Category Archives: The Neuterati

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

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

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

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

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.

Study Finds That Testosterone Treatments Turn Democrats More Conservative

It’s not going to surprise a whole lot of people that the chemical that makes men more manly also makes men tend more towards conservatism. But now, we have a study to prove it.

The study, published by Professor Paul Zak of Claremont Graduate University, demonstrates a clear connection between testosterone levels and the political preferences of males. The 136 males participating in the study disclosed their political affiliations, then were either administered a synthetic form of testosterone or a placebo.

In an outcome as surprising as the setting of the sun, the Democrats participating in the study that took testosterone felt less warmly about their own party by 12 percent, but felt more warmly about Republicans by 45 percent.

Democrats happen to be the most compliant people, and compliance in males correlates with a lack of testosterone. I’m stating the obvious, of course. But maybe a study is already underway which will demonstrate the connection.

Come to think of it, it was mainly the Democrats that insisted on shutting down gyms and confining people to their homes during the Coronavirus Apocalypse. An apocalypse that I survived, by the way. And you probably did, too.

The study showed the strongest shift in Democrats that were weakly affiliated, and the effects waned among those with stronger Democrat leanings, and among weakly-affiliated Republicans.

Come to think of it, many of the Democratic policy positions tend to decrease the testosterone of those affected. When men pretend to be women, there isn’t much expectation that those men would have high testosterone. And of course, those men have a home in the Democratic party! When men become obese, their T-levels tend to crater. But they’d still find company among Democrats who tout the “healthy-at-any-weight” bullshit that actually kills people.

Also, consider the fact that Democrats are the ones actively trying to trick young boys into having themselves neutered. Could it be that Democrats are trying to castrate for themselves a set of lifelong loyalists?

Considering the role of the gonads in testosterone production, it would follow that the fastest way to turn a man Democrat is to have him de-balled and de-pricked. And who knows how many professing Democrats have already underwent the process?