Sympathy for the She-Devil?
A collection of brief thoughts on Feminism, or Eurofeminism
Crying Wolves?
I don't care who you are, but if you're going to recount sexual assault, abuse or attention, stories from years ago, you can have sympathy, but can't demand credibility on the basis of not having a prick.
court official to woman in the dock: "Do you promise to tell the whole truth, and nothing but the Truth?"
Woman in the dock: "Are you blind?"
*
court offical to man in the dock: "Do you promise to tell the whole truth, and nothing but the Truth?"
Man in the dock: "Yes."
Judge to man in the dock: "Are you aware of the penalty for perjury"?
'Grooming' is a common word used by women in the west to disclaim responsibility for their actions and decisions. It's, "It's not my fault! I was groomed to do what i kept doing again and again and again....and it wasn't because i liked it, or wanted to, or felt like it, or signed a contract to do it, it was simply him grooming me to do it." I don't understand why the men aren't allowed to come up with that sort of an excuse.
I wonder why people don't ask after why 'victims' aren't 'groomed' to say, no!, to the grooming efforts of men.
Let's face facts, western teenagers, unlike teenagers in relatively modest and decent cultures, are no 'Little House on the Prairie' cherubs reared on sunflowers and sunshine. How many times have we seen teenagers laughing at other teenagers for being virgins in western shows? American Pie anyone? Do you think people only turn sexually promiscuous and start doing the pizza the moment they turn 18? No, they are already 'groomed' from younger than that by their own culture, are aware of movies that encourage sexual promiscuity and which adults flock to see, amongst numerous other influences. That is what precedes the 'grooming' of boys to men when they 'talk them into bed'.
From young, they are 'groomed' by the media, mtv, sitcoms, movies, pop culture, and so on, into sexualised, arrogant, ill-mannered, self-absorbed, and ignorant, people who view themselves as superior to men. With such 'maturity', their being teenagers as evidence of gullibility is quite the tall tale isn't it. Grooming can only be alleged if the teenager has been groomed as a child to do this sort of thing before they are aware of the rights and wrongs of anything.
And why is it that people don't appreciate the fact that men themselves are 'groomed' by the over sexualisation of children and teenagers in western entertainment? And how men are also groomed by western entertainment that trains people to not think, just react, and be based and primitive with all their gore, sexual promiscuity, etc? And don't forget that this grooming of men starts when they are boys through the media and the sexually promiscuous western culture. Are they supposed to become decent and think rationally the moment they turn 18?
What? Are men supposed to be insusceptible to 'grooming' once they turn 18? If so, how is that so many queue up outside Apple stores overnight, or buy into the latest movies, gadgets, and so on? Grooming never ceases, so it is not just something 'men do' to innocent little girls skipping down the mountain with flowers in their hair.
In the above post by this actress, the supposed victim attempts to imply diminished responsibility claiming to be a, 'teenager', 'brainwashed, 'manipulated', 'submission'. Why? She hadn't heard of a police station till she 'came of age'? She didn't know how to say no? Her legs were magnetised with similar poles and just couldn't stay closed? How are we to trust the word of women who claim abuse in a culture that celebrates 50 Shades of Grey, sexual abuse, sexual promiscuity, 'friends with benefits' as freedom? Just as the 'culture' abets people to be overly sexual, abuse, etc, it also grooms people to lie when they don't get their way, or just want attention, or view even a compliment from a man as 'sexual harassment'.
Holy Pussy Batman!
Women in the west, with their brand of Femdom Feminism (eurofeminism) tend to to view themselves as beyond critique and suspicion and expect their word alone to serve as judge and jury, with the rest of society expected to serve as executioner. That basically turns juries and judges into mere formalities or even superfluous in quite a few cases. I may believe the real women of the past, but when it comes to these femdominist 'women', reason demands that i be skeptical. (what do i mean by the 'real women of the past'? That's for another article. Thanks for wondering.)
It has even spurned phenomena like the #metoo movement which tends to cast all men in a bad light for even merely telling a woman that she has beautiful eyes. I'm recollecting an article by the BBC where one of their British Indian reporters recounted a scary incident where a guy in New York (i think) took her out for dinner and told her she had beautiful eyes. She then goes on to talk about how molested she felt by that and did her best to portray the guy as some sort of predator. She needs to see a psychiatrist and get a pair of shades.
And we shouldn't forget all those famous actresses or singers - 'famous' doesn't denote 'quality' or 'skill' or deserving of all that money by the way - who traded their modesty for fame and fortune, and then complained about how they were allegedly taken advantage of years after their bank accounts had swollen even further. I don't get these so-called 'victims'. They do the same thing onscreen with their 'steamy sex scenes', promoting sexual promiscuity, and thus telling the world, that for money, it's alright to do such things? Why would any producer NOT think that such women were 'easy'? I do. Not by choice, but by their actions. Unless they expect their 'easy' actions to not be seen as 'easy' simply because they say so and they got a pussy to prove they are right.
They aren't victims, they're just Sex Workers.
It appears that being a woman and claiming to be a victim is quite the commodity these days. You get publicity, a global outpouring of sympathy, tv interviews, have their face on Time Magazine covers, be presented as 'the woman of the year', get a book done, be paid loads for all of these. Makes me wish i was a woman sometimes. I wouldn't need a job. I can just entice a guy to feel me up and then wait for the money and attention to pour in. The moment you can make money from crying wolf, there would be many who would cry wolf. (dual meaning here)
If one was to think about it, prostitutes can also claim to be taken advantage of by men for money. How are they any different from these overhyped, overpaid, bimbotick Hollywood actresses, singers and whatnot who did the same for millions in their bank accounts, and vice versa?
No, when it comes to prostitutes, the EuroLeft (a perversion of the Left) insist that they be called, 'sex workers', thus adding what they think is a semblance of respectability to their profession.
How about these Hollywood actresses who were 'victimised' by Weinstein and co. just calling themselves 'sex workers' then. But no. They view themselves as 'actresses', 'stars'. So they are better than prostitutes, and therefore have the right to feel more violated? No they are not. If it is good enough for prostitutes to be called 'sex workers' for trading body for money, then it is good enough for anyone who gets what they want by playing the role of a sex worker on and off screen.
These Hollywood women weren't taken advantage of unless they were held down or actually molested. But if they took it with a smile, and the dollars that came with it, and remained silent, they were moonlighting as 'sex workers'. And their silence allowed the alleged predator to make victims out of more women. So these hollywood sex workers, i mean, actresses, were basically saying,
'i'm gonna keep quiet about this producer showing me his dick so i can make millions. So who cares about that guy making victims out of more women. Screw them. I want fame and fortune, and that's all that fucking matters." Rather than congratulating these 'women', they ought to be taken to task for remaining silent in favour of money, fame, and fortune. They are worse than prostitutes. But such 'women' became social heroines?
And so what if some Hollywood producer or whatnot showed you his dick. Just say, 'no thank you' and move on. Even flashers do that everyday in the west don't they. I don't see women who encounter that making the headlines and being made 'women of the year' for being traumatised by the sight of a dick with a dick?
No Harm in Asking my dear
There is no harm in a man 'asking', as they are encouraged by those women out there who say 'yes'.
If woman have a problem with that, take it up with those women who say yes after a drink or two, not start up some asinine campaign called #meToo. You are already promoting it via your movies where women say yes after a drink or two, or even make the first moves for it. And it is women playing these roles on the telly. They are promoting it. Many of these hollywood female 'stars' do it too. So what's with the complains?
It is the overall culture of sexual promiscuity that the west promotes like a religion that is causing this. Women have central blame on this one. If #meToo has any place, it is in cultures where sleeping around like a cheap hooker isn't culture, like it is in the west, and women are decent and yet abused. There, it makes sense. In the west, it is based on the denial of sense.
Someone forgot to tell me that women are royalty now. Or maybe i wasn't paying attention.
Should we all look down when a woman walks by?
Haven't you ever wondered why some of these school girls and women bark, 'pervert!' at school boys and men respectively in western shows when they look at them?
Are these women so grotesque that men must be perverts for gawking at them with desire? You could be a pervert for looking at a dog, or one of your own gender, with sexual or romantic desire, but why does one qualify as a pervert for looking at a woman? Doesn't make sense does it.
No, that indicates that the attention of men must be invited, not given. "Because we are royalty now." But not too worry. Such invitations will be forthcoming if you sport a Rolex, swing about keys to a Ferrari, or look like George Clooney. (though in chinese cultures, the most attractive men are either the rich, or men who look like wimps as chinese women look for men whom are weak and easily controlled.) If not, it is, "how dare you look at me you twerp! Pervert!" You see that sort of bitchy behaviour in many an american or british show. They sport a sort of arrogance that really does much to invite a smack.
That sort of attitude has spawned phrases like, 'Girls Rule, and Boys Drool'. And that sort of attitude is now unsurprisingly spawning misogyny. Women in the west really need to learn how to behave.
Remember 'The Accused'? The first of Eurofeminist propaganda.
In the 80s, there was this movie where this girl goes into a bar, behaves like a prostitute in the way she is dressed and dances, is raped, and the men who did it are thrown into prison after she goes through a long ordeal through court cases and such. The issue was, 'even though she dresses and behaves like a slut, she has the right to say no, and men cannot take it as an invitation.'
Well, yes. But that wasn't the moral of the story. The actual moral of the story was Femdominist. The movie was a trick. It portrayed the consequence that Jodie Foster faced as so vile that it had the effect of justifying what she did through and through.
No it doesn't.
She still behaved like a slut, she doesn't deserve respect, she isn't the sort any self-respecting man would want to bring home to meet his parents, one has to wonder what sort of parents she had, she certainly is not the type to be a mother of any child, and no child is going to take pride in seeing his or her momma behave in such a manner.
But what the movie did was to validate all her actions as deserving respect, because if you didn't, you are on the side of the rapists. That is how the west justifies all sorts of evils, perversions, and simply bad behaviour, with the phrase, 'You are either with us, or against us'. They said the same nonsense when they suffered retaliation for all their evils in the middle east too.
Ever since that movie, the slogan of the Eurofeminist (bowel) movement has been, 'Not only can i be a slut, but you must respect me for it, and never use the word slut because it makes me come across as a slut for my slutty behaviour.' The logic is really twisted. It's as if a bad behaviour becomes a good behaviour because they don't deserve to be raped for it. What sort of nonsense is that?
They did this with the perverse LGBT movement too. First they portrayed them as victims when some were assaulted and killed. Then to stop such assaults, people demanded that such behaviour is seen as normal. And then from there they moved on to demand that it taught to children to prove that it was perceived as normal. And now, if you don't see it as normal, you're the pervert? Is there something in the water in the west now that turns everyone there stupid?
And Western Social Media steps in to block and ban anyone who uses such a word, thus freeing women to be worse than the men of the past whom they complained about, and yet be respected for it. That way, western women become the immoral icons for morality, thus turning the idea of morality, decency, modesty, and restraint into evils itself.
Marrying a woman makes you a homosexual
It is this sort of nonsense that has in turn contributed to the unfortunate growth of the homosexual population as well, since marrying one of these new 'liberated' women is worse than jumping into bed with a guy. And being trained into such disrespect for men, it is no wonder that some of these 'women' are becoming perverse and marrying each other. Twisted indeed. But that is what is contributing to the definition of the western persona, defining ideas of freedom, and determining what twisted form it ought to take.
As it is true that people tend to form close relationships with their own gender from young, prior to the pursuit of friendships or romantic relationships with the opposite gender, with the promotion of the 'normality' of homosexuality, many men will end up turning to their own genders with whom they had more egalitarian relationships with, and become homosexuals or engage in homosexual activities. It is also exacerbated by the capitalist consumerist system promoting Immediate Gratification and Reaction over thought.
And as women also tend to form close relationships with each other from childhood, with the portrayal and reduction of men to Simply Pricks, it makes them see simply red when they encounter men, and they just end up in bed with other women. That is the logic of male emasculation being promoted by Jewish-controlled Hollywood. You demonise men till it becomes a self-fulfiling prophecy, get women to mutate into lesbians, and men into homosexuals, and transfer social power to women whom are fast becoming incoporated into the capitalist consumerist system. And then they tell the whole world that it is just 'the freedom to love' and 'freedom of choice' and people will completely miss what lies beneath.
There is nothing normal or natural with homosexuality. 'Coming out of the closet', referring to men and women seeking social validation for being perverse, is most apt, as the 'closet' is where the boogeyman is supposed to live isn't it.
Homosexuality, and other sorts of sexual perversions, usually arises as a psychosis, a quirk in the way one looks at things, or out of desperation. From there, in the west, due to the western effort to stop the persecution of these people, they ended up normalising it so that people will have no reason to ridicule them. And this moves on to promoting what is a psychosis, quirk, or product of desperation as a normal choice, and people forget that it was actually once a tendency arising out of abnormality.
So in the current situation, with the abnormal situation of women mutating into something like a Biblical plague, homosexuality becomes a reaction to, or consequence of it. It is then normalised as an effort to get around the fact that 'the fairer sex' has turned into the Wicked Witch with a bad case of boils in spirit, if not in looks.
Fem/dom/inism & Capitalism
The problem is, when freedom is pursued within an overarching class-based, elitist, exploitative (like capitalism) system, it often translates to the oppressed group seeking not equality, but dominance. It goes in line with the approved and promoted ethos of the overarching class-based system.
Equality within the capitalist status quo is only in terms of having the right to be more than equal to another via 'success' within the economic system, and it can only happen at another's expense. It's like in The Highlander, where all immortals have an equal right to kill each other, but only one can remain standing. That is the farce that is capitalism.
Capitalism, after all, is all about imposing an opportunity cost on success in the form of empathy and compassion. It is not an economic system, but a system to promote, popularise, and perpetuate the darker potentials of human nature where one can't get ahead except on the heads of others. The economics is the means, not the ends.
Eurofeminism isn't about attacking the worst excesses of men, but attacking men's refusal to allow women access to it. That, it appears, is deemed by women to be the worst of all excesses of men.
So, within such a system, when 'women' seek to gain 'equality', they do so by fighting to join in the worst excesses of men which they had previously complained about. That is why words like 'slut', 'bitch', 'tramp', 'slag', and others such terms to distinguish a bad woman from a good woman, so that women will know what is wrong and right, are outlawed in social use so that women can enjoy 'equality' in being equally or more bad than men and demand that people see nothing wrong with it.
In a nutshell, Eurofeminism views Patriarchy as Men's attempt to deny women the right to be as fucked up as the worst of men. There is nothing respectable or laudable about such an approach toward equality, and Eurofeminists need to stop being childish and appreciate that point.
That is Eurofeminism.
It is perverse, twisted, and basically anti-progressive. It turns women into an abomination that desires not to end oppression, but to become one of the oppressors. Some of the aims of Eurofeminism are good, but it is serving to whitewash its evil aspects, such as killing babies to feel free via 'prochoice', sleeping around, dressing like prostitutes did in the past, and terming all of this 'freedom'. And they promote it all in movies and sit-coms by sexual debauchery, violence and the emasculation of men. Men in the past never produced movies in the mainstream where women were treated as bad as men are treated by women in the mainstream 'entertainment' spewing from the west, and being replicated throughout the world of today. And women never seem to notice that. Why is that my dear?
Within this context, all these allegations of men taking advantage of, or abusing women, are suspect. If it is not of recent occurrence, shut it. It can be tantamount to lying and villification, for the purpose of forwarding the Eurofeminist cause of being as bad or worse than the worst of men, and demanding that they be respected for it.
Eurofeminism is the centrefinger of The Invisible Hand
At the end of the day, the Eurofeminist movement is fundamentally a capitalist incorporationist movement in effect, if not in intent. Women traditionally have been family focused. Their pragmatism was traditionally familial, not political. They would soothe the man after a hard day's work at being screwed by the Lord of the Manor, and give him the strength to go out the next day to bend over yet again. They had to ensure that the hubby kept his job, did whatever it took, to feed the litter. Politics didn't interest them, only the immediate needs of the family.
But they did keep alive the notion of being nurturing, caring, loving, devoted, and all that. That in turn did make men think, at least subconsciously, "if my wife for whom i work so little for, can love me like that, why can't the lord of the manor for whom i spend a large part of my life slaving for, love me even half as much? So that, amongst other instances of goodness, contributed to political activism against the lord time and again to the present.
However, with the entrance of women into the political arena, they sort of validate the system as it stands. They validate it's exploitative, uncaring, self-serving way, patriarchal ways by joining in themselves. This leads to them further ensuring that men keep up with the role of 'Butt-whipped Billy and Hogtied Ted's Far From Excellent Adventure' (coming to a cinema near you this summer) within the economic system. They don't just soothe men to put up with shite, they actually take an active part in legislating it, all the way to handling its logistics for delivery to the dinner table.
And if this isn't bad enough, the emasculation of men in western 'entertainment' serves to further thumb-down the man and depoliticise him further, telling him that he is just a sex-starved dickhead who needs to be managed and told what to do. And in that, women become the centre finger of The Invisible Hand (capitalism) taking and talking down the last vestige of opposition to the system women have complained about so much, but are now a part of.
I suppose in some respects, it is the man's fault. He took too long to bring down The Man who has been buggering him for ages, till the System incorporated women and shut him up for good - excluding myself of course. I'm still bare-chested, chest-thumping, butt-kicking rogue and rebel, and revere woman so long as they don't try to act like they got a dick, and if they do, can expect a swift and unadulterated kick in the nuts.
Eurofeminism is Neo-Colonialism
In part, the Eurofeminist movement is a neo-colonial movement demanding that the depravity that passes for 'culture' in the west be emulated throughout the world. It is a final attack against all non-white civilisations, histories, wisdoms, cultures, philosophies, religions, etc, of the world through the demand that their women of base repute, or sluts, like Lady Gaga to Porn stars, to violent debauched women, be held up as moral, social, and cultural icons throughout the world. It thus completely displaces their ancient ideas of liberty as being free of our base selves in favour of the western idea of liberty being nothing more than taking liberties.
You see, in the non-western world, the woman is seen as the epitome of the best traits of humankind. If they were to be perverted, then humanity loses it's final torchbearer to the heavens. The woman is one of the moral icons supporting other cultures. They have Mother Goddesses, female goddesses playing pivotal moral roles, and so on. To corrupt the woman is to corrupt man, who is the child in the womb, even when he is out of it and strutting about. That is the insidious idea behind the corruption and debasement of the idea of The Woman through the debauched feminists of the west.
Yes, the west will point to all the numerous instances of the abuse of women in the rest of the world, but those are abberations, not the core of their culture. And wherever there are great ideals, there will sure to be conflicts with it from those whom act for their own interests, and that is where the abuse of women come from. But in the west, the degeneration of women is not an abberation, but the core of their culture after the 50s.
By the way, the abuse of women in Indian culture, in case you didn't know, is of european origins, not Indian. The real Indians practiced an agricultural economy, and thus introduced the idea of a Mother Goddess, and so on. The influx of 'Aryans', however, added a western toxin into it in terms of patriarchy. Bride-burnings, the caste system, the subjugation of women, etc, were of European origins, through the 'Aryans'. And so, once, the europeans introduced the subjugation of women to India, and now they want to introduce the subjugation of men through their gender-confused women?
The reverence of women is the cornerstone of many cultures, and it is this cornerstone that the west seeks to destroy, and with it, the entire structure of thousands of years of true culture. True culture is not one that is perfect, but one that seeks to undo imperfection. The west is a debased degenerate culture now that sees taking liberties as freedom, whereas in ours, liberty is being free from it. The west would be well-advised to put their eurocentrism aside and learn from their betters, and cease and desist in their white western supremacist efforts to subjugate all cultures in the world through their Jewish and White-controlled media, entertainment, and social media industries.
(The above is the closing scene of Tarantino's, 'Death Proof' where a guy is portrayed as evil, and thus justifying a protracted scene of female-on-male gross violence. It is quite the common theme in western post-80s pro-femdom 'entertainment' from movies like these to sitcoms like The Big Bang Theory or Friends, amongst numerous others. Western 'entertainment' frequently justifies certain attitudes by constructing a 'good reason' for it. For instance, portraying this person as so evil so as to promote and glorify female aggression and violence in itself. In society, it translates to arrogance and condescension toward men.
It is a psychological technique frequently used by the Jewish-controlled Hollywood, mainstream social media, news and entertainment industry to desensitise people to gore, violence, etc, or make them more accepting of sexual debauchery, and other evils that are 'trending' in the west. All of this is purposed to reduce people to their primal and base instincts for profit and control.)
In Sum
When it comes to women, my idea of a Feminist is the Virgin Mary, and my own mother (whom my brother and i revere as a living saint.) She illustrates the best traits of a Woman standing strong in the face of the worst excesses of men. Freedom is the impulse to nurture our better potentials, not join others in their worst.
Mary didn't feel oppressed having to give birth to Jesus, she saw it as a validation of Being Woman, in being nurturing, loving, caring, and leaving the worst excesses of humankind to Men. She didn't view the right to kill the babe in the womb as evidence of being free. Freedom was an expression of her nature and related obligation to nurture it to life, and throughout its life, as the final effort to redeem mankind from his worst impulses.
In that, women could help bring out the best in a man by getting him to tone down his worst through the maternal nurturance of his better potentials. That is woman. There to free men from the oppression of the darker side of his potentials nurtured by an exploitative patriarchal system. That deserves our reverence.
Misogyny, in a sense, is Man's anger at being deprived of a saviour in the form of a good woman. That is why it has spawned lots of seemingly derogatory words. It is not hatred of woman, but being deprived of a woman worth reverence for her goodness that gives rise to it.
Eurofeminists say that God is a woman. No. He is not. God is a Man who is in need of a Mother. He wondered for eons as an orphan. In his likeness we are made. And woman are made in the likeness of the Queen of Heaven, and the Mother of God. When women fall through Eurofeminism, God and the Heavens fall.
So, the moral of the story is,
Stop being a bitch and be a woman for God's sake, literally and figuratively. We men are counting on you.
Amen
edX
Comments
Post a Comment