Category Archives: The Neuterati

My Opinion of the Keffals/Chris Chan Interview

1 Reply

Just this morning, Keffals has uploaded an abridged version of his interview with Chris Chan. For those who care to view, the following is the video:

I may have indicated as much already, but when Chris Chan trails off into pseudo-spiritual babble, I mostly just trail off, assuming that he’s adding nothing of value to the discussion. But I have noticed some amount of consistency in his delusions, which indicates that he has given them some thought. Whether he sincerely believes his own bullshit, there’s at least some amount of premeditation in his spouting-off.

Having said that, when someone has a guilty conscience and therefore a motive to obfuscate, and they’re not making sense, it’s not a bad idea to ask whether their statements are truly designed to be understood.

During the interview, Chris said something revealing in a way that he probably didn’t realize. While he still vehemently denies committing the crime with his mother that he previously gave an unprompted and disturbingly detailed confession to, he stated that the crime was committed by another Chris Chan in another dimension. But this was considered important for Chris Chan to bring up, even though he denies that that other-dimensional Chris was actually himself.

For one thing, this sounds like a form of dissociation, an obvious way for Chris to cope with the guilt of committing a crime by convincing himself that the crime wasn’t really himself, but instead a different version of himself in another dimension.

What’s more, this explanation opens the gateway to potential gaslighting on the part of Chris, where Chris can attempt to convince people that their memories of Chris’ crime, and his confession to it, are actually memories that leaked from another dimension, causing us to remember things that, according to Chris, didn’t actually happen with the Chris Chan of this dimension.

Remember that Chris Chan has previously stated his belief in a “dimensional merge”. Whether he believes in it or not, it still is something that he can view as a tool to exonerate himself.

Also, at some point in the interview, Chris pivoted to talking about Donald Trump, for whom he clearly has disdain, even though nothing about Trump’s presidency or political career has had any noticeable impact on Chris, himself. Another example of how parroting left-wing talking points can melt an already weak mind.

Chris Chan also brought up Russia, making them out to be a modern-day Babylon, and in the process, sounding like so many false prophets of days gone by. He said that Putin would “fall by his own sword”. As I see it, Russia has a high likelihood of facing a collapse for some reason or another within the next few years. But the idea that Chris has any amount of special insight about it is laughable.

By the way, Chris Chan really needs to drop the whole schtick where he pretends to be Jesus Christ. Anyone of Christian background would find this grossly offensive. What’s more, Bible prophecy indicates that, when Jesus does return, the coming would be with great glory, and the entire world would become aware of Christ. This doesn’t sound like what’s happening with the author of Sonichu.

I’ve suspected previously that Chris Chan’s messiah complex was some form of malingering, an obvious attempt to further an insanity defense. Chris Chan’s insistence long after his trials indicates a sincerity in his delusion.

Chris Chan did a lot to attempt to capitalize on the discussion, wanting to convince those who block him on X that they were just going to get harassed anyway, whether they block him or not. This is, of course, shitty reasoning, as anyone aware of Chris Chan is aware that he’s the kind of guy you want to stay away from, as he tends to bring with him some unwanted attention.

Of course, Chris Chan still sees himself as the victim of his own bad reputation, which he himself did plenty to cultivate. He brought up Bluespike, even though Chris could’ve easily handled him by not responding to him. He brought up the gal-pals who were actually trolls, when he could’ve been skeptical of anyone claiming a strong interest in him in spite of never meeting him, and being scammed by multiple people with the same routine in the past.

Like many predators that have been outed, they want people to just leave the past in the past, and just pretend that they never did what they did. Because Chris can’t identify with normal people, he doesn’t comprehend how normal people handle forgiveness. If someone has had a career in grand larceny in their history, and we all collectively decide to not punish him, that doesn’t mean that we’d consider him just the same as everyone else for a position as a bank teller.

Chris Chan committed incest. While he may have avoided punishment, most people would still prefer that he not attend conventions. Especially considering that he continues to deny that he committed the crime, in spite of the evidence. We don’t want him near our kids, we don’t want him near ourselves, and we don’t want him leaving replies on our X updates.

If you’re interested in one transgender asking another transgender softball questions, the interview doesn’t disappoint. That aside, it’s plain to see that, between Chris Chan and Keffals, it’s Keffals who is operating with more intellectual horsepower. It just so happens that that horsepower is directed towards degeneracy.

The Collab Between Chris Chan and Keffals Makes Kiwi Farms Easy To Justify

Leave a reply

Apparently, Chris Chan is planning a collab with Keffals. This was according to Chris, as he posted the following on X:

You may know who Chris Chan is, as he is considered the most well-known of all lolcows. A couple years ago, he committed a sexual offense involving his own mother, becoming a case study in true crime, and ascending to horrorcow status.

Keffals is a bit more obscure, but perhaps far more enraging. He became known for making HRT drugs at home to sell to minors without their parent’s knowledge or consent, and ran an infamous “catboy ranch”.

The packaging for his bathtub-made HRT contains the phrase, “Keep out of reach of parents.”

Both persons are males who pretend to be women, and both hate Kiwi Farms with a passion, so it wasn’t terribly unlikely that the two would have eventually found each other.

If you’re unfamiliar with Kiwi Farms, it’s an online message board that initially focused on discussing Chris Chan, but has since pivoted to discussing the ridiculous things that social media personalities do. It’s often made out to be a hive for online bullies, and while it’s true that many of its members are unsavory individuals, I think the board as it is now can be justified. In fact, I’ll go ahead and do that now.

Suppose that arson was legal. As in, you could do it, and the law wouldn’t lay a finger on you. Would you do it?

If you’re like most people, your answer would be, “No!”. This is because most people would see arson as immoral, regardless of what the law allowed.

But suppose that, not only was arson legal, it was actually incentivized. Five dollars for each house destroyed. Odds are, most people would still refuse to do it, and would be outraged at such an incentive, if it were to exist.

However, some people would jump at the offer. “Five dollars, per? Hells yeah!” they’d scream, before getting to work. We would call such people “sociopaths”, because what little they’d have to gain is something which, in their minds, outweighs the suffering that they’d cause.

But suppose that homes were being destroyed, but rather than by acts of arson, instead through influence. Suppose that a level of abstraction separates the act that destroys the home from the home being destroyed, in such a way that allowed for plausible deniability on the part of the influencer.

The influencer might influence people to drink base liquids, eat laundry detergent, dive from moving speedboats, take prescription drugs without a prescription, idolize dangerous terrorists, make self-destructive lifestyle choices, and many, many more acts which, if people were to try them, the likely outcome is that families could be torn apart, property could be damaged, and even lives could be lost. And while all this is going on, influencers are financially rewarded just for the attention that they get.

If this were to happen, and if it were financially incentivized, would you see that as a problem?

Let’s drop the hypotheticals. After all, you probably knew what I was getting at when I brought up the influencers. The fact is, influencers do encourage destructive behaviors. These behaviors have caused damage that these influencers didn’t have to face consequences for. And yes, these influencers are being financially incentivized to accrete attention to themselves, even if the attention is through the promotion of destructive and socially corrosive ideologies and activities.

These influencers are the sociopaths who don’t give a damn what damage that they might cause for you or for anyone else, so long as they’re getting the attention that they want, and the money that they really care about.

These sociopaths are among the many influencers on social media.

They don’t have to believe what they’re saying. And they usually don’t. They don’t have to see the communities, families, or individuals whose lives they are destroying. And they couldn’t bring themselves to care. They might even convince you that they’re your friend, when in reality, your mere attention only slightly enables the transaction that is their sincere desire.

By now, you’re probably wondering what can be done about these influencers. The answer is to shine a light on them, and subject them to the ridicule and satire that is richly merited.

That’s where Kiwi Farms comes in.

If it weren’t for Kiwi Farms, deviants such as Chris Chan and Keffals would have a much easier time being the predators that they are.

And now that the two have found each other, it’s become much more important that an eye is kept on the two. Because if the two are the miscreants that they are independent of one another, just imagine what they can come up with working together.

Hey WaPo, Do You See What I See?

Leave a reply

The Washington Post has published an article acknowledging the results of a poll that shows that 57% of Americans favor the GOP’s general policy positions regarding the trans agenda, favoring their work to protect children from the transgender ideology that is being foisted upon them from multiple sources.

As you might expect, their article is still teeming with buzz-words used in the typical leftist word salad. So, if this article represents a pivot on WaPo’s part to reconcile with America’s moral majority, it’s a slow pivot.

But slow progress is still progress, even if we’d prefer that it accelerate.

An old expression among journalists is to “side with your audience”, which implies that if any bias is expressed, it would preferably be the bias of the publication’s expected audience. It would seem as though WaPo has just learned something about their own audience. The poll they cite would be a Washington Post-KFF poll, so it might be accurate to say that the results would represent the views of their audience, which I would have imagined to have been left-wing enough to tolerate their historical bias. Considering that, I think it’s reasonable to expect that a greater percentage of Americans would side against the trans agenda than what would be represented by the poll.

According to the article:

Most Americans don’t believe it’s even possible to be a gender that differs from that assigned at birth. A 57 percent majority of adults said a person’s gender is determined from the start, with 43 percent saying it can differ.

For one thing, the use of the phrase “assigned at birth” suggests that a person’s gender is arbitrary decided upon by the delivering doctor, as though it were a determination that would be independent of the reality of a person’s biological sex. The fact is, most people view a person’s gender as a communication of their biological sex, and therefore, if a doctor determines an infant’s gender in a manner inconsistent with their biological sex, then that doctor is incorrect.

The fact is, a biological sex is a reality, which exists independent of anyone’s perception of it, and a person’s gender is an intellectual expression of the reality of the matter. If the expression is inconsistent with the reality, the expression would be incorrect. This is how most people view the reality of gender and sex. If WaPo intends to side with their audience going forward, they would do better to express this understanding.

And some Americans have become more conservative on these questions as Republicans have seized the issue and worked to promote new restrictions. The Pew Research Center found 60 percent last year saying one’s gender is determined by the sex assigned at birth, up from 54 percent in 2017. Even among young adults, who are the most accepting of trans identity, about half said in the Post-KFF poll that a person’s gender is determined by their sex at birth.

A six-percent jump is pretty significant, especially in just a few years, and indicates that public sentiment is shifting drastically against the trans agenda. As one might expect, Pew’s poll showed a greater majority than the Post-KFF poll, which indicates that there’s still a divide between WaPo’s typical readership and the general population.

Of course, this indicates that there’s a greater potential readership to be had for WaPo if they were to side with the majority in this regard.

In a step in the right direction, WaPo presented a viewpoint critical of the trans agenda who had recently changed her mind. According to the article, behavioral therapist Alyssa Wells had the following to say:

“At first I was on the side of acceptance, like using the pronouns and stuff, because I want people to be kind to each other. I don’t want people fighting all the time,” she said. But she has come to see things differently. “My concern with transgender is mostly with the children.”

She has a lot more to say, and I recommend reading the article to see what else she has to say. But she brings up a solid point when she points out that, considering the legal ages for voting, drinking, and smoking, children are too young to be making choices that could permanently change their bodies.

Considering the fact that the human brain is not fully developed until about the age of 25, the case can be made for 25 bring the legal age for many things, such as voting and drinking. I wouldn’t want public policy determined by people whose brains are not fully developed. What’s more, it’s not reasonable to expect a person with an underdeveloped brain to fully comprehend life-altering decisions.

And, while we’re at it, can we just let children be innocent? If someone’s age consists of a single digit, they are way too young to be gaslit and misled about sex, gender, and sexuality.

One of the big unanswerable questions is whether public opinion around transgender issues will shift over time as it did around gay and lesbian rights. Some experts see parallels between the two issues, particularly as conservatives center their efforts on children and schools. Early backlash against gay people also focused on allegations that children would be harmed.

“Some experts” is one of my favorite phrases in journalism, up there with “industry analysts” among game journos. It’s a phrase that’s used to make an opinion appear to be a product of careful deliberation by educated professionals, when there are few to no scholarly examples to cite.

It’s obvious what’s going on, and this is different from the issues surrounding gay and lesbian rights. As more people are learning more about what’s going on, more people are turning against the trans agenda. Especially considering that children actually are being harmed.

People without children of their own might not be fully able to comprehend this, but when you mess with people’s children, that pisses them off.

Continuing, the article points out that more than 6 in 10 adults oppose biological men exploiting the trans movement to enjoy easy, slam-dunk victories over biological women in women’s sports. From that point, it has this to say:

In that vein, 21 states have passed laws that bar transgender athletes from participating in sports that do not match their sex assigned at birth, according to the Movement Advancement Project, a research group that supports LGBTQ rights.

It’s pretty much W after W for those opposing the trans insanity, and this article doesn’t even bother to deny it. Whether grudgingly or not, it seems like WaPo isn’t doing much to obfuscate the reality of the matter.

For the rest of the article, it’s basically the same: most oppose so-called “gender-affirming care” directed at children, by about 6 or 7 to 10. The rest are likely intellectual dead-ends who are suckered by buzzwords and newspeak. When it comes to discussing trans identity topics with children, 3 out of 4 are opposed. As for the remaining fourth, it’s probably nuanced, but I’d rather keep children away from them, to be safe.

It’s fascinating to see a biased outlet like Washington Post come out with so much data that goes against a typical left-wing talking point. But considering the overwhelming and increasing opposition to the trans agenda that this data represents, it would have been hard to altogether ignore.

Is this article evidence that WaPo is having a change in heart, and is starting to side with the moral majority over the banking cartels? Perhaps, though it’s also possible that they’re just grudgingly presenting data points from a study they were involved in. But in any case, it does express that they are at least cognizant of public sentiment on the topic of the trans agenda, which is solidifying against it as more about it is known.

Looks Like the Trannifesto Is Delayed, Again

Leave a reply

Last week, social media lit up with the news that the manifesto of the Covenant school shooter, Audrey Hale, would finally be released to the public.

Great, we finally get to read it, right? Well, we got an update just this week:

It’s disappointing that we can’t yet read the words of the deviant behind the shooting, as doing so would allow us to better understand the motive behind the act, and put us in a better position to understand the nature of the deviancy that is plunging our society into moral decline.

But let’s be honest, here. None of us are likely to be surprised by the contents of the manifesto. The motives of the shooter are obvious on their face, just by the nature of the shooter, and her chosen target.

A tranny flipped out, and decided to attack a Christian school. The fact that the trans community has something against Christians is not a secret, especially considering that Christians are usually outspoken about the trans movement.

Even from a philosophical perspective, uncorrupted Christianity is incompatible with the trans movement, as both movements are characterized by a different paradigm of mind.

A central tenet of Christianity is its call to repentance, which carries with it the implication that, because a person may be wrong about their outlook, there is a reality outside of one’s own understanding, and that a person can and should change their thinking to be better in touch with the reality which exists independent of whatever a person may perceive it to be.

Such thinking is at direct odds with the notion that one’s mind determines one’s own reality and one’s own truth, which is a characteristic of the post-truth mindset that supposes that the reality of a matter is determined by one’s perceptions, and therefore any successful self-deception successfully creates a new reality. Transsexuals tend to ascribe to a kind of magical thinking where they determine their own reality, which they can change through force of will.

Audrey Hale targeted a Christian school. For one thing, it’s evident that her sick mind perceived a child as a valid target, and could not allow them to simply be innocent. But it’s also obvious that she hated the fact that Christians voice opinions that challenge her worldview, which intrinsically challenge the magical thinking that is a characteristic of her movement.

What’s more, she likely also hated the fact that Christian thinking had an impact on public policy. Just prior to the shooting, her state of Tennessee has passed legislation that protects minors from some of the more egregious excesses of trans culture, joining the growing number of states that are doing the same. If Audrey thought like the typical extremist of her movement (and the fact that she was willing to murder over it shows that she did), she viewed this legislation as a form of persecution, or even genocide, as the more radical among them often do, and therefore saw her behavior as justified.

In the absence of more information, we can speculate as to why the trannifesto is being kept from the public’s eyes. It’s likely the case that someone is using lawfare in an attempt to keep it from people’s sight, because it’s hard to imagine that it could do anything besides damage the trans movement. The language in the tweet above would seem to suggest that this is the case.

Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone were to leak it. That seems to be how it goes with this kind of thing, nowadays.

Twitter Quietly Drops Prohibition On Correct Gender Pronouns For Transgender Individuals

4 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.

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.

The “Mouse Utopia” Experiment That Fooled Your Parents and Grandparents

Leave a reply
Dr. John Calhoun, pictured inside the Universe 25 enclosure.

Even with good intentions, what’s stupid is still stupid. So it is when one attempts to thwart a perceived oncoming crisis, but ends up doing more harm than good.

Decades ago, researcher John Calhoun set out to conduct a set of experiments which involved confining rats to enclosures, and observing them as they are continually provided with ample food, safety from predators, and allowing their populations to grow without interference.

The most famous of these enclosures was called “Universe 25”, which was notable for its capacity for housing upwards of 5000 mice. As the experiment progressed, the mice descended into antisocial and violent behavior, and the colony ended up failing when the females failed to care for their young.

This research came to be of particular public interest, as it came at a time when Malthusianism, the idea that the earth was nearing its limit for its ability to support humanity’s growing population, was widely accepted. In light of this, it’s easy to see why Calhoun’s experiments were interpreted to mean that consequences similar to what befell Universe 25 might also befall humanity, if humanity’s numbers were to continue to grow unchecked.

But there was a problem. Calhoun’s experiments did not concern limited resources, nor did it concern overpopulation.

The purpose of the experiments was to observe behavioral sink in rats who were not able to escape one another’s company at any time. This becomes evident when considering the fact that the colony did not want for anything to eat or drink at any time during the experiment, as it was all provided by Calhoun. What’s more, the Universe 25 enclosure came nowhere close to capacity at the point when the colony failed.

Nonetheless, the consensus was that the experiments gave us a glimpse into the future of humanity if humanity’s numbers were to continue to grow without check, further feeding into the Malthusianism that was popular at the time. In a sense, the Universe 25 experiment came to be the “mouse utopia” experiment which fooled your parents and grandparents.

As a case study concerning the National Socialists of Germany may prove, when any misconception becomes popular enough, tragedy is a potential outcome. While Malthusianism may have already been popular in the decades preceding Calhoun’s experiments, a popular misconception regarding them may have played a huge role in the movement’s further popularity. And, wouldn’t you know it, it was the following decade that saw the production of the now popular Jaffe memo.

That’s not to say that there’s no value to be found in Calhoun’s experiments. But to find that value, one would have to look at them in terms of the data that they actually provided. And if there is carryover between the observed behavior of rats made to live in close proximity and human beings, there is a concern which is applicable to today, rather than in a hypothetical future time when human population is far greater. After all, large numbers of humans live in close proximity, today.

The fact is, there is noticeable behavioral sink in rats who are made to live in close proximity, unable to escape one another’s company. Among what’s concerning is that the males in the experiment tended to become hyper-aggressive, often fighting each other, even when there’s apparently nothing at stake. They also tended to become hyper-sexual, with homosexuality becoming rampant.

The behavior of the females also became concerning. The females tended to become more masculine in their behavior, also becoming more aggressive and hyper-sexual. As matters continued, most of them failed to care for their own young, many of them abandoning their young, leaving them to die. And yes, we’re still talking about rats.

Also of interest was the emergence of a special category of male. These were referred to as the “beautiful ones”, because they avoided other rats (and thus fighting), and they devoted their time to self-grooming. Any time they fed, they avoided other rats, often by waiting until many of them were sleeping. These rats were so psychologically damaged that they refused to mate, even after being removed from the enclosure and placed in the company of ideal females.

I’ve been avoiding direct comparisons until now, but I’d like to indulge by pointing out the obvious similarities between these so-called “beautiful ones” and humanity’s MGTOW and Herbivore Men movements. If you’ve never heard of them, they largely boil down to being groups of men who have foregone relationships with women, often over bad experiences.

As large numbers of humans live in close proximity, it’s easy to see a certain disregard for one’s fellow man. Those who manage large numbers of humans tend to see less value in them as individuals, instead viewing them as statistics, and numbers to be managed. There is an Asian saying: “A frog at the bottom of a well knows nothing of the ocean.” Indeed, a limited perspective can lead one into making wrong assumptions, even as far as to interpret disparate data as supporting their own preconceived notions. Get out of cities.

Watch the Georgia Guidestones Get Wrecked

Leave a reply

Ladies and gentlemen, for your viewing pleasure, the Georgia Guidestones being destroyed:

I prefer to call them the Georgia Geldstones, because they’re sometimes referred to as the “American Stonehenge” by those whose pet ideology involves tricking young boys into having themselves neutered after convincing them that they’re actually girls. However, the Georgia Geldstones are a Stonehenge in the same way American cheese is a cheese: it’s a shitty failure.

No one knows for sure who set the Georgia Geldstones up, but it’s believed that their anonymous builders intended them to be a lasting set of instructions for how to manage the world after a nuclear war. Whether a nuclear war is specified or not, it’s still troublesome that one would believe that they’d be an ideal set of instructions for how to manage a global society, at all. That’s because the first set of instructions involved setting the global population to a very low number:

1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

As of this posting, there are around 8 billion people alive. So for the Neuterati to achieve their vision of an ideal society would take a shit-ton of murder.

Then, as if it weren’t already clear that the Geldstones were set up by the kind of shits you wouldn’t share a lunch table with, here’s the second commandment of their blighted religion:

2. Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.

Ideally, people decide for themselves who they partner with, and how many offspring result. To say so wouldn’t be telling any decent person anything they didn’t already know.

However, the Neuterati have their own ideas for how you live your life, and they want to make your most personal decisions for you. This makes them your enemy.

The real Ten Commandments concern personal conduct, including commands not to murder, steal, commit adultery, or bear false witness. None of the ten commandments of the Georgia Guidestones mention anything of the sort. It might be that the people behind the Guidestones have a problem with the real Ten Commandments. Or maybe they prefer to recraft society in its own image, and then proceed to micromanage every human being.

Most of the rest of the commandments on the Geldstones aren’t terribly noteworthy, and may even fall into platitudes that don’t mean anything. However, the tenth acknowledges “nature”, the Moloch of the secular age:

10. Be not a cancer on the earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

I stick to my own kind: the human kind. Any reasonable person would. In contrast with this, the Neuterati view humans as a problem. They have declared war on mankind, and have placed their manifesto in plain sight.

The Neuterati have their own religion. “Nature” is the name of their god. “Sustainability” is the name of their altar. The scalpel is the sparagmos with which they tear our children apart. And the Georgia Guidestones were among their graven images.

Until they were destroyed.