All Episodes
June 5, 2016 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
14:34
This Week in Stupid (05⧸06⧸2016)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everybody, Chris Reagan here.
Welcome to This Week in Stupid, the show where the stories aren't made up and the points do matter.
Sargon couldn't be here this week.
He's on vacation, man-spreading on various modes of public transportation all over the globe.
So I guess I'm filling in today.
Boy, this is a bad idea.
I don't normally do this many stupid stories in rapid succession, so this might be fatal for me.
So rest in peace.
Alright, rip me.
So our first story today comes from ABC Australia, an article titled, Seven Words You Should Avoid Using About Women in the Workplace.
Australian of the Year and former Army Chief David Morrison wants Australians to stop using the word guys in the workplace because he says it's not inclusive to women.
I especially like the fact that there's no context given here.
There are no stipulations.
Like even when you're referring to a literal congregation of men, you can't say guys because it's not inclusive to women, despite the fact that there may or may not be even any women present.
Can't use it.
Can't use it.
Likewise, groups of women should not be referred to as girls at work because it's belittling and offensive.
Now by now you guys should have noticed something, and that something is the fact that these rules are being put in place specifically for men to follow to protect the feelings of women.
It's ironically traditional, isn't it, to put the onus on men to protect women?
That sounds a lot like women are just damsels in distress and they need big strong men to stop using harmful words to protect them.
Boy is this fucking stupid.
And by the way, there aren't any words that girls aren't allowed to use.
I mean, because imposing rules on women?
Boy, that would be sexist.
One other thing I'd like to note is that terms like guys and dude aren't even exclusive to any given gender.
I have plenty of female friends who use the word guys to describe their group of female friends.
It's not exclusive to men.
The irony here, of course, is that most of these words like dude and guys have lost all, if not most, of their masculine exclusivity, and they're now all inclusive.
Women can call women guys and dudes.
It's not specifically applicable to just one group of people.
They're all inclusive.
And because they're all inclusive and being used to describe women, it's now sexist.
It's fuck.
It's amazing.
Referring to women as girls, Ms. Cooper said, was sexist and inappropriate, because it's often used to demean women.
Okay, so here's the thing, right?
You can't win.
You can't win, because let's say you stop using the word girls to refer to women.
Let's say instead you use women all the time.
Just imagine.
Well, women has the word men in it, and it's an extension of the word men.
So what you're implying when you say women is that women are just an extension of men?
Hell no!
That's super sexist and demeaning towards women.
Women with a why, that is.
So you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.
You really can't win in this situation, and I'm curious as to whether or not these people have caught on to this by now.
So the next word you can't use is bossy, as I'm sure you remember from the Ban Bossy campaign, a campaign designed to show how strong women are while simultaneously claiming that a single insult is enough to completely destroy their fragile self-esteem.
Because that's what feminism is all about.
Now I'm not going to spend much time on this one.
I assume most of Sargon's audience has already seen the Ban Bossy campaign.
They know pretty much all of his opinions on it.
Those are basically my opinions on them too.
I'm not going to spend too much time on bossy.
Now the word feisty is the next word on the banished patriarchal Rosetta Stone.
Please don't call women feisty.
In fact, it's Downton Abbey actor Daisy Lewis' least favorite word for obvious reasons.
Alright, look, I'm not a huge fan of the word feisty myself.
I think it's kind of a weird word.
Also, it just takes more effort to say than anything else on this list.
But what the hell do I care if a Downton Abbey actor thinks it's a bad word?
Like, what kind of argument is that?
Is that an appeal to popularity there?
Oh, this famous person thinks it's bad.
Better fucking listen to this famous person because that is the moral authority.
Ball busting is the next one.
When was the last time you heard someone call a man a ball breaker or a ball buster?
I've actually heard this one more times than I can even bother to remember.
Ball busting is not a term designated specifically for females.
It's not even close.
It's a term designated for frustrating people, usually bosses, usually superiors.
Jays, I've probably said you're busting my balls to my male friends more times than I can count.
Oh, you need me to pick you up at the airport at 12 a.m. with 10 minutes' notice?
Oh, you're really busting my balls, dude.
Next up is the word bitch.
Well, I mean, that's an insult, so you should probably avoid most insults at the workplace, for obvious reasons.
But again, the term bitch is not exclusively a female gendered insult.
Guys can be bitches.
I've heard numerous guys get called bitches.
I call guys bitches all the time.
Just because the word itself is gendered for a female dog doesn't mean the insult or the colloquial use of it is also gendered.
It's just not.
Now, I will concede that it's mostly used towards women, but again, it's an insult that shouldn't even be said in the workplace to begin with because it's an insult.
It's not about the gender of it.
It's about the fact that it's a disrespectful thing to say at fucking work.
Now, the next one is shrill, which I find infinitely amusing because it's a word that has an actual definition that isn't gendered at all.
It's a term that simply means high-pitched or piercing.
A trait that is objectively more applicable to female voices than male voices.
Now, I don't have the most masculine voice in the world, but I'm sure some people would call my voice shrill.
I'm sure that's something that some people might think.
But the overwhelming majority of females have way higher pitched voices than men do.
So it stands to reason that a female voice could be more often described as shrill than a man's voice.
That's not a gendered insult.
It's just a description of what is happening.
I mean, is this not shrill?
It's like if somebody used the term lumbering or lanky to describe a male.
It's like that's just a trait more common in males.
It's not a gendered insult just because it happens to apply to one gender more than the other.
But really, Australia, what are you gonna do?
You gonna lock people up?
They're already in Australia.
The next colossal heap of bullshit comes from The Guardian in the form of an article titled, Why We Should Close Women's Prisons and Treat Their Crimes More Fairly.
Now when I first saw this article, I thought, okay, I think I get where he's coming from.
I think I understand what he's going to say.
I think he's going to say, female prisons are a weird distinction to have.
We should just have prisons for everybody, and we should stop treating women's crimes as if they're less serious than male crimes.
Like, as everybody knows at this point, females spend less time in jail for equivalent crimes.
I think that should stop.
That's where I thought this article was going.
But this is this weekend stupid.
So I was wrong.
Sentencing systems around the world should be radically reformed to start with the assumption that women should not be sent to prison for their crimes.
What a fucking joke.
Women almost never scare us, commit random acts of serious violence, violate our sexual integrity, or form organized crime networks, yet their prison numbers are now the highest in recorded history.
So women almost never scare us or commit serious acts of violence.
Okay, so then why do mothers kill their children more often than fathers do?
Why is that a thing?
Does almost never mean most of the time to you?
Not to mention the myriad of violent crimes that females almost exclusively commit, like that classic, that classic cut your husband's dick off and throw it in the garbage disposal prank.
That shit goes well on daytime TV.
We're about to go there because this woman allegedly did.
According to the Orange County DA's office, Catherine Q Becker is accused of cutting off her husband's penis with a knife.
Taking his penis and throwing it into the garbage disposal.
I mean, I don't know the circumstances.
I don't know why he filed for divorce.
I don't know what was going on between them.
However, I do think it's quite fabulous.
I mean, Lizzie Borden, Casey Anthony, I could give off a list of dozens of women who have committed equally atrocious crimes to men.
Women never violate our sexual integrity.
Right, right, because males can't get raped, right?
Because women never sleep with minors or take advantage of men.
Domestic violence is an exclusively female issue.
Forming organized crime networks?
Excuse me, just like five seconds on Google yielded a bunch of results to counteract that point.
I found several lists of female gang leaders and crime lords.
I really like that you're in favor of equality when it's about equal pay and equal opportunity, but you just can't admit to yourself that men and women are actually more equal than you think they are.
Women kill, women rape, women run criminal organizations.
They're just as capable of serious acts of violence as men are.
Just because you don't hear about it as often doesn't mean it simply doesn't happen.
In the United States, women commit only 17% of felonies.
Note the only there to diminish what that actually means.
While in Australia, they commit about 13% of crimes dealt with in the higher courts.
Right, because as we know, the court system is famous for not going easy on women, right?
Hypothetical experiment, guys.
Hypothetical experiment.
If these people were to analyze race statistics and see that, oh wow, only 17% of white people commit crimes and the majority is committed by minorities.
What do you think their conclusion would be?
Do you think it would be, oh, well, just they barely do anything.
The white people barely commit any crimes.
Let's just absolve all the guilty white people.
Do you really think that would be the conversation?
My God, how you could look at higher incarceration rates for males and still come off of that information thinking that women are the ones getting the short end of the stick is baffling to me.
Moreover, when it comes to sexual offenses, rounded off to the nearest whole number, women constitute 0% of all offenders.
That's right.
Zero.
Wow, women are never convicted of sexual offenses?
Well, I guess that means they simply never happen.
Not at all.
Not once.
O.J. Simpson didn't kill Nicole, guys, because the court showed that he- that OJ Simpson constitutes 0% of all Nicole Brown murders.
I guess he's just an ordinary American hero.
Here's the thing about the regressive left, and I say this as a liberal, and I've said this numerous times.
The problem in the thesis is something that I agree should be fixed.
Sentencing systems from around the world need to be radically reformed.
Yes, I wholeheartedly agree.
I wholeheartedly agree.
And my first suggestion would be equal time for equivalent crimes, because as we know, women get treated far, far nicer in court for horrible crimes than men do.
And of course, relegating nonviolent drug offenses to something more like community service rather than actual prison time, these are the solutions that I would suggest, going off of that initial thesis.
But instead of going that route, they go off on this weird tangent about how since women commit fewer crimes or are convicted of fewer crimes, then they just shouldn't be arrested in the first place.
Now they backpedal later in the article, but they still maintain this idea that, oh, they're rarely convicted, therefore let them go.
It's bullshit.
So our next mental credit card with insufficient funds comes from the Mary Sue in the form of an article titled, Judd Apatau has a theory about Trump Fans and the New Ghostbusters.
So Uprox asked Judd Apatau what he thought of the Ghostbusters, and this is how he responded.
I would assume there is a very large crossover of people who are doubtful Ghostbusters will be great and people excited about the Donald Trump candidacy.
I would assume they are the exact same people.
Now I'm no Trump supporter.
I think the dude's really entertaining.
I like him as an entertainer.
Maybe not maybe not a maybe not a president.
Regardless, you have to understand, to people like me and maybe people like you, Trump is just an amusing wrench thrown into the political system.
But to these people, he's basically, he's literally Hitler.
So basically what he's saying here is people who don't find the Ghostbusters movie to be all that interesting or funny are basically racist, xenophobic Nazi.
The movie is made by the great Paul Feig and stars the funniest people on earth.
So I couldn't be more excited.
Now, Melissa McCarthy is not one of the funniest people on earth.
I even drew up a very, very scientific graph to prove my point.
And you might be saying, oh, Chris, that's a fake graph.
You just did that with the with a with Microsoft Paint or something.
Well, it's still more proof than Judd Appatel brought for his Trump Ghostbusters fan theory.
As always, it's important to draw the distinction between people who have doubts about the movie in good faith and people who hate the new Ghostbusters just because they see it as emblematic of SJW politics.
See, now who is the one who draws those distinctions?
Because I guarantee that these people would classify me as somebody who just hates the movie because I hate it, despite the fact that every video I've made on the subject makes arguments about the film's quality, about how it's a cash grab, a myriad of things that has nothing to do with the female caste or SJW politics at all.
See, that's the problem.
The media now is the one that decides whose criticisms are actually valid, and that's a fucking problem.
Because do you think these people are actually going to look at any criticism and say that's valid?
Absolutely not.
They're going to distinguish all of it as the same thing.
They're just going to say misogyny, sexism, bigotry.
I don't need to deal with this criticism.
Everybody who hates the movie is racist.
They're the worst.
And fuck everybody who simply criticizes them because they're basically in the same boat.
And the last bit of internet cancer we'll be diagnosing today comes from the BBC.
BBC turns down trainees because they are white.
Job applicants stun to be told corporations only want people of ethnic minority backgrounds.
The job description added that the two posts were exciting training and development opportunities for those from black, Asian, or other ethnic backgrounds.
So the BBC has essentially prevented people from applying for jobs at their network based on the color of their skin.
I mean, this is pretty clearly racism, isn't it?
Because even under the social justice definition of racism, which is prejudice plus power, this now qualifies.
Because the white people in this situation are powerless.
They literally are the only people excluded from applying for these jobs.
They are the only ones being discriminated against, which means the white applicants physically can't be racist.
I can't wait to see how this will be justified.
What an interesting twist that is.
Anyway, that's it for this week in Stupid.
I know this video is probably shorter than most of Sargon of Akad's other ones, but I'm pretty quick on my feet.
Pretty quick with my words.
Now, Sargon didn't give me any specific rules about shilling my channel on this video, so out of respect, I won't shill my YouTube channel, which you can click on here.
I won't, I won't advertise it like that.
But I will say that I make a bunch of videos like this.
I make every once in a while I do a big animated song parody called Social Justice the Musical.
I'm working on part four right now.
If you want to check that out, it's right here.
But again, I'm not shilling.
I'm not advertising.
That would be rude of me.
Export Selection