Counter-Currents
Having It All:
America Reaps the Benefits of Feminism
Beau Albrecht
1,908 words
At least all publicity is good publicity — or is it?
Speaking of tarnished reputations, Townhall featured a story recently, “Dem Candidate Is Livid GOP Discovered Her Chaturbate Channel.” It turns out that Susanna Gibson, who is running for the Virginia House of Delegates, was found out to be a part-time cam girl who goes by “hotwifeexperience.” The screen name suggests an infidelity kink, and true to form, this comes out in some of her chats:
“Yeah, I f**k random strangers if you’re hot,” Gibson allegedly bragged. “I just want a private room with somebody filming their c**k so I can c*m looking at it, Jesus Christ,” the Chaturbate star said. “Oh God, I want to f**king get railroaded by all of you.”
If she keeps up her side gig as a cam girl, she could stand to improve her monologue skills. The story documents some of her other online sessions. They often included a lot of begging for Chaturbate tokens, the website’s virtual currency. For example:
“Y’all can watch me pee if you tip me and some tokens. Again, I’m raising money for a good cause,” Gibson stated. “Y’all I need more tips . . . They want anal and missionary, but I’m only doing it if they’re in a private room,” she explained, adding: “Racking up one token left and right, any more?”
The missionary position? What is this world coming to? zOMG! More seriously, after being outed by the Washington Post, the candidate was full of righteous indignation, characterizing the exposure as revenge porn:
“It won’t intimidate me and it won’t silence me,” Gibson responded, calling the circulation and exposure of the publicly posted material “a sex crime,” “the worst gutter politics,” and “an illegal invasion of my privacy designed to humiliate me and my family.”
So let me get this straight: broadcasting obscene, livestreamed videos over the Internet is okie dokie, but bringing this to the public’s attention is a sex crime and an invasion of privacy? Oh, come on! Normally, what a husband and wife do in their own bedroom behind closed doors with the curtains shut should reasonably fall under the right to privacy. But if they turn on the webcam and broadcast it to the world, then they’re voluntarily abrogating this privacy. It’s therefore a little silly to play the victim.
This is especially so since they were making money from it. Welcome to being a porn star! Moreover, since they were doing regular cam shows while running for office and apparently not disguising themselves, it’s hardly surprising that a local coomer put two and two together. Unfortunately, they didn’t figure that there’s a decent — or is it indecent? — chance that these activities would’ve been eventually discovered:
Gibson’s attorney Daniel P. Watkins, a prominent libel-and-slander lawyer specializing in high-stakes defamation cases and “reputation counseling,” told the outlet that his client was not aware of — nor had she authorized — the posting of her Chaturbate content on other third-party porn sites, asserting that the publicly available archived videos somehow violates Virginia’s revenge-porn law § 18.2-386.2, which makes it illegal to “maliciously” disseminate photographic and/or videographic sexual depictions of another person in “a state of nudity” with the “intent to coerce, harass, or intimidate.”
You can buy Greg Hood’s Waking Up From the American Dream here.
This reasoning seems a bit dodgy to me. Since cam girls purposefully do what they do, where’s the malice? I’ve never been to Chaturbate, but I bet dollars to baklava that their user agreement explicitly states that “content creators” grant intellectual property rights to the website to put videos of their activities online. That’s exactly what e‑THOTs are there to do, now isn’t it?
That said, I’d be more understanding if this were about stolen amateur clips never intended for public distribution. I also would give her a break if being a cam girl was a youthful indiscretion that surfaced and came back to haunt her years later. So she made a mistake, which isn’t so remarkable given human fallibility, but a would-be elected official really needs to keep things squeaky clean. For anyone who wishes to run for office, that’s certainly something to bear in mind!
Politicians and “sex workers” aren’t so different, are they? The former porn star Cicciolina got elected to Italy’s Chamber of Deputies, proving that a colorful past isn’t necessarily a deal-breaker. I understand that some of the flicks she was in were pretty far out. Italian politicians haven’t been up to that stuff since the Roman Empire’s decadent days. Compared to that, Susanna Gibson’s urinary vids and back-door specials on Chaturbate can’t be all that remarkable. For that matter, compared to Silvio Berluscone she seems like Little Bo Peep.
It also occurred to me that rather than hiring damage control consultants, or getting offended because her side job of exposing herself was exposed, she could just own it and turn lemons into lemonade. “Susanna Does Virginia” might be a little much as a campaign slogan, but “Sexiest Democrat Ever” could work, or maybe even “Hot Wife, Hotter Candidate.”
You realize what you signed up for, right?
Liberal studmuffin Justin Trudeau
Speaking of unusually attractive liberals, several media outlets chimed in regarding a TikTok user who is in search of a trad guy. One was the New York Post item “I’m a liberal — it’s hard to find masculine men to date who aren’t conservative.” She’s a bleach blonde with sharp features, and cute enough that she doesn’t look like a Leftist. Still, she’s having difficulty finding Mister Right:
“As a liberal woman, it is really hard to find a man who is willing to play the more traditional masculine role in the relationship in today’s day and age who is not a conservative,” said the TikToker with the username @Ms_Petch.
“A man who wants to pay on the first date; who wants to open your door; who has that want and desire to take care of you and provide — who is not a conservative.”
Just a word to the wise: When all those liberal dudes were told that women wanted equality, they actually believed it. I feel bad for them, especially the male feminist allies. They have no idea why @Ms_Petch and others like her are rejecting them. They’re doing what they were told, yet still get shot down. The blue-pilled dating advice they get is so bad that it’s almost like a malicious joke at their expense.
“And obviously as a liberal woman I do want to be respected for my independence. And I do want to have my own autonomy in the relationship and not be combined or confirmed to the traditional female homemaker, childbearing, role,” she said.
“I don’t want to compromise my morals and values just to find a man. But, am I asking to have my cake and eat it too?”
In a word: yes. Decide on whether you want to be spoiled or liberated, and stick to it.
To get past her predicament, she’ll have to adjust her expectations about what she wants from liberal guys. If not, she can start practicing the open-mindedness that her ideology claims to value. Why not? I’ve had girlfriends all over the ideological map. Romance and politics go together like ranch dressing and double-entry bookkeeping.
The ladyboy lecturer
Speaking of remarkable expectations, Dylan Mulvaney’s speaking fees went up. If you’ve been thinking of conducting a presentation at the office with this special guest star — America’s most notable ladyboy since Divine — you’ll have to fork over some serious swag now. If there are any takers, that might very well set a record for the costliest one-man drag show. According to a brief write-up by The Independent:
Dylan Mulvaney has come under scrutiny after allegations from the @LibsofTikTik Twitter account claiming the controversial influencer demanding $40,000 for speaking engagements on women empowerment at colleges in the US. Social media users also accused her agent, Crista Spadafore, of confirming the claims.
The Big D apparently made over $26K from a speech at the University of Pittsburgh. Sweet! Surely this must be pretty close to the top of the heap as far as lecturing goes, short of getting taken on by the Clinton Foundation. That’s more than twice as much as the $12K that Robin DiAngelo, the High Priestess of White Guilt, got from the University of Kentucky for a two-hour talk. And it’s even more than the $20K for a one-hour virtual presentation by Ibram X. Kendi, the much-celebrated “anti-racism” mogul. (Both of these Leftist mediocrities have been fêted and lauded for their sage wisdom about race relations, and granted professorships by AmeriKKKa’s racist establishment that they complain about incessantly.) I’m quite amused to see that these noxious guilt-peddlers have been upstaged by a 26-year-old ladyboy, one whose most noteworthy accomplishment is inadvertently being the catalyst for the Budweiser brand’s greatest tribulation since Prohibition. Go Dylan!
Months after the epic $26K haul, the young sage’s agent is upping the tab to $40K for future engagements. Yeah, I get it: Inflation is a bitch. (I just bought a pint of ice cream for $5.29 at the local Stop‑N‑Rob, for crying out loud. And you should’ve seen my grocery tab last month! Let’s go, Brandon!) More seriously, although the speaking fee seems just a smidge steep, on the other hand it’s hilarious. What a clever bastard to pull this off! Fools and their money are soon parted, right? So if there are liberal moonbats who want to fork over 40 grand to hearken unto the wisdom of a twinkle-toed fruitcake just four years out of college, whose 15 minutes of fame have gone into extended overtime, then by all means, fork over the moolah!
Dylan, I’m going to tell it to you straight: You’d better milk this racket for all it’s worth while the getting is good. One of these days, the bubble will burst for overpriced lecturers whose livelihood depends on pushing The Narrative. When that happens, the gravy dries up for good. If you invest the loot wisely, then at least you’ll have a soft landing before you have to get a real job. Life’s tough, yanno?
Again, The Big D’s greatest notability is in relation to the Bud Light fiasco, which severely wounded the long-standing Anheuser-Busch business empire. This in turn spearheaded a broader backlash against Woke Capital. This resulted from a bad decision by a marketing exec who didn’t realize that the virtue-signaling stunt would go over tremendously badly with their customers. It’s therefore not really Dylan’s fault for what happened, any more than the kid who played Anakin Skywalker in The Phantom Menace is responsible for the lousy screenplay that nearly made the Star Wars franchise jump the shark. The Bud Light sponsorship happened to be the straw that broke the camel’s back, and the rest is history.
Still, after being in the middle of that brouhaha, might there be some pearls of wisdom to impart to us? As it shows on the booking form, Dylan’s specialty is speaking about women’s empowerment. Good one! I couldn’t make this up even if I tried! Although a mallrat half Dylan’s age is a far better authority on what it is to be a woman, recall what I said about fools and their money.
There’s no indication that there have been any takers so far. If $40K turns out to be too pricey, I’ll generously make a bargain: For merely $20K, I’ll be happy to put my hair in pigtails, slap on some makeup, wear a dress, and deliver a pep talk about female empowerment. Deal?
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
14 comments
We have been humoring you ladies, with your daft euphemisms for infanticide like ‘reproductive justice.’ And for supporting the BLM riots, for supporting the COVID hysteria, for supporting the Ukraine war. We have really been very lenient. I live in the same world as you ladies, in a world you wish to ignore where white people are attacked in America everyday, where cartels and terrorists cut heads off, where Europeans blow each other to bits. Something needs to change ladies, and if your rights need to go, they have to go. Look at the state the world is now with you all SO empowered. And if you think this is hate, I pray you never meet a real hater or you may have a heart attack.
Funny take! But I think the Star Wars franchise jumped the shark in 1982 right after The Empire Strikes Back.
My thoughts are that The Empire Strikes Back had tons of gravitas, and Darth Vader had some killer lines. It’s pretty hard to follow up that, especially when the flick has Ewoks.
This is so disgusting that no wonder decent White men are not getting married and having kids. Women like this are gutting the White race.
The destruction of marriage is not woman’s fault, but men’s. Men are the chief legislators in this country for Nazi feminist, and are the enablers for the chief corporate consumers in this nation which are woman. From “no fault” law to child abduction and paternal slavery how could we ever promote the signing of a state (not church) marriage license to our sons in the land of milk and funny, or child support money.
The forces behind radical feminism went way above the pay grade of ordinary men. Here’s just one item:
https://www.frontpagemag.com/marxist-feminisms-ruined-lives-mallory-millett/
Dear Beau Albrecht
I have just read the marxist -feminist article and agree with this feminist culture conspiracy described within it completely, BUT,, although it is all true, it is completely incorrect with the “marxist” culprit. The culpable system which was the catalyst for extreme feminism was capitalism, under a capitalist controlled government, in 1960’s capitalist America. Fascism, which was nothing less than forced socialism, never advocated the type of feminism that we today are responsible for (advocating traditional family and the Mos Maiorum) and it certainly has nothing to do with its older founding doctrines of Marxism. We can blame the devil himself but he is also not at fault,,, we are.
The following from the book Reflection (2022 edition) by Guzziferno;
Pamphlet Article; Parent’s rights march May, 2018-Washington DC:
Under Title IV-D of the social security act 42 USC section 658(a) State courts earn vast amounts of revenue from federal government through performance grants based on the number and size of child support orders issued and satisfied. They receive one dollar for every dollar collected to feed state budgets and an army of civil servants (Divorce industry fuels- family “education” programs, feminist N.O.W, shelter workers, BW advocates, State and Federal legislature, HHS, Child support enforcement, Child support administrators, Child Protection Agents, Youth and family services, Social workers, Psychologists and Court appointed child psychiatrist, Mediators, CASA’s, GAL’s, Lawyers, Judges, Police, Corrections officers and Juvenile holding facilities) all in a multi billion dollar operation employed to serve in this process of separating children from fathers and then establishing the industry of trying to deal with the problems created by this separation with the help of our legislators, leading to the demise of family and increasing mental health problems which start in adolescence. This is accomplished by first providing easy awards to one parent under the auspice of it being politically correct, or an acceptable act in order to successfully drive a wedge between parents and to further a lucrative growing process (divide and conquer). If this does not destroy the future of family for all these mothers it most certainly does for most of the children involved. Having visited House and Senate offices in Washington DC during this march, I have explained to those officials or teams who made themselves available that our training in the Defense Department taught us to recognize cash awards, funds, gifts or incentives like Title IV-D as incentive rewards which are potential “conflicts of interest”. Under such a highly “questionable system”, how can we substantiate the court claim which supposedly prioritizes “The best interest of the child?”
“They help create the problems and then extract the money from the victims of the same problems to pay to resolve them, conveniently funding state entities and setting an example for all those who would use the system to profit and to all who wish to profit by it,, and as a result it is so designed only to perpetuate this business of single custody rather than reduce it.”
(Groucho Marx once praised a man for inventing spaghetti stuffed with bicarbonate soda, thereby being the first to cause and cure indigestion at the same time.)
(we can add to this the initial school shootings after the divorce spike of the 60’s, teen and father suicides)
I did mention that there were several factors feeding into Second Wave feminism. Cultural Marxism, as noted above, was just one of these. The Rockefellers / Deep State also wanted to promote it, to get more women into the workforce so they could drive wages down. (Aaron Russo mentioned all that.) So it’s understandable why the CIA was promoting Gloria Steinem. Moreover, the Zionists took great interest in promoting radical feminism; make of that what you will. Then some feminists were certifiable head cases lashing out against society, though their ravings are hallowed primary texts still taught in women’s studies courses. Finally, there were the multiply afflicted, like Shulamith Firestone, who was a cultural Marxist and also checked a couple of other obvious boxes. All told, these factors worked together to brew up a nice little mess for society.
Anyway, common men had nothing to do with starting Second Wave feminism. Neither did common women, despite considerable astroturfing. Declaring war in the “Battle of the Sexes” was a decision made way above our pay grade.
Oh give your paternalism a rest. We finally have a woman admitting that women are doing this and you can’t handle it.
@Felix – “Oh give your paternalism a rest. We finally have a woman admitting that women are doing this and you can’t handle it.”
THANK YOU, Felix!! I came of age in the early 1980s, and second-wave feminism was already the established status quo. The men of my day already expected that their future wife’s would contribute half the family income; I was never asked, to borrow from the catch-phrase, if I would prefer the more traditional, supplementary role of serving a husband as a help-meet, instead of a boss as an employee.
Feminism is not of my doing, and I have suffered beyond measure for being groomed to be a copy of a man, when I was never anything but the most shrinking of violets — or hyacinths, as the case may be!
Is there not a word for this: pornocracy? And is it not arguably the endpoint to which “sex positive” feminism tends?
I’m glad the NY Post covered the woman looking for liberal guy to take care of her. The comments on her TikTok already got there first:
That’s like saying, ‘I want to invest in something without having to do anything but get all benefits from it
All I heard is I want someone to take care of me but I don’t want to take care of them
Reflection, by John Guzziferno
Aaron Russo’s statements on feminism involving Rockefeller and the CIA and Guzziferno’s 2006 publication are very similar;
“The Constitution has been broken, by compounded laws, statutes which are constantly modified to override its principles, the rights of ALL the people.”
I submit that slavery was not the driving priority or main motive for the American civil war, nor was the welfare of the Kuwaiti people the cause for “Operation Desert Storm”, as we expressed so clearly in our opposed U.N decisions with our low or no concern for Rwanda (Hutus/Tutsis war and massacre, and also Sudan, Yemen, Palestine, etc.) Unlike Iraq, genocide was declared in some of these places. I also suspect through my study of sociology that the drive for woman’s equality in and out of the work force was not only in the best interests of “woman’s rights”, but in Government and Industry’s enrichment simply by the doubling of this nation’s work force and its income tax revenue. This increased work force also helped provide the stabilized or stagnant low salary levels for industries workers despite the recent decades of increasing inflation rates. Salaries were reduced or frozen because of the increased demand for jobs and workforce availability since the 1950’s, until it has actually required two incomes to maintain one household. From sociology studies in university texts these numbers cannot be ignored and claim no relative effect or profitable affiliation. The resulting follow up movement of the 60’s which introduced sweeping family legal reforms also created a vicious and corrupt divorce and child custody industry which has been very prosperous. One cannot witness this resulting surge and the necessity of two parent incomes, and a simultaneous accommodating legal industry with court room moral injustices to marriages and children, without any government concern or serious legislative corrective action, and not suspect the same. Again, industry is fed its larger workforce providing more controlled wages, expansion, and its sub-partner in government more income tax revenue, while local State governments are then provided and new revenue source using new legislation, “sweeping up” after the resulting family destruction through their increased family court industry. Now throw in the added secured votes under an “equal rights cause” to labor, along with the family separation incentives, and it is nothing less than pure genius in a “win-win” plan for the profiteers.
God works in mysterious ways and so does Capitalism. This move for increased profit by doubling the workforce or slave force is still being expanded today by our industrial government in every part of life; now with the help of illegal immigrants at yet even lower illegal salaries within our nation, and even lowers labor costs by outsourcing our jobs to third world subjugated populations outside our nation. All this, while justifying the action in the political fashion of promoting American and foreign job growth through global trade and expansion…“and with all’s gratitude for the right to work”. -(Guzziferno)
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment