Maya Angelou, “Trying to support her son as a single mother, she worked as a pimp, prostitute and _____.” How does such a passage make it into an 8th Grade maths test? That depends…
Nobel Prizes are hard to get, Nobel Peace Prizes easier.
A Nobel Prize is awarded to people who excelled in a field of science and worked hard at doing so, while a Nobel Peace Prize is awarded primarily to someone who makes the grade for political expediency. Nobel Peace Prize winners are in the company of,
- Aristide Briand and Gustav Stresemann (1926);
- Henry A. Kissinger and Le Duc Tho (1973);
- Rigoberta Menchú Tum (1992);
- Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin (1994)
- Kim Dae-jung (2000);
- The United Nations (U.N.) and Kofi Annan (2001);
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. (2007), and
- Others. (No offence or insult to anyone who actually deserved a Nobel Peace Prize intended. — WHS)
Although Andrew Weaver cannot lay claim to ever having been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, he happily does so but is not the only climate-alarm populist who lays claim to it without being entitled to do so (i. e.: Rajenda Pachauri and Michael Mann).
Meet ‘One of the World’s Foremost Climate Scientists’
Andrew Weaver: climate modeler, Green Party deputy leader, Greenpeace promoter.
Andrew Weaver is a climate modeler. Which means he spends his time messing about with computers. His “research” takes place in a virtual, imaginary, speculative world. Decades or centuries from now his climate predictions may turn out to be correct. Or they may be forgotten because they were spectacularly wrong.
What is important is that, at this moment in history,
Andrew Weaver is one of the world’s foremost climate scientists and a leading expert on global warming…He is Canada Research Chair in climate modeling and analysis at the University of Victoria, and has authored or coauthored nearly two hundred peer-reviewed studies in climate, earth science, policy, and education journals. He was chief editor of the Journal of Climate from 2005-2009. [backed up here]
One area of political endeavour where Nobel Peace Prizes are much sought and pursued is feminism. Women may not excel as much in science as men do, but the feminists try to make up for that by trying to create their own truths, whereby they at times obtain a much-sought-after Nobel Peace Prize for some of their sisters. Some succeed, as did Rigoberta Menchú (see the article by David Horowitz identified in the following), and others (or their supporters) fail in their bid to fame through obtaining a Nobel Peace Prize, as none was awarded to (former prostitute) poet and author of creative fiction Maya Angelou, although that was apparently not for lack of trying by some of her supporters.
R I G H T O N ! — D A V I D_H O R O W I T Z
I, Rigoberta Menchú, liar
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
How left-wing propagandists, a fellow-traveling Nobel committee and a corrupt media perpetrated a monstrous hoax.
The story of Rigoberta Menchú, a Quiché Mayan from Guatemala whose autobiography catapulted her to international fame, won her the Nobel Peace Prize and made her an international emblem of the dispossessed indigenous peoples of the Western Hemisphere and their attempt to rebel against the oppression of European conquerors, has now been exposed as a political fabrication, a tissue of lies. It is one of the greatest hoaxes of the 20th century….
Maya Angelou was an American story teller, born long after the last American slaves were liberated, She chose to remain in the United States, and why not? She did well, by writing “for money,” complaining about her slave ancestry and the fact that she had been a prostitute — both popular topics.
Pa. high school apologizes for using inappropriate Maya Angelou questions on homework
AP January 13, 2017, 2:23 PM
PERKASIE, Pa. — A Pennsylvania high school is apologizing after students were given a math homework assignment that asked which family member had sexually assaulted a girl.
The assignment focused on Maya Angelou and her autobiography “I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.” It provided an algebra formula that asked: “Angelou was sexually abused by her mother’s ___ at age 8, which shaped her career choices and motivation for writing.” Pennridge High School students needed to solve the formula before deciding whether the answer was boyfriend, brother or father.
Screenshots of the homework posted by news organizations showed the subsequent question reads: “Trying to support her son as a single mother, she worked as a pimp, prostitute and ___.” Another formula must be solved to determine if the answer was bookie, drug dealer or nightclub dancer. «
Is all of what Maya Angelou reported and wrote about the unvarnished, hard and cold truth? We already know from the CBS NEWS report that some of the embellishments added by the man-hating feminists in that maths test are fabrications. Still, when one reads, “Although referred to as Dr. Angelou, she never went to college,” one must wonder. What does it mean when Angelou stated, in responding to critics of the veracity of her writing, “I agree with Balzac and 19th-century writers, black and white, who say, ‘I write for money'”? In other of her own words: “There’s a world of difference between truth and facts. Facts can obscure the truth.” That is a good way of putting it. That should be taken to mean that, for the sake of bringing in money, Angelou had no qualms about substituting her own “truths” for the facts. Someone like that obviously has strong opinions but is not a good source of facts of history, her own or in general but is a source to go to for anyone in search of strong, unsubstantiated opinions.
No one knows why a caged bird sings, other than that it is speculated that birds often sing to proclaim their presence or the territory they claim. It stands to reason that any caged bird can be quite comfortable and proclaim that fact by singing. No amount of creatively writing and declaring by anyone, not even by Maya Angelou, that “I know why the caged bird sings,” will change that fact, but it will ensure, if done well enough when writing for money, that the author will live comfortably ever after.
That still leaves the question of how and why Angelou’s creative writing made it into an 8th Grade maths test. The apology offered for that transgression declared that it was a mistake. Yes, it was. It was not an accident. It was deliberate. It was a hate crime and no more a mistake than any other crime is. Was it merely misandry, was it for mercenary reasons (to help out the publishers of Maya Angelou’s works), or was it both? Who knows what the motivation for that deliberate ploy for attention really was? It did receive a lot of attention.
All of that leaves one with the firm impression that feminist sources of truth may well be popular but don’t necessarily acquire the desired extent of political correctness, and that may well be because the expression “feminist source of truth” can be thought of as an oxymoron.