So I posted a comment at one of the gay websites I visited in researching the post I made yesterday about the GLAAD poll showing a decline in gay acceptance in America.

I said over there very much the same thing I said here, i.e., Trump isn’t a cause but a symptom.  When the public face of the LBGT community became censorious, progressive scolds who seems to enjoy sticking their thumb in the eye of moderate Middle America, there was push back.  That push back was part of Trump’s appeal.

Fewer young women are calling themselves “feminists” because that word has become associated with shrieking, blue hair harpies, who wear vagina costumes in public and cry about “the patriarchy.”  They don’t want to be associated with that.

If the LGBT community goes down the path where “LGBT” becomes inexorable associated  with the worst sort of anti-social debauchery and crybullying over preferred pronouns, it will be rejected as well.

In a nutshell, I don’t care who you have sex with – as long as they are consenting adults – but I hate a radical leftist.

The Onion did a story 17 years ago that is as spot on today as it ever was, “Gay-Pride Parade Sets Mainstream Acceptance Of Gays Back 50 Years.”

In a rush to prove my point, I was called a homophobe, transphobe, Nazi, fascist, white supremacist/nationalist, and and FOX News watching bigot.

I brought up the problem of Brendan Eich, the co-founder of Mozilla who was fired after a couple of days as CEO for making a $1,000 donation to Prop 8.  My point was that there was no evidence that he discriminated in the office.  He simply donated money to a political cause he agreed with, based on his Catholic faith.  Both his right to donate and his faith are protected by the First Amendment.

The response was that those protections don’t apply to the private sector (true, but still a matter of principle) and that he deserved what he got for his hateful behavior.

To which I said “Being a good Catholic that believes in Catholic doctrine.”

The answer was “Yes.”

This went around and what it came down to is that any Christian or Jew, and theoretically Muslim (but you know how progressives bend the knee to them) who believes that marriage should exist between one man and one woman should be fired for being hateful.

That technically it is illegal to discriminate against someone because of their religion is not an issue, they are not firing you for being a Christian or a Jew, just for believing in ALL the tenants of the faith.  You can still work, if you renounce your religious belief in the sin of homosexuality.

This is of course regardless of whether or not you actually did anything discriminatory, it’s simply the thought crime of your beliefs.

Some pigs are more equal than others.

And they wonder why mainstream America is becoming less accepting of gays.

As Miguel pointed out earlier, the Social Justice crowd just can’t handle the movie 12 Strong.

First it was that the movie made a much of mass murdering, women oppressing, terrorists the bad guys.

Now, “IT’S TIME TO WAGE WAR AGAINST WAR MOVIES THAT GLORIFY OUTDATED MODELS OF MASCULINITY.”

Yep, 12 Strong is just too masculine for these milquetoast limp-dicks.

“As Hollywood begins to navigate the #MeToo landscape,” Tatiana Siegel reported, “one of the first casualties appears to be big-screen erotica. In the wake of the Harvey Weinstein scandal, studios are steering clear of sex.” Alyssa Rosenberg, writing in the Washington Post, hopes that Hollywood’s embarrassed executives are navigating “the end of a very narrow way of thinking about what’s alluring.” Instead of movies that objectify women, she suggests more films that portray sex and sexuality in intelligent ways.

This reckoning is long overdue. And it can be extended to another genre that has distorted how men behave: war movies. Hollywood has shown itself capable of making excellent war movies (think “Three Kings,” “Paths of Glory,” and “The Best Years of Our Lives”), but most are problematic. Some of the biggest war movies of the post-9/11 era don’t just show violence in ways that are often gratuitous and occasionally racist. They model a cliched form of masculinity that veers from simplistic to monstrous.

For instance, you can see Rambo and John Wayne return to life in the latest war blockbuster, “12 Strong,” which was produced by Jerry Bruckheimer, who also brought us “Black Hawk Down.” “12 Strong” is an extravaganza about a Special Forces team that fought the Taliban in Afghanistan in the weeks and months after 9/11. During the movie’s pivotal scene, the leader of the Green Berets, played by Chris Hemsworth (the grievously handsome star of the Thor franchise), decimates a hive of Taliban fighters with his rifle ablaze as he gallops ahead on his fearless horse (yes, he’s riding a horse). In the same way that Hemsworth’s assault weapon goes rat-tat-tat and the bad guys fall like bulleted dominoes, the scene itself checks off one born-in-Hollywood cliché after another: of the rugged gunslinger, the warrior in camo, good versus evil, the modern vanquishing the profane, a man at his fullest.

Since Peter Maass (not to be confused with Peter Maas, who wrote one of the best non fiction books I have ever read) has shit for brains, I think I will explain this slowly.

The Taliban regularly rape women and girls in villages they had conquered.  Then they would stone these same women to death for infidelity, because they had been raped.

The Taliban are the Harvey Weinsteins.

The US Special Forces that went into Afghanistan fought the Taliban.  They rescued women from being raped by Taliban forces.  T

The Special Forces are … not like anybody in Hollywood because they all knew and went along with it for the money.

Taliban = raping terrorist = bad guys.  Special forces = good guys.  It’s not much more complex than that.

Whenever I write about the real-world impact of war movies – and I’ve gone to bat against “American Sniper,” “Zero Dark Thirty” and “13 Hours” — I always get responses along the lines of “Relax, these are just movies. Don’t take them so seriously. They’re harmless.” That’s when it becomes necessary to say that movies can create or reinforce narratives of history and gender that influence what people think and what they do. Boys and men develop their notions of masculinity from a variety of sources that include the films they watch (the extent to which this is true is, of course, open to debate). The time has come for Hollywood to turn away from war movies that, while satisfying to both a studio’s bottom line and a flag-waving concept of patriotism, perpetuate a model of masculinity that does violence to us all.

Rescue the women and children, protect the innocent, kill the terrorists.  That’s not toxic.  That’s been a man’s duties since the beginning of time.

Somewhere, a long, long time ago, some cave man looked at his son and said:

“Ugh, there is a saber tooth tiger coming this way.  The women and children are hiding in the back of the cave.  Take this sharpened stick and go kill it before it eats one of us.”

If Ugh didn’t do that, we as a species never would have survived.  Over the millennia, their decedents have fought off predators and conquering hordes to protect the women and the children.  That is a noble duty of men.

Don’t get me wrong, soldiers often do brave things and shouldn’t be denied credit for it. I’ve reported on the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Bosnia, so I’ve seen heroism from soldiers of many nationalities, as well as cowardice and abuse. That’s not the issue. What matters is that well into the second decade of our forever war, the combat movies that populate our multiplexes and our minds are devoted to a martial narrative of men-as-terminators that should have been strangled at its birth a long time ago.

Yes, we should all aspire to be John Kerry and bend over backwards to bolster our enemies because he’s sensitive and progressive.

Better yet, let’s not.

It doesn’t have to be this way. The best war film of the last year, “Thank You for Your Service,” based on the nonfiction book by David Finkel, quietly focuses on the troubles of a group of soldiers after they come home from a deployment in Iraq. The film has only two battle scenes, and both are excruciating to watch because their violence is frightening rather than glorious – the opposite of Bruckheimer’s feel-good shoot-’em-ups. The men in “Thank You for Your Service” are struggling with PTSD, painfully coming to the awareness that the combat that gave them such purpose in Iraq has injured their psyches. Nobody looks like Thor in this movie, nobody behaves like Thor, and the John Wayne style of masculinity that these men might have aspired to emulate is shown to be an artificial and harmful construct.

No, Thank You For Your Service  was a liberal war movie that shit on the military, America, and patriotism.  Liberals love a war movie that makes the military look awful.  They get off on their hatred for traditional patriotic values.  Talk about a toxic mentality.

“12 Strong” earned nearly twice as much in three days as “Thank You for Your Service” has earned in three months. And the numbers – more than $15 million in ticket sales for “12 Strong” in its first week – are Venmo pennies compared to the box office take of “American Sniper,” the macho movie about Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle that has earned more than half a billion dollars since 2014. Who is at fault for the lucrative war chum that Hollywood tosses into our Saturday nights – the movie studios or the movie-goers who love to consume this masculine nonsense?

I think the best explanation of this is to quote General George S. Patton, a man who pissed more testosterone that Maass has in his whole body.

“Americans love a winner. Americans will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win all of the time. I wouldn’t give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. That’s why Americans have never lost nor will ever lose a war; for the very idea of losing is hateful to an American.”

Chris Kyle was a winner, the men in 12 Strong were winners, Hollywood making a movie that rubs the idea of how shitty America is to it’s veterans in the face of Middle America is a loser.

I am at this point reminded of a quote, often attributed to George Orwell.

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.“

America celebrates those who are ready to do violence on our behalf.  Protecting the innocent from those who want to do us harm is a virtue.

Confusing that virtue for a bunch of Hollywood elites abusing their power to take advantage of women is not virtue.  It’s evil.  So is terrorism.

Engaging in some sort of moral equivocation that makes one the same as the other is toxic idiocy.

American Sniper, Blackhawk Down, and 12 strong are movies for men who love their wives and children, and would put their lives on the line to protect them.

These same moves are criticized by males who need to have another man satisfy their wives.

PUERTO CABELLO, Venezuela (AP) — The cab of Carlos Del Pino’s big rig gave him a nerve-rattling front-row seat to a surge in mob attacks on Venezuela’s neighborhood markets, cattle ranches and food delivery trucks like his.
Shortly after pulling away from the docks at Puerto Cabello, the country’s biggest port, he witnessed 20 people swarm a truck ahead of him and in a frenzy fill up their sacks with the corn it was carrying to a food-processing plant. The driver was held at gunpoint.
“It fills you with terror,” Del Pino said.

Venezuelans Loot To Eat Amid Economic Tailspin

It is getting worse down there. According to some NGO sources, since the New Year there has been close to a 100 events of looting across the nation. More cattle ranches and dairy farms are reporting intruders killing or trying to kill cows for food like in the video that went viral where a cow was stone to death. Any kind of business who sells food is not safe unless they have armed security or belongs to a government honcho who gets free police or national guard  to guard the place.

This is what you get with a Socialist government that successfully convinced people that they did not need guns, that guns are bad and you are a criminal if you own one because they would protect you.

It won’t be long till these hungry mobs start going into houses to steal food because they smell something being cooked coming out of that location. Not a single gun will be available to repel the invaders and the people inside the house will be lucky to get away with their lives.

When the shit hits the fan, those with the guns impose the rules, good or bad.

Venezuela: A Dystopian Orifice… OK, a shithole thanks to the usual suspects.

…if the Democrats will continue in their path to lose elections and heckle President Trump (o do some other stupid shit) during the State Of The Union address.

For some reason, I think something will happen, it will be hashtagged #Resistance and we won’t stop hearing from the Media about how brave whomever pulled the stunt was.

Reminder: "chain migration" is a made up term by the hardline anti-immigration crowd. Its purpose is to dehumanize immigrants. If you're using that word, you're declaring a side.

— Chris Murphy ? (@ChrisMurphyCT) January 27, 2018

I would like to thank Chris Murphy, the Minister of Truth, for letting us proles know through the Twitter prolefeed, that “chain migration” is now crimethink.  I will upsub and rectify to the appropriate newspeak to crimestop.