SJW-controlled site Metal-Archives.com, famous for its desire to regulate what is “metal” and exclude non-leftist viewpoints from the site, has deleted user “bitterman” who gained notoriety for his realistic, masculinized reviews which expressed extreme intolerance of insincere, manipulative and mediocre metal. All of the writings of this person are now removed with no chance for the user to recover the hours of effort he put into the site.
Bitterman made a name for himself for thoughtfully but viciously reviewing the excess and stupor of contemporary metal, using a somewhat tongue-in-cheek “metal warrior” style as he skewered perpetrators of false metal like Watain. According to one commentator, “he paid the price for holding for-profit poseurs to the same standards as Onward to Golgotha and early Burzum” because of his vicious attacks on all that pretended to be underground metal and failed. Many of Metal-Archives.com’s staff are gamers who undoubtedly are aware of the SJW incursion into gaming that prompted #gamergate as well.
Wherever SJWs go, they censor all that is natural and right: masculinity, warfare, conflict, elitism, quality and excellence. Then they replace these with twee indie-rock metal hybrids and a policy of “acceptance” that rejects quality bands under the same excuse that Wikipedia uses, “notability,” while promoting the kind of hybrid dreck that 90s underground metallers would have thought belonged in the bin with Sonic Youth and Rites of Spring, not raging death metal and black metal.
Again we see the problem of allowing SJWs to infiltrate metal through media as, using that power, they change what it means to be “metal” while trying to purge metal of what makes it unique. At the end of this agenda, they will create a neutered form of metal-rock that will promptly collapse because it lacks all of what makes metal appeal to its audience, and the genre will collapse like the Soviet Union or Pol Pot’s regime. The SJWs will not care, because they got their 15 minutes of fame.
Tags: censorship, comicgate, gamergate, metal-archives, metalgate, scifigate, sjws, watergate
19 thoughts on “#metalgate: SJW-controlled Metal-Archives.com censors realist reviewers”
Well then, how do you explain this:
The retarded fags at encylopedia metallum only erased him from the writer’s search engine but the reviews are still there.
Why isn’t Bitterman writing for deathmetal.org is what baffles me and also, some say that the “angry black metal elitist” and bitterman are the same guy. Dunno.
You can find everything he wrote here, I think: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=bitterman&sitesearch=metal-archives.com&gws_rd=cr,ssl&ei=UII0Vc_LCo25aYirgOgN
He has also been banned ages ago so this is pretty much old news. Still, it’s a good thing they’ve kept this, I read them for laughs between wanking sessions as they’re both humorous and accurate.
Old news, but I always felt bitterman was just another of Brett’s aliases.
We also host some of Brett’s reviews that he submitted under his current and previous aliases.
It would be interesting to hear what excuse, if any, they gave for deleting him.
Why the Blitz-era Ministry of War poster? I hope it’s meant in a positive way because the attitude it was trying to foster and the people it was aimed at are the antithesis of all that is SJW? If the SJW’s were in charge then it would have been called the Ministry of Regrettable, Challenging, People-Focused Behaviour (An Equal Opportunities Employer & Diversity Champion)
Keep these SJW articles coming.
Metal Archives has always been shit. It’s essentially the NeoGAF of metal. What else is new?
Thought I’d seen it all but apparently the sjw comedy is far from jumping the shark. First the pseudo-underground metal clothing line and now this, simply because one reviewer (probably the only one on the site without multiple piercings) did not want to join the hugbox. No longer associated with honesty and integrity, metal’s capitulation proceeds, although I doubt bitterman will be deterred.
bitterman wasn’t banned and we approved his reviews as they were valid contributions to the site. One of the best reviewers on the site, that’s why I personally approved many of his reviews.
It appears that he tried to change the email address his account was registered to and he never used the new activation link. I assumed the account deactivation was intentional. We’re aware that he contributes to the site under another username now and that’s welcome.
Best wishes on your crusade for social justice and the fight to uphold the values of masculinity, warfare, conflict, elitism, quality and excellence. Keep fighting trends with that hashtag of yours and your militant presence in the blogosphere. #metalgate
Thank you for the statement. We are attempting to contact him now to get his side of the story. Until that happens, no clear objective outcome will have emerged.
I believe this is the error the site gave:
It would not be the first time Metal-Archives staff have lied — present company excepted of course — so we will hold out until we can hear from bitterman II.
I took a screenshot of his account from a moderator’s perspective. The email and IP are removed for his privacy: http://i.imgur.com/99lhypQ.png
This is interesting — thanks for posting it. What are the “reports” to the right?
Impressive that he mentioned us! <3 bitterman
No problem, glad to help and clarify. The section to the right shows messages sent by mods and users working on the report queue. Zodi’s message asked him for his help on correcting the genres of several hardcore bands. Obscurum fixed a report given by bitterman for the band “Aeon” and was letting him know he dealt with it. Tueur’s message was the same, but for the band “Unfit Ass.”
Lied? *You’re* the one posting disingenuous articles (full of creepy stalking, even) without even the simplest of fact-checking.
Not that I’m surprised at the lack of facts, mind, but wow at the nerve of calling M-A liars. You haven’t even posted a retraction yet. Hilarious.
There is no need for a retraction; we haven’t heard the full story. M-A’s own message claimed a ban.
I see what type of person I am dealing with here.
“We’re aware that he contributes to the site under another username now and that’s welcome.”
“It appears that he tried to change the email address his account was registered to and he never used the new activation link. I assumed the account deactivation was intentional.”
This is the reason. No conspiracy here.
We need you to email us to confirm your identity, and deny the earlier statement made in your name that it was not so. Thanks! email@example.com
well this was entertaining. i was unaware of his/her reviews until this moment. fantastic.
Comments are closed.