Monday, 31 December 2018

ABC accuses wypipo of forcing non-whites to bash police

Archived 31 Dec 2018 05:50:27 UTC


Leaders from Melbourne's African migrant communities have accused far-right activists

I immediately thought that this would be a hit piece. Far-right? What does that mean?

Forget about the emotional response to the term, and think objectively about the term - does it now mean anything at all?

It used to mean something precisely - a neo-Nazi if they were from recent times, a member of the Italian or German Nazi movements if from the past. Now I see the ABC use it against all sorts of people.

In fact, a popular feminist branch called "antifa", which tends to do the more brutal acts that most feminists don't have the strength to accomplish, calls anyone who votes for a conservative politician a Nazi - even simply wearing a hat that resembles the MAGA hat will get you labelled - then bashed.

Antifa loves to bash those it calls Nazis.

And Feminists pushed the hashtag "Punch a Nazi" right besides them.

So when the ABC starts calling protestors "Far Right", I want to know what evidence they have for it. Did they record antisemitic speech, for example? Was there a call to attack other countries, or to commit genocide against minority groups?

Well, if the ABC knows about such evidence, it has, in its wisdom, kept them from the police, because they weren't charged with any of that.

So what did they do?


They protested legally, as is their right.

"There are unwritten codes you have to live by to ensure you are not threatening to anyone in society."
Since when? Oh right - you can't read these unwritten codes - they are invisible ink. You have to be a true believer in Social Justice to be able to perceive them.

"If someone has committed a crime, it is important to try them before the law... "
So in other words, they hadn't broken any laws. If the ABC had stopped there, that would be fine. But as Feminists, they just can't do that.

"… but be mindful that we have got people in our society that are more disadvantaged than others."


No, we are not required to judge people according to intersectional social justice. We do not have to look at law-abiding citizens protesting legally, and stop them because they offend someone that the Far Left regards as racially superior to them.

Everyone, regardless of sex, race or creed, so long as they are obeying the law, is free to do what they want. That's it. You do not get to be some moral police force, deciding who is free and who isn't on the basis of their genetics.


"They refused requests from the group and police to stop recording"

the police keep telling us that they can record us at their whim. Why can't we record them? We see the ABC recording the activists. Why can't the activists also record public events?

Why is it the Far Left who gets to decide who is allowed to gather evidence of crimes?

"a dispute broke out, during which police allege a 25-year-old man from the football-playing group assaulted an officer."

Like this one. The activists protested legally. The group they protested against - one often accused world-wide of violence behaviour - was violent in response. To the police. Who then turned around and decided that the white people were responsible because white, and the non-whites were not to be judged to the same standard.

We used to have a good word for that.

We called it RACIST.

"The incident prompted Police Minister Lisa Neville to warn that "racism itself does not make any of us safer""

Here's an idea, Lisa: what about not being racist?

What about judging everyone the same regardless of skin colour? That means locking people up if they commit crimes, even if black, and NOT locking them up if they aren't committing crimes, even if white?

Jeez, why is that beyond SJWs? The bigotry of low expectations!

"I think it is really unfair and wrong for any group in a thriving multicultural society like ours to try and incite hatred or fear for one group against the other," Dr Ngum Chi Watts said.
Seriously? I see the ABC doing that all the time. Not a day goes past before they print an article blaming all wickedness on men, and finding excuses for the most brutal acts by women. But recently they have been pushing out anti-white rhetoric, including black supremacist propaganda holding that the people of Britain were black, until the evil white people invaded and murdered them all, and somehow hid that from history.

Turns out SJWs LOVE racial vilification - so long as it is against the correct targets!

"Vic Police Minister says people who 'incite' violence will be held to account"

So... not the people doing the violence - but those who the violent feel provoked them by their existence?

The irony that these are the same people printing domestic violence posters with evil men bashing their wives and saying "I had to do it... she PROVOKED me..."

"However, you can also then take a step back and say 'what has been the reporting when it came to people of colour in the last 12 months?"

This is a term Feminists use to mean "anyone they like". Essentially, they regard all people of English stock as intrinsically evil, and those outside as being better depending on how different they are from that group. But they don't regard them as moral equals - instead, they lower their standards, refusing to treat the "Noble Savages" with the same justice, to view them as just as capable of reason.

They do not see them as equals, but inferiors. It's a peculiar outlook. They see black people as some sort of childlike Eloi race, and white people as the clever but cannibalistic Morlocks.

"    "Those kids, irrespective of skin colour, had a right to be there, just like any other person on that beach. And what was really most upsetting was they were just going about their business."

Yes, all of the people had the right to be there so long as they obeyed the law, and that includes protesting and recording. Getting violent means you should be punished irrespective of skin colour.

So why is the Police force, run by SJWs, and the ABC, ditto, opposed to the very principle they repeat so often?

"Irrespective of skin colour - unless you are white, you scum!"
""it's OK to be white" — a phrase commonly used by white supremacists."

Notice that the SJW 'journalist' here inserts their opinion as fact. How many white supremacists do they know? What was the sampling method?

I'm going to take a wild guess here, a complete stab in the dark, and say they made the whole thing up. "It's okay to be white" was deliberately created to expose the racism of Feminists. Feminists KNOW it is not okay to be white - they hate whites, even when they ARE white, and this phrase is their nemesis, and they won't rest until they have manipulated people emotionally, because they cannot deal with the rational argument it presents.

Here's a question for the ABC: Is it, or is it not, okay to be born white?

Because I think we all know the problem for them. They know in their gut that it is not okay, but they can never admit to it.

So, dear reader, ask yourself - is it okay for people to be white? If not, what Final Solution do you propose to the White Problem?

"Last year he confronted former Labor senator Sam Dastyari in a Melbourne pub and called the Iran-born politician a "terrorist" and a "monkey"".

Oh no, mean words! If this incident occurred, why wasn't that person charged with slander?
The Aztecs, an ethnic group predisposed to commit crime due to its culture
The Nazis, an ethnic group predisposed to commit crime due to its culture
"Dr Ngum Chi Watts said the Australian community must understand that no ethnic group is predisposed to commit crime due to its culture."

In June 2010, through a Freedom of Information Act request, The Sunday Telegraph obtained statistics on accusations of crime broken down by race from the Metropolitan Police Service.[n 2]

The figures showed that the majority of males who were accused of violent crimes in 2009–10 were black.

Of the recorded 18,091 such accusations against males, 54 percent accused of street crimes were black; for robbery, 59 percent; and for gun crimes, 67 percent.[27]

Robbery, drug use, and gang violence have been associated with black people since the 1960s.[28]

In the 1980s and 1990s, the police associated robbery with black people. In 1995, the Metropolitan Police commissioner Paul Condon said that the majority of robberies in London were committed by black people.[29]

Street crimes include muggings, assault with intent to rob, and snatching property. Black males accounted for 29 percent of the male victims of gun crime and 24 percent of the male victims of knife crime.[27]

On sex offences, black men made up 32 per cent of male suspects. Similar statistics were recorded for females. On knife crime, 45 percent of suspected female perpetrators were black; for gun crime, 58 percent; and for robberies, 52 percent.[30]
Operation Trident was set up in March 1998 by the Metropolitan Police to investigate gun crime in London's black community after black-on-black shootings in Lambeth and Brent.[31]

Between April 2005 and January 2006, figures from the Metropolitan Police Service showed that black people accounted for 46 percent of car-crime arrests generated by automatic number plate recognition cameras.[32]

It turns out that certain ethnic groups have always been associated with violence. Gotta say, I thought that it was commonsense that the Amish were safer to be around than Shaka's Zulu tribes, but what do I know?

Here's a radical idea - maybe people from violent cultures currently engaged in decades of violence are violent because the culture they are in is violent, and simply pushing them from one country to another doesn't erase that background of violence.

Feminists constantly say "teach men not to rape!" but then look at men from the Congo - an ACTUAL rape culture, where rape is normal and moral as a weapon against your enemies - and refuse to use that same standard.

Maybe they should be saying that people from such countries need to be taught not to be violent - to Australian police, for example? Just an idea? Too out there?

No, I am not saying that the amount of melanin in your skin determines your behaviour. I am saying not all cultures are the same and some are measurably more violent, and it was only recently that the Police decided that it is politically incorrect to even acknowledge it.

"All these youth are part of our society, so we have to deal with them as a collective"

Far Left types are what is known as "collectivists". They do not see humans as individuals.

"Right-wing activists criticised as un-Australian"

Were they Australian or not? "Un-Australian" is an emotive term which sounds like it means something - but means nothing.

"I am disappointed and shocked to hear that a group of people would deliberately provoke a group of African youth"

I wonder if the police were apologising as they were being bashed? "We are so sorry our faces are bruising your knuckles? We hope our livers don't hurt your toes as you kick them?"

""We know that the actions of the very far right do not represent the views of Victorians."

They seem to be moving further and further right as this story progresses. But if they don't represent the views of Victorians, what were they? Aliens? Demons?

Or maybe they were people from Victoria, i.e. Victorians? Wow! Shocking, huh!

 "Abeselom Nega said the activists' actions had no place in modern Victoria. "

The activists - who were peacefully protesting.

As opposed to those who behaved violently - which he has no problem with!

"The last thing we want is people who want to divide us along races "

If Nega acquires self-awareness, will his brain explode?

"He said he is concerned that the media's reporting on youth crime in Melbourne was fuelling racist attitudes."

So he had no problem with the people committing crime - just the reporting on that crime?

""I just kind of told him 'it's ok mate, I'll pay you with card' … I had to reassure him, more than any passenger would have to do," he said."

Oh no, a driver was worried about not being paid. Probably because of bad previous experiences. So the driver is not allowed to experience fear, because that is racist? It's funny that I constantly see the ABC telling women to be afraid of men because bad men have hurt women!

Here's a novel concept - STOP CRIMINALISING EMOTIONS.

If the driver was afraid, dealing with someone from the group that hurt him before in a civil manner will help abate that fear. Thus, good experiences overcome bad. But it's hardly unreasonable for a driver to want to be paid, and since drivers get robbed (and worse!), they have to be more fearful than the general population anyway.


"He said another friend from an African migrant background had experienced racial profiling while he was crossing the street to do some grocery shopping.

"A lady who was inside her car saw him crossing the road, she told her child to run back into the car, she locked the car, scared that he was going to attack them," Mr Muse said."

Yep, and I've had women react that way to me if I haven't shaved regularly. People will judge you if you look a bit rough. So what?

"He said a second friend who enjoys jogging at night now avoids wearing a hoodie to keep warm in winter because of the reactions of some people on the footpath."

Yes, people assume hoodies will commit crime, because they often do.

If you see someone with their face covered up, running up to you at night, you better be prepared to fight for your life.

Or if you work for the ABC, you just get your chauffeur to drive you to your gated suburb, I guess.

Shocking moment a hoodie-wearing youth throws a lit firework into a 'random' car on a London street

"The teen suspect, who was last seen wearing a gray hoodie..."
Criminals often wear hoodies, as they are effective at countering surveillance.

Thursday, 29 November 2018

Ex-PM Julia Gillard finds clothing just toooo harrrrrd....
Archived from

"The first woman to occupy the post of Australian prime minister says she remains hopeful that the "next few years" will see a "great feminist wave of change", despite the fear, anxiety and nostalgia that have driven the rise of figures like Donald Trump."

Note that it's unclear whose opinion it is that "fear, anxiety and nostalgia that have driven the rise of figures like Donald Trump".

Is it Gillard's? The author's? Who knows? It is simply presented as fact, and never challenged.

Maybe... just maybe... Trump was elected because the alternatives were worse? I can't count how many people said "I would have voted for Bernie but he folded when BLM bullied him - he was too weak to be leader".

And Clinton? "The future is female" is a reference to a call to genocide me. She championed it. Feminists had no problem with that, they applauded when she said it. What do you think that makes men think when they hear her say that? That their sons will have no place in the Feminist Future?

Maybe some people love their sons? Just a thought.

"Speaking at a Labor fundraiser in Sydney, Julia Gillard said that "yes, there is Trump" but there was also "the women's marches, #MeToo and more women running for the US Congress than ever"."

The women's marches, with Linda Sarsour as their leader, calling for an end to Jews and the imposition of Sharia Law? Oh yes, very progressive!

#MeToo, calling for an end to Due Process and the Presumption of Innocence, calling for an automatic guilty verdict for any man accused by any woman? Gosh. I wonder why men wouldn't want to commit suicide by supporting that!

More women running? Citation needed! What I have seen is Feminists demanding - and winning! automatic victory for any woman who wants a seat at the head of the table.

Feminists hate merit. They dream of a segregated world, with two legal systems, dependent on the sex you are born with. Born Female? That's the correct sex! Automatic jobs for you, but only the best jobs, of course. Men still have to do all the dying so you can be safe.

No wonder even little boys are having sex-change hormones. The Future is Female. Being Male is Toxic. Who would want to be male in a Feminist Tomorrow?

" And I genuinely believe that when the history books are written about this period, it will be identified as another of the great feminist waves of change"."

Just like the 1930s were a period of fascist change. The thing about progressives is they follow the Marxist idea that history has a time table, and that everything is marching to Utopia - and if you stand in the way of Utopia, if you are a counter-revolutionary, it's off to the re-education camps for you!

"She put this down to changing media standards which "in the era of click-click media" found it easier to generate "lazy" stories by focusing on the clothing of female leaders"

It's not lazy, it sells. That is called Capitalism. There is a demand amongst female readers to read stuff about clothes. Men do not care about the brand name of some chick's outfit. They care about boobs and butts. Clothing is the last thing on their minds.

" men were shielded from this by virtue of adopting effectively "uniforms"."

Gosh, if only Feminists could use things called "arms" to put on those outfits too. If only. Maybe they need men to dress them, because it is just too hard?

" astonished at having her outfit of black trousers and white jacket being a feature of some of the reporting"

Trump's appearance is a constant feature of Progressive reporting. I don't think I have seen an article where they don't moan about the colour of skin, his hair, his hands or even his penis.

But I forgot the Feminist Mantra - "It's okay when we do it!"

Monday, 5 November 2018

Social Justice demands 8 year old boys be 'corrected'... for life.

Saved from 4 Nov 2018 14:38:39 UTC

Note: this site sabotages archive attempts. I had to do quite a bit of work to get around it.

"When an 8-year-old tells you she is in the wrong body, she means it."


An 8 year old can say they are ready for sex, too. We do not let children make decisions that can permanently ruin their life.

“ Lily Maerz, Fiana Jefferson, and Zuri Jones have been diagnosed with gender dysphoria “

By what objective test? To what degree were their parents pressuring them, telling them that masculinity was toxic?

If feminists force all the males to have a sex change, how will they create new feminists? Is it that they are just too stupid to realise that sex change renders you infertile? Do they not know how babies are made?


“ They will start taking hormone blockers right away."

Then their penises will never develop. The penis is used in surgery to form a vagina. They will never be able to have intercourse due to this early re-assignment.

“ At age 14 to 16, they will begin taking female hormones"

This will be irreversible. They will then have increased cancer and other risks for life. They also must continue to take the hormones. There’s no going back.

And yet they are at an age where lifelong decisions are illegal in ANY OTHER AREA.

You cannot have sex or drive a car at 14, or go to war, or run a business. You are not regarded as capable of making such decisions.

Yet social justice demands that we take an 8 year old, put them at the wheel, and if that means a fiery death - so be it?

"The overall mortality for sex-reassigned persons was higher during follow-up (aHR 2.8; 95% CI 1.8–4.3) than for controls of the same birth sex, particularly death from suicide ...

Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population."

Friday, 2 November 2018

Senator Hanson-Young declares: "IT IS NOT OKAY TO BE BORN WHITE"

This sign was posted outside my office in Adelaide this morning. What a disgrace. The person who put these signs up should be ashamed of themselves.

This is a known alt-right slogan and it is not welcome in Adelaide and has no place in 2018.

If you look up the origins of this saying you will know why and who it has been deliberately used by to intentionally divide people. That is not something I support.

It is okay to be you - no matter the colour of your skin. We need inclusivity.

Two Legs Bad. cartoon mammal vertebrate fauna

"The person who put these signs up should be ashamed of themselves."

How dare white people be ok with being white! They need to feel ashamed! Purge whiteness from the Earth, starting with yourself, Senator!

"This is a known alt-right slogan"

Is it? Is there any source for that that is based on fact? Because as far as I can see some anonymous people thought it would be a good way to expose the racism of the far left... Jeez, I wonder if that worked?

"If you look up the origins of this saying you will know why "

I don't care if Hitler liked milk, it doesn't make milk bad. You are attempting to say the statement is wrong because people you don't like said it. Well, guess what, Nazis invented the jet engine. Are you going to stop using that?

"It is okay to be you - no matter the colour of your skin. "

... so long as you aren't white, of course!

"We need inclusivity."

Except for all you white people, you don't belong in [current year]!
Senator, you are the complete embodiment of the NPC meme.

Oooh, just saw your edit history - very revealing.

" Pro-nazi slogans "

Sorry, do you think this is 1930s Germany? The Nazi Party is dead. If any Nazis survive, they are either senile, or frozen in ice, waiting to be thawed out to fight Captain America.

World War 2 is over. Did you not know this?

But is very interesting that you say being ok with your skin colour is the same as WANTING TO THROW PEOPLE INTO GAS CHAMBERS.

You know who Nazis killed? White people. They had no care for whites, and certainly didn't care if they were ok. They thought Aryans were superior, and others that we would class as "white" - like slavs - subhuman beasts to be slaughtered or worked to death.

They had your mentality. They didn't think being born with certain skin colours was ok either.

"...have no place in [current year]".

NPCs always bring up the calendar year. I wish they could at least be programmed to tell the time as well.

"Go back to the rock you crawled out from and stay there."

Ooh, scary, Senator! The Nazis must have heard you and time travelled back to the days of the Weimar Republic! Well done!!

Saturday, 22 September 2018

Is asking actors to ACT a hatecrime?
Her introduction was as Ms Marvel as
Captain Marvel was an existing character.

multirpuniverse commented on appreciation-post's photo ““Captain Marvel should smile more” “she looks so serious all the...”
“Smile more.” I love that Brie shot back at this!!! Wonder Woman did not smile in her poster! Why should Captain Marvel? Why should Black Widow? Why should Scarlet Witch and all the other women in movies “smile more”? To do what exactly? Make them look more fuckable? Relieve your misogynistic thoughts and do whatever the hell you want with them? Nuh uh!!! This is the 21st century! Wake up and keep your hands and your dicks to yourselves!!!
I was going to say feminists were insane but inane is more the case.

adj.        One that lacks sense or substance:  interrupting with inane comments; angry with my inane roommate.    

“Smile more”, goes their strawman. It doesn’t matter that it’s been debunked, they know it’s debunked. Feminists love to lie, and every repetition of the lie is like a little orgasm for them.

“ I love that Brie shot back at this!!!”

So the customers pointed out she shows nothing but resting bitch face, and she ... attacks her own customer base?

Man. This is going to be the ghostbusters reboot all over again.

“ Why should Scarlet Witch and all the other women in movies “smile more”? “

a) Every male character does.



b) It makes a character relatable that at least somewhere in their lives they aren’t just looking vaguely annoyed.


“ To do what exactly? Make them look more fuckable?
It is perfectly cromulent to have scenes in a movie that are there to appeal to female sexuality...

Umm, you do realise women are also attracted to women? Why do you hate lesbians?

“ Relieve your misogynistic thoughts “

You first. You are the one who can’t stand women being treated like men are. You do not respect women, you either want them in a pedestal or surrounded by cushions. Go fuck yourself.

“ This is the 21st century! “

This is what a Feminist thinks is an argument.

“ keep your hands and your dicks to yourselves!!! “

Yep. Feminists think asking an actor to act in a movie is the same as raping them.

Feminists hate smiling, except at male suicide, of course. Everything decent about them has long died, and they can’t comprehend human emotions any more.

No wonder they find the suggestion that Brie show anything but resting bitch face to be infuriating!

Maybe she just can’t. Maybe that’s all she has left?


As has been pointed out many times, Jude Law shows more emotion in two seconds
Captain Marvel - formerly Ms Marvel - used to have emotions.
self confidence

She could even... smile!

In the comics, Rogue and Ms Marvel battled, and Rogue drained her powers for years...

Wednesday, 12 September 2018

Feminists push more wage gap victimhood

Because of the way they set up the 'meme', it's unreadable unless I make the pic huge - and no, they don't link to an archive or anything you can use to see if any of this actually happened.

So 4 randos who nobody cared about - have a look at the number of likes their comments got - are the proof there’s a hostile environment for women in tech?

This the level of proof required for feminists. Hell, those accounts could have been created by feminists for this ‘gotcha’.

Here’s an idea - maybe the reason that women and men, on the whole, do different jobs when they have a choice is… men and women are DIFFERENT.

Study finds some significant differences in brains of men and women

A meta-analysis of sex differences in human brain structure

Study finds differences in male, female brain activity when it comes to cooperation

Male and female brain rhythms show differences

So here's a thought; why is it female feminists are unable to create their own coding houses? Why are feminist computer games appalling? 

And why can't they work from home in any case? Hell, there are Indians writing code for American offices - they don't fly over, they use funky technology called "the internet" to shift code from one spot to another.

And what's one of the things they do? They make mobile apps. Like the model. The one who claims that the environment is hostile.

How do you find it hostile when you can work anywhere you damned well please?

A feminists able to find victimhood without ever experiencing it? Gosh, how shocking!!

See also:

How feminists misrepresent the gender ‘wage gap’

Tuesday, 4 September 2018

Are the changes in asphyxiation laws a Trojan Horse?

This is from the ABC Australia, and of course it works from the Duluth Model - all domestic violence is described using the paradigm of male abuser - female "damsel in distress"

Choking, non-fatal strangulation offences already in Queensland the focus of new push for WA

Archived: 4

Sep 2018 13:22:05 UTC

Now the law is especially focusing on those who use strangulation to any degree. I would have that the assault laws would already cover it, but they are being specific.

Why, I have to wonder? What has changed?

Well one thing that has changed is that a lot of women enjoy erotic strangulation (breathplay). This puts men in an interesting situation where they can be arrested for doing ... precisely what their partner demands they do!

Unfortunately, Domestic Violence organisations are largely run by and for feminists. Have a look at each story on this web page, notice the pattern?

Males are the enemy.

Females are the victim.

There are no gays or lesbians - despite lesbian DV being the highest and gay DV being the lowest.

"The Western Australian Council for Domestic and Family Violence Services, the peak body representing women's refuges in WA"

Women's refuges. Not men's. A body to cover ALL domestic violence victims only cares about female victims of men. There are no refuges for men. There is certainly no acknowledgement that strangulation can be consensual.

  • Women's Crisis Line: 1800 811 811
  • Men's Referral Service: 1300 766 491
Wow! A men's referral service! Surely that would be where men could get help?

Wah wah!! It's " for men who are wanting to stop their violent or abusive behaviour towards their family members"

4 Sep 2018 13:38:38 UTC)

I have to wonder if that means a man can be charged over the wishes of his wife? The poor dear must have internalised misogyny - she can't possibly enjoy such things - she really needs to turn to the light and embrace OUR faith ...

Also - what about auto-erotic asphyxiation? Will men be arrested for masturbation? But that would mean men could be domestic violence victims ... of themselves!

Male victimiser = true but male victim = impossible! (Feminist head explodes)

Note: I am not advocating breathplay. My personal opinion is that it is just too dangerous. But to refuse to even acknowledge women could desire it, and to make up a law that would prosecute any male that agrees to it - that seems to be corruption at work.

We do not criminalise dangerous practices or we would outlaw mountain climbing and diving the oceans. We let adults make choices.

"The Personal is Political" is a Feminist slogan. So too is "Get the Hell out of our Bedrooms". I just wish they would make up their minds.

Further Reading:

Take My Breath Away | A Breathplay Guide

Ask Anything: Can Breath Play Be Safe?

Monday, 3 September 2018

Mother teaches boy to hate himself - in the name of feminism, naturally!

"boys supported from an early age that “girls can do anything”"

Well, we would have boys taught to loathe themselves, because they know boys can't "do anything". So I have to wonder what mother would think that that was a good idea?

Lemme guess - you followed it up with screaming "The Future is Female" at him until he agreed to do the surgery?

 Perhaps it's not too late to put the poor bastard up for adoption. Jes' sayin'. We get it, you hate all males, but surely pushing that one into suicide might be a little too far, even for you?

3 Sep 2018 13:16:24 UTC

Saturday, 1 September 2018

Why I think sex is binary in humans

In context, I had my Facebook account suspended for saying that humans have two sexes. I received a message that that was now considered hatespeech, and my account was locked.

In Australia, hatespeech is a serious crime. Worldwide, we have seen those accused of it locked out of social media, their videos demonetised or even removed - thus destroying people's livelihoods. And we have seen the biggest social media platforms marching in lockstep, purging those deemed hatespeakers even when they can find no law or even rule that they broke.

I must dissent.

16h16 hours ago

for those unclear on my thoughts about bio sex, i have long described sex as a spectrum, not binary. the spectrum has a bimodal distribution (which is a spectrum with 2 peaks). the peaks in the spectrum arise from two competing networks of gene activity (aka "male" and "female").
Replying to

What mystifies me is the degree to which some people exhibit such a violent rejection of non-binary gender, as if the mere concept were some sort of existential threat to them. Why so much fear and anger over this?

Archived from

1 Sep 2018 11:06:32 UTC

My response?

To me, this is much like the arguments I used to have with creationists. They depended on the fact that the models we use do not cover everything perfectly. They depended on the popular misconception that they needed to!

The fact is, all scientific models are imperfect. Science is an attempt to use models of reality, while acknowledging that reality itself may be unknowable. You simply try to create one that fits the facts as best as possible, and that has some predictive value. You keep that model until you can find a better one. It can be emotionally difficult to discard the old model, but it is necessary to do so for science to progress.

If you say the current model of male and female is incorrect, but have nothing more accurate to replace it with, then you are expressing a matter of faith, not science.

You are worshiping the God of the Gaps.

"Men think epilepsy divine, merely because they do not understand it. We will one day understand what causes it, and then cease to call it divine. And so it is with everything in the universe."
- Hippocrates (c. 460-377 BCE

Quote Sources: Cosmos

So why so much fear and anger, when charlatans and fanatics try to spread this dogma?

Because force is used against those who don't agree with their faith. Because instead of logic & science, we have Feelz.

You feel the model is wrong? Very well. Find one with better predictive power. Because I think that a male pig & a female pig are necessary for a piglet.

Every. Damned. Time.

Sex, like species, is not a "social construct" as they would have us believe; as they demand we agree to or be silenced.

To claim that the boundaries over some areas are fuzzy therefore the entire model must be discarded is insanity. We know that a male cannot mate another male and produce offspring. As Monty Python pointed out,

Wanting something to be true will not make it true - in fact, a good scientist needs to be very much aware of the coldness of reality, that it is often exactly what we do not want it to be.

If you stay on those tracks, all your wishing will not make that train brake any faster. By being aware of the reality, you are empowered. You have the choice to get off by simply moving to one side. It might be inconvenient. You might be comfortable sitting there. People have even decided to take a lovely nap right on that spot. But if you do not move in time, that train will end your life.

I've known train workers who had to deal with the consequences of drunks attempting a crossing - impaired by booze, they fail to grasp the reality of the situation in time.

I will spare you the details, and I strongly suggest you avoid the photos.

Why do I reference species? Because recently I have seen a push from Social Justice types to deny the existence of white people - to erase us from history, to claim that race is a social construct (and white people are evil!).

I have even seen them claim animal species do not exist, using boundary conditions of the model. For example, it is possible to successfully mate some species with somewhat viable offspring if they are very closely related. However, that is neither a way to disprove race nor species.

Unfortunately, Tumblr is a total mess when you try to export or archive it, so I cannot do justice to the argument on their side. However, if you watch the British BBC or the Australian ABC, it is impossible to avoid, as they are both effectively propaganda outlets for SocJus.

I am not sure how they can doublethink around the idea that white people don't exist AND they must be purged, but they sing songs about it on the taxpayer-funded ABC. I was involved in the complaints that eventually brought it down, but here is an excerpt from it.

Races exist.

We can predict what race someone is from bones, from genetic markers, from hair. The idea that the prediction must be perfect is bullshit; we use weather forecasts that are not, and cannot be perfect, and life and death decisions will be made with less than 100% certainty in all situations, because that is how reality works.

These morons want to make everything into a social construct, because they think confusing the matter will mean people will become pliable, easy to manipulate, willing to accept the emotive proposals they make rather than logic.

Yet science does not work that way. And all they can do is manage to get people killed if they succeed.

“ About 85% of Jewish Americans have an Ashkenazi Jewish background. Their families came from Eastern or Central Europe. As many as 1 in 4 people in this group is a carrier of an AJ genetic disease. “

Whoops! Turns out reality doesn’t give a shit about post-modernist dogma. Knowing you are more probably going to have a genetic disease is better than not knowing, which is the only alternative they can offer.

Yet more heresy!

Ermahgerd! Where does it end!

Maybe they will ban medicine as being Islamophobic or some bullshit. But meanwhile, back in sanity land, IT IS BETTER TO DEAL WITH THE FACTS THAN YOUR FEELS.

Forensics 101: Race Determination Based on the Skull

Because that is how you stop murderers. Not through mental tricks, word games, doublethink, but through the cold hard facts. Races exist, and knowing how to determine which one a corpse belongs to helps stop other people being turned into maggot-food. It is literally a matter of life and death.

It is the sort of brutal reality that is necessary to be able to prove a genocide took place in Rwanda. Something that cannot even exist in their minds.

They are just another breed of Holocaust-deniers.

Fuck Social Justice. It is anti-science, the anti-intellectualism of post-modernism blended with the worst of marxism to make a hellish brain-dead brew.
As for saying species don’t exist because there are some fuzzy boundaries in some cases - again, that is bullshit. Knowing whether some organisms are in the same species gives you information as to the genetic viability of cross-breeding.

Take an extreme example, where species are closely related:

Tigers and lions are similar but different species, and whether the offspring can reproduce at all is greatly dependent on the combination of male and female (which SocJus thinks is a social construct!)

“ Likewise, lions and tigers have historically overlapped in a portion of their range and can theoretically produce wild hybrids: ligers, which are a cross between a male lion and female tiger, and tigons, which are a cross between a male tiger and a female lion; however, tigers and lions have thus far only hybridized in captivity.[12]

In both ligers and tigons, the females are fertile and the males are sterile.[12]

So sane people - who know sex and species are biological facts, not something that can alter depending on how people feel, can use that to predict what the outcome of a crossbreeding will be.

Science: Unless a male and a female mate, you will not get offspring.

SJW: How very dare you! We cannot predict whether or not someone is male of female from their body as sex is a social construct! It is impossible to know how pregnancies occur, or whether two people with penises will make a baby!

Science: It is incredibly unlikely for different species to produce offspring, and the only known examples of limited viability occur in closely related species.

SJW: “Species” is a social construct! Unless it perfectly predicts that no different species can interbreed, it must be ignored!

Which is bloody obvious, because otherwise donkeys would be crossbreeding with antelopes, and centaurs would be commonplace!

No, SocJus, no matter how you ahem that horse, this will not be the outcome.

Sex, and species, are hard facts. All the wanting wishy-washiness in the world won’t change them to meet your needs.

Wednesday, 22 August 2018

Maybe she wasn’t raped, but he clearly violated her in some way.

Feminists say women never lie about rape. They defend female rapists, making it impossible to charge them with rape in many countries. They make excuses for women constantly, #MeToo!

Feminists love rape. They just want to be the ones who do it.

And false accusations? They claim that it is GOOD for men to be falsely accused.

“ In her view, rape is a subjective term, one that women must use to draw attention to other, nonviolent, even nonsexual forms of oppression.

“If a woman did falsely accuse a man of rape, she may have had reasons to,” Ginny says. “Maybe she wasn’t raped, but he clearly violated her in some way.” “

archived from,9171,1101910603-157165,00.html,9171,1101910603-157165,00.html

17 Feb 2015 14:11:08 UTC

Wednesday, 25 July 2018

Feminists demand males be declared rapists in Australia

Why do Feminists hate men, and why do men put up with that hate?

Archived from

25 Jul 2018 05:35:12 UTC

““If it’s not an enthusiastic yes, then it’s a no,” Ms Goward said in May.”

In almost all of my sexual experiences, my partners haven’t verbally asked me for consent. It isn’t dreamt of in Pru Goward’s mindset that a woman should have to do this of a man, and I have to say that this would be a very effective method of birth control.

 If someone is my partner, they have consent until I say no, and if I can’t trust my partner to reciprocate, then I see no point in relationships. Why should I live with a gun to my head, under laws that give women the freedom to kill me at a whim?

Plus, how do you prove you have you have verbal consent? Would voice recordings be enough? What if you have sex several times in a row, do you need a different record of each encounter? What about changing position? Changing rhythm? Does it need to be renewed every three minutes? Thirty seconds?
  1. Do you consent?
  2. Do you consent?
  3. Do you consent?
  4. Do you consent?
  5. Do you consent?

Say they said yes loudly in steps1-3, and 5, but 4 was soft. Would Ms Goward seize about that as evidence of sexcrime?

In sex, people are often kissing, or using mouths in other ways. Some people are very nonverbal, but according to Goward, if a female pulls a male to the bed, takes off his clothes, and then hers, then jumps on him… he has raped her, because he did not ask her VERBAL consent.

Feminists love to change the law to criminalise sexuality, but it is always selectively enforced on a sexist basis. Men are rapists. Women are their victims. They can’t imagine any other way for it to be.

No wonder they want sex work and sexbots banned. Whatever will they do if men have alternatives to living with a gun to their heads?

Tuesday, 3 July 2018

"Deities & Demigods - the Melnibonean Matter", by James M. Ward

I’m going to print this out once a year for the rest of my years. I absolutely hate it when ignorant people say TSR/me acted in copyright infringement for the Melnibonean and Lovecraft sections of the book.

When I was given the assignment for that book I listed the various pantheons that I wanted to use. Gary noted that maybe the Lovecraft and Elric sections might be a problem. He gave me the Arkham House and Michael Moorcock addresses and I immediately wrote them explaining what I was doing and asking for their permission to include their material.

Wonder of wonders I got two letters back giving me permission to use their work. I foolishly gave those two letters to the lawyers at TSR. They might still be in some lost file at Wizards. I would kill for them now.

Anyway we printed up the book and it sold great. We then got a cease and desist letter from Chaosium. I don’t blame them a bit, however they didn’t know about the two letters. TSR would have won a court case hands down.

However, the company wasn’t rich at that point and Brian Blume didn’t want to go to California, get a California lawyer, and spend time and money winning the case.

I went nuts because I had done way more than I was supposed to in clearing the way for those two licenses used in the book I wrote. I even offered to write two more pantheons free of charge, but the Blumes didn’t want to bother. I fumed for years.

Now, when people talk on line about TSR in copyright violation it presses my maximum angry button. Maybe some of my facebook friends can pass along this word as time goes on so that my blood pressure levels can say in the normal range.

Now this might seem like a rant and it is. However, when people say TSR was in infringement they are calling me a plagiarizer. I consider myself a very honorable man. I would never, ever steal material that was not my own. I will not put up with that moniker.

Thanks for listening.

James M. Ward
07/03/2018 1:06am

Editor's Addendum:

Is Cthulhu in the public domain?

Copyright status of works by H. P. Lovecraft

Wednesday, 27 June 2018

Tha Spooky Ghoooost!

The ghost in Fallout 4 hangs about at the top of the building. She mostly stands on a box, staring out the window.

She seemed happy enough for me to visit.Ok, she seemed a little freaked out at first. Maybe haunting is against the ghost code of conduct or something, and she was afraid she'd been sprung.

But then she seemed to be at ease with my company.

I guess window-staring is best experienced as a shared activity.

I kept thinking... "you're a ghost... shouldn't you be floating, and rattling chains... or something?"

But no. Box-standing it is. At least she has a couch if she wants a nap.