Category Archives: Culture War

Bud Light Debacle Intensifies: Alissa Heinerscheid On The Way Out

Leave a reply

The debacle with Bud Light since hiring Dylan Mulvaney to represent their brand is 100 times worse than you know. On Friday, their VP of marketing around which this controversy has been swirling is on leave.

In times past, when there was an announcement that an entity grudgingly had to report, it was made on Friday. This was because it was the end of the work week for many people, when people preferred to wind down, and any announcement would likely be buried by the weekend itself. Thus, Friday was once considered the time where news stories went to die.

But that’s not the age we live in, anymore. In this connected world, the people can be well-informed, regardless of when an announcement is made.

The VP of marketing for Anheuser-Busch, Alissa Heinerscheid, is on leave. We all know what that means, because the same language was used by Project Veritas with James O’Keefe, before he quit and went on to form O’Keefe Media Group.

Only, because Alissa Heinerscheid is only a household name for the wrong reasons, if at all, she’s being processed into unemployment.

We know how it is with companies like Anheuser-Busch: They have shareholders, with whom they want to project confidence. It’s because of this that if you were to ask anyone representing Anheuser-Busch in any official capacity, they’re going to insist that “Everything’s fine, everything is just fine, why do you ask?” even as they’re bleeding out all over the market, and distributors are struggling to find shelves willing to take any more of their product.

If you remember, this whole mess started when TikTok personality Dylan Mulvaney announced that he had been hired by Anheuser-Busch to represent their Bud Light product line, a move which alienated typical beer drinkers.

Since then, a video featuring Anheuser-Busch VP of marketing Alissa Heinerscheid has surfaced, explaining her personal belief that she had a “mandate” to change the Bud Light brand from the image she had of its current base, which she described as being “fratty” and “out-of-touch”, and replace that same base with younger drinkers. Images of her college adventures have surfaced, showing her to have been fratty in some of the worst ways, which includes at least one picture of Alissa drinking out of a rubber.

I’m no marketer, but I suspect that one thing a marketer should never say under any circumstances is that a product’s established user base needs to be replaced with a new user base. After all, these are the people who have demonstrated a loyalty to the brand, and it’s usually this customer base that a company would rely on for its continued success. To attempt to throw them out in order to roll the dice on a hypothetical new base would seem an unacceptable gamble, as such a move would demonstrate disloyalty to the established base, and any hypothetical new base would have a low expectation of loyalty towards them, considering the loyalty that the company demonstrated towards their previous base.

Or, at least don’t upset your customers. Oldie, but goodie.

I know that some people are looking for an apology from Anheuser-Busch. Such an apology might be an admission of wrongdoing, and a commitment to do better going forward. But I don’t have my hopes up.

Besides, even if Anheuser-Busch and its ex-CIA chief were to apologize, I doubt that the Bud Light (Bud Lick, LOL) brand would actually recover. It’s gotten to the point that no one wants to be caught drinking a Bud Light, or they’ll be made fun of, with the guys asking them when they plan on getting their “bottom surgery”. No one wants to risk that kind of embarrassment, so no one wants to drink a Bud Light.

But for a moment, can we appreciate the kind of power that Dylan Mulvaney has in his creepy hands? As much as we may hate to admit it, he has the power to destroy brands, costing them billions of dollars (if they even have that kind of money to lose), by just endorsing them. That’s a terrifying thought.

In any case, with ESG losing ground, it’s hard to imagine that Anheuser-Busch has very many options for reducing the damage done. The fact is, they need to push product in order to be worth anything as a company. And with stores not buying many cases, it’s going to be interesting to see the sales numbers when those come.

I know that not everyone out there takes pleasure when someone reaps the rewards of stupidity, but I think that there’s comfort to be had in a predictable universe that still operates according to the principles of natural law, and of cause and effect. Especially when someone has deliberately chosen to malign those who effectively provided for them. We don’t always get to see the out-of-touch city dweller who makes fun of the people who makes his food for him go without. It’s more amusing still when it comes upon a corporate type who can’t identify with the typical working man. There is mirth to be found in this.

I think an appropriate accompaniment to such mirth would be with a nice cocktail, like an Old Fashioned, or a Gin and Tonic. Or maybe a Pina Colada if you’re feeling particularly festive. There are lots of choices as far as cocktails go. And if a hard liquor goes woke, it’s easy to replace.

Buzzfeed To Shut Down

Leave a reply

The internet is about to become far less cancerous. BuzzFeed News is going in the dustbin.

BuzzFeed was a website that drew in tons of traffic through SEO optimization, gaming algorithms, and lots and lots of plagiarism.

It was originally a listicle website that posted braindead articles, like “12 Cat Pics to Get You Through Your Wednesday“, “6 Signs That You Are Like Raphael From the Ninja Turtles“, and “8 Lifehacks That Haven’t Been Working For You Because You’ve Been Doing Them DEAD WRONG!“

If you’ve been to Buzzfeed, you probably thought that those were actual headlines from their site, because they were stupid enough to belong. Fact is, I just made them up. But if those same headlines were in their site somewhere verbatim, it wouldn’t surprise me.

Many of their articles were bereft of words, largely consisting of pictures. Much of what’s on their site was lifted directly from other websites, often without attribution. In other words, it was like the Cracked.com articles that were written by the users. However, the MIT grad operator of the website knew how to turn the site into a money printer through SEO optimization.

But then they discovered rage-bait, and how that could draw in traffic. That garbage drew in mountains of rage-clicks that allowed the site to rake in a ton of money.

Eventually, they got into journalism, and no prize for guessing that they were lacking in ethics. They pretty much took a political side, and made things to appeal to their tribe. While just about every news outlet does this, Buzzfeed was noteworthy in doing less than most others to hide their bias.

Remember the guy who made the news for getting into a fight and getting killed over a chicken sandwich? That story originated from BuzzFeed. In reality, the fight wasn’t over a chicken sandwich, it was over a place in line. At the time, people memed over chicken sandwiches. So BuzzFeed, determined to game the algorithms for attention as they usually do, decided to season their coverage with bullshit.

Then there’s their tendency to push zombies into their stories wherever they can fit them in. It should be obvious why. Millions of dinguses are coping with their slow decent into mediocrity by fantasizing about how they’d survive a zombie apocalypse, and daydream about a hypothetical scenario where their video game knowledge actually makes them supermen. Because BuzzFeed knows the potential for clicks from the zombie crowd, they’ll randomly mention zombies here and there. Idiot clicks are still clicks.

BuzzFeed knows the potential for rage-clicks from injustices concerning racism and sexism, which is why they look for racism and sexism anywhere they could find it.

BuzzFeed has fried the minds of millions of gullible cretins, so you can imagine how much better the world of journalism has become now that BuzzFeed is shutting down.

Apparently, their bullshit isn’t profitable anymore. I suspect that there’s more to it, such as that venture capital running dry, and ESG is beginning to putter out. The company still has Huffington Post, which is another news site that few people actually take seriously. Hopefully, that one isn’t long out of the grave, either.

In any case, this is yet another sign that the culture war is turning around. I suspect that we’re going to be seeing a lot more like this in the days to come.

Twitter Quietly Drops Prohibition On Correct Gender Pronouns For Transgender Individuals

5 Replies

I’ve pointed out before that when dealing with horse-puckey of great magnitude it helps to have at least one foot in reality. If you agree, then I have great news for you today: Twitter has quietly dropped its prohibition against use of biologically correct pronouns when referring to transgender individuals from its hateful content policy!

291 replies to 163 likes. What a ratio.

In addition to use of biologically correct pronouns, users may also refer to transgender individuals with the names that they were given at birth, an action called “deadnaming” by transgender individuals who decide to change their names as part of the pretense of being someone they are not.

The majority has never at any point agreed with the transgender insanity. However, the fraction-of-one-percent who have furthered the movement have recently held disproportionate influence over institutions, appealing mainly to the political left who present the issue as a matter of social justice.

However, as the transgender movement continues towards extremes, such as exposure of children to the transgender ideology and actions such as of the deadly mass-shooter Audrey Hale, the public conversation continues to turn against it.

For a short while there, to speak against self-delusion and sexual perversity was to speak truth to power. But with Twitter coming around and becoming stronger as a free-speech platform, the public is enabled to honestly and earnestly discuss the matter, and the flow of the era continues to turn against the sexual deviants.

Personally, I suspect that the perverts are going to turn more towards extremes, particularly the dead-enders who understand that they’ve taken positions that will result in them becoming pariahs at a point when they’ll have lost the ability to influence public policy, and a lasting record of their deviance will remain on the internet for ages to come.

The side of the truth has always been the safest side to be on. For those who got on the side of the trans insanity, their best bet would be to jump ship and pretend that they’ve never been a part of it, wipe their social media as needed, and hope that no one remembers that they once pushed tranny bullshit.

Because at this point, the trans movement doesn’t have much of a bright future ahead of it.

A Few Thoughts About the Bud Light Debacle From Someone Who Doesn’t Drink the Stuff

Leave a reply

If you’re in marketing, it’s your job to read the room. You have a customer base that you have to appeal to, and to understand their sensibilities comes with the position.

Beer is one of the most ancient beverages still consumed today. What’s more, it has a certain image associated with it. Today, it’s viewed as daddy’s drink, and you can have some once you’ve grown up.

Considering this, it’s understandable why a corporate beer brand wouldn’t hire an effeminate, shrill charlatan who pretends to be a little girl to be a spokesperson for their brand. Such a move would be entirely self-defeating, especially considering that the delusion that the guy represents goes against the values that the typical working-class beer drinker would be expected to hold.

Understanding all this, it should follow that the backlash against Anheuser Busch for hiring make-believe-girl Dylan Mulvaney as a spokeswhatever for their Bud Light brand would prove to be catastrophic for both the company and the brand. It just follows.

It gets even worse in light of a recently-surfaced video of their own VP of Marketing stating her desire to replace Bud Light’s existing customer base with a newer, younger base, as brought up during this boomer news spot:

Getting younger people on alcohol? What an interesting take. But considering that we live in a society that tolerates companies that want young people addicted to cigarettes and fast food, it’s not altogether surprising.

As much as the diversity hire hates Bud Light’s frat image, she seemed to be rather okay with frat behavior, as revealed in a batch of images of her partying in college, among which is a picture of her drinking out of a rubber. But hey, we all do stupid stuff in college, right? Right?

What kind of colleges are these clowns going to? I remember that when I was in college, most of the students studied hard because they were concerned with their grades, myself included. It’s bad enough that bullshit colleges will give their drunkass students passing grades, it’s a spit in society’s eye that they’ll have six-figure salaries to look forward to after they graduate.

Personally, I have little trouble avoiding Bud Light, because I seldom drink beer. I’m a bit of a fitness enthusiast, so I have trouble fitting a beer in when I’m counting calories. When I do go for one, I usually prefer an IPA, or something less corporate, like something from a smaller, more local brewery.

When I want something alcoholic, I usually go for a cocktail. Those are great, because you know what’s going into them, provided you make them yourself. Also, if a hard liquor goes woke, replacing it with a different one is a snap.

I’m not going to pretend that I have a thorough comprehension of the bar scene. I mainly went to bars because a friend of mine wanted to go. But I do know well enough that they tend to have a certain culture, where you don’t want to stand out for doing weird shit. Considering this, to have Dylan Mulvaney, a man known for pretending to be a little girl, as a spokeswhatever for a beer brand seems like an act of sabotage. Granted, not every bar is the same.

Again, if you’re in marketing, you have a job to read the room. You certainly don’t have a mandate to replace a brand’s existing customer base with the kind that you might prefer.

Anheuser Busch has one move which would be more effective than any other to reduce the damage done to their brand. No, it’s not to hope the problem goes away on its own. No, it’s not to release some smarmy advertising spot in the hopes that their original base ignores the fact that they didn’t back down.

It would be to issue an apology. To acknowledge that what they did was wrong, denounce the same wrong that was committed, and resolve to do better going forward.

And the best part is, it doesn’t take a team of marketers or PR consultants. All it takes is a few minutes on Twitter. And it’s free.

They might take a hit to their ESG score, but with major companies like Vanguard already dropping ESG, they’d be ahead of the game.

Or they can continue to writhe while pretending that everything is okay. Either way, I’m getting what I want.

Audrey Hale May Have Been An Abuse Victim

Leave a reply

The story of Audrey Hale is already interesting, and it got even more interesting when it was discovered that the mass shooter that attacked a Christian elementary school in Tennessee was an FTM transexual. Since then, talk about her has gotten really interesting.

However, a passing post on a message board took me down a rabbit hole that led me to consider the possibility that Audrey Hale may have been the victim of sexual abuse as a child, and that abuse may have actually occurred at the very same elementary school that she attacked.

Before continuing, I want to make it clear that it’s not my intention to come anywhere close to excusing what Audrey Hale did. There is absolutely no excuse for going on a shooting in an elementary school, no matter what you may have been through at any point. I know at least two people who were sexually abused as children. While the experience was traumatic for both of them, neither of them went on to become school shooters. So yes, it’s possible to have been a victim at one point, but not turn out to be a piece of shit.

Audrey Hale, however, was a piece of shit.

Having said that, here’s the article that started me down the rabbit hole. It’s a Courthouse News Service article dating back to the year 2013, that pointed out that a Presbyterian church covered up for a “confessed child molester”, the church being the Covenant Presbyterian Church of Nashville.

In the article, we got the name of the confessed child molester:

In the lawsuit, Davis claims that on July 14, 2008, “the defendants quietly accept[ed] the resignation of the confessed child molester, John Perry, from the Covenant Diaconate, with Lewelling recorded in the board minutes as being present in the room.”

As the article points out, abuses of children by John Perry had been committed, and they were when John Perry was a part of a Presbyterian church, which is noteworthy considering that the Christian school targeted by Audrey Hale was also Presbyterian, and Audrey herself was reportedly once enrolled as an attendee. Because Audrey was 28 years old at the time of the shooting, and the school was an elementary school, it would have been quite some time since Audrey had been in attendance as a student.

According to the article, the resignation of child predator John Perry was accepted in 2008, so it would stand to reason that the abuses would have occurred prior to that point.

In the United States, it’s usually from around ages 6 to 12 that a child is in attendance of Elementary School (from Kindergarten to Fifth Grade). If Audrey had been in attendance of Covenant School, that would have likely been from the years 2001 to 2007. Because Covenant School offers a pre-school program, a student could hypothetically start school there younger than age 6. This might not have been the case for Audrey, as according to Covenant School’s website, the year 2001 would have been the school’s founding year.

If Audrey Hale had actually been sexually abused at the very school where she would later go on a shooting rampage, that would add a new dimension to the story, and make a possible motive for the shooting more apparent. However, at that point, it doesn’t seem as though that connection would yet be made with the information available to us at the time of this posting. After all, the manifesto has not yet been released, and that document might do a lot to tell us about the sicko’s motivations for the shooting.

With a name for the abuser, I decided to look into more information about him. As it turns out, the guy was being investigated by police, but ended up being let off by reason of the expiration of the statute of limitations for the offenses.

As I see it, there is sound philosophical basis for the statute of limitations, especially considering that human memory can be flawed, and tends to become more flawed the older a memory may be. However, that makes it no less disappointing when a person who commits a heinous crime gets off because of it.

But that’s not the only surprising thing about the matter, according to this article by the Daily Mail UK: The child abuser went on to become a co-author alongside Mike Huckabee!

Mike Huckabee was, of course, entirely unaware of the fact that the co-author of his book was being investigated for child abuse. But if it turns out that Audrey Hale was one of the students that was sexually abused by John Perry, imagine how she would have felt if she were to discover that the piece of filth who abused her would go on to team up with one of America’s most famous men!

For the searching that I did, I didn’t find a definitive link between John Perry and Audrey Hale. It would have stood to reason, considering that names of victims of child sex abuse are not usually public, not only for their benefit, but also because the victims would be minors.

It tends to be the case that victims of sexual abuse as a child experience lasting emotional disorders, and they often require psychiatric treatment. In many cases, the children can become sexually aware younger than one might expect them to. Because homosexuals tend to have a high occurrence rate of victimhood of child sexual abuse, it’s reasonable to expect that their sexuality is a manifestation of the effect that the abuse had on them. While transsexuality is relatively new and still somewhat unstudied, it’s reasonable to suspect that an interest in transsexuality at any age could be a manifestation of the trauma of child sexual abuse.

Could Audrey Hale have been sexually abused as a child at the very same school where she would eventually die as a mass murderer? As of this posting, it’s hard to say definitively with the information that’s been publicly made available. It’s because of this that I’m interested in the contents of Audrey’s manifesto, which may explain her motives.

Of course, I think it’s reasonable to ask why child abuse happens as often as it does in religious settings. Personally, I doubt that child abuse happens in religious settings with greater frequency than in the general population. However, I think it’s obvious that the unbiblical practice of celibacy is partly to blame. But outside of that, I suspect that predators find something attractive about churches due to the fact that religious folk tend to attempt to resolve matters amongst themselves, rather than get law enforcement involved. Because of this, there would be more potential for predators to manage matters when things go wrong when in the company of the religious, than in more secular settings where there’s a stronger connotation of obligation to report wrongdoing of that nature.

But if it turns out that there’s a connection between John Perry and Audrey Hale, I imagine that John Perry would be sweating bullets about now.

Dylan Mulvaney Would Benefit From An Intervention

Leave a reply

I know I’m not the first to say it, so I’ll just add to the noise. Dylan Mulvaney is not right in the head.

Here is a video of him pretending to be a 6-year-old girl:

As the pendulum continues to build momentum as it shifts from left to right, Dylan Mulvaney is going to be one hell of a loser.

Wokeness May Be Destroying the Global Economy, But Economic Hardship May Destroy Wokeness

Leave a reply

The insolvency of Silicon Valley Bank has resulted in a run on the banks, which has resulted in more insolvent banks. The Red Pill community has pointed to SVB’s prioritization of DEI initiatives as being a significant factor in the bank’s collapse, and note with a sense of irony that wokeness may have knocked over the first dominoes that may result in a collapse of the global economy.

Of course, it’s also pointed out that SVB may have been targeted by Uncle Sam for having been friendlier to the crypto market. That sounds kinda conspiracy-theoryish, but if that’s the case, I’d say that that effort backfired, considering that Bitcoin shot way, way up in response to the SVB collapse.

More banks have since collapsed due to bank runs, and I’m seeing the more Red Pill types celebrating the accelerated collapse of the woke movement. While I can get behind that, it’s a little disturbing that there are people who seem to be cheering on the destruction of the global economy. It’s enough for me for the institutions to come to the realization that the woke movement is of no benefit for them to get behind. But considering how much harder it would be for everyone if the global economy were to collapse, I wonder what benefit it would be to anyone if things came to that.

Perhaps there would be some benefit, if only to slap more people awake to the true nature of the woke movement, and if people as a whole were to ditch the crutch of the victim mentality in favor of living on one’s merits. Which they may end up doing out of necessity, if things get difficult.

My foresight is not great. If I had better foresight, I would have understood the true nature of the global economy before majoring in Electronics. Live and learn, and all that.

But still, I can see what would come about if economic difficulty were to necessitate meritocratic living. It would mean that ideas such as wokeness would be viewed in terms of its virtues, which wouldn’t be much outside of its ability to manipulate algorithms. Even now, entertainment companies are slowly coming to the realization that woke messaging negatively impacts the quality of their products, which is part of the reason why viewers are starting to turn against subscription-based streaming services. And now, we’re seeing banks collapse after investing in numerous DEI startups.

While the pendulum is already shifting against wokeness, economic uncertainty would further push the general public into meritocracy as they seek out a way of life that actually, you know, pays the bills. Projecting victimhood seldom does as much, and is becoming increasingly evident as being the sport of the interpersonally manipulative.

When matters are difficult, people turn to merit to get by. It’s when motivated by survival that people look at themselves and other people in terms of what they have to offer. That’s the most practical course in challenging times. Because men tend to have greater upper-body strength than women, and the physiology that lends them more towards physically-involved labor, men tend more towards more dangerous jobs that usually pay better than clerical jobs. This means women would tend towards management of resources and maintaining relationships, in part because their relative lack of physical endurance would mean that this would be the safer option for them, but also because women tend to have minds that are better suited to such things. While feminists wouldn’t like it, more women would return to the trad wife life, even if only out of necessity and in consideration of what they’d have to offer in consideration of their innate attributes.

Considering this, what the woke movement shouldn’t want is challenging times, as woke pet causes tend to thrive more in the prosperous conditions that allow for the luxury of societal experimentation, erroneous philosophies, and the inflexibility of thinking that would result from the rigidness that is characteristic of the woke cult.

Yet, challenging times is just what one can expect, considering that it is the natural consequence of experimenting with ideologies such as wokeness.

New York City Teacher Does TikTok Presentation About Sexualities of Nintendo Characters, Says She Was Only Kidding

Leave a reply
What New York calls an educator.

There’s a teacher in New York by the name of Remy Elliott (certified as Jeremy William Elliott) who decided that it would be a good idea to do a video on her TikTok account in which she assigned various gender identities to Nintendo characters, such as Mario and Princess Peach.

According to her TikTok presentation, “Mario came out so long ago most people forgot”. Not only that, she claimed that Luigi is demisexual, Princess Daisy is bisexual and polyamorous, Toad is ready to come out as a trans-girl, and Yoshi completed transition to a male, complete with breast-removal surgery that left no scars.

As I read about this, it became apparent to me that the presentation was a joke, which was something that Remy did assert. But even so, to make a presentation like this when representing your school district as an educator seems like an insanely bad move.

But just in case you doubt where this piece of work stands in the culture war, Remy claims to have a trans flag, a bisexual flag, and a non-binary flag on her desk at her work, which would be at school. She did this to show just how accepting she was of these things.

The only reservation she had concerning what she shared with her students concerned her polyamory, because that “is not in the conversation”. But she did confer with administrators, who agreed that it would be appropriate with her to speak with students about her relationships.

I disagree. A teacher’s job is to teach, preferably on the topic of the class in question. It’s certainly no place for any educator to bring up personal matters, especially not personal matters of a sexual nature, and certainly not with students who are still minors. What’s even more vexing is that the school district’s administration, after hearing of Remy’s polyamory, approved the teacher to speak of it, rather than immediately shooting it down for the repugnant idea that it was, or at least recognizing the potential for controversy and bad press.

She said: ‘This is not a conversation that conservatives are having at all. They’ve decided… like, you can’t do this at all, there’s no place for it. 

So, now we know what a depraved half-wit does when she ignores any voice of reason. She’ll upload a presentation to TikTok which bullshits about the sexual identities of Nintendo characters.

‘And that just shows such a lack of thought and care. They’re not understanding of the people. They’re children as people and where they’re at.’

And, no surprise, she’s of a mind that determines that it’s ageist to say that it’s wrong to introduce sexual deviancy to children.

Notice how she’s registered under the name “Jeremy William Elliott”? She is actually a he.

So yeah, we have yet another case of a man identifying as a woman, likely in an attempt to make it easier to approach children about sexual matters.

She added: ‘It’s also strange to point out that they have genders and sexualities, as being a cisgender heterosexual man is in fact a gender and sexual orientation.’

How he arrived at the conclusion does not follow. The fact that Mario is apparently straight does not make it unusual to talk about the genders and sexualities of Nintendo characters. In fact, there are some cases where mature, adult fans may prefer to speculate about this topic, to the end of coming to a better understanding of the characters in question. Putting aside, of course, the fact that the characters in question are seldom, if ever, sexualized in the official materials. What makes the matter unusual in Remy’s case is that he wished to publicly have the conversation as an educator, with dozens of ninth-graders presumably involved.

‘As part of my DOE employment, despite being primarily hired as an English Teacher, teaching our established and vetted sex education curriculum was not only something I was hired for, it was something I was trained and qualified in.’

That was a shitty move on the DOE’s part. After all, Remy can’t be counted on to present the sexualities of Nintendo characters in good faith. I’ve been a Nintendo fan for decades, so I can take issue with many of the claims that Remy makes.

For one thing, Mario and Luigi are evidently straight. This is presumably one of the reasons behind why they go after princesses Peach and Daisy. They want some of that vertical smile. For Toad to transition to a girl would be redundant for his franchise, because his sister Toadette is already a character in those games. Then there’s Remy’s assertion that Yoshi had “top surgery”. Yoshi is a reptile. Reptiles don’t have mammaries.

She added that she only ever spoke of her personal life ‘within reasonable limits.’ 

It’s great to know that Remy is willing to draw the line somewhere, even if that line should have been placed well before telling minors that Princess Daisy is “hella bisexual”. But, who knows? Maybe Remy will do another installment where she points at Samus Aran as being trans, and Link as being a closet fairy. Yoshio Sakamoto and Shigeru Miyamoto don’t seem to be in any hurry to represent the perversity of the moment, so perhaps Remy will step forward to help them out?

No More Secrets By Chaya Raichik Is The Kind Of Thing We Need

Leave a reply
From Bravebooks.us

When bad people are writing hit pieces about you, you know that you’re doing something right. Author Chaya Raichik of Libs of Tiktok fame knows exactly what that’s like.

Chaya is now a children’s book author, having just published No More Secrets: The Candy Cavern, available for purchase on Bravebooks.us.

As I’ve pointed out before, narrative is a valuable tool in communicating important moral lessons. This holds up whether the lesson is delivered to children or adults. While works of fiction have the notable fault of being fictional, and therefore one can make the moral anything they want, it’s still the case that these are valuable in making certain topics easier to approach.

As many of us are becoming increasingly aware, when people ask children to keep secrets, it often to the end of manipulating the child into doing or saying something that they may not otherwise do or say. And because they possess the naivete intrinsic to a child’s state of mind, children can be easily manipulated. Because of this, it’s important that we teach children to speak up when something doesn’t seem right.

While one may read this book and understandably see parallels with the current scandal involving teachers tricking children into going trans, the fact is, this book’s core lesson extends in principle to anyone who would attempt to use “keeping secrets” as part of the grooming process.

I recall from my college days that a sociology professor told the class that one of the ways that a predator can groom a child is by asking them to keep secrets. Oftentimes, it’s something subtle, like letting a naughty word slip, then asking the child not to tell their parents that they said it. If the child does tell their parents, then that’s a sign that that’s the kind of kid that the predator is better off not messing with. Sometimes, the process of grooming involves testing the waters in various ways to determine whether it’s safe to proceed. Predators are often more methodical than they are given credit for.

Similarly, we need to teach our children that if anyone tells them to keep secrets from us, it becomes really important that they share those secrets with us. Because even if that person seems like they might be fun or trusting, that person might be trying to take advantage of them in some way.

Also, big props to artist James Scrawl, whose art in this book is simply adorable.

The forces of depravity and perversity know that they’re going to lose the culture war if they were to only attempt to appeal to adults, who see their ideology for what it is. Because of this, they are pivoting to attempting to appeal to children, whose minds are still pliable, and are therefore easier to take advantage of. We need to teach our children to speak up when something doesn’t seem right.

We also have a duty to teach our children a love for the truth. After all, if our children don’t have a love of the truth in their minds, someone else can come along and fill them up with whatever they want.

Before wrapping this up, I’d like to point out a couple points of contention that leftists have concerning this book. Because, for some reason, it’s leftists who have a problem with a children’s book that encourages behavior that could keep children safe from dangerous predators. Go figure.

Pseudo-intellectuals love using the concept of projection as the “NO U” of psychology, to the point that they actually think it’s clever to point to wanting to keep children safe from predators as evidence that they are a predator.

While it’s no surprise to me that leftists have little respect for human rights, they usually keep their hands closer to themselves than to suggest that someone is subject to illegal search and seizure for raising a concern, just because that concern isn’t favorable to leftism.

I honestly cannot fathom what an ignoramus that a person would have to be to suggest that a person may be guilty of something just by saying that it’s bad to do it. To spell it out: You cannot further a thing by furthering something that is the negation of that thing.

I suspect that weshlovrcm doesn’t actually believe what he’s typing. After all, a person who forms such a stupid thought and internalizes it as a sincere conviction should lack the capacity to purchase a device and a subscription to a telecom company, in addition to whatever else he needed to do to send his message, unless a government-appointed handler set all this up for him.

Which, if that were the case, would only upset me even more, because that would mean that I indirectly paid for him to access the internet.

Not to worry, we know that those ones are a problem, too. However, pointing out that there are predators in different institutions does not mean that we are no longer concerned with the ones in the institution that we are currently discussing.

There is no need for the diversion. Or, there might be, considering that your ilk thinks that calling “projection” is clever, and that expressing concern indicates guilt.

Arbitrary second example, indicating that these people really seem to dislike churches. But here’s the thing: church attendance is not compulsory. People can decide not to attend a church, or any church. And they can decide not to bring their children with them. This contrasts with public education, which in many cases is compulsory.

If you hate churches so much, just don’t go. No one is making you. You may stand to benefit in a huge way if you were to pay attention to the sermon, but if you were to not go, churches would have slightly less problem with wishy-washy bench-warmers whose hearts are not really in it.

I pulled these nuggets off of this page. There’s more, if you care to read them. But if you’re up for smarter reading, here’s a link to purchase Raichik’s new book.

Sawyer Hackett Does Not Get the Homelessness Crisis.

Leave a reply

The left seems to have no problem with throwing money at problems, as long as the money is not their own. And they’ll happily do so, with little respect for the underlying causes of those problems.

Here’s yet another precious moment:

There’s a reason why the left tends to swing more for younger voters, and that’s because they don’t think younger voters have the insight needed to recognize the left’s platitudes as being as naive and vacuous as they are.

Oftentimes, you’ll hear one of them say that there are N number of homeless people and M number of houses (where N < M), and therefore solving the homelessness problem is as easy as putting one in the other. This sounds appealing if you don’t understand the nuances of the matter, which might be the ignorance that they are banking on.

The fact is, people who are homeless are usually homeless for some compelling reasons, and unless the underlying reasons for their homelessness are solved, the act of scooping them up from off the streets and dropping them off in a vacant home will probably only solve their problem for about a week.

For one thing, people become homeless because they struggle with drug addiction. That’s being generous, of course, as in many cases, it’s not so much a struggle as it is a full-on embrace, to the point that a person deems them more important than anything else, including having a roof over their head.

And that makes it more interesting that California is actually providing homeless drug addicts with the free drugs that they’d need to continue their addictions.

Another problem has to do with mental health. Some people have a difficult time holding down a home by reason of mental illness. While these people could be institutionalized and therefore treated, mental clinicians in the western world are largely dependent on voluntary committals. This is made unlikely in cases where one’s paranoid delusions result in them distrusting the professionals who could otherwise help them.

How does one go about solving this problem? I don’t know, but it’s one major underlying problem behind the homelessness crisis.

Perhaps it’s the case that Democratic strategist Sawyer Hackett is truly unaware of the nuances behind the homelessness problem. But it’s hard to dismiss the possibility that he’s aware that the problem is more difficult to solve than just dropping homeless people into empty houses, and he’s counting on you not having the insight to question him about it.

In either case, it’s not a good look.