Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the worst health secretary in memory. His unscientific views on vaccines are imperiling lives around the world, and have contributed to the deaths of a several children in the US and its territories. He is unqualified, unfit, and unstable. So I say the following not to cheerlead him, but to try to combat the very culture of health polarization that has put him in power:

It is a good thing that the federal government is pushing Big Food to make even small changes to its products. Liberals should take the win, push for more, and resist the urge to find fault with health-affirming shifts simply because they’re coming from the bizarro and often dangerous MAHA movement.

Subscribe now

In case you missed it, several large food corporations have announced that they are phasing out some artificial food dyes by the end of 2027. West Virginia recently banned foods with most artificial dyes, as well as some preservatives. Not every big food company is getting on board — candy companies that market to children are big holdouts, because kids really like brightly-colored candy — and ultra-processed foods are still awful for us, dyes or no dyes. But, despite many failed efforts to curb the worst excesses of the ultra-processed food industry, this time around a few companies really do seem prepared to take this admittedly fairly small step.

This is good. It’s not enough, but it’s good.

Read more

Donald Trump was in Scotland today visiting his gold courses and had the press in to witness his big meeting with Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister. Their topic of discussion, reporters were told, would be trade and the situation in Gaza.

Not.

Headlines followed: Trump dogged by Epstein questions overseas. Three thousand miles from the D.C. swamp, where for the past two weeks his feet have been stuck in the mud of his relationship with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, Trump couldn’t escape him.

The questions came at him. He dodged. It’s a hoax. The files “were run by the worst scum on earth.” He blamed his usual suspects: Biden, Comey, Hillary, Garland. He isn’t in the Big Birthday Book for Jeffrey. “I don’t do drawings. I’m not a drawing person. I don’t do drawings.”

It's not working. He can’t escape the echo from the gigantic thud when the unsigned DOJ-FBI memo hit the table, dismissing the Epstein story with a few blasé paragraphs: He wasn’t murdered, there was no “client list.” The story is stuck to him, and nothing he has tried has freed him from it.

Last week, he dispatched his personal defense attorney, Todd Blanche, now his own personal deputy attorney general, to meet with convicted pedophile sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell at the federal prison in Tallahassee Florida where she is four years into a 20-year sentence. He got the “are you going to pardon Ghislaine?” question on the White House lawn before he departed for Scotland, and he got it again today in the presence of a grim-faced Starmer. Both times, he began his answer with, “Well, I’m allowed to give her a pardon.”

Whatever the Blanche-Maxwell meeting was supposed to accomplish, it didn’t work, either.

Now it’s all over MSNBC and the internet that Trump has lost Joe Rogan, who has had a couple of guests on his mega-popular podcast to discuss the Epstein matter. Today, Rogan made the cogent point that Trump’s failure to make good on his promise to drain the Epstein swamp and let the whole thing out is echoing his other broken promises – to end the war in Ukraine, to lower inflation, to fix the trade deficit. It’s all of a piece, Rogan implied.

So, you’re trying make all these phony trade deals with the EU and Japan and Singapore and every other country in the whole damn world, you’re cutting your pal Netanyahu loose by telling him you want to get food to the starving children in Gaza, you’re so pissed at Putin that you cut his deadline to come around on Ukraine, or you’re going to hammer him with new sanctions…you’re trying, in other words, to be presidential.

And what’s dominating the news? Your base is in an uproar, the Congress is voting to subpoena the DOJ Epstein files, the guy you thought was a pal, Bongino at the FBI, is setting what Yahoo News called a “MAGA thirst trap” with an X post that says darkly, “I’ll never be the same after learning what I’ve learned.”

It’s all falling apart. What’s a conspiracy-mongering lying liar supposed to do?

I don’t know what genius advised him to open the Ghislaine Maxwell Pandora’s box, but he’s going to have to do something with her now. There’s already a leak that Todd Blanche talked to Maxwell about “a hundred names.” Coming on top of a statement from her lawyer that Maxwell truthfully answered every question put to her by Blanche, Ghislaine now has a fuse sticking out of the top of her head. She is a bomb that’s so ready to explode, Trump is going to have to do something about her.

But what? We know how completely Trump is in love with his pardon power. It’s really the only power he’s got that is absolute. Nobody can get in the way of his power to pardon, not even the Supreme Court gets a say.

He could just give Maxwell a pardon or commutation and sit back and, in effect, say fuck you to anybody who questions his pardon of her. That’s what they tried with the DOJ-FBI memo a month ago. Nothing to see here, folks. Go away. But it didn’t work. Rogan’s guest talking about Epstein was a former CIA officer named Mike Baker who put it succinctly: “The mob wants to eat,” Baker thundered. “And they’ve been throwing red meat to the mob about ‘Epstein files’ now for years.”

Rogan agreed: “It’s part of how they got elected.”

Pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell with a big fuck you to his base and everybody else won’t work, either.

The “one hundred names” thing is another ticking time bomb. Blanche and his newly-hired loyalist puppies at the DOJ are probably burning the midnight oil trying to come up with a theory about how Maxwell was framed by the Deep State. They’ve got Deep Staters a-plenty to work with. The Epstein jet manifests alone are a gold mine for conspiracy theory mavens, with lots of Democrats they could throw into the grinder to produce new red meat for the base. In answer to a question in Scotland, Trump made the point that he had never “had the privilege” of visiting Epstein’s island. But Clinton did, Trump said. And so did Larry Summers. “He was president of Harvard,” Trump proudly reminded everyone.

Boom. An Epstein co-conspirator and Harvard in one swoop.

Can’t you already hear his justification for pardoning Maxwell? She was treated so unfairly. It’s one of Trump’s favorite charges, that powerful people – absenting himself, of course – victimized someone who he has suddenly found favor with. The Marine sergeant who executed Afghan prisoners of war. His entire mob of violent maniacs in the Capitol on January 6. So unfairly treated. The torch-carrying white supremacists in Charlottesville: The press has treated them absolutely unfairly.

Himself, of course. “No politician in history, and I say this with great surety, has been treated worse or more unfairly,” Trump told Coast Guard graduates way back in 2017, when he was just getting the unfairly bandwagon started.

So, it will probably be Ghislaine, too, so unfairly treated that he will have to make it right with a pardon, and for a cherry on top of his double-reverse triple salchow DOJ definition of justice as retribution, he’ll throw some juicy conspiracy charges at Bill and Hillary and Biden and you-name-‘em.

He'll be counting on a MAGA memory hole the size of the fucking Grand Canyon to open up and swallow his load of bullshit, if he tries to get away with pardoning a convicted pedophile sex trafficker like Ghislaine.

Silly us. We thought the Washington Post’s lie-o-meter would matter when it hit 35,000, or whatever it was. Now he’s paving the Rose Garden and raiding Fort Knox for more gold leaf to slap on White House filigree. A pardon for Ghislaine will just be more gild for the lily in the Trump White House.

Give a gift subscription

Leave a comment

Share

… as long as they are healthy, well fed and well educated

Much of the panic about falling birth rates can be dispelled once we realise that (barring catastrophe) there will almost certainly be more people alive in 2100 than there were in 2000. But what about the distant future? Dean Spears, co-author of After the Spike has kindly provided me with projections showing that with likely declines in fertility the world population will decline by half each century after 2100, reaching one billion around 2400. Would that be too few to sustain a modern civilisation ?

We can answer this pretty easily from past experience. In the second half of 20th century, the modern economy consisted of the member countries of the Organization For Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). Originally including the countries of Western Europe and North America, and soon extended to include Australia and Japan, the OECD countries were responsible for the great majority of the global industrial economy, including manufacturing, modern services, and technological innovation.

Except for some purchases of raw materials from the “Global South”, produced by a relatively small part of the labour force, the OECD, taken as a whole, was self-sufficient in nearly everything required for a modern economy. So, the population of the OECD in the second half of last century provides an upper bound to the number of humans needed to sustain such an economy. That number did not reach one billion until 1980.

Things have changed since then with the modernization of much of Asia and the rise of China as the new “workshop of the world” in manufacturing. But the history is still relevant.

We can also look at the US> Even today, trade accounts for only around 20 per cent of US economic output. Given a US population of 400 million, it is reasonable to suppose that the production of goods and services elsewhere for export to the US might account for another 100 million people. Most of the needs of these people could be met from within the US economy, but let’s suppose that they employ another 100 million in their own countries. That’s still only about 600 million people who, between them, produce all the food they need, the manufactures that characterised the indsustrial economy of the 19th and 20th century, most of the information technology the world relies on, and a steady flow of technological and scientific innovation.

At the lower end of the scale, Charlis Stross has estimated a minimum requirement of 100 million people, a number that might increase in a society even more technologically complex than our own. But since current demographic trends won’t produce that number for nearly a millennium, we probably don’t need to worry (unless we want to colonise space, the context of Stross’ estimate)

In summary is no reason to think a billion people would be too few to sustain a technological economy. But would a world of a billion people look like?

It’s foolish to try to say much in detail about life hundreds of years from now. What could a contemporary of Shakespeare have to say about the London of today? But London and other cities existed long before Shakespeare and seem likely to continue far into the future (if we can get there). And many of the services cities have always provided will be needed as long as people are people. So, it might be worth imagining how a world population of one billion might be distributed across cities, towns and rural areas.

Australia, with 5 per cent of the world’s land mass and a current population of 25 million, provides a convenient illustration. A billion people would populate 40 Australias, with twice Australia’s current population density. However, around half of Australia is desert or semi-arid (estimates range from 18 to 70 per cent, depending on the classification, and not many people live there. So, the population density of a billion-person world would look pretty much like that of urban and regional Australia today.

Opinions in Australia (as elsewhere in the world) are pretty sharply divided as to whether a bigger population would be a good thing, but it’s unusual for anyone to suggest that we are spread too thinly. On the contrary, congestion, sprawl and the conflict between environmental preservation and housing are seen as the price to be paid for a larger population.

A billion person world could not support mega-cities with the current populations of Tokyo and Delhi. But it could easily include a city the size of London, New York, Rio, or Seoul (around 10 million each) on every continent, and dozens the size of Sydney, Barcelona, Montreal, Nairobi, Santiago or Singapore (around 5 million each). Such a collection of cities would meet the needs of even the most avid lovers of urban life in its various forms. Meanwhile, there would be plenty of space for those who prefer the county

With only a billion people we wouldn’t need all the space in the world. The project of rewilding half the world, now a utopian dream, could be fulfilled, while leaving more than enough room for farming and forestry, as well as whatever rural arcadias followers of the simple life could imagine and implement.

Open thread, my loyal subscribers!

Suggested topic: Will Trump pardon Ghislaine Maxwell?

If he does, will his base let him get away with it? What will be his excuse for why he pardoned her? Not even Trump will say that he has pity for a poor thing facing 16 more years behind bars when the crime she went to jail for was trafficking minor girls for sex with adult males.

She was convicted under his watch, by his Department of Justice, so he can’t blame it on Obama and Biden. So who will he blame? And for what?

If he pardons her, will it be to shut her up, or because she has agreed to concoct a gigantic fib and implicate Trump’s enemies in the secrets of Epstein? If that’s the scam, how are they going to sell that pant-load of steaming crap?

If instead, she insists that Epstein was completely innocent, because of course she is innocent along with him, how will that equally steaming load stand up to inevitable interviews that will follow with prosecutors who know the evidence that put her away?

Of course, Trump might just wave his tiny hand like a wand and – Poof! – it will all go away, and the MAGAs will go back to slobbering about woke. But it’s worth a Friday evening thread, don’t you think?

Give a gift subscription

Leave a comment

Share

The people of Gaza are starving. The people of Gaza are being starved because of a failed humanitarian system implemented by a vengeful government, run by people who do not seem to care if the people of Gaza starve — or are displaced or shot or bombed. To quote Haaretz, Israel is starving Gaza.

As is so often the case in war, women and children who didn’t start it and did nothing to perpetuate it see unique horrors. According to UNFPA, the birthrate in Gaza has declined by more than 40% since before the war: Many women are too malnourished to get pregnant or to carry pregnancies to term. A third of the babies born in Gaza were born underweight, premature, or with other problems requiring putting them in the NICU. And what NICU? Gaza’s infrastructure has been destroyed, and even basic supplies for infants — things like baby formula — cannot get through the Israeli blockade. The rate of maternal death is 20 times what it was in 2022.

Subscribe now

I can’t find an Israeli statement on these particular stats; I would guess that, as is the case with most statistics coming out of Gaza, Israel disputes them. But I haven’t seen Israel offer its own numbers. Israel has blocked journalists from entering Gaza, so reports are impossible to independently corroborate. Israel has blocked many humanitarian groups from bringing the volume of aid needed.

Writing about Israel and Palestine is exhausting because it requires so much throat-clearing, and it’s a master class in whataboutism. What about what this group did first? What about this other concern? What about this other line of culpability? There are no shortage of bad guys here, no danger in running out of people onto whom to cast blame, no dearth of moments when all of this could have been different. But here, in this reality, Gazans are starving right now. Children are starving. Mothers cannot feed their babies. None of this is a natural disaster. This was both predictable and predicted.

At the core of my politics is the idea that we can care about many things all at once — that acknowledging the suffering of one group does not have to take away from the suffering of another. Proportion matters, of course. But empathy needn’t be finite. The suffering of Israelis on Oct. 7 was immense. The traumas that follow generations of Jewish experience are real. The grief for the hostages remains raw. The evil of Hamas, a group that is now trying to leverage the world’s outrage at mass starvation to enable their own ends even if it means more Palestinians will starve, is hard to overstate. The reality of rising anti-Semitism is terrifying, and makes a Jewish state feel all the more necessary. The fear that rises up when opposition to this war and to the Israeli government gets tied up in opposition to a Jewish state is acute — when the war is discussed in terms of whether or not Israel should exist, a reflexive and in my view pointless and dangerous frame not applied to places like, say, Sudan or South Sudan or Rwanda or the DRC or Russia or Pakistan or any of the Islamic countries that denies equal rights regardless of religion. We can hold all of that.

And also, and I would argue, we can say with the utmost urgency: Mothers in Gaza are cradling babies whose spines are visible through their skin. Desperate, hungry people are being shot by IDF forces at food distribution centers. Far-right Israeli leaders and some average Israelis are saying without fear that they want to take Gaza as part of Israel, that they want an ethnic cleansing, that forget debates over whether this is a genocide — they want a genocide.

Israel controls the food that comes in and out of Gaza. The Israeli government has been using food as leverage, arguing that Hamas steals food supplies, sells them, and then profits, using those resources to continue waging this war. Hamas has proven that they believe vast Palestinian suffering benefits their cause. But Israel also has a choice about how much suffering to impose. You don’t starve a civilian population because horrible actors might steal and sell the food.

Gaza is starving. It is starving because of choices made by the Israeli government. There is no explaining that away.

Israel chose to put into place a new aid system run by private US contractors who dole food out at a tiny number of sites overseen by IDF soldiers. They gutted the previous systems of humanitarian relief and aid delivery. They struggled to find any competent, experienced person to lead this aid scheme, because it was so facially dangerous and foolish. It has turned into a calamity. And despite worldwide outrage, Israel is doing little to fix the situation, because, as far as I can tell, Israel’s current leadership isn’t particularly moved by the reality of Palestinian starvation, suffering, and death. Neither is America’s current leadership, which seems keen to enable the worst parts of the Netanyahu government.

These evil policies are a threat to Palestinian life. But they’re also a threat to Israel. It may not be rational or fair that Israel’s existence is up for debate, but Israel is a small albeit extremely powerful country with some very hostile neighbors, relying on a United States with shrinking global influence and a Europe with shrinking sympathies. Even before the war, Israel’s right-wing government was, like America’s, turning the country away from democracy (and got much farther than the Trump administration has here). The more Israel behaves as a violent, authoritarian power engaging in shocking war crimes, slaughtering civilians, and forcibly displacing an entire population, the harder it gets for anyone decent — including many liberal Jews — to stand in its defense. Israel’s biggest threat to its own existence as even a marginal democracy is itself — or at least, this current iteration of itself. (I would also argue that the emergence on “anti-Zionism” and the end of Israel as a Jewish state as a core requirement of leftist and pro-Palestinian politics is just as much an own goal, insofar as it creates a feedback loop of existential threat that makes conflict easy and compromise nearly impossible, but that’s another post).

Israel, like America, is not just a country but an idea and a set of ideals. And like America, the core of that idea is contested. What is at stake right now, at least for supporters of Israel, is not the nation’s physical existence — Hamas, I am pleased to inform you, does not have the ability to wipe Israel off the map — but its soul.

You can’t starve a civilian population and keep your soul.

As an American, I don’t believe that a vile government impugns the legitimacy of a country, or confirms some inherent badness of a whole people; if that was the case, I’d be in some trouble. But I do think this is a moment that demands clarity and action, not justification or equivocating. Gazans are starving. Babies are wasting away. This is a choice. We can make a different one. And there will be dire consequences to continuing down this path, including for the many people who are turning Gaza into Hell.

xx Jill

Share

Subscribe now

Please support this work by becoming a paying subscriber. This newsletter is free and will always remain free but it still takes time and effort to produce. Your support means everything to me. For just $5 a month or $50 a year, you can keep the Opinionated Ogre going. Thank you!

🌟BECOME A CONTRIBUTING SUBSCRIBER!🌟

Every now and then, a writer will put out an article that will attract the attention of the worst people on the internet. It’s like the Bat Signal has gone up, and they gather like maggots to spew their “opinions.” Dana DuBois of genXy had this dubious honor the other day when she wrote about how grown men leer at her teenage daughter. Not glance and take note of how attractive she is, but linger and stare, fully aware that she is underage.

genXy

Middle-Aged Men Keep Ogling My 16-Year-Old

“This way, mom!” shouts my eldest daughter, carving a path through the throng gathered for the Fremont Solstice parade…

Read more

5 days ago · 304 likes · 213 comments · Dana DuBois

Now, I could comment on a similar experience in my life. Lila developed a full-grown woman’s body at the annoyingly young age of 13 and has been dealing with ogling teenage boys and creepy men since then. But you really should read Dana’s article if you want that story.

Rather, I am going to stay in my lane and introduce you to some of the delightful “men” that have been flooding her comment section. You see, I have been screaming from the rooftops, FOR YEARS, that there was something deeply wrong with the American right wing. Something gross and vile and dangerous and…growing.

There have always been men who are attracted to young girls. For some, it’s a legitimate sickness, a real mental illness they cannot control and they hate themselves for it. But there is a far larger group who have openly embraced pedophilia for ideological reasons. They have crafted elaborate stories to justify their lust for children and have quietly and very quickly consumed the American far right.

Let’s meet one now. Say hello to “Jason Chastain.” Jason has some thoughts on children. Some very unhealthy but VERY familiar thoughts:

“The male gaze” is catching popularity as a term. It’s a natural phenomena, like gravity. I wonder if women realize it’s the flip side of “The Female Gaze”? I think I’ll have to write about it because there’s a lot to it. But I will share a few points.

Women basically become (physical) “millionaires” age 16 or 17, and get to wreak havoc on male minds for a dozen years. They don’t have to work for it, don’t have to grind in decades of torturous work to build value. They’re born with it.

Men have to build their value with extreme effort, some of them ignored until past their 30’s when they are finally earning.

I have known young men who were wealthy. They got the female gaze. Older married women ogling them for their money or fame. They were grossed out by it, but even more turned off by the crass, grasping materialism. If he was in ordinary clothing in a McDonald’s, she wouldn’t look twice. Repulsive.

I too have felt it. I am an attractive man, did some modeling in Los Angeles years back, so I wasn’t ignored like many younger men. However as I grew older, wearing a suit for my job, the female gaze was discovered. Younger women who ignored me, suddenly were all seductive smiles and batting eyelashes. But their gaze was the suit, the gold watch, the wedding band. And sure enough, in shorts and a polo, the young ones didn’t look twice as. The female gaze, you see, is at the wallet. They don’t want the man, they want a sponsor.

The female and male gazes will happen because they come naturally to the genders. And they each contain something despicable we don’t like when we see it. 🤷‍♂️

If you’re struggling a bit to understand what the actual fuck Jason is talking about, allow me to introduce you to the concept of the “Sexual Market Value.”

If you don’t already know what this is, I am so very very sorry for what I am about to expose you to. However, it’s really REALY important you understand how fucking depraved people like Jason are and exactly how commonplace this way of thinking is.

So, Jason says women are “millionaires” by age 16 or 17 and men have to build their worth. That they’re mostly ignored until they’re in their 30s. Here’s what he’s referring to. This is a chart, a very widely distributed chart, that claims to map out the “value”, or the attractiveness, of men and women to the other sex according to their age.

Aside from grossly objectifying both men AND women, there are a few things to take note of here:

1. A woman’s value is based solely on her physical appeal. How much does she make? Is she successful? Is she a leader in her field? Who fucking cares? Is she young and fuckable? That’s the only relevant aspect in this scenario. That’s why Jason considers 16 and 17-year-olds to be “millionaires.” They’re young and fuckable.

2. A man’s value is based solely on his earning potential. Is he a good man? A good father? Is he a drunken, violent piece of shit? Who fucking cares? Does he have a good job and money? That’s the only relevant aspect in this scenario.

As you can see in Jason’s comment, men are the victims here, not women. Cruel cruel society punishes men and rewards women. When will someone think of the men!?!?!? Boo fucking hoo.

Now, there is a third aspect to this chart that most people do not consider, but you fucking bet I did when I saw it because I’ve been reading the comments from these sick fucks for years.

Look at the chart again. 10 is peak sexual desirability. But 5 is far from undesirable. 4 is pretty good and 3 is OK. It’s only when you get under 3 that you are no longer all that fuckable. Got that?

Now look at the female graph again. What’s the number for age 15? That would be a 5. So in the world of Jason and his fellow creepy kiddie-fiucker weirdos, 15-year-olds are quite attractive to the “male gaze.”

Cool.

Now look at the graph again, and continue the curve to the left. Imagine what would be there if the chart hadn’t been mysteriously cut off. 14 is pretty fuckable. So is 13. 12…maybe 11. Hell, is a 10-year-old a 3 or a 2? We’re not really sure because the skeazy perverts wisely chose not to advertise that aspect of their ideology. But let me tell you right here and right now: They do not see 12-year-olds as out of bounds.

After all, they’ll be “millionaires” in just a few years.

Imagine you’re a 45-year-old man. You lock yourself down a 12-year-old girl. She’s a beautiful little girl so it’s a good bet she’s going to grow up to be a stunning woman. That means when you’re 50 and she’s a 17-year-old “millionaire,” you have another 15 or so years of maximum sexual value before she’s “too old.” That’s a pretty good deal for you, right?

And if you start early, say, 35? Well, you can always get rid of your now-valueless wife in her 30s and find another 12 or 13-year-old.

If that sounds insane and beyond any kind of misogyny you have ever even contemplated, you do not understand how dark and twisted these fucks are.

It gets worse because of course it fucking does.

“Purity.” They loooove to talk about “purity.” They’re obsessed with “purity.” They’ve invented an entire pseudo-science that dictates women who sleep with multiple partners are quite literally genetically damaged. That means any child you have with them isn’t “your” kid. It’s yours and every other man she’s ever fucked. What a whore. Who could ever sleep with a woman with a “high body count?”

So what’s the solution to this made-up problem? Trap them when they’re young and, preferably, a virgin. Oh, and make divorce illegal again so they can never leave. And make birth control illegal so they’ll be forced to have as many children as you want while making them financially dependent on you. Don’t forget to shred the social safety net, making it all but impossible for a mother to flee with her children from an abusive husband.

Now you understand the larger picture here. It’s not JUST about trapping women. It’s about trapping GIRLS, little girls, in abusive, predatory marriages where a grown man can rape them. This is a real thing, not just on the far right, but in mainstream GOP politics.

Why Are Some Republican Lawmakers Hellbent on Preserving Child Marriage?

Jason isn’t the only dipshit weirdo justifying leering at little girls. Dana’s comments were oozing with pedos the FBI should definitely be investigating:

ChiChi is an antivaxxer and a climate change denier. And remember, MEN are the victims of women being sluts and whores. Even when those “women” are only 16.

ChiChi equating urination to arousal suggests he may have his own “pee tape” hidden away. Why are so many of these incel losers also hardcore perverts? I try not to kink shame but…ew. And stop drooling over little girls, you fucking R. Kelly pedo.

Here’s Kyle, a true student of human evolution:

Kyle is wildly racist. He hates Jews and Black people and immigrants. He’s the total scumbag wannabe Nazi package. Literally.

Kyle imagines himself part of the Master Race. Except that he’s afraid of everything. Women. Gay men. Gay women. Feminists. Immigrants. Science. Jews. Blacks. Muslims. The whole world is filled with threats and danger to his precious white maleness. Which is weird because I thought he was the Master Race? If that’s true, why is he such a fragile little bitch?

Did you know the Opinionated Ogre has a weekly podcast? It’s true! New episodes every Thursday! Catch the latest episode here:

The Ogre says "Fuck The Master Race."

Here’s Dan. He knows EXACTLY who to blame. The teenage girls, of course.

It’s important to note that Dan is a fan of Matt Taibbi, a self-professed serial sex pest. I’m sure that’s just a coincidence and not a selling point.

I personally love it when dickless wonders like Dan announce that all men are slavering beasts that cannot control their urges. And then they cry big sobby tears when women say they feel unsafe around men.

“That’s not faaaiiiiiir! Why do you hate men?!?!?” Another whiny little manboy. Fuck off, Dan.

Here’s Richard. He doesn’t get what all the fuss is about! Women stare at him all the time!

My man, they’re not looking at you because they want to fuck you. They’re looking at you because you look like a reject villain from the 1960s Batman show.

Richard appears to be around 55? 60? One wonders how he has walked the earth this long and not learned from a single woman how threatening it is when a man stares at her. How frightening it is when a man approaches her on the street or in an elevator and no one is around. How men fear women laughing at them (for dressing like Temu Doctor Who, perhaps), but women fear men killing them. It doesn’t take much, just a polite refusal to go on a date or exchange phone numbers. “Why don’t you smile when I compliment you, you fucking bitch?!” And then the violence.

But hey, Richard has women stare at him all the time, too, so he totally understands what it’s like for women.

Shut the fuck up, Richard.

Here’s another real winner. This fucktard longs for the day when robots will end his days of being completely unfuckable.

Oh yeah, this is straight up incel shit. He wants a robot fuck toy SOOOOOO badly because it’s currently illegal for him to force a 12-year-old to marry him.

Dana’s comments are littered with this shit. It’s important to understand the rage oozing from these losers. They were never taught to respect women or themselves. They never took a moment of time to understand the world women inhabit because women exist for their sexual gratification and nothing else. Now that women are very much over that bullshit, these sad little manbabies are throwing a temper tantrum because they have to grow up.

But they don’t want to. Why be a man when you can be a fucking pedophile instead? Why better yourself to attract a woman when you can chase after children who don’t know any better and will be trapped in your rapey misogynistic fantasy for decades? It’s so much easier to lower society’s standards to make it easier for you than to raise yourself up. Self-improvement is hard. Destruction is easy.

Just read Jason’s comments if you really want to understand how deep the rot goes.

Women abuse their power. Men are powerless before them. 16-year-old girls have the same body as a 26-year-old. And there it is. That means a 15-year-old is equivalent to 25? 23? A 14-year-old is as good as a 21-year-old? And men just can’t stop themselves!!!

I promise you, when Jason thinks no one will notice, he talks to his fellow pedophiles about how he would fuck a 14-year-old if she were “mature” enough.

This is not the kind of pedophilia where a person is gripped by impulses they cannot control. This is a calculated push to normalize the abnormal. To reduce women to objects and make controlling them as easy as possible because modern women terrify them.

These sick fucks can tell themselves any myth they want to justify it, but at the end of the day, they see their only chance at a long-term relationship is with a child slave. That’s who they are and that’s how they should be treated.

These are dark times but I will continue to tell the stories you need to hear in a clear (and usually profane) voice. If I entertain/anger/inform you, preferably all three, please consider becoming a supporting subscriber today for only $5 a month or just $50 a year.

🖕FUCK THE PATRIARCHY!🖕

Fascism hates organized protests. They fear the public. They fear US. Make fascists afraid again by joining Indivisible or 50501 and show them whose fucking country this is!

The Blue Wave has begun and the fascist fucks are scared. There are 101 days until it hits Virginia and Pennsylvania. If I were a billionaire fascist loser, I’d think REALLY hard about getting out of the way.