Latest posts by Brian Martinez (see all)
- Badger Pod Nerd Cast 20: It’s Blowjobs, All the Way Down! - January 13, 2015
- Badger Pod Nerd Cast 19: Far Gone Girl - January 6, 2015
- Badger Pod Nerd Cast 18: Disgusting Abhorrent Pencils - December 16, 2014
Join the Badgers on the Polecat as we discuss the news of the week including a woman who raped a disabled boy (you’ll never guess what happens next), how moral outrage is self serving, the 2017 GDC, and more! Tune in @ 6pm Eastern
Kink-shamed Into Censorship
The popular kink-oriented, adult social network website known as Fetlife has had an unstable existence since it’s birth to say the least. Events such as the release of Fifty Shades of Grey, which saw the site flooded with normies, to the recent case of a wealthy Australian who allegedly used the website to find potential victims, haven’t been helpful to Fetlife’s community. But now an even greater threat has surfaced, one that threatens Fetlife’s very existence and the service it provides. Last month the community guidelines tightened to crack down on “depictions or discussion of edgier kinks, including blood, non-consent, alcohol, cutting, and the vaguely defined ‘obscenity'”. The website also began purging thousands of photos, groups, and entire fetish categories with no warning to follow the new guidelines. What caused the sudden change in standards? As Fetlife founder John Kopanas explained, the bank which the website does business threatened to close the website at the behest of several credit card companies that objected to the website’s content for “illegal or immoral” reasons. Kopanas submitted to their demands and instated the new guidelines, but still appears to have lost the ability to process credit card transactions. Kopanas hasn’t released any further statements on the subject since the announcement and many questions still abound.
Psychologists Validate the Concept of “Virtue-Signaling” as Real and Harmful
By Max Derrat
Psychology professors from both Bowdoin College and the University of Southern Mississippi have inadvertently validated what we have been saying all along about virtue-signaling! Professor Zachary Rothschild and Lucas A. Keefer published their recent findings in the latest edition of Motivation and Emotion. Quote:
“Feelings of guilt are a direct threat to one’s sense that they are a moral person and, accordingly, research on guilt ﬁnds that this emotion elicits strategies aimed at alleviating guilt that do not always involve undoing one’s actions. Furthermore, research shows that individuals respond to reminders of their group’s moral culpability with feelings of outrage at third-party harm-doing. These findings suggest that feelings of moral outrage, long thought to be grounded solely in concerns with maintaining justice, may sometimes reflect efforts to maintain a moral identity.”
For each study, a group of respondents were presented fabricated stories about labor exploitation or climate change. In some of the articles, the blame was placed on Americans. In others it was placed on the Chinese. After reading these articles, the respondents were given a series of short surveys and exercises to assess their levels of personal and collective guilt, as well as anger at third parties like corporations for example. There were five key findings from their study. 1. Triggering feelings of personal culpability for a problem increases moral outrage at a third-party target. 2. The more guilt over one’s potential complicity, the more desire “to punish a third-party through increased moral outrage at that target.”
3. Having the opportunity to express outrage at a third-party decreased guilt in people threatened through “ingroup immorality.”
4. “The opportunity to express moral outrage at corporate harm-doers” inflated participants perception of personal morality.”
5. Guilt-induced moral outrage was lessened when people could assert their goodness through alternative means “even in an unrelated context” (COUGHGAMERGATECOUGH).
In other news… following this report on virtue-signaling, YouTube personality hbomberguy has been informed that he can now proceed to suck Max Derrat’s big, fat, yellow cock (feel free to edit this out if you want, Brian ;P ).
I Left My Brain in San Francisco
The annual Game Developers Conference took place last week, ladies and gentleman. For those of you who don’t know what the GDC is all about, it’s basic description also comes from its title. It’s a literal game developers conference… where tens of thousands of people within the video games industry gather for lectures, panels and tutorials on how to advance game development. These panels range from talking about how to make better hardware, better AI, better sound, basically everything you can think of that goes into making and selling a game. However, because this conference takes place in San Fran-fucking-cisco, you would be remiss if you didn’t expect to see good ol’ fashioned soc-jus inserted in there somewhere. Unlike past years, where social justice related topics were relegated to GDC’s Advocacy track, it has now become a part of the education panels as well. Our biggest example of this came out of a panel titled “Teaching Students to Make Games under Fascism”. It was presented by a woman named Bonnie Ruberg, who has presented these types of panels at past GDCs. In GDC 2015, she presented “Creating Safe Spaces at Game Events” and at GDC 2016, she presented “Building Safer Spaces in Game Education.” You get the point. At this years GDC, her presentation included slides that were passed around widely on Twitter. One slide said: “Video games are political. The way we make games is political. The way that we teach our students to make games is political.” The word “political” was highlighted in red on that slide. At a completely separate panel from Bonnie’s a slide said “End White Cis Gender Able Bodied Man as the Default”. The words “the default” were also highlighted in red. I (Max) am not on today’s show because me and Karen are chilling here in the Canadian version of San Francisco, a.k.a. Toronto… so I’m going to have to ask Brian, Scott, Hannah and Mike to recall their arguments from the early days of GamerGate and fire away. Guns up, let’s do this…
Disabled Man is Raped, Women Most Affected
By L. Kemlo
Drake University, a private school in Iowa is being accused of violating state laws in a “first-of-its-kind Title IX retaliation case”. Tom Rossley, a trustee who served 23 years on the university board was fired after defending his son accused of sexual assault from a kangaroo-court investigation.
According to The College Fix citing Rossley’s suit, the accuser conceded “on the record” during a later Title IX hearing that she initiated sex without his consent. Drake university effectively ignored these claims, prioritizing the female student’s accusations and later firing Tom Rossley after his complaints. Tom Rossley has now filed a federal lawsuit, accusing the university of failing to accommodate his son’s learning disabilities in the sexual-assault investigation.
Both students were intoxicated but the female student initiated oral sex on Rossley’s son. By the same standards given to female sexual-assault victims, the son was not able to give consent. However, despite the claims, the male in the situation was the only one investigated and the counter claims labeled as retaliation.
“Comfort rooms” were provided for the accuser and her family, while Drake University required the accused to be his own advocate and act as his own legal representative, despite knowing about his language disability, and was provided no access to his father nor “comfort rooms”.
Rossley’s lawyer, Andrew Miltenberg, has represented dozens of male students found responsible for sexual misconduct. According to Miltenberg, Drake University has both covered up the father’s complaints about his son’s treatment and failed to investigate the son’s own pleas for help after being assaulted by a female student, violating their own rules.