Tranny ‘Feminist’ Declares You Are ‘Discriminatory’ Not to Date Him/‘Her’

Posted on | December 14, 2016 | 4 Comments

Left: Justin Dennis in 2012. Right: Riley J. Dennis in 2015.

“Would you date a trans person? Honestly? . . . Well, if you said ‘no,’ I’m sorry, but that’s pretty discriminatory.”
— Riley J. Dennis, November 2016

Justin Dennis, a/k/a Riley J. Dennis, is a transgender activist who describes himself/“herself” as an “intersectional feminist” who is “also super queer (transfeminine lesbian to be specific).” Also, not coincidentally, Riley J. Dennis is a deranged totalitarian who doesn’t believe that other people have a right to their own opinions. Riley J. Dennis wants to tell you what to think, and even presumes to tell you who you are required to date. Your romantic preferences are wrong!

Here’s some news for Riley Dennis: Men and women are different.

No matter what they teach in college Gender Studies classes, the truth is still the truth, and the truth is men and women are different. Feminists can shriek all they want about “gender essentialism,” and lecture us from the Cliff Notes version of Judith Butler — the social construction of the gender binary within the heterosexual matrix — but they still can never change the fact that men and women are different.

Orwellian word games, in which other people’s personal preferences are condemned as illegitimate — racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. — are an attempt to impose a totalitarian regime on society. By invoking the concept of “civil rights” and accusing others of discrimination and prejudice, the “social justice” totalitarians seek to silence criticism, by implying that all opposition to their views is analogous Bull Connor unleashing police dogs against black people in Birmingham in 1963.

“Because we associate penises with men and vaginas with women” (gosh, I wonder why?) “some people think they could never date a trans man with a vagina or a trans woman with a penis.”

Riley J. Dennis majored in English at Whittier College, so perhaps he/“she” might contemplate the meaning of the word could, as opposed to the word would or the word should. We are not dealing with hypotheticals here, and thus the word “could” is inappropriate. You could do many things, conceivably, that you never actually would do. If you were to ask me what you should do, my advice would be to stay away from the kind of weirdos who go to Whittier College. But please, continue . . .

“But I think that people are more than their genitals” (as if this were a startling discovery) “I think that you could feel attraction to someone without knowing what’s between their legs.” Here again we have the word “could” used to suggest a hypothetical, and the word “attraction” is extracted from any practical context. What is the teleological purpose of “attraction”? Riley J. Dennis is talking about genitals — “what’s between their legs” — and therefore we might ask, why do genitals matter in terms of “attraction”? Do you really need me to explain this? Didn’t your mother give you the where-do-babies-come-from talk when you were a child?

Unlike kids at Whittier College, when I was in school, we not only studied grammar, logic and rhetoric, but we also studied science

Sex is about reproductive biology. Human beings are mammals, and any eighth-grader can figure out what that means in terms of sex.
Once you understand this scientific definition of sex, everything else is just details. Young people have to figure out how to attract potential partners, how to choose a good partner from among the prospective candidates, and how to negotiate a relationship that will lead toward lifelong monogamous pair-bonding — i.e., a successful marriage — because this is the ideal situation in which to raise children.

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply . . .”
— Genesis 1:27-28 (KJV)

This is very simple. Sex is about procreation, and therefore sexual success can be measured. There are winners — the ones who are blessed, in obedience to the divine commandment — and there are losers.

All of my ancestors were successful in this regard, or else I wouldn’t be here. As the descendant of a long line of sexual winners, therefore, I have inherited a legacy of winning, much the same way the University of Alabama football team has inherited its own winning legacy. Carrying on that victorious tradition, I’ve got six children of my own — the oldest three already married, with two grandchildren so far — and dare to hope that future generations of my descendants will continue this reproductive winning streak. Meanwhile, there’s the intersectional feminist . . .

“I’m very atheist. Like atheist with all of my soul. Except I don’t have a soul, so just like with all of my being. . . . I was raised Christian, and I don’t think I ever bought into it like 100 percent, but it was sometime around eighth grade when I decided like, for sure, I am an atheist.”
— Riley J. Dennis, May 2016

In eighth grade, Justin Dennis decided he was an atheist, and now, at age 23, Riley J. Dennis has decided “she” is a “transfeminine lesbian.” Gosh, it’s almost as if there were a “strong delusion” involved here.

Riley Dennis accuses those who disagree with him/“her” of “reducing people to their genitals” — you’re guilty of an ignorant prejudice if you don’t want to date a “woman” with XY chromosomes and a penis, you see. Perhaps the best reply to such an accusation is, “So what?”

How is your “transphobic” prejudice different from, or worse than, Riley J. Dennis’s blatant prejudice against normal people? Riley J. Dennis is abnormal, and expects the rest of us to tolerate his/“her” preference for female clothing and effeminate mannerisms. Most of us do grant such tolerance, so long as these weirdos stay away from our children. If you want to live your life like an extra from the cast of The Rocky Horror Picture Show, you are free to move to San Francisco and let your freak flag fly. And I’ll keep my kids 2,500 miles away from San Francisco.

America is a free country, see? “Riley J. Dennis is a polyamorous, atheist, gender non-binary transwoman . . . educating people on the nuances of gender, sexuality, and intersectional feminism,” and I am a Christian conservative father of six who says Riley J. Dennis is crazy.

Under the First Amendment of the Constitution, I have the right to say that Riley J. Dennis is crazy, and I also have the right to tell you that Riley J. Dennis is a selfish liar, promoting a false concept of “discrimination” for his/“her” personal gain. Riley J. Dennis hopes to get rich selling “intersectional feminism” like Colonel Sanders got rich selling fried chicken. Feminism is being sold as a commodity, and these ideological vendors do not work for free. Riley J. Dennis claims to be an atheist, but he/“she” is in fact a fanatical member of a quasi-religious cult.

Why do devotees of the “intersectional feminist” cult make these false accusations of “discrimination” against their critics? For the same reason that the pagan silversmith Demetrius slandered the early Christians, provoking a famous riot: “Great is Diana of the Ephesians!”

Because their livelihood depends on public acceptance of feminism — there are jobs to be had and money to be made by promoting this ideology — the cult leaders preach to their followers that anyone who criticizes feminism is a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot. Therefore, feminists have succeeded in banishing critics from university campuses, which function as temple shrines of the feminist cult.

This is why feminists tried to shout down K.C. Johnson at Ohio University. This is why feminists called in a bomb threat to a journalism conference where Milo Yiannopoulos was scheduled to speak. Feminists cannot exercise total control unless they can silence their critics, which is how feminists have seized control of academia.

Why does Riley J. Dennis believe he/“she” has the authority to condemn other people’s romantic attractions as “discrimination”? Because he/“she” is a recent graduate of Whittier College where the annual tuition is $44,574, plus $12,902 room and board, and a Special Snowflake™ who attends that kind of private liberal arts college is not accustomed to hearing the word “no.” For $57,476 a year, whatever the Special Snowflake™ wants, the Special Snowflake™ gets. The faculty at Whittier College kowtow to their precious little darlings, and after four years of being pampered, these impudent young brats consider themselves qualified to lecture the rest of us about . . . Well, everything.

Riley J. Dennis, Class of 2015, is an expert, “educating people on the nuances of gender, sexuality, and intersectional feminism,” and the rest of us are expected to sit silently while he/“she” educates us. Riley J. Dennis claims to be “a strong believer in equal rights for everyone” — except anyone who disagrees with him/“her.” Nobody has a right to disagree with Riley J. Dennis. To feminist totalitarians like Riley J. Dennis, disagreement is “hate speech” and criticism is “harassment.” If you don’t want to date Riley J. Dennis, that’s “discrimination.”

Yes, Riley J. Dennis made a video called “How to Date a Feminist,” because obviously everybody wants to do that, right? I mean, right?

By the way, did I mention that Riley J. Dennis is a “pacifist . . . socialist, anti-capitalist” who voted for Hillary Clinton? Did I mention that Riley J. Dennis hates all 62 million Americans who voted for Donald Trump?

Don’t “normalize” voting Republican, says Riley J. Dennis. Instead, he/“she” wants you to “normalize” weirdos like him/“her.”

Remember: He/“she” is an atheist, and doesn’t have a soul.

My 2017 Prediction: Heteronormative Patriarchy Will Continue to Dominate the World, Just Like It Has for the Past 7,000 Years. #tcot

— The Patriarch Tree (@PatriarchTree) December 15, 2016

Category: Gays, Sex Trouble

In The Mailbox: 12.13.16

Posted on | December 13, 2016 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
Dennis Prager: On Men Viewing Women As Sex Objects
EBL: Keith Olbermann Loses It (Again)
Twitchy: Texans Pack School Board Meeting After District Officials Triggered By A Charlie Brown Christmas Poster
Louder With Crowder: “Safe And Rare?” Huge List of Abortion Clinic Health Violations Proves Otherwise

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Have You Taken The Ku Klux Klan Rafting?
American Power: Katherine Cramer’s The Politics of Resentment
American Thinker: The Big Lie – Russia Stole The Election
Animal Magnetism: Animal’s Daily News
BLACKFIVE: The Seventh Plague by James Rollins
Da Tech Guy: Christopher Harper – No Student Loan Bailout!
Don Surber: President Trump Wins Another News Cycle – Kanye Dig It?
Dustbury: Her Swiftness
Jammie Wearing Fools: America’s Most Badass Sheriff Wins Congressional Runoff
Joe For America: Obama Crushes Conspiracy – No Evidence That Russia Tampered With Election Votes
JustOneMinute: Not To Say “Merry Christmas”, But…
Power Line: Two More Good Trump Appointments
Shark Tank: FL Gov Scott Travels To Washington To Discuss Repealing Obamacare
Shot In The Dark: I Have Seen The Future…
STUMP: Chicago Public Schools – Bonds, Budgets, And Tax Bites
The Geller Report: France’s No-Go Zones
The Jawa Report: Sandcrawler PSA – PEOTUS Priapism, also, UN Fires Wonder Woman For Failing To Feel Boob Shame
The Political Hat: Trans-Medicine
This Ain’t Hell: 7th Division Heading For Afghanistan, also, Detroit Registers More Votes Than Voters
Weasel Zippers: Italian Priest Cancels Nativity Scene Because It Could Offend Muslims, also, Trump Selects MT Rep Ryan Zinke For Interior, Former TX Gov Rick Perry For Energy
Megan McArdle: Sears Transformed America. It Deserves To Die With Dignity.
Mark Steyn: Silent Night

Today’s Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
Shop Amazon Devices – Fire tablet only $39.99

Category: Linkagery

Never Argue With a Feminist

Posted on | December 13, 2016 | 2 Comments

Beware of pretty faces that you find.
A pretty face can hide an evil mind . . .
Oh, don’t you let you let the wrong word slip
While kissing persuasive lips.
Odds are you won’t live to see tomorrow.
— Johnny Rivers, “Secret Agent Man,” 1966

My blog buddy The Political Hat has taken to posting some of my articles on radical feminism to Reddit’s “Men’s Rights” forum. As I have sometimes remarked, I am not a men’s rights activist (MRA) because, as a conservative, I do not believe in the idea of group “rights.”

We have no more rights than we are willing to die defending. All your rights under the Constitution — including your First Amendment rights to free speech and freedom of religion — are ultimately dependent on your Second Amendment right to defend yourself against anyone who would wrongfully deprive you of your life, liberty or property.

Therefore, to speak of “rights” in terms of identity groups is to incite hostility between these groups, an invitation to the Hobbesian nightmare of anarchy and civil war — bellum omnium contra omnes, the war of all against all — and the destruction of civilization:

Hereby it is manifest that during the time men live without a common Power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called War; and such a war as is of every man against every man. . . . In such condition there is no place for Industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no Navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continual Fear, and danger of violent death; And the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

Feminism Is a Totalitarian Movement to Destroy Civilization as We Know It, and the feminist’s destructive purposes make her an enemy of everyone who values the benefits of civil society, especially including what Jefferson called “the pursuit of happiness.” Feminists are as much anti-happiness as they are anti-male, anti-capitalist and anti-Christian.

When you understand what feminism actually is, you understand why I say, never argue with a feminist. Simply quote them, and the evil of their ideology should be self-evident to every intelligent person. Consider the case of lesbian feminist Hannah Rose McShane.

She was voted “Outstanding Student” in the Gender and Sexuality Studies program at Georgia State University. How can one “argue” with her total hatred of heterosexual men (“cishet white boy tears”)? If a lesbian feminist asserts that “men are trash,” what can you say in reply? Hatred is an emotion, and not subject to factual dispute. America is a free country, and Hannah Rose McShane is therefore free to hate men. All I did was to quote her (e.g., “F**k the patriarchy”) in order to demonstrate the anti-male hate propaganda being taught by her professors at Georgia State University, where Ms. Shane was hired as a student assistant. The taxpayers and legislators of Georgia may wish to investigate why a state university is promoting “Lesbian and queer organizing . . . feminist and queer theory,” to quote one of Ms. McShane’s professors, but that’s up to them. My job is merely to research and document the facts.

About 15 hours work went into that carefully researched article, and when it was posted to Reddit by The Political Hat, the first commenter said, “Just another radicalised feminist. It’s not even worth trying to debate these sorts of people with sound reasoning, facts, and logic. All you’ll get back is abuse.” To which another commenter replied: “No do it, debate them, but make sure other people are watching. Drag them into the light.” As I say, however, there is no point debating feminists. You can’t argue with hate, which is what feminism is.

Documenting this hatred requires research. Think how many hours went into documenting what is being taught for $63,550 a year at Swarthmore, which has an entire department devoted to analyzing “the social relations of power” and offering “feminist critiques of biology,” staffed by professors who are experts in “heteropatriarchal language” and “gender non-conformity and sexual dissidence.”

You cannot argue with these people — they are clearly beyond the reach of rational discourse — but you can expose them:

What bothers me is how, when we are engaged in a war of ideas, so many people continue to be deceived by appearances. Whenever I blog about feminism, this attracts comments from men who disparage the looks of women like Andrea Dworkin — “ugly fat man-hating dyke,” etc. — rather than engaging with the monstrous ideology such women promoted. . . .
For more than two years, I’ve been researching radical feminism . . . to demonstrate what feminism really is. People keep laughing, as if no one could possibly believe such things, and yet this anti-male/anti-heterosexual hate propaganda is promoted in “10,000 courses teaching over 90,000 students at 700 colleges and universities across the nation.” What will happen when, in 10 or 15 years, the alumnae of these Women’s Studies are indoctrinating the next generation of young fools? And what will opponents say when the man-hating dykes are not so fat and ugly? . . .

You can read the rest of that at The Patriarch Tree. The problem posed by feminists who put a pretty face on this ugly ideology is that young men are not trained to beware that “a pretty face can hide an evil mind.” This is also why young men so often suffer romantic misfortune.

Ask yourself, what was James Bond’s job? He was an intelligence operative, whose most basic task was gathering information. One must apply one’s self diligently to preparing for the mission:

Luck is the intersection of preparation and opportunity, as they say, and the Boy Scout motto “Be Prepared” is the secret to being lucky in love. . . .
When people tell me how lucky I am to have such a wonderful wife, I smile and say: “Luck? No, it was skill.” The difference between talent and skill is that skill may be improved by practice. Work hard at something — 10,000 hours, as Malcolm Gladwell said — and you are certain to improve your skill. . . .

Read the rest of that, too.

Category: Sex Trouble

Late Night With In The Mailbox: 12.12.16

Posted on | December 13, 2016 | 1 Comment

— compiled by Wombat-socho

OVER THE TRANSOM
Battleswarm Blog: Shoe0nHead – “Internalized Misogyny”
Proof Positive: A Pre-Inaugural Invocation
EBL: Are We Really Supposed To Take This McMuffin Fellow Seriously?
Twitchy: Federal Judge Denies CO Electors’ Suit To Unbind Votes; Washington Electors File Suit
Louder With Crowder: Canadian “Minister Of Women” Opposes Self-Defense – Because It’s Sexist?

RIPPED FROM THE HEADLINES
Adam Piggott: Fred Gets Healthcare Completely Wrong
American Power: Russian Hackers And American Hacks
American Thinker: Big, Very Rich, And Dangerous – Time To Rein In Private Charitable Foundations
Animal Magnetism: Goodbye, Blue Monday
BLACKFIVE: When All The Girls Have Gone, by Jayne Krentz
Da Tech Guy: JD Rucker – To Win The Abortion Battle, Pro-Lifers Must Embrace The Left’s Most Powerful Weapon
Don Surber: Anyone Care To Be The WaPo’s Token Trumpkin?
Dustbury: Strange Search Engine Queries, also, Paranoia For Beginners
Jammie Wearing Fools: Deranged Democrat Begs Electoral College Voters To Block Trump
Joe For America: Lawmakers Strike Back – Jill Stein May Be Forced To Pay For “Frivolous” Recount
JustOneMinute: A Red Under Every Bed
Power Line: Remember When The Russians Hacked The White House Computers?, also, Cry Havoc!
Shark Tank: McCain – “It’s Clear The Russians Interfered” In Elections
Shot In The Dark: Chanting Points Memo – Fake Coverage Of Fake News
STUMP: Chicago Retiree Healthcare – Some Are Out Of Luck (For Now)
The Geller Report: Obama Blames Intel For Failing To Warn Of ISIS Rise
The Jawa Report: On Deasher!
The Political Hat: Geert Wilders Convicted Of Expressing Thoughtcrime
This Ain’t Hell: Military Times Reports Vet Groups Push To Keep McDonald At VA, also, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Rejects Veteran’s Last Request
Weasel Zippers: Two Instances Where Democrats Were Hunky-Dory With Russian Interference In Elections, also, Dem Rep Chaka Fattah Gets Ten Years For Corruption
Megan McArdle: So, What Do Your Parents Do? And Your Great-Grandparents?
Mark Steyn: Baby, It’s Cold Outside

Today’s Digital Deals
Amazon Warehouse Deals
Shop Amazon Devices – Fire Tablets Up to $30 Off

Category: Linkagery

Hillary Is Madonna or Something

Posted on | December 12, 2016 | 2 Comments

Everybody wants to play pundit nowadays. The New York Times unleashed its arts writers on the most over-analyzed election in history:

“I was called a whore and a witch,” Madonna said on Friday in a searing speech about the sexism and bullying that women face in the music industry and the culture at large.
“Such a nasty woman,” Donald J. Trump interjected in October as Hillary Clinton pointed out holes in his Social Security plan during their final presidential debate.
Madonna and Mrs. Clinton: both trailblazers, both polarizing figures, and both attacked for actions, choices and behavior that are broadly accepted — even applauded — when done by their male peers. Madonna herself made a connection between the two women before her speech Friday, saying it was “really important to make a stand and speak my mind” about women’s rights after Mrs. Clinton’s loss in November.
Our pop music editor, Caryn Ganz, and deputy Culture editor and former political correspondent Patrick Healy looked at how Madonna and her speech put Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy in fresh perspective. . . .

Go read the whole thing and ask yourself: Why?

Why does every liberal with access to a computer feel the need to share their “perspective” on this topic? Why do we care what Madonna says?

Isn’t the purpose of this kind of “journalism” essentially therapeutic?

Aren’t these New York Times writers basically grieving in public, and inviting their fellow liberals to console themselves about Hillary’s loss by saying, “All great women suffer the slings and arrows of misogyny”? By putting the whole election into “perspective” — a perspective where even millionaire pop stars and powerful politicians can think of themselves as victims of patriarchal oppression — the New York Times invites their affluent liberal readers to share in the sense of communal victimhood. Is the entire staff of the New York Times gobbling Prozac and Paxil? Are there any emotionally stable journalists employed there, or is the entire staff just one big group therapy session for depressed neurotics?

Category: Election, Hillary Clinton, New York Times

Rule 5 Sunday: Maid of Meat

Posted on | December 12, 2016 | 3 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

I don’t know for sure if I linked it this past week (and I’m too lazy to look it up) but Donald Trump stirred up the crazies by selecting Andy Puzder as his nominee for Secretary of Labor. Feminists and their beta male fellow travelers were immediately OUTRAGED since Puzder, as head of the Carl’s Jr. burger chain, has for quite some time been commissioning ads using lovely young women to flog his burgers. An example of one such, featuring tonight’s appetizer, can be found here.

Speaking of outrage and beautiful women, this is your weekly reminder that many of the following links are to pictures generally considered NSFW. The management is not responsible for grease fires, over/under-cooked meat, excessive mustard, onion breath, or other problems arising from your inability to click at appropriate times and places.

Kate Upton gets hot and bothered by the Southwestern Patty Melt from Carl’s Jr. in this ad from the 2012 Super Bowl. Should’ve ordered the large soda, Kate.

Ninety Miles from Tyranny kicks off with Hot Pick of the Late Night, Morning Mistress, and Girls With Guns, followed by Goodstuff with noted EM Drive scientist Paula Abdul, Animal Magnetism with Rule 5 Reciprocity Friday and the Saturday Gingermageddon. We also heard from The Last Tradition with Rita Ora and Miley Cyrus.

EBL’s thundering herd this week includes Snow in Hawaii, Ingrid Bolso Berdal, “Baby, It’s Cold Outside”, WWII Pinup Art, Phoebe Cates, Carl’s Jr. Ads, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, and Emma Stone.

A View from the Beach contributes Rita Ora, Angelic or Devilish?, The Eternal Christmas Question: Real or Fake?, Tina Fey Calls Trump a Nazi, A Model Student Who Prefers Self Defense, SJWs: Is There Nothing They Won’t Try to Ruin?, Gidget Just Doesn’t Get It, Using Dark Matter to Explore the Stars?, Madge Not Yet Come to Terms with Trump Presidency, and This Boob Needs a Civics Lesson.

Proof Positive’s Friday Night Babe is Michelle Dockery, his Vintage Babe is Veronica Carson, Sex In advertising is all about tax deductions, and there’s also Your Schadenfreude NFL/Niners Report. At Dustbury, it’s Susie Wolff, Rebecca Black, and Hailee Steinfeld.

Thanks to everyone for their linkagery!

Visit Amazon’s Intimate Apparel Shop
Amazon Fashion – Jewelry For Women

Category: Rule 5