SJWs Don’t Like Female Heroes

Related imageRelated image

Related image

They both probably think the woman below is Wonder Woman .

This is a point I’ve raised many times before, but its one that I feel needs emphasised and explored in greater detail.

For the last few years I have criticised the regressive left’s negative influence on the sci fi and fantasy genres.

I am not by any stretch of the imagination right wing. I have written articles trashing those on the right in the past, such as the following.

5 Worst Right Wingers On Youtube

In terms of liking female heroes and female created forms of entertainment meanwhile; I have written ten thousand word articles on characters from Xena, put forward ideas for tv shows starring female heroes and casting suggestions (that have been rewteeted by popular genre actresses.)  I have also ried to bring attention to more obscure female singers like V.V. Brown and written articles about Amy Winehouse, that her own mother enjoyed (and even started following me on twitter as a result!)

See here.

10 Reason To Admire Amy Winehouse

Ingrid Oliver: Best Tweet I Have Ever Received

Dana Delorenzo: Means More To Me Than You Know

Cult Villains 1: Callisto

In spite of this however I have been accused many times of not being able to stand female led shows, strong women, or female dominated forms of entertainment by SJWs on sites like Gallifrey Base and by people like Mr Tardis and Samuel Davis; simply because I am critical of the regressive left’s influence on the genre as I feel it focuses too much on attacking men than in building women or minorities up.

Interestingly enough however when you look at the SJWs who are so quick to hurl accusations of “not being able to stand female heroes” at others own history. You can see that they often don’t seem to care about female heroes.

The overwhelming majority of leading ladies in the genre like Lucy Lawless, Maggie Q, Dana Delorenzo, Gina Torres, Katey Sagal, and Lana Parrilla’s fans will be made up of men and women like me. People who actually like fantasy and sci fi and don’t want to impose their own political views on everything.

In this article we are going to explore famous examples of SJWs not caring about female heroes and ultimately why both male and female SJWs don’t care about female heroes. I feel this is the most important point to raise against SJWs, as they always like to paint themselves as modern day Gene Roddenberry’s; fighting for representation against the evil bigots. Ironically nothing could be further from the truth.

Also from a personal point of view it is very annoying to get told constantly from people with 0 knowledge of female heroes that I need to get used to seeing strong women on tv. I did. Back in the fucking 90s when I was 3!

Famous Examples

Image result for claudia boleyn

Obviously I can’t accuse every SJW of being like this. I am sure there are some SJWs who do genuinely like female heroes, but for the majority I have come across that is not the case.

At the very least the most prominent, influential and high profile SJWs, (who have in some cases had an impact on franchises.) Have 0 interest in female led film and television series.

Mr Tardis Reviews is one such example. For those unfamiliar with him, Mr Tardis is a youtuber who as his name would suggest specialises in reviewing Doctor Who. At one point he also did work as a professional critic.

Mr Tardis is a staunch defender of Jodie Whittakers casting as the Doctor. Now normally this wouldn’t be enough to make me dislike someone, but Mr Tardis has resorted to slandering all of her critics as sexists, homophobes, racists, and bigots who just can’t stand women in leading roles.

A prime example of this was when he claimed that Jeremy Clarkson, a UK television presenter, was a holocaust denier simply because Clarkson was critical of series 11 of Doctor Who.

Clarkson in truth said that he doesn’t think holocaust denial is a serious issue as only a fringe group of nutters, who are never going to hold any sway actually think the holocaust never happened. He compared holocaust deniers to flat earthers and people who think the earth is only 1000 years old in this respect. Now you may not agree with Clarkson and feel that it is a more widespread issue, but that’s hardly the same as Clarkson being a holocaust denier himself.

Mr Tardis has also targeted smaller channels and twitter users and encouraged and sent his fans to attack them as sexists such as the following.

 

Finally Mr Tardis has also been accused of gatekeeping such as when he famously declared to critics of series 11. “I DON’T CARE IF YOUR FEELINGS ARE HURT BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOUR IN LEADING ROLES WATCH IT OR DON’T BUT GET THE FUCK OUT OF THIS FANDOM.”

The great irony is that Mr Tardis himself has 0 interest in female led films or television series. I’ve brought this up to him many times on twitter (before he blocked me.) Each time he tried to come up with a different excuse for his apparent lack of interest in female heroes, all of which fell flat.

First of all he said that there have been no prominent female led films or television series since Buffy 16 years ago for him to review. He has continued to make this point against others.

See here. Buffy Ended 16 Years Ago

Ironically all Mr Tardis does with this kind of argument is not only show off his ignorance of female led series, but insult them too.

Since Buffy there have been dozens of female led series. Once Upon A Time which started in 2011 ran for 7 years and featured a woman, Emma Swan as its main protagonist for 6 years. Regina, the Evil Queen, played by Lana Parilla meanwhile was by far and away the most popular character in the series among the fans and the writers and served as both its main antagonist/anti hero.

See here.

In addition to this there has also been Charmed, which though starting just before Buffy finished, ran past it by several years (and ultimately had a longer run too.) I Zombie, Ghost Whisperer, Nikita, Sleepy Hollow, Legends of Tomorrow, Jessica Jones, Supergirl, Underworld film series, Resident Evil film series, Hunger Games film series, X-Men Prequel film series (where the main hero is arguably Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique) Promethius, Sabrina remake, Charmed remake, Scream tv series, Bionic Woman remake, Tru Calling, Battlestar Gallactica remake, Dark Angel, Dollhouse, The Sarah Jane Adventures, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Being Human etc, all of which have emerged since Buffy finished.

Not all of these series have had a long run, but the same is true for most male led genre series too. Genre series in general sadly, apart from a few exceptions like Doctor Who, Buffy, Xena and the later Star Trek sequels often don’t get a long run on tv. Randall and Hopkirk Deceased, Ultra Violet, Torchwood, Lost in Space, Firefly, even the original Star Trek, are all iconic male led series that all only lasted 4 series at the most.

In addition to this there have been strong roles for women in every single male led series of the past several decades. From Killer Frost in The Flash, to Kelly Maxwell in Ash Vs Evil Dead, to Leela in Futurama, to the various companions in New Who. In fact ironically in various male led series like Red Dwarf and Futurama the strongest, bravest, and smartest role has been taken by a woman, Kochanski, Leela etc.

See here.

Dana Delorenzo Wins Artemis Action Next Wave Award Winner

So again for Mr Tardis to try and pretend that Buffy was a flash in the pan for women in the industry (just to cover his own lack of interest in female led series) is incredibly insulting to women like Lana Parrilla and Dana Delorenzo.

Mr Tardis has also said that he hasn’t reviewed these female led series such as Once Upon A Time because they are not the type of thing he normally reviews. This is a pretty lame argument. There is nothing to stop him devoting a section of his channel to looking at genre tv, or if he doesn’t have the time to do a video, setting up a wordpress site such as this.

Finally Mr Tardis, several months after I’d first accused him of not liking any female led series did try and claim to me that he has reviewed female led films and ran through various films that he has reviewed.

The only problem with this list was that the films to start with where recent films that he had been forced to review as a professional critic (or simply to stay relevant on youtube.) They weren’t even films he particularly liked. Even then such was his desperation to get together a decent list of female led films he’d reviewed, he was forced to include both Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey among them!

50 Shades of Grey is definitely more empowering for women than Xena Trilbee!

If only I’d watched 50 Shades of Grey instead of Xena. Then I’d have really learned to accept strong women like Mr Tardis. 

Ultimately Mr Tardis has not tracked down any female led tv series to review on his own. If a female led show is even remotely niche like Once Upon A Time then it will pass him by. He has never commented on the impact any female heroes have made on the genre. He has never looked at the careers of prominent women within the genre. He has never supported or at least given a shout out to more overlooked women in the genre. He doesn’t even follow any prominent women within the genre like Lucy Lawless, Dana Delorenzo, Lana Parrilla, etc on social media.

Now I am not saying Mr Tardis’ lack of interest in female led series means that he is a sexist. (Though that would be no more ridiculous than his accusations against people like Bowlestrek and Nerdrotic being sexist for not liking one female led show.)

Still in all fairness Trilbee just might not have an interest in modern day genre series? However it is ironic that Mr Tardis is willing to paint himself as being the only sane man in sci fi fandom, desperate to see strong women in the genre, such as here.

Women Are Allowed As Lead Roles In Genre Series

When in truth he is the one who is behind most of the rest of sci fi fandom. He’s the one who couldn’t tell a Lucy Lawless from a Gina Torres. He is the one who would draw a blank at a picture of Lana Parrilla and couldn’t tell you who Emma Swan, Prue Halliwell, Callisto, or Kelly Maxwell were.

Another prominent example of an SJW desperate for female heroes, yet bizarrely never watching them is Youtuber/musician Claudia Boleyn. Claudia Boleyn was a high profile critic of the Steven Moffat era of Doctor Who, accusing it of sexism and homophobia.

She became quite a prominent figure in Doctor Who fandom and later got a job working at Doctor Who magazine, as part of their new time team.

Now I don’t have anything against Claudia Boleyn personally, unlike Mr Tardis who has acted in a disgraceful way to critics of series 11.

I freely admit to having been greatly frustrated with some of Claudia’s opinions and statements in the past. Nevertheless in all fairness to her, Claudia has never attacked smaller channels, sent her fans to attack someone, slandered all fans who disagree with her as sexist, or lied about people the way Mr Tardis did about Jeremy Clarkson being a holocaust denier.

See here for an example of Claudia being more mature and respectful to her critics like ShoeOnHead than Mr “GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY FANDOM”.

ShoeOnHead on Twitter: “Claudia Boleyn The Feminist I Responded To In My Video Is A Sweetheart”

I myself had a reasonably friendly and regular interaction with Claudia via twitter and youtube until 2018 when she blocked me on twitter.

Now I don’t hold any ill will towards Claudia for blocking me. I think she just got fed up of me constantly questioning her opinions on things, which is fair enough. You can be opened minded, but also fed up of having to constantly defend your position on everything all the time.

Still whilst Claudia may have behaved in a much more respectful way than Mr Tardis. Ultimately I think Claudia sadly still falls under the same criticism, of not practising what she preaches in regards to accepting female heroes.

Claudia Boleyn likes fewer female heroes than Mr Tardis (if such a thing were possible!) I have never seen her even mention Xena, Buffy, Charmed, The Heroic Trio, The Bride with White Hair, Once Upon A Time, Nikita, Ghost Whisperer etc. She doesn’t follow any prominent women within the genre on social media. (Once again, if you were to ask her who Lucy Lawless, Gina Torres, Eliza Dushku, or Summer Glau were, she’d probably draw a blank.)

Furthermore a lot of the male led shows she has reviewed and is a fan of, ironically have female counterparts that she doesn’t bother with. Its not even like she can say “this show isn’t the type of thing I don’t watch.” (Which wouldn’t hold any water anyway considering Claudia claims the most important thing about a series is good representation.)

Merlin one of her favourite series is for all intents and purposes a British expy of Xena.

Xena and Merlin are both pseudo historical series that merge surreal, camp comedy with quite dark, gritty and violent content. Both merge different historical periods together and revel in the historical inaccuracies as a source of humour. Finally both also update old myths and legends in a modern way.

Take a look at the two main villains from Xena and compare them to two of the main villains of Merlin. One is a cocky, egotistical guy, dressed in black leather with long hair, who thinks he’s god’s gift and who initially holds all the power. The other is a much more evil, intense, psychotic, blonde, who plays on his vanity and later turns the tables on and absolutely humiliates him.

Image result for ares vs callisto

Image result for cenred morgause

So the question is. Why does Claudia not prefer Xena? If what she says is true that she has to see bisexual women like her on tv; shouldn’t Xena that stars two bisexual women interest her more than Merlin, which stars two white, straight men?

Similarly look at Supernatural and Charmed. Claudia loves Supernatural, but I have never seen her mention Charmed. Both revolve around siblings fighting Demons, who come from a long line of Demon killers. Both feature Angels, who are not entirely sympathetic and are portrayed more as petty civil servants. Too hung up on maintaining traditions at the cost of human life. In both instances, an older sibling develops an intense relationship with one of the Angels, who goes rogue, whilst the youngest develops a romantic relationship with a Demon; who the siblings eventually end up having to kill. Both shows even feature Death who is played by a sinister, but charming and affable English man. Death in both series holds a special interest in the main siblings, simply because they keep escaping him. Both shows even feature a finale called All Hell Breaks Loose, where one of the siblings dies and a deal is made to revive them, which ends very badly for the older sibling.

Yet once again Claudia loves Supernatural, the one starring MALE siblings and has 0 interest in Charmed starring female siblings.

Finally Class another male led show Claudia loves is basically just a British expy of Buffy. Both revolve around a group of misfit teenagers who have to guard over a portal beneath a school where monsters from other universes and worlds emerge.

So again why does Claudia not care about any of these female led series?

Whovian Feminism (a blogger whose real name is Alyssa Franke) is another famous example of not caring about female heroes, despite promoting herself as fighting for representation for women against the evil, toxic, white male side of fandom.

I have never seen Whovian Feminism even mention any female led series or films, bar the 2017 Wonder Woman that was in the cinemas.

Once again just like Mr Tardis, Whovian Feminism has never tracked down female led series on her own and tried to bring them to other people’s attention. She’s never supported or given a shout out to overlooked women in the genre. All she has done is attack prominent men within the genre and demand that male led series be more feminised.

Similarly the youtuber Samuel Davis is quick to dismiss all critics of Jodie’s Doctor as sexist gammons (including yours truly.) A quick look at Davis’ channel however shows once again that he doesn’t practice what he preaches.

There are NO reviews of female led series, like Once Upon A Time, Nikita, Xena etc on his channel. He doesn’t even have any knowledge of female led shows in the slightest. Once again Samuel Davis wouldn’t know a Renee O’Connor from a Maggie Q. Samuel Davies ironically probably likes the least amount of female heroes or female led or created forms of entertainment than Claudia Boleyn herself!

Paul Cornell, a comic book writer, who has also written for Doctor Who, is perhaps the poster boy for SJW sell outs meanwhile. He has regularly slammed all critics of Jodie era Doctor, Ghostbusters and Captain Marvel as sexist, homophobic, racist MRAs.

In fact Paul even tweeted this cartoon depicting critics of Whittaker as wife beaters.

I’m sure posting cartoons where people who represent you shag the wives of people not happy with Jodie Whittakers era will get them watching again Paul. There’s a reason Claudia Boleyn is the only one people don’t hate. It is sad though that Claudia, someone in her early 20s was able to make a much more mature and even handed response to a critic, than Paul Cornell, someone in his early 50s! Also nice for feminist Paul Cornell to trivialise domestic abuse by comparing it to a disagreement about Doctor Who.

Ironically once again Paul has very little interest in female heroes. He has written some stories for Vampirella, but other than that the overwhelming majority of Paul’s favourite series and his own fiction star men. Look at his blog and you won’t find reviews of Buffy, Xena, Once Upon A Time, Nikita etc. He doesn’t follow the likes of Lucy Lawless, Sarah Michelle Gellar, or Lana Parrilla on social media, or ever give them a shout out either.

Cornell much like Trillbee knows NOTHING about women in the genre, yet constantly lords it over people with legit criticisms of some female led films like Ghostbusters as though he is the only one who has ever watched a female led film.

So the real question is? Why do these people who claim to care so much about female heroes and are so quick to slander others as everything from misogynists, to wife beaters, to holocaust deniers have such little interest in and knowledge of female led series? Well there are 4 main reasons in my opinion.

4/ They Only Care About Making Themselves Look Good

Image result for paul cornell

This more applies to male SJWs like Paul Cornell, Mr Tardis and Samuel Davis. Basically these guys want to lord it over other fans. They want to present themselves as more tolerant, forward thinking and on the right side of history, compared to the sad, smelly, basement dwelling Gammons.  Its all about their own ego rather than in actually building women up, so they have 0 actual interest in women in the genre.

In many cases they are also desperate to promote themselves professionally and so will pander to the dominant political ideology in the entertainment industry (which currently is leftist politics.)

Mr Tardis is an example of this. He mentioned in his video arguing that there is no political bias in Doctor Who, that he has worked freelance for the BBC before in an effort to claim that the BBC have no biases against hiring white men.

Jump to roughly 31 mins 30 secs in to see him admit he has frequently worked freelance for the BBC.

Trilbee’s claim that there is no bias against white men at the BBC is of course demonstrably not true. See here.

The Unspoken Bigotry of BBC’s Diversity Quotas

BBC Autumnwatch Presenter Sidelined For Being Too White

BBC Presenter Jon Homes Fired For Being Too White

BBC Chief Admits Monty Python Wouldn’t Be Hired For Being Too White And Male

Many have accused Mr Tardis of being a shill for the BBC as a result of lies like this. Whether he is actually being paid by them or not, I don’t think it can be denied that he is trying to get in with the BBC regardless.

In about 20 years time when right wing tribalism replaces left wing tribalism. (Generation Z are according to polls, the most right wing generation since world war 2.) These same people like Mr Tardis will most likely be sucking up to the right wingers who will take over the industry instead.

All they care about is making themselves look good or getting ahead. They currently think they can do that by making out that critics of controversial changes to characters like the Doctor hate all women, and that they are the modern day Gene Roddenberry’s standing up for the little people in fandom.

The great irony is that they end up using all of the tactics they accuse “toxic fandom” of using. Gaslighting, humiliation, dogpiling on people, misrepresentation of people’s opinions etc.

3/ They Don’t Like Sci Fi or Fantasy

Related image

The sad fact is that many SJWs don’t actually like Sci Fi and Fantasy. The likes of Claudia Boleyn and Whovian Feminism for instance are not actual sci fi fans. (This is not about gender before people accuse me of going on about fake geek girls. There are just as many male fans that this also applies too.)

These people will like just a few sci fi or fantasy franchises that are popular, but will ultimately not have any real knowledge of the genre. They won’t seek out sci fi, horror or fantasy books, films, television series or comic books on their own. They won’t even bother with the franchises they like now in a few years time when the franchises popularity fades somewhat. Of the franchises they do like, they won’t even like them for their sci fi or fantastical elements. Instead they’ll only care about things like shipping, representation, costumes they can wear to comic con etc.

Claudia Boleyn is a prime example of this. Claudia Boleyn does not like sci fi or fantasy in general. Look at her twitter page and you will find constant tweets about Coronation Street and Emmerdale Farm, Soap Operas. She won’t bother with any sci fi or fantasy series that is not current. She won’t track down the old classics like Xena, Buffy, Blake’s 7, Lost in Space, Charmed, Red Dwarf etc.

Similarly if a current series is even remotely niche like Once Upon A Time or Ash Vs Evil Dead it will completely pass these people by. They will only know about a franchise if its current and mainstream.

I’m not saying this makes them stupid or shallow. They just don’t have a vested interest in sci fi as a whole, but as a result of this they genuinely won’t know the likes of Kelly Maxwell, Callisto, or Regina even exist, as most sci fi and fantasy, regardless of whether its male or female led is niche.

At the same time I’d argue that a lot of SJWs actually look down on sci fi and fantasy.

There is absolutely an element of class snobbery in their disdain for the genre. Many SJWs come from upper middle class backgrounds, where sci fi and its fans are seen as stupid and childish. Take a look at this memorable quote from Whovian Feminism about the people who don’t want a female Doctor.

“Supposedly well meaning observers always like to come in and say that hardcore fans won’t accept a woman portraying the Doctor. This attitude does both the show and our fandom a disservice. While there’s always a smattering of assholes to prove this type of attitude does exist, they aren’t even close to the majority. And even if that were true, we should not let the direction of the show be dictated by the worst of its fans. If a misogynistic jerk who disparagingly refers to a woman Doctor as The Nurse says he’ll quit watching the show, then he is exactly the type of fan we should be proud to piss off. I promise, plenty of new fans, (especially ones with disposable income) are waiting in the wings to take his place.”

We definitely don’t want any riff raff or plebs watching Doctor Who right Alyssa?

The real question is why are people like Claudia Boleyn and Whovian Feminism being treated as experts of the genre? Why do people listen to them when they complain about how sexist the genre is? About how there aren’t enough women role models? How they fuck would they know?

Similarly why are they more or less being allowed to decide the future of the genre, with producers seeing people like Claudia and Whovian Feminism as their target audience and pandering to them above all else?

The answer is because anyone who disagrees with the ideology these people represent is seen as a woman hater. Still ultimately these are people with 0 interest in the genre, making sweeping statements about it and its fans because it suits their agenda.

2/ Misplaced Guilt and Projection

A lot of SJWs who claim to be desperate to see more female led films and tv series, yet have 0 interest in any existing female led properties, I feel are perhaps projecting when they accuse others of needing to get used to female heroes.

These people (particularly if they are men.) Actually feel guilty for not preferring Xena and Buffy to Doctor Who and Star Trek. Its stupid for them to feel that way of course.

They might just prefer Doctor Who or Star Trek because they prefer the writing, acting, and characters. Also even if they did prefer the Doctor, a male hero, because they are male, by the SJWs logic what’s wrong with that? Feminists such as Claudia Boleyn constantly go on about how they prefer female heroes because they are female. (Despite never actually watching female led series.) The Doctor had to actually be changed from male to female so Claudia and others could enjoy the character more. With this in mind what’s wrong with a male viewer preferring a male hero because he relates to him more?

Still whatever the case because these people are so obsessed with gender politics they actually do feel guilty for preferring a male hero to female hero.

See here for a classic example. Steve Shives, a notorious feminist youtuber who actually is made to feel guilty by his wife for preferring Angel as a series, not even as a character, to Buffy!

You can see how with this in mind a lot of these men are actually projecting when they rant about fandoms not accepting female heroes. Deep down they worry that applies to them for the stupidest of reasons.

1/ Anti Men Bigotry

Image result for jodie whittaker

The regressive left have a very strong anti men bias. They essentially view all white men as being privileged shit lords who need taken down a peg or two.

See here for examples of the regressive left’s hatred of white men.

Man Free Festival Guilty of Discrimination

Why Sex Ed Classes Are Anti Men

Youtube Stops Hiring White Men As Part of Diversity

Cinemas Sued For Women Only Wonder Woman Screenings

NUS Gay Men Are Not Oppressed Enough

As a result of this, the regressive left naturally want to tear down forms of entertainment that men enjoy more, (which sci fi is perceived to be) and destroy any strong roles for men in entertainment that they can.

This is undoubtedly a large part of why the likes of Claudia Boleyn, Whovian Feminism, Christel Dee etc, are more interested in changing male characters into women, or replacing them with women, like the Doctor, Wolverine, Iron Man, Thor etc; than in original female heroes.

Xena, Buffy, Regina, Kelly Maxwell, Ripley, Nikita, do not take anything away from men. None of those characters ever make comments about men being inferior, nor have the actresses playing them even insulted their male viewers. They are solely about building women up, which is why the likes of Claudia Boleyn and Whovian Feminism have 0 interest in them. Evidently building women up is less important to SJWs than tearing men down.

Feminists first of all want just about every sci fi or fantasy series to include digs against men. We can see this in SJW themed series such as the notorious CW version of Supergirl and later seasons of the 21st century version of Doctor Who.

See here.

In addition to this feminists want to turn as many male heroes into women, not because they want to see more female heroes, but because they want to take role models away from little boys.

Don’t give me the “but a female Doctor can still be a role model to little boys just as much.” If that’s the case, then why can’t a male Doctor not be a role model to little girls?

Ultimately you don’t have to take a role model away from either. You can create more female counterparts to male heroes, or more totally original female heroes. In Doctor Who’s case there already was a time lady character named Romana, who could have been brought back to the revival and then given her own show, allowing both little boys and little girls to have role models of their own.

The feminists and the SJWs don’t want that however. They want little boys to lose role models, because they perceive them as all being privileged and having had it too good for too long.

Peter Davison, who played the Fifth Doctor was slandered as a sexist and eventually chased off of social media by feminists, for daring to say that he was unhappy at boys losing a role model in the Doctor.

Peter Davison Quits Twitter Over Toxic Who Fandom

How dare Peter Davison say he’s sad for little boys to lose a hero. Fucking bastard Gammon!

If the SJWs can’t take a role away from male audiences then they will insist on the character being emasculated or weakened.

Examples of this include Luke Skywalker who was famously undermined in Star Wars The Last Jedi, or the original William Hartnell incarnation of the Doctor who was brought back in the first episode to feature Jodie Whittaker, and rewritten into a sexist, homophobic moron.

All of these petty little digs against white men are clearly far more important to the SJWs than actual female empowerment.

The irony is that their constant digs against men are why the majority of both men and women in fandoms HATE SJWs. Men don’t like seeing iconic characters like Luke and the Doctor be made into self loathing males, whilst the majority of women outside of the SJWs little elitist bubble don’t like seeing men get insulted. Most men and women actually like each other. I’d never watch a show where strong female characters like Xena and Buffy were constantly insulted or undermined the way the men are in Supergirl, or the 21st century version of Doctor Who.

Its got nothing to do with people not being able to accept female heroes. Ironically the SJWs are the people who want to systematically attack the representation of one gender, but like all bullies they present themselves as the victims and accuse people of what they are guilty of IE attacking all postive and strong representations of one gender.

Don’t get me wrong I am not saying that the likes of Claudia Boleyn, Christel Dee, or even Whovian Feminism are psychopathic, man hating feminazis who would never be friends with a man.

I think that they are all young people who have fallen under the influence of a very toxic ideology. One which does at least foster bitterness and resentfulness against men.

This is not about women taking over franchises. Ironically about 95 percent of the people who have brought this SJW nonsense into sci fi and fantasy series are men! Either self loathing men like Steven Moffat or people who don’t really believe it, but think it can make them popular, like Paul Cornell. Many of the most outspoken critics of identity politics meanwhile have been women.

Ultimately this is about a corrosive ideology (that is pushed by just as many men as women.) Having too strong an influence on the entertainment industry.

Its an ideology that harms both men and women in the genre. Not only does it pit them against each other, but it also tears down or replaces all strong roles for men, like Luke Skywalker, the Doctor etc, whilst ironically ensuring that strong roles for women like Xena and Kelly Maxwell are ignored.

We need to therefore always challenge SJWs about what it is they really want. Make them question why if they actually care about representation, they don’t bother watching any female led shows that are out there? That question should always be asked of Whovian Feminism and Claudia Boleyn and Samuel Davis.

Thanks for reading.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why William Shatner Has Done More For Social Justice Than Any SJW

Okay now I know I am a little late to this, but still I feel I had to comment on it.

Recently William Shatner provoked outrage among the regressive left when he posted a series of tweets bashing SJW’s.

Now I have always been a massive fan of William Shatner. The original Star Trek series is still my favourite incarnation of Star Trek, but my respect for him just went up even further after this.

As many of my regular readers will know I feel that the SJW’s have had their talons locked around the sci fi and fantasy genres for the past few years. They ALWAYS have to take over everything they become “fans” of. Famous examples of this include Doctor Who, Ghostbusters and both Marvel and DC.

Sadly however whilst most people hate the influence these people are having on things like Doctor Who and Ghostbusters. (As evidenced by the fact that all the SJW versions of these formerly beloved franchises like Doctor Who, Marvel and DC have all to the last been huge flops.)

Figures Reveal Sharp Decline In Viewers For Doctor Who

Marvel and DC Suffer Slump in Sales

Virtually no one within the entertainment industry at least has spoken out against them. The reason for that is simply because the SJW’s are bullies who will slander anyone who disagrees with them and may even finish their careers.

Peter Davison who played the 5th Doctor for instance merely said that people should go a bit easier on those who are unhappy with a female Doctor and was chased off of twitter as a result.

See here. Peter Davison Quits Twitter After Female Doctor Comments

Tim Allen meanwhile in this clip points out how anyone in Hollywood who is even remotely pro Trump is treated like a Jew in 1930’s Germany.

Of course it later cost him his career.

Things aren’t any better for women either.

Nicole Kidman similarly tweeted that since Trump is our President now we better just get behind him. She didn’t even say that she had voted for him, or that she thought he would be a good President, just that at this stage there is no point in complaining about something we can’t change.

Kidman subsequently had to endure a barrage of abusive tweets, including ironically from Anita Sarkeesian fanboy Joss Whedon, who mocked Kidman’s appearance.

Remember kids the feminist thing to do is call a woman who disagrees with you a turd and mock her appearance.

Then of course any woman who says that she isn’t a feminist is often bullied and forced to say she is one, like Taylor Swift.

So with this in mind first of all I think its incredibly brave of William Shatner to not only say anything even remotely negative about SJW’s, but to do so in such a blunt, aggressive way too.

Also I think its brilliant that not only has such a major figure from the sci fi genre come out and stood up for geek culture by attacking the biggest threat to it. But the fact that William Shatner was also someone who did combat genuine racism, sexism and prejudice in the entertainment industry just further highlights how the SJW’s are not true progressives, but mere posers.

William Shatner starred in one of the most progressive series ever made, Star Trek. It featured a Japanese man a few decades after World War 2, a Russian at the height of the cold war paranoia and a black woman during the height of the civil rights movement among the main cast.

Shatner’s character Captain Kirk also had the first ever interracial kiss in the history of American drama. Both he and Nichelle Nichols sabotaged attempts by the network to block the kiss too.

William Shatner on Interracial Kiss

In addition to Star Trek, William Shatner also starred in a Roger Corman film called The Intruder in 1962.

Based on the novel of the same name by Charles Beaumont, Shatner plays the villain of the piece Adam Cramer who attempts to whip up hatred against the black townspeople. At one point he even goes as far as to frame a black man for raping a young girl.

After Wrath of Khan I’d say its the greatest performance of Shatners career. He is every bit as good as the villain as he would later be as the hero.

The Intruder was a remarkable film. Released two years before the Civil Rights Act, it showed how easy it was to whip up racial violence, and the dangerous effect people like Cramer can have on communities.

Of course Shatner wasn’t the only famous entertainer who had helped to combat prejudice decades ago, but now viewed the modern day SJW’s with disdain.

The late great John Hurt in one of the last ever interviews he gave complained about how modern day society had become too politically correct and how angry he was that people can just decide something is offensive and that’s that its not open for discussion.

Sir John Hurt Slams Modern Society For Political Correctness

John Hurt starred in The Naked Civil Servant back in the 1970’s which told the life of Quentin Crisp, and much as The Intruder showed us the full extent of racism in 60’s America, then The Naked Civil Servant showed us the full extent of homophobia in British society.

Its very telling that people like John Hurt and William Shatner would view the modern day “progressives” as nothing more than posers and bullies.

These are people who did combat genuine prejudice within the entertainment industry and now they have to see a bunch of spoiled brats, who’ve never dealt with any kind of genuine prejudice, not only making words like racist, sexist and homophobic lose all meaning by applying them to everything, but also ironically employing genuinely racist and sexist attitudes and policies against people.

From barring all white men from being allowed to audition for a character like the Doctor, to calling all white people racist, to accusing all men of being privileged etc.

And on top of that they have the cheek to compare themselves to people from the 60’s a decade where combating racism wasn’t things like being upset over a Halloween costume, or tweeting about how much you hate Trump to your friends who all think EXACTLY the same way, but instead actually fighting to have equal rights.

So yes I now have even greater respect for William Shatner from not only standing up to these bullies, but also disassociating the true progressives from the modern day posers.

Of course Shatner has since been accused now of being a racist, a sexist, homophobic etc. Fortunately however anyone who has followed his career knows that Shatner has done more for true social justice than posers like these people

Will ever do.

 

 

 

 

Why I Hate Owen Jones

Owen Jones for those of you lucky enough to be unfamiliar with him is a left leaning political activist and journalist for The Guardian and The New Statesman. He is also the author of such books as Chavs: The Demonization of the Working Class.

Now in spite of what people have said about me being alt right I would consider myself a socialist to some extent. There are many things I overlap with Owen Jones on such as socialized healthcare and welfare. Ultimately however I find Jones to be someone who does far more harm than good. He is almost a walking parody of a “Social Justice Warrior”.

Owen Jones is actually a threat to free speech as well as a total hypocrite and a racist, on top of being one of the most high profile apologists for the most retrograde system on earth.

Hypocrite on Free Speech

My biggest beef with Owen Jones is the way he tries to present himself in his youtube series such as in the video above, as a laid back, nice guy who is open to hearing other people’s opinions. He even ends his video with a “tell me what you think in the comments below”. The truth of the matter is its best not to disagree with Owen Jones too much or else he will try to shut you down.

A notorious example of this was when he complained about there not being enough LGBT voices being allowed to talk about the Orlando massacre, yet he deplatformed Douglas Murray, a gay man by refusing to appear on Channel 4 with him because he disagreed with Murray’s views on Islam (and other things).

A more prominent example of Jones shutting down people he disagreed with was when he got Katie Hopkins fired from LBC.

Now I generally don’t like Katie Hopkins. Much like Milo Yiannopoulis, she is someone who does make some valid points, but generally seems more obsessed with presenting herself as outrageous.

Still Jones behaviour towards her was absolutely disgusting. Hopkins said there needed to be a final solution to the Islamic problem after the recent Manchester attack.

Now obviously “final solution” was a very poor choice of words, but Hopkins after realising how bad it sounded apologised and said that she did not mean to encourage violence against Muslims, simply that people needed to wake up to the problems Islamic extremism caused.

That wasn’t good enough for Owen Jones however. Jones started a campaign to get Hopkins fired from her job and sent tweets to her employers. He called for a public boycott against LBC until they fired Hopkins.

Sadly LBC relented and after Hopkins was dismissed from her position Owen Jones spent the next day gloating about it in the most nasty and childish ways.

See for yourself

Owen Jones Tweets About Katie Hopkins Being Fired

Owen Jones Gloats Over Katie Hopkins Firing

Owen Jones is a like a little spoiled child, stamping his foot, and refusing to appear on tv if someone he doesn’t like is on with him, or storming off on live tv if everybody isn’t talking about what he wants. Compare him to another left leaning journalist John Pilger who in this clip interviews a truly disgusting individual named Duane Clarridge yet keeps his cool.

And Owen Jones couldn’t even share the stage with Douglas Murray! To even call him a journalist is an insult to true journalists like John Pilger.

Ultimately I don’t think Jones has actually harmed the career of Katie Hopkins or Douglas Murray in the long run, but its not through lack of trying. The fact that he would want to prevent some opinions from being heard and even ruin people who express a view he doesn’t like’s entire livelihood makes him a threat to free speech and a nasty bully all around.

Rank Islam Apologist

Owen Jones despite being openly gay is an utter apologist for a belief system that wants to criminalise his entire way of life. He treats all legitimate criticism of Islam as comparable to people who want to drag Muslims off the streets and kill them.

The fact is that apart from a few genuine right wing fanatics nobody has ever even tarred all Muslims as evil.

People like Tommy Robinson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Paul Joseph Watson, Sam Harris and Douglas Murray (all of whom have been tarred as Islamophobes and racists by Jones.) Have always stressed that not all Muslims are evil. Indeed the likes of Murray and Harris are close friends with Maajid Nawaz a devout Muslim man and reformer of the Islamic faith. Sam Harris has even written a book with Nawaz.

However whilst there are obviously many decent Muslims, the fact is that Islam itself is a dangerous, violent and evil ideology.

Its holy books the Quran and the Hadith command ALL Muslims to murder all non believers, and apostates, and all LGBT people too. It also says that all women are inferior to men and that white people are superior to black people too.

Here are some sources to back this up.

Note: I also lost all respect for Kraut the maker of this video after he got Rage After Storm a youtuber fired by contacting her employers. I didn’t agree with Rage’s video that he replied too about race realism, but Kraut much like Owen Jones should not have tried to harm someone’s career.  However that said this video is probably the most detailed and well researched on Islam’s violent hatred towards LGBT people. 

Muslim Grooming Gang Statistics

Easy Meat: Britain’s Islamic Rape Gang Problem.

The Proof That Islam Has A Problem With Homophobia

52 Percent of British Muslims Think Homosexuality Should Be Illegal

Now again there are many decent Muslims in the west, but these Muslims tend to either be cherry pickers who select only the good parts of their religion and dump the bad bits, or in some cases I think a lot of them haven’t even read their holy book as David Wood has often pointed out.

However the many Muslims who are raised on genuine Islamic beliefs hold very bigoted views towards women, LGBT people, Jews and Atheists; and this is before we get into the rise in Islamic terrorism which has struck nearly every major European city over the past 4 or 5 years from Paris to Barcelona to London.

Islam’s influence needs limited in the west. All Madrassess and Muslim faith schools should be shut down and a limit must be placed on immigration from any Muslim majority country until these issues can be dealt with. Furthermore all of Islam’s flaws need to aired out in the open and the religion needs criticised as often as other faiths such as Christianity.  Finally the religion also needs reformed by people like Maajid Nawaz, Imam Tahwidi and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Ironically thanks to the likes of Owen Jones who shut down any discussion about Islam, Muslim reformers such as Imam Tahwidi are actually in greater danger as even they are deemed as Islamophobic and thus their message isn’t able to reach as wide an audience leaving them more vulnerable.

This is not about race. This is about stopping a dangerous and poisonous ideology’s influence from spreading throughout Europe.

Sadly however Owen Jones and others like him have to make it all about race simply because a lot of Muslims have dark skin. This in itself ironically is racist as basically Owen Jones and others like him are not holding dark skinned people to the same high moral standard as white people.

Owen has done all he can to make it impossible for people to talk about the problems with Islamic extremism.

First of all he has tried to slander and ruin the reputations of anyone who talks about Islam as a racist like Richard Dawkins.

On Owen Jones Fallacy That Richard Dawkins Is A Bigot

Owen Jones on Anti Muslim Bigotry

Then of course as we have been over there are his attempts to actively ruin the livelihood of critics of Islam such as Katie Hopkins and Douglas Murray.

Jones has also I’ve noticed almost every time there is an Islamic terror attack managed to shift the discussion away from Islam and onto some kind of manufactured offence against the mainstream media.

After the Orlando massacre, Owen Jones I feel gave a lot of the SJWs an excuse to not talk about what it was that caused the massacre, the Islamic hatred of gays. For the first few hours after the slaughter I noticed a lot of SJWs I follow like Claudia Boleyn and Paul Cornell being oddly quiet on social media.

I think it could have been a turning point for many of them as this was one of the worst terrorist attacks in American history directed solely at a group of people whose rights they claim to fight for. Here for once they couldn’t just sweep it under the rug. They’d have to confront Islamic hatred of LGBT people as dictated by the Quran, but sadly Owen Jones on air childish tantrums allowed the likes of Boleyn and Cornell to side swerve it once again.

Instead all the SJWs would talk about the next day was “Sky News is so homophobic because it didn’t say LGBT every two seconds and apparently mistreated Owen Jones because of that.”

Similarly after the Manchester bombing, Owen Jones once again diverted attention to Katie Hopkins and again gave the SJWs a chance not to talk about the real issue, a religion that commands that all non believers be killed and is inspiring people to do that all over Europe.

Finally Owen Jones has often tried to compare the hatred towards Muslims in modern society as being comparable to the hatred Jews experienced in Nazi Germany.

I think its disgusting that Owen would try and compare people like Tommy Robinson and Paul Joseph Watson to the Nazis. Jones ironically with his obsession with comparing everything to World War 2 (Trump is Hitler, the Muslim ban is like the Holocaust, the EDL are the Fourth Reich etc.) Is actually in danger of trivialising the true horror of the Nazis.

The hatred of Jews by the Nazis was widespread, violent, and culminated in an attempted genocide. Its obscene to even attempt to pretend that some bad tweets against Muslims is even remotely comparable.

Furthermore hatred of Jews in Nazi Germany was sanctioned by the government. Laws were brought in against Jewish citizens, police officers wouldn’t charge people who carried out acts of violence against Jews.

In modern European societies there have been some occasions of the authorities actually covering up crimes carried out by Muslims out of fear of looking racist.

Police Cover Up Islamic Hate Crimes

Why Did The Police Cover Up The Abuse Of 1400 Girls

Its Not Only Germany That Covers Up Muslim Sex Attacks

Swedish Police Cover Up Migrant Crime Spree

Can you imagine the Nazis doing all they could to cover up a crime carried out by a Jewish man so as not to appear racist?

The Nazis’ hatred of the Jews was also founded on a racist belief that the Jews were racially inferior, the unter mensch.

Now I’m sure that there are some individual bigots who hate Muslims because a lot of them have brown skin, and yes there have been some violent crimes against Muslims in the United Kingdom too.

Still certainly the majority of as well as the most high profile critics of Islam are not racist.

Watch any video by the likes of Paul Joseph Watson, David Wood, Tommy Robinson and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and all of their objections against Islam are to do with the beliefs of Islam, NOT the race of any of its followers.

Ironically Islam as an ideology is comparable to Nazism. Both have a pathological hatred of the Jews, both despise LGBT people, both view dark skinned people as inferior to white people, and both want to impose their own fascist rule on all societies across the world.

With this in mind Owen Jones ironically can only be viewed as a modern day Quisling or Lord Haw Haw. He is betraying everything he claims to support such as free speech, LGBT rights, gender equality, and equality for all based on skin colour by making it virtually impossible to say anything negative about Islam.

Racist, Sexist Hypocrite

Owen Jones as we have been over is not only a racist towards dark skinned people, as he never holds them to the same high moral standard as white people. He is also ironically happy to demonise all white people.

Want proof? Take a look at this article that Owen wrote about the supposed rape culture in the west.

Not All Men Commit Rape, But All Must Condemn It

In this article Owen argues that all men in the United Kingdom are complicit in the widespread abuse of women due to the culture they live in. Apparently even though we live in a culture where rape is rightfully viewed as one of the worst crimes a man or woman can commit, and where an accusation of rape is enough to ruin a man’s entire life. Our culture still somehow tells men that rape is okay?

Yes there are terrible miscarriages of justice in some rape cases, but the same is true for many crimes. Our justice system overall is not perfect.

Still lets play Devils advocate here and suppose that Owen is right that there is a rape culture in the west.

Okay Owen so if all western men, even those who do not commit crimes are still complicit in it because they are part of a culture that promotes it. Why does the same not apply to Muslims? Even all of those innocent Muslims? They are part of the same ideology that does say to kill all LGBT people, kill all non believers and that all women are inferior? So using YOUR logic Owen ALL Muslims are complicit even if they don’t take part in the extremists atrocities.

Yet you won’t find Owen ever saying that all Muslims need to take responsibility for the crimes carried out by their religion. In fact quite the opposite

Is Islam the Problem? No

“Look At The Difference In Owen Jones Articles When Its An Islamic Terrorist And A Far Right One

The great irony here is that Owen is judging people for something beyond their control, whilst famous critics of Islam like Tommy Robinson that he regularly derides as bigots are not.

Owen Jones has also publicly said that white people are not victims of racism in the United Kingdom.

See here White People Are Not Victims Of Racism In The United Kingdom

Really Owen? So in that case anti semitism doesn’t count as racism? Also what about the unprecedented epidemic of white girls being abused by Muslim men who openly say that they abuse them because they view white women as inferior.

White Women Are Inferior Says Muslim Grooming Gangs

All White Women Are Only Good For One Thing For Me To Fuck Them And Use Them As Trash

Owen Jones for all his talk of socialism and feminism is perfectly happy to throw these young underprivileged girls under the bus by basically denying that they were victims of racism, as hey by his logic they can’t as they are white.

Its very telling that Naz Shah recently retweeted and liked a tweet from an Owen Jones parody account telling white girls who had been abused to shut up for the sake of diversity, thinking it was actually a real tweet of Owen’s.

Naz Shah Shared And Liked Tweet From Parody Account Of Owen Jones Telling Abused Girls To Shut Up For Sake Of Diversity

It amazes me that Owen Jones after this didn’t maybe rethink a few things? Imagine knowing that someone could do a parody of you saying that young girls who have been raped should shut up and people would actually think it was you!

Personally if that was me I’d definitely reassess my position as a champion of women’s rights and the little guy.

Conclusion

Owen Jones is a bully and a threat to free speech. He is actually helping to stop genuine progress in the United Kingdom. There is a real problem with Islam that needs to be talked about, but the longer it goes unsaid the more innocent people like the victims of the Muslim grooming gangs will continue to suffer in silence, Muslim reformers will also continue to be in danger as they will be left out in cold, and finally there will be a greater chance of a genuine right wing backlash against ALL Muslims.

Finally Owen Jones also seemingly doesn’t care about people as much if their skin is white. He’s happy to demonize a group and hold them all accountable if their skin is white (and their gender male), and he’ll deny that white people are victims of racism in this country even when hordes of young white girls are being sexually assaulted because of the colour of their skin.

With all of this in mind Owen Jones in my opinion can only be viewed as an utter disgrace and a Quisling to genuine left wing and progressive politics.

 

 

 

 

 

Why Do Geeks and Nerds Hate Feminists?

In the last couple of years the sci fi and fantasy fan community as well as the gaming community in particular have developed a very hostile attitude towards third wave feminism.

Whilst many high profile geeks in the industry itself such as Will Wheaton have welcomed what they feel are progressive changes to the industry brought about by feminists. Most fans I think its fair to say feel that the current brand of identity politics has had a poisonous influence on many large franchises.

In this article I am going to run through the reasons feminists are the most hated group in any fandom. Note: Obviously I am not saying all feminists are this bad. I am sure that there are many feminists who bring a lot to their fandoms, and obviously I am not condoning any abuse feminists have received online, though its worth mentioning that many anti feminists have received similar abuse.

There are psychos in any group and its a poor argument if they are the only people you can use to discredit the other side.

Also when I say feminists I really mean third wave feminists as the first and second wave feminists were by and large genuinely worthwhile movements. However in the modern western world, sadly third wave feminists represent the majority of feminists and so I won’t bother with the distinction here.

Feminists Have To Make Everything About Them

Again nobody has a problem with female led, or even feminist themed shows like Buffy, but the problem is that feminists have to make everything about their movement.

Often feminists will find a way to criticise something that is completely benign as being sexist and demand that it be changed. They will accuse anyone who disagrees of sexism, and rather than talk about the show, film, comic book, or game that we would normally have just talked about and enjoyed. Everyone instead has to talk about the feminists ridiculous accusations of sexism. Furthermore the work itself will later begin to pander to feminists too, regardless of how it affects it.

A classic example of this was the recent animated adaptation of Alan Moore’s classic comic The Killing Joke. Now fans had been clamouring for an animated adaptation of this story for many years starring Mark Hamill, long regarded as the greatest Joker.

Finally in 2015 it was announced that Mark Hamill would be reprising his role as the Clown Prince of Crime in an animated adaptation of the story after all.

Sadly however feminists complained that the story was sexist and even demanded that it not be adapted.

See here.

Batman The Killing Joke And Its Edgy Rape Storyline Is Not A Comeback I Want To See

Its Time To Kill The Killing Joke

Now the accusations of sexism against The Killing Joke are in my opinion contradictory and hollow.

Feminists have argued that it normalises violence against women due to what happens to Batgirl. That is complete nonsense of course as the Jokers actions against Batgirl are meant to be him finally crossing the line (which given how evil the Joker normally is, is really saying something!)

Feminists main beef with The Killing Joke however is that it is part of a supposed sexist trend in comic books where a female character is crippled, tortured or killed just to further a male characters story. This trend is referred to as “Women in Refrigerators” and personally I find it to be hypocritical.

There are plenty of instances of supporting male characters being tortured, crippled or killed in order to further a female heroes story. In Xena her son Solon is killed by her adversary Hope, Gabrielle’s husband Perdicus is sliced open by arch enemy Callisto. In Once Upon A Time meanwhile, the three main female characters Emma and Regina and Snow all lose their male loved ones, whilst in Charmed two of the sisters Prue and Phoebe’s main male love interests are killed off. In Buffy and Nikita male supporting characters are crippled horribly. Xander has his eye poked out by the evil Caleb, whilst Birkhoff is brutally tortured by Nikita’s nemesis Amanda who smashes his thumbs.

How is this scene any different to what the Joker does to Batgirl? Both involve the villain brutalising someone close to the hero, but when its a male villain doing it to a female supporting character its sexist? At the end of the day I don’t think that either this torture scene or the crippling of Batgirl are sexist. Both are just examples of the writer trying to up the ante between the hero and villain.

Sadly however feminists slandered The Killing Joke as sexist and so that was all anyone ended up talking about when the film was released. Even reviews on non feminist sites had to mention how sexist the story was and put a heavier focus on Batgirl’s treatment than was necessary.

Even the film itself was compromised by a need to pander to feminists. The opening 30 minutes of the film revolve entirely around Batgirl. The producers did this in order to counteract the claims that the story was sexist by expanding on Batgirls role.

Now personally whilst I enjoyed the film overall I think this was a mistake. The Killing Joke is NOT Batgirls story. Its about the Joker and Batman. It makes 0 sense to focus on Batgirl as we ultimately have to abandon her when the story actually starts. Thus the first 30 minutes is completely detatched from the rest of the movie.

Of course the great irony is that feminists found the opening 30 minutes even more sexist. Still the point is the fact that it was Mark’s last proper performance as the Joker (he has since voiced the character in Justice League Action, but since that is a short series, aimed at a younger audience, then its really his last performance in a serious, feature length production.) And just simply the fact that it was an adaptation of a much loved, and highly influential comic book was completely overshadowed by the feminists complaints.

Another example of feminists completely overshadowing a product is of course Doctor Who, the worlds longest running and along with Star Trek most successful sci fi series. From about 2011 on feminists began to sink their claws into the Doctor Who franchise.

They targeted its showrunner Steven Moffat in particular and slandered him as a vile sexist, homophobic,  racist, abelist etc. Sadly it became received wisdom that Steven Moffat was incapable of writing women, that he hated minorities and the man’s reputation was harmed greatly.

See here.

Trigger Warning Sexual Assault In Doctor Who

Doctor Who Is Racist

Doctor Who Returns New Direction

Problematic Posters For Doctor Who

Steven Moffat Is A Classist

University Study On Sexism On Doctor Who

Steven Moffat And His Problem Representing Women Of Colour

Sadly just like with The Killing Joke it got to the point where all anyone could ever talk about in regards to Doctor Who was whether or not it was sexist, should the next Doctor be a woman, are male Doctor Who fans entitled etc. Practically all Steven Moffat talks about in interviews nowadays is that he is not sexist.

Steven Moffat Tweets Against Accusations Of Sexism

Steven Moffat On Sexism

Stop Assuming I’m A Sexist Demon

Steven Moffat much like the makers of The Killing Joke began to pander to his feminists critics as a result in many ways.

He cast a woman as the Master, the Doctors archenemy, and rewrote him to be in love with the Doctor to pave the way for a female Doctor. He also beefed up the role of the Doctors companion, Clara to be far more important than she should be (to the point where she was even billed first instead of Capaldi the actor playing the Doctor). Finally he also included many anti male, and even anti white remarks throughout the show and its spin off too such as the following.

TANYA: White people. 
APRIL: White people what? 
TANYA: Always so optimistic. Always so certain things are going to work out for you. Oh, well, because they usually do. 
APRIL: My dad tried to kill me when I was eight. 
TANYA: But you got your mum up walking again. Typical white-person happy ending.

Finally it was recently been announced that the next Doctor will be a woman after all (though more on that later.)

Marvel Comic books are yet another example of feminists having to make something all about them. Marvel comics just like Doctor Who have begun to pander to feminist audiences recently to the point where they have replaced longstanding male characters with female counterparts just like the Doctor (including Iron Man, Thor and Wolverine) and have begun to fill their comics themselves with more divisive SJW propaganda.

These videos cover the SJW propaganda in Marvels and to a lesser extent DC’s latest comics brilliantly.

Now again you can see the problem here. People who just want to read a fun story about monsters and superheroes have to have all of this crap shoved down their throats constantly.

I’m not saying you can’t ever make a story that features a political allegory. Sometimes a writer of a long running series like Doctor Who might write a story with a particular political slant its, but again that’s different as it won’t be featured all the time. Also if a character was previously politically neutral then I don’t think its a good idea to change them to being a political metaphor.

For instance Spider-Man, Superman, Batman, Wonder-Woman are all characters that everyone can enjoy, liberals, conservatives, socialists, capitalists. They are just escapism.

Take a look at these scenes from CW’s adaptation of Supergirl to see how a previously politically neutral character can be hijacked by feminists and SJWs.

Supergirl has NOTHING to do with feminism. Just because she is a female hero doesn’t mean she has to be a feminist. By that logic then does Batman have to be reinterpreted as an MRA and complain about things like unfair custody battles, and the high rate of male suicide in the next Batman movie?

No other political or social group has to inflict their ideology on a work of entertainment that’s supposed to be for everybody like feminists do.

Take for instance a well known right wing sci fi geek and Doctor Who fan in particular like Dave Cullen. Dave is better known under his youtube moniker “Computing Forever”, and probably most famous for his youtube series “The Regressive News”. Dave thinks socialism is among the most destructive and dangerous ideologies ever devised, and he also voted against gay marriage in Ireland.

Now does Dave insist that Doctor Who be a conservative show and revolve around his political opinions and that the Doctor become a conservative character with the same political opinions as him? No Dave and others conservative Whovians just accept the Doctor for what he is and enjoy the show.

I on the other hand, though I agree with Dave on a number of things like Islam, and third wave feminism and I enjoy a lot of his work; politically I am on the opposite end of the spectrum to Dave in a number of ways. I am a socialist, and I also support gay marriage very strongly.

However again do I insist that Doctor Who follow my political beliefs and have the Doctor rant about how socialism is the only way forward for humanity? Or do I just take it as a sci fi show?

Feminists like the blogger Whovian Feminism however HAVE to make Doctor Who completely revolve around their political movement. Her slogan is actually “My fandom will be feminist.

Thus not surprisingly as a result of this feminists earn the hatred of nerds more than any other political or social group because they are the only ones who have to take over the entire product they become “fans” of.

To be fair this is not just specific to the sci fi and fantasy genres. Feminists have a habit of taking over everything they latch onto. Take a look at the new atheist movement. Now I was never that interested in the new atheist Movement, but it was at one point a healthy, thriving movement filled with diverse opinion, but once again feminists complained that it was sexist (over the most trivial reasons) and ultimately took it over, creating Atheism +

This video by Chris Ray Gun sums up how they took over the new atheist movement superbly, but really he could be talking about Doctor Who, Marvel Comics or just about any fandom that feminists have taken over just as well.

They Claim To Speak For All Women

Tumblr inline np3i5eWuFg1s7lmou 500.jpg

Courtesy of Drunken Peasants Wiki.

Ironically among the people who despise feminists and their influence on fandoms the most are women.

The reason for this is because feminists often act as though they represent women in general. Any criticism of feminism by nerds is seen as an attack against ALL women by evil white men. Similarly anything the feminists want is apparently what ALL women who are sci fi fans want to happen.

Examples of this include Will Wheaton’s fawning article about Anita Sarkeesian where he says about her critics.

“She also talks about her life as a target in the online culture war known as Gamergate, waged by entitled male gamers who fear change in an industry that is evolving while they seem determined to remain 15 forever.”

The irony is that many of the things feminists like Anita Sarkeesian champion, most female nerds despise.

Again take for instance a female Doctor. The likes of Whovian Feminism would have you believe that all women who watch Doctor Who desperately want a female Doctor. Truth be told most people against a female Doctor are women!

See here

Women Do Not Want To See A Female Time Lord

Similarly whilst Will Wheaton might be quick to tar Anita’s critics as being all entitled male gamers, many of her harshest critics are women!

See for yourself.

Ironically Will Wheaton is doing a better job of ignoring what women have to say, as he isn’t even acknowledging certain women’s existence because they don’t fit into his “evil men attacking poor little damsel Anita Sarkeesian” narrative.

Indeed feminism has done more to silence women in the sci fi and fantasy fandoms than anything else as female fans like Ciarra McCord’s opinions are NEVER represented in the mainstream media. They’d have you believe that every woman automatically agrees with Anita Sarkeesian. Furthermore feminists often have a condescending attitude towards any women that disagrees with their narrative of “you don’t know what’s good for you”, “trust me in the long run you’ll thank us” or the classic “you’re suffering from internalised misogyny by disagreeing with us”.

Fact is many women despise the influence the likes of Anita Sarkeesian and Whovian Feminism are having on certain franchises just as much as any male fan. However they end up being more pissed than male fans because they end up being lumped in with toxic people like Sarkeesian simply for being women by feminists and the mainstream media.

They Limit Female Characters

SJWs and feminists are really more desperate to be offended than they are to enjoy something. Thus it doesn’t matter how interesting or well written, or well acted a female character is, they’ll still find one way to call her portrayal “problematic” to say the least.

Ironically however this just prevents writers from being able to do as many interesting things with female characters as they are with their male counterparts.

Lets take a look at one of the all time greatest female characters, Xena the Warrior Princess.

Now for those of you might be unfamiliar with her, Xena played by Lucy Lawless began as a supporting villain on Hercules the Legendary Journey’s. She was a cruel warlord who eventually learned the error of her ways thanks to Hercules. Such was her popularity that she eventually gained her own series which ended up being not only the most successful genre series of the 90’s (in terms of overseas sales it was the most popular show in the world at the height of its success.) But also ran longer than its parent show Hercules.

Xena would travel the world in her own show alongside her sidekick Gabrielle. The two fought evil warlords,  Gods, and figures from history like Julius Cesaer. Though some critics have dismissed Xena as just a camp 90’s show its impact on the entertainment industry was immeasurable. It led to a massive craze of female led shows which included Buffy, and it influenced the likes of Quentin Tarrantino who based his movies Kill Bill on the feud between Xena and her archfoe Callisto. It also was even one of the key influences on the revived Doctor Who and Torchwood.

The character of Xena meanwhile has remained an icon around the world ever since and recently it was announced that there were plans for a remake over 20 years after the original series.

Sadly however if it were up to feminists and SJWs then Xena may very well have never been made as when you think about it Xena based on what they have said in the past would offend them too much.

To start with Xena is obviously too sexy for feminist fans. Feminist fans always complain about the male gaze and have also argued that the heroines like Wonder Woman set a bad example for little girls by not being more realistic, or even overweight.

When Will Wonder Woman Be A Fat, Femme, Woman of Colour

Wonder Woman Fired From Job At UN

So again it goes without saying that Xena, the stunningly beautiful amazon that men like Ares are desperately in love with would NOT be popular with modern day feminists.

Furthermore feminists would NOT be happy with extreme levels of violence directed towards women in Xena the Warrior Princess.

Recently a poster for X-Men Appocalypse was banned after complaints from feminists because it featured the titular villain grabbing Jennifer Lawrence’s character Mystique by the throat.

Feminists complained that it was promoting violence against women so Fox actually had to pull the poster.

Fox Apologises For Offensive X-Men Poster

Similarly a recent poster of the Joker threatening Batgirl also had to be pulled for the same reason.

DC Pull Cover Of Joker Menacing Batgirl After Complaints

Also Whovian Feminism, among others have also complained any time a female or LGBT character is killed or harmed in the revived Doctor Who.

An Open Letter To Steven Moffat

With this in mind how the hell would these people cope when Xena is strung from the ceiling, beaten with clubs, crucified, shot with dozens of arrows, has her back broken, her legs smashed with a hammer, decapitated, drowned, whacked with a log etc.

All of these scenes would clearly have to be cut, which would make Xena’s adventures a little more boring to say the least.

Finally far too many of Xena’s storylines revolve around men too. There is her longstanding romantic relationship with Ares, there is the death of her brother which turns her evil, the death of her son which drives a huge wedge between her and Gabrielle, her ongoing feud with Cesar, her redemption at the hands of Hercules. Undoubtedly many episodes of Xena where she battles Ares, Cesar and other male adversaries won’t pass the Bechdel test.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Bechdel test it is where feminists judge something in terms of how sexist it is by looking at how many times women talk about men, obviously the fewer times they talk about men the better.

If you ever wanted proof that the Bechdel test is nonsense take a look at the scene where Xena finds Solon’s dead body.  Its easily the most powerful scene in the series.

Earlier Gabrielle had given birth to a half human, half Demon child that she named Hope. Sadly Hopes evil side was too great and she began to murder innocent people (including those who had risked their life for her.) Xena wanted to kill her for the greater good, but Gabrielle lied to Xena that she had already killed her, when in truth she managed to get Hope to safety.

Hope later returns and murders Xena’s only son Solon after tricking Gabrielle again. Its an amazing twist in the series to have Xena’s son die not at the hands of archenemy Callisto, but because of her best friend. Its also probably the best performance of Lucy Lawless’ career as we see Xena cradle her lifeless teenage son in her arms.

However technically it doesn’t pass the Bechdel test as hey, Xena and Gabrielle are talking about a male character.

Now obviously its not good if the only thing women talk about is men, but at the same time the Bechdel test is too flawed a way to measure it clearly.

Naturally as a result of all this many writers find it more difficult to write for women nowadays. They don’t have to worry about having a male character whose life revolves around a female character like say the Doctor and his grand daughter Susan, or the Doctor and Rose, or Spider-Man and his many love interests.

They don’t have to worry about making male heroes big, strapping, sexy muscle bound heroes. Nobody is pushing for a fat, bald, ugly James Bond are they?

Furthermore nobody cares whenever anything violent happens to male heroes. There have been plenty of posters of male heroes being attacked and beaten that nobody has ever complained about, as well they shouldn’t.

Oh my god Batman is being tortured by Bane on the cover, quick pull it, pull it, this is promoting the most heinous violence against men.

Ironically writers nowadays will be more inclined to write for male characters instead as they are given more artistic freedom, and their characters aren’t looked at by crazed MRAs desperate to find everything about Batman’s portrayal problematic for vulnerable young men.

Their Complaints Are Often Hypocritical

Many of the things that feminist fans feel are problematic about portrayals of female characters in the genre apply to men too.

Personally I don’t want them to complain as much about portrayals of male characters either. If that happens there will be no stories left to tell anymore.

Still if the feminists are after true equality then they should be just as angry about “problematic” portrayals of men in the genre.

For instance they only ever get upset when female characters are killed off, even though far more men are killed off than women in sci fi and fantasy.

A poster of a woman being strangled by a male villain is enough to provoke extreme outrage yet a scene from that same film of Wolverine slicing and dicing hundreds of guys goes unnoticed.

Men make up a far larger amount of victims of the weeks, mooks the hero slaughters, and far, far more male villains are killed in gruesome ways too.

Look at this scene from Buffy season 6. Now imagine a male hero killing a female villain in this way.

Think people would cheer him on? Granted Willow is meant to have crossed a line here, but even then most fans in my experience tend to support Willow, and indeed the show often makes out that she was right anyway. Xander in the next episode says that Warren had it coming and Buffy doesn’t entirely disagree.

Feminists also complain about oversexualised images of female characters and also how fanboys drool over them being sexist and examples of “male gaze”.

Now I am not going to deny that female heroes like Wonder Woman, Xena, Buffy and the Charmed ones obviously have a lot of sex appeal.

However what’s wrong with that? Its perfectly natural and furthermore there are just as many examples of over sexualised male characters for the female fans too.

Feminists however never complain about this at all which ironically creates a double standard against men and women. Men are shamed for their natural sexual urges in a way women are not, whilst at the same time female performers like Lucy Lawless and Gal Gadot are shamed for looking gorgeous and using their sex appeal in a way that hunky male leads are not.

At the same time ironically it could be argued that actually there is a greater market for the “female gaze”.

Put it this way do male fans of Charmed go online and write pornographic stories about Shannen Doherty and Alyssa Milano the way that fan girls do about the male lead characters in Supernatural, the Winchester brothers?

Its not just Supernatural of course. Slash fiction is a phenomenon in many major fandoms and its almost always female dominated. Now again I have no problem with it, but imagine the scorn feminists would have for a male fan who constantly wrote lesbian porn stories about two sexy female characters that he spent all of his time drooling over on fan forums.

Furthermore non sexualized male characters like the Doctor have been completely sexualized in order to appeal to female viewers.

For 26 years the Doctor was a completely asexual character and was often played by older men like Jon Pertwee and William Hartnell.

However for the revival Russell T Davies and Steven Moffat both said they wanted women to like Doctor Who so they decided to make the character more appealing to women. As a result of this they not only for many years cast younger actors in the role, but they completely rewrote the character of the Doctor to be more romantic and sensitive to make him appealing to the fangirls.

Again imagine the absolute outrage there would be from feminists if there was a major, completely sexless female character like say Miss Marple who had to be reimagined to be sexy for male viewers and they not only cast an actress like Maggie Q in the role, but also deliberately rewrote her to act like what they think a young man’s idea of the perfect woman is.

The Doctor in the 1970s. A completely sexless character in every respect.

The Doctor of the 21st Century who was tailor made for a female audience.

You can see how this is just sheer and utter hypocrisy. Apparently a character who was always sexualized like Wonder Woman needs to be rewritten to be completely non sexualized or else its sexist. Meanwhile a completely sexless character has to be rewritten to be a love struck emo hero snogging every woman he comes into contact with to win round female audiences?

Another example of feminists hypocrisy is the way that they complain whenever a female characters story revolves around a man. Again Steven Moffat is often slated as being unable to write for women because he makes their lives revolve around the Doctor in Doctor Who.

However once again these feminists NEVER comment on examples of male characters lives having to revolve around women (not that I think they should but again either comment on both or none at all.)

Spider-Man’s existence revolves entirely around his love interests, the Doctor from 2005 onward’s life usually revolved around a woman, Rose, Donna, River Song etc, Dave Lister the lead protagonist from Red Dwarf’s life revolves around his love for Kristine Kochanski. Many of Angel’s story arcs revolve around his love interest on both Buffy and his own show.

Similarly supporting male characters in female led shows like Riley in Buffy, Ares in Xena, and Cole in Charmed’s lives revolve around the female leads, yet feminists don’t condemn those series as anti men the same way they did the 11th Doctors era, because Rivers life revolved around the Doctors.

Feminists basically look at things one way with male characters and another with female ones.

Worst of all however is the way that feminists on the one hand can’t stand there being any franchise that’s aimed more towards men, yet on the other they want men kept away from any that is aimed towards women.

Again take a look at Doctor Who. Doctor Who despite having always had a large female following, was generally seen as a guys thing.

Sci fi in general is seen as a guys thing, the Doctor is a male character, whilst his sidekicks are women, and the show was always somewhat action packed, even in the Hartnell era, so its not hard to see why people would assume that it was more for men.

As a result of this feminists initially despised Doctor Who in the 80s and through the 90s. They always slandered it as inherently anti women and contributed to its reputation falling.

By the 2010s however when Doctor Who was popular again then the feminists latched onto it, but this time they demanded that it all be changed to suit them. They argued that Doctor Who was a horrible little boys only club and needed to be more inclusive to the point where the Master had to become a woman, UNIT a longstanding military organisation has to be occupied entirely by women, and finally the Doctor himself has to be a woman.

We are constantly told that Doctor Who now becoming completely female dominated is a good thing as its more inclusive to female fans.

A Female Doctor Who Is The Feminist Hero We Need Now

The Time Lady Project: Whovian Feminism

Meanwhile for the Wonder Woman movie there were actually all female screenings held for it.

Of course its not like this is a one off. Whovian Feminism has hypocritically demanded that white men be limited from writing or directing series starring female or minority leads whilst always pushing for more women to both write and direct Doctor Who. She has argued that female characters written by women are always superior.

Of course the great irony is that the two most famous genre characters of the past at least 50 years, Xena and Buffy were both created by men. I’m not saying that this means men write better female characters, but you can see how it doesn’t matter? (Incidentally this is another reason Xena would struggle in the SJW/feminist dominated environment of today ironically.)

Basically feminists want sci fi and fantasy to be something where men are killed in the most horrible and gruesome ways regularly on screen, but if a woman even gets threatened in something then it has to be pulled and the makers apologise for promoting violence against women.

Also at the same time there are to be no pin ups for men, and men who fancy Buffy are to be shamed as perverts, whilst female fans can spend all their time drooling over the likes of James Marsters, Jensen Ackles and David Tennant and even write gay fan fic stories about the male leads they are attracted too.

Similarly we are allowed to have countless male characters like Rory Williams and Spike follow a strong female character around and have his life utterly revolve around her, but as soon as we have a strong male character like the Doctor with a female sidekick, then that is sexist, and we have to focus more on her, have her be the real hero of the story to the point where she takes his place in the opening credits, and gains his powers and use them much better than he ever did.

I wonder if Jodie will get a male companion that takes her place in the opening credits and gets her powers and uses them better than she does and tells her she has been useless compared to him?

And finally now all male led things like Doctor Who have to be feminised from top to bottom to not be a little boys only club, whilst anything starring a female hero has to be seen by women first, and can only be written and directed by women.

Yeah not hard to see why feminists are viewed as a bunch of anti men hypocrites with this in mind.

They Never Create Their Own Characters

Feminists and SJWs can never create their own characters. They always instead demand that other people’s characters be changed to their liking. Examples of this include Wolverine, Thor, The Doctor, The Master and Iron Man who have all been replaced with or been turned into women.

SJWs always claim that representation is important, but the thing is there is nothing to stop them from going out there and coming up with their own characters. However there are two reasons they don’t.

One is that they want to push their agenda to as many people as possible. Thus they want to use an already established and iconic character like say the Doctor, rather than create a new character and take the time and effort to make them an icon.

Take a look at Frank Hampson the creator of Dan Dare in contrast. Hampson felt at that time that comic books weren’t teaching children proper values. Hampson was a devout Christian and a socialist. As a result of this he decided to create Dan Dare (who went on to be arguably the most influential British comic book character of all time) that espoused those values.

If he had been like the feminist fans of today however he would have simply attacked other people’s work as sexist, racist etc until they did it the way he wanted.

Also there is a certain level of spite involved if the product stars white men and its fans are white men. Feminists always LOVE to go on about how they have made sexist male fans heads explode by taking away their characters. Thing is you are not a sexist if you don’t want your favourite character to be replaced which has essentially happened in all of these cases. Fans have similarly not liked it when beloved characters have been replaced by other men such as Damian Wayne taking over as Batman.

However the difference was you didn’t have to get other fans relishing in the fact you were upset or telling you, you were a bigot for not liking Damian Wayne.

They Never Bring Attention To Original Female Characters

Continuing on from my last point, feminist fans are often the last people who actually ever like, never mind talk about female led series.

Take a look at Claudia Boleyn. Now I certainly don’t hate Claudia Boleyn personally. She is a really nice, intelligent girl, and any time I have spoken to her on twitter she has always been nice. She just seems a little bit misguided to me.

Still however Claudia sadly I feel cares more about turning male heroes into women to get back at the perceived “entitled male fans” than she does about actual female heroes.

The reason I think that is because Claudia virtually never comments on female led shows. Look at her blog or her youtube account. Almost all of the shows she reviews or is most passionate about star men. Doctor Who, Class, Torchwood, Merlin, Supernatural.

Where are her videos about Charmed? About Xena? About Buffy? About Earth 2? About Ghost Whisperer? About Once Upon A Time? She goes on and on about desperately wanting to see women and LGBT people like her on tv, yet Xena, a series about two bisexual women who are the worlds greatest heroes has never interested her?

Clearly Claudia actually doesn’t need to see someone who is like her on tv to enjoy a show. She has 0 interest in the massive franchises that already feature them. In fact ironically there are female counterparts to all of her favorite shows.

Supernatural and Charmed are two very similar shows. Both revolve around siblings who battle Demons. In both cases one of the siblings develops a close relationship with an Angel, whilst the youngest develops a romantic relationship with a Demon who wavers between good and evil and is eventually killed by the siblings. Both shows also feature a finale called All Hell Breaks Loose where one of the siblings is killed and the other is forced to make a deal with a Demon to save them which results in bad consequences for the eldest sibling.

Charmed however stars women and was created by a woman, whilst Supernatural stars men and was created by a guy.

Which one is Claudia a devoted fan of? Yep the masculine version.

Similarly look at Merlin and Xena. Both very similar shows in terms of style. Pseudo historicals, which mix fantasy, surrealism and humour. Take a look at two of the main villains in Merlin, Cenred and Morgause, a cocky egotistical guy with all the power, and a psycho blonde who eventually turns the tables on him.

Where have I seen that before?

Yet again between these two similar series which is the one Claudia loves? The one starring the two bisexual women or the one starring two white dudes?

Torchwood and Class also both have a similar premise to Buffy another female led series. All three revolve around portals to other universes below modern cities which attract monsters to them. Class is even set in a school!

However again which is the only one ironically out of those three Claudia isn’t a devoted fan of? That would be Buffy, the one starring a female lead.

I’m not saying this makes Claudia a liar. I think like a lot of these young fangirls she’s been worked up by a lot of the crap around her into thinking that representation is important (as indeed I was at one point) without even realizing that most of the shows she likes star men, so clearly she actually doesn’t need to see someone like her to enjoy something.

She also has no doubt been convinced that anyone who doesn’t say want a female Doctor is trying to limit what women can do in the genre.

However if she stopped and thought about it then she would probably realise that actually she clearly doesn’t care about representation at all.

If Claudia’s going to call people who don’t like Missy sexist, then by her “logic”. We can call her a self loathing woman for not liking Xena, Buffy, and Charmed over Merlin, Torchwood and Supernatural.

The same applies for Whovian Feminism. This woman claims that she is desperate to see things starring women, yet she always reviews Doctor Who? I put this question to her on twitter that she cared more about taking the role of the Doctor away from men than in female heroes.

All Whovian Feminism could say (aside from calling me a random white dude, like skin colour has anything to do with it) was that she liked the Wonder Woman movie.

That hardly shows an extensive knowledge of female heroes Whovian Feminism that you like the one currently in the cinemas. I doubt she has even heard of Callisto or Alti.

Paul Cornell is another male example who claims to care about female representation yet I have never seen him even once mention any of the classic female led series. Almost everything he reviews or indeed has written for is male led apart from a very few exceptions.

Doctor Who, Wolverine, Sherlock Holmes, Superman, Dan Dare. Where are Paul’s extensive reviews of every episode of Xena? Where are his Buffy comics, his novel showing us what happened to the Charmed sisters, his character who is a love letter to 90’s female heroes?

He doesn’t give a shit about any female heroes. Same applies to Will Wheaton. The only things I have ever seen Will Wheaton talk about are male led shows like Doctor Who, Star Trek (obviously) or films like Star Wars.

Now again normally I wouldn’t give a shit about how many female heroes someone likes, but it does make me laugh that all of these people who go around telling everybody else “you need to get used to seeing women on the tv”, “its about time that we got to see more female heroes”, “I’m so fed up with seeing heroes be nothing but white men”, NEVER watch anything starring a female lead.

To be honest when they tell they rest of us that we need to get used to seeing female heroes I think they are projecting. They are terrified that actually that applies to them because they prefer male led shows like Doctor Who to any female led one.

Of course again I’m not saying that preferring Doctor Who to Xena or Buffy makes you a sexist, but considering that a lot of these people will accuse you of being a sexist if you don’t like Missy, Jodie Whitaker as the Doctor, then its not so hard to believe that they worry that applies to them too.

Whenever you see someone complain about representation then you can be pretty sure that they don’t actually like that many female led shows. 

The same also applies to all of these women and men who keep going on about “now that the Doctor is a woman my daughters will finally have someone to look up to”.

If they didn’t before then that’s your fault! You were the one who chose to show them nothing but male led things like Doctor Who or Star Trek.

You could have maybe, just maybe shown them one of the following, Xena, Buffy, Charmed, Once Upon A Time, Relic Hunter, Nikita, Charlies Angels, Terminator 1 and 2, The Sarah Connor Chronicles, Alien film series, Star Trek Voyager, Resident Evil film series, Underworld film series, Day of the Dead, Wonder Woman tv series, The Bionic Woman, Jessica Jones, Penny Dreadful, Stranger Things, Kill Bill 1 and 2, Sleepy Hollow tv series, Alias, Ghost Whisperer, Dark Angel?

Of course feminists earn the hatred of nerds not only because they go around telling the rest of us we need to get used to female heroes (despite never watching anything with female heroes) but they also ironically do down the contributions of many iconic female led series too.

The way feminists act now  you’d think that the likes of Xena and Buffy never existed!

As a devoted, life long fan of Xena I am fucking fed up of it constantly being overlooked, but the reason for that is that it doesn’t fit into the “women are never allowed to be the heroes narrative” which is fuelled by feminist fans.

If feminist fans really cared about female representation in the genre, they’d either go out and create new characters or try and bring attention to female led classics like Xena and Charmed that are perhaps a bit overlooked. Instead however they are obsessed with making as many male characters into women as they possibly can, showing that its more about taking it away from men than a true desire for equality.

They ALWAYS Get Their Own Way

Sheldon’s a better representation for feminist fans in this scene than any female hero like Wonder Woman.

No group in any fandom gets their own way quite like feminists. Just take a look at the Doctor Who series.

As soon as they started complaining, EVERYTHING in the show was tailored to suit their needs. The Master was made into a woman, there were constant references to the Doctor changing gender, another timelord gender flipped, and finally the Doctor got turned into a woman even though the majority of fans were against it.

Most Fans Against A Female Doctor

Similarly Marvel has also killed off and dropped many of their greatest and most popular heroes like Iron Man and Wolverine just because feminists wanted more diversity.

The reason they have so much more power is because they slander the makers of series personally, calling them names such as sexist, homophobic, racist etc. Also as ShoeOnHead has pointed out many times, people are more sympathetic to women’s problems, and as people associate feminism with all women sadly, then people are more likely to listen to and feel they have to try and fix a feminists complaint.

Also the mainstream media is on their side too and thus will often skewer things like Gamergate are Nazis, all people who don’t want a female Doctor are evil sexists etc, whilst not presenting the other side of the argument at all.

Now all of this is understandably annoying, but what makes it even worse is the way that feminists always go on about white male fans being privileged and that they need to get used to things not going their way!

In her review for Death in Heaven Claudia Boleyn comments on how the death of Osgood represented accurately how the fangirls had been treated by the writers of the show all season.

Are you fucking kidding me! For those of you unfamiliar with Doctor Who the season Claudia was referring to was one where the Doctors archenemy, the Master was turned into a bisexual, trans woman who wanted to shag the Doctor, where the groundwork was laid for a female Doctor, where Clara not only completely took over the show but also even took Capaldi’s place in the opening credits and was billed first. All to satisfy the feminist fan girls who complained throughout the 50th about the companion not being given enough to do, that another white man had been cast as the Doctor and that there weren’t enough LGBT characters.

The idea that Claudia could think that was a season that went out of its way to antagonise the fan girls is laughable. In fact it reminds me of a line from the Doctor Who story Resurrection of the Daleks “No matter how you react the Daleks see it as an act of provocation.”

They Only Bully Sci Fi Because It Is An Easy Target

Its funny the way feminists and SJWs have singled out these two genres to attack more than any other.

Sci fi and fantasy have a long history of being among the most progressive and left wing genres, particularly when it comes to female lead series and representation for minorities.

There aren’t nearly as many leading roles for women in other popular genres like westerns, crime thrillers, and spy and espionage stories.

So why don’t feminists go after these genres? Simple, because they are not as easy to bully. Sci fi and fantasy are sadly looked down on. Even with the recent geek fad, they are still often seen as sad and childish interests. Thus not only are the papers often going to be on the side of the feminists against the sad gits who like silly childish things, but many nerds are also at the same time not going to want to defend their interests so vigorously out of fear of looking like sad gits.

Thus they will often only be too happy to let the feminists tread all over their franchise. Also to be fair again as the genres have always historically been progressive and forward thinking places then its fans will initially be more open minded.

Thus for all their talk of fighting for equality, feminists pick the easiest prey so to speak.

They Sink Every Franchise They Latch Onto

Not Cast On Merit

Every time a franchise panders to feminists (which as we have seen is often) its viewers, readers, audience in general will sink dramatically.

Doctor Who has shed two million viewers every single year since it started pandering to feminists. In fact the last series scored the two lowest rated episodes in the shows entire 50 plus year history, with viewers dropping to barely above 2 million at one point.

Marvel have of course begun to suffer record losses too since their SJW pandering began.

Doctor Who Viewers Down At 2 Million

Marvel Executive Diversity To Blame For Low Sales

The reason they drive away viewers is because ironically for all their talk of diversity they make things like Doctor Who that could previously be enjoyed by anyone into things that only they can like.

Another reason they sink each franchise they influence is because they don’t actually care about what is the best thing for the franchise. Only in pushing an agenda. Thus stories take a back seat to virtue signalling, actors and actresses aren’t cast on merit, writers aren’t hired on merit either. They are all just there to tick boxs.

Take a look at Whovian Feminism, a woman who undoubtedly had an influence to some extent on the direction of Doctor Who (as she has interviewed several writers and directors from the show so they are at least aware of her blog.)

She has regularly said she wants a female Doctor and Master, just because. Thus neither Jodie Whitaker or Michelle Gomez were cast on merit. On top of that Whovian Feminism is demanding that there be an equal amount of female and male writers for the next season. I obviously have no problem with female writers, but nobody should be hired solely for their gender.

When you do that you are obviously not going to end up with the best person, and I a fan want the best people hired for Doctor Who. Whovian Feminism however doesn’t and again as she is the type of fan they listen too,  the show doesn’t always have the best people working on it and thus its quality falls.

Conclusion

Feminists are the most hated group in any fandom they become a part of and for good reason. They ultimately are the only group who can never just simply be a part of any franchise they claim to be fans of. We all have our own expectations and ways we want franchises to go. Difference is we don’t all bully anyone who doesn’t want it to go the way we want to as sexists, or racist, or homophobic.

I mean hey I wanted Osgood to be 12’s companion. When Bill was announced I didn’t try and bully Moff into still making Osgood the new companion. I just accepted it. Feminists however sadly have to make everything go their way, and they always get it, whilst at the same time claiming that they are the victims.

Until feminists take a long hard look at how they have been acting and step back from making absolutely everything about them and their movement, then they will always remain the most hated members of any fandom.

 

Why I Hate Rational Wiki

 

A website devoted to debunking bullshit claims, whilst at the same time praising Anita Sarkeesian as a feminist hero.

Rational Wiki is a popular website which as its name would suggest attempts to offer up a more logical and practical approach to political and social issues as well as debunk what it sees as pseudo scientific theories.

Sadly over the last few years it has developed a strong left wing bias to the point where I and many others feel it has actually become more of a propaganda piece for the regressive left than anything else.

In this article I am going to highlight what I feel are the main problems with Rational Wiki.

Its worth baring in mind that as it is a Wiki that anyone can edit, then its content may change over time. Who knows in 2 years time it could actually do what it says on the tin and offer up impartial, fair and even handed articles on subjects.

At the current time of writing however Rational Wiki is nothing more than an SJW propaganda piece. Again normally I wouldn’t mind if it was. After all everyone is entitled to their opinions. However its the fact that they present themselves as Rational Wiki that bugs me as that makes it look like it is an impartial and logical website when it is nothing more than an opinion piece.

Rational Wiki Has A Double Standard When It Comes To Islam

Rational Wiki in a nutshell.

Now to be fair to Rational Wiki it has provided some criticism of Islam and many notable Islamic preachers. However like many on the left I feel that it goes easier on Islam simply because its a religion practised by mostly dark skinned people.

Its a classic case of having a soft bigotry of low expectations. Basically its okay to attack people for their beliefs and ideologies as long as they are white.

An example of this can be found on their Webshites and Websites pages. The Webshites page as its name would suggest is a list of sites and bloggers that Rational Wiki considers to be biased, untrustworthy and even harmful. The description on the page warns that citing any of the people in this list will cause you to automatically lose the argument.

Now in their Webshites page they have a youtuber called Syeten. Syeten does cartoons parodying religion, but he places a greater emphasis on Islam than other faiths.

Rational Wiki says to avoid his channel because it isn’t even handed when attacking religions as it focuses too much on Islam.

At the same time however Rational Wiki has Non Stamp Collector on its Websites page which are sites that it not only recommends but uses as reliable sources for its articles.

Non Stamp Collector is a youtuber who does cartoons parodying the Judeo Christian faith and only the Judeo Christian faith (as that is the one he grew up with, and thus has the most experience of.)

Now personally I am a fan of both youtubers. I’m not always keen on Syeten’s videos mind you. I’ve never really been a fan of jokes about other people’s appearances which Syeten sometimes does like his Jaclyn Glen video. Still that’s just my personal taste, and overall I have immense respect for them both as their cartoons really bring to light just how twisted the Old Testament and the Quran are.

Here are some examples of both men’s work.

There is really no difference in either men’s work as you can see, but about Syeten Rational Wiki says “Prolonged exposure may result in the following side effects: nausea, depression, high blood pressure, loss of IQ, periodic outbursts of hysterical guffaws, and broken keyboards.”

About Non Stamp Collector however they say “Warning this video may cause excessive hilarity“.

The funny thing is, Syeten has actually done videos parodying Christianity too, whilst Non Stamp Collector has only ever stuck to one religion. Again I don’t think that makes Non Stamp Collector a bigot either, as he only goes after Christianity because he has extensive knowledge of it.

Still the great irony is that by Rational Wiki’s standards then Non Stamp Collector is the bigot not Syeten as his channel is devoted completely to one religion.

In this respect I find it hard to take Rational Wiki seriously as critics of religious dogma when they clearly are more oversensitive to criticism of the fastest growing and currently the most dangerous religion on the planet.

Obviously as you can see from both men’s videos the Old Testament and the Quran are among the most disgusting books ever written. However Islam is currently more dangerous than Judaism or Christianity for the following reasons.

The Jewish religion has been reformed many times over the years, and is a more loose, tribal religion that’s laws and traditions are not as strict. Also the Jewish faith is much more vague about its concept of the afterlife and tends to focus on the here and now. Thus radical Jews are not as likely to blow themselves up because they think they will get 72 virgins in the afterlife.

Christianity meanwhile is a more benign religion overall. There are some dodgy parts in the New Testament sure, but overall Jesus’ message is to love your enemies, grant unto others as you would unto yourself, and he is presented as someone who genuinely loves everyone around him and even begs god to forgive his murderers. Added to that Christianity has had a reformation too.

Islam meanwhile has had no such reformation. It is presented as the definitive word of god, and so therefore there isn’t really room for interpretation. It tells its followers to slay all nonbelievers, to kill all homosexuals, and that all black people and women are inferior to white men. It also promises its believers an afterlife if they wage war on non believers and martyr themselves in conflict with them!

Now this does not mean that all Muslims are violent bigots. Many Muslims in western society have never even read the Quran, just as many Jewish people have never read the Old Testament. Other meanwhile undoubtedly cherry pick the good bits of their faith too.

However those who are raised on genuine Islamic beliefs do at least hold prejudiced views against women, LGBT people and Jews, even in the most civil western societies. In the United Kingdom for instance over 50 percent of Muslims think homosexuality should be illegal.

50 Percent Of All British Muslims Think Homosexuality Should Be Criminalized

Rational Wiki however apart from a few exceptions will shout down almost any reasonable critic of Islam like David Wood, Pat Condell, and Tommy Robinson as racists and people you should ignore, but they’ll praise an equally harsh critic of the Judeo Christian faith.

Again the reason for this is because basically Muslims are mostly brown and in Rational Wiki’s condescending mindset, all brown people are oppressed and victims of evil white men.

Ultimately Rational Wiki are the brave type of skeptics who will go after people who believe in heaven or spirits or the afterlife for comfort and ridicule them in order to look smart and superior, but they will slander people such as Tommy Robinson, Thunderf00t and Kraut and Tea who call out religiously motivated hatred of LGBT people, and misogyny as bigots and tell you not to listen to them

Videos that Rational Wiki, who care so much about tackling misogyny, homophobia and religious dogma absolutely do not want you to see according to their Webshites page.

Rational Wiki can only be viewed in my opinion as shameless hypocrites and cowards.

White Knighting For Antia Sarkeesian

Apparently the only reason anyone could hate this liar, charlatan, and fraud who went to the UN to try and shut down her critics is because they are sexist according to Rational Wiki.

Now I dislike Anita Sarkeesian in general. The woman has done more to harm genuine feminism than any actual misogynist. She is a cynical, lying opportunist who wants to bask in the feminist glory but doesn’t actually combat any genuine sexism.

Thus she picks perfectly benign targets like video games, sci fi, comic books and lego and calls them sexist for the most petty reasons in order to make herself look like a feminist champion.

Clearly she just hates Anita Sarkeesian because she hates women. Seriously. Rational Wiki has written under a picture of Anita “Oh My God A Woman On The Internet!” A very nuanced and rational rebuttal to her detractors of course.

However simply liking Anita Sarkeesian wouldn’t bother me to the point where I’d bother writing an article attacking someone for it. In Rational Wiki’s case however I dislike the way that they defend Anita for various reasons.

To start with ironically they turn her into a damsel in distress. Look at their article about her. Its mostly just about how she has suffered horrendous online abuse.

Now I don’t doubt that Anita Sarkeesian has had a lot of genuine online abuse, but still so what? Everybody gets abuse online. There are psychos and trolls on every side.

However Rational Wiki not only tries to make it look as though she gets it worse for being a woman, but they also at one point actively say that because of the harsh online treatment Anita Sarkeesian has received we can’t criticize her.

Take a look at this quote from Jim Sterling that they have on her Rational Wiki page

There are some solid criticisms you can level at Sarkeesians work. I’m not 100 percent on her side, you know. She’s not perfect by a long shot and her video series is a little off base, with some of the examples she’s named as targets. But we can’t talk about that anymore, because the debates not about whether she’s right or wrong. The debate was invalidated as soon as people tried to ruin her life en masse. The chance to debate her on merit was lost once people started threatening to rape her

What a ridiculous assertion, and whilst Rational Wiki may not have written it originally they still quoted it, showing that they agree with it.

Apparently because some of Sarkeesian’s critics are assholes then that means no one is allowed to say anything bad about her?

By that logic then Rational Wiki can’t criticize half of the people they do.

Take a look at Thunderf00t whom they despise. He too has received death threats, rape threats, has had people mock his father dying of cancer and has even had people try and get him fired from his job!

See here

So then going by Sterling and Rational Wiki’s logic the chance to debate Thunderf00t was gone as soon as people started to try and ruin his life and told him he deserved to be raped for all eternity!

Lauren Southern is another notable youtuber who they attack, and again by their own logic they shouldn’t. Lauren has not only had death threats and rape threats but has been physically assaulted many times and even had urine thrown over her!

That’s worse than anything that’s happened to Anita Sarkeesian. Mean tweets can’t actually hurt you. Getting punched in the face, and having urine thrown over you however?

Rational Wiki likes to go on about Anita’s law or Anita’s irony which is where a woman who complains about sexism is then forced to endure sexist abuse by men telling her there is no sexism. (Of course in Rational Wiki’s mind, telling her she is wrong probably counts as “sexist abuse”. On top of that what about the women like Mercedes Carrera’s criticisms of Anita Sarkeesian too?)

Still I’ve decided to coin a new term here (assuming it hasn’t been coined already. If it has apologies) Lauren’s Law which means when feminists and white knights complain about sexism but then don’t care when women who don’t share their opinions are treated in sexist ways up to and including physical assault. Example: Rational Wiki white knighting over poor little Anita’s mean tweets whilst ignoring the abuse the likes of Lauren Southern and other conservative women receive.

Finally Blaire White is another person that Rational Wiki despises and she not only regularly receives death threats but was actually attacked and nearly stabbed by her crazed feminist roommate.

Slightly worse than being called a mean name on Twitter (which Blaire is anyway, every fucking day!)

The abuse the likes of Blaire, Lauren or Thunderf00t have received is either mentioned fleetingly or not all on their Rational Wiki pages.

To be fair they do call the person who threw urine over Lauren a douche on her page, but still that’s it. They don’t try and present Lauren as a victim that we should all feel sorry for, have entire sections devoted to the abuse she has gotten from people online, and have quotes about “As soon as people started hitting Lauren then the chance to debate her on merit was gone”.

Again however the reason for that is because ironically they want everyone to feel sorry for Anita because they know that her arguments don’t actually hold up under any fair, rational analysis.

Also finally I feel that they deliberately misrepresent her critics. For instance they claim that the majority of her critics think she wants to ban video games. Whilst I am sure that some of her online trolls have said this, its ridiculous to act as though that’s what the majority of her critics such as Thunderf00t and Sargon of Akkad have accused her of.

Also at the same time they don’t address other more frequently cited and valid criticisms of her such as the fact that she complains about sexualized female characters, whilst never commenting on sexualized images of male characters.

According to Anita and Rational Wiki only one of these images is sexist. Why do I think there is a double standard? I don’t think either image is sexist by the way. Let viewers both oggle Xena and drool over Spike. Its natural. Still to only focus on one as a bad thing creates a gross double standard against both genders as men are shamed for their natural sexual urges, whilst women are ironically shamed and even made to feel guilty for cashing in on their sex appeal as performers whilst men are not.

Then there is of course the fact that Anita complains about female characters being killed in video games such as Hitman, despite the fact that far more male characters are killed regularly in video games (and indeed all forms of media.)

And then there is her rampant hypocrisy for slating video games for being too violent overall and for featuring heroes who solve their problems through violence whilst constantly praising Buffy a show about a female character who regularly stakes, decapitates, and burns her enemies to death!

The great irony is that Buffy is actually among the very few heroes who always kills her enemies. Most heroes like Sherlock Holmes, Batman (in some versions), Superman and Spider-Man have a moral code where they will never kill. Others meanwhile like the Doctor, Xena, Captain Kirk, even Wolverine will only kill if they need too. Buffy however? Due to the nature of her enemies she always kills them. She is actually the most violent popular hero of all time. Yet Anita who can’t stand video games that teach kids that violence solves problems loves Buffy and holds it as the pinnacle of genre series.

Rather than address these types of criticisms on her page however (or bring up her endorsement of gender and racial segregation.) Rational Wiki instead will bring up things like Mundane Matt’s silly comment (that he later regretted) about her smiling like a white person or claim that a picture of her playing a game when she was ten proves that she always liked video games (despite the fact that plenty of people play games as children and then grow out of them later.) Or they claim that people said she chased Joss Whedon off of twitter (which again people by and large didn’t say. They did however point out that Jonathan McIntosh her producer did join in the hate mob against Whedon which eventually drove him off Twitter.)

Their attempts to refute Thunderf00t’s criticisms of Anita are also mostly hollow.

They claim for instance that there is a problem with representation of women in video games, that there aren’t enough female heroes, that women have a hard time from gamers etc, whilst offering no sources to back these claims up, and never commenting on the various sources that contradict Anita’s statements such as.

Interview with Liz Finnegan

On top of that they also say that Sarkeesian disables the comments on her videos because of the abuse she gets. They completely leave out the fact that again all youtubers get abuse in their comments sections, but also that in the various re-upload’s of and responses to her videos, comments about raping her and vicious abuse in general are in the extreme minority.

They also fail to mention in their “debunking” of Thunderf00t’s claims about Hitman that he criticises Anita first of all for her double standard in only complaining about female characters being killed, when far more male characters are gruesomely killed in video games, and also that the game does punish players for murdering female characters (and only female characters) and furthermore that it is ridiculous to say having strippers in a strip club is somehow sexist. Rational Wiki even says “why have the strippers there at all”. How about because its a strip club!

Also they claim that the damsel in distress trope should be phased out once games stories become more complex and involved, completely ignoring the fact that they have been phased out as video games have become more complex and developed more involved stories.

Basically Rational Wiki does its best to misrepresent Anita’s critics and ironically turn her into a damsel in distress to make casual readers feel immense sympathy with her. They jump through the most ridiculous hoops to defend this utter disgrace to feminism.

Bare Faced Lies And Slander

OMG a woman I’m scared (using Rational Wiki’s “logic” against them.)

Rational Wiki regularly slanders those whose opinions it disagrees with. For instance on its Webshites page it says that the youtuber Some Black Guy thinks Donald Trump is a great guy. This is a total distortion of his opinion. Having now watched many of his videos all Some Black Guy has ever said is that he thinks Donald Trump was less dangerous than Hillary Clinton as Clinton was a war monger who openly antagonized Russia and China.

However he made it clear that he did not actually like Trump several times. Some Black Guy’s opinion of Trump was no different to John Pilgers who also said that he hoped Trump would win instead of Hillary Clinton due to Hillary’s track record in countries such as Iraq, Libya and Honduras.

By Rational Wiki’s logic then John Pilger of all people is a Trump fanboy as his opinions on him are pretty much exactly the same as Some Black Guy’s.

Furthermore they also claim that Blaire White advocates bullying fat people and that she may not have been joking about having refugees gassed. Whilst I don’t think it was one of Blaire’s best jokes, again it was clearly a joke. When you look at the context its obvious that Blaire is just trying to get a rise. Again you might think it was an inappropriate joke, but that’s Blaire’s style.

The fact that Rational Wiki would even try and suggest that it wasn’t a joke however shows how desperate they are to discredit her. Blaire also has explicitly said that she does not want to see people be bullied for their weight, but at the same time she doesn’t think being obese is a healthy lifestyle choice and therefore should not be promoted as such by things like “the body positivity movement.

This is a perfectly fair view to hold. Most people don’t think smoking is a healthy lifestyle choice, but that doesn’t mean they want to publicly humiliate and shame smokers or even stop them from smoking. But at the same time they are going to call out someone who says that smoking is a healthy lifestyle.

Furthermore they claim that Blaire White has attacked Riley O’Dennis simply for claiming to be trans and still having a penis. Again this is a gross misinterpretation of Blaire’s views. Blaire criticized Riley because she believed he had not undergone any form of transitioning (though she later apologized when she found out that he had.)

Still Blaire’s criticisms against Riley are more to do with his political leanings such as his ridiculous claims that straight men and gay women who don’t find him attractive are transphobic.

Rational Wiki again however doesn’t address these criticisms that Blaire has for Riley and simply lies that her issue with him is that he still has a penis. Blaire has said many times that most trans women keep their male genitals, so she certainly would not mock Riley Dennis for it.

Rational Wiki has also been very deceptive on the feud between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Linda Sarsour too.

Rational Wiki thinks very highly of Linda Sarsour. It includes her among the websites it recommends and uses as a valuable source. Ayaan Hirsi Ali meanwhile, though it acknowledges that some of her claims are valid, it generally tends to dismiss her as an Islamophobe.

Rational Wiki actually tries to make Hirsi Ali the bad guy as best it can.

All it mentions about her feud with Linda Sarsour is that Ayaan Hirsi Ali said Linda Sarsour could not be a feminist because she was a Muslim. Now personally I don’t see anything wrong with this statement anyway, as Islam says that women are inferior to men, so if you are actually a devout Muslim then you obviously can’t be a champion for women’s rights.

Still Rational Wiki completely leaves out the fact that Ayaan Hirsi Ali says Linda Sarsour can’t be a feminist because she supports Sharia Law (a law that deprives women of basic human rights.) And also that Linda Sarsour said she wanted to beat the shit out of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and take away her vagina (Ali is a survivor of female genital mutilation.) This is actually what began their feud, but again you wouldn’t know it going by Rational Wiki.

Furthermore Rational Wiki is often quick to dismiss people like Chris Ray Gun, Mundane Matt and Some Black Guy as sexists and members of the alt right, simply because they are critics of feminism. All 3 of them are fairly left leaning, liberals (Ray Gun supported Bernie Sanders and refused to vote for either Trump or Clinton in the 2016 election.)

Finally they also failed to mention the abuse Laci Green has received from feminists (including being called a slut, getting death threats, and being doxxed) simply for dating Chris Ray Gun!

Once again we can see Lauren’s Law in full effect here. When Anita is subject to harassment, Rational Wiki devote practically an entire page to it. Whilst Laci Green, not only another woman, but a feminist is subject to doxxing, death threats and sexist abuse Rational Wiki doesn’t comment on it as it doesn’t fit their narrative now that she is simply associating with an anti feminist Chris Ray Gun in her private life.

All they say is that her fans aren’t happy with her dating Chris to say the least, which doesn’t even begin to cover the abuse Laci has received.

Conclusion

As you can see Rational Wiki is really nothing more than a propaganda piece for SJWs which tries to present itself as an impartial and well rational source.

For this reason I think its very important to call them out on their bullshit and show that at the end of the day whilst they claim to be impartial and level headed, they regularly lie and misinterpret things to suit their own agenda.

Thanks for reading.

Problems With Feminism

In the last few decades feminism has broken into mainstream popular culture like never before.

Whilst initially this was a good thing as it helped to bring a greater focus to women’s issues, sadly it has also led to various other problems which I will explore in this article.

I don’t identify as a feminist. I don’t have anything against the concept of feminism itself, as it is simply equality between the sexes.

At the same time however feminism is more than just a concept. It is a full blown political and social movement and whilst it has done many great things in the past, in its current form its not something I would wish to associate myself with.

Sadly however I feel that many people in the mainstream media are too scared to ever criticise the feminist movement, as any criticism of feminism is almost always seen as an attack against all women.

A recent example of this can be seen when Piers Morgan simply voiced a criticism of the Women’s March in January and Ewan McGregor and Patrick Stewart both boycotted This Morning, a programme which Piers Morgan co-hosts (with McGregor cancelling a scheduled appearance and Stewart vowing to never appear on the show again as long as Morgan is host.)

Now regardless of whether or not you agree with Morgan, its quite frankly pathetic of both Stewart and McGregor to boycott the man simply for expressing a negative opinion about anything even remotely feminist related.

If you disagree with Piers Morgan wouldn’t it be better to go on his show and actually you know, argue with him, explain why he is wrong, maybe listen to his arguments in a fair and decent way before decrying him as a sexist bigot who should be boycotted?

Sadly however because Morgan was criticising feminism, then neither Stewart or McGregor (along with many others) were willing to give him a fair shake.

Ironically however by reacting this way, people like McGregor and Stewart just end up hurting feminism in the long run. As feminism can’t look in on itself and recognise where its going wrong because any and all critics of feminism are shouted down as sexists. Then as a movement, feminism is becoming stagnated and static.

Every single movement must be able to look inwards and acknowledge its own faults, and even just change with the times. If it can’t then it will cease to be of any relevance and become an old archaic, puritanical group of people clinging on to outdated concerns and silencing anyone who dares to disagree with it.

In this article  I am going to highlight the problems modern feminism has, the different types of feminists there are, and why true feminism is still needed in the world today despite the problems it has.

As always let me know what you think in the comments below.

Why Feminism Is Still Needed, But Why Its Also Standing In The Way

There is no denying that on a global scale women have it worse than men. That’s not to do down men’s issues or try and turn misery and suffering into some kind of competition of course.

Still in certain countries around the world such as Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Somalia, women live lives of unbearable suffering and inequality. Though again that’s not to say that things are rosey for the men in these countries either, particularly if you are gay. In fact its worse for LGBT people as they will be killed in Islamic majority countries, regardless.

Still all women in these countries are deprived of basic rights and privileges such as being allowed to drive, marry whoever they want, an education, and even just being allowed to dress however they wish. They are the property of their husbands, fathers, and brothers, they have to do everything they say, and are regularly traded like pieces of meat. They also have to endure such horrific forms of abuse as genital mutilation, acid attacks and regular violent sexual assaults.

These countries are in desperate need of first wave feminism, and we here in the west should do all we can to help the women suffering in these countries to overthrow the genuine and disgusting patriarchy they live under.

First we need to supply any feminists groups and even just individual women brave enough to fight back against the misogynistic Islamic culture they are cursed to live under with financial aid.

Second we must also boycott any country that treats women as less than fully human the same way that we boycotted South Africa during the Apartheid regime. Finally we must always make sure that everyone knows how women are treated in these countries.

I am sorry to say that I did not know about the case of Dina Ali until just a day or two ago. Sadly it appears that it may be too late to help this poor woman, but at the very least she should serve as a further reminder that we need to focus on the plight of the women (and other people) in Islamic countries more than we do now.

Every activist worth their salt should be doing all they can to bring tragic cases like Dina Ali to as many people’s attention as possible; rather than taking part in marches organised by self promoting, Sharia Law supporters to attack Donald Trump for saying pussy 12 years ago.

Feminism far from being obsolete is in some places needed now more than ever.

In the west meanwhile I think its more complicated. I do not believe that we live in a Patriarchy in the west.  I believe that western society is by and large an egalitarian society where everyone is treated equally regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation.

Ultimately we do not live in a society where anyone is told that they cannot go for a job, or any position based on who they are. I also do not believe that we live in a rape culture either. Its true that our justice system is far from perfect and there have been many great miscarriages of justice (not just for rape but many other crimes too). But at the same it is also true that rape is rightfully viewed as one of the most reprehensible crimes in our society. An accusation of rape is enough to completely ruin someone’s reputation forever.

Christina Hoff Sommers: Rape Culture Is A Panic Like 1980’s

RAINN, Nations Largest Anti Sexual Violence Organisation Rejects Rape Culture Idea

Similarly other claims of an institutionalised patriarchy such as the gender wage gap have been debunked time and time again too. See here.

Don’t Buy Into The Gender Wage Gap Myth

Yes The Gender Wage Gap Is Still A Myth

Thus I don’t believe we live in a patriarchy. However that said I do think there are certain areas where women are disadvantaged compared to men in the west, but at the same time there are areas where men are disadvantaged compared to women too.

The reason for this is because ironically I think that western society does not take into account the key differences between men and women. Men and women are obviously equal, but they are different, not just physically, but in terms of personality in some respects too.

Sadly modern western society I feel is probably too egalitarian for its own good in that it does view everyone as exactly the same and doesn’t consider that some situations might benefit one gender more.

For instance the way the education system is set up currently favours women more, hence why fewer boys are going to University than girls and generally do well overall. See here.

At the same time the way the medical profession is set up favours men as it doesn’t take into account the fact that women will naturally need to take long periods off in order to have children. Young women in the medical profession sadly often have to make a choice between having children and having a career.

Females in Medicine. Having Children

Similarly there are many other double standards against men and women in our society. On the issue of sex, I would agree that there is a slut/stud double standard in some respects, but at the same time there is ironically a double standard when it comes to female on male rape as people tend to view men as always wanting sex, and being lucky if some hot girl pays them any attention.

Current British laws on rape are very misandiristic as according to the law a woman cannot be charged with raping a man unless she is an accomplice to it.

Is The Law On Rape Sexist

I feel that in order to counteract these double standards we need to accept the differences between the genders and try and find a way to accommodate them in every situation that requires it.

Create an education system that can benefit both genders, take into account that women in certain professions may need to take a certain amount of time off in order to start families, and work around that etc.

Modern, third wave feminism however I feel stands in the way of recognising the true cause of gender inequalities in western society for various reasons.

To start with many feminists argue that gender is a social construct created by the patriarchy. Now its true that certain stereotypical male and female behaviours are as a result of indoctrination, but ultimately most of them do stem from biological differences.

I feel that feminists often say that gender is a social construct in a misguided attempt to help trans people. They probably think that by tearing down so called gender norms they are making people who blur the lines between genders behaviour more socially acceptable.

The thing is by saying that there are differences between men and women you are not saying that trans people are either amoral, or don’t exist.

Obviously there is a spectrum and therefore we do get some men who are more feminine, and some women who are more masculine, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. However the point is that most people do tend to behave according to their gender. I am not saying that gender decides every aspect of your personality, but it certainly does have a noticable impact on 99 percent of men and women.

Even with trans people it does too. If there were no true differences between the genders why do trans people feel that they were born in the wrong gender? Why do they change their gender if there are no true differences between the sexes? Ironically by saying that gender doesn’t exist you are actually saying trans people don’t exist and ignoring what they go through.

People have actually had their careers threatened for daring to question the received feminist wisdom that there aren’t only two genders such as Jordan Peterson.

Furthermore by insisting that we live in a patriarchy despite the many disadvantages faced by men such as the following.

Feminists tend to gloss over men’s issues (apart from obviously a few positive exceptions such as Hoff Sommers), as ALL men are seen as privileged in some way over all women.

Though some feminists may occasionally comment on things such as the high rate of young men committing suicide, even then I find its often in a way that is anti men.

It says that its men’s fault that things are so bad for them because of their own “toxic masculinity” which apparently drives other men who can’t compete to suicide. Feminists “sympathy” for men suffering in the west therefore, is often just a tool they can use to further attack masculinity which again diverts our attention away from the real causes of inequality. A lack of understanding of the differences between men and women.

Finally the fact that feminists view western society as being completely anti women also leads I feel to feminists always trying to view a situation in a way where women are hard done to rather than in any kind of objective way.

An example of this was Hillary Clinton’s outrageous comments that women are the real victims of war as they lose their husbands and sons! Even when men are being sent off to die in pointless conflicts in their thousands, sometimes millions, its still somehow women who are suffering more?

On the one hand its true that we need feminism to tackle the very real inequalities that women still face all over the globe, but on the other hand its kind of standing in the way in combating real gender inequalities in the west caused by natural differences between men and women, as it leads us down a mistaken path where we believe that we still live in a patriarchy, whilst also somewhat paradoxically telling us that there are no true differences between men and women.

Feminism therefore needs a top to bottom reformation, but in order to do that I feel we need to know the different types of feminists there are in the world today in order to see where the movement is going right, and where it is going wrong.

Whilst there are many different feminist groups I feel they can all be grouped into the following five categories by and large.

1/ True Feminists

These feminists include the likes of Christina Hoff Sommers, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Maryam Namazie and Camile Pagilia.

Now I don’t always agree with every individual thing these feminists say. For instance Ayaan Hirsi Ali politically is probably more to the right than I am.

Still these women at the end of the day do actually follow the true definition of feminism, “the belief in equality between genders”, and combat the very worst forms of misogyny in the world today.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has been a vocal critic of Islam’s treatment of women for her entire life. She has helped to bring the suffering of women in countries like Somalia to a far wider attention in the west. She has given countless lectures on the subject of women in Islam, made tv appearances, written best selling books (many of which draw on her own traumatic childhood in Somalia where she was forced to endure among other things, her genitals being mutilated.)

She later founded the AHA foundation which is the worlds leading organisation working to end things such as female genital mutilation, honour killings and arranged marriages.

As a result of this Ali has faced genuine attempts on her life by Islamic extremists. In fact she has to walk around with bodyguards everywhere she goes, and has even had to cancel several public appearances.

Maryam Namazie, another outspoken feminist critic of Islam similarly has had to endure regular threats against her life, and recently even had to deal with Muslim men trying to interrupt a lecture she was giving on what women endure in Islamic countries.

See here

Feminists like Ali and Namazie are true champions for female empowerment. They help the women who are suffering from the ugliest forms of misogyny at a risk to their own safety.

They also at the same time however do not have any anti male feelings either. In fact they fight just as hard for men’s rights. Ayaan Hirsi Ali has devoted her life to helping marginalised groups of men in Islamic countries such as gay men (who again in some ways have it even worse than women in Muslim countries.)

You’d actually be hard pushed to find a greater champion of men’s rights in the west than Christina Hoff Sommers herself meanwhile.

These feminists care about inequalities against both genders and battle for many worthwhile causes across the entire world.

Sadly however whilst they have done a lot of good work for many marginalised groups, they are not only a minority within modern feminism, but their influence on mainstream popular culture is also limited.

The reason for this is because these brave ladies expose the mainstream media for the cowards they are in dealing with radical Islam.

Now I am not trying to tar all Muslims as evil, and I am certainly not advocating for persecution of innocent Muslims.

However at the same time the religion is in desperate need of a reformation (more so than feminism!)

Islam at its core is a violent, bigoted, and dangerous religion. It says very explicitly that all other religions are to be abolished, that all LGBT people are to be executed, that all black people are inferior to white people (Islam also advocates slavery too.) That all women are inferior to men, and finally that all non believers be killed or converted.

Now not all Muslims follow the bigoted beliefs that are in the Quran. Many Muslims who live in the west abandon the negative aspects of their faith in order to fit in with western society.

However those who do not and actually follow what their holy book says word for word, at the very least hold prejudiced beliefs against gays and women. Sadly its a higher percentage than you’d think.

A recent poll showed that over 50 percent of Muslims in the United Kingdom believed that homosexuality should be criminalised.

Poll Shows That Half of British Muslims Think Homosexuality Should Be Illegal

52 Percent of British Muslims Want Homosexuality To Be Criminalised

Of course in the most extreme cases Muslims born and raised even in western countries on Islamic beliefs can become suicide bombers and carry out violent crimes against those who insult their prophet Muhammed and even just non believers.

Sadly these violent crimes have only increased the more influence Islam has gained in the west. Rather than make more concessions to Islam, we should be insisting that it change its values to fit in with our own. We should be aiding Muslim reformers (including Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maajid Nawaz.)

However the mainstream media is simply too terrified to take Islam on. Nobody wants to end up like Charlie Hebdo. The only reason things like Charlie Hebdo happen however is because the mainstream media leaves small, low key critics of Islam out in the cold.

Its easy to pick off critics of Islam like Charlie Hebdo, a tiny little magazine. If the entire mainstream media however starts criticising Islam as much as it does other religions then things have changed. We have shown the extremists a sign of strength, as images of their prophet are everywhere, on tv, in the newspapers etc, and its not like they can destroy the entire mainstream media is it?

However the mainstream media are a pack of shameless cowards and so they refuse to comment on the problem with Islam, but at the same time they also slander those who are brave enough to speak out against the religion which sadly includes the likes of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, in order to cover their tracks.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is either slandered as an Islamophobe and racist (despite Islam not being a race.) Or just ignored completely (much as many Islamic crimes are too) by the mainstream media.

Sadly as a result of this Ali and others like hers influence is sadly not all that it could be, and worse still the mainstream media in an effort to look progressive starts to prop up a very different type of feminist as their safe champions of women’s rights, which leads to my next point.

2/ Career Feminists

The most contemptible and dangerous type of feminist. These feminists include the likes of Anita Sarkeesian, Gloria Steinam, Rebecca Watson, Hillary Clinton and Amani Al Khatabeh.

These feminists emerged when feminism started to become popular and trendy. They saw that there was money to be had in the movement, however they didn’t want to actually take the risks that would come with speaking out against the worst form of sexism in the world today. Risks that again true feminists like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Maryam Namazie have to deal with on a daily basis.

So they instead invent mythical bogeymen like the patriarchy, and the gender wage gap to rally against. They pick perfectly benign targets such as video games, sci fi tv shows, and comic books and slander them as sexist in order to make themselves look like feminist champions.

They also somewhat ironically present themselves as damsels in distress by trying to make out that they are constantly harassed and victimised in western society. Now I am not saying that western society is perfect, but again a lot of these so called hostile environments for women that career feminists complain about are blown out of proportion or just flat out made up.

Take for instance the harassment women endure online. Feminists would have you believe that its only women endure online harassment.

Truth is men ironically endure far more abuse online than women do according to studies.

Higher Proportion of Men Report Abuse In Online Survery

Now this does not mean I condone any of the sick and twisted abuse that women get online, but the point is, its not a gendered issue is it? These sicko’s clearly go after everyone for every reason, which is why the best thing to do is just ignore them.

Similarly feminists such as Anita Sarkeesian will often try and paint video games, the sci fi and fantasy genres and comic books as being hostile, unwelcoming places for women, and indeed minorities such as black people. They will also tar their fans as being openly misogynistic and racist.

Once again nothing could actually be further from the truth. To start with many studies have shown that there is no link between violent forms of entertainment and people committing actual acts of violence.

Also whilst its true that many video games do allow the players to murder female characters, far more male characters are killed in video games.

Furthermore sci fi and fantasy, and video game fandom’s are usually welcoming to women and minorities. There have been many, many sci fi and fantasy films, television series, video games, comic books etc that star non white, non male, non straight characters and audiences have embraced them just as much.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Xena the Warrior Princess and Charmed. All 3 series were among the longest running fantasy series (until it was surpassed recently by Supernatural, Charmed was the longest running fantasy series in American history.) All three also became global icons and had an immense influence on popular culture and other television series.

In fact the sci fi and fantasy genres have often been ahead of the curve in terms of representation for women and minorities, with the original Star Trek series having the first ever interracial kiss in an American drama. None other than Martin Luther King himself praised Star Trek for its progressive values and actually said it was important to the civil rights movement!

Yet feminists such as Anita Sarkeesian seem to go out of their way to target these genres more than others because they are the most progressive genres and Sarkeesian therefore won’t have to actually deal with a genuine misogynistic backlash.

Also things like sci fi and video games are looked down on by the mainstream media. Even with the recent geek fad, nerds are generally still looked down upon, with things like comic books and video games being seen as childish interests.

The mainstream media will naturally be on the side of the feminists against the supposed, smelly, sad, basement dwelling nerds and even some nerds themselves will be on the side of the feminists. They won’t want to be seen as sad gits whose whole lives revolve around things like video games and Doctor Who so they will happily join the feminists in slandering their own interests.

Now I don’t doubt that the likes of Sarkeesian have received death threats from some psychotic nerds and gamers, but there are psycho’s in every group. Many anti feminists have had to endure death threats, and even physical assaults and attempts to get them fired from their jobs.

See here

All of this ironically is worse than anything any feminist critic of video games or sci fi has ever had to endure. No nerd or gamer has ever thrown their own urine over Anita Sarkeesian. No one has ever actually punched Rebecca Watson in the face, and no one has ever tried to get say Whovian Feminism fired from her job and ruin her life. Mean tweets? Yes okay, but again those aren’t quite the same thing, and as we have been over anti feminists, indeed EVERYBODY gets mean tweets.

So no I don’t think that Anita Sarkeesian is in the same kind of danger as Ayaan Hirsi Ali for speaking out against video games. I don’t even think that Anita is in as much danger as Lauren Southern is for criticising feminism or saying that there are only two genders.

So that’s why Anita goes after video games. Its a brilliant way through a little media manipulation of making herself look like a feminist champion without actually having to do a sodding thing to help women in genuine need of feminism.

Anita Sarkeesian and others like her are total opportunistic cowards.

Other career feminists might have a second agenda of their own, beyond simply becoming famous, and use feminism to make themselves untouchable.

I feel that Muslim feminists fall under this category. I am sorry but its impossible to actually follow the teachings of the Quran and be a feminist. The Quran openly says that women are inferior to men. Any movement that advocates the equality of both genders has to be at odds with the teachings of the Quran (that is until the Islamic faith has a reformation.)

Now many of these Muslim feminists claim to be practising Muslims who know their own holy book. So going by their own words we can’t just accuse them of being ignorant of the true nature of their faith.

Even then though if they were merely ignorant then that doesn’t say much about the type of feminists they are. They claim to care about women’s rights, yet they don’t know what the religion they follow actually says about women?

Or indeed the suffering it has inflicted on women throughout history and still continues to do so throughout the world today?

Nevertheless I feel lot of these Muslim “feminists” such as Amani Al Khatahbeh actually lie about how sexist Islam is in order to dupe people for a variety of reasons.

First of all it can allow them to gain more oppression points. The modern SJW consensus is that Muslim women have to endure double what western women do. Not because of the religion of Islam of course, but because of evil western Islamophobia.

Also as devout Muslims the likes of Amani are following a process called Taqiyya. Taqiyya is the name given to deception in Islam.

Muhammed encouraged his followers to lie to non believers about the true nature of his religion through Taqiyya when Islamic forces were weak.

Once Muslim forces were strong enough then the non believers they had lied to were to be disposed of or forcibly converted like all infidels.

Here are some interesting videos on Taqiyya.

By far and away the most disgusting example of a Muslim Feminist duping unsuspecting liberals through Taqqiya however is the case of Linda Sarsour.

Linda Sarsour is a vile human being. She advocates Sharia Law, a law that says that women are inferior to men, and that homosexuality should be criminalised and she has also said that she wants to take away Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s vagina because of her remarks about Islam.

The fact that Ali is a survivor of female genital mutilation is something that Sarsour must surely be aware of. With this in mind it doesn’t seem likely that this was just a random threat does it? It seems to me as though Sarsour was saying that she actually wanted to cut out Ali’s vagina, but was hiding it under the mask of feminism of all things by saying it was because Ali didn’t deserve to be a woman.

To the mainstream media however, Sarsour is a champion for women’s rights and the underdog as that’s how she presents herself through clever deceptions such as the Woman’s March.

Linda Sarsour exposes herself as a lying, homophobic, racist, hateful, poisonous scumbag, traitor to her own gender and wannabe hood bitch every time she opens that cancerous asshole she calls a mouth.

Of course sadly other career feminists will often support these Muslim feminists because they benefit their narrative. If people wake up to how big a danger Islam is, then Anita Sarkeesian will be seen as the joke for going after video games and appearing at the UN to try and censor people saying she sucked!

Same with all the career feminists who focus on things like manspreading, women being called bossy, etc. They support the Muslim feminist deception of Islam being a feminist religion to cover up their shameful cowardice compared to true feminists.

Finally male career feminists not only use their position to further their careers but also for sex too. I know that’s a cliche, and I certainly would not decry every single man who identifies as a feminist as simply wanting to get laid. That’s as lazy a way of arguing as when Social Justice Warriors just call someone who disagrees with them a Nazi.

However at the same time it cannot be denied that many militant male feminists who slander other people as sexists and even perverts have been exposed as using their status for sex.

See here.

Of course they are the perfect feminist champions for the mainstream media to prop up as they are safe. They won’t have to run the risk of actually worrying about taking on genuine misogynists like the Islamic extremists who try and murder Ayaan Hirsi Ali or even just the Islamic thugs who tried to silence Maryam Namazie. Instead they can just slander nerds, or video gamers.

Sadly however as these feminists and the mainstream media work together (as they both benefit each other) these feminists have a far greater influence and reach than the true feminists do. This in turn leads me to my next point.

3/ Misguided Feminists

These feminists are often young feminists who I feel have been taken in by the likes of Anita Sarkeesian, and Rebecca Watson. These feminists include the likes of Claudia Boleyn, Laci Green and Emma Watson.

I don’t see these feminists as being malicious. I do think their hearts are in the right place, but the problem is all the media they have been exposed to has filled their heads full of lies that they live in a society that despises women and so they actually believe bullshit like the gender wage gap, sexism in video games, etc.

Furthermore they also buy into other dangerous lies such as Islam is a religion of peace, or even that Islam is a feminist religion and will ironically end up defending a religion that says they are inferior for their very gender!

Claudia a bisexual, feminist really needs to watch these two videos

To see how duped she was by the toxic alliance of feminism and Islam.

I think its important to try and reach out to and debate with these feminists. In the case of people like Anita Sarkeesian they don’t want to reach out and debate with people as they know their beliefs are a lot of bullshit, but they don’t want their arguments to be disproven because then their cash cow will end. Anita Sarkeesian has openly refused to debate Milo Yiannopolous several times for instance. Even when he has offered to donate money to feminist charities if she did.

Then there was her recent hilarious outburst when Sargon of Akkad merely sat in the audience of a talk she was giving. Aside from calling him a garbage human she also outright refused to debate him when he offered too.

Misguided feminists however I feel are not the kind who always shout down any opposing opinions.  I’m sure some of them will, but ultimately I think a lot of these feminists are kind, decent, intelligent people. They have just been given the wrong idea which is why its important to talk to them.

Claudia Boleyn, though I strongly disagree with many of her opinions I find to be a nice person all around. I’ve had a few disagreements with her on twitter about various things, but she has always been very polite and courteous to me. She’s never derided me as a sexist, a bigot or anything like that. She has also done a few response videos to people who disagree with her and again has always been very polite and respectful in them too.

ShoeOnHead did a video challenging her views on women being funnier than men, and Claudia once again was very polite and respectful in her response to Shoe. See here.

“Claudia Boleyn The Feminist I Responded To In My Video Is A Sweetheart”

Laci Green similarly had a very civil debate with Blaire White, and has also recently expressed an interest in debating more anti feminists too.

As you can see its vital to have an open debate with these kinds of feminists. I think that sadly however because of the likes of Sarkeesian who try and shut down anyone else having a discussion, all feminists are tarred with that brush and as a result many people assume the likes of Laci and Claudia are unwilling to have a discussion and so they don’t reach out to them.

I’m not saying that these feminists are less intelligent than I am for believing things like the gender wage gap.

Until just a few years ago I used to believe in feminist lies like that too. Its understandable as that was all people from my generation in particular ever heard all around them, from television, to the papers, to the education system.

However the rise of the alternative media in the last few years has helped to shed a light on many of the main feminist myths and really I think its just a matter of time before most of these types of feminists like Claudia Boleyn will see the truth about the state of their movement.

I’m not saying that they will stop being feminists. They might do, but I think it would be more beneficial if they instead tried to reform their movement, as again sadly feminism is still needed in some ways now more than ever, but its just people like Sarkeesian that are making it a negative force.

Of course not all of these misguided feminists are nice, reasonable people like Claudia Boleyn. I feel that some of these women are sadly deeply unhappy people who have issues which third wave feminism exploits to lure them in.

Indeed many ideologies and cults try and lure in the most vulnerable and unhappy people by telling them what they want to hear, IE its not your fault, its everyone else’s fault, we have all the answers, get back at the people who did this to you etc.

An example of this is Cora Segal. Segal for those of you who don’t know is a feminist who famously heckled Milo Yiannopolous and Christina Hoff Sommers. She threw a child like tantrum shouting “KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OFF THIS CAMPUS, KEEP YOUR HATE SPEECH OFF THIS CAMPUS” over Sommers every time she tried to speak.

The footage of Segals outburst was uploaded onto youtube and Segal was subsequently mocked by people all over the world. She even became a meme, and earned the unflattering nickname of “Triggly Puff”.

I feel sorry for Cora. I think she is probably very unhappy with her weight. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with being fat of course. However from a practical point of view if you are obese then you will be more likely to have serious health issues.

The same thing applies for someone who is far too thin as well. No extreme size is healthy.

Someone like Cora Segal if she is unhappy with being overweight should do one of the following things. 1/ Try and lose weight which is obviously hard. 2/ Come to terms with the fact that she is overweight. There is nothing wrong with being overweight morally, but again from a practical point of view it is unhealthy as are lots of other popular habits such as smoking. I would never dream of bullying smokers, or decrying smoking as amoral, but at the same time I would also never lie and say smoking is a perfectly healthy habit either.

However feminism will lure young, unhappy overweight women in. First it will make them feel better about being overweight by spreading lies like “healthy at any size”. Then it will make them angrier by telling them that everybody hates them because they are overweight, that no one will ever find them attractive if they are overweight etc, because of the patriarchy.

As a result of this women like Segal will never do anything about losing weight, and they will never come to terms with being overweight either, which will make them unhappier in the long run as they ultimately believe they live in a society that despises them.

Its a shame and I would never mock someone like Cora Segal. I would much rather talk with her, but with feminists like her I admit it is somewhat harder as they have invested in their beliefs emotionally more than people like Laci Green and Claudia Boleyn.

Finally once again misguided male feminists I feel can differ from their female counterparts somewhat. Misguided male feminists I feel are men who are guilted into being feminists, simply because they are men.

They buy into all of the myths about toxic masculinity, all men being privileged, all men being potential rapists etc, and grow to despise themselves as a result.

Steve Shives I feel not only falls into this type of male feminist but epitomises it!

See here.

In spite of how loathsome he can act such as when he tries to shut down anyone who disagrees with him from Sargon of Akkad to Laci Green, I do feel sorry for Steve Shives to some extent. Ultimately Shives is someone who has been made to feel guilty just for being a man!

However it is difficult to have a conversation with a feminist like Shives as he has invested so much emotionally in feminism he can’t stand any kind of criticism or skepticism (ironically) on the subject.

4/ Bully Feminists

These feminists are people who know that feminism can make someone utterly untouchable and use that to bully others. There are always people like this who emerge when a movement gains power and prestige and abuse it.

They are not by any means exclusive to feminism, but sadly again as feminism has gained power and influence in our society then these bullies have emerged too.

Here are some examples of people using feminism to push others around and in extreme cases even try and ruin their lives just because they can.

5/ Men Hating Feminists

I know its a cliche, but there is no denying that its true. A lot of modern day feminism seems to be more focused on kicking men down, taking away things they like, and generally treating them like crap than it does in helping women.

I am not including psychopaths like Valerie Solanas here. Solanas was a feminist who wrote the SCUM manifesto (which argued for the extinction of men) and tried to shoot Andy Warhol. She was an obvious lunatic and is not representative of any modern day feminist (apart from other lunatics of course which as I said earlier are found in every movement.)

You don’t need to be a raving looney to be bigoted towards a group of people like Solanas. Indeed sadly I think many misguided feminists can also fall under this category to some extent, as their heads have been filled with such anti men nonsense.

That doesn’t mean that they will despise every single man they come into contact with. I’m sure that personally they will have lots of male friends, and still be decent people all around, but sadly their general attitudes towards men will be negative.

Anti men feminists in fact can fall under all of the previous categories (except for the true feminists like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Christina Hoff Sommers.) Some career feminists can often use their platform to simply vent any frustrations they have against men too.

The general feminist consensus is that all men are privileged compared to women, that all men have sexist attitudes towards women ingrained into them by society, that all men are potential rapists, and that all men have had it too good for too long.

All of these points are completely false of course. Privilege is no longer defined by gender. Does a homeless man have privilege over Beyonce who is the worlds highest earning singer.

Men ironically make up the majority of the homeless in western society.

84 percent of Hidden Homeless Are Male

9 out of 10 sleeping rough are male

Also far from having sexist attitudes towards women, most men are hardwired to actually be sympathetic towards women.

People Are More Likely To Protect Women Than Men

Also as far as the “men have had it too good for too long argument” goes, well there is an element of truth to that.

For years women were not given as many opportunities and rights as men, and were viewed as genuinely lesser, which was obviously terrible. Still it wasn’t a picnic for men years ago as well.

Men were viewed as being more expendable than women, hence why they were the ones sent off to die in pointless wars, and forced to do the hardest jobs.

As Christina Hoff Sommers said there are and have always been disadvantages and advantages to both sexes, and that’s why men and women who are in this together need to recognise that, rather than simply compete for who had it the hardest decades, even centuries ago.

Sadly however as feminists for whatever reason, feel that men are responsible for ALL the problems of society and have all the breaks, then they will attack them in every way they can.

Feminists have recently begun to force boys as young as 11 to be taught that they are potential rapists. Children have reportedly come home in tears at being made to feel that they are potentially evil, simply for who they are.

We Must Stop Indoctrinating Young Boys

Then of course there is the fact that feminists have shut down shelters for abused men.

Domestic Abuse Shelter Shut Down

Need Knows No Gender

Its not like this is an isolated incident. There are 33 spaces dedicated to male victims of domestic abuse in safe houses and refuge’s in the United Kingdom, whilst there are 4,000 spaces reserved for women.

Feminists have outright attempted to shut down Men’s Rights Groups and ban them from being able to speak and have even laughed at men’s issues being raised in public.

See here.

Feminist Protesters Shut Down MRA Event

Row After University Cancels MRA Event

Why Are Our Universities Blocking Men’s Socieities

You can see what I mean here. This isn’t feminists being fed up with men’s issues being brought up every time someone want’s to talk about women’s issues (as they often paint it.)

Instead this is ironically feminists not being able to stand it whenever men’s issues are brought up at ANY point.

Look at the entertainment industry as well. Any form of entertainment that men might enjoy more or might even just feature more male characters has to be feminised from top to bottom.

Feminists will complain about something starring a male hero, and featuring other male supporting characters as somehow being sexist, until all of the male roles are replaced with women, more women are hired behind the scenes than men, and there even anti men jokes and remarks inserted into them.

Take a look Doctor Who, and video games. Now Doctor Who is a male dominated series. Its lead the Doctor is obviously a male character, his archenemy the Master is a male character, as are many supporting characters like The Brigadier and Davros.

Feminists however for years have been calling Doctor Who sexist simply for having male leads and have demanded that all of the male cast be replaced with women, which has already happened. The Master is now a woman, and UNIT a military organisation, previously staffed by men are now all women. (EDIT update, after laying the groundwork for it for many years, it was announced in July 2017 that the next Doctor will be a woman too.)

See here.

The Depressing Disappointing Maleness of Doctor Who

How Doctor Who delivered A Righteously Feminist Finale

No one is having that attitude towards female heroes. I’m not going on about how “its so disgusting that in Xena and Buffy and Charmed, and Once Upon A Time, and Ghost Whipserer, and Resident Evil the men never save the day. Instead its always the women, we need to change that set up pronto.”

When it comes to a male led show like Doctor Who however, then because of the feminist audience the makers have to, while the character is a male undermine him constantly for his female sidekick, like this.

That is until they turn him into a woman. I wonder if Jodie’s male companion will threaten to hit her across the face so hard she’ll basically die?

PS the whole “its canon that the Doctor can turn into a woman” argument feminists trot out is utter bullshit. It wasn’t for 50 years until the feminists bullied the showrunner into including it. I won’t go into why a female Doctor is a terrible idea as this isn’t the place, but if you want to know why and also how the feminists slowly took over (and sunk) Doctor Who by bullying its makers and its fans, take a look at this article I wrote about it here.

5 People Who Killed Doctor Who

Of course at the same time whilst Doctor Who a male led series has to be completely feminised from top to bottom, then when it comes to female heroes like Wonder Woman, not only do feminists like Whovian Feminism not want men to write and direct for them, but they also don’t even want men to be allowed to go and see them until women have.

Of course banning men from public events is something that feminists like to do whenever they can.

Swedish Female Only Music Festivals Until Men Learn To Behave Themselves

Video games meanwhile have always been a form of entertainment that men have enjoyed more. I’m not saying that no women enjoy them, but they are mostly a male dominated interest.

Naturally as a result of this, feminists want to absolutely destroy the video game industry. And no I am not saying that they want to destroy them by getting more women to like them, or by demanding that more female characters be included (there have been popular female video game characters from the start.)

Feminists are ruining the industry by slandering it. Smearing its fans as anti women bigots, and making ludicrous claims that it encourages not only bigoted attitudes but even violence towards women.

As Christina Hoff Sommers puts it in this video here, they basically just want the video game culture to die, simply because its one that men prefer.

Feminists essentially want to take any form of entertainment that men might enjoy more away from them, silence issues that affect men more and finally teach you boys that they are potentially evil simply because of how they are born.

This is really the main reason that not just most men, but most women hate modern day feminism and refuse to identify as feminists.

See here.

Poll Few Identify as Feminists. Most Believe in Equality.

Feminism is now seen as a hateful, bigoted movement and with good reason. Its nonsense to claim that its just because people hate women’s rights. As the poll shows most people in modern society support equal rights for everyone, and that’s why they hate feminists.

Quite frankly the fact that anybody still supports a movement, never mind men, which uses phrases like toxic masculinity, shuts down any attempt to talk about men’s issues, bans men from public places, attacks any masculine interests as evil and sexist, whilst trying to ironically exclude all men from any feminine interest, I think shows how people are more sympathetic to women’s issues over all.

Even when the movement is so blatantly sexist, people still don’t want to junk it completely as they still think if its for women, then it has to have some merit, surely? Imagine if there was a movement that cared about genuinely marginalised men’s rights, but at the same time constantly attacked women at every corner. People would not bother with it for one second.

Conclusion

The governor Pat Condell sums it up brilliantly as always.

As you can see there are still many great feminists who are true champions for equality around the world such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Christina Hoff Sommers.

Sadly however their influence on the next generation of feminists, though not completely insignificant, is ultimately dwarfed by the safer, career feminists who have filled an entire generation of young men and women’s heads with irrational and ultimately unimportant bullshit like manspreading. These career feminists have also whipped extreme bigotry towards men, whilst ironically making it hard for people to talk about the biggest danger to women in the world today, Islam, simply to cover up their own cowardice.

At the same time the fact that feminism has become utterly untouchable in the modern western world then it has also become something that bullies and frauds like Linda Sarsour can use to make themselves untouchable and further their own ends.

Its important therefore that the next generation looks up to women like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Christina Hoff Sommers instead of people like Anita Sarkeesian in order to learn what true inequalities against women need to be fought. If not then feminism which has almost lost all credibility among people will be an almost completely dead movement within then next generation.

Thanks for reading.

My Favourite Social and Political Commentators

,

Nowadays it seems you can’t trust anyone. Everyone from the biggest news channels, and media outlets to Youtubers making entertaining videos from their bedrooms are derided as fake news, or a shill for some crooked politician, or part of some new and dangerous political movement..

In my opinion the only thing to do in the current climate is to look at as many different sources as you can, even people that you don’t particularly like, and then draw your own conclusions. For instance, even though I find them most of the time to be nothing more than a sick parody of what they once were. I still watch BBC News regularly, simply so that my sources don’t become too one sided.

That said however there are obviously social and political commentators who I agree with more than others on the most important issues, and whose style I even just personally enjoy watching.

In this article I am going to run through my personal favourite social and political commentators. I don’t agree with any of these people on absolutely everything, and again I obviously don’t get everything I think from these people either. I just feel that they are generally on the right track more than most, and whilst I do think its important to listen to as many different people from both the left and the right as possible. These would still be my best recommendations.

Please let me know what you think in the comments below and also who your top choices would be as well.

John Pilger

Someone I have been a huge admirer of for most of my life. I was first introduced to John Pilger through my parents who were also big fans of his.

I’ve read many of his books and watched almost all of his documentary’s. Pilger for me is probably the most accomplished journalist of the entire 20th Century. He has helped to shed light on many of the worst disasters caused by US, British and Australian foreign policy over the course of his decades long career.

For instance his groundbreaking documentary ” Year Zero the Silent Death of Cambodia” helped to bring world wide attention to the suffering of the Khmer people. As much as 45 million pounds was raised in small donations from across the entire United Kingdom in solidarity to the nation after its first showing.

Pilger has also produced documentaries about the Australians treatment of the Aboriginies, the genocide in East Timor, the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and the Vietnam war. He has also been a consistent critic of the likes of Tony Blair, George W Bush, and Barack Obama.

Though there have been some controversies over the years, with some critics dismissing Pilger’s work of being too sensationalised. Overall Pilger has continued to have a large influence.

I do agree that he can be a little bit too anti Western at certain points. He is guilty of sometimes taking anybody’s side against Western governments and also of sometimes sugar coating the sins of its enemies.

However overall I think he maintains a clear and level head in his reports and his work is very thorough and well researched.

He also somewhat refreshingly for someone on the left has criticised identity politics. Indeed he warned of identity politics influence long before many of its most outspoken critics on the right back in 2008 when Obama was elected.

John Pilger is the type of journalist that we don’t see much of anymore. Someone with real integrity who tries to bring attention to those who are in need of real help and that’s why even though I don’t always agree with him. (I do most of the time) I always have nothing but respect for him.

Brendan O’Neill

Much like John Pilger, O’Neill is one of the few people on the left who criticises identity politics.

I would consider myself a socialist, but I absolutely despise identity politics. I feel that identity politics is the biggest enemy to any kind of genuinely progressive politics, as it keeps us squabbling about the most unimportant differences like race, sexuality etc, whilst duping us into thinking that we are fighting to end racial and other prejudices.

Thanks to identity politics the left is more fragmented than it has ever been. Rather than trying to work together to try and fix the real source of inequality, which is class. People are instead fighting over things like who is more oppressed, gender pronouns etc.

Its also advocated that people be put in positions of power regardless of their ideas or character just to tick some boxes. This can be seen with the lefts attempts to canonise Obama and Hillary Clinton, two of the biggest war mongers in US Politics simply because Obama was the first black president, and Hillary could have been the first female president.

Those on the left, who should have been calling Obama and Hillary out for destroying the country of Libya and leading to a greater rise in Islamic extremism were instead viewing their time in office as being steps forward for society, simply because of their gender and race.

We are never going to get anywhere with identity politics (which is why so many of the corrupt bastards at the top like George Soros LOVE identity politics.)

Thus someone like O’Neill who champions old genuine left wing values, yet criticises the phoney, divisive nature of identity politics is important in my opinion.

Tree of Logic

A youtuber and outspoken critic of Islam and Black Lives Matter. I agree with Tree on most things, but politically she is probably a little more to the right (by her own admission) than I am. When I say right I obviously don’t mean “oh my god she is a Nazi” more just that she is less a critic of Capitalism than I would be.

Still Tree’s video’s on Islam are absolutely brilliant. She really has done her research and also speaks from personal experience too.

Sadly like many critics of Islam, Tree has been dismissed as racist, but that’s ridiculous. Islam is NOT a race. Islam is an ideology. We are allowed to criticise all other ideologies from Christianity to Capitalism, so why not Islam? For instance I’m not about to call Tree a racist for presumably being opposed to Socialism given her pro Capitalist ideas. So why the fuck would anyone call her a racist for criticising another ideology?

Not all Muslims are violent or bigoted of course. Many Muslims that live in the west, who are brought up with western values will cherry pick the good parts of their faith.

Those who do actually follow everything the Quran says however, at the very least hold bigoted views towards women, homosexuals and Jews, and in the most extreme cases become terrorists.

The reason for that is of course because the Quran says to kill all non believers, kill all homosexuals and that all women and black people are inferior to white men.

In my opinion people like Tree who are brave enough to speak out against the religion not only deserve our respect, but are also important in helping to stamp out the worst forms of racism, sexism and homophobia that come from the Islamic world.

Angry Foreigner

Another youtuber, Angry Foreigner is from Sweden and has done excellent videos on the devastating effects of Sweden’s open door immigration policy.

I obviously like any decent human believe that we should help refugees. However I don’t believe that the open door policy is the way to do it. The open door policy is dangerous as it allows in people without checking them first. Ultimately any country has a right to decide who comes in, to ensure its own people will be safe.

Angry Foreigner has also explored in great detail the Swedish government’s soft bigotry of low expectations in dealing with Muslim criminals, often ironically for a so called feminist government at the expense of women.

There isn’t really that much I disagree with him on. Off the top of my head I can’t think of anything major I clash with him over, but I’m sure there will be something eventually. Still overall his videos are very well researched and informative. Definitely worth a look.

Blaire White

One of the most popular Youtubers, Blaire I’d say is probably more to the centre of things. She’s certainly not as left wing as say John Pilger, but I wouldn’t describe her as right wing either. Though hilariously she is often derided as a Nazi by the mainstream media.

Blaire’s main targets are feminism, identity politics and Islam. She has a very laid back approach to the subjects she tackles, though her sense of humour is often quite biting. She doesn’t strike me as someone with an axe to grind, more someone in the middle who tries to be as fair in her assessments as much as possible which, coupled with her brilliant sense of humour make her videos always interesting to watch.

She is also a great debater too and was among the first members of the “Skeptic community” who was able to successfully reach out and convince people on the other side to actually discuss their opinions, such as in her video with Laci Green.

In this respect I feel Blaire has had a very positive influence on bridging the gap between the SJW’s and the Anti SJW’s.

ShoeOnHead

Another youtuber that I would describe as being in the centre. Shoe is very keen not to associate herself with any real political ideology. She laughs at the most ridiculous people on both the right and the left. Though her style is very accessible and her sense of humour is brilliant, and her videos are very well researched too.

My only problem with her is that she doesn’t release that many videos.

Still good things come to those who wait and I rarely find myself disagreeing with her videos.

Christina Hoff Sommers

A second wave feminist, Sommers split from mainstream feminism due to what she felt was a hostile attitude towards men and also a lack of action against Islams treatment of women.

Since then she has provided interesting critiques of third wave feminism. In my opinion Sommers is what feminism needs. Feminism though starting out as a genuinely progressive movement has over the years been hijacked by posers, who are actually too scared to comment on real inequalities faced by women.

People like Anita Sarkeesian and Caitlin Moran don’t want to run the risks that actually come with speaking out against Islam’s disgusting treatment of women, so they go after safe, benign targets such as video games, and science fiction.

Worse than that however is the way that feminism has become dogmatic to the point where it can’t accept any criticism of itself, which has in turn led to it becoming a static movement.

Sommers meanwhile is trying to break feminism out of its rut and gear it towards becoming a respectable and noble movement once again that actually helps women, rather than just as a vehicle for posers.

Whether she will succeed or not? Who knows, but she will always have my support at least.

Chris Ray Gun

A self identified classical liberal, Chris much like Blaire and Shoe, is really more to the centre of things, and tends to look at the worst of the left and the right. He has a very even handed and fair approach to the subjects he tackles, and isn’t I feel motivated by any pre existing biases.

Chris’s videos are always very amusing. His humour is energetic, self deprecating, and over the top, yet he always in amongst the drinking bleach and other crazy antics, manages to make his points very clearly and backs them up well.

He is also a talented and accomplished musician and has produced many songs, including original material and parodies of old songs with a political slant.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

A true feminist hero. Ali grew up in a Muslim country Somalia, and had to among other things endure genital mutilation at a young age. Ali has devoted her entire life to trying to bring about a reformation of Islam and has written many books on the subject as well as given many talks too.

Among the books she has written on Islam include The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam, Infidel, Nomad: From Islam to America: A Personal Journey Through the Clash of Civilisations and Heretic: Why Islam Needs a Reformation Now

Sadly she has been targeted by extremist Muslims for many years, and in fact has to walk around with body guards almost everywhere she goes. Worse still many people on the left and the mainstream media have tried to deride Ali as a racist and trouble maker.

Still she has always remained a strong critic of Islam and continues to this day to be a true champion for women’s rights and free speech.

David Wood

David Wood is a Christian apologist and so naturally as an Atheist I clash with him on the subject of God. For the record though I have no objection to anyone believing in God.

I have always said the only right way to live your life is a way that doesn’t harm other people. Thus for all I care you can believe the universe was actually created by a flying spaghetti monster as long as it doesn’t impinge on anyone else’s rights.

To be fair to David its not like he tries to silence anyone who doesn’t believe in God either. He is always willing to debate with people in civilised ways, but again as he is a devout Christian then obviously I don’t believe in what he does.

Despite this however I do love David’s videos on Islam. David probably gives the most comprehensive run down of the religion of anyone and really help to debunk a lot of the most dangerous myths about Islam.

See here.

Paul Joseph Watson

Paul Joseph Watson is an editor at Info Wars, though he also has a youtube series of his own. He is one of the most popular critics of third wave feminism and identity politics with his videos having had over 100 million views so far.

Now Paul is someone that I disagree with on quite a lot of things. Paul by his own admission is very right wing. He believes capitalism is the greatest system on earth and I feel he tends to gloss over America’s sins too.

Though I often describe myself as a socialist, I suppose you could maybe call me a light socialist. I think that capitalism has to at least be reformed, and that we need to bring in more socialist elements into western society, though not necessarily become a full blown socialist society. Not yet.

I feel we have already done this in the United Kingdom to great effect so far, with the NHS obviously being a more socialist concept. I personally think the NHS despite its problems is always preferable to a private health service.

I think a full capitalist society ultimately leads to corporatism. Paul on the other hand feels that corporatism and capitalism are distinct from one another.

I also at the same time am not always so keen on Paul’s videos against feminists. He does make some excellent points about the state of the movement, but I think he can get too nasty and personal when he goes on about feminists being fat, ugly bitches that no one wants to fuck. (Though to be fair its not like feminists don’t make similar comments about the supposed “Alt Right” all being ugly, sad, basement dwelling virgins.)

Still despite these faults I do have a lot of respect for Paul and think he talks a lot of sense on most things. His videos on Hillary Clinton were brilliant and really helped to shed a lot of light on her corruption. He also does great videos on Islam and its apologists, and has also highlighted the hypocrisy of the mainstream media brilliantly many times.

Paul’s style is very confrontational and no nonsense which is refreshing in the modern over sensitive PC culture that we live in, and its not hard to see why he has earned so many fans as a result.

I also feel that Paul is more even handed and fair than people give him credit for. For instance he has often been derided as a Trump fanboy. Yet he was among the first to criticise Trump when he launched an air strike on Syria.

Unlike those who still praised Obama even after he had destroyed the entire country of Libya, killed hundreds of innocent people in drone strikes, and kept the USA at war through his entire tenure as President. All it took for Paul was one air strike for him to criticise Trump.

Compare Paul’s comments warning Trump of “opening the gates of hell” by toppling Assad after Trump’s first foreign policy blunder to Owen Jones’ about Obama “being so cool” in 2016, a year in which Obama dropped over 26,171 bombs on wedding parties, hospitals, schools and homes, and then tell me who is the real fanboy of a President?

Overall I’d say Paul could almost be described as the anti John Pilger in that, whilst Pilger’s problem is that he is too anti Western society, Paul’s is that he is maybe a bit too pro Western society. I can understand Paul’s frustration when idiots on the left try and make out that the West is a worse than any Islamic culture, but still in the past Paul has gone too much the other way to the extent where he has made out that Margaret Thatcher was a hero which is just ridiculous in my opinion.

Interestingly enough Pilger and Watson do actually overlap in terms of opinion on many key issues, such as the bias of the mainstream media, American intervention in the Middle East, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and identity politics.

A debate between Pilger and Watson would be very interesting I think.

Tommy Robinson

The founder and former leader of the EDL, Tommy Robinson was someone that I only began to appreciate recently.

Like many I believed the lies the mainstream media told about him being a far right racist, and a Nazi for years.

It wasn’t until I saw him on Paul Joseph Watson’s channel and finally heard his side of the story that I saw that nothing could be further from the truth.

To start with politically Tommy is really more to the centre than anything else. Also he has never expressed or promoted racist views at any point in his career.

All Tommy has ever done is criticise Islam (he has frequently made a point not to tar all Muslims with the same brush either. He has simply gone after the religion of Islam.)

Sadly however because the mainstream media are such miserable, pathetic cowards when it comes to Islam, they slander Tommy as a racist.

Tommy has done more for the truly marginalised in this country than all of his critics combined.

Whilst I admit that he has made mistakes, overall I have to respect the fact that for the past 10 plus years Tommy at a risk to his own livelihood, reputation, safety and even life has done all he can to speak out against a hateful and dangerous ideology and the poisonous influence it is having on our society.

 

Honorary Mentions

Among the other people I listen to frequently include Computing Forever, Sam Harris, Abby Martin, Some Black Guy and Kraut and Tea.

Now, Kraut and Some Black Guy I really like, but I haven’t had time to see as many of their videos. I aim to rectify that soon, but for the time being I am not as familiar with their work. I will say that Kraut gave what is undoubtedly the best run down of homophobia in the Islamic world.

Other Youtubers who I have only seen fleetingly but who so far I have been impressed with include Logicked, Roaming Millenial, and The Iconoclast.

Abby Martin meanwhile I have been a fan of for a long while. I think she talks a lot of sense about the negative effects of American foreign policy. Her videos on Hillary Clinton are also excellent. Indeed I’d say she and Paul Joseph Watson more than anyone else really helped to bring to people’s attention just how corrupt Clinton actually was, though ironically Paul and Abby despise each other.

The reason for that is because Abby is sadly a rank Islam apologist. Seriously she is an Owen Jones level of Islam apologist. Its like her brain just shuts down any ability to look at things in a fair and rational way as soon as Islam is brought up, and she just hears all fair criticism of the religion as “I hate brown people!” Even when Abby is being told Islam is in need of a reformation by an actual Muslim man himself (Maajid Nawaz) Abby still writes his criticisms off as Islamophobia.

Computing Forever meanwhile though I like his regressive news series I do feel he is perhaps a bit too right wing for me at times. For instance he is opposed to gay marriage (and even voted against it), whilst I support it very strongly. Still I don’t think he is a bad guy or anything, and he is always willing to listen to other people’s opinions too. However I feel that politically, though I agree with him on a lot and respect him, we are maybe just too far apart.

Thanks for reading.