Categories
Uncategorized

So Stefan Molyneux is a slam poet now, apparently

snap snap snap snap

By David Futrelle

Racist Dingus Stefan Molyneux

has started to write

most of his tweets like this

for some reason.

I can only conclude that the far-right YouTube philosopher blabber has become a slam poet. And who are we to judge? Who amongst us has not written bad poetry at some point in our lives?

So put on some Charlie Parker and enjoy these recent, er, works by Stef. I’ve taken the liberties of giving them titles.

“Ladies”

“Free Riders”

“Names”

“Without kids”

“2000 New Babies”

“Drafted”

Wow. That’s some of the whitest slam poetry I’ve ever seen. .

Actually, I take that back. While it’s the most white supremacist slam poetry I’ve ever seen, this little performance is at least one more white.

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

105 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
epitome of incomprehensibility

*reads Troubelle’s and Owen’s poems*
*applauds*

@Ucalegont – Welcome! And agreed. It’s not as if Molyneux is speaking out against “the patriarchy” himself, is he?

Plus, what is this phrasing about “welcoming Islam”? Did someone go, “Hello, abstraction of Islam, come into this vaguely defined area that is ‘The West'”? Newsflash: Muslims are people, not just abstractions of an ethnicity or religion. Just as Molyneux isn’t a blob of Christianity (or whatever he believes). And one would hope he doesn’t represent all white people (not sure about his precise ethnicity: his last name sounds French, but his first name is Stefan, not StĂ©phane).

@Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie – I think the Doonesbury cartoon was trying to express admiration for AOC by showing that the other characters are jealous of her productivity. (The way it was done seemed a little clumsy to me – sure, a lot of the Doonesbury characters are slackers, but Melissa doesn’t fit that trope.)

Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
Weird (and tired of trumplings) Eddie
5 years ago

sure, a lot of the Doonesbury characters are slackers

*cough zonker cough, cough*

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
5 years ago

Sorry if this is too unrelated, but did we ever discuss this fucking article, justifying the Republic the Gilead in “Handmaid’s Tale”?

https://biblicalgenderroles.com/2019/05/24/the-world-of-the-handmaids-tale-not-completely-bad/?sfns=xmo&fbclid=IwAR22rlEOvoq2DUDR5PFybORPtgZe7b4jsOse1bJ4xLJmDl9VzESWRkiLC7g

Just an excerpt from the article:

What About the Infamous Wedding Scene?
Earlier I spoke about a scene from Margaret Atwood’s book that was also portrayed in the Hulu series which shows a mass wedding ceremony of several couples. Many of the girls are very young, perhaps 12, 13 or 14 years of age and they were being married to men much older them, perhaps 10 or 20 years older or more.

(…)

I have already addressed the fact that the nation of Gilead was wrong in usurping the authority of father’s over their daughters. But what if fathers willingly gave their young daughters, even those in their early teens as portrayed in arranged marriages to older men – is this a violation of Biblical morality?

The answer is a resounding NO. It is not immoral or “abhorrent” or “horrific” in the eyes of God. The Scriptures tell us in two passages when God says a young woman is ready for marriage.

(…)

So, God’s allowable age for marriage to a woman is when she shows the signs of puberty, development of her breasts, growth of pubic hair and she has had a period. At that point it is perfectly moral for her to be married.

And her “consent” is not required by God. And God does not grant her the “agency” that we believe women have today. It is her father’s decision (Exodus 22:16-17). And there is absolutely nothing unbiblical about arranged marriages (Jeremiah 29:6). Also, it is not immoral for men much older to marry younger women.

Katamount
Katamount
5 years ago

@Kat

Having never seen Doctor Zhivago, to me, Sharif will always be the British spy Cedric in the Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker spoof Top Secret!

comment image

Naglfar
Naglfar
5 years ago

@Diego
That article is appalling. I read part of it, and they are fans of child rape. It’s crap like this that makes me very scared for the future.

Diego Duarte
Diego Duarte
5 years ago

@Naglfar

Pretty much. At least conservatives of the 90s and 2000s would answer in platitudes and take some sort of stance against child marriage. Oh they would definitely not impede it in any sort of way, but at the very least they weren’t pushing it as “moral” according to the eyes of god.

Now though, it certainly feels like the new wave of reactionary politics and Nazism has emboldened them to pursue the more radical forms of misogyny.

As someone very eloquently said yesterday: the GOP needs to be completely uprooted, and the very earth it grew out of, salted to prevent from ever growing again.

Naglfar
Naglfar
5 years ago

@Diego

Now though, it certainly feels like the new wave of reactionary politics and Nazism has emboldened them to pursue the more radical forms of misogyny.

Yep. Racism and sexism are more acceptable than they’ve been in decades. The manosphere and alt-right exist now because they’re acceptable now in a way that wouldn’t have flown 10 years ago.

A few months ago, there was one Nazi fellow who claimed that their 2024 presidential run would target the incel vote. I laughed it off, but now it is scary that a candidate could potentially be so openly misogynistic. I mean, Trump is easily the most misogynistic president since…I don’t even know.

Moggie
Moggie
5 years ago

@Weird Eddie:

A response I’ve cultivated when talking to trumpanzees who call the Democrats “socialists” is;

“I wish you wouldn’t throw that word around like you know what it means”

If they ask ME what it means, I tell them;

“It’s not my job to educate you, go research it for yourself”

Do you find that works? Because I suspect they’d often claim they have researched the topic: by, for example, listening to Ben Shapiro.

solecism
solecism
5 years ago

Ladies.

Fact.

The moment you welcomed Islam into the West

You lost the right to complain about

The Patriarchy.

Actually, it wasn’t women who did that. It was the rich white men who bought enslaved Africans, some (many?) of whom were Muslim and brought their religion with them to the New World. It is solidly the white patriarchy that’s responsible for this. Not that Muslims in North America are really a problem. It’s the white male patriarchy that’s the problem. Way to DARVO there, Stefan.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
5 years ago

@Moggie: *raises ibuprofen in wordless salute*

So, God’s allowable age for marriage to a woman is when she shows the signs of puberty, development of her breasts, growth of pubic hair and she has had a period. At that point it is perfectly moral for her to be married.

Isn’t it interesting how, when speaking about the bodies of people to be controlled, exploited, and disposed of, they’re considered to be mature adults the very second they show the slightest sign of puberty? Black boys become threats and young women become sexualized at age 12, or even earlier.

And yet, Brock/Chad/Brett/Trump Jr. are allowed to be “just young boys” well into their 30s, but only when they’ve done something wrong. They’re still learning! We musn’t ruin their bright futures over whatever monstrous thing they’ve just done!

Naglfar
Naglfar
5 years ago

@Moggie
Then you ask them to define it, then when they give the Ben Shapiro scare definition, explain what it actually means. It may or may not work, but if they keep insisting they are right, say “Ben Shapiro hates socialists. It’s usually not a good idea to trust people to know about what they hate. Do you think white supremacists are experts on Martin Luther King Jr?”

solecism
solecism
5 years ago

@Buttercup Q. Skullpants

And yet, Brock/Chad/Brett/Trump Jr. are allowed to be “just young boys” well into their 30s, but only when they’ve done something wrong. They’re still learning! We musn’t ruin their bright futures over whatever monstrous thing they’ve just done!

I think your estimate of the closing date of that is too conservative. Is there an end date? Look at Kavanaugh. He’s what, 54? This bullshit fills me with so much rage.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

White men are too young to be held accountable until they’re too old to be held accountable, because times were different back when they were young.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

Some possible good news in amongst all the horror this week.

The ECourtHR has ruled that domestic violence counts as degrading and/or inhuman treatment under Art. 3 of the EConventionHR.

That means there’s ‘horizontal effect’ and the state comes under a duty to prevent/investigate.

More details here:

https://www.juriosity.com/knowledge/article/0503ae3d-0a3e-49e1-a7b5-9c3a56996df8

Crip Dyke
Crip Dyke
5 years ago

This is excellent, Alan. Really, we’ve needed this for some time, all over the world. We’ve had a few favorable decisions and actions here in the US related to asylum cases, but they’ve generally been undone as there isn’t a SCOTUS ruling on point and any administrative law advisory opinions we get will be overturned/rewritten by the next republican to come into office.

And, of course, these only say that other countries had a duty to respond and that failure to respond – at least failure that occurs in a systematic way – is evidence relevant to determining a person’s fear of persecution or violence “well-founded” and thus bears on issues of refoulement and grants of asylum. What it doesn’t do (and what it never does) is impose any duty on our own police/social services to take action (see DeShaney v. Winnebago County and Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales).

I look forward to the day when decisions like Volodina v Russia are the norm, and even the US is no longer an exception. Of course, I fear that day is still many years away.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
5 years ago

@ crip dyke

What it doesn’t do (and what it never does) is impose any duty on our own police/social services to take action (see DeShaney v. Winnebago County and Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales).

We had a very similar approach here until relatively recently. Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire being the key case. That confirmed the police didn’t owe a duty of care to individual members of the public.

That’s becoming a bit less restrictive now. There’s still no general duty; but a duty can arise when the police themselves create the danger, and possibly where the police are notified of a risk and give advice on how to deal; or are otherwise ‘seized’ of the matter (possibly; it’s still bit up in the air)

There’s quite a nice review of the relevant cases at the end of this one

https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2018/4.html

Ucalegont
Ucalegont
5 years ago

@Naglfar: thanks for the welcome.

@epitomeofincomprehensibility: thanks for the welcome. Yes, they are people and some of them are not even Muslims. Putting all of them in one bag and treating them like an invading species is just what racism is about.
I guess Molyneux should be an Irish born man with Huguenot ancestors. But I think ethnicity is a question of how you define yourself.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
5 years ago

@WWTH: And the conservative response is always “who hasn’t done something stupid during their teenage years?” Because they think it’s perfectly normal to, say, throw a blackface party, or pose with a cardboard cutout of AOC and pretend to choke her. And they think those people should get a free pass because, hey, teens are dumb and don’t know any better, and now they’ve grown out of it. Like the Parkland kid who posted racist and derogatory screeds on a shared drive at his high school, and then tried to convince Harvard that he’d matured and learned in the 18 months since then.

These teenagers know EXACTLY what they’re doing. The cruelty is the point. Ignorance is a fig leaf they hide behind when they get caught.

Moggie
Moggie
5 years ago

“The cruelty is the point” really needs to become the official slogan of the Republican party.

Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
Kat, ambassador of the feminist government in exile
5 years ago

@Katamount

Having never seen Doctor Zhivago, to me, Sharif will always be the British spy Cedric in the Zucker-Abrahams-Zucker spoof Top Secret!

So Omar Sharif was the kind of guy who felt comfortable enough in his own skin to play a doctor-poet who yearned for his lost love and a guy who was the butt of a practical joke.

No wonder Stefan Molyneux’s envy of this Muslim convert gnaws at him.

numerobis
numerobis
5 years ago

solecism: I’m gonna need a source on the slaves bringing Islam story. My understanding is in about the 1960s it became fashionable to switch from the church foisted upon black people by white people towards a similar-but-sufficiently-different religion — that’s a century after the end of overt slavery.

Megi Stardust
Megi Stardust
5 years ago

My apologies if something like this has already been posted.

Under no circumstances

Should you ever

Allow a Vogon

To read poetry to you.

solecism
solecism
5 years ago

@numerobis,

Here ya go:
http://www.danielpipes.org/868/servants-of-allah-african-muslims-enslaved-in-the-americas

To be fair, I searched for that one. My sense of Islam being introduced to North America via the Middle Passage is coming from a general recollection from various sources, some fictional but clearly well researched (see, for example, Yaa Gyasi’s Homegoing. And unfortunately, I just packed up my entire personal library, so I am unable to immediately search my various books of scholarly research on slavery. I got the impression that Cudjoe, interviewed by Zora Neale Hurston, was Muslim, though I haven’t read the book yet (Barracoon), and I could be wrong about that. I can’t find any ready confirmation online. Of course, he was the last outlier of the terrible trade.

Certainly, Islam was well established in Africa by the 9th or 10th century at the latest, so it’s not surprising that Muslims would get swept up in the slave trade that took off in later centuries.

The 1960s thing is true too. Isn’t that how Nation of Islam originated?

Rabid Rabbit
Rabid Rabbit
5 years ago

@solecism:

A lot of the Slave Coast, though, was still pagan, hence why they got sold into slavery — Christians theoretically weren’t allowed to enslave Christians, Muslims theoretically shouldn’t enslave other Muslims, but they were all fine with enslaving animists, hence why they could have commercial relations.

That is, of course, a gross oversimplification of what happened among Africans during the slave trade centuries, but it’s an element of it.

solecism
solecism
5 years ago

@Rabid Rabbit,

Absolutely! I am not claiming that the majority of enslaved Africans were Muslim, just that some subset definitely were, so Islam reached North America long before the modern era, even if white people didn’t recognize that fact at the time or presently. Certainly, some of the African groups heavily involved in the slave trade with Europeans were some flavor of animist and therefore had no problem enslaving Christian or Muslim or other pagan neighbors. The Dahomey spring to mind.

My original point was that white patriarchy is the cause of importing non-Christian religions to the Americas, and pretty early on. The syncretism that resulted in various flavors of animism-infused Christianity demonstrates that this East-West clash of civilizations is of course bullshit. Of course, Stefan et al blame women for whatever social ills they imagine regardless of reality (as per usual wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong).