This is profoundly dangerous to us all. Because, not knowing us, they cannot understand where the limits are. They’ve been butting up near our maximum levels of tolerance for some time now. Sooner or later, one of them is going to exceed that boundary because he doesn’t even know it’s there, anymore.
Source: Leftist Hoaxes: A Failure to Understand the Right
Once upon a time we referred to the doctrines that originated with Mohammed by calling them Mohammedanism, just as we do with Confucianism and Manicheism. Now we call them Islam, “submission.” It is rather as if Muslims started calling Christianity by the English word “charity.”
If this were not about power, then all we should have to do is explain that we sometimes use the names of founders of sects in the terms thereof, and our interlocutors should then say, “Oh, I see; OK, no problem then.” But if they are not willing to do this, then their insistence that we change our parochial behavior to suit them, despite the fact that their objection to our customary practice makes no sense, is, precisely, an exercise of power. It is the linguistic equivalent of their insistence that we not walk our dogs in parks where they are enjoying themselves, or exercise our right of free speech by evangelizing on the street in the vicinity of their public gatherings, or install footbaths in all public restrooms. If this goes on, then at some point, logically, they will be insisting that our women wear the burka, so as not to offend their sensibilities. I mention this absurd result only to demonstrate the absurdity of the premise from which it sprang.…
The question then becomes: ought we to understand our language as the Muslims wrongly understand it, just to coddle their feelings? If we do, we are effectually submitting to them, and the submission is a type of jizya.
The very same thing is proceeding, along a different vector, with the feminization of English. E.g., eliminating “waiter” and “chairman” in favor of “waitperson” and “chair,” bowdlerizing Scripture, rewriting poems and hymns, changing quotations of eminent thinkers, on and on.…
I have duly renamed my Islamic links to Mohammedanism links and will use the spellings ‘Moslem’ and ‘Koran’ from now on.
Source: PC is Jizya
Not sure who’s more insane, this woman, or the government of Great Britain.
The woman, identified only at TT, has sued the Registrar General at the High Court so that she can be “recognized” as the child’s father, or “parent,” according to the Christian Institute.
There is a legal requirement that the mother of a child be listed on the child’s birth certificate as the mother.
But the woman, who already has used the law to change her designated sex to male, objects.
Source: Mom gives birth, then claims she’s actually father – WND
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. Smollett, two others in “active interviews” with Chicago police; Evidence of police “slow play” emerging. That story about …
A source familiar with the records provided by the Empire star states that Smollett downloaded his phone activity into a spreadsheet and then deleted certain phone calls before handing over the records. “He did the [detectives’] job for them because then they only had to focus on the numbers he deleted.”
Source: And Just Like That, The Smollett Story Begins to Unravel
What I found remarkable about the movie is something I notice whenever I watch old movies and that is the maturity. A movie about the cat and mouse between a male and female today will have at least half an hour of rutting and humping, along with some explosions and lots of vulgar language. The modern presentation of male-female relations is so crude, that porn makers of the past would have been offended. In the old days, the film maker and audience expected a more sophisticated portrayal of sexual relations.
Let that sink in: “The modern presentation of male-female relations is so crude, that porn makers of the past would have been offended.”
The last new movie I saw in the theater was The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe. That was in 2005. Before that it was The Fellowship of the Ring in 2001. As you can see, there’s very little worthwhile to see. Most of them are remakes of old classics (which almost always are worse than the original) or another childish installment of some comic book superhero movies. I outgrew comic book superheros around age eleven, along with comic books. And ALL of the movies these days preach liberal political correctness.
So, when I do watch a movie, it’s probably going to be one from the 1960s or before. There’s a lot of them I haven’t seen ever.
Source: Old Movies
Progressive tyranny has reached such an extreme in the moonbat dystopia formerly known as Great Britain that people are literally imprisoned for stating factual truth rather than politically preferred lies:
Tell the truth, go to jail? Hmmm. I wonder how that will work in court?
Court: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Me: Hell NO!!! You go to jail for that!
Source: British Woman Arrested for Referencing Factual Truth – Moonbattery
Seriously? Who even uses a term like ‘anal cleft’?
I don’t want to see you ‘anal cleft’ at all. OK, I might not mind if a young, attractive woman is wearing a thong at the beach… which is not what I consider a work environment. If you are at work showing your ‘cleft’ I’ll consider it sexual harassment and file a complaint.
How much “anal cleft” is one allowed to show while at work? That’s the question one Washington state court is trying to answer. A US Circuit Court of Appeals is reviewing an ongoing legal saga
A US Circuit Court of Appeals is reviewing an ongoing legal saga between bikini baristas and the city of Everett over the anatomical phrase “anal cleft” and whether dress codes imposed on businesses violate their civil rights.
Their civil rights? How about MY civil right to not see your nasty ‘anal’ anything? Showing that in public is rude, crude, and should be socially unacceptable. Have these people no self-respect?
Well, if you go around showing it off, don’t complain if some raghead camel-jockey member of the ‘religion of peace’ rapes you. You asked for it.
Source: Bikini baristas fight for their right to bare butts