Careercow Jonathan "Full" McIntosh / RadicalBytes - "Pop Culture Detective", Cucked hard by Anita Sarkeesian, King Snowflake

Superheroes:

Fil0DZ4.png

YpvFf55.png

2PS58mO.png

NXoqLd5.png


Power Fantasies:

6cVLLw4.png

bKjBOSe.png

c6i8suv.png

SoTNcFC.png
 
2: Voyager sucked ass and much like your girl Hillary, Janeway didn't live up to the black man that came before her.
.

Voyager is great. My favorite comedy with a villain protagonist.

But I'm a little disturbed by the fact that so many SJWs think it's the best thing ever. The writing was awful and inconsistent to the point where Kate Mulgrew herself said she was starting to play Janeway as if she had some serious undiagnosed mental condition.
 
Apparently telling raunchy jokes is a bad thing now.

It's not like there are women who like raunchy jokes, after all...

No, in McIntosh's view women are innocent virgins that must never soil themselves with something as mundane as sexuality. We must stay ~pure~ and ~untouched~ and keep ourselves away from anything sexual or assertive, or we will be ~tainted.

Or something. I think. Yeah, these "feminists's" infantilization and obsession with female purity is annoying and creepy as Hell, and McIntosh's bullshit perfectly shows how condescending it is.

I'm just gonna leave it to plebcomics again.

View attachment 196190

Never been a big fan of plebcomics, but hot damn that's the perfect answer to his BS. Tempted to spam him with tweets featuring it one of these days...
 
Oh, and oh no, a show from the 1960's has elements that offends our progressive millennial mindset! Boo fucking hoo. Star Trek was trying to push the envelope at the time. They had a black woman in a prominent position. They had a Japanese guy as their primary helmsman (though I'm not sure what the attitudes towards Japanese were at the time). They had a guy that looked semi-demonic as second in command. And they had a Russian guy in a time when there was very real concern from the audience that the Russians were going to nuke them.

60s attitudes towards the Japanese were swinging positive, but wasn't quite at the "acceptance" stage yet. People in prominent positions still remembered the huge amount of Anti-Japanese propaganda that was published. For example, just take a look at this piece, drawn by Dr. Seuss himself.

Ironically, Dr. Seuss also published this anti-racism cartoon, just for contrast.

Prejudice towards Japanese people were primarily a West Coast problem, however, Star Trek having a Japanese man as a prominent figure was quite bold. Additionally, George Takei himself did a lot of work to break Asian stereotypes-much has been made about how he learned how to fence in record time so he could fence on set instead of being handed a katana.

Basically, it was good we had Sulu. While Takei's going lolcow himself these days, Star Trek brought a vision of the future where people of all races and creeds could work together for the betterment of humanity. Say what you will, that it didn't go far enough or they should have had a non-white guy as the captain, but it did push the boundaries of what was acceptable, and that was great.
 
God forbid this guy talk about healthy, acceptable forms of masculinity once in a while.

That's a good point. What's "healthy" masculinity, to these people? Is any violence that a man commits "toxic"? They go on and on about "toxic masculinity", is there a good healthy masculinity or is it all bad? Define your shit, people!
 
God forbid this guy talk about healthy, acceptable forms of masculinity once in a while.
That would imply that he believes such a thing exists. In addition to being a humorless sack of shit devoid of all possibility for deriving joy in anything, he's a greasy manlet lacking much in the way of positive masculinity.

Almost 70 years ago now, C.S. Lewis had something to say of this ilk (and why you keep them away from any actual meaningful power):

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals."

Thankfully for us McCuckintosh is only a Twitter tyrant, trying to cure the world of "toxic masculinity" twenty tweets at a time. The humorless hellscape gets confined to his timeline, and will hopefully remain there evermore.
 
That's a good point. What's "healthy" masculinity, to these people? Is any violence that a man commits "toxic"? They go on and on about "toxic masculinity", is there a good healthy masculinity or is it all bad? Define your shit, people!
Definitions are the enemy of people like Josh. You can't hold them accountable for their dumb shit when they can fall back on some weak alternate meaning.
 
Back