Canceling Snow White

Uncategorized 1 Minute

Snow White promotes rape culture

Prince Charming’s life restoring kiss is non-consensual because being unconscious, she cannot give consent.

(Napoleon, are you watching this?)

Published by Don Tabor

I am a former Chairman of the Tidewater Libertarian Party and was the 2007 LP candidate for the 14th district VA Senate. Previously, I was the Volunteer State Director for the FairTax. I am married 50 years with two grown children and 5 grandchildren.

Published

44 thoughts on “Canceling Snow White”

        1. Yes, I underestimated the degree to which women would vote based on their emotional discomfort with Trump’s personality.

          Same error you are making her.

          But go for it. EXPLAIN to them why they shouldn’t feel that way. That’ll be fun.

          Like

          Reply

          1. You cannot help yourself, can you?

            Women – poor little dears. So emotional. If they were smart and rational like you, they would have voted for Trump. Yeah, right.

            As I said, this kind of baloney is desperation. A silly opinion that very few take seriously – even the most “woke” of women – pulled from obscurity and spread around by Fox News. The same lying hacks that reported last week that (1) Biden was banning hamburgers and (2) the government was buying mega-copies of “Superheroes Are Everywhere” to give to immigrant children.

            Dripping with pitiful desperation. But, hey, enjoy your brandy.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Emotional? Perhaps the idea that Trump was a fraudster from the day he started working for Papa Trump and the tax evasion gang.

            Or that tearing children, even toddlers, from their parents who were refugees and then lying about where they were.

            Or maybe, just maybe, having an admitted sexual pervert, assaulter and probable rapist (maybe even pedophile since Epstein was a great friend who like women on the “younger side”.

            Or that we wanted a man elected president to be, well, a man.

            Despite your assertions, women do make rational decisions and have made excellent leaders worldwide.

            Liked by 2 people

          4. That women are capable of rational thought is unquestioned, but it is also unquestioned that, in general, emotion plays a much greater part in their decisions.

            In some contexts that is not a bad thing, but we cannot ignore it.

            Like

          6. Nothing misogynistic about it. I think women are wonderful. And often they are right and we are wrong.

            But women are different, they can reason in the same way as a man, but it is not their natural path. That’s not a bad thing. In areas where relationships are required they are superior to men unless we force ourselves to think as they do,

            If you doubt that difference, try telling an angry woman to get a grip on herself and calm down.

            Like

          7. If my wife or daughter read these posts, they’d ask to bring a gun to the house. And shoot the computer. Not because they are emotional, but because they would think you are a “barefoot and pregnant” kind of guy. I won’t argue with them. They are a lot smarter than either of us.

            Like

          8. ” . . . but it is also unquestioned that, in general, emotion plays a much greater part in their decisions.”

            That is some world class Archie Bunker bullshit you are sharing.

            Women may have different values and different leadership styles but are no more prone to emotional decisions than any other gender. Less prone would be more like it.

            Women are more likely to express emotions. Men are more likely to act on them.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. “Nothing misogynistic about it.”

            Uh, what you are expressing is just about the most insidious form of misogyny. Women are so sweet but just not rational like we men. Being rational is not in their nature. Incredible bullshit!

            Liked by 1 person

  2. Once upon a time, not long ago, there was a leader of a great nation. A man who would be king but the peasants were not happy with his lies.

    He tried to storm the castle, but his soldiers were better trained at drinking beer than revolution. And the leader, scorned and “de-tweeted”, retired to a warmer place.

    His magic was still pretty good. And other possible leaders would make pilgrimages to his new home in an effort to kiss the ring and transform themselves from human to lapdog.

    The kisses were non-consensual, of course, but the joys of being petted, coddled, fed and doing tricks to please the would be king were legendary.

    Soon, only real men and women were in the castle, but it was overrun by small, noisy dogs who had been transformed by their leader.

    And the nation cheered as the kennels filled with dogs who could only see through their right eyes. And consequently walked in ever tightening circles around the Florida prince. No longer able to work anymore, they all became caddies.

    A fairy tale that will be passed on to future generations as “The Prince and the Frog (Pepe)”.

    O at least this was as toad to me. 😇

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. You have no sense of irony, do you.

        It was not just about Trump, but rather a rebuttal to your tale with another, truer one.

        Besides, if you think that all those toadies marching lockstep to Florida is not a current issue, you have just been gaslighting yourself.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        1. Inside the heart of every woman voter(except those whose hearts have been eaten out by wokeness) beats the heart of a princess and if you make Prince Charming less than charming and they will rip your parts off.

          Like

          Reply

      2. “. . . keep right on fighting the last war.”

        Uh, that would be you and the GOP. This war on “wokeness” is the same, worn-out racism and misogyny – albeit decked out in a new dress – that Trump and his supporters carried into battle last year. It backfired then and will continue to do so. The days of unquestioned white male hegemony are over and until the GOP figures that out, they have nowhere to go but down.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. You are too funny. War on “wokeness” aka a war on myth driven stupidity? No, not a war, it’s repeating common sense in rebuttal of pure BS. Even your savior Obama derided “w okeness”.

          Like

          Reply

    2. This fairy tale is about as pathetic and worthless as being “woke”. I get it, it must sound cute to the children, you know, easily offended, overzealous, nosey neighbor Democrats that you want to just spit on.

      Like

      Reply

        2. His is a reverse wokeness. He sees resentment as his only recourse. Like the party he bows to, no policy thoughts. At least Don and JTR attempt those. They fail, but at least they try.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

    1. Why was 1619 funded in the first place?

      It is clearly an agenda driven project, not an objective study, so why would it be publicly funded? Do we fund studies of history from the Klan point of view?

      Like

      Reply

      1. “Do we fund studies of history from the Klan point of view?”

        It’s not necessary. American history was basically written form that point of view. Why is it wrong to consider the viewpoint of the enslaved in our country’s history? Is it not a part of it? OT say it isn’t is another lie.

        And the 1619 Project was not a federally funded project. To not include aspects of it in American History studies would be a complete whitewashing of our story.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Absolutely, if the promoters find any new FACTS not previously included in our study of history then our history should be updated.

          I am unaware of anything other than a reframing of known facts to project an agenda.

          Like

          Reply

          1. ” . . . any new FACTS not previously included . . .

            Your view of the nature of historical writing is – let’s say – oversimplified. No history contains all the FACTS. And every generation of historians brings its own perspectives with regard to what is important and what can be skipped over. You seem to think the history YOU were taught is some sort of Dogma or Revealed Truth. It is not.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Reframing of facts that have been whitewashed from history lessons for 200 years? It is not “reframing”; it is correcting the record from a viewpoint not taken into consideration over the years.

            Like

        2. Oh what trash. Whitey done done it to history too. Your racist claims against white people is very telling. Facts are facts, you can’t change it to suit your racism.

          Like

          Reply

          1. “Facts are facts, ”

            That would mean something if YOU believed in facts. Yet your comments continually show a complete and total disregard of facts.

            Like

      2. Good grief.

        Publicly funded? You appear to not know what you are talking about. The 1619 Project is a journalistic effort of the New York Times.

        It is about the telling the truth of American history so, in “conservative” circles that means it is “agenda driven.” God forbid that attitudes and beliefs be based on the truth.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. It is my understanding that it originated among university faculty and that the NYT advanced the idea.

          In any case, the objection to defunding’1619 would be moot were it not supported by the public through the involved universities

          Like

          Reply

          1. Your “understanding” is just plain wrong. The 1619 Project is the work of the New York Times.

            The “defunding” issue is about “conservatives” objecting to the use of any of these materials in the schools. They want the Federal government to eliminate federal funds to any state that allows these materials to be studied. They cannot win in the marketplace of ideas so they want the government to declare them the winner and ban other ideas.

            It appears that you have absorbed – and are now repeating – a bunch of brain dead blather from the right wing media bubble about the 1619 Project. Why not do a little checking yourself before sounding off?

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Once again the proof is in the pudding. The new conservatives of the GQP have fallen into the clutches of the previous POTUS. They have no real policy ideas to sell to the American public so they rant on about cultural issues that really have nothing to do with “kitchen table” topics.

    Wokeness, cancel culture, transphobia are the only things left for the GQP to present to the voters. Used to be G-d, guns and the Bible. Now it is “Look at what the lefties are trying to do to your society”. Diversity and progress be damned.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. “Diversity” doesn’t trump discrimination like you want. You claim to despise discrimination but actively practice it under the umbrella of “diversity” as long as white people suffer somehow. Aren’t you proud to be a racist?

      Like

      Reply

      1. Your attempts to refer to me as being a racist because I support the idea of equal treatment for ALL is one of your more laughable attempts to piss me off. I laugh at what you say because you are an idiot for saying it.

        I get it; Keep the darkies where they belong; under the boot of the white man

        Like

        Reply

  5. I think you are confusing rape for necrophilia. After all, these 2nd generation trash moneyed princes thought these girls, Snow White and Sleeping Beauty, were dead, albeit Sam Kennerson did do a very funny skit on the arrest of homosexual necrophiliac funeral director.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. ” Kennerson ”

      It was Sam KINISON. Saw him live in San Diego many years ago. Great show with Robin Williams in attendance.

      “I WANT MY RECORDS BACK! I WANT MY FUCKIING RECORDS BACK!”

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment