Why the Grid-Girls and Walk On Girls saga will be the death of feminism

Ok Feminists, you’ve finally done it now.

You’ve finally proven to the entire world just how regressive and authoritarian you have become. Anti-feminists have been saying for years how Feminism isn’t about fighting for women’s rights anymore, but that it is now about projecting your world view onto the rest of us Proles. We must say what you say, think as you think, and relinquish all sense of self that we have; all in order for women to RULE THE WORLD!

I mean, you guys aren’t even trying to be stealthy about it anymore. You used to at least try to pretend that it wasn’t about taking power from men, but simply having an equal share of such power. You used to use phrases like “Equality between the sexes” and “feminism is for men and women.”

What a load of clap-trap.

With feminism’s latest attack on “all that is misogynist”, the mask has finally slipped. It’s no longer about women’s rights. Well, at least not ALL women.

I bring your attention to two articles, both of which highlight exactly why feminism has signed it’s own death warrant.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/5435188/darts-the-masters-tournament-models-scrapped/

This article from The Sun highlights the story of the Walk On Girls (women who escort the players into the arena) from the Premier League of Darts, being scrapped after the story broke about the infamous Presidents Club dinner at The Dorchester.

(For my take on the aftermath of that story see my post: Presidents Club – why Great Ormond Street are WRONG to return their donations)

The next article is also from The Sun, and brings us the news that Formula One is now axing their Grid-Girls (promotional models used in Formula One) from the sport because:

“We don’t believe the practice is appropriate or relevant to Formula 1 and its fans, old and new, across the world.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/motorsport/5467725/formula-one-end-use-of-grid-girls-grand-prix-races/

So, the reason feminists are celebrating these decisions?

No surprises for guessing that “the objectification of women” is the top one.

Wasn’t one of the core principles of First-wave feminism, to fight for the rights of women in order for them to be allowed the freedom to make their own choices? I mean, it’s not like feminism is about giving women the right to choose what type of employment they should willingly participate in, is it?

Or is it just the type of employment that most hard-core, extremist, non-conforming, man-hating-anarchists wouldn’t stand a chance of being successful in? Shaving legs, taking care of your appearance and smiling, are generally not something that radical feminists are famous for after all…

Bitchiness aside, I honestly feel that a lot of the negativity towards these type of employment roles, simply stems from one thing – jealousy.

Don’t get me wrong; men get jealous as well.

I’d love to be a strapping 6′ 4″, bronzed, chiselled-hunk of a man, with the looks of Chris Hemsworth and the dick of John Holmes (without the disease of course). My wife would love that too, although she did get excited the other day when watching Thor Ragnarok; when The Hulk came on-screen naked, she started shouting at the TV because she didn’t get to see his: “green Hulk-dick.”

Anyway, I digress…

I’m not however, any of those things, yet I, and most non-feminists (yes, that includes women as well), don’t begrudge people for being beautiful.

We celebrate them.

So what if men are looking at these women because they are beautiful? Do feminists really believe that the women doing this job don’t know that?

Men are often accused of treating women like air-heads, and seeing women as an inferior species who can’t think for themselves. Who’s guilty of that now, fem-tards? You guys are the ones saying that these women, who clearly know what the job entails and who have clearly chosen to do the job in the first place, are being victimised and exploited.

A little patronising, don’t you think?

objectification

Also, do women not also objectify people?

Should we ban the use of catwalk models: used solely for the reason that they are beautiful people, thus helping to sell a product?

What about models in beauty-product commercials?

Male and female strippers?

Walk-On Chaperones at awards ceremonies, such as the Oscars?

Actors and actresses?

Pop stars?

These, and many more professions all, to a degree, fall under the same category that Grid Girls and Walk On Girls fall under – the use of someone’s physical beauty to promote a product.

And do you know what else these professions all have in common?

They are all done by people who have CHOSEN to do them.

Two things need to happen here:

  1. The owners of the companies who have ended the employment of so many women, need to grow a pair and stop caving in to such utter nonsense as this. The few don’t speak for the many.
  2. As for feminists and the rest of the PC brigade: just stop. Stop with the idea that’s it’s somehow wrong for humans to be attracted to one another. It’s a part of our nature, and it’s one of the reasons that the human race has lasted so long. The fact that you may not agree with it, doesn’t mean that the rest of us do.

Feminism used to be about fighting for the rights of women everywhere; to be able to make their own decisions, and carve out their own paths in life. Now, it’s simply become a tool with which to indoctrinate and conform; to let men and women know that if feminists don’t like it, then neither should you.

These women are now out of a job thanks to feminism’s new “puritanical” ideals; jobs that these women willingly took part in.

Who would have thought, that feminists would be so against the idea of a woman giving consent and using her right to choose?

Guess what feminists? Men and women alike are all on to you.

In fact, you could say: #Timesup

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Remembering Charlie Hebdo

3 years ago today was quite possibly the day that summed up to a tee, just how far Religious Extremists would go to further their ridiculous agenda.

“On 7 January 2015 at about 11:30 local time, two brothers, Saïd and Chérif Kouachi, forced their way into the offices of the French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie Hebdo in Paris. Armed with rifles and other weapons, they killed 12 people and injured 11 others. The gunmen identified themselves as belonging to the Islamist terrorist group Al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen, which took responsibility for the attack. Several related attacks followed in the Île-de-France region, on 7-8 January 2015. On 9 January 2015 was the Hypercacher Kosher Supermarket siege, where a terrorist murdered four Jewish hostages and held fifteen other hostages.”

Sourced  from Wikipedia

I think back to that day and remember how, for just one day, everyone in the Western World seemed to be on the same page. Political lines were erased; there were no “Left v  Right” arguements, no “SJW v anti-SJW” debates. The only thing that seemed to matter was that EVERYBODY knew that this was indefensible, and barely ANYBODY was trying to excuse the actions of these animals.

Free Speech was important and neccessary, including the right to ridicule Religion without consequence.

The sad thing was, it didn’t last long.

A week after the massacre, according to a report in The Telegraph (link here) the Journal du Dimanche newspaper in France ran a poll that showed that 4 in every 10 people polled thought that Charlie Hebdo had gone too far by publishing the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.

4 in 10. Let that sink in for a moment.

Though I believe in God, I’m not a huge fan of organised religion. Put simply, I think it causes more problems than it solves. However, I DO believe in respecting the fact that people have strong beliefs and that when those beliefs are challenged or openly ridiculed, that those people will either defend them or ignore them. Do you believe every word of the Bible, the Quran or the Torah? All power to you; just don’t try and shove it down my throat and don’t try to hold me to the same moral standards as yourself.

Defending your religious beliefs through discussion and debate is one thing. Slaughtering people because they drew a cartoon of your Prophet is not a reasoned reaction.

ThePenIsMightierThanTheSword28CartoonistsPayTributeToTheVictimsOfTheCharlieHebdoSho

Yet still to this day, people insist that Charlie Hebdo should not have published the cartoons. To me, that says everything about the mindset of the “Left” and the “Woke” of us in western society; ready and willing to mock Christianity for being out-dated and archaic, yet among the first to defend any kind of insult to Islam. Ask someone who thinks that the cartoons shouldn’t have been published, about the violence that followed and you’ll get a half-baked response consisting of “but it’s mocking their religion” and “they shouldn’t have killed them but…”

It reeks of cowardice and the inability to be able to say anything negative about religious extremism.

It also has a more chilling undertone to it:

It’s justifying the outcome.

Are we so cowed and afraid to stand up to religious extremists that we’re willing to gloss over violence and slaughter? Have we really digressed to the point where we can’t even poke fun at the things that seem to some as beyond credible?

You need look no further than the likes of Justin Trudeau and Angela Merkel for an answer to those questions.

Free speech is the very foundation upon which any society should be built. It allows us to develop and progress; to express ourselves fully and bring popular AND unpopular ideas to the forefront of human discussion. It is essential for the progression of our population, as without it, we are surely doomed to die out as a species.

If you can mock one religion, then you can mock them all.

WITH NO EXCEPTIONS.

You don’t have to like it. But you DO have to accept it.

At this moment, 3 years after the fact, I feel that as a society we can no longer say:

“Je suis Charlie”

But hopefully, with a little backbone, we can throw off the blanket of cowardice and fear and once again claim the right to be able to say:

“Nous sommes Charlie”.

 

RANT OVER

“Beware the irrational, however seductive. Shun the ‘transcendent’ and all who invite you to subordinate or annihilate yourself. Distrust compassion; prefer dignity for yourself and others. Don’t be afraid to be thought arrogant or selfish. Picture all experts as if they were mammals. Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence. Suspect your own motives, and all excuses. Do not live for others any more than you would expect others to live for you.”
Christopher Hitchens

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feminism – The Gulf between Persia and the West

Although the majority of major news networks are barely covering it, (apparently there’s a big white truck blocking CNNs view) there is an uprising happening in Iran. Women are beginning to take off their hijabs and protest the Islamic dictatorship that is choking the very freedom from it’s people; particularly its women.

You look at what is happening in Iran; from Honour Killings to the fact that women’s testimony is worth only half that of a man’s, and you quickly come to realise that women are in desperate need of support to enable them to break free from the oppressive Government. The very things that modern Feminists in the West claim to stand for are being trampled on by Iran’s leaders, causing untold suffering to it’s women.

Yet, as the brave protestors in Iran are rising up and fighting back, the proud and strong Feminists of the West who have been fighting their own “oppression” and “torment” are silent. In fact, the only people I hear in support of these women are the very people Feminists claim to be Sexist, misogynistic, homophobic….you know the drill.

As soon as I learnt of the Uprising, I immediately knew that the Western Feminists would clam up. And here’s why:

THERE’S NOT A DAMN THING THE WOMEN OF IRAN CAN LEARN FROM THEM

The “problems” that Women in the West face are little more than a joke when you compare them with women in Iran or any country that even entertains Sharia for that matter.

Women in the West don’t have to do what a man tells them.

Women in the West don’t have to cover their heads or dress modestly.

Women in the West don’t have half the testimony of that of a man.

Women in the West are free to leave the Country without a man’s permission.

Women in the West can do anything they bloody-well please, whenever they please.

 

Western Feminists want “equality between the sexes”; the ability to be on a level playing-field with men.

Listen up Western ladies – you already have it.

It’s the rest of the world who don’t.

“But muh wage-gap!” I hear you cry.

It’s been debunked more times than the Flat-Earth Society.

So I’m going to ask all Feminists to stand with me and send your support to the Women of Iran and the rest of the Sharia-led world who are facing the kind of torment and suffering that you claim to suffer from.

Linda Sarsour. I will expect you to be at the front of the line with your hijab burning at your feet, ready to take on the oppressors of women. Lena Dunham. Anita Sarkeesian. Chelsea Handler. Samantha Bee. Hilary Clinton. Justin Trudeau. Barack Obama and all of you proud Feminists who call yourselves “Champions of Women”.

Your time has come.

Your chance is here.

Grab your Pussy Hats and form a march! March to Tehran and demand change!

This is the REAL fight you have been waiting for, and myself and the rest of the “Misogynists” are here with you.

AS EQUALS.

 

RANT OVER

 

Laura Plummer – Drug Mule or Love Fool?

Laura Plummer, who was arrested in Egypt for carrying 300 Tramadol pills into the country, was jailed for 3 years and sent to prison.

Carrying Tramadol pills into Egypt is illegal, therefore; no argument right?

Wrong.

Karl Turner, an MP for Laura’s home town, Hull, has stated:

“[She was] going to visit her partner in Egypt, taking what she thought was a painkiller and no more than that,” he said.
“It clearly is a banned substance and whilst we must respect the law of other countries there must be good sense and fair play as well.”

Sourced from BBC News: For full article click here

Turner also goes on to say that Plummer was “naïve” and is “suffering from sleep deprivation and anxiety”.

Well Mr. Turner, here’s a little anecdote for you.

When the Car Tax system in the UK changed from a paper disc system displayed on a car, to the new system; I found myself in some hot water. I believed that when you bought a car that was Taxed, that the Tax would follow on with the car, and when it expired I would begin paying for it myself.

How wrong was I?

I ended up being pulled over by the Police and issued with a fine for driving an un-Taxed vehicle and a good talking-to about the importance of keeping up-to-date with current driving laws.

I was stressed. I was anxious. I was naïve.

Yet I was still guilty and completely at fault. I hadn’t done my homework and it cost me.

As it should.

Not being aware that something is illegal isn’t always the best excuse to try and get out of a sticky situation, particularly in a foreign country.

What gets me about this situation is not just that she took an illegal substance into a foreign country. She was in possession of 300 Tramadol pills. You can’t be prescribed that many at once, and you certainly can’t supply them to someone else. It’s illegal.

If you can’t have that many Tramadol at once, then she obviously obtained them in a non-legal manner; according to her family Ms Plummer was given them by “a friend”.

Did she not question her “friend”, (who no doubt said “Don’t tell anyone where you got them from”) about the legalities of carrying such a large amount of prescription drugs? She might not have known it was illegal to be given them or to give them out, or to even enter Egypt with them, but she must have known that something wasn’t right. You can’t even buy more than two packs of paracetamols in a shop, never mind carry such a large quantity of a Class C drug into a foreign country.

There’s just no way that there wasn’t any alarm bells ringing in her head. She may have been naïve about certain aspects, but certainly not all. And like I said earlier; being naïve doesn’t mean you didn’t commit an offence.

There’s an amazing thing called the Internet that can be used for all sorts of things like asking the following question –

“Does car tax transfer with the sale of a car?”

I could have saved myself some money and stress by googling this question, yet I didn’t and therefore had to suffer the consequences of my naivety.

You can also Google the following question –

“Can I carry an amount of Tramadol, a Class C drug which I’m not legally allowed to be prescribed in the UK and which weren’t actually prescribed to me but were given to me by a friend, into Egypt?”

I think she already knows what the answer is to that one.

On a final note, Karl Turner MP will no doubt be using all resources available to him in getting to the bottom of finding out who supplied the drugs to Ms Plummer I assume?

Or would that be NAIVE of me?

 

RANT OVER

 

Meryl Streep and the Hollywood Hypocrisy – #Sheknew

The Hollywood sex scandal certainly isn’t going away anytime soon.

And neither should it.

It has however, been injected with another talking point: #Sheknew

Aimed at Oscar-winning actress Meryl Streep, the #Sheknew campaign is a series of posters spread around Hollywood depicting Meryl Streep and Harvey Weinstein with the Phrase “She knew” plastered over Meryl’s face.

Personally, I don’t think she should be on that poster.

I’ll explain why.

For those of you who don’t already know; Meryl Streep is a long-time friend to Harvey Weinstein and denies ever knowing ANYTHING about his years of abusing women. A fact that many, including actress Rose McGowan (who claims that Weinstein raped her), simply do not believe.

Normally, I would be the first person to say innocent until proven guilty (read my post The problem with Linda Sarsour and Lena Dunham). However, if you look closely at this case, it becomes more and more clear that it would be pretty much impossible for Streep NOT to know about Weinstein’s behaviour.

Harvey_Weinstein_Césars_2014_(cropped)

Harvey Weinstein’s behaviour was undoubtedly the worst kept secret in Hollywood. Practically EVERYBODY in Hollywood knew a story about him or at the least, knew somebody who did. The very fact that Streep was friends and colleagues with Weinstein for a number of years is, some would say, evidence enough that she must have at least suspected something. Arguably the greatest Actress in the last 30 or so years, she will no doubt have contacts ranging from all aspects of the movie and political worlds in which Weinstein was well-known and feared. Somebody must have said something to her at some point. A little whisper here. A little word in the ear there.

Hollywood is full of people who can’t keep secrets, and knowing something as explosive as the Weinstein scandal is too much not to at least tell a fellow Hollywood alumni if not the press.

However, speculation can only get you so far. I’d be a hypocrite if I didn’t say that Meryl Streep doesn’t at least deserve the right of due-process to be able to “clear her name” in all of this. The evidence against her knowing about Weinstein’s behaviour is pretty substantial, yet I think the whole truth of the matter will never see the light of day. It’s easy to say “Of course she knew! She must have!” simply because she was friends with the guy. But throw in the fact that she is without a doubt the most famous and well-connected actress in Hollywood, and you really do have to ask: “How could she not know?”

Finally, to single out Meryl Streep alone is perhaps a tad unfair.

I understand why some people have; some see her as the ultimate hypocrite: the rich, privileged global superstar who portrays herself to be the moral conscience of “the people”, the epitome of all that is good and fair and just; all the while telling us, the lowly proles that we are how we should live our lives better. How to give more. Who to vote for. Who we should revere and condemn.

All while buddying up to people like Harvey Weinstein.

Like I say though: she needs due process. There’s no proof, just conjecture that she had any idea how much of a monster Harvey Weinstein really is.

And then I remember someone else she’s spoken up for.

Someone else she has applauded and lavished praise and admiration on.

Somebody who, she does know is guilty of being a monster. A rapist. Even a paedophile. We know that she knows he’s guilty.

Of drugging and raping a 13-year-old girl.

Roman Polanski.

The crimes of this man are beyond abhorrent. And we all know they are true.

Meryl Streep knows they are true, yet still applauds and congratulates the man for his accomplishments in Hollywood.

THAT is the true reason I believe most people believe she knew the truth about Harvey all along. It’s not the first time she has done it.

I’m going to end this piece by saying this:

I still don’t think it should be Meryl Streep on that poster.

It should be all of them.

The whole damn lot of them.

From the make-up artists, to the grips, the camera operators to the actors, the directors to the producers. Brad Pitt. Hilary Clinton. Donald Trump. Barack Obama.

They all knew. Every single last one of them knew and yet; they did nothing.

Nothing.

Nobody was willing to stand up and risk their way of life, their position amongst the elite. They all had too much to lose by way of association.

That was proven the moment Rose McGowan finally broke her silence and was then cast aside like a traitor.

They all knew. And trust me, that’s not all they know. But until someone puts them all in a position where they HAVE to condemn someone, you’ll be the last ones to know.

#Sheknew?

How about #Theyknew?

RANT OVER

 

 

 

Akayed Ullah: The man from Brooklyn

Lone-wolf.

Local-man.

Brooklyn resident.

These are the terms that have been used to describe the man who tried to blow up and kill potentially hundreds in New York city today.

At the very moment that Bill de Blasio and Andrew Cuomo were speaking at a press conference on the streets of New York, Sky News was naming the botched Bomber as Akayed Ullah; a 27 year old Bangladeshi who had been living in Brooklyn for the last 7 years.

Sky News told it exactly like it was.

And that’s the only way it should be.

Enough now. Enough of this bullsh*t.

Enough of this idea that the identity of the perpetrator of acts like this should be shielded from us for as long as possible.

We’re not stupid.

Tell it like it is CNN, New York Post, Mayors’ Office, Governor Cuomo.

Let us know who these people are straight away.

I know it embarrasses you lot when it turns out NOT to be a White Nationalist committing these acts.

That doesn’t mean you have to deny the (mostly) inevitable.

 

RANT OVER