Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

The Wikipedia article for Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, AKA teenageers trooning out because all of their friends were encouraged to do so by psychos on Tiktok, redirects to Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria. It's almost entirely an attack on the academic article which originated the term. A glance at the citations shows that what has been written about it is far less lopsided than what the article itself presents, but some of Wikipdia's tricksiest writers worked hard to make it seem like no one except a few cranks in the wilderness thinks that ROGD might be real.

By the way, it's nice to be back on this site. TTD!
 
The world's largest military installation has been renamed (and Kiwi Farms didn't even notice): "Fort Hood's Fuck and Suck" is henceforth to be called "Fort Cavazos's Feed and Seed".

Who was John Bell Hood?

2005-2018 or so:
John Bell Hood (June 1[2] or June 29,[3] 1831 – August 30, 1879) was a Confederate general during the American Civil War. Hood had a reputation for bravery and aggressiveness that sometimes bordered on recklessness. Arguably one of the best brigade and division commanders in the Confederate States Army, Hood gradually became increasingly ineffective as he was promoted to lead larger, independent commands late in the war; his career and reputation were marred by his decisive defeats leading an army in the Atlanta Campaign and the Franklin–Nashville Campaign.

Now:
John Bell Hood (June 1[2] or June 29,[3] 1831 – August 30, 1879) was a Confederate general during the American Civil War. Hood's impetuosity led to high losses among his troops as he moved up in rank. Bruce Catton wrote that "the decision to replace Johnston with Hood was probably the single largest mistake that either government made during the war."
 
The world's largest military installation has been renamed (and Kiwi Farms didn't even notice): "Fort Hood's Fuck and Suck" is henceforth to be called "Fort Cavazos's Feed and Seed".

It gets quoted a lot, but at times like this it deserves repeating:
Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.
— George Orwell, 1984
(To stay on topic, what Wikipedia publishes on the Internet is alas part of the record.)

Note they couldn't simply choose, say, the most deserving Union leader. It had to be a Hispanic general. You know, because white people keep getting all the credit even though they hardly contributed anything to our wars.
 
Last edited:
I take it every Confederate officer down to the privates will be getting the WW2 Wehrmacht officer/tank ace treatment if feasible. I don't think any clique of Civil War buffs on WIkipedia will be able to fight them for long.
 
There will soon be a Civil War equivalent of K.e.coffman, maybe a mixed black-Jewish woman (such as an Alicia Garza), who will get to work purging all information about Confederate officers. Civil War buffs who meticulously looked up and documented obscure information about battles and their participants will object to their work being deleted, and be called racists who want to bring slavery back and banned. Beaming articles will be written in mainstream news about the great "work" being done by removing all this accurate content, and several issues of the Signpost will be devoted to glorifying this destructive editor.

Or perhaps it's already happening. Per above, it appears that John Bell Hood's article is being trimmed.
 
Last edited:
So the narrative changed from the war being that of bloody and needless, waged by rich plantation owners against Honest Abe to a bunch of backwards rednecks banding together, taking on the federal government, and causing a hell of a lot of damage whilst having nothing to sustain it for four years?

I'm actually kind of okay with this. Deo Vindice
 
So the narrative changed from the war being that of bloody and needless, waged by rich plantation owners against Honest Abe to a bunch of backwards rednecks banding together, taking on the federal government, and causing a hell of a lot of damage whilst having nothing to sustain it for four years?
It's more of the standard authoritarian discourse on opposition. The enemy is well organised, powerful, omnipresent and an existential threat to the very foundation of the regime. At the same time, it is discordant, weak, isolated, and easily defeated. It occupies both states at once.
 
American communists have a extreme fetish for the American Civil War, and especially with Reconstruction. They project modern politics onto it very, VERY hard. They worship the Union and white wash it as some sort of progressive beacon of hope and glory that was literally gonna lead us all to gay luxury space communism and the Confederates as all being the establishment and reactionaries and evil capitalists and so on and so forth.

It's why they are so desperate to destroy the legacy of the Confederacy. They see it as a prelude to their own revolution, so they need to get it done. It is why they refuse to allow it to have a nuanced discussion and explain how both sides were racist as all hell but the issue was about states rights to slavery and how to deal with it. When they speak of the hate they have of Dixie they are actually hating on the Yankees just as much, just through a lens.
 
American communists have a extreme fetish for the American Civil War, and especially with Reconstruction. They project modern politics onto it very, VERY hard. They worship the Union and white wash it as some sort of progressive beacon of hope and glory that was literally gonna lead us all to gay luxury space communism and the Confederates as all being the establishment and reactionaries and evil capitalists and so on and so forth.

It's why they are so desperate to destroy the legacy of the Confederacy. They see it as a prelude to their own revolution, so they need to get it done. It is why they refuse to allow it to have a nuanced discussion and explain how both sides were racist as all hell but the issue was about states rights to slavery and how to deal with it. When they speak of the hate they have of Dixie they are actually hating on the Yankees just as much, just through a lens.
Because progressives see it as part of the eternal march into the Superior Future. They treat it like a slider in a video game, where the more it was pushed in the past means the further left it can be pushed in the present. That's where they get the idea how great everything would be if not for those damn Southerners getting in the way of Reconstruction, and Reconstruction not going far enough. You also hear it a lot about the Nazis too, like I saw a post once where a guy was lamenting how we'd be "decades ahead" in LGBTQIA+ rights if only poor Magnus Hirschfeld wasn't persecuted by the Nazis.
 
Note they couldn't simply choose the most deserving Union leader. It had to be a Hispanic general. You know, because white people keep getting all the credit even though they hardly contributed anything to the war.
Somebody might read that and get the impression that Cavazos was a Union general. He died in 2017.

The 2021 Defense Authorization Act directed the removal of names that "honor or commemorate the Confederate States of America." A goal of The Naming Commission is to inspire service members from diverse communities by giving military facilities "proud new names that are rooted in their local communities and that honor American heroes whose valor, courage, and patriotism exemplify the very best of the United States military."[18]
Kind of weird how the bigoted white supremacist hegemony in Texas never renamed San Antonio, El Paso etc?
 
American communists have a extreme fetish for the American Civil War, and especially with Reconstruction. They project modern politics onto it very, VERY hard. They worship the Union and white wash it as some sort of progressive beacon of hope and glory that was literally gonna lead us all to gay luxury space communism and the Confederates as all being the establishment and reactionaries and evil capitalists and so on and so forth.
Anyone who knows anything about Reconstruction knows it was vile and corrupt beyond belief. And the shit Sherman did would have been classified as a war crime had it been done to anyone but the Confederacy.
 
It's why they are so desperate to destroy the legacy of the Confederacy.
What is the legacy of the Confederacy? Some battlefields, monuments erected by the sons of losers, and three constitutional amendments? Fans of Dixie are second only to blacks when it comes to making up fairy tales about their glorious past and deluding themselves about how much they matter today. We wuz officers an' gennlemen an' sheit.
 
What is the legacy of the Confederacy?
It has little to do with whatever the real legacy is, it has to do with the idea they have of it in their heads. It has to do with boiling the frog and using the pretext to push for a destruction of the old USA to birth a new commie USA.

Like I said: They see it as a catch-all for anyone not on board with Progress™️ and to push their shit. It's why they started with taking down confederate statues and are now busy scrubbing any mention of southerners and moving to attacking any US figure not pushing for Progress™️
 
Today's featured article is about two Victorian cross-dressing faggots of no historical significance whatsoever.

Apparently it was a major media circus 150 years ago. It makes sense it gets an article, but it's hypocritical beyond belief to have a blow by blow account of what happened when Nazi generals, aces, etc. either don't get articles or have it trimmed down to absolutely nothing.

That said, the article has some hilarious quotes if you take it out of context.
He also noted that both Boulton and Park had large penises and Boulton also had a scrotum "of inordinate length"; he said this was a result of their sodomy.
The anus was very much dilated, ... and dilatable to a very great extent. The rectum was large
According to Cohen, the work "provides a piquant complement to the other narratives of their lives, valuable both for radically shifting the perspective and for highlighting the tendentiousness of any report about 'sodomitical practices'."
 
Apparently it was a major media circus 150 years ago. It makes sense it gets an article, but it's hypocritical beyond belief to have a blow by blow account of what happened when Nazi generals, aces, etc. either don't get articles or have it trimmed down to absolutely nothing.

That said, the article has some hilarious quotes if you take it out of context.
My god, this is why Wikipedia is so sickening
 
Back