I Am Firmly Against the Death Penalty (A response to Prager U)

Our favorite conservative “think tank” has come out with yet-another video where they blatantly miss the point of an issue while trying to sound super smart, and somehow these people have a ton of defenders.  I will never understand that.  As in never, at any point in time.  How a conservative group dedicated towards “education” can make videos on such relevant topics as why people don’t like saying Merry Christmas, or why belief in God is actually the best thing for America, or the ever-popular God showing that murder is wrong.  Yeah, that’s totally not contradicted by the Bible.  Nope, not at all.

Now they have decided to come out and say that the death penalty is a-okay!  I’m sure this guy considers himself “pro-life” too.  Of course he does.  If these people weren’t bleeding hypocrites, they’d be nothing at all.  Dennis Prager comes out and say that the death penalty is not only right, it’s moral.  Let’s take a look at this bullshit.

Prager begins by saying that there are almost no issues where he doesn’t understand both sides.  Dennis, there are a TON of issues that you don’t understand both sides on.  I linked three of them above.  Your inability to understand the most basic of counterarguments that people make is quite something.  But it seems that when it comes to the death penalty, Prager has an unbridgeable gap that he cannot reconcile with the left on.  He wants us to make sure he knows that he thinks not every murderer should be killed, but he believes there is a moral imperative that they should not be.  Okay, Dennis, let’s hear your reasoning.

He goes through a story, and yeah, it’s awful.  The two people he talked about are terrible people.  But, Dennis, this isn’t about your anecdotes about horrible people.  There are a TON of truly horrifying stories that I can tell about murders that go far beyond two guys and one crime.  He says that the people opposed to the death penalty in this instance are saying they deserve to live.  It’s not that, Dennis.

What people like myself are saying when we say that we oppose the death penalty isn’t that people like these two scum-fucks deserve to live.  It’s that we do not believe that if our government is going to say that we believe in the rule of law, and that murder is wrong (two things I wholeheartedly do believe), then we can’t have a government coming in and saying that we should have no issue killing other people.  What those two men did was deplorable.  They are awful people and I have no problem locking them in jail and throwing away the fucking key.  But it is ethical hypocrisy for us to be able to say that we are a moral nation that has an ethical standard, and then fail to live up to that standard.  I’m sorry, but that’s wrong.

He goes on to say that people like me are saying that these people don’t deserve to die.  I’m not saying that all, Dennis.  I’m saying that our country is a nation of hypocrites if we decide to kill these two people and then turning around and saying that murder is wrong.  It’s not that complicated.  This is what I hate about Prager.  He can’t do ethical arguments.  The whole reason he told this story with the background going all back and dark images meant to conjure dark images in the mind was to get past the critical thinking part of your mind and get to the part that wants justice.  The part that wants blood for blood.  Those two men he described are disgusting people.  I don’t care if they get butt-raped in prison.  But I am able to look past the emotional side and see to the side that says that if we are going to be the kinds of people who ignore our own standard, then we might as well just not have that standard at all.

Let me give you a counter-example, Dennis.  Say those two men do what you described, and I just happened to be there with a loaded .44.  I blow their disgusting fucking brains out for what they did.  I apparently wasn’t there in time to stop them from doing it, but I am there in time to kill them as they are trying to escape or something like that.  What would happen to me?  I’d be tried for second degree murder.  Maybe I could make the argument that I was trying to save the life of the father who you never said if he lived or died.  But if they are no longer a threat and are fleeing, then I killed two people in cold blood.  I’d be found guilty.  Maybe my defense lawyer could do what you’re trying to do and maybe that would work, but probably not.  Because at least one person would see that I took the law into my own hands.

By your standard, I did nothing wrong.  Those two men are disgusting people and they don’t deserve to live.  So then why should I not be potentially found guilty of two counts of second-degree murder and potentially sentenced to death and they should.  What’s the line between them and what would be me?  Where do you draw that line?

Your first example is pretty much on point with what I just said as to what people like me believe.  Bravo.  But your second example is fucking stupid.  I just said that I don’t care about the value of human life in respect to those two pieces of shit.  Fuck them.  This is purely a standard of ethics and a refusal to be a hypocrite.

Prager then says one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard – that sparing murderers belittles the act of murder.  How?  They’ll be in jail for the rest of their lives.  For all the crimes they are guilty of, those two are never going to breathe free air again.  I have protected the public by locking them away, if I’m on that jury.  I’m dying to hear how keeping murderers alive somehow belittles the act of murder.  Does sending a rapist to jail belittle the act of rape?  SJWs calling everything under the sun sure does, but when the police arrest someone and they are found guilty in a court of law and they are on the sex offender registry for the rest of the lives, that sure as fuck doesn’t sound like it belittles that.  That person will likely never hold a good job, likely never have a stable relationship, and likely never have a good home because plenty of good neighborhoods have laws about sexual predators living there.  Some places have it where if you are on the sexual offender registry, you have to go door to door and tell people that.  Effectively killing any chance of you integrating successfully into that neighborhood.  I’m not seeing your point here.

It’s easily proven, he says.  This should be good.  He argument is the biggest non-sequitur I’ve ever seen.  Saying that murderers shouldn’t be killed is the same as making murder have the same punishment as…a speeding ticket?  The fuck?!  One of these things is not like the other.  By putting a murderer in jail for the rest of their life, or for the vast portion of it, you are effectively removing that person from the rest of society.  They can no longer present a danger to anyone.  How is that belittling it.  We recognize this person as a serious danger, and so they will be removed from society for the vast portion of their life, if not all of it.  The two gentlemen he described, if found guilty, their parole officer doesn’t exist.  For four (potentially, we don’t know if the father lived or died) counts of murder and two (or three?) counts of sexual assault, these men are never getting out of jail.  Ever.  How was murder belittled?  All ears, Dennis.

Then we get the “what about the loved ones?” argument.  Oh Groj.  Yeah, and what about the loved ones of the people who are killed by the state?  This makes for a nice segway into another argument against the death penalty – what about the loved ones of people killed for crimes they didn’t commit?  Like that dad in Texas who was killed because he was found guilty of murdering his daughter, when it was found out later that she actually was ripped up by the family dog, and the cuts the investigators believed were knife wounds were from the surgeons trying to stop the bleeding.  What about that man’s loved ones?  He was sentenced to death for a crime he did not commit, and it’s only after he is already dead that he is exonerated.  What about those people?!  Where’s their justice?  In my eyes, if we kill one innocent person as part of your “moral” imperative for the death penalty, that’s one person too many.

He says that the families are angry and hurt because that person isn’t dead.  Sure.  Of course they are.  But here’s the thing, Dennis – justice isn’t about that.  It isn’t about emotional satisfaction.  If that were the case, shouldn’t the victims of rape be allowed to rip off the genitals of the person who raped them?  What about the woman who kept teenage girls in her basement as sex slaves?  What should they be allowed to do to her?  The justice system is about doling out punishments that fit, based on what the person did.  I’m sorry that the person in front of that headstone is sad.  It sucks.  I’ve lost someone I loved to a fucking idiot who is going to be getting out of prison in the not too distant future.  But he served his time and that’s that.

Then he make a strawman argument saying that if I think the Dr who I guess did live at the end of this saying that the people who did this should die, I think he’s immoral.  I don’t think that.  What I think is that he is being government by his anger, and not seeing that the law isn’t about making him feel good.  If that were the case, punishments for all sorts of crimes would be infinitely worse.  The law is about removing dangerous elements from society, and about providing rehabilitation for those who can be rehabilitated.  Granted, with the piss-poor quality of American prisons, that’s not happening.  Gotta love the private prison system and the drug war.  But some people can’t be rehabilitated, and they have to go away forever for the safety of the public.  I’m sorry the doctor is angry.  I really am.  What happened to him is awful.  But his anger doesn’t dictate the nature of the law and how punishment is supposed to work.

And then we get another strawman of those who made the argument I did about those who are innocent and get killed, saying that we oppose it even when evidence is absolute.  Dennis, that’s not the fucking point!  The point is that one innocent person being killed by this law that you say is so justice is one too many!  For a guy who says that he sees both sides of an argument, you sure are missing the point on this one.  Huh, maybe it’s because his notion of seeing both sides is bullshit.

Prager then makes the argument that by keeping murderers alive in prison, they get to kill more people in prison.  Hey Dennis, I don’t know if you knew this, but a fuck-ton more people get killed in prison when gang violence in the streets comes inside.  America’s prison system is so fucked because of the drug war, and the drug war comes inside and that is where so much more prison murder comes from.

That’s all of the major arguments.  After that it’s just him reiterating his old points. My point stands – if we are going to say that we say that murder is wrong (which I most-assuredly do) and that we are a nation that respects the rule of law (which I try to believe, though until all cops are forced to wear cameras), then we cannot kill another person while saying that killing is wrong.  Mama didn’t raise no hypocrite.

Until next time, a quote,

“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” – H.L. Mencken

Peace out,

Maverick

 

Media Silent that DNC Hack Was an Inside Job

As a graduate with a degree in journalism and public communication, seeing the media’s blatant attempts to try and subvert the conversation about the DNC leak last summer was infuriating.  It was 24 hours of “Russia done did it!”  A pathetic dodge that fooled only the same liberals who were going to suck Hillary’s dick anyway.  Do I support Trump?  Fuck no.  But seeing evidence being released of a political candidate working in collusion with the media to outright rig the primaries was fucking infuriating.  We all got to watch democracy fail in front of us, and just like every other time I’ve watched it fail, nobody cared.  Not really.  Because then the narrative become, “if you don’t support Hillary, you support Trump!”  Or they tried to hide under the email scandals skirts.  Even now, all the “But her emails!” memes sure do not want to talk about the REAL reason we hated that cuntbag.  It’s so frustrating.

But now we know that it was not Russia.  In the Daily Mail (article linked here), they discuss an article from The Nation, where a series of experts came forward with information that the amount of information leaked to WikiLeaks was too large to be done over the Internet.  It would have had to be someone inside the camp getting the information directly from there.  In other words, someone in Hillary’s camp grew a conscience (hard to see, I know, given Hillary’s outright refusal to admit that ANY of what she did was wrong) and leaked the information.  The news media is unable to do their fucking job, so of course it was from an outside source.  If they could do any REAL investigative reporting, what a wonderful world it would be.

What do we hear, now that all the “Russia did it!” crap has been debunked?  Not a lot.  In fact, it’s pretty much radio silence.  You’d think this would be big news.  Proof that the left’s eagerness to restart the Cold War to cover Hillary’s ass sure was misplaced.  But nope.  It’s just lots of silence.  Though, there was a report from New York Magazine where they made the argument that The Nation’s article was poorly written.  So that invalidates the information they got?  Un-fucking-real.  Will you people say ANYTHING to avoid taking responsibility?!

Just once, I’d like to see a news outlet with integrity.  They don’t exist.  Not anymore.  How I’d love to find the teacher I had for Journalism and the First Amendment.  She made the argument that the news in this country isn’t nearly as broken as I claimed it was in a class discussion.  Wrong, bitch!  Now we know that it is.  Because when the news was caught in a lie, rather than taking responsibility, what did they do?  “RUSSIA!”  When they were caught using that as a dodge because now we have evidence that it wasn’t Russia?

If the media is this incapable of admitting when they do wrong, then what is their ethical standard?  What is the line that ethically-void talking heads like Rachel Maddow draws?  Where is that place that CNN is willing to admit that what they did was wrong at?  I genuinely want a fucking answer.  We all know that Hillary will NEVER admit that anything she did is wrong.  She released a fucking book called “What Happened,” which is basically her denying what really happened.  What happened is you, moron!  What happened is the fact that your a vindictive cunt, who was so desperate to get your turn at the wheel that you rigged the primary against a candidate who would have destroyed Trump.  That’s what fucking happened!

All I want is some sign that the field of journalism is something other than sellouts and ideologues.  Just one.  Just one goddamn sign that the field has some redemptive qualities.  But no!  They get busted putting their hands in the cookie jar and all they can do is deflect and then hope if they don’t talk about it for long enough that everyone will go away.  Because hey, if you can’t make those almighty dollars and get in tight with the heir apparent (at least in her mind) to the Presidency, then what are you doing?

Moments like these make me feel like I wasted my time with this degree.  After all, if everything that comes out these days is just click-bait bullshit, then the field really is dead.  Now it’s just ideologues on one side of the fence or the other telling their audience exactly what they want to hear.  I follow liberal and conservatives, and see a complete lack of nuance on any side.  When I am seeing Laci Green giving the most nuanced perspective these days on Twitter, something is fucking wrong!  Not that anyone cares.  Or ever will.  After all, better to just be told what you want to hear.  This country is so lost.

Until next time, a quote,

“An empire toppled by its enemies can rise again.  But one that crumbles from within?  That’s dead.” – Baron Zemo, Captain America: Civil War

Peace out,

Maverick

The Debate About Sexual Attraction and Transphobia

I love how the Internet just loves to get pissed.  It really does.  The Internet loses its fucking mind every time there is some big thing that they feel they have to get upset about, because they have nothing better to do with their time.  Lately, it’s been Riley J Dennis getting her panties in a bunch because people chose to call out the video that her girlfriend made where she basically says that if you don’t date a trans person who still has the genitals of the sex they were born as, you’re a bigot.

This argument is so dumb for a lot of reasons.  I’ve already talked before in my post about the Fall of Zinnia Jones how this is simply ridiculous.  After all, you’ll like dick if you just give it a try!  What’s what?  That argument sounds just like the ones that straight people said to gay girls?  I know my friend Quinn heard that same argument from the Priest in the church she grew up in when she was younger.  But now we have the regressive left literally taking that EXACT SAME argument and waving it with the banner of it being a good thing.  That just blows my fucking mind.  They’re so desperate to be seen as tolerant that they take the rhetoric of intolerant people and use it as a way of proving how not-intolerant they are.  There’s so much delicious irony.

I am one of the people who says that Riley’s girlfriend was basically making the argument that sexual “preferences” is a choice.  Because you can choose to magically like dick, if you are a girl and don’t.  Just like I can magically choose to like dick on a girl.  Right?  See, here’s something that all these SJW retards don’t want to realize when they make the argument “the last thing I think about is genitals.”  Really?  Then you’ve never have sex.  See, sex is about sexual contact.  To all the SJW guys, here’s a question – you have a girlfriend?  If you get one, and you’re in bed with her, would you wanna suck her cock?  Would you want her fucking you up the ass with it?  Because if she has one, then that’s how sexual contact will go.  You will be fucking her penis.  I wonder if that’s how Steve Shives gets it on.  Maybe he is living proof that you can grow to like it long enough if you take it.

Everyone I see on Twitter and other sites arguing this crap seems to want to totally ignore the fact that if you are making the argument that what you like to feel, sexually, can be changed.  So ladies, you like getting fuck by a big cock?  Great.  These people are telling you that you can not like that, if you just give it a chance.  Do you see how stupid that is?!

It baffles me how we’ve come to this.  Everyone on the far-left is so desperate to not be called a bigot that we’re going to pretend that what you are sexually into can just be fundamentally changed if you just give it enough of a chance.  All the straight guys are gonna magically want to suck cock and all the straight girls are going to want to touch vaginas.  An argument for which there is NO evidence of ANY kind that it is true.  After all, you’re born wanting what you want.  The same argument that the gay community uses equally applies here.

We live in an age where, in order to be seen as “progressive,” there is a fucking purity test.  This bothers me.  This social justice mentality has infected everything.  A lot of people are saying that going after SJWs is tired, but then we see this stupid crap, and I realize that it’s not.  It’s as big now as it has ever been.  And these people don’t see how they’re doing real damage to their own movement.  Because now, instead of wanting to be allies, they’re made to feel guilty about their “preferences.”  Yeah, because what you like to have when you are at the most intimate moments of your life is just something you can choose.  Imbeciles.

I get where all of this is coming from.  For real, I do.  I maintain that I get why Riley said this crap.  It’s because she didn’t want people to be rejected.  Rejection hurts.  But here’s the thing that Riley and all the people who think like her don’t seem to want to accept – rejection is part of life.  Trust me, I’ve gotten a ton of it.  I know what it’s like.  You gotta accept that not everyone is going to be attracted to you.  Some people who see that giant honking Adam’s Apple are going to be put off.  Some people who see that painfully-average penis are going to be put off.  That’s not bigotry.  It’s because they know what they want to have sexual contact with, and that isn’t it.  Hey Riley, would you suck your girlfriend’s cock if she had one?  Would you let her peg you with it?  If that thought provides even a moment’s hesitation for you, then maybe you fucking get it.  And maybe you can see that this isn’t bigotry.  It’s just someone wanting something else in the bedroom than you.  I’m sorry if you or your friends have been hurt before because someone didn’t want you.  But we all have to deal with that.  Saying that a lesbian is a bigot because she doesn’t want a penis inside her is just as disgusting as the aforementioned Priest saying Quinn should just give dick a try and it would grow on her.

I genuinely can’t see the difference between those points of view.

Until next time, a quote,

“I think putting labels on people is just an easy way of marketing something you don’t understand.” – Adam Jones

Peace out,

Maverick

Jordan Peterson and the Dirge of YouTube

It seems that YouTube, and Google by extension, has decided that rather than let what the people who made the site big in the first place want to watch, they are going to decide for us.  Yes indeed, they are going to tell us what is okay to watch, because after all, we aren’t adults who can make up our own fucking minds about things.  We are stupid children who have to have this website tell us what is appropriate to watch.  They said that to Jordan Peterson today.

Without any warning and without giving a single reason, they decided to suspend his YouTube account.  When he tried to go to his GMail account to ask what was going on, that was suspended too.  Upon seeing this, he appealed the suspension.  It was denied.  No reason given for that, either.  Peterson did get all of his accounts back.  How?  Because he is a popular person.  After he put the heat on YouTube with social media posts and writing articles, they reinstated him.  Had they not, this post would be another Bad PR post, because they would have started a garbage fire.  But Peterson was popular.  And the new bad day is just starting.

See, YouTube has released a new press release saying what they are going to do with YouTube channels that make controversial content in the future.  It will be done to videos that haven’t violated YouTube’s policies in any way.  That’s right, someone in a position of power is going to basically let us know that the thing we wanted to watch is bad.  Why?  Because YouTube said so!  They will immediately be unable to monetize their videos.  They will never be in anyone’s Recommended videos section.  They will also have features like comments, likes, and suggested videos removed.  It is being called the “Limited State.”  What’s more, all of this is going to happen without a SINGLE person being involved.  An AI program will do this for YouTube.  In essence, YouTube has told a computer what is appropriate for people, and now that computer is going to go out there and do everything they can to purge this content without openly deleting it.

YouTube has also said that this is just the beginning.  More and more types of videos are going to be added to their self-proclaimed blacklist in the months ahead.  They’ve promised that.

I remember the good old days of YouTube.  When it was the wild west.  Sure, you had to slog through a massive ocean of “YouTube stank,” as Jello Apocalypse put it, but you could find whatever you wanted to watch.  It was a golden age where people were able to make a stable living, peddling their views to the marketplace of ideas.  Don’t like that person’s views?  Well, you can bet that there is someone who is preaching to your choir that you can go see.  Or you can start your own channel to preach about how My Little Pony now caters to the alt-right.  No joke, there was an article where SJWs say that.  It’s amazing.  Whatever your point of view, it was open to make money off of and be in that marketplace for all to see.

But those days are gone.  Now we live in the days where the Wall Street Journal could run a hit-piece a PewDiePie and how a racist video has ads from Coca-Cola and some fashion brand all within two refreshes, which I contend is bullshit.  If it did happen, then that is the biggest jackpot of all time.  Especially since YouTube is very good about targeting ads to your demographic.  A museum in my state is in most of my ads that I see, unless it’s gamer content I watch. YouTube knows what’s-what.  And since advertisers are the biggest pussies in the world and are afraid that someone may see a video saying that Islam is bullshit with an ad from their company, now YouTube has decided to basically castrate their own service.  Why?  Because if someone’s offended, that makes them look bad!

No, YouTube, this makes you look bad.  You’ve basically decided to be the teacher who punishes the entire goddamn class for the actions of one dumbfuck kid.  That’s the meat and potatoes of this entire thing.  And rather than nut up and have a person involved in ANY of this bullshit, you said, “eh, fuck it!  Let’s just let some AI do the job!  Because that TOTALLY hasn’t backfired on us already.”  Anyone remember when YouTube had a bot mass-flagging videos with content ID matches?  It was a huge to-do a few years back, when a ton of film critics basically lost all their revenue because of the fact that the YouTube bot saw a clip from a movie in that video.  What’s more, just like with Peterson, there was NO communication from YouTube about any of this.  I swear, the more I see that company not talk to people who support it, the more I wonder if the inside of that place is like Mundus’ bank in DmC: Devil May Cry (I like that game, so fucking sue me).  It wouldn’t shock me.

I just know that this “limited state” bullshit is going to extend to anti-SJW content.  I just know it.  Because after all, Google has openly supported these kinds of people.  So podcasts like The Drunken Peasants?  Am I going to have hunt them down to see their stuff?  If they are completely unable to monetize any of their stuff at all, or have Super Chats for when they are live, then their income is effectively destroyed.  So they’re gone.  So many of the YouTubers that I watch and love will be crushed by this, all because YouTube and by extension Google are too pussy to tell the advertisers to nut up and deal with the fact that the video with Roosh V may have their products advertised on it.  I’m sure they’ll survive.

This is how YouTube dies.  If they go the distance with this, then effectively they will be destroyed.  And I guarantee, once the breeze changes, some young thing will come out there to capitalize on it.  “Do you wanna watch something other than cat videos?  Come to our site!”  I am not going to keep watching YouTube if the content I want to see is buried behind their Chinese wall.  I’m just not.  If YouTube wants to turn into TV, I’ll just go and watch Netflix.  Don’t have to wade through as much crap there.

Until next time, a quote,

“Bad decisions made with good intentions are still bad decisions.” – Jim Collins

Peace out,

Maverick

2060: The Year Humanity Begins to End

Saw this story about a new study done that shows that the sperm count among human males is rapidly declining.  Over the last 30 years it has dropped off.  At the current rate that it goes, the vast majority of human males are going to be completely infertile by 2060.  The cause of this decline is yet unknown.  So even if we learn what it is tomorrow, the chances that we can fix whatever is wrong with our species is nil.  I am loving this news.  I love the shit out of it.  Because it seems that everything Carlin said about humanity and our effect on this planet was true.

One of my favorite bits by George Carlin was him ragging on this idea that we need to save everything now.  We’ll save the trees, the whales, those particular snails.  Everyone is going to save something.  Now it’s coming out that while we are so busy trying to save the whole goddamn planet, humanity is on the verge of death.

Naturally, the SJW media was all over this.  See, the study where it was found that sperm counts are dropping had the most definitive results in western countries, but not in Asian or African ones.  Which to me isn’t a surprise.  How big a sample size could they have had in a lot of those places?  It’s too easy to show that in Asian countries birth rates are already starting to plummet.  Japan is at a point where they are about to have a year where more people die than are born.  I’ve said before how I think the fact that other western nations are following suit is a good thing.  We need the human race to descend by some.  Too bad I didn’t see that that number is about to go off a fucking cliff.  Though, given the fact that western nations have a much larger exposure to crap than other countries, maybe it is just a First World thing.  As I said, the SJW media was all over how great this is.  Yeah, die, all you westerners!  Let’s let the Africans inherit the world!  Too bad that without modern medicine from the west, even if they are immune from whatever is happening to the rest of the world, they will die off in massive numbers from diseases.  Saw this retarded SJW who actually believes that without white people, Black Panther would be a true story.  Hilarious.  Yeah, read the book “Guns, Germs, and Steel,” you fucking retard.

For my part, it’s genuinely refreshing to know that humanity’s time is coming to a close.  We find out why this is happening tomorrow, and I guarantee that corporate America would fight against it just as we fight against accepting that climate change is a real thing.  A chunk of ice the side of Rhode Island just broke off Antarctica, but let’s talk about how it’s all bullshit.  Hilarious.  Corporate America will do everything they can.  And the libertarian dumbfucks will sing about how people dying off is a good thing because of the free market.  The SJWs will all get into a big circle and sing about the death of humanity like it’s the best thing ever.  It will be the last gasp of a species with all this promise, who chose to do nothing with it.

I was always hoping that I would get to be one of the last people on the planet as humanity finally brought our time on this world to a close.  Alas, that won’t be the case.  It seems we now have definitive proof that the generation who comes after us is almost-certainly going to be the last.  It’ll be like Children of Men, only with the true heartbreak being that humanity could have done great things.  Instead, we spent all this time making iPhones and other crap when we could have at least colonized Mars.  So for all you people in your 20’s who are thinking about having kids, I say best not to.  What’s the point?  You’d be condemning the generation you breed with the reality that we are doomed and there really is no point in fighting to continue the species.

It’s too funny for words.

Until next time, a quote,

“The planet’s not going anywhere.  We are!  Pack your shit, folks.  We’re going away!” – George Carlin

Peace out,

Maverick

Disfigurement Article Totally Fucks Up Representation

I just love how everything is now a virtue signaling thing.  No matter what you do, you have to find a way to make everything that people like somehow bad.  There was this great article in The Onion about how a girl takes a brief break from being a feminist to actually enjoy something.  That’s how I feel about every single piece of click-bait crap that is on display these days.  If these people could take a break from their latest pet issue, who knows what they would enjoy.  Let’s see an example from an article from some teen magazine.  I won’t be talking about the article, but rather the images they use to sell their narrative.  Because it’s all so stupid.

Okay, let’s break this down.  I could go into all of these characters, but I want to focus on just one.  But before I get there, let me make a point about the characters shown here.  First, they are all heroes.  Second, they are known for their disfigurement.  Third, their deformity is part of their narrative in an important way.  Like how Big Boss (second from top-left, for those who don’t game or pay attention to modern culture in any way) lost an eye because the Boss took it from him.  His predominant eye.  The goal was to hurt his ability to fight, and it was achieved.  Or how Old Snake (top-left) was disfigured stopping Liquid Ocelot’s plan.  Or maybe I could get into how Deadpool’s *second from bottom-left) whole arc in the film is that he is grotesque and deformed, but desperately wants to get the woman he loves back.  How about Darkman (second from bottom-right)?  His whole story is depressing.  Underrated superhero movie.

The one that I really want to look at though is the character on the far-right – Auron from Final Fantasy X.  Let’s get into the fact that he’s disfigured and really show how featuring him in an article this stupid is fucking ridiculous.  There’s a story about why he is so messed-up, and it is equal parts tragic and central to his character.  See, Auron went with Braska to fight Sin.  In the end, when Braska called the Final Aeon, he used his other Guardian, Jecht.  After seeing Braska die, and seeing everything that happened as all for nothing, he chose to go back to Zanarkand and confront Yunalesca about the futility of it.  After a very grueling battle, he was defeated.  The battle killed him.  But instead of simply allowing himself to die, he chose to fight it, and came back as an Unsent.  He crawled his way out of Zanarkand and back up Mt. Gagazet, before nearly dying again on the side of the mountain.

Aside form not being able to follow that story if you never played the game, did you catch something about it?  Like how Auron was a good man who became disfigured from the cruel injustice of the world.  Now one of his arms doesn’t work right and his eye was destroyed.  He’s arguably the coolest character in the entire game.

Here’s my point – fucking know what you’re talking about when you use shit like this!  Are there a lot of disfigured villains?  Sure.  But there are also a lot of disfigured heroes whose disfigurement is part of their character.  A central part.  Like Nice from Baccano, who blasted half her face because of her love of explosives.  Tsume in Wolf’s Rain, who has a massive scar on his chest because of a sin he committed.  Edward Elric, in Fullmetal Alchemist, who lost an arm and a leg in a horribly-botched alchemy attempt to bring his mother back to life.  Just got done watching the first season of Westworld, and you see Ed Harris character go from being an unlikable monster to an almost-sympathetic character, because we learn what got him to where he is and it’s kind of depressing.

This idea that pop culture at large says that only villains are disfigured is laughable.  I hate how every little thing is some stupid social justice thing.  Like some guy who said that Game of Thrones doesn’t have enough black people.  Are you fucking kidding me?!  So, a series set in a medieval world, with the largest amount of focus on a very Anglican part of that world doesn’t have enough black people?!  No!  Really?!  You’re putting me on!

For all the legitimate points that are made about pop culture and the flaws in it, we then have to deal with shit like this, and it is insufferable.  I hate this crap.  But everywhere I look there is more and more of it.  Can we please grow the fuck up?!

Until next time, a quote,

“When you don’t know what you’re talking about, it’s hard to know when you’re finished.” – Tommy Smothers

Peace out,

Maverick

People Cheering John McCain’s Cancer Make Me Sick

I’m a liberal.  That’s something you have to clarify now, because the hard-left has a purity test for this shit.  Because if you don’t hate the person they hate as much as they hate them, you’re secretly a conservative.  If you have opinions that they don’t like, you’re right-wing (ask Dusty Smith about that).  If any of your politics don’t align with their sensibilities, you are a traitor to your fellow liberals, no matter how left-leaning your positions are.  Just ask Laci Green how that’s going.  She decided to give those opposed to her side a voice and let them speak and now she is the SJW equivalent of a race-traitor, even though she still harbors a lot of values that are in line with a lot of theirs.  But she is open to conversation, so I can at least disagree with her and it’s okay.  If she was here, I would have some lively debates with her about the nature of gender and how everyone’s belief in thousands of them is something I find ridiculous.

The reason I brought that up is because I’m on Twitter today and I’m seeing a lot of shit.  Like how Chester Bennington committed suicide.  A fact for which I am incredibly saddened.  I may not be a fan of their later stuff, but when I was young Linkin Park got me into punk rock.  My friend Quinn hit me up after the news dropped and said it hurt her personally because she had a very strong punk identity growing up.  We used to listen to Linkin Park’s CD’s, back when those were still a thing.  To this day she tries to still keep the punk rock love close to her heart.  The punk rock lesbian, and she calls herself.  We had a long conversation about growing up listening to that music.  It was saddening.

I also learned that John McCain recently found out that he has cancer.  It’s very serious.  Having just gotten through an episode where I could have potentially had skin cancer, stuff like this strikes very close to my heart.  I also got to see my grandfather die of it.  Then there was Quinn’s mom, who was the most important person in the world to her.  When her father cast her out when she came out, it was her mom that stood by her.  Destroyed the family, but she was loyal to her daughter.  Lost the relationship with the older daughter for that as well.  Since she couldn’t put the smokes down, lung cancer took her as well.  It was an episode that I got to help Quinn through when she was broken so hard.

But here’s the thing – I don’t agree with John McCain on pretty much anything.  I can say that at least he wasn’t a hypocrite about valuing family.  He was strongly against the LGBT community, but when his daughter comes out as gay, he is suddenly very quiet on that.  So props there.  He put his money where his mouth is.

With the announcement of him having a serious condition that could potentially be fatal, I see shit like this.-

Or this –

To the people who are cheering at the thought of a man dying of cancer, has any one of you detestable pieces of shit lost someone to cancer?  Have you seen what it does to a person?  I honestly question if any of these loathsome shit-biscuits have any sense of empathy at all.  Yes, because what side of the political debate I’m on should mean that I want to see this man die a very painful death?!  Is that really how these animals think?!  That’s what you are if you think this way – an animal!  You’re lower than the lowest form of scum.

Is this the new left?  Stuff like this is why I have to qualify me being a liberal.  Because I do NOT stand with these people.  I do NOT consider them my friends, my allies, my comrades in arms.  I want NOTHING to do with anyone who thinks this way.  I think the liberals need to kick these fuckers to the curb to let them rot away like the gangrenous growth that they are!  Post haste!

I am a liberal, and now it comes with a caveat that I am not one of these liberals.  I am not part of the regressive, authoritarian left.  I am part of the libertarian left, and damn proud of it.  If these worthless pricks shown above could please be forced to watch someone that they care about have to suffer with cancer, maybe then those little empathy muscles would go off and they could remember what being a decent fucking person is like.  Oh, who am I kidding?  If these people were capable of empathy they wouldn’t have reveled in someone dying in the first place.

Until next time, a quote,

“It’s the hardest thing in the world, to go on being aware of someone else’s pain.” – Pat Barker

Peace out,

Maverick