Your typical social justice warrior is concerned with self-image over everything else.

Like any good Pharisees, they want you to see them practicing their religion in the open. They are the ones who are giving the most glory to their divine ruler, identity politics, and want you to know that they are the most devout. They look down on you from the tips of their noses from their lofty moral heights.

Behind closed doors, however, they are hypocritical snakes who are sometimes unaware of just how hypocritical they are. Their levels of self-awareness don’t go any further than the aforementioned upturned nose.

But I digress.

All things in this world must match the moral heights of this modern day group of Pharisees. You must obey the strict code of ethics they have laid down for you, and it must reflect in everything you do, say, or create. Everything must, in some way, bear their message. If it doesn’t bear it properly enough, you must be ready to kneel and submit yourself to their very public flogging, thanking them for the whip at your back and begging for forgiveness. Failure to do so will result in judgment, in one form or another.

Enter Rockstar Games, a popular video game development company known for such titles as the Grand Theft Auto (GTA) and Red Dead Redemption series.

Anyone vaguely familiar with the video game industry knows that Rockstar has always swum in controversy. In fact, that controversy is part of the way they sell games. Their titles typically involve a “sandbox” style gaming system where you are essentially allowed to go anywhere and do anything you’d like. GTA is their most controversial title, wherein you play a criminal who can do anything from steal cars, pick up hookers, rob banks, and even kill indiscriminately. I think I need not tell you that it’s not a game for children.

Red Dead Redemption and its prequel, games set in the wild west, are a bit more subdued in their balls-to-the-wall take on being a criminal. In this game, you don’t have to be the bad guy, and in fact, you can be completely lawful and even honorable when completely undirected by the game. However, you’re still given the chance to be evil if you so choose. The game allows you to make these kinds of decisions on your own. Do you rob the stagecoach or leave it be? Do you kill the man who came for you, or do you subdue him and walk away? The choice is yours.

Of course, not everyone is going to be completely lawful and honorable all the time. Sometimes it’s more fun to be dastardly and, like Westworld, sometimes it’s far more fun to don the black hat and let your darker side out. One YouTuber recorded himself doing such a thing and posted it to his channel.

In his video, YouTuber “Shirrako” found a feminist within the game. As it takes place in the early 1900’s, the feminist is campaigning for women’s right to vote. Speaking with this feminist non-player character (NPC) will trigger a dialogue whereby the feminist tells the protagonist that men are “judgemental prigs” who have made a mess of the country, and it’s up to women to straighten men out.

Shirrako records himself then beating the feminist up, hogtying her, putting her on the back of a horse and riding into a swamp where he then feeds her to an alligator, kicks her corpse, and then blows it up with dynamite.

If you think that this kind of thing is horrifying, then that’s fair. These kinds of games, or this kind of playstyle at the very least, certainly isn’t for everyone. However, I think we can all agree that while kidnapping a feminist and feeding her to alligators in a virtual world isn’t a good guy thing to do, it’s also a virtual world and we can acknowledge that it didn’t really happen. It’s an adult playing an adult video game, doing something within the allowances of the game.

He could have easily left that feminist alone, and in fact, there is a mission within the game where you help suffragettes in their quest to gain voting rights. Some people will gladly help them, others will feed them to alligators. I don’t really look down on either of these playstyles. It’s a game where doing dark things doesn’t affect the real world, and even the most virtuous person can do something completely horrid in-game for a laugh.

But SJWs and feminists won’t, or can’t, make that distinction. For them, the pile of pixels that represents a feminist was a message that needed to be solidified in the game without the possibility of molestation from the player. Not even in Shirrako’s private moments, on his private channel, should he have been allowed to do what he did.

For the SJWs, this NPC was holy, she bore a holy message, and she should be treated like a holy figure.

YouTube banned Shirrako’s channel, and pieces were churned out about how horrible it was that Rockstar would allow such a scenario in its games. Meanwhile, videos were being uploaded by the minute of many people playing the game, oftentimes highlighting action scenes where the player is killing men of all stripes. No fuss was raised there, and the discrepancy wasn’t lost on Shirrako.

According to One Angry Gamer, Shirrako wasn’t the only one abusing the virtual feminist, and YouTube had actually been going around and deleting videos where people had done violence against that specific NPC. Again, violence against any other NPC was fine, but doing anything to the feminist besides being kind and friendly was the promotion of violence according to YouTube, and resulted in a strike against the channel. In Shirrako’s case, it resulted in his channel being banned.

However, after eight kinds of hell were raised in the public square, YouTube got cold feet and reinstated Shirrako’s channel.

I’d like to say all’s well that ends well, but I can’t. While I’m, of course, bothered by the fact that SJWs are capable of silencing people they don’t agree with thanks to their infiltration of information distribution corporations and social media sites, they seem to go weak in the knees when confronted by a righteous online mob about it. They are bullies, and so act accordingly when confronted with a power greater than them.

What bothers me is that this won’t be the last time this happens, and it has everything to do with the mentality the social justice adherents have about themselves, and their view on the world around them.

SJWs truly believe they are the ultimate moral good, and as such, give themselves license to direct others in how to conduct themselves. It’s a pseudo-morality, of course, and propagates every evil they claim to stand against. This moral code also begins and ends with others, not themselves, but this is beside the point.

The point is that SJWs are proving time and again with their censorship, bullying, and relentless browbeating that they believe whatever you create is under their judgment. At the end of the day, your product is not yours, it’s theirs. Your creation needs to fit within their guidelines and meet their approval. Stepping out of line means consequences.

What’s more, your company is under their direction too. In order for your company to pass the smell test, you must obey their dictates. Sometimes this means hiring them to positions within your company to influence it from the inside. It doesn’t matter if they’re qualified. They’re more of a political officer than a creative talent. They’re not there to help you put out your best product. Rest assured, your product will suffer, your company may lose money and fans, but at least you’ll have pleased the mob and it will praise you for your woke-centric work.

This episode of outrage from them, as the many before it, exposes the hands of the SJW and shows you their true character. Violence against virtual others is okay, but not again virtual them. It gives off the impression that their message can be treated with disregard and even insulted and mocked. They can’t have that, and they will do what’s necessary to make it difficult for apostates. They will mob you, censor you, pressure you to hire them into their company, alter your product, or else. You will obey. You will be made to care.

Freedom of expression be damned.

I and thankfully many in America can’t stand for that. I’d rather a dozen Shirrako videos displaying wanton virtual violence that even I think disagreeable available for public viewing than the social justice-obsessed have the power to silence whoever they disagree with at the drop of a hat. I’d rather artists create freely without fear of censorship or punishment from people who believe themselves to be our moral betters.