SJW KILLER: Prominent activist deemed ‘insane’ in stabbing murder of young woman
A prominent California social justice activist has been ruled insane and sentenced to 39 years in a psychiatric facility for the stabbing murder of a woman and the attempted murder of a second woman in Berkeley.
Pablo Gomez Jr., 24, was majoring in Chicanx/Latinx studies at UC Berkeley when they stabbed and killed 27-year-old Emilie Inman at her home on Jan. 6, 2017. After hiding her body in the garden, Gomez went on to stab Kiana Schmitt, who survived.
Jessica Yaniv appeared today in B.C. Provincial Court accompanied by her mother. Yaniv is facing two counts of possession of a prohibited weapon violating the Firearms Act.
As we previously reported, Yaniv was arrested in August by RCMP after appearing on popular YouTuber Blaire White’s channel, brandishing and demonstrating the functionality of a taser at one point in the debate, and claiming to be fully aware of its illegality.
On the live stream, Yaniv also unleashed a racist rant disparaging the East Indian and immigrant communities of British Columbia, asserting “we have f*cked up people who migrate here, who think they can do whatever they want.”
Yaniv set off an international firestorm after taking female immigrant salon owners to a Human Rights Tribunal after they refused to wax her penis and testicles. She lost her case in October.
In court today, Yaniv acknowledged the two charges and scheduled a court date for January 13 2020 at 2:00 pm.
Yaniv also complained to the presiding Justice of the Peace about “threats” she claims to be receiving, to little acknowledgement from the court.
Yaniv faces a maximum sentence of six months in prison.
Burns Lake has finally gotten some closure this week after former mayor Luke Strimbold has been sentenced to two years less a day for his crimes of sexual assault, sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching.
All his crimes were committed on youth, under the age of 16.
The 29-year-old former mayor pleaded guilty to two counts of sexual assault in addition to once count of sexual interference and one count of invitation to sexual touching.
Many members of the community are unhappy with the verdict, feeling the sentence was light considering the original charge was 29 sex offences over a two year period against seven minors between 2014 and 2017.
The Crown had asked for four to six years in federal prison, however the judge ruled that Strimbold will instead serve his sentence in a provincial institution followed by two years probation upon his release. He will remain a registered sex offender until 2039.
The time period of the assaults overlap with Strimbold’s time as mayor 2011-2016.
Madam Justice Brenda Brown of B.C. Supreme Court factored that in as part of her ruling saying that Stimbold was in a position of authority. Brown also acknowledge Strimbold’s use of drugs and alcohol and that he had in fact sought out counselling for these issues prior to any charges being laid. She delivered her decision via video conference from Vancouver to the courtroom in Smithers, B.C.
Justice Brown said that Strimbold has shown remorse and is of low-to-moderate risk to reoffend.
Strimbold delivered a tearful apology to his victims at a sentencing hearing last week, according to CBC. He described them as friends and said, “I am deeply sorry to each of them and will forever be regretful.” He went on to apologize to the community of Burns Lake, saying, “I am sorry I let you down.”
Stanley Tessmer, Strimbold’s defence lawyer told the court that his client was the victim of abuse himself at a young age. Strimbold was unable to recognize that abuse and such is the reason he was unable to recognize the problem with his own actions when the originally occurred.
Tessmer also brought to the courts attention that Strimbold was a closeted gay man who was bullied in his youth which led to his substance abuse.
Tessmer asked the court for 18 months in a provincial jail.
Former Babine Lake First Nation Chief Wilf Adam was unhappy with the verdict, calling the sentence “unacceptable,” saying it failed Strimbold’s victims as well as the people of Burns Lake who’d put their trust in him as mayor.
“I just find that totally unacceptable. The system has failed the victims,” he said.
Adam was chief of Lake Babine at the same time that Strimbold held office and the two worked closely together on multiple occasions including dealing with the aftermath of the 2013 Babine Forest Products mill explosion in Burns Lake, according to CBC.
This is no doubt one of the reasons Adam felt so frustrated by the sentence saying that Strimbold’s actions were a “betrayal of trust, not just to me but to the people of Burns Lake, to the Lake Babine Nation, to the other First Nations in the Burns Lake area.”
Now a board member of the Northern Health Authority and the First Nation Health Council, Adam has been working to bring counselling services to anybody in the Burns Lake area who is seeking help. He feels the recent trial has likely brought up some painful memories for any members of the community who had previously experienced abuse themselves.
CBC reported Adam said that if Strimbold does want the community to heal than, “He needs to look at himself. He needs to make sure that he truly is sorry for what he has done – not to be forced in court, but to truly understand.”
“He really needs to help himself.” said Adam.
Softboys, fuckboys, and everything in between are the new archetypes of masculinity. Gone are the days of Humphrey Bogart, slick cigarette and steely stare, smoke curling into greased back hair. The new heirs to the throne of masculinity are more suited to high chairs. As with most things these days, toxic masculinity is to blame. Only this time, it’s the push back against it that has led to these softboys and fuckboys, and they are even more toxic than what came before.
They may seem like a welcome diversion from more classic, American masculinity, what we now think of as toxic. A toxically masculine guy might call a woman a sweetheart, mansplain, catcall, hold the door for you, think you need help with luggage or heavy packages. A softboy knows better than to help women with anything, he knows that even the offer is unwelcome. Believing in the power of women means knowing they don’t need or want men for anything at all.
The contemporary softboy is derived from those non-threatening K-Pop icons, like the boys in BTS, Super Junior, and iKon. Soft, sweet, totally non-rapey, these guys, gals, and gender non-binaries often wear pastels and do cute things on TikTok. The downside of the softboy is that for all his soft sweetness, he turns to fluff when it’s time to actually stand up and take responsibility for being a viable partner.
Fuckboys are similar to softboys in that they are just as non threatening, but they’ve figured out that there’s no reason to make the woman they’re fucking happy more than intermittently. In fact, it’s to their advantage to keep her guessing on hey they feel about her because it leaves her no time to realize just how much of a fuckboy they are, or how little she’s getting from the interactions. The more irregular his affections, the more she will want them.
We used to call these guys jugglers. Dudes who could strum Indigo Girls songs on their acoustic guitars, who liked to hacky sack, and who, in every case, could juggle. They thought they were cute, but mostly they were non-threatening. They were expert at turning a declared cuddle sesh into sex. It was an effective game, but slightly skeevy, a little dishonest, and able to happen without any real amorous entanglements, or even as a prelude to it. They might talk about their shyness, they might like The Cure, and they definitely have exes with strings attached because they never properly broke up in the first place.
Back in the 1990s I went out with a boy who lived in an NYU dorm room with three other guys. We sat on his bed and ate hash brownies before a night out, as his roommate slipped into jammies and an actual sleeping cap. He tuned his guitar. As we were leaving, a girl came in wearing jammies, slippers, clutching a teddy bear. The whole scene seemed so innocent. “I’m here for story hour,” she said. He held up a copy of Dr. Seuss’ “Oh the Places You’ll Go,” and she giggled. Today this guy would be a some kind of cross between softboy and fuckboy. Those guys can probably juggle, too.
Humphrey Bogart, Jack Lemon, Robert Redford, and even Dick Van Dyke were swashbuckling tough guys with hearts of gold that represented the classic, American male archetype.
They did the right thing for the right reasons, and sometimes the wrong thing for the right reasons, but they were guided by innate principles of not fucking people over. Women and society at large have pushed back against these classic male roles, tearing them down for their chivalry and lack of emotional expression.
In their stead have arisen gentlemen who come over for a fuck but can’t even send a reasonably enthusiastic text the next day. Men who slouch so hard they seem shorter than any of the women they’re vaguely but not really courting who they want to want to sleep with them. We’re creating a society of man babies only to discover that what society needs are committed partners, not grown children who need endless attention and placating.
The social justice-led pushback against toxic masculinity has led to a decline in any kind of respect or appreciation for the male archetype that came before. What were we expecting from the new archetype of manhood? A guy who is in touch with his emotions and knows what his partner is feeling and has a good job that he’s passionate about that doesn’t run on fossil fuels and has him home in time to help with the kids’ homework and cook dinner and make love with a smile? That guy is as much a fantasy as the masculine tough guy with a heart of gold. Or the strong but silent type, or the distinguished gray, the hero, the joker.
These new manboys do not make good archetypes. These are guys that do not take charge of their lives or chart their own course. They sit back and let things happen, they are not active participants. We need men who are intentionally living their lives, guys who do. Instead, culture has pushed the aggression, straight-forward ambition, and competitive spirit right out of what we expect from masculinity. What we have are a bunch of boys too afraid to be men, too unwilling to step into the light and pursue something, anything.
With the ousting of toxic masculinity goes the swashbuckling heroes who swoop in and save the day, rescue damsels in distress, and fight losing battles simply to uphold their own principles of rectitude. That’s okay though, because no one wants those guys anymore anyway. We must want what we’ve gotten.
Toxic masculinity may have gotten a bad rap, but I think we’d all rather see a guy own himself, and his choices, a guy who assumes he’s got weight and matter in the world, is confident that he’s more worthwhile, and let’s you know it. Masculinity being toxic is problematic. Softboys and fuckboys do not present a picture of hotness. Classic masculinity, with all it’s brashness and bravado, is way hotter than a juggling asshole with a Dr. Seuss collection.
Social justice has come for the NHL. And Ron MacLean, fresh off of throwing his broadcasting partner and better half Don Cherry under the bus, has bought in 100%.
During the intermission of Hockey Night in Canada this Saturday on Sportsnet, MacLean addressed his guests, Kwame Mason and Tara Slone:
“I said to Kwame, I don’t see you as black, I don’t see Tara as a woman. And then I realized, ‘There’s your white male privilege. You know what, Ron? You don’t have to see that because you don’t need to see that.'”
He then went on to apologize for not having enough people of colour pick the three stars on Hockey Night in Canada and for the structural racism and sexism of hockey. You can watch the clip here:
Of course, the ironic thing is that Ron MacLean’s original way of viewing Mason or Sloane was correct. He didn’t see Mason as a black man and he didn’t see Sloane as a woman. He saw them both as fellow human beings.
Now, he has been re-educated (so that he may keep his job) to only see them for the minority groups they represent. This is objectively more racist and sexist, but it’s the kind of racism and sexism that social justice demands. Ron MacLean is now safe.
The social panic sweeping over hockey started with the debacle of Don Cherry’s firing from Sportsnet for saying “you people” in reference to immigrants who don’t wear the poppy (an incident that he was willing to clarify and apologize for).
More recently, Calgary Flames head coach Bill Peters was fired for uttering the N-word to a player many years ago as an assistant coach for another team. Whether Peters should have been fired, fined, or otherwise sanctioned after his apology is a matter up for debate. Certainly, people have said and done worse and kept their jobs, but the trudge toward progress made any such nuanced discussion impossible.
Since these incidents, far-left Canadian pundits such as Jess Allen and Nora Loreto have claimed that hockey is inherently racist or white supremacist. Allen claimed that hockey players were “white boys” and “bullies” while Loreto proclaimed in a boastful tweet that hockey leads to “white supremacy and misogyny.”
Take note. This is how social justice movements always work. They take individual instances of inappropriateness or intolerance (or even something as mild as a misunderstanding) and they apply those instances to an entire culture and claim that the community must be fixed at any cost. Of course, this means consultants, specialists, diversity trainers, federal assistance and a whole lot of hand wringing.
It doesn’t seem to matter to these crusaders who want to clean the culture that Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of our hockey-loving country, has been the centre of racist incidents more times than he can even remember.
No reasonable person could say that Bill Peters was more racist than our prime minister. But you see, Trudeau’s past racism is different because he’s on the social justice team! He can lead the nation forward by helping us have these difficult conversations and recognizing. These big bad hockey coaches and players on the other hand, well, they must be punished and banished from the culture because of toxic masculinity and systemic hetero white something something.
We’ve already seen the panic hit social media, with former NHLer Daniel Carcillo attempting to create McCarthyite blacklists of other professional coaches based on rumours:
It’s only going to get worse. But before the entire hockey community drops their sticks in favour of pitchforks, I would like to suggest that the progressivist push to name, shame, and force every “community member” to grovel and pledge their allegiance to intersectionality is not the answer. If hockey continues down this path, it will lose fans and revenue.
Like any culture, hockey has its problems. But those problems are caused by individual human beings. If a coach, player, or fan is acting in a racist or sexist manner, then they should be held accountable as individuals. And matters such as these should be adjudicated between the parties who were actually involved in the behaviour.
The shift from individual responsibility to collective guilt is where things skate downhill real fast. Grievance Studies scholar James Lindsay spotted it right away and quite aptly quipped, “LOL RIP hockey”:
This will not end well. Whether it’s the world of music, comedy, film, or professional sports, social justice crusades lead to nothing but division. If the NHL continues to get woke, it will most definitely go broke.