#Arkhaven INFOGALACTIC #Castalia House
Disney: We simply can’t have pedophile partiers who make sick jokes about molesting children directing our movies. You’re fired!
DC: Hey, James Gunn is available now? You’re hired!
Bounding Into Comics has the details:
Warner Bros. confirmed to Gamespot that Gunn will write the next installment of the Suicide Squad. They told Gamespot, “It is confirmed that James Gunn is writing the next installment of the Suicide Squad franchise.”
This retraction and apology is more than a little amusing, in light of Mark Siefert’s well-intentioned attempt to understand the other side and play peacemaker. But as I had originally warned him, SJWs cannot understand anything and one cannot reason with them. Delenda est.
An Apology Concerning Vox Day: We Made a Mistake
Posted by Kaitlyn Booth October 11, 2018We at Bleeding Cool wish to issue an apology.
Bleeding Cool does not support bigotry of any kind, nor will we become a bullhorn for the bigots of the world to go off.
Today one of our writers made an error in judgement resulting in giving exposure to viewpoints that we abhor. We will do better, going forward, and that is a promise. The author admits that this was an extreme error of judgement that never should have been made and that other members of the Bleeding Cool writing staff were unaware of the contents of this article.
In a first step towards that end we are announcing, effective immediately, I am stepping into the role of Editor-in-Chief and will be implementing new review policies across the Bleeding Cool teams. Yesterday an extensive interview was run with publisher, author, and political figure Vox Day.
The intention of the interview was to investigate Day’s political and ideological views, and his operations as a publisher. But these intentions do not matter. The intent of the article and interview were poorly executed, and poorly communicated.
While the intentions of the author might have been one thing, the reality of the situation is another. Bleeding Cool would like to issue a sincere apology to everyone for the article in question.
We do not, in any way, agree with the ideology of Vox Day. We do not support divisiveness in the fan community, or in our culture at large. We do not support those that try to bring down others. We support diversity in all aspects of pop culture. We support everyone fighting the good fight against bigotry and only wish we could play a part in making not only the internet but the world a safer place for all individuals. We cannot apologize enough for the people we have offended. We cannot apologize enough for the breach of trust this has had with our readers and people within the community. We hope you’ll be willing to give us a chance to win back that trust in some capacity.
We will do better.
Read the original article here. Meanwhile, John Trent of Bounding Into Comics is celebrating his new monopoly on all the independent comics news.
Your transaction has been refunded
Your transaction to ALT-HERO:Q on Indiegogo has been refunded!
Indiegogo’s Trust and Safety Team determined this campaign didn’t comply with our Terms of Use. You’ll no longer receive any perks associated with this transaction. Please visit our help center for further information on how Indiegogo protects users.
Needless to say, we’re looking into this. We’ve got everyone’s email addresses and so forth, so if we have to set up our own crowdfunding platform, we will do so. However, in light of the fact that Indiegogo has done this retroactively, we are already looking into the legal aspects of their actions. I am not yet aware of any reason, in fact, I do not even know if the scheduled payment for the campaign was delivered on schedule or not two weeks ago. I assume not, but I won’t be able to confirm that until tomorrow.
I’ve already talked to The Perfect Aryan Male, the architect of our lawsuit against GT Interactive. Suffice it to say that the band is back together!
If you’re Legal Legion of Doom and licensed in California, get in touch and join the team.
UPDATE: This lawsuit should prove educational. At first glance, it looks very similar. It’s very interesting that it was filed in Massachusetts.
I wish Marvel Studios would hire Megan Ellison to run it:
According to The Wrap, Annapurna Pictures has run into financial difficulties as of late, culminating in the “jettisoning of two upcoming films with marquee talent” and the exit of its film division head…. Coming in December, Annapurna will be releasing the Christian Bale star vehicle “VICE,” another leftist propaganda film in which Bale plays former Vice President Dick Cheney opposite Sam Rockwell playing President Bush. The film is reported to have cost a “bloated $60 million to produce” when it should have cost only half that. Factor in marketing cost and the film hasn’t got a prayer.
“There is a financial issue going on,” a source told The Wrap. “Her dad has put a lot of money into the company and I don’t think he wants to support her behavior and what’s been going on. There are restraints — the money is not flowing.”
Annapurna also recently dropped its slated film about Fox News founder Roger Ailes just three weeks away from starting production. It had been approved for a whopping $35 million budget.
A source close to Megan Ellison says she has been making political passion projects with zero regard for financial cost or box office potential.
“She makes bad decisions,” the source said. “She wanted to chase all these expensive movies that weren’t going to make money, and she said, ‘I don’t care whether they make money.’ That’s not how you run a company.”
It is if you’re an SJW. From a Financial Times article in 2014:
She is Megan Ellison and, depending on who you talk to, she is either the saviour of an industry that has succumbed to brain-numbing comic-book movies and superhero sequels or a wealthy heiress who splashes the cash on films that don’t necessarily make financial sense.
From the transcript of the Darkstream:
It’s really amazing to see how someone like Jordan Peterson simply doesn’t understand that people pay attention to what you say, and that people pay attention to what you said yesterday. People pay attention to what you wrote! He seems to think that as long as you fold, spindle, and mutilate the ideas that are coming out of your mouth, as long as you pretend to be thinking very seriously, really debating with yourself and thinking very hard like you’ve never ever thought about the subject before, then you can say whatever you want. Because, you know, you don’t think you’re right, it’s just a thought experiment, it’s just an idea, just, you know, contemplating various options and throwing ideas out there. It’s total bullshit! It is from the start, it is all the way through, it is at the finish.
Let me make it clear for you: Jordan Peterson is a used car salesman, except the used car he is selling is himself. Okay? He’s not your dad, he’s not your uncle, he is somebody who is making a lot of money off of you and people like you because you’re dumb enough to fall for this guy! Look, I’m a writer, I am an editor, and I knew before I finished the first chapter of 12 Rules of Life that Jordan Peterson was an intellectual charlatan. Now, I will admit that I wasn’t aware that he was a complete lunatic until I read Maps of Meaning. I didn’t realize that there was something genuinely wrong with him until I read Maps of Meaning and I didn’t realize how totally full of bullshit he is until I watched some of his videos.
Look, when you see him pull this move, “no, I’ve never thought about this before, I’m really just working my way through the same thing that I’ve been asked about 50 times before, but I want you to think that I’m really trying to puzzle my way through this and I don’t want you to hold me accountable for anything that I say,” I mean, you should be embarrassed! You should be irritated with yourself for listening to this guy at all!
Over the last few weeks, I was interviewed extensively by Mark Siefert and Rich Johnston of Bleeding Cool, the comics media site. It is quite literally the longest, most thorough interview I have ever read, much less participated in on either side. Bleeding Cool posted the entire interview almost entirely verbatim, including the follow-up questions and answers. It is precisely 767 percent more honest and fair than the NPR hit piece was, and demonstrates rather clearly how the Internet media puts the mainstream media to journalistic shame.
This doesn’t mean either Siefert or Johnston agree with me at all about anything. They very clearly don’t, for the most part. But they recognize that Arkhaven and Dark Legion have successfully established themselves in the comics space and that it makes no sense to simply pretend that we don’t exist. Beyond that, they observably understand that the customary SJW response is not only ineffectual, but serves to add considerable fuel to the fire that motivates us and our supporters.
In some ways it’s a debate as well as an interview; while I could offer a few objections to some of his corrections to my answers, there is little point in going down those rabbit holes. For example, I don’t view Marvel’s denial of its director of content and character development Sana Amanat’s connection to the Clinton Foundation to be conclusive or convincing given the direct relationships between the foundation, her cousin, and her two brothers. But given the in-depth investigation they clearly did into my family and heritage – which was very interesting as I previously knew nothing about my historically significant Irish ancestor – they doubtless have the ability to dig considerably deeper into that situation if they wish to do so.
But it is a fair, detailed, and extremely informative interview, which I suspect a number of people on both sides of the ideological spectrum will enjoy reading. I expect a fair number of SJWs will be outraged by the fact that Bleeding Cool acknowledged my existence at all, and when they did, failed to devote the entire interview to angrily denouncing NAZICOMICSHATE, but then, birds will fly and fish will swim too.
We no longer live in a world where we can mutually pretend that our comics don’t contain politics so we don’t have to argue about it. Politics covers everything like a rash you want to scratch even though you know that’ll make it worse. Comics are no longer a brotherhood beyond politics, and fandom is no longer sacred ground.
Vox Day has played a role in creating that world, in my opinion (which he disputes to a substantial degree in the interview below, for the record), and has also published books that I dislike, and things that are intentionally antagonistic. On the book and comics publishing front, that doesn’t bother me, at all. Have at it. It is a legitimate function of art to be disagreeable, to inspire dislike and even anger.
Because comics can in fact be dangerous, very many publishers in our history have faced struggles for distribution and placement on newstands or in stores. Day has stated that he’s had some inexplicable issues with selling his comics on Amazon. If that’s true, it’s wrong. Any distributor or retailer can refuse to carry a comic for any reason (a concept that I am personally very familiar with), and that’s perfectly fine too. But if there’s any third party or rogue employee interfering with Castalia House books or comics from being sold at Amazon when those comics are salable according to standard policies, not only are you in the wrong, but you’re also helping Vox Day, not hurting him. You’re giving him and his followers something to fight.
You won’t convince anyone that Vox Day’s politics and opinions are wrong by restricting his followers’ ability to buy his comics. Quite to the contrary. Attempting to win by restricting the publication of information (note that this is a different thing than controlling the flow of information that you yourself consume) does not put one in particularly enviable company. That’s not how to win any modern conflict, let alone a conflict based on information… which is all of them now.
I’d much rather be reading the There Will Be War series than discussing Vox Day’s politics. Or writing that post about Luis Senarens that I mentioned earlier. But politics are the core of who Vox Day is and what he talks about — for the moment — so let’s go….
Bleeding Cool: I want to start off with something that’s come up in connection to Comicsgate and events that have spun out of your disagreements with Ethan Van Sciver. Comicsgaters often say they want politics out of comics. At its core, the idea that people want comics to be escapist entertainment certainly isn’t objectionable. But you recently noted:
“Second, comics have always had political and ideological elements to them; the core problem with what the SJWs are doing in comics is less about how they are inserting their lunatic politics into the comics and more about the way in which they are ideologically policing who is permitted to produce and publish comics at Marvel, DC, Image, IDW, and other comics publishers.”
Is it possible to create superhero comics without political elements? Is “with great power comes great responsibility” a political statement?
Vox Day: Yes, it is possible to create superhero comics without political elements, but one will end up with a limited range of stories that are intrinsically unrealistic. After all, there is no way that the governments and militaries of the world would simply ignore the increased power that superheroes could offer them. “With great power comes great responsibility” is not a political statement, it is a moral statement. And it is not possible to create superhero comics without moral elements.
Read the whole novella-sized article, entitled Vox Day: Altered States of America, there.
Also, speaking of Arkhaven Comics and Chuck Dixon, I’m happy to report that CHUCK DIXON’S AVALON #2: RULEBREAKER, is now available in a gold logo edition from Arkhaven Direct, this time complete with dialogue. We’re working on getting replacement issues out to those who received what we shall euphemistically describe as “silent collector’s editions”.
UPDATE: The initial response on Twitter is, of course, entirely surprising to absolutely no one.
Smack Talk Showdown@SmackTalkShwdwn
This is disgusting. Why give this hate monger a platform?
Amazon ditches its HR-replacement AI for violating several of its assumptions:
Amazon.com Inc’s machine-learning specialists uncovered a big problem: their new recruiting engine did not like women.
The team had been building computer programs since 2014 to review job applicants’ resumes with the aim of mechanizing the search for top talent, five people familiar with the effort told Reuters.
Automation has been key to Amazon’s e-commerce dominance, be it inside warehouses or driving pricing decisions. The company’s experimental hiring tool used artificial intelligence to give job candidates scores ranging from one to five stars – much like shoppers rate products on Amazon, some of the people said.
“Everyone wanted this holy grail,” one of the people said. “They literally wanted it to be an engine where I’m going to give you 100 resumes, it will spit out the top five, and we’ll hire those.”
But by 2015, the company realized its new system was not rating candidates for software developer jobs and other technical posts in a gender-neutral way.
The problem of the machine not spitting out results preferred by those using it is hardly new. And while the article claims that “gender bias was not the only issue” and that “problems with the data that underpinned the models’ judgments meant that unqualified candidates were often recommended for all manner of jobs” is almost certainly true, the problem is that Amazon did not give its AI a fair shake.
Amazon simply assumed that the undesired preference for male employees and “unqualified candidates” was a bug rather than the feature that it may have been. If the AI actually worked, then it would have undermined not only the concept of sexual equality, but credentialism as well. But instead of actually allowing the experiment to proceed and seeing if those unqualified male candidates recommended by the AI were successful employees, they chose to kill it on the basis of its violation of their preconceived ideas.
It’s too bad that they didn’t allow the experiment to play out, because the complete destruction of corporate credentialism is desperately needed in today’s increasingly competitive global marketplace. Then again, given how Amazon already dominates the online retail space, it’s probably just as well for their competitors that they turned away from the possible advantage the AI-HR system might have given them.
First he offers a ridiculous, long-winded justification for his “Kavanaugh should step down” tweet:
I asked myself a question, after reading these posts: “Is there an alternative to confirming or not confirming Kavanaugh?” When a choice appears starkly binary, a third path appears impossible, by definition — but might possibly still be worth seeking. I tried to place myself in Kavanaugh’s position, while generating a potential answer (and think that I can do so with some justification, having been publicly identified as reprehensible by many people—prominent journalists, activists, and academics among them).
I thought, “He can’t withdraw, prior to the nomination, because his reputation has been savaged so badly that withdrawal would not only mean loss of the Supreme Court nomination, but demolition of his entire career and future life.” So the only way for Kavanaugh was forward, through the FBI investigation, on to the nomination hearing, and the hope that he would be… what? Cleared? Not cleared, because it is too late for that, even given the favorable or at least not damning FBI report. A large percentage of the American public does not believe that he is an appropriate choice for the highest bench position in the land (51{b70b139db3e26271be493a29e5845e472849fb9ef3854e30dd0f16ed9e15a891}, according to NY Mag: https://nym.ag/2RwLUGt, citing a CNN poll). I’m not claiming, necessarily, that CNN’s poll is reliable. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that there is very widespread opposition to his candidacy, much of it generated not by people’s belief in his innocence or lack therefore but by their objection to the manner in which both parties handled the nomination process.
It’s not a good thing when there is general discomfort with the manner in which something as important as the naming of a new Chief Justice is undertaken. It doesn’t bode well for the stability and peace of the state (and perhaps–perhaps–there is nothing more important to preserve than that).
So I thought, “What might I do in such a position?” Withdrawing, prior to a full investigation, did not constitute an acceptable option. But it’s not clear that accepting the position, given the scale of opposition to my candidacy (“my,” in my simulation of his situation). So what if the FBI cleared me, I received the nomination, but then decided that it might be best for medium- to long-term peace and the good of the country if someone who shared my views but who had not been contaminated, rightly or wrongly, by the horrors of the nomination process in question be put forward as a candidate in my stead? Objections to that might include:
- Perhaps the Democrat opposition would mount a similar campaign against my putative successor. But that would provide virtually unassailable evidence for the purely manipulative and political motivation of the accusers, forcing them to duplicate their strategy a second time. That would help reveal the machinations for what they were, in a manner that would be virtually undeniable.
- Perhaps time is of the essence, and there would be no way to place another candidate of conservative leaning on the bench before the November elections. As they say, however: “act in haste, repent in leisure.” It might be acceptable to wait a month and test the democratic waters: if the Republicans do well in November, then their moves to nominate the candidate of their choice have been fully and evidently vetted by the electorate. That’s not a bad medium-to-long-term strategy.
- Perhaps it is necessary, as an act of patriotism, to sacrifice personal ambition for the broader welfare of the country.
- Perhaps that would also enable “me” (Kavanaugh) to regain the moral upper hand, in some permanent manner: with my name cleared, enabled in at least some manner to go on with my life, I could clear the way for the next, hopefully less contentious candidate.
So those were my ideas.
Then he threatens to hold his breath until he turns blue quit Twitter because he can’t take the well-merited heat.
I was laboring yet again under the naïve misapprehension (and should have known better at this stage in the media war) that I could offer an idea—not a certainty—for consideration on that platform. I should have known better not least because I had already discussed the dangers of Twitter, for example, with my son, who insisted over many months that if I engage in contentious issues online that I should do so with a longer blog post, and link to that with Twitter. I should have known better because Twitter appears primarily to be a forum where errors are magnified and outrage and vitriol almost certain to emerge whenever uncertainty about motive manifests itself.
I honestly don’t know what to do with Twitter. It’s a very dangerous platform, and may well be doing more harm than good. But I have something approaching a million followers. Do I owe them a certain allegiance? Should I just abandon my account, or should I try to use it properly, whatever that means? I think it would be safer for me to leave Twitter and it would almost certainly better for my mental health and ease of mind and conscience.
Jordan Peterson has NO intention of quitting Twitter. He’s a fame whore and he’s just desperately trying to get his disappointed followers to buy into the “clarification” narrative.
UPDATE: I didn’t notice this on the first read-through. Jordan Peterson is also an ignoramus.
It’s not a good thing when there is general discomfort with the manner in which something as important as the naming of a new Chief Justice is undertaken. It doesn’t bode well for the stability and peace of the state (and perhaps–perhaps–there is nothing more important to preserve than that).
The charlatan who has been contemplating this matter so very deeply apparently didn’t spare one single thought for the fact that Justice Kavanaugh was not named Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. The naming of a Chief Justice is indeed a significant government event, but it doesn’t have anything to do with the recent Kavanaugh confirmation.
Some of them are downright beneficial to society:
The Society for Human Resource Management published a report Thursday that documented the result of the movement that called on society to believe allegations of sexual harassment without question.
According to the study, nearly a third of executives report that they have “changed their behaviors to a moderate, great or very great extent to avoid behavior that could be perceived as sexual harassment.”
The CEO of the SHRM, Johnny C. Taylor Jr., explained that “some of the more concerning pieces of data that came out of the research are around the concern that there may be a backlash of sorts.”
“There were men who specifically said I will not hire a woman going forward,” he explained.
“Those who said they would hire a woman said they would not travel with one, and they, more importantly they would not engage in activities after business hours,” Taylor added.
Ironically, a genuine misogynistic woman-hater is considerably safer in the current environment than the most passionate confirmed male feminist. I don’t hate women, but I have never trusted them or believed in their doe-eyed innocence, which is probably why I’ve never had any problem in this regard even though feminists have hated me since 2001.
My habits are pretty straightforward. Don’t touch women and never initiate contact with them. Don’t talk to women outside the friends and family circle except to exchange the customary civilities or to do business with them. Don’t express attraction to women. Don’t betray any emotion or vulnerabilities to women. Don’t permit yourself to be put into situations where you are alone with women. Don’t allow your mind to be distracted by a pretty face or a shapely figure. When in doubt, walk away.
There are a few exceptions, of course, but they are women who have proved, over time, that they are individuals who can be trusted, and not merely in the context of male-female relations either.
At the end of the day, I just like Spacebunny a lot better than the rest of them, so it’s less a series of intentional behavioral guidelines than a lack of interest on my part.
There is a story about Terence McKenna, upon being introduced at a conference by an academic who kept going on about the epic drug-taker’s amazing metaphors concerning other-dimensional elves, standing up and angrily shouting, “It’s not a metaphor! The elves are real!” At which point everyone in the audience suddenly realized that the famous techno-philosopher was not brilliant, he was not insightful, and his thinking was neither revolutionary nor creative, he was just crazy.
Owen Benjamin – by the way, you guys were right, the man is extremely funny – appears to have had a similar epiphany about the intellectual frauds known as Jordan Peterson and the rest of the New York Times-christened “Intellectual Dark Web”. From the transcript:
Brett Weinstein comes out swinging. I was saying WeinSTINE, they were saying it was WeinSTINE. They’re such fucking little weasels. When Brett was on Rogan, they said it was WeinSTINE instead of STEEN, but that was blatantly because of Harvey. Now they’re all saying WeinSTEEN. Bunch of fucking weasels. The Intellectual Douche Weasels. IDW. Intellectual Douche Weasels.
For those of you who are like, “oh, you’re turning on your own, Big Bear,” no, I’m not. I’m using criticism and social shame to try to alter someone’s behavior. I am not taking anyone’s rights or calling for anything.
Brett Weinstein says “Quite a good discussion of some IDW-” That’s Intellectual Douche Weasel. The Intellectual Dark Web, what a bunch of fags. All right, “reactions to the Kavanaugh confirmation and push-back. Warning, contains nuance. You may be triggered. If you are, avoid social media for 24 hours. Comfort and herb tea are available free of charge at a local safe space.”
These people. I can’t believe I was once rooting for them. That’s all right. See, that’s a mistake I expect you to get past with me. I made a mistake, I said you can trust a guy like Brett Weinstein to give pushback from a liberal stance and that’s how you can come up with the best- no! These people are undercutting the American republic and they can go fuck themselves. Don’t listen to a word out of their mouths.
I’m asking you to do that out of consent, by the way. I’m not forcing anyone or condemning or “taking down”. That’s so stupid. This is Charlie’s reaction, by the way, when I told him what Jordan Peterson has been up to. He hasn’t been taking it very well. You know, he looked up to him almost like a father figure and now he doesn’t even want to clean his room! He’s just throwing his toys everywhere… he’s spiralling.
By the way, you’re the one who cleans your room. It has nothing to do with Jordan Peterson. Everybody just needs a better Dad. That’s what it comes down to. The Baby Boomers sucked at being parents and so now no one knows what money is or how the government works.
What’s interesting to me about the Official Opposition’s sudden reaction to Jordan Peterson’s massive faux pas is the way they are desperately trying to reinforce his false “thought experiment” narrative. What a great nuanced discussion! It’s just a thought experiment that demonstrates how nuanced and thoughtful ol’ Uncle Jordan is! He didn’t actually mean what he said. LOL! Don’t you know he just works out what he thinks in public? He’s been thinking about this issue for a long time, a long time, but he’s just working out what he thinks about it now in response to your reaction to his tweet, which you must understand was just a nuanced thought experiment that struck him amidst his contemplation on how best to clean someone else’s room.
No, it’s an extremely significant demonstration of how little character and integrity these weasels possess, as they join forces in order to cover up for Jordan Peterson’s mask slipping in public and revealing the real anti-American left-wing globalist face underneath. In fact, the main thing I took from all of this was the confirmation that Scott Adams is not on our side, after he rushed to accept the Crazy Christ’s “clarification”.
Think about this. Did Milo ever get this kind of protective public insulation for his public missteps? Did they ever extend the same benefit of the doubt to Kavanaugh or anything that President Trump has ever said? The Incestuous Douche Weasels know, they immediately recognized, that Peterson exposed himself badly on Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, and anyone who falls for this frantic ex post facto itachi kabuki is a self-deluded fool.
It is simply ghastly to observe how many Peterson cultists continue to delude themselves about the man, even after they saw him unmask himself. They have the situation precisely backwards. Peterson didn’t take one bad position after establishing many good ones, to the contrary, he very publicly took one good position early on that is very much against the flow of his entire personal and professional perspective.