Monthly Archive: July 2016
Readers will remember Emily Depasse as the feminist who bragged about teaching sex to 12-year-olds in Baltimore during the #ShoutYourStatus campaign to “destigmatize” sexually transmitted diseases. The infamous feminist now wants you to know how much she hates marriage:
My Catholic grade school centered the purpose of marriage and sexuality around love and familial concepts. The cliché story where Mom falls in love with Dad, they get married, and their love creates a child, you. As I grew older, I came to disagree with this perspective as a lone ideology. During my junior year of college, I accepted a new definition of marriage, courtesy of my human sexuality course. The concept? Marriage as a business deal. While most of the class struggled to dissociate the idea of marriage without romance attached, it immediately clicked with me. . . .
American society’s concept of the ideal heterosexual marriage is a fantasy, a fetish that no one is willing to label as such. . . .
We receive shame from family members with each passing year that we spend single, or each year that a serious relationship doesn’t evolve into an engagement, or proves childless. People begin to wonder if something is wrong with you, or maybe you just haven’t come to terms with your sexuality yet. People search for any excuse to fulfill their need as to why you still check the ‘single’ box when they think it’s time for you to check ‘married’ instead.
Feminism: Pro-herpes, anti-marriage.
As previously mentioned, I will be giving a presentation for the “Forum on Campus Sexual Assault, Consent and Due Process” Aug. 1 at Central Piedmont Community College Central Campus in Charlotte, NC. The title of my presentation will be “Sexual Paranoia: The Ideology of ‘Rape Culture’ Hysteria,” and will include about two dozen quotes demonstrating how the current campus crisis has its roots in feminist theory, especially as this anti-male ideology is promoted in university Women’s Studies programs. My presentation will include about two dozen quotes from feminist sources spanning nearly five decades since the emergence of the so-called Women’s Liberation movement in the late 1960s. Most of those quotes have been used here at the blog over the past two years and many are included in my book Sex Trouble: Essays on Radical Feminism and the War Against Human Nature.
The quote from Andrea Dworkin cited above is not included in my conference presentation, but I wanted to discuss it here to show how this anti-male belief system is so deeply rooted in feminist belief that it is impossible to speak of “moderate feminism.” This quote from Dworkin, describing rape as “the primary heterosexual model for sexual relating,” is about as close as she ever came to saying that all heterosexual intercourse is rape. She never said that in so many words, but in reading her work — and I have read four of her books — this is the only reasonable inference of her meaning. This is not a matter of a few phrases in a single book or article, but a theme endlessly reiterated throughout Dworkin’s career, and her vehement opposition to heterosexuality, per se, was the entire basis of Dworkin’s fame. “Maligning Andrea Dworkin in death amounts to little more than misogyny,” feminist Meghan Murphy wrote last year on the 10th anniversary of Dworkin’s death, but who is “maligning” Dworkin? Is it “misogyny” to quote Dworkin?
Feminists are fundamentally dishonest, and their defensive reaction when confronted with their own words — compelled either to defend or repudiate what they or one of their eminent comrades have written — exposes this dishonesty. Andrea Dworkin was a particularly bold liar, whose career was built on slanderous falsehoods. Her hateful anti-male screeds were constructed by an artful use of propaganda tactics. The speech quoted above was one she delivered seven times between March 1975 and April 1976, mainly on college campuses, including SUNY-Stony Brook, the University of Pennsylvania, SUNY-Old Westbury and Queens College/CUNY. Her use of evidence is selective, as she presents various authorities (e.g., the biblical Book of Deuteronomy and Ovid’s Ars Amatoria) as sanctioning rape and cites these ancient sources as supposedly representing a universal regime of male supremacy. The problem with this, of course, is that the vast majority of Americans have never read anything Ovid ever wrote, and how many Americans in 1975 were living as if they took the Bible seriously? Was it pious Christian young men whose “male imperialism” was terrorizing helpless college girls at SUNY-Stony Brook or Penn? Or perhaps Andrea Dworkin meant to impugn scholars of Latin, who left the library filled with concupiscent lust after reading Ovid and assaulted the first coed who caught their eye.
Speaking of dishonesty, Dworkin was often guilty of using the work of others without due credit. She was not a plagiarist, but she had a habit of citing the same facts from the same sources used by other feminist writers, without acknowledging where she had found these facts. Susan Griffin’s groundbreaking 1971 article “Rape: The All-American Crime” gets a single footnote reference in Dworkin’s Our Blood, although anyone can compare her 1975 speech “The Rape Atrocity and the Boy Next Door” to Griffin’s 1971 article and see the repeated use of the same sources (e.g., a 1952 Yale Law Journal article and a 1971 book by Menachim Amir) to make the same points. You might think that Dworkin could have been bothered to mention Griffin’s name in the actual text of her speech in acknowledgement of her debt, but it would not do for The Great Author to admit the extent of her wholesale borrowings from a lesser writer.
more at the above link
What would you call a 33-year-old man who both had and axiomatically acted upon a deviant sexual appetite for underage, drug-addicted, runaway boys? (No, not Jerry Sandusky.)
What would you call a man of whom, as regards sexual preference, his own friend and biographer confessed, “Harvey always had a penchant for young waifs with substance abuse problems”?
In a recent interview with OneNewsNow.com, I called this man “demonstrably, categorically an evil man based on his [statutory] rape of teenage boys.”
But you can call him Harvey Milk.
Harvey Milk’s only claim to fame is that he was the first openly homosexual candidate to be elected to public office (San Francisco city commissioner). His chief cause was to do away with the Judeo-Christian sexual ethic. In 1978 Milk was murdered over a non-related political dispute by fellow Democrat Dan White.
And a “progressive” martyr was born.
Merriam Webster defines “pederast” as “one who practices anal intercourse especially with a boy.” It defines “statutory rape” as “the crime of having sex with someone who is younger than an age that is specified by law.”
Harvey Milk was both a pederast and, by extension, a statutory rapist.
The US Navy is set to name a ship after gay rights activist and politician Harvey Milk, according to a report by the US Naval Institute News.
The tanker, which is yet to be built, will be called the USNS Harvey Milk, USNI News said.
It cited a notification signed by Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus.
Milk was one of the first openly gay politicians in the US and was killed a year after winning election to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
He served in the US Navy in his youth as a diving officer during the Korean War before being honourably discharged.
Milk was wearing his Navy belt buckle when he was shot dead.
Speaking in 2012, Milk’s nephew Stuart Milk said such a move would send “a green light to all the brave men and women who serve our nation: that honesty and authenticity are held up among the highest ideals of of nation’s military”.
This is what Obama thinks of the military. This is what he thinks of children. This is what he thinks of us.
As J.E. Dyer reports, Obama will be naming a Naval vessel after Harvey Milk…
The U.S. Naval Institute reports that Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus will be naming a Military Sealift Command support ship after slain San Francisco politician Harvey Milk, a 1970s crusader for gay issues.
The ship class is the John Lewis class “fleet oiler,” and USNS Harvey Milk will be T-AO-206, the second unit of the class.
In company with Milk and John Lewis, the admired civil rights leader, will be Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, who is credited with jump-starting the Supreme Court in a career of political activism;
Harvey Milk was a major gay activist and the usual suspects will be getting a kick out of this. Except that, aside from everything else, Harvey Milk was also the creepy guy trying to lure kids into his van.
Gerard Dols told of how – as a physically disabled teen – the “very nice” Harvey Milk had encouraged him in 1977 to run away from his Minnesota home and come to San Francisco.
According to Dols, Milk told him, “Don’t tell your parents,”
In his glowing book “The Mayor of Castro Street,” Randy Shilts wrote of Milk’s “relationship” with the McKinley boy: ” … Sixteen-year-old McKinley was looking for some kind of father figure. … At 33, Milk was launching a new life, though he could hardly have imagined the unlikely direction toward which his new lover would pull him.”
Years later McKinley committed suicide.
This is what Obama’s America looks like. It’s a nightmare of pure evil. And yes, things don’t get more evil than some of Harvey Milk’s associates.
“Rev. Jones is widely known in the minority communities here and elsewhere as a man of the highest character, who has undertaken constructive remedies for social problems which have been amazing in their scope and effectiveness,” Supervisor Milk wrote President Jimmy Carter seven months before the Jonestown carnage.
The purpose of Milk’s letter was to aid and abet his powerful supporter’s abduction of a six-year-old boy. Milk’s missive to the president prophetically continued:
“Not only is the life of a child at stake, who currently has loving and protective parents in the Rev. and Mrs. Jones, but our official relations with Guyana could stand to be jeopardized, to the potentially great embarrassment of our State Department.”
John Stoen, the boy whose actual parents Milk libeled to the president as purveyors of “bold-faced lies” and blackmail attempts, perished at Jonestown.
Obama’s Obamanation is a sick and twisted place.
latest news in the ongoing gender war in Korea started by the feminist pervert pedophile group Megalia
Back in 2014, an event called GamerGate caused a TON of controversy in the gaming world.
Driven by a story that someone called Zoe Quinn had dated gaming journalists in exchange for coverage, and eventually expanding to everything media and social justice related, it let to a huge backlash that’s still being felt to this day.
But while that’s calmed down a bit in the Western gaming world, it seems history is repeating itself in South Korea.
Because another GamerGate like situation has just erupted there! And this controversy is even worse than the GamerGate firefight turned out to be.
So what could possibly cause such a huge uproar? Why is the South Korean internet and gaming community in flames at the moment?
Well, it all starts with a t-shirt being worn by a voice actor for the online game Closers.
Content wise, it doesn’t say much of interest. Just the sentence “Girls don’t need a prince”. It’s a mildly positive message and nothing more.
But the context behind the t-shirt… that’s a different story. Why? Because it comes from a very controversial site called Megalia.
What’s Megalia? Well, it’s a site that’s supposedly about ‘promoting misandry and female supremacy’. Seriously, that used to be their stated ‘mission’.
And this is not an exaggeration. The people behind this site, absolutely hate men. Like, at a level that makes Jezebel look like Reddit in comparison.
So much so in fact, that they:
- Celebrated the Korean War, because ‘so many men died’.
- Falsely accused a webcomic author of being a rapist.
- Filmed the men’s changing rooms/restrooms
And that’s only the somewhat ‘work safe’ stuff we can mention here. Put simply, they’re deeply despised in South Korea. So much so in fact that people from said site are being arrested on a weekly basis due to various incidents caused by it.
Oh, and the sales from the t-shirt go towards paying legal costs for those arrested in relation to events on the site.
So yeah, it seems to be a pretty messed up place.
Because of this, Nexon thought it was inappropriate for a staff member to be wearing the t-shirt. So she got fired for it, and her voice clips removed from the game.
And this is where all hells breaks loose.
I mean, you know what happened with Alison Rapp, right?
How she got fired from Nintendo for doing some second job of question disrepute? And how afterwards, people started trying to claim she was fired because of GamerGate?
Well, imagine if that was the event that started GamerGate. If Rapp’s firing caused gaming journalists to say ‘gamers are dead’ and caused a large scale internet war to break out as a result? If everything bad around Rapp and GamerGate was merged into one big ball of internet drama?
Because that’s what’s happening in the South Korean version. Many writers, voice actors, game devs and others are now saying she was ‘fired because of a t-shirt’. And this has led to a large scale fight on sites like Twitter, with some of the same people calling anyone who opposes them misogynists and banning them from their sites and Twitter accounts.
Then to add a bit of ‘gamers are dead’ controversy in, the same figures supporting the fired voice actor are now calling their fans ‘slaves’, ‘dogs’, ‘pigs’ etc and saying they only matter for them because they pay them money.
Which is going down about as (not) well as you can imagine.
And it gets worse. You see, these people are part of a company called Lezhin Comics. This site became well known because it actually paid its authors a normal salary with extra incentives based on who read their books. So, it’s a bit like an American comic publisher then, except with works submitted by third parties a bit like Steam.
Unfortunately for Lezhin, the attacks by their authors have led to tons of accounts being deleted, refunds requested and other such things. This is causing a panic among investors and management.
Add possible censorship laws and the damage being done to the reputation of these industries, and you’ve got an absolutely massive internet war that could make GamerGate look like a mild disagreement.
Guess those who forget history really are doomed to repeat it.
What do you think about this South Korean GamerGate type crisis? Is it as bad as it seems?