When I was young, I hated politics. Of course I didn't know anything at all about politics, nor did I understand anything about it, but I was completely prejudiced against it in a rather childish manner. "Politics" to me, like to most children, was nothing but a bunch of people in business suits talking all day long about dry and boring stuff that went completely over my head, and that seemed completely inconsequential to my life. In a survey at the school I was in, about the subject of possible future careers, I ranked "politician" as the least desirable possible. (If you are curious, I ranked "scientist" as the most desirable. Not that I turned out to be a scientist at the end, unless you consider an MSc in computing science as "a scientist", but I do love science even today.)
As I have grown older, I have started to understand politics more. No more is it just a bunch of people in business suits talking dry and boring stuff. Instead, it has become ugly, nasty, sometimes irritating and even infuriating. It gets worse when politics are mixed with ideologies, and when these ideologies are artificially and forcefully shoved into things where they don't belong, ruining and marring everything.
I'm an avid consumer of video games. Video games are a fantastic and interactive voyage of the imagination. You can travel and interact with fantasy worlds, solve puzzles, drive cars, fly, fight evil monsters, even simulate the ugly real world in a safe fictitious environment, while still fighting evil. When the story of the game is well written, it can be immersive and engaging, the characters can be likeable, and you can feel empathy for them. You may need to sometimes make hard moral choices, still fully in a safe fictitious environment. In some ways, some games can be an engaging test of what your personal opinion on things are, when you are presented with moral choices. Othertimes video games are just a relaxing way to chill out, playing a calm slow-paced but engaging game, in a beautiful fantastical virtual environment. Video games are like a pause from the boring, ugly reality; a safe way to take a break, to forget about the ugliness and the stress of the real world.
But then enter the politics. Then enter the ideologies. Then enter the social justice warriors, the feminists. Because feminists just can't leave anything alone. They have to permeate and invade everything. They have to make everything to be about themselves and their ideology, and they just can't leave it be. They have to create problems where there are none, just so that they can ram themselves into it.
Feminists have done their hardest to make video games an ugly and disgusting world, and the people who play the games ugly and disgusting stereotypes. They want to use their power and influence to beat and mutilate the world of video games until it's nothing but a disgusting rotting corpse covered in vomit and feces. They do this by relentlessly attacking video games, their creators and their players with cherry-picking, straw men and outright lies. They take antiquated stereotypes (which weren't even all that popular to begin with) and blow them out of proportions and claim that they still apply today as strongly as always; they cherry-pick details of some individual games, isolate them from their context, and then present them in a way that implies that it applies to the majority of games (even when they don't apply even to the games they cherry-picked them from). They present as facts completely fabricated allegations about the influence games have on people. They fabricate problems that just aren't there.
But the feminists are not content on attacking the games themselves. No. They have to attack the players too. They stereotype gamers, they insult them, they depict them in all kinds of derogatory manners. They want to paint a picture where the "typical gamer" is nothing but a socially awkward, sexist, misogynist, racist, aggressive white man. They want to take the public image of video games and their players, which has slowly gained more general public acceptance, and change that public perception back to being a monster to be abhorred and despised. And when gamers protest being depicted in such insulting manner, they throw back even more insults and engage in coordinated public smearing and character assassination campaigns. And because they are feminists, the media and the public at large listens to them. They are a monster, and they are basically unstoppable. They ruin, divide and devastate, and the public and the media showers them with attention, money and awards for it...
The world of video games has been invaded by ravaging political ideologues, bigoted zealots, and they have made it into an ugly, disgusting mess. They are smug, they are pretentious, they are self-righteous. They have hijacked video games for their own agenda. They just couldn't leave it alone.
And if you think that video games are the only example, you would be quite wrong.
The so-called "metalheads" are a counter-culture that formed from and around metal music. Counter-cultures are rebellious and do not follow typical societal norms. While I'm not personally involved in anything that could be called a counter-culture, I can nevertheless understand them. Their ideals could, perhaps, be described as this:
"Fuck social norms. I'm and individual, and I won't be dictated how I should or shouldn't behave. Sure, I won't outright hurt other people, murder them, or steal, but I won't conform to social norms I don't agree with just because some morally high smug asshole tells me to. You are not the arbiter of my behavior, or what is and isn't 'normal' or 'acceptable'. You can go live the life you want, I'll live the life I want. I happen to like this subculture, and if you don't like it, then don't let the door hit you on your way out. Nobody forces you to participate."
However, whenever such a subculture becomes large enough, naturally feminism just can't leave it alone. They have to invade it, they have to poison it, they have to permeate it with their moral high values. And that's exactly what's happening currently with the "metalhead" culture. Feminists are invading it and causing division and unrest. Divide and conquer.
This ought to be difficult with a counter-culture that gives the middle finger to "normal" social values. But these are feminists. Feminism has an incredible power and influence in our society, even more than any counter-culture, no matter how rebellious and radical it might be. Feminism has an incredible power to poison the mind of even those who wouldn't otherwise care. And thus, of course, a war is forming within the subculture. Only time will tell which one will prevail.
Let's move to the sci-fi and fantasy fiction community. The Hugo Awards are a renowned and prestigious set of awards given annually to the best science fiction or fantasy works and achievements of the previous year, first awarded in 1953. These awards celebrate and promote the best works of fiction within these genres, for their merit as works of art.
Who the author of the work is should, rather obviously, have no effect on whether it's nominated and awarded. I do not know if judges have had any biases (in the past or nowadays) depending on the author (eg. giving awards more easily to known authors than unknown ones), but from what I gather, that's most probably not the case. Each work is judged on its own merits, and the judgment is pretty much agnostic to who has created it. Which is, of course, how it should be. The ideal situation would be if the judges had no idea who the author of the work is, so that they can judge it completely impartially and without bias. (This is of course pretty much impossible to achieve, but it's probably not even needed. The judges who decide the awards are probably not biased.)
Naturally feminists have a problem with this kind of impartiality, with this kind of treating everybody equally regardless of their gender or ethnicity, with judging a work by its own merits regardless of who its author might be. Of course. Because feminists can't leave anything alone, and must inject themselves into everything, and make everything into a feminist issue. So, naturally, feminists are complaining loudly that there are no quotas for Hugo Award nominations for women and minorities. In other words, feminists are seriously proposing for the Hugo Award committee to discriminate against people based on their gender or ethnicity, and nominate certain people over others based on those aspects, rather than their actual work. Of course.
Because when you are celebrating and awarding art, you have to make it into a political statement, and you have to promote lesser works over better ones just to promote a political agenda. Naturally.
There is no community that feminists will not co-opt and try to invade. Lately the social justice warriors have been trying to impose their totalitarian rules on open source programming forums and communities around the internet. For example, the Ruby community has been having a fierce battle between social justice warriors and coders who oppose their fascist ideas. (For example, one idea they vehemently oppose is a proposal by the social justice warriors that if any member of the community ever, anywhere, at any time, anywhere on the internet, makes a remark or expresses an opinion that the social justice warriors do not like, that person should be reported and permanently banned from the community. Excommunicated. For expressing the wrong opinions.) Social justice warriors have already divided-and-conquered many other open source programming communities, and the Ruby community is in the middle of a war right now.
But perhaps no other subculture has become more devastated, ravaged and divided than the world-wide atheist community. (Of course in the case of atheism, the concept of "community" is extremely loose, as there are no central core tenets or ideologies that would be universally agreed or followed. However, using the word isn't a complete misnomer either.) The chasm that feminism has created in the atheist community is astonishing.
Atheist feminists tend to be horrifyingly vicious, toxic, vile, divisive, caustic and vitriolic. They verbally attack relentlessly their critics, they organize coordinated smearing and character assassination campaigns, they use technological means (such as scripts and bots) to try to silence, ban and harass their critics... No critic, be it friend or foe, is safe; if you get on their bad side, you become a persona non grata, and you get "excommunicated", vilified and demonized. There's an entire vocabulary that the atheist feminist community has invented to verbally attack, belittle and insult their opposition (such as "tone-troll" and "enablist", besides the more typical "misogynist", "sexist", "bigot" and such, which are usually thrown at their opponents with complete disregard to their meaning or whether they really apply or not.) The amount of oozing vitriol in their blog posts and YouTube videos can sometimes be astonishing. Even the most moderate of atheist feminists, who are otherwise nice, rational and intelligent, succumb to incredible irrationality and vitriol when they turn their "feminist switch" on.
Feminism was once a great social movement that produced real change for the better. It greatly influenced the development of law and human rights, achieving milestones in equality. However, it has transformed into a monster. It has transformed into a bigoted ideology that wants to poison everything. It wants to make everything to be about itself; it wants to make everything a feminist issue. If there is a subculture that has not yet embraced it, it will attack, invade, divide and conquer, until nothing is left but smoldering ruins where once there was a beautiful world.
And then they wonder why people have grown to hate feminism.
As I have grown older, I have started to understand politics more. No more is it just a bunch of people in business suits talking dry and boring stuff. Instead, it has become ugly, nasty, sometimes irritating and even infuriating. It gets worse when politics are mixed with ideologies, and when these ideologies are artificially and forcefully shoved into things where they don't belong, ruining and marring everything.
I'm an avid consumer of video games. Video games are a fantastic and interactive voyage of the imagination. You can travel and interact with fantasy worlds, solve puzzles, drive cars, fly, fight evil monsters, even simulate the ugly real world in a safe fictitious environment, while still fighting evil. When the story of the game is well written, it can be immersive and engaging, the characters can be likeable, and you can feel empathy for them. You may need to sometimes make hard moral choices, still fully in a safe fictitious environment. In some ways, some games can be an engaging test of what your personal opinion on things are, when you are presented with moral choices. Othertimes video games are just a relaxing way to chill out, playing a calm slow-paced but engaging game, in a beautiful fantastical virtual environment. Video games are like a pause from the boring, ugly reality; a safe way to take a break, to forget about the ugliness and the stress of the real world.
But then enter the politics. Then enter the ideologies. Then enter the social justice warriors, the feminists. Because feminists just can't leave anything alone. They have to permeate and invade everything. They have to make everything to be about themselves and their ideology, and they just can't leave it be. They have to create problems where there are none, just so that they can ram themselves into it.
Feminists have done their hardest to make video games an ugly and disgusting world, and the people who play the games ugly and disgusting stereotypes. They want to use their power and influence to beat and mutilate the world of video games until it's nothing but a disgusting rotting corpse covered in vomit and feces. They do this by relentlessly attacking video games, their creators and their players with cherry-picking, straw men and outright lies. They take antiquated stereotypes (which weren't even all that popular to begin with) and blow them out of proportions and claim that they still apply today as strongly as always; they cherry-pick details of some individual games, isolate them from their context, and then present them in a way that implies that it applies to the majority of games (even when they don't apply even to the games they cherry-picked them from). They present as facts completely fabricated allegations about the influence games have on people. They fabricate problems that just aren't there.
But the feminists are not content on attacking the games themselves. No. They have to attack the players too. They stereotype gamers, they insult them, they depict them in all kinds of derogatory manners. They want to paint a picture where the "typical gamer" is nothing but a socially awkward, sexist, misogynist, racist, aggressive white man. They want to take the public image of video games and their players, which has slowly gained more general public acceptance, and change that public perception back to being a monster to be abhorred and despised. And when gamers protest being depicted in such insulting manner, they throw back even more insults and engage in coordinated public smearing and character assassination campaigns. And because they are feminists, the media and the public at large listens to them. They are a monster, and they are basically unstoppable. They ruin, divide and devastate, and the public and the media showers them with attention, money and awards for it...
The world of video games has been invaded by ravaging political ideologues, bigoted zealots, and they have made it into an ugly, disgusting mess. They are smug, they are pretentious, they are self-righteous. They have hijacked video games for their own agenda. They just couldn't leave it alone.
And if you think that video games are the only example, you would be quite wrong.
The so-called "metalheads" are a counter-culture that formed from and around metal music. Counter-cultures are rebellious and do not follow typical societal norms. While I'm not personally involved in anything that could be called a counter-culture, I can nevertheless understand them. Their ideals could, perhaps, be described as this:
"Fuck social norms. I'm and individual, and I won't be dictated how I should or shouldn't behave. Sure, I won't outright hurt other people, murder them, or steal, but I won't conform to social norms I don't agree with just because some morally high smug asshole tells me to. You are not the arbiter of my behavior, or what is and isn't 'normal' or 'acceptable'. You can go live the life you want, I'll live the life I want. I happen to like this subculture, and if you don't like it, then don't let the door hit you on your way out. Nobody forces you to participate."
However, whenever such a subculture becomes large enough, naturally feminism just can't leave it alone. They have to invade it, they have to poison it, they have to permeate it with their moral high values. And that's exactly what's happening currently with the "metalhead" culture. Feminists are invading it and causing division and unrest. Divide and conquer.
This ought to be difficult with a counter-culture that gives the middle finger to "normal" social values. But these are feminists. Feminism has an incredible power and influence in our society, even more than any counter-culture, no matter how rebellious and radical it might be. Feminism has an incredible power to poison the mind of even those who wouldn't otherwise care. And thus, of course, a war is forming within the subculture. Only time will tell which one will prevail.
Let's move to the sci-fi and fantasy fiction community. The Hugo Awards are a renowned and prestigious set of awards given annually to the best science fiction or fantasy works and achievements of the previous year, first awarded in 1953. These awards celebrate and promote the best works of fiction within these genres, for their merit as works of art.
Who the author of the work is should, rather obviously, have no effect on whether it's nominated and awarded. I do not know if judges have had any biases (in the past or nowadays) depending on the author (eg. giving awards more easily to known authors than unknown ones), but from what I gather, that's most probably not the case. Each work is judged on its own merits, and the judgment is pretty much agnostic to who has created it. Which is, of course, how it should be. The ideal situation would be if the judges had no idea who the author of the work is, so that they can judge it completely impartially and without bias. (This is of course pretty much impossible to achieve, but it's probably not even needed. The judges who decide the awards are probably not biased.)
Naturally feminists have a problem with this kind of impartiality, with this kind of treating everybody equally regardless of their gender or ethnicity, with judging a work by its own merits regardless of who its author might be. Of course. Because feminists can't leave anything alone, and must inject themselves into everything, and make everything into a feminist issue. So, naturally, feminists are complaining loudly that there are no quotas for Hugo Award nominations for women and minorities. In other words, feminists are seriously proposing for the Hugo Award committee to discriminate against people based on their gender or ethnicity, and nominate certain people over others based on those aspects, rather than their actual work. Of course.
Because when you are celebrating and awarding art, you have to make it into a political statement, and you have to promote lesser works over better ones just to promote a political agenda. Naturally.
There is no community that feminists will not co-opt and try to invade. Lately the social justice warriors have been trying to impose their totalitarian rules on open source programming forums and communities around the internet. For example, the Ruby community has been having a fierce battle between social justice warriors and coders who oppose their fascist ideas. (For example, one idea they vehemently oppose is a proposal by the social justice warriors that if any member of the community ever, anywhere, at any time, anywhere on the internet, makes a remark or expresses an opinion that the social justice warriors do not like, that person should be reported and permanently banned from the community. Excommunicated. For expressing the wrong opinions.) Social justice warriors have already divided-and-conquered many other open source programming communities, and the Ruby community is in the middle of a war right now.
But perhaps no other subculture has become more devastated, ravaged and divided than the world-wide atheist community. (Of course in the case of atheism, the concept of "community" is extremely loose, as there are no central core tenets or ideologies that would be universally agreed or followed. However, using the word isn't a complete misnomer either.) The chasm that feminism has created in the atheist community is astonishing.
Atheist feminists tend to be horrifyingly vicious, toxic, vile, divisive, caustic and vitriolic. They verbally attack relentlessly their critics, they organize coordinated smearing and character assassination campaigns, they use technological means (such as scripts and bots) to try to silence, ban and harass their critics... No critic, be it friend or foe, is safe; if you get on their bad side, you become a persona non grata, and you get "excommunicated", vilified and demonized. There's an entire vocabulary that the atheist feminist community has invented to verbally attack, belittle and insult their opposition (such as "tone-troll" and "enablist", besides the more typical "misogynist", "sexist", "bigot" and such, which are usually thrown at their opponents with complete disregard to their meaning or whether they really apply or not.) The amount of oozing vitriol in their blog posts and YouTube videos can sometimes be astonishing. Even the most moderate of atheist feminists, who are otherwise nice, rational and intelligent, succumb to incredible irrationality and vitriol when they turn their "feminist switch" on.
Feminism was once a great social movement that produced real change for the better. It greatly influenced the development of law and human rights, achieving milestones in equality. However, it has transformed into a monster. It has transformed into a bigoted ideology that wants to poison everything. It wants to make everything to be about itself; it wants to make everything a feminist issue. If there is a subculture that has not yet embraced it, it will attack, invade, divide and conquer, until nothing is left but smoldering ruins where once there was a beautiful world.
And then they wonder why people have grown to hate feminism.
Comments
Post a Comment