Wednesday, 18 May 2016

The new bimbo

The era of sexual freedom arrived in the sixties and it changed humanity in many different and unexpected ways. Young people of every new generation get the ability to more and more freely hit on each other and  evaluate each others attractiveness. Thus since then we're getting into the unknown waters where almost every part of our potential partner is exposed before we even decide if we should attempt to date them. It also added to the sexualization of men as objects. Fit male bums were a thing since I was a kid(heck, that was back in the 80s) and cashing in on your pretty face disregarding your origins or intellect is no longer a female privilege. Male model is a thing and it's a profession bringing in good money(not as much as female but still) and actors that are nothing special but a pretty face every housewife would love to cuddle have been part of our lives for couple of generations. So a little bit under the radar it seems a new phenomenon emerged. We all know what the derogatory term bimbo means-an empty headed doll, presumably female. The implication that pretty people have it easier to a point where they often don't have to work hard for anything and fail to develop their natural abilities is not deep beneath the surface. It could be read in other, more sexist line of thought but that is not our goal here. Instead let's think rationally-what saves modern men from becoming bimbos? As a matter of fact-nothing. Societal norms are preventing us from seeing such process unfold as when a blonde girl becomes famous partially because of her looks the media wants to hear her opinions of the world no matter how stupid they are. They will twist and fit until they find the appropriate questions to be asked-like what is her favourite colour or what ice cream she likes the most, but they'll  bring their audience what's needed. For men however stereotypes make us hold them to a higher standard-we would always expect them to speak on politics or philosophy where applying the logic with female pretties media should only discuss sports with such individuals.And here is when the plot thickens and we come to the very reason, I m wasting some of my free time writing this:

So here's the guy who sold his looks and made buck of that checking in every mark in the stereotypes of a bimbo box. It is not uncommon for someone that became rich and famous due to one specific quality to start believing he is above those grey nominal people surrounding him in every other aspect that we can compare humans too. And Ben Afleck here proves to be the ultimate bimbo, jumping to idiotic conclusions because religion and politics-it can't be that hard, right? Everybody knows everything needed to be known about these 2 popular topics. In his simplistic, atavistic views Islam means brown people-automatically good and whoever opposes that is a racist. If you haven't watched the video and are unaware of the utter idiocy of contemporary "progressives" you'll find it hard to believe someone can hold and express such confused and simplified ideas so if that applies to you I encourage you to watch Ben confirm my story in his own words.

And to get on to the topic, here is the latest example

Pretty incoherent, isn't it? Really hard to analyze and criticize a statement when the speaker is not sure what he wants to say, except that he wants to shine as someone that is modern and not backwards. Just like a seal would join it's herd when it hears them barking George felt the need to add something to the dialogue and predictably ended up hardly putting two sentences together.Now, I m not saying Trump didn't stretch his populism game bit too far, while I still think he is the much needed for the world change he would've been better off cutting his comments to the point of "build the wall" whereas "they send their rapists here was controversial to say the least. But the generic arguments that Clooney was trying to shove down the throats of the audience were a serious insult to the average IQ of everyone present. We are not afraid of women? Given Trump's history how is he supposed to be afraid of women or mistreating them? But regressive masses are simple as I already pointed-they have one course of action, one set of words and oddly enough don't ever consider how that discredits their beliefs-if not for them at least they should think how would it sound to a rational, neutral listener. As of now they are like the snake who only has one course of action to any encounter that involves something bigger than her-bite and run. Racist, homophobe, islamophobe they shout.

Someone criticizing Islam can do it for bigoted reasons, but those reasons can not include racism Ben, you idiot.  And dear Trigglypuff as Milo politely explained to you it is weird to call a racist homophobe a gay dude with preference of dating blacks(btw my spellchecker claims there are no such words as homo and islamophobe-how racist!).

And with mr Clooney here we saw that whole process summed up-he dumped all the right buzzwords(even implied instead of straight up using them to sound smarter) while nodding his head under the perfect angle so we could all enjoy the perfectness of his profile. Yup George, we can all see it now-you are just another stupid, male bimbo.

Monday, 9 May 2016

Liberals vs Faggots-latest cultural war

Many have probably noticed that something weird has been going on in the Progressivo-sphere. Once deemed valuable allies gay men are being attacked from lefties on all fronts. In UK the students union was discussing dropping them from the LGBT movement as they "do not face oppression" and are "promoting misogyny, transphobia, racism and biphobia”. The twitter feminist mob sprang as if it has been waiting in hide for this moment for ages(as they always do). Here are results for "cis gay men" no cherry-picking, no cheating, only the top results:

So what does this vitriol come to show you may ask. It is pretty simple actually. The flagship of "progressive"(I can't put this enough in parentheses) movement manifesting itself mostly online and on campus in the English-speaking countries is feminism and feminist ideologues. And feminism has counted gay people as their most reliable ally, they took gay men for granted as part of the movement. The logic behind that was pretty simple but lying on a false premise. As we all know the revival of feminism came as angry and bitter lesbians stated all the success of the 60s liberation movement were merely the beginning and much more work lied ahead. And some work they did indeed-creating a weird mixture of equality issues with the teachings of few philosophers flexing and distorting Marxist theory to a point where the leadership of the Soviet bloc dubbed them radicals. If you don't trust my modest opinion on what started the second feminism wave I'll let it's leaders tell you themselves:

So here's how leftism(I repeat-please do not perplex with Marxism as communist were never as mean and vicious as the new progressives are) mixed with feminism and men hating to form modern progressivism. And as gay men are you know-gay and queer they were expected to seek full equality for themselves under the banner of feminism and later the wider "progressive" movement. After all, gay women started all the fuzz, right? Right? Wrong. The same anti-equality logic that formed modern feminist agenda can be applied the other way around. As much as gay women don't need men and profess disgust for masculinity and male genitals(not sure why so obsessed with them) we can say the same about gay men. In fact they are the only male demographic over which women don't have easy to access control.Furthermore just like gay women are women and tried to create a movement unifying on gender basis,gay men obviously would have more empathy and bias towards men.And this is exactly what we are witnessing-big part of gay community left feminism and not only that but stood under the loose flag of MRA. If that wasn't enough the amazing Milo Yanopoulos is the drop that spills the cup.Witty, charming and fiercely anti-PC he enjoyed amazing increase in popularity alternating between ruthless, well-grounded critique of feminist narratives with outrageous and triggering provocations. Feminists and other progressives simply have no idea how to react to him as their usual shtick of calling everyone who disagrees with them a racist homophobe doesn't fly well when we're talking about a gay dude who loves as he says black cock.

Friday, 6 May 2016

Jonathan and the superiority complex

Remember Jonathan Butler? The guy that leftist media(I m absolutely unironically including CNN among those) left speak in his own words so the only way the public heard about the incidents in which Butler was key figure was through his own descriptions . That kinda put bit of a dent on his claim that the USA is a country with deeply ingrained white racism that hurts him as a black dude. You'd expect bias against the black dude from racist media, not undisguised support.

Yea bro, you look just like Ghandi, now if you could ACT like him that would be nice

Jonathan is now back  telling everyone who disagrees with him that they are part of the problem.
Dear Jonathan, do you know who else but you is famed for using the phrase "if you are not with us you are against us"? I'll help you since I suspect you took too much "progressive" studies to have any actual knowledge of history and I'm afraid as true American you already exclaimed "Jesus!". The correct answer however is comrade Lenin for he made a state-wide policy based on this way of thinking. Another notorious example of someone who did not respect the right of others to be neutral would be Genghis Khan attributed with saying "I will consider a declaration of neutrality to be a declaration of war against me." 
Here is someone with real problems Jonathan and I hate to say it but yours are not.You started a hunger strike over a poop swastika(another reason to question what you learned in Uni-there were no black people in the death camps you idiot) and someone calling the N word a friend of yours. Wait, this friend of yours? The one that admitted of creating hate crime hoax? Yes, this was the "credible" source that sparked your outrage.So what did wake your anger and resentment, what started the revolutionary fire or "concerned students"? An edgy troll attempt (anonymous, just saying) and an alleged racial slur from a guy who outed himself as a race-baiter.You said you just wanted freedom and justice, but you were pleased with getting served the head of the uni president on a platter. That guy was feeding a family , but with the arrogance so typical for rich kids you never cared about that, did you?The moral position you're coming from seems backed by your hunger strike and nothing else. And as the whole world saw how you threat unbiased journalists trying to cover your protest I'm sitting on the fence how real said hunger strike was.

I just want to ask you one thing dear Jonathan. Would you stop by a random homeless white man on the street, look him in the eyes and tell him how low you think of him because he has all this white privilege and yet he's there on the street while your oppressed father is worth 20 million? Does that mean the homeless man is a totally worthless piece of shit? Because it sounds like this is exactly what you think.Middle class white citizen that has achieved what Jonathan's dad did has merely cashed in on his white privilege. The real achievement is when you are handicapped. Starting from scratch and getting somewhere means nothing if you are white. Can you sense how that gives our SJW hero a sense of superiority? It is undeniable. So we get back to why did he feel the need to show up and tell everyone that disagrees with him that they are part of the problem. To put it simple-they are putting under question his superiority complex.