Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘netflix’

Masculinity Isn’t Toxic, Our Erasure of It Is



Sam Smith
Those who wrote off masculinity as ‘toxic’ never truly understood the concept.

Author Tristan Justice profile




Sam Smith does not look healthy.

Last week, conservative journalist Andy Ngo published screenshots of the singer’s Instagram page. On the left, Smith is seen handsomely seated with his prestigious Oscar. The ensuing photos highlight his attempt to transition into someone who is “non-binary,” or a person who believes he was born a third sex or above the sexes altogether. The logic defies everything we know about human biology down to the binary nature of our chromosomes.

No one seems to know what a woman is these days, but does anyone even remember what a man is? Smith’s progression in Ngo’s photos underscores the erasure of cultural masculinity declared “toxic” by millennials. When you lose sight of what it means to be a man — what it means to look like a man, act like a man, and live like a man — you de facto lose the values that form the foundation of healthy masculinity. But our culture doesn’t even know what a man is.

Around this time last year, my Federalist colleague John Daniel Davidson provided a definition.

“If we’re going to defend manliness as good and virtuous and necessary for a healthy republic, then we need to be clear about what it is and what it is not,” he wrote, continuing:

Yes, men should be physically strong. They should also exemplify traditional masculine virtues like courage, independence, and assertiveness. But why? Not so they can sh-tpost about how ripped or good-looking they are compared to libs, but so they can protect and defend those who are weak.

That is the organizing principle behind the entire concept of manliness: it is not a style or a pose or an adornment. It is a way of being, of living according to the principle that you are responsible for the welfare of others, and should sacrifice yourself for their sake.

What does that mean in practice? It means stepping in to help those in need, whether it’s a woman being harassed or a stranger whose car has broken down. It means risking your own safety to protect someone being attacked, instead of just filming the attack on your phone and posting it online like a beta.

It also means marrying and remaining faithful to the same woman your entire life, and raising a family with her. It means working whatever hours and at whatever job in order to provide for that family. It means going to church every Sunday, whether you feel like it or not, to pass your faith on to your kids. It means getting up in the middle of the night to feed a colicky baby. It means taking your two-year-old daughter to swim class and singing all the songs — your own sense of dignity be damned.

I’m not sure I could write a better definition, amplifying the stoic virtues of physical strength, mental fortitude, and sacrificial living driven by a desire to strengthen the weak and protect the vulnerable.

Where we break is sexuality, and writing as a gay man, I know we don’t see eye to eye on certain fundamental differences. I may never live up to the picture of masculinity Davidson’s worldview prescribes, and I may never have children, but we can agree to disagree like adults. And that’s where the left has gone mad.

Gay men are often allergic to any kind of conversation surrounding masculinity because they’ve been mocked by a class of macho men as “queer,” a slur-turned-term-of-endearment that now qualifies one for the left’s privilege points. True masculinity, however, extends safety for the victims. Those who vilified it never truly understood the concept.

Before Davidson’s column, I’m not sure I remember even thinking critically about manhood — perhaps during a conversation with my father in high school. But beyond that, these discussions seem to have been choked out by a culture eager to dismiss masculinity as universally toxic.

If you question Smith’s regression — the legitimacy of it, the integrity of it, and even the consequences of it — you’re a heretic to the woketopian ruling class that’s hellbent on dictating acceptable speech.

But it isn’t just Smith. There’s a deeper mentally disturbed current pulsing beneath the decline of healthy masculinity and femininity. Consider that nearly 60 percent of people who call themselves “non-binary” report having a mental health issue. And that’s despite both difficulties in diagnosing mental illnesses and the fact that gender dysphoria itself is a mental sickness included in the latest psychiatric manual of mental disorders, meaning the real percentage is far higher.

See for yourself. How is this not a mental illness? Why are we not allowed to call it that? And why on Earth is it unacceptable to ask questions about the twisted state of the sexes?

These people are obviously struggling with a pain that’s very real. Their so-called gender identities might be made up, but their pain undeniably exists. Contrary to parental blackmail by family therapists, data shows gender-confused people are even more likely to commit suicide if they move forward with some kind of transgender transition.

The intolerance of questions surrounding gender dysphoria is baked into the elimination of masculine virtues, which promises peace and coexistence — or the allure of a projected $5 billion surgical industry by the end of the decade. But we need to understand what in the world is going on with men, and we need to be able to ask these questions.

Men today are not working. Their suicide rates are rising as high as their testosterone levels are falling low: While men make up nearly half the population, they represent 80 percent of suicides, and testosterone levels have dropped by double digits since the 1980s.

Men’s low testosterone levels reflect a population that’s not eating right, not exercising right, and not acting on their underlying ambitions. They’re becoming apathetic pot smokers stuck in the pursuit of cheap dopamine hits through Netflix and porn. And these low “T” levels are threatening fertility, which is already on the decline, in the long term, while guaranteeing a generation of fat, lazy men with no hormonal motivation in the short term.

The death of masculinity — its public execution brought about by its supposed toxicity — is the existential crisis nobody’s talking about.

Note: this is the first post in the author’s new conservative newsletter on culture, health, and wellness. If you liked this post and the topics addressed, consider subscribing here.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at

Elon Musk diagnoses Netflix’s big problem after platform sheds subscribers, stock tumbles: ‘Woke mind virus’

Reported by CHRIS ENLOE | April 20, 2022


Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, has diagnosed the disease that he believes is causing Netflix’s foreboding financial woes.

Netflix announced on Tuesday that it experienced its first net loss of subscribers in more than a decade during the first quarter of 2022. The streaming platform disclosed that 200,000 users dropped the service between January and March. The news caused shares of Netflix stock to tumble more than 25%, CNBC reported. Netflix previously told shareholders the company would experience a net gain of 2.5 million subscribers in the first quarter of 2022. To make matters worse, Netflix is now forecasting the loss of another 2 million subscribers in the second quarter of this year. Netflix’s stock further cratered more than 30% as of Wednesday afternoon.

Musk pointed to woke ideology as the source of Netflix’s subscriber and impending financial woes.

Responding to news of the significant stock tumble, Musk said, “The woke mind virus is making Netflix unwatchable.”

In response to another Twitter user who said the “woke mind virus is the biggest threat to the civilization,” Musk affirmed, “Yes.”

Indeed, Netflix has platformed provocatively progressive content. For example, Netflix hosts the show “Dear White People,” which is described as addressing the “complexities of prejudice that take different forms — whether it’s white or light-skinned privilege, sexism, or homophobia.”

Netflix is also scheduled to release a new show on Thursday called “He’s Expecting.” As the title suggests, the show is centered on a pregnant male character. Netflix describes the show: “When a successful ad executive who’s got it all figured out becomes pregnant, he’s forced to confront social inequities he’d never considered before.”

Netflix is also working with Ibram X. Kendi to adapt his anti-racist work into film projects, and the platform released a show about Colin Kaepernick last year. The platform attributed its subscriber decline and bleak forecast to market factors outside the company’s control, account sharing, competition (from Amazon, Disney, YouTube, Hulu, and others), and other “macro factors” including “sluggish economic growth, increasing inflation, geopolitical events such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and some continued disruption from COVID.”

2 Million Sign Petition Protesting Netflix’s ‘Gay Jesus’ Christmas Special

Reported by David Ng | 

URL of the original posting site:

gay jesus / Netflix via IMDB

An online petition protesting a Netflix Christmas special that portrays Jesus Christ as a gay man has reached two million signatures, putting pressure on the streamer to pull the show.

The First Temptation of Christ depicts a thirty-ish Jesus bringing his boyfriend home to meet Mary and Joseph. The Portuguese-language special, which debuted worldwide on Netflix earlier this month, comes from the Brazilian comedy group Porta dos Fundos (literally, “Back Door”).

The petition is demanding that Netflix retract the 46-minute show and that its makers be held responsible for committing a “crime” against the faith.

Netflix is facing mounting criticism over the show. The Catholic bishop of Tyler, Texas, has called the streamer blasphemous over its release of the Christmas special.

“Respect is the last thing they are thinking about, every Christian should denounce this film, it is blasphemy against the Son of God who suffered & died even for all who deny that He is Lord of the Universe,” said Bishop Joseph Strickland in a tweet Sunday.

Strickland later said that he had cancelled his Netflix subscription.

“Dear America Podcast” host Graham Allen also condemned the show, saying: “Jesus isn’t some ‘woke’ culture experiment for you to convince young people that biblical teachings are ‘debatable’?!”

Netflix offers a wide array of progressive and left-leaning content, including shows from its high-profile production deal with former President Barack Obama and Michelle Obama.

Former Obama national security adviser Susan Rice currently sits on Netflix’s board of directors.

Netflix’s chief content officer Ted Sarandos is a close friend of the Obamas’ and was an active fundraiser for the former president’s campaign.

The First Temptation of Christ also portrays the Virgin Mary as a marijuana smoker. Netflix backed the comedy group’s last religious send up, The Last Hangover, which satirized the last supper. Fábio Porchat, the star of the Netflix Christmas comedy special told Variety that the backlash to the film is “homophobic.”

The online petition is seeking a total of 3 million signatures.

Follow David Ng on Twitter @HeyItsDavidNg. Have a tip? Contact me at

The FCC Repeals Internet Regulations After Months Of Wild Protests

Reported by Eric Lieberman | Tech and Law Reporter | 8:43 PM 12/13/2017

WASHINGTON, DC – JULY 19: (L-R) Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai and nominees Jessica Rosenworcel and Brendan Carr prepare to testify before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee during their confirmation hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill July 19, 2017 in Washington, DC. Pai has served as the FCC chairman since January of 2017 and is due for re-appointment. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) repealed Obama-era internet regulations Thursday in a 3-2 vote, signaling a culmination to a long-winded and highly heated debate. Net neutrality — an amorphous concept generally meaning all internet traffic should be treated equally — has been fiercely contested in recent years, increasing in intensity over recent months. Specifically, the best way to enforce net neutrality, or ensure that internet service providers (ISPs) don’t partake in unfair practices, is the crux of the policy dispute.

Proponents of the net neutrality rules imposed by former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler argue that placing the government at the center of the internet is needed to ensure wireless carriers like Comcast and Verizon don’t triage consumers by offering different services with varying speeds, also known as fast lanes. They further contend that the regulations are integral to preventing content owners (think Netflix and Hulu) from paying broadband providers to “cut to the front of the line” at congested nodes of internet traffic, also known as “paid prioritization.” Such corporations could also conceivably favor their own content over that of others in what sometimes is called “vertical prioritization.”

Say, for example, Comcast wanted to encourage its customers to use its On Demand platform for entertainment viewing purposes, it may slow Netflix’s streaming capabilities. Thus far, there has been minimal evidence of ISPs engaging in throttling or paid prioritization. Yet, advocates of the rules argue that it will likely occur prevalently, especially as the internet ecosystem becomes even more complex.

To enforce the rules, Wheeler made the internet a public utility, like water or electricity, under the Title II classification — a fact some supporters of the now-nixed net neutrality regulations are unaware of.

Critics of the net neutrality rules, and thus proponents of the FCC’s decision to repeal the mandate, are generally supportive of a neutral internet, just not in its present state under the Title II category. The onus to police the industry from engaging in anti-competitive behavior has fallen on the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for years (along with the Department of Justice’s own oversight). The FCC’s repeal plans to restore jurisdictional authority to the FTC.

Even ISPs have said they agree there should be a neutral internet as long as it doesn’t overly burden their ability to operate freely and offer special deals that can benefit consumers.

“Your internet Thursday afternoon will not change in any significant or substantial way from the internet you are experiencing today on Wednesday. Nor will it be different next week, nor will it be different on a Thursday a year from now,” Michael Powell, president and CEO of NCTA, a trade association representing the internet and television association, said in a media briefing. “This isn’t just a hollow promise or pledge — it’s rooted in sound self-interest. I think one of the things that the debate often obscures is the fact that ISPs like net neutrality too … they make a lot of money on an open internet.”

He says that the industry has “discovered over decades of providing these services that an open internet model is much more profitable than a closed internet model, or one that tends to create artificial scarcity,” and believes clamping down on users’ capabilities is bad business.

Powell provides an example of one of the most well known online service providers in history realizing this.

“Ever since AOL abandoned the use of closed models, industrial actors have recognized the folly frequently of that model, and continued to pursue that otherwise,” he said.

He says the industry is quarreling over how the FCC of the past, specifically under the later years of the Obama administration, decided to mandate net neutrality rules specifically through Title II classification and delegate itself enormous power.

Nevertheless, the clamor over the debate has caused some to become so incensed they have resorted to vile, racist actions.  Non-bigoted arguments made in op-eds and from grassroots organizations lack the hateful content but still use extreme — and arguably hyperbolic — language.

“Trump’s FCC Wants To Kill A Free And Open Internet,” reads one.

“Everything Ajit Pai Has Fucked Up in the Last Three Months,reads an irreverently critical headline from Gizmodo.

“White House Endorses FCC Chair Ajit Pai’s Quest To Murder Net Neutrality,” reads another.

The brouhaha has been so steadily raucous — and in most instances elusive of actual nuanced policy debates — that Jon Leibowitz, a Democratic commissioner at the FTC from 2004-2013, felt the need to write an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal (which officially endorsed Pai’s rollback) titled “Everybody Calm Down About Net Neutrality.”

“The rhetoric over net neutrality has reached a fever pitch, with each side predicting dire consequences if opponents get their way,” opened Leibowitz, who was was FTC chairman starting in 2009. “There is a critical need for protections from anticompetitive practices online, but both sides are exaggerating. Just as the sky did not fall when the FCC imposed its current Title II version of net neutrality in 2015, it also won’t fall if the FCC reclassifies broadband as an information service later this week.”

He describes the situation as that of “Chicken Little” because “the FTC, my former agency, is an experienced cop on the beat in this area. It protected internet users from unfair, deceptive and anticompetitive practices for the two decades before the FCC’s 2015 rule, which removed its jurisdiction.”

He also references aforementioned historical events.

“Consider the core principles of net neutrality, which I have long supported: unfettered access of the entire (lawful) internet and transparency about broadband providers’ practices,” wrote Leibowitz in TheWSJ. “The FTC worked on those issues for years. In 2000, it conditioned AOL’s acquisition of Time Warner on the combined company’s commitment to treat competing internet providers operating on its network fairly.”

Pai says his plan, which is supported by the two other Republican Commissioners Michael O’Rielly and Brendan Carr, will satisfy both those core principles due to a mandate that ISPs be transparent with their practices and offerings. That way, the FTC steps in only when it deems necessary.

“Tomorrow is an important day as the FCC will vote on rolling back heavy handed Obama-era Internet regulations,” Pai told The Daily Caller News Foundation on Wednesday.

Critics of the repeal, on the other hand, believe enforcing transparency isn’t completely doable or viable.

Setting aside the extremely violent threats made against Pai, as well as a Republican U.S. congressman, some proponents of the repeal consider the public attention to the issue a good thing.

“Americans cherish the free and open Internet, so the public has rightly expressed a range of views on this topic,” Carr told TheDCNF. “Now, some of the stories trending out there are simply fanning the false flames of fear. Indeed, the apocalyptic rhetoric is surprising, even for Washington standards.”

He says that the move to repeal isn’t “a radical new experiment,” but rather an apt reversion to “the same regulatory framework — Title I — that governed the internet in 2015 and for the prior 20 years.”

Overall, Carr expects the rollback to be a big win for consumers and for innovation, the latter of which will help the former.

Roslyn Layton, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who also served on the 2016-2017 FCC Presidential Transition Team, said in a prior interview that the net neutrality rules imposed in 2015 don’t comport with innovation. For example, 5G, the next generation of wireless technology, will allow significantly faster internet and spur further development of technological capabilities that turn former pipe dreams into tangible realities. But this will only occur if net neutrality rules are fully repealed as planned and broadband providers are permitted to expand and invest, including in remote, rural, low-income areas of the country, according to Layton.

Commissioner O’Rielly agrees.

“Chairman Pai’s proposal will pass 3-2 tomorrow. As a result, in the short term, it is unlikely that consumers will notice any changes to their broadband experience,” O’Rielly told TheDCNF on Wednesday. “In the long term, by lifting Title II and removing heavy-handed regulations that inject uncertainty into the market – such as a requirement to come to the FCC to ask permission to innovate – I expect to see more investment and innovation in the broadband industry.”

Democratic FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel did not respond to TheDCNF’s most recent request for comment by time of publication, and Democratic FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn declined to comment for the time being.

The article has been updated to reflect the finalized voting, the results of which were highly expected.

Follow Eric on Twitter

Send tips to

A House of Cards – Abandon Hope, All Ye Who Enter Here


Posted by

For final confirmation that Washington, D.C. is unsalvageable, look no further than its obsession with its own deconstruction—the hit Netflix series House of Cards.

Kevin Spacey essentially plays the anti-Christ, and the ruling class just can’t get enough of seeing through its own mirror darkly. Oh, I know he technically plays Congressman-turned Vice President-turned President Underwood, but he’s really giving us the anti-Christ portrayal every Left Behind movie failed to muster.

Using a ruthless and cunning (and often entertaining) display of realpolitik, Spacey is able to elevate himself all the way to the presidency without ever winning an election. He is evil incarnate, an agent of chaos just like the devil himself, and many of the most powerful people in our nation’s capitol can’t get enough of it. One of his biggest fans is the President of these United States.

“Underwood is getting a lot of things done,” Obama said. “I wish things were that ruthlessly efficient.”

Ironically, some of the things Spacey’s Underwood gets done is the breaking of the teachers’ union, and the first substantive cuts in entitlement spending since the dawn of the Welfare State. Two things Obama would never stand for, but many of his conservative opponents would cheer.

But maybe it’s not what’s Underwood is doing that Obama likes, but the way Underwood goes about doing it that attracts the president? Underwood has no regard for the rule of the law, the Constitution, common human decency, decorum, fairness, or any semblance of honesty. Sound familiar?

But unlike Obama, who actually has some ideological non-negotiables (albeit the wrong ones), Underwood has none. He will betray any constituency or any ally, no matter how loyal, in order to get what he ultimately wants—power for power’s sake. Spacey’s Underwood is the very embodiment of the anti-Christ figure many Christians believe will arise at the end of days. He has no problems working with either side to set them up to betray them later, just as many Christians believe the anti-Christ will do the same with Israel in the last days.

And his wife is almost as bad.

Played by Robin Wright Penn, Mrs. Underwood isn’t patterned after any First Lady I know of. She’s more like a black widow spider. She even uses a sexual assault from her past to cover for all the abortions she’s had, simply because she didn’t want to be a mom. The only thing that sets her slightly apart from her villainous husband is that she actually feels bad for their vicious maneuvering every now and then. Although her guilt lasts but for a fleeting moment, of course.

Along the way every amoral cliché you can imagine is vividly portrayed:

Pro-lifers are screamers and dirty bombers. A lost girl finds contentment in the lesbian lover she meets at their evangelical church. A female reporter having an affair with Underwood has sex with him while calling her dad on Father’s Day. The reputable D.C. reporter who breaks the scandal wide open has a Middle Eastern name. Republican actor Gerald McRaney basically plays the Koch Brothers. Native American tribal leaders are little more than wannabe gangsters. The Tea Party are reactionaries that stand in the way of progress. Underwood himself is a bisexual graduate of a prestigious South Carolina military academy, and so on and so on.

It’s easy to say the show leans Left, but it brutally pans the Left just the same as the Right. No one is unscathed. Conservatives are almost unfathomable to the show, but liberals are often depicted as betraying whatever cause they originally came to Washington, D.C. for. You root for no one, but rather for a giant mushroom cloud to eviscerate the whole lot of them. Sort of an apocalyptic control-alt-delete button. The show would more appropriately be titled Drain the Swamp.

I’m not sure what’s more nihilistic, the plot lines or the fact the very culture House of Cards is self-parodying seems to be loving it? I can’t imagine any other human endeavor enjoying its own broadcast media deconstruction as much Washington, D.C. seems to be enjoying theirs.

And the ruling class wonders why it’s so hated and vilified by everyday Americans.

Throughout history, ruling classes have not responded so approvingly to such biting satire of their heinous exploits. But ours is now a culture so far gone, they’d prefer to shamelessly own it and revel in their nakedness instead.

Perhaps our republic has become the real “House of Cards?”

About Steve Deace

Steve Deace barely made it out of community college in one piece, and then loosely attended a real college for a while. We say he only attended because there’s no record of him actually accomplishing anything while he was there, or at least anything he wants to tell his three children about before they’re 21 years old. By the grace of God he managed to find a woman that would put up with him, his wife Amy who daily exhibits the patience of Job. Because he’s not that educated, Deace actually believes the Bible is literally true and the Constitution isn’t a living, breathing document. He also knows way more about superheroes, Star Wars & Star Trek, and college football than any man not living under a vow of perpetual virginity in his mom’s basement should. He’s also the author of Rules for Patriots: How Conservatives Can Win Again


Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: