Transgender Activist Backlash

And now this: You can be fined for not calling people ‘ze’ or ‘hir,’ if that’s the pronoun they demand that you use

This is the government as sovereign, threatening “civil penalties up to $125,000 for violations, and up to $250,000 for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct” if people don’t speak the way the government tells them to speak.

How is it not obvious that this is straight out of 1984? The gov used words to reform cognitive thinking.

I would refuse to call someone “ze” or “hir” or anything other than their born gender out of PRINCIPLE against this policy.

The more you push to brainwash the public when it comes to gender, which the science still does not show what transgender activists want people to believe, the more pushback you will get. And hitting people with their pocketbooks for not adhering to a political movement’s demands is completely against everything that this country was founded on.

This is the backlash: you are the gender you were born with. You got a dick? You’re a man. You got a vagina? You’re a woman. You’ve got a mutilated penis or vagina because your genes are fucked up and don’t play well with testosterone or estrogen (intersex)? You’re whatever your genetic results are.

Everything else is neither ze nor hir.

Advertisements

A One Sided Conversation With A Red Pilled Feminist

I’m going to seem very harsh here, but that’s because I’m a dick. Her piece is actually very good.

Are women so smothered by the blanket of victimhood that we can’t concede that men face issues too?

Yes. Women smother each other all the time. Lesbian domestic violence is among the highest per capita. But I digress…

Isn’t the hallmark of intersectionality finding victimhood everywhere?

LOL No. Intersectionalality is the interest of finding victimhood in only specific demographics which help activists empower themselves.

Feminist boosterism can make us feel empowered.

Feel good. Not empowered. It makes you feel good. You can only empower yourself and that’s done by taking action. It’s a tough thing, really: you are only empowered by powering through things, which requires “empowerment.” The trick is that the power was always there; most people just don’t perceive it.

This is good; I too love when I am told I am special and powerful. Women do indeed face many problems in society.

Not as many as women, the most privileged class by all objective measures, actually face.

However, at my women’s college in particular,  feminist ideology renders students blind to the injustices that disproportionately affect men, like homelessness, harsh prison sentencing, and gang violence.

This doesn’t just happen at colleges. It happens everywhere, including places of legislation, the White House, the Twitters, in the streets, hell, even Facebook groups filled with harpies.

Thus, colleges need to actively incorporate men’s issues into their curriculum.

Why? Men generally don’t bother trying to think of problems as systemic, largely because they aren’t. Social norms of behavior which hurt a demographic or another aren’t systems. Systems have to be especially designed with purpose. People’s behavior, while they can be affected by systems, generally are self-generating. You can build a system to affect consumer behavior, for example, but the human behavior was always the same. The conditions that the human behavior interfaces with changes. If you are averse to risk and a government policy increases the risk of an activity, your aversion to risk may reform your actions. Your behavior is unchanged. That’s why the concept of “systems of oppression” are ridiculous: people feeling they have no power (thus the need for “empowerment”) need to be reminded they have agency and blame” systems of oppression” for their perceived lack of agency and power. It’s delusional.

Men generally don’t bother fighting “systems of oppression” that oppress them because men aren’t being told that personal failures are to be blamed on something other than themselves. Society tells men they are responsible for this and that and men agree – usually because they are. If you don’t get up and move, it’s not necessarily because you’re being kept from doing so. It’s your responsibility to do it. Women, on the other hand, are being told someone else needs to do it for them. Men don’t get told that. Hence men KNOW they have agency while women need to be reminded they have it as well.

And who tells women they have no agency in the modern era? Other women do. Women activists who need money, so they create the illusion that women still have no agency despite having it.

To actively avoid talking about men’s issues is to create a citizenry deprived of important knowledge about how the world works for men and shields students from socio-economic realities. This must end.

When I started taking Women’s Studies classes 4 years ago, I was seduced by feminist ideology.

I’m so sorry.

Mentally tabulating my oppression cards became a hobby.

This is the latest craze among the blissfully ignorant youth. Go on.

Unfortunately, being steeped in feminism didn’t just make me blind to the truth about men—it made me actively resist learning about it.

Is it like an allergy? Does feminism make people testosterone intolerant? Is that why the men who get involved in feminist circles seem like walking, talking, stinking manginas?

Thankfully, while feminism taught me that women were on the losing side of everything—real life taught me that disadvantage is more nuanced than that.

Yes, the world is very complex. Gender relations are incredibly complex. So complex that you need science to understand it.

So why do we ask feminists, who are the antithesis of science, anything about gender relations at all?

Tracer’s Pose & Blizzard’s PR Failure

When it comes to public relations, Blizzard dun goofed.

Earlier today, Blizzard game director Jeff Kaplan responded to a single complaint about Tracer’s pose in its upcoming game, Overwatch. The developer promised the poster that Blizzard as a studio was committed to making sure no one felt “uncomfortable, under-appreciated or misrepresented” by removing the pose.

It doesn’t matter whether anyone at Blizzard and the Overwatch development team had previously decided they were going to make the change to Tracer’s pose. When it comes to public relations, the optics are all that matter and the optics provide a single narrative, which has been repeated in perpetuity throughout the Internet: Blizzard caved to a misogynist who posted in the guise of a well-intentioned person.

Let’s be clear here: the original complaint was a misogynist complaint. It wasn’t a pro-women complaint. It was purely and simply a misogynist, sexist complaint. It doesn’t matter whether the complainant was a feminist (very likely) or a fundamentalist Christian person; they are both of the same ilk: religious fundamentalists who believe the entire world must bend to their will or be forever branded a heretic.

For all the talk about modern feminists being pro-women, most modern 3rd wave feminists are sex-negative simply because one half (male) of this dimorphic species (homosapien) almost universally has the biological imperative to seek and impregnate the other half (female) and one of the behaviors exhibited by that male half gauges some of the genetic and maternal value of the female based on physical traits and characteristics. This is not simply a human behavior, it is a universal behavior among dimorphic species.

But thanks to the progress of civilization, particularly technological progress, this has become anathema to a very tiny, yet very vocal, narcissistic cohort, comprised mostly of women. Both intellectual and technological progress have provided most of the basic human needs for people living in Western societies. Based on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, both men and women have their physiological, safety, love/belonging, and esteem needs taken care of (outside of specific circumstances that tend to plague certain demographics). Men and women can breathe, have plenty of food, water, time to sleep, can poop almost whenever they want, and have sex. Even the people in the lowest rung of sexual attraction *can* get busy once in awhile, even if it requires money. Most people feel safe from bodily harm, employment is far better than it has been historically, people aren’t as afraid of losing their property than they were historically, and we are living in a near post-scarcity society where resources are so plentiful, we may as well forget about the concept of property all together. We have more access to kinship and friendship than ever before; we can get sexual intimacy and feel a sense of belonging (even if we have to pay for it). We have built self-esteem up to the point Narcissus would cringe at the realization the last two generations are narcissistic to a point almost all of us should be locked up in a looney bin.

So now people in the West are primarily concerned with self-actualization. Morality is not inalienable from religion, but they are almost always tied together (Haidt, J. (2007) Moral psychology and the misunderstanding of religion. Edge.org). A deep sense of morality and a desire to solve perceived societal problems leads to an attempt at problem solving through either persuasion or coercion. The complainant of Tracer’s pose was exhibiting typical religious fundamentalist behavior we more commonly recognize as conservatively Christian traditionalism and moralism.

[R]eligiosity is an enormously important fact about our species. There must be some combination of evolutionary, developmental, neuropsychological, and anthropological theories that can explain why human religious practices take the various forms that they do, many of which are so similar across cultures and eras. I will also take it for granted that religious fundamentalists, and most of those who argue for the existence of God, illustrate the first three principles of moral psychology (intuitive primacy, post-hoc reasoning guided by utility, and a strong sense of belonging to a group bound together by shared moral commitments (Haidt).

It’s not a coincidence that the more morally intuitive half would create a new religion out of agnosticism and atheism (again, spiritual belief is not a prerequisite of religion); and it shouldn’t come as a surprise that the moralist behaviors of both feminists and religious fundamentalists look so similar. If some behaviors exhibited by religious fundamentalists (e.g., all women must cover up, otherwise they are being indecent) are misogynist, then the same behaviors being exhibited by other people must, as a rule, be misogynistic. If it is immoral for a woman to display sexual behaviors (it has been argued by a minority that Tracer’s pose was sexual) and they must not do so, for whatever ultimate goal the religious fundamentalist has, then it is a rule against the woman’s civic rights to express herself and dress herself in whatever way she wishes. Tracer’s pose was argued to be improper behavior in front of the boys; as a matter of fact, it was deemed immoral. This is why the argument against Tracer’s pose was crafted as a concern about the impressionability of women and girls.

The contractual approach takes the individual as the fundamental unit of value. The fundamental problem of social life is that individuals often hurt each other, and so we create implicit social contracts and explicit laws to foster a fair, free, and safe society in which individuals can pursue their interests and develop themselves and their relationships as they choose.

Morality is about happiness and suffering (as Harris says, and as John Stuart Mill said before him), and so contractualists are endlessly trying to fine-tune laws, reinvent institutions, and extend new rights as circumstances change in order to maximize happiness and minimize suffering. To build a contractual morality, all you need are the two individualizing foundations: harm/care, and fairness/reciprocity. The other three foundations, and any religion that builds on them, run afoul of the prime directive: let people make their own choices, as long as they harm nobody else (Haidt).
Letting people make their own choices “runs afoul of the prime directive,” meaning that, ultimately, “feminism is not about choice,” as neither is religious fundamentalism about choice. Women, under this new religious fundamentalism, do not get a choice. They must conform to specific behavior which does not run afoul of any of the prime directives – one which includes demolition of The Patriarchy (the modern Original Sin). When Tracer chooses to make a sexy pose, she is running afoul of the prime directive; she is making her own choice. Blizzard aided and abetted in the removal of that choice.

Yes, it sounds silly: Blizzard put her into that pose, therefore removing that pose is not the same as removing her liberty to make that pose. She’s a piece of digital art, not a human being with her own intelligence.

Yet the fact still remains that Blizzard sent a message to women and girls: you do not have the agency to be a woman. In fact, the message was that women and girls are not allowed to be human. Sometimes human beings feel bloated and slothful, and just not all that excited about anything. And in other times (sometimes the same exact day), human beings feel differently. Nobody, unless they are catatonic, acts and behaves the same exact way all the time. This argument that the pose was not in line with Tracer’s personality is a questionable argument. Is there a woman, regardless of what her story has been, who feels and behaves the same way all the time? Are women simply automatons who act and behave just one way? Or do women, and men for that matter, sometimes feel depressed, sometimes angry, sometimes cynical, and sometimes (perhaps, once in a blue moon), flirtatious?

Blizzard sent the message that women must behave one way all the time. And cover up. It’s indecent to go around nearly bare-chested (see the garrison follower Croman). It’s disgusting that women can sometimes turn around and give the enemy they just bested a mischievous look. It’s immoral that young, teenage girls, would get the impression that they can dare pose the same way as men do. They do not have that agency, do they, PR-failures that is Blizzard?

The Power Behind Affirmative Consent

Ashe Schow writes about yet another example of a college man getting his day of justice after a school is forced to settle a lawsuit after the student was expelled, unjustly, for alleged sexual assault.
Washington and Lee University has settled with a former student who filed a lawsuit alleging gender bias as the motivation for his expulsion over a sexual assault accusation.

The student, identified as John Doe in the lawsuit he filed in late 2014, was expelled after an investigation in which he was not allowed legal representation or cross examination, and which was conducted by an administrator who allegedly told his accuser that “regret equals rape.”

John and the university have “compromised and settled all matters in controversy,” according to new documents filed in the case. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. Typically, accused students win very little in settlements; they might get their record cleared and a small amount of money that doesn’t even cover their legal fees.

Here’s the reality, though.
Here is what Klein believes:

– The number of sexual assault victims is “far too high,” so high as to justify “sweeping” and “intrusive” legal measures–specifically, California’s new law.

– This law is “sweeping in its redefinition of acceptable consent.”

– The law could define as rape “two college seniors who’ve been in a loving relationship since they met during the first week of their freshman years, and who, with the ease of the committed, slip naturally from cuddling to sex.”

– The law intrudes on “the most private and intimate of adult acts.”

– The law’s “overreach is precisely its value.”

– The law “will settle like a cold winter on college campuses, throwing everyday sexual practice into doubt.”

– The law will create “a haze of fear and confusion over what counts as consent.”

– If successful, the law will cause all or most college men “to feel a cold spike of fear when they begin a sexual encounter.”

– If the law succeeds, “colleges will fill with cases in which campus boards convict young men (and, occasionally, young women) of sexual assault for genuinely ambiguous situations.”

– The existence of cases “that feel genuinely unclear and maybe even unfair” are especially necessary for the law to succeed.

– “The Yes Means Yes laws creates an equilibrium where too much counts as sexual assault. Bad as it is, that’s a necessary change.”

When you look at the activities feminists activists perform, you don’t see them working to help individual women and individual victims. What you see from feminist activists is an advantageous power play, a power play that some would argue (with strong evidence to back up their assertions) was always the intent of feminism from the beginning.

Conor states that “[m]any proponents of affirmative-consent laws would dispute the way Klein characterizes them, and favor them with the expectation that they won’t result in injustice.”

Feminists have never been all that great at following the evidence and coming to a conclusion, but evidence doesn’t matter as long as they can still get what they want. And all of these legal wins we can keep celebrating are for naught as long as the damage has already been done. The intent isn’t to help individual women who may be victims of sexual assault. It’s to damage the psyche of men who are seeking to succeed in life because feminists are very close to eviscerating “Patriarchy.”

Now that women have economic and academic power, they are making another power play. Women always had the power of creation and the access to the pleasure to partake in the activities the create that life. Now that they have even more power to create and end life, they are even freer to govern their lives. This may be a good thing, but, as a consequence, it has also shifted the monopsony of romance and domestic partnership even more in women’s favor, and with government standing behind them all the way, even as far as often providing them with financial support in place of a domestic partner, women are needing men less and less.

What better position can women be than in this modern age in the west, the first time in history where women can go their entire life without a single man in it – whether they’re poor mothers who are supported by government subsidies or middle and upper class educated women who, unless they decide to become mothers, make more money than men (“Women in their 20s earn more than men of same age, study finds”)?

But that’s not enough. Because feminists are not egalitarians, they want to make sure that the “Patriarchy,” whatever they decide to define it in [current year], is finished. They want to make sure that men are fearful of entering sexual relationships with women. Any day now, any man could be a victim of sexual assault without any physical contact ever occurring. He can be charged with sexually assaulting a woman and, without recorded proof (a felony in some states) of consent, he would have little to no chance of proving consent was given.

There’s no better way to ruin a man’s life than to make them forfeit their future by labeling them a rapist, especially with the power to spread this knowledge with the permanence of Google and social media, and by ruining their chance to get an education and make a living? There’s no better way to instill fear in a man than to place a risk far too great for them to take.

A reminder from Conor: “If successful, the law will cause all or most college men ‘to feel a cold spike of fear when they begin a sexual encounter.'” Those who want to fundamentally reform society will silence and instill fear in those they believe have social and economic power and, in doing so, proving they are the ones truly in power.

Rotherham, Rape Culture, and A Dearth of Mental Health

I’ve had a very difficult time reading this article, “A Rotherham abuse survivor speaks out. It’s taken me as long as the article has been online to read it because it’s such a horrible story and I don’t deal well with this kind of stuff. I could never be a counselor to help girls who have gone through such ordeals because I’d become too emotionally affected.

Speaking of counseling, it is absolutely atrocious that this woman has not been provided the necessary counseling she needs and most definitely deserves.

Even when she says she’d like to tell her apathetic police officers to “drop dead”, she then breaks into a laugh. The most emotion she shows is when discussing Laura’s death. Sarah bends her head as she talks about her sister’s murder and picks repeatedly at the label on her water bottle, ripping off the paper in short shreds.

Sarah hasn’t had any therapy to help cope with her trauma. She was offered bereavement counselling when her sister died but after the first session, the therapist said she could have a second appointment in two months time. “I told her not to bother,” says Sarah.

Sarah says she hasn’t heard of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, though she seems to show the classic symptoms, and doesn’t understand depression. “Some days I just sit there all day and cry, and some days I can laugh about it all,” she says.

She has flashbacks and nightmares, periods of insomnia and intense anger. “I sit there and think, I just need to go out and batter someone. But then I think, where’s that going to get me?” Sarah also suffers panic attacks, which can be triggered by anything from a spider on the wall to a fly buzzing near. “I get right stressed and then I just hide away for a couple of days,” says Sarah. “I won’t leave the house.”

It’s beyond obvious that she is in need of counseling, serious and empathetic counseling with someone who respects her and takes her seriously instead of simply brushing her away as the police had repeatedly. I don’t know if she’s likely to hurt herself, though. She seems very strong and defiant despite the terrifying experience she’s had.

Photographs © Copyright by Julian Andrews. Eye R8 Productions Ltd. 2015. 29/06/15. Victoria, London, England. Commission May0063541 Portraits of Sarah Wilson who has waived her anonymity and written a book about her experiences at the hands of the abusers in Rotherham
Photographs © Copyright by Julian Andrews. Eye R8 Productions Ltd. 2015.
29/06/15. Victoria, London, England.
Commission May0063541
Portraits of Sarah Wilson who has waived her anonymity and written a book about her experiences at the hands of the abusers in Rotherham

Sarah is currently working with the police to help them recognise signs of grooming, and has begun to compile evidence to build a case against her attackers. She has recently given birth to her 14-week-old son, Myles, and plans to raise him in Rotherham. When I ask why she doesn’t move away, she’s quick to respond: “My sister’s buried there,” she says.

“Rotherham’s my town, why should I be run out of my town because of what they did?,” says Sarah. “If it was up to me, I’d be living next door to the b******s to intimidate them. Rotherham’s where I was born and grew up. It’s my home.”

It requires a tough as nails person to be willing to face her abusers like that.

But she needs therapy to cope better with the trauma she’s endured –  not for her safety but to help her move on with a healthy life without the obvious symptoms of PTSD she’s not been treated for. When uneducated and helpless, people with PTSD can fall prey to dangerous substance abuse to cope with their anxiety and depression. She’s already had enough to deal with due to drug abuse; she doesn’t need any more drug abuse in her life, whether it’s a dependency on legal drugs such as alcohol, or harder drugs.

The fact that she is a victim of such horror and hasn’t been provided the necessary help she should be getting (a two month wait is pure negligence) is evidence the UK does not do a good job taking care of its victims of assault despite their perceived progressive health care system. Perhaps if they had a more capitalist health care system, they’d have counselors who were more eager to provide good counseling and actually give a damn about providing a good service instead of being more interested in clocking out.

She’s similarly disgusted by her two social workers, who used to moan about their caseload and treated both Sarah and her mother with disdain. “I f*ing hate them. They’re crap, they’re crap, they’re just crap,” she says. The social workers, she claims, never showed any concern for Sarah, and acted as though they couldn’t wait for the workday to end so they wouldn’t have to think about Sarah any more.

Perhaps she’s projecting a bit here, but I haven’t seen any good evidence about the UK health care system being that good as it is. The American mental health system is a travesty even with the monetary incentive to provide decent service (too often, mediocre service is provided to milk people instead of truly setting them on a healthy path [see “F*ck Feelings: One Shrink’s Practical Advice for Managing All Life’s Impossible Problems” by Michael Bennett, M.D.), so I can only imagine a socialist health care system like the UK’s system would be this terrible.

My wife decided to get the autobiography mentioned in the article. I could never finish it if I picked it up and tried to read it. I’m far too sensitive to this subject despite the strong stomach I have for almost everything else in life. I’m fine looking at gore, both fantasy and from closed-circuit footage, I’m fine with details of violence and assault, I’m even fine with tales of people mistaking a fantasy story for a science fiction story (I shudder at the thought, though), but when it comes to rape, I have problems. It’s why, when I hear of people minimizing rape by redefining rape as every innocuous slight or transgression toward a woman, I get especially pissed off. Rape is almost as serious as murder, but we as a society do not trivialize murder as much as some have been trying to trivialize rape in an attempt to make it seem like it’s happening everywhere.

Yes, Rape Culture does exist. It exists in the Middle East and parts of Africa. It exists in Rotherham. It exists in parts of South Asia. But based on some people’s telling of it, Rape Culture exists in Antarctica of all places, too, simply because a man has stepped on that plot of earth.

1l899s1
Everything is rape, y’all

Both men and women need help with cases of rape and sexual assault. It’s serious business and not something to trivialize, either by police, counselors, or activists trying to use victims of sexual assault to gain social control and power.

Don’t neglect stories of rape simply because talking about pockets of rape culture requires acknowledgment that certain cultures are not civilized and equal in moral value relative to modern western mores. It’s not fair to the victims and it’s what these monsters want you to do.


Violated’ by Sarah Wilson can be purchased for  $5.99 on Kindle or less on paperback. (The link is not an affiliate link.)

Read about another account of grooming and rape here, “They like us naive’: How teenage girls are groomed for a life of prostitution by UK gangs.” Emma Jackson’s story can be read in-depth via her autobiographical telling in Exploited’ for $9.99 on Kindle.

Female Game Characters We Love to Love

TheGG.net, in An Open love Letter to Female Game Characters – Past, Present and Future, listed a few lovely ladies in video games I’d like to mention as some of my favorite.

I wish Square Enix​ would remaster Parasite Eve (Aya Brea). My wife and I loved that game to death. Parasite Eve 2 was a monstrosity that shouldn’t have existed, though.

Mom_vignette

Samus Aran will always be one of the most beloved female game characters, but the Metroid games need to come back stronger. Nintendo has been dropping the ball; we need a good return to Metroid’s roots.

It’d be nice if American McGee would remaster American McGee’s Alice, but I’d take a continuation of the game story beyond the 2011 sequel.

I didn’t get to play Nariko from Heavenly Sword, but I wish I had. I watched the “full animation movie” of the game and was fascinated by it. I didn’t appreciate that type of game until years later, too, which makes it even worse for me.

I want to get a Wii U so we can play Bayonetta. Those games and the character Bayonetta is right up our alley. She’s sexy, powerful, and the game is raunchy enough for us pervs.

I’m surprised there aren’t any Final Fantasy female characters in the list. There are so many good ones that people love. None from Final Fantasy IV (Rydia, Rosa) , VI (Terra, Celes), VII (Tifa, Aerith, Yuffie), or X (Yuna, Lulu) were listed – and all of them had lovable, memorable female characters.

I hope to play many more games with female characters. Most of the characters I play in World of Warcraft are female. I simply love their animations and the way they look better than the clunky looking male characters (especially for Horde).

The idea that there aren’t women in games design (many are artists!) and there aren’t women in video games (hello!?) is ludicrous on its face, let alone when you start listing them. Sure, there are many more male characters than female characters in all of gaming, but most games tend to be about war and, regrettably, men are usually the ones who wage them and participate in them. It’s only obvious that men would be the ones to get bloody in the video games about them.

Still, I’ll play a female Blood Elf Paladin any day.

BEPallyfemale2