‘Vulva’ is the Latin term for female genitalia. It is used in anatomy lessons at medical school and has no wider social or literary application. It designates the entire body area of the female genitals.
* * *
Now, it would be considered unseemly, and rightly so, if a male group were to call itself the Phallus Quartet, or the Membrum Virile.
So why apply a different standard to a female ensemble?
Because it’s just Latin and no-one knows what it means?
Wrong message.
I’m afraid the estimable Norman Lebrecht is clueless here. The message is exactly the right one for its intended recipients, the CRT, DEI, LGBTQIA2S+-×÷§∆π~® crowd. It’s a virtue signal, telling them: “We’re different. We may be playing Bartok, the Mozart Haydn Quartets and Late Beethoven, but we’re at a far remove from those other string quartets part of the fascist-racist white-male power structure. So show your support by coming to and being seen at our concerts, even if you’re bored to death by chamber music. Bring your ear pods and listen to whatever you want, but be there.”
I’m sure the Vulva Vocians would want to put the above in different words, but the message will be the same, whatever words they choose.
(Note to readers: your Tatler is moving from a condominium to a house. This is the result of complaints from inmates of a neighboring condominium over my dog, who occasionally would stray on their hallowed turf, though not causing any harm or messiness. The house sits on three acres, which should prove a happy solution to the problem.
Meanwhile, the dreary task of preparation for the move is taking its toll by depriving this blogger of any inspiration to crank out new posts. Matters should improve the middle of next month, upon the closing on the sale of my present digs and the purchase of the new ones. Meanwhile, I ask your forbearance.)
The above not withstanding, the little item below was enough to rouse the Tatler from his lethargy.
After a couple hours on the Rehoboth beach, @potus was asked about the rising death toll in Hawaii
Obviously, the most powerful man in the free world (for the near future, at least), without his minders present, was unable to respond to a sycophantic reporter’s gentle lob, to be used in yet another valentine to the putative president; this in the guise of a news item to demonstrate his compassion. Nope, he couldn’t manage it without assistance.
This is not to say the president’s eunuchs aren’t on the case. They no doubt are busy researching the matter of the Maui fires at this writing, assessing it from the perspectives of racism (obligatory, no matter what the issue), global warming, blaming the Republicans, as well, it goes without saying, Donald Trump. They will not fail us and upon their briefing of Mr Biden, we may expect soon to hear pearls of wisdom emanating from the great man’s lips concerning Maui fires, referencing of course the matters his programmers have plugged into his dessicated brain.
For most mainstream media, even the increasingly rare conservative press, a nasty dog in the White House is hardly page-one material. Thankfully, the New York Post, though technically a part of MSM, hearkens back to a nearly extinct branch of the press, the brash and outspoken tabloid.
Amusing as the headline is, the Post also performs a service printing the story because it makes a point most other media refuse to acknowledge and usually cover up, which is there isn’t a single aspect of Joe Biden, his administration and his kleptocratic kin which doesn’t stink. He and his clan when faced with making a decision, no matter how minor, inevitably make the wrong one. This is especially true when lucre is involved (“what’s in it for me,” is their by-word), but also when it concerns only an ill-behaved dog.
A biting dog, even in the White House, should not be a big deal, but becomes one when the poor creature, instead of being provided training and discipline, à la Barbara Woodhouse (“No Bad Dogs”), is permitted instead to continue its egregious behavior, thus causing mayhem and grief to the already beleaguered White House Secret Service detail. Naturally, in the Biden manner, it has been covered up (parallels to Hunter Biden, anyone?).
Assuming our nation survives this God-awful presidency, historians (real ones, not left-wing propagandists), will likely make comparisons of the Biden Administration to earlier corrupt administrations; specifically, those of Presidents Grant and Harding. They would not be fair comparisons, though. Both Harding and Grant (the latter a true war hero), despite their crooked staffers, were good men themselves, but were either too weak, incapable of, or unwilling to rein in the bad guys.
The Biden administration is unique in our country’s history as having an executive as rotten to the core as the cretins who report to him. It is to our never-ending shame we allowed this terrible man take office.
Conservatives are in a pother because Fox Corporation has been contributing, under the table as it were, to noisome left-wing organizations like the “Satanic Temple, the Trevor Project, Planned Parenthood and the Southern Poverty Law Center.”
Come now, how can they be surprised and outraged by such a revelation? Fox Corporation is a publicly traded company and there is hardly a publicly traded company in America that doesn’t contribute to horrid organizations like those. There are surely squishes on Fox’s board, as well among its shareholders, who insist in the name of democracy [sic] the company help support these instruments of the devil. Besides, the contributions result from matching gifts by employees and are fairly minimal, no higher than a grand per coven.
Instead of attacking the vastly less than perfect Fox Corporation, conservatives should instead broadcast loud, far and wide the names of the beneficiaries of Fox’s largess. Just imagine, for example, the squirming by directors of the SPLC when an ill-bred indignant at the organization’s annual meeting starts screaming at them for sucking at the teat of the Fox; Marvelous to behold.
The Rev’d Miss Wendy Dalyrimpleproudly displays her tats.
News item: Tattooed reverend gets hate online as Canterbury Cathedral defends her appointment to leadership role.
Since I’m at a loss for words, I’ll let someone else speak, Moses, in Leviticus 19:28:
Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord. (KJV)
Tellingly, immediately following, in Leviticus 19:29, we read:
Do not prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore; lest the land fall to whoredom, and the land become full of wickedness.
Tempting as it is, I will not attempt creating a nexus between those two verses, rather, let them stand apart in silent snarkiness. It is worth noting however, before our cultural mores were tossed into the trash in the 1960s, tattoos generally were found only on tradesmen and enlisted men in the armed forces, and rarely on women. The last few decades however they have become familiar adornments, ubiquitous even, among professionals, priests included, though not on Catholic priests, yet; given the wretched state of the Anglican Church these days however, it’s only natural tats would find themselves on the arms and torsos of her priests.
Fr Gross-out struts his stuff.
Now, striking a blow for women’s equality, the madre in the news item has indulged herself in those lurid self effacements which, owing to my upbringing, decades later still cause me to cringe. In all honesty, your Tatler cannot look at heavily tattooed people and take them seriously. I know I am not alone in this.
In the case of heavily tatted C of E clergymen, though some have protested them, it hardly matters, as the average Sunday attendance in Anglican (and Episcopal churches, stateside) is likely less than the number of those horrid images on their bodies.
This video is a must-see for all observant Catholics. It is an explanation by Gavin Ashenden, an Anglican convert to Catholicism and the Associate Editor of the Catholic Herald. This hearty soul has taken the trouble to slog through the entire instrumentum laborisfor Synodality (something this writer gave up about three-quarters through), recently released, which lays out what the synodists have in mind for the future of the Catholic Church. It is ghastly stuff.
In essence, the future Catholic Church, according to the synodists, will have little concern over an individual’s sinful behavior, past or present and will be far more concerned with engagement with him via “conversation” and “acceptance.” The Catholic Church of the future will become a “feel-good” institution, where the words of Jesus will be reinterpreted as progressive relativistic mush.
What is behind this dreadful morass, unsurprisingly, is the LGBTQ+ movement, as if there were among them a large percentage of Catholics, or Catholics to be, which is highly doubtful. Most observant Catholics who are gay likely know what the Catechism expects of them and live their lives accordingly and quietly. So in all, what the Synodality is, is a woke display of virtue signaling. As Mr Ashenden nicely puts it, it is
. . . colored and distorted by the endlessly repeated aphorisms of subjective relativism immersed in constant therapeutic truisms.
We should still beware, though. Should the synodists be successful in pushing this wretched stuff through, we well might see the beginnings of schism in the Catholic Church, as it is unlikely observant Catholics, of all kinds, who reverently practice their religion will want anything to do with the heterodox claptrap the synodists so eagerly promote.
* * *
A footnote: by coincidence (or maybe not), here is the Gospel reading for yesterday’s TLM Mass, the Seventh Sunday after Pentecost. Our pastor in his sermon mentioned it was removed from the Novus Ordo lectionary. Hardly a surprise.
St. Matthew 7. 15-21:
At that time: Jesus said to His disciples, Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. Not every one that saith to Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.
The U.K. is fighting to keep a unique bronze chandelier by Alberto Giacometti within its borders, issuing a temporary export ban to give a local institution a chance to match the £2.4 million ($2.9 million) purchase price on the work.
It’s a pretty penny—especially considering the lighting fixture was worth just $700 when British painter John Craxton discovered it in a London antique shop in the 1960s. The artist was immediately aware of the significance of his find, as he recognized the work as having belonged to his late friend Peter Watson, an art collector and important midcentury patron of the arts in the U.K.
$700 seems pricey enough for this light fixture, which to my unpracticed eye appears to be an assemblage of metal parts made into a chandelier after a bit of rummaging around a metal shop. Does the mere fact the artist Giacometti did the rummaging really make it worth a cool three-million? How so?
Can anyone explain what’s so special about a rather dull collection of nuts and bolts, albeit their being made of bronze, without lapsing into artspeak. No? I didn’t think so.
Not long ago at St Francis of Assisi Church in Midtown Manhattan, parishioners hosted an event titled “United in Love Pre-Pride Festive Mass and rooftop BBQ.”
Here are some photos of the event for your delection.
Sheer speculation and hypothetical to say the least, can you imagine this God-awful stuff taking place were the Tridentine Rite being celebrated? Novus Ordo, with its painful informality, invites this sort of junk that the old mass wouldn’t permit.
In the description of this event on the church’s website, is the following.
Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Trans Catholics have recently been particularly singled out for vitriolic, uncharitable, and frankly, unchristian, attacks by some members of the Church. In one photo you will see a small protest which took place outside of the Church of St. Francis of Assisi before and during our Mass which underscores this point. This attitude is completely against the teaching of the Church and does not bear witness to Christ who said “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another just as I have loved you.
Here is the referenced photo.
Four “protestors,” observed by a single bystander wordlessly holding a banner urging the participants inside to consider expending their energies humbly devoting themselves to the Heart of Jesus, who suffered for us all, rather than to their own personal “pride.” This is, apparently, an example of “vitriolic, uncharitable, and frankly, unchristian, attacks by some members of the Church.”
The participants in this silliness ought to be reminded, even though a mass was celebrated by a priest sympathetic to heretical behavior, Church teachings are immutable and inviolable on same-sex matters, no matter how many “pride” flags are waved during the eucharist. Indeed, if those particular teachings were changed (along with any other Church teachings) it would mark the end of the Holy Catholic Church.
THE TAOS TATLER. 