Leftist outlet Slate’s hot take on the Muslim suicide blast after an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester was a futile exercise in identity politics and a major embarrassment to say the least.
Writer Christina Cauterucci rightly assessed that the demographics of Grande’s fan base would certainly include girls and women among the dead. Indeed, the first two confirmed casualties were of an 8-year-old girl and an 18-year-old girl. And Cauterucci was also right in concluding that the heinous attack targeted children. However, she couldn’t resist veering off into how feminism was also a victim:
“[T]hey targeted fans of an artist whose global brand is one of blissful, unsubdued feminine sexuality. Grande has long been the target of sexist rhetoric that has deemed her culpable for any sexual objectification or animosity that’s come her way. Her songs and wardrobe are sexy, yet she’s maintained a coy, youthful persona; the combination has led some haters to argue that she’s made her fortune by making people want to have sex with her, so whatever related harm befalls her is entirely her fault.”
At the time of her writing, the blast hadn’t been officially declared terrorism but Cauterucci was already sure of the motives of the bomber:
“Like her pop-superstar predecessor Britney Spears, Grande has advanced a renegade, self-reflexive sexuality that’s threatening to the established heteropatriarchal order. If the Manchester bombing was an act of terrorism, its venue indicates that the attack was designed to terrorize young girls who idolize Grande’s image.”
“These girls are survivors of an orchestrated attack on girls and girlhood, a massive act of gender-based violence,” Cauterucci concluded.
One thing this attack against children, women, men, and all the other infidels in the West couldn’t possibly be in Cauterucci’s mind — Islam.