Family Guy Embraces Political Correctness

I'm not a stoner, but I do watch "Family Guy." They ridicule everybody that you're not supposed to. Lesbians, Muslims, Jews, black people, even homosexuals.

But the gay mafia got to Seth MacFarlane. How else would you explain the bowdlerization of Episode 17 from Season 5? Entitled It Takes A Village Idiot, And I Married One, this scene takes place around a campfire.

See if you notice the difference. This is the original version. I should know. I've seen it a hundred times.



And here is the bowdlerized version.



I don't think "Family Guy" has a responsibility to be an equal opportunity offender. But the revision isn't as funny.

Why do faggots not want us to understand that they take it in the ass? I guess it's all part of the effort to sanitize homosexuality, like appropriating words like "gay" and "marriage."

For fuck's sake, they even annexed the rainbow symbol. The rainbow was revealed to Noah as a reminder of God's promise to never again use a flood to destroy humanity. Using rainbow iconography is just mocking God.

The Coup

A persistent media narrative since the election of Donald Trump has been that Hillary won the popular vote, and this somehow makes Trump illegitimate. To help make the point, they continually point out the Electoral College system itself is racist. And sexist.

There is probably a thinkpiece coming from Salon, or an explainer from Vox, about how the Electoral College is ableist or classist as well. The point is to de-legitimize the system. That being done, the next step is to target the individual Electors themselves.

This is the logical outcome of our tolerance for direct action. These days, it is normal for hundreds of women to parade in front of a man's house wearing disgusting yoga pants.

This insurrection might be directed from the sitting President himself. The Tiffany Network ran a story "wondering" if some electors will "go rogue." Never forget that the president of CBS News is the brother of one of Obama's national security advisers.

Other media outlets have gone much further. Politico published the names of all 538 electors.

Buzzfeed published a list of the electors with their personal information attached. They later took the post down. Ten hours later.

Yesterday, electors reported that they were being harassed.

Today, electors are reporting they are receiving death threats.

Tomorrow, expect to see the deep dives of investigation begin to bear fruit. Recalcitrant electors will have court records unsealed, and The Guardian will have a story about an elector who was once arrested for domestic battery. Meanwhile, stories about Democratic electors who volunteer at soup kitchens will proliferate.

This is Saul Alinsky's 12th rule for radicals: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions."

And the media will help the radicals, because the media has taken Trump's victory personally. Trump studied mass media for three decades, and applied that to his campaign. The media always believed that they could destroy anyone they chose to. They would attack, the target would apologize, and his apologetic weakness would diminish him.

Normally I'm not one for paranoid conspiracies. I need a few more data points to confirm. But the Twitter suspension of those on the alternative right is partial confirmation. The first thing totalitarian governments do before a crackdown is round up all the dissidents.

Some of the more powerful Twitter accounts, like Mike Cernovich and Ann Coulter, are also lawyers, and would put up a legal challenge. Twitter would want to wait until the last minute to ban hammer them. But the purge is continuing. Every day it's someone else.

Yeah Baby!

Somebody please explain why a lesbian who conceived using in vitro fertilization is our moral exemplar for motherhood. Yet here we are with Jillian Michaels making the media rounds to promote her new book, Yeah Baby.

The subtitle is The Modern Mama’s Guide to Mastering Pregnancy, Having a Healthy Baby, and Bouncing Back Better Than Ever. Her usage of the colloquial "mama" is a subconscious affirmation of the truth that she is not a mother, because a mother requires a father. Jillian is just a receptacle that somehow managed to create a replicate of itself.

She was on Good Morning America, this morning, and she described how the book came from "the birth of my son," without mentioning the fact that her son will never know his father. Yet "this is the new generation maternity book."

The choice of book cover is notable, because if an expectant mother saw who Michaels really is, she would put the book back on the shelf in disgust.

Is Jillian Michaels too ashamed of her "new generation" family to put them on the cover? You tell me.

But let's put aside any retrograde suspicions that Jillian and her "wife" are grooming their children to be homosexuals. What is the most important duty of a parent?

The most important duty of a parent is to protect their children. But Jillian Michaels has no boundaries, and believes that she is justified in burdening her six-year-old daughter with mommy's fears.

When Donald Trump was elected, Jillian told her "children that the fight for equality is FAR from over." "My daughter cried and my son comforted her," she continued. What a fucking maggot.

Jillian, someday "your" daughter Lukensia is going to want to know where she came from. What are you going to tell her? That her parents died in the earthquake? Her aunts and uncles too?

You know, there was a name that kept popping up during the election. Laura Silsby, who is connected with the Clinton Foundation, was incarcerated in 2010 in connection with the New Life Children's Refuge case.

Thirty-three children were smuggled across the border from Haiti and into the Dominican Republic. Most of these children were not orphans. They had families.

Hey, Jillian, Lukensia is about that age. Oh, but I'm sure her adoption was on the up-and-up, right?

Insert Meaningless Platitude Here

Jeep started running this commercial for their luxury Grand Cherokee a couple of months ago. Now, I do love me some aspirational consumerism, but it seemed a bit odd that they would use an old Yusuf Islam song to get your toes tapping and into dealerships.

You know, Cat Stevens, who went full Islamic but is attempting to re-enter the mainstream, in spite of many controversial statements, like these:

"I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing," when informed that protesters were burning an effigy of Salman Rushdie. "He must be killed. The Qur'an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die."

The Jeep Cherokee may be the only major automaker whose spokesman would declare a fatwa on their own customer, should they affix a "Mohamed was a Pedophile" bumper sticker, instead of the ubiquitous "COEXIST".

And don't you love the empty, factually inaccurate platitude in the Jeep ad's subtitle? "What unites us is stronger than what divides us." It's as vapid as references to "our shared values" that Obama's speechwriters constantly fall back on.

And it's horse shit. The force that pulls us apart is entropy, and it explains why the universe is flying away from its place of origin at the speed of light. The gradual decline into disorder is inevitable and the force that resists that decline must constantly be nurtured and rejuvenated.

Otherwise, you get shit like this. This is a nice, white woman, resident of Portland, just trying to get somewhere. She has had her windshield and the exterior of her rig smashed up with a baseball bat.

"Hey, is that the Cherokee with the Summit trim? Yeah? I could tell by the hand-crafted leather heated seats and suede headliners."

The civil war is well begun, though not with skirmishes between left and right, but rather between the forces of the far left (disorder) and the Ann Althouse-types of the center-left (order).

You Bumpkins Just Need To Get Out More

In the opening scene of the 2005 movie, Junebug, "outsider" art dealer "Madeleine" (Embeth Davidtz) meets Southern boy "George," (Alessandro Nivola) at a Chicago auction.

"Do you like this one?" asks Madeleine.

"It makes me happy," says George. "But I'm going to buy the UFO."

This is the view of the urban/rural divide as perceived by cultural curators in media. Madeleine can peddle awful paintings because they will be appreciated ironically by collectors. George is ruled by simple emotions like happiness and even his taste in art is alien.

This is foregrounded by the election in which rural counties voted for Donald Trump. And according to writers like Patrick Thornton, this isn't because urban elites don't understand rural folks. It's the other way around.

"My high school had more convicted sexual predator teachers than minority teachers." Really? Your unionized public school district can't fire convicted sex offenders? And you would tip the scales by what, luring minority teachers out of the suburban districts they would prefer?

"The first gay person I knew personally was my college roommate," Thornton writes. He "me a better person." Hey, me too! But my first gay friend started calling SoCons "Nazis" because we wanted to settle the gay marriage issue by allowing full civil unions. It wasn't enough.

I don't know how you could write about gay marriage from an urban point of view without at least acknowledging Memories Pizza and Sweet Cakes By Melissa. Business owners realized that they could lose their livelihood via a mean-spirited social media campaign or even the power of the state.

Thornton continues, "We, as a culture, have to stop infantilizing and deifying rural and white working-class Americans." Now who's being intellectually dishonest?

Look at this video by Ami Horowitz where he interviews Berkeley students and tell me who has been infantilized.

People have been running to safe spaces on college campuses to avoid harmful ideas. Now they are communicating just how childish they are by wearing safety pins on their clothing. There is no symbol more evocative of crying babies than a pin used to fasten diapers.

Further on, "They need to shake hands with a Muslim, or talk soccer with a middle aged lesbian, or attend a lecture by a female business executive." Lots of Muslims think Westerners are filthy and won't touch them. Lots of lesbians are raising their kids and hoping they will also be gay. And who the fuck wants to be lectured by anyone. Chances are, they are working for a female. Big fucking deal.

Maybe they feel like they don't need to shake hands with a Muslim, or do anything they don't want to, and resent people like Catherine Lhamon mandating that they put boys in girls' bathrooms.

I can understand the fear that some minorities feel right now. I live and work around diverse people, and I see the look in their eyes. But ask yourself, Patrick. Who made them afraid? Trump has said some stupid things but it was people like you who turned it into a moral panic.

Retiring Hillary

Time to retire, @HRClinton45 aka President-Elect HRC. Back to Arky.

This was to be a troll account, but never got rolling. On Message For Her filled that niche quite well. The whole point was to articulate how stupid it was to clear the field for such a rotten candidate. She was anointed to be next in line to the throne, but a funny thing happened.

What's next for the parody account formerly known as President-Elect HRC, formerly formerly known as Clock Boy?

I thought for months that a fun direction would be a parody account along the lines of Brock McRapeface. It would be constant slut-shaming and mocking the campus rape hysteria. But I'm sort of partial to a new idea that came to me this morning.

You may have heard of homosexual conversion therapy. This would be the reverse image, or heterosexual conversion therapy. Are you hetero but don't want to be? Donate to my patreon.

There are thousands of images that could be employed. Obama and Biden waving rainbow flags, Justin Trudeau marching in a gay pride parade, the White House lit up in rainbow hue.

Are you a male heterosexual looking enviously at your high-status gay neighbor? Go suck a cock.

Can Women Be Sexist?

If and when Hillary wins tomorrow, we can look forward to years of beta fags calling heterosexual men, "sexist," for criticizing her. Women who do not toe the progressive line will also be tagged with this word.

These words in use today, like "racist," and "sexist," are one-way streets of condemnation. While the word "sexist" means "prejudice based on sex," the reality is quite different.

The progressive line is that women cannot be sexist against men because men have all the power. Women have historically been persecuted by men.

This reasoning is based on a logical fallacy, that of the Noble Savage, and once you see it, you can't un-see it. It's a flaw of reasoning big enough to drive a truck through.

The Noble Savage is the representation of humanity in its pristine state, untouched by modern civilization. You see this fallacy deployed a lot to describe the fate of Native Americans at the hands of settlers. It falls apart when you realize that Native Americans were just as disposed to start wars and butcher people as the most bloodthirsty colonists.

The Blameless Female narrative falls apart when confronted by the staggering amount of cruelty that is dispensed by women. The feminist trope is that men who behave abhorrently are driven to do so by "Toxic Masculinity." This is explained with a "Not All Men Are Like That" and said to be the result of faulty social conditioning. Unfortunately, it carries the scent of demonizing innate masculine behaviors that arise due to testosterone.

What about a woman who throws her newborn out a window? Did she suffer from a lack of socialization, or could it have been post-partum depression? If the latter, could she not be said to be suffering from "Toxic Femininity?"

Society allows sexist double standards to exist against men. If a woman kills her husband, she has a decent chance of acquittal using the defense that she was abused. But if a man kills his wife and tries to justify it on the grounds that she was abusive, he would be laughed out of court.

Women bitch a lot about stereotypes that portray them as emotional and unstable. But they don't call them stereotypes because they are so rare!

Women carp endlessly about the lack of females in engineering, and this represents oppression. But ask a woman why there are so many women in teaching, or nursing, and you will hear, "women are just better at stuff."

Feminists critique their objectification by men, but what about men who are objectified by women? Women are attracted to tall, fit, high-income, high-status men. Doesn't that make women sexist, too?

Feminism's Wake

Jill Filipovic again, for fuck's sake. This week's contribution is titled, "The Men Feminists Left Behind."

The takeaway quote reads, "while feminism has transformed American culture, our politics and the lives of women, men haven’t evolved nearly as rapidly. Women changed."

If women evolved, they evolved into men. But even this is debatable. Women haven't evolved, they have regressed. The single mother has ascended to higher social status than a married woman raising her family. This is justified by pointing to Nature, like the bitch who is left alone to raise her puppies.

The reason that a bitch can raise eight or more dogs successfully is because they can be self-sufficient in a matter of weeks. A human being requires at least ten years.

Yet single motherhood represents progress, and is elevated to higher social status. This is achieved by insisting single-parent homes aren't "just as good," they're "better."

Nowhere does this female regression have more devastating results than in the black community, where three-fourths of children are raised out-of-wedlock. Filipovic's argument is thus racist because the only villains in her little narrative are white men, who "must change."

A strong case can be made that men have changed. Men have evolved. After all, what is evolution itself, but adaptations made in response to selective pressures?

Have women faced selective pressures? No, they have been cossetted and protected and allowed to nurture and cultivate their vulnerability.

Men have evolved, Jill. They just haven't evolved in the way that you would like.

Men are adept with tools. One of the tools that men have become proficient with is a legal document called a pre-nuptial agreement. This tool was created to solve the problem that men have with women who are favored in the court system.

There are other, less functional ways that men have evolved. The family is not the only place where feminists decided that men were superflous. The educational system and the modern workplace favors women, so men have this attitude called, "going their own way."

This is just a way of responding to incentives, which are themselves a type of selective pressure.

Cultural Appropriation

Parents, as Dennis Prager says, are going into debt in order for their children to be taught values that contradict their own. One of the truly odious concepts being pushed on students is this thing called, "cultural appropriation."

This issue always peaks around Halloween, but the cultural enforcers among us claim a fresh scalp nearly every fucking day. Much of the kvetching seems to come from crazy yentas, it's totally meshuggeneh.

A white person wearing blackface can be considered objectively offensive. But how damaged does your collective cultural psyche have to be to want to physically attack a white boy for wearing dreadlocks?

The notion that cultural appropriation caricatures the worst stereotypes of black people does have merit, but they don't call them "stereotypes" because they are so rare.

There are stereotypes for every cultural group, white people included. The ridicule directed towards whites for being inbred, racist rednecks never gets any pushback. Supposedly it's ok because white people are the "cultural majority."

Supposedly it's ok because white people are the only people that can be racist, because "racism requires power." People of color therefore cannot be racist.

This is a Marxist construct, and requires acceptance of the Noble Savage fallacy. Black people, and all people of color, are portrayed as virtuous outsiders who remain uncorrupted by civilization. It is only the White Man who colonizes and enslaves.

Bruh, when you use Marxist dialectic and Critical Theory to argue that Black Lives Matter, you are appropriating systems that were invented by Jews. You Jewish, bruh?

And bruh, when you articulate arguments using the English language, you are appropriating a communication method that originated as a Low German dialect. Go back to using clicks and grunts, bruh.