This article from the Buggers Broadcasting Communism is shocking in many ways.
- It was written in December 2015, four and a half years ago. It is astonishing to see that, so many months ago, the money for the TV Licence (which is mandatory in the UK) was wasted on this sort of rubbish.
- It is a piece of shameless activist and deviant propaganda. In the United Kingdom, this “gender” stuff is far, far less developed than in the US; and whatever is there, is there because of the extremist bigots like the BBC.
- It is fully oblivious of the utter absurdity, of the surreal other worldliness of the entire issue. It is as if these people were paid to live on a different planet, where they see as their job to introduce both words like “hirself”, “verself” and “zirself” and the – don’t laugh – proper use of such entirely artificial and completely pointless mental constructs.
The long article is written by people living in a parallel world, for people living in a parallel world; courtesy of people paying their wages in this world.
There were thoughts, in the UK, to abolish the TV Licence and leave the BBC free to survive out of advertising revenue. Whilst not an ideal solution (The BBC is a valuable brand with a huge goodwill, that should be sold in the market rather than left to this bunch of morons), the measure would have gone a long way to dam the flow of public money destined for sheer deviant propaganda. However, it seems more and more that Boris Johnson hasn’t much testosterone left in him after his Chinese Virus hospital stint. I am, therefore, not very optimistic on this.
What can we do in such situation? The most useful thing we can do it getting vocal in criticising, and ridiculing, this sort of exercise in madness.
Collective consciousness is certainly influenced by the media, but it is also built out of a myriad of individual interventions. I am actually of the opinion that the prevalent use, nowadays, of wrong words like “gay” is due not to their use by the perverted minority and their friend, but to fake conservatives caving in and accepting to use the language of the enemy out of sheer desire to appease them and appear nice.
Let us all give our contribution so that this never happens with “hirself”, “verself”, “zirself” and the rest of the fantasy world in which these people want to live.
Sad, but truthful article about the pitfalls of political correctness.
A Trannie (that is: a faggot who wants you to believe he is a dyke; or such like; I always get so confused…) is now suing CrossFit, a fitness organisation which organises its own CrossFit Games. In her modesty, she would be happy with $2.5m.
The reason for Mr (note) Jonsson to become rich is that he had a “gender reassignment” some years ago, but the organisation does not want to allow him to compete among the women.
In case you are thinking this is an April joke, no. It’s simply California.
My spontaneous thoughts on the matter:
1. If CrossFit is the “gender equality” organisation, as they might well be, I sincerely hope that they lose the suit, or have to pay the Trannie a lot of money. It is only fitting that the owners pay the price of their own stupidity, through their own stupidity. Contrappasso is how Dante would call it.
2. Similarly, I hope this changes the sport landscape in the USA and the entire world, and leads to new regulations by which Trannies are allowed to participate in women’s competition everywhere, from athletics to swimming to soccer. They would, ceteris paribus, easily outperform the women by way of their being … men. You would have women ousted by an awful lot of medals in favour of a small army of well-trained… men.
The liberal word would have to applaud. The women would have to shut up. They can’t say “but … biologically.. she… she… is a man!”, can they now?
Hey: the man was officially given the legal status of a woman by the stupid laws of the Socialist Republic of California. Why would he now have to be “discriminated” by the oh so inclusive society which allowed him to mutilate himself and undergo horrible chemical or hormonal treatments, and pledged to see him as a woman? How is it that reality can only be ignored when it just allows a couple of people to feel smug with themselves, but does not apply anymore when, say, other women pay the price for it?
Some people are trannies, my dear liberal female athletes. Get over it. Let’s make a huge PC exercise out of it, through Olympics and Paralypics, cycling, football (soccer), absolutely everything! You made this bed, now lie in it.
I hope the “struggle” for equality of the FDTAAP* crowd goes to its very end. I dream of a Wimbledon “female” tennis final between two trannies. Now that would be “inclusiveness”…
Live by political correctness, die by political correctness.
*Faggots, Dykes, Trannies and Assorted Perverts
I wonder when the Pollyannas will start to realise that the enthusiasm of libtards and assorted perverts for Francis does not come from them misunderstanding him, but from them understanding him all too well.
The last piece of evidence is here, with the crowd of perverts “honouring” Francis because he “changes the perception” of perverts abandoning themselves to abominable practices.
How can you deny they are right, and the Pollyannas are wrong? Francis downplays both homosexuality as a perversion and sodomy as a sin crying to heaven for vengeance, in front of a global audience, and obviously being very pleased with the result.
Let us not be blind and let us see reality as it is.
Whether out of sheer stupidity, or appalling ignorance and arrogance, or outright evil intention, this man has been working for the enemies of Christ since March 13.
From their friends you'll recognise them.
Beware of the wolf in black shoes.
Laura L. Iberal
The DMAOLA (Dog, Mule and Alternative Oriented Lovers Association) has yesterday demanded that the State of New York recognises their right to lawfully wed their loved ones.
“It is a pure matter of justice”, says their national speaker, Mr Dan B. Ass: “Now that the gay community has finally succeeded in obtaining that their right to love finds legal recognition, we DMAOL community demand that the same criteria be used with us”. The “Smarts” (this is how the members of the DMAOLA call themselves; Mr Ass informed me that every other definition will be considered extremely offensive, hurtful and, as he says, “lovephobic”) have made very clear that their human rights are at stake, and that they are going to fight the battle for their right to love until final victory.
“We don’t need to win any referendum anyway”, says again Mr. Ass, “as we plan to win our battles largely through judicial activity, following the example of the GLBT community”. Mr. Ass expects the general population to remain against them for a while, as – as he puts it – “the lovephobic prejudices of the conservative, most notably of the Christian population are not going to go away overnight”. Still, he is adamant that “the fight for our human rights will go on” and “you can’t stop love”.
I have asked Mr. Ass how the DMAOL community reacts to some problems that will be posed by critics: isn’t marriage supposed to be between a man and a woman? “Nonsense”, says Mr. Ass whilst caressing his female Great Dane called Valeria, with whom he has been romantically involved since 2009; “It is clear that marriage is now, from a legal point of view, completely detached from every gender definition. The New York Legislative clearly states so. We only propose to go a little step further and to state that marriage is a union between loving beings. To deny us our right to love is to oppress our most elementary human rights; an expression of sheer, blind lovephobia”.
What about the consent? Isn’t consent necessary for a valid marriage? “It is as long as the law says so”, replies Mr. Ass. “A man and a woman were necessary too, but they aren’t anymore. As the recent example of New York shows, you only need to change the legal parameters to adequate them to the result you wish to obtain. Besides, if desired the consent can be either legally presumed until proof to the contrary, or ascertained with other means” [he goes “woof! woof!” and Valeria, the female Great Dane, enthusiastically joins him].
And what about the money? Are dogs, mules and other animals allowed to become heirs of their partners? [“spouses”, Mr. Ass corrects me somewhat peeved]
“This is possible, but not necessary”, answers Mr. Ass again. “Our non-human spouses could be given title to a patrimony administered by trustees, as it is the case now for human minors; at their death, the money would be distributed according to normal law of succession, unless the original donor has disposed otherwise. But we don’t insist on this; rather on the legal recognition of our right to love”.
In the end, says Mr. Ass, “we want to work to put an end to the endless prejudices of a culture based on the oppression of those who prefer alternative loving. This oppression is based on the supremacy of the strictest conformity to Judeo-Christian values that has damaged humanity for so many years. The recent legislation de-coupling social institutions from Christian values makes it not only perfectly possible, but socially imperative that the same criteria be applied to us. We only demand the right to love, and ask that our civil rights be respected”.
But what about harming the animal? Is this not going to be hurtful? “Hurtful? Ha! – laughs he – do you think that sodomy is a walk in the park? This hasn’t been an obstacle, has it?”
But do you really think that you will change the mind of the people? I ask Mr. Ass again. “In time, of course I think so”, he answers, “I am absolutely persuaded of it! Look at homosexuality! Only two generations ago, homosexuality was considered a disgusting perversion not even to be mentioned in front of children, and at the same level of being smart! Nowadays, children are taught in “sensitivity classes” about homosexuality, and are given books with homosexual penguins and dolphins!” I must admit that he has a point here. “And look at the churches! The Episcopalians have women priests, women bishops, even gay and lesbians bishops! Give them some time, and they will have alternatively loving priests and priestesses, bishops and bishopesses! Haven’t they always followed the evolution of the general mentality?” I reflect, and stay silent. He is unstoppable: “If someone had told you sixty years ago that in two generations the Episcopalians would have priestesses, bishopesses, and gay and lesbians everywhere, even in bishop’s positions, would you have believed him?”
I can’t contradict Mr. Ass here, either. “You see”, he continues now fully animated whilst Valeria, the female Great Dane, wags her tail, “just give us the right President, and we’ll even have a smart judge at the Supreme Court! Heck, who knows – he continues – perhaps we already have! There are so many smarts forced to remain in the closet because of society’s lovephobia! We calculate that we are at least 5% of the population. Julius Caesar, Dickens, Beethoven, Napoleon, Queen Victoria and Gandhi were certainly or very probably smart”.
“What you really need to understand”, says Mr. Ass now entirely animated, “is that you either follow religious principles, or you don’t. You can’t stop in the middle. Once you have decided that religious principles aren’t the foundation of civil legislation, who is to say what is right and what is wrong? The lovephobic prejudices against us is purely the result of a Judeo-Christian reflex, totally opposed to the rights and freedoms of our modern, inclusive society! How can you decide that the gay community should be included, and the smart community should be excluded? I know, some excuses can be found for us as they were found for the gay community. But in the end, it’s on the Judeo-Christian prejudices that they’ll be based.” I listen with interest. He is not deprived of logic. “Besides, we don’t think that real Christianity condemns alternative loving. Jesus is love!”.
“Our society is based on freedom, tolerance, inclusiveness, love, change, and doing no harm. We demand that you truly embrace these values. We harm no one, we do not want to take any right away from anyone, and we are accepting of any lifestyle. Who is more modern and democratic than us smarts?”
Interviewed about the matter, Mr Mario C. Uomo, the Governor of New York, has stated that “whilst the smart lifestyle is not one I would personally endorse, I fully understand the desire for equality of the DMAOL community”. He will not actively seek to promote legislation in that sense, but “if the state legislature finds that this can be done” he doesn’t feel that it is in his duties to “impose his conviction on those having different opinions”. Mr Uomo, who said that his Catholicism is “sincerely felt”, made nevertheless clear that he wishes the DMAOL community every success “in their fight for equality, human and animal rights”.
For the Poofington Post,
Laura L. Iberal