All Episodes
Previous Next
April 2, 2017 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
28:25
This Week in Stupid (02⧸04⧸2017)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello everyone, welcome to this week in Stupid for the 2nd of April 2017.
This week, we will be talking about the same thing we talk about every week.
Free speech, because it's so bloody important, and there are so many people trying to take that away from you.
Why don't we start with Mike.com's witch hunt against some teenagers who are telling jokes.
Horrible teens are still doing racist promposals, and this may be the worst one yet.
It's prom season, which means teens are once again engaging in that ritual of mildly coercive one-upmanship known as the promposal, and unfortunately also being super racist about it.
Well, I guess we'd better see this super racist promposal then, shouldn't we?
Here it is.
You may be picking cotton, but we're picking you to go to prom with us.
And what's that, a black person in the photo who's taking part in it?
Because it's just a joke?
Oh, these horrible teens, Mike.
It's a good thing you've covered this.
Otherwise, who would be holding these teenagers to account for these jokes?
In much the same way that conservative Christians held teenagers to account for playing Dungeons and Dragons and listening to heavy metal music.
How very dare they?
The latest appears to be from a group of teens from Monarch High School in Coconut Creek, Florida, who asked their black friend to go to the prom with them using a sign with a racist joke about slavery.
And according to Elite Daily, she said, yes, Massa.
This clearly wasn't some light-hearted and well-meaning banter between friends.
Oh no, this was clearly their attempts to reinstate slavery and get their friend picking cotton for them and shining their shoes and using a separate drinking fountain.
I, as a concerned progressive citizen, do hope that people stood staunchly against this joke and in fact formed a Twitter Inquisition to track down these teenagers and make their lives a living hell.
Twitter users tried to track down the accounts of the women in the picture, but they are now unsurprisingly deleted.
Damn it.
The racists got away this time.
But next time, racists, you can't hide from us.
Racist promposals are nothing new, and certainly not newsworthy, and tend to make the rounds each year.
In 2016, there were several memorable instances, including in Austin, Texas, a senior who wore a burqa with a sign reading, Prom would be the bomb with you.
Clever.
Yeah, that's fucking amusing.
The popular Twitter account Son of Baldwin posted this regrettable invitation which invoked fried chicken and Kool-Aid.
My god, did anyone file a bias report?
Because honestly, I think that these people are, in fact, complete racists, and something must be done.
This is my favourite part of the article.
Ask yourself whether this came from a modern progressive dyed-head journalist who's very concerned about socialism, or a 1980s conservative Christian who's very concerned about saving your soul.
Listen, teens, we understand that summer's around the corner, and you're chomping at the bit to move on to bigger and better things, but racist jokes are never funny, even when they're coming from the professionals.
For the sake of prom and civil society, if you must make a big, ostentatious promposal, stick to memes.
I don't know about you, but I can just feel the finger wagging coming through that article.
I can just feel the moral busybody looking down their nose and going, nope, this is not acceptable.
I will not stand for this.
This is terrible.
This offends me, and I'm sure that means it offends everyone else.
Been all, these kids probably won't listen.
They're already in their teens, they already want to rebel against society, our beautiful progressive utopia.
So what we need to do is indoctrinate them really early.
I mean, by the time they're 16, that is way too late.
They've already been exposed to all manner of horrific racist jokery.
What we need to do is get them when they're kids.
And I'm talking not even when they first get into school.
We need to target preschoolers.
Specifically, sexist preschoolers.
Four-year-olds who exhibit sexist behaviour at preschool are the targets of the Victorian government, Santa Australia, Crusade Against Family Violence, with early childhood educators to be taught how to eradicate gendered norms and stereotypes from the classrooms.
Is there anyone who's comfortable with them doing this?
Who's comfortable with a bunch of ideologues going on a utopian crusade to eradicate gendered norms and stereotypes from classrooms?
As if such a thing is even possible.
This is a recipe to make these classrooms tyrannical and oppressive.
Is that the kind of environment you think that children should be raised in?
The Victorian Education and Training Department will train 4,000 early childhood educators during the next year to implement respectful relationships programmes in preschools.
If you're in Victoria, do you want social justice warriors indoctrinating your children?
If you don't, you have to write a letter of complaint to either the department or your local politicians.
If you want to prevent this, that's what you have to do.
It is seeking a supplier to develop and deliver a course that will increase educators' knowledge of the role of gender equality in preventing family violence.
Oh, pure ideology then.
I see.
Well, I mean, if that's what you want taught to your preschool children, don't do anything.
Just let it happen.
Because it's going to if you don't.
According to a document released last week, research has shown that children become aware of gender expectations and try to fit within these gender norms by the time they're in preschool.
Oh no!
Oh no, whatever shall we do?
Well, I mean, I would personally just let them act as they want to act, and they'll fit into society just fine.
But we could instead indoctrinate them against their own natural instincts.
Why?
Because things might happen.
That's why.
As young children learn about gender, they may also begin to enact sexist values, beliefs and attitudes that may contribute to disrespect and gender inequality.
Well, you know what?
Fine.
I will endure all the sexist values, beliefs and attitudes and the disrespect and gender equality that may come about because of it, because I don't want a bunch of psychotic progressive ideologues indoctrinating any children, especially not the mandate of eradicating gender norms.
It's ridiculous.
I don't know how anyone can go along with this.
Professional learning will increase the capacity of early childhood educators to understand and implement respectful relationships and gender equality into program delivery.
It will build the capacity of educators to use reflective practice and to critically evaluate their work with children using anti-bias approaches specifically targeting gender bias.
I don't want you controlling people.
I don't want you controlling how these kids act and live and think.
Because you're not complaining that these kids are doing something that's actually wrong.
You're not complaining that they're breaking the rules, that they're hurting people.
What you're complaining about is they act in a way that is not progressive, that it does not fall in line with this anti-gender ideology.
And why would they?
They're people.
Most people don't.
You have to be indoctrinated in a specific way for you to hold these beliefs, because otherwise you will notice that your natural inclinations inform your behaviour anyway, and that gender stereotypes and gender norms are a product of that.
And I'm sure it will come as no surprise to learn that this new program will cost taxpayers $3.4 million.
If you don't want your tax money going to this, you should write to your politicians.
Seriously, if this pisses you off, just pause the video now, Google your local politician and spend two minutes writing an email saying, look, I've seen this gender theory targeting preschoolers in our state, and I'm not happy with it.
I want this to be repealed.
I don't want my tax money going on it.
I think this is entirely ideological.
And then send it and then come back to the video.
I'll still be here when you're done.
But this is something you should do.
As an individual who is concerned about the state of your country, you need to at least make yourself heard.
Because if you're not heard, they don't know that you're bothered.
And if they don't know that you're bothered, they don't know that you exist.
Here's who you shouldn't contact.
The Minister for Families and Children, Jenny Mikakos, who defended the early childhood program, saying it would be appropriately designed.
The early years are an important time to start helping children develop a secure sense of self and healthy, respectful relationships.
And this will prevent family violence in the long run.
And if we look at, say, the domestic violence rates between lesbian couples and gay couples, we find them highly elevated.
If we look at the suicide rates of transgender and the cancer rates of transgender people, we find them highly elevated.
It's almost like preventing family violence in the long term can be achieved through many methods, and this is not a good one.
The person you should probably be emailing is the Liberal family spokesman Georgie Crozier, who said, the government should let kids be kids.
You need to contact Georgie Crozier and let him know that you, a voting, taxpaying citizen, are not happy with how this is going, and you want some change.
And remember that this shit is everywhere, and if you are not following their rules precisely, they will do what they can to hurt you.
Even if it's small things like losing marks for using he, where universities are penalising undergraduates for offensive gender phrases in essays and exams.
These people are in control of your children's lives.
Students at the University of Hull have been told their essays will be marked down unless they use gender sensitive language.
Many universities are already advising students and staff not to use gender offensive terms such as he or she to describe people that could be either male or female.
And terms such as mankind, manpower and man-made are frowned upon by academics if used in essays.
This is cancer.
I mean this is nonsense for a start.
He or she are not like insults or offensive unless you are particularly sensitive because you have been indoctrinated to be sensitive about these things.
And terms like mankind, manpower and man-made mean human kind, human power and human-made.
It's not male or female, but these people are idiots.
They are the sort of people who literally think history is gendered because it has H-I-S at the beginning of it.
And then they make up a term like HISTERY because they don't know anything about the etymology of the word.
The fact that it comes from the ancient Greek that means inquiries.
It's nothing to do with gender, but these people don't care.
They don't give a damn.
What they want is control over what you think.
And this is one method of exercising that control.
And it's gone beyond trying to disincentivise people to actively deducting marks from students for using these phrases.
Do you want that to continue?
If you don't, you should contact either your local politician in Hull or you should email the deans and the heads of these universities.
Contact them, let them know that you exist, because the longer you leave it before emailing them with your complaint, the more this carries on because they don't know that people oppose it.
A document sent to the students reads, Language is important and highly symbolic.
In your essay, I thus expect you to be aware of the powerful and symbolic nature of language and use gender-sensitive formations.
Failure to use gender-sensitive language will impact on your mark.
A professor of sociology at Kent University told the Sunday Times, usually such threats are implicit rather than spelt out, as in the case of Hull.
This linguistic policing is used as a coercive tool to impose a conformist outlook.
The alternative is to pay a penalty of being marked down.
And here is the reason that this is being done.
They say, I would be negligent as a professor who is running a class about the human condition and the assumptions we make about being human if I did not also raise the issue of gendered language and ask my students to respect the need for gender-neutral language.
Well, I'm sorry, but the need for gender-neutral language applies to less than 1% of the population.
And I'm sorry that these people fall outside of the bounds of what is normal, but that's terrible.
And no, I don't think we should like persecute them or anything.
And you know what?
If one of them comes to me and says, you know, I'm transitioning into a woman, so could you call me she, please?
I would call them she because I'm not a total dick.
But to punish other students for using gendered language is ridiculous.
And this cancer doesn't just stay in schools and universities.
You know, maybe you don't give a shit about the next generation or something.
You think, well, fuck it, it's just going to stay there.
It's not, obviously.
HSBC, one of the major high street banks in the UK, have selected 10 gender-neutral titles for their customers.
The chosen option will then be used when phoned by staff and on all documents.
Well, why just 10?
There are literally thousands of these pronouns.
You couldn't get lists and lists and lists and lists of them.
Why just 10?
Those who do not identify as Mr., Miss or Mrs. will be able to choose from a range of options.
The options include M, MIA, MIX, Psi, and SIR.
MISC, which stands for miscellaneous, and PR, an abbreviation for person, can now be used.
Why not just have other?
Give them a little box in which they can type in the pronoun of their choice and you don't have to worry about making sure you have the right pronouns listed because I'm telling you you don't.
I already know there will be people who complain about this and say, well, my pronoun isn't represented.
Why not?
Why are you being bigoted against me?
Although the policy is aimed at transgender people, anyone can choose one of these titles.
HSBC said the titles allow people who identify as a particular gender or don't want to be identified by gender to choose the title that works for them.
Well you know what?
That's opening it up to the internet.
What you can then do then is email HSBC, email their customer services department, their complaints department and complain that Keck, Keck Sia and Keck Self isn't on the list.
Go wild.
You can do whatever you like.
You can email them and whinge as much as you want about whatever you want because that's all they're responding to.
Fucking whinging.
Oh well there were people who are like, oh but but like my personal pronoun isn't included on the list.
Okay well what are you gonna do about it?
You're gonna whinge at HSBC until they realize because they don't give a damn.
They do not care either way.
They have done this because they are seeing this constantly in the news.
They are seeing activists constantly protesting against stupid things and they're thinking well maybe we should do something.
If this is what people want we're gonna respond to that.
It's just to pander to customers.
HSBC said the changes offer transgender customers a better, more personal banking experience.
They don't care.
They just want your money.
They just want your custom and they will do whatever it is that they think will get it.
That's the only reason.
And you know what?
In isolation, I wouldn't say anything about this.
I'd just be like, well, who cares what they do?
Who gives a damn?
But this isn't just in isolation.
These people are responding to large-scale societal changes that are happening under people's noses, and no one seems to be pushing back against it.
The resistance to this ideological takeover of society is very minimal and not terribly effective.
For example, this week we had the free speech bus, which provoked fury by travelling around the US promoting an anti-transgender message.
And I don't even think that's a fair assessment.
I don't think it's an anti-transgender message.
It's just a pro-traditional gender message.
And it's not like these things can't live side by side.
Traditional genders and gender norms can exist, as well as transgender people.
But that's the problem for them.
It's not that they can exist alongside these things.
They don't want to exist alongside these things.
Activists are up in arms about a bus which has been touring New England and is heading south with words, boys are boys and girls are girls emblazoned on it.
My god, won't someone think of the children?
Or the trans activists in this case.
Gregory Metz, the US director of Citizen Geo, the group behind the free speech bus, said they were trying to push back against laws and policies which sought to cater to transgender people.
He said, there's an agenda and movement that's saying it's okay for a boy to be a girl and that you can use whichever restroom you want.
We think that's very harmful.
Well, that's only if you look at the statistics that it's harmful.
I mean, on an interpersonal level, it probably isn't.
So here is the offending bus in question with pictures of girls and boys with XX and XY on.
I don't know.
Science is just really sexist though.
I mean genders, like biological sexes which then translate into gender roles because we're social creatures?
That sounds like hokeum to me.
Sounds ridiculous.
That can't possibly be true.
And of course, protesters holding placards demonstrated yesterday as the large orange bus parked in front of the Massachusetts Statehouse in Boston.
They chanted, no hate, no fear, trans people are welcome here.
Why?
What about the bus was hateful?
It was just pointing out basic biological facts about human beings as a sexually dimorphic species.
The males have XY, the females have XX, and you can't actually change these chromosomes.
So you can pretend all you want through social constructs and gender roles, but the fundamental biological reality of life is that.
That's not telling trans people they're bad.
That's not hating or fearing anyone.
That's just insisting that the biological facts are adhered to.
The text written on the side of the bus reads, it's biology.
Boys are boys and always will be.
Girls are girls and always will be.
You can't change sex.
Respect for all.
Hateful.
Absolute monsters.
Just because you can't actually change your chromosomal makeup doesn't mean you don't also hate trans people, because you clearly do.
The bus may appear benign, but it only serves to fuel rising hatred and violence towards the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, said Mason Dunn, someone with a direct vested interest in having this agenda promoted.
Yeah, I'm sure there's a gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender holocaust going on as we speak.
Just point me at the death camps.
Show me the mass graves.
Show me the results of people being misgendered.
Because I don't think it's quite as harmful as you think.
But here's the kicker.
Words in this setting are violence.
No, they're not.
Just stop you there, they're not.
Words cannot be violence in any setting.
Say it with me.
Words can't be violence.
Words can't be violence.
Do you get it, Mason Dunn?
It just can't be the case by definition of the things that you are talking about.
Violence is a physical act.
A word is not a physical act.
Therefore, you are wrong and you will always be wrong and you need to stop selling this bullshit.
And if you won't do that, then everyone else needs to stop buying it.
Because remember, everyone, if you want equality, you have to curtail free speech.
On March the 23rd, New Zealand woke to the horrific news of yet another terrorist attack, this time in London.
A deranged individual plowed a car into innocent pedestrians and brutally stabbed a police officer to death before being shot.
Five people died, including the attacker.
The Twitter sphere was soon abuzz with conjecture and accusation.
Who was to blame?
What were the motives?
Oh, I wonder.
I felt sick as I read comments saying, Islam is to blame.
It must be another Muslim.
Those fucking Islamophobes.
Yeah, okay, they were right, but that was bigoted.
How dare they?
The fact that the attacker was a Muslim is irrelevant.
Well, not to the people who got run down.
But I mean, it's not like you care about victims, is it?
The issue is that Islamophobia was the first response.
Well, I'm sorry, but we've had so many terror attacks in Europe from Muslims, almost exclusively so, that frankly, you'd have to be a moron to not think that this was probably another terrorist attack by a Muslim.
It's just the truth of it.
Most of them are, and someone will scream, yeah, but what about Anders Breivik?
Yeah, what about him?
What about him?
There have been dozens and dozens of attacks, and one of them was from a crazy right-winger in Europe.
And then they'll be like, oh, what about Dylan Ruth?
Yeah, dozens and dozens of attacks, and one of them was Dylan Ruth, and now you have two attacks.
Wow.
What about the Canadian Moss?
That's three attacks!
Three whole attacks you've got!
Fucking hell!
Right-wing terror is just through the roof.
I know that on a weekly basis, we have to consistently thwart Islamic terror plots, and unfortunately, some of them come to fruition.
So that means that maybe once a month there's a horrific attack where a bunch of people die, and it's a Muslim terrorist attack.
But it doesn't matter because you have what a boundary.
What about this?
What about the other?
Well, stop you there.
When we're having a conversation about right-wing terror attacks, we'll ask you.
Until then, sit down and shut the fuck up.
If you're a Muslim, you have to continually defend your faith against people who accuse it of being a dangerous and violent set of ideas.
Yeah, you don't in any way think maybe I should criticize my own faith.
Maybe I should do some introspection and ask myself, is this real?
Is Islam really the word of God?
And if it is, why do so many people kill in the name of God?
Why would a universal deity that created the earth and everything on it, including all of the people, say that it's okay to kill some of those people?
But no, you don't want to do any introspection, and you certainly don't want Muslims to do any introspection.
So well done, progressives, you are probably doing your job, your part, to hold back the reformation of Islam.
Brilliant job.
Islam is the religion of peace, the religion of peace, not just a religion of peace.
No, no, get out of the way, Buddhism.
Islam is the real religion of peace.
You can tell by all the beheadings it does.
No more conflict and questioning after someone gets their head chopped off.
Anyone who understands that it has no part in the ideology of ISIS.
Yeah, right, yeah.
What concern for the religion of Islam could the Islamic State possibly have?
Life is a constant fight for other minorities too.
Yeah, often against Islam.
Like with the poor victims who died.
I mean, you don't care.
You don't give a damn.
You're just here to morally grandstand to attempt to take away free speech as if that's gonna what?
Prevent terror attacks?
Fucking of course it's not!
If you're a member of the alphabet soup community, you must battle for your rights.
You are forced to choose between just two bathroom choices when often you don't fit either.
It's not a right to have gendered bathrooms.
It's an option that people usually choose because it usually makes most people more comfortable.
You could have a single gender neutral bathroom if you want.
Nobody's rights have been infringed by gender neutral bathrooms.
The misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic hate speech directed at oppressed groups is damaging to society.
And with the rise of Donald Trump's brand of politics, it is also becoming legitimized.
It's becoming legitimized because you force this crap everywhere, and everywhere everyone has the same response.
Well, there is some hope.
The Canadian Parliament has passed the M103 motion, which calls on the government to condemn Islamophobia.
It is the silver lining of a dark and depressing cloud, and is something I think New Zealand should seek to not only emulate, but improve.
Our government should look to criminalize not only Islamophobia, but racist rhetoric and the criticism of feminism and LGBTQAA plus rights.
Is this what you want?
If you live in New Zealand, if you think that this is a problem, you should email your politician right now.
Pause the video, go and Google the name of your local MP, give them a quick email.
Just send them an email saying, look, I'm really concerned about this.
I'm really concerned about the government.
I'm really concerned about the criminalization of free speech to protect quote-unquote minorities.
I'm really concerned that this will end up infringing my rights.
Please will you reassure me that you will fight this if you see it?
Free speech is all well and good, but it should not be defended at the expense of minority groups.
What?
Are you suggesting that minority groups should have special rights of their own?
And these rights should be more important than the rights of everyone in society?
Because that's what that sentence means.
That's what you're saying.
Free speech is an I mean, it's a good right, but these other groups have more important rights that trump your free speech, and so your free speech can be let go if it's going to come at the expense of these minority groups.
And then if you're going to say something nasty about Islam, you should lose your free speech.
That's what they want.
That's their platform.
That's their political goal.
Nothing quells fear and hatred like making it illegal.
This is what they actually believe.
They actually think that fear and hatred will go away if you just make fear and hatred illegal.
They are that stupid.
And they care about your rights so little that they will push this stupidity at your expense.
If we stop opposing progressive values, then surely the constant fighting will stop too.
They're mental.
They don't understand what's going on.
And somehow these people have control of your schools, your universities, and your politicians.
And guess who's funding it?
That's right, you are!
This is all being done at taxpayer expense!
You're paying for these people to do this!
New Zealand is not a place of tolerance at the moment, but I believe if we curtail free speech, we will be on the path to a fairer future.
This is their dichotomy.
You can either have tolerance or you can have free speech.
I'm not talking about some backwards Asian collectivist hellhole.
I'm talking about countries that were founded by England.
The English-speaking individualist, English common law, parliamentary democracies that are supposed to hold free speech above all else, to ensure the accountability of their own politicians, to prevent tyranny.
▲
Export Selection