Your unpopular opinions aren’t really that unpopular.

There are many topics that are considered taboo to discuss (or if they can be discussed, you have to take a particular side). Many of these topics, are topics that I have covered on this blog, or will cover at a later date.

Now let me just set the record straight. I’m no racist. I’m not a homophobe. I’m not sexist, nor would would I consider myself to be bigoted in any other ways. I’m just a guy who likes the way society is (or rather was before political correctness took hold) and don’t want to see it deteriorate any further.

I believe that everyone should have the right to self-determination. The right to safety. The right to culture. The right to be proud of who they are and where they came from. However, with rights comes responsibilities, and I think this is where problems are occurring.

The foreign national has the right to come here and work hard to make a better life for themself. They in turn have a responsibility to respect our laws and our culture, rather than trying to enforce their own on us.

I’ve got a better idea. Why don’t you get on a plane and go to one of the Shariah hellholes that already exists. And take your stupid ninja ghost costumes with you.

The transgender has a right to be able to figure out who they are and to find comfort with themselves. They in turn have a responsibility to understand that the vast majority of people already are comfortable with who they are and shouldn’t have to change our whole societal dynamics to accommodate their confusion.

As I’ve said before. Toilets were separated because of the different SEXES (a biological reality) rather than the social construct of gender.
Now this is more like it. Is compromise really such a hard thing?

Feminists have a right to expect equal opportunities and fair treatment as their male counterparts. They in turn have a responsibility to understand in a truly fair society that means competing based on merit.

“Go fuck yourself”: You sure showed him with your impeccable arguments.

There are numerous other examples of rights vs responsibilities that I could address, but I’ll just leave it here. The point that I’m making is this. The kind of things I’m discussing here are things that I’ve discussed with people in person. In my experience, most reasonable people would agree with what I’m saying. The problem is that the media constantly plays up the idea that everyone considered to be “vulnerable” is somehow a victim of oppression, and so people are uncomfortable discussing these topics openly. Yet, just like me, these people are sick of being told that they’re privileged, or that they’re part of something bad, or that they have no right to feel worried about the erosion of our culture and our way of life.

I’m not advocating for something revolutionary and extreme. I’m just saying that if we want equal rights, we should all have equal responsibilities, and I know most people would agree with this. However, in order for this to happen, we need to take pride in who we are and what our ancestors accomplished and we need to stand up against those who attack us simply for pointing out an obvious reality. Their slanderous comments only have power if we let them. I think it’s time that we took this power back.

White Privilege: Because white people should feel guilty about being white.

There are plenty of examples of Cultural Marxist nonsense that annoy the hell out of me, but one of the concepts that particularly bothers me is the concept of “white privilege”, a ridiculous myth that is being forced upon us by a bunch of insane leftists who want to blame every single bad thing in the world on white people. This is a ridiculous notion that perpetuates an idea that nobody else needs to take responsibility for their own actions, and should instead blame it all on being “oppressed by a system that favours whites”.

This is something that has been bothering me for a while, but the event that inspired me to write this was the Washington Post’s reaction to the Ferguson riots (a few extracts are in italics below)

When black people are protesting in Ferguson and across America, they’re not protesting against white people.

Wait, you mean that #KillAllWhites that the black rioters were using on twitter was not directed against white people? Wow, could have fooled me.

They don't really hate white people. They're just mad about injustices.
Can you imagine if whites were calling for the genocide of blacks on twitter? The media would have a frenzy.

How about this video that shows a “protester” attacking a journalist in Ferguson just for being white.

A screenshot from the video above. The simple minded idiot can't even put on a t-shirt properly so I doubt he has the mental capacity to see the wrong in his behaviour.
A screenshot from the video above. The simple minded idiot can’t even put on a t-shirt properly so I doubt he has the mental capacity to see the wrong in his behaviour.

It actually gets somewhat amusing in this next part in which a white marxist who goes to Ferguson in solidarity with the protesters gets his ass kicked for doing so.

That's what you get for being white.
That’s what you get for being white.
Yeah, I'm sure it is just some of them who are being dicks. I'm sure all the others burning and looting are wonderful people.
Yeah, I’m sure it is just some of them who are being dicks. I’m sure all the others burning and looting are wonderful people.
Actually I think this guy may be the biggest racist of all. That's such a condescending attitude to take.
Actually I think this guy may be the biggest racist of all. That’s such a condescending attitude to take.
Resiliency? Against what? They're literally destroying and looting from their own city in honour of a cigar thief who was killed for attacking a cop.
Resiliency? Against what? They’re literally destroying and looting from their own city in honour of a cigar thief who was killed for attacking a cop.
And there you have it everyone. Mean words and politically incorrect opinions hurt more than brutal physical violence. I really hope this guy doesn't procreate.
And there you have it everyone. Mean words and politically incorrect opinions hurt more than brutal physical violence. I really hope this guy doesn’t procreate.

Yes, it’s against white people. Stop lying Washington Post.

Black communities are ultimately protesting systems of injustice and inequality that structurally help white people while systematically harming black people.

I call bullshit on this. Affirmative action policies means that society is bending over backwards to help minorities at the expense of white people due to the belief that minorities are at an unfair disadvantage.

A cartoon that supports affirmative action. It also shows their hypocrisy. You see when it suits them, we're all equal and therefore deserve equal treatment, but when it doesn't suit them, we're as different as the animals in this cartoon.
A cartoon that supports affirmative action. It also shows their hypocrisy. You see when it suits them, we’re all equal and therefore deserve equal treatment, but when it doesn’t suit them, we’re as different as the animals in this cartoon.
This is insulting to any self made successful black people. It's almost as if it's implying that they CAN'T succeed without help from whitey.
This is insulting to any self made successful black people. It’s almost as if it’s implying that they CAN’T succeed without help from whitey.

Benefiting from white privilege is automatic. Defending white privilege is a choice.

This is ridiculous. Are you really trying to say that it’s wrong for white people to do well in a country built by and inhabited by a majority of white people? Would you go to China and complain about Chinese privilege? Would you go to Israel and complain about Jewish privilege? Would you go to *insert any non white country here* and complain about *insert non-white demographic here* privilege? Of course not, because that would be racist.

As white folks, we can’t know what it’s like to go through life without racial privilege because we literally haven’t.

We’re going through it right now by virtue of the fact that we’re constantly being told that areas we live in are “too white“, by having the rape of innocent white European girls by third world invaders being covered up by authorities (a topic I intend to address someday), and by giving preferential treatment to other races through affirmative action.

You may have heard stories about black friends being monitored in department stores

Now, I don't know how accurate this data is, but it suggests that (in America at least) the crime rate of non-whites is higher than that of whites. Maybe that's why they're followed around more in stores.
Now, I don’t know how accurate this data is, but it suggests that (in America at least) the crime rate of non-whites is higher than that of whites. Maybe that’s why they’re followed around more in stores.

Going by the above table (assuming the data is accurate) I think it makes more sense for the decent law abiding blacks to blame the criminals from their own race, rather than “racism” from whites.

Maybe you know that a black man or boy is killed every 28 hours in America by police or vigilantes.

I’ve covered that in my previous post and I agree that it’s a shame. I think more research needs to be conducted as to why this is happening.

maybe you know that even the most egalitarian Americans harbor unconscious negative attitudes about black people.

We don’t live in the world of 1984 (supposedly) so we shouldn’t be punishing thought crime. We should instead be working to understand why people harbour these thoughts to begin with.

But still, in some part of your brain, if you imagine that wouldn’t happen toyou even if you were black, it means you believe something other than race is to blame for all those statistics and studies — which can only boil down to some rationalization of inherent superiority on your part. And then you’ve just shown exactly what privilege is and why black folks feel the need to assert their basic humanity.

Assert humanity… by behaving like animals, destroying property, looting and attacking innocent people for being white?

Anyway, at this point, I’m getting fed up typing. The link is there. Read the rest of it yourself and make up your own mind. I’ve already made up mine.

My thoughts on the Ferguson situation.

“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”~ Martin Luther King: A great man who would be saddened by what he would be seeing if he were still with us.
“I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”

For the past few months, I have been following the news in Ferguson Missouri, with great interest. For those who aren’t up to speed, here is what happened. A white cop murdered an innocent black child in cold blood, back in August and the black citizens of the city have been peacefully (albeit, angrily) protesting ever since. In a miscarriage of justice, it was just announced a few days ago that the killer cop will not be facing charges and so, the protests have escalated. At least, that’s what the mainstream media has been telling us.

Now, let me just make this quite clear. I don’t know all the facts. Nor am I going to even try and pretend that I do. I wasn’t there to witness what happened, so I can only analyse the situation based on the evidence that I have seen. So here is my interpretation of the events, based on what I have read.

Michael Brown was not the “Gentle Giant” he has been portrayed as. I’ve no doubt that he may have been to his friends and family, but I don’t believe he was in general.

This image has been commonly used in stories about Michael Brown.
As has this one. Was there ever a more innocent looking victim? Propaganda, designed to tug at the heartstrings, I assure you.

Minutes before he was killed, Brown and his friend had robbed a box of cigars from a convenience store. The 6’4″, 292 pound Brown, also pushed the clerk around on his way out. Hardly the act of a gentle giant.

The innocent gentle giant, moments before his death.
The innocent gentle giant, moments before his death.

As bad as this, it’s hardly a capital crime, and I don’t believe he deserved to be shot for it.

However…

Minutes later, Officer Darren Wilson, encountered Brown and his friend walking in the middle of the road and asked him to move on to the footpath. Now this is where the stories start to diverge. Generally, it is accepted that there was some kind of a struggle between Brown and Officer Wilson. What happened next is where the confusion begins. According to some eyewitnesses, Brown fled and was shot in the back. Others say he raised his arms in surrender and was shot. According to Darren Wilson, Brown tried to take his gun from him and was shot in the hand while doing so. This caused Brown to get more aggressive and so, Wilson shot him again and again until the threat was neutralised, when Brown was dead. The autopsy corroborates Wilson’s testimony.

However, none of this matters. All that matters is this. A white cop shot a young black man. The reasoning behind it is irrelevant. Now, I’m not going to deny that there is a problem with racism in America. The fact that at least every 28 hours, a black person is killed by law enforcement in America is statistical insanity and suggests that something is seriously wrong. However, I just don’t think this particular case is the one to make a martyr out of. I’m sure there are plenty of other black people who were killed by white law enforcement who are more deserving of this sympathy than Brown. But nevertheless, Brown’s death has been the straw that broke the camel’s back and unleashed months of peaceful protests.

Peaceful protester throwing tear gas.
Peaceful protesters whose trousers are clearly a few sizes too big for them.
Fire fighters stop by building which has been peacefully protested.
Fire fighters stop by building which has been peacefully protested.
Peaceful protesters. protest racist liquor store.
Peaceful protesters. protest racist liquor store.
Peaceful protesters stocking up on supplies which I’m sure they paid for.

Imagine if Martin Luther King was around to see this. Now there was a man who knew how to protest both peacefully and successfully but more importantly, about things worth protesting about.

Oh and let me just finish by saying this. All I care about is what’s right. If evidence comes out to suggest that Michael Brown was indeed an innocent victim of an overzealous, trigger-happy, racist cop, I will change my tune and support the protesters. However as it stands, the evidence that I have seen suggests that Darren Wilson only acted in self defence and so, I’m on his side for now. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens as time goes on.

Destroying your own city and stealing from your own community (many of whom are minorities themselves). Yeah, you sure showed Whitey.
Destroying your own city and stealing from your own community (many of whom are minorities themselves). Yeah, you sure showed Whitey.

The Normalcy Bias: A potentially fatal trait to have.

The normalcy bias refers to a person’s inability to comprehend the possibility of a disaster occurring, or if one does occur, the inability to realise how serious it is until it’s too late. However, I’m going to steal the term and apply it to another situation to which I think it is suited for.

The vast majority of us would like to think of ourselves as decent, normal people. We believe that what we perceive as good is factually good, and what we perceive as bad is factually bad. There’s nothing wrong with this. The problem occurs when we project our own values on to others. We assume that because such a way of thinking, a way of feeling, or a way of behaving  seems completely rational and normal to us, that everyone else must think the same way. This is flawed and can be disastrous.

Lets look at the lead up to WW2 for an example of the worst case scenario. In the 1930s, when the Nazis came to power, Germany made a rapid economic and military recovery and soon began to flex its muscles once again. The other great European powers (notably France and Britain) were naturally alarmed by this and wanted to make sure that Germany didn’t become a threat again.

However, there was also a sense of sympathy in Britain that perhaps Germany had been unfairly treated by the Treaty of Versailles, so rather than bullying them into submission, Britain chose the approach of appeasement. The British Prime Minister of the time, Neville Chamberlain, worked under the assumption that Hitler, the leader of a civilised European country, would have similar motivations to himself and so, would be just as determined to avoid a war as he was.

Neville Chamberlain after securing “peace for our time”. Little did he know, that peace wasn’t worth the paper it was printed on.

Of course, we all know that didn’t happen. Germany ended up invading Poland and much to the bewilderment of Chamberlain, WW2 happened. So, why am I talking about the normalcy bias right now? Simple, because I think it’s a danger to us in our present situation of borderline unrestricted mass immigration.

Now just to reiterate what I’ve already said (before the accusations of racism start occurring) I have nothing against a sensible immigration policy. I see no problem with letting in a reasonable amount of intelligent, hardworking, and skilled immigrants who are interested in contributing to our countries, and who respect our laws and our culture. Nor do I have a problem with us taking in genuine asylum seekers who are in need of our help. In fact, I reckon most people would share this view.

What I do however have a problem with, is mass immigration, in which millions of non-Europeans are brought into European countries, regardless of their skills, but more importantly, regardless of their respect for our way of life. We think that because we would regard a world of religious oppression and barbaric behaviour to be a bad thing, that everyone would feel that way. Also, we assume that everyone wants to experience Western style freedom. This is despite the blatant evidence to the contrary that exists within our own borders.

Why are these people welcome in our countries? No seriously, can anyone who isn’t a braindead moron justify this?
You don’t like blasphemy? Well, there’s plenty of Sharia hellholes where it’s forbidden that you can go to instead.

We can’t use the excuse of “oh they don’t know any better”. They live in our countries, they know what we’re all about, and yet they CHOOSE the lifestyle of their old countries instead. And more importantly, they want to inflict that lifestyle on us by force. They leave their countries, they come to ours as our guests, and they want to dictate to us how we should live our lives. This isn’t simply immigration, it’s colonisation. The normalcy bias prevents people from seeing the danger that we’re in. We have this idea of “oh, they’re just a minority. They don’t have the numbers to do anything”. Or we think that those with the power to do something about it will come to their senses, and put a stop to it. That kind of thinking is suicidal.

This summarises my fears perfectly.
This summarises my fears perfectly.

The birth rates of Europeans have stagnated. Meanwhile, the people we’re importing en masse are breeding at a much higher rate than us. It’s not racist propaganda to point out the fact that their numbers are growing faster than ours. If people like those in the pictures above get the numbers necessary, you can be sure that they will try to force their way of life on us. Unfortunately, people are too in denial to see this. That’s why, I’m actually glad that they’re acting up already. If people can wake up to the threat now, we might have a chance to stop it. Either that, or we can just stay asleep and go the way of the Native Americans.

English school marked down by inspectors for literally being too white.

Is this a school, or a Hitler Youth meeting? I just can't tell anymore.
Is this a school, or a Hitler Youth meeting? I just can’t tell anymore.

From Daily Mail

Pupils at the rural primary lacked ‘first-hand experience of the diverse make-up of modern British society’, declared the watchdog.

However, around 97 per cent of the population in the town to which the school belongs are white.

So 97% of the inhabitants of the town are white? Wow, we certainly can’t tolerate that.

"97% of inhabitants are native British? No,these are the statistics we prefer to see." ~ British school inspector
“97% of inhabitants are native British? No,these are the statistics we prefer to see.” ~ British school inspector

It said the school was failing to do enough to ensure pupils understand the ‘cultural diversity of modern British society’ and experience ‘first-hand interaction with counterparts from different backgrounds’.

But parents complained Middle Rasen Primary in Market Rasen was being punished for factors outside its control and had effectively been told it was ‘too English’.

And that’s clearly the most evil thing in the world as we all know that white people are the spawn of Satan.

The row is the latest controversy over new rules on teaching ‘British values’ introduced in the wake of the Trojan Horse scandal, in which Muslim extremists tried to infiltrate schools in Birmingham.

Schools are required to ‘actively promote’ British values such as democracy, tolerance, mutual respect, individual liberty and the rule of law.

Teaching the rule of law, tolerance and democracy? I’m a bit confused, did that not apply to the Pakistani gang rapists who raped 1400 English girls in Rotherham (that we know of)? What about the ones who march through London intimidating native British people for consuming alcohol or not dressing modestly enough for them? Or the ones who demand Sharia law for Britain (a concept entirely incompatible with your so called British values you claim to care about so much). Nah, who am I kidding, that’s not a big deal. The biggest threat to British values is clearly a town of 97% native British inhabitants.

From The Mirror

The school had been highly praised in the report for its management and teaching, plus its well-behaved, courteous and enthusiastic pupils.

But they were handed a ‘good’ rating instead due to: “Pupil’s cultural development being limited by lack of firsthand experience of the diverse make-up of modern British society.”

Fuck those great managers, teachers and students. Diversity is all that matters, right?

“But they can’t force people to come.

“Why would the school spend time on trying to teach the children how to integrate with people who aren’t even there.

“I think the school has been victimised, it seems very vindictive to just mark them down for something they cannot change.”

Oh but they must change. Even though China is for the Chinese, Japan is for the Japanese, Israel is for the Jews, Black African countries are for the black Africans, and Arab countries are for Arabs, what were once white countries are now for everyone.

“Very few are from other ethnic groups, and currently no pupils speak English as an additional language.

OMG, you mean the kids in the ENGLISH school, speak ENGLISH as their FIRST language? This is terrible.

From Grimsby Telegraph

“I think the school has been victimised, it seems very vindictive to just mark them down for something they cannot change.”

But they must change, THEY MUST!!!!

From Telegraph

Schools are now told to place fundamental British values at the heart of the timetable including mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.

I didn’t realise it was mutual. The impression I always got was that the British must respect the faiths and beliefs of others, but it’s perfectly acceptable for extremist Muslims to not respect the native British. I’m very confused.

Tolerant Muslims in the UK.
Tolerant Muslims in the UK.

Last month, it was claimed that a small Christian school in the Home Counties had been penalised after failing to other invite faith leaders, such as imams, in to lead assemblies.

Would a Muslim school be penalised for not inviting a priest in to lead assemblies?

“The large majority of pupils are white British. Very few are from other ethnic groups, and currently no pupils speak English as an additional language.

Clearly this will lead to the British going off conquering a quarter of the world again, unless something is done.

Ugh, I just have to show it again. This is the most evoil thing that I've ever seen.
Ugh, I just have to show it again. This is the most evil thing that I’ve ever seen.

Seriously, when are people going to wake up and realise that there is an anti-white agenda in predominately (for now) white countries? The insane far left have this obsession with not allowing an area to be too white. Would they do this to a predominately black, Asian, Muslim etc area? No, because these so called anti-racists are just anti-white. This is just the latest example in a long list of incidents like this. I can guarantee you, I will be covering this topic a lot more in the future.

“Average Barbie” leads to unintentional hilarity.

From time to time, I’ve heard people (usually the really extreme feminists) complain that Barbie dolls are sexist. One of the earliest examples I can recall from pop culture to reference this was the episode from the Simpsons in which Lisa invented a doll to compete with the talking Malibu Stacey doll (an obvious Barbie parody), after being disgusted with the ditzy comments the doll came out with, such as “Lets bake cookies for the boys”, “Thinking too much gives you wrinkles”, or my personal favourite “Don’t ask me, I’m just a girl *giggles*”.

It seems that after decades of hostility towards the dolls, the extremist feminists have won a major victory, by having a Barbie doll made with realistic body proportions

Left: A typical Barbie doll. Right: Average Barbie.

Information about the doll (for anyone who cares) can be found right here. It is actually worth checking out for one piece of hilarity in my view. On the right of the page, there is a link to sexy Chris Hemsworth pictures, complete with a picture of him with his top off.

A picture of the page in question (in case they remove it at a later date)
A picture of the page in question (in case they remove it at a later date)

I just find the double standards to be hilarious. Lets face the facts, most men are never going to look like Chris Hemsworth. Instead of feeling inadequate about it and demanding that he put on weight to make us feel better about ourselves, we just get over it and accept who we are. I’d also bet that the vast majority of women don’t get offended by the the body of Barbie either and are of sound mind enough to have more important things to worry about. It’s just the usual minority of vocal lunatics getting their way. Seeing these two things side by side just amuses me to the point were I’m actually suspicious that it was done on purpose.

“It’s not fair. They need to make Action Man flabbier and less muscular, as this promotes unrealistic expectations about male bodies”~ Said nobody ever.

It’s not “Romanians”. It’s not “Romani”. It’s “Gypsies”.

For better or worse, one of the principles of being a member of the EU is the right of free movement of citizens between member states. The problem is, that not every person who can avail of this right is going to be of benefit to their new host nations. If a large group of a particular demographic move in and start causing trouble, this can lead to prejudice against said group. Obviously, the politically correct brigade cannot abide by this and so will do whatever it takes to stop this from happening, even if it means demonising another, entirely innocent group in the process.

Gypsies, have acquired a very negative reputation in various Eastern European countries, who have dealt with them for centuries. They are generally regarded as economic parasites, thieves, and generally just a scourge on society, with a sociopathic disregard for others. One of the countries in which they are particularly associated with is Romania.

Gypsy children “at work”
They are enriching our culture.

The naive Western European countries had no idea what they were getting into with the 2004 and 2007 enlargements of the EU in which Eastern European countries joined. This opened up the free travel arrangement to whole new demographics of people. While some (most notably here in Ireland, the Poles) have integrated well and have been fine additions to our workforce, the same can not be said by everyone.

Stories about Romanian criminals causing trouble, is something that I’m sure a lot of people are familiar with. It’s become so common that many people have been led to believe that Romania is a country full of criminal scum and are genuinely shocked whenever they meet a a decent Romanian person. This is a result of the standard Cultural Marxist propaganda techniques, camouflaged under the usual banner of political correctness.

For 100s of years, these people were known as gypsies due to the mistaken belief that they came from Egypt. Evidence available now points to an Indian Origin instead. Gypsies was simply a term used to refer to these people. It was never meant as an insult. However, people like Ian Hancock (a Gypsy himself) decided that this term that had been used to refer to his people for so long, was apparently an insult and so lobbied to have the term “Romani” used instead. The word “Gypsy” had too many negative connotations surrounding it.

In a sense, he is right in one way. The word “Gypsy” has indeed taken on negative connotations as time has gone by. There’s a reason for that. The actions of the gypsies themselves has caused people to hate them and therefore the once neutral word gypsy has been tainted by those actions.

A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet. And a gypsy by any other name is still a gypsy, with all the same traits he had before.

The politically correct brigade of course took delight at finding yet another way to subvert traditional norms and be offended, and so started referring to these people as “Romani”, “Roma” or even just simply “Romanians”.  This meant that when reporting on their criminal behaviour, they could be hidden within the much larger Romanian demographic, resulting in Romanians becoming hated in Western Europe due to an unfair association with the behaviour of an entirely different group.

This is absurd. The Romanians and Gypsies are nothing alike and should never be lumped together. It would be like saying that the Australian Aborigines and the Australians of European ancestry are the same. That’s how different they are.

If you ever hear a story about “Romanian” criminals again, please remember this. More than likely, “Romanian” is just politically correct language for “Gypsy”

Cultural Marxists: “If transgenders can’t be comfortable, then nobody can”

Very recently I made a post in which I discussed the doctor who claimed that transgenderism is a mental health rather than a civil rights issue. I don’t take pleasure in the idea that these people are undoubtedly suffering. However, just because these people are suffering, doesn’t mean everyone else needs to be dragged down to their level.

In the last few years, I’ve seen transgenders being increasingly highlighted in the media as being a marginalised group in need of compassion and help. I have no opposition to this, but I think the way in which various Western countries have been going about doing so is nothing short of insanity.

A little over a month ago, I read about a primary school in Britain which introduced unisex toilets without consulting the parents. Parents, were of course furious about this, and the children themselves were uncomfortable with going to the same toilets as the opposite sex. What was the schools response? To ignore the concerns of the parents and instead invite them to a discussion on transgender equality.

A rare image of parents heading to a meeting on transgender equality.

I’m sorry, but how the fuck is this equality? The story makes no mention of how many transgender students that there even are in the school (I’m guessing there actually isn’t any all and this is all just an idiotic stunt to make themselves look progressive and get a pat on the head by the insane politically correct media). However, even if there is a few, catering to this small minority over everyone else is not equality at all. True equality would mean providing toilets for boys, girls and a third gender neutral option, for those whose gender doesn’t match their biological sex. However, it’s pretty obvious that equality isn’t the issue here. Creating chaos, and destroying long held values is. Oh, but it gets worse.

Another story that really irritated me was about a school in Nebraska in which teachers were provided training documents which dictated that they should not use gendered terms such as “boys and girls” or “ladies and gentlemen” when referring to the students. Instead (and try not to laugh too hard at this idiocy) it suggests using terms such “hey campers” or “purple penguins” to describe the students. I shit you not, read it here.

It’s ok to call the kids purple penguins, but we can’t call them boys and girls, as that might confuse them.

What mandate to these idiots have to impose this stupidity on everyone else? Where did they get the idea that anyone who opposes this nonsense is the one with the problem? I’d bet that most rational people would have a problem with this, but this loud and vocal minority of lunatics somehow are given the opportunity to force their unnatural and insane views on the majority.

In the former communist countries, in which Marxist theories were put into practice, in their efforts to create an equal society, they realised they were unable to raise the standards of living of everyone. Their solution to that was just to lower everyone’s standard of living to an equal level instead. Cultural Marxists are exactly the same. When a small minority of people are different from what is deemed normal, instead of helping these people to adjust and become more comfortable, their solution is to just destroy everything that is natural about our societies and make everyone equally uncomfortable.

And somehow I’m the one with the problem for pointing this out.

Except for the fact that toilets were originally separated because of the different SEXES you simple minded twits, not your “social construct, gender” nonsense.

Are the stories about Hitler getting too ridiculous to take seriously?

Adolf Hitler, the psychotic crystal meth addict and asexual germaphobe, responsible for the murder of 6 Million Jews. Pictured alongside Eva Braun, who could cause him to orgasm just by lifting her skirt. Oh, did I mention, he only had one testicle and was part Jewish himself?

Despite the fact that the man has been dead for almost seven decades, it seems as if the world can’t stop obsessing about Adolf Hitler. Despite the numerous tyrants that the world has endured before and since, none of them can hold a candle to the level of fascination that Hitler elicits and likely never will. Hitler has pretty much become the personification of evil in the eyes of most of the world, as the media continues in their never ending quest to essentially turn him into a comic book supervillain.

I’m not here to defend the actions of Hitler (I’ll leave that for the neo-nazis and holocaust deniers of the world). However, I do take exception to the fact that so many of the stories we do hear about Hitler are so ludicrous, that they serve, not as a documentation of history, but instead as nothing more than a smear campaign against a man who already has plenty of genuinely bad things that can be held against him.

I mean lets take a look at a few of these stories.

1-He was addicted to Crystal Meth

2-He was an asexual germaphobe

3-He achieved an orgasm just by watching Eva Braun lift her skirt

4-He had only one testicle

5-He was a Jew himself

Some of these stories have already been disproven. Some even contradict each other. However, my point is this. How many more of these ridiculous unproven stories are we going to hear as time goes on, and when are people going to realise that by promoting such stupidity, they’re only lending credibility to the Hitler apologists. Afterall, if some stories are untrue, how are we supposed to believe anything?

How long will it take for some “historian” to use this picture as “proof” that Hitler was also gay, and only hated gays because of his own insecurities. Not long, I bet.

I really think that stuff like this plays into the hands of Nazi apologists perfectly. By giving them such stupidly easy “facts” to disprove, you only serve to open the door for them to start preaching against other things. The holocaust is actually illegal to even question in several EU countries, and Israel (obviously). However, many people (for example, David Irving and Ernst Zundel) continue to do so despite facing persecution. Seeing these men stick to their beliefs, despite facing hefty prison sentences, simply for daring to question the holocaust, makes them seem like martyrs for a cause. I would much rather see holocaust denial being allowed and disproven through facts. I’ve heard the excuse thrown around before that actually taking the time to argue with these people would only serve to legitimise them. I disagree. I think imprisoning them without daring to confront them is what really legitimises them. However that’s a different topic for a different day.

“New evidence suggests that Hitler was a cyborg”~ Historian in the not too distant future.

Political correctness: Where facts take a backseat to “Muh feelin’s”.

If there is one group of people that I certainly don’t envy, it’s transgendered people. I can’t even begin to imagine how it must feel to feel as if you’re trapped in a body that isn’t a representation of who you really are.

A few months back, the former Chief Psychiatrist of the John Hopkins hospital made the controversial statement that rather than just simply being a different lifestyle that is perfectly normal, transgenderism is in fact, a mental illness, and that sex changes are biologically impossible.

Dr. Paul R. McHugh: A brave man who doesn't allow hurt feelings get in the way of scientific fact.
Dr. Paul R. McHugh: A brave man who doesn’t allow hurt feelings get in the way of scientific fact.

He cited studies which showed that between 70% and 80% of children who suffer from gender identity disorder are just going through a phase and end up moving past it (something which isn’t an option for children who are put on puberty delaying medication by their doctors at the first of any such issues). He also cited studies which show that the suicide rate of transgender people who go through with sex reassignment surgery is in fact 20 times higher than that of the general population, suggesting that getting the surgery they felt they wanted, didn’t do anything for their happiness. And to be honest, I can see why that would be so. How could irreversibly mutilating your healthy, natural, genitalia, and pumping yourself full of the opposite sex’s hormones possibly seem like a solution to any problem?

Based on these studies, he claimed that treating it as a civil rights matter, rather than a mental health issue was doing no favours. Needless to say, his comments didn’t go down too well. You see, despite being one of the leading authorities in the world of psychiatry, with 6 books and 125 peer reviewed articles to his name, and with other peer reviewed articles on the topic at hand being cited, his scientific claims went against the feelings of the liberal brigade, which clearly makes the man a heretic.

Galileo facing the Inquisition for daring to claim the Earth revolved around the Sun. He must have hurt the feelings of the church by saying this.

The way I see it though, this man is much more a friend to the transgendered community than the liberal brigade that encourages them in their delusions. If a person suffering from schizophrenia claimed they heard voices telling them to harm themselves, they would receive treatment rather than encouragement and support for their delusions. Is it really such a bad thing to try to treat people who are transgendered rather than encouraging them to mutilate themselves and potentially destroying their own lives if ever they have second thoughts like the 70% to 80% of their peers who do?