Tag: #metoo

Man Sentenced to Prison for Rape With No Hard Evidence

Othman Mekhloufi | @othmanmekhloufi

On January 10th, 2019, a mostly female jury found Albert N. Wilson, a 23-year-old University of Kansas student, guilty of raping a woman he met at a nightclub near campus.

Douglas County District Judge Sally Pokorny sentenced him to 147 months (over twelve years) in prison.

On the night of September 10th, 2016, Mr. Wilson met his accuser at The Jayhawk Cafe nightclub, known as the Hawk. They were in line to get into the ‘Boom Boom Room’, a dark and crowded dance floor in the basement of the club.

At the time, Mr. Wilson was 20 years of age and used a friend’s ID to enter the nightclub. The accuser, a then 17-year old high school student, was not asked for identification by the club at all.

Continue reading “Man Sentenced to Prison for Rape With No Hard Evidence”


Joe Biden Exposed the Standards of the General Election

Jack Shields | @Jack_Shields20

The general election is still over a year away. We can’t trust presidential polls too much, especially if they’re within the margin of error. However, one candidate is not within the margin of error. Joe Biden is blowing Trump away. He has the moderate, blue-collar appeal that could win back the Rust Belt and give the suburban women uncomfortable with Trump a home in the Democratic Party. Every Democratic candidate will lose to Trump except for Biden, who would win in a blowout.

Continue reading “Joe Biden Exposed the Standards of the General Election”

Campus Carry Bans Make Sexual Assault Easier

Tom DiGennaro | United States

The vast majority of college campuses do not allow campus carry. In fact, 16 states completely outlaw it. Pennsylvania and Virginia are two of the 23 states that allow campuses to set their own policies for firearms.

Continue reading “Campus Carry Bans Make Sexual Assault Easier”

Slavoj Žižek Fails to Fully Understand Hierarchies

Daniel Szewc | Poland

One must understand the realities of Eastern Europe from 1945-1989 to understand Slavoj Žižek’s mentality. His embracement of the Marxist way of being is completely the result of his comparatively strong societal position in Slovenia before the fall of the Eastern Block. This was exemplified by the fact that this hierarchal position, created on the basis of being closer to the Marxist view of a perfected human than the average man, got even stronger after the acceptance of capitalism in his native country (for all intents and purposes, Slavoj Žižek is a celebrity in Slovenia). Of course, this brought to his subconscious the notion that being closer to Marx makes you a more efficient human in general, whilst in reality, it was just the manifestation of parts of the old, synthetic establishment, Žižek included, surviving into the new era, and adapting to the new circumstances.

As for his support of leftism, contrasted by his dislike of societal decay, it is comparable to liking uranium, yet disliking the particles that it emits. No matter how hard you try to keep society stable, without the philosophical absolute, you are unable to do so.

The Maintenence of the Hierarchy

Any hierarchy without an unreachable entity, whether it be a value or a being, that cannot be toppled from the bottom is doomed to fluctuate drastically, as well as to crash in a time proportionately short to the number of active members in the said structure. For example, the morally unthinkable happened in France, the regicide of the revolution, and the hierarchy’s immovable peak was shattered.

Soon after, the bloodshed flooded over to the initial instigators of the crime, causing the whole megastructure to topple. In the end, a new hierarchy arose, with Napoleon rising to its peak. He was able to justify his role sufficiently enough not to be toppled by power-hungry contestants for his position only because of his idealization and even stronger emancipation of the traditional role of emperor.

For such processes to not happen, equality, not hierarchy, would have to dominate throughout life forms- something that is mathematically ridiculous. To assume that the total sum capability of creatures as complex as us to have equal chances at maintaining our positions at a zero level hierarchy is simply improbable. Too many variables influence our lives on the daily for this to happen naturally, and for any individual even remotely knowledgeable about cybernetics, it is obvious that no circuit can encompass a circuit equally or more complicated than themselves, therefore the human mind may never manage to understand it’s own secrets (…and variables that make us so different in outcome).

Of course, #MeToo became dominated by empty media icons, because it’s the natural consequence of having a promiscuous society, something one can earn money off, and human nature. The last of the three implies inequality in intelligence and ability, whilst the first is implied by leftism. You cannot have all three and not get the result that #MeToo got.

In general, however, I personally like Žižek’s look on Buddhism, as well as I think that his views on love can be put to good use by any thoughtful person on any side of the political arena. Alas, 90%+ of what he says is based on some ridiculous imaginary plasticity of the human condition. For example, Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychologist, if anyone, knows the most about empirically proving the aforementioned rationalist perspective of it being improbable.

Who will win the debate between the two? Well, the better question is whether the side that in fact loses will be able to comprehend it’s fallibility, or will it stay in its shell of Marxist presumptions.

71 Republic is the Third Voice in media. We pride ourselves on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source

Following the Gillette Ad, Get Politics Out of Advertising

Jack Parkos | United States

Whether or not you agree with the message of Gillette’s recent ad, it is clear that it is risky for any corporation to get political. Without a doubt, it can have great blowback. Gillette’s new ad is receiving both love and hate and the divide here is clear. In fact, the YouTube video is receiving a great deal of criticism from people. Many are calling to boycott the company.

Indeed, this ad makes some highly questionable claims. However, the main focus of this article is not to criticize the claims made by Gillette. Instead, it will discuss political marketing and how it is bad for the consumer and producer.

It does not take a marketing expert to know that you don’t alienate half of your customers. But when a company gets into politics, they almost inevitably do this. One should not receive cultural and political lectures when simply trying to purchase a razor.

Why Critics Dislike the Gillette Ad

First of all, some believe the ad has stereotyped men as misogynistic. They also believe it has used the leftist talking point of “toxic masculinity”. Critics have noted that the ad implies that fathers (a large consumer of razors) are currently failing to raise their sons to respect women. The left associates that the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” in the court of law is somehow promoting this behavior. Many believe that this is an insult to their top consumer. Gillette has claimed that this isn’t the point of the ad. Nonetheless, it comes across as such to many people.

The ad was trying to say that the good men should stand up to the “toxic men”, which of course is true. But critics of the Gillette ad state how good men already do that. They also suggest that to imply they don’t simply because they believe in due process is insulting to many.

Whether you agree with the ads or the criticism is irrelevant to why politics should not be in marketing, however.

Keeping Marketing Out of Politics

What place does a corporation have in this matter, anyway? Gillette is using a cultural movement to sell razors. The product has nothing to do with any political issue. They are simply trying to make themselves seem morally superior. Is it not toxic behavior to use a sensitive topic just to sell more razors?

It is not just Gillette that is the issue. Nike did this with Kaepernick. Countless other examples exist. Many people simply want to watch a game or even a commercial and get a break from politics. People just want to buy products without having to take a stand. All these ads do, though, is divide an already divided country. This ad is just another battle in the culture war. Why must everything be political?

Whether left, right, liberal, conservative, or anything else, the marketing industry should steer clear of political issues. Their job is to provide a good or service, not give lectures. Issues such as #MeToo are critical to talk about, but a Gillette ad is not the proper setting.

71 Republic is the Third Voice in media. We pride ourselves on distinctively independent journalism and editorials. Every dollar you give helps us grow our mission of providing reliable coverage. Please consider donating to our Patreon.

Featured Image Source