Browsed by
Category: Pop Culture Crap

Don’t Make Me Laugh

Don’t Make Me Laugh

To be honest, I can’t really laugh at this.  So, the director of the film Desire has gone on record defending the scene, claiming that the mothers of the two actresses were on set when it was filmed, and that the girls didn’t know what they were doing, exactly.  There is even, supposedly, a “making of” program showing how the scene was filmed.

I had wanted to bring this up in the earlier post, but didn’t want to edit it, as I’d have to edit the Medium post too, and I’m lazy.  I am not proud of that.  Perhaps it worked out for the best.

This is the director’s statement, copied from Variety’s article:

“Despair” is a film. When we see a shark eating a woman on film, no one thinks the woman really died or that the shark was real. We work in a world of fiction; and, for me, before being a director comes being a father.

Of course this scene was filmed using a trick, which was that the girls were copying a cowboy scene from a film by John Ford. The girls never understood what they were doing, they were just copying what they were seeing on the screen. No adult interacted with the girls, other than the child acting coach. Everything was done under the careful surveillance of the girls’ mothers. Because I knew this scene might cause some controversy at some point, there is “Making Of” footage of the filming of the entire scene.

Everything works inside the spectators’ heads, and how you think this scene was filmed will depend on your level of depravity.”

Oh, so WE’RE the depraved ones!  You have a little girl riding a pillow in a very, very sexual manner and we’re depraved for pointing it out?  Why the fuck is this scene in the film anyway, if you’re so fucking virtuous?

And pardon me, but I think this guy is full of shit.  How do we know the girls were ignorant of what they’re doing?  I am not about to track down the “making of” feature for this film, because I don’t even want to watch that.

I also love how Variety just had to point out that Megan Fox, one of the first to report this issue, is a “conservative” commentator.

Anyway, it doesn’t matter if they knew what they were doing or not.  The fact remains is that the director coached them into doing this, and filmed it.  Even more horrifying – their mothers allegedly watched this happen and said nothing.  A lot of sexually abused children end up doing stuff while not understanding what it is they’re doing.  That doesn’t absolve the abusers.

Netflix isn’t doing anything, and the mainstream media is still largely ignoring the issue.  Of course.

Since the r/pizzagate subreddit was banned, people have moved over to Voat.  There’s some interesting discussion in two different threads:

Diego Kaplan defending Netflix and his film ‘Desire’
Netflix under investigation for streaming disturbing child pornography scenes

Kiddie porn? In my Netflix?

Kiddie porn? In my Netflix?

This has been a story for a couple of days, and it has gone just as you would expect it to have gone. Leftists ignore it, and those that don’t ignore it (a tiny minority) claim that there’s nothing wrong with it. People who call themselves right-wingers are saying that this is a nothingburger, and that we’re all a bunch of hopeless prudes, because children are sexual beings, doncha know?

I am, of course, talking about a film called Desire. It is available on Netflix for US users. Allegedly, the film’s opening scene depicts a very young girl — ten or eleven years old — riding a pillow as if it were a horse, and having an orgasm, of which sparks concern in her sister, who calls for her mother. In context, it’s supposed to be the depiction of a girl’s very first orgasm, it’s supposed to be “accidental” and is there for comic relief.

Even in this context, this scene is flat out disgusting. Sure, there’s probably worse, but we can’t brush this off simply because there’s worse. Uh, that’s a problem. A huge problem. If people had raised a fuss when these worse films were released, perhaps there wouldn’t be a problem today. But no, none of you perverted clowns breathed a word about films like Pretty Baby and Blue Lagoon, presumably because you didn’t want to be labeled a prude. As if there were something bad about being a prude. I’ve never understood that. I’d rather be a prude than a whore. Prudes generally don’t have STDs. I’m not interested in having gonorrhea or syphilis.

So, this film is called Desire in the US, and its original title is Desearás al hombre de tu hermana. It is from Argentina, and these Central and South American countries (including Mexico) seem to be more…comfortable with very young children being sexualized. The synopsis is pretty simple:

“Lucía and Ofelia, two sisters, finally meet after 7 years at Lucia’s wedding. But when Juan, Lucia’s husband, and Ofelia meet, they feel like a disruptive fantasy have enchanted their minds and bodies…”

I tried looking for the names and profiles of the actresses that played the young sisters in the infamous scene, and they aren’t listed on the IMdb page.

This reminds me of another film I watched a few years ago, called Towelhead. It is a film about some girl from the Middle East moving in with her father (who is from the Middle East; her mother is white and they’re divorced). She ends up having a very disturbing and abusive relationship with the US Army soldier living on her street. In one scene, she’s in the soldier’s house (she is kind of friends with his son, I think) and ends up looking at his porn collection. She fantasizes about being the girls she sees in his nudie magazines; she crosses her legs and moves in such a way that she ends up stimulating herself, and has an orgasm. The character is supposed to be fourteen or something, but the actress that played her was over the age of eighteen at the time that scene was shot, so nobody got up in arms over that.

I wanted to know if the actress in question was of age. Unfortunately, the IMDb page doesn’t even show them as being credited. I don’t know what the age of consent is in Argentina, and I don’t even know the actress’s name. Okay, I just looked it up at Wikipedia (I know) and this is what they had to say about it (there are no citations there, by the way):

“In Argentina, the age at which there are no restrictions for sexual activities is 18[citation needed], regardless of gender or sexual orientation[citation needed].”

You can read the rest here.

I have not watched the scene in question and I do not want to. I do have a Netflix account, and I did look it up to see if it was still there. The film is still there. It was released last year, by the way, so the young girls in the scene would only be a year or two older than they were when it was shot, depending on when the scene was shot. I first heard of this at PJ Media, of which has a screenshot from the scene, but their faces are obscured. You can see it here. I don’t even like looking at that screenshot. I have absolutely no desire to watch the scene or the whole film.

If this is legal in Argentina, that’s one thing. The film can just “stay” there. But here, that’s another story. I think the scene should be removed. Based on what I know of the film’s story, it is unnecessary anyway. The story can be told without it. Removing it wouldn’t change anything.

We shouldn’t be okay with this shit. We really shouldn’t, but even those supposedly on the right think it’s no big deal. We’re just prudes because the notion of a fucking ten year old child riding a pillow like a seasoned porn star squicks us out. Well, excuse the fuck out of me for having standards.

I’m Not Dead

I’m Not Dead

Featured photo by Photo by Burak Kebapci from Pexels

So I clearly haven’t been keeping up with this blog lately, and for that I am sorry.  A lot of things have happened that I wanted to comment on, but didn’t.  There are two reasons for that – one, depression, and two, not having enough to say about whichever topic.

Things have been extraordinarily rough for me this past month, but I am managing to get through it.

I am also still hard at work on my novel, but it’s kind of a train wreck right now.

Two things I want to comment on, briefly, before ending this post.  One, the situation with Tommy Robinson is very scary.  I know, he had gotten himself into trouble previously and some asshole judge took it upon himself to exploit that to ensure that the British public remain in the dark about the Muslim rape gangs menacing innocent British girls.  The UK has no death penalty, but since the Muslims in their prisons are bloodthirsty maniacs, there’s a good possibility that Mr. Robinson may die in prison, and at their hands.  After all, some guy went to prison for leaving a bacon sandwich outside a mosque, and halfway into his one-year sentence he was found dead in his cell.  That’s insane, by the way, going to fucking prison for leaving a bacon sandwich anywhere for any reason.  So it’s okay to insult Christians but it’s not okay to insult Muslims?  I hate the left’s bullshit double standards.

Which brings me to the situation with Roseanne.  I didn’t watch her rebooted show, but I am sad it’s been cancelled.  I personally did not find her tweet offensive.  I hate Valerie Jarrett and I’d have far nastier things to say about that…that thing, but whatever.  And all Roseanne did was insult Valerie Jarrett, not all black people.  Furthermore, she apologized and deleted the tweet, and seemed rather sincere about it, given that she told people to refrain from defending her and that we shouldn’t boycott ABC over their decision to cancel her show.  In a normal world full of sane people, the apology would be accepted and perhaps her pay would be docked or something.  Now not only is she out of a job, but her castmates, who were totally innocent, are out of a job too.  Once again, the left’s double-standards are at play here, because people can say nasty things about the President, his wife, their kids, the Vice President, and the White House press secretary and get awarded their own Netflix show and whatever else, but talk shit about that bitch Valerie Jarrett and they wage holy jihad against you.

I fucking hate double standards.  Leftists are the absolute worst hypocrites on Earth.

Still Against Abortion, Regardless of What You Think

Still Against Abortion, Regardless of What You Think

Image Source:  Pixabay

I was browsing around the Internet and somehow found myself on the official website of a South African dance group that I listened to twenty years ago.  Predictably, the female member is totally pro abortion.  The page in question is here, and you’ll have to scroll down to see her comments on abortion, since she doesn’t know how to blog, I guess.

She has a questionnaire for those of us who are pro-life.  I do not call myself pro-life because I am not against the death penalty.  I am strictly anti-abortion, because it is the ending of an innocent life.

Oh, and before she demanded that all pro-lifers answer this questionnaire, she had this to say about abortion:

“I do feel that abortion is the ending of a life, rather than just a medical event. And, I am totally pro free, safe abortion for anyone who asks.

Okay, here is the questionnaire, and my answers.

1) How many ‘unwanted’ children have you adopted?

I have not adopted any children as of yet, because I am not financially capable of caring for a child.  I would like to adopt someday, however.  I feel that this is responsible.  If I were to fall pregnant, I would, however, have the child and I would probably raise the child myself.  Adopting is not like going to the store and purchasing an item.  Adopting in the US is apparently very expensive.  I can barely pay my student loans.  I certainly cannot afford to pay adoption fees.
2) How many children have you fostered?

See previous question.  I am not financially able to care for anyone but myself, unfortunately.  Deliberately fostering a child or adopting a child when I have so much debt would be irresponsible.
3) How many single teenage mothers who are not blood relatives have you taken into your home for a full year or more?

I don’t know any personally. I also don’t own a home, and I live with someone else.  It would be up to them as to whether or not I could take in a single teenage mother.  If I did own a home, I would.  I might not be able to pay for a lot of her expenses, but I’d let her live in my home for a year and try to help her get on her feet, or finish school.
4) How many hours per week do you spend volunteering at a facility for abused/abandoned children?

How many hours per week do you spend volunteering anywhere?  You’re awfully self-righteous.

I work for a living.  That’s my contribution.
5) What percentage of your annual income do you routinely donate to facilities for abused/abandoned children?

What percentage of your annual income do you routinely donate to any facility for anything whatsoever?  Tell me where you’ve volunteered and how much you’ve donated.  And it has to be for abused/abandoned children, not some abortion organization.  If you care so much about children, focus on helping children that are already alive, and stop focusing on killing innocent children.

All of this is irrelevant, because, as you just said, abortion is taking a life.  Absolutely nothing justifies taking a life short of murder.

I don’t like not being financially able to adopt children.  I am not proud of it.  But it’s reality.  I make sure I don’t get pregnant, and I don’t engage in any activity that might result in a pregnancy because right now, I cannot afford kids.  That’s the smart thing to do.  If you can’t afford contraception, you should refrain from any activity that might result in pregnancy.  That’s the smart thing to do.  But feminists like you are not interested in doing the smart thing.  Instead, you think with your cunt.

She finishes off with this:

Unless they can answer at least “one” (or more) to at least one (or more) of these five questions, as far as I am concerned they are not actually ‘pro-life’ but merely pro their own self-righteousness, and would be doing the world a great favour if they just went home and picked their noses instead.”

Sorry, but no.  You don’t get to tell me what to do, unless you’re interested in paying off all my student loans.  Then I might shut up about politics…maybe.  No guarantees.  Besides, I answered them, so therefore I have the right to speak up.

This woman, called Levannah, is just as self-righteous as she thinks pro-lifers are.  Perhaps more.  She expects us all to take in all the orphans of the world, regardless of our ability to actually care for them, simply because she’s fucking hooked on the “make them live up to their own rules” Alinsky tactic.

Besides, these arguments have no bearing on whether or not abortion is bad.  Instead, it’s nothing more than a logical fallacy – an ad hominem attack, an appeal to motive.  Instead of debating the merits of abortion, you attack your opponent.  Your logic is literally as follows:  “abortion must be good because pro-lifers are hypocrites who don’t care about the children we couldn’t kill in the womb.  They don’t care about those children because they don’t adopt all of them.”

But you yourself said that abortion is the taking of a life.  Whether I have adopted children or not does not change the fact that abortion is the taking of a life, nor does it have any impact on the validity of abortion whatsoever.

Plenty of pro-lifers have taken in the so-called ‘unwanted’ of the world.  She’d know that if she did any research whatsoever.

Oh, and one more thing. I used an image of a black baby because black babies are being slaughtered by Planned Parenthood, an organization founded by Margaret Sanger, who was, to put it bluntly, a racist bitch.  There are literally less black people in the United States thanks to Planned Parenthood.  No, I will never, ever, EVER fucking support Planned Parenthood nor will I ever support abortion.

To reiterate:  if you “feel” that abortion is taking a life, then your questions are complete and utter bullshit, and do not justify the taking of that life.  Call me self-righteous all you want.  I’ll just call you a selfish, genocidal murderer because that is precisely what you are.  I’ll take being self-righteous over that any day.

Whitey must always be the bad guy

Whitey must always be the bad guy

Photo by Steve Johnson from Pexels

Well, well, well.  I guess Keira Drake’s (revised) novel will finally released this month.  I’ve been trying to get the “racist” copy of the novel but to no avail.  However, the Washington Post has published a little bit of the original, and compared it with the revised version in their report on the drama involving The Continent, Keira Drake’s debut novel.

First of all, let me state that I really cannot stand the Washington Post’s page design.  The quotes are blurred or obscured and are revealed as I scroll, then are obscured again as they scroll out of view.  Stupid.  The article, “How Keira Drake rewrote The Continent is quite revealing.  I would have posted an archive.is link, but the Washington Post are staffed full of assholes.  Rest assured, I made a PDF copy of the article and I sent it to my Kindle, AND I made an ePub copy of it thanks to an extension called dotepub, so I have several copies now, in case they change something or delete it or – and this is far likelier – put it behind a paywall.  Hey, you never know.

I’ve written about this before, and I am not sure if I actually predicted that this would happen, but I know I thought to myself, “they’re gonna make the bad guys white.”  And they did.

So it was never really about racism, it was about how brown people are always victims and never the victimizers.  If the antagonists being brown skinned is racist, how is changing them to be white people any less racist?  The notion that making a group of people the antagonists is somehow racist is utterly absurd anyway.

The author not only made the bad guys white and the good tribe brown, but also made the main character mixed race so as to avoid the white savior trope or the dark-skinned aggressor trope.

Okay, so let me get this straight – we’re not allowed to stereotype “marginalized” people.  But we are allowed to stereotype white people.  From where I sit, that’s still fucking racist.  Let me repeat that in bold:  that’s still fucking racist.

The author and the publishers fail by their own standards.  They just rearranged the deck chairs on the Titanic, but the ship is still fucking sinking.  It’s still racist by their flimsy, idiotic standards.

Oh, wait, that’s incorrect.  They’re racist by any intelligent person’s standards.  They are absolved of their racism due to the idiotic notion that only people in “power” can be racist.  This notion that black people or whoever don’t have any “institutional power” is complete bullshit and they know it.

This sorry situation only makes me that much more determined to self-publish my novel.  I’m having a hell of a time editing it because as of right now, it’s well over 300,000 words.  I cringe every time I think about it.  I am also angry with myself because the antagonist alien race in my novel are tall white humanoids.  However, I’m going to leave it like that, and when you read the novel, you’ll know why.  I promise, you’ll love it, especially given the Weinstein affair.

I still have her book preordered, although I could have sworn it said it would be released next year, not this year.  It might have been a glitch on GoodReads or something, because I remember looking at it and seeing the 2019 release date and going, “damn, they pushed it forward a third time?  Why not just cancel it and be done with it?”

Let this be a lesson for everyone – the SJWs will never be satisfied.  Never.  There’s no point in pleasing them – you’re only wasting your time.

EDIT:  Unf, there’s MORE!  The Vulture has republished an article (archive.is) originally published in the New York Magazine and it also has more information.  Also, more utter bullcrap so it really deserves its own post.  I might fisk it.  Oh, and some Native Americans (archive.is) are still not happy with the revised version.  As I said, they will never, ever be satisfied.

Islamic Terrorism Is Real, Just So You Know

Islamic Terrorism Is Real, Just So You Know

So, according to the left, Islamic terrorism isn’t real. Or acknowledging it is Islamo-hatred or Islamophobia.

This wretched slop of shit hosted at the Daily Beast (I used an archive link, so they don’t get any revenue, and in case the piece is deleted) accuses Pamela Geller of being an Islam-hating beeotch, or something, and takes great pains to inform you of her social-media darling daughters.

I had no idea she even had daughters. Yes, apparently her daughters are all very active on social media (mostly Instagram) and are pretty successful…and none of them even so much as mention their connection to Pamela Geller in passing. Her daughters avoid mentioning any association with her, and they never appear with her in pictures.

The author of that stupid post obviously wants to believe it’s because the girls are embarrassed to have Pamela Geller for a mother, and that they vehemently disagree with her politics. Then the author cites the handful of political posts the girls have made, and it’s pretty obvious that they’re at least moderately right-wing.

Interestingly enough, the author never mentions this one simple fact: Pamela Geller, regardless of how you feel about her activism, has gotten death threats for the things she’s said and done. I don’t care what you think of her politics – she does not deserve death threats, and she’s gotten plenty of them. She even wrote a book about it – it’s called Fatwa: Hunted in America and was published by Milo Yiannopolous’s Dangerous Books.

So it’s no surprise that Geller and her daughters avoid associating with each other in public. If anything, it might very well have been Geller’s idea, if only to protect her daughters from getting death threats, or god forbid being kidnapped by ISIS and tortured or killed for propaganda purposes.

I bet the bitch hag author knows this, and decided to publish the names and account handles of Geller’s daughters solely so some ISIS bastard can kidnap one of them and teach that Islam-hating Geller a lesson or two. That’s how these scumbags roll, after all.

Oh, and it gets worse. According to Fox News, they lost the online talk show they used to have. And, predictably, the scumbag leftists have been harassing them on Twitter and Instagram. You can see some of the tweets at Breitbart. Why the left gets to pull this shit and get away with it is utterly beyond me. It also makes me so fucking angry.

You must pay tribute

You must pay tribute

pexels-photo-586812
Sheep.  That’s all they want in Hollywood.

So the left is whining about Taylor Swift’s alleged “aggressive whiteness” and the reason she is so “aggressively” white is because she has, so far, not denounced Trump.  Info Wars has a story on this, if you want to read it.

As Alex Jones said, it’s like the music industry – and the entertainment industry as a whole – is a creepy cult.  Just a few years ago celebrities weren’t required to pay tribute to leftist orthodoxy.  One could be apolitical and it would be fine.  Now, however, that isn’t the case.  Your very silence is tacit support for Trump.

Gee, weren’t they whining about Bush’s “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” line from several years ago?  And now here they are, practicing the same damn thing in believing that if you aren’t calling Trump an orange baboon barbarian neanderthal, you must be a supporter who hates blacks and Mexicans and wamen or whatever.  Yes, I said “wamen” because at this point, that’s what feminists are – whiny women.  (Handy definition of the word ‘wamen’)

The entertainment industry is the propaganda arm of the Democrat party and the globalists around the world.  They’re all enraged that Hillary didn’t become the first female president, and they’ve been lashing out at everyone and everything.  They’ve adopted the stark black/white morality that they used to hate so much.  If you aren’t with Hillary/Democrats/globalists/progressves then you are evil, even if you don’t express explicit support for the dreaded ‘other’ (in this case, Trump, the alt right and the Republicans).

Taylor Swift clearly doesn’t care, as she’s still hugely successful anyway.  Most of her peers in the industry are smart enough to leave her alone about it.  Perhaps they know her views on politics.  She’s too successful for them to jettison her out of their circle just yet.  I also think she’s probably a leftist or a centrist, but that she doesn’t harbor the insane hatred most of Hollywood has for anyone that isn’t exactly like them.  She used to be friends with Lena Dunham, called herself a feminist in the past and last year she tweeted support for the stupid Women’s March, but did not attend.  She didn’t attend this year, nor did she even bother to mention it, which has the feminazi wamen all in a tizzy.

She also has a lot of weird fans that like to pretend that she’s some secret Nazi or white supremacist, and they make memes of her dressed up as a Nazi or something.  She has no real control over her fanbase – nobody does, really – so I don’t understand why she is at fault for what some randoms on the Internet do.  Nothing she has said or done has indicated that she’s a neo-Nazi or white supremacist.  She also hasn’t said anything to indicate that she’s a right-winger or a Trump supporter.  She just doesn’t talk about politics.

The left loves bragging about the amount of celebrities they “have” on their “side” as if that meant anything at all.  Hint:  it doesn’t.  In fact, it’s even more meaningless now that they’re openly hounding a pop singer into spouting their (empty, bullshit) rhetoric.  It’s obvious that a lot of this whole FUCK REPUBLICANS AND CHRISTIANS AND STRAIGHT WHITE MALES AND TRUMP REEEEEE garbage is nothing more than virtue signaling on the part of celebtards who wish to retain their fame and fortune.  Half of them probably don’t give a shit one way or the other, but have to repeat the mantra in order to keep their careers.

That says it all, really.

The left has officially lost their minds

The left has officially lost their minds

the offending tweet

A porn star named August Ames – who was only 23 years old – has committed suicide after getting a shitload of harassment and hatred on Twitter for being, according to the left, too choosy and discriminatory about her sex partners.  In other words, she claimed she didn’t want to perform with a certain porn star because he had done gay porn, and according to what I’ve read online, gay porn does not have the same kind of testing standards regarding STDs that the straight porn industry has. You can read about it here.  The above is the offending tweet.

(Warning:  bad language and thoughts that will be highly offensive to hypocritical and overly-sensitive liberals)

Read More Read More

Here we go again

Here we go again

american heart

Another day, another “problematic” book.  I hate that word, by the way.  “Problematic.”  SJWs love using it.

First, it was Keira Drake.  Then it was Laurie Forest.  Along the way they tried to torpedo recent releases by Veronica Roth and Maggie Stiefvater, both of whom are more established YA authors.  And now it’s Laura Moriarty’s turn.

To be honest, her upcoming YA novel American Heart sounds like pro-Muslim, anti-American propaganda.  Poor widdle Muslims are put into internment camps cuz whitey is eeeeeevil and the main character, who is white, meets some innocent Muslim girl and realizes just how wonderful and peaceful they all are, and how purely evil everyone else is.

Basically.

So, what’s the problem?  Leftists eat this shit up with a spoon.  They love this crap.  Well, not in 2017.  Maybe this would have been all the rage in, say, 2005, when eeeeeevil Bush was in office, but not now, because now the rules are even more strict than they were…well, ever.

The problem with this book, according to the fat, blue-haired hambeast SJWs is that this book employs the so-called “white savior” trope.  An example of the reviews:

fathambeastsjw

This…thing is completely unaware that her very “review” (I highly doubt she even read the book) is just another example of the “white savior” trope.  After all, do her poor widdle Muslims really need her to come to their defense?  Are they not capable of defending themselves?

But this isn’t all.  Oh no.  Kirkus originally gave this book a starred review, but changed it after the backlash.  This book, which will be published by Harper Collins, went through the SJW Sensitivity Reading Gauntlet, and Kirkus even subjected it to their Muslim reviewers.  None of this was good enough for the spoiled rotten SJWs, though.  Kirkus caved like the cowards they are.  Oddly enough, they stood by their starred review of Laurie Forest’s The Black Witch.  Looks like this time they couldn’t take the heat.

Vulture has the explanation behind the altered review.  This one paragraph stood out to me:

“And while the Muslim woman who wrote the original review was involved in the editing process — “the decision to retract the star was made in full collaboration with the reviewer,” he says — altering the review does not appear to have been her idea in the first place. According to Smith, Kirkus concluded internally that edits would be made before reaching out to the reviewer.”

Really?  The original review was written by a Muslim woman.  According to Vulture, it seems that it was not the original reviewer’s decision to remove the star and alter the review.  Interesting.  Sounds like more “white savior” bullshit to me.  I mean that only to hold these people to their own standards.  I wonder if the woman was pressured or even bullied into agreeing with the removal of the star and the edit of the review.  How could she not have seen the so-called “white savior” trope in the story?  Can you imagine these white Kirkus editors sitting this Muslim woman down and condescendingly explaining to her that her original review was wrong because she wasn’t outraged by the fact that the protagonist of the story was a white girl?  These people are hypocrites by their own standards.

Oh, and this is just hilarious:

Kirkus’s critics are skeptical of that claim; among the more cynical takes on the controversy is that Kirkus used the reviewer’s identity as a shield, only to then suppress her voice when it didn’t toe the line. Smith bristles at that: “It’s like no one believes that this reviewer has a mind and can change her opinion. Is that so difficult to believe?””

Is it so difficult to believe that perhaps a member of the Victim Class might not have given much of a shit about “white savior” tropes in the first place?  Yeah, she can change her mind.  But in this case, I highly doubt it.  Given how the left acts on a regular basis, I believe that it is entirely plausible that this woman was shamed and bullied into “changing” her mind.  It’s so blatantly obvious that the woman’s “voice” was suppressed, and, in all likelihood, by a bunch of white infidels.

It is also crystal clear that the star was removed because of the “white savior” thing, and the douchebag editor even admits to it:

“When I ask if the book’s star was revoked explicitly and exclusively because it features a Muslim character seen from the perspective of a white teenager, Smith pauses for only a second: “Yes.””

This is just wrong.  It is so wrong it’s not even funny.  The skin color or ethnicity of the characters shouldn’t be more important than the overall message.  As far as leftist propaganda goes, this book is pretty solid.  It shows a white girl realizing that non-whites are people too, and that they don’t deserve to be shoved into internment camps simply because of who they are.  Just a few years ago this premise would have been solid, and everyone would have loved it.  The original reviewer had no problems with it.  Initially, anyway.  But now, you can’t tell a story from a white person’s perspective anymore if it involves members of the Victim Class.  Never mind the fact that it might be persuasive and get people to take up your cause.  It’s not perfect.  Not to mention that if Laura Moriarty had written it from the Muslim girl’s point of view, it’d still be problematic because Laura Moriarty is white.  You can’t fucking win with these people.  There’s no point in playing their bullshit game anymore.  I cannot emphasize this enough:  fuck these assholes.  Write what you want.

I am so glad I’m not one of them.  Truly.  Being a liberal, or SJW or progressive or whatever they’re called this week must be exhausting at best.  It’s like living in the Soviet Union or some other totalitarian regime where people are constantly spying and snitching on each other.  It’s crazy, and look at how quickly these people fold.  The only time they ever stand their ground is when they’re opposing us.

Whether or not this will have a serious effect on the Democratic party and their ability to win elections, time will tell.  I truly hope that this is the end of Democratic dominance.  It should be, if these people can’t even get along with one another.  Their party unity used to be one of their very few good traits.  No matter what happened, they generally circled the wagons and closed ranks.  Now, I have yet to hear about some DemonRat getting primaried because they weren’t sufficiently liberal (I refuse to use that popular “w” word.  I refuse).  But who knows…perhaps 2018 will be the year the SJWs finally turn on their politicians.

Back to the topic, though.  So far, the book’s publication will go forward.  It’s due to hit bookstores in January, 2018.  I’ve been trying to find an ARC on eBay, in case the publisher changes their minds.  Haven’t been successful.  As for this book, I am not so sure I even want to read it.  One might be tempted to pre-order the book just to stick it to the left, but this time…I’m not so sure.  I actually did purchase The Black Witch and the prequel novella Wandfasted but I haven’t finished it.  Haven’t started on Wandfasted either.  If American Heart is cancelled, I might try to find an ARC, but I don’t think it will be necessary if it is.

Anyway, write what you want (do your research, obviously, but you should always do research no matter what you write).  Write books about black people if you’re white.  Write books about Japanese people if you’re Hispanic.  Write books about gay people if you’re straight.  As long as your story is respectful and realistic, nobody but SJWs are going to bitch about it.  We need to stop caving to these totalitarian monsters.  They’re all a bunch of unemployed, ornery asshole losers with no sense of humor.  Nobody should give a shit about what they say, except to laugh at them.

Hollywood is a wretched hive of scum and villainy

Hollywood is a wretched hive of scum and villainy

obiwan_scumevillainy

Well, well.  I know there’s more important things to talk about – the sketchiness of the Las Vegas shooting (so many things just don’t add up), hurricanes, fires, the NFL bullshit (I’ve already touched on that here, a few months ago).  I agree that those things are important, but we can talk about more than one thing.  Right now, I want to talk about this.

My motives are not entirely pure.  I’ve been fed up with liberal bias in Hollywood for a really long time.  I’m following this story with great interest because of the schadenfreude.

You know what I’m talking about.  Harvey Weinstein, former head of The Weinstein Company, a movie distribution outfit.  Produced lots of movies – a great deal of them critically acclaimed award-winners – and donated shitloads of cash to Democratic causes and candidates, including both Obama and the Clintons.  Turns out the guy is like Bill Clinton 2.0, and is guilty of the same things, sexual harassment and actual rape, of all things.  Oh, and paying his victims to remain silent.  That too.

This is just rich.  Absolutely rich coming from an industry that still, to this day, paints all Catholics as pedophiles or at least pedophile apologists no thanks to the church’s coverup of child abuse.  Absolutely rich coming from an industry chock-full of people losing their ever-loving minds over Trump’s “grab them by the pussy” comments.

About that for a brief moment.  If you actually listened to the tape in question, all he really did was admit to trying to kiss women, or at least wanting to kiss women all over.  So?  Lots of men do.  As for the pussy-grabbing bit, he was merely making an observation about the entertainment industry and the upper echelons of power.  Trashy, desperate social-climbing skanks generally will let you grab them by the pussy and whatever else as long as they can get ahead in life.  Trump apologized for those remarks.  A few accusations were made after the tape went public, but so far, none of them have stuck, obviously, and there’s no other evidence that Trump sexually harassed anyone.  So no, Trump is not a sexual predator and to say so at this time is libel.  Don’t fucking say that if all you have as proof is the “grab them by the pussy” comments.  That isn’t proof.

So here we are.  This scandal just keeps getting worse.  A-list actors have taken their sweet time in getting around to denouncing the man that some of them considered God.  Okay, only Meryl Streep called him God.  Judi Dench just got a (temporary) tattoo of his name on her decrepit ass.  Journalists and other actresses are coming out of the woodworks to say “I saw this” and “he did this to me” and so on.  He’s already been fired from The Weinstein Company (his younger brother Bob is still with the company; even so, they’re thinking of changing the name).

It just goes to show how utterly hypocritical these people really are.  They just love it when some Christian and/or conservative screws up.  They all had orgasms of indignation and outrage back in the ’80s when televangelists like Jim Bakker got caught with their pants down.  These…ugh, trying to keep the potty mouth at bay….but these cretins just loved that shit.  Absolutely freaking loved it.  And, of course, fast-forwarding a decade or two, the toe-tapping senator, the governor that ran off with his foreign mistress, etc.  Oh, and let’s not forget the more recent scandals involving the late Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly, who isn’t, for the trillionth time, a Conservative or Republican.  But he’s not a progressive leftist either, so the left loved going after him anyway.  The left just loved this.  Alinksy’s Rule for Radicals:  make the enemy live up to their own standards.  Paraphrased, but you get the idea.  They do this so very well.

We can do the same thing, but let’s face it.  Most of the Republicans in power are total cucks.  They don’t want to play hardball because it might make them look mean and undignified.  By all means, the Republicans should be running on the hypocrisy of the left.  This should be mentioned by every Republican next year.  The left has no right to judge us when all of these whores have known about this guy’s behavior and did NOTHING for twenty-something years.  They have no moral authority.

As I have been writing this, two more A-list actresses – Angelina Jolie (who had a bad encounter with him and not only vowed to never work with him again, but warned others about him) and Gwyneth Paltrow (who was asked for a massage, turned it down and told her then-boyfriend Brad Pitt about it, who confronted Weinstein, who then told Paltrow to keep quiet about it) – have come forward.  How many more has this guy victimized?  Probably loads more.  He’s like Bill Cosby, in my opinion.  I think the both of them are absolutely guilty, and they’ve both probably got a trail of victims that is probably miles long.

So I wonder, how many actresses and actors do sick shit to make it in the entertainment industry?  How many musicians have done this kind of shit to get a record deal?  Thank God for the Internet.  Truly, because you can make movies and music and distribute both without bothering with the studios or record labels.  People won’t have to whore themselves out for fame.  At least, in the future.  Right now, the record labels and film studios still hold a lot of power and influence.  I hope that will change.  It’s already changed publishing, which is why I’m even going to be published in the first place.  I plan on self-publishing my novel because, while it’s very timely, I am still a vicious thought criminal, and therefore no book deal for me.  Just saying.  Of course, some lefty dill weed will be all, “like, your writing sucks so you wouldn’t get a book deal anyway, lol.”

Uh, that’s bullshit.  Explain how the fuck a stupid hack like E.L. James can become a best-selling author after changing the names of her crappy Twilight fan fiction and publishing that as an actual book?  Yeah, Fifty Shades of Grey  is nothing more than Twilight fiction with the names changed.  E.L. James is living proof that you don’t need talent or skill to get a publishing deal.

Back to the topic at hand.  I wonder…all this silly anti-Trump vitriol and vicious feminist grandstanding…I wonder if it’s their way of sticking it to the men that have victimized them.  I am sure that Harvey Weinstein is far from the only Hollywood big-shot doing this kind of stuff.  He was just careless and sloppy and finally got caught when someone else in Hollywood felt he was expendable.  I mean, someone at the New York Times had this story ready to go in 2004, but Weinstein got it shelved.  So what happened since then?  Who knows.  But these women can’t just outright say, “so-and-so is a nasty pervert who forced me to do degrading things for film roles.  Fight misogynist assholes like him by voting Democrat!” or else they’d have said it ages ago.  They can’t call these people out by name or they’d be ruined.  So they project that onto Republicans.  At least, that’s my theory.

So next time you see some starlet in a magazine, you’ll probably wonder what sort of sick shit she did for fame.  And you won’t feel compelled to worship her or envy her anymore.  She’s just a bag of meat to the men that gave her that fame in the first place.  She might look good, she might have all the money in the world and a hot boyfriend, but she’ll always be subservient to some of the sickest beings on the planet.  That’s the price one has to pay for being in that industry, and that’s a price a lot of women are unwilling to pay.

So no, I’m not jealous of them.  Not anymore.  I don’t have to perform sexual favors to pay my bills, and I am very, very grateful for that.