Let the Salt Flow, Steve

I hate talking about Twitter drama, especially in the wake of a tragic event where a woman who I know I would disagree with on so many levels was murdered by a man on a drug-induced paranoia, but the worst part about this whole affair is that so many people have chosen to make this issue about their pet social affair without even a thought to the victims and helping people.  We have the feminists who have chosen to make this about how male feminists are hypocrites and secretly just monsters, and the anti-feminists who have made it about how this guy is a hypocrite.  It’s depressing, but I chose not to comment on it.  At least until I saw how Steve Shives reacted, which is perhaps the smallest way of all.

TJ Kirk decided to make a video (linked here) where he maligned both sides and posted a link to a memorial fund for Heather.  It was a kind gesture where he did his best to be open and to make it about the tragic death of a woman who truly should have seen the signs that this guy was not the best dude and gotten out of there.  But that isn’t what happened, and my condolences go out to the girl who was in the Skype call with them and to the friends and family of Heather.  That is horrible and I hope they can find some measure of peace.

But Steve Shives didn’t have this reaction.  Hell, he didn’t even have the action of demonizing anti-sjws.  No, his reaction was the worst of them all.  He decided to attack TJ for making the video he made, in one of the saltiest diatribes I have ever seen.  See for yourself.

I just love this.  Steve, I know that you will NEVER address anyone outside of you SJW circlejerk, but I have an open challenge for you – back this up.  Tell me where exactly TJ used condescension, degradation, intolerance, or shameless exploitation in the video I linked to above.  I’m all fucking ears.  Tell me where he was using hate when he asked both sides to set aside their differences and mourn the loss of someone who died well before her time because of a terrible event that was fueled by drugs.  She died alone in the street, and TJ said he felt sad about that.  He asked neither side to make this about their pet issues and instead embrace our common humanity to come together and even donate to a memorial fund in her name.  Where were any of the qualities you listed in that video?  This is an open challenge to you, Steve.  But I know you won’t accept.  I’m already blocked by you (#BlockedbySteve) and you have shown that you refuse to address anyone who isn’t one of your little minions.

For a long time, there have been those who have postulated that your entire beef with TJ is that he is infinitely more popular than you.  He has over 1 million subs, while your channel is slowly bleeding subs because no one wants to watch your shitty content anymore.  I am one of those people.  And with this disgusting diatribe you have basically proven beyond any doubt that that is EXACTLY who you are.  You are a petulant boy who is screaming and pouting because the other kids like him better.  Except they aren’t kids, are they?  Neither are you.  They are grown adults who have made a choice based on their own preferences.  But you haven’t progressed passed the angry middle-schooler who doesn’t get why everyone likes that other kid more when you are way cooler.

Steve, in the interest of trying to be the better person in the wake of this tragedy, let me try and appeal to a sense of decency (if you have one) – please, step back from your anger and get some help.  Wherever all this rage comes from, get it looked into.  It’s clear that you are miserable.  You spend all your time getting angry at other people and being your wife’s bitch.  No matter how kind and appealing to goodness the video TJ makes, all you can do is hate him and hate him being on YouTube.  When Laci Green decided to make a post where she said that she is going to be reaching out the anti-SJW crowd and attempting to engage in civil discourse, you railed against the idea that they are even allowed to speak.  You said that the only people you would make friends with are people who could silence their ability to speak.  You then make a jab at TJ, just for good measure.

Is this about that video TJ made where he basically destroyed you?  Yeah, I watched that too, and it was funny.  Did it burn you inside, to realize that everything he said is true?  That the people have spoken and they don’t see your content as worth anything and TJ’s as what they want to see?  I bet it did.  I bet it filled you with white hot rage as you listened to him tear you to shreds.  But you have no one to blame for that video except yourself.  You continually try and go after him and make him look bad, but all that ever does is make you look bad.  At least outside of the circlejerk.  Not that you would ever know.  As you told Laci, the only opinions you could even stomach are those that agree with your own.  Anyone with a different opinion is blocked.  Because if your confirmation bias isn’t confirmed and your hatred vindicated in your own mind, then why bother talking?

Get help, Steve.  This isn’t healthy.  The longer this goes on, the chances that when you finally grow the fuck up your audience will be there is less and less by the day.  Us anti-SJW types are kind of vindictive, but if I can give Laci Green another chance, when she has made some of the stupidest feminist-centric videos I have ever seen on that MTV abomination “Braless,” then I could give you a chance too.  I bet even TJ would accept an apology from you, but who knows on that end.

Until next time, a quote,

“No one heals himself by wounding another.” – St Ambrose of Milan

Peace out,



Let’s Answer “Reasonable” Questions SJWs (of YouTube) have for Anti-SJWs

After all the response videos that have been made by my side of the ideological fence and the questions for SJWs video that TJ collabed with people on, it should be no surprise that SJWs on YouTube finally decided to make a compilation of “reasonable” questions that they have for us.  I figured that since I did a response to the questions on BuzzFeed Yellow, I would take a crack at this.  Now, this video is rather long video, in comparison to the ones on BuzzFeed Yellow, so I will be shortening down some questions.  Otherwise we’ll be here all day writing this.  Here is a link to the original video, so you can see for yourself what the questions were in their entirety.  But I will not be taking these out of context.  Just getting at the bare minimums to answer them.  Let’s do this!

Do you see the irony of responding to the reactionary things on the left with hypersensitive reactionary videos of your own?

I’m sorry, when did my side of the fence go after someone job because we don’t like their points of view?  When did one of us go to a rally of the SJWs and start screaming, “no more hate speech on this campus!” while waving her giggly arms about?  I don’t see the irony, because while my side of the fence can be just as oversensitive as those they mock, we haven’t gone to NEARLY the lengths they have to make our disagreement known.

Why do you have an aversion to being called “right-wing” when you criticize the left and defend the right?

Because I’m not a conservative.  I have many left-leaning values.  I am for gay and trans rights.  I am economically liberal.  I am socially libertarian.  I believe in sensible gun regulation (not banning.  SENSIBLE regulation).  I am pro-choice.  The reality is that I am not a conservative, and I don’t like to be called something I’m not.  I don’t call myself a liberal these days either because both sides of the ideological fence are equally full of shit.

How do you reconcile being rational and evidence-based with having Twitter accounts with inflammatory statements and things that I believe are completely irrational?

It occurs to me that I’m making these shortened versions of these questions a lot more reasonably than the are.  As for the question, it’s because my Twitter account exists to promote my website and have fun.  Sometimes that means trolling the likes of Jonny McIntosh about his sad pathetic excuse for manhood.  I don’t claim to be some great academic.  I’m an asshole on the Internet.  But I still need evidence for claims that people are making.  I left religion because it couldn’t give me evidence of its validity.  Why should the identity politics of the regressive left be any different?

Are you aware that the buzzwords you have created have lost all meaning they once had?

Yeah, actually.  Are you aware that calling everything under the sun, including staring at a person rape has taken so much of the validity away from what should be a very serious crime?  No joke, go to Google and type in Stare Rape.  Or, better yet, type in Birth Rape.  That’s a real thing.  If we’re going to talk about who has done more damage to the usage of words, I would much rather be on the side that is making words that are used just to rub people the wrong way be the ones we rendered useless.

I believe that anti-SJWs take on weak feminists positions and make videos about them.  Instead, why not take on the most “robust” positions that you can find and take them apart?

Such as?  No joke, come on here in my Comments section and tell me which concepts you want me to attack.  I’m all ears.

Since I actually want to take on issues like male suicide and male addiction rates in society, would you be willing to put aside your differences with feminists and work together on this issue?

Absolutely.  Tell you what, if you have some advocacy group or whatever that just focuses on those issues and leaves the rest of your identity politics at the door, I would be all over shouting you out.  But again, you have to leave the rest of it at the door.  We can be allies on this issues, and there are others that I would be willing to do, if you were willing to hash it out with me.  Leave links on the Comments if you are up to it.

What is third-wave feminism?  I hear you all have objections to this specifically and not others.  So what is it in your eyes?

Hey Steve.  To answer your question, it’s this recent brand of feminism that is all about identity politics, word-policing, tone policing, social justice, and taking all the agency that women have and basically robbing them of it.  Granted, even you all can’t agree on how it is supposed to work.  Anita Sarkeesian said that “choice feminism” is wrong because she believes that women don’t actually have any real choice.  However, there are women in your camp who disagree with that.  There is severely sex negative feminism and then you have the people like Laci Green, who is desperately trying to ride the line between them in order not to be attacked like the last time she transgressed against the feminist mob and they turned on her like a pack of rabid dogs.  Not to mention, I would also definite third-wave feminism as ineffectual.  First wave feminism got women the right to vote.  The second wave got women the rights to their own body.  What has your group done?

Why does Trigglypuff represent all feminism but this inflammatory men’s rights activist doesn’t represent all men’s rights activists?

Never said she did.  In fact, I think both of them are idiots.  I don’t call myself an MRA.  I think both sides have the exact same problem – trying to solve the issues between the genders by focusing specifically on the issues of one of them.

Why am I being told to answer for the views of feminism that I don’t specifically agree with?  Does that mean that you are in tandem with those of your side of the fence all the time?

Nope.  I have views that are all my own.  That’s why I don’t live in an echo chamber.  I also don’t hold you personally accountable or that you are in line with those on your side of the fence.  I take on SJWs one at a time.  I denigrate the views of Steve Shives because they are his views and his alone.  I don’t know what Trigglypuff’s views are, but if I did, I would take them on individually.

If we’re so bad because we don’t talk about the “problems,” then how are you any better when you complain about us?  Why aren’t you talking about the problems?

Because you all and your values systems are part of the problem.  We talk about you because your single-issue voter camp is doing real harm to all sorts of fields, from academia to culture as a whole with the identity politics and the rest of that bullshit.  Now we are seeing the identity politics take on real serious tones when you have BLM advocating for the murder of cops.  That’s partly on you.  You all are part of the problem.  At the moment, you’re the biggest problem I can find, because all the best of the YouTube anti-SJW camp has been pretty diligent about showing why your ideas are harmful.

Why aren’t you concerned with “feminist theory” in academia as you are in taking on feminist videos for views?

For the same reason that I attacked Venom Fang X and didn’t go after the views of Thomas Aquinas – the former is fun and the latter is boring.  This isn’t that complicated.  Tell you what, find me some video that is engaging and not in some dull, monotonous voice talking about feminist theory, and I’ll see if I can slog through the bullshit academic language long enough to make a response to it.

What about second wave feminism do you like so much?  Which second wave feminists have you studied in some academic way to get this opinion?

Hey again, Steve.  I didn’t study them in an academic way.  I admire second wave feminism because of what it accomplished.  It got women the rights to their own bodies and it also was part of the sexual revolution that got women to have control of their sexuality.  That was a great step in the right direction for women in this country.  Meanwhile, your group is doing fuck-all to help women in the third world who are being treated like second-class citizens, or in the case of women in the Middle East (specifically in respect to ISIS-controlled territory) having no free agency and even being sold as sexual slaves.  Second-wave feminism can show that it accomplished a lot.  What does your side have to show?  That you got game developers to not make female characters as scantily-clad?  “Progress.”

How can you critique feminists when you don’t examine enough of their material to truly understand what they’re talking about?

You know what would help there?  A citation.  You talk about how we just watch the first 15 seconds of a video or read the very slimmest of an article and then make judgments based on that.  So far as I’ve seen, TJ and the like on YouTube use videos clips in their videos to rail against SJWs points.  Never seen Steve Shives do that.  Who is it who is doing this?  All ears.

You claim that you can separate the religion of Islam from those who practice it, but based on what I see in your comments sections or in hangouts and I don’t see you addressing it.  How can you claim to have that point of view if you don’t condemn those people?

If you are looking at a YouTube comments section and think that that is indicative of anything other than cancer, then you are REALLY uninformed about the nature of the Internet.  I don’t scroll through the comments sections of YouTube for the same reason I don’t jump on the /pol/ board on 4chan to see if humanity is worth anything.  It is not going to help.  If we were supposed to go after every troll commenting something negative of everyone who has called some Muslim a camel-fucker, then we’d be here all day.  I do believe the religion of Islam is toxic bullshit, and I don’t believe all Muslims are.  Savvy?

If you think systemic racism isn’t a thing, why don’t you use your platforms to talk about actual solutions to race issues rather than vilifying groups like Black Lives Matter?

Oh, I’m sorry that it’s all over the Internet with that BLM protest chanting, “what we do want?  Dead cops!  When do we want it? Now!”  I have talked in detail what I believe is a good approach to ending police brutality, but I just don’t see it as a race issue.  I see it as a lack of accountability issue.  There are plenty of people of all sorts of ethnic groups who get the long end of the law.  I see it as a police problem and an unchecked power problem, rather than a racial issue.  There you go, I used my platform to talk about a solution.

When will you do a video on white-on-white crime and what we can do about it in our communities.

I did say that I’m in favor of reasonable gun control, did I not?  If so, there’s a good step in the right direction.

You say that you are for equality of opportunity, so why don’t you discuss the fact that there is discrimination that has been well-documented (without a single citation of ANY studies)?

I take instances of “discrimination” on a case-by-case basis.  If you come to me with an instance of what you believe is discrimination, then I’ll examine it.  And sure, it exists.  But when I hear you lot saying that there is a huge amount of racial discrimination all over the board and doing as you have done and not cited any of these sources that you so cavalierly declare exists, it leads me to question the validity of your claims.

Do you not get why saying that All Lives Matter in response to Black Lives Matter is ridiculous?

Nope.  You want to make it about one group.  I want to make it about what I see as the bigger problem – unchecked power in law enforcement.  We give cops guns, badges, and virtually no oversight.  What kinds of people do you think such lax rules will draw in?

If you consider yourself an egalitarian, will you go after those in your community who use buzzwords that I don’t like?

Nope.  See, unlike your side of the fence, my fee-fees don’t get hurt when someone calls me a faggot.  I actually grew a thicker skin than you all did.  Sorry if that’s such a problem for you.

Are you willing to acknowledge that your fans attack people?

Sure.  I publicly acknowledge that people have free will and can do what they like.  Do I agree with people on my side of the fence who do bad things?  Nope.  Do I believe that they have every right to do them?  Yup.  I can’t control what other people do.  I can condemn things like doxing and harassing, but that’s it.  So there you go.  I made a public statement of condemnation.  How about when your side of the fence does things like sending Milo Yiannopoulos knives in the mail?  There’s an idea.

And that was the last of these questions that I want to deal with.  That was sad, and pathetic.  And REALLY boring.

Until next time, a quote,

“And by the way, next time you want to tell one of these stories – have a point!  It makes it so much more interesting for the listener!” – Neal Page, Planes, Trains and Automobiles

Peace out,


The “You’re No Better” Argument

If you are like me and have a very negative viewpoint of SJWs and third-wave feminism, then you have probably heard something to the effect of “you’re no better than the people you make fun of” or “your side is just as guilty” to begin a counterargument against what you have to say.  I have heard it more times than I can count, and I find this argument more than a little annoying.  It is a blatant dodge to avoid having to answer your own point, but the thing that bugs me more is when they make the argument about me personally.  It’s one thing when it’s people who tend to think as I do, but it’s something else when they accuse me of it as an individual (situation).

It is impossible to argue against the idea that there are anti-SJWs who live in just as much of an echo chamber as those who are in the SJW camp.  There are so many channels on YouTube dedicated to nothing but a giant circlejerk on both sides.  That’s an objective fact, and I won’t go disputing it.  To do would be dishonest, and mama didn’t raise no hypocrite.  However, saying that our entire movement is just as much of a circlejerk as those we oppose is simply dishonest.

My favorite content creators on YouTube have shown that they will talk to all kinds.  TJ and the members of The Drunken Peasants have shown that they virulently disagree with Milo Yiannopoulos on all kinds of issues, but they were willing to sit down and have a very heated but still civil debate with him on their show.  It is one of their most popular episodes, and I really liked how Milo and Paul could get so animated against one-another and still be able to come together and be civil at the end of it.  That’s how I have always tried to view things.  The Bible Reloaded has done everything they can to avoid both sides of the SJW debate, but their audience has seen fit to allocate them into one circle or another, based solely on who they did a video with or who they talked to.  It’s frustrating how those outside of the content creators (or at least the most vocal of them) tend to just go off the rails the moment one group of people talks to another.  It happens on both sides.

Which brings this back to me personally.  When I am told that I am just as bad as the SJWs that I criticize, I can’t help but be amused.  Why?  Because the simple reality is that that is the farthest from the truth.  I could sit down with Anita Sarkeesian and have a very civil debate with her on her talking points.  I think she’s a con artist, but that wouldn’t stop me from being a good journalist in that instance and being willing to talk to her.  No joke, the opportunity to do so would be the most amazing experience I could ask for.  Being the person to look at Anita’s human side (if such a thing exists).  I could sit down with Steve Shives and debate his points of view.  Some people are shocked, but aside from the SJW stuff, I think that Milo and Lauren Southern are full of shit.  I dislike almost all of their major talking points outside of the parts we agree on.  But I could sit down with either of those people and have a very lively debate about our perspectives on things and walk away feeling both challenged and energized.

Are there those who are just as bad as the other side?  Obviously.  When some of the people I agree with take shit from their audience about their points of view, it’s hard to deny it.  But this is NOT indicative of myself or the movement as a whole.  Keep that in mind.  Some of us like to see opposing points of view.  I follow conservative and liberal people, and that’s fine.  I have friends on both sides of the aisle.  Not all of us want to have our points of view sucked off by our contemporaries.  We just want to talk.

Until next time, a quote,

“It’s always the same with these bogus equivalences: They start by pretending loftily to find no difference between aggressor and victim, and they end up by saying that it’s the victim of violence who is ‘really’ inciting it.” – Christopher Hitchens

Peace out,


A Content Creator is NOT Responsible for their Audience

I will say that this is in direct response to our favorite little uninformed kid who thinks that she knows how the world works, Milo Stewart, but the reality is that I’ve heard this talking point all around the SJW watercooler of videos, and it’s time that somebody made a response that isn’t full of emotional rhetoric.  For you see, that’s what the SJW videos on the subject are – emotional conjecture that leads them to think that they’re right.  There’s a flaw in that thinking that I honestly want to address, to my audience of nobody in the SJW circlejerk.  However, if some of you maybe think there’s something to the point that a content creator is responsible for the actions of their fans, this is for you.

The origins of this concept have come from the fact that there are now a plethora of anti-SJW YouTube personalities who make what they call “roasting videos” (they’re not.  They’re response videos.  And this isn’t a new thing.  These videos have been around for as long as I’ve been watching YouTube) toward people that they disagree with.  These videos take clips of what people say and reply to them.  Overall, these are very negative responses.  After all, there was that wonderful quote by Milo Stewart that put her on the radars of everyone who has replied to her –

All white people are racist, all men are misogynistic, all cis people are transphobic. The majority is always biased against the minority.

People will call it “victim-blaming,” but the reality is that a statement like that is going to understandably get some negative responses.  Maybe Milo doesn’t get why people find this a problem.  Her two biggest influences are a two YouTubers, on a racist bitch and the other a black nationalist called Uhuru.  It’s obvious that a level-headed examination of the culture she lives in not what she’s getting.  But when you make declarative statements about people’s prejudices and say that everyone has them, regardless of personality or upbringing, it’s going to understandably get some people riled up.

SJWs who end up becoming very well-known in a negative way often do not react well to this.  Milo is but one.  There are plenty of SJW responses that they make to being responded to where the first thing they do is blame the person who made that response for the reaction that their fans have, going to the person’s channel and then going after their videos.  While there are plenty of trolls in the bunch, I refuse to believe that there aren’t people who would like nothing better than to have a civil discourse about their disagreement.  For as much as I find Milo Stewart an ignorant little pup, I would love to sit down with her and hash out her problem with all these people who she clearly has taken no time to get to know.  But all of this insane digression has a point.

Those who create content are not responsible for what people do with that content.  If I write a post where I say that Anita Sarkeesian is really dumb and her views are unrepentantly ignorant of gaming and those who consume it, does that make me responsible for when one of my fans says something negative to her?  No.  I put the content out there.  I have never and will never encourage violence against anyone or even harassment.  When I say that someone is dumb, that’s a personal opinion.  I don’t go on to their channel and rail on every video.  I troll people on Twitter, but it’s usually just little jabs poking fun.  I’m not the kind of person who gets mad easily.  Granted, if I ever was face-to-face with Uhuru, I would have some words for that little effeminate piece of shit that are most unkind.  He is a terrible person, and his views on the world are morally disgusting.  Not to mention his actions are juvenile, such as when he want to a convenience store and made a giant ass of himself just so he could bait the cops into attacking him.  That was just pathetic, and it’s a testament to the cops involved that they just tried to talk to the little whelpand learn what his problem is.

Milo, I know that you’ll never read this.  Your echo chamber is so firmly closed that you probably have me one a block-list.  But no one who makes a response video to you is responsible for the actions of their fans.  Unless they are telling their fans to hunt you down and murder you, it’s not their fault if their fans troll you.  I’m sorry, but that’s just the way it is.  If you don’t like what people have to say to you in the Comments, then you can mod.  Or you can close your comments and ratings down entirely.  Or you can do what I do and let whoever comment and don’t even pay attention.  I don’t read the comments my YouTube channel gets.  I don’t have a cancer fetish.  To the other SJWs who want to make this argument, think long and hard about that.  After all, plenty of SJW supporters have doxxed, harassed, or in the case of Zoe Quinn, instigated trolling of those who they disagreed with (Google the incident with Candace Owens).  It’s a slippery slope to start going down, which is why I don’t do that.

Until next time, a quote,

“Being a victim is totally in vogue right now.” – TJ Kirk

Peace out,