RULES

​

https://preview.redd.it/5et7evbqktd91.png?width=1179&format=png&auto=webp&s=1936ffc23825cb5546d51bcead786eb12ab6d6e6

This subreddit was originally created by RalphRetort to promote his own show. I will now be listing the mods as of 2022. He was banned repeatedly by Reddit for shilling himself. As of April 2022, the only active moderator was GhostLeviathan. He added me (AstaSilva), and now I'm here to help clean up this sub. The SJW fad is over and done with, so this sub is mainly going to be making fun of buzzfeed articles and little else X)

I was on r/Batman and I was arguing with someone that it’s wrong to race/gender swap characters, and that Hollywood needs to stop that stupid shit. The person I was talking to got mad and started yelling that I’m a racist. Even though I made it clear that I am against swapping anyone. This caused me to be banned from commenting anymore. So I asked the mods to unban me and told them what exactly I said, and they accused me of saying that I was against Hollywood hiring black actors( I never once said that. They fucking lied) and then muted me so I couldn’t even defend myself. So I left that fucking group and I suggest anyone else to do the same. Bunch of damn lefties nut jobs, that cannot stand for someone to have a different opinion.

If you put anything that excludes minorities(not the majority), they will delete your post. I also got banned because SpaceHusband misconstrued my words to say I was ban evading and threatened to delete my account. I did not admit to that or have ever done that on reddit. I merely mocked his attempt to threaten me with a banning. Because her, ban evasion is super easy. I will admit I was rude to him, but fuckin' SJWs and their bullshit pisses me off.

Why can men Not fantasy about woman, But woman can? (Like The Rob Liefiled. thing)
Why do You care about "Being fit" But then eat a shit loads of food?
Why do You girls get to, be "The right gender" When, EQUALITY is one of your TOP priority's!
How come we can't think about, Hot anime girls but ya'll give a fuck about us... When ya'll do the same damn thing... (Unrealistic... Body's and shit) Like for real why?

Recently I got into an argument with a few dumb fucks people on the topic of racism. Now, I know what you're thinking, darling reader, and no, I wasn't called racist in Greggs, lads. Rather, this discussion was on the definition of racism; and it's one I've heard many times before and have gotten so sick of that I decided to rant about it like I do with everything else that gives me the slightest inconvenience. No need to brace yourselves; it's such a common saying that I'm sure you've heard it before: “Racism equals power plus privilege” as it was described to me by a group of college girls who have very good relationships with their fathers, I’m sure.

(On the chance you haven’t heard it before, that’s likely for a very good reason; because I only learned in the editing of this document that it is actually “Power + Prejudice = Racism”, so perhaps my essay is now bunk, but I’m petty, so I don’t care)

I like that it's put into a little equation, that's the only thing I like about it: R = P+P. Ironic that they did though seeing as how it's usually men who excel in mathematics and equations and it's ever so plainly clear that women are their dominant audience. HEYO.

​

Anyways, the biggest issue I have with the equation is that it doesn't make sense, and here I get to explaining why:

Privilege, and Power are not static, they are contextual. A dance instructor has power whilst he is teaching his class and lacks it when he's getting chewed out by his parents for still living at home and suffers horrible prejudice at the hands of The Boomers. Likewise, privilege is contextual, yes, it is, even if someone is born into a rich family, the moment they find themselves in a ghetto and are specifically targeted because of this fact, they have less privilege than the person born in the ghetto who, by the nature of knowing how to dress and act, avoids being roughed up. To put this in a more modern context (and by modern I mean: right now): I, as a white male, lack privilege when trying to talk about how privilege + power is stupid for any empirical measurement in comparison to a black woman, who's word is taken at greater weight and value for no other reason than the fact that she is a black person and I am seen as the dumb white boi; and no amount of crime statistics saves my pride when I'm being laughed out of the class.

In fact, power and privilege are so contextual that they don't even change based on the situation, but the very microcosm within a single interaction. Let me demonstrate: A teacher simultaneously wields and lacks power over a student, for he has deemed authority over the student and can command them within reasonable limits, but cannot physically force the student to do much of anything without getting in trouble; and likewise the student lacks power in authority over the teacher, yet he can punch the teacher in the face if he so chooses and would face a slap on the wrist in terms of legal repercussions whilst if the teacher did so, he would have to be very careful about dropping any soap for the next 5-10 years.

A child lacks power over an adult, as it is the adult that is the expected authority, but if the child is cunning and traumatized enough, they can use the idea of being sexually abused as leverage to get the adult to do what they want, because they have the privilege of people believing them over the big evil maybe aggressor. Where does this lie on the scale of power? Because if you ask me, the power to be able to ruin someone's life on a whim is far greater than the power of authority to tell someone no dessert before dinner time.

​

I hope you see what I mean now when I remark that both power and privilege, however constant they may first appear, are very fluid and constantly in a state of flux, a muddled grey area where a single instance, a motion, a slip of the tongue, can change the dynamics radically; and if you are not seeing it, allow me to demonstrate a bit further because oh goodie I do love sounding ever so smart.

Imagine a scenario where I am walking down the street, minding my own business (yes, really) whereupon I am accosted by a group of black men for no reason. Remember, this is purely hypothetical. Imagine these men start beating me, mercilessly, until I am black and blue and have teeth knocked out and bones broken, and my wallet stolen, all the good stuff. Imagine they run off laughing, referring to me in crude humor and language. Remember, this is just a fun little exercise. Now, suppose all this was filmed and I took all these men to court to try them for assault, battery, being black, the works. It's all recorded on footage, open and shut case, but in the heat of the moment I shout racist expletives at them. The case would be instantly dropped. I would be seen as a cruel, terrible aggressor who harassed poor African-American boys no older than eight. Socially, I would be completely damned, as I walked home and found people chanting outside my house about what a horrible racist I am; going back home earlier than expected the next day after finding I had been fired for my job because they no longer want to associate with me. Friends and family would become guilty by association, while strangers would whisper in passing about my evil, vile wickedness that ought to have been purged with the beating.

Is this not black privilege? The idea that they could legitimately bring harm to someone only to be let off when it is revealed that the victim has some racist tendencies? Oh, and for those of you who would shake me at the collar and tell me that such a thing is pure fancy, I would like to direct you to an incident in Louisville where Judge Olu Stevens sentenced a black man, Gregory Wallace, to five years' probation for the crimes burglary and robbery with a handgun; breaking into the housee while the family, including their 5 year old daughter, was still at home. The daughter in question was noted to become traumatized after the incident, developing a phobia of black men; this was told to the judge, who was also black; and in the final reading of the case and incident, the judge made many negative remarks, not on the behaviour of the criminal, but of the family of the little girl for “allowing these racist tendencies to develop”. He insists that the girls' phobia had no weight in his ruling but...come on now... For reference, though take this with a grain of salt as I am no law student, the average jail time for armed robbery is 15 years, nigh ¾ of which must be served before probation is even a consideration. Surely, if black folk suffer due to being black in the legal system through systematic oppression, then...shouldn't he have gotten a much harsher sentence, than a clearly much lighter one? Likewise, since it is scientifically proven that people tend to be favourably bias to members of their own inner group, is it not a privilege for the criminal to have been born black through pure happenstance, since the man who judged him also happened to be black?

​

In fact, now that we're on the subject, it seems like an awfully great time to be black. Black-Only dating sites, cultural movements, forms of entertainment, “culture” that nobody else is allowed to participate in, an entire myriad of scholarships, diversity-quotas in the job market, lower standards of qualification, and even a special subset of government budget set aside specifically to give to black folk who need help paying their bills. No I'm not kidding, look it up. This is on top of social privileges: ideas equating blacks with 'noble savages', lower standards on what's considered noteworthy and successful (such as being congratulated for reading), frequent excuses made for the behaviour of young black men who fall into bad crowds and black women who end up being single mothers, and even excuses made for mass disruption in riots; having it be said that “they were acting out their anger against an unjust system who acquitted a racist and murderer”. I honestly have to wonder how angry someone must be before they are justified in looting, but that's just a tiny musing, no need to pay attention.

Of course, all this, all these benefits of blackness can be excused by the age-old reasoning that because slavery occurred at all and because institutional racism was openly accepted as the status quo not that far back, it is completely justified that all these benefits are simply given to make up for it, and on the contrary even MORE must be given to make up for it. It's true, slavery was awful, as was institutional racism, so it makes sense that there would be some hard feelings over it, yet I can't help but raise an eyebrow when every time I mention that whites were also responsible for abolishing slavery and institutional racism, and thus should get at least some deductions on the reparations they owe, someone always chimes in with a scoff “What are you talking about? You can't take responsibility for things you personally didn't even do”. Big Think™.

​

This is where my conspirator’s mindset kicks in, for I can't shake the feeling that all this is somehow orchestrated by them in an attempt to undermine western society. You never see Turks asked for reparations for slavery, you never see Italians asked for reparations for slavery, you never see Arabs asked for reparations for slavery (despite the fact that the Arab slave trade was far more brutal, transported far more slaves, and resulted in far more death and misery for the captives), and there's never any end to it either, there's never this end goal, end year date where suddenly its paid off, or an accumulation of resources where after enough is given it is considered fair; it's taught that it will always be a stain that must always be paid off, but isn't that in itself a form of privilege now? After-all, I expect that if trends continue, even in 100 years we'll still be being told we must pay reparations for past crimes, what of 200, 1000? Do you mean to tell me that Western Nations and Western Nations alone were so evil, so vile, so devilish (despite the objectively harsher conditions in every non-white country that everyone conveniently glosses over along with the fact that slavery was practiced in non-western nations at all) that even in one thousand years, poor blacks will still be suffering micro-oppressions by our evil, white hands? And that, that alone, is reason enough that I have to give away 1/3 of my paycheck to them? Surely, SURELY, it is an absolutely amazing privilege to be given wealth, status, and opportunity wherever you go simply by the colour of your skin. In fact, a stark couple generations ago, such a thing was already the norm for non-immigrant Whites and, fancy fancy, we refer to that as the Jim Crow era, which is synonymous with...racism....hmmm...Expanded Thought Trademark.

​

At long last this culminates perfectly into my end point: If racism truly is power + privilege (or even power + prejudice) then I can call Obama all sorts of awful, vile, KKK approved things and nobody can do a damn thing. Hear me out: Obama, despite being black, was born into privilege. Though not 'wealthy' by regular standards, he attended private schools, his parents were well educated, and he had the means to travel frequently; far wealthier than I or my family was at such an age. Likewise, even as a former President, but especially when he was one, he possessed far more power than I could even wish for; the disparity between his social and political weight and abilities and mine were as vast as the distance between our planet and Pluto. Regardless of how you feel about the matter, former President Barrack Obama clearly has more power and privilege than I myself do, both in youth, and especially now, therefore I should be unable to be racist toward him. There is nothing I can do or say that would ever affect him in any meaningful way, and no amount of bad words or fists shaken at the sun will sway him or any of his vast gains. His power and privilege vastly outweighs anything I am capable of, and so I can call him whatever I please...right? Or does that seem off to you. It may especially seem off to say that he can very well be racist against me, and that the slightest transgression he may make against my person carries far more weight considering at any given time he has someone on speed dial who could easily snipe me out should he so see fit. All this stands so long as you actually see it that way, for I know there will be one, at least one, just one, stupid motherfucker who actually insists that by the fact of my white skin and nothing more, I still, for whatever stupid dumb fuck reason their mental gymnastics can pull up from the great abyss of retardation that rests within their soul, have more power and privilege than a FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE MOST POWERFUL NATION ON THE PLANET.

​

These people are lost, pay no attention to them.

​

It's difficult coming up with a racist joke for this one because, honestly, I have seen both black and white folk espouse these types of views insisting that whites are somehow simultaneously morally corroded and worse than every black person ever and also that we have some godlike superpowers or something that sear the poor ethnic folk with our very presence seeing as how many micro-aggressions one can feel at any given moment. Frankly, I can't fault either of them: If I were black, I would be so into screaming this very thing into a megaphone for the sake of getting more riches and as a white person I understand self hatred is just so in right now. So instead I will insult both groups by saying that when the flood waters rise as they inevitably will, the apologist white folk will drown from being at shin level from all the groveling and the megaphone-wielding black folk will drown regardless because they can't swim.

​

There was no obvious spot to include this bit but I like it so much I'm just going to do it here; it's my essay, I can do what I want with it, fuck you.

Anyway:

Thought Experiment: 4 people, labelled A. B. C. and D.

A is a white male, young, asexual, in college (no scholarships), and is working two jobs. He is poor. He is very intelligent, the smartest of the four, and suffers from trauma and mental disorders due to an accident at a young age that left him an orphan. He is generally unhappy and feels terrible most days.

B is an asian male, elderly, heterosexual, not in education but has multiple degrees, and is not working. He is homeless by choice, the most destitute of the four. He is very intelligent and suffers from nothing but a drug addiction. He was born into an extremely wealthy and well-connected family but does not return to them for personal reasons (though they would accept him and he knows this). Despite this, he is neither happy nor unhappy, and considers his life one worth living

C is a white woman, middle aged, bisexual, high school educated and no intention of anything beyond, she has average intelligence. She works from home in a job she enjoys and pays well. Upper-middle class, she is married to the love of her life and has two children, but unfortunately is bound to a wheelchair and has zero use of her lower body. Her poor husband, eh? Despite her disability, she considers her life a very good one with very few issues.

D is a black woman, young, lesbian, in college, but despite this she is quite dull. She does not work, as she comes from an extremely affluent and well-connected family. She goes to college purely for the fun of it with zero intention on working, as she has no need to. She suffers from nothing and wants for nothing, the happiest of the four.

Rated from top to bottom, who is the MOST privileged to LEAST privileged? If you give this same test to your cohorts without communicating your own answers or reasonings, you will quickly find that your answers differ, as there are no objective measurements for what level of oppression or suffering is worse than any other.

​

Do you see now why the argument that racism is power + privilege is so foolish now? How many calculations you must do in your head at any given moment? Who is the least privileged I wonder? Who trumps who in the Oppression Olympics? White women and Black Men seem to be on equal standing, but what of a Transgender F-to-M, does their now gained passing male privilege counter the privilege lost from being transgender? Where do West-Indians stand? Considering that blacks were taken here forcefully but their land was outright invaded? Do Asians also suffer from the curse of not being white? Or do their frequent displays of intellect and generally positive stereotypes counteract this, despite still being inherently racist? See, this is all so confusing, all so tiresome, I'd much rather just call myself a bigoted idiot for saying hurtful things about Mr.Obama regarding his race, who I'm sure is very nice man in person, and call it a day. I'd prefer the world make sense and we all agree that racism is just someone being a jackass to someone else over their race, and even if their jackassness is generally positive, it's still in poor taste. I wish this was universally recognized for simplicity is the closest to efficiency, and efficiency is the closest thing we have to perfection; but I also recognize that for as long as there is something to be gained from raving about how oppressed you feel, there will always be folks who are ever so awfully inclined to run away with that mindset all the way to the bank.

​

Yet hark, for now that I've made my point, I've yet another thing to attack (as always. I'm a very aggressive bloke, you see), and that is.... why? WHY did this argument even come about in the first place? That minorities or disenfranchised peoples cannot be racist? It's noteworthy that in all the arguments I've seen in favour of this notion, none of these people claim that minorities are incapable of exhibiting the traits associated with racism, things like bigotry, prejudice, or bias; no, their argument is simply that we shouldn't 'call' it racist, we should call it something else when they demonstrate it in order to accent the impotence of it...but why? There's no need to; after-all, we already have a word for what they're describing: “Powerlessness”. In fact, you could make this argument make a lot more sense simply by switching out a few words; let's see here... Where it was “Minorities can be bigoted, but they cannot be racist” it becomes “Minorities can be racist, but they are powerless in acting on it” (which, for the record, is also false. The meer rumor of racism or sexism in the workplace is enough to have someone fired from their job before the case is even cleared. But hey, at least it seems more sensible to the common folk). Yet, they are not happy with this...the meaning between their phrase and my rephrasing is the exact same, but they will reject it outright...why? Because mine includes the idea that minorities can be racist, and theirs cannot; so, we're just arguing semantics! That seems odd. Why all this trouble over a bit of wordplay? See, this gets my wheels turning oh so much. What is so important about the word 'racism' itself that it needs be scrubbed clean of even any attempt to associate it with a minority? Hmmm. I cannot help but wonder if it is all deeper than it first appears.

What image comes to your mind when you hear the word “Bigot”? Maybe someone older, someone shaking their head back and forth, someone ignorant, refusing to listen, someone 'stuck in the old ways', someone with wrong opinions...but...do you imagine this person being outwardly harmful? I don't. I just imagine an old person who hates gay folk, but other than vitriol, lacking any form of capacity to harm. What about “Prejudice”? What do you imagine then? Maybe a person, or groups of people, who sneer at passersby who don't look like them? People who clutch their purses tightly to them when someone of a certain uncommon complexion walks by? This is what I imagine, the connotation, just someone a bit afraid, who feels nervous and anxious around the unknown peoples they may face in this ever-diverse world. Yet still, not someone actively harmful. Even “Bias”, easily the worst connotation of the three, for to me it brings up images of a boss hiring someone purely on preference rather than skill, yet this too is only a 'locking out' of opportunity; which, while indeed harmful, is only passively so, perhaps even only meekly. The thing in common with all these words, all these connotations, all they bring to mind, is someone angry, fearful, or corrupt, but not violent or sadistic in and of itself... If I said “I am bias toward members of my own race”, it brings fourth an entirely different image than if I said “I am a racist”; if I said “I am bigoted toward these new social fads and sexual awakenings” it's completely different than “I am a homophobe”; if I said “I am prejudice against members of the opposite sex” it's completely different than “I am a sexist”, wherein the former words are also associated with ignorance, stupidity, close-mindedness, all negative attributes to be sure, but nothing that cannot be altered or avoided, it is so much different if I say the latter words, associated with violence, with intentional harm, with going out of my way to be cruel to those that only through ill fortune have earned my disfavour; and I think, my darling readers, this is the end goal. To be bias is to be a dickhead. To be prejudice is to be an asshole. To be bigoted is to be stupid. To be racist is to join a lynch mob. Your grandmother who bakes cookies and dislikes blacks is a bigot, the white hooded man who wants to kill you is a racist.

I cannot help but feel that all of this is just some undercurrent, some type of chess play, wherein the people who originally thought it up were desperately trying to advocate for the idea that a minorities' prejudice (though especially a black persons') is harmless, while a white persons' prejudice is deadly.

​

Suddenly it makes a lot more sense, doesn't it? Why they are trying so hard to tie the word 'racist' to anything that could feasibly represent The Big Bad Wolf, and this despite the fact that any person of average brain function could already deduce that power over others was not required in order to be an active harm to those around you.

It is a role set up specifically for a very certain type of villain, and it all falls into place. The dreaded white man, who used to be so strong, so influential, is now just the boogeyman who must be erased for everything to be okay. Any evil in the world, regardless of who commits it, has blame placed solely on the shoulders of the whites: The state of Africa? All white people's fault. Muslim Extremists? Those damn white people. Environmental issues? The White Man started it! Poor race relations between people of different cultures? It's the White Media's doing! This and no amount of evidence to the contrary will ever be enough. Why? Because that's the 'White Man's' evidence, that's all phooey, smoke and mirrors; but hark and know that anything good the White Man does is not to be attributed to them either. Abolishing slavery? Blacks rose up and they were forced to. Americans donating more money, time, and resources than any other nation on the planet? Those are reparations, dues owed (and they will always owe more). Even common inventions are often claimed to be the work of another culture's that the White Man just stole. The White Man is the villain, and thus he cannot do anything right. The White Man leaves nations and neighbourhoods they formerly stayed in? That's 'White Flight' and it must be demonized. Ah, but the White Man moving in? That's 'Gentrification' and must be demonized. The White Man cannot partake in any culture other than his own, for that's just 'Cultural Appropriation', and it is wrong, but it is also wrong for them to isolate their culture, for then they are simply 'Non-Inclusive', and must be chastised. Does the White Man 'not see colour'? Of course he does, who does he think he's fooling, he's the villain, lying, or even worse! Ignoring racism and micro-aggressions. But if the White Man DOES see colour...then they're just a racist. They're a racist. A racist. They must suffer suffer suffer while they pay pay pay, they must whip themselves and bend over backwards and hire folks for their diversity, and only date outside of their race because we wouldn't want the evil whites breeding (but also not fetishizing the poor poor darling minorities), they must never ever attribute any wrong done to him or ANYONE else by a minority as the fault of anyone but himself; only the white man, forever the white man, is accountable for the actions of themselves and everyone else on the planet, because, I mean, what kind of idiot honestly believes that we should judge people by the content of their character rather than the colour of their skin?