All Episodes
Previous Next
June 19, 2016 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
22:25
This Week in Stupid (19⧸06⧸2016)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello everyone, welcome to this week in Stupid for the 19th of June 2016.
I do hope you're all feeling very tolerant, because you're about to have to tolerate some very intolerable things that happened this week.
Starting at the bottom and working our way up, lefty game journalists blame violent video games and gun culture for Orlando shooting.
I'm sure you've worked out exactly where this is going, but let's push on and see if you're right.
We have of course the usual suspects, like Bob Chipman in his very subtle, I'm a regressive, but I don't mean to think I'm too regressive.
So it might sound kind of reasonable saying, hey, if part of your hype reel is how many real firearms you can use and how awesome gunplay is, maybe dial it back this year.
We of course have Jonathan Jack Thompson Macintosh saying, I was going to live tweet E3 press events today, but I just don't think I can stomach the way the video game industry fetishizes gun culture.
I might still tweet about E3, but fair warning, today I've got no patience for video games that glorify guns, gun violence, or gun culture.
Which is what you literally say every single day, Jonathan.
Of course, we need to have a serious discussion about how video games fetishize guns and glorify gun violence and end up contributing to gun culture.
How about, let's make a deal to boo all games at E3 that feature real-world gun violence without any substantial qualifying of why it's there.
What do you mean substantial qualifying?
They're shooter games.
Or how about the lesson of E3?
Game studios are working very hard to build fantasies about how cool it is to be a mass murderer, which is a very interesting way of saying soldier.
I think my favourite was this one though.
The question I'm referring to is this.
How many mass shootings until the game industry stops making shooting people seem fun?
Because that's what happens when you're playing like Battlefield or something.
It's just shooting people.
It's not armed combat between enemies or anything like that.
No, no, no.
It's exactly the same as a massacre.
Now, I know that there is absolutely no connection between video game violence and real-world violence.
And I know this, because if there was anything, anything, to suggest that there was, these chuckle fucks would be tweeting it out constantly.
But instead, what they're doing is nagging and nagging and realizing that they've got a lot more in common with the religious rights than they do with the liberal left.
But I think it was this article on The Verge that really pissed me off about the progressive press talking about Orlando and E3.
So, how do you sell violent video games after a tragedy?
Pretend like it didn't happen.
And this whole article can be summed up with this one quote from it.
The reaction was not to react.
Yes, they didn't need to virtue signal, because video games are not responsible for this violence.
Unlike the gaming press, I'm not simply going to follow my biases and point the finger at something I don't like and blame that.
And I know a lot of people are going to say, yeah, but this is Islam, right?
And I'm not sure.
I'm really not sure.
There are a lot of conflicting reports of things that would imply it's one thing or another, and I really think it's the sort of thing that's going to require quite a depth of analysis, and I simply haven't had the time yet.
But I can tell you that a couple of months ago, yet another study came out that found no evidence that violent video games make children aggressive.
Put simply, there does not seem to be a link between fantasy and reality.
I've got no doubt that they're going to continue doing studies on this until the cows come home, and I've got no doubt that each of these studies will come back saying, we think it's probably something more important than escapism that is turning people into spree killers.
Since we're on the subject, He for She wants gamers to commit to gender equality.
He for She is UN Women's Solidarity Movement for Gender Equality that made a huge splash in 2014.
That's when actress Emma Watson gave her now famous speech that gender equality isn't a women's issue, it's everybody's issue.
Which is weird because it really sounds like it's a women's issue, really a feminist issue to be honest.
Since then, he for she has been working with executives, government leaders, and heads of state to commit to addressing gender equality within their own organizations, communities, and industries.
Now, he for she is getting into a different kind of partnership, one with electronic arts to target its users, because seriously, these people are getting fucking everywhere.
On Sunday, it launched an in-game challenge in Star Wars Battlefront at its EA Play events in London and Los Angeles.
The goal?
To encourage gamers to commit to He for She's Pledge, which states, I will take action against gender bias, discrimination, and violence to bring the benefits of equality to us all.
Now, you might wonder how exactly that's going to be done on online multiplayer games, and I can only assume their answer is police other people's actions.
If this is sounding rather Orwellian, that's because it is.
This is exactly what the party encouraged children to do to their parents if they committed any act of wrongthink or went against the orthodoxy in any way.
So, well done, he for she.
It's always nice to know that there are people so committed to Orwell's vision, they will do anything to bring it to life.
And don't forget, this is an important step for an industry that has earned a reputation as being hostile to women.
Linking to a video by Brianna Wu complaining that a tweet had ruined her life.
Well, I mean, the irony of that, of course, I'm going to just overlook because I'm a nice guy like that.
But the reputation for it being hostile to women has come exclusively from feminists.
It wasn't female gamers who ran to the media screaming, oh my god, the video game industry hates women.
No, no, it was feminists.
And it was done to build a victim narrative to enable this kind of control.
Not only is this important in terms of getting men on board to commit to actions that support gender equality, but we hope that within our lifetime we are able to create change.
Said David Kim, head of global diversity at EA, which in a parallel universe could quite easily be chief theta examiner at EA.
Being the head of global diversity is probably not bringing in much money for EA.
In fact, I would really like to know exactly what good it is doing at all, except for acting as the priestly class for the new religion of tolerance and diversity and equality of outcome.
And that is literally what they want.
A McKinsey study found that it will take more than a hundred years to achieve gender parity in US corporations.
And I am just fine with that.
I wouldn't care if it took a thousand years.
I wouldn't care if it never happened.
I just don't care about the gender ratios in anything.
Because it's just not something I judge people on.
A thing is not good or bad based on the number of vaginas and penises within it.
It's simply not something important.
But for some reason, these Marxist-inspired gender activists have got it in their minds that this has to be the case.
This has to be the case, and they want to create a very controlled environment that other people, the people in it, will police each other to maintain, for reasons unknown.
At no point do they ever give us a reason as to why this should happen.
They simply never justify why this is an important issue.
It's anti-egalitarian to judge people on arbitrary factors like their gender.
It's just not important to me.
But then I am one of those old egalitarian dinosaurs from the 90s who literally see beyond race and gender to factors within the control of the individual.
Factors upon which they can demonstrate their agency and their worth.
I never signed up to the cult of diversity, so I don't like judging people on factors beyond their control, such as their race.
So I don't see why Wayne State would drop their maths requirement and add a diversity requirement instead.
Actually, I take the bit about the maths requirement back.
They say, this decision was made largely because the current maths requirement is at a level already required by most high school mathematics curriculums.
So, okay, it's unnecessary, it's redundant, you can get rid of it, it sounds worse than it is.
But why do you need to add a diversity requirement?
A faculty committee has proposed adding a three credit hours requirement in diversity to the general education curriculum at Wayne State University.
Well, I think we may have found our Melissa Clicks of Wayne State University.
These would presumably be the problem professors who are obsessed with gender and race.
They say, we are proposing the creation of specific diversity courses with students required to take one course in this designation.
Why?
What the fuck are they going to learn?
They're going to learn white people evil and brown people are oppressed?
That'll be good for their self-esteem, won't it?
That's a great idea.
Rather than letting them prosper in an environment free from racial or gendered prejudices, they're in fact going to introduce them, tell them how to think, and then flip them off into the wide world to be obsessed with these categories until we can somehow sit them down and fucking deprogram them.
The committee report said these courses will provide opportunities for students to explore diversity at the domestic level and consider the ways in which it intersects with real-world challenges at the local, national, and or global level.
When I say that they are trying to set up a new priestly class in society to introduce something that if it was missing, nobody would notice.
I'm not joking.
This is a method to gain control.
This is the thin edge of the wedge.
Do not think it will stop with only three hours for every student.
It will continue.
And it will continue because there will be no forces pushing against it.
There will only be forces pushing for it, and it will be coming from the students who have been recently indoctrinated.
I mean, what the fuck does this even mean?
Explore diversity at the domestic level.
What are they going to go home and go, well, both of my parents are white?
And I love the intersecting with real-world challenges at the local, national, and or global level.
Shut up.
Just shut up.
This is a sentence that never needed to be said.
It's nonsense.
And since we're on the subject of universities, DePaul President capitulates to outraged anti-Milo students.
Tenders resignation.
Dennis Holschneider has announced plans to step down from his role as president of DePaul University following pressure from radical left-wing activists in the wake of Breitbart Tech editor Milo Yanopoulos' recent visit to the campus, which I did a video on and I'm sure you're familiar with.
And he of course apologised, but the apology only caused more problems for Holschneider.
The DePaul Black Leadership Coalition representing black students and faculty members on campus, which isn't that just the best fucking idea to have, have put relentless pressure on the president ever since he apologised to the college Republicans and called for his resignation.
Well A, you should never apologize to these people.
Nothing is good enough until you have been destroyed, which we can see in the case of Holtzchneider.
He actually did do something wrong.
His faculty, under his tenure, allowed these protesters to interrupt a perfectly civil meeting, threaten a guest, and prevent the security from intervening.
He should apologize.
And he did.
And now he is being forced to not only apologize, but to resign over the fact he apologized that he let something wrong happen to them.
This is fucking madness.
This is what I mean by these people doing everything they can to gain control.
They are now the ones de facto in control of the faculty.
If the faculty do something wrong, they will apply relentless pressure to keep them in line, to break them.
How many presidents and high-ranking faculty of universities have to resign before we break up these groups?
This is unacceptable.
They should not be able to constantly pressure people who haven't really done anything worthy of their own resignation simply on the basis of their say-so.
Seriously, Mizu, Yale, now here, probably others that I can't think of off the top of my head.
I mean, where does this end?
Where does it end with the social justice lunatics gaining this kind of control over their universities?
Do we want to see that be the norm?
So let's talk about an unironic fusion of social justice and Islam in the form of Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, banning negative body image adverts on the London Underground.
As part of his mayoral election manifesto, Sadiq Khan pledged to ban adverts promoting, quote, unhealthy or unrealistic body images.
The advertising watchdog received 378 countum complaints in 2015 about a weight loss advert that asked customers if they were beach body ready.
I've done a video on this, I'll put it in the description so you can watch it if you'd like.
Here is the offending advert with the unhealthy and unrealistic body image of an attractive slim woman.
Fuck it.
This is insane.
This is fucking insanity.
Not only is this censorious, there is nothing wrong with this poster, which is why it was put up in the first place and allowed by the advertising standards agency.
There was nothing wrong with a slim woman in a bikini.
You fucking puritans.
But you know what?
I think I've actually come up with just a prototype of an idea that might satisfy both feminists and Islamists on this subject.
So the advert is basically a giant fat ninja clad head to toe in black with the phrase, are you Burka body ready?
Because let's be honest with ourselves feminists, you probably are.
And Sadiq Khan, I'm sure, will totally agree with this.
As I'm sure that every radical Islamist in London will.
I mean, maybe the Finsbury Park Mosque can have it on their wall.
Mr. Khan said, as the father of two teenage girls, I am extremely concerned about this kind of advertising, which can demean people, particularly women, and make them ashamed of their bodies.
It's high time it came to an end.
Yeah, yeah, you get restricting that, man.
You know, is there anything else you'd like to censor while you're at it?
I mean, let's just, let's just do the whole hog.
Let's just go the whole way.
What else would you like restricted?
Criticism of religion?
Can we, should we, we should probably ban that, shouldn't we?
But this is even better, though.
Our customers cannot simply switch off or turn a page if an advertisement offends or upsets them.
And we have a duty to ensure the copy we carry reflects that unique environment.
Or they could shut up and fuck off.
There is nothing wrong with a slim woman in a fucking bikini.
It's not bad.
It doesn't do anything to people.
And if it does, then that problem is with them.
They have to change.
Everyone else doesn't have to change.
I might recommend not eating so many carbs and maybe going for the odd run.
And that might do wonders for their self-esteem.
But fuck it.
Let's just get banning things.
How could that go wrong?
On the BBC London Facebook page, many people were quick to praise the mayor's initiative.
Magdalena fuck you Poland said, please ban it, I don't want my children to look at it, right before clutching her pearls and screaming, what's someone think of the children?
It's a picture of a woman in a bikini, it's not going to scar them.
But others warned it was the start of the Islamification of London.
Yeah, the start.
But no, it might be the feministization of London.
Have you considered that?
And they said that the mayor was adopting this policy because of his religious values.
Don't be silly, these are British values.
Banning pictures of women, that's a British value.
Covering up women, that's a feminist value.
What are you talking about?
This isn't about Islamic values.
That would be crazy talk.
I mean, come on guys, it's the current year.
When have Islamists, or Muslims in general, ever demanded a ban to something they personally don't like that contravenes their Islamic values?
I mean, it would never happen in a modern secular nation like, oh, I don't know, Turkey.
Oh, wait.
Islamists attack Radiohead fans at Turkish release party.
Well, this is clearly right-wing propaganda.
A group of men attacked fans at a Radiohead listening party Friday in Istanbul, apparently angry the fans were drinking during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan.
But what if they weren't Muslims?
Amateur video reported to have been live-streamed on Periscope appears to have captured the incident.
In the video, the unidentified attackers enter the store shouting, close it down, close it down, aggressively, as attendees were listening to Radiohead's newly launched album, A Moon-Shaped Pool.
Well, that doesn't sound like the Islamic version of social justice warriors at all.
The video shows the assailants, thought to be from the neighbourhood, roughly removing one person from the store.
A few moments of yelling outside the shop, one of the attackers in a white shirt is seen returning and shouting at the remaining handful of people to get out of the store.
He knocks over a beer can and then, still shouting, flings a stool outside.
Continuing to curse, he yells, are you not ashamed to be doing this in Ramadan?
Well, I tell you what, I for one can't wait until Turkey joins the EU.
The lights of the store are turned off and voices can be heard in the street shouting, I'll kill you, I will burn you alive inside.
That last part harkens back to one of Turkey's deadliest attacks, in which 35 intellectuals were burned alive by an Islamist mob in 1993, which of course had nothing to do with Islam.
Also having nothing to do with Islam, the attack had a chilling effect in secular circles, where it's seen as part of a growing trend of Islamist threats on liberties.
And of course, people who are not real Muslims are also part of nationalist Islamist youth groups that have threatened gay and trans pride parades.
A nationalist Muslim youth group issued a severely worded statement against the 13th Gay Pride Parade in Istanbul, scheduled for next week.
We are warning you in advance that we are not responsible for what happens after this.
No, you're responsible for us attacking you.
The ultra-nationalist Islamist youth group, it's the nationalism that's the problem here, remember, added that they will do whatever it takes to stop the parade from taking place during Ramadan.
Side note, Ramadan has also got nothing to do with Islam.
The Istanbul governorship issued a statement banning the parade, citing security reasons.
Last year the parade was banned as well, and police dispersed crowds using tear gas and water cannons.
Crowds of people who were just not Muslims.
And since we're on the subject of people who are also not Muslims, Australia's Prime Minister regrets dinner invite for an anti-gay cleric.
Mr. Turnbull, MP for the Sydney seat that hosts the annual gay and lesbian Mardi Gras parade, said that he would not have invited him if he had known his views, emphasising the need for acceptance of diversity of sexuality and religion.
Well that's kind of interesting isn't it?
I mean it puts you in a bit of a bind when you have a person of a religion that doesn't tolerate the diversity of sexuality that you want to tolerate.
I mean which one has to go?
That's the question isn't it?
Which one are you going to choose between?
And you could have found out about his anti-gay views by simply opening a fucking Quran.
And another news that the politically correct establishment and frankly anti-liberal establishment would like to rather not talk about, I imagine, there's been another instance of sexual violence at yet another German festival.
I mean, obviously this wasn't done by Muslims, because these people weren't real Muslims.
None of them are.
In fact, it's fucking impossible to find a real Muslim.
I'm really, really interested.
I mean, the only people who seem to be real Muslims are in fact ex-Muslims.
People who, in fact, are pro-tolerance and diversity and the ability for people to live their lives on their own terms without some kind of authoritarian ideology dictating how they need to live.
And, you know, I know I might sound like this deeply barbaric and utterly savage individual when I say that I would really rather it if we didn't tolerate ideologies that taught their followers to believe that women are literally half the value of a man.
I mean, I know, it's my evil egalitarianism coming out again, but I would really like it if men and women were not treated with any distinction between them in the eyes of the law or society.
I would really like that if we could have some kind of respect for half the population.
I know that sounds crazy.
I would like them to just live their lives unmolested from a group of young African men on a sex attack and a number of women in connection with a festival at Ahrensburg.
They tried to steal mobile phones and wallets as well, according to Jung Freiheit, which I'm guessing is another case of Tahrirus Jamir.
You know, that fun Arabic rape game where groups of men surround a woman, sexually assault her, possibly rape her and steal her possessions.
I mean, there's nothing.
Look, right, all I'm saying is that if you have a culture that completely devalues women and treats them as second-class citizens, and women who are out there revealing their flesh have it coming, you can hardly blame the people committing the crimes, can you?
Which is why the police simply don't really want to talk about it.
I mean, they didn't really want to go and make a public announcement about it.
But a spokesman for the local police did say that they've registered five sex crimes and sex crimes of theft in connection with the festival.
But there has been unrest that we have seen in recent years.
I mean, it's general unrest.
It's not connected to anything like this.
There's nothing in it.
It's just general unrest, probably due to the far right.
I mean, the far right are probably causing these people to do this.
And it's certainly nothing to do with the fact that the establishment is so apologetic and almost protective of these criminals that is causing the rise of the far right.
▲
Export Selection