Hard pills to swallow: Cas isn’t gay & Misha Collins is annoying

Your gay group is weird. Really, you want turn women into men. The birth rate in Europe is already low and reducing it even more by converting women into men is idiotic.

Another thing is you want manly women? No straight guy wants to date another man. A man wants to date a woman because she is feminine. If she's dating a guy, he's gay.Your little community is all gay and nothing else.

And in the end, as we can see, germany never changes. Once upon a time, the ideal representative of the Aryan race was a tall, blue-eyed blond man. Now you're trying to create the ideal man (bro) as a muscular, animal-haired muslim. And of course, it's best for everyone to drop their nationalities in order to create an idiotic gay community.

I will not mention this post about torturing a Ukrainian. Germans just like to torment others (non bros or whatever you called it).

I don't think I've seen such sick ideas for a new community in a long time.

When I read your blah blah, I kept thinking of this video:

Instead of getting upset about my blog: Date a "feminine woman" and do something about the low white birth rate yourself. There are enough super feminine women out there. But maybe you're too poor and gay for that yourself, and instead squirt your cum in a handkerchief while scrolling through tumblr. ^^

I'm going to address your objections factually, although I really don't feel like it. But it still has to be done:

—

Yes, the Germans are such a terrible nation. They torment you with so much money that you get; not to mention their cultural and technological achievements that brought mankind forward. Yes, people all around the world really suffer a lot from the evil Germans who take in millions of refugees: 2/3 of all current welfare recipients in Germany are Ukrainians, by the way! And they contribute absolutely NOTHING, they just eat the hair off the heads! So before you open your fucking mouth, deal with the real circumstances!

Your sympathy for that corrupt piece of shit somewhere in Eastern Europe disqualifies you for good. I guess you're a white supremacist cheering on Ukrainian neo-nazis against evil Igor?

The fact that you still took a close look at my blog suggests that you are at least somewhat attracted to men. You may be telling yourself that you're being totally straight when you're not.

However, you didn't understand the logic at all. I don't want to change the current society, because it cannot be changed. I'm talking about separation. That's a totally other approach.

By the way, I never use the term "gay", because gay means much more than just being homosexual or bisexual, it also has a political meaning that I absolutely do not share. That's why I also speak of an androphilic community, where masculinity and male values are central. You don't see the benefits behind it. Instead, in the existing conservative thinking, you mourn the old ways, which only worked to a limited extent when there were no contraceptives. Even Iran proves this, where women are still oppressed and pushed into a female role, but the birth rate is far too low.

Testosterone also makes women sexually willing; much more willing than your petite super feminine dolls. I therefore want to improve women without losing their female sexuality! Femininity should be reduced to a biological minimum and optimized in this state. So there emerges a clear evolutionary advantage, especially when the division of society is overcome: Instead of umpteen genders, there is only the masculine, whether with a cock or a pussy hidden under a dicklet. Thus, my concern is to develop a better working alternative. Yes, I'll admit it might seem pretty weird to an outsider. But weirder than our current society? Weirder than the literal interpretation of the Bible and the morality derived from it? Weirder than anything before?! I do not think so!

Every kind of society started out with a mere idea. Just think of Karl Marx, who shaped the world with his new ideas like no other; whether it was good or bad is anyone's guess (I'm not a communist, but I'm not a fervent supporter of capitalism either). In this sense, every change begins with just a thought and the will behind it.

Gay Men, Newsflash, are Still Men

Growing up, I never really had a lot of slumber parties. Before high school, I only had sleepovers with two girls from my Girl Scout troop (and I guess camping trips if that counts). In high school I only had one sleepover with the kids from my department. The only people to come were all girls. 

But from the course of conversations with female friends and interactions with media, I realized it was a common occurrence to have a gay man included in “all girl” sleepovers. The logic was, as I came to know it, “He’s gay, he’s not attracted to me, so it’s okay to include him in this.” This logic carries over to all sorts of realms. From girl-talk to graphic and intimate discussions of guy problems, these women treat these men (and these men treat themselves) as if they are women and belong in women’s spaces. 

In fact, an adult gay man who went to my school (turned 18 junior year, 19 senior year type thing) had this habit of barging indiscriminately into the women’s restrooms. Did a teacher ever do anything about this? Of course not. Why would they? After all, he’s gay, it’s not like he’s going to do anything to the girls. Moreover, none of the women who witnessed this or who heard about this ever complained to any administrator. Why didn’t they? Well because he’s gay. What would he want to do to them?

Well it turns out he did do things to girls and not just in the bathroom. He openly groped his female classmates chests and rear-ends. But no one complained, so no one must’ve been bothered, right? Wrong. Privately, among actual women, these girls disclosed to me and their friends that they were made horrifically uncomfortable by this grown homosexual man’s advances. But they thought, because he was gay, that he must not have meant anything by it or that he didn’t know better(1). 

But gay men do know better. This particular gay man was was not medically delayed in any way. The only explanation of this behaviors is that like all predators, he had no respect for the personhood or bodies of the people he aggressed upon. Gay men, no matter how feminine, are still men. Thus, we should not normalize (as has been normalized for decades) the practice of treating them as such. Do not include your gay male friends in single sex sleepovers. Do not include them in discussions of lady problems or “guy problems” you would only tell other women. Do not let gay men traipse into women’s spaces (restrooms, locker rooms, hell-- conferences specifically for women) because you believe him to be limp-waisted enough to be hardly a man in the first place. It’s wrong, factually speaking, and it’s insulting; gay men are fully men. It also places you and your fellow woman in danger physically and psychologically(2). Simply do not take that risk. 

This brings me to a discussion of transsexual men. Transsexual men are men and deserve to be treated as such. They have been known to cary the exact same risks of every other variety of man. 

There was one transsexual man in my class of 10. He had begun his transition before high school even started. To me and most other people, he looked exactly like a 14 year old boy. That’s what he ways. So it both amazed and disgusted me when the girls and my class (and the female teacher) would begin talks of “lady problems” or subjects like that would normally only be discussed around women. There is a man sitting right next to me and I am hearing discussions of period “globs”. I can feel him sinking into his seat and below the table-- as any other boy would. 

Along with the fact that transexual men are equally capable of predation as cis men, it adds insult to a person already struggling with their gender identity. And regardless of what you think of transsexuals, upsetting them just to be an asshole for 15 minutes should not come before keeping women safe. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1) Can we take a moment to acknowledge how insulting this is to gay men to pretend as if an individual’s habit of groping women is a symptom of gay men “simply not knowing what that means to girls.” Give me a break. Gay men are full people and are as capable as anyone else to understand how their peers feel and they are most definitely capable of understanding consent and interpersonal discretion. 

2) I don’t mean to seem like I believe men to be inherently predatory. I don’t believe they are. But everyone must admit that men pose a greater danger to women than fellow women do. Men are physically stronger, that’s just a fact, and studies have seemed to show you’re more likely to be affected by the bad actions of the opposite sex rather then your same sex-- likely because your own sex is more familiar. 

About the Killer...

Hello there person on the internet. I don't know you, but if you're reading this you will know me, or at least what I'm about. The name and description of this account pretty much says it all; pretty much...

I just want to clarify that I am fully aware that the terms "snowflake", "SJW" and "cuck" have been made popular due to extreme right Republican, mostly Trump supporters over the last few years; however, they don't own those terms nor are the first to use them. I am not a Trump supporter and never will be. As a matter of fact, Donald Trump is one of the biggest snowflakes I have ever witnessed. Getting butthurt over every little criticism, insulting people he once claimed he liked/respected because they say they don't agree with everything he does (pre and post presidential election mind you), etc... the man is a crybaby.

Just so we're clear here... A snowflake cuck is simply anyone, republican or democrat, liberal or conservative, who gets offended by every little thing or every little person under the reality sun who doesn't agree with their fragile sensibilities.

This goes for the following which I will be covering over time:

- Using certain terms/phrases which can be negative (grasp your chest and gasp now) to express emotions, but don't reflect that person's actual beliefs about human issues. I.E. If I say something is gay or call someone a faggot that doesn't mean I am against homosexual people, or their rights or that I'm protesting gay marriage in front of court houses. Sorry the word "straight" isn't used to describe dumb shit, but that doesn't mean everyone saying shit is gay means they hate gay people...

- Stating facts about people and their appearance..... Sorry fat people... If you're fat, you're fat. Sorry simple facts of life bother you so much. I know a few skinny people also hate being called skinny due to body issues, but it's far and few between fat people and the same still applies.... If you're fat, you're fat, if you're skinny, you're skinny, if you're whatever in between, you're whatever in between, doesn't always mean people are out to get you and doesn't mean they hate you or think you're ugly just cause you're FACTUALLY fat...

- Jokes/Stand-Up Comedy/Overly PC Fascist crowds... You are cancer, you are killing comedy because you don't know how to take a joke and not take everything seriously.... Do you not realize most of what comedians say they don't even truly believe IRL? Even if they do..... Who cares? As long as it's funny? Sorry, anything can be a joke, including rape. Doesn't mean they condone rape... If you can't understand that, move the fuck along snowflake. The PC culture has gone to the extremes in general as well, people can't say anything without being made to feel like pieces of shit because they say something someone may not like as a part of freedom of expression. I'm not even talking about people going around saying blatantly evil shit, those people are dicks, but I mean the most innocent of shit. Like if someone says "I have a friend who's an Indian, he lives on a reservation a few towns over." and people act like you just condemned that whole group to hell because you didn't call your FRIEND a "Native American!!!!" instead.... Lol..... Ugghhhhh.... Get a grip people......

- Millennials.... The epitome of the snowflake plaque..... Sure, not all millennials are snowflakes, but a good majority of them are. Much more than past generations..... They call it progressive behavior when really they are being fascists trying to control free speech and expression; especially at stand-up comedy acts..... Just gay as fuck.... Lol

- Asexuals/Sexual Shamers.... So now a days if you comment on someone's appearance as being "hot" or "sexy" these little pieces of shit wanna downvote and criticize said posts because they don't understand the simple fact that men have penises and women have vaginas and sometimes they see people in certain revealing clothing/poses that induce a sexually attracted response as a condition of being a normal human rather than some sexually repressed cuck.

- Feminazis...... Lol...... Just lol..... Not every person who has a penis and makes a seemingly funny or observational comment about the opposite sex is trying to strip away all of your rights or how strong or equal you can be. The difference between genuine feminists and feminazis is night and day....

Oversensitive/overprotective animal rights cucks..... Sorry bitch boy, it's not animal abuse, it's innocent fun so STFU about "Don't ever do that to that beautiful animal ever again! You don't deserve to have pets!" when it's clear the animal is not in danger and it's just good fun. You're a dumb shit and you know nothing about how well they care for their pets or their bond and simply judge them because some guy sneaked up behind his dog, yelled and made him jump or some shit? Gimme a break ya little bitch...

- Did you assume my/that person's gender!!!!? No shit stick, I don't assume when facts are concerned, I just go by said facts. Chances are if you look like a dude, you're a dude. If you look like a chick, you're a chick. If it quacks like a duck............. It probably calls you a cuck. Look, nobody cares if you identify as a woman, if you've got a 5 o'clock shadow, adam's apple and a penis taped to your thigh behind some dress, wig, and makeup, you're still a fuckin dude..... I'm not gonna call you a woman cause you identify as one "inside". I'm also not going to say a white guy is black because he identifies as a black man. I won't call you a cat because you're a human who identifies as a feline ya nutty bitch. Funny how that works eh? Gender is not fluid and it's not a choice. Nor is race or friggin' species. Lol....

You can turn yourself from male to female aesthetically and call yourself a woman, sure, and I'll most likely call you a woman if you actually look like a woman, but you're still factually not a woman. You don't have milk producing breasts or possess a real vagina or womb..... You can never get pregnant..... Never have a period...... Not a real woman..... Deal with it. "But Cuck Killer, some women can't get pregnant!" blah blah blah.... Yeah, we are all aware of this. It's also not the norm, and obviously even for women who can't get pregnant and whatnot......... Their vagina is still real/natural from birth soooo..... Yeeeeaaahhhhhh...... They are real women still...... Because..... ya know..... their vagina's weren't fashioned from half a mutilated penis..... This also applies to the cancerous "he/him" or "her/she" bullshit on some people's social media profiles. You don't need to proclaim your gender like that, nobody cares. This wasn't something people ever put in profiles to "clarify MY gender" up until a couple years ago. I go out of my way to call them the opposite gender of what they shove in your face to refer to them as just to see them blow their shit. Lol

It's also clear that when someone addresses a group of people and says "Hey, guys!" even when women are present, it's just a common greeting and "guys" in this context just means people.... Not literally calling the women males.... So relax and stop throwing a bitch fit when people say that. It's not always about gender specifics for crying out loud.

- LGBTQXYZSDL blah blah blah whatever it's initial count is up to at this very second of this minute of this hour. Look, I'm not against gay people, nor do I dislike them generally speaking. I am for gay marriage and all that jazz, so this isn't so much about the gay community but more so the people (not all of them are even gay, but they are snowflakes) who raise a big shit when you say "LGBT" but leave the Q off, or worse yet just say "gay/transgendered community" instead of the initials. They act like you just killed a baby right in front of them, calm down faggot, it's not that big of a deal. (Again, snowflakes, me saying faggot there doesn't mean I hate gay people, read above and note that I have no hate for homosexuals and faggot in this case simply means "dumb shit" lol).... How long will it be before they add a new initial to it and people shit their pants if you don't say "LGBTQBSHSKSBDGSN" in one breath without pausing to catch your breath in between? I cringe to see the day. LMAO

And more than likely more ridiculous shit as time goes on. Sure this list will be updated over time as dumb shit keeps happening.... But that is the gist of what this account will be about. Basically people getting offended and raising a stink over every little thing.

If you're still reading you either agree with me or you're a glutton for logical punishment. Either way, get those seat belts on!

Identity Politics and surrounding issues

Everyone knows about Identity politics. Some activists scream about colonisers, radical feminists cause a clicking ovation at slam poetry, gender-fluids cause controversy over the apparent 78 genders (or 112, or 63 - whoever you get your info from) and the overall takeover from the left when it comes to issues such as personal feelings and how someone identifies.

So let’s break it down.

Identity politics is essentially how someone can change their political beliefs and their whole identities based upon their identity (e.g. race, religion, social class, wealth, sexuality, etc.). The idea in itself might seem appealing to many, as it seems to with the left, but recently, Identity politics has gotten out of control.

Black people and those that sympathise are screaming about white men colonising the U.S. in the eighteenth century, that’s over two hundred years ago, and talking about the murders of their ancestors by the ancestors of the white men and women they walk around college with today. This idea promotes the victim mentality, where someone walks around thinking the world’s out to get them everyday and that everything’s against them. It’s simply false.

Many current white Americans today are actually descendant of people who immigrated into the country after the civil war, which statistically speaking, means that their ancestors most likely did not murder the ancestors of black Americans today.

Talking about the victim mentality, walking around screaming at white ‘colonisers’ (Which I'm pretty sure only became a term used by the progressive left after Black Panther was released), is, in itself, inherently racist. But we don’t mention that, do we? Right? I mean...you can’t be racist to white people, am I right?

Wrong.

You can be racist to white people. Being racist has nothing to do with one’s social class, past history of their race and so on. Being racist, however, has everything to do with judging another by their skin colour. 

Oxford Dictionary describes it as this:

“Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.”

Where in that does it mention that you cannot be racist to white people because they’re the oppressors? No-where. It doesn’t say anything, and you want to know why? That’s because ‘reverse racism’ doesn’t exist. It’s just called racism.

Why do conversations about racism, oppression and slavery always have to do with black, African people and white, European people? The Middle East practically ran slave trading for a while, and it’s still happening. Irishmen were enslaved for a time. Do you see them getting mentioned? Nope.

“But what does that have to do with America?”

Nothing, you’re right, but it does show that slaves in America weren’t the only ones out there, and while American slavery has been abolished, Middle Eastern slavery in certain areas has not.

Now let’s look at feminism.

Feminism is currently the core belief that men and women are not equal in developed countries. I’m here to say that’s false. Men and women have the exact same rights as each other and complaining about the so-called ‘pay gap’ is nothing in comparison to what women have to go through in, once again, middle eastern countries and parts of Africa.

Look at this video for example:

While it’s not a conservative video, it does illustrate that these two people, a white man and a black woman, both of whom work the same job, but at different companies, are not only equal in pay, but the black woman is paid much more than the white man.

While this isn’t true for many places, a number of factors do influence how much someone is paid, such as; family leave (Whether it be maternity or otherwise), whether the employee decides to go part time or full time, whether the employee takes more time for the family, holidays and so on. It’s the same for both men and women. I guarantee that a man who works from home or works part time to spend more time with his kids is going to be paid much less than a woman with no kids and a focussed career.

Comparing the salary from the same or similar jobs but from different companies is not a way to get reliable statistics.

Feminists parading around in vagina hats to protest Trump in the 2016 women’s march is just kinda sick, really. Not even going to give a factual statement here, It’s sick. I don’t want to look at vagina hats and whatever other shit that they parade around in.

Moving aside from the side of the debate, let’s look at Muslims, feminist movements relating to Muslims, LGBTQ+ issues relating to Muslims, terrorism and other religious issues relating to Muslims.

Before we even get into it, I have nothing against peaceful Muslims. Freedom of Religion is a right.

Feminist Muslims. Oh how you’ve gotten everything wrong. Just today, Iranian women are pulling off their hijab’s in a protest for rights.

from: https://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Iranian-Women-Tear-Off-Their-Veils-in-National-Push-for-Rights-20180425-0040.html

from: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5656091/Support-grows-Iranian-woman-viciously-beaten-morality-police.html

There was also the story a few months back about the woman doing the same thing. Then there’s white, American, atheist women (Called sympathisers or allies), who put on hijab’s for feminism.

What’s screwed up here?...hmmm

LGBTQ+ Issues. There are many. The Muslim religion is, in itself, greatly against homosexuality of any sort. Gay men and Lesbian women in the Middle East have been brutally murdered, and it’s not even stopped at the borders of the Middle East. I’m sure everyone heard of the rehabilitation camps in Chechnya. Well, guess what? Chechnya’s actually a Muslim majority. The main religion is Sunni Islam.

While the may have nothing to do with it, it’s still quite a coincidence.

Let’s talk about religious issues relating to Muslims and other religions. Many believe Muslims to be older than Christianity and Protestants. This is false. Muhammed, the founder of the religion, actually wanted to be a Catholic priest but was kicked out for being too militant. From then on, he created the Muslim religion in retaliation to the Catholics.

In truth, Christianity, Judaism and other religions like those, predate Muslims by around 600 or so years.

Next on the list is Terrorism.

Yes, many terrorists are Muslim, no, that doesn't mean that all Muslims are terrorists. There are white, domestic terrorists, like the Las Vegas shooter and several school shooters, but those responsible for some of the U.S’s biggest disasters in the past have been Muslim terrorists.

Al Queda was responsible for 911.

Osama Bin Laden was a big name in Terrorism.

Just recently, the YouTube shooter, a Muslim woman.

Boston Marathon Bombings

Those are just some of the few since 2001. Thousands of people have died, and there have been many more from Muslim terrorists in other countries. Now, none of this doesn’t excuse what the white terrorists have done (Because white privilege isn’t real), what it does do, however, is prove that there is a part of Islam, not all of it, a part of it, that is wrong, that has caused several mentally unstable Muslim men to go out, bomb people and fly planes into buildings.

Now, how about when Muslims immigrate to first world countries from Syria, Iran, Sudan and all of those ares. If you ask them to name which law they thought was better, many would say Sharia Law. In developed countries such as the U.S, U.K, Australia and so on, immigrants should be expected to follow the laws of that country, not the laws of the country they left behind. That should be fact. 

Religion actually has nothing to do with that. The Laws in Canada are different to the laws in Australia. Canadians moving to Australia should be expected to follow Australian Law, just as Australians moving to Canada should be expected to follow Canadian law. While the concept is the same, the stakes are higher when the immigrant is from a third world country.

I’ve known people who immigrated from Africa. They’re fine with the laws.

Lastly, let’s move onto the sexuality, gender and sex debate. You know, the one where the LGBTQ+ activists claim that there are infinite genders or some crap.

I can break this down into a few easy ways to understand it.

Sex and gender are not different from one another. Both have a basis in biology. Your sex is what genitals you have, a penis = male, a vagina = female. This is how it has been since sex and gender were first termed.

It goes deeper than genitals, though, it goes into your genes, cells, chromosomes, muscle composition, body fat distribution and so on. It’s common knowledge that males have an XY chromosome makeup, while female have an XX chromosome makeup. The deciding factor of what sex you are, actually depends on the father. When it comes to muscle composition, male’s have genetically stronger muscles, their composition is stronger than that of a female’s.

Female’s generally have softer muscle composition, as genetically, a woman isn’t made for doing hard work like a man is, a woman is genetically made to be a caretaker. That’s not to say that every woman is the same, just the opposite actually, but this is just the general genetic profiles of men and women.

A woman’s fat distribution is different to that of a man’s. A woman will have more fat around her hips, thighs, breasts and arms, while a man will generally have more fat around the stomach (See: Beer belly) and just the upper body in general.

Men and Women have different skeletal structures. A woman has a wider pelvis than a man, this is so she is ready to have children, smaller shoulders, smaller head and a smaller skeletal structure in general to a man’s. While a man will have a thinner pelvis, broader shoulders, larger rib cage and is generally taller. The height difference is quite apparent in many real world situations. (Every male I know my age or older, is much taller than me) There are anomalies to this everywhere, the odd female taller than all the males she knows, or the short male who feels like a dwarf in comparison.

This get’s me to hormones. Male and female brains will send out different hormones to their bodies. This is mostly evident in oestrogen and testosterone. Oestrogen is a woman’s hormone, generally a boost will be given through puberty which stimulates breast growth and the menstrual cycle, which in turn enables the female to have children. Males, during puberty, get a boost of testosterone, causing facial hair, voice breaking, genital growth and so on.

There is obviously a distinct scientific difference between male’s and females, and this is what gender and sex have been founded in. Both relate to the scientific properties of the sex.

Frankly, I don’t understand half of what goes on in the side of the world.

Well, thanks for sticking around (If you made it this far, sorry for the long post)

~GTM

Tactical Anger and Its Power: Words and Actions in the Age of ACT UP

submitted essay for my Youth in Revolt course in the Global Liberal Studies program at NYU in Spring 2018

The 1988 photo shows only the jacket-clad torso of a young man. Careful letters surrounding the upended pink triangle on his back read, “If I Die of AIDS, Forget Burial, Just Drop My Body on the Steps of the FDA.” In context we know that the jacket and its wearer were part of a protest by the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP). The man in the photo, artist David Wojnarowicz, died less than four years later of the disease he was protesting. Today the photo is historic, used in remembrances of the AIDS epidemic and referenced by high schoolers in their new fight against gun control. The CDC reports that between 1981 and 1992 over 200,000 people in the United States were infected with the disease. Within those years, the CDC places the percentage of those killed by AIDS at about 89 percent. A slew of activist groups arose out of this urgency, working to push the US government to address the epidemic. While certainly not the first, ACT UP is perhaps the most well-known.

This essay seeks to examine how meaningful, focused anger was used as a positive force by ACT UP members during the peak years of their activism. Michel Foucault and Jack Halberstam’s approaches to power and its structure in society are particularly crucial for understanding ACT UP’s radical, anti-capitalist approach in their fight against the violent ignorance of the federal government and the incorrect narrative of the disease perpetuated by the news media. In addition to repositioning the connotation of AIDS as a solely gay male disease, ACT UP used their anger and grief to turn loss into activism and force the United States government to acknowledge and act on the epidemic.

The first organized ACT UP protests began in March of 1987 on Wall Street in New York City “the financial center of the world, to protest the profiteering of pharmaceutical companies.” The organization, which had formed just weeks earlier made enough of a statement to gain attention from The New York Times and the FDA. The act of civil disobedience meant arrests for seventeen members.

From the beginning, ACT UP established itself in direct opposition to the capitalistic principles of the pharmaceutical industry. In The Queer Art of Failure, Jack Halberstam juxtaposes the “heteronormative” and “subordinate, queer, or counter-hegemonic” concepts of success. He argues that the heteronormative construction of success values “capital accumulation,” while the queer, or non-dominant construction is associated with failure because of its focus on “non-conformity, anti-capitalist practices, [and] non-reproductive lifestyles.” Media coverage of the disease – and the activists fighting it – focused primarily on the idea that AIDS was a disease that solely affected gay men. The headline for the New York Times coverage of the Wall Street protest read, “Homosexuals Arrested at AIDS Drug Protest.” In their outreach, however, ACT UP worked to correct the narrative and raise awareness about the facts of the disease.

The Women’s Committee within ACT UP distributed information that specifically addressed the existence of the disease within the Lesbian community in addition to continuing to provide key information about the epidemic as a whole. One flyer, titled “AIDS: A Lesbian Issue?” breaks down the ways that women can contract AIDS. The document uses inclusive language, such as the continued use of the “we” pronoun. Furthermore, the document disrupts the notion of “gold star lesbianism” and refrains from shaming IV drug users.  One section of the document reads, “We have to take talking about sex and our sexual history out of the closet. We have to trust and support each other enough to talk about sex and safer sex. Lesbians are at risk because we have sex.” The document asks its readers to get involved, citing statistics about AIDS deaths and drawing attention to the disproportional affect the disease has on people of color. This document, and a similar one aimed at readers of Cosmopolitan, both express dissatisfaction at mainstream coverage of AIDS and encourage involvement from women readers.

These women-specific flyers also highlight the disparity of AIDS research, citing the lack of “official statistics” and the perpetuation of violence against those in the queer community. This specific ACT UP campaign seeks to raise awareness within a broader group. In The History of Sexuality, Foucault writes that “there is a plurality of resistances, each of them a special case.” The Women’s Committee of ACT UP modified their tactics when their target audience broadened. They pinpoint specifically why AIDS is also a women’s issue and call for involvement to “protect ourselves against violence” and “fight for our relationships, for our community and civil rights, for control over our bodies, our health, our sexuality, our lives.” The expansion of outreach focused on the vulnerabilities of a specific, at-risk group that had the power to mobilize and join forces with those already participating in the movement.

This focus on restructuring the narrative also required a careful approach to media outreach. Internal documents distributed to ACT UP members show the groups targeted approach to interviews, both in paper and on television. Ann Northrop, a journalist and activist, created a document called “How to Manipulate the News Media.” The numbered list gives members precise advice on how to handle being interviewed about the cause. This particular pamphlet does not delve into facts about the cause but rather focuses specifically on how knowledgeable activists can best serve ACT UP by becoming critically thinking spokespeople.

While the title is eye-catching and seems intent on provocation, the actual contents of the document are straightforward and realistic. The first point of the document, “Listen Before You Talk,” urges members to note the way control works in media coverage. “The most important thing you can do is control the editorial point of view of the whole story. To do this, you must interview the interviewer.” Later the document acknowledges that journalists think that interviewees “are crazy,” because they “understand how little control the interviewee has, and how exploitative the whole process is. So reporters start out with some basic contempt for the people they interview.”  

Michel Foucault writes extensively about power relations, arguing that “there is no power that is exercised without a series of aims and objectives.” The news media document demonstrates ACT UP’s clear cognizance of the roles at play, even in a relationship as seemingly simple as journalist and subject. Northrop is clear that the journalist (and to a greater extent the media company) maintains power over the spokesperson. However, the stakes for which the journalist plays are comparably lower than those members of ACT UP intending to speak out and educate. The document aims to earn “good” press for ACT UP in the form of a uniform, polite approach. Additionally, Northrop’s prior experience as a journalist mean that her tips come from “inside” of the trade. The power dynamics at play here are not simply hierarchical. Foucault writes against the notion of “strictly relational character” in power relationships. Instead, he argues that they “[depend] on a multiplicity of points of resistance: these play the role of adversary, target, support, or handle.”

In this case, ACT UP showed a clear regard for the value of media publicity. However, as previously discussed, much of the media distributed about the nature of AIDS, at-risk populations, and activist work was incorrect. Northrop’s document shows the group’s clear intent; ACT UP’s “manipulation” of the news media was really a push toward fair, factual coverage and another step toward finding proper treatment and care for those with the disease.

Another crucial aspect of ACT UP was the vocal nature of their protests. These “actions” perhaps best display the way ACT UP activists targeted their anger toward tangible political change. In demonstrations, the group often used the now iconic chant “ACT UP, Fight Back, Fight Aids!” The shorter phrase, “fight back” was used in a number of other chants. In this primary chant, the word fight has a double meaning: one in reference to how bodies tackle illness and the other perhaps more aggressively to the violence committed by the passivity of the government.

ACT UP expressed their disdain for government officials and their ignorance and intolerance about AIDS in several ways. The vocal, public, and often visceral nature of ACT UP protests gained greater attention and in turn allowed AIDS activists to make demands about their cause. The first protest on Wall Street specifically targeted the FDA and President Reagan. The list of demands called for immediate release of potentially lifesaving drugs, while simultaneously scolding Reagan and the pharmaceutical industry. “Curb your greed!” one demand reads. The end of the list declares, “President Regan, nobody is in charge!” While this protest was focused on two main subjects, ACT UP did not limit their criticism to a specific party or industry. Lists of chants and poster slogans delineate between “general,” “Democrat,” and “Republican.”

Protestors did not steer clear of AIDS deaths, instead emphasizing the rising death toll through poster art and chants. A chant against Reagan declared, “Reagan, Reagan you can’t hide! We all know its genocide!” Similarly, a print poster depicted skulls lining the way up to the front of the White House. The messages directed specifically at Democrats are less visceral; posters aimed at Democrats like Dukakis and Gore carry messages like “We vote too!” and “We are watching you!” Another poster bears the message “Our vote is a weapon we are prepared to use.” These messages establish ACT UP as important demographics within the voting population. Rather than succumb to the “dominant logics of power and discipline,” these political statements serve as assertions of control within the paradigm of heteronormativity that Halberstam sets forth.

ACT UP did not stop at artistic depictions of AIDS’ death toll. The group also staged “political funerals,” including putting ashes of AIDS victims on the lawn of the White House and bringing the open coffin of Mark Lowe Fisher to the headquarters of the Republican National Committee in New York in 1992. Prior to his death, Fisher wrote about his wish for such a funeral:

Death takes place behind closed doors and is removed from reality, from the living. I want to show the reality of my death, to display my body in public… I want my death to be as strong a statement as my life continues to be. I want my own funeral to be fierce and defiant, to make the public statement that my death from AIDS is a form of political assassination. We are taking this action out of love and rage.

Fisher and his fellow activists were aware of – and fully intended – the shock factor in political funerals. His funeral was one death in hundreds of thousands in the United States alone from AIDS. The mobilization of grief in ACT UP protests, in combination with the group’s ability to create tactical approaches to change policy and raise awareness propelled the movement forward. Political funerals also subvert the idea of death as failure or finality. Halberstam writes that “capitalist logic casts the homosexuals as inauthentic and unreal, as incapable of proper love.” The political funerals, as Fisher described, are out in fact out of love – and rage. The authentic, heartfelt, and brutal emotion behind actions as intense as political funerals only serve to underscore the group’s dedication to their loved ones and community and their fight for legitimacy.

ACT UP’s protests were rooted in grief and anger, as well as an urgent desire to restructure the narrative around AIDS. In their oral history project, ACT UP members describe forming the group to “turn anger, fear, grief into action.” The group used their own emotions constructively, and worked to shift the dynamics of power present in both the federal government and news media.  The movement sought to reshape conversation around the disease, raise awareness within the LGBT community and outside, and secure treatment. The devastating trauma of the AIDS epidemic and the memory of the federal government’s neglect remain, but so do groups like ACT UP. The group’s mobilization turned desperation into real, effective change that is still visible in activist work done today.

1 “Political Funerals.” ACT UP New York, 1995

2 ”HIV and AIDS --- United States, 1981--2000.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

3 “ACT UP Capsule History.” ACT UP New York.

4 “ACT UP Capsule History.” ACT UP New York.

5 Halberstam, Jack. The Queer Art of Failure. Duke University Press, 2011 (182).

6 A term used to describe a lesbian who has never had sex with a man; This document and the group in particular work to fight the transphobic and otherwise shaming nature of this term and association.

7 “Method.” The History of Sexuality, by Michel Foucault, Crane Library at the University of British Columbia, 2009 (514).

8 Northrop, Ann. How to Manipulate the News Media. How to Manipulate the News Media, ACT UP .

9 Foucault 514.

10 Foucault 515.

11 Halberstam 181.

12 “Political Funerals.”

13 Halberstam 185.

14 “The Tactics of Early Act UP.” ACT UP, ACT UP New York.

Works Cited

ACT UP Capsule History.” ACT UP New York.

Halberstam, Jack. The Queer Art of Failure. Duke University Press, 2011.

“HIV and AIDS --- United States, 1981--2000.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Manuscripts and Archives Division, The New York Public Library. "AIDS is a primary issue. Demand a national plan on AIDS." New York Public Library Digital Collections.

“Method.” The History of Sexuality, by Michel Foucault, Crane Library at the University of British Columbia, 2009.

Northrop, Ann. How to Manipulate the News Media. How to Manipulate the News Media, ACT UP.

“Political Funerals.” ACT UP New York, 1995.

“The Tactics of Early Act UP.” ACT UP,  ACT UP New York.

The Myth of Milo

The castle has come alive through all the battles that have been waged before its walls, the many storms it has stood in some life has seeped into its stone blocks. It’s alive it’s alive heat rising and lights beginning to glow ready to shatter at any moment from the sheer power. The castle, a force to be reckoned with towering over the land before it, but this great structure is under attack it has grown too strong, too massive and many seek to shake it down. Its might weapons have begun to feel the test of time, it has felt trembles that shatter windows and crack foundation. All this though it still stands and seeks to repair itself through some restructuring.

https://twitter.com/ReaganBattalion/status/833405993006616576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

           As of yesterday Milo Yiannopoulos has reportedly resigned from his position at the Breitbart News Network. This essay will focus primarily on what this all means for journalist as it relates to our current political moment and through criticism

Milo Yiannopoulos is an outspoken British journalist and now former Senior Editor for Breitbart. Milo first hit mainstream media as a commentator on the 2015 gaming journalism debacle known as Gamergate. Milo stood opposed to feminist critics and bloggers of the likes Anita Sarkeesian and Laci Green and as the scandal would die down we would begin to see less of Milo. It would not be until the following summer that we would hear of Milo again, this as a result of Twitter banning Milo from the site. For those who followed Milo up to his ban they would know that Milo had a rocky relationship with Twitter. The company had taken such actions of striping his verification and at one point suspending him only to ultimately reinstate him. Twitter hoped to make an example out of Milo for this ban given that he had a habit for antagonizing people on Twitter which would only cause a portion of his supporters to take that as a green light to harass them.

The specific incident in question was that of Leslie Jones, a cast member on Saturday Night Live and a lead on the recently released Ghostbusters (a major component of the criticism/harassment she had been getting). What had made this ban so controversial was that Milo was targeted not just for his audience but for what he stood for politically. Milo Yiannopoulos is a very loudly outspoken conservative and where there are those who are liberals in similar positions to Milo they are not banned but he is, Twitter also did a poor job handling the situation in not explaining the cause for the ban. As a result of this controversy would make it seem as though Milo was the victim in this scenario, some even heralding him a hero of free speech. This would do nothing but propel Milo into stardom landing him a book deal and putting more eyes on him than ever before.

Milo would go on to have a number of large public speaking gigs as well as big interviews, the most notable of which being his recent interview on Bill Maher and his scheduled speech as UC Berkeley which has ultimately resulted in a riot. This is off no cause of Milo’s own words or actions but of a peaceful protest that turned quickly into a deadly one. The speech would be cancelled before it could even start and Milo would have to be escorted off the premises for his own safety. This is another situation that would make liberals look like violent thugs that can’t have peaceful discussion and need to resort to violence. Milo is heralded once again as a near martyr and goes on to speak at other venues. Now don’t get me wrong Milo deserves all the credit he gets he is not only a good journalist even though a bias one, something which he does not shy away from he is a great public speaker backing up his views with facts and engaging his detractors with more grace than many of them show him. At times on the internet he does have a tendency to act of that of a troll in public he’s willing to hear out and debate with the other side without just shutting them down to further perpetuate his views.  

Now within these last 48 hours Milo has come under fire for a number of remarks made on a podcast back in January where he talks about an experience in which he was 17 in a relationship with 29-year-old man. An experience by which he doesn’t as though he personally was taken advantage of but was actually taken care of. It is at this point that Milo begins to ride a fine line between victim and supporter of hebephilia. For those who don’t know is the sexual preference for early adolescent children between the ages of 11-14. The media in their portrayal of this story would show Milo as someone normalizing the idea of relationships between young boys and grown men. Milo would go onto combat these claims on his Facebook page defending himself. Blaming his own verbal slips up along with some deceptive editing as for the medias claim that he supports hebephilia. A quick disclaimer before I continue, I do not support what Milo said in or out of context, though I feel like his perspective on the matter in question is skewed by a situation in which he can be seen as a victim. That being in his history of having a relationship on a man way older than him as a young adult.

Now why is this so important you may ask, well as a conservative journalist Milo is a very important given the fact that he is gay. Where in many arguments that Milo’s conservative views are bigoted he avoids a lot of the identity politics issues just by his background. Milo is a myth that is not inherently constructed by the superstructure it is he has been cheered on by them. In our modern day an age as the number of straight white males in our country begins to take a decline and public opinions of both conservative and liberal ideologies begin to become more accepting of different minority groups the hierarchy must employ those who may not look just like them but take them in shaping and molding them into those that perpetuate their ideals. It is from this distinction that your Tomi Lahren as the conservative female voice against feminism, Milo as the gay conservative voice against liberal ideology, and so on and so forth. It is through this discourse of having a counter cultural identity that enables Milo to speak on subject by which other conservatives might be constrained from speaking on.

To better understand this concept of a person being formed into a mythology I refer to Roland Barthes. Roland a French literary philosopher and theorist who focused heavily on what he called “the false obvious” an implicit idea that supports that of the bourgeois. Where Milo may be contrary to what people expect him to be he is not the original myth but a cultural counterargument. In Cultural Theory and Popular Culture, the example of young boy black dressed as a French soldier saluting what is presumed to be the French flag. This example is a form of propaganda the importance of the boy’s race comes in as an underlining way in which to support imperialism. Showing that African in the same way that this boy has been conformed to French society so can they and it is to the it benefits not to their detriment. People are turned in propagandist symbols that perpetuate patriarchal ideology.  

Though in being counter he still conforms to the norms of conservative society and perpetuates those ideas as a homosexual male. Now don’t get me wrong there is nothing wrong with the idea of a conservative homosexual is a bad thing I herald Milo and those like him. As Americans we no matter what our background have right to believe what we choose. It is just important to note the way in which conservative society wants to present him as a poster boy for conformity. In an attempt to ensure that the ideals of the hierarchy maintain themselves it must adapt. New exceptions must be made our future conservative will not look the same way we imagine them today.

The power is not within the hands of Milo though his position has given him a level of autonomy within the right-wing community. This is an action that can be made on both sides though on the liberal side of things it is a lot less obvious. What will often occur is that certain groups are made out to be more important than others given that in many circumstances they may be marginalized or oppressed. This does nothing but patronize these people and further ostracizing them from the group. His use a conservative symbol for tolerance show his importance in journalism as it relates to the political spectrum but there is still more to this story.

As this year has progressed it has seemed that new reporting has gotten sloppier and lazier when it should be adapting to our current situation and becoming adapters. This defamation of Milo’s character as a way to discredit him is ultimately going to be a journalistic failure. Given Milo’s ties to Breitbart and Breitbart’s ties to the Trump administration this has been an effective journalistic low blow. Though low blows only show how weak the attacker is and assume to much strength from those being attacked. In furthering my point, I direct you to structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure and poststructuralist Michel Foucault.

The Mainstream Media or MSM has used decisive language as a way to discredit Milo using his own words against him and employing powerful labels onto him such as pedophile. It is a word so horrendous that the idea of being even compared to someone of that nature is anyone’s worst nightmare. In this way Milo has been marginalized by the public and many of his supporters have jumped shipped in efforts not to be presumed as pedophiles themselves or supporters of a presumed pedophile. The use of a fallacy such as the Ad Hominem fallacy used here only shows weakness in facing Milo on his own terms showing that those who do so can’t result to the tactics of calling him a bigot rather actual presenting flaws in his argument with facts not fallacies. The major mistake being made is in the lack of factual evidence, though Milo may have some warped views on the consent and how old person should be to consent to sex, actions wise he has done nothing wrong and until the rumor mill can drum up allegation of Milo committing acts of pedophilia this whole thing will ultimately been seen a slander campaign by liberals as a way to make conservatives out to be something they aren’t. This whole situation shows the major impact our system of language can have on a situation. If the right words are employed, it can make for a very damaging attack though not a lethal one.

This is where I lead you to Foucault. Foucault’s theories focus primarily between the relationship between knowledge and power and at the current moment conservatives hold majority political and public power. This caused by two things our current political administration, something that is out of the typical journalist control but what is in their control is journalist ability to use factual evidence as a way to debunk and disprove detractors. Though this is cry often falls on death ears, knowledge itself is not power but knowledge gives one access to power. The moment when a conservative or liberal makes a fool out of someone by having a more nuanced understanding of the subject at hand. This prowess makes out one sides argument to be weak an ultimately make it seem wrong. Where ultimately neither side is completely write or wrong so it is often two adept communicators may find themselves arguing around each other. The discourse of their political perspectives has constrained them from speaking on certain issues because it requires a less biased perspective to be able to wrap your head around.

What comes of this in the end is the further separation of the left and right politically and ideologically creating an inability for debate or discussion where both sides seek to discredit the other rather than ignore binary oppositions and approach each other’s arguments on common ground which is detrimental to the medium of journalism.

The History of Transsexualism in Scotland: Written by an Eavesdropper of Conversations at Ward 17 in May ‘14 by their Respective Confessors

Really interesting contextual history I'm sure even Cuntster can verify the factuality of: Homosexuality's decriminalization in England had no remit in the other constituencies until much later. Only ahead of Northern Ireland, homosexuality wasn't officially decriminalized in Scotland until about 1992, I think, a year after I was born; it wasn't possible to officially legally change sex even post-SRS until a year before or a year after, I've forgotten, because again, an Act of Parliament wasn't given territorial extent beyond England, allowing Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales to arbitrarily decide on LGBT matters on their own. Incompetence? Negligence of a deliberate sort? We'll never know; both the husband of the post-operative transsexual April and "her"self are now dead, so the ins-and-outs of cases precedent to laws regulating gender identity, female-impersonation, and so forth will remain somewhat of a mystery buried in their graves and I'm supre as hell not trusting Wikipedia's analysis -- my own skills in this regard have already exceeded theirs. An LGBT community in Scotland thus didn't really exist as such until '89-'92; prior to then, it was disparate, deservingly GRIDS-ridden, and confined to places better fitting for little Ambers, the gutters, the beggars of Princes Street, the projects of the Gorbals, on train-lines waiting to die whilst the mascara-laden tears of a male-faced hon was waiting to off himself. Yes, for some, unlike Amber, these are tragic histories. Amber never had to face that for even a second. We thus, need lend no sympathy towards him, even though he continuously demands it for being a young transitioner and of the blood of bourgeois Gods in the Ko Pong style which had accurately portrayed aristocratic narcissism. Transsexualism was actually the first proposal -- Melanie's pilfering of the dispensary was not illegal; it was an informal agreement between the establishment and Melanie herself as she had basically anointed herself Scotland's first legally-recognized transsexual after graduating with her generalized psychiatry PhD. in the late-1980s -- by none other than Melanie, to solve the homosexual problem; Stephen Greene's consensus was clear at the time, the two were not only synonymous -- although I still grant some latent bisexual traits be requisite -- but the cure to schizophrenogenic autogynephilia. I hold steadfastly to the power of SRS to cure female embodiment fantasies required for a transsexual to even survive within their entrapped predicament. I'm a very, very textbook case. The problem is that the current textbook for autistic transsexualism has covered children, and individuals of Stiles' IQ level ("child like individuals"). For later transitioners of average intellect (myself, arguably Christine barely), the research is comparatively non-existent and thus presumed 'illegitimate' on the basis of ad culo arguments. This has nothing to do with 'rezsons'. If these genes are discovered, I probably will have at least a few. But let's speak honestly; Amber wouldn't resist manipulating the results, would he? Autogynephilia is a form of female embodiment fantasy. It is used to cope with the entrapment sexually within a homosexual, who is the pre-transsexual, and hence the term homosexual transsexual, femininely essential notions of sexuality, emotion, and to a lesser common extent, intellect (I'm that very unusual former Kanner autistic with a curiously high verbal IQ hence my rediagnosis, but it could all be bullshit, so I wave my hand proudly to the 'intellectually feminine' claim). It is not a sexual motivation, which is where Blanchard went wrong; sexualization of motivation is rather a self-vilification technique to get them to "snap out of it", this way, allowing the transsexual to rationalize themselves as fake. This pseudo-definition of autogynephilia is actually a cop-out: you must be fake if you want to be fake. The illegitimate desires of child-minded people like Robert should never be the consideration in the first instance, but the complex emotional, intellectual and characteristic needs of cases such as myself.

Natalie Sharpe/Robert Wayne Stiles has 24 hours to write a counter-essay in argument of all these points, without the assistance of Cuntster. If he manages, I'll detransition. If he fails, and I'm going by the neo-Confucian yangban examination standard of satisfaction, not the western one of grading criteria, Sophie's here to stay. :) Expect a repost on tumblr when I can be bothered.

The Fat JewaEUR( tm) s ‘Money Pizza Respect’ is the worst notebook IaEUR( tm) ve ever spoke

I wish I liked the Fat Jews new notebook. It would make a far more interesting bit if he surpassed our anticipations. No one I talked to expected it to be good. I gambling he didnt even write it, said one sidekick. I bet he had his interns write it.

To contextualize this for people who arent on the Internet all the time, Josh The Fat Jew Ostrovsky became the center of controversy when he was accused of stealing memes and jokes from humorists this summer. Ostrovsky had been doing this for years, and amassed millions of Instagram admirers with his admittedly good meme aggregating skills. But comedians took a stand when he signed with the flair bureau CAA in August.

Upon interpret Money Pizza Respect , there is no doubt in my knowledge that the unfortunately entitled work is written by the Fat Jew himself; I confidently assert that Money Pizza Respect is singlehandedly the most difficult journal I have ever read.

His actual sense of humorand Im talking about humor , not the memes he aggregatesis dreadfully abject. He relies on a Tucker Max-esque style of storytelling, praising cocaine and alcohol abuse and fucking his groupies, who all represent a different type of crazy daughter stereotype.

In a section ironically titled The Eleven Commandments of Not Being the Worst Person Ever, he counsels readers that if you aggressively and frequently talk about your sexuality life, people will think youre gay. When you tell me that you undertook a slam pig and stuffed her axe wind, he writes, I assume that your actual destination is having anal sexuality with soldiers. Ostrovsky shapes sure to note that the only exception to this rule is Dan Bilzerian, who has literally thrown a woman off his roof, smashing her foot, and been accused of kicking another woman in the look.

Money Pizza Respect is fastened with homophobic statements. He writes a greenback to P. Diddy: Sorry for outing you as a homosexual. Im pretty sure you are, but Im sorry. Theres too a health dosage of sexism, describing his female groupies as a bunch of fours and fives who have monstrous maid sides detest their daddies. To accomplish the trifecta, he likewise manages to be transphobic, referring to transgender maidens as trannies in a section recounting two brothers bachelor party.( When two brothers and pals found out the strippers “whos” causing them lap dances were trans, they left the club immediately .)

Before I satisfied Ostrovsky, I was confused about how he was so successful, especially after reading his book, where he brags about his selfish and generally gross behaviour at every possible instant, proudly presentations pictures of him wearing a thong made out of beef jerky, and writes situations like, Cocaine is the greatest talent the world has ever seen.

When I sat down with him at a press junket, located at an arcade in Chinatown, I immediately understood why hes garnered so much success. He is unfortunately alluring and is actually a naturally funny person. Hes like the refrigerate, mean son in 8th point, the different types who inserted cup to all your best friend and attained merriment of girls for being ugly or not having boobs hitherto. The form who definitely bullied me, and hitherto I tirelessly tried to gain his affection.

During our interview, Ostrovsky remained on the defensive, masterful at answering my doubts with non-answers. He is somebody who has never taken life seriously, which is perhaps not too difficult for a straight, white, affluent male. He is basically interested in his conception of fun, and hopes youll connect him for the travel. If not, fuck off.

Its not that I began to like Ostrovsky or his book any more after converging him, but I extended from disliking him to appearing an iota of sorrow for him. His ostentatiou and unapologetic immaturity, his bratty affect: This is what has brought him success, and what I imagine will be his inevitable downfall.

So my approaching for this interview, because I know a lot of beings have been shitting on you, is to not shit on you .

No ones been shitting on me.

I was curious about how that affected you emotionally, and how you appeared about getting blasted by the media .

It was certainly a shitty situation. Im of the Internet, so its like a lot of beings screaming about thoughts. I respect trolling. I respect beings hollering at one another, which is why the Internet is so fucking great. I definitely didnt take it personally. It was also something that it was necessary to get talked about. Parties were not on the same sheet. Like a 38 -year-old comedy writer and a 16 -year-old Filipino millennial were not considering the questions the same way.

I try to look at it like I was the look of the whole stuff. I intend the Internet is a giant, lawless fuckin thing. Sometimes the work requires some rules But not too many. Because this is gonna be odd. No parents. But you know, sometimes beings get pissed. I undoubtedly see it from the 16 -year-old Filipino millennial back. I dont look for recognition on my nonsense and I dont ever watermark or anything like that, but I likewise get the other side extremely. Im old enough to understand both sides. I exactly miss everyone to be happy so were fuckin partying.

Instagram for fucking photos of puppies playing volleyball in sunglasses and iguanas surfing. I precisely want to have everyone get listen, set the problem, and then get back to surfing iguanas. It didnt rock me emotionally because I merely understood it as something that needed to be discussed. It definitely went hazardous and exciting at some points. Beings just get fucking crazy, theres a portion of those individuals who dont even know what theyre calling about. I get chased by TMZ. Some person followed me around a Duane Reade preserving my phone call. That was tight.

You liked that ?

I kinda felt like Leo, for like two seconds. It was also scary. No one wants that life. I was trying to look at it like this is a conversation that needed to be had. I didnt look at it as being shit on. The Internet is more important to me than their own families or anything. I would love to be with the Internet, have sex with the Internet, I affection the Internet. Now its a better place.

Why was it important for you to celebrate medicines, specifically cocaine, in your volume ?

Its a mixed bag. I refer to it as the best and worst event ever. Persona of the ethos of this notebook is that its a how-to guide in that its like I dont know what you should be doing but I know what you shouldnt be doing. Ive determined every horrible act. I basically think you read this book and you dont do coke. Because youre like, its gonna establish me unbearable. Like my breath is gonna smell like a napkin and get into a super intense exchange about trash I dont even care about.

I think it depends on how old-time the reader is. For me, Ive done coke so I understood more where you were coming from in that it can be great and appalling at the same age. From a girls position, it might just appear very cool .

It depends. Im pretty explicit that its been responsible for the greatest happenings that ever happened, but likewise some of the most terrifying happenings, very. I think its more self-reflective than it is encouraging.

Your notebook is provocative is many channels. Parties are going to interpret some of the content as transphobic and homophobic. I was thinking of the assembly whatever it is you refer to trans women as trannies .

I dont know what youre specific referring to.

You wrote about tranny strippers. Thats a contentious statement. Numerous trans parties have spoken out about how injurious they find that term to be. I was curious about how you would respond to those reviewers .

is a factual account of what happened. Youre talking about an actual pejorative statement?

Yeah. Its a insult. There were a bunch of moments in the book where I speak something and immediately thought about how angry it would realize social right activists on the Internet.

Social justice parties are angry at everything.

I was wondering if you included some things specific to be provocative .

No, obviously not. First of all, any social justice being can come at me at any time. I literally have more transgender pals who will vouch for me than anyone else. They self-identify as trannies. Request a transgender who is not a geek from the Internet how they identify, and I bet you will find hundreds who mark as trannies.

I know transgender tribes who determine that lane. Its like the N-word. If they call themselves that, its OK. But having a cis person is a different story .

Any person who would find offense in that kind of minutia is not someone who should be reading this book.

Its not your audience, thats possibly true-life.

That shouldnt be anyones gathering, as far Im concerned.

As I was speaking your volume, I was thinking about your crazy narcotic and sexuality storeys as they are linked to Tucker Max s legends from I Hope They Suffice Beer in Hell . Was he somebody who affected you ?

No, thats like bro culture stuff. This is completely different.

Tonally, there were similarities .

Ive never read it, but I also think that in terms of this notebook, like Ive been living concert prowes long enough to write a book full of debaucherous narrations, but I wanted to go with more pathos, true. From what I understand from Tucker Maxs stuff, he doesnt actually move into too much trash like that. Not all the fibs here are particularly turnt up, as far as Im concerned. There are some that are honest lineage floors , not every narration is about partying.

But a lot of them are .

We can go through it When I was writing it, putting in some ardour and truth, and some real appear on it, like speak about my mummy having sex with Shel Silverstein and being a 9-year-old offspring performer diva. Shit like that, to me, that is not the same as walking around a bar with a breathalyzer. I dont not relate to it, but Ive never read any of his stuff.

Ostrovsky as small children actor Josh Ostrovsky

Do you differentiate between the Fat Jew as your performative character and yourself as Josh ?

No. I dont going to go at night and unscrew the hairection, sit down, and listen to This American Life and be like, Oh, what a hard daylight at work! Being the Fat Jew! No, its all one in the same. To me, this is gonna be disingenuous. I was doing this stuff long before there was anywhere to share it, long before anyone knew about it. Ten years ago, people in New York would be like, Oh thats the Fat Jew, the guy who does crazy stuff. It wasnt something I created and raised in order to share on social media for the masses.

But this is your career, this is your joy, but a lot of artists and performers differentiate between their performative ego, which is still their ego, and who they are when theyre not playing .

Im not an master or relevant actors. Im neither.

How do you link ?

Im the only one whos really just going for it. Im genuinely forming it up as I go along. I could start a ros companionship and that could become a real thing. Im about to do the worlds firstly EDM cologne.

What is that gonna aroma like ?

I dont know. Thats a good inquiry. Like I dont even just knowing that that entails but Im gonna do it. Its 2015. Anything is possible. The world-wide is so ridiculous at this extent. I might open a yoga ashram in Toronto. Who knows? Im one of the only people who doesnt consider anything on or off limits. I dont think that it can be defined. We have this human need to compartmentalize, to be like, What are you? But I dont know.

I guess its my job to mention, as a novelist trying to make sense of what you do.

I dont think theres anything to make sense of. I dont know. What do you think I do?

I think youre a content developer and musician .

Thats vague. But yeah. Im not not. But thats what Im enunciating. I like to keep parties approximating, obstruct people off kilter. If people suppose Im a comedian, I will move in a totally different direction and start seeing cologne. I wanna build people move, What the fuck? Maintaining parties guessing, remaining genuine gossip running about me, whether its, I dont want to say the word negative, but whatever its gonna be, thats what I am. A communication starter? I dont know.

Tastemaker ?

Conversation piece? Idiot? All of the above?

Whats your goal with your work? Why do you do what you do? Aside given the fact that you exactly want to do it .

The end goal with the book is that I remember I can get some turnt-up 18 -year-old to read. Thats the challenge, like, can you get fuckin some kids to read and think its genuinely fuckin cold? Is that doable? Ill literally do it just for that.

Were doing speaking raves to promote the book. IRL is what the programs called. Its just like gigantic DJs and works. Like, can you stimulate them read? I think its doable. I dont thoughts writing knows how to do it. I dont think mothers know how to do it.

So you want to realize say chill ?

Kind of. What if Im somehow the person to do it?

What are your favorite journals ?

I ardour Shel Silverstein, and not only because my mom fucked him. Mostly, Im the type to read 100 listicles. Like, what kind of bagel is Rihanna? You know what I entail? One-hundred times Rihanna ate fruit. Im not speaking enough books.

No ones reading enough journals .

Maybe now? That would fucking funny. To get a fucking 17 -year-old whos over it to sit down and read an entire journal? I symbolize I put in some trash to break up the chapters, like you can color in a picture of Tyrese. I symbolize, I dont want you to have to read too much.

Illustration by Max Fleishman

Popular on The Daily Dot

I went to the Rentboy liquidation sale, and all I went was this amazing bodyguard swag

After a massive federal raid, Rentboy had to sell its entire power on Craigslist to pay its lawyers .

By Mary Emily O’Hara — November 02, 2015

Read more:

The post The Fat JewaEUR( tm) s ‘Money Pizza Respect’ is the worst notebook IaEUR( tm) ve ever spoke appeared first on caredogstips.com.

from WordPress http://ift.tt/2u9ef9P via IFTTT