It’s “white male cunt” week, yet again

Some daft fuckwit who DK unwisely lets post on his blog is having the traditional “oooh, look at me, I’m white and male so I’m oppressed” rant.

Fuck you, you stupid prick. Spoken as a white British male – if you’re lucky enough to be born white, male and British, your reserves of luck relative to the average person-who-is-born are so *enormously, vastly fucking enormous* that uttering one fucking moronic lying retarded word of ‘oh noes, the blacks get a better deal than me’ style nonsense ought to be punished by flaying alive.

If you’re white, male and British and you think there is something wrong with your life, you may well be correct – but the thing which is wrong with your life is that you, despite being given every opportunity open to you by life, have fucked it up. Stop whining or kill yourself. If you decide to pick the second option, here are some directions.

20 thoughts on “It’s “white male cunt” week, yet again

  1. “Some daft fuckwit who DK unwisely lets post on his blog”…

    It’s whom, you ignoramus, not who, but whom.

    That aside, the article was crap.

  2. cornishdowns says:

    You, sir, are a clueless cunt. His point was that it is wrong – and always wrong – to discriminate on the basis of gender or race. As you are too fucking dense to grasp that simple concept, perhaps I could invite you to South Wales where you can tell some young men how lucky they are to be born white and male in person.

  3. Antisocialist says:

    Since when has being born ‘white male and British’ automatically meant you were born lucky? Idiot.

  4. Antisocialist says:

    Since when has being born ‘white male and British’ automatically meant you were born lucky? Idiot.

  5. g1lgam3sh says:

    You, Sir, are a Poltroon.

  6. g1lgam3sh says:

    Oh, BTW, if you want to be an utter fuckwit at least get some bandwidth. Amatuer, zilch Auter.

  7. Katabasis says:

    I look forward to your tour of the nations’ predominantly white “sink estates” (ZaNuLabour term) explaining to all of these people born into a cycle of poverty and no prospects exactly how this applies to them.

    Also, assuming that the “white male” part of your equation is the most important, you could also parachute into numerous slavic nations, perhaps starting with Chechnya, and explaining to all the white males there that they’ve never had it so good.

  8. Larry Teabag says:

    Gooseburger, you are wrong.

  9. Grammar Moses says:

    “Gooseburger, you are wrong”: How so? The way to check “who”/“whom” is to recast the sentence with “and he” or “and him”, thus –
    “Some daft fuckwit, who[m?] DK unwisely lets post on his blog”
    > ““Some daft fuckwit, and DK unwisely lets HIM post on his blog”
    as opposed to:
    “Larry Teabag, who doesn’t understand grammar”
    > “Larry Teabag, and HE doesn’t understand grammar”
    Apply this rule to any sentence you can think of with “who” or “whom” in it (adjusting “he” to “she” or “they” as you wish), then come back and tell a waiting nation – nay, globe – what the hell you think you’re on about.

  10. Quite right Elmer, PDF should be flayed for his socialistic grammaritarian errors, and hanging is too good for the likes of Larry Teabag.

    The rest of the commenters here are entirely correct, too – being born white and British isn’t lucky at all, and you can keep it. Foreigners get all the luck, and I say that as a Somali warlord who splits his time between roaring about in my technical, cursing in my heathen lingo and machine-gunning children and nuns.

  11. Sunny says:

    Its a stupid piece also because in certain cases, like primary school teachers, it will be used to help white males get into positions.

  12. hellblazer says:

    Closes italics, and returns whence he came.

  13. So I was right, Teabag. Where is my £5.00?

  14. Larry Teabag says:

    Uh, me retract my point. Me blame my white maleness.

    If you want £5 Goosey, here are some directions.

  15. PDF says:

    the nations’ predominantly white “sink estates”

    Paid, housed, fed, Sky TV, all the weed they can smoke. Not an ideal lifestyle, but still better than at least 75% of the world’s population.

    Also, assuming that the “white male” part of your equation is the most important

    Importance:
    1) British
    2) White
    3) Male

  16. [...] The last post appears to have stoked up some controversy among fuckwits. A particular idiot says: [...]

  17. N says:

    “…South Wales … white and male”

    They’re not white though, are they – they’re *Welsh*.

  18. Mr Clovis says:

    # Elmer Quigley Gooseburger Says:
    “Some daft fuckwit who DK unwisely lets post on his blog”…
    “It’s whom, you ignoramus, not who, but whom.

    Nope (no) it’s who. In this case, the fuckwit is the subject of the sentence.

  19. Dangbh says:

    ‘Nope (no) it’s who. In this case, the fuckwit is the subject of the sentence’

    No. ‘Fuckwit’, the word, not the person, forms the subject of the sentence. The sentence being ‘Some daft fuckwit…is having the traditional’ etc…

    But the ‘who’ does not refer to nor is it referred to by the verb ‘is'; instead it is part of this adjectival clause: ‘who DK unwisely lets post on his blog’, within which it is the object of the verb ‘lets’ and therefore the correct word is ‘whom’.

    Awesome post, by the way. Some arseholes have just no fucking clue at all what it means to have a shitty life.

  20. Mr Clovis says:

    Dangbh,
    I think you are right. The difference between your post and Mr Gooseburger’s, is that yours is informative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>