there were so many things leftists could’ve boycott businesses over on this large of a scale but they waited until innocent Israelis were massacred horrifically and they needed to prove that it didn’t matter

What follows is a continuation of this discussion with @korrasera .I’m unclear on whether korrasera wants to continue talking about the matter, and that thread is itself extremely long. So, I’m making a new post to explore the matter further and explain my reasoning.

Brooklyn 99 is a magnificent show that portrays black men as wholly rounded, sympathetic characters. That portrays Latina women as diverse and intelligent. That portrays the exhaustion of being a Jew in a Christian society with grace and humour. That portrays the complexities and hurdles of queer life, without turning queerness into a tragedy.

All of these things are true, and all of them are good.

And all of this goodness comes from police.

The show consistently, relentlessly, presents police as good people who sometimes get caught up in a bad or corrupt system.

In fact, these police are so good that they can single-handedly counter the entire history of police violence in the lives of the people around them.

Let’s begin with Captain Holt’s husband, Kevin.

When introduced, Kevin is cold, passive-aggressive, and generally unpleasant towards the police his husband works with. This is portrayed as a terrible character flaw which he must ultimately overcome.

It’s revealed that his distaste for Holt’s coworkers is because for the last 40 years, they have been destroying Holt’s life and their marriage, through sustained, relentless bigotry, both racism and homophobia. But, you see, those were the bad cops. Good cops like the show’s main characters would never do something so horrible.

Therefore, Kevin's perfectly justified, and frankly, correct discomfort around police is a flaw that he needs to fix, and that he is ultimately able to fix when the good cops prove to him that, actually, those other cops were just some bad apples and there are good apples too (and please don’t pay any attention to the fact that bad apples spread rot so quickly through an entire warehouse).

It is only once he gives up his completely justified distrust of people who have been destroying his family for decades, that he is seen as a compassionate and caring character. Only once he accepts that Not All Cops Are Like That does he become the empathetic and kind character we see in later seasons.

There are people who believe, wholeheartedly, that because B99 shows that there are bad cops in the world, it cannot be pro-police. But, most people in the world don’t think all cops are good people, just that most cops are, and that when police violate human rights, they do so for a justified reason. A reason like imprisoning murderers or removing other, corrupt cops from the force.

The reasons that the main characters of B99 also always have for their actions. In the narratives of B99, when police violate human rights, they are always justified in doing so.

When Captain Holt makes a deal to help a mob boss, rather than facing any meaningful consequences for this action, his whole precinct joins together to cover up the deal. They do so by “ensuring” that the mob boss can’t do any harm to anyone. But, they nonetheless engage in a department-wide cover-up of police corruption. This is portrayed positively, as a coming together for the team.

The fact that the department reveals and overcomes other forms of police corruption on sere to prove that when these cops, the good cops do it, it’s justified. It’s righteous. Because they are doing it for good reasons, not bad ones.

When Holt and Jake take recording and observation hardware from the precinct without permission (this is theft, this equipment is stolen), and use it to trick someone into making a confession on tape, then use this recording as a bartering chip to get the criminal to do what they want, this too is justified narrative. They don’t have another choice! Besides, undisclosed recording is legal in New York (though, blackmailing people with those recordings is still illegal, and so is stealing police grades observation equipment, but don’t pay that any mind).

And just in case that early-season blackmail story-line wasn’t enough, the latest season ends with almost beat for beat the same blackmail story-line, except this time the recording equipment isn’t stolen. Instead, a confidential cell phone is illegally cloned and used as evidence to blackmail the chief of police into stepping down. But it’s okay for the heroes to steal the private property of a public figure because he’s a bad guy and they’re doing it for the right reasons.

And, if you’re already inclined to think positively about police, then, when in the real world you see someone do the same thing, you might be just that little bit more willing to believe that their justifications make up for it. Because, again and again, even on exceptionally progressive, well-crafted shows like B99, when the “good cops” engage in flagrant violations of human rights, they’re doing it for the right reasons. They’re working outside the law, but it’s okay because we can trust them to ignore the safety protocols.

Any time the narrative discusses the rightful consequences the main characters should face for these absurd miscarriages of justice, they are proven to have been right all along. Jake goes to prison for being a “corrupt cop” because he is framed by a much worse policeman. But the things he’s framed for are all things he has actually done. Breaking the chain of evidence, taking restricted materiel out of lock-up, keeping confidential case records in his home instead of in the records rooms. He’s “framed” in that we, as the audience, know he did those things for “the right reasons.”

And that gives people a reasonable doubt, when a real-world corrupt cop does all the same things, except he actually is doing them for the sake of corruption. Because we have been primed to see those actions as “technically against the rules, but only if you’re a bad guy.” And the cops on B99 aren’t bad guys. They’re the good cops! The progressive ones! The compassionate ones!

The ones who lock sex workers up in & make fun of them for having STIs. But it’s fine when the good cops do it, again and again, as a recurring gag. Because, hey, they’re diverse!

When Jake Peralta keeps a man trapped in an interrogation room for almost a full 24 hours without sleep or food and screams loud, relentless music at him, lies to him about what they know, threatens a young black man with jail time to force a confession out of him?

Sleep deprivation, isolation, exposure to loud noises, threats, all of these are forms of torture. But Jake’s right. The man was a murderer. And technically, those tortures are legal, so it’s fine. Jake himself, in the episode, talks about how it’s actually really fucked up that he can do all of these things. And then he does them anyway and is rewarded for it.

Again and again, the show says, “police malpractice and violence is bad,” and again and again, it tacks on, “except when our protagonists do it because they're doing it for the right reasons.” The thesis of the show could easily be described as, “police malpractice is a horrible crime that must be overcome., and the only way to overcome it is with more police malpractice.”

And that feeds directly into people believing that when the cops in their home town do something horrible, they were probably justified too. Because the police in their town are “the good ones” too.

This isn’t like anti-shippers with their proclamations that fan-fiction is making people think raping children is totally a good thing. As a general rule, it’s accepted in our culture that raping children is fucking heinous. Fan-fiction isn’t going to stand up in the face of that. In fact, it’s so accepted that actual science doesn’t stand up in the face of it (what a great time to remind everyone that most rape of children is not perpetrated because of sexual attraction but because of violent power-seeking behaviour, the same as any other type of rape, and pretending otherwise makes it harder to combat this specific form of rape).

The general opinion of policing in the US, however, is positive. The consensus of most people is that “most cops are good, it’s just a few bad apples who need to be thrown out before they rot the rest of the barrel.” B99 espouses that exact same message. It completely matches the general perspective of police in the US. And for people who already hold those views because they’re the dominant ideological framework? Shows like B99 reinforce them. For people who are on the fence, shows like B99 make supporting police even when they’re miscarrying justice and abusing human rights, seem normal.

Pretending that this unfortunate truth is just “overly simplistic” and an attempt to silence discussion is wildly misrepresenting the facts of the show, the fandom, and the way propaganda works.

Propaganda is biased media that influences other people to share those same biases. And while most of B99’s biases are positive, and most of its goals are laudable, the fact of the matter is, it’s a show where cops are the heroes. Full stop. There are bad cops, too, but the heroes of the show are the police. And their heroic actions are justified, no matter how extrajudicial or immoral they are. Their ends always justify their means, because they’re the heroes.

B99 is magnificent as a piece of representative media. It strives to make the world a better place!

It also does so by portraying cops as the ones making the world a better place even when they’re behaving immorally.

Both of these things are true, and in fact, it is the excellence of the show as a whole that makes it such compelling police propaganda.

ETA: For whatever reason, korrasera is now claiming that I blocked her so that she would not have the chance to respond to this post. That’s incorrect. I have not blocked korrasera, and she is welcome to respond if she likes, just as you all are. I’m happy to continue this discussion if you all like.

I misunderstood that post, but nonetheless, I’m open to continuing this discussion.

Who Goes Nazi? Brooklyn Edition

If you’re anything like me, a twenty-something Twitter leftist with an advanced degree in the humanities, you hate absolutely everyone around you and badly want to kill them. You live in a brownstone playground of Timorese food and adult coloring books, and you want to suicide bomb the L train but leave a note blaming it on manspreading or whatever, so people don’t think you’re one of “those” random mass murderers (the bad kind). You hate having to tell people at parties that you “work in content,” and you hate the fact that they all also work in content. You hate that they all make content for outlets that are slightly cooler and more prestigious than the outlets you make content for. You hate that none of them have even fucked you for like thirteen months. You hate that you can’t even hate them for the ways in which they’re different to you, because there aren’t any. But fear not! There’s one thing you’ve got that nobody else does: you know that you’re definitely, 100% Not A Nazi.

But what about them? Imagine if the Nazis took over America and it was suddenly cool and prestigious to be a Nazi, and there were trendy Nazis on the TV the whole time, and they once again sold soap with slogans like “Dove: The White Pride Soap for Hating QTBIPOC and Not Amplifying Their Voices.” But also don’t imagine, because that’s exactly what’s happening.

 This game was invented by Dorothy Thompson in her classic 1941 Harpers essay Who Goes Nazi?, in which she presciently pointed out that intellectuals are definitely more Nazi than aristocrats, but not nearly as Nazi as union leaders. But she set her essay at some dinner party in the Hamptons or wherever, and last time I went out there I went swimming in the sea and a wave hit me and I lost my bikini top and a bunch of bros in boat shoes started laughing and pointing at me in a way that despite my white privilege I still feel was somehow like imbued with racism, and then afterwards I just stayed inside for three weeks writing content and ordering groceries online, so the setting needs to be updated. Let’s look at your group DM. Which of these Twitter creatives who live in Brooklyn would go along with it and become a Nazi? (All of them.) And who never, ever would? (Me.)

 Mr A isn’t actually in your group DM, and you’ve never encountered anyone like him irl, but you literally can’t stop talking about him, so he gets included anyway. Mr A is a short ugly loser, and he’s already a Nazi. He doesn’t even live in Brooklyn, he lives in his mother’s basement, and eats chicken tenders, and he doesn’t get laid, but in a different way to the way you don’t get laid, which has to do with patriarchy. Mr A is a Pizzagate. Mr A is a Gamergate. Mr A is a segregationist. Mr A opposes the reforms of the Emperor Diocletian (284-305). Mr A won’t shut up about the superiority of a “free silver” bimetallic monetary system over gold specie, and keeps on talking about the “gold shills” in a way that doesn’t really make sense until you realize that your own name is Goldschmidt, and yeah, he doesn’t really care about expansionary monetary policy at all, he’s talking about the Jews, and specifically you. Mr A is basically a pathetic worm whose life sucks and nobody likes him, but also he represents the whole of the repressive forces of society and he’s at the top of the social hierarchy. Everyone you’ve ever met is actually Mr A, wearing various masks. He is the source of all your problems. He must be killed, and once we kill him, we need to find more people like him to be the source of any problems we have left over.

 Mr B is in your group DM, but you also have a separate group DM with everyone else except Mr B in it. He keeps trying so hard to be nice, and says stuff like “so how is everyone’s day today” with a smiley emoji, and when you’re talking to him you get this airless feeling like you’re about to suffocate in his treacly good-natured presence. Every time you see Mr B at a party you’re afraid that he’s going to blurt out that he loves you, but you can’t keep your distance too much because he’s so clearly autistic, and you don’t want to be ableist. Anyway once in the group DM he said that while he obviously thought divining for water with Y-shaped copper rods was good and important and valid, he didn’t understand what it had to do with socialism. That made everything better, because clearly he’s a Nazi. The whole group DM expended hours of emotional labor educating him about how dowsing is part of LGBTQ+ culture and how his dismissive bro-y attitude was reactionary and gross, and eventually he posted a video of himself crying and begging for forgiveness and promising to do better, because you guys were the only friends he had. This was classic white fragility, but in the end you let him stay. You just have the other DM now, where you make fun of him and it’s ok, because if the Nazis came and he had license to start being cruel and sadistic to other people, he’d definitely do it.

 Ms C is one of those women who doesn’t like other women, and you know this about her because you can’t fucking stand the bitch. Plus she says stuff that’s really not ok, even though it costs nothing to have empathy and be kind. You’ve personally heard her use the D-word, the H-slur, and the L-pejorative, all while laughing and holding a glass of white wine by the stem, like she doesn’t need to consider the harm this does to others, just because she’s “funny” and “an artist.” She’s the Cool Chick. She makes nude self-portraits (the bad, skinny kind), and she’d throw you under the bus in a second for male attention and approval. She’d definitely go Nazi. But the worst thing about her is that she has the impudence to be bisexual and Asian, which makes it really hard to call her out. But then you realized that all Asian people are collectively responsible for the long history of anti-Blackness and misogynoir in their communities, and you’re thinking of holding her collectively responsible for the Rape of Nanking too, once you’re certain she’s a sushi Asian and not the dim sum kind.

 Ms D’s boyfriend works in finance, or like accountancy or something, or I think I heard he was a musician? Maybe a drummer or possibly he used to bartend at a place where they had live music. Anyway they definitely have vanilla cishet sex in the missionary position and you can’t stop thinking about it, his body, her body, naked, moving, breathing, together, almost silent, tender, disgusting. She says she’s a socialist but doesn’t devote every minute of her waking life to getting mad about people online. This means she’s just vaguely following a trend, and if the trend were being a Nazi (which it is), she’d be a Nazi (which she therefore is). You can’t imagine yourself actually hitting her but it’d definitely be punching up to maybe poison her food?

 Mr E used to be a comrade, but then he did a tweet that got 38.6k RT’s and now he’s moved to Los Angeles to spend his whole time in writers’ rooms. Last you heard he was pitching an animated show for adults about a snail with borderline personality disorder. It hasn’t even been greenlit yet, but you’re already thinking about all the ways in which it will be a missed opportunity and do harm and perpetuate tropes. Mr E will definitely turn out to have been a Nazi, and then you can start an anonymous petition to get the show cancelled so he has to move back to New York. Once he’s back you can send him a long email about how much it sucks his career burned out and how (even though you won’t say it in public) sometimes people do actually take the social-justice thing too far. That way he’ll be a comrade again, which is good, because we believe in rehabilitating people who have a genuine change of heart.

 Mr F probably thinks he’s better than you. He’s a union organizer. So are you (you added “#Unionize” to your Twitter name), but his union stuff involves workers who aren’t in tech, content, or grad school, and he probably thinks that makes him more in touch with “the real workers,” who he probably thinks are just a bunch of cis white males in a factory, who are probably all racist and probably have thick, heavy dicks that intrude on your mind in a kinda #MeToo way a lot of the time. He talks about class, and you agree that class is important because you’re not a lib (you support Bernie, you just want him to Do Better). But from the way he says it you’re certain he doesn’t acknowledge all he/him lesbians as part of the working class. He’s trying to save a tiny sector of the workers from a necessary and important socio-economic shift that will impoverish them and make their lives worse, and that’s what being a Nazi is. This is why his union needs to stop dragging their heels, change all of their rules and priorities, and let you get him fired.

 Ms G (me) will never go Nazi, because she is beautiful and kind and pure, and has all the good opinions instead of the bad ones. Because of this she’s allowed to do things that other people can��t do. She can totally fail to understand what having an authoritarian personality actually means, and construct a version of the Who Goes Nazi? essay in which the people who go Nazi are just people who are already right wing, having confused politics with personality, probably because she herself has no personality other than her politics. She can minimize, ignore, or even encourage the infliction of actual suffering when it happens to the wrong kind of people. She can write that “nothing that terrible has really happened” since the publication of Mark Fisher’s Exiting the Vampire Castle, even though Mark Fisher himself is mysteriously not around to appreciate that fact. She can do some shit with threatening to leak an unedited draft that I don’t even want to go into. She knows that the Nazis don’t come promising hatred but promising to be your friend, but it’s ok because she doesn’t really have any friends, just mufos. She’s doing great. She’s building a better, kinder world. She will never, ever be the Nazis.

Choose hate?

Through my years of living on this Earth, I have, as an 19 year old student in high school, realized, I believe, more than a 45 year old man or woman ever have.

I shouldn't have realized those things. I am only 19 years old. But I did and I learned many moral and right teachings of life.

It cannot be explained because people hate. People hate no matter what you write and if I write what I want, there will be so many misunderstood comments. Because here's the thing. When I read this book, this amazing book published somewhere around 1950s I believe, this was what was written :

"Communication is in the same class with the elixir of life and the philosopher's stone. It just isn't. You can't explain yourself to anybody. Never in this world. Or why you do something. Or what makes you tick. You can't ever point to something that happened to you and say- There! That's me. Right in therr. See? Now do you understand? Because nobody's going to. " - William Goldman

But here's the problem. We try. We try so hard to explain ourselves to people that we don't even see how much energy we put in it. It exhausts us almost to the max.

And then we are hated. Hated for trying. Hated for trying to bring out our truest selves. Whoever we are or at least trying to be, we are hated.

And in my whole 19 year old life I have been so disgusted by the hate people give. Not only to people but to animals, nature, beliefs etc.

And sometimes even if it is to someone who has done another wrong. A big amount of wrong that makes you furious and you go: "I hope he dies a horrible death."

Why would you want him dead? What would that do good to you? Who will fix the wrongdoing of that another person?

We have been thought when we do something wrong, we are punished. Is death really a punishment? Is it? Old people crave death when they are stuck on the bed with nothing but tubes and diapers and already grieving people surrounding them. Bad people are terrfied of death. Some, some not. Hitler commited a suicide. Why? Ask yourself why did he do it? Was it because he craved death at 56 of age?

No,it's becuase when you're at your lowest, you look for death as a salvation for your problem. Death? It's beautiful. You're not that person anymore. You're gone. And if I use the same example what were jews and victims of Hitler's horror left with? - Hate. Hate towards him. Does he care? No. He's dead. Whether if it's in "heaven" or "hell" or whether if he was recairnated into a plant or an ant. Do people know? No.

When we are left with hate, what do we do with it? We put it on anybody who is close to us. Strangers? Acqaintances? Colleagues? Friends? Significant other? Family? Children?

We hold the hate inside and don't know where to put it, whom ti give it too. Because we don't want it. When we hate ourselves, it's easier to distract yourself on pointing flaws in somebody else.

"She's fat."

"Ugly bitch."

"Whore."

"Pervert."

"Faggot."

"Retard."

And what saddens me is that all of those are words with a meaning. Those aren't just insults, they are words with a meaning.

Worse part of this is, we use it on our own friends as a joke, as a greeting- and it has affected us and our way of speaking. We cuss and talk like those are the only words in our vocabulary. Why?

"She is overweight."

"Unattractive female dog."

"Prostitute."

"Deviant."

"Gay man."

"A sick person."

The synonims. You read the first ones, you know they are insults. You read the synonims, the tone is different.

So yes, the need to call somebody names is an urge when you are furious, hateful but know that you're not only insulting them, you're insulting those people who are those.

Is being overweight a bad thing? It's not heathy, that's all. And sometimes not even that. Perfect body, hiding your flaws, everything you have ever read about loving yourself. Even those quotes. If they are cheesy and lame and unoriginal, they are still true. People are different. Their metabolism is different. The construction of their bones can be strong or weak. Genetics is a thing. Dietary problems are a thing. It's not only unhealthy, for some people having the perfect body is unhealthy.

I don't understand. The way people use words to verbally assult other people. "You fucking pig." Pigs are smart. One of the smartest animals in the animal kingdom. And yeah, you can say that as a way to tell a disgusting person off or or tell it as bullying. Which is a thing not only in high schools, not only in work places and not only on the streets as you walk by but everywhere. Everywhere is happening the same thing. Hate.

So you can say awful about the people who murdered, raped, caused genocides, bombed etc. but when you spread hate like that, you're the one who is creating them.

Yes, I cuss. Yes, I hate. It's the nature of all beings. But there is a fine line of hating and terror.

People do it all the time. Terrorize other people because they want to be respected and praised. Because they don:t want to feel the way they do. And I pity those people for they can't see the other side of the solution.

Yes, it's sweet to taste but is it reliving you or is it making you crave for more?

I have been thought how to hate. Maybe not directly but it was there.

"You can't associate with the Serbian people." - "Why?" - "They killed our people in Srebrnica."

You mean I can't associate with the Serb who was not even born in 1995. Hate the person who wasn't the part of the massacre? I can't be friends? Be in love? Be all the things that are out of my controls? Just hate them?

"Never give a homeless man money. He'll just spend it on the alcohol or drugs. They are all frauds. He should go work instead. A person who needs money will work. "

Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe he'll buy himself food. Maybe he can't get a job. Medically. Maybe from the background of which he was a victim. All in the maybe.

"Don't dance with him." - "Why?" - "Are you blind or are you just pretending?"

Honestly, for someone who saw their own mother being terrorized by my father, who was good looking and still is, can say that character is the only beauty I seek for in my partner. Always.

"She's dumb. She keeps failing the tests."

Why? Lazy? Easy-going? Always sleeps? Or is it undiscovered learning disability? Or mental torturing problems at home? Or any other mental sickness?

How can you be so sure on who is what? How can you hate on someone by looking on them? You psychic? You God? No. So stop pretending like you are. Stop spreading hate because you can't stand the hate inside of you. The more you mix the shit, the more it smells.

It's not just the hate on coloured people tho I honestly don't see the difference between the meaning white and black as they are only different colours but still colours.

Colour, religion, beliefs, background, looks, disability, language barrier, accent, body shape, hair colour and even a birth mark on the wrong part of your body. Everything is hated.

It's like a sick joke. How can people not see it? - "There is only one race in the world. The human race." - my sociology teacher

I bleed. You bleed. I knife you, you die. Is money gonna save you? Will the word "bitch" save you? Will your pride? Your ego? Your all so high reputation? Or is it a doctor? Who could have been a homeless person you were so terrified of giving your money to because either you needed it more than him to buy cigars or alcohol or whatever you landed your eyes on. Well, he starved and froze to death. So he is not near.

That's how life works. Whether you spread hate, more hate grows inside and around you. Whether thats from people or life itself.

But love and peace, forgivness, generousity... When is the thought of that? When a bad day goes by and you curse it, you decide to hate it? Why not think of what good can you do to turn it to its contrast?

Funny thing is that you're not the only one going through it but we do sure love to feel like we are the only ones. Like the world has turned its back on us. The world doesn't have a back. It's a weird rock floating in a space, which nobody knows what that is. Like the sun. Sun is a rock that is on fire.

Why bug ourselves with questions and problems we have no solutions for? Why don't you do what you love? It's not impossible, you've just been thought that. But look how many other people proved you wrong. Television is now normal. Radio is normal. To us. To the ones who were born with it. To people decades ago? Nah. People did the impossible all throughout the history. Not because of spreading the hate, telling people off, insulting them verbally or physicaly cuz that doesn't help. It's becuase they threw their hate aside and decided on something much more lighter. Hope. Dreams. Ambition. Goals.

So, I'm 19 years old. I am overweight. I cuss. I don't believe in God but I'm a born Muslim with a Buddha statue in my room. My English is better than my mothertongue. My best friend is a Serb. I listen to also black people music even if I'm a white person. I sing to it to it. I'm still a virgin. I am not ashamed of who I am.

I know the why and you don't. So go ahead, judge me hate me. It's easy. Decide to hate but know that I don't give a shit. I'm going to listen Your Peace by Jacquees, talk to my Buddha and change into my shorts to show off my thick thighs during the winter. I think I'm going to turn into a hippie as well.

Peace and love.

And now, some Unpopular Opinions!

Because at this point, why the hell not?

Iron Man was better than The Dark Knight

I am in no way, shape, or form suggesting that The Dark Knight is a bad movie. Far from it, in fact. It’s a damn good movie with some fantastic performances, a gripping story, and some of the best written characters and dialogue in the history of movie making. So is Iron Man the better movie? For one, it’s not so stuck up its’ own ass about its’ message. The Dark Knight is a lot of things and one of them is pretentious as fuck, come off as less of a love letter to Batman and more of a method of the director Chris Nolan showing how much he has nothing but contempt for superheroes and comic books in general. Iron Man, in contrast, embraces it and has fun with the idea of a guy who builds a mech suit and fights bad guys. There’s also the question of influence, and that right there is no contest. The Dark Knight influenced Batman; Iron Man influenced the entire movie industry.

Final Fantasy XV was a massive disappointment

I kind of feel bad for dunking on this game considering they just cancelled the last of the DLC. Then again the last of the DLC was going to expand on Lady “Show Up and Blow Up” Lunafreya and Aranea “I’m here and now I’m not” Highwind’s stories and now we’re not getting them and I’m still bitter as fuck for the director’s pathetic excuse for why a girl couldn’t attend the coming of age road trip, so all bet’s are off! Okay, the ladies getting shafted aside, there is a lot to like about Final Fantasy XV, but was it worth the tedious development time? No way in hell. The game looks good but like many open world games feels mostly lifeless and empty, and of the four main characters only one of them is likable and isn’t even playable in the game’s vanilla form. The story is a broken mess that requires other forms of media to fully grasp (dick fucking move there, Squeenix) and the summons coming at random times serves as more of an annoyance than anything, especially since they always seem to show up except during times when and where they’d be useful. It also doesn’t say good things about a company’s management when a game can sell millions of copies in record time as well as do gangbusters on downloadable content and then still manage to lose over 30 million dollars.

And for the record, let it be known that Noctis is far and away the whiniest and most emo protagonist in Final Fantasy history, which is saying something considering this is a series where one such protagonist’s entire character is being so jaded and world weary to the point that his name is the sound a crying baby makes, and he doesn’t whine and complain as much as Noctis does.

Just because you’re a cop or a soldier, that doesn’t automatically make you a good person

I’m in favor of police and law enforcement and even though I believe our military budget makes Caligula himself look frugal in comparison I do support our troops. Having said that, being a cop or a trooper doesn’t mean jack shit if the person under the uniform is a complete and utter scumbag, which happens more often than many care to admit. In fact some people, many people, become cops and soldiers not to protect and serve or out of a sense of honor and duty, but simply because they like making others miserable and want to do it for a living. There’s a reason songs about fighting the law and unflattering depictions of authority figures date back as far as authority figures have been a thing. Respect is earned, not given.

‘White Nationalist’ and ‘Nazi’ are the same things

Calling a Nazi a white nationalist is like calling somebody who abuses their spouse a rough lover. Stop beating around the bush and tell it like it is. Also, don’t debate Nazis, punch them. Punch them as hard as you fucking can. If they punch you back, punch them again, and again, and again until they either run away (which most of them do) or stop moving. Trust me, nobody is going to miss them. That goes double for the alt right. Oh, and speaking of which...

Far Cry 5 chickened out

As somebody who grew up in a dead gold mining community that was mostly Catholic, when the first trailer for Far Cry 5 came out I was stoked as hell for the chance to gun down religious fanatics and skinheads in a place in rural America that didn’t look all that different. Then the game came out and it was abundantly clear to anybody that something somewhere in the game was changed at the last minute. Some have argued that it was their intention from the get go, others claimed they didn’t want to alienate their core demographic. It doesn’t say nice things about your core demographic if you’re worried about depictions of white supremacist cultists scaring them away, but okay, fine. Then make a game that takes place during the decline of the Ku Klux Klan, or in a post World War II Europe where you hunt Nazi war criminals, or failing that make something akin to Black Dynamite or a wacky 70′s Kung Fu movie where everything is purposefully over the top and exaggerated, I don’t care! All your other games have you gunning down hordes of brown people, let people like me and my husband kill some skinheads god damn it!

If you still support Donald Trump after all the vile and abhorrent things he’s done, you’re a bad person

There’s no beating around the bush on this one. I don’t blame people who were swooned by this conman thinking he’d genuinely make a good president and have since regretted their decision. I have nothing but sympathy for them. No, I’m talking about the people who STILL trip over themselves to defend this vile, homophobic, delusions, misogynist, narcissistic bigot. Like when he called Nazis “very fine people,” or is still pushing for a stupid wall along our border that will be bested by two extension ladders and a pair of tin snips. The travel ban, the rollback on regulations that kept food insecure people fed, kids dying in his fucking concentration camps, yeah, no. He’s a treasonous scumbag who deserves to be locked in an 8x8 cell until he rots, and if you still support him then you can claim the top bunk.

Climate change is real and coal can fuck off

Coal is dead. Let it lay down and rot. What, coal is your only source of income in the area you live in? Then move somewhere else! You think I would have left my hometown if there were any opportunities other than timber, fishing, and tourist traps? Sorry, but the longer we stay in the past with coal the lesser we can look forward to a future where a planet can sustain human life. If we want our planet to live then coal needs to die.

No, the left isn’t “just as bad” as the right

This is a fucking gas lighting farce that immediately falls apart when put under scrutiny. Are there extremists and crazies on the left? Of course there are, but they’re entirely different beasts as those found on the right. The left is more of a “eat enough kale and you can talk to dolphins” or “sleep with crystals under your bed and you can see the future” kinds of crazy, whereas the right is more of the “kill all the queers and let the brown babies starve” kind of crazy. Oh, and to each and every single person who said “Clinton is just as bad as Trump,” y’all can cover your reproductive organs in honey and stick them in a mason jar filled with live bullet ants and tarantula hawks, you ignorant scare mongering shitheels!

“Captain Marvel doesn’t smile!”

So what? She’s a space Navy Seal, not a boy scout like Captain America or Superman; she’s not supposed to smile.

No, the ‘alt left’ doesn’t exist and Antifa aren’t the same as Nazis

Are Antifa breaking the law? Yes. Should they be held accountable for their actions? Yes. Are people who want to kill Nazis exactly the same as people who want to exterminate the Jews and subjugate anybody who isn’t white while wiping other people’s culture off the face of the Earth under an authoritarian rule? Hell to the no and “Antifa is just as bad as the Nazis” is right up there with “Vaccinations cause autism” and “the Earth is flat” on the scale of “If you believe this, you are STUPID.” If Nazis and white supremacists went unopposed they’d go around raping and murdering Jews and non whites until there were absolutely none of them left. You know Antifa would be doing if there weren’t any Nazis around? Sitting in their crappy apartments smoking weed, sipping craft beer, eating pizza, and laughing their asses off at 20 year old Saturday Night Live skits. Ooooooh, scary! Yes, Antifa are assaulting people and destroying public property and yes they should be held accountable for their actions. But I’m not going to pretend, even hypothetically, that Nazi apologist scumbags like Tucker Carlson having his door banged on or actual Nazis like Richard Spencer getting punched in the face is on the same playing field as babies being put in cages, innocent black people being murdered by cops, or Jews being put into ovens, you fucks!

New She Ra is better than Old She Ra and 80′s cartoons in general

If you don’t like the new She Ra and prefer the old one, fine, you do you, but don’t act like the original is “So much better” because it isn’t at all. The villains were jokes, the animation was beyond cheap, the characters all looked the same, there were stupid talking animal sidekicks, and the story went nowhere really fucking fast outside of “Bad guys are doing bad guy stuff, our heroes must stop them” because they were commercials to sell toys. Nothing more, nothing less. If the new She Ra isn’t your bag then that’s all well and good, but don’t be a stupid asshole about it, talking about how it wasn’t featured at PowerCon like it’s a big fucking deal when only sad dorks like us give a shit about conventions, or whine about how you’re being oppressed and censored because a 16 year old isn’t rocking 44DD’s, or talk about “CalArts style” like that’s a real goddamn thing. Oh yeah, and speaking of which...

“CalArts style” is not a thing

Shut the fuck up, no it isn’t. It’s a stupid, meaningless buzzword hurled at people who never fucking went to CalArts in the first place. If you’re perplexed as to why modern cartoons all look like Steven Universe, the simple fact is that cartoons are made predominantly for children and shows are made to be aesthetically pleasing to them. With shows like Adventure Time, Regular Show, Steven Universe, Star vs the Forces of Evil, and Gravity Falls being soaring success stories while shows like Young Justice, new GI Joe, and 2011 Thundercats ambitious failures, it’s obvious that formal abstractionist non angularity is in while aspirational human physical fitness is out, and a big reason the latter was even a thing in the first place is because they were toy commercials first and there were only so many variations on plastic molds to form the fucking action figures and because it was the 80′s and Arnold was the biggest star at the time.

“Star Wars: the Last Jedi” is a good movie and fanboys can eat bantha poodoo

I’ve heard all the reasons for why The Last Jedi is a bad movie and they’re all either stupid nitpicky bullshit or meaningless fanboy gripes. I could write an entire essay debunking those reasons point for point, like how the reason Holdo didn’t tell Poe a damn thing because no admiral would ever a tell a lowly grunt anything about their plan, especially after being demoted for being a hotheaded little fuckup. Or that Rey being related to Obi Wan or any previous Star Wars character didn’t happen because that would have been stupid and the definition of predictable. Or that the reason Akbar didn’t do the suicide run is because he’s a meme that the general audience doesn’t give a shit about and that there’s no way in Hell that the Mouse would allow a character named “Akbar” to do a suicide run. Or that Kylo Ren not being an intimidating villain is the whole point and that you’re supposed to hate him because he’s a petulant Darth Vader wannabe and a snake to boot. Or that the effectiveness of said suicide run, where Snoke came from, or the state of the Resistance by the end of the movie, or that any other so called ‘plot hole’ doesn’t matter because this is a movie about space wizards for children and paying obsessive attention to meaningless and pedantic details is exactly how we end up with stupid subplots in the Beauty and the Beast remake and Metropolis and Gotham City being across the river from each other! But the biggest one is Luke wasn’t portrayed as some Jedi Clint Eastwood (why fanboys want that eludes me; the EU did that a few times and they were all terrible) and that him exiling himself doesn’t make any sense.

Sorry, but no, Luke running off to a far and unreachable island makes perfect sense. For one, it’s kind of a thing that disgraced Jedi do, and for two, Star Wars is a fairy tale in space. All of the characters draw inspiration from characters and archetypes from fairy tales and fables of old, and the one Luke Skywalker resembles most (largely by design) is King Arthur. Think about it. Common boy who doesn’t know who his real parents are, meets an old wizard, gets a legendary sword, discovers he’s of noble lineage, tags along with a few colorful characters, goes on a quest that’s bigger than him and the life he knew, hits a few bumps down the road, and then eventually he saves the kingdom by overthrowing his father who once was a great man and a hero but gave in to power and corruption and became a dark reflection of his former self.

You will never unsee that. 

Oh yeah, and remember how things turned out for King Arthur in the end? He started a whole new kingdom, he had a few good years, he grew arrogant, things started to fall apart, and suddenly he and everything he worked to build up were undone overnight by a younger, more vindictive relative. Disgraced, Arthur was whisked away to an unreachable island deep rooted in his own legend and mythology where he remained until Britain had fallen to darkness and needed him again. Now of course Britain as we know it has yet to see such a thing (we’ll see how Brexit turns out) but Luke did exactly that. And no, sorry fanboys, but The Last Jedi wasn’t a failure in any sense of the word. It grossed over a billion dollars, received critical praise, the DVDs and BluRays sold like hotcakes, and was adored by kids, teenagers, and young adults, the primary audience that Star Wars is for in the first place. And I don’t give a shit what the audience score on RT says, because for one aggregate sites are a blight on film criticism and we went from this;

“Batman v Superman and Suicide Squad are AMAZING, Rotten Tomatoes is biased and paid off by Disney!”

To this...

“Star Wars: the Last Jedi is TERRIBLE, Rotten Tomatoes says so!”

In just over a year. To say nothing of the fact that what you’re currently saying about The Last Jedi was also said about The Empire Strikes, and like ‘Empire’ twenty years from now people will look back on the fanboy outrage and say “Wow, what a bunch of babies.” And before the inevitable response...

“But Solo bombed because of The Last Jedi!” 

Nooooo, Solo bombed because it came out right between Infinity War and Deadpool 2, was rife with development issues since day one of production, it was aimed overwhelmingly at fanboys obsessed with Star Wars deep lore answering questions that the general audience doesn’t give a shit about, nobody was even interested in the thing until the Lego Movie guys were signed on for a hot second, moviegoers aren’t currently hurting for cocky space cowboys...

...and because of the simple fact that it’s a solo movie about Han Solo...and it’s not 1995 and Harrison Ford isn’t in it. See, fanboys don’t realize that just because nerd and geek bullshit is mainstream now doesn’t mean that everyone is now a fanboy deep rooted in everything from where the characters are from to where they’re going, because when people say “I love Star Wars and Han Solo is my favorite character” what the vast majority of them mean is “Those movies with the space wizards and the laser swords are a lot of fun and Harrison Ford is a great movie star.” That’s it. That’s extent of why people like Han Solo. Sad dorks like us may care about stuff like where and when he got the Falcon, how he met Chewie, where the dice came from and all of that and more, but the general audience just wants to see Harrison Ford do cool shit in space. That’s it. To say nothing of the fact that nobody was even interested in the spinoffs in the first place. When Disney announced that they were making episodes 7,8, and 9 everyone went “Oh Hell yes, sign me up!” Then when they followed up with that they were also making spinoff movies about stuff that happened off screen or between movies the same audience was like “Oh...well that’s neat, I guess.”

And no, that stupid fanboy boycott had nothing to do with. Even the dude who started that petition to strike TLJ from canon admitted that he was in a bad place and that he was being stupid and angry, and I can promise you that all the shrieking dorks on Youtube are the buzzing of flies to Disney. If that crowd had any box office and movie making decision influence whatsoever, the next spinoff we’d see a trailer for would be “My Twi’lek Waifu: a Star Wars Story.”

PewDiePie is the worst thing to happen to video games this side of the gaming crash of 83 and he needs to fuck off

Yes, you read that right, and I don’t say that lightly. All sorts of terrible things have happened in the gaming industry since the gaming crash of 83. The console wars, the Atari Jaguar, the Philips CDi, Jack Thompson, the death of the Dreamcast, WoW, an entire console generation packed to the gills with homogenous gray and brown shooters with protagonists who all looked the fucking same, GamerGate, microtransactions, DLC abuse, the death of Maxis, an increasingly toxic fandom, “women are too hard to animate,” the degradation of E3 from a showcase of the biggest and bestest in gaming to a corporately sponsored circlejerk of self congratulatory backslapping and so much, much more.

I don’t care how much PewDiePie gives to charity, or how many fans he has, or how many people think he’s just the greatest, because he’s not. He’s an embarrassing, stupid asshole who constantly gets busted for making stupid racist jokes and by extension making his fans and everyone who has even the vaguest ties to the word ‘gamer’ look like stupid, racist assholes. He’s a corporate ass sucking apologist who gives exposure to anti Semites and racist wastes of space to his audience of mostly 10 to 15 year old boys, and he’s more terminally obnoxious than an Adderall addicted Pomeranian. 

The day he posted his first video of him overreacting to a jump scare while making loud screeching noises on top of edgy rape jokes was the day the progress of “gaming as an art form” was shot between the eyes, placed in a box that was then filled with concrete, and thrown into the ocean. He’s a dumbass man child that’s making all of us look bad and he needs to take his millions worth of corporate sponsorships and fuck off forever into some dark, lonely corner of the Internet where he’ll never be seen or heard from again until an inevitable meltdown that lands him on an episode of Down the Rabbit Hole.

And that concludes this post. I’ll give my final thoughts tomorrow, and on Saturday I’m closing this account forever.

The Genocide Of The Innocent: Reprint From 12/19/15

    Written by: Anthony Chiozza

Hearing about babies dissected alive could lead one to despair easily. Those that are still in touch with their own soul feel an anger, and deep pain that can not be adequately communicated with the pen. Children of God for Life’s facebook page states the following: “Dr. Ian Donald explained what he witnessed at Karolinska Institute to Fr Paul Marx at HLI several years ago: Experiments were being performed on near-term alive aborted babies who were not even afforded the mercy of anesthetic as they writhed and cried in agony, and when their usefulness had expired, they were executed and discarded as garbage.” Difficult words to read for those with a soul. (1) For the record, the Karolinska Institute is located in Sweden. (2) However, the United States, Planned Parenthood, and the citizens of this country have enough blood on their hands as well, as revealed by the recent Planned Parenthood “scandal.” The only scandal that I am aware of is that millions of babies have been exterminated for years.

    There are not enough human tears to be wept that can make up for the atrocities committed against the weakest of the human species. Perhaps you have considered that I sound more like a humanist than a Catholic, but let me assure you that I fully expect God’s wrath to pour out upon this disgusting, “modern” society sooner rather than later. Some people hear, “God’s Wrath,” and they assume that this is some kind of evil God that enjoys punishing people. My theology might be off on this, but in any case, this is how my perception of this concept works itself out in my mind. God loves us so much that He weeps while having to destroy us, because we have rejected His love. If we think back to Scripture Jesus sheds tears on Jerusalem. His own people did not accept His Love, and Rome would decimate the city precisely as Jesus prophesized. Further, God’s Chastisements can also lead many to repent before death, and spare them an eternal death in hell.

For the record, I used to vote for politicians that murder babies. I was once  a full functioning member of the “Culture of Death,” in almost every regard. I have, through God’s mercy, had the good fortune to be slapped awake by Him, and I confessed those sins. These are just some of my sins, but how many pretend there is some subtle discussion to have about voting for millions of babies being slaughtered, while weighing the economic pros and cons? This cannot be considered clear reasoning. Considering if one should vote liberal to stop war is a more valid line of reasoning to follow, but also a line of reasoning that ultimately fails. Surely, liberals would continue to vote democrat if we were murdering Jews at home, but wanted to avoid killing others in wars abroad? I can hear the discussion now. “Well it is true that ‘Feel the Burn’ Sanders and Hillary want to keep murdering Jews in our country, but at least people won’t die in war abroad.” There is no subtle discussion to be had here.

    War is upon us, and it has been upon us for a long time, and many lives will be lost in war. Even under supposedly liberal leadership the slaughter of war continues, and whose fault is that? Those that have held the reigns of power in the past are guilty. Specifically, the Bush administration, which was fully stocked with a gaggle of neoconservatives. We cannot leave out Hillary Clinton, as she voted for the unjust war as well. The neocons didn’t listen to Saint John Paul II when he said they could not go to war in the middle east! “John Paul has insisted that war is a "defeat for humanity" and that a preventive strike against Iraq is neither legally nor morally justified.” (3)

     News flash for the Liberals out there laughing at the Neocons’ clouded reason, and disobedience to the Holy Father. Democrats have supported genocide much longer than any Republican Neocon, that didn’t listen to the Pope concerning the wars in the Middle East. This is not an excuse for the Bush administration’s disobedience to the Pope, but an important theological point! War is a punishment for the very crimes Liberals continue to support, by voting for leadership that is willing to sacrifice babies at Lucifer’s alter. When Our Lady of Fatima appeared to three shepherd children she confirmed Scripture, that war is indeed a punishment for sin. (4) (5)

    Again, why do Liberals continue to vote this way even though many of them are Catholic?  This vote is in trade for some false perception of economic advantage, or a misguided line of reasoning thinking we will spare lives by preventing war. I hear the emotional counter arguments now: “But if the economy is better, women will kill less babies.” Studying the statistics it does seem that the majority of abortions are happening for a lack of affordability. However, upon further investigation of the reasoning behind these decisions, and breaking down the data into subcategories, one must admit that affordability is highly subjective in the mind of the individual. The following statistics began being collected in 1986 and were published in 2005.

“Nearly three-quarters said they could not afford to have a baby.

Of those women who gave two or more answers, the most common response -- inability to afford a baby -- was most frequently followed by one of three other reasons:

Pregnancy/birth/baby would interfere with school or employment.

Reluctant to be a single mother or experiencing relationship problems.                       Done with childbearing or already have other children/dependents.

Below is

a breakdown of women's responses that

specified reasons that led to their abortion

decision

(percentage total will not add up to 100% as multiple answers were permissible):

74% felt "having a baby would dramatically change my life" (which includes interrupting education, interfering with job and career, and/or concern over other children or dependents)

73% felt they "can't afford a baby now" (due to various reasons such as being unmarried, being a student, inability to afford childcare or basic needs of life, etc.)

48% "don't want to be a single mother or [were] having relationship problem[s]" (6) (8)

  Only one reason listed seems to actually correlate with, “inability to afford a baby.” That reason is, “inability to afford basic needs of life.” The rest seem to be highly westernized ideas about “affordability.” There are women in dire poverty all around the world having babies, including the United States. For the sake of argument I will admit it is possible that these other categories might include some legitimate economic reasons, but that, of course, does not excuse the sin. When the statistics are broken down further we begin to get a clearer picture that these reasons are westernized reasons. Only twenty-three percent of abortions are because of affordability. Sixty-six percent of these abortions are happening for reasons other than affordability and that is without the health of the mother, or rape included! (7) In fairness two categories, or more, could be chosen by the woman filling out the form. Sixty-six percent is the best estimate that can made.  The percentage could be less.

Why Women Have Abortions:

The reasons they gave in 2004

25% Not ready for a(nother) child/timing is wrong

23% Can't afford a baby now

19% Have completed my childbearing/have other people depending on me/children are grown

8% Don't want to be a single mother/am having relationship problems

7% Don't feel mature enough to raise a(nother) child/feel too young

4% Would interfere with education or career plans

4% Physical problem with my health

3% Possible problems affecting the health of the fetus

<0.5% Was a victim of rape

<0.5% Husband or partner wants me to have an abortion

<0.5% Parents want me to have an abortion

<0.5% Don't want people to know I had sex or got pregnant

6% Other (7)

   Did voting Democrat ever stop 23% of these babies from being murdered? It would be interesting to break the statistics down further and see if the number of abortions in that category rose during the years of Democratic presidents. We obviously know that babies were murdered for that reason, in those years despite the numbers, so voting Democrat will never stop this from happening.  We always hear from Liberal Left about how much the government cares for everyone. Why don’t they care enough to use tax money to save babies instead of funding their genocide? Catholic Democrats hold up a magic economic key and argue they can stop allowing genocide, or at least most of it, if you will just vote for their party. I can hear the conversation with them continue, “We can save some of the Jews, even though we are the ones throwing them in the ovens, if you just vote for our party.”

    Turning back to the Republican side of the isle, can any Catholic clearly give me Donald Trump’s position on abortion? He seems to be all over the place.(9) Right now, apparently, it is not ok to kill babies in the Don’s mind, except for certain situations. This flies in the face of his previous position of being pro-abortion. He wouldn’t consider defunding Planned Parenthood, but maybe he will now? Who really knows? (Update: Thank God for President Trump. Could he still be critiqued? Yes, but he has done more than any other sitting POTUS that I can recall.) 

     Meanwhile we have candidates like Rand Paul, willing to stand on the Senate floor for hours filibustering, in order to defund Planned Parenthood! How can Conservative Catholics even seriously consider Trump when there are candidates that are more experienced, in regards to defending the country, and trying to save the unborn? Not only are they experienced, but they have proven they will fight the good fight! If Rubio shows up he might fight, I don’t know, probably not...I digress...The story recently broke that Planned Parenthood will be fully funded. Go back and read Dr. Donald’s witness testimony about babies screaming in pain as they are torn apart.

    What should Catholics be doing other than praying the rosary, to end this nightmare? I have personally heard at least two Priests, and read on EWTN that it is a mortal sin to vote for someone that supports abortion. The voters guide on EWTN by Father Taraco, Ph.D. states, “Except in the case in which a voter is faced with all pro-abortion candidates (in which case, as explained in question 8 above, he or she strives to determine which of them would cause the let damage in this regard), a candidate that is pro-abortion disqualifies himself from receiving a Catholic’s vote. This is because being pro-abortion cannot simply be placed alongside the candidate's other positions on Medicare and unemployment, for example; and this is because abortion is intrinsically evil and cannot be morally justified for any reason or set of circumstances. To vote for such a candidate even with the knowledge that the candidate is pro-abortion is to become an accomplice in the moral evil of abortion. If the voter also knows this, then the voter sins mortally.” (8)I would respectfully recommend that Trump supporters click the link in the source list below to the Catholic Answers article and consider if they are making the right moral decision weighing all the other candidates positions.

    It would follow that a good Catholic would make a prudent decision, even if they were still unsure, and follow what these good sources of Catholic teaching are saying. Unfortunately, Catholics in the United States continue to march us backwards into darkness. It would be impossible for politicians that condone the genocide of babies to be elected in this country if Catholics would actually be Catholic. For some inexplicable reason they choose not to follow the Church, but their own wills, desires, and political leanings. If only they were obedient like the Queen Mother Mary, to her Son, they might not only find that abortions end, but that the economy would also improve. Perhaps we might get more worthy candidates to vote for on both sides of the narrow political spectrum in this country as well! How many Catholics will continue to do their will and not the Father’s Will?  For now, “we the Catholic people,” seem to want more bread and circus in exchange for the blood of the innocent. Update 1: Ladies and Gentleman, I have a serious question, and thought experiment. Apparently the five non negotiables are not Catholic teaching when it comes to voting. Pope Benedict said, in a letter, that one could vote for a pro-abortion candidate, but NOT because they are pro-abortion. I can find nothing that carries the weight of encyclical that says otherwise. However, I still feel in my heart, very strongly, that it is wrong to vote for a pro-abortion candidate. My thinking relies on a statement from Pope John Paul II: "That is the dignity of America, the reason she exists, the condition of her

survival, yes, the ultimate test of her greatness: to respect every human person,

especially the weak and most defenseless ones, those as yet unborn."

-Pope John Paul II 

I feel Saint Pope John Paul II's desire for America will never be accomplished here if Catholics are free to vote for pro-abortion candidates because they like other parts of that candidates platform. The analogy I think of to explain this to people follows as: Do you think everyone would be trying to make the best choice while people are being marched off to the ovens and just kind of toss their hands and their air, and say, "Well, I don't agree with them burning those Jews, but they have a great economic policy, so I'll vote for them." Anyway, these are just my thoughts on why I think it should not be allowed for Catholics to ever vote for a pro-abortion candidate, but I accept that I am probably wrong. My heart tells me never to vote that way personally. Thanks for the thoughtful consideration. I offer my sincere apologies to those Catholics that choose to vote for pro-abortion candidates. God bless.

Update II: A good friend of mine sent me another article today from a Priest on the issue of abortion. I feel it is important for everyone to form their conscience appropriately on this issue. I would respectfully ask that everyone read this, whether conservative, or liberal. When Pope Benedict said it would not be a grave evil to vote for a pro-abortion candidate, it was in the context of a letter. This is far from an encyclical, or words spoken from the Chair of Peter. This was his opinion. While I respect his opinion, and believe he was a great Pope, my heart tells me he is very wrong. A Pope is a man as well, and can be mistaken in matters of the Faith. Even a great Pope like Benedict. It is important that we all SERIOUSLY consider our position on this issue before casting a vote that could possibly send us to hell. I am so concerned about this, specifically because of the salvation of my soul, and other souls, I am considering writing a second piece on abortion and voting. Please pray for my soul. LINK: https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2016/03/03/can-catholics-support-a-pro-abortion-candidate/

​Citations:

Debi Vinnedge, President and Executive Director, “Children of God For Life,” Nov. 9, 2015, accessed Dec. 17, 2015, https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=905776096177162&id=223315007756611&fref=nf&pnref=story

(2) Dr Cecilia Götherström, Associate Professor, “Unique stem cell brittle-bone study starts,” Oct. 12, 2015 0 2:00 EST, accessed Dec. 17, 2015,

http://news.cision.com/karolinska-institutet/r/unique-stem-cell-brittle-bone-study-starts,c9844692

(3) Associated Press, “ Vatican Strongly Opposes Iraq War,” March 12, 2003, accessed Dec. 17, 2015, http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/03/12/vatican-strongly-opposes-iraq-war.html

(4) Father Nicholas Gruner, “ Part I – The Urgency of the Fatima Message,” unkown, acessed, Dec. 19, 2015,

http://www.fatima.org/books/divimp/dichap1.asp

(5) Catholic Answers Staff, “ Does God Send War As Punishment For Sin,” unknown, accessed Dec. 19, 2015,

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/does-god-send-wars-as-a-punishment-for-sin

(6)  Lawrence B. Finer, Lori F. Frohwirth, Lindsay A. Dauphinee, Susheela Singh and Ann M. Moore “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions :  Quantiative and Qualitative  Perspectives,” September 2005, accessed Nov. 17, 2015,

https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf

(7) Gudrun Shultz, “The Real Reason Women Choose Abortion,” unkown, accessed, Dec. 19, 2015,

http://www.actionlife.org/index.php/life-issues/abortion/item/124-the-real-reason-women-choose-abortion

(8) Linda Lowen, “Why Women Choose Abortion - Statistical Breakdown of Reasons For Abortion,” Dec. 16, 2014, accessed Dec. 17, 2015, http://womensissues.about.com/od/reproductiverights/a/AbortionReasons_2.htm

(10) Fr. Stephen F. Torraco, PhD, “A Brief Catechism for Catholic Voters,” 2002, accessed Dec. 17, 2015,

https://www.ewtn.com/vote/brief_catechism.htm

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:(Statue)_Stop_Abortion._University_of_Ilorin.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

Women’s Rights Photo: Kenneth John Gill

(9) Bethany Blankley, “Donald Trump’s Abortion Muddle,” Dec. 5, 2015, accessed Dec. 18, 2015,

Hey, Could I please have a m&f ship please? I'm a pan female & I have tan skin, dark brown eyes and hair that's dark brown& golden blonde in a deathhawk. I'm a very shy person until I open up then I'm fairly outgoing. I can be very childish & bubbly or more mature and straightforward. I'm a horror and thriller writer and I love metal and indie music.I'm intrigued by dark history and dark things in general.I try to act tough but I'm very emotional & I have a hot temper. Cult or Apocalypse please!

I ship you with... Misty Days, and Kai Anderson!!

(So I went full out with this so there is a trigger warning for attempted rape graphic violence, and brief mentions of the holocaust. So if you don’t like then I will dm another one with no triggers. I just went full out. tbh it feels like more headcons or an imagine lmao. Hope you enjoy!~)

ஐ When you first met Misty (Coven Era) you were very shy but deep down she knew you were an outgoing loving person and wanted to help open you up. 

ஐ Sometimes when you walk around the forest enjoying nature you play some calm indie music to set a calm, peaceful mood.

ஐ You read a lot on the dark history of witches. You also learned that most of Earth’s dark history’s involved witches.

ஐ She loves how you can be childish and bubbly but can be mature and straightforward. 

ஐ You could be who you truly were around her and not fear that you would be judged and she does the same with you.

ஐ When she died from the seven wonders you were devastated. You researched ways to bring her back from hell. 

ஐ You teach the new witches at the academy the dark history of their witch roots and how not to make the same devastating choices. I mean Anne Boleyn using a love potion on King Henry VIII and it made him obsessed with her and eventually led to her ruins. 

ஐ When she was brought back by Michael Langdon you were so happy. You both ran in to each others arms kissing each other forgetting the world around you. 

ஐ When Dinah lets Michael and Mead in you and Misty died in each others arms.

-- BONUS- After Mallory murders Michael Langdon (Sorry I’m still grieving lmao I know it’s a tv show character but damn)--

ஐ Your teaching the girls a lesson about how World War 2 was actually about how Hitler was a warlock who went rogue and tried to kill the witches and supreme but dragged the Jews and other countries in to the war to cover up the fact that it was actually a witch vs warlock war. When a  hand is placed on your shoulder. 

ஐ “Don’t worry I found a way for you to be reunited with Misty just meet me in the hall after your done teaching.”

ஐ You did just that and she was right you were reunited with Misty.

----------

⌘ You grew up with the Andersons and that is how you ended up in the cult.

⌘ You were going to college to become an author and maybe one day direct your own horror movies.

⌘ You graduated and came back to live at home because you had to help your mother take care of your sick father.

⌘ When you came home and were all unpacked you walked next door to your high school sweet heart Kai’s house. Winter opens the door.

⌘ “Oh, shit Y/N is that really you?” 

⌘ “Yeah, I just came back from college. My Father... is well sick. Is Kai home?”

⌘ “He is but now is not a good ti-”

⌘ “Holy shit Y/N is that you?!” 

⌘ You recognized that voice anywhere.

⌘ “Hey Kai” You smile as he hugs you.

⌘ He had a bag of Cheetos in his hands. 

⌘ “Hey, so now is not a good time but are you free for Lunch tomorrow?” Kai asks.

⌘ “Oh yeah, of course.” You smile.

⌘ “Great, see you tomorrow.” He smirks. 

⌘ The next day at Lunch he tell you that he is running for governor and asked if you wanted to help. 

⌘ “Of course I will help.”

⌘ “Good, but meet me later by the alley way near our houses. You know where we would hide to-”

⌘ “Yeah, I know!” You laugh slapping his arm.

⌘ Later that night you did that but it was not as expected. A man came out of no where and tried to take advantage of you. Kai came and pushed him off of you and handed you a hammer. 

⌘ “W-Why are you handing me this hammer, Kai?”

⌘ “You know why, didn’t he make you angry by touching and taking advantage of you like you were some prostitute?”

⌘ Tear spilled from your eyes. 

⌘ “K-Kai, I can’t kill h-him...” 

⌘ “Why not he tried to take advantage of you?!” Kai shouts making you whince.

⌘ He was right though. You gripped your hammer tightly. The man looked at Kai with pleading eyes and you swung your hammer down on the mans head. 

⌘ Even though the man was dead the rage took over you and you kept swinging blood spraying on your face.

⌘ Kai grabbed the hammer from you and held you close hushing you. 

⌘ He explained his plan to you and how you just killed a traitor.

⌘ You are part of the cult and you won’t lie you felt like shit for killing people but you loved Kai.

⌘ “Y/N, come with me.” 

⌘ You follow him and he holds your hands. 

⌘ “Will you have the honor in having my Messiah baby?”

⌘ “Oh Kai, I don’t think I’m ready for-”

⌘ “I know but this will be our Messiah baby!”

⌘ “Well Alright.”

⌘ During the fall of the Cult you found out you were pregnant. You were sure you would give birth to your baby in jail and have them be taken from you. Surprisingly Ally told them that you were against your will there too. But maybe because you told her and Beverly you were pregnant.

⌘ After the fall of the Cult and you gave birth to two ‘Baby Messiah’s.” A girl named Winter Jazmine Anderson after your dearest friend and Damien Cole Anderson.

⌘ You called Kai on the prison phone. 

⌘ “Hello.”

⌘ “Y/N, you fucking traitor! How dare betray me like this! You haven’t called me in fucking 9 months!”

⌘ “I was busy.”

⌘ “With what?! Fucking Ally you slut!”

⌘ “No, I was busy being pregnant with your messiah’s!”

⌘ “Messiah-’s?...”

⌘ A boy name Damien Cole Anderson and A girl named Winter Jazmine Anderson.”

⌘ “Is it true? Am I really a father?”

⌘ “Yes, baby.”

⌘ “I’m breaking out of here in two months, and I am going to kill that fucking traitorous slut Ally!”

⌘ “Or we can elope and you help me raise our Messiah’s!”

⌘ I.... Fine.”

⌘ He faked his death in prison and instead of killing Ally you two elope and Kai creates another cult but leaves you and the kids out of it so if shit goes down they won’t be taken away.

Baby, It's Rapey in Here

If you don't know, in the days of Christ, Pharisees were the people telling everybody what they should do and not do. And they did it with the arrogance of a straight white 25 year old Mormon who just named his planet.

Now, by "Jesus", I mean a whacky Jewish street-magician and sometime Rabbi named Y'shua who, between alcoholic benders with his bro's, wowed crowds with crazy Eastern slight-of-hand and who later got turned into a Disney Prince/Ken doll named Jesus.

Y'shua is credited with saying a lot of cool stuff that was pretty generic Jewish wisdom, but we don't like attributing cool wisdom to Jews, because Jews shouldn't have nice things if you love Disney Jesus, which we do.

As for Pharisees, they were big fish in the little pond where Y'shua lived. Outside of Palestine, nobody gave a shit what a Pharisee was, but in the political life of that small little country, Pharisees were the Tea Party. Or, if you'd like to keep it Biblical, you can think of them as Darth Vader if Darth couldn't leave town. They were powerful af in town and nothing 2 steps outside, get it?

Anyway, Y'shua loved to turn the Pharisees' sensibilities on them. When it was possible to take their logic and shove it up their asses, he was right there with the shoving, preferably in public. Peter, later to become the epitome of Popiness, held the lube. Pharisees were the villians of a lot of Jebus's stories, expressly because they favored their own fucked-up ideas about God over and above oogie stuff like human love... have you ever noticed how sticky humans are?

Y'shua liked to say that the most serious stuff in a Pharisee's world, like not eating shrimp, not touching your girl's hand when she's on her period and not wearing cotton/poly blends has fuck-all to do with God's love, and he knew he was right because God is his Daddy. Yes, in that sense, too.

As long as we're on the subject of shrimp, it is a little-known fact that Y'shua wanted to serve everybody Shrimp Cocktail at the Sermon on the Mount, but had to settle for loaves and fishes when the caterer didn't come through. Also, no cocktail sauce in 1st Century Palestine -- no one had thought to combine ketchup, Worcestershire sauce and horseradish into that delectable condiment we now know as cocktail sauce. I made that up, but now you can make your own cocktail sauce

All of this fun drove the Pharisees into a murderous rage because obviously, God doesn't get woodies unless he's ordering genocide, which he did do, kind of more often than is generally considered polite. In a Pharisee's world, if God said murder me some babies and old people, that was absolutely a-okay as long as you weren't doing it in a 50/50 cotton/poly tee. And yes, I'm overstating -- this is satire, dear.

Now along the way to being asphyxiated in a state-sponsored execution, Jebus said that Our Daddy who Art in Heaven doesn't want us mistreating each other. Unless it's consensual and there's a safe word. Take all the laws and genocides that have been attributed to Daddy, all the murdering and raping and just... don't. Instead, just be nice. To everybody. And have a glass of wine, for fuck's sake.

Y'shua loved him some hookers, almost as much as he hated Pharisees, did I mention that? Well, he liked to talk about hookers, and not like The Donald does, but respectfully, knowing that his audience would have found pros to be the absolute worst sort of human. In order to show just how deeply Daddy means, "Don't hurt each other," Y'shua would tell stories about not hurting even a hooker, not when she's on duty and not when she's off. This idea is now referred to as the Gospel: don't slap hookers and sure as hell don't kill them. Even if you're in a 100% wool blazer.

Unfortunately for the future of humanity, Y'shua was more street magician and poet than he was lawyer. He wasn't too specific and he never said boo about stuff we wish he had, like what it really means to Be Nice or when life begins or wtf is up with stuffed-crust pizza, but let's cut him some slack -- he never flushed a toilet or wiped his ass, he probably never saw a white person, never looked in a mirror or brushed his teeth and if he'd ever heard of a candle, he'd have been willing to stand in line overnight to get one. We can only expect so much.

But even Y'shua -- a dirty, primitive half-crazy hooker-loving street-magician wino -- even he could see thay loving God either means caring for each other, respecting even the least of us, or it doesn't mean anything.

Getting back to the pissed-off Pharisees, they got the Roman governor to look the other way and -- long story short -- killed Y'shua. Or maybe not, that part's a little up in the air. At any rate, the bad guys won, clearing the way for an asshole named Saul to pick the legend of Y'shua out of the gutter, polish it up, set it to music and viola! Jesus! Later, other guys loped off our hero's talliwhacker, stuffed his ass shut and completed the transformation of Y'shua to DisneyPrince KenDoll Jesus. But that's another story.

The reason I'm telling this story, of Pharisees and Y'shua, is that irony I wanted to share way back at the beginning, and now you're ready! Go, you!

We live in a time when growed-ass Christians have become... wait for it... Pharisees. They based a religion on a guy and then gradually became the bad guys in their hero's story! Ta-Da! Irony!

Pharisees hate people, always have and always will -- too sticky. But they sure know what change is, and fighting change is a lot more important than being nice. These are people whose daily lives are filled with Miracles beyond even Disney Jesus' imagining: And lo, the wall of the home didst produce hot flowing water. The small box sang with the voice of an Angel, and the crowd didst mutter, "skip".

So phone apps and plumbing is all in a day's work but the concept of Be Nice is too complicated? Would explain why this whole Constitutional Republic thing is losing traction.

Lately the Pharisees can't see, for the life of them, what is wrong with a song about getting a woman liquored up and getting her to stay over. It's all in good fun, right?

Honestly, this song and it's fate is nothing. But respecting one another and being nice instead of hurting each other? It's still a good idea, and much, much simpler than the Pharisees can abide or understand.

Verifying a list of “hateful feminist quotes”. (From F to M)

Continuing my checking of whether these quotes are actually hateful opinions of feminists (instead of, say, non-hateful opinions, or opinions we can’t know where they came from, or fictional opinions made by fictional characters...) or not.

"I was, in reality, bred by my parents as my father's concubine... What we take for granted as the stability of family life may well depend on the sexual slavery of our children. What's more, this is a cynical arrangement our institutions have colluded to conceal.".

Sylvia Fraser Journalist

Unverifiable. Once again, the only places where this quote is cited is from this same copy-pasted “hateful feminist quotes” list, which I’ve shown (and will keep showing) over and over to be fucking dishonest, to say the least. By this point, NOBODY would give it the benefit of the doubt.

"All men are rapists and that's all they are"

Marilyn French, Authoress; later, advisoress to Al Gore's Presidential Campaign.

Fictional - it comes from "The Women’s Room" (1977). Specifically, Val (one of the fictional characters in the book) says it right after her daughter has been raped.

"All patriarchists exalt the home and family as sacred, demanding it remain inviolate from prying eyes. Men want privacy for their violations of women... All women learn in childhood that women as a sex are men's prey."

Marilyn French, The Women's Room, Summit Books, 1977

True, but not hateful (and not from "The Women's Room"). It's definitely a denunciation of the rigid gender roles that put the man as the family’s head, and the woman as the servant who has to serve the man - even sexually. Notice how she talks about “patriarchists”? Yeah, those are the people who want to enforce those gender roles.

"The media treat male assaults on women like rape, beating, and murder of wives and female lovers, or male incest with children, as individual aberrations...obscuring the fact that all male violence toward women is part of a concerted campaign."

Marilyn French, The Women's Room, Summit Books, 1977

True, but not hateful (and not from "The Women's Room"). She was talking about rape culture, or one aspect of it - specifically: the refusal to see violence against women as a systemic issue. It’s easier to blame social problems on single deranged individuals (which are “not me”) rather than admit that they’re social problems (and thus “also me”); but it doesn’t solve those problems. This is what French was denouncing.

"My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don't even need to shrug. I simply don't care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don't matter."

Marilyn French, Author "The Women's Room"

Again: fictional. "The Women's Room" is a fictional book.

“As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love; he can rape women…he can sexually molest his daughters… THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN IN THE WORLD DO ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE.”

- Marilyn French

True, but not hateful; it has been massively (I suspect deliberately) edited. Here's the full quote, with the parts that anti-feminists chopped away in bold:

"As long as some men use physical force to subjugate females, all men need not. The knowledge that some men do suffices to threaten all women. Beyond that, it is not necessary to beat up a woman to bear her down. A man can simply refuse to hire women in well-paid jobs, extract as much or more work from women than men but pay them less, or treat women disrespectfully at work or at home. He can fail to support a child he has engendered, demand the woman he lives with wait on him like a servant. He can beat or kill the woman he claims to love; he can rape women, whether mate, acquaintance, or stranger; he can rape or sexually molest his daughters, nieces, stepchildren, or the children of a woman he claims to love. THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN IN THE WORLD DO ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE."

So, yeah. Anti-feminists forgot to include job discrimination, general disrespect, and treating your wife like a servant to the list; with their omission, they try to make French appear as if she was saying "most men are rapists, murderers, or beaters of women". Pretty fucking dishonest, to say the least.

"My own informal survey of adult women suggests that very few reach the age of twenty-one without suffering some form of male predation--incest, molestation, rape or attempted rape, beatings, and sometimes torture or imprisonment."

Marilyn French, The War Against Women, Ballantine Books, 1992, p. 195)

Unverifiable and not hateful. Given the massive bullshit that happened with the previous quote, I now suspect that anti-feminists attempted the same trick here - cutting away stuff like job discrimination/general disrespect/being treated like a servant.

"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race."

Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future - If There Is One - Is Female.

Huh, look at that: a true and actually hateful quote. Good job. Have a cookie.

"[Men are] freaks of nature... full of queer obsessions about fetishistic activities and fantasy goals."

Germaine Greer, The Whole Woman, Knopf, 1999

Unverifiable. While various sources report the quote to try and attack Greer, I cannot find any part of the quote in the "The Whole Woman" ebook. Maybe there is, and I just cannot see it because it's just a preview, but I'm very doubtful.

"If women are to effect a significant amelioration in their condition it seems obvious that they must refuse to marry."

Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch, McGraw-Hill, 1971, p. 317)

Unverifiable - same as the above - and probably not hateful, given that this is, once again, about forcing women into heteronormative gender roles and marriages. Maybe the quote really exists in the "The Female Eunuch" ebook; but I can't find it.

"...men bash women because they enjoy it; they torture women as they might torture an animal or pull the wings off flies."

Germaine Greer, The Whole Woman, Knopf, 1999

Unverifiable - see the previous. However, there are a few quotes where Greer points out that some men torture women, and very probably enjoyed doing so.

"The man regards (woman) as a receptacle into which he has emptied his sperm, a kind of human spittoon."

Germaine Greer, The Female Eunuch, McGraw-Hill, 1971)

Once again: unverifiable. But it looks like Greer here is talking about the attitude of many men at the time.

"Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release."

Germaine Greer

True, but not hateful. Here's the original quote from 1970 (again, the bolded part is the one that anti-feminists cut out):

"Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release. The problem of recidivism ought to have shown young men like John Greenaway just what sort of a notion security is, but there is no indication that he would understand it. Security is when everything is settled, when nothing can happen to you; security is the denial of life. Human beings are better equipped to cope with disaster and hardship than they are with unvarying security, but as long as security is the highest value in a community they can have little opportunity to decide this for themselves."

This isn’t about whether men should be all thrown in prison or not. This is about how putting “security” above everything else means stripping any choice from your life - which would make it so that it couldn’t even be called “life” at all.

In an interview Germaine Greer (radical feminist, writer) was asked the question, "You were once quoted as saying your idea of the ideal man is a woman with a dick. Are you still that way inclined?" Greer first denied that she had said it, and then replied, "I have a great deal of difficulty with the idea of the ideal man. As far as I'm concerned, men are the product of a damaged gene. They pretend to be normal but what they're doing sitting there with benign smiles on their faces is they're manufacturing sperm. They do it all the time. They never stop. I mean, we women are more reasonable. We pop one follicle every 28 days, whereas they are producing 400 million sperm for each ejaculation, most of which don't take place anywhere near an ovum. I don't know that the ecosphere can tolerate it."

Germaine Greer At a Hilton Hotel literary lunch, promoting her book, The Change-Women, Aging and the Menopause, Knopf, 1992 from a news report dated 11/14/91)

Unverifiable. It should say “SUPPOSEDLY from a newsreport THAT NOBODY SEEMS TO BE ABLE TO FIND”. So, yet another unsourced quote.

Oh, and the “My ideal man is a woman with a dick” quote? ALSO unsourced.

"The nuclear family must be destroyed, and people must find better ways of living together…. Whatever its ultimate meaning, the breakup of families now is an objectively revolutionary process…. No woman should have to deny herself any opportunities because of her special responsibilities to her children…."

Linda Gordon in "Functions of the Family," WOMEN: A Journal of Liberation, Fall, 1969

True - this quote is actually a really existing quote. It’s also distinctly non-hateful of men. It’s distinctly angry at the social imposition of marriage and the nuclear family system, though - but remember: the wife was supposed to stay at home and obey her husband in everything, back in 1969.

"And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual (male), it may be mainly a quantitative difference."

Susan Griffin

True, but not hateful. I’ve managed to track the quote. And guess what? It was a talk about how the social expectations of the time (this part was written in 1971) expected the woman to turn down sexual advances even if she desired them, because it was considered “unchaste” for a woman to desire sex; and expected the man to wear down the woman’s “reserves”, without checking whether the woman in question actually wanted the sex, or not. It the same part, Griffin explains how, *with this social system* (that she did NOT create, nor is she advocating for) the difference between “a man who wear down a woman’s reservations” and “a rapist” is simply in how much pressure they use to make the woman have sex with them.

“We live in a culture that condones and celebrates rape. Within a phallocentric, patriarchal state the rape of women by men is a ritual that daily perpetuates and maintains sexist oppression and exploitation. We cannot hope to transform “rape culture” without committing ourselves fully to resisting and eradicating patriarchy.”

–Bell Hooks, “Seduced by Violence No More,” in Stan, Adele ed. Debating Sexual Correctness (New York, 1995)

True, but not hateful. The book is specifically talking about rape culture - aka a culture that, even if it claims that rape is wrong, in practice it fails to adequately deal with rape, instead blaming women for getting raped. This, in turn, allows sexist men to oppress women with next to no consequences.

"When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression..."

Sheila Jeffreys

Unverifiable. HOORAAY!

“In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and communally raise them”

(Dr. Mary Jo Bane, feminist and assistant professor of education at Wellesley College, and associate director of the school’s Center for Research on Woman).

Unverifiable, and probably not hateful. For starters, the source for this quote is Lew Rockwell, which is an INCREDIBLY far-right-biased source.

For another, the quote sounds like part of an argument in favor of the communal parenting, which is an argument that has been pretty explored. Also, note how she refers to communal parenting - not to women-only parenting.

"I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which a man structurally does not have. He does not have it not because he cannot have it. He's just incapable of it."

Former US Congresswoman Barbara Jordan

Huh, look at that. This quote (it’s reported in a 1992 issue of Texas Monthly, but the actual quote doesn’t have a date) is actually true, and does sound hateful. Can someone check out the score? Because, at the time of this writing, I checked 42 quotes, only 2 (possibly 3) of which were verified to be true and actually hateful.

"Marriage has existed for the benefit of men and has been a legally sanctioned method of control over women.... Male society has sold us the idea of marriage.... Now we know it is the institution that has failed us and we must work to destroy it.... The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore, it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men."

Nancy Lehmann, Helen Sullinger, Declaration of Feminism, 1971

Unverifiable. Apparently there is a book titled "The document: a declaration of feminism" published in 1971; but there's no way to verify if that quote actually exists. And the link I provided is basically the only source of that book's existance - outside of the edited quote above, which is present only in anti-feminist websites.

There is also the "Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen", written by Olympe de Gouges in 1791. Coincidence? I have no idea. Maybe it is.

"Man-hating is everywhere, but everywhere it is twisted and transformed, disguised, tranquilized, and qualified. It coexists, never peacefully, with the love, desire, respect, and need women also feel for men. Always man-hating is shadowed by its milder, more diplomatic and doubtful twin, ambivalence."

Judith Levine

Maybe true, but there is no context. I can’t make heads or tails of what it actually means. It’s the same case as some of the Dworkin quotes - no indication of the work or the context it was taken from.

"I feel what they feel: man-hating, that volatile admixture of pity, contempt, disgust, envy, alienation, fear, and rage at men. It is hatred not only for the anonymous man who makes sucking noises on the street, not only for the rapist or the judge who acquits him, but for what the Greeks called philo-aphilos, 'hate in love,' for the men women share their lives with--husbands, lovers, friends, fathers, brothers, sons, coworkers."

Judith Levine, My Enemy, My love

Unverifiable. The only sources talking about this quote are anti-feminist ones.

"There are no boundaries between affectionate sex and slavery in (the male) world. Distinctions between pleasure and danger are academic; the dirty-laundrylist of 'sex acts'...includes rape, foot binding, fellatio, intercourse, auto eroticism, incest, anal intercourse, use and production of pornography, cunnilingus, sexual harassment, and murder."

Judith Levine; summarizing comment on the WAS document, (A southern Women's Writing Collective: Women Against Sex.)

The quote itself is unverifiable and not hateful, given that all of those acts have been (1) used by men against women, and (2) justified as “normal” sexuality by those same men.

However, the bit where the anti-feminist author of this list talks about “Women Against Sex” is false: the real title of the document Levine was talking about was "Sex resistance in heterosexual arrangements: Manifesto of the Southern Women’s Writing Collective". Because making up a false title to demonize feminists is acceptable behavior, am I right, anti-feminists? (# sarcasm)

"Men's sexuality is mean and violent, and men so powerful that they can 'reach WITHIN women to fuck/construct us from the inside out.' Satan-like, men possess women, making their wicked fantasies and desires women's own. A woman who has sex with a man, therefore, does so against her will, 'even if she does not feel forced."

Judith Levine

Slightly unverifiable - I can’t find neither a scan, nor the citation for the full Levine quote. What I did find was the book Levine was looking at - My Enemy, My Love (1993), a book that talks about “gender roles, the social definitions of masculinity and femininity, the culture’s assignment of certain exclusive traits to each biological sex, [which] have imprisoned us on either side of a divide”. Also: no mention about whether the women interviewed by Levine were feminists or not, and in particular, no mention of the context for the quote.

"All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman."

Catherine MacKinnon

False. The quote apparently comes from Playboy, Oct 1986; but it wasn’t written by MacKinnon, nor anyone was able to track the instance where she supposedly originally said/wrote that.

"You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs."

Catherine MacKinnon, Feminism Unmodified: Discourses of Life and Law – Sex and Violence: A Perspective, Harvard University Press, 1987

True, but out of context. From what I can understand, this is from yet another discussion about non-con pornography (“Only Words”, 1993); MacKinon wasn't talking about families in general.

What's with anti-feminists taking discussions about problematic and sexist porn and deciding that feminists were talking about everyday life? What, do anti-feminist believe that pornography is an accurate representation of real li-

Nevermind, let's move on...

"Feminism, Socialism, and Communism are one in the same, and Socialist/Communist government is the goal of feminism."

Catherine MacKinnon" Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (First Harvard University Press, 1989), p.10

False. The quote is completely absent from MacKinnon's book, or any of her books. Apparently, this is a slightly modified quote from "The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism".

"In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent."

Catherine MacKinnon

Misattributed. The quote itself comes from "Professing Feminism", which wasn't written by MacKinnon, but by Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge; they were talking about MacKinnon and Dworkin's opinions - they weren't quoting them. (And no, neither Dworkin nor MacKinnon believed that intercourse is rape.). The misattribution was caused by right-wing columnist Cal Thomas, who wrote an article about "Professing Feminism" and mistakenly attributed that quote to MacKinnon.

“The care of children ..is infinitely better left to the best trained practitioners of both sexes who have chosen it as a vocation…[This] would further undermine family structure while contributing to the freedom of women.”

–Kate Millet, Sexual Politics 178-179

Misattributed. Here, Millet isn't talking about his own beliefs; he's talking about Engels's. Specifically, he's talking about how the idea that "The woman is naturally the one best equipped to raise a child" has the effects of:

Put a limitation on the woman, but not the man. If the woman wants to, say, pursue a career, she's forced to deal with child-raising AND with pursuing the career; the man has to deal only with the latter, because society pressures the woman into doing the former.

It's inefficient, because you just decide that the woman is the one most capable of raising a kid, instead of looking at which person is the most capable.

"We can't destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy marriage."

Robin Morgan.-From Sisterhood Is Powerful, (ed), 1970, p. 537

True, but not hateful. Again: “marriage” presupposed that the woman stayed at home and obeyed her husband in everything. I fail to see how being against the imposition of this kind of marriage/gender roles is hateful.

"I feel that 'man-hating' is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them."

Robin Morgan.-former president of the National Organization for Women (NOW) and editor of MS magazine

True (1973). I also fail to see what’s wrong with “class-hatred”, aka being justifiably angry with the oppressing class while fighting against its privileges. I mean, I do understand that nobody shouldn’t oppress anyone else even if they were oppressed beforehand, but here we’re talking about expressing justified anger against an oppressive system, and wanting to dismantle it. What, is that illegal now?

"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire."

Robin Morgan.

True, but not hateful. I fail to see where’s the problem with this quote. It’s basically the concept of “yes means yes” - you don’t have sex with anyone unless they want it. ...Oh, wait, now I see why anti-feminists have a problem with this quote.

"And let's put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism--the lie that there can be such a thing as 'men's liberation groups.' Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group, specifically because of a 'threatening' characteristic shared by the latter group--skin, color, sex or age, etc. The oppressors are indeed FUCKED UP by being masters, but those masters are not OPPRESSED. Any master has the alternative of divesting himself of sexism or racism--the oppressed have no alternative--for they have no power but to fight. In the long run, Women's Liberation will of course free men--but in the short run it's going to cost men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily. Sexism is NOT the fault of women--kill your fathers, not your mothers".

Robin Morgan.

True (1970), but not hateful. This shows a big miscommunication problem between MRAs and feminists. See, many feminists define sexism not as “acts of individual discrimination against a gender”, but as “an oppressive social system where one gender is treated as inferior”. By that logic, what MRAs claim is “sexism against men”, feminists call it "discrimination against men", but not "sexism against men", because women did NOT create this system where masculinity is put on a (very narrow) pedestal and femininity is derided. As Morgan put it:

"The oppressors are indeed FUCKED UP by being masters, but those masters are not OPPRESSED. Any master has the alternative of divesting himself of sexism or racism—the oppressed have no alternative—for they have no power but to fight. In the long run, Women’s Liberation will of course free men—but in the short run it’s going to cost men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily."

You can’t compare the situation of an oppressed class (who has to tear down the system biased against it) with that of the privileged class (who actually made the biased system in the first place and could fix it). And what Morgan is saying is correct. Systematic oppression divide society in a privileged group (which has a certain amounts of benefits that the oppressed do not have, and/or is exempt from various disadvantages that instead the oppressed do face) and an oppressed one. Dismantling such a system DOES damage the privileged group, because it takes away their privileges - privileges that they shouldn't have in the first place, and that are based on the oppression of marginalized groups.

“My white skin disgusts me. My passport disgusts me. They are the marks of an insufferable privilege bought at the price of others’ agony.”

-Robin Morgan

Not hateful. From the looks of it, here Morgan is talking about the effects of white colonialism and racism - specifically how they benefit white or white-passing people such as her. For example: being allowed to travel or emigrate wherever you want and be treated as a person, while non-white immigrants are by default believed to be violent criminals, murderers, and rapists.

Celine says that it is our people trying to ride his people into hours our Max and our regular s into his it's really what it is and it shows and the two big ones are doing cuz they have to I know that these idiots will be the fight too and the idiots get small and they don't care because they're going to ride into that in the middle there say they're going to go grab people that's how they're going to do it the problem I have is that they expose what the stuff was over and over silently and cold and conversations they're ridiculous buffoons and he's fooled you you just these Jews to him and that's what you are what do you want for me you know he says just sitting here bothering him to do this so I did was juicy up a little bit 20% and you're over the top and you have no way of telling and screaming it at you you think we're going to do like what you want cuz you wanted your non-powered jackass it's like sit there keep doing it feel bad for him it's real powerful tons of money can't do anything very frustrated and angry with you you know it's a lazy piece of crap Mike and Justin and billion who is homos just sitting there thinking you're going to win this is horrible I get hit so often he tries to help me too and there's tons of power all sorts of things happen for reasons I can't explain just hit me out of nowhere this person helping me the same she's sorry a million times it's only hit me that she may have been possessed you can't figure out from what or how I'm even forced to by Biden is fairly evil and wrong a lot of times. Biden is like a driving force for all this to happen by the way a new elected him now he's going to be emperor he's just like this piss poor guy who doesn't do what I do and it's not my caliber and he says that he's action Jackson and he's pissing and s******* all over everyone cuz he can't stand you cuz you go after his race basically we don't have a war between our races all of us against Max and everyone hates you Max and you're just this lazy assholes expecting stuff to happen that we used to work for you it kind of solution you don't do anything

Ghwb

You're doing something now and CAA says he's talking to you and you won't remember it in a few minutes so I understand that yeah we don't do anything CAA says good. So after you George for what you have what you know it seems to know they exists and that's a problem and he says the family is always been spying on me what the hell were you having him do that you don't know and I say this I don't remember all this stuff and it's kind of hazy but I do know what their job was and is and doing a good job at it so I don't mention it that much but these people are crazy in the bothering me and him and you George will hit you out of nowhere because that's what they do they're a bunch of assholes and they praise themselves for it okay I got to get rid of them and CA knows these people around you're going to lose

Mac

We spent so much money and wasted it on these idiots and they don't do anything right he says this is their headquarters they're holding me here as a prisoner and they're having me do their plan because they're douchebags literally and they're wasting their own way and they don't really care cuz they know the plan is to have Max fight me and fight us and we understand that and the suicidal so going after him he hit me he did it on purpose and we can't stop these idiots and they're stupid we're trying not at the same time these idiots are always in the way then he turned into his mega powerful ones the truth is he's getting away with it but kind of forcing him to do it and these idiots are forcing to do it a lot it doesn't make sense because stupid people are doing it

Ghwb

That's exactly what it is the stupid people in the neighboring him they're too stupid to know that they're stupid by doing it and what we know is something stupid is going to happen and it is huge stupid things are playing to happen to us

Mac

What do you look very stupid to foreigners and they're taking advantage of it that doesn't matter he says and it won't that's really stupid what these stupid people are doing because they don't know they're doing something stupid it's going to continue until something stupid happens to all of us Satanist

Ghwb

No I'll probably proceed with my plan but if you get me out of here at least you'll think you have a chance or maybe act it and some people might believe you have a chance if I stay here it's a stupid place for me to be and these stupid people will be running their lives into the ground as they always do because they're stupid

Zues

This conversation is stupid because it's all true

Hera

You people are stupid cuz you couldn't figure it out and how many people can figure this out this is a rat's nest and so complicated and evil and dangerous something some genius is running it but really it's so stupid at the end of it in the beginning of it you have to know that it's a stupid people and they just got done ruling the Earth and then this crazy action Jackson guys doing it almost no change he's almost as stupid as they are

Ken

I've got to get out of this stupid mess no we made the stupid mess we understand what the delinquencies are sort of no we're stupid that's what it is stupid people do stupid things and we're stupid

Trump

And boy was your presidency stupid this boy took advantage of you every which way but Sunday he was going to town on you too took everything you had in areas in the area he's been raping you like it's like a crazy mother f***** he has almost everything that you had now it's taking everything that you had after that you're the stupidest person I've ever seen Trump you can't figure it out how many of you so stupid you shouldn't be here practically all of you admitted I can't get them out of here he doesn't know where to go either he can't go up there you going to put them on trial that's really stupid then we go on trial you've got us all walked into this it's my advantage and he says finally because someone's going to see how stupid these people are it's true if he goes to court we didn't go to court if he gets stuck in a place like this we feel it it's very stupid but that's what you're doing you're these zenocital people and you want to go after all the other races and you sit there not doing it if it's killing you yeah you're the stupid people too Max but really it's cuz these stupid Max

Ghwb

Realize the situation is stupid frankly everything we do is stupid but frankly today's conversation brings light on something these retarded assholes are far more damaging than just being a stupid joke they're rude they're treasonous they're murderous they steal tons of money and food and stuff eat it squander it and die and don't care is like being surrounded by sick primates and what he said is you take the hair off and you put them in a room and you weaken them a little because they're too strong and you sit around and you can try and tell if they're corky or not and a lot of people have trouble with it cuz he just tell you what to do and stuff then they go at each other they're bunch of assholes like those two little monkeys so I'm going to prove a point and we're going to stick him in a zoo and you'll see George what we're talking about cuz we get stuck in there with him you can't do anything but try and fight them he's making fun of us cuz he didn't really see what happened but a lot of people did and they hate these people and it works what we might do is take him up on it and put five corks in at 10 corks And one gorilla you'll see how the gorilla reacts cuz we've done it so we don't have to redo it he says just send a video and protect your gorilla now cuz it's going to happen and John C Reilly is back but he's thinking stupid things about the gorilla and anyone would really but you know you said dogs heard him and stuff doesn't think that way I try not to who cares power so it's understandable and he's like a person to do a lot of retarded people cuz he thinks on a similar level but he's not he's an animal and he was just in his territory and he's trying to survive he's on the defensive because the real returns corky and put him on defense so John knows that oh yeah so we're going to go to town on you can't stand you I'm going to see if John wants to get his torso back and other people like him look up Garth hate some pretty good for his torso trick this is yes this one's stinky

Mac

It's truly have something and it's a little bit of Hope going to fix ours and straighten these idiots out if they can be but they're a mess horrible and At him all day long and really at us too and they're at UMacs so I'm going to write up how

Ghwb

A rant: I haven't spoken to my abusive parents in several years, and today I got an e-mail from my dad that was a random biblical verse. | Spoiler Alert: I got kinda mad. via /r/atheism

Submitted November 30, 2020 at 09:38PM by Obliterature (Via reddit https://ift.tt/2JdYlaY) A rant: I haven't spoken to my abusive parents in several years, and today I got an e-mail from my dad that was a random biblical verse. | Spoiler Alert: I got kinda mad.

My parents growing up were abusive and were the cause of various forms of trauma to my three siblings and I. My dad, a lapsed Catholic, decided he was a "Christian" again after Barack Obama was elected and started sinking into a far-right sinkhole of anti-intellectualism. My mother, is a right-wing Jew. What a combo, eh?

Anyway, I've been estranged from them for several years, because I couldn't handle their gaslighting, denial, and continuously crappy and toxic behavior. I told my Dad and Mom at the time that they would be back allowed in my life if they met certain conditions (seeking mental health treatment and committing to seeing through being the primary condition). Today, I get this e-mail quoting the Bible verse Psalms 95:6"

O come, let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the LORD our maker.

I don't know what came over me, but I flipped out. I got angry. And I couldn't stop myself from writing him an e-mail back. This may be petty, but I just felt like I had to share it. Apologies if this doesn't belong here.

​

The E-Mail:

Oh, shit, are we trading favorite biblical verses now? Here’s a few of my favorites:

How about when Leviticus weirdly shames women for having periods?

" 'When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. 20 " 'Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. 21 Anyone who touches her bed will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 22 Anyone who touches anything she sits on will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 23 Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, they will be unclean till evening. 24 " 'If a man has sexual relations with her and her monthly flow touches him, he will be unclean for seven days; any bed he lies on will be unclean. 25 " 'When a woman has a discharge of blood for many days at a time other than her monthly period or has a discharge that continues beyond her period, she will be unclean as long as she has the discharge, just as in the days of her period. 26 Any bed she lies on while her discharge continues will be unclean, as is her bed during her monthly period, and anything she sits on will be unclean, as during her period. 27 Anyone who touches them will be unclean; they must wash their clothes and bathe with water, and they will be unclean till evening. 28 " 'When she is cleansed from her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean. – Leviticus 15:19-28

Or that one where God tells Moses that the crippled and handicapped aren’t fit for his church?

The Lord said to Moses, 17 "Say to Aaron: 'For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. 18 No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; 19 no man with a crippled foot or hand, 20 or who is a hunchback or a dwarf, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles. 21 No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is to come near to present the food offerings to the Lord. He has a defect; he must not come near to offer the food of his God. 22 He may eat the most holy food of his God, as well as the holy food; 23 yet because of his defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary. I am the Lord, who makes them holy.' – Leviticus 21:16-23

This one ought to hit close to home: kill your sons who are stubborn and rebellious. Well, what are you waiting for, pops?

If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid. - Deuteronomy 21:18-21

Ohhh, looks like any many who’s injured his cock and balls isn’t allowed in church either…I wonder if emasculation from wife counts? Is that why you never go to church?

No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the Lord. - Deuteronomy 23:1

Personally loving this one where men have permission to cut off a wife’s hand should she try to defend her husband.

If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity. - Deuteronomy 25:11-12

How about the one where God condones bashing babies against rocks?

Daughter Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is the one who repays you according to what you have done to us. 9 Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks. – Psalm 137.8-9

Or the one where God condones ripping babies to pieces, looting their parents’ houses and raping their mothers?

See, the day of the Lord is coming -a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger- to make the land desolate and destroy the sinners within it. 10 The stars of heaven and their constellations will not show their light. The rising sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light. 11 I will punish the world for its evil, the wicked for their sins. I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty and will humble the pride of the ruthless. 12 I will make people scarcer than pure gold, more rare than the gold of Ophir. 13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble; and the earth will shake from its place at the wrath of the Lord Almighty, in the day of his burning anger. 14 Like a hunted gazelle, like sheep without a shepherd, they will all return to their own people, they will flee to their native land. 15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through; all who are caught will fall by the sword. 16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses will be looted and their wives violated. – Isaiah 13:9-16

Hubba, hubba, Ezekiel!

There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. - Ezekiel 23:20

Oh damn, what about that time in Hosea when God’s all about baby-killing AND violently murdering pregnant women? I thought Christians opposed abortion?

"But I have been the Lord your God ever since you came out of Egypt. You shall acknowledge no God but me, no Savior except me…"You are destroyed, Israel, because you are against me, against your helper… The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." - Hosea 13:4, 9, 16

And no examination of the Bible is complete without some New Testament Exodus shenanigans about selling your daughters into sexual slavery.

"If a man sells his daughter as a servant, she is not to go free as male servants do. 8 If she does not please the master who has selected her for himself, he must let her be redeemed. He has no right to sell her to foreigners, because he has broken faith with her. – Exodus 21:7-8

Tell me, Dad. Do you really think you know more about the Bible than I do? I literally majored in literature and the “classics” of western culture. I graduated Summa Cum Laude with a 3.99 GPA. I’m halfway through a masters degree on these kinds of ancient texts.

You, on the other hand, are a fake Catholic who rarely goes to church and has mindlessly hooked onto far-right & conservative talking points in your old age out of your reactionary racism to the election of a black man to the presidency.

What the fuck happened to you? The [CENSORED NAME] I remembered when I was growing up was an marginally intelligent and moderate thinking person capable of critical thinking. The [CENSORED NAME] I’ve seen devolve into the anti-intellectualism of American-Christian nationalism & conservatism since Barack Obama took office in 2008 has been an embarrassment to yourself, to your Jewish wife, and to your children. Get a fucking grip.

Your politics and your religion are centered around greed, prejudice, and the marginalization of ethnic, cultural, political, and religious minorities. Your fetishization of your personal “freedom” and “liberty” over the health, safety, and human rights of others is vile and repulsive, and it illustrates that your ideology extends to only caring about yourself and your immediate circle, rather than for the common good of all people. (Not very Christian, bro.)

All that aside, you know my conditions for allowing you and mom back into my personal life. You must:

​

Be open and honest with our mother about her abusive behavior towards you and your children over the decades.

You must seek mental health intervention and treatment for her, to include medication and therapy. She is sick. She has been sick for a long time. She is long overdue for psychological help. Your enabling of her abusive and unhealthy habits is only going to further isolate you and her and compound her mental illness, as well as present detrimental effects to your own mental health, if they haven’t already.

She must commit to A.) Admitting the abuses she’s done to you, your family, her family, and all of her children and B.) Following through with her mental health treatment. No half-measures. No quitting. She is sick, and she has been sick for as long as I can remember. She will not ever get better or be better if she does not have your support and encouragement throughout what will likely be a very sordid and difficult treatment. She will not get better or be better if she doesn’t commit to seeking treatment for, what is likely, the rest of her life.

You need to finally own up to your own flaws, too. You have gaslighted us, your kids, and told us that the abuses and trauma we have endured from our mother and you have not happened; that we are liars and that are “ungrateful”. You have enabled your wife’s abuses by turning a blind eye to them. No longer.

BONUS: If you could at least try to understand that your politics are not only harmful to humanity at large, but to your children and grandchildren, as well, it’d be fucking nice to see you apply some critical-fucking-thinking to the ideology you’ve so mindlessly given yourself to.

Here’s the thing, [CENSORED NAME], I may be the only kid that’s cut you out of my life so far, but I can guarantee you: I will NOT be the last. [SISTER 1] and [SISTER 2] are tired of you, they are tired of mom, and they are ashamed of you. I tell you this not to hurt you or twist the knife, but to warn you. You have been dangerously close to losing them the way you have lost me for years. Every time one of your ignorant political rants shows up on their Facebook feed, every time you harass them about wishing mom a happy birthday, or harass their ex-husbands on Facebook, every little stupid and inconsiderate act you take, is pushing them closer to the ends I have taken to separate myself, my family, and my children from you.

As the status quo stands right now; you and mom are toxic. And I cannot in good faith bring people like you around my children. You did enough damage to me and my siblings. I won’t let you hurt my children, too.

You’ve already missed out on nearly the first two years of [CENSORED WIFE'S NAME] and I’s daughters’ lives, and [CENSORED SON'S NAME] has no idea who you people are. I am certain they cannot tell the difference without your influence in their lives. Can you?

I am not an unreasonable person, and I do not ask for anything that is out of your realm of capability or power; I am not asking for the clocks to be turned back and for you to undo the years of abuse and trauma you and mom inflicted on us. I am not the hateful and ungrateful son you have painted me to be. I may be stubborn and rebellious, but I am not without reason or compassion.

Your Stubborn and Rebellious Son, Take Him to the Elders at the Gate of Town For His Stoning,

- [CENSORED NAME]

HYPOCRISY IS BAD, BUT YOU’RE WORSE

“I like the Walrus best," said Alice, "because you see he was a little sorry for the poor oysters.” “He ate more than the Carpenter, though,” said Tweedledee. “You see he held his handkerchief in front, so that the Carpenter couldn't count how many he took: contrariwise.” “That was mean!” Alice said indignantly. “Then I like the Carpenter best—if he didn't eat so many as the Walrus.” “But he ate as many as he could get,” said Tweedledum. This was a puzzler. After a pause, Alice began, “Well! They were both very unpleasant characters—” (Through the Looking-Glass)

This is a moviepost—extensive spoilers follow for Death Proof, Jackie Brown, and Inglourious Basterds—and I wrote it mostly because I wanted to talk about some movies. But first, a topical tie-in:

There is always an outside that a person considers unworthy of life...The individual progressive or racist may never say that the outside is unworthy of rights, but they feel it. This is what is meant by that line from Inglorious Bastards when the character of Lt. Aldo Raine says; the "Nazi ain't got no humanity. They're the foot soldiers of a jew-hating, mass-murdering maniac and they need to be de-stroyed!"

Here we have a thirst to destroy the perceived inferior, except instead of a racist seeking the end of Jews it is the progressive liberal seeking the genocide of racists. That's irony.

And understand what is happening here. Aldo Raine is really a proxy for Quentin Tarantino. Tarantino is the one speaking, not Brad Pitt. The man is very left-wing and he wrote the script. That move is essentially an exposition of the directors [sic] politics.

The above quote is taken from The Anti-Puritan. Exactly what it sounds like: dude read three Moldbug posts and now thinks he can write. The specifics of this guy’s bad opinions are not that interesting—would you believe that even the videogame industry has been corrupted by cultural Marxism?—but perhaps something can be learned from the framing:

A climate scientist drives to an important summit on global warming. On the way there, he fills up his tank with gas. The only reason oil companies are in business and climate change is occurring is because of people like him who fill up their tanks with gas. Their payments make climate change possible. The payments are the reason Exxon, Shell and BP exist.

A feminist complains about the cis het patriarchy. Her boyfriend, whom she spreads her legs for, is tall, strong, confident, manly, and "dominant" in every way. Fucking dominant men is the reason they exist, the reason they will continue to exist, and the cultural incentive to become dominant...She and billions of other women perpetuate "the patriarchy" with their sexual choices. Patriarchy exists because of them.

A college professor complains about McDonald's. She has eaten fast food from a burger restaurant recently. She, and millions [of] others, are the reason McDonald's exists. (Source)

Let’s accept that there’s a lot to unpack here and move on. Focus instead on the form of the argument: tu quoque, again and again. The feebler the discourse the more accusations of hypocrisy (Bush Lied, Barack Hussein’d) because hypocrisy doesn’t require knowledge of anything but pre-algebra logic. Even a child can identify a contradiction: “But mom! You said—!”

This is precisely the skull malformation that has constricted discussion of the protestors who identify as “Antifascist Action” and are derided as the “alt-left.” Antifa has already become a perennial non-issue where all opinions are based on anecdote and there are plenty of anecdotes to go around; no one has skin in the game, anyone can upvote, and measurable achievements are dwarfed by spikes of indignation like hypertensive hemorrhages into America’s brain. If you don’t believe me, you haven’t been watching the stock prices of PP, NRA, PETA, and BLM.

Antifa now faces the two attacks that were long ago formulated against other activist groups. One: antifa is composed of violent morons who carry upon them body and pubic lice species yet to be classified by science. Two: antifa is counterproductive to their stated goal, e.g. getting to whack-a-mole pamphleteers is actually a powerful incentive to suffer for fashion.

I suspect both criticisms are true, but whatever—does the first imply the second? Is violence bad even when it is effective? Because if it isn’t, then claiming that “antifa are thugs too!” is worse than useless. Your opponent can simply reply, “So what? Nazi ain't got no humanity.” And now that you’ve cried wolf, that guy won’t listen when you claim that, in this instance, violence might not work. So you better be damn sure about your answer: what price should be paid for the sin of hypocrisy?

There is always an outside that a person considers unworthy of life...

Quentin Tarantino has dedicated his career to answering this question. 

QT has seen too many movies for it to be any other way. If you consume enough art across epoch and genre, you can’t help arrive at the Susan Sontag #redpill that content doesn’t matter all that much. All art is genre fiction no matter the pretensions and our lizard brain judges accordingly. Sure, thematic analysis is fun to play with after the fact, but if a movie has the right tropes in the right places—femme fatales, tough muchachos, pretty pictures, happy ending—well, you can convince yourself of just about anything.

Take, for example, Death Proof. Genre: exploitation/slasher. Synopsis: hot babes go for a night out, ex-stuntman stalks and runs ‘em down in a death-proof car; stuntman rinses and repeats with another girl gang except they turn the tables and Mortal Kombat his thoracic spine. Rating: extremely badass, you should check it out, anyone who tells you different is a pleb.

Namely: some people complain that the movie has too many scenes of girls talking and that their QT-isms are an unrealistic depiction of an actual group chat. The characters bicker lewdly, if that’s a thing, alternating between weirdly masculine sex-as-status teasing and pledges of undying affection, the verbal equivalent of a catfight, which is maybe how a creepy foot fetishist would imagine female dialogue, but...

Nope, still pleb. Tarantino wasn’t the first guy to invoke this trope, it’s part of the DNA of the slasher genre, as old as Jamie Lee Curtis getting razzed for her virginity in Halloween. Misogyny, maybe, but also content is a spook. Slasher movies have to fill 70 minutes before the eponymous slashing, and they also have to make you care about the outcome of said slashing without humanizing the characters so much that you get all Marley and Me when they die. 

What’s the secret? Status games, the less nuance the better. Boys would watch paint dry if you said it was a grudge match. Catfighting is no different than the elaboration of powers in a shonen manga or the suspicious glares exchanged between heist movie protagonists: it creates tension. Different value systems have been described, there can only be one, now you’re rooting for process of elimination to reveal the truth. No—you identify with that process. Hail Gnon. You could make a movie with men playing status games and being killed off by women and men would still find it hot; I know this because of female horrorcore rappers but also because this movie is called Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! and it’s 10/10. Incidentally:

This is referenced again in the final scene of the film, in which the viewer cheers on our group of heroines as they beat to death a pleading, injured man.

Here’s the hot take: tote bag feminists are wrong to think that drawing boobs on Powergirl is a male attempt to diminish her power. On the contrary, the more vampire slaying the better. Sexualization is an attempt to gain access to female power: if she wants The Phallus badly enough, she might just lend her power to you. Obverse: men are idiots for thinking that the existence of rape fantasies means that women secretly want to be raped. There’s an image floating around the manosphere about that terrorist with a heart of gold, Ted Kaczynski, who was gauche with ladies in the free world but deluged in love letters upon his incarceration. Before you can say medium = message, someone tragically rendered celibate by their 23andMe results will point to this as proof that women “only want serial killers.” Newsflash: Kaczynski is serving eight life sentences without possibility of parole. Do you think the fangirls didn’t know that? Rape fantasies (theoretically “hot”) are qualitatively different than being raped (“unimaginably horrific”) because you construct the former, can turn it off at any time. The fantasy victim is assaulted by a terrible power, but the person who selects and controls that power is...

Of course it is, cough, problematic, that slasher movie girls display power through HPV vaccinations while male zombie apocalypse survivors soliloquize on whether suicide is inevitable in the absence of God. But once you sexistly set up that women should be valued by their sin, the wages = death equation is not in and of itself misogynistic. No, it’s just inevitable: sex-as-status tension can only be relieved in two ways and one of them is frowned upon in theaters. Film crit cliché and Kraftwerk song, I know, but: watching a movie renders you impotent—you can’t interact with the sexy image on the screen—except through what the camera will allow.

That’s why you are complicit in the murders that occur in the first half of Death Proof. The ex-stuntman—old, a teetotaler, star of TV shows long forgotten (and played by once-famous Kurt Russell)—is as impotent as you are, capable of getting a deleted scene lap dance but zero penetration, and when he gets in his car to commit vehicular homicide x4, he looks at the camera and smiles. Because you’re right there with him, waiting for the money shot. It would be nice to fuck, but you’ll settle for a murder. Except when it actually happens, played four times for your amusement, it’s horrible—a face melted off by a tire, a wet leg flapping in the street. Throw in a Wilhelm scream. Wasn’t that what you wanted? Are you not entertained?

It’s all perspective, my man. For all the short shorts and naughty words, the girls plan and backup plan ways to prevent unwanted sexual advances; two of them have boyfriends and one is texting a crush trying to seal the deal; they discuss and decide against inviting the opposite sex to their lakeside vacation. But that’s not what you see from the outside. That’s not where your attention is drawn, wandering the club and editing your .jpg of grievances. For you, dancefloor means sex, choker necklace means slut, and being a slut means she would never sleep with you. That’s a personal insult. And that means that nothing else matters.

Which is insane. This isn’t an argument for or against promiscuity, the point is you don’t even know promiscuity looks like. You know symbols, and for that matter, why those symbols, where did you learn those? Brazzers? If you’re gonna be mad at a thing you should at least be mad at the thing itself, not at whatever fucked up fetish you’ve imposed on reality.

There’s a scene midway through the movie where QT tips his hand. The second girl gang is lounging in a car, one of them dangling her feet out the window. The ex-stuntman approaches, you assume his perspective, and maybe because it’s an old grindhouse film...

...but the color goes out, and everything is black and white.

Which, speaking of:

Jackie Brown is first and foremost a movie about being extremely cool all the time (you should watch it). The plot is an excuse: briefly, Pam Grier (airline stewardess), Robert Forster (bail bondsman), Samuel L Jackson (arms dealer), Robert De Niro (ex-convict), Bridget Fonda (stoner surfer chick) and a couple Feds each try to nab a briefcase holding $500K.

Jackie Brown is secondarily a movie about how race shapes each and every human interaction, but that description makes it sound like a Very Special Episode, and that couldn’t be more wrong. The movie is gleefully amoral, in fact lapses from pure MacGuffinism are treated as intolerable weakness, e.g. Jackson to De Niro:

ORDELL: You know what your problem is, Louis?

Louis doesn't say anything, he just puts his hands in his pockets.

ORDELL: You think you're a good guy. When you go into a deal you don't go in prepared to take that motherfucker all the way. You go in looking for a way out. And it ain't cause you're scared neither. It's cause you think you're a good guy, and you think there's certain things a good guy won't do. That's where we're different, me and you. Cause me, once I decide I want something, ain’t a goddam motherfuckin' thing gonna stop me from gittin' it. I gotta use a gun get what I want, I'm gonna use a gun. Nigga gets in my way, nigga gonna get removed. Understand what I'm saying?

Apparently not, because De Niro later makes this mistake and gets popped.

For these characters, race is just another weapon. When Jackson meets Forster for the first time, he lights a cigarette, puts his feet up on the desk, and taps out the ash in a partly full coffee cup. Then he points out a photo of Forster with a black employee. “Y’all tight?” “Yeah.” “But you his boss though, right?” “Yeah.” “Bet it was your idea to take that picture too, wasn’t it...?” In their second encounter, Jackson, trying to get bail for Grier, pulls the same trick:

ORDELL: Man, you know I'm good for it. Thousand bucks ain't shit. 

MAX: If I don't see it in front of me, you're right. It ain't shit. 

ORDELL: Man, you need to look at this with a little compassion. Jackie ain't no criminal. She ain't used to this kinda treatment. I mean, gangsters don't give a fuck - but for the average citizen, coupla nights in County fuck with your mind. 

MAX: Ordell, this isn't a bar, an you don't have a tab. 

ORDELL: Just listen for a second. We got a forty-year-old, gainfully employed black woman, falsely accused - 

MAX: Falsely accused? She didn't come back from Mexico with cocaine on her?

ORDELL: Falsely accused of Intent. If she had that shit - and mind you, I said "if" - it was just her shit to get high with. 

MAX: Is white guilt supposed to make me forget I'm running a business?

But Forster—male lead, the “good guy”—plays his version of the race card and flips the script.

Example 2: Bridget Fonda, surfer gal, plots to betray Jackson, who “moves his lips when he reads,” "let's say he's streetwise, I'll give him that.” But Jackson knows that she sees him that way, it makes her predictable, which is why he can keep her around: “You can’t trust Melanie, but you can always trust Melanie to be Melanie.”

That’s not the half of it. Jackson talks a soon-dead man into getting in the trunk of an Oldsmobile, houses a homeless addict in Compton and tells her it’s Hollywood; he lies effortlessly, and when drafting your fantasy friend group you should be aware that people who lie effortlessly do it because it’s fun. Threatening someone gets you an automaton who will system 2 your demands and nothing more. Deceiving someone gives you control over that person’s soul. So Fonda’s stoned delusions of manipulating him—which in fact make her easier to manipulate—are part of her appeal. Translated: “She ain't as pretty as she used to be, and she bitch a whole lot more than she used to...But she white.”

Except Fonda is manipulating him. She’s spent her adulthood as the side piece for Dubai businessmen and Japanese industrialists who—though she doesn’t even speak the language—get off on the fact that she’s a haughty blonde who thinks she’s better than them, thinks she can manipulate them. But since they’re paying for rent and weed, doesn’t that mean...?

Example 3: Pam Grier as Jackie Brown.

From more Sam Jackson than Sam Jackson to mumblecore for Medicare, Jackie outsmarts everyone and it’s not even close. The Feds lean into their uniforms but she doesn’t miss a beat: urbane dinner guest in one scene, “panicked, defensive, unreasonable black woman” in another. Of course the movie ends the way it does, of course. Jackson steps into a dark room. Jackie screams “he’s got a gun!” And a cop pulls the trigger. You can’t always beat the system, but if you try sometimes, it just might beat who you need.

Why does Jackie win? The canon explanation is that she’s an airline stewardess: her job is to tell people of all origins what they want to hear. The meta explanation is she’s played by blaxploitation star Pam Grier. The gimmick of Grier movies like Coffy and Foxy Brown is their exaggeration of the audience’s favored tropes re: sex and race—say, hypersexuality and fashionable/wearable blackness. But the punchline of these films is that on-screen, Pam Grier with an afro is disguising herself as an high-class escort to fool the baddies: “The gentlemen you’ll be meeting this evening have a preference for…your type.” And then she kills them.

So it’s true that these films let you "exploit” a caricature, but the flip side is that anyone who can turn that caricature on and off gets to exploit you. And that seems to be Jackie Brown’s realist take: not that racism is the Original Sin for which Thou Must Atone—because everyone sees race and is selfish besides—but rather that it makes you a sucker. And the flip side: by capitalism or by meme magic, the world will always conspire to show you what you want to see. Choose wisely.

If Jackie Brown accepts that racism is inevitable, Inglourious Basterds sets out to prove that it’s also kind of fun.

It’s telling that Inglourious Basterds posters are push-pinned on the walls of fraternity houses right next to Scarface and The Wolf of Wall Street. Three movies, three sets of protagonists who happen to be amoral, masculine, and white. Sounds like a diss, but who are creatine-chugging white boys supposed to look up to? Chris Pratt? You can just tell that guy was grown in a test tube. There’s a reason Tarantino movies are popular and there’s a reason I’m talking about them instead of Buñuel or Tarkovsky and it has something to do with “making intensive use of a major language” and the twenty-somethings desperate to identify with a character named “Bear Jew.” And the above scene is indeed, “sick af.” Goes off without a hitch except when the Nazi says that he got his medals for bravery, and then there’s a split-second of—what, annoyance? Like, stick to the script, asshole. You’re sure as hell gonna get it now.

But I’m sure you’re aware that’s the joke, that once you got Ennio Morricone in the background you can justify anything. The Basterds “ain’t in the prisoner taking business”; they scalp the dead and maim the witnesses they leave alive. There’s no panorama of concentration camp horrors, no humanizing backstory, no evidence of any softness save boyish joy in the art of cruelty. Halfway through the film a young man celebrating the birth of his son is shot dead after surrendering in a Mexican standoff; the Basterds shrug and move on. At the climax of the film, a movie theatre full of Germans is exploded, shot, and burned to death. The modern viewer can’t help but cheer.

The opening chapter, Colonel Hans Landa vs. the outgroup under the floorboards, sways your sympathies in the opposite direction. No, it doesn’t make you hate the French or the Jews. But the tension—the silence and the ticking and the mounting requests and insinuations—is so unbearable that you can’t help but wish for someone to pull the Band-Aid. And the camera can’t do that. Only characters can. Only the character driving the action, and Landa drives the action in his every appearance. Something has to happen—and like the man onscreen, you cave.

Hans Landa alone seems to understand that he’s in a movie, which is perhaps why he’s so polite, so witty, so manically overacted. Perhaps this is how he sees through the Allies’ tricks and disguises: he assumes everyone else is an actor as well. And perhaps this is the apologia for his crimes: he’s just playing a role. The Basterds loathe the Nazis, but Landa bears no animosity towards the Jews, can empathize with them quite easily—it’s just, he likes to play detective and the Nazis were hiring. Is that really worse? Didn’t both the Walrus and the Carpenter eat as many as they could get?

And so, near the end of the film, when Landa cuts a deal to exchange his Hugo Boss for Levi Strauss, he asks of his prisoners the one question that would matter to a character in a period piece: “What shall the history books read?”

Landa’s argument, of course, is a load of shit.

In Inglourious Basterds, every disguise fails. The British film critic-turned-agent is unable to play the Nazi he’s seen on-screen. The German actress is revealed to be an Allied spy. The vengeful Shosanna is revealed as a sweet Jewish girl; the baby-faced Nazi lusting after her is shown to be a monster. The propaganda film burns. Only Lieutenant Aldo Raine and one Basterd make it out alive, and that’s because they’re American, i.e. monolingual.

Perception is a slave to narrative, but narrative has zip zero zilch nada to do with reality. The author is dead. Was Triumph of the Will a “good movie,” technically proficient and even emotionally moving? Absolutely. Could the director’s intentions have been “good,” apolitical, an attempt at beauty but nothing more? Unlikely in this case, but possible. But was Triumph of the Will “good”?

This is the obvious yet unswallowable truth: sometimes good people do bad things. “Nazi ain't got no humanity”? How many films have Nazis with wives, mistresses, children, pub games, medals for bravery? And yet Lieutenant Raine’s opening polemic is correct: the foot soldiers of the Third Reich worked for a Jew-hating, mass-murdering maniac: they needed to be destroyed. Reality isn’t Disney, where internal beauty works its way external. Reality isn’t even so kind as to match intentions with consequences. The American (Union) soldiers fighting against the Nazis (Confederacy) may have been motivated by every bit as much hatred and bloodlust, and yet they were necessary, they were the good guys. FYI—that’s irony.

“So you’re saying we should punch the alt-right?” Are you an idiot? The Nazis weren’t bad because they were Nazis, they were bad because of the things they did. If you actually think that punching a teenage Kekistani is going to bring down the New World Order, go ahead, but stop pushing the pillow of identity over the mouth of reality.

The goal of the System, the sum of vectors going both left and right, is to keep people arguing about abstractions of violence so they won’t deign to consider the ugliness of pragmatism. The radical left will asseverate that violence is justified, refusing to question whether their particular brand of protest is effective; the alt-right will keep rallying against cropped image lunatics, the finest examples of white genocide the media has to offer, never seriously considering that sometimes people lie on the internet; and “““centrists””” will deduce that since violence is never okay, since everyone is so irrational, nothing can be done. But that’s still a perspective: it’s the perspective of the camera.

Fuck that. This essay is a condemnation of anyone who thinks that the hypocrisy of the outgroup disproves their complaint, of anyone who thinks that good intentions are enough to absolve you from sin:

You don’t get to forget what you are.

21st century guide to a free world (Updated 26.08) Foreword Have you thought about why is it that as time goes by society gets more dangerous to live in. There are more mentally ill people, more psychopaths, more pollution,  more cancer, more illnesses, more selfishness, more loneliness. Why isn't it going the other way around like more freedom, safety, wellbeing, trust and connection between people? Why is it that every aspect of our lives is monetized? To understand how the world has come to be so you have to know our past as well as the present situation. Christinity has shaped Europe and it's people since it's creation. Many of our social customs and ways come directly or are greatly influenced by it. At the core of Christianity is a belief that Man is a sinner, a fallen being whose only salvation is in letting God's blood. Oddly enough God rants very angrily at people in old testament about people "eating his flesh and drinking his blood", yet this God angering sinful activity is the cornerstone of all Christian sects. An awake and aware 21st century person knows that one is what one thinks and believes. Said person is also aware that sacrificing someone else for your own gain is evil. Especially a blood sacrifice. Doesn't matter that it is imaginary, it is still gross and wrong. After the medieval crusades, templars, returning from Middle-East pondered that the God presented in Bible could be the bad guy and the Snake, who confronted Eve with an offer, actually a good guy. They called him Lucifer. Thus was born one of the most powerful organizations in the whole of the world. Luciferianism. This cult established the first international banking system and soon grew rich and very, very corrupt. Consider the following points: * Templars adopted kabballistic( a jewish esoteric teaching) knowledge as their own. *They took the baseline corrupt christian dogma, despite it being so obviously the opposite to what Jesus preached as a reason to think that the Biblical character, the devil was actually a good guy. * John the Baptist called jews “You are of your father the devil” * Jews veritably hate Jesus even today. * Templars went underground in 14th century and soon emerged as the Freemasons * Freemasons have a hierarchical power structure. You don't get to the highest degree unless you are a major world player financially and politically * All Freemasonic cults, of which Skull and Bones is one, operate clandestinely. In the beginning they needed to hide their true views and activities for fear of being persecuted by the Catholic Church. These days they are surely well versed in keeping out of sight. * To even join Freemasons you must be rich and active in cultivating the society. (Who made our world such a mess?) * Both Freemasons and Jews are usually the money people. * Irish had a spell for getting the devil and his money out and away from one's life. *Jews and Israelites were at odds and even at war with each other. * No one nation is evil, Jews are no different. They have Zionism and orthodox religion which justifies violence toward other people. Just like whites, blacks, asians, etc have religious "justifications" for hating others. * America was created by Freemasons, which is why that country stands by Israel by default, no matter what horrible deeds Israeli military commits on the Palestinians. * Judaism is a religion, not a race. Jews branding their critics "anti-semites" is an ages old method of the guilty blaming others of their own faults. In fact Palestinians and Arabs are Semitic. When you criticise Catholics that doesn't make you racist. Yet criticising Jews does. Wake up from the slumber! *Jews view gentiles with contempt. Remember, Freemasons inherited their religion from the Jews. By the looks of how they degrade our education, society, culture and our self-identity, it seems they also inherited their superiority complex. *Goyim is not a jewish word of endearment for non Jews. It's more likely to mean useless eaters, cattle, mindless animals than "Gentiles". Would this self-superior religion view others as more gentlemanly than themselves? * Jews sacrifice lambs. It is a satanic ritual. Freemasons sacrifice people. So who's the worst? Here are few resorces for you to study this whole matter and get a more in-depth view. Europeans Are The "Lost" Tribes Of Israel - A Rare Documentary https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbbSVjVWX-4 Then consider this statement by a jewish activist. https://youtu.be/G45WthPTo24?t=38 An orthodox Christian view on Jews https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbLd688gXoI Rabbi Dovid Weiss: Zionism has created 'rivers of blood' | Talk to Al Jazeera https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUppu2OHVTY Christian view on Freemasons. Beside being funny it's on point too. https://youtu.be/fDizgM5DUaY So that's what they teach themselves "We are God" Yet to public they propagate a culture of trashiness. At point 34:52, aliens consider humans "limited" https://youtu.be/hKJzAXbjlbQ No wonder if we are being totally controlled by out of control loony religions, like Luciferianism. Satanic child sacrifice rings all go hand in hand with moneyd and powerful groups, just the exact circles in which Freemasons operate. https://youtu.be/rvVb_cVcwB4 There's so much more to study. About templars, the Lost 12 tribes of Israel, etc. It all points to the same. There are a few wealthy and powerful running satanic, deceptive religious orders and cults. And, just like in society most members of those cults have no clue whatsoever about their organizations true end goals. Let us continue with the modern state of the world. What is Satanism. In essence it is a cult of selfishness. It's adherents seek to exploit others for their own gain. What do Freemasons do: *Operate in secret *Pretend a good cause *Are in control of modern culture, media, movies which are full of lewdness directed at children, violence and general decadence. How is that not Satanic? They are satanists with another name. If it walks like a duck and quacks like duck then it is a duck. Look at our business and political arena. *You succeed the better you can lie and manipulate other people. * You make more money if you exploit people and their needs or weaknesses. * All world power centers are rumored to be hotspots of child abuse, human trafficking and sacrifice. Vatican, Brussels, London, New York. * Governments are supposed to represent people. No one has the right to force someone against their will or hold captive anyone without being threatened in the first place. Yet, the government can force people to do anything. That in itself shows that you are a captive of the government and not represented by the government. So if the Freemasons are supposed to be wealthy and influential players in our modern world then why isn't our world getting safer and better like their public humanitarian declarations claim as their goals? Have you seen a one Freemasonic Lodge which, after a thorough study and observation does not come out to be involved in crime, perving, underage sex slaves, etc, etc. Here are few interesting videos to get to know the whole picture. There are many more. Go explore and learn. The Masonic Religion is Luciferianism https://youtu.be/tjPQ_ZXqkWI Skull and Bones were involved in JFK assassination https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ka_vjCU-qg J Edgar Hoover was a Freemason and one of the main organisers of JFK assassination. A secret military industrial syndicate was responsible for 9/11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbdxXWN4DGk So Donald Rumsfeld, himself a Mason or Skull and Bones initiate, orders 3000 people, Americans, to their deaths at 9/11 Here's a further tidbit to consider. The word pagan means satan. That's what the Catholics called all non-christians. Horned god worshippers, satanists. Makes it real funny seeing some people identify themselves as neo-pagans. A cult which involves a horned god and making pacts with that god. Do you realize now, that we live in a mad Luciferian/Satanic world where the masses are docile slaves? The Guidebook to becoming Free People. Start making loving, caring connections with people. Don't exploit anyone. Refuse to do so. Instead enact mutual care toward everyone and demand the freedom to do so. Protest being treated like a mindless will-less cattle. Legal code applies to players in the arena. It's like in the wrestling world. You are not in the ring, the code does not apply on you. Legal code is not the Law. Nor does it even matter what it is. It works on the basis that the authority has power and right to rule over you. Only a slave has a master who decides what the slave can do or can not do. A free person is fully responsible for one's freedom and actions. Stop looking at the government as your savior, it's the system of your imprisonment and it's maintainers are not interested in letting you go. Become self responsible. Start working for your and everyone's wellbeing. Stop being a selfish asshole with an excuse "everyone does it and i need money to buy food". The more you separate from other people the less you have and the more you need money to get what you need. Those who created and run the economic system are always going to be it's masters and can do whatever they want. So, what? You want to mass exploit people and murder your way to the top? People who think like this will end up lonely, mad wrecks who can find no love, no company, no solace. They get their love from perving on and raping others. Is that what you want to become? Crazily enough there are many budding businessmen looking to become just like that. The key to unraveling the system of evil is to not consent, even if you say yes to the authorities. Just think that it is a lie to save yourself and they will get all the karma from abusing you. If you don't know then authorities corralling you around is authorities corralling you around like rancher does it with his cows. Got it? You're a human being. Your life is about freedom and living according to your own understanding while respecting others at the same time. We are not meant to be someone's elses property to command and do as they would. Eject all ideas about creating a business or making money or becoming a politician to save the world. These things are meant for selfish people to control others. You can't change them, only demolish or reject them. Alternatives are needed. Not every politician or freemason is evil. Demand changes and common sense. The evil system can be and has to be left behind and a new way of truly taking care of each and every one has to be established. It can only happen if you make it so. Give and receive freely. For giving is receiving and receiving is giving.

Chris Ray Gun, White Hysteria and Dishonesty

For the past few weeks, we've seen a bit of a shift in white youtubers- especially on the gaming side of the platform. White gamers who generally only offer their (supposedly) funny hot takes on the latest games and the hottest gaming trends have taken the dive into political commentary. They’re inspired by this new presidency and conversations surrounding him and the so-called “SJWs” and “Main Stream Media”. While some are critical of Trump, plenty of them have come out to boldly state that they hold ideologies that are consistent with the leader of the free world. Bravely, they've taken to Twitch broadcasts and Google Hangouts to express their true feelings and one such gamer was JonTron, of the Game Grumps. 

Jon Jafari, a man who self identifies as white despite being Iranian (more on that later), has taken to several broadcasts to express his sympathy with White Nationalism and White Supremacy. This has shocked a lot of his fans, who have now transformed his Reddit page into a mostly anti-JonTron roast fest. While they remain shocked by his out of touch comments like “Rich black commit more crime than poor whites” and “What about the crime rate in Africa?”- I’m actually not very surprised by this at all. Now, confession, I have a bit of a prejudice against the gaming community- if you haven’t been able to tell already. While I know and understand that not all gamers are racists and not all gamers cosign things like sexism and misogyny, I’ve been hardpressed to find a group of people who have the same visibility and influence as someone like PewDiPi or Game Grumps, call these things out. In fact, it seems like often times they side with and sympathize with the times when racism or sexism materialize in their circles. So, I have- what I’ll admit, is a pretty unfair bias against gamers and I’m not surprised when prominent gamers turn out to be racist and I’m even less surprised when they’re defending by other prominent gamers. 

Because I’m a black woman who blogs about anti-racism and does so pretty openly, I get a lot of harassment and trolling. Now, I’ve been a blogger since I was 15- so honestly these things don’t really phase me, but I’ll be honest and say that sometimes I get trollish myself and at times it’s not always the best recourse. One thing I’ve learned (especially on this fucking website- still hate tumblr) is that often times when you’re in situations like this, it’s best to not respond.. .but hey-probably because I’m a child of the internet, it’s hard for me not to sometimes. 

Racist trolls always dominate my mentions. Any time I make any point about racism, you’ll be sure to find some white troll in my comment section refuting what I’m saying. The other day, I was ranting about JonTron because, TBH, I really find the whole thing quite fascinating. White people have largely convinced themselves that being called out for racism can ruin someone’s career. And you know what- as someone who’s fans have tracked down racists who’ve attacked me and gotten them fired... I get it. That’s not totally untrue- but it definitely is on Youtube. 

JonTron regurgitates white supremacist talking points almost perfectly and one of said talking points is “White Genocide”. If you've never heard of this term before, it sounds like it’s a discussion about the mass murder of white people. I completely understand why people would think that, but that isn't what it means. Here’s a definition from one of the leading White Genocide information websites:

White Genocide is:

Moving millions of non-White immigrants into traditionally White countries over a period of years 

Legally chasing down and forcing White areas to accept “diversity“. This is known as “Forced Assimilation“.

White Genocide is being carried out by massive immigration of non-White people and forced assimilation. As a result we are turning into the minority in America, Australia, Canada, and Europe. 

Now, if White Genocide were the mass killing of white people on the basis of them being white, I would obvious oppose that. Why? Because I don’t believe in any sort of genocide or violence on the basis of race. hell, I’m the same person who defended Trump supporters and Tumblr’s STILL mad about it. 

White Genocide is a concept that’s been around forever. With the hysteria around immigration today, I think a lot of people can connect the dots and see why people like JonTron (The son of an Iranian Immigrant) would easily latch onto these ideologies. This is part of why it doesn’t shock me. Because if you know anything about American History, you know this conversation has come up decade after decade whenever a large group of non-white immigrants come into the country. A central aspect of this concept is a demonization of miscegenation. Miscegenation, if you don’t know is just an old-timey word used to describe interracial relationships. As a black woman with a white boyfriend (who BTW is Japanese and Italian- so pretty much already unpure), I personally find the hysteria to be quite funny. It’s honestly hard for me not to. I guess it’s because I’ve been a minority my entire life and I’ve had to listen to white people- even in this conversation, pretend as though things are completely fine when it comes to how the majority relates to the minority. Hearing all of these white people fear being breed out is funny to me on several levels, but the biggest one being that there’s something so disgustingly hypocritical about it all. White people literally colonized a land that wasn’t theirs, attempted to actually violently genocide an entire race (failed), raped them, forced them to assimilate and then over centuries imported non-white workers and slaves to build their country and now this particular group of white people are upset that.... in 2017, white women have the choice to sleep with men of color. And that’s really what this is all about, but I don’t want to get too deep into describing to you what white genocide is. In summary, many black men were lynched in post slavery America because they were accused of lusting for white women. This was seen as self defense of the white race and black men were often genitally mutilated after they were hung. So there’s a very long and extensive history there,  but I digress. 

In talking about White Genocide, I obviously made a lot of jokes about it because, at least to me, it’s a laughable concept. A very very laughable concept. After a full day of trolls in my mentions,  did what I kinda tend to do after hours of trying to have reasonable conversations with these people- I flip their logic onto them. So when i got a tweet about how black people a “slave race” because they have “bad genes” this is what I said: 

Now, to me, this is a joke and a very funny one. Why? Because the idea that genes are either “good” or “bad” or “dominant” is fucking laughable Scientific Racist bullshit. Bullshit utilized by white supremacists to argue that white people are just naturally more superior to all other races. There’s a longer conversation there, but if you care, here’s my video about Scientific Racism. 

If you’ve ever followed me on twitter for an extended period of time, this side of me wouldn’t shock you. If you only follow me on Youtube, it might. I’m positive people on this fucking reactionary website are going to be hella pissed off (lol), but this is me. I sit through tons of fucked up shit that I find it HILARIOUS. I find it funny. It’s hard for me to not laugh a white supremacist tweets because, to me, it shows how insecure they are. I’m someone who speaks about race and racism- it’s my job. These people devote their entire days to sitting on twitter and regurgitating racist bullshit....as a hobby. 

ChrisRGun, a Youtuber with almost 300k subscribers decided to share my tweet with this caption:

Chris deliberately removed the tweet I was responding to and presented this a declarative statement I made out of nowhere. Suggesting that it was somehow unprompted. Now, you can make the argument that I shouldn’t have stooped to their level and maybe there’s a part of me in the back of my mind where I agree with you. But do I regret that tweet? Absolutely not. It’s hard for me to feel bad about shitposting when people like Chris regularly defend shit posts all the time. 

Chris was one of these gamers who bucked up to defend PewDiPie when he made his “Kill All The Jews”... “joke”. Now, i’m not Jewish and my understanding of antisemitism is still expanding- but it’s my understanding that jokes like “Kill All The Jews” being seen as normal or inoffensive somehow, is an aspect of antisemitism. But to people like Chris, these comments were taken “out of context”. It’s unfair for the Pewds lose his relationship with Maker and other gigs because “he was taken out of context”. Yet here Chris actually goes out of his way to remove the context from my post- which was that I was throwing back the flawed logic of a racist at him because, at least to me, it’s fucking funny. 

But what I find funnier, actually, is that people like Chris Ray Gun are also the same people who whinge all day long about how “SJWs” are reactionaries who get offended by absolutely everything. Here you have a very clear joke tweet that he looked at in full, decided that the context didn’t matter and cropped it in a way to omit the context fully. He is, quite literally, no different than the strawman SJWs he’s always complaining about. The beginning and end of these’s people’s criticisms of “SJWs” is ‘hypocrisy” But he’s a massive, shameless hypocrite. How do you defend Pewdiepie with the whole “it’s been taken out of context” shit and then deliberately omit context from my post. You could make the argument that BOTH of our comments were wrong, jokes or not. However, if you believe Pewdipie’s comments are a joke, then you absolutely need to make space for the fact that mine was as well and equally deserves you defense. 

But what’s the difference between JonTron and Pewdipie and myself? Well they’re two white men and I’m a black woman. Defending those two and harshly criticizing me doesn’t conceal racial bias. The truth is both Pewdiepie and JonTron are white men and we live in a society that grants white men the full and total access to their emotions. We see them as emotionally complex and nuances. They have multiple sides and have the ability to change and be well-rounded. JonTron’s just a silly fool parroting white nationalist talking points to millions of people. PewdiePie is just a Swedish sweetheart who’s sick of the establishment so he makes funny jokes about killing Jewish people because, you know, it’s funny. But me? I’m a black woman, so I’m angry and spiteful. I have an agenda against white people and this one tweet, sarcastic or not, is the complete and total sum of my work. I am not granted the right to redeeming qualities. I do not get to say or do even an inch of what white racists do to me and still get the benefit of the doubt. What Chris’ bias reveals here is that is isn’t quite the champion of free speech that he presents himself to be. The difference between JonTron and myself is that JonTron actually feels that way, I’m making a joke pointing out the flawed logic of racists. 

He made a few more tweets:

What a lot of white people seem to constantly underestimate is the persistent racism that black people and people of color deal with their entire lives. When you’re used to being called a nigger and you’re used to white supremacists saying to you that you’re inferior, these things don’t actually phase you. What we’re seeing right now with white people like Chris is that they are reacting to something that most people of color in white dominant spaces reacted to when they were children- Othering. These are people who are not used to being see as white. They are not accustomed to people saying negative things about whiteness or white people. When I was a child, my otherness was very clear to me. I was a black kid in (at the time) a mostly white preschool. I had to learn fairly easy that not only was I different from the other kids, but that people saw these differences as inherently negative. So what did I do through my formative years? I learned to be comfortable, proud and content with myself. That my blackness isn’t a negative and my skin, hair texture and body are all beautiful as they are. When you’re accustomed to being seen as the default, being othered is scary. Interestingly enough, this ties directly into White Genocide, which is largely the fear that immigrants and miscegenation will displace white people and make them a minority. That idea requires one very real and central emotion: Fear. These groups have to prove to white people that they are at risk, that they are being attacked, that people are trying to suppress them. To use anti-sjw jargon, they need to sell them a victimhood narrative. They have to convince them of something so devastating and so hurtful that they have to mobilize. They have to stand up. They have to fight. And people like Chris Ray Gun serve it up to you on a platter. They willingly feed misinformation to their, generally young and impressionable audience and convince them that their ideas are not only unpopular, but being repressed. But this isn’t true.

Chris Ray Gun has  296,473 subscribers

JonTron has  3,117,693

Pewdiepie has  54,299,958

I have  118,125

My channel, my content and my platforms are all smaller than theirs, but they sell you the idea that my content is so successful and influential that it needs to be stopped. That my ideas are so damaging that they should be suppressed. Think about that for a moment. The fact that these people have platforms that cast a very very large shadow over mine and they have to sell you the idea that somehow someway, people like me are the real problem. That people like me are influencing culture in a way that’s damaging and divisive. We aren’t. We are small voices that are often drowned out by the status quo- but every good story needs an antagonist. Every good story has a challenge. And to rally their base, the need to frame me as that villain. And guess what, it’s successful because their ideas are the status quo. Most people agree with and cosign them. Because their ideas, in truth, aren’t actually unpopular or edgy or unique. They’re common. And this is why you’re seeing so many more of these gaming channels pander to this ideology. Because in a world where everyone wants to be the Next Pewdiepie, they have to get a new shtick and right now, this works. 

Chris Ray Gun commented on a Kevin Logan video about him and claimed that his friend was the one who sent him that tweet (classic Machiavellian tactic) not him. 

I don’t believe him,but mostly because I perhaps give him too much credit. I would like to believe that people like him who make such bold statements and decided to redirect their fanbase to my page to explicitly attack me would do a bit of research and find the actual tweet to see if it were real. Imagine if someone photoshoped a tweet and put my name on it (something that’s happened) and sent it to him and he posted it. That would not only be dishonest, it would be unethical and he’d be a massive hypocrite. That aside though, if true, what this means, at its base is that he didn’t do his legwork and sheepishly posted something because he didn’t agree with me. I know, and I’m sure plenty of you know that i was making a joke and that these are not my beliefs, but he believed it. He fell for it. He wasn’t critical and didn’t try to see the full picture of what was said. That should still bother you. And to his point about “if a person of the opposite persuasion made the same tweet”- well they did. The one I was responding to. And all Chris’ posts did was invite more white supremacists to my page to talk to me about the natural inferiority of black people. But we know that both him and his buddy JonTron do carry that belief. They spend time defending that idea on their pages constantly. In conclusion, what this ultimately is, is them not quite holding white supremacists to the same standard. I went through Chris’ page. He isn’t making posts fighting against white supremacy. He isn’t countering it, he isn’t trying to. He’s coddling and pacifying it. And that, to me, says a lot. 

My two cents on the Pewdiepie situation

Mind you, this is coming from someone who is not personally a Jew culturally or religiously. Nor do i have anyone in my family who (that i am aware of) was personally victimized by the events of the Holocaust. So essentially he did a practical joke/social experiment in which the goal was to show how crazy the site Fiverr can be. (For anyone that doesn't know, Fiverr is a site where you can hire someone to do something for 5 bucks) the experiment consisted of him hiring some guys to hold up signs that said "Death to all Jews." In a word, yikes. As a result of this "joke," Felix lost his network deal with Disney and his Google Preferred advertising status on YouTube got revoked. As well as getting his show on YouTube Red cancelled. There are thousands of people screaming that "it was just a joke!" And "it was harmless comedy." People want to remain loyal to someone that they care about. He's an icon to many people and an inspiration to them as well. He's donated millions of dollars to various charities over the years and, aside from some serious problem moments, has shown qualities that a large portion of people consider to be that of a decent person. So then what do we make of this? Does he deserve the heat he's getting both on the business side of things and on the public outcry side? My thoughts are that he's made his bed. I understand the knee jerk for a lot of people to want to overlook what might be a small overstep in the handling of a joke but look at it this way. From a white guy to other white people that don't yet understand, I'm gonna try and paint a picture here so...work with me. 70 years ago or so, around the time your grandparents and great-grandparents were running around. Except yours weren't. Yours were being rounded up along with their friends, family and everyone they had ever known. Entire communities. All because they had been born the way they had. Because of their names, where their families hailed from, and yes, their religion. After years of torture, rape, watching each other be executed in various grisly and horrific ways, they finally are released. The war is over and they can go home. This is something that never leaves your community. It is forever the tale of when you all almost became extinct. Now that this horror story is forever a part of your racial memory, you notice that the world has moved on. It's nothing more than a folk tale glazed over in history books so that its only job was to say "this guy was messed up but America saved the day ;D" The world moved on. They start telling nazi jokes. Anyone that doesn't tolerate something is now a "___ nazi." There alongside them are jokes made out of the suffering of your people. Jokes about ovens, showers, and mass murder. These are just jokes to people because they have no frame of reference that they can see. Or maybe that they want to see. But you couldn't move on. You didn't move on because less than a century ago, you and your family and everyone that you care about from your community was almost wiped off the map. You were almost banished to the annals of history where people that will never know your suffering would shake their heads and say "tsk tsk, what a shame." It is an event so glossed over by political figures, business leaders, and world leaders that that now you see people being elected all over the world that indirectly, or sometimes directly, support people that wish that the nazis would've finished wiping you out! Amidst this terrifying climate, places that you feel safe are dwindling. One of the places you 'might' feel safe is YouTube. It's a place where you can escape the sense of impending dread, at least for a few hours. And then you see what Pewdiepie did. The biggest star of one of the last safe spaces just encouraged people that hate you to finish killing you. And all of this ^^^ doesn't even take into account the fact, the proven fact that i will source if deemed necessary, that hate crimes against Jews has grown at a terrifying rate since the new year began. Now, whether it was intentional or not, does this seem like something that is ok? Would you forgive him?

Finally, an American President Stands Up to Al Sharpton: An In Depth Look at the Con-Man Frontpage Mag ^ | 07/30/2019 | John Perazzo

Al Sharpton has been in the public limelight for just over 30 years – ever since he first burst upon the scene by promoting the fake story of a white-on-black gang rape in upstate New York in 1987. 

But not until now has America had a president with enough courage to tell the nation exactly what Sharpton is: “Al is a con man, a troublemaker, always looking for a score,” said Donald Trump on Monday.  In response, Sharpton did the only thing he's ever really learned how to do: He accused the president of harboring “a particular venom for blacks and people of color.” What a surprise. “Trump says I’m a troublemaker & con man,” Sharpton added. “I do make trouble for bigots.”

Let's take a brief look at some of the career highlights of this self-anointed “troublemaker for bigots” shall we?

Supporting a Communist Front and Angela Davis

The February 9, 1971 edition of the Communist Party USA newspaper Daily World, noted that Sharpton had recently addressed a White Plains, New York rally in support of a CPUSA front group called The Committee to Free Angela Davis. At that time, the Marxist revolutionary Davis was in prison for her role in abetting the murder of a California judge.

Sharpton Praises the Marxist Holiday, Kwanzaa

On December 24, 1971, the New York Times quoted Sharpton praising Kwanzaa, the race-centered winter holiday that had been recently established by Maulana Karenga, a Marxist black nationalist who had once been arrested for assaulting and torturing two women. The philosophy underlying Kwanzaa is known as Kawaida, a variation of classical Marxism that also includes enmity toward white people. Practitioners of Kawaida believe that one's racial identity “determines life conditions, life chances, and self-understanding” -- just as Marxists identify class as the determining factor of one's life conditions.

The Tawana Brawley Racial Hoax

Sharpton first entered America’s national consciousness on a large scale in November 1987, when he injected himself into the case of a 15-year-old black girl named Tawana Brawley, who claimed that she had been abducted and raped by a gang of six whites in Dutchess County, New York. Despite a complete absence of any credible evidence to support Miss Brawley’s story, Sharpton assumed the role of special adviser to the girl. In the autumn of 1988, after conducting an exhaustive review of the facts, a grand jury released its report showing beyond any doubt that the entire Brawley story had been fabricated, and that at least $1 million of New York taxpayers’ money had been spent to investigate a colossal hoax.

The Central Park Jogger Case

In April 1989, a 28-year-old white woman, dubbed the “Central Park jogger,” was brutally gang-raped and nearly beaten to death in New York’s Central Park by a group of black and Hispanic teenagers. Despite the defendants’ graphic and detailed confessions, which were captured on videotape and delivered mostly in the presence of their parents or guardians, Sharpton insisted that the boys were innocent victims of “a fit of racial hysteria” that was sweeping the criminal-justice system and all of American society. Charging that the jogger’s boyfriend was the real rapist in the case, Sharpton organized protests outside the courthouse where the five suspects were being tried, chanting, “The boyfriend did it!” and smearing the victim as a “whore!” All five suspects were convicted for their involvement in the crime and were sentenced to prison terms ranging from 5 to 13 years. Their convictions would later be overturned in 2002 when another man, who was already serving a life prison sentence for other felonies, confessed to having committed the 1989 rape in Central Park. But there was never any doubt that all five of the original defendants had been intimately involved in the brutalization of not only the young woman, but of several other victims in Central Park that same night.

Racial Slurs Against Black Political Adversaries

In the early 1990s, Sharpton derided moderate black politicians with close ties to the Democratic Party as “cocktail-sip Negroes” or “yellow ni**ers.”

The Anti-Semitic Riots in Crown Heights

In the summer of 1991, Sharpton injected himself into the unrest that followed an August 19 incident where a Hasidic Jewish driver had accidentally run over and killed a 7-year-old black boy named Gavin Cato in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn, New York. Reporter/columnist Jeff Dunetz wrote that immediately after the child’s death: “A false rumor began to spread that the Hasidic ambulance crew had ignored the dying black child in favor of treating the Jewish men. This falsehood was later used by Al Sharpton to incite the crowd.”

Sharpton Derides Mayor Dinkins As a “Ni**er Whore”

During the administration (1989-93) of New York City mayor David Dinkins (an African American), Sharpton angrily denounced Dinkins (when the latter was unsupportive of Sharpton’s activism) in the following terms: “David Dinkins, you wanna be the only ni**er on television, only ni**er in the newspaper, only ni**er that can talk. Don’t cover them, don’t talk to them, ’cause you got the only ni**er problem. ‘Cause you know if a black man stood up next to you, they would see you for the whore that you really are.” (Click here for audio.)

On another occasion, Sharpton referred to Dinkins as “that ni**er whore turning tricks in City Hall.”

The Racist Kean College Speech

In 1994, Sharpton delivered an incendiary speech at New Jersey’s Kean College, where he said: “White folks was in the cave while we [blacks] was building empires … We built pyramids before Donald Trump ever knew what architecture was … we taught philosophy and astrology and mathematics before Socrates and them Greek homos ever got around to it.”

The Kean College speech also featured Sharpton explaining that America’s founders consisted of “the worst criminals, the rejects they sent from Europe … to the colonies.” “So [if] some cracker,” he continued, “come and tell you ‘Well, my mother and father blood go back to the Mayflower,’ you better hold you pocket. That ain’t nothing to be proud of, that means their forefathers was crooks.” Sharpton later defended his use of the word “cracker,” calling it merely a colloquial term used to describe a certain kind of equal-opportunity bigot: “It’s certainly not a racist term and certainly not an anti-Semitic term,” said Sharpton, “because a cracker hates [both] Jews and blacks.”

The Deadly Boycott of Freddy’s Fashion Mart

In 1995, Sharpton led his National action Network in a racially charged boycott against Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a Jewish-owned business in Harlem. The boycott started when Freddy’s owners announced that because they wanted to expand their own business, they would no longer be subletting part of their store to a black-owned record shop. The street leader of the boycott, Morris Powell, was also the head of Sharpton’s “Buy Black” Committee. (In the 1970s, Powell had been confined to a mental hospital after he had attacked a police officer with a lead pipe while shouting, “I am going to kill you, pig.” He eventually escaped from that hospital and, in the eighties, went on trial for breaking a Korean woman’s head during another protest.)

In the aftermath of that atrocity, Kareem Brunner, a black security guard employed by Freddy’s, testified to the State Supreme Court that he personally had heard the boycotters say such things as: “Kill the crackers”; “Get the Jew bastards”; “This block is for blacks only”; and “Get the Jew owners out.”

Appearance at a Socialist Scholars Conference

In 1998 Sharpton was a featured speaker at the Socialist Scholars Conference in New York.

Speaker at the Million Youth March

Then, in his address to the marchers, Shabazz stated: “The only solution any time there is a funeral in the black community, is a funeral in the police community.” “I don’t care what the Jews say,” he added. “You [blacks] are the only people that have been in bondage for over 400 years. You are the true chosen people of God, and it is not the so-called Jew.” Sharpton, in his own remarks to the crowd, praised former Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammed as well as Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan, and Khalid Abdul Muhammad.

“Redeem the Dream” Rally

In August 2000, Sharpton held a “Redeem the Dream” rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC, where one of the featured speakers was Malik Zulu Shabazz. At that event, Shabazz called on black young people, including “gang members,” to unite against their “common enemy” — “white America” and its allegedly racist police departments. He also articulated a “black dream that when we see caskets rolling in the black community … we will see caskets and funerals in the community of our enemy as well.”

Sharpton’s Closeness to Khalid Abdul Muhammad

In February 2001, when Khalid Abdul Muhammad died in a hospital as a result of a brain aneurysm he had suffered, Sharpton was at Muhammed’s side. He then gave Muhammad’s family $10,000 to help cover his funeral expenses. Among the more noteworthy things Muhammad had said during his career as an activist:

He said that Jews had provoked Adolf Hitler when they “went in there, in Germany, the way they do everywhere they go, and they supplanted, they usurped.”

Disparaging Mormonism

When Mitt Romney, a Mormon, ran unsuccessfully for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, Sharpton said: “As for the one Mormon running for office, those who really believe in God will defeat him anyways, so don’t worry about that; that’s a temporary situation.”

Praising the Council on American-Islamic Relations

In September 2012, Sharpton was a guest speaker at the annual fundraising banquet of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), where he called CAIR “one of the most important civil-rights organizations in the United States today.” Also addressing that same convention was Siraj Wahhaj, an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Two years later, Sharpton keynoted the 2014 incarnation of this same CAIR event.

Sharpton Derides Black Political Adversaries As “Negroes”

In June 2016, Sharpton led a rally at his National Action Network headquarters in support of black Assemblyman Keith Wright, who at that time was running in a Democratic primary election as part of his quest for the House of Representatives seat that would soon be vacated by the retiring congressman Charles Rangel. At the rally, Sharpton derided Wright’s primary opponents, who also were black, in terms suggesting that he viewed them as race traitors: “You’re supposed to be attracted to these Negroes you ain’t never seen before,” said Sharpton. “I mean, they must have a laboratory to just create these Negroes.”

Conclusion: President Trump Was 100 Percent Right

In summation, it is clear that President Trump's assessment of Sharpton was entirely accurate. Sharpton is indeed a “con man” and a “troublemaker.” In fact, those words are far more charitable than a disgusting reprobate like him deserves.

NOTE:

[1] Jonathan Mahler, “Sharpton’s Image As New Moderate Dimmed by Video,” Forward (December 22, 1995), p. 4.