When I first heard about this, I did sit on the story for a bit. I was laughing so hard, that after going to bed, I actually dreamt that I was laughing.
Suppose that you had a service that almost no one would accept for free. Then, someone had the idea of charging money for it. Such a plan would make about as much business sense as lighting a pile of money on fire. But so it was when CNN had the idea to make their own subscription-based streaming service, by the name of CNN+.
When you think of CNN’s typical audience, you’d imagine that they’d be about as warm to the idea of subscription-based streaming services as they would be towards cryptocurrencies, exercise, and thinking for themselves.
So, how do you imagine CNN+ is doing? If you imagine that they’ll be shuttering the platform by the end of this month, you won’t be disappointed. But then, your boomer dad probably wasn’t disappointed either, in spite of all the nostalgia he might be feeling about the days in which corporate news outlets provided people with their center for viewpoints that were considered societally acceptable.
But gone are the days when most adults turned to the television as their only source of information, like a hamster to a feeder. People today are using the internet, where the likes of CNN is surrounded by information sources and commentary that people would much rather prefer, such as one-man studios with larger followings than corporate news outlets that have been around for decades.
I don’t feel bad for CNN, at all. It’s been a long time since they’ve ditched all pretense of impartiality in favor of pandering to the drones with their political ideology of choice. CNN is much of the reason why most people don’t trust corporate news outlets, and though they call themselves “the most trusted name in news”, the opposite is true.
Though it doesn’t help them that they ran with a defamatory story against the Covington kids. The Dershowitz defamation case didn’t make them look good, either. Then there’s CNN’s defamatory story about Joe Rogan. Kyle Rittenhouse might have a case for defamation, too.
Perhaps the most compelling reason to watch CNN is for the potential for drama when it comes to any high-profile, politically-charged story. But even then, you’d have to wade through piles and piles of bullshit. And for what? Just to say that you got to see another story that contributed to CNN’s decline as it aired? I’d rather preserve my sanity and hear about it secondhand from my peers.
Nothing says that CNN is packed with witless toadies quite like one of them suggesting that people might want a subscription-based CNN news outlet, and them pushing it all the way to market without them realizing that it might be a bad idea. Maybe they could take that same innovative instinct and use it to develop an armpit-flavored breath mint.
MSNBS is in a race to herp every last derp that’s available on the market, and to that end, they are now attempting to establish a connection between Neo-Nazis and the fitness world.
If the corporate mainstream information media was infiltrated by Russian or Chinese agents out to demoralize the western world by degrading its moral values, they would have to work pretty hard to achieve better results. Yuri Bezmenov, eat your heart out!
Before getting started, I wanted to point out that the author of MSNBC’s article was Cynthia Miller-Idriss, and the following is a few of her recent offerings:
Obviously, she’s got a chip on her shoulder about Nazis. Either that, or she feels the need to virtue-signal now that the left is actively supporting Neo-Nazis in Ukraine. If you sit in a cubicle for 8 hours a day, doing little except trying to find anything wrong with what actually productive people are doing in an attempt to justify your existence to your supervisor, and you’re worried that you might actually be useless, you can feel better knowing that people like Cynthia Miller-Idriss are out there, getting paid to write stupid defamatory bullshit about the far-right being Neo-Nazis for MSNBS. But your workplace is probably still better off without you.
If you were in the mood to destroy something beautiful, you’d be disappointed to learn that it was Cynthia Miller-Idriss that wandered into our sights, instead. Still, this is going to be one satisfying take-down. Let’s get into it!
It appears the far right has taken advantage of pandemic at-home fitness trends to expand its decade-plus radicalization of physical mixed martial arts (MMA) and combat sports spaces.
As much as I like me some video games, there’s a problem when the left wants to lock you in your home with nothing else to do. As it turns out, Cynthia takes issue with the people who used the pandemic lockdown as an opportunity to get in shape. As we all know, the left is all about bOdY pOsItIvItY, which used to mean exercising and eating well, but now means consuming food and consuming media as one’s paunch oozes down past their genitals.
Cynthia wanted you to get fat! How dare you go against her wishes by developing yourself, instead!
Earlier this month, researchers reported that a network of online “fascist fitness” chat groups on the encrypted platform Telegram are recruiting and radicalizing young men with neo-Nazi and white supremacist extremist ideologies. Initially lured with health tips and strategies for positive physical changes, new recruits are later invited to closed chat groups where far-right content is shared.
It’s obvious the game that Cynthia is playing. She could start out by saying that not all fitness buffs are Neo-Nazis, and that the problem is only with the ones whose political leanings tend them towards the National Socialist German Workers Party. Later on in the article, Cynthia has this to say:
Fitness of course is a staple and a hobby for many people, for whom it is enjoyable and rewarding for brain health and overall well-being. Physical fitness channels dopamine, adrenalin and serotonin in ways that literally feel good.
Why would Cynthia wait until the second-to-last paragraph to suggest that the problem is not with all fitness buffs, if her intention is not to write something to pander to the so-called “body-positivity” crowd? The fact is, Cynthia has an audience, and a financial incentive to tear down those who would put the effort into bettering themselves.
Let me tell you why I diet and exercise: There’s no telling when my own stamina or physical prowess might be an important factor in saving or protecting myself or the people close to me. What’s more, anyone who might attempt to threaten me or the people near me would be far more likely to reconsider if it were evident that I’d be able to overcome or overtake them. Also, women smile at me when I’m in public. There’s that.
When it comes down to it, physical fitness is the most obvious outward sign of one’s virtues, as it demonstrates a person’s ability to live disciplined and committed to a routine. What’s more, because the body is interconnected in a network of fibers and fluids, sinews and synapses, nutrients and neurons, when the body is in optimal shape, a person is more likely to be mentally sound, as the brain is connected to the same healthy network.
If a person is lazy, they’ll just direct their energy into excuses, such as using Cynthia’s article to virtue-signal about not being a Nazi. If you’d rather not diet or exercise, that’s your choice. But don’t try to drag other people down.
Physical fitness has always been central to the far right. In “Mein Kampf,” Hitler fixated on boxing and jujitsu, believing they could help him create an army of millions whose aggressive spirit and impeccably trained bodies, combined with “fanatical love of the fatherland,” would do more for the German nation than any “mediocre” tactical weapons training.
Here’s one weird fact about Hitler: he was a military leader. And here’s a bonus fact: most heads of state in the history of mankind were also military leaders. And here’s one more, because facts are so much more fun when there’s an arbitrary third example: military leaders tend to prefer that their armed forces be capable. Yeah, I know! Shocker! But it gets weirder: the U.S. Armed Forces still insist on the rigors of basic training! Coincidence? Or deliberate connection to Nazi extremism?
The article then goes on to explain how Neo-Nazis have recruited in fitness facilities in Ukraine, Canada, France, and even the United States. This is no surprise, considering that extremists of all kinds have successfully increased their numbers by recruiting people through their hobbies. Much like a how a bunch of weird freaks attempted to recruit children into sexual perversion using Splatoon 2’s lobby feature (links to Kotaku, activating ad-blocking software is advised before following that link).
Just so you know, Cynthia Miller-Idriss is interested in reaching out to “at-risk” youths, which I suspect means anyone outside of the lock-step her own political ideology mandates:
For those of us working to find better pathways to reach at-risk youth, understanding the ways that far-right groups recruit and socialize youth — in ways that go well beyond rhetoric and ideas — is crucial. It’s critical that leaders, including parents, physical trainers, gym owners, coaches and others in the fitness world understand how online grooming and recruitment can intersect with spaces that we generally think of as promoting health and well-being. The realm of online fitness now provides a new and ever-expanding market for reaching and radicalizing young men; and it requires our targeted focus and resources to try and stop the cycle.
The intended takeaway from that closing paragraph is that it’s time to expand the witch-hunt to include fitness centers. Excluding Planet Fitness, which is too busy filling the faces of gullible cretins on “free pizza days” to turn out people who are actually physically fit. Leftists like Cynthia Miller-Idriss have a habit of splitting the world in two, and consistent with their pattern of warring against any form of virtue that’s been rigorously tested against eons of human history, they’re willing to “other” those whose self-betterment includes physical fitness.
Like any cult that destroys the minds of anyone who adheres to it, leftism discourages the pursuit of anything outside of itself, and exists solely for the benefit of its own leadership. If anyone dares to take on any activity that they deem haram, they’re willing to destroy them by calling them any name they possibly could, no matter how inflammatory, and no matter how dubious the alleged connection. Except when it comes to calling people pedophiles, they seem to be hesitant about that, for some reason.
People really need to stop consuming legacy news media. The pundits of old mainly exist to prey on old people and those who’d have no idea what their opinions were without the assistance of a punk rocker or some other influencer that’s clearly in the pocket of the establishment.
As one reads an article that attempts to make a connection between a community that exists for self-betterment and the worst pariahs (that the left is supporting in Ukraine), a few questions come up: To what end was the article written? Is it really possible for it to actually be as cynical as it appears to be?
Does MSNBS really view the work of Cynthia Miller-Idriss as being representative of a professional progressive publication?
Did he get off way too easy? Definitely. Was the leniency a product of his celebrity status? It’s likely. Yet, it’s great to know that we live in a world where backbiters have a chance of tasting a portion of what they deserve.
Apparently, the system was pissed at something different from what the rest of us were. While we were upset at a deliberate attempt to paint a huge portion of the electorate in a defamatory light, all while attempting to benefit from the attention, what got the system riled up was the resources spent in pursuit of a frivolous and false accusation. He was ordered to pay over $120,000 in restitution to the city of Chicago, and a $25,000 fine.
It seems the moral of the story is, if you want the legal system to give a care about defamation, you have to demonstrate that it matters to their bottom line. Sure, it’s a shitty moral, but at least a lying piece of work is getting locked up.
I suspect that he’s not going to the real thing, but to celebrity jail, where he gets to while away his time in relative comfort, with substantial amenities, and near-limitless entertainment, all while his basic needs are met. So, perhaps his real punishment in the long-term would be the hit to his own reputation.
That aside, most people are not celebrities. So, this story is still a valid warning to false accusers everywhere. Some famous guy didn’t get away with it, so they might not get away with it, either.
It would seem as though Dave has been getting plenty of engagement, in spite of having been banned on YouTube in February, as evidenced by the fact that his property was vandalized, as was public property near his new home, attempting to smear him as a “paedo”.
Dave himself outlines this in the video below:
I don’t have some special insight into the matter, but it wouldn’t surprise me if the people who vandalized Dave’s property acted on a dare. The first bit of evidence is the D-student nature of the accusation; “paedo” is what you’d call someone when you want to tear them down as cheaply as possible, in as few words as possible. Also, they misspelled his name.
The group mechanics of online organizations that engage in intimidation, such as ANTIFA, aren’t hard to understand. They largely come down to a bunch of trolls convincing gullible people to act on dares. It’s not much different from the neighborhood kids who convince some new kid to commit a prank, like ding-dong-ditch, on the pretense that “if you do it, we’ll respect you for it”.
But in reality, the opposite is true. A kid who acts on the dare is pegged as a bitch, who can be made to do anything that he’s asked to do, if put under enough pressure. In time, the bitch can be dared to steal or vandalize, while the ones that put him up to it don’t have to face the consequences if he gets caught.
Acting on a dare doesn’t win the kid respect, it only results in more dares. And he may only be a few dares away from having sex with patio furniture.
If you’re wondering what ANTIFA discussion groups are like, it’s pretty much a huge hive of trolls that try to goad whatever gullible imbeciles that meander in to do what they want them to do, so they don’t have to get their hands dirty by doing it themselves. Then they laugh themselves silly when an imbecile turns bitch by doing what the trolls want him to do.
The idea behind these groups is, “make someone else do it”. And that’s where those who are sincere in whatever the group purports to be about comes in. I don’t know, but I suspect that these groups are 90% trolls, and 10% sincere, with the occasional one among the sincere willing to go far enough to be a bitch.
(If you disagree with the use of language in this post, consider this: What do you think the trolls call the gullibly sincere behind their backs? And is that a title you’d want for yourself?)
The fact is, trolls are great at disguising themselves as someone who is sincere. It’s the whole reason they can so effectively manipulate other people into doing what they want. It wouldn’t surprise me if certain leftist fringe communities were composed almost entirely of trolls, who are collectively ready to pounce the moment that someone who is sincere in their convictions decides to show up and attempt to identify as one of them.
Then they get that person to do something stupid, and shortly afterwards, that person becomes yet another Encyclopedia Dramatica article. Then, there they go, that’s their prize for believing so hard in the cause that they vandalize someone’s home.
Did you really think that these leftist fringe communities existed for the betterment of society? No, the real point is to act as lul-farms, which milk the gullible few for whatever lulz can be drained from them. And once someone outs themselves as willing to stir up IRL drama for the cause, the trolls are just going to latch on and suck away. When do they stop? I don’t know, they can remain on the same guy for years. And if a record of the mis-deed remains on the internet for someone else to find, it’s hard to tell when interest in the lol-cow will reignite, long after it was thought to have died down.
If that sounds like an undesirable outcome to you, then these leftist fringe communities are something for you to stay away from.
But for at least one guy who messed with Dave Cullen, it might already be too late. His best bet at this point would be to get out of there before matters escalate beyond his ability to manage.
If you’re concerned that cancel culture is running amok, then the above video is worth watching. It’s about 21 minutes long, but it’s worth every second for those following matters related to cancel culture.
It’s one thing to understand that someone is wrong. But to really prepare yourself to fight back against the problem, or be ready to mount a reasonable defense, it helps to understand the psychology of your adversary.
Anna Runkle, a.k.a. the Crappy Childhood Fairy, usually does video presentations on topics relevant to those recovering from childhood abuse. If you haven’t had an especially unpleasant childhood, her videos still provide piles of insightful information on psychology, and the offering above is no exception.
The presenter points out that there’s a narcissistic desire at the heart of cancel culture. What they seek is the gratification of making a difference by standing for a cause, even if their cause equates to nothing more than a witch hunt.
I can make the observation that it hasn’t been productive to point out that the many accusations waged by cancel culture aren’t grounded in truth, and are usually based on assumptions made on flimsy inferences. The reason why this gets nowhere is because cancel culture isn’t concerned with the truth of a matter. To them, it matters more that their natural desire for tribalism is fulfilled, and to that end, they are going to seek out anyone that they can label an enemy, so that they can have a target.
This naturally leads to the question of what to do when cancel culture comes for you or someone you know or employ. Because they’re out to get a reaction, the best thing you can do is ignore them. You can block them on social media, if you want to. Naturally, this is going to seriously piss them off, because they want their voice to be heard (while trying to silence yours). Even if you’re a freedom of speech kinda guy, you have no obligation to endure abuse. So block them, and if they get pissed off, it’s their fault they’re making themselves feel that way. And if you give it more thought, appreciate the irony that they can’t take what they attempted to do to you.
Don’t engage with them. Certainly don’t apologize to them. Block them, if need be. Then go have fun doing things that they don’t, like have sex.
If you know someone who is being cancelled, the best thing that you can do is likewise ignore the attempted cancellers. If you employ that person, it’s important that you get behind them, since if the cancellers get the idea that you’re spineless, they’ll just go after you, instead, because they’d know that you cave in to pressure.
It’s not hard to be more courageous than they are.
If effortlessly blocking them doesn’t turn out to be a deterrent, then you can move on to learning to enjoy their tears. They’re losers, and you’re pissing them off. Some people are the right people to piss off. If terrible people are your enemies, then you’ve made the right enemies. In time, they might realize that they’re the ones who are giving you what you want, then back off. I wouldn’t count on it happening right away, especially if they’re inordinately stupid.
I know that some people might disagree with “my methods”. Just because I recommend them doesn’t mean they’re my methods. Something’s gotta go in that mug.
“All opponents are not necessarily enemies. But both enemies and opponents carry certain characteristics in common. Both perceive their opposite as an obstacle, or an opportunity, or a threat. Sometimes the threat is personal; other times it is a perceived violation of standards or accepted norms of society. In modest form, the opponent’s attacks are verbal. The warrior must choose which of those to stand against, and which to ignore. Often that decision is taken from his hands by others. In those cases, lack of discipline may dissuade the opponent from further attacks. More often, though, the opponent finds himself encouraged to continue or intensify the attacks. It is when the attacks become physical that the warrior must take the most dangerous of choices.”
There is an expression: “One bad apple spoils the barrel.” It has to do with public perception going against a group due to the behavior of just one maverick. Of course, it’s not fair to the group being discussed.
The brony community has long been a pronounced example of an eccentric group, and the legacy media has long sought after any excuse to jump all over them.
Now, thanks to the actions of one bad guy, the entire brony fandom has been “linked with neo-Nazism & shootings”. Sound unfair? That’s just how The Sun has framed it with the following headline:
In reality, bronies aren’t especially dangerous, though I still wouldn’t let them play with any children of mine. The vast majority of bronies are just fans of the show. It would be great if the article pointed that out.
Oh, hold on. They did. Eight paragraphs into the story:
While the overwhelming majority of bronies are just sincere fans of the series,…
The Sun’s article
Then they went right back to framing the fandom as deranged sociopaths:
…online forums have been infested with extreme porn and racist messaging for years — and have even been linked with real world violence before.
The Sun, continuing the same sentence
When discussing bronies, it’s hard to tell where the irony ends and the fanatical lunacy begins. But one fan took things too far when he carried out a mass killing, beforehand expressing a desire to be with the character of Applejack (pictured above) “in the afterlife”.
I can’t speak for bronies, but I imagine that they are currently saddened, both at the tragedy, and by reason of the press’ attempts to frame them in an intensely negative light. The list of people falsely-branded as racist or neo-Nazi is growing by the day, and it so happens that bronies are the latest addition to the club.
Sadly, if the press wanted to defame any group as neo-Nazis, they’d have a simple time doing so. A long-running internet meme is to corrupt something that seems innocent, which often has to do with producing fan art with Nazi imagery. If it’s an intellectual property that you like, or any fandom, it’s likely already received the same treatment at the hands of photoshoppers. While the artists might find it funny, a sad potential side-effect is that a corporate legacy media with an agenda would find it trivial to dig up their works to use as misleading examples of connections to Nazism.
These misleading examples would then be presented to consumers of legacy media, who don’t know well enough that the images were merely intended as jokes (in poor taste), and not representative of the sincerely-held ideals of the greater community.
I’m a live-and-let-live kinda guy. As I see it, if a bunch of guys want to play with plush ponies, that’s totally up to them, and there’s no reason to complain if they’re laid-back about it. Better still, they’re funny, and give us some laughs. Of course, I do have the right to point out when one is acting like a goofball or is taking things too far.
Don’t give bronies a hard time. They’re people, just like you and me. The difference being that women find them much harder to date.
Red Skull, as you may know, was originally conceptualized as a Nazi, and was depicted as fighting for Hitler himself.
On the other hand, Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist who, as a college professor, encouraged self-development and gave lectures about, among other things, how Hitler was a seriously evil dude.
So, what’s the thinking behind making Peterson out to be a Nazi supervillain? I don’t know, but I imagine that avoiding the cognitive dissonance involved would require an immensely skillful evasion of reality.
If there’s one takeaway to be had from Sonichu, it’s that if you can’t beat your enemies in real life, just make them out to be villains in your own comic book.
As he is now, Red Skull represents every boomer-aged snowflake’s greatest insecurity: that millennials and post-millennials could simply use the internet and find better ideas than what the establishment has been shitting out.
It’s to the point where, if you found out that Jordan Peterson was caricatured in Captain America, you probably discovered it outside of the comic itself.
American comic book writers should want people to actually read their comics. To this end, it would be expedient for their comics to be something that people wouldn’t avoid out of self-respect. People don’t make fun of me for reading manga, but if they found me reading Captain America, it would be hard to live down.
Assuming I actually read American comics, that is.
Thanks to humor website NotTheBee, we have an archive of a panel from Captain America from days-gone-by, from back before Cap was indoctrinated into the Cult of Woke. It’s quite moving, and an excellent example of what he has fallen from:
I’ve used Yelp before. It’s a user-driven review site that can help people decide which restaurants and other businesses to visit, and which ones to avoid. I admit that I’ve made the choice to choose a different establishment because I’ve read one-too-many negative reviews. I’ve even written some reviews, even if just to point out that a fast-food joint is, in fact, a typical fast-food joint (filthy parking lots, an unpleasant connotation of class-warfare from rude employees that could’ve applied for a different job, etc.).
Now, if an establishment makes the news for being racist, that establishment can be flagged on Yelp as racist.
Yelp’s decision to classify these restaurants in this manner on their own is likely to fend off the possibility of review-bombing, which has long been a problem on Yelp. You might have already known that anyone can write up a Yelp review, and in those reviews, people might not necessarily tell the truth. In fact, Yelp themselves has previously shown evidence of review fraud from businesses that have payed people for reviews on Yelp.
In a similar manner to how a group of people can review bomb, a group of people can also agree to make an accusation of racism to the point of the accusation getting media attention. This effectively weaponizes Yelp as yet another tool to tear someone down with the mere power of false accusation.
But it gets even worse in the context of post-truth regressive leftism. It usually goes that if just one person is making an accusation, it can usually be dismissed as a pie-in-the-sky grumbling of a malcontent. But if multiple people are making the same accusation, then it seems as though something must really be up. If a bunch of people can come to a consensus that someone should be a target, and agree upon a story to bring them down, that can be difficult for people to argue against, especially in a culture of people who presume guilt against people arrested for and charged with crimes.
I think this can be called the Jezebel effect.
If you’re wondering who Jezebel is, she’s someone we can read about in the Bible. She was married to a king who wanted a plot of land, but the owner wouldn’t sell it to him. So Jezebel invented a crime against him, and got a couple people to act as false witnesses. The land owner was then slain, and the king got the plot of land, but immediately afterwards got a stern talking-to from Elijah.
If you’re wondering what eventually became of Jezebel, she was defenestrated then eaten by dogs. Not a pleasant way to go.
Let’s be honest here; true racism in America is rare. You’d have to comb the land to find someone who is sincerely racist (as opposed to being falsely-accused). Ironically, the most racist language that’s propagated today comes from the groups traditionally thought of as being victims of racism. Come on, guys. You have to be the change you want to see.
While true racism is bad (as rare as it may be), the witch-hunt for racism has morphed into a mind-destroying toxicity of the worst kind, and is used as a false pretext for going after people merely for being on the other side. To that end, it’s a problem that persists for it’s own self-perpetuation. The weaponization of false accusation is too powerful a weapon for the mobs to want to give up.
It’s obvious to any sensible person why it’s wrong to hate someone for an immutable characteristic. But it should also be obvious why it’s wrong to target someone with a false accusation because you disagree with them, or suspect they aren’t doing enough to champion your own pet cause.
It’s too bad that there are as many people out there as there are who aren’t as strongly concerned with the truth of a matter as they are with its potential to further their own ideology. But as I’ve said before, if it’s necessary to lie to get people to accept what you’re trying to sell them, perhaps you shouldn’t believe it, either.
EDIT: A previous version of this article was written with the assumption that the designation as racist would be made by individual users. It does help to be careful with your news sources, as some of them can present a matter in a way more consistent with the bias of the news organization presenting it. Not that that’s a new problem.
You know all those times when someone is accused of being a pedophile, and you hear your friends say, “I knew it. I can tell the signs.”? It happens every time someone is outed as a pedophile, even though they don’t seem to say anything about it until after the facts are known.
You nod and say that you could tell the signs too, but we all know the reality of the matter, and that’s that you really didn’t see it coming. Don’t you feel left out when your friends have the ability to determine that someone is a pedophile, but you don’t?
Well, have no fear! By the time you’ve finished reading this article, you’ll have had the training you need to determine whether someone is a pedophile, well before you either see them on the news or they are accused on Facebook.
To tell whether someone is a pedophile, you have to look for certain mannerisms. To be more specific, if they do something that you find at least mildly irksome, that’s a sign that they might be a kiddie-diddler. The more irritating that you find someone’s behavior, the more likely it is that they’re a pedophile.
For example, if you find it annoying how that guy on the corner taps his feet when waiting for the light to change, that’s a sign of pedophilia. His pedophilia, of course. Or, if someone in front of you is just a little too slow or is taking too long to get out of the way, that’s a classic sign that he’s a pedo. You don’t know for sure, but play it safe and assume the worst. Or, if someone pays for a small grocery order with a check, that’s a sign he’s a pedophile, too. Keep your distance, and regard with disgust.
In fact, the longer that you pay attention to someone, the more little signs you’ll notice that he’s a pedophile, and it will continue to add up. Proven fact.¹ You might notice that there are a lot of pedophiles in public places you frequent, such as big box stores. In spite of the fact that true, clinical pedophilia is something rare, they tend to congregate everywhere you go, for some reason.
Another sign that someone is a pedophile is that they’re being too nice. How is that a sign of pedophilia? It’s a little known fact that a large percentage of child molesters are someone who the victim knows. Pedophiles are actually quite methodical; they’ll build a positive rapport in an effort to get closer to the one their sights are really set on: your child. Don’t have children yet? They’re planning ahead for the eventuality that you get one. They’re really cunning.
But, what about your children? What if the mean people go right for your kids when you’re not around, and try being nice to them? There is a time-proven method for preventing child abuse, and that’s to teach your children about “stranger danger”. How it works in principle is pretty simple: just teach your children that people they don’t know are molestation waiting to happen, and your children will be much better prepared to take care of the rest. Your children may have their ability to form interpersonal relationships stunted for the rest of their lives, but that’s a small price to pay to avoid having their faces show up on milk cartons.
While we’re talking about your children, we know it’s hard to avoid taking them into public. To avoid having a pedo snatch them away, teach your kids to scream “RAPE” at the top of their lungs in the event that someone gets too close.
The exact odds of a child abduction may be significantly lower than them being struck by lightning, but you’re still not willing to take that chance, are you? Besides, people get struck by lightning with frequency compared to winning the lottery. You buy tickets, don’t you? Play it smart.
Another sign to watch for is whether someone seems to be particularly jittery about being accused of being a pedophile. It’s true that accusations of pedophilia are going around like crazy, and are increasing all the time. But no one would actually be afraid of being called a pedophile unless they have actual reason to be concerned, right? And who would be more concerned about being outed than an actual pedophile! Am I right?
So, how can you use this to determine whether someone is a pedophile? Easy, just bring up pedophiles and how much you hate them, every opportunity you get. Say how much pedophiles make you angry, and what you’d do if you met one. If there were any pedophiles in earshot, they’d start to get at least slightly fidgety. That’s a giveaway! If anyone so much as breaks a sweat, they’re busted.
The last method for finding pedophiles is by far the most effective. Just go around and accuse people of being pedophiles. It can be for any reason or no reason at all. If it turns out that they’re not pedophiles, don’t worry, they’ll be screened by the criminal justice system. In the meantime, there will be plenty of media attention surrounding that person’s alleged pedophilia, so people will keep their distance from them and employers will avoid hiring them, which will makes things much harder for that pedophile in the event that they actually are one. And if they’re not, the press will just go back over their archived news articles and search engines will edit their automated indexes, and things will be all better again. That’s how it works, right?
And if it turns out that that person actually is a pedophile, you’ll have been the person to have nailed them. Sweet victory! Just be aware that you might have to take a few shots with different people until one of them rings true.
So, there you go! Because you stumbled on the right article while using the internet, you’re now armed with knowledge, and ready to spot those pedo-meanies with your EAGLE EYES! Child molesters won’t be able to resist your ability to see the green-colored glow that they emanate.²
A few prominent Pokemon YouTubers have been accused of preying on minors. As it often goes, it started with one person coming forward, and afterwards, more people came forward claiming to be victimized by prominent members of the Pokemon community.
It’s really nothing new that some people misuse games and social media to attempt to take advantage of other people, but it’s still disappointing when it happens.
When it comes to the nature of the crimes committed, I know that it may not be popular to speak as a voice of reason, but it’s still important, considering that society would quickly break down if accusations (true or false) were allowed to run all over the place without scrutiny.
“And we can’t have that.”
So, considering what’s at stake, let’s be brave enough to use our heads. There are a few important points to consider as this and any similar drama unfolds.
First, accused does not mean guilty.
I don’t mean to make excuses for these guys in the event that they actually did sexually abuse a minor. If that were the case, I say throw the book at them. I’ve known a couple people who were sexually abused as children, and that’s the kind of thing that can mess a person up for a very long time.
However, people are capable of making stuff up, children included. If it turns out that at least one of the accused is innocent, this whole matter really sucks for them. Worse yet, it can ruin opportunities down the road, as their name will continue to come up in connection to crimes that they didn’t actually commit in web searches for years to come.
When it comes down to it, it’s for a court of law to determine innocence or guilt. We the public may be presented with convincing evidence, but the evidence has a lot of potential to have been doctored or be one-sided. Therefore, let’s not be too hasty to rush to conclusions, considering that we may not have the full story.
Second, if you really were a victim of sexual abuse, you need to take this information to the proper authorities.
By “proper authorities”, I mean “the police”, since law enforcement would have a better chance of stopping the predator and bring the person to justice than your Twitter audience, no matter how big the audience may be.
I know how hard it can be to come forward, considering that sexual predators usually intimidate their victims out of doing so. Making it harder still is that people don’t want to be known as the person who was victimized. Still, it’s very possible that the predator has other victims, no matter how things may seem. Because of this, it’s important to come forward.
To law enforcement, of course. Taking it to law enforcement would allow the victim to maintain their dignity and remain anonymous while an investigation can be conducted, and in the event that guilt is determined, justice may be served. On the other hand, taking it to social media comes off as a grab for attention, and law enforcement still might not get wind of it.
I know it sounds like I’m really laboring the point here, but bringing the matter to social media isn’t as productive as it may seem. People might be outraged and bang their pots and pans together, but the end result is likely the predator remaining free and picking the next victim just shortly afterwards. It’s law enforcement that gets results. Law enforcement.
Third, a few scummy people don’t define an entire community.
While we already know this, the corporate media is very predictable, and there’s a big chance that they will use this to make the case that the Pokemon community, or even gaming communities in particular, are populated by predators. We know that this is not the case, but old media tends to sensationalize things in an effort to get their audience interested.
If they pull this, just remember that they’re old media, and they don’t matter as much as they used to.
Old media makes bank off of mischaracterization, sensationalism, and outright libel. You don’t, so you have no incentive to do the same thing. Don’t be like them.
I know that there are other points to make, but that’s satisfactory for now. I’m interested in seeing how the drama unfolds, and in the outcome in the event that these YouTubers are taken to law enforcement. Come to think of it, have any of the accusers taken the matter to law enforcement? It’s kind of important that they do.