill challenge as CEO that he would never have faced, or at least never as steeply, as CTO. Add a gay mafia and you've got a guy 1) already short on CEO-specific skills 2) now facing active, irrational opposition.
Keith
LOL almost everyone in silicon valley is on the autism spectrum.
DeleteAFAIK, Mozilla is a non-profit, so I suspect it is much less affected by market Darwinism. Making statements is its stock-in-trade (e.g., it's got a Manifesto).
ReplyDeletePik, I wasn't sure what areas of Mozilla, if any, were responsible for producing revenue, but this is why boycotting Firefox, at least, seems rather pointless to me, if not in fact counterproductive.
DeleteAnd so if we're already talking about 1) a collectivist organization; 2) funded largely or mostly by venture capital and some crowd-sourced charity; 3) that may already overwhelmingly "at once a global social movement, a valuable consumer brand and a company based in the State of California" and little else, then it seems to me we've already left the notion of individuality and individual rights as a corporate value aways back upstream: the "openness" Mozilla speaks of isn't and never will be an internal mission statement but rather only an external one. In its own way, then, this isn't unlike someone getting incensed that the Catholic Church isn't a democracy. It just ain't in the cards.
My own belief, which the Mozilla insider linked does nothing to dispel, remains that Eich was a guy inevitably promoted into his Peter position; if he was high-functioning Asperger's as well, his doom was already sealed, as the resignation of three board members right after his appointment and before the whole Prop 8 kerfluffle seems to hint at. Add Silicon Steve's gay mafia to that as well, if it does in fact have a significant presence in Mozilla, and you have a situation where Eich was pre-destined to be returned to doing what he does best.
Keith
Because high-functioning Asperger's types are nowhere to be found in Silicon Valley!
Deleteespecially not in executive/founders positions. still LOL
DeleteWOW. It's clear to me now why so many on the religious right are simply lambs to the slaughter. You really have no idea what you're up against, do you?
ReplyDeleteOr maybe it's just that you'd rather not know.
DeleteWhen it comes to this kind of attack, Eich (and Dreher for that matter) are our kin. Dreher has worked for both media corporations and a foundation. In this current climate, he may not be able to find employment with any of these because of the public stance he has taken on gay marriage. He has a right to make a stink about it and it we care about our own employment prospects or those of our children we should be very concerned. An all-out witch hunt may be in the offing. There is already a deep chill. Since I don't plan on seeking further employment, my contribution to Prop 8 is unlikely to effect me but there are many others we need to be concerned with.
ReplyDeleteand this sort of thing has been going on sub rosa for decades. Now the left are feeling their oats and getting bolder, that's all. It's about time the middle of the country come to grips with the fact that *the left despises you, they think you are dirt*
DeleteSteve,
DeleteTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII):
This law makes it illegal to discriminate against someone on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex. The law also makes it illegal to retaliate against a person because the person complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit. The law also requires that employers reasonably accommodate applicants' and employees' sincerely held religious practices, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the employer's business.
http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/religion.cfm
The problem with Dreher is that he wants someone else to be responsible for his pants not being pulled down so that he can continue to look inviting to all sides: "You bring the gun to my gunfight so that I can continue to bring the potato salad and everybody will still like me." This is why he depends so heavily on Andrew Sullivan carrying his water for him. Those who buy into Dreher's arguments in these cases pretty much can't help but buy into this implicit, Dreher-only-serving payload assumption underpinning all of them: "Who will exert themselves on my behalf so that I can remain the helpless little lamb I prefer to be?"
To the extent there is any sort of gay mafia activity afoot, the lesson they seem to be rapidly learning is this: slap a social conservative, watch the social conservative cry like a little girl for Mommy. Lesson learned? Slap the little bitch twice as hard, get twice as much or more in return.
Keith
Of course, there is more to the story than Dreher is telling. But then, a boring observation from the WSJ and Eich's own words don't drive as many website hits as "ERROR HAS NO RIGHTS".
Delete"On top of all this, Eich wasn’t even seen as a slam-dunk choice to run Mozilla in the first place. As the Wall Street Journal reported weeks ago, some Mozilla board members wanted to hire an outside C.E.O., presumably to shake up the organization, which has struggled to make inroads into the mobile business. Three of the company’s six board members actually resigned before Eich was appointed. (The company claimed, rather implausibly, that the resignations were unrelated to the C.E.O. search.) Eich himself told VentureBeat that the board had interviewed twenty-five candidates before settling on him; he even wondered aloud why they didn’t pick Jay Sullivan, who was the other internal candidate for the position."
The gay mafia may well be at work her, but so is the investment mafia. And with Mozilla Foundation being a non-profit that depends not on product sales but investor contributions, a closer look at the situation makes me think this is less about the gay mafia scoring a skin than an inept board picking someone wrong for the job.
Dreher is milking this Eich thing exactly the same way he milked the Phil Robertson episode - as a relentless follower-on - and his bandwagon-jumping-on ability and the ability to cast things in the most hysterically stark terms has already paid him back with a link in Real Clear Politics. If he were simultaneously selling Dreher-cloths to save his followers from gay hordes about to overrun them, he could eat nothing but French oysters for the rest of his life. It's all about the Benjamins.
DeleteKeith
Has it never occurred to you, Keith, that you are Dreher's bitch? I mean, you follow the man more closely than Erin Manning does.
ReplyDeleteI follow Dreher the way I do because he is unique among human beings: a creature whose just about every move in life, if not flamboyantly self-parodying in its own right, is imminently ripe for parody, and usually on a daily if not even more frequent basis. Dreher is a daily, self-refilling cornucopia of pathological human foolishness, a gift that never, ever stops giving, one unusually rich in areas that matter the most, not at all your Days Inn fruit basket.
DeleteTo mix metaphors, I enjoy Dreher as the running stock ticker of the pathological vices of the human mind.
With these sorts of precious gifts we teach our young what berries not to eat, which gods not to worship, and how not to be such fools themselves.
Keith
"I follow Dreher the way I do because he is unique among human beings"
Deletethe irony abounds
I think that Keith (in his usual long winded way) has just admitted that he is Dreher's bitch. Let 's see how long this one stays up.
DeleteDreher is an entertaining flibbertigibbet and poseur, but I agree with Katherine and Silicon Valley Steve that that doesn't make him wrong about everything every single time. He's right about the gay and pro-gay "inquisition" and has surely suffered from it professionally, given the enormous online paper trail he's left, going on and on and on so obsessively about homosexuality. His obsessiveness about that subject likely helped to cost him the Templeton job and the specific content of his obsession, especially his opposition to same-sex marriage, had to have closed many doors in his face in trying to promote a Little Way. Salon or Slate or one of those sorts of online liberal magazines did a pre-emotive hit piece against him before the book was published, calling him a "homophobe." So I think he's paid some price for things he's said and knows whereof he speaks, on this particular point.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteBut I never raised your straw man about Dreher being "wrong about everything every single time", I only said that he can effortlessly be parodied on a daily basis.
DeleteAs to your main point, that someone should actually have to stand and fall on their beliefs, and particularly when they are exhibitionistic performance artists like Rod Dreher or Annie Sprinkle, well I suppose some people just don't understand how fundamentally servile and craven their underlying beliefs actually are.
So I'll explain it to you simply: once you leave Mommy and Daddy's protection, you are on your own, and no one owes you anything, least of all the requirement to like you, for any reason. If you rub some people the wrong way - Rod's Catholic-bashing seems to rub some people the wrong way; which dioceses should be required to hire him as their press liaison? - tough luck, quit being such a sniveling titty baby.
That this sort of grotesquely slavish sort of thinking is even more risible when it comes from ostensibly Christian or conservative sources, who really, if they have any principles at all, should know better. So the gays don't like you? Awww...poor titty baby. Either fight back if they're doing you any real harm - there are literally crushing glaciers of legal avenues to do so - or STFU.
Did the whole point of this post escape everyone? That blaming simple, fundamental incompetence on lofty principles instead, "racism" being the current choice du jour, is the oldest, most craven scam in the book? That if you don't even have the moral courage to stand up for yourself, you deserve to be ground under and out of history so that something better can replace you?
Remember, Eich resigned of his own volition, he didn't force the board to fire him, which he could have, because that choice served him best under the circumstances. Sorry, it wasn't his place to serve anyone else's weenie psychic needs by proxy.
Keith
His obsessiveness about that subject likely helped to cost him the Templeton job
DeleteNo, what cost Dreher his Templeton job was muhzik flagrantly violating the employment terms he was hired under.
Most if not all of Dreher's career slide can be attributed to foolish, ego-driven decisions of this sort, not to his being treated unfairly by cruel forces beyond his control. Dreher wants to remain the exhibitionist Peter Pan boy-child who never grows up, and he thinks the world owes him that existence. And, within the blog-bubbles of sycophants and sympathizers he can create for himself from time to time like some sort of diving water bug, he can episodically achieve it.
And if he can, well, doggoneit, so can I, minions.
Keith
Oengus, your deleting of your own comments has become your signature. It's kind of silly. FOR GOODNESS SAKE, WILL YOU RELIGIOUS MEN GET SOME BALLS?
Deleteuh oh my comments are needing approval now? the blog dies, not with a bang....
DeleteI set up comments so that if a post is brand new, no approval is needed. If it's older than 5 days then approval is needed.
Delete(Off to get "some balls"....)
Pauli, if you're going to "get some balls,' don't go to the Vatican. You won't find any there... ;)
DeleteThat should read "preemptive." Doggone auto-correct.
ReplyDeleteSo you concede that you want to follow Dreher's lead in living out your days as an exhibitionistic man-child who won't grow up and won't outgrow his infantile fixation with Rod Dreher. Sounds like being Dreher's bitch to me. And, no, I'm not one of Dreher's "minions." Who's being a conspiracist now?
ReplyDelete