Mar 212016
 

An anonymous commentor brought to our attention that the UN is making a push towards mandatory paternity leave.  The key word there is mandatory.  The UN is not saying that businesses that can afford it may want to consider offering paternity leave or that men should have the choice of taking paternity leave if offered.  The UN is explicitly saying that men must be forced to take paternity leave because maternity leave oppresses women due to the fact that maternity leave creates an incentive for businesses to hire men.  The UN has admitted that the only way for men and women to be equal at work is to “handicap” men.

This is not the only case where it is suggested that men need to be “handicapped” in the workplace.  At the Good Mangina Project, which recently has become the Scared Shitless of Donald Trump All The Time Project, a feminist discovered that one of the reasons for the so called wage gap was that men work more hours. This immediately becomes that women are being oppressed by men working “too many hours” because it creates an incentive to hire men.  Again, the solution is to “handicap” men when it comes to working.

I chose the word “handicap” for a reason because what we are seeing is the prequel to Harrison Bergeron.  (For those of you who are unfamiliar with Harrison Bergeron, it is a science fiction short story about a future America where anyone of above average intelligence, strength, etc. has to be handicapped to the lowest common denominator.  For example, anyone who was more intelligent than a moron would be “handicapped” by implants that prevent that person from mentally concentrating.)  Feminists are treating Harrison Bergeron as a how to guide.  Right now, they are trying to “handicap” men by throwing roadblocks in their work and careers by forced paternity leave and forced limits on how much we can work.  When that fails to bring men down to the level of women, the next step will be to try to force men to use the “handicaps” that are described in Harrison Bergeron.  Of course, this will lead to the worst economic depression in history, but feminists will just blame that on men.

Jan 182016
 

Paul Murray brought up how the US Constitution says that crimes must be tried by courts in reference to the college rape tribunals (which we know are a part of the false rape industry.  Specifically, he is referring to the end of Article 3, Section 2 of the US Constitution which says:

Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

The only exception to a jury trial for a crime is impeachment.  For all other crimes, all citizens of the US are guaranteed a jury trial.  Despite what feminists think they can get away with, the constitution makes no exception for rape.  The existence of college rape tribunals are in violation of Article 3, Section 2 of the constitution.

Additionally, the sixth amendment is also relevant.  It says:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

College rape tribunals violate every single clause of the sixth amendment of the constitution.  Feminists have declared war on Article 3 & the sixth amendment of the US Constitution.  (Feminists have declared war on the entire US Constitution, but that is a subject for another time.)  Feminists have been running this war for a long time.  First, feminists tried to use the Commerce Clause in the constitution in the first VAWA (violence against women act) to allow women to sue men they accused of rape even when said men had been exonerated by the criminal justice system.  For obvious reasons, the courts declared this to be unconstitutional.

Now, feminists are trying to declare rape a “civil rights violation”.  Remember that the college rape “tribunals” got started because of a letter to colleges from the Dept. of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.  The trick feminists are using is have have men accused of rape not charged with a crime, but a “civil rights violation”.  Because these men don’t get charged with an actual crime, they are denied due process.  This is a violation of the spirit of our entire legal system and the constitution.

This reminds me of a science fiction TV show from the 90s, Bablyon 5.  In that show, the President of the Earth Alliance (all of Earth plus all human colonies) wanted to make himself a dictator.  One of the things he did was to create a organization called the Nightwatch which was designed to root out non-“peaceful” behavior.  (This could be easily be replaced with civil rights “violations”).  Non-“peaceful” behavior conveniently included criticizing the government of the Earth Alliance.  The Nightwatch wasn’t involved in the criminal justice system so it did not need to follow the rules of due process.  Even people who had joined the Nightwatch questioned this:

Because the Nightwatch was enforcing directives from the Earth Alliance political office (which could be replaced with the Office of Civil Rights easily) due process was thrown out the window until someone was charged with an actual crime.  In other words, a person who committed a burglary, for example, would get full due process, but someone who criticized government policy would be dealt with by the Nightwatch who was completely free to ignore due process.  The reason for this was that burglars or bank robbers or drug dealers or most criminals weren’t a threat to the coming dictatorship (which happened later in the series).  Anyone who spoke out against the government was.  Rather than completely take away due process which everyone would notice, they took away due process only in the areas that were relevant to them.  This allowed them to hide what they were doing.

Feminists are trying to do the exact same thing.  Feminists don’t care about taking away due process from burglars, bank robbers, drug dealers, etc. because the crimes those people commit aren’t crimes where (it is assumed that) women are the victims.  On the other hand which something like rape, feminists want due process taken away because they want women to have the power to destroy mens lives just like the Earth Alliance government in Bablyon 5 wanted the power to destroy anyone who criticized them.  (It goes without saying that male victims of prison rape won’t benefit from this.)  Also, like the Earth Alliance government, not trying to take away due process in general gives feminist the benefit of being able to hide what they are doing (at least until the lawsuits from men start showing up).  This is why colleges were chosen to host these “tribunals”.  By starting them on college campuses, most people wouldn’t be in a position to notice them especially since they wouldn’t have a broader effect on due process.

On Babylon 5 the endgame of the Nightwatch was to merge it with regular security/police (which happened).  Similarly, the feminist endgame to the college rape “tribunals” is to merge them into the government as a “civil rights” court and enforcement system where due process is ignored since it is not a criminal court.  Such a thing is a violation of the US Constitution and needs to be destroyed before it can even be created.

Aug 152015
 

There’s this feminist science fiction movie called Advantageous.  Among other things in the movie, women are increasingly becoming homeless because women can’t get jobs.  The stated reason for this in the movie is that jobs have been destroyed due to technology and since unemployed men are more likely to start revolutions.  Thus it makes more sense to employ men.

This is a good example of how feminist science fiction is a failure.  While preventing revolutions might be the stated reason for not giving women jobs in the future, it’s not the real reason.  The real reason is a combination of women’s work being automated, men being more productive, and men not creating problems in the workplace such as frivolous lawsuits like women do.

On top of this the movie doesn’t address why women (or more women) just don’t become stay at home mothers.  That’s because feminists can’t understand the marriage strike or MGTOW.  What has happened in this movie (even though it can’t explain it) is that the marriage strike has reached critical mass, MGTOW has greatly expanded, and employers have been forced to stand up to women.  The widespread homelessness of women in this movie is not due to misogyny.  It’s because women’s behavior towards men has been so vile that both men and employers want nothing to do with them.  Of course, a feminist science fiction movie can’t understand this.

Jul 242015
 

Buzzfeed has this article about worst lewd comments female cosplayers have allegedly received from male nerds.  Their examples were kind of weak, such as:

  1. “Hehehehehehe…” – This was guy who was just laughing.
  2. “I always go with my husband so I never had an issue.” – This woman has never had a problem by their own admission.
  3. “I’ve only been inside you for like 900 years.”
    — 10th Doctor [cosplayer] when I cosplayed the TARDIS at MCM Expo 2011.

With that last one, it’s important to explain the context.  On the TV show, Doctor Who, the main character, The Doctor, is an alien who has this vehicle called the Tardis that travels through time and space.  However, due to faulty circuits it looks like an old British police telephone box.  It’s something of a character in the show, but since it is a vehicle, people actually go inside of it so it isn’t a lewd comment.

Already, this article has problems.  Beyond that the male nerds who allegedly made lewd comments aren’t around to defend themselves.  However, that’s not the biggest problem.  When it comes to this sort of thing, whether a woman is receptive to these types of comments or not depends on the man saying them.  These women were cosplaying at conventions filled with unattractive male nerds.  If hot guys said that same things to them, they would be fine with it.  It’s like the Saturday Night Live sexual harassment skit where the only way to avoid a sexual harassment lawsuit is to “be handsome, be attractive, don’t be unattractive”.  It’s the same principle.

These women who are cosplaying are also dressing up in sexy costumes and shoving it in the face of the unattractive male nerds at these conventions.  They’re intentionally engaging in attention whoring and then complaining about it.  However, it’s worse than that.  What these women are doing is going on fishing expeditions.

A fishing expedition is a legal term where a lawyer tries to gain information outside of the relevant bounds of a case.  Often, a fishing expedition happens when a lawyer has a weak case and is trying to search for unrelated incriminating information.  It also can be used as a method to attempt to prejudice a jury even if there is no incriminating information, whether related to the case or not.  Fishing expeditions are considered dubious from a perspective of legal ethics.

Since these women are cosplaying at conventions with lots of unattractive male nerds, anything the male nerds say or do will be interpreted negatively since they’re unattractive.  That could include something as simple as saying hi to these women or even just looking at these women without interacting with them.  These women have a weak case that they’re actually being harassed by male nerds at conventions so they’re effectively on fishing expeditions to try an incriminate male nerds.  They are trying to provoke reactions from male nerds (which can be and are likely completely innocent) and use those reactions to incriminate male nerds, similar to a legal fishing expedition.  A legal fishing expedition is unethical and what these women are doing is also unethical for the same reason.  And that’s true even if one of these fishing expeditions turns up a male nerd who is legitimately acting inappropriately, just as it would be true if a legal fishing expedition turns up evidence of a crime being committed.

Jul 202015
 

There’s a new show on Syfy called Dark Matter.  In the most recent episode, we find out that one of the main characters was part of an insurrection against the galactic government called the Galactic Authority.  He and several of his comrades went to a space station and stole a destroyer from the Galactic Authority, but his comrades left a bomb on the station which murders 10000 innocent people.  His comrades don’t tell him this, and he doesn’t find out until it’s on the news.  He was angry that his comrades murdered innocent people but they and his commanding officer tell him to man up.

This was a good example of how “man up” is used to manipulate men.  What was even better was his response to being told to man up.  He shot all of them.  That’s the best response to “man up” I have ever seen.

May 202015
 

Spoilers for Game Of Thrones ahead.

Feminists and manginas are in an uproar about the most recent episode of Game Of Thrones because one of the main characters, Sansa Stark was raped by her husband, Ramsay Bolton, on their wedding night.  Ramsay Bolton has been well established as a cruel and sadistic individual so this is not an endorsement of rape on Game Of Thrones.  It’s quite the opposite.  However, everyone complaining about this is a hypocrite for two reasons.

First, they didn’t complain when other women were raped or abused.  For example, Danerys Targaryen was also raped by her new husband, Khal Drogo on their wedding night.  Danerys falls in love with him afterwards.  If feminists had any logical consistency in their beliefs, they should have gone apocalyptic over that.  Another example was when King Joffrey ordered a hooker to abuse another hooker.  Neither case raised the ire of feminists.  The only real difference is that Khal Drogo and King Joffrey are hot while Ramsay Bolton is ugly and gross.  What feminists are telling us is that rape is only really rape if an ugly guy does it.  It doesn’t count if a hot guy does it.  This is similar to the rules of avoiding sexual harassment complaints, “Be handsome, be attractive, don’t be unattractive”.

Second, they are completely silent about what happens to men and boys in Game Of Thrones.  Here is a very short and incomplete list of things feminists have failed to complain about:

  • Thousands of men dying in a war over who gets the throne of Westeros
  • An 8 year old boy being pushed out a window
  • Men getting beheaded
  • A man getting his skull crushed by another man’s bare hands
  • A man being stripped naked and paraded through King’s Landing, Westeros’s capital city
  • A man being tortured
  • That same man being castrated
  • Another man threatened with castration because he’s a dwarf, and there is a trade in dwarf dicks.  The trade in dwarf dicks is large enough to support a profession with the title of cock merchant.

There’s so much more, but you get the idea.  Here’s what we can conclude.  Feminists are fine with men being murdered, tortured, and castrated (as long as the men aren’t hot presumably).  Feminists are fine with hot men raping and abusing women, but they will lose their shit when an ugly man rapes a pretty white woman.

Jul 262014
 

There’s a show on the Syfy channel called Defiance.  It takes place in the late 2040s in what used to be St. Louis (now called Defiance) after several alien species collectively called Votans (because they called their home star system, Votanis) become refugees on Earth after the destruction of Votanis.

datastahmatarrOne of the Votan species, the Castithans, have what we would call a very traditionalist society and culture including in relations between men and women.  Being on Earth the Castithans get exposed to feminism, and this was the basis of the plot of the most recent episode.  Two of the main characters on Defiance, Datak and Stahma Tarr, are Castithans and married.  Datak is sort of like Tony Soprano in that he runs (or ran) a criminal organization like the mafia.  At the end of last season, Datak kills an Earth Republic military office because he was insulted so that leads to him being imprisoned by the Earth Republic.  Ostensibly, Datak and Stahma’s son takes over the criminal organization, but in reality Stahma is running it behind the scenes.  Stahma quickly takes over actual control of the criminal organization.  Datak finds out that his wife took over and is not happy about it when he gets out of prison.  Stahma is able to maintain control of the criminal organization, and this leads to Datak and Stahma being separated (although they’re still married).

What Stahma did was against Castithan religion and culture where women aren’t supposed to be running businesses and the like.  In the most recent episode of Defiance, a Castithan cleric starts preaching against Stahma.  Eventually, Stahma goes to Amanda Rosewater, the former mayor of Defiance who is now running her sister’s brothel after her sister died.  Amanda tells Stahma about feminism, although she never uses the word, feminism, and convinces Stahma to talk to other Castithan wives who she thinks may feel that their culture and religion is oppressing them.  Later we see Stahma at something that looks like a knitting circle where she tries to convince some Castithan wives, one of whom is the wife of the cleric that was preaching against Stahma, to take up feminism (although, again, the word, feminism, is never used).  The other Castithan women don’t go for it so Stahma decides to give them poison tea to drink which kills them.  Stahma is able to pin the deaths on the cleric who gets publically tortured at the end of the episode for the murders of the Castithan wives.  Datak runs into Stahma at the public torture and says to her that he was surprised that she didn’t pin the murders on him.

What we have here is an apt metaphor for feminism.  As soon as feminism gets introduced to a society free of from it, it leads to murder (similar to the introduction of abortion) and men get falsely accused of crimes they didn’t commit.  It’s just a true for aliens as it would be for humans.

Jun 212014
 

I found this story about Matthew Hindes, a U.S. Navy submariner, who is facing contempt of court charges if he doesn’t show up in court on Monday for a custody case involving his ex-wife.  However, Hindes is currently deployed out to sea, so he can’t show up on Monday.  Because of situations like this, there is a law called the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which requires a minimum 90 day stay in a civil case involving a person in military service.  The judge in this case has decided that she can just ignore the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act to hold Hindes in contempt of court.  The custody dispute involves Hindes’s daughter.  Currently, Hindes and his new wife have custody of his daughter because Hindes’s ex-wife neglected their daughter.  The judge has gone so far as to say that the daughter isn’t in the care of her father, but that isn’t true.  She is in her father’s care (and her stepmother’s care).  His job just happens to involve travel.  This case can set up a dangerous precedent where men in military service can lose custody of their children (or even something as simple as visitation rights) just because they’re deployed.  The same thing will happen during divorce proceedings.  Ex-wives of military men will know to challenge custody and visitation while their ex-husbands are deployed.  Women seeking to divorce their military husbands will also know to wait until their deployed.

This gave me an idea for a science fiction story or novel that takes place in the near future.  Men serving in the military en masse start experiencing divorces and losing custody of or visitation to their children because women know the best time to begin any type of civil proceedings is when a military man is deployed.  As men in the military come home from their deployments, they are promptly arrested for being in contempt of court for civil cases they had no knowledge about.  This creates a groundswell of distrust for the courts and the government in general in the military.  Men who would have otherwise joined the military choose not to because they don’t want to be arrested after a deployment.  Eventually a general or generals concerned that this situation is a threat to the security of the U.S. decide to overthrow the government and setup a military dictatorship.  The actions of these generals has widespread support among all of the lower ranks of the military since either they have been a victim of this situation and/or have several buddies who have.

Either that or the military is so weakened that a squad from ISIS takes over the U.S. in a weekend because no man is willing to fight to defend the U.S.

Nov 202013
 

There’s a new show on the Fox Network called Almost Human.  It’s a science fiction cop show that takes place in the year 2048.  The second episode had to do with sex bots.

Since this is television, this episode of Almost Human had to have women being hardest hit by the existence of sex bots.  That’s exactly what happened.  Sex bots in Almost Human have lifelike skin, but it’s different enough that anyone can tell it isn’t the real thing.  An Albanian crime ring decides to offer its customers with a more real sex bot experience, so they start abducting women and harvesting their skin to be used for the sex bots.

Since this is the year 2048, you would think the technology to grow human skin would exist making abducting women completely unnecessary.  In fact, the first episode of Almost Human talks about how programmable DNA exists which can be used, among other things, to grow replacement organs for people.  That means the show itself has established that the technology to grow human skin exists.  There is no reason for an Albanian crime ring to abduct women to skin them.  It would be easier and cheaper just to grow skin as part of the sex bot manufacturing process.

The only way that sex bots could “harm” women is by men deciding that they would rather have sex with sex bot than women.  That would be ridiculous as the plot of a TV and would not have the effect of showing women as the victims of the evil menz.  Instead we get the absurdity of “sex bots will cause women to be abducted for their skin”, ignoring what was established on the previous episode, to make it look like women are violated by sex bots.

Jun 032013
 

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

Recently there have been a couple of examples showing that feminists have a problem with hot women showing their bodies.  For example, a feminist at Femspire wrote an article attacking every single aspect of the new Star Trek movie, Star Trek: Into Darkness.  In particular, the author of that piece objected to a scene where Dr. Carol Marcus (played by Alice Eve) was in her underwear.  Nothing actually happens in that scene.  There is no pornographic aspect to it or anything to worthy of an objection.  It was nothing more than anyone would see on most beaches.  Here is an image of what was in that scene to judge for yourself:

alice_eve

One of the comments in the Femspire piece, actually called this “gratuitous nudity”.  For something to be “gratuitous nudity”, it actually has to have NUDITY which would require Alice Eve to be naked, not in her underwear.

In the UK feminist groups, UK Feminista and Object, have launched a legal campaign against “lads’ mags”, magazines that have hot women in their underwear and similar amounts of clothing.  These magazines aren’t pornographic, and they have nothing to complain about.  Despite those facts, UK Feminista and Object are saying that “lads’ mags” constitute sexual harassment or sexual discrimination against employees and customers of the stores where they are sold.  Since the “lads’ mags” show nothing more than would be seen on most beaches, UK Feminista and Object are saying that going to the beach is a sexually harassing experience which is clearly absurd.

Clearly, feminists have a problem that goes beyond nudity or pornography since they have a problem with men seeing women, particularly attractive women, in their underwear.  They are even trying to change language so that women in their underwear are considered “nude”.  What is happening here is an attack on (heterosexual) male sexuality.  Men like looking at hot women with few clothes on.  The problem feminists have with images of women in their underwear is that men like looking at them.  Everything that the feminists are saying about “harassment” (as if you can be harassed by an inanimate object), “nudity”, and/or “misogyny” is just a smokescreen for how they can’t stand men doing something they enjoy like looking at hot women.

Aug 182012
 

I have been thinking a lot about the importance of male spaces.  There has been a feminist war on the existence of any and all male spaces based on the principle of if men are doing something, no matter what it is, without women, then they have to be stopped immediately.  This is also applies to predominantly male spaces like STEM employment, video games, “geek culture”, etc.  It’s no surprise that we have seen a feminist/female assault against these areas such as the constant blather about sexism in video games and Obama’s attempt to apply Title IX to STEM.  Whiskey has talked about how (female) Twilight fans (including the “Twi-moms”) took over Comic Con and ruined it.

We are running out of male spaces.  The feminization of game is being attempted.  There have been several attempts to turn the MRM into being all about women.  (The most recent attempt was the LadyMRAs reddit which was supposedly about women helping the MRM ended up exposing its real agenda when they became rabidly insane against MGTOW.)  The only real space that has managed to completely resist and fight off feminization and feminist invasion is MGTOW.  At least one reason for this is because women in general see the MGTOW as hostile to women (regardless of what men in the MGTOW space are actually doing).

Knowing that MGTOW has been the only male space to resist feminization and feminist invasion because it is (de facto) hostile to women, then is the only way to preserve male spaces by making them hostile to women?  8ball commenting at SWAB’s blog thinks that this could be the case:

I’m starting to wonder if it’s even possible to have a male-only space that isn’t hostile to women. And contrary to popular belief, this isn’t because I think any gathering of men will inherently turn misogynistic, rather the opposite.

Any space that isn’t completely alienating to women will eventually be …. “invaded” (for lack of a better term) by women, who will then insist that it conform to their sensibilities. Look at Geek culture for example.

You can see this happening in places like The Good Men Project. Most of their readers are women, a good percentage of their articles are not even remotely about men, and another significant percentage are about how men’s lives affect women. And even when the article is about men… often it is written by a woman.

I’m not sure how good of an example The Good Mangina Project is since it was started by male feminist men, but in thinking about it, 8ball has a point that even The Good Mangina Project now has a much higher percentage of women authors and women commenting and less articles even tangentially relevant to men than when they started.  In a way, this does show that male spaces have to be hostile to women to defend against feminization and feminist invasion.  While The Good Mangina Project didn’t start out as a true male space, it shows that any space that is feminized will become more feminized over time.

I’m certainly willing to listen to ideas on how to protect male spaces without making them completely hostile and alienating to women, but at this point, I can’t see any other solution to protecting male spaces.

Jun 192010
 

Last Saturday I talked about reptile aliens, and this post will do that again.  I’m thinking about making Reptile Alien Saturday a semi-regular occurrence.  It will have some reptile alien talk and some stuff about what the Illuminati is really up to.

Last week you should have seen some reptile (non-)aliens on Doctor Who.  Remember Part 2 of last week’s episode is tonight on BBC America for those of you who get that channel.  Or you can download the episode off of bittorrent.

In other reptile alien news recently the SciFi Syfy channel showed one of their crappy movies called Wyvern.  It features one of the last appearances by Don S. Davis before he died where he thinks he is getting attacked by reptile aliens but it turned out to be a wyvern (dragon).  Don S. Davis was General Hammond in Stargate which had actual reptile aliens called Unases.

Getting on to something more interesting in my last post here I talked about some of the weird obsessions with sex particularly bizarre and disgusting sex acts.  8:03 had this as an explanation:

Repressed homosexuality. Explains all their obsessions with sex.

I am forced to agree.  Why else would someone photoshop a picture of Dick Cheney to make it look like he has a huge dick?  Or just look for a picture like that.  Just the fact that they’re thinking about the genitalia of politicians is bad enough.

Not to be outdone Greatbooksformen expanded his trolling repertoire to include this obsession with bizarre sex.  Read what he wrote at Roissy’s blog:

when you hold a fiat dollar and look at it

real close now

look relaly relaly clcose

can you see the ifat funded cock sliding in and out of the girls’ ass behind teh pyramid? lzozlzllzlzlzl

i swear to good it is there and if you can’t see it you can smell it lzozlzlozlzl

This is a solid trolling job here since I’m sure the Henry Makows of the world see these sorts of things when looking at the a dollar bill.  I’m sure they see it on everything else too.  I tried looking at a dollar bill to find this but I couldn’t.  I wouldn’t expect to since I can’t dream up the most bizarre sexual crap there is.

Jun 122010
 

For those of you in the US who get BBC America tonight and next week you should be watching Doctor Who.  Tonight is part one of an episode featuring reptile aliens.  They’re not really aliens since they’re from ancient Earth but it’s close enough.  It’s a two part episode so be sure to watch tonight at 9PM EST for part one and next week on the 19th at the same time for part two.

Those of you in the UK (i.e. Bhetti) should have already seen this.

If you don’t have a TV or don’t get BBC America the episodes can be downloaded from bittorrent.  Part one is called The Hungry Earth and part two is called Cold Blood.

Apr 302010
 

If you don’t read Seasons of Tumult and Discord, then you don’t know that I along with Whiskey won their Futurist of the Year award.  (I know you thought STD meant sexually transmitted disease.  Get your mind out of the gutter.)

I would like to congratulate my fellow winner and Spearhead colleague Whiskey.  He has been discussing the death of science fiction on TV in this part of the internet longer than I have, and he deserves this award too.  This award would not have been possible without the efforts of many people.  I couldn’t have done it without Brent Spiner (Star Trek The Next Generation’s Cmdr. Data) calling me an asshat or being viciously attacked by John Scalzi and Dan Savage.  I also would like to thank the crazy chick who kept getting “rage blackouts” from my post and the hundreds (or maybe it was thousands) of women who all told me that I have a small dick.

In many cases a prophet is not recognized in his own time.  I have been more fortunate as we can watch how quickly the SciFi Syfy Channel has descended into a den of wrestling shows, cooking shows, and other entertainment exclusively for women.  This is part of how TV/cable channels are trying to resist the future which means the internet taking over the television system.  Between that and the ideological bent of those who control the media industry, we will see more of this in the future where actual cable channels morph into copies of each other showing the same programming that is designed to only cater to females.  Eventually, even the Weather Channel will succumb to this.  Yes in the future the Weather Channel will change its name and stop reporting on the weather.  Remember you heard it here first.

Once again, thank you for this award, and congratulations again to my co-winner Whiskey.

Jan 142010
 

I wrote a comment to the Spearhead post on the movie, Avatar:

While Avatar is leftist propaganda for all the reasons described in this post, its worse than that. There is no way the Navi could have naturally evolved on Pandora and not be in the worst kind of poverty that we have ever seen. Their lives would be nasty, brutish, and short. Imagine the real life of a cave man or observe the poorest places in the world to get an idea of what their lives would be really like.

At one point the main character says that humans have nothing to offer the Navi. That’s right because the Navi are luddites who would rather remain completely ignorant of everything around them pretending its one step above pure magic. The Navi have no interest in not just technology, but knowledge and civilization. Of course, given how primitive the Navi are, all the humans on Pandora would have to do is wait until a famine or a plague and then they would have things the Navi want.

Or imagine if something worse happens like an asteroid falling on Pandora taking out enough of Ewa to shut it down. Then what will the Navi do? It’s not like they could fix anything because they treat it as one step above magic. The Navi are completely dependent on Ewa for everything. This will get them sooner or later. One disaster is all it will take.

We hear this all the time that the poorest people in the world (or the Navi) are better off because they live a “simpler life” and “closer to nature”. It’s all bunk whether its in a technologically advanced movie or not. Really, Avatar is slap in the face of anyone who has ever worked to make their lives and the lives of other people better.

I was thinking about this, and Avatar hits on something that I have said before.  Biology is not magic.  The Navi treat their ability to link to animals and trees on Pandora as being “connected” to Ewa.  Such a thing would be all but impossible evolve naturally which means someone designed it.  The Navi are afraid of understanding how anything on Pandora actually works.  In other words they think biology is magic.  In reality Ewa is probably just a computer system for regulating Pandora.  It’s a BioGeoComputer, a computer that spans a planet (or a moon in this case) using biotech, but it’s a computer none the less.

Treating biology as magic is fundamentally female supremacist.  To believe that idea is to believe that women and women alone have some sort of mystical power of life (because women give birth to babies).  Thus the person that believes biology is magic believes that women are fertility goddesses.  Biology can be observed, experimented on, and replicated like everything else in the universe.  There is nothing special about biology.  When you understand how biology works, you understand that women aren’t doing anything special in creating life.  It may not be obvious, but knowing such things helps to depedestalize women.

Going back to the movie Avatar, the Navi fundamentally have female ideals because they don’t want knowledge.  Feminists and other female supremacists don’t want men to have knowledge for similar reasons.  Whether its game or just being able to compare notes on how women are acting, knowledge is power.  This is the reality that stands in stark contrast to all of the ideas that the Avatar movie promotes.

Aug 052009
 

Marvin Minsky, a leading AI researcher at MIT, once said about the difference between general fiction and science fiction, “General fiction is pretty much about ways that people get into problems and screw their lives up. Science fiction is about everything else.” and “But aside from the science fiction, I find it tedious to read any ordinary writing at all. It all seems so conventional and repetitive.” This is important when looking at what is happening to science fiction on television.

Recently, Whiskey wrote about how “Syfy” is adding several gay characters to various shows. This isn’t as bad as what is coming out of Britain. There’s a spin off of Doctor Who called Torchwood. In Torchwood pretty much all the main characters have had at least some type of homosexual experience on the show. Two of the main characters have an ongoing homosexual relationship. One of the characters, Capt. Jack Harkness, isn’t even just gay or bisexual. If you do a search on that character you can find the writers talking about how he’s “omnisexual”. Basically, he’s willing to have sex with anything, men, women, aliens, etc. The creator of Torchwood, Russell Davies, has even admitted to having an agenda by saying that by the 51st century (where the character is from) everybody will be omnisexual. It’s worth noting that Torchwood is what Russell Davies wanted to do with Doctor Who, but the BBC put a stop to it (because Doctor Who was traditionally a “kids’ show”).
Torchwood is basically slash fiction on TV. What slash fiction is when someone takes a TV show or a movie and writes some “fan fiction” and adds homosexual relationships. Slash fiction started when the original Star Trek series was first on TV. Women (since slash fiction is primarily written by women) started writing Kirk/Spock stories (notice the slash there) where Kirk and Spock had a homosexual relationship. If you have seen even one episode of Star Trek you know this is completely absurd.
All of this is basically a war against real science fiction. What these women and gays are doing is trying to turn science fiction into general fiction. Remember what Minsky said, General fiction is pretty much about ways that people get into problems and screw their lives up. Science fiction is about everything else.” In other words, lots of general fiction on TV is nothing but pointless relationship drama. Science fiction is about everything else such as (straight) men doing things, inventing things, building things. With slash fiction and the introduction of gay characters on science fiction shows, these people are trying to convert science fiction into more of the homogeneous mass of relationship drama. This is in addition to the obvious agendas to normalize all sorts of deviant behavior.
What these people are doing are even more dangerous than that. We all know about men who as boys were inspired by science fiction to go out an invent things and develop technology. Science fiction inspired these men to advance civilization. This attempt to convert science fiction into general fiction is effectively a war on the advancement of civilization.
Jul 082009
 

Recently the Sci-Fi channel, a cable channel that used to be about showing science fiction and related programming changed its name to the Syfy channel. The Sci-Fi channel has been dying for a long time. Now, it is offically dead. This name change represents that the channel is no longer about science fiction in any way, shape, or form. However, the Sci-Fi channel has been dying for a long time. The death of the Sci-Fi channel started in 1998 when Bonnie Hammer took over the channel and decided that “more female viewers were needed”. Of course, there couldn’t be a cable channel that men would be interested in watching. Women can’t have that. It took eleven years, but the Sci-Fi channel is now dead due to what is essentially an anti-male crusade.

The Sci-Fi channel used to show good science fiction shows such as Farscape, but they killed it. The channel’s remake of Flash Gordon failed because many viewers tuned out after the pilot since nothing science fiction was happening for most of the pilot.
The “reimagined” (more like redelusioned) Battlestar Galactica was incredibly anti-male. (You can read the link for many examples.) Dirk Benedict who played Starbuck in the original BSG series (yes there was an original BSG series in the 70s) also had a lot to say about the poltically correct [also anti-male by definition] bullshit of the new BSG. Beyond that here is the biggest example of politcally correct/anti-male BS from the new BSG. In the original series from the 70s, the Cylons were created by reptilian aliens NOT humans. The mechanical Cylons commited genocide against their reptilian creators and then proceded to attack other aliens and destroy them. One of these species of aliens, the Hasari, asked for help against the Cylons after the Cylons invaded their territory. Humans responded to their call for help which started the Cylon-Human war. In the new BSG the backstory was completely different, and its the result of women catering to women. The backstory from the original BSG was too pro-male since it shows the war is sometimes necessary.
It actually gets better if you watch all of the episodes of the original series. At one point the humans fighting the Cylons come across another previously unknown human colony. This colony is divided between two states who are at war, the Western Nationalists who are free and democratic and the Eastern Alliance which is run by some form of totalitarianism. The president of the Western Nationalists negotiates a peace with the Eastern Alliance, but the Eastern Alliance just used the “peace” as a cover to attack the Western Nationalists. Again, this was too pro-male for the then heads of the Sci-Fi channel. (As an aside Islam has a word for using peace treaties to regroup and attack like this. It’s called “hudna”. This tatic was also a favorite of the LTTE (Tamil Tigers) before they were destroyed earlier this year.)
R.I.P. Sci-Fi channel.
Translate »