Inclusiveness is Exclusive

My central identity is based on my love of anal sex with men

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/openly-gay-nhl-prospect-prokop-speaks-out-after-reimer-refuses-pride-jersey-170254936.html 

Hockey needs to become a sport everyone can feel welcome in, and Nashville Predators prospect Luke Prokop doesn’t plan to let anyone stand in his way of turning that goal into a reality.

Prokop, the first openly gay player under an NHL contract, has been a trailblazer in the hockey community and an important role model to many across the sport. But while the 20-year-old has made several positive strides in making the game more inclusive, he is disappointed about the lack of progress at the highest level of competition.

The 6-foot-6 defenseman expressed those feelings in a statement Monday night, describing a recent trend of teams and players opting out of Pride festivities as "a step back for inclusion in the NHL."

"Pride nights and Pride jerseys play an important role in promoting and respecting inclusion for the LGBTQIA+ community and it's disheartening to see some teams no longer wearing them or embracing their significance, while the focus of others has become about the players who aren't participating rather than the meaning of the night itself," Prokop wrote.

Prokop shared these comments just days after San Jose Sharks goaltender James Reimer refused to wear a Pride-themed jersey during pregame warmups, citing that his religious beliefs would not allow for it. Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Ivan Provorov took a similar stance earlier this season during the franchise’s Pride-awareness night.

The New York Rangers, New York Islanders and Minnesota Wild recently scrapped their respective on-ice celebrations after multiple players from each team declined to wear Pride jerseys and wrap their sticks with rainbow-colored tape during warmups.

Learning about those announcements was disheartening for Prokop. What is worse, however, is how much attention they have dragged away from the importance of making everyone around hockey feel welcomed.

"Everyone is entitled to their own set of beliefs and I think it's important to recognize the difference between endorsing a community and respecting individuals within it," Prokop continued. "Pride nights are an essential step towards fostering greater acceptance and understanding in hockey, and I strongly believe that by prioritizing diversity and inclusion, we can create an environment where every player feels comfortable bringing their authentic selves to the game. As someone who aspires to play on an NHL team one day, I would want to enter the locker room knowing I can share all parts of my identity with my teammates.

"While there's still progress to be made before hockey is for everyone, I'm optimistic about the change we can achieve and am committed to being a part of it."

So, who is "everyone"? 

Does "everyone" include those who don't support homosexuality?

Why would hockey players wrap their sticks in rainbow flags to show support for homosexuality? Particularly when only one player in the entire league is a homosexual. How weird is that?  

Furthermore, what does LGBTQIA+ even mean? Is that like an acronym for a street gang of sexual deviants who want to steal your soul instead of your shoes, or what?

Is it not interesting that everyone has to participate, or they're a bad guy? Why does it matter if some goalie doesn't want to wrap his stick in a rainbow flag? It's like this one "openly gay" guy is forcing his beliefs on "everyone" else, and if "everyone" doesn't go along with him, then the media attacks them for not being inclusive. It's all very weird. 

There has to be an agenda here. What is it? Depopulation?

The hypocrisy is appalling when it comes to these social issues, like homosexuality. They redundantly say that inclusion is making "everyone" feel welcomed, yet "everyone" is only those who agree, or go along with the inclusive narrative. 

What about the "feelings" of "everyone" who is either indifferent, or who doesn't approve of homosexuality? Do they not matter? I mean, statistically speaking, the majority of people aren't members of the LGBTQIA+ mafia. The majority of people care less about the sexually deviant behaviors of a small minority of people. There will be -and always have been- sexual misfits.

And why would anyone be "openly gay" anyway? I just don't understand why a guy who plays hockey needs to make sure everyone knows that he enjoys anal sex with other men. It's really bizarre. What does his enjoyment of having anal sex with men have to do with hockey? I'm pretty sure everyone who has a job separates their personal life from work. It seems like you would want to keep your personal affairs to yourself and not boast about your sexual endeavors to your coworkers. But nowadays, people have discovered that sexual deviancy will get them attention. Or, force people to like them, even though they probably wouldn't otherwise.

It's pretty sad that we live in a society that people have to do weird sex stuff to get attention, or to feel liked.

Would anyone know who Luke Prokop is if he didn't like having anal sex with men? Even hockey fans probably wouldn't know who he is, because he isn't even that good at hockey (compared to the other hockey professionals). But, I guess kudos to him for marketing himself. People know who he is now, even if it's just because he likes to brag about his love of anal sex with men.

The LGBTQIA+ thing (and just wait, there will be other letters/symbols added in the near future) is like the hippie thing of the 60s. It's the counter-culture, that actually is the culture, because the system supports it. That's what makes it (the movement) all so lame and uncool; it's enforced and supported by the state. There is nothing "counter" about it. 

The homosexual thing would never be cool anyway, because it's so repugnant and repulsive (it's so disgusting, that they will even accuse you of being gay if you come out against gay behavior: "oh, you don't like gay sex, you must be gay!"). And most importantly, it's a Biblical abomination. There is nothing cool about spiting God. And that's exactly what the "pride" movement is about; the rejection of God. The Bible is clear on pride, and it's not a coincidence that the gang of homosexuals chose pride as their moniker. 

James 4:6 God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.

We are all sinners. Nobody is perfect. But God sent his only son to die for our sins. Humble yourself and repent! 

All glory to God! 

 

What if....

https://www.cbssports.com/tennis/news/marta-kostyuk-ukrainian-tennis-star-refuses-to-shake-hand-of-russian-opponent-following-atx-open-win/

Ukraine's Marta Kostyuk refused to shake hands with Varvara Gracheva, a Russian, after she won the ATX Open in Austin, Texas on Sunday. Kostyuk beat Gracheva 6-3, 7-5 to clinch her first career WTA title.

The 20-year-old Ukrainian ended up shaking the hand of the match umpire, but wouldn't shake the hand of Gracheva. Instead, she simply walked past Gracheva on two occasions.

"It was just my choice," Kostyuk said of skipping the handshake, according to The Mirror. "We had a great match, don't get me wrong. She's a great competitor, I respect her as an athlete, but that has nothing to do with her as a human being."

Kostyuk has been outspoken regarding Russian and Belarusian players being permitted to compete in WTA events.

"Whoever speaks out [regarding the war] clearly I believe has every right to be on tour but whoever doesn't... I don't think it's just humane," she said in January, according to The Mirror. "I don't really talk to anyone [Russian and Belarusian competitors] I barely say 'hi' to them."

What if a....:

Russian refused to shake the hands of Ukrainian?

Russian refused to shake the hands of American?

Russian refused to shake the hands of a black person?

Russian refused to shake the hands of homosexual?

Russian refused to shake the hands of Jew?

Russian refused to shake the hands of feminist?

In the social sphere, truth is always perception.

In the status quo, the narrative is engineered.  

Objectively, the truth is always unbiased. 

If you want to know something, objectify the subject.  

Foolish Pride

I've always struggled with pride. Tbh, "struggled" isn't really the right word, because I've always viewed pride as a positive. I have pride in everything that is associated with ME (race, ability, intelligence, skills, appearance, etc, etc). A better way to state the first sentence would be: "Ive always had a lot of pride." But, the Bible is redundant about not being prideful. 

I've been going through some struggles of late. I've been reading about struggle and to a T it's viewed as a building block; something we should embrace and learn from. I feel like God is trying to teach me about my pride with this current struggle. If it weren't for my prideful nature, my current struggle would be more of a nuisance than a struggle. 

All Glory to God!

Proverbs 29:23 Pride ends in humiliation, while humility brings honor.

How Memes Find Resonance

UFC 278 Predictions

 

UFC 278

Kamaru Usman  vs.  Leon Edwards

Paulo Costa  vs.  Luke Rockhold

José Aldo  vs.  Merab Dvalishvili

Lucie Pudilová  vs.  Yanan Wu

Tyson Pedro  vs.  Harry Hunsucker

Marcin Tybura  vs.  Alexandr Romanov

Jared Gordon  vs.  Leonardo Santos

Sean Woodson  vs.  Luis Saldaña

AJ Fletcher  vs.  Ange Loosa

Amir Albazi  vs.  F. Figueiredo

Aoriqileng  vs.  Jay Perrin

Victor Altamirano  vs.  Daniel da Silva

Picks highlighted and underlined (I don't watch women fights, so didn't pick that one) 

Right-Wingers Are Significantly Smarter

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/08/my-week-with-americas-smartest-people.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=pocket_hits&utm_campaign=POCKET_HITS-EN-DAILY-SPONSORED&SEQUOIACAPITAL&A-2022_08_19&sponsored=0&position=5&scheduled_corpus_item_id=0be14885-a94e-4d54-a18b-9771f298609e

You might have some preconceived notions about Mensa. Maybe you think it’s full of super-geniuses and/or hopeless nerds and/or elitists who haven’t earned that status. Perhaps you were put off by the group after listening to comedian Jamie Loftus’s podcast about her year as a Mensa member, in which she delved into the organization’s right-wing undercurrent and the online harassment she faced while writing about it.

“There is no overstating what community can do for someone who, as many members described to me, feel like misfits in their everyday lives and want to belong somewhere,” Loftus said on the podcast, My Year in Mensa. “A society with murky goals whose selling point is superiority is not a healthy place to find it.”

Mensa does have a nasty origin story. It was co-founded by Roland Berrill in England in 1946, an Australian who was a proponent of phrenology (as well as astrology, palmistry, and dianetics). The organization’s other founder, Lancelot Ware, thought intelligence tests were a better way of measuring brain power, and, per the Irish Times, was “influenced by the work of Sir Cyril Burt, who had concluded that intelligence might have a racial basis.”

The leadership of the organization today does not appear to maintain the same racist ideas about intelligence as Berrill and Ware. Mensa International’s website contends, “Mensa is a round-table society where ethnicity, color, creed, national origin, age, politics, educational and social background are all completely irrelevant … Mensa takes no stand on politics, religion or social issues.”

What if the smartest people in the world were predominately white racists? Then "smart" would be deconstructed into an inferior concept. In fact, it already has. Smart people can't be racist, because racists are stupid. 

Everyone (including Scientians) knows that "intelligence has a racial basis." It's just explained with excuses and rhetoric.

"MENSA is a round-table society," that doesn't discriminate on the basis of race. So what are the demographics of MENSA? Glad you asked:

American Mensa Ltd. Demographics

64.4% male, 35.4% female (0.2% won't say)

54% between 30-49 years of age, 14% under 29, 0.32% over 80

31.2% in first marriage, 29.82% never married, 13.32% divorced once, 9.53% in second marriage after a divorce

Just over half have no children, 12.4% have one child, 18.66% have 2, 9.95% have 3, 4.37% have 4, 1.29% have 9+

about 30% earn $20-40,000, 10% earn $50-75,000, 9% earn $40-50,000 and about 0.5% earn more than $250,000.

17.93% Master's degree or equivalent, 17.56% four year graduates, one in 11 are Ph.D.s.

41% work in private industry, 13% in government, 13% self employed.

88% European ancestry.

49% Christian, 3% Unitarian, 9% Jewish, 7% agnostic, 3.6% atheist, 9% no religion

14% only children, 19+% older of two, 12.5% younger of two, 11.5% oldest of three, 6.8% middle of three, 5.8% youngest of three, 9.7% oldest of more than three, 10.8% middle of four or more, 4.4% youngest of four or more

Computer-related occupations 10%, 3.75% own their own business, Electrical Engineers are 2.6%, 7.5% are in education, 3% lawyers, 0.11% judges, 0.02% are in astronomy.

Sometimes we (conformists) don't like the truth. But that doesn't make it not true. No matter how hard anti-whites try to eliminate white male superiority, they fail. 

Women aren't as smart as men (per Science!), and non-whites aren't as smart as whites (per Science!).

The real question is why that bothers people so much. Why is there a collective surge of anti-whiteness? Nobody makes a big deal about black people holding all the world records in sprinting. It only happens with white men. 

I know the reason, and so do you. 

People are haters. People hate that white men are superior in most things, so they make being white and superior a bad thing. It's classic jealousy rooted in envy.

CDC Wants To Atone For Their Mistakes, So They're Going To 'Increase Diversity'

I'll hire more black people so white people will trust me.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/17/health/cdc-announces-sweeping-changes/index.html 

Big changes are coming to the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary as the nation's lead public health agency.

CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky met with senior leadership at the agency this morning to lay out her plans for overhauling how the agency works. She plans to remake the culture to help the agency move faster when it responds to a public health crisis. She also wants to make it easier for other parts of the government to work with the CDC, and wants to simplify and streamline the website to get rid of overlapping and contradictory public health guidance.

Staff will be notified of the change by email. More than 12,000 people work at the agency, which is headquartered in Atlanta.

The changes will be aimed at improving the culture and restoring public trust after the agency's acknowledged missteps in its response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Walensky will bring in former HHS Deputy Secretary Mary Wakefield to the CDC to oversee the reorganization.

Key organizational changes announced today include:

• The Division Laboratory Sciences and the Office of Science will now report directly to the CDC director, a move aimed at improving accountability of the delivery of timely information

• A new office of intergovernmental affairs—a hub where states health departments and other federal agencies with interact with CDC

• A new executive council—reporting to the Director—will determine agency priorities, track progress, and align budget decisions, with a focus on public health impact

• A new equity office, which will increase diversity both in CDC's workforce and add that lens to its public health activities

Additional actions announced today include:

• The CDC is going to create a new online mechanism for the pre-publication delivery of science 

I'm just going to go out on a limb and say that hiring more black people isn't going to restore trust in the CDC. But, who knows, maybe I'm just racist and when Americans see that a Jewish woman is hiring more black people to deliver "science" they will be like, "OK, cool. I trust the CDC now."

Typically in these types of situations -where people are held accountable for mistakes- it's a top down kinda thing. So changes would be made at the top. I'm just not quite sure how decreasing the number of white men who work for the CDC is going to change anything within the public's eye. Like, how would they even know?

The lack of trust is based on the information and the messenger, not on the demographics of interns and secretaries in Atlanta. 

I'd be willing to bet that the demographics of the CDC employees in Atlanta are at minimum representative of population demographics. 

Interestingly enough, the CDC's YouTube channel has an I am CDC tab, in which employees introduce themselves, and give a brief job description. Scroll down the list and count how many white men you see. Is their goal to have zero white men?

Here is the showcase video from the CDC's website.

What it seems like to me, is that Walensky is scapegoating white men for American's lack of trust in the CDC. In other words, she is blaming her mistakes on too many white men working for the CDC. So she is going to attempt to regain that trust by decreasing the percentage of white men employed at the CDC, and "add that to the public lens." 

Maybe it will work. Time will tell. But it's hard to think anyone with any common sense would ever trust an organization that lied so many times, even if you support anti-white racism. 

And they're still doing it with the new monkeypox thing. Putting political correctness ahead of the facts.

I'll tell you what won't happen though: you won't see any media pundits accusing Walensky of being anti-white for scapegoating white men for the lack of trust in the CDC. Why is that?