If you have children in the very annoying age range of 0-100 then there is a chance that you know of and loathe the new Nickelodeon program aimed at middle school aged kids (the worst age) Bella and the Bulldogs. If not, here is the official synopsis from nick.com:
Middle schooler Bella Dawson left her life as a popular cheerleader behind to join the Bulldogs as their new star quarterback. Trading in her pom-poms for a pigskin was a total dream come true, but now Bella must find a balance between football and her cheerleading BFFs. Does she have what it takes to overcome the doubters and lead her team to victory, without compromising who she is? And what will happen when those worlds collide?
At first glance, Bella and the Bulldogs seems to be a simple gender role experiment. The idea of a girl playing a "boys' sport" (or a boy playing a "girls' sport") is not new to children's entertainment, nor is Bella a paradigm shift in "Gender-Equal Ensemble" trope that is prevalent in our entertainment.
Bella and the Bulldogs' problems do not lie within its depiction of the genders; rather the show is under fire from Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) - we're using that correctly, right? - for its presentation of race relations and roles. As one quote Gawker pulled from a site that is blocked at work put it: "Bella and the Bulldogs, besides promoting ... race cucking..."
Before we move on, I feel the need to do something no other article I've read on the subject has done; define race cucking. Cucking seems to be a verb form of a cuckold, which in this context means "the husband of an unfaithful wife" and is a reference to the cuckoo birds that lay their eggs in the nests of other birds." That would make race cucking something about a woman having sex / relations with a male not of her race.
The issue SJWs are having with Bella and the Bulldogs - and trust me it has been difficult to flush out – is the apparent dislike they say the main character has for her own race. Bella, the title character, leaves her established role as a cheerleader to join the high-school football team where her old friends are forced to watch her and her new relationships with members of a different race. This being a show about and for children it cannot go as far as some believe that co-creator Jonathan Butler wants to go. From wehuntedthemammoth:
It seems someone discovered that one of the show's co-creators, Jonathan Butler, is apparently the same guy who, under the name Jonathan Corban Butler, wrote and directed The Cuckold, a 2009 straight-to-DVD drama looking at what Butler calls "a little-known fetish in the swinging lifestyle called 'cuckolding.'" That is, black men having sex with white women while their white husbands look on.
Bella and the Bulldogs do not go so far as to have Bella and Tony (her new best friend once she joins the football team who is not of her race) have sex in front of anyone, but the implication some are drawing from of this "new" best friend is that she, Bella, is leaving her race identity behind in favor of what, the show, is suggesting is the "better" race.
As pointed out in many a comment section, Bella's birth race (it is unknown what she identifies as) is portrayed as weak and evil whereas Tony's race is portrayed as "numinous" (I had to look that up. Who the fuck uses numinous on a message board? Just say religious or spiritual.) It is due to this perceived inequalities between the races that has inspired The Daily Stormer to post part of a petition asking Nickelodeon to "stop marketing cuckold fetishism, as well as other forms of sexual fetishism (foot fetishism, for example) to children." But due to the total impotence of online petitions, The Daily Stormer, and other like-minded SJW sites, are encouraging their readers to get the show canceled through any and all means available. This has inspired many of their readers to take to Twitter, Facebook, and You Tube to consistently hound and bully Nickelodeon until the network caves to their demands.
This is not the first time that so called Social Justice Warriors have used social media to bully entertainers / networks away from messages they do not agree with. Just this past spring the Sandy Hook Promise Concert lost numerous bands and other acts due to the public outcry against the tours purported goal of "protect[ing] children from gun violence." Tim McGraw, the concert's headliner, did not with-draw stating that:
As a gun owner, I support gun ownership. I also believe that with gun ownership comes the responsibility of education and safety — most certainly when it relates to what we value most, our children. I can't imagine anyone who disagrees with that.
But, that was not enough for the SJW crowd who continued to bully and harasses other entertainers with accusations stating that supporting the Sandy Hook Promise of "protect[ing] children from gun violence" was a thinly veiled attempt to "disarm Americans before the Zionist invasion.
Personally, I have yet to see Bella and the Bulldogs as my son is only 4 and watches a different set of abominations that classify as children's entertainment these days, but as I read through all of the discussions regarding this and other attempts by SJWs to "shut down" voices they do not agree with I am still amazed at how many people think that the actions of The Daily Stormer, The Mary Sue, or The Outhousers somehow affect the free speech of Nickelodeon or any of the other so-called "victims" of SJWs. We all have the right to say whatever we want as long as some very few (and reasonable) parameters are met, the most important being that what you say should not call for or inspire others to cause someone pain or the damage of property. SJWs have the right to bitch and moan all they want, they have the right to tweet and Facebook whomever they want and say whatever (to an extent) they want. Nickelodeon has the right to air whatever they want. No freedoms are restricted, no rights trampled on.
SJWs can be bullies, mean spirited, and / or just plain annoying, but the rights of protesters do not diminish just because technology has made it easier for them to communicate their displeasure. Throughout most of history only those with the power and access to mass-communication were able to organize boycotts petitions (petitioning Pepsi to drop Madonna in the 80s and Ludacris in the early 2000s as examples) and it seems that people who are still beholden to the idea that communication is not meant for the masses who want to "get rid of" this type of activism. A view that is wholly and completely un-American.