The University of Toronto is holding an event on February 28th titled: BLACK is My Religion: A Black Only Event.
The event claims to focus on how faith can be used to fight against daily injustices. As well as looking at the restrictions and openings faith offers the black community.
There’s a new Netflix Christmas film that portrays Jesus as gay and it’s causing outrage. The comedy group Porta dos Fundos is behind a new comedy entitled “The First Temptation of Jesus Christ.” Over 1 million people have signed a petition to have the film removed from Netflix.
The five-person comedy group is from Rio de Janeiro, and make comedy sketches and parody videos on their YouTube channel. The name of their group is Porta dos Fundos which translates to “back door.”
They have signed deals with Fox Network Brazil and Netflix and critics often relate their style to the likes of Monty Python films although they certainly aren’t without critics.
“It is a serious offence against Jesus Christ and the Christians! It has no historical evidence to support the insinuations presented.” was one person’s reasoning behind signing the petition. The film is not intended to be a documentary. Others have called the film’s creators “demons” and “heretics.”
Another wrote: “A movie that came to destroy the image of Christ who gave His life to save us. Netflix has featured series that the family can’t join to watch. God created man and woman and no one can change that.”
Despite the feverous reaction, it isn’t the first time that Porta dos Fundos have had a go at Christianity. Netflix released the film “Especial de Natal Porta dos Fundos” (The Last Hangover) and was a parody of Hollywood hit “The Hangover.” It tells the story of Christ’s disciples after they wake up the morning after the Last Supper. The disciples are hungover and their messiah is missing. That film won an emmy for best comedy.
Historian Murilo Cleto tweeted: “Last year’s Christmas special, Jesus was portrayed as a sadistic, homicidal, hedonistic drunkard who hated to pray and no one bothered.
“Now that he’s harmless and gay, the world has fallen. It’s atrophying the brain.”
President Jair Bolsonaro took to Twitter to express his thoughts calling the film irresponsible: “Christians and non-Christians have asked me to take action against the irresponsible members of Porta do Fundo,” he wrote. “It’s time we took a collective action—churches and all good people—to put an end to this.”
Even some members of the LGBT community have expressed dislike for the film on social media for the movie’s stereotypical portrayal of gay men.
“A major publication is happy to publish any old nonsense so long as it’s sufficiently woke. Social justice ideology has infected our mainstream media,” Andrew Doyle explains in a new video lecture recorded at the National Liberal Club in London on 13th October 2019.
The 25-minute video is a brilliant explainer on how satire and hoaxing work in 2019. With major platforms and publications getting woker by the minute, it’s imperative that people who haven’t succumbed to the woke moral panic to call out the many hypocrisies and incoherencies of social justice. For the few who don’t know, Andrew Doyle is the genius behind the internet’s greatest troll, Titania McGrath.
In 2019, feelings outweigh facts at every turn. And when op-eds read like fabricated drivel, it’s no wonder that the public has a hard time discerning truth from fiction. It takes comedians and satirists to point out just how insane this whole thing is. Doyle points out that “the woke are the establishment” and he couldn’t be more right. Those who are in the powerful cultural positions, in academia, media, arts, entertainment, and most importantly, advertising, are the ones with the batons and horses to push these ideas onto the public.
This is the kind of influence that matters, not politicians and legislators, but those who control the media. And they are being fooled by their own unwillingness to address their woke bias. It is this bias that veers us into the realm of complete absurdity, where people hate themselves for their skin colour, language is colonialism, words are violence, and disagreement is fascism.
“The mainstreaming of social justice is also evident in the fact that even respected, national newspapers don’t seem to understand the basic definitions of phrases like fascist, alt-right, and even far-right,” Doyle remarks. “They no longer know what these words mean, and they are just bandying them about promiscuously, which is really damaging. Now if you claim the right to define the word Nazi as just anyone who disagrees with you politically, then, of course, you can also claim that there is an epidemic of Nazism. But in doing so you are also inadvertently, acting in the interests of the worst kinds of people.”
Doyle notes that the reframing of the conversation to mark those who disagree with the mainstream social justice movement as alt-right Nazi fascists, cedes the argument in favour of free speech to those very people you are trying to silence.
The last five minutes of the speech is where Doyle truly shines. He points to three specific pieces published by major platforms. “In August of last year, The New York Times ran an anonymous letter. It was called ‘How Can I Cure My White Guilt?’ It was just signed ‘Whitey,’ and it was a person who described themselves as being riddled with shame for being white. Now the whole thing was obviously ridiculous, and obviously a hoax. So, Titania claimed that she had written it. And she provided screenshots, of the letter, on her hard drive, with the date, just to prove that she was the author.”
Doyle claims that the authorship doesn’t really matter. Maybe he wrote it, invoking the spirit of Titania, maybe he didn’t. The point is that “a major publication is happy to publish any old nonsense so long as it is sufficiently woke. The social justice ideology has infected our mainstream media. And irreparably degraded its standards.”
Finally, Doyle mentions the crown jewel of hoax columns—a breathless op-ed published by The Independent. “In February of this year, Liam Evans wrote a piece for The Independent, and he cited a number of extremely talented comedians, people like Dave Chappelle, Ricky Gervais, Finn Taylor, and he said that their jokes about sensitive topics amounted to hate speech. He said that these kind of jokes ‘should be subject to investigation. It simply isn’t good enough for comedians to cry free speech after every hateful joke, as if the laws that govern the rest of us don’t apply to them.’”
Who is Liam Evans? Well, he’s clearly an authoritarian, censorious monster. But he’s also clearly not real. Doyle asks why The Independent would run such clearly fabricated nonsense and points to the fact that a number of prominent comedians complained to the publication. Doyle asks, “What is happening to our media? Why is a respected national newspaper publishing drivel by a writer that no one has ever heard of just because it’s pushing a woke agenda? What does that tell us? And the other question they should have been asking is why is the left publishing these kinds of censorial articles that used to grace the pages of the right-wing tabloids? And if it takes a hoaxer to provoke a little self-reflection, then surely that’s a good thing.”
“Again, I do not want to speculate as to the authorship of that article,” Doyle says. “But I will point out one thing which I do find just a little bit curious… You might be interested to note that if you take every fourth letter of every sentence, it actually spells out the phrase, ‘Titania McGrath wrote this, you gullible hacks.’”
When asked if he was indeed behind the hoax article, Andrew Doyle remained playfully cagey, telling The Post Millennial: “So many of the opinion columns in the woke press read like satire already, so in a sense I shouldn’t be surprised that such an obvious hoax would be published.”
The truth is if it weren’t for geniuses like Doyle, Gervais, Chappelle, CK, and the handful of other comedians brave enough to stand up to the woke mob, the culture wars might be a lost cause. As Doyle has pointed out numerous times, hoaxing and satirizing the woke establishment is actually punching up. Every major platform and publication is woke in 2019. Those who issue social justice diktats have all of the power and influence. Doyle’s work is vital.
News hoaxes are as old as news itself, but what news outlets can get pranked about is very revealing. In this case, media wanted to believe that a young woman hated her whiteness, that Sam Harris is a gateway drug to the alt-right, free speech doesn’t matter, and off-colour jokes must be investigated by the authorities. The New York Times, The Guardian, and The Independent wanted to believe these things. In fact, they were desperate to believe these things. That’s why they published these hoax stories. And that’s why we need to keep making fun of them.
Merriam Webster’s word of the year is “they,” that ubiquitous plural word that’s been turned singular, individualistic, and is a smoke signal sent up to claim special status in the gender landscape. “They” was a top look-up for the dictionary site; “the dictionary is also a primary resource for information about language itself, and the shifting use of they has been the subject of increasing study and commentary in recent years. Lookups for they increased by 313% in 2019 over the previous year.”
People just want to know what it means, and how they can and should apply it, either to themselves, or to those who request it. The pronoun has been omnipresent, on name badges, in Twitter bios, and in the continuous discourse over which pronoun should be used for whom and upon what whim.
Celebs have embraced “they” this year, staking their claim to being just a little bit different than all the other taboo-breaking popsters out there. Brit singer Sam Smith changed his pronouns to the gender-neutral “they” after doing some choreography that made him realize there was a “vivacious woman inside [their] body.”
Jonathan Van Ness, of Netflix’s hit self-improvement, show Queer Eye has determined that he is they, as has Chilling Adventures of Sabrina star Lachlan Watson. Nico Tortorella, from TV Land’s “Younger,” claims that when they met their spouse Bethany, “he was a boy and she was a girl, whatever that means… Today Bethany and [they] both identify as non-binary and prefer ‘they/them’ pronouns.”
It’s always a touching moment when a newly minted they comes out as they for the first time, before lights and cameras, with welcoming applause and accolades. It can be done in a think piece, or a quick video, or on social media. Brigette Lundy-Paine, from the show Atypical, came out via Instagram post, “where they posted a picture of their cat with the caption, “I’m non-binary, always felt a lil bit boy, lil bit girl, lil bit neither. Using they/them as of late n it feels right.”
They has come to mean so much more than “those people over there,” and is representative of an entire gendered alt lifestyle, wherein a person believes themselves to be neither male nor female, but some variation on the assembled themes.
In assigning “they” word of the year status, perhaps Merriam Webster is signalling its own intentions to go all-in on the trans trend of pronouns adoption and word transition. So far, their definition of woman is still “an adult female person,” but the jury is still out on whether the dictionary will be brought up on hate speech charges for specifying a female correlation to the word.
This is not the first time “they” has made a splash. In fact, when academics were trying to eliminate the sexism in the standard use of of “he” in academic papers, they often switched to “they,” and pluralized instead of using they as a singular.
In a statement, senior editor at Merriam Webster, Emily Brewster, said “Pronouns are among the language’s most commonly used words, and like other common words (think ‘go,’ ‘do,’ and ‘have’) they tend to be mostly ignored by dictionary users. But over the past year or so, as people have increasingly encountered the nonbinary use, we’ve seen searches for ‘they’ grow dramatically.”
The choice to give they top billing in the word of the year charts was data driven, not human decision making. They simply had more lookups. Perhaps that’s because the more it is used out of context and outside the realm of its normal definition, the more people realize that their understanding of this simple word has been compromised.
But never fear, great uneducated public! If they is confusing, if preferred gender pronouns are vexing, there are multiple guides to help you figure out how to ask what someone’s pronouns are, how not to ask, how to figure out if maybe you yourself are alt gendered.
You never know, you could be agender, androgyne, androgynous, bigender, cis, cisgender, cis female, cis male, cis man, cis woman, cisgender female, cisgender male, cisgender man, cisgender woman, female to male, ftm, gender fluid, gender nonconforming, gender questioning, gender variant, genderqueer, intersex, male to female, mtf, neither, neutrois, non-binary, other, pangender, trans, trans*, trans female, trans* female, trans male, trans* male, trans man, trans* man, trans person, trans* person, trans woman, trans* woman, transfeminine, transgender, transgender female, transgender male, transgender man, transgender person, transgender woman, transmasculine, transsexual, transsexual female, transsexual male, transsexual man, transsexual person, transsexual woman, or two-spirit.
With “they” hitting top of the charts for Merriam Webster, it’s a good indication that gender non-binary preferred pronouns are here to stay. Before next year’s International Pronoun Day on October 16th, take some time and figure out if you are they. It would be a real hate crime to find that you have been misgendering yourself, and you don’t want to be accountable for that. You, too, might be a they at heart. After all, we contain multitudes.
The NHL will be implementing new changes in order to deal with the social justice frenzy that has been going on since the firing of Don Cherry from Hockey Night in Canada. Cherry was fired on Remembrance Day for his now-infamous “you people” moment when he chastised new Canadians for not wearing the poppy.
According to NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, there will be mandatory counselling and training concerning anti-bullying and racism.
TSN reports that “The NHL plans to establish an anonymous hotline for players and team personnel to report inappropriate conduct; coaches and management will participate in mandatory annual training on inclusion and harassment; inappropriate conduct will result in discipline from teams, the league or both.”
At a press conference last Friday, Bettman said, “Inclusion and diversity are not simply buzz words. They are foundational principles of the NHL,” and went on to say, “Our message is unequivocal: We will not tolerate abusive behaviour of any kind.”
Shortly after Cherry’s firing, Mike Babcock was let go from the Toronto Maple Leafs. Sportsnet detailed one of the major allegations against Babcock: “[Babcock] was accused of maltreating forward Mitch Marner in his rookie season by making him list the hardest working players on the team and which ones didn’t have a strong work ethic. Babcock later told the players whom Marner had listed without Marner’s knowledge.”
Bill Peters was next on the chopping block. Former player Akim Aliu made an allegation against Peters regarding racial slurs, about a decade ago, while they were both in the AHL. Peters apologized for the incident but was made to resign anyway.
Most recently, Jim Montgomery of the Dallas Stars was let go by his team citing “unprofessional conduct.” Details on the situation are scant at this point. It could be warranted or it could be an overreach.
Some of the points involved in the NHL’s new plan include:
- Incidents of unacceptable behaviour being reported immediately by teams. Otherwise the use of “severe discipline” will be used
- Immediate punishment for past, present and future incidents
- Mandatory yearly counselling for coaches and managers focusing on diversity and inclusion.
- Anonymous hotline for players
- A disciplinary council run by NHL executive vice-president Kim Davis
Bettman said that he has been given full support by the board of governors concerning the new “code of conduct.”
There aren’t any conclusive ways to measure the effectiveness of diversity and inclusivity training. Diversity and inclusion specialists advocate for ongoing training as opposed to a one time shot, to make sure that the messages are driven home over and over again. This is becoming industry standard in more places than the NHL, and while it makes for a good press release, there’s no conclusive evidence to believe that it helps. What is definitely does is put people on edge and add stress.
Severe discipline. A snitch line. Diversity training. Free-thinking, reasonable people know where this will lead.
The experts who will be brought in will be drunk on progressivism and cancel culture. And they will reframe the conversation, and the thought processes so that people will constantly try to see how they were personally wronged.
It doesn’t have to be this way, but it’s going to be. The NHL is well about to enter a grievance-fuelled McCarthyist era. The blacklists, witch hunts and virtue signalling have already begun. And it’s a damn shame.