Similar posts

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

Whenever you start talking about the need for Christians to live holy, someone inevitably asks that all important question that compromised immature believers and psuedo-Christians tend to ask:

"Well dang! What CAN we do then?!'

People only ask that question when they still want to do sinful things. No, Christian: you cannot go to the club still once you become a believer! Well, technically you can - Paul said that all things were lawful to him - but the deeper question would be WHY WOULD YOU STILL WANT TO?

What is it about the Christ in you that resonates with the clubbing life? What does Jesus and vodka have in common? What does the Holy Spirit have in common with shots of Patron, while uber-sexualized music blares over the sound system?

What does extreme cleavage, tight pants and high heels have in common with Paul's advice to the Christian woman in 1st Timothy 2:9-10:

"And I want women to be modest in their appearance. They should wear decent and appropriate clothing and not draw attention to themselves by the way they fix their hair or by wearing gold or pearls or expensive clothes. For women who claim to be devoted to God should make themselves attractive by the good things they do."

It's hard to convince someone you are living for Christ when you just got done grinding on the dance floor with them! Or when you just got done sexting with them.

And for the guys:

"I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling..." 1st Timothy 2:8

Notice it said lifting HOLY hands? Fellas: your hands can't be holy if they were just clutching a blunt or a shot of Henny.

Neither can they be holy if they were just clutching yourself in a nude photo sent to some woman you're trying to have sex with! (Use your imagination on this one.)

Notice too that it also said men should be without anger and QUARRELING? You'll notice a continuous string of angry quarreling men on my page every now and then, trying to one-up me because they're offended with what I've written. True holy men aren't out there attempting to one-up godly messengers!

Your new life in Christ should be a witness to others that draws them to your newfound life: not something that becomes scandalous and a Christ-repellent.

Let's exemplify godliness in all that we do. Or why even bother with Jesus in the first place?

I've always been an all-in or all-out type of guy. Why play around with something as powerful as Christianity when you have no intention on living right? Where's the commitment at? You're better off just remaining a sinner!

"It would be better if they had never known the way to righteousness than to know it and then reject the command they were given to live a holy life." 2 Peter 2:21

There's plenty you will learn to do that's actually fun and highly enjoyable, as you start to mature in your walk with Christ. Holiness is far from boring!

But you have to first be willing to mature. And you cannot mature until you're willing to make a total break with sinful activity.

Remember: the first command Jesus ever gave was the command to repent. Nothing else happens in your Christian journey until repentance from sinful living first takes place.

God bless.

Take_Me_Back_Please #fundie reddit.com

Typical fucking normie neurotypicals. Look at how nice and sweet they look on their social media profile picture on that website with their cat and look at how racist and cuntish her true personality is when she thinks that no one else sees her.

If you don't hate normies you haven't been spending enough time around them or you're a normie yourself.

They're backstabbing pieces of shit who only care about one-upping one another. They bring chaos and drama everywhere they go. It's fucking tiring.

WorldGoneCrazy #fundie disqus.com

No, life does not begin at conception. When life begins is determined by pro-aborts using a Ouija board. Generally, the supernatural event defining the beginning of life that magically occurs sometime during pregnancy can be found by taking the moment of abortion and adding 5 minutes to it, thus alleviating the guilt of the abortionist, abortive woman, and bro-choicer who dragged her into the abortuary.

"Life is a continuum. Life on earth has started a few billion years ago and didn't stop since then. Or are you claiming sperm and egg cells are not alive? It would surprise me if scientists from Northwestern University really stated that 'Life begins with a “flash of light” or “fireworks"'. And it would really surprise me if abortionist used this silly argument."

Confusing sperm and egg cells with a conceived human shows how science-phobic you are, John. It seems to be a Hail Mary effort lately by pro-aborts to equate sperm to a human being and claim that masturbation is genocide. It must be difficult for the superstitious ones to accept that they were once zygotes, embryos, fetuses. For those of us who actually do science - and understand the difference between sperm and humans:

“Fertilization is the process by which male and female haploid gametes (sperm and egg) unite to produce a genetically distinct individual.” Signorelli et al., Kinases, phosphatases and proteases during sperm capacitation, CELL TISSUE RES. 349(3):765 (Mar. 20, 2012)

"Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception). "Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being." [Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]

"The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote." [Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]

“Human life begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm (spermatozoo developmentn) unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote. This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.” “A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo).” Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

“Your baby starts out as a fertilized egg… For the first six weeks, the baby is called an embryo.” Prenatal Care, US Department Of Health And Human Services, Maternal and Child Health Division, 1990

Landrum B. Shettles, M.D., P.h.D. was first scientist to succeed at in vitro fertilization:

“The zygote is human life….there is one fact that no one can deny; Human beings begin at conception.”

“The zygote and early embryo are living human organisms.”

Keith L. Moore & T.V.N. Persaud Before We Are Born – Essentials of Embryology and Birth Defects (W.B. Saunders Company, 1998. Fifth edition.) Page 500

Ronan O’Rahilly and Fabiola Miller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

“Although life is a continuous process, fertilization… is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.”

“[All] organisms, however large and complex they might be as full grown, begin life as a single cell. This is true for the human being, for instance, who begins life as a fertilized ovum.”

Dr. Morris Krieger “The Human Reproductive System” p 88 (1969) Sterling Pub. Co

“The first cell of a new and unique human life begins existence at the moment of conception (fertilization) when one living sperm from the father joins with one living ovum from the mother. It is in this manner that human life passes from one generation to another. Given the appropriate environment and genetic composition, the single cell subsequently gives rise to trillions of specialized and integrated cells that compose the structures and functions of each individual human body. Every human being alive today and, as far as is known scientifically, every human being that ever existed, began his or her unique existence in this manner, i.e., as one cell. If this first cell or any subsequent configuration of cells perishes, the individual dies, ceasing to exist in matter as a living being. There are no known exceptions to this rule in the field of human biology.”

James Bopp, ed., Human Life and Health Care Ethics, vol. 2 (Frederick, MD: University Publications of America, 1985)

“Zygote, fertilized egg cell that results from the union of a femalegamete (egg, or ovum) with a male gamete (sperm). In the embryonic development of humans and other animals, the zygote stage is brief and is followed by cleavage, when the single cell becomes subdivided into smaller cells.

The zygote represents the first stage in the development of a genetically unique organism. The zygote is endowed with genes from two parents, and thus it is diploid (carrying two sets of chromosomes). The joining of haploid gametes to produce a diploid zygote is a common feature in the sexual reproduction of all organisms except bacteria.

"Although life is a continuous process, fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte." - Ronan O'Rahilly and Fabiola Müller, Human Embryology and Teratology, 3rd edition. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2001. p. 8.

"It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of the life of a new individual." - Clark Edward Corliss, Patten's Human Embryology: Elements of Clinical Development. New York: McGraw Hill, 1976. p. 30.

You're welcome. Embrace science, do not fear it.

"It seems you are confused here, World. You are the one claiming life starts at conception. Nothing in your post supports that notion. You even mention a source that says 'Although life is a continuous process ...'.
Thanks for admitting that your argument was rather silly."

"You are the one claiming life starts at conception."

And I just proved it using peer-reviewed medical and biological sources, unlike the superstitious one that you are.

"You even mention a source that says 'Although life is a continuous process ...'."

Read on, Child, there is more where you conveniently put the ...:

"fertilization (which, incidentally, is not a 'moment') is a critical landmark because, under ordinary circumstances, a new genetically distinct human organism is formed when the chromosomes of the male and female pronuclei blend in the oocyte.""

Still waiting for your evidence that you were never a zygote, embryo, or fetus.

"No need. You claimed 'life starts at conception'. Your evidence does not show that. It shows life is a continuum - conception is merely a milestone in the formation of a new individual - a crucial one, but certainly not the only one. Your silly argument for not allowing abortion because 'life starts at conception' therefore ends here."

I gave you peer-reviewed science, and you reply with feeewwwings?!?

Still waiting for your proof that you were not a zygote, embryo, and fetus. This won't take long, will it? :-)

fuck_ITcucks #sexist #psycho incels.co

Consent is a made up concept by foids to make sure ugly men, like us, just do our jobs to serve them, provide emotional support when they want, simp for them, and other than that leave them alone and never manifest our sexuality which they find disgusting. They think we're disgusting and that we don't have feelings, but ofc that's rude to say, so they come up with buzzwords like "consent", "unsolicited advances", "rape", "metoo" to bully us into becoming silent slaves and never expressing our feelings.

I mean, first off, the only real difference between an attractive guy and what they call a creep is looks, aside from the fact that the ugly guy has been denied the chance to learn social skills, and isn't as confident due to constant bullying. The ugly guy will naturally want to find love and get sex just like the chad and will try to do so. Women should just learn to deal with that and learn to politely reject people they don't like when they hit on them. They should be able to deal with minimal annoyances like that without whining if they want to consider themselves adults with the same mental maturity as men (which they should since they say we're equal).

Sometimes feminists complain about men lashing out bc they get rejected, and tbf there's some stupid men out there, but in a lot of those cases it's probably not bc of the rejection per se, but bc it's easy to lash out if they look at you like you're a cockroach or talk to you like you're utter shit they just want out of the way. I mean who wouldn't want to beat up someone who treats them that way.

Also, even if they were polite when rejecting incels, that doesn't fix the fact that it's an injustice that we're consistently denied sex and love, which are basic needs (despite soyciety wanting us to just watch porn, play videogames, wagecuck and shut up). So at some point you have to wonder, is rape really so wrong? It's one thing if chad rapes his gf because he can't take a no despite having sex constantly, but if an incel gets tired of NEVER having sex and rapes someone, isn't that kinda understandable? The incel's suffering is a lot greater than that of the raped foid. Not to mention lesser forms of "rape" like groping or having sex with someone who's drunk, tbh I'd say those aren't morally wrong at all (as a suffering incel, just like stealing isn't the same if you're starving vs just greedy).

So basically consent is a scam, if an incel gropes or rapes a woman bc he's 25 and has NEVER been able to have sex with consent, he did nothing wrong. Consent = know your place and leave women alone if you're not chad. Fuck that.

That being said I'm not advocating rape, just saying an incel (vs a chad who can't take a no once) who does it should be empathized with and not go to jail, and at most get mandatory therapy or something if caught. As to lesser forms of "rape" like groping or drunk sex, those are completely ok in my book (again, only if you're incel).

Made a poll to see what you guys think :feelsokman:

francois #fundie sciforums.com

Is it wrong to be disgusted by homosexuals?

I’m not homophobic, but I’m not ashamed to say that I find many homosexuals to be obnoxious. I don’t have any problems with anybody who keeps his sexual inclinations to himself. However, I have a huge problem with homosexuals who impose their sexuality on me and others. Let me explain what I mean.

I don’t have a problem with women giving me the eye. What I mean by “the eye” is the look a person gives you when it’s clear that they’re interested in you, and they find you sexually appealing. When a person gives you the eye, a lot of communicated. When a woman gives a man the look, it means he can have sex with her if he puts in a little effort. It is unmistakable when it happens to you. Personally, I find it flattering, no matter who gives me the eye. Even if it’s an ugly chick, my ego gets a boost. If it’s a hot chick, it gets an even greater boost.

Usually men don’t give women the eye, because it’s presupposed that the man will have sex with the girl. A man giving a woman amorous eyes would be redundant. Thus, it is questionable when a man does it.

However, when I get the eye from homosexuals, I am put off. I don’t know why this would ever need to be explained to homosexuals, but here it is: Don’t ever assume a random person is gay. Don’t put the moves on another person, unless you’re sure he/she is also a homosexual. Heterosexual males don’t appreciate it when homosexual males hit on them. It is disgusting, because men know men. We know what they want to violate our corn holes and we are disgusted by it. It doesn’t just apply to being hit on. It also applies to compliments. If a homosexual man compliments me on my looks, I don’t take it the same way I would from a woman, or even a fat, ugly woman. I take it that he wants to violate my corn hole.

What pisses me off on top of that is sheer (I’m not talking about all homosexuals—I have no problems whatsoever with people who keep their sexualities to themselves, regardless of what they do in private.) audacity that some homosexual men have. One of my brothers told me a story about him in a bar one time. There was this one guy who joined my brother and his friends at a table. He was a nice enough guy who just wanted to make friends. Then the guy started talking to one of my brother’s friends. My brother’s friend was very drunk and the two of them were hanging out, talking and having a good time. And then suddenly, the guy said to my brother’s friend, “How would you like to give me a blow job in the bath room for 10?” Needless to say, the friend was stunned and stalled — completely caught unaware, not knowing how to respond. My brother then stood up and told the guy that he had to leave immediately. He did. Now, let's ignore the homosexual's lack of social graces. Let's say he was just hitting on him and he didn't actually ask him for a blow job for 10?” It’s still wrong because he was assuming he was gay. It’s stupid for a least a few reasons. One, heterosexual males hate being hit on by homosexual males. Two, chances are high that the male who is being hit on is heterosexual male. This is because we live in a world where most males are heterosexuals. There are a lot more heterosexuals than there are homosexuals. So why do they do it?

It’s arrogant. Do they think if they’re charming enough the heterosexual male might appreciate the effort? Do they think there’s a chance the heterosexual might turn into a homosexual? “Well, I’m not gay, but for you, I might make an exception.” No. Trust me, we don’t want your advances. We don’t appreciate your compliments. We don’t even like hearing you talking about sex in general.

I don’t care about what people do in private. If a man has raunchy dirty sex with another consenting man, that’s fine with me. But don’t talk to me about it. I can assure you, I’m not interested. You’re not special, and I’m not going to make an exception for you. While you’re at it, don’t tell me I’m good looking either. Don’t hit on me, and above all, don’t give me the eyes.

Am I wrong here?

[ Maybe you ping as fag on the gaydar, francois. ]

Perhaps you're right. However, that doesn't matter. The point is, gays should be sure that the person they're hitting on, complimenting or making some kind of advance on, is also gay. So hitting on and flirting with another person of the same gender is fine if you're in a gay bar or in some gay place. That's fine. That's what those places are for. But hitting on somebody or making some kind of advance on a person in a regular bar or any not explicitly gay public place should be absolutely, positively sure that the person he/she is hitting on is also gay. They should bend over backwards. Even if I do look gay (which I don't), a homosexual shouldn't hit on me. Unless a homosexual is in a gay bar, they should ask the people around "Hey, do you know if that person is gay/available for some man-on-man action?" And then when they've talked to enough people to be confident that the person in question is in fact, gay, then that person can go ahead and flirt and camp it up with said person.

[ You seem to have double standards. You're quite ok with heterosexual men "hitting" on girls in bars, it seems, trying to pick them up. But when it comes to homosexual men hitting on men in bars to try to pick them up, then you get all offended. ]

I don't have a problem with homosexuals going to gay bars to pick up homosexuals. That's fine. That's what gay bars are for. Heterosexuals picking up heterosexuals at a non-gay bar is what non-gay bars are for.

[ I can only assume that you feel somehow threatened by homosexuals showing interest in you. ]

You can safely assume that.

[ Yet, at the same time, you can't comprehend that a woman might equally feel threatened by your uninvited interest in her. ]

I can comprehend that, completely. However, it's different, because heterosexuals are a majority. Not only is heterosexuality more common, but heterosexuality is generally deemed less disgusting. A boorish heterosexual male hitting on a poor heterosexual girl is different from a boorish homosexual male hitting on a poor heterosexual male. The difference is huge.

You can call it a double standard if it pleases you. But I really don't see it as such. In the third page of the thread I introduced an analogy with the floggers/fuckers and the tour bus driving driving his sick friends across the country.

I agree with you that some women are disgusted by some males who hit on them. But let's compare that to the tour bus analogy. Sure those few women may suffer from these stupid men hitting on them. But those women are like the three or four out of the 25 people on the bus who are sick from the bus driver who is driving fast. The boorish man who is hitting on the poor girls are the bus drivers.

The homosexuals who are hitting on the horrified heterosexuals are like the bus drivers when the bus is full of 25 sick people. And those people are sick because of the speeding. The bus driver continues speeding, ever merrily to his destination, without a care in the world about the 25 people in the bus who are doubling over in their vomit. It's very inconsiderate in my opinion.

If you were that bus driver wouldn't you slow the bus down for your sick friends if it would make them more comfortable? Even though the bus driver is a minority, he should still take his friends' into consideration. It's really simple utilitarianism. You do what makes the most people comfortable.

[ And yet, you seem quite willing to impose your sexuality on other people. And you also seem quite happy for others to impose their sexuality on you - provided that you welcome their advances. ]

Well, there is a huge difference between assuming that a given person is a heterosexual and assuming he is a homosexual. Huge difference. If homosexuals were a majority, I would probably still hate being hit on them, but I would probably get used to it and eventually learn to tolerate it out of simple necessity. However, they are not the majority. They should try to make the majority comfortable by inhibiting their sexualities in our presence because it sickens us. It's simple utilitarianism.

[ So, it seems to me that what you really want is for people to read your mind and magically deduce whether you want sexual attention or not. If they are a "hot chick", then bring it on. But if they are a "hot guy", they should somehow just know that you're not into that ]

Lol, no. That's not what I want. I already explained what I want. What I want is really quite reasonable. I want homosexuals to find out whether or not I am gay before they grope, give me the eye, or make some kind of advance on me. That's what I want. Let me know if you're still confused. I don't know if I can make it any clearer to you. I have Skype. It might be easier to explain it that way.

[ If you're claiming that men never make sexual advances to girls - that it's always the other way around - you're living in a fantasyland. ]

Luckily, I never said or implied anything of that kind. Males are constantly throwing themselves at women in the hope of a favourable response - much moreso than vice versa.
It's called "trolling." It's a tried and true method.

[ But you're happy to "put the moves on" any women, I suppose. ]

Hold on now. You're being hasty and presumptuous. I'm not happy to put the moves on any woman. I'm not a prick. I only hit on women if they are receptive. I can usually tell very quickly in my interactions with women whether or not they are receptive. If they aren't, I don't waste my time or hers.

[ What if she is homosexual? Shouldn't you check, first, like you expect men to check your sexuality? Tell me - how do you propose that will work? "Hi, I'm Bernard." "Hi, I'm francois." "Just checking, francois - are you homosexual?" ]

Once again, I think you think it's a double standard. But it's really not. It's because homosexuals don't find heterosexuals nearly as disgusting has heterosexuals find homosexuals. That's reason number one. Reason number two is this: there are way more heterosexuals than there are homosexuals. Simple utilitarianism. Are you familiar at all with hedonistic calculus?

[ Why? There's no "violation" between consenting adults. ]

You took that too literally. I was just writing colorfully. I try not to bore the shit out of my readers. I am courteous. I consider others. I wish some homosexuals were the same way.

[ And you think that there aren't equally audacious heterosexual men who go around propositioning every woman they see and think might be fair game? ]

Not really that many guys do that. And yes, those kinds of guys are obnoxious, especially if the attention is unwanted. However, it's not on par with that of homosexuals hitting on heterosexuals. It's really not. I think I've already explained my reasoning to you. I think you can anticipate what I would say to that. If you need it again, let me know.

[ How hard is it to say "Thanks, but I'm not interested"? ]

It's not hard at all. My real problem is homosexuals that give me the look or grope me. Or homosexuals that make out in public places. Homosexuals making out in a public place is not the same as heterosexuals making out in a public place. Once again, I don't give a shit about what people do in private. However, in public, I think homosexuals should still be courteous and yielding to the horrified majority.

Well, it might be a 7 to 1 ratio, or something like that. Not terrible odds. From what I've heard and read, it's more like 1 out of 20, or 5%. They are a minority.

[ Do the men who proposition women think the same thing? ]

Get real man. A homosexual man hitting on a heterosexual man is not the same thing as a heterosexual man hitting on a heterosexual woman. If you think it's the same thing, you need to get outside. Take a walk.

[ I don't think many homosexual men would have a problem with that. They would be quite happy to avoid you. ]

Once again, I don't want them to avoid me. I've had gay friends. I'm not a homophobe. I've made it clear what I want many times, but you keep ignoring it, because you know that what I want is actually quite reasonable. Let me reiterate: I want homosexuals to find out whether or not I am gay before they grope, give me the eye, or make some kind of advance on me. They should be yielding to the horrified majority.

Still confused?

[ In fact, I wonder what francois's religious views are. ]

I have none. I'm an atheist. My disgust for homosexuals imposing their sexualities on non-homosexuals is natural and based on several bad experiences with homosexuals. It has nothing to do with Leviticus, as I'm sure you would love to think.

[ Do you think homosexuals have been accepted as a "norm"? I'll bet Prince_James and francois and Baron Max don't think homosexuality is "normal". ]

Then you would have lost money. That you would so flippantly assume that I would think that homosexuality is not natural or normal speaks volumes about you.

[ You rank people giving you the eye above people dry-humping you? Maybe you meant "and lastly"? ]

Strangely, yes. I've been groped, hit on, and stared at by homosexual men. And I think getting the eye is the worst.

Like this one time I got groped it was by this homosexual whom I know. It was at school. We weren't really friends, per se. But we were on a friendly basis with each other. He is openly gay and I knew he was gay. No problems.

However, one day, I was bending over to get a CD from my bag, and he couldn't resist apparently. He grabbed my ass. And I can completely understand my brother's friend at the bar, who was just completely shocked and stunned and didn't know what to do. I was just shocked and appalled for a good 20 seconds or so. After that, however, I composed myself and calmly told him to never do it again and that if he tried to do it again, I would likely beat the shit out of him. Overall, it was a pretty bad experience. But it wasn't the worst. The worst is getting stared at.

Like this one time I was working. And this homosexual who was buying something was staring at me, giving me the creepiest, depraved smile I've ever seen. Words can't describe how it made me feel. All I can say is that it made me feel really dirty. I felt like I needed to take a shower. I felt like I needed to peel off the first layer of skin cells that were infected by the treacherous photons which bounced off my pure, virgin skin and into this asshole's depraved pupils. Worst experience ever. This happened to me a few weeks ago in the bar. It wasn't quite as bad, but it still made me uncomfortable.

[ It's as wrong as being disgusted by heterosexuals, bisexuals, or asexuals.
It's a form of prejudice to be disgusted by a general group of people in that manner. You have to look at things on an individual basis.
]

I'm not disgusted by all homosexuals: just the ones that make it very apparent that they're sexually interested in me, and those who kiss their boyfriends in public and talk about their sexcapades in public. Normal homosexuals, I don't mind at all. Rude ones piss me off.

TheLastAsian #racist reddit.com

Let’s calm down, it’s not a Chinese age. The same things were said about Japan, and where are they now? They all returned to Japan, because the men couldn’t cut it. Japan has no sense of exploring the world, despite being one of the most intelligent, dominant races ever. Even today, the Japanese will stay in Japan, rather than have to take a single risk with their lives on the rest of the planet. Their women eventually outmarried at 70% the last I checked, and today they are the least likely to intramarry and have kids. The same is happening to Chinese, but they’re just 2 generations behind.
The Chinese are even lower on Maslow’s hierarchy ladder. They’re concerns are primitive, or at most about looking rich and status hunting. They will buy anything European or American. Their men have no greater cause. They have no sense of self-actualization. Their young men are mostly concerned with obedience or notice the lack of sex available to them, and are incapable of thinking beyond that. They will do nothing more than make some good money, have 1 or 2 kids, and hang out at the golf course or have goals of having sex with a white girl.
Look at the streets, nightclubs and bars of NYC. Their men and women have no self-esteem, and it shows in their dating and marrying habits. Despite having the highest IQ, East Asians are willing to take away their offsprings’ IQ advantage, so they can be less Asian. Even if they have kids, most East Asians have 2 kids maximum. When’s the last time you’ve seen a proud 2nd generation East Asian father with 5 kids? Probably never.
They take their 1 or 2 kids and take them for tennis and piano lessons, so they can show other Asians how cultured their kids are. East Asians have the highest overall IQ, especially in mathematical areas of the brain. They are also the least likely race prone to disease and aging. When they mix, their children are less intelligent and less healthy on average, but still smarter and healthier than whites. However, if you talk with young East Asians, it’s abundantly clear they’re willing to trade it for height and becoming more white, no matter how they rationalize. Imagine if 70% of white girls all wanted to become black, despite black culture. That’s what East Asians do.
So they dress their kids in clothes as if they’re cute dogs and spend way too investment, because they’re in denial about nature vs nurture just like educated white liberals. For a scientific people, they have a blind spot when it comes to genetics and it’s overwhelming role over nature in IQ and life success.
Instead they have the Amy Chua mindset, and they try to mold their perfect one or two Asian kids through being the “perfect parent”. Also, Asian women are have a tremendous reputation for interracial sex and out-marriage. Again, how independent thinking can Asians be? They have 1.5 kids each, and half that time it’s with a non-Asian. None of them notice that white IQ > mixed white/black IQ > black IQ. Even with the highest IQs, Asian women make kids with lesser IQ races more than they make Asian kids. And Asian men honestly do not care. None of them want kids. They’d rather become robots or spend 1000 hours on a video game. They’re intelligent, but don’t seem to have metacognition.
The is where Jews or intelligent whites have done a vastly better job than East Asians. We all know you should have multiple children, and you must encourage rhetorical skills along with a logical understand of mathematical concepts, rather than memorization, repetition and application. The children learn to discuss adult topics and offer their opinion with their parents. You encourage them to offer opinions, listen and debate. Teach them to develop habits to self-determination and self-actualization. They learn to make decisions, and as a parent you set the guideline. You accept that your child could fail, but you also have many more of them. Your value as a parent is your emotional support. Your self-esteem isn’t dependent on your child’s success to the degree it is for East Asians. And it always helps that you didn’t just have 1 or 2 kids, just so you could live in a nicer house with a nicer car at a nicer vacation spot. You shun aside materialism and build a family instead.
Even ghetto black men are wise enough to know they should have alot of children. They simply lack the moral compass or the proper education to raise them. Their concerns are about on how people hate blacks, rather than correcting their own mistakes. Hispanics are actually stronger in a sense they have men who take risks, women who have pride, and for all their faults and lower IQ, they value big families. They have their share of idiots, but they are the single group that has taken over more parts of the cities, more politicians, and have more children.
Asians are stereotypically lone wolves and take a perverse pride in that. If one East Asian is having a tough time, another one will not be there to help. They abandon each other faster than any other race. Their social scenes are about one-up manship status. They will discuss their prestigious academic record, company position, or income and wealth. Maybe she will introduce her Jewish boyfriend to you, as if she’s won the lottery. He will unconvincingly brag about some machismo anecdote, which highlights his insecurities. It’s a bore.
So despite their overall population today, as long as this trend continues, East Asians will go extinct before whites. You cannot argue with the fact that their women don’t like their men, and their men have no goals of fathering many children like their great ancestors. You can go to any college and white collar workplace. East Asian women are all single and overworked. Most of them are with non-Asian men. East Asian men are mostly concerned with studying, video games, making money, and maybe meeting some nice girl to have 1 or 2 kids with. This includes the American raised ones. Look to the Japanese as the precedent.
If any group of Asians will be successful, it will be South Asians. The Brahmin Indians are the most intelligent and successful race in the US. Many speak English, the lingua franca, before coming to America. They win all the spelling bees, because they are highly linguistically developed. That’s why they have such incredibly long names. Look at the lists for top successful men under 40 in any business magazine. It’s Indians. Look at the highest median income, other than Jews, it’s Indians. East Asians are low risk shame cultures, and they bring that same sense of conformity here, from the bedroom to the boardroom. They have no sense of Asian identity that they want to develop and pass on through parenthood fatherhood. They want to adapt in, and will behave like liberal whites. They are horrendously uneducated about genetics and IQ, and refuse to learn about it because it is not politically correct as liberals inform them. This works because of their shame culture, and shame only works if you are prone to conformity. It’s why East Asian women are the least race loyal. They conform quickly to whomever is in power with little self-awareness and zero conviction. They’d have to be an independent thinking race to do otherwise.

Anonymous #racist unz.com

Let’s calm down, it’s not a Chinese age. The same things were said about Japan, and where are they now? They all returned to Japan, because the men couldn’t cut it. Japan has no sense of exploring the world, despite being one of the most intelligent, dominant races ever. Even today, the Japanese will stay in Japan, rather than have to take a single risk with their lives on the rest of the planet. Their women eventually outmarried at 70% the last I checked, and today they are the least likely to intramarry and have kids. The same is happening to Chinese, but they’re just 2 generations behind.

The Chinese are even lower on Maslow’s hierarchy ladder. They’re concerns are primitive, or at most about looking rich and status hunting. They will buy anything European or American. Their men have no greater cause. They have no sense of self-actualization. Their young men are mostly concerned with obedience or notice the lack of sex available to them, and are incapable of thinking beyond that. They will do nothing more than make some good money, have 1 or 2 kids, and hang out at the golf course or have goals of having sex with a white girl.

Look at the streets, nightclubs and bars of NYC. Their men and women have no self-esteem, and it shows in their dating and marrying habits. Despite having the highest IQ, East Asians are willing to take away their offsprings’ IQ advantage, so they can be less Asian. Even if they have kids, most East Asians have 2 kids maximum. When’s the last time you’ve seen a proud 2nd generation East Asian father with 5 kids? Probably never.

They take their 1 or 2 kids and take them for tennis and piano lessons, so they can show other Asians how cultured their kids are. East Asians have the highest overall IQ, especially in mathematical areas of the brain. They are also the least likely race prone to disease and aging. When they mix, their children are less intelligent and less healthy on average, but still smarter and healthier than whites. However, if you talk with young East Asians, it’s abundantly clear they’re willing to trade it for height and becoming more white, no matter how they rationalize. Imagine if 70% of white girls all wanted to become black, despite black culture. That’s what East Asians do.

So they dress their kids in clothes as if they’re cute dogs and spend way too investment, because they’re in denial about nature vs nurture just like educated white liberals. For a scientific people, they have a blind spot when it comes to genetics and it’s overwhelming role over nature in IQ and life success.

Instead they have the Amy Chua mindset, and they try to mold their perfect one or two Asian kids through being the “perfect parent”. Also, Asian women are have a tremendous reputation for interracial sex and out-marriage. Again, how independent thinking can Asians be? They have 1.5 kids each, and half that time it’s with a non-Asian. None of them notice that white IQ > mixed white/black IQ > black IQ. Even with the highest IQs, Asian women make kids with lesser IQ races more than they make Asian kids. And Asian men honestly do not care. None of them want kids. They’d rather become robots or spend 1000 hours on a video game. They’re intelligent, but don’t seem to have metacognition.

The is where Jews or intelligent whites have done a vastly better job than East Asians. We all know you should have multiple children, and you must encourage rhetorical skills along with a logical understand of mathematical concepts, rather than memorization, repetition and application. The children learn to discuss adult topics and offer their opinion with their parents. You encourage them to offer opinions, listen and debate. Teach them to develop habits to self-determination and self-actualization. They learn to make decisions, and as a parent you set the guideline. You accept that your child could fail, but you also have many more of them. Your value as a parent is your emotional support. Your self-esteem isn’t dependent on your child’s success to the degree it is for East Asians. And it always helps that you didn’t just have 1 or 2 kids, just so you could live in a nicer house with a nicer car at a nicer vacation spot. You shun aside materialism and build a family instead.

Even ghetto black men are wise enough to know they should have alot of children. They simply lack the moral compass or the proper education to raise them. Their concerns are about on how people hate blacks, rather than correcting their own mistakes. Hispanics are actually stronger in a sense they have men who take risks, women who have pride, and for all their faults and lower IQ, they value big families. They have their share of idiots, but they are the single group that has taken over more parts of the cities, more politicians, and have more children.

Asians are stereotypically lone wolves and take a perverse pride in that. If one East Asian is having a tough time, another one will not be there to help. They abandon each other faster than any other race. Their social scenes are about one-up manship status. They will discuss their prestigious academic record, company position, or income and wealth. Maybe she will introduce her Jewish boyfriend to you, as if she’s won the lottery. He will unconvincingly brag about some machismo anecdote, which highlights his insecurities. It’s a bore.

So despite their overall population today, as long as this trend continues, East Asians will go extinct before whites. You cannot argue with the fact that their women don’t like their men, and their men have no goals of fathering many children like their great ancestors. You can go to any college and white collar workplace. East Asian women are all single and overworked. Most of them are with non-Asian men. East Asian men are mostly concerned with studying, video games, making money, and maybe meeting some nice girl to have 1 or 2 kids with. This includes the American raised ones. Look to the Japanese as the precedent.

If any group of Asians will be successful, it will be South Asians. The Brahmin Indians are the most intelligent and successful race in the US. Many speak English, the lingua franca, before coming to America. They win all the spelling bees, because they are highly linguistically developed. That’s why they have such incredibly long names. Look at the lists for top successful men under 40 in any business magazine. It’s Indians. Look at the highest median income, other than Jews, it’s Indians. East Asians are low risk shame cultures, and they bring that same sense of conformity here, from the bedroom to the boardroom. They have no sense of Asian identity that they want to develop and pass on through parenthood fatherhood. They want to adapt in, and will behave like liberal whites. They are horrendously uneducated about genetics and IQ, and refuse to learn about it because it is not politically correct as liberals inform them. This works because of their shame culture, and shame only works if you are prone to conformity. It’s why East Asian women are the least race loyal. They conform quickly to whomever is in power with little self-awareness and zero conviction. They’d have to be an independent thinking race to do otherwise.

Isaac Weishaupt #conspiracy illuminatiwatcher.com

Hello and welcome back to IlluminatiWatcher.com! I’m your host, Isaac Weishaupt, and we’re going to take a look at the phenomenon known as Pokemon…

WHAT IS POKEMON?…

If you’re like me then you aren’t quite sure what this is. I had to read around several articles online before coming to my conclusion that Pokemon is merely another tool of the Illuminati and the occult…

Pokemon is translated as “Pocket Monsters” and it was introduced to us in the mid-1990s. It has remained popular ever since, and the release of the Pokemon Go app boosted its popularity to unbelievable heights as users search for these monsters with their smart phones (and news media outlets fear mongered us into believing that it will inevitably lead to getting robbed or hit by a car, as these things have indeed happened to a few players).

THE MONSTERS OF POKEMON

The Pokemon are basically a collection of monsters that players can use to fight one another. The list of monsters reads like the list of 72 demons from the Goetia; all with various powers and abilities that the player can strengthen in order to become a stronger competitor. The whole purpose is to train your Pokemon to become stronger in their abilities and evolve into more powerful monsters.

One such example is Haunter; a ghost with the ability to levitate and haunt others. Its more evolved form is Gengar which has more attributions one would find with an actual ghost (e.g. lowering the temperature around itself and laying curses on others).

What I find curious about these few “ghost” Pokemon is that they are all the color purple. This color represents the “Mauve Zone”- an area where one can find the hidden demons of qlippoth in the shadow realm on the dark side of the Kabbalah Tree of Life…

The Mauve Zone is described in Kenneth Grant’s Beyond the Mauve Zone in terms of contacting other worldly entities with supernatural powers:

Access to the Mauve Zone has been facilitated in more recent times by the use of magical systems developed by occultists such as Austin Osman Spare and Aleister Crowley, both of whom established contact with inter-dimensional entities possessed of transhuman knowledge and power. Both systems involve the use of sexual magick to open hidden gates that have remained sealed for centuries.

Indeed, upon further inspection of the other worldly Pokemon known as Gengar, we find it to be described as one of the “Shadow” Pokemon…

EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS AND THE MAGIC CONSPIRACY

Other controversial characters of Pokemon are the monsters known as Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam. The Evangelical Christians raised a fuss about these characters, and though I typically try to keep a level head and avoid siding with over-paranoia; I’ve got to say they may be correct! Hear me out…

The characters were intended to be introduced as Hocus and Pocus; but were changed to Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam in honor of the spell incantation (as per Wikipedia). Those of you that read SACRIFICE: MAGIC BEHIND THE MIC already know that Abracadabra is part of the occult belief of shaping the universe to the practitioner’s will (fulfilling the desires of Aleister Crowley, Paulo Coelho, The Secret, etc.):

Given the importance of wordplay in the rap genre, it shouldn’t be that much of a stretch of the imagination to think that musicians are using actual magic to create their art. Art in and of itself is magic because you’re creating something out of nothing. The term Abracadabra has Aramaic roots and literally means “as I speak; I create.”

It’s a magical belief system that projects an illusion and makes the viewer believe it, which makes it a reality. It’s no different than the concept of the media or entertainment industry repeating a false theme (e.g. an illusion) to the viewers until it becomes an accepted “reality.” You see pharmaceutical companies pushing advertising of new ailments until you believe it affects you. They are making something out of nothing: abracadabra.

Abracadabra is a term used by witches and magicians alike; with origins of praise to the gnostic deity known as Abraxas (as per Texe Marrs’ Codex Magica) and early physicians used to use it for healing powers; which is of no surprise since the beginning of the Hypocratic Oath starts out with talk of swearing to Apollo and other pagan deities.

So we find that Pokemon employs this same practice here with these three linked characters. They have the expected supernatural abilities such as ESP, teleportation, and other psychic abilities. In fact, it turns out that magician Uri Geller sued Nintendo over these characters because he believed them to be modeled after him with his “supernatural” powers to bend spoons with the mind!

Looking at the actual characters we can see symbols that suggest they may indeed be occult in origin.

The lines on Kadabra’s chest appear to look like the lightning bolts of the Nazi party’s S.S. Schutzstaffel, which could link us into the lightning symbolism of Lucifer; the fallen angel.

This isn’t the first time we’ve seen entertainment geared towards children that uses magic and lightning bolt symbolism…

Another explanation for these lines are that they are actually waves taken from the Zener cards used to test one’s mental powers. Zener cards are part of the Spiritualism movement that sought to unite scientific principles with religion through parapsychology- and many figures who have delved into occult ideas have played a part in this movement (e.g. Carl Jung).

In the opening sequence of Ghostbusters we see Bill Murray’s character testing out psychic abilities with the use of Zener cards (even more precisely- the waves card that we see on Kadabra).

The red star is also an occult symbol when you consider that the Communist movement is tied into occult desires such as the destruction of religion and the increasing influence of government (e.g. New World Order). The red star symbolizes Communism, but it could very well be the symbol of Lucifer; the blazing star and recipient of adoration from occult groups.

You’ll also recall how the highly occult-connected Charles Manson and Family murders took out Sharon Tate who was infamously known for her racy photo shoot in which she wore the red star of Lucifer (*note that she was tragically murdered after the release of Rosemary’s Baby– a film about a satanic cult that sought to create Crowley’s “moon child” demon through sex magic rituals; AND Tate was originally supposed to play the role of the mother of the demon spawn):

CHANNELING POKEMON ENTITIES

So it appears the purpose of the Pokemon phenomenon (especially Pokemon Go) is to make contact with these monsters. These entities can then be used for their powers and they have a mutual contract with the player/magician.

In fact, the lyrics to the Pokemon song support this type of idea:

Pokemon, (gotta catch them all) a heart so true
Our courage will pull us through
You teach me and I’ll teach you
(Po-ke-mon) Gotta catch ’em all

This contract between the monster and the practitioner is no different than what we’ve seen from ceremonial magicians such as Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons who attempted to contact various spirits and entities in order to learn from them. In fact, all of Crowley’s Thelema religion is derived from his contact with the spirit known as Aiwass!

“Teach me and I’ll teach you” is indeed the axiom of any good occultist magician…

EVOLUTIONARY INDOCTRINATION

Similar to other superhero tales we are being spoon fed; the concept of Evolution plays a crucial role in Pokemon. The entire game is built upon first making contact with these monsters and then trapping them (which would be conducted by the magician as they trap the entity in a magic-triangle). After they trap them, they must train them and make them evolve into the next higher powered character.

They lyrics to the Pokemon theme song also support this kind of thinking:

I will travel across the land,
Searching far and wide.
Each Pokemon to understand
The power that’s inside

This is one of the biggest aspects of occultism in the early 2000s as we are bombarded with various ideas and themes of evolution in our entertainment. We are being conditioned to accept the idea that mankind can evolve into beings with supernatural powers.

Julian Vigo #sexist feministcurrent.com

In an effort to move to a greener existence, I recently switched to an ecological toothbrush. As I have been living uniquely from solar panels for almost two years, I was forced to ditch my electric toothbrush. In choosing an ecological toothbrush, I studied materials, as well as the advantages of recycled plastic brushes versus those with replaceable heads. In the end, I had to eliminate every single option aside from the single one I chose. Yes, I had to exclude that which did not meet my personal standards and convenience.

I think a lot about exclusion these days. The #MeToo campaign which emerged in reaction to the sexually aggressive acts of Harvey Weinstein is clearly a female-centered campaign. But recently I’ve seen arguments that #MeToo should be extended to include males. While being “inclusive” of everyone might seem like a nice idea, the reality is that there are perfectly rational reasons for exclusivity in many situations. Our shared experiences with certain humans help us form bonds where and when we need them. These bonds can often make life bearable for those experiencing particularly painful moments in their lives. Commonalities help to create community. The truth is that all communities are exclusive, in one way or another, of individuals who don’t share certain experiences or requisites. While some might be tempted to argue exclusion equates to segregation, such arguments are very much apples and oranges, particularly in the context of women’s rights.

There are several key differences which should be underscored, when discussing “exclusion” in the women’s liberation movement, beginning with the myth that feminism must focus on males. Thanks to liberal feminists like Emma Watson, among others, many women have been made to believe that arguing for the inclusion of males in the women’s movement is a worthwhile cause. But any group in protest of its oppression by another group is within its rights to demand that the oppressor not be included in its organizing. For instance, when labour unions secured the legal right to represent employees in 1935, employers were excluded from the class of employees because it was understood that employers (as well as managers and supervisors) held power over workers. In terms of economic class, it seems that most people are on the same page when understanding which group holds power over another.

Similarly, civil rights advocacy began with the premise that there is social inequality between people of colour and white people, making a necessary distinction between who is being oppressed under white supremacy. Robbing a person of the right to distinguish the oppressor class means that she is barred from speaking about and identifying her oppression.

Nobody expected the Black Panthers to consider the marginalization of KKK members from their organization for good reason. Similarly, no such claim of exclusion was made about the Million Man March in Washington D.C. in 1995, when approximately 400,000 African American men converged en masse in the nation’s capital to engage in teach-ins, worship services, and community organizing. While there was a discussion over the fact that women were excluded, there was also recognition that black men had the right to gather without women to discuss their issues, and this action was largely supported by African American women. Two years later, the Million Woman March was held in D.C. to focus on issues specific to women.

This sort of exclusion is not based in hatred or a desire to do harm. Exclusion is how we decide, like me and my ecological toothbrush choices, what meets our needs. Exclusion is not necessarily about owning a card to an elite club — it is about setting a particular direction for an individual, group, activity, community, and so forth. All social groups exclude in some way. While I am a big believer in reaching over the aisle to dialogue with those responsible for our subordination, I also recognize the need of any group to make decisions within its group before reaching across that aisle.

(..)

Does the fact of breast cancer support groups for women mean that males cannot get breast cancer? Of course not. And there are breast cancer support groups for males. Why? Because males and females experience breast cancer differently. Commonalities between same-sexed bodies are part of the social intimacy that both males and females alike cherish across cultures. Be it in the hammam or the steam room, the hospital ward, or the changing room at the gym, there is intimacy between people of the same sex that provides a space of security and dignity. Females especially value these spaces because the public sphere is not safe for women. Being in a female-only changing room can offer women a needed reprieve from the daily sexualization of their bodies, and from unwanted male attention and judgment.

The issue of “exclusion” has become a touchpoint for the left in recent years. Most notably, we have seen exclusion being derided as bigotry in trans activist circles where women who say they would not feel comfortable with a male in their change rooms, their women’s shelters, or in a women’s prison are labelled transphobic. Yet both these examples come from real life paradigms. In 2007, Vancouver Rape Relief Society won a case against Kimberly Nixon, a trans-identified male who had attempted to join the training group for peer counsellors at the women’s shelter.

Nixon was asked to leave the group account of having been born male, and because the shelter operated on the basis that women could best counsel other women, having had the specific experience of growing up female under patriarchy. The B.C. Court of Appeals’ decided that Vancouver Rape Relief had the right to determine its own membership, as any oppressed group of people has the right to “discriminate” when organizing in their own interests, as a class. Currently pending in Texas is the case of three female inmates who are suing Federal Medical Center Carswell in Fort Worth, claiming that, “They are living in a degrading and dangerous environment by being forced to share showers and bathrooms with the transgender inmates.” The truth is that, for most women, sex does matter. What is more remarkable is that males who claim to have an internal “female identity” have zero compassion for or comprehension of the reality women face in a male supremacist world, and would prefer women put aside their own material reality, comfort, and safety in order to validate men’s feelings.

Choosing a female gynecologist or desiring a female-only space for changing is not meant to incriminate all males as, to paraphrase George W. Bush, “evil doers.” Rather, a woman might choose a female gynecologist both because she feels a woman would better understand her body, but also because she feels safer in that vulnerable state with someone statistically unlikely to assault them. Women’s desire to change in a locker room without male-bodied persons would likely be based on something similar, as well as a desire to maintain healthy boundaries that too often go unrespected. In excluding males from female spaces, women are demanding that society accept the healthy boundaries of women, even if, in certain scenarios, males might wish to be on the other side of the line.

Last week, Bustle ran a story arguing that “some members of LGBTQ community feel that the [#MeToo] campaign focuses too strongly on the gender binary and seems to erase nonbinary or genderqueer people from the conversation.” But what this statement really conveys is that males feel excluded from a conversation lead by women speaking out about male violence. While I would not deny that males experience violence, it is overwhelmingly violence inflicted by other males. What makes #MeToo important is that violence against women and girls is coded into the structural social hierarchy. When women contribute their #MeToo stories, they are doing so as females who have, from childhood, been groomed as objects that exist for male use.

It cannot be overstated that females suffer disproportionate levels of sex-based discrimination and violence, including sexual harassment, domestic violence, rape, and trafficking. Women are quite aware that they are discriminated against and physically abused because of their sex, regardless of how they may feel, internally, about the gender roles imposed on them. It is entirely insignificant, for example, how the over 200 women who James Toback sexually harassed identified. To demand that #MeToo include non-binary people is to miss the point of the feminist movement: feminism has from its inception been explicitly about breaking the hierarchy and stereotypes reinforced through gender which demanded women not leave the house, not vote, and not work. It is not the “binary” that is the problem so much as it is gender itself, under patriarchy. Men who rape women don’t care whether their victims feel “binary” or not.

What Bustle would like is for women to use a language that is seemingly more neutral, less politically objectionable, and more inclusive… of males. Otherwise there would be no uproar with focusing specifically on women’s voices and experiences in this campaign. Males insisting on being “included” in women’s social protest against sexism is just more of the same sexism — women are being instructed to shut up about their oppression by males unless they include males. Beyond that, under patriarchy, women are always under pressure to be sexually available to men. This new language of “inclusion” that frames “exclusion” as inherently harmful has led to males who identify as transgender to insist that women include them not only in their groups and politics, but in their beds. That this is explicitly sexist is made clear through the fact that I have yet to see any male who identifies as trans pressure heterosexual men into sleeping with him.

A narrative that insists on coercing or goading women into including their oppressor is anything but progressive. Likewise, insisting that the language of gender neutrality is what matters in a conversation about sexual violence is far from revolutionary. Taking up the five-cent terms like “non-binary” and “queer” will have no impact on the facts of sex-based oppression for females. The challenge we face as a society is not to carpet bomb women’s movements with accusations of “exclusivity” and “bigotry” when women recognize that males and females are different and have different needs. Creating linguistic games might seem avant-garde to undergraduates, but the reality is that gender is what prescribes the behavioral cues engrained in females throughout their lives. Gender is what is hammered into females as a class, rendering them subjects of a discourse they have no power to respond to. The notion that gender can ever be neutral is patently absurd since gender is not the solution. It is the problem.

Changing language to be “be more inclusive” is counter-revolutionary and pretending that such language does anything other prevent women from effectively organizing towards their own liberation is delusory. The language of gender inclusivity does nothing to dismantle the social and political inequalities that females face. It does, however, create a lovely illusion (especially for men who want to seem progressive in their attempts to thwart our movement): that saying “genderqueer” makes one a “feminist.”

various incels #sexist reddit.com

(fuckitilltryanything)

This week's suicide fuel: I saw 2 teenagers hugging and kissing eachother while waiting in line to order at Subway, and my first thought was: "one day when I'll grow up I'll have a gf too" and then I remembered that I'm 27 years old.

What's your suicide fuel for this week boyos?

(Furcel)
This is why I don't go outside. Everything is suicide fuel.

(knajjd11)
accidentally glancing at the mirror while brushing my teeth was this week's strongest suicide fuel for me

(rottingalone46)
This happened to me not long ago. I was waiting to order a sub and the only people were a young couple and a guy in a wheelchair. The guy in the wheelchair was having mobility issues so he was taking forever to pay for his food and the couple was just making out and groping one another beside me while I just stood stiff, sweating bullets and trying not to stare. I swear I have nothing to look forward to these days except the day my life ends. I can't take this shit anymore tbh.

(BF8211)
One of my bullies (who I made the infamous posts about) just proposed to his girlfriend in Turks and Caicos. Both are going to the same law school (that his dad bought them into but that's another story) and basically get to live the dream life. Meanwhile, I'm stuck LDARing and I head back to the Army tomorrow where I get to watch PowerPoint after PowerPoint about how not to fuck up in South Korea. Seriously fuck my life fam.

(fishhookurethra)
Chad marries Stacey; white picket fence and a dog
The incel enlists; lays down his life for the ZOG

(DongyKonk)
One of my bullies died in a motorcycle crash a couple of years ago, leaving behind a wife/gf and an infant son. I wish I could say I didn't smirk when I heard the news. For all I know, he could have become a decent guy in the years since I knew him, but I just can't bring myself to forgive the guy, even in death. Feel bad for his kid though.

(elliotrodger14)
I saw the Facebook profiles of hot people from my high school who have great careers and happy relationships.
I can't even call them Chad and Stacy because these people are leagues above Chad and Stacy. I guess they're Chad+ and Stacy+.

(Shower_Taker)
Can you imagine having that same thought at 40? I'd immediately drop what I'm doing and pigeonhole in a dark corner of my room for about a week. In my case, I've had the same "someday I'll grow up and have a girlfriend" thought since I was in 1st grade of primary school - and here I am.

(MGTOW-Wizard)
Woke up today and thought about the rope. Such is life.

cosmicgirl #racist stormfront.org

Conversely, females of the brown and black species-races can't stop putting out and crapping litters of goblins. Anyway, i think that Jewish population hovers at 2 percent per region, is because this helps to keep the jew network in place, and helps to keep them 'obscure' and seen as 'merely harmless little jew oddkins', while also ensuring that their reach of influence is as global as possible. If jews completely hemmed themselves into one ethnostate, then it could easily be surrounded, and another 'loller cost' would inevitably happen (allegedly). Also, if they remain spread out (and/or also stealth about who is and isn't a jew) then it is likely that, in the event that we whites wake up and defend ourselves as a species-race, then there is less chance of them being entirely rooted out and done away with, both in terms of species-race, and in terms of reach of power and influence.

After all, if one is not able to be readily pegged as a jew by anyone else, but one knows that oneself is a jew anyway, then once the pieces stop falling, the process of infiltration and long-spanning shenanigans can begin, all over again. This allows them to (to a degree) hide out in white or mildly arabic nations, and foist the consequences of their actions onto the host populace (usually whites) within the region. White inborn ideology and nobility is also exploited, and words are arranged to distract and imp-lie what the jew wishes to misconstrue or make happen. The Jew in modern times is a big fan of things like political discourse, psycho-ology, and ed-jew-cation, because with these arcane things, the jew now knows that they can speak spells of implication, and make white people do their bidding, take their blame, and even become geno-suicidal. This now frees up alot of effort on the part of jews, and allows them to think up, and enact even greater vile actions of ruination upon their hated blood enemy, we Whites.

Imagine it from the jewish perspective (viciously disgusting, i know, but, just for a minute ?); you have no morality, no higher purpose other than wanton revenge, and to rule the world right back into the ground it was built on, and suddenly, circa ww1 and ww2, after thousands of years of getting (inexplicably and repeatedly) one-upped, you discover that your enemies Big Magic, also works on him, even more so than you or the brown and black races. Suddenly, with your enemies grimoires of education and development, he is at your complete mercy; make him dance funny, sing your race's songs and poems, and yes, even make him throw himself on his own sword. All it takes, is the right sorts of words, to cast his own spells upon him. What sort of devilish fun would jew-you have, now that your most intractably hated foe, has become your most entertainingly useful newest minion ?

caamib #sexist caamib.wordpress.com

As had been previously explained, America had pretty much for all intents and purposes died by 1920 and the disastrous decision of the 19th Amendment, though some opinions place the beginning of the end even earlier, in 1800s. So in this aspect, which is a crucial one, America will not return to sanity. Trump won’t abolish women’s suffrage, he won’t bring women back into kitchens, none of this will happen. Did the Bush presidency restore the value of American women? Did the Reagan presidency stabilize what was a rapidly plummeting value of American women in the 80s (of course, with certain noble exceptions of women in backwoods areas, exceptions which still exist today) ? No, the battle is lost. The best aspect in terms of women will be, as Roosh says, to make it easier to find a fellow traveler. But even there you need to be careful which traveler to choose.

In terms of feminism, SJWs, alt-right etc, all of these things are kinda irrelevant ultimately if you look at the paragraph above, which outlines the real crux of the issue. Without abolishing women’s suffrage, without a hasty return to strict patriarchy, nothing of real relevance will happen. And we know Trump could never do that

Some incels #sexist #kinkshaming reddit.com

Re: Reminder: There is no such thing as a feminist woman

image

(Subhumanmanletcel)

Bitches have no value besides being a fuck hole. And they get annoyed when non chads reminds them of it. Female humor is basically whores trying yo one-up other whores with their whoreness

that dude at the bottom desperately trying to salvage womens dignity.

Can't salvage something that doesnt exist. He's trying to salvave his blue pill illusion

(Plan_o-f_Will)

Shit, I can literally feel his world melting in front of him. I felt the same way when I stopped being a bluepilled retard

Thing is, that's supposed to happen when you're a kid or maybe a teen. This dude will never get over it. He's probably in his 30s. Way too invested in the lie.

(Links_Hacks)

White knight cuck's circuitry is frying lmao. 'But...women are kweenz...how could...but...misogyny...'

(bcat124)

the difference is that the 4th panel is chad, and rest are normies/incels .

Every single woman on this earth LOVES to be called nothing but a fuckhole, if you have the right face and height.

And then people ask me why I hate women JFL ur the weirdo for not hating women imo

(HomoheroBishii)

Like a KKK member who only has sex with black people. Literally nobody would question how silly that is. Yet feminists have convinced society that their contradiction is okay because "it's only in the bedroom," even though my KKK example is also only sex related. Humans don't just suddenly turn off their instincts the moment they step outside the bedroom, so feminists basically prove this comic true: https://i.imgur.com/ZuSM1xM.jpg

(lickmytushyhole)

Radfems exist and this behavior is why they shit on libfems. They hate BDSM and anything similar to it.

Radfems and libfems are both retarded

(shadowPerla)

Feminism is a giant shit test and men keep failing it. You have no idea how many feminists are into self degradation and shit. It's all a facade. Deep inside they're just horny cunts with daddy issues, waiting to get put in their place.

(Zurgoide800)

Lol, doesn't surprise me. The feminist I used to talk to, liked getting fucked raw from behind doggystyle, with the intent of getting knocked up, as a form of roleplay. Too bad she was obese, otherwise I would have tapped that. incredibly enough, she could still find guys willing to do that, despite her obesity.

I totally see why youre hateful. That doesnt mean that whatever you argue under such hatefulness is correct.

feminists have daddy issues. every man with a little brain left, knows it. Of course nobody likes to be called a whore in a normal conversation. Do you really need to poin out the obvious? come the fuck on.

(Carkudo)

"This shit" i.e. feminist women admitting that they're sexist and prefer traditional gender roles.

"I try to empathize with you guys, but then you go and post pictures where members of my ideology admit that my ideology is morally bankrupt"

Yeah, if your empathy is predicated on not calling your ideology out on its hypocrisy, you can stick your empathy up your shapely ass because nobody needs a narcissist's "empathy"

Fair point about empathy. I guess that your situation calls for empathy regardless of your personal stance on other issues.

I dont see a connection between havimg a kink and preferring traditional gender roles.. and my ideology doesnt prohibit traditional gender roles.. it just sees them as one option among many.

The fact that the picture angers you and you wish people wouldn't post it means you do see the connection. Good job on showcasing your ideology's hypocrisy once again.

Jed I. Knight #racist amren.com

That is one crucial difference between whites and blacks, certainly because of genetics. For a white person to be able to commit such an atrocity, you are virtually always dealing with an individual under a clinical diagnostic of psychopathy. However, regular blacks, often teenagers, are capable, in group, of such evil acts, and later analysis often conclude to an absence of psychopathic traits. I take it from my sister who is a legal psychiatrist and NO LIBERAL. A white psychopath will not show any remorse and keep his cool, while blacks will cry, deny, blame it on others, but were in fact able to commit an atrocity outside of any psychiatric condition. Anyway,, take it for what it's worth.

Sean Thomas #fundie blogs.telegraph.co.uk

Are atheists mentally ill?

...

In the last few years scientists have revealed that believers, compared to non-believers, have better outcomes from breast cancer, coronary disease, mental illness, Aids, and rheumatoid arthritis. Believers even get better results from IVF. Likewise, believers also report greater levels of happiness, are less likely to commit suicide, and cope with stressful events much better. Believers also have more kids.

What’s more, these benefits are visible even if you adjust for the fact that believers are less likely to smoke, drink or take drugs. And let’s not forget that religious people are nicer. They certainly give more money to charity than atheists, who are, according to the very latest survey, the meanest of all.

So which is the smart party, here? Is it the atheists, who live short, selfish, stunted little lives – often childless – before they approach hopeless death in despair, and their worthless corpses are chucked in a trench (or, if they are wrong, they go to Hell)? Or is it the believers, who live longer, happier, healthier, more generous lives, and who have more kids, and who go to their quietus with ritual dignity, expecting to be greeted by a smiling and benevolent God?

Obviously, it’s the believers who are smarter. Anyone who thinks otherwise is mentally ill.

And I mean that literally: the evidence today implies that atheism is a form of mental illness. And this is because science is showing that the human mind is hard-wired for faith: we have, as a species, evolved to believe, which is one crucial reason why believers are happier – religious people have all their faculties intact, they are fully functioning humans.

Therefore, being an atheist – lacking the vital faculty of faith – should be seen as an affliction, and a tragic deficiency: something akin to blindness. Which makes Richard Dawkins the intellectual equivalent of an amputee, furiously waving his stumps in the air, boasting that he has no hands.

various commenters #sexist incels.co

(BarredOut)
[Blackpill] BRUTAL BLACKPILL STORY

Sup boyos, I'm new here but I've been lurking the community since July. Today I wanted to share with you an absolutely brutal blackpill a chadlite friend told me yesterday.

So, about an year ago a few of my friends (two low tier 5-6/10 normies and two chadlites 7.5/10) went to a northern city in my country (EU) to have some fun an try to get some femoids. Basically this chadlite friend who told me the story already had a gf at the time, the other three didn't, and beware since this makes everything worse and obviously exposes femoids hypergamy even more.

So they go out in a club and try to approach some femoids. The other chadlite (the one which didn't have a gf) scored almost instantly, while the two low tier normies both approached the same girl but both failed miserably, first one then the other. My chadlite friend (the one with a gf) wasn't trying to score cause he wasn't interested since having a girlfriend.

Well, guess what the fuck happened. The girl who rejected both of the low tier normies spontaneously approached this friend of mine, sat on his lap, started acting slutty and eventually started making out with him, all by herself, he didn't even had to get his ass up from the chair. And keep in mind the two that got rejected are both looksmaxxed/gymcelled 5-6/10 normies, they both got rejected in turn, so imagine what it is like for us. And keep in mind my friend isn't even chad, he's a 7.5/10 5'8 chadlite, not even gymcelled.

JFL at normies saying that you actively have to try to get a girl, that you gotta do all the work, and that you gotta better yourself and pick up signs a girl might throw at you, lol.

Just a daily reminder that it is beyond over boyos, have a nice day.

(TheRealChincel)
Yeah, nothing revealing here to me but JFL @ thinking guys have to approach.

(Twisted)
And this place tries to act like normies don’t have it bad.

Incels have it far worse though I won’t deny that.

If NT normies get rejected then imagine how badly I’d get shut down considering I’m not NT

(RREEEEEEEEE)
Ok, so they're trying to get some degenerate whores. Not brutal or a blackpill to me, kek

(BarredOut)
wut? Did you read the rest? The blackpill is that they are normies and failed, while the chadlite did absolutely nothing and got the girl. Hence, imagine what it's like for us if normies get cucked like this. That was the point of the post.

(RREEEEEEEEE)
You're 6.5/10 if you looksmaxx naturally (just shaving, doing your hair) so you'd fare better than they'd do. But in a club.... kek, you're shit outta luck.

Yes, I did read the post. But I am anti-degeneracy, so what happens in a club doesn't bother me. Most of us are also aware that if you're good looking, girls approach you, and not the other way around. :p

(Raiden)
>clubbing

Never done this before

(BarredOut)
Don't do it. Having normie friends I've tried sometimes, it' absolutely degenerate and terrible if you're incel. It's literally a blackpill manifestation IRL. Drunk stacies acting as slutty as possible to attract all the chads, it feels unreal seriously. It's like seeing all the theories discussed here taking place in front of your eyes.

Joe Stirling #conspiracy forum.prisonplanet.com

So now the Masons are posting lies about me
? ?
I got a good laugh when I stumbled across this recently:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/people.htm
Scroll down to the A-Z list of the 340 or so “Anti-Masons” they have named, and click on “Jim Prange.”
(Or, direct link to the entry at this link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/others_pg2.htm#Prange

The website is a popular pro-Mason propaganda site run by Freemasons, and there is now a listing for me on that website under their category of “Anti-Masonic Examples,” a list that puts right-wing, bigoted nuts who happen to be anti-Masonic in the same company as authors who are truly exposing the organization’s dirty deeds, such as David Icke and Jim Marrs.

Here’s what they have to say about me:

Jim Prange (Pseudonym: Alex Parma) - Mr. Prange - using his credentials as a former newspaper reviewer of video games and his extensive knowledge gained through playing in a band - has concluded that the Masons are planting secret messages (from the reptile race) in crop circles while they're simultaneously poisoning the water supply. Using such impeccable sources as David Icke, Jim Marrs, and William Cooper (there's more than a bit of irony there, folks!), he has convinced himself that there's a huge conspiracy he's uncovered in Howell, Michigan. Perhaps Mr. Prange and his imaginary friend Mr. Parma have found an alternative to drinking that water.... You can find his rantings here. <- (link provided to essay)

This entry is revealing: in the one sentence they give to my essay’s central theory, they have twisted around one of the most crucial points of my theory to the opposite of what I actually say in the essay. Supposedly, I have concluded that “the Masons are planting secret messages (from the reptile race) in crop circles while they're simultaneously poisoning the water supply.”

Anyone who actually reads my essay will know that I’m clearly stating the opposite- that I think forces OPPOSED to the Masons are planting messages in crop circles, and in the case of Howell, that this anti-Masonic/anti-New World Order force created a crop formation to point out to the masses that high-level Masons are involved in the poisoning of the Howell water supply at a sacred site, and that these Masons have been brazenly indicating it by landscaping (not via crop circles, but via traditional, long-term landscaping) some of their symbolism onto the immediate area, visible from the air.

I figure, I must be pretty close to the truth if, in order to discredit me, they have to resort to such a low tactic. If my theory really is as ridiculous and off-base as they’d like you to believe, surely using my own words against me, unchanged, would have been all they needed to prove their point.

Interesting parallels to David Icke’s online debunkers, who often resort to similar tactics, such as claiming that Icke is “pro-fascist” or “anti-Semitic.” Anyone who reads a book by Icke, or even spends a little time on his website to find out if this is true, will know that his views are quite the polar opposite.

For an example of this type of disinfo-reliant debunking, check out this ridiculous exchange I had back in July ’04 with “Ben” (the administrator of the forum at alienufos.com, the “Central Online UFO Community”- a messageboard that is endorse by and partnered with UFO Magazine) and a few of his hired cyber-goons:
http://www.alien-ufos.com/forum/showthread.php?s=ad9b2a103cbf240 01d6e7066cb57a891&t=2162
At one point, he even resorts to saying that “when Icke says ‘lizards,’ he means ‘Jews.’” I had to give up on this forum and stop posting, as I couldn’t waste any more time lowering myself to their level any longer, already having discredited their debunking enough for anyone with a brain to catch on.

It’s interesting how often online debunkers of David Icke resort to these tactics to try to discredit him. After all, if David Icke’s theory is so off-base, wouldn’t it be far more effective for his debunkers to discredit him by using his own actual words, in full context, against him?

Interesting how Icke’s debunkers’ “Talking Points” are repeated almost verbatim from website to website, even though all it takes is a few minutes of reading Icke’s actual words to realize that they are misstating some of his main points as the opposite of what he actually says. I guess if you repeat a lie often enough, many people assume it’s the truth…

Now that I see similar tactics being used on me, I truly feel a warm, renewed sense of accomplishment for what I accomplished in decoding the Howell formation.

I wonder how many of the other people debunked on their “Anti-Masonic Examples” list are misquoted in their entry?

The Thunderbird Wheel has been activated; the dawn is here. Wise serpents will know it's time to either leave or join the side of light; any serpents who stay where they are will be burned by the sun.


Part 2.......

So now the Masons are posting lies about me
? ?
Here's further evidence from the ridiculous masonicinfo.com website that proves without a doubt that organized Freemasonry is an elaborately compartmentalized, crumbling pyramid of lies run by professional liars.

This is the last paragraph of their disclaimer page, where the author of the website attempts to absolve the Masonic organization from any accountability for the lies told on this website:

"And just to clarify: this website is a PERSONAL endeavor. Lest there be any misunderstanding, the concept was that of Ed King, solely and independently. There were no discussions with Grand Lodges nor, in fact, was there even a discussion with any other Mason! It was conceived and released without any suggestions from any Masonic source whatsoever. And to reiterate: no one person speaks for Freemasonry! Ergo, whether you like this site or you hate it, it is NOT an "official" Masonic site nor does it pretend to be...."

Here's the direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/leader.htm

Hmm-- so, according to the author of the site, Ed King, masonicinfo.com is "not an official Masonic site nor does it pretend to be."

OK, so what IS the official website endorsed by organized Freemasonry for information on Anti-Masons? Let's find out:

1)Go to the OFFICIAL Freemasonry homepage on the internet, which is http://freemasonry.org.

2)From there, click on "Links." The direct link to the Links page is:
https://freemasonry.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid= 83

3)From there, click on "Informational Sites." The direct link is: http://links.hiram.net/Informational_Sites/

(Before going to the next link, notice the caption for the 4th link on this page, titled "Anti-Masonry: FAQ." The caption to this link reads:
"This Anti-Masonry FAQ details the maliciously mendacious and willfully ignorant attacks on Freemasonry; with reasoned and factual responses.")

4)From the "Informational Sites" link of step 3, click on "Anti-Masonry: Points Of View." Direct link:
http://links.hiram.net/cgi-bin/links/jump.cgi?ID=32

T he above link will automatically redirect you to:
http://www.masonicinfo.com

5)From there, click on "Those who oppose Masons and Masonry." The direct link to this is:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/objectors.htm

6)Next, click on the word "people" on the line that reads "And specific people that oppose Freemasonry." Direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/people.htm

7)From the A-Z list on their page, scroll down to my listing under "P." -> "Jim Prange (pseud: Alex Parma)" Direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/others_pg2.htm#Prange

Inte resting... So the only website endorsed by the official Freemasonry home page for information on specific "Anti-Masons" is: (drum roll, please)
www.MASONICINFO.COM!

Yet, according to the author of www.masonicinfo.com, his site is not officially endorsed by Freemasonry.

See how it's done? With tricky wording, the Masons have created an illusion that seems to erase any accountability the Masonic organization should have for the blatant, provable lies told on their officially endorsed website for information on Anti-Masons.

Once again, this proves that one of the the main reason "masonicinfo.com" exists is to simply prevent average, unthinking people from reading any material by the "Anti-Masons" who are on to the truth, using the reprehensble method of reversing of the words of said "Anti-Masons," knowing that the majority of the readers of the website will not bother to read the work of the "Anti-Masons" misrepresented on the site, and that those that do actually read the work of the "Anti-Masons" are past the point of no return anyway, having been turned on to the truth through hard facts.

Knowing this, the Masonic organization then seemingly avoids accountability for their numerous bald-faced, traceable lies on the website by having the author of the website claim that it is not an official Masonic site, even though it is the ONLY website for information on specific "Anti-Masons" endorsed by the official website of Freemasonry!!!

How many people will see through this figure-eight of doublethink and realize that Freemasonry is built on a foundation of lies?

Hopefully more will see through the blatant BS peddled by these con artists, now that I've posted this "smoking gun" that proves, beyond a doubt, the fundamental dishonesty that comprises the backbone of organized Freemasonry.

Over the next few weeks, I will repeat versions of this post on any internet forum I can find where some anonymous Freemason messageboard poster name-drops "masonicinfo.com" in defense of Freemasonry. I've really got my work cut out for me-- seemingly, this is the website to which defenders of Freemasonry seem to always refer when defending their organization from truth attacks by "Anti-Masons" on the internet.

The Thunderbird Wheel has been activated; the dawn is here. Wise serpents will know it's time to either leave or join the side of light; any serpents who stay where they are will be burned by the sun.

by Jim Prange

ban freekmasons #conspiracy davidicke.com

The truth about Masonicinfo.com by Jim Prange

I got a good laugh when I stumbled across this recently:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/people.htm
Scroll down to the A-Z list of the 340 or so “Anti-Masons” they have named, and click on “Jim Prange.” (Or, direct link to the entry at this link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/others_pg2.htm#Prange

The website is a popular pro-Mason propaganda site run by Freemasons, and there is now a listing for me on that website under their category of “Anti-Masonic Examples,” a list that puts right-wing, bigoted nuts who happen to be anti-Masonic in the same company as authors who are truly exposing the organization’s dirty deeds, such as David Icke and Jim Marrs.

Here’s what they have to say about me:

Jim Prange (Pseudonym: Alex Parma) - Mr. Prange - using his credentials as a former newspaper reviewer of video games and his extensive knowledge gained through playing in a band - has concluded that the Masons are planting secret messages (from the reptile race) in crop circles while they're simultaneously poisoning the water supply. Using such impeccable sources as David Icke, Jim Marrs, and William Cooper (there's more than a bit of irony there, folks!), he has convinced himself that there's a huge conspiracy he's uncovered in Howell, Michigan. Perhaps Mr. Prange and his imaginary friend Mr. Parma have found an alternative to drinking that water.... You can find his rantings here. <- (link provided to essay)

This entry is revealing: in the one sentence they give to my essay’s central theory, they have twisted around one of the most crucial points of my theory to the opposite of what I actually say in the essay. Supposedly, I have concluded that “the Masons are planting secret messages (from the reptile race) in crop circles while they're simultaneously poisoning the water supply.”

Anyone who actually reads my essay will know that I’m clearly stating the opposite- that I think forces OPPOSED to the Masons are planting messages in crop circles, and in the case of Howell, that this anti-Masonic/anti-New World Order force created a crop formation to point out to the masses that high-level Masons are involved in the poisoning of the Howell water supply at a sacred site, and that these Masons have been brazenly indicating it by landscaping (not via crop circles, but via traditional, long-term landscaping) some of their symbolism onto the immediate area, visible from the air.

I figure, I must be pretty close to the truth if, in order to discredit me, they have to resort to such a low tactic. If my theory really is as ridiculous and off-base as they’d like you to believe, surely using my own words against me, unchanged, would have been all they needed to prove their point.

Interesting parallels to David Icke’s online debunkers, who often resort to similar tactics, such as claiming that Icke is “pro-fascist” or “anti-Semitic.” Anyone who reads a book by Icke, or even spends a little time on his website to find out if this is true, will know that his views are quite the polar opposite.

For an example of this type of disinfo-reliant debunking, check out this ridiculous exchange I had back in July ’04 with “Ben” (the administrator of the forum at alienufos.com, the “Central Online UFO Community”- a messageboard that is endorse by and partnered with UFO Magazine) and a few of his hired cyber-goons:
http://www.alien-ufos.com/forum/showthread.php?s=ad9b2a103cbf240 01d6e7066cb57a891&t=2162
At one point, he even resorts to saying that “when Icke says ‘lizards,’ he means ‘Jews.’” I had to give up on this forum and stop posting, as I couldn’t waste any more time lowering myself to their level any longer, already having discredited their debunking enough for anyone with a brain to catch on.

It’s interesting how often online debunkers of David Icke resort to these tactics to try to discredit him. After all, if David Icke’s theory is so off-base, wouldn’t it be far more effective for his debunkers to discredit him by using his own actual words, in full context, against him?

Interesting how Icke’s debunkers’ “Talking Points” are repeated almost verbatim from website to website, even though all it takes is a few minutes of reading Icke’s actual words to realize that they are misstating some of his main points as the opposite of what he actually says. I guess if you repeat a lie often enough, many people assume it’s the truth…

Now that I see similar tactics being used on me, I truly feel a warm, renewed sense of accomplishment for what I accomplished in decoding the Howell formation.

I wonder how many of the other people debunked on their “Anti-Masonic Examples” list are misquoted in their entry?

The Thunderbird Wheel has been activated; the dawn is here. Wise serpents will know it's time to either leave or join the side of light; any serpents who stay where they are will be burned by the sun.

The darkest hour is right before the dawn.

Part two;

Here's further evidence from the ridiculous masonicinfo.com website that proves without a doubt that organized Freemasonry is an elaborately compartmentalized, crumbling pyramid of lies run by professional liars.

This is the last paragraph of their disclaimer page, where the author of the website attempts to absolve the Masonic organization from any accountability for the lies told on this website:

"And just to clarify: this website is a PERSONAL endeavor. Lest there be any misunderstanding, the concept was that of Ed King, solely and independently. There were no discussions with Grand Lodges nor, in fact, was there even a discussion with any other Mason! It was conceived and released without any suggestions from any Masonic source whatsoever. And to reiterate: no one person speaks for Freemasonry! Ergo, whether you like this site or you hate it, it is NOT an "official" Masonic site nor does it pretend to be...."

Here's the direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/leader.htm

Hmm-- so, according to the author of the site, Ed King, masonicinfo.com is "not an official Masonic site nor does it pretend to be."

OK, so what IS the official website endorsed by organized Freemasonry for information on Anti-Masons? Let's find out:

1)Go to the OFFICIAL Freemasonry homepage on the internet, which is http://freemasonry.org.

2)From there, click on "Links." The direct link to the Links page is:
https://freemasonry.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid= 83

3)From there, click on "Informational Sites." The direct link is: http://links.hiram.net/Informational_Sites/

(Before going to the next link, notice the caption for the 4th link on this page, titled "Anti-Masonry: FAQ." The caption to this link reads:
"This Anti-Masonry FAQ details the maliciously mendacious and willfully ignorant attacks on Freemasonry; with reasoned and factual responses.")

4)From the "Informational Sites" link of step 3, click on "Anti-Masonry: Points Of View." Direct link:
http://links.hiram.net/cgi-bin/links/jump.cgi?ID=32

T he above link will automatically redirect you to:
http://www.masonicinfo.com

5)From there, click on "Those who oppose Masons and Masonry." The direct link to this is:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/objectors.htm

6)Next, click on the word "people" on the line that reads "And specific people that oppose Freemasonry." Direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/people.htm

7)From the A-Z list on their page, scroll down to my listing under "P." -> "Jim Prange (pseud: Alex Parma)" Direct link:
http://www.masonicinfo.com/others_pg2.htm#Prange

Inte resting... So the only website endorsed by the official Freemasonry home page for information on specific "Anti-Masons" is: (drum roll, please)
www.MASONICINFO.COM!

Yet, according to the author of www.masonicinfo.com, his site is not officially endorsed by Freemasonry.

See how it's done? With tricky wording, the Masons have created an illusion that seems to erase any accountability the Masonic organization should have for the blatant, provable lies told on their officially endorsed website for information on Anti-Masons.

Once again, this proves that one of the the main reason "masonicinfo.com" exists is to simply prevent average, unthinking people from reading any material by the "Anti-Masons" who are on to the truth, using the reprehensble method of reversing of the words of said "Anti-Masons," knowing that the majority of the readers of the website will not bother to read the work of the "Anti-Masons" misrepresented on the site, and that those that do actually read the work of the "Anti-Masons" are past the point of no return anyway, having been turned on to the truth through hard facts.

Knowing this, the Masonic organization then seemingly avoids accountability for their numerous bald-faced, traceable lies on the website by having the author of the website claim that it is not an official Masonic site, even though it is the ONLY website for information on specific "Anti-Masons" endorsed by the official website of Freemasonry!!!

How many people will see through this figure-eight of doublethink and realize that Freemasonry is built on a foundation of lies?

Hopefully more will see through the blatant BS peddled by these con artists, now that I've posted this "smoking gun" that proves, beyond a doubt, the fundamental dishonesty that comprises the backbone of organized Freemasonry.

Over the next few weeks, I will repeat versions of this post on any internet forum I can find where some anonymous Freemason messageboard poster name-drops "masonicinfo.com" in defense of Freemasonry. I've really got my work cut out for me-- seemingly, this is the website to which defenders of Freemasonry seem to always refer when defending their organization from truth attacks by "Anti-Masons" on the internet.

Christopher Leonid #sexist returnofkings.com

The Mainstream Embrace Of #MeToo Puts Us One Step Closer Towards The Enslavement Of Men

Defining male agency during the collapse of the Sexual Revolution.

The progenitors of the #MeToo meme have been elevated to that dubious plinth of social endorsement, the cover of Time magazine.

image
#Iwouldnt

These women did not “launch a movement.” However, the current wreaths-to-laurels victimhood craze does bear out the completion of an important cultural cycle.

Free Love Wasn’t Free

A core premise of our sexual dystopia is:

‘My body my choice.’

Within the bounds of legality, we are supposed to believe that neither sex is more damaged by their coital decisions than the other. The retro-active outrage now mounted by women at men on account of mutually consensual sexual intercourse (and calls for the bounds of legality to be shifted accordingly), reiterates that this is not actually the case.

The struggle of many a post-prime girl for exclusivity with a series of increasingly inferior suitors, must be a brutal way to discover that it is still impossible to raise a joyridden car back to its factory-new price.

Men are checking out of monogamous commitment, leaving two generations of women wandering a widening bimbo-limbo between settled life either as a housewife or denizen of the increasingly cash-strapped welfare state (the overwhelmingly administrative sector jobs provided to ‘career women’ being a manifestation of the latter).

As an institution, marriage is only debased further by social and legal efforts to enforce commitment from men to polygamous women who spent their bloom years in promiscuity. Although such an iniquitous contract could be excused by a myriad of exceptional circumstances, the unprecedented glut of women beneath the male investment threshold turn the exceptions into clichés.

The Gynocentric Interpretation

A defining characteristic of corporate and clickbait discourse is the effort to sublimate readers’ frustration into outrage while bypassing the question of accountability. Time and others are now under huge pressure to find mythologies to both explain the dissatisfaction of their female readership and serve as the basis for corrective political action. Someone must be to blame for their problems; anyone but themselves.

What Time has produced is a fairy tail without a prince. It begins:

‘Movie stars are more like you and me than we ever knew.’

We are then introduced to a wide range of women who were:

‘brought together by a common experience.’

They were actually brought together by Time, at great expense, to confirm the biased premise of their leading article. Time then chews over each of these women’s testimonies, droning on and on and on in a tantric, mantric, incuntation of its utterly banal and predictable conclusion:

image
Time have revealed their straw man – and he’s called Donald Trump.

I suspect that the feminist Trump-tantrum is not caused by Trump per se, but by the part of American society which voted him into office. It’s an important distinction because it means that, as a political instrument, Trump is needed the most by the very people who like him least. Without Trump, the outrage would be revealed for what it truly is: a million personal vendettas against a million brash, powerful and wealthy American men who these women consentingly gave their bodies to.

Trump’s appeal to the free market and private capital (as well as the string of hot women who have let him ‘grab ‘em by the poosy’), is more than just a refusal to push the envelope on welfare policies which enable sexual liberation—it is an exposition of the gulf between what is conventionally true and what is actually true about modern female sexual opportunism.

The self-deception may be genuine, but was revealed nonetheless when #metoo was triggered by the loss of societal contingency plans to ensure female sexual freedom (alpha fucks and beta bucks), by constraining that of men. The fat child screams not while it is happily eating itself to death but when the cookies are taken away.

[Video titled "Satan leaves a woman's soul as Trump is sworn in"]

Feminism’s Finale

The premise of #metoo has now been twisted by various degrees to its own complete inversion. Nearly a year ago, I was told by a County Court in Britain that I owed money to a woman whose sexual advances I had gently rebuffed some years before. Neither I nor the court had any idea why I owed her money or what her claim was, but I still had to defend myself.

A case that would never have come to trial twenty years ago dragged out for months as she gradually patched together a claim (without evidence), which gradually escalated to an allegation of sexual abuse.

My trial was the direct result of her assumption that society would stand behind her in extracting resources from the man of her choosing. I was lucky that she had a legal history of ‘choosing’ other men before me, and the judge sent her howling from the courtroom.

But what if I had been her first shot? What if she’d gone to the Crown Prosecution Service?

I add, for the sake of completeness, that I am a strict adherent of pre-marital abstinence and, in the case of this particular woman, had never kissed, hit on, made a pass at, nor been in any form of romantic relationship with her. #Iwouldnt—and that is precisely what enraged her.

Let the irony of this case serve as an illustration of the extent to which feminine imperatives can now be exercised to strong-arm men into compliance. If you have earned a #metoo assertion like I did, you’re probably doing something right.

What for men in 2018?

The dregs of women will always preen their sexual worthiness in a sensational light by announcing that a man once made an unwanted pass at them, just as feminist Phrynes like Emma Watson will always lend a pretty face to their ugly cause (phoney outrage is her profession’s prerogative. I bear her no grudge).

Our toxic tributary of sexual realism to the mainstream discussion sees the feminist victimbragging for what it really is: another attempt to circumvent rational analysis and keep society plugging the feminist narrative. Soon, #metoo will become as passé as ‘Trump Bedroom Backlash,’ but these phenomena are mere symptoms of a deeper social condition.

As private debt piles up and resources cease to flow, society will have to find new ways of demanding that men judiciously restrain their own behaviour on behalf of the unfettered dualistic sexual strategy of women—sexy badboys and stable providers stepping up and down as and when women demand it. The contradictory messages that this sends to men are now compounded by the constant possibility of being criminalised for making a faux pas.

Today, as trials move from the courtroom to the press and to Twitter and Facebook, the degree of kafkaesque reassurance that I had—the basic certainty that I was on trial—is starting to ebb away. A lot of men who don’t grasp the underlying biomechanics behind the sexual victimhood phenomenon are doomed to be spirited on a windowless train of THOT thought from false premise to final solution: their enslavement to women, either directly or via the state.

The chaotic disconnect between the claim and the truth is not a means to an end but the end itself. This climate of fear is the West’s way of forcing the marriage of mankind to womankind, joylessly mandating social responsibilities without providing any privilege. The carrot has gone from the sexual contract and only the stick remains.

image
It can still be a beautiful life for men who don’t answer to society. Careful though, the beta version of this man is Smeagol Gollum.

The harder men try to opt out of commitment to women, the stronger the social effort will be to drive them back, until escape from women will turn into escape from society itself.

HardFin #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Something doesn't add up about Bowie's Death

Anyone else feel a little strange about Bowie's death happening exactly when it did?

His passing happened before the Golden Globes, but they put off announcing the death until afterward. Why? What was so significiant about the Globes last night (and just a day before Obama’s State of the Union)? Maybe it was the relentless coverage Matt Damon and his movie The Martian received at the Globes, putting him squarely on track to receive an Oscar in one of the nation’s most watched television moments, a moment he will surely use to make a grand political statement. And who does Damon support? Who has he been out there campaigning for? You guessed it, Global Elite Deep State queen bee Hillary Clinton! And Bowie’s death is news now, but it will be buried tomorrow in the hype for Obama’s SOTU speech.

This is what makes the Bowie death even more convenient for Hillary. It does seem fortutious when you consider that the most important cultural creation about the planet Mars before “The Martian” was the song “Life on Mars”, which has been rated the number one rock song of all time by critics. It’s also well known as a criticism of contemporary culture and the sort of arms race/space race out of control big government projects of the time (1970s) when maybe the problem is all that government intervention and spending in the first place. Its pure mockery of big ego, which is what the Clintons are notorious for. This is why the Dems fear libertarianism which proposes dumping all the lower class handouts, the corporate entitlements and the taxpayer subsidized private jets and private police forces protecting the elites.

All this makes sense when you consider that Hillary is considering a big weapon against Trump in the war of ideas: She’s is going to propose a new manned mission to Mars, according to sources already leaked, some sort of hackneyed attempt to hijack Trump’s “Make America Great Again” mantra. And you can’t do this when you have this huge critic out there who has the perfect song to mock your big government spending. Seeing as everything these days is a culture war and Twitter is the place where these battles are fought, Hillary would have been at a HUGE disadvantage if Bowie’s libertarian tendencies were made public. He has long stood for indepence and an end of governement sureveillance. He was vocal in support of nationalism, too. He’s very well respected among young and old people alike and they would have seen Clinton’s sham for what it is, a ridiculous big gov’t spending project to deflect from her Global Elite/ Global Government agenda.

“Coincidentally” enough, the Oscars are on February 28th and that’s immediately before Super Tuesday, March 1st, when the majority of Americans will vote and at that point most analysts believe Sanders and Hillary will be in a dead heat after Iowa, New Hampshire, so such a huge television moment like Damon on stage in front of billions throwing his support to her campaign could just be what Hillary needs to seal the deal.

I’m not saying Damon commited the murder, but why haven’t there been any mentions of Bowie’s wife Iman in the NYTimes obit? It seems she’s really staying out of the press at this crucial moment. No one even knows if she’s been allowed to speak to the press. And Damon being at the Globes on the other coast in front of the world is the perfect alibi. If you have doubts about Hillary connection to political assassinations, just Google the The Clinton Body Count List.

I’ve also read some debate about Bowie’s new album. It was supposed to be his most political yet. Curious to see if his Hollywood producers release an edited version now…

Michael Aydinian #conspiracy gmmuk.com

So what we’re seeing today is a step by step process. Wrestling power away & seizing control is one thing; doing so without it ever becoming common knowledge is another thing altogether…. & you’ve got to hand it to them. How many people are aware the Rothschilds already virtually control the worldwide printing of money? Any time they like they can initiate economic meltdowns, which opens the way for more conflict & war. They’ve the media to not only cover their back but to continually instil fear into the populace as well as drive wedges between various groups of people. Divide & conquer has always been part of their modus operandi.

They control almost all the West’s politicians. I’ve said it a million times – it’s not just Palestine – the US, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Australia – all the major Western nations ARE OCCUPIED TERRITORIES! Moreover any country brave enough to defy & not capitulate to these Zionist mafiosi banksters….. well, can’t we see what’s occurred in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Malaysia, Venezuela & a host of other countries? They’ve but one thing in common – THEY WERE SINGLED OUT BECAUSE THEY DEFIED THE ROTHSCHILD ZIONISTS!

Then when one conducts meaningful research into the horrific level of systematic exploitation that’s occurred in the past 250 years in Africa, Asia, Central & South America where the vast wealth of these entire continents have been siphoned away leaving billions penniless, it doesn’t take long to realise who’s ultimately behind this. Almost all Diamond & Gold production is under the control of agents of the Rothschilds. One can hardly imagine how much of the world’s petroleum they now control.

So, along with their control over the world’s major natural resources, they have the entire banking system, the mass-media, Wall Street, industries of Energy, Armaments, pharmaceuticals & anything else that matters, well & truly locked up! NOW THEIR GOAL IS TO ENSURE THERE IS NO POSSIBLE CHANCE WE CAN EVER CHALLENGE THEM. That means ultimately they have to be able to eradicate millions, if not billions of people & to get away with it as if nothing untoward has occurred. THAT’S WHAT THEY WANT!

At least we have democracy. Wrong! There does not exist one aspect of our elections process in the UK which hasn’t been compromised. Zionists control all the key facets including our politicians, the media, the judicial system & law enforcement. This is why war criminals & child molesters not only evade justice but are rewarded financially for being loyal servants to their despicable cause. Freedom of speech exists accept when Zionists or Israel is criticised. It is crucial to recognise one is perfectly able to criticise pretty much anyone else.

To counteract this blatant anomaly, Zionists have mastered the art of labelling critics anti-Semitic, as well as the technique of making out Jews are the victims, forever living in fear. Many Jews genuinely believe this because they too have fallen foul of the monstrous propaganda & lies Zionists specialise in. Saying more of us need to wake up is patently obvious. However, for the time being, we need to make it absolutely clear to our traitor politicians – A CORNERSTONE OF DEMOCRACY IS THE RIGHT TO PROTEST! DO THIS AT YOUR PERIL!

Finally, I’ll say this – ALLOWING ANY FURTHER EROSION OF OUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IS TANTAMOUNT TO SIGNING OUR OWN DEATH WARRANTS!

BaptistForeva #fundie teens-4-christ.org

I believe that all Disney movies are wrong to watch, and try to avoid them as much as possible. Why are you focussing a topic on just ONE of those evil Disney movies? Aren't there other wicked ones that many teens love to watch, such as The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Lion King? These have strange fantasies portrayed in them, and should not be watched by Christians.

Incel Wiki #sexist wiki.incels.info

Feminism

image

Over a hundred years ago a bunch of rich women were upset that they could not move up in official positions of power in work or politics. So they got men to give them the vote and affirmative action for political office. Through legislation women made it even easier for themselves than men to climb traditionally male dominance hierarchies! Only problem is that they aren't sexually attracted to men who are lower in dominance hierarchies of status and money than they are. So as women gained dominance in traditional male hierarchies, they complained a bunch about there being 'no good men'[1] aka the dwindling amount of men wealthier or more powerful than them to give them tingles. As less men gave them tingles more incels were created and more men were sent their own way. And as women gained more dominance in society they complained more about beta males, and "rape" etc...
?
They even created campaigns against these increasing amount of men lower on the social hierarchy than them they are not sexually attracted to like the:

Anti Catcalling Movement: aka 'Men poorer than me better not hit on me in public'

Anti Manspreading Movement: aka 'Public transport users (people poorer than me, or people who have not yet proved they are higher status than me) should not make me think of their junk'

Metoo movement: aka 'Autistic and socially isolated ugly men who can't read social cues should be locked up or ridiculed as much as rapists'[2]

image

Female Contempt for an Obvious Outcome of Feminism: Househusbands

A matriarchal world where women make more money than men would seem to necessitate an increase in house-husbands. The male liberation movement, a subset of feminist MRAs in the 60s wanted a dramatic increase in househusbands. However even in the most feminist countries, women will still expect the man to work or else a breakup, even if she makes enough to provide for the family in an uber-welfare state. This is of course, insanely pointless. Early 20th century anti-feminist and Marxist Belfort Bax' quote still remains true, "Among all the women’s rights advocates I am not aware of one who, in her zeal for equality between the sexes, has ever suggested abolishing the right of maintenance of the wife by the husband."[3]

Even in a country where feminism is intitutional and mainstream, where equal-pay laws are in place, and where women have more total personal wealth than men, "the key factor in the decision to divorce is whether Hubby has a job. If he doesn’t, even if his job loss is involuntary, his odds of being ditched by his wife skyrocket"[4]

As Eggman puts it, "Talk to any US woman and they'll tell you about men offering and actually buying them all sorts of things, when was the last time a woman offered to buy you a house or car, now that we have gender equality and all?"[5]

A 100% Completed Feminist World Be Better for Incels Than Partial Feminism... Theory

So far we see that feminism literally creates incels, but there may be a silver lining in a 100% feminist universe compared to a partial feminist universe, in that feminists feminize societies to the point where all men are so beta that it's not hard to become a chad or to get a woman to agree to be asked out. Since no men ask women out in the 100% feminist universe once men are so beta.

The Eradication of Feminism is Best for Incels... Theory

Because feminism has created more incels, many if not most self-identified incels are trad-con, patriarchal, and don't subscribe to the previous theory and think matriarchies won't be sexually generous. They should argue for a generous patriarchy with strictly socially enforced monogamy as not all patriarchies are alike. In most if not all modern patriachal countries, polygyny arises and men hoard women, causing inceldom as well. And in patriarchal muslim countries, the hoarding of women in harems, inflates the bride-price so high that there exists a vast underclass of singe men who are susceptible to the promise of either real life brides or virgin brides in the afterlife through terrorist organization like al-Qaeda or ISIS. It is for this reason that people joke about incels and muslims terrorists on incel boards. Some incels also believe that the only kind of pro-natalism that can be achieved to wipe out inceldom would be through a racial supremacist movement, which partly explains why people like Richard Spencer pander to incels.

Alia_Harkonnen #sexist reddit.com

Female Personality Evolution

Despite most of them being fuckable, women have to compete too. Every woman wants to not be like other women but her ability to climb up the ranks of uniqueness depends on many factors, such as her intelligence, looks, environment, inborn personality, creativity, and more. This list is quite simplified but it helps define female evolution from its simplest forms to the most complex ones.
Goal is simple and universal to all but the last type: “To maximize number of sustainable high quality orbiters and to obtain the greatest possible appreciation and commitment level from the best available Chad.”
LEVEL 1: Basic Stacy
Life revolves around being validated on social media, make up, identifying with Beyonce's songs, and Chads cock. When eventually too old for Chad to keep on fucking, she sells herself to the highest bidder, has kids, gets fatter, dies.* Chad of Choice: Justin Bieber
*keep in mind, if attractive enough, she doesn’t have to compete with anyone below level 8. Especially in Gym Stacy version, which is Basic Stacy attending gym.
LEVEL 2: Basic Stacy Deluxe
Same exact script but with some thought put into rationalizing and romanticizing it to sound deeper than it is. For example, social media obsession is actually her networking or being artistic, and the top 40 songs she identifies with are ballads sang by crap female singers with great vocal range such as Adele, which in her social group counts as having a taste. Will finish college and have some type of career in something like education, and if she ends up purposely unemployed with kids, she'll base her decision on research. She likes Chad because of his confidence and personality and when she gets pumped and dumped she'll actually overcome an abusive relationship. Chad of Choice: Christian Grey
LEVEL 3: Good Girl
Average in every single way, and less attractive than her Stacy friends without actually being ugly, she usually went unnoticed. She appeals to men by being decent and stable, which is what many look for especially in comparison to her friends who can get sponsorships just for fucking around. Often from religious or at the very least overprotective families. She doesn’t drink, doesn’t do drugs, doesn’t sleep around, is average in school, wants to marry and be a mom, and soon enough when removed from school setting where she’s surrounded by more flashy girls, she finds men who are very happy with this offer. What these husbands to be don’t understand is that they bore her to tears, that she dreams of the same Chads who fuck her best friend she’s living vicariously through, and that the only reason she isn’t living it up is fear. She’s a ticking time bomb that will blow up and result in an especially shocking affair, divorce, and sexual exploration (drunk orgies) later in life. Chad of Choice: Her beta boyfriend’s alpha best friend or her best friend Stacy’s Chad
LEVEL 4: Basic Tomboy
Can range from attractive to ugly, this one is just smart enough to perceive than despite all the attention, men don't really value basic Stacy and her "interests", especially once in a relationship with her. Being interesting doesn’t come naturally to her due to complete lack of original thought, so instead of copying basic Stacies from her circle, she copies basic Norman/Chad in an attempt to get an edge over other girls by being more fun and in tune with the male brain. So she passionately follows sports, denounces anything fancy and girly, wears only natural looking make up, and forces herself upon a group of male friends who accept her because she lets them fuck her. The other part of her personality focuses on desperately trying to please every stereotypical male desire that stereotypical Stacy stereotypically fails at. This one is a treat for the right kind of guys since in her endless quest to prove how non difficult she is and how much she gets the male mind, she tolerates being cheated on, makes sandwiches, embraces porn, and takes it up the ass. Chad of choice: male best friend who is alpha in her pack - this one doesn’t annoy men with celebrity crushes, and they aren’t masculine enough for her anyway
LEVEL 5: Quirky fat girl
Unattractive enough when compared to 50% of Stacies around her, and not athletically or socially talented enough to be one of the guys, this one is under the impression she developed a personality. That means putting a lot of thought into standing out. Usually this is achieved through elaborate and irritating fashion choices such as wearing something from the 50ies or making a certain colored lipstick her thing. She also reads. Young adult fiction, of course. Thinks she's a bit of a geek cause she talks to her more nerdy male friends about Harry Potter and acts like she too has a crush on Emma Watson. Attempts humor a lot, think Amy Schumer. Men actually can't stand her but is a relatively easy fuck during her younger days which leads to resentment and turning to popular feminism later in life. Then she becomes a typical twox/askfemales poster explaining how women wear make up for themselves and how objectified she felt that one time when a drunk guy catcalled her although/because she knows he was actually addressing her friend. Has an office job and cats. Chad of Choice: supporting vampire character from Twilight whose fantasy gay relationships she writes fanfictions about (she knows the saga sucks but it’s her “guilty pleasure”)
LEVEL 6: Tomboy Deluxe (also known as The Gamer Girl)
Good looking and a bit smarter than the average tomboy, she doesn’t have to sell herself short to get an edge over basic Stacy. Claims to get along better with men but makes sure to look cute during. She wants her beta orbiters to really worship her and finds she can get more adoration from the romantic “nerdy” crowd. There she can also find Chads with better earning potential and more willingness to commit than when fishing among average jocks. Since she perfected the formula of mixing universally popular geeky interests (as long as they don’t require too much effort getting into) and cleavage, her ego is over the roof. This also makes her get bored of most men (never the attention though) which makes her sadistic until the right Chad comes along and makes her his bdsm bitch. Chad of Choice: The Joker
LEVEL 7: The Intellectual
Smarter than Gamer Girl, this one is actually able to read a book that isn’t young adult fiction and watch a three hour long black and white European movie where everyone smokes and feels unhappy. She gets some form of personal pleasure from it although mostly just because she knows she’s one of the rare ones who get it. Got into a decent college and will never miss the chance to mention her degrees, including during online arguments. Normally tries to get at least a few of those because being a college student is important to her identity. Is a more advanced level feminist, environmentally and politically aware, liberal, likes to think she’s cynical but is really just sarcastic when applicable. Worked hard to obtain resting bitch face and to appear as disinterested with everything as possible, including sex. Has few friends with benefits among her philosophy student male friends who validate her as a fascinating, smart and witty individual she’s not. Once they turn exclusive men tend to develop deep loathing for her, which is fine because she loathes them back. Chad of Choice: Her philosophy or English literature professor, at least until they finally have sex
LEVEL 8: Manic Pixie Dream Girl
Very beautiful face that always made men idolize her over slutty big tittied Stacies. Never really felt overly pressured to compete with women in her surrounding because men always fell in love with her whenever she smiled at them. Isn’t completely dumb but her energy is mainly focused on unproductive self analysis because everyone convinced her she's fascinating. What she needs validated is that this is really true, because on some level she knows that she is actually pretty boring. Her challenge is picking the right Chad worth settling for, and in the process she breaks many men’s hearts and egos. She doesn’t really know what to focus on and doesn’t like to feel like a bad person, so she deals with her hypergamy by creating a very flaky, inconsistent personality that mirrors adored and special types of women in popular culture. Often turns to drugs out of boredom but without seriously committing to them either, and develops existential depression every time she gets too settled into anything, because she is never sure if she’s missing out on something better. She looks for artistic talent Chads to provide what she herself can’t in her hopeless, exhausting attempts to be creative. Her taste in art boils down to her appreciating whatever is pretentious enough to make her think she doesn't get it. Chad of Choice: Lead singers from hipster bands such as Arctic Monkeys
LEVEL 9: The Unicorn
Had at least one big trauma or unhappy childhood which fucked her up, combined with receiving extreme adoration from men later in life. This created a fun mix of insecurity and ego, and a few mental disorders. She is usually a very sexually conflicted asexual. She has a good ability to at least subconsciously read people and she adapts her personality to mirror the fantasies of the men she is talking to. This is because she is always looking to be everyone’s everything. Her introductions are great, after which she enters a depressive phase and then goes into total destruction mode. Because she wants to leave a lasting impact without restricting herself to one person or one life, she does it by leaving scars so that they think of her even in her absence. She can’t fall in love with individual men, and is mainly solipsistic. Thinks of herself as completely emotionally empty and most likely is an addict, but can keep on bouncing back for a while due to everyone in the world wanting to support her. Chad of Choice: N/A
Level 10: Level 9 that manages to murder you and through it become the most significant person in your life while also being free of you and able to play the same crucial role in other people's lives. Role only reserved for a small percentage of female psychopaths, but if you're searching for one, places like this is where you find them so don't stop believing....

CH #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

The relevancy of this post will probably be moot by the time it’s published, but I’ve made some points about our current climate of anti-sex prudishness that deserve consideration, so here ya go.

I’m glad Trump came out in support of Roy Moore. The man’s travails — stoked to an incomprehensibly vitriolic froth by Nasty Womanhood, Inc and the Jewish Interest Media — are emblematic of the man-hating culture that suffuses us. Do I think it’s a leetle weird for a 30 year old man to actively seek to date late teenage girls? Sure, but it’s not criminal (not as long as AOC varies state-to-state from age 14 to 17….I can’t take a statutory crime seriously if all it requires is a hop across the state border to decriminalize the charge), and certainly not worthy of national coverage knowing that it would hardly have made the local news in the 1970s (which really could have been a millennia ago given how much American culture has changed since then).

30-year-old Roy Moore’s preference for teenage love isn’t a radical aberration or departure from the spectrum of normal male sexuality. It’s out on the tails of normal male sexuality, but not off the curve into abnormality where actual paraphilias (e.g., pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality) exist. NEWSFLASH: Men prefer young women, at minimum younger women than themselves, and men with power and social status that are naturally attractive to women will be better able and willing to fulfill their desire. At the margins, this means there will be HSMV older men who will date 17 year old Southern Roses, and some of those men will be actively pursuing a marriageable young woman with plenty of residual reproductive value to provide him with the large family he wants.

Roy Moore has four children with his wife of forty years. As far as we know, he has been faithful to her the whole time, and she adores him. His wife is fourteen years younger than him. This indicates that his youthful exuberance pursuing teen girls was part of a conscious desire he had at the time to find his One True Girl and marry her.

As long as there are teenage women with shapely figures telegraphing the opening of their prime fertility windows….

...

…there will be men of all ages ogling them. Some of those men will have the mate value and the immunity to social expectation to win one over as his own. Roy Moore’s preferences were within the sphere of normal, naturally evolved male sexuality. To dumbly conflate his dating history with that of pedophiles and pervert potted plant masturbators cajoling actress whores with a bit of the ol’ quim pro quo, is a slanderous joke and reveals a deep-seated discomfort with and spite toward the Darwinian contours of male sexuality and male romantic longing.

FYI it’s not all that unusual or uncommon for an adult man to get tripped up by the apparent age of an especially voluptuous teen woman. Unless a man is in the habit of asking all 0.7 waist-hip ratio women for their IDs, there’s a chance one of them might conceal being a barely legal vixen.

Related, some men (maybe Moore) either physically age more slowly or retain a light-heartedness of spirit that belies their age, which both makes them more attractive to and more attracted to younger women. It’s not the rule, but it’s a fairly notable exception.

Say what you will about Roy Moore, at least his girls agreed to date him (even if they retconned a discomfort 40 years later). The Synagogue of Seediness doesn’t bother with the formality of mutual agreement, they just passive-aggressively jam tongues down throats “to rehearse our lines”.

In sum, if you believe every recollected detail of the ancient allegations, only one woman at the time was underage (barely) when Moore asked her out on a date, shared consensual 2nd base foreplay with her, and drove her home when she wanted to leave. The rest of his “accusers” — aka bitter aged cows who regret not being the woman Moore married, all of whom with shitty personal relationship histories and connections to thecunt’s #SheMenstruated cat lady symposium, retconning their bloom of youth trysts with Moore into criminal acts — were legal age at the time of the alleged May-December violation of the feminist code of acceptable intersexual conduct.

You may think it’s icky for a grown man to consensually date barely legal teen girls, but that doesn’t make it criminal. There was a time when, while not quite the social norm, such couples weren’t all that unusual and nobody much blinked an eye when they encountered one. We all know of our own or someone else’s great-grandparents with big age gaps who started popping out kids when great-grandmama was seventeen.

I doubt Moore’s janey-come-lately accusers really were all that scandalized by his come-ons in 1977. Here’s a rule of thumb I use to determine the validity of a woman’s sexual misconduct accusation: If she waits more than ten years to tell anyone about it, she wasn’t all that bothered by the infraction when it occurred. If she waits forty years, it’s a political hit job exploiting a radically changed anti-sex feminist cunt climate.

But it is fair to ask why Moore would, if reports based on memories of contemporaries from forty years ago are accurate to the tiniest detail (they’re not), pursue questionable if mutually consensual age-disparate relationships with teenagers to the exclusion of older women, and risk the specter of social ostracism. Some say it’s because Moore was emotionally stunted and socially awkward — a 1970s proto-sperg — who wanted a deferential and awestruck teenage woman for company unlikely to challenge his self-conception or strain his capacity for mature adult banter.

Maybe, but probably not. I think he just liked ’em ripely hot, and didn’t much care about “relationship complementarity” as de-sexed ür-bugman Will Wilkinson might put it. This notion, held dear by both white knights and feminists, that men who date younger women are secretly intimidated by strong, independent, empowered older women is why I say betacels and bitterbitches have a lot more in common than they’d willingly admit.

Psychologically emasculated white knights who gripe about “power imbalances” in the workplace between male bosses and female subordinates, or in society between older high status men and younger inexperienced women, can’t seem to fathom or accept the reality that female sexual desire is different than male sexual desire, and women are typically attracted to powerful men. Two to tango, chumps. Men are aroused to provide for and protect vulnerable, deferential women, and women are aroused by strong men to whom they can safely and happily defer. Even to whom they can submit. Perfectly equal relationships are also perfectly passionless relationships. Sexual polarity is the lube of love. Male power and female admiration provide the sexual frisson that magnifies feelings of love and creates a solid foundation up;on which to build up a lifelong commitment.

Other theories for Moore’s focus on finding a teen fiancee that I’ve read hold more weight for me.

...

Character matters, and it looks to me that Moore’s accusers have the lowest of character, which rightly calls into question their veracity. Their low character doesn’t disprove their allegations, but it certainly is a leading indicator that they’re telling lies, or at best telling politically embroidered quasi-truths.

...

Well, you know, (((comedians))) get a special dispensation. (For the record, I have no problem with Jerry Seinfeld dating a legal 17 year old hottie. Men work hard to acquire status, fame and power FOR JUST THIS SORT OF OPPORTUNITY.)

...

That’s one of the better analyses of Moore I’ve read. He had an epic case of blue balls, and he wanted that feeling of young love that was denied him for so long. Are we going to lynch the man for that? If so, then you may as well criminalize men and castrate us all, because our dicks and our hearts aren’t going to cooperate with the anhedonic low T androgynarchic shrewtopia the hag collective wants to impose on society.

The next #resistance narrative is taking shape. Already I have shitlib acquaintances telling me, “How is it Ok that Trump can get away with groping women but no one else can?” You knew this was coming. Frankenwinestein was the sacrificial lamb to the gods of NeverTrump.

I’m near certain that Dem leaders and Cuckryans sat down with Frankenstien and said “Look Al, the photo is bad, you’re gonna have to resign, but look at it this way, you’ll go down a martyr, we’ll use your sacrifice to take down Moore and Trump. This is how you can do the most good.”

It’s pretty clear to me that the leftoid fuggernaut, caught off-guard by Pedowood, scrambled to segue from Chosen perversion to smearing the good names of Gentile anti-establishmentarians. Jizz up the waters enough and people forget who the worst perps are.

That’s why I have been consistent in my assessment of these decades-old sexual harassment allegations: mostly a bunch of Regret Fling griping from post-Wall women with a few genuine victims sprinkled in to give the moral panic a veneer of legitimacy. NeverForget that the overwhelming majority of these sex abuse accusations have been leveled against male feminist shitlibs, so what we are seeing is a moral panic started by shitlibs and feminists that they are DESPERATE to enlarge beyond the scope of the ghetto of male shitlib perverts.

Libs trying to tie Trump to #MeToo should be made aware of their telling silence and support when Hillary was running smear campaigns against Bill Clinton’s accusers. And in Bill’s case, one of the women, Juanita Broadderick, has been saying since day one he raped her.

It would be funny if, after every GOP establishment eel turned on Moore and the combined force of the jewish interest media lobbed their artillery at him, he still won. Biggest middle finger to the Globohomo Uniparty and to Schoolmarm Feminism this side of Trump’s election.

...

When you accept that the GOPe cuck elite really truly hate the heartland Americans they pretend to represent, you’ll understand their behavior and be able to predict their future actions. The Uniparty is real, and they are feeling the heat. Moore, please.

Daniel Amneus #fundie fisheaters.com

[From a book titled "The Garbage Generation" hosted on the linked website]

What IBM thinks of as the promotion of equality is better understood as the undermining of hypergamy, one of the pillars of the patriarchal system. Hypergamy, or the "marriage gradient," means that women "marry up," men "marry down." A cinder girl may hope to marry Prince Charming, but a chimney sweep cannot hope to marry Princess Charming. A male doctor might well marry a female nurse, but a female doctor would hardly consider marrying a male nurse. The female nurse may be underpaid, but in the marriage market her prospects are better than those of the female doctor because there are more desirable males she can hope to "marry up" to.

...

IBM's question implies that society's arrangements tilt in favor of males. The fact is that society's arrangements produce more male winners and more male losers. One principal reason for the success of the male winners is the knowledge that they might well be losers: they must earn their success and are motivated to earn it partly by the greater risk of failure. IBM proposes to intervene in society's arrangements to confer benefits on females which will increase the number of female winners without increasing the number of female losers. What will increase is the number of male losers, since the male engineers will be competing not only with each other but with females enjoying a conferred advantage denied to males. Another question:

WHICH ONE WILL BE PRIVILEGED TO ATTAIN STATUS BY MARRIAGE AND WHICH ONE WILL HAVE TO EARN IT FOR HIMSELF/HERSELF BY WORK AND SELF-DISCIPLINE?

With IBM interfering with "market forces" this question might have to be re-worded: "attain status by marriage or by IBM's largess." As IBM offers women more status, marriage has less to offer them-- men have less to offer them. Men's marriageability is decreased because they have relatively less to offer women; women's marriageability is decreased because they have fewer men to "marry up" to. As IBM transfers status from those more dependent on work and self-discipline to those less dependent on work and self- discipline, men will become less motivated, since the rewards for work and self-discipline are reduced. The effect, though at a higher level of income, will be what is observable in the ghetto, where women enjoying the handouts of the welfare bureaucracy and become economically and status-wise independent of men, with the consequence that large numbers of men become de-motivated and less marriageable.

Two more questions:

WHICH ONE IS MORE LIKELY TO DIVORCE HIS/HER SPOUSE? WHICH ONE WILL HAVE HIS/HER LIKELIHOOD OF DIVORCE INCREASED BY A FACTOR OF FIVE IF HE/SHE IS EDUCATED AND ECONOMICALLY INDEPENDENT?

...

Let's project IBM's program into the future. Let's suppose the wearers of the blue and pink booties grow up and both become engineers. Then:

WHICH ENGINEER IS MORE LIKELY TO BE CHILDLESS?

IF BOTH MARRY, WHICH IS LIKELY TO HAVE MORE CHILDREN WHO WILL BENEFIT FROM HIS/HER SUPERIOR EDUCATION?

Virginia Woolf thought as IBM thinks: families would make great sacrifices to educate their sons, few sacrifices to educate their daughters. She failed to understand the reason: education enables sons to have families, to provide for wives and children who would benefit from the sons' education economically and by the transmission of the knowledge and the values embodied in the education. Educating daughters does not enable them to provide for husbands, and greatly decreases likelihood of their having stable marriages. The birthrate of educated women is far lower than the birthrate of educated men. (Ms. Woolf herself was childless, as are most feminists.) What Bernard Lentz says of professional men and women of the period l890-l940 is true of other eras:

Even for the "superperformers" [the most successful professional women]...marriage still led to diminished success, resentment, and a distracting tension in their personal lives. In contrast, men at this time found marriage had numerous advantages in their climb up the professional hierarchy....

Ergo, society has a greater interest in encouraging and furthering the education of males. Educating a boy enables him to have and to support a family, to give children an advantage in life, to transmit family values and strengthen the patriarchy, to create social stability. Educating a girl enables her to escape marriage, or if she marries, to escape childbearing or to have a smaller family. Education, which increases her independence, will enable her more easily to expel her husband and inflict upon her offspring (whose custody is virtually guaranteed her) the disadvantages accompanying fatherlessness. Feminists see these options as desirable, but why should IBM or the rest of us see them as desirable?

...

Feminist-economist Dr. Barbara Bergmann offers a little paradigm-story about Pink People and Blue People earning their living by picking berries on an island. Like women and men in our own society the Pinks and Blues have sex-segregated occupations. Dr. Bergmann thus illustrates "the crucial point":

If a group is segregated and furthermore is crowded into a relatively narrow segment of labor-market turf, its members will as a result be less productive, and their economic rewards will be lower.

(It is a sufficient refutation of this to point out that Senators are a segregated group occupying a narrow segment of the labor-market turf, but they do not suffer from low economic rewards.)

...

If men cannot outperform women they will not perform at all, and society will be lucky if male energies are merely wasted in narcissistic display rather than in disruptive violence and machismo. A man with nothing to offer a woman save a paycheck the size of her own is impossibly disadvantaged. He will know, and his wife will know that he knows, that the words "I don't need you, Mister" are always at her disposal and, thanks to the anti-male bias of the divorce court, she has an authority in the family greater than his own. Patriarchal capitalism prospers because it creates an arena of work wherein males are allowed to succeed and create wealth and where they are motivated to do so and rewarded for doing so by the satisfactions of family living.

...

Ms. Wattleton's pitch for "reproductive rights" and Dr. Bergmann's pitch for taking better jobs away from men to confer them on women come to the same thing: men are excluded from meaningful participation in reproduction. Men become superfluous members of families. The basis of civilized society is that men shall share equally in reproductive decision-making, and shall earn the right to do so by working. The program of feminism is to deny men this right by undermining the sexual constitution, the Legitimacy Principle, marriage and the family. When they talk about women's reproductive rights and about making women economically independent of men, this is what they mean.

Uglyme #psycho incels.co

[RageFuel] IT morons really think we behave like this irl do they

#1
One of cucktears favorite piece of (idiocy) advice is "the reason why you're incel is because you call women foids, noodlewhores, cumdumpsters, holes, etc. If you stop calling women like that maybe they would want to be with you"

Seriously are they that stupid? Do they think that we actively go around calling girls like that on a daily basis? Imagine if I said "thanks you fucking hole" to the girl at the grocery store. How long you think it'd take for me to get arrested for harassment? What those dumbasses fail to understand is that most of us try to be normal and functioning members of society but women don't care about that, they just give us the cold shoulder cause we are ugly. If we use those terms here it's because this is a safe non judgemental place for us to cope. So, soytears can shove their advice up to they used up asses cause it doesn't fucking work.

To_Live_is to_Serve #sexist incels.co

[LifeFuel] Imagine if the gender roles were reversed.

You could get a one-way open relationship with your looksmatch while also using tinder to get Prime top percentage Stacies. Your fellow men will be lazy and thousand cunt stare making you a real catch. You will not have to work; you could just get a virgin betabuxx 7/10 engineer wife without sexual experience.

You could give thousands of cream pies and not worry about pregnancy as you have total control over paternity and abortion. You get easy well paid job as receptionist while your looksmatch get a depressing manual labour job. You could sell your dirty undies for money while staying completely anonymous and you could show your currently subhuman body on webcam to get endless compliments and money by women who want to admire your body. You would get softer sentences and it would be a crime to make you homeless. You would not get attacked violently by other men as they have a great solidarity and would burn 1000 women alive instead of having your needs go unmet which the government would support.

All modern media would cater to your hedonistic desires while you would be praised for having the spirituality you have. Genes would be filtered out by selection of females instead of female selection meaning that your mass reproduction could be justified as a part of evolution. You could have sex with virgin teens illegally and they would be grateful for you taking their virginities and creampieing them. You could help the incel normies ascend in this world and get praised as a moral paragon by both the privileged and the unprivileged. You would get endless personalised compliments by sending a mass message on your real tinder intead of just the catfish account.

Women would instinctively protect you with their lives and send you gifts, expecting nothing in reward and getting joyfully over a dicpic which they would brag about getting from you on the internet. No face would be too foul and no penis too small for you to live a life of leisure and privilege and anyone who says otherwise would get deplatformed immediately. Women would still cook food and take care of children as betabuxxers do now. You would decide when sex is had in the relationship and media would uphold male pastimes like warfare, sport and gaming while condemning fraudulent make-up. Women who get caught frauding men get burned alive by jealous women as soon as you give the hint.

You wouldn't need to have a personality or an inner monologue to get by but having one would grant you great opportunities. You could wear shorts in public and get compliments IRL daily while being able to have sex with any woman who compliments you. You would be the archetype of an admirable moral person. Parties with high energy would be held to attract and amuse people like you and get you to open up and have sex like for young females. All men would have a similar smv; some difference in attraction would exist but fetishes even it all out. All female students and teachers would want you and especially you as you don't appear to be damaged by the cunt coaster. It would be paradise-like.

The true paradise comes from within but is a poor comfort when you are poor, wet and unwanted.

TheNEET #fundie incels.co

I used to be 100% honest, but it didn't benefit me in the long run. At some point I've concluded that normies are violent animals, so manipulating them to gain something is a-ok. I don't consider them a subject of my morality, I'd slay them if not for the ramifications. I've developed two personalities: one is the real one, the caring one, and the other is absolutely sociopathic, only seeks to maximize the pleasure. I don't want to get cucked, so I use the second one most of the time irl.

Robert Foster #fundie patheos.com

Conservative state legislatures have been hesitant to defy tyranny for many years. Most Christians in this country have been reluctant to fight against evil in my lifetime, although there is as much to fight for today as there ever has been. The soul of our nation hangs in the balance as we sit on our hands and complain about losing our country, all the while our enemies are mocking us and not just defying our Constitution, a set of laws created by man, but mocking and defying God.

I am not one to pick a fight, this fight began a long time before I ever got here. I firmly believe in the Constitution and the rule of law, which I have sworn an oath to uphold.

It is our duty as men and women of Christ to stand in the gap between tyranny and evil and those who are unable to defend themselves. There is one set of laws above all others and that is God’s law. Nine judges cannot override God’s law. They may defy it, but they cannot override it. I for one will no longer sit idly by as an elected State Representative for MS and do nothing while judge/s act as if they are more Supreme than God Almighty.

I am calling on the Mississippi Legislature to pass a law outlawing abortion after a heartbeat is detected, with the only exception being if the mother’s life is at risk. Some things are worth getting sued over and worth fighting for. No matter how many judges pass injunctions or what fines or penalties they try and threaten us with we must stay strong in the face of evil and defy their orders to allow abortion to take place in our state. The time to act is now. Young women should not be faced with this burdensome decision any longer, it should simply not be an option.

We must destroy evil before it destroys our nation and our children’s future. We must uphold God’s law in our land as well as the Constitution — for the latter cannot exist without the blessing of the first. If it is the last thing that I do as a state Legislator I will see to it that every last abortion clinic in this state is closed.

In His Service,

Robert Foster

endersblade #fundie mmo-champion.com

Also, for the ignorant, being a pedo is no more an illness to be cured than being gay. Sexual preference is just what you're attracted to. My friend has the most ogrish looking wife I have ever seen, but he finds her irresistible. Does that mean that one of us has an illness? No, it means we have different preferences in what we find attractive. Some people find the same sex attractive. Some people find animals attractive. For some, the underaged. The only reason people view such a thing as bad is because people say it is. Just like being gay used to be bad. Just because YOU don't accept it doesn't mean it should be outright banned. The pure ignorance of the greater masses is what leads to things like this.

So look at it from the pedo point of view: I'm sure many of us have sexual vices. What would happen if you didn't have access to some sort of release? In this case, an adult wants to have sex with a minor. Well, looking at kiddy porn is illegal, so that's (mostly) out. Obviously having sex with a legit child is also illegal. Sex dolls? Sex robots? At least before this ban passes/passed, they were legal. A legal release for your vice. If I was into kiddos and had a doll that simulated, at least to some extent, sex with a kiddo, I'd imagine I would be satisfied enough. Granted, my hand simulates quite a bit as it is, so whatever.

Now, that doesn't mean that their urges to fondle kiddos is going to ultimately LEAD to them doing so - but the frustration of not satisfying that urge could lead to other issues. Being sexually frustrated doesn't just mean your wife isn't putting out anymore. Just look at Prohibition...people will find a way, and that way may not always be better than what was in place beforehand


A gay person does not rationalize their desire to be with other people fo the same sex by projecting their desires upon them unless they actually are mentally ill. Just because I like guys does not mean I rationalize my desire by kidnapping random guys and saying that in truth they really love me. Pedophiles routinely rationalize their desire to be with someone who cannot consent and will often show visible signs of pain during intercourse and will romanticize those relationships and even brain wash children. They also often trade the kids around.
There is no equivalence here.

You are reading way, way too into what I said. Sigh. Why aren't you people intelligent enough that I don't have to spell this shit out? Sheesh.

Do I think people wanting to fuck children is good? Of fucking course not. However, since we're being asinine, it's technically more natural than gays - at least they're having sex with the PROPER opposite sex. There is nothing natural about being gay. That said, I support gays, I don't support pedos.

I was also posting under the assumption, apparently incorrectly, that people would realize I wasn't talking about YOUNG children, like single digits, etc, and that I wasn't referring to straight up rape. If a teen wants to have a relationship with an adult, I don't care what the fuck you try to rationalize your response with, it's up to them to do so and they know what the fuck they are doing. All of you were that age once, you knew what the fuck sex was. Some of you lost your virginity at 13, 14, hell maybe even sooner.

Is it strange for some, say, 30+ to want to be in a CONSENSUAL relationship with someone 13, 14, etc? By societal standards today, sure, it is. Has it always been? Nope. As a matter of fact, more human history has not only supported it but EXPECTED IT than not. Wrap your head around that one. But you outright say that the teen is being raped against their will just because they're "underage", or that the teen didn't know what they were doing (you are, at that point, putting words in their mouth), is just straight bullshit.

Rape against anyone, from the age of 0 to infinity, is rape. I don't condone it against adults OR children. Brain washing, as you say, same thing. Doesn't matter the age, it's wrong. But there ARE cases where the younger of the two KNEW what the fuck they were doing, but the adult gets into trouble because OMG that person is diddling kiddos! Burn them!

Sigh. I could drag this on and on; either you guys are going to pick apart what I say and twist it, or you'll understand what I'm getting at and move on. Either way, from the rest of the responses in the thread, it is very obvious that the majority of them aren't capable of talking about this subject with an open mind or without extreme biases.

Maggie Eriksson #fundie quora.com

Jesus is the most real person I have ever met. I wrote a book recalling 300-plus- conversations He and I have had together called The Still Small Voice of Jesus. I met His Father first, 50 years ago.

I was homeless, totally alone in a strange town, friendless, unemployed, sick, destitute, and my car lien was being foreclosed due to the long-term illness and job loss. I said “God, I don’t know if you’re real, but if you are, I need help, and I’m willing to listen.

I did not know who Jesus was at the time, but I knew that Christianity revolved around Him. I also knew that if “something” could intervene in my life so I would have a place to live, someone to care about me, food, time to recuperate so I could eventually find a job, a way to pay off my car lien and finance a new loan, that “something” would have to be God/Jesus.

I knew one person in that town, my doctor’s nurse. I had been discharged after six weeks in the hospital far from anyone I knew, and used most of my money to rent a room. The day that I prayed asking God if he was real was three weeks later. I had no way to pay the next month’s rent. I had just enough to buy some food. The next day I went to the grocery store, but started sobbing in the check out line. The woman ahead of me turned around and it was my doctor’s nurse - the only person I knew. She immediately befriended me and invited me to come home with her. The next day she and her husband invited be to live with them until I was well enough to work again. Neither one of them knew me, and I had never met him.

The next day I met a man in a waiting room, he was idly reading a newspaper and we struck up a conversation. He was fascinated by my background. I had been a scientist with NASA on Apollo Eleven, and the first lunar landing was just a week away. I was waiting to speak with a bank lending officer about getting a loan for my car and just then he called me in. The stranger went ahead of me and told him to give me anything I wanted. He was the president of the bank - and knew I was unemployed, just out of the hospital. The next day my unemployment compensation came in so I could make the payments.

In three days every impossible need I had cried out to God about, was met. How could I NOT believe God was real? If God the Father was real, then God the Son is real. God is a trinity, whether he moves as Father, Son or Holy Spirit, He is real. Because Jesus allowed Himself to be made a living sacrifice as a way for humans to receive eternal life, the Father honors the Son above himself, and would have us call Jesus, Lord. He has promised that whatever we ask in faith, in Jesus’ name we will receive. (Asking in faith means we are just assuming God wants to have something for our own purposes, but we KNOW that what we ask is according to His revealed will.)

I have received MANY miracles in my life, praying in the name of Jesus. I was miraculously healed of diabetes, stage 4 kidney disease, and dependence on a walker due to weakness in my legs - overnight. I went from not being able to walk three feet un-aided to being able to walk half a mile without aid. It has been three years since I needed a walker. Once I was unemployed and $1,000 short of being able to pay my mortgage and utilities for two months. Two months in a row total strangers handed me a check for $1,000 saying “God told me to give you this.”

Yes. God/Jesus is real.

mate #sexist kiwifarms.net

Am I a rapist?

Earlier this year I went back to a city I used to live and work in in my early twenties. I hung out with my old friends and went to some of the bars we used to go to. Whilst I was in one of these bars I bumped into a girl that I had history with and suddenly, the moment I saw her, I remembered that by #MeToo standards I had probably raped her. She didn't seem mad or bring it up or anything, we actually talked all night and had a cool time. She had been hot before but she's even hotter now. She's put on weight in a good way, I've put on weight in a bad way, so unfortunately nothing happened.

Anyway this is what happened with her in the old days when I lived in that city.

Her and I worked for the same company but in different branches. The young people from all the (4) branches in the city used to generally get together and have a good time (get hammered) a lot. There was a lot of shenanigans. Anyway, she developed a reputation for getting blackout drunk and shagging random guys, including one of my best friends. It was a very, VERY well deserved reputation. She also told everyone that she was in love with me and would frequently fling herself at me. If we were in a club she would basically molest me, if I got with another girl she would cry, even though we had no past at that time and actually she didn't know me well at all. At the time I was in much better shape than I am now and I was not averse to the odd bit of rumpy-pumpy so people who knew me and her casually had no idea why I wouldn't shag this girl, as she was hot. Everyone that knew her well knew exactly why I wouldn't. She was the village bike.

Anyway one night we were all out, she was trying to get with me as usual, and the girl I had hoped was going to join us cancelled. So I thought, 'fuck it' and took the drunk girl who was apparently in love with me home. We got back to my apartment and we started shagging. She was incredibly drunk and went to sleep half way through. I continued anyway.

I don't feel guilty as I know she was super keen on me, tried to shag me constantly and slept like a starfish, taking up all of the bed.

When I saw her earlier this year she looked even hotter than before (and I have to admit she was hot before, she just repulsed me because of her behaviour) and had calmed down a lot, everyone says she is like a different person. Cruelly, I'm fat and balding now and shes no longer interested.

So.

Am I a rapist?

Caamib #sexist blogger.com

bold is mine


Gally, I will reply to you though my goal isn't so much for you to read it, as you're a delusional idiot, but to make an intelligent reader, somebody who really wants to learn about this stuff, see why you're wrong and misrepresenting a lot of what we believe.

"Being anti-masturbation and anti-porn has NOTHING to do with fighting against feminist anti-male sex laws. "

Jesus, what idiocy ! Of course they don't have nothing to do with it. You're right. You know what it has to do with? Actual improvement in male lives. Making it easier for healthy, reasonable males to get women. Which masturbation actively impedes by making them less motivated to do so. But the fuck would you know about any of that?

That's basically the reply to that entire paragraph of utter bs. Let's go on...


"You're validating their whole enterprise. The whole feminist movement has been a response to the ever greater range of sexual alternatives for men to the average woman on the street (and women are getting more and more average by the day, at least in the West). "

You have no idea why and how feminism comes about. Today's males have far less sexual choices than those in 1970s, when there was less feminism. Another thing that's a waste of time to discuss with you.


"How the hell can you seriously rage against feminist anti-porn laws when you agree with the feminist junk science basis for them?"

Which "junk science" are you rambling about? Feminists were never against masturbation, in fact they deem it to be an acceptable "solution" as their idea of a nightmare is whites having any kind of sex. But this is also something you're too stupid to get.

"You also completely fail to see what's going to be happening in the next few decades."

No, in fact you do. Your idea of robots replacing women in that women will not happen. And I'll tell you why. There's several reasons. First of all, the technology won't develop. In late 1998 people believed they'd have robots as servants and various other stuff by 2018. We don't. We have been stagnating technologically since around 2000 and your fantasies simply won't happen. Chances are that technology will decline, not improve with times.
Other issue is that there's still a lot of shame connected to using such technology.

But there's one reason that is much more crucial - men and women still want to be with each other. I still meet women 13-40 with my online ads, because modern Western women, as messed up as they are, still are looking for somebody to control them and own the shit of them, to put them in their place. You won't replace this and the male need to do so with any robots and virtual reality.

And there's a more important reason as well- why would we want to do so? Can you marry a robot, have a child with a robot? No? So what is the point, anyway? Why live in a virtual reality and knowing you'll never procreate? You think men like fschmidt, Nathan or myself would have kids if we did so? Why don't you just take drugs or kill yourself if you don't want to live in the real world?

"This is the last thing men need in the face of the tsunami of anti-porn based feminist sex puritan laws."

No. This would be a blessing, which he understands full well as he's not as dumb as you are. It would make thousands of men get off their asses and take women.

"'I'd go as far to say as you're as much of an enemy to men as feminists are at this stage"

No, he's just not a delusional idiot like you.

"And given all the work you've done for the last couple of decades, includes bravely standing up to the Norwegian State, that's a real tragedy."

Standing up to delusional idiots like yourself, who pretend to be their friends (unlike the less perverse Norwegian state) is also quite brave. As I told you, he's just not a delusional idiot like you.

"yet if you can point to one single pro cannabis legalization activist (let alone 'the leader') who actually promotes the idea that smoking cannabis is harmful and should be avoided, then I'll apologize to you and become a 'Male Sexualist'."

No. Another thing you get completely wrong. An actual comparison would be "find me a cannabis legalization activist who actively promotes harmful chemical alternatives to pot that are known to destroy people's lives". And that is what masturbation is - a shade of actual sexuality, nothing. A dangerous tool that makes you complacent and unlikely to seek out actual sex. If you think being a male sexualist is about helping males jerk themselves off in dark rooms... Well, I'll just say that getting rid of that would be the first step to not being an idiot.

"We're struggling to get more than a dozen followers out of the 3 billion men on the planet affected by feminist sex laws"

But feminist sex laws would collapse quickly if men stopped jerking off. Because, guess what? You are not a hebephile. There's no such thing. All sane men would sleep with 12 year-old girls and younger. And they'll be much more motivated to so when they don't jack off. When millions do it regularly, and they will when boys are discouraged from masturbating, it will be easy.

"Islamic minded anti-masturbation incels who crave spending their lives with a HB4 just when AI sex robots and virtual reality sex are becoming real??"

No, no, no, no.... Just no.

Everything wrong and stupid. The problem with the term incels is lookism and cultism, which didn't exist when I was in charge more, as I explained in my June article. This is directly connected to their takeover of the term after July 2016, Also, you miss the real point. Incels aren't meant to be popular or liked, of course feminists will hate them. The point is to promote actual solutions, which don't have to do with looks but are extremely contrary to feminism (finding non-feminist wives, rape etc). When men who call themselves incel seek actual solutions then the term will be seen more seriously. The idea that you will get a political solution in Western countries is pure idiocy. I just want to help men improve their everyday's lives. Politics is a waste of time and these countries like Norway will collapse like all countries which adopted their policies did.

It's your stupidity and idiocy and listening to mainstream media that you believe incel is some political term or whatever. It isn't. You're a fucking incel.

My goal is simply to improve the lives of men, not some great political solutions you dream of.

I already addressed the robot thing. Your assumptions about the state of technology and human nature are wrong.

If I chose robots instead of women I'd never have a daughter now, for example. Or several girlfriends or willing sexual partners, not to mention less willing ones.

Also, I'd like to address some of the shit you said before, some of which I painstakingly translated..

-Eivind's ideas on women being the owners of sex don't mean that men can't reject sex. They just mean women forcing it on them should be very lightly punishable. If I don't want chocolate that moment and somebody force feeds me some delicious chocolate am I some great victim? That's nonsense ! And Eivind did say that in cases of harsher violence these women should be charged with assault. But for giving somebody chocolate, which is how men see women's sexuality? Of course not. Another thing you'd know if you weren't a brainwashed house negro.

- No, male fetuses masturbating in wombs aren't a problem. Males usually develop first serious interest at women at around 12-14. Besides, their penises are usually too small to be properly masturbated before around 10-11-12, so they masturbate them the way clitorises are played with before that age (at least that is my experience). So such males don't develop penile sensitivity and can be successfully directed to have sex with rl girls of similar age of slightly younger/older. See how stupid and clueless you are?

Also, remember just one thing, Gally. Sperm doesn't ask. It doesn't ask if you're worthy enough, if you achieved this or that, if you have this or that level of consent or respect. It just impregnates. Think about that. So impregnate somebody. Do your role in the world.

I was attacked for saying I should have killed 12 year-old girls with C4 and burning rubber tires around their necks, but guess what? THIS IS WHAT MODERN WESTERN WOMEN WANT. What they don't want is anybody of IQ above that of a goldfish and any respect. This went down the drain from the first moment they got basic "rights" like suffrage, which are nothing but privileges that enable the destruction of society.

Oh, and another thing. Regarding islamic minded incels, you're completely wrong, as usual. Those in such communities who are most islamic minded, like myself or fschmidt, aren't even incel anymnore. Most actual incels, at least by my definition, are lookist fools who know nothing about history or wqmen's nature, want to have consensual sex (and nothing else) with dirty Western sluts who get raped regularly anyway and don' give a fuck about it, and then they're are angry when this fails.

doclove #fundie the-spearhead.com

Look at reality. Our American Republic has been under durress since the Seneca Falls meeting in 1848. They managed to change the divorce laws for the American Civil War Veterans 1861-64. Before this, if there was a divorce, the man got the house and the children unless something was seriously wrong with him. Divorce rates were only a measley one percent and a spouse still had to prove fault and it wasn’t easy to get a divorce and not everyone could get one. Divorce rates rose to 10% by the end of the First World War, and why shouldn’t they as women usually got the house and kids even under a fault system. Then just in time for the Vietnam War, the divorce laws were changed to no fault and the wife still got the house and kids like it was after the American Civil War unless something was seriously wrong with her. After the Vietnam War, marriage was a man’s fool game tp play and to be honest after the American Civil War it was starting to get a little bad too.

As most of you know, I’m a 43 year old White man and a Christian and a Catholic as well as an U.S. Army Veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m also a bit of an amatuer historian. The Roman Republic rose for two imporatant reasons although they weren’t the only ones but I believe they were crucial. Enforced monogamy even if the husband but not the wife was allowed in practice if not theory to commit adultry. Pater Potentas, Father’s power, was the other reason. A man had a right to harm or kill his wife, children even unmarried adult female children, adult male children even if theoretically elected to the highest office of the Republic, Consul. He also had the right to harm or kill his grandchildren and great grandchildren. He had the right to harm or kill his descendants wives, slaves, his descendants slaves, his descendants wives slaves or any freed slave by him or them. He had a right to do this without being questioned. Not even the Taliban would allow such a thing as a man needs sufficient reason to do so. When these rights were lost by the Roman Empire among other reasons as well, Rome started to eventually lose. The same process is happening in the USA and we had a much more pleasant patriarchy for the Females even before 1860 than the Roman Republic ever did. As I said above even the Taliban was more pleasant to females than the Roman Republic which our founding fathers based much of our American Republic on. Although it emotionally and in a moral Christian Catholic sense offends even me, in order to halt and reverse our decline we may need to reinstitute some Ancient Roman Republican laws. There’s a reason the Roman Republic crushed all before it, even after suffering fearsome losses in battle and horrific defeats. I see no other logical way. By the way I’m of Polish and Irish descent and not of Italian descent. For as painful as it is for me to admit this, I logically can see no other way to prevent the coming collapse. If someone disagrees with me, please logically prove me wrong as emotionally and morally I would accept and love it. I mean this.

BNP Nottingham #racist nottinghampost.com

Notts County have expressed their "disgust" at a Tweet from the Nottingham branch of the BNP which hoped the Magpies were relegated because "they play overpaid immigrants".

The political party took to social media just hours before the club's 2-1 win against Doncaster on Saturday which crucially moved them out of League One's relegation zone.

Posted to more than 1,200 followers, the Tweet said: "Hope Notts County get relegated today - a great lesson in how to alienate the fans by playing overpaid immigrants who couldn't give a s**t."

But Notts chief executive Aileen Trew condemned the comment today with the club priding itself on trying to stamp out racism with professional bodies such as Kick It Out.

She said: "As a club, we would like to express our disgust at the views in this tweet

"Notts County have a zero tolerance stance on discrimination of any kind and deal proactively with any reports of alleged abuse.

"We will continue to work effectively with organisations such as Kick it Out to eradicate such any racist views within the game and also to promote inclusion."

Only two of Notts' 16-man matchday squad which was named against Doncaster are non-British with full-back Mustapha Dumbuya from Sierra Leone and striker Balint Bajner from Hungary.

Paul Elam #sexist archive.is

[From "The unspoken side of rape"]

Isn’t it more than just a little fascinating that underneath all this hoopla about rape is a whole lot of women who, when thinking about some guy pinning them down in a kitchen and forcing a hand up their blouse, generally tend to do so with their own hand or a vibrator between their legs? You don’t have to like it to know its true.

And isn’t it also interesting that the most rape obsessive morons on the planet also happen to be some of the ugliest morons on the planet?

Consider this. If rape awareness was a religion, Andrea Dworkin was The Fucking Pope. The 300+ lb. basilisk of man-hate had a face big enough and pockmarked enough to be used to fake a lunar landing. Her body was roughly the size and shape of a small sperm whale.

And she thought of little else in her life other than rape. The subject drove almost everything she said and did.

She even claimed to have been drugged and raped in 1999 in Paris, an accusation that was never proven and which came under a great deal of scrutiny, apparently for damned good reason.

C’mon people, Dworkin’s problem wasn’t that she was raped. Her problem, and I mean all along, was that she wasn’t.

Did I say she was the Pope of Rape Awareness? Let me take that back. She wasn’t the Pope, she was the Jimmy Swaggert. Like a corrupt televangelist who only shuts up about sexual purity and morality long enough to secure the services of a five dollar hooker, Dworkin was the poster child for “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Or, in other words, she was obsessed with rape, quite possibly even creating the illusion it happened to her, precisely because her worth on the sexual market was measured in pesos.

Dworkin wanted to be raped, which in her mind meant being sexually desired, but didn’t have the goods to make that happen so she made a career of hating both the source of her rejection, men, and the source of her competition, attractive women.

Go figure, her other pet peeve was porn.

It is much the same with the SlutWalks, those rapidly growing celebrations of stupidity and cellulite taking over the western landscape. Most of the women there may be dancing Dworkin, but money is on the idea that when not participating in the SlutWalks these girls are desperately trying to fuck their way into feeling attractive.

Attractive enough that a man would lose control of himself to have his way with them
.

[...]

The real lesson here is simple. The concept of rape has a lot of utility for women. One, it feeds their narcissistic need to feel irresistible. Two, if feeds their narcissistic need to feel irresistible. That level of irresistibility is the pinnacle of a woman’s sexual viability and worth. And for a whole lot of women, sexual worth is the only self-worth they know.

Edmund_Kemper #sexist incels.co

[Cope] [Personalitypill] Women can easily detect your personality muh body language muh social cues muh blah blah blah

First, I’m gonna debunk some dumb arguments by IT

My god their arguments are so fucking pathetic.

muh body language. What body language do they think we fuckin use? We use normal everyday body language that everyone uses when women are nearby. We’re mostly just having our whole body relaxed and normal they prolly assume we clench our fists and stare aggressively.

muh language. We don’t even use incel slang irl and the idea that we have evil tones of voices when talking is retarded. Most of us act like typical bluepillers irl. Not hard at all to hide your tone of voice.

muh social cues

I can assure these fucking faggots that if anyone irl knew we use incels.co, all of them would be shocked. I’ve acted like a typical bluepiller in front of others. Most of them act friendly to me and think I’m genuinely bluepilled. And most women who I had to talk to because they’re a tutor or a office worker had no fucking clue that I’m “evil” because I act completely normal with them and act calm as fuck. What do they think I do, make offensive jokes and use weird language? I act as bluepilled as every retard irl does. If ITmet me irl they’d have NO clue that I’m Edmund_Kemper. And also many of us are socially isolated and don’t have anyone around us to talk to and go to a community college or home where people are anti social so this whole body language mental gymnastics is retarded.
If women can detect bad personalities, date rape, domestic abuse etc would never happen.
And even Ted bundy would’ve never deceived his victims
and these fags think we actually discuss inceldom or feminism or politics irl when we usually don’t. And when one guy I have as a social coach brought it up with me sometimes I act bluepilled as hell
And then these retards use anecdotal fallacy “because this one incel I knew” like as if one represents all
and no IT none of us stare at foids. How do they know we stare at foids? How do they know we act aggressive towards women. Most women I’ve met act normal around me (no don’t accuse me of bragging I mean they act like whatever around me like they do around anyone else)

and how the fuck do they know what humor we enjoy. The only people who know our sense of humor are close friends not foids we never speak to
Also aren’t depressed people able to hide their depression, but blackpillers can’t hide their blackpilldom?

Alright now that was a copy and paste of a comment I made on here

now let me show you guys something

if incels can’t hide their personalities, why do rapists succeed at it? Most rape Victims are raped by someone they know, like an intimate partner, friend, acquaintance, relative, etc. Many of them probably trusted the rapist, yet it happened. I’ve read that many rapists have hostile feelings about women and are misogynistic yet they successfully hide it. Many date rape victims had no idea that their date would rape them. Have these ITcels looked up rape by deception as well? Also, 93% of child molestation victims are molested by someone they know and trust and who the family trusts, yet only 38% of child molestation victims report the molester and many times people don’t know about it. Child molesters hid their personality.

Studies show that 5%-% of men are rapists and that 54% of college athletes have admitted to perpetrating some form of sexual coercion. We all probably have been friends with a rapist and had no idea he was one, because he successfully hides it.

Also, many domestic abusers hide the fact that they’re a potential domestic abuser when starting a relationship before the abuse begins, so domestic abusers hide it too, and many times when abuse happens, nobody will know about it and in public, the domestic abuser easily hides it, so many don’t find out. And many closeted Homos hide it (many times we can tell they’re gay but many times we can’t).

Also studies show that rapists often do have consensual sex and in fact have much more consensual sex than non rapists and are much more sexually active and successful than non rapists

also many people with depression hide it and many times nobody knows they’re depressed. A chad in my hs roped and people were shocked because he was always smiling and happy. But he was depressed. Robin Williams also hid his depression and nobody knew he was depressed. The world was shocked when he roped.

Ted bundy tricked his victims and hid the fact that he was a murderer.

Fading Light #racist stormfront.org

Unequal

Heather Mac Donald is an investigative journalist who has done some truly remarkable work in exposing the endless lies of the left. I must admit I’ve rather idolized this person for her bravery in usefully confronting the endless anti-White diatribe with hard (and hard-to-find) facts. That being said, my idolization of people doesn’t take the usual idiotic form of guru worship so common among the endless throngs of retards that populate our world. I simply appreciate—and feel a sense of debt.

Now imagine how irritated I was to click on one of her speeches on YouTube only to hear her refer to the “horrific injustice of slavery and Jim Crow,” or something similarly mindless. And many would say I shouldn’t dwell on that bit, but I think the failure of so many to dwell on that is exactly the point. For all the good she has done, it rather sounds as if Ms. Mac Donald would keep us on the road to hell (decrying the suffering the whole time) because she—even she—buys into the utterly ludicrous narrative that Blacks have been mistreated by Whites EVER.

And so it goes with virtually every public figure that I admire or border on admiring: Jim Goad at Takimag, Donald Trump, Steven Crowder, and several others. These are reasonably intelligent individuals—certainly without peer among their leftist opponents, which makes for some very entertaining argumentative beat-downs. And I’m even willing to grant that Donald Trump is in no position to voice such a thing as what I’m about to say, but I can tell that he is a true-believer, that ALL of them are true-believers . . . that Blacks are equal to Whites, or that they SHOULD BE TREATED as equal to Whites.

For leftists, this is as far as they needed to read. I’m “bad” because I dare to assert that the races are not equal—more specifically that the White race is superior to all other races on earth. Leftards have been conditioned like monkeys to sententiously repeat their special little religious mantras about equality and human uniformity and magic hate rays that make even rich Negroes do badly on tests. So if you’re one of these people, please let me address the other members of the audience and do me a favor by putting a gun in your mouth and blowing that shriveled sack of excrement you call your brain out through the top of your pointed head.

But whom does that leave? The blades are all sharpened, the armor is polished, and the enemy has left the gate unmanned, but nowhere in the wide world can we find even one person sufficiently intelligent to pick up his own sword without cutting off his own fingers. What a pack of bloody imbeciles! Sometimes I feel utter shame at how long it took me to see the truth, and then I reflect on how alone I am in what I can see.

I’d like to put aside the fact that evolution literally precludes the possibility of racial equality. Let’s spare ourselves the observation that the inventive history of the White race outstrips that of all other races COMBINED by about a thousand-to-one. I’d just like you to stop for a second and use information gathered by your own eyes. Just for a moment shut off the propaganda voice you let rule your consciousness from the back of your well-trained mind, and access your own direct personal experience for a moment. When in the course of your entire life have you ever seen any evidence, even one shred, that the races are equal? No evasions, no cherry-picking, no tu-quoque fallacies: Have you ever seen any evidence that the various non-White groups you have encountered, taken one race at a time or all at once, were a match for the majesty, cleverness, decency, and beauty of Whites?

Every philosophical ideal you hold dear in the world, whether you are a leftist or an actual human being, has come from our race: Civilization itself, environmental conservation, rejection of spousal abuse, the notion of human rights, every medium in which you have ever received information, the understanding of the movement of the heavens, democracy, the aspiration for personal greatness and worth, all of it, ALL OF IT, has come from the White race. THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE WILLING TO LET DIE AS YOU PRETEND IT MAKES YOU NOBLE TO SAY THE RACES ARE EQUAL.

And all of that is destroyed by the non-Whites. In China and Japan, individuals are relegated to the existence of being little more than mechanical surfs mass-producing for a soulless state. In any dealing you have with public officials, be they police or school masters, judges or businessmen, you can expect to have to pay a bribe to get “fair” treatment. Japan hides it a little better, but practices amakudari in selection of CEOs and has been repeatedly admonished for stealing patents and doing nothing to prosecute countless bribery cases. I mention these two nations because Asians are the closest thing to a decent race apart from Whites: the closest thing, but still a thousand light years short of it. They lie and they cheat and they steal constantly. They, like every other non-White race, swarm into White nations for a better life, bringing their corruption with them and destroying what we have, all while telling us how oppressive and hateful and vile we are.

How many people have you ever heard of who wanted to run away from a White nation for Japan or China? Honestly, have you EVER? What does that tell you?

My point here is that none of this is going to get any better until White people are hurting badly enough that they lose their fear of stating what they can see with their own eyes. We are forbidden to say our race is the best precisely because it really is the best. It simply isn’t brought up by even the most daring of anti-globalist personalities because it is the one objective fact that will unify all the inferiors in their rage and hatred of our achievements. But the really sad truth is that these “daring” nonconformists won’t admit it even to themselves.

Blacks were NEVER mistreated in America, never mistreated by the White race anywhere, not for even one day. Putting aside more leftist evasions like focussing on far-removed singular individuals who met a bad fate (though more often than not, even they got better than they deserved, like Negroes hanged for raping or murdering innocent people), the non-White races have always gained from us far, far, far more than we gained from them. Our interactions with them have always been to their benefit, and always they have cried crocodile tears and pretended they were wronged.

And slavery was never unjust to Blacks, Heather. Blacks are intellectual children, and violent, indolent, incompetent, and useless. They were taken from a life of horrific poverty, rampant disease, incessant warfare, and early death in Africa to a life of useful work, medical providence, and the same respectful care that was given to any tamed horse by his master, if not out of benevolence then out of a desire for consistent productivity. The only injustice in that slavery was to the White race. Slavery has been turned into yet another mythical holocaust where Blacks, supposedly provided for free in endless supply to evil White southerners, were daily whipped bloody, raped, and worked without sleep in deserts full of cobras until they dropped from exhaustion. This narrative is as far from reality as is describing a kids’ summer camp as a prison—or Bruce Jenner as a woman, for that matter.

Oh, and Africa had then AND STILL HAS NOW slavery. If we really think that’s so horrible, why aren’t we bombing Africa at this very moment? But we actually know better, don’t we. And the Middle East still has slavery. And the crap we buy from our “trade partners” in China is essentially manufactured by slaves, isn’t it. That’s why we buy it. Slave labor makes for cheap products—in both senses of the word.

But the Negroes received their food and lodging, a bit of alcohol now and again, and were allowed to get together and play music and party, and accumulate personal baubles just like everyone else. They simply weren’t allowed to leave, just like the average laborer right now in China or Mexico. But we aren’t bombing China and Mexico because we know it’s not really that bad, and what on earth would we do with them if we “freed” them from it?

The average person in Mexico has seen their enslavement as nothing but a blessing. Having a factory to work in, with air conditioning and a steady pay check beats the starvation existence they had on their overcrowded farms, trying to squeeze a survival out of the parched dirt. My objection to our factories moving to Mexico has nothing to do with this enslavement (i.e. EMPLOYMENT) of the Mexican people, but rather the horrific effects it has had on my own race.

What would the average Black slave have become if he had been freed? We have the answer to this: He would keep working on his original plantation for a paycheck that amounts to nothing more than the benefits he got when he was a slave, and his freedom had thus expanded to either going to work on another plantation for the same pay, or moving north and trying to mooch off the naive pity of the anti-slavery libtards of the time. Few took that last option because it was the unknown and required thought and effort. The opportunity to become a welfare parasite had to be brought to the southern Negro’s door by libfags from the north because Blacks are so inferior that they would have remained slaves forever rather than figure out how to live off other people’s tax money. Where in ANY of this is the “injustice” to Negroes?

Realizing the races are not equal matters because all the supposed injustice of “White privilege” is based on the unproven (and entirely false) assertion that the races OUGHT to all be entitled to the same things. In a world where liars and retards can claim children are equal to adults, the protective parent who won’t let his or her pre-adolescent have sex and drink alcohol becomes an “oppressor,” and the physically weak, ignorant child becomes the “oppressed.” In a world where devils and imbeciles declare that animals are equal to people, a barbecue becomes a “holocaust” and rats and roaches must be allowed to live in your home, in your cupboards, in your bed else you are guilty of “bigotry.” But in reality in both cases, the universe has a logical hierarchy and making unequal things equal is an act of cowardice or stupidity at best.

Attention Jim Goad and Donald Trump and Steven Crowder and Heather Mac Donald: Go outside tonight and look up at the moon. There’s a fifty-fifty chance it will be in your sky tonight whenever you read this, assuming that by some chance you ever do. Human beings have been to that world, have walked around on its surface, left flags, brought back to earth pieces of the heavens. And every last one of them was White: not Asian, not Jewish, not Middle Eastern. White.

You rightly pride yourselves on seeing past the PC brainwashing. When are you going to admit to yourself the reality that the races are not equal, and that one of them is clearly far better than all the others? There’s a world full of people watching you, daring to ask questions of themselves based on what you say. Maybe it’s time you found a way to get them to ask the one that really matters, but first you’ll have to ask it of yourselves.

Kevin D. Denee #fundie thercg.org

Should teenagers and others in the Church express themselves to the world through blogs? Because of the obvious dangers; the clear biblical principles that apply; the fact that it gives one a voice; that it is almost always idle words; that teens often do not think before they do; that it is acting out of boredom; and it is filled with appearances of evil—blogging is simply not to be done in the Church. It should be clear that it is unnecessary and in fact dangerous on many levels.

Let me emphasize that no one—including adults—should have a blog or personal website (unless it is for legitimate business purposes). [...]

Blogging has become a socially accepted practice—just as are dating seriously too young, underage drinking and general misbehaving. But just because someone else “jumps off the cliff” does not mean you should do the same.

[Note: the info above was posted on the author's personal blog]

Farther #racist forums.myspace.com

BLACK WOMEN Dating and MARRYING WHITE MEN #2 Before I begin this post I would like to thank everyone for their response
to my previous threads.

WARNING
the information in this post may not be suitable for all readers.
Reader discretions are advised. The Blackwoman will date, and as reported daily, will marry a white man. She finds in her relationship with the white man perhaps the answer to all her dreams and fantasies.

First, he is removed from the black experience, and brings a new set of rules to the involvement. Second, he represents the culmination of every movie and T.V. show she has ever seen featuring a gallant white beau who knows how to treat a woman and swoops in always coming to her rescue. Third, he is an alternative set of men whom sheBelieves can be utilized because of the non availability of Black men.

Now that there appears to be fewer Blackmen, and she can’t get along with any of them, she is perusing other races to see what she can see. When the Blackwoman gets with a white man she may manufacture a complete new set of vowels which she uses to construct her new light and airy “proper” voice. She irresistibly become ever so amused by his jokes and pretends to like the things he does.

She becomes an actress of sorts and she relaxes a bit because the white man does not know the full story of her failure with the Blackman. Since the white man does not know the ins and outs of Black intimacy he is more tolerant of her and they both enjoy the novelty. She can wear as much make-up as she desires and to the white man this is normal. While the Blackwoman is known to ignore a Blackman on a street corner, in an elevator or on the subway, she seems always ready with an eager appealing smile when a white man, especially one in a suit and tie, tries to make light conversation with her. She appears to be flattered and falls into crisp bright personality. Her smile is sometimes so instant it looks like a flash of sparkling white snow, blushing and appreciative.If she decides to date him, later on, she is seen to be overly affectionate in public. ThereMay be hugging, provocative kissing or fondling in public.She is willing to ignore many of the white man’s shortcomings regarding wardrobe, language, music, car, or job. She convinces herself that he is normal and she must accept him as he is, and above all he is just another man. When she is with him she thinks she is finally free.Free of the Blackman’s hassles and free of her own history. She is proud of the him in front of her family and friends or on the other extreme; she knows that her social integration relationship will not be accepted, so she keeps it a secret. He is considered special to her and automatically “knows how to treat a woman.”

Certainly better than a Blackman does-she thinks. CONCLUSIONThe Blackwoman believes that she has reached the ultimate pinnacle of personal developmental achievement when she arrives at the point of seriously considering dating a white man and if watched closely she can be seen acting out the mannerisms of white women. She has absolutely forgiven the white man for enslaving her people, and the white man has forgiven himself for enslaving Black people. But the poor Black woman has not forgiven herself for being a slave.

Ron Baity #fundie huffingtonpost.com

Baptist Minister Ron Baity on a federal judge striking down gay marriage ban in North Carolina

“If you think for one skinny minute, God is going to stand idly by and allow this to go forward without repercussions, you better back up and rethink this situation,” Baity said in remarks transcribed by Raw Story. “I want you to understand, that is raw, pure blasphemy.”

Baity also drew comparisons between gay marriage and Sodom and Gomorrah, the cities destroyed by God in biblical stories.

"My friend, we are meriting, we are bringing the judgement of God on this nation as sure as Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed, don’t be surprised at the plagues. Don’t be surprised at the judgement of God," Baity said. “You think Ebola is bad now, just wait. If it’s not that, it’s going to be something else. My friends, I want you to understand, you can’t thumb your nose at God, and God turn his head away without God getting your attention.”

"High Priestess" Maxine Dietrich #conspiracy angelfire.com

The aliens who are behind the program of xianity are part of a movement called “The Intergalactic Federation.” The IGF’s agenda is one of “non-interference.” They plan to stand idly by while humanity blows itself to smithereens with nuclear weapons.
The visit from the virgin bitch is typical of the IGF. There is a theme of negative prophesy while the sadistic aliens stand by and watch, not lifting a finger to help. In most cases, children are involved and preyed upon. The alien greys and enemy Nordics (angels) who have an insatiable hatred of humanity work with the IGF.

Satan and the Original Gods are from Orion. The IGF is at war with Orion. The IGF works through many of the “New Age” people and mystics. The IGF aliens do not bother to help their human lackeys when they are having problems and in addition, they are sadistic and tell them of their misfortunes before they occur. Gifted humans such as Franz Bardon who worked for the IGF are prohibited from using their powers freely, even if this means saving their own lives or the life of a loved one. Upon their death, they are absorbed into “the light.” The light is also called “The One” and is a mass of harvested human souls used by the alien greys. There have been reports the Vatican made a deal with the greys- wealth and power in exchange for souls. This explains why the Catholic Church works relentlessly to suppress human spiritual advancement and is nothing but dead materialism devoid of any spirituality.

Satan and his Demons do not give negative prophesy. If you ever experience an entity telling you something bad is going to happen, you can be sure this is not Satan or any of the Demons.

Samira Sood #wingnut theprint.in

Picture this: You’re at a party with many people. Some are family, some are close friends, some are colleagues, some are friends of friends, some are school and college friends. There are all kinds of conversations going on. As it always happens, someone starts talking politics. Then someone finds the political chatter so abhorrent that they pick up a mic and announce that everyone present who supports X political party, should just shut up.

The better, classier, more constructive thing to do would be to either engage with the person you disagree with and try to understand, or extricate yourself from that conversation and move on.

Now, replace the party scenario with social media. You may not pick up the mic and shout literally, but many people see this kind of rude, aggressive, attention-seeking behaviour as perfectly kosher on Facebook, Instagram or Twitter.

I’ve lost count of the number of Facebook posts I’ve seen, especially in the last couple of months since the Citizenship (Amendment) Act protests took off, that say, “If you still support the BJP and Narendra Modi, please unfriend me now”, and frankly, I’m tired of it.

A bubble
There are two aspects to the act of unfriending, whether IRL (in real life) or online, that I find problematic. One is that sanitising one’s life/news feed/timeline to such an extent that it becomes an echo chamber is dangerous. Of course it’s tricky, because there are many factors that come into play here – how close you are to the other person, if you’ve tried to engage with them on politics in the past and failed, whether they have actually said anything problematic or just voted for a party you don’t like, and so on.

Maybe it’s a random college acquaintance, so you rationalise it as: “Well, we’re not even in touch except for birthdays, so why not just delete?” Maybe someone has repeatedly made remarks that displayed extreme bigotry.

But what if it’s neither? What if it’s your favourite uncle or your work bestie and what if they’re not saying anything hateful per se, but simply voicing their support for a party that they truly believe has done some good work, even if not in the same departments that you care about? What if they have the numbers to show for it, numbers that you, given your preference for an echo chamber, might not otherwise have seen? Would it not be worthwhile to understand why someone you love is politically so different from you? Would it not enhance your own understanding of India and the motivation of its people at the polling booth?

There can be many reasons why someone votes a certain way, but painting every BJP voter and Modi fan as a bigot who needs to be ‘cancelled’ seems counterproductive. This limitation of ‘liberals’ has clearly been proven in the last two Lok Sabha elections.


Just do it, without virtue-signalling
The second problem with unfriending is the performative virtue-signalling, which is very much an online problem. If, for whatever reason, you have decided that you would like to unfriend people based on their politics, then just go ahead and do it. What is the need to write a social media post telling them to unfriend you? They don’t seem to have a problem with your divergent views being on their news feed, but somehow you become the liberal darling because 73 people liked/loved your post and a dozen even shared it (they couldn’t even be bothered to write their own breakup note).

I asked someone close to me, who had recently asked pro-BJP people to unfriend her on Facebook, why she felt it was okay to put the onus of unfriending on other people. Her response was that she did not know exactly who on her friend list was pro-BJP and that she didn’t have the time to find out and delete multiple people, and that she was making it easy for them. To me, though, it came across as the opposite – when you do this, you’re making it easy for yourself. If you don’t even have the time to find out who the other person is, much less why they vote the way they do, but you want them out of your life, aren’t you doing liberalism a massive disservice? It gets enough flak in India as it is.

No one is born woke, just like no one is born a bigot. Everyone is learning, most people are trying. But the problem with so many liberals (and I count myself as a liberal too) is that in trying to out-woke and out-liberal each other, we are ending up with a fragmented liberalism that has no room for anyone who doesn’t have exactly the same views. And it is precisely this fragmentation that makes it so easy for the other side to exploit the cracks and push liberalism to the losing side.

Caamib #psycho caamib.files.wordpress.com

image

A picture of two crudely drawn guys.

One, wearing black, scrawny, frowning, and labeled “Virgin Incel”:

* calls anyone with the slightest romantic/sexual experience 'normies', is basically running a cult

* likes aspects of modern degenerate society other than not getting laid himself

* makes bizarre and phantasmagorical theories on what society should do, like blinding newborn females, never does anything about it irl

* most violent act against women is throwing coffee at one and trying to infect the other with the flu virus

* rarely and vaguely talks about feminism, and obsesses with looks, thus missing the real issue

* remove all the women from their communities, even ones that agree with him on some issues and have experience and education, simply because they are women

* turns every Incel platform he visits into a cesspool

* hates all women everywhere and at any time period because he lacks any knowledge of the world

* calls other cucks for allowing women to post and not being in a cult but has the same opinions on age of consent and rape as mainstream society

The other, labeled “chad caamib”, is visible muscular, has a big crotch bulge, wears bright red, and seems happy:

* Allows noncels and even married people to post on his Incel platforms, knowing their experience, knowledge, and wisdom are often greater than 19-year-old NEET virgins

* Bans people who equate Incel to merely a lack of sex, always accentuates the importance of finding a good wife

* Was interviewed for several newspapers and scientific magazines throughout the years

* Saw a lot of attempted outright defamation, simply gave the trolls someone else's info and was never harmed in any way or removed any of his writings

* Proudly and openly calls for the killing of feminists and leftists, knowing that there is no real improvement without this

* Blackmailed women for sex by calling their home handlines, impregnated a schizophrenic woman with his baby, raped several women he didn't even know and proud of all of this

* Deservedly hates modern Western women for being scum but knows that female behavior is influenced by culture and that there are good women in strictly patriarchal societies

* Openly claims all modern Western females of any age should be raped, would proudly sleep with any girl 12 or older

Michael Aydinian #conspiracy gmmuk.com

What’s as clear as daylight is once again we are being deceived by the corporate media. It’s safe to say nearly everyone who possesses a relatively functional brain is aware of this along with the fact an evil, hidden agenda simply has to exist. What’s undeniable too is the level of deceit we’re being subjected to. In an analogy with earthquakes, it’s off the Richter scale! Since the media is owned & controlled by Zionists whose allegiance is strictly confined to a banking dynasty hell bent on establishing a New World Order, it is beyond the boundaries of sanity for us to continue to cower in fear & not call out those responsible. Our lives depend on it so saying nothing is a recipe for disaster. As the great man Albert Einstein once said – ‘evil thrives because good people do nothing.’

The good news is their lies have become so obvious, more people than ever are speaking out. This has pushed the power-brokers into a corner. They simply have to stop the hemorrhaging but as I explained in my piece yesterday, freedom of speech is sacrosanct, a fundamental right & therefore anyone tampering with it is committing nothing less than a crime against humanity. So no surprise we’re fed a heap of unadulterated drivel. Apparently this is to tackle hate speech which ironically is something the media are specialists in creating. The harsh reality is way too many people are now prepared to be labelled anti-Semitic. This slur has long since worn thin & it’s only purpose is to stifle meaningful debate. Here’s the long & the short of it – the reason for this assault on Freedom of Speech & all the baloney regarding anti-Semitism – IT’S THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN STOP THE TRUTH COMING OUT!

Yesterday I posted a piece about the ‘massacre’ in New Zealand. Since the attack was against Muslims I erroneously assumed this act of madness couldn’t have been staged. Why would they do this? Since 9/11 media & politicians have pounded the totally fabricated notion the world is bedeviled by terrorism due to Muslim extremists. What earthly reason would they now have to donate worldwide sympathy on a plate to the very people they’re demonising? So I wrote a piece assuming this lunatic, in fit of Islamophobic rage, had indeed gunned down innocent worshipers. Since the media is entirely responsible for fomenting Islamophobia, I put this massacre down to them.

This is why one should never rush to judgement & significantly, be big enough to rectify an error. In fairness the first video I saw looked real but always in the back of my mind was the dilemma – the attackers are supposed to be Muslims who rip their tonsils to shreds screaming Allah-u-Akbar! They’re not supposed to be the victims. So I assumed…… First, I must thank all the people who marked my card. I will tag everyone who commented…… so……now the truth.

Straight away several friends stated the video was staged, fake & edited.
My good friend Joan Roth commented, ‘it seemed like a video game.’ When I watched another clip I felt yes. That’s right. Certain crucial factors then became obvious.
50 people dead! Scores more injured. Where’s the blood? What we saw was not possible. There was hardly any blood. This has happened before.
Moreover, victims that were shot hardly displayed the normal body reactions when one is hit by bullets.
Alex Quarmby said it looked like blanks were being fired & when one considers how there were no shell casings, hardly any holes in walls or any debris – again, this is simply not possible.
When I saw the 2nd clip it seemed dummies were on the floor.
Apparently the shooter had no criminal record. Are you kidding me? Thanks to Matthew Moore for that heads up.
Way too many red flags but perhaps the big giveaway is why are Google, U-tube & FB busting a gut trying to take down videos of the alleged massacre. There can only be one answer to this – IT WAS A RIGHT ROYAL SCREW UP!

One thing for sure, like I tried to explain yesterday, the hierarchy would love nothing more than every human being (except themselves) to be stripped of their firearms. I also have said many times, the greatest problem they have, perhaps apart from Russia & China, is the fact Americans are armed to the teeth. I’ve also said to my American friends, ‘do not whatever you do allow them to take your guns. This would be tantamount to unconditionally surrendering to the most evil, vicious mass-murderers.

[...]

But we still have the problem of Muslims being the victim so this time around I’ll try to connect more dots. Sadly it’s somewhat of a scarier scenario. What if this massacre of Muslims is merely a precursor for a series of false flag attacks against Western targets? We know initiating false flag events is exclusively the domain of Zionist warmongers. This way the media can say this is payback for the attack on the Mosque but more importantly they can rekindle hatred & fear towards Muslims & thus open the way for politicians to pass legislation that would otherwise be deemed as Treason. Or perhaps it will give them the excuse to attack Iran because let’s face it – THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT THEY WANT! The plan to create Greater Israel may have been conceived in 1982 by Oded Yinon but it commenced with 9/11 & this goal has been pursued with zest ever since. For me, this makes more sense.

Rush Limbaugh #conspiracy #wingnut #pratt #quack rushlimbaugh.com

CALLER: My question is it, what makes one medical expert better than another medical expert, particularly in terms of something like hydroxychloroquine?

RUSH: That’s an interesting question. So you’re essentially asking me why when one medical expert says hydroxychloroquine sucks does he get listened to and another medical expert, “No, no, no, the stuff is good,” is he ignored?

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: Politics.

CALLER: Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. (laughing)

RUSH: I mean, you laugh, but politics is the answer to the question out there, Jenna.

CALLER: Yes. Yes. Absolutely. I mean it seems to be in everything.

RUSH: Hydroxychloroquine may as well be a slave owner.

CALLER: Yeah. That’s true. Absolutely. I mean, obviously there’s people that have been cured by it successfully. Nothing works 100 percent successfully for everybody. There certainly are these side effects, every commercial that you ever hear, every other —

RUSH: Well, you know, I’ll tell you something, that’s true too. There are always, even in certain medicines, some of them work on some people, some of them don’t on others.

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: We’re all different.

CALLER: Hm-hm. Yes. Absolutely.

RUSH: We’re all different gene makeup. There’s so many different factors that go into this. So the answer to your question, sadly, is politics.

And the politics of this, folks, let me find — I’ve got time, find the sound bite. Quickly, quickly. It’s number 11. Grab sound bite number 11. Last night CNN, Wolf Blitzer to Thomas Friedman, New York Times. “Do you see an end in sight to all this COVID stuff and everything else?”

FRIEDMAN: Oh, I do see an end in sight. It’s in November. I will walk. I will crawl. I will slither. I will bike. I will hike. But I will be going to the polls to vote for Joe Biden because until, unless we replace this president and this administration, we’re gonna be having the same conversation every day. All right? That is what this is about. It’s about removing this man who has no business being president.

RUSH: There you have it. It’s all gonna end in November, folks. Wolf Blitzed, “When is this gonna end, Thomas? When’s it gonna be over? Do you see an end to this?” Yeah. Yeah. November. But, you know, I have a reaction to this for the lovable and adorable Never Trumpers out there and a lot of you weasely Republicans who think, like Friedman, that Trump is the problem here. But I’m gonna have to get in the monologue segment of the next hour.

RUSH: Can Thomas Friedman name one thing Biden would do that’s different? He can’t think of one thing because Biden doesn’t know what he’s gonna do. Friedman probably thinks he’s gonna be on the committee running the country. That’s probably what’s going on.

Some incels #sexist reddit.com

"People keep hiring me just cuz I'm a WOMAN."

image

(PvtJamesRyan)
I’ve been telling everyone that most Job ads are fake and only there to fish for women since 2010 and no one, not even incels, believed me. And no I’m not even talking about female quotas here, I’m saying that when you have a thirsty male boss (which is 99% of companies) he is only putting out job ads so that women can apply in the hopes that he can get laid with her. When you look at a job ad, Don’t for even one second think that he would be interested in hiring a man like YOU, Because they’re all putting out jobs only to look for pussy. I am also saying that if you are a man, you will need to apply maybe a hundred times before you even get a job, but a woman of similar or even lower skill set than you can get instantly hired because the moment the boss looks at her long legs, he will dump your Male resume in the trash and hire her on the spot. All that effort you put into uni, it’s worth nothing when compared to stacys looks. As an entrepreneur who’s been around the block for several years, I’ve been in the market long enough to know this shit is irrefutable. Anyone who still believes women should get economic help despite all their overwhelming economic advantages is a mentally retarded cuck who knows nothing about the world (I’m looking at you inceltears).

(refuseRoasties)
Foids in STEM live life on tutorial mode. They are there to keep the thirsty numale wagecucks in check by dangling their hot female coworker carrot in front of them for this one special time of the day when she will give them some bits of chit-chat at the coffee machine.

Most career women don't know shit besides looking good in formal clothing. HR foids are the worst, giving weekly talks about team building and communication to hordes of soyboys gathering in airconditioned wageslave pits... JFL at the wage gap ! Many of them earn more than the hard working incels in the departments deeper down the hierarchy where the actual hard work happens.

(pzezson)
So fucking true it hurts man. I've worked in IT and it's hilarious watching all the hordes of subhuman curries who I work with lust after the one young white chick in our department who's a scrum master. And the funny thing is that hoe doesn't know jack shit about programming but makes more than a curry or rice who had to grind their way through uni learning CS only to do grunt work fixing bugs and working on tickets and shit grinding 9 - 5 everyday only to make less than the hoe who only needs to show up to work to look pretty. JFL AT THIS FUCKING LIFE

(PvtJamesRyan)
And even if they break out of the rat race like those curries who invented tinder or that ricecel who invented snapchat, they will still end up orbiting around that one white chick in their new startup office and then getting metooed a year later, and then the chick goes off to start her own startup. I’m talking about bumble.

(AnyGoal)
all the boomer males do this shit too. i mean fuck at least the numales are in their age range and have a tiny chance of being beta bucks. most of the boomers have absolutely no chance, not even to run sugar daddy game, they're just too old and ugly, yet they'll still try to get these women into their workplace just to create an infinitesimal delusional increase in sexual opportunity in their lives.

(PvtJamesRyan)
Yes and that’s the reason why men don’t get any replies when they apply for jobs. Sorry mate, it’s not because we are not a good match for the company, it’s becuase we don’t have a pussy which is what the horny deadbedroom male boss is really looking for. Also, a lot of HR are women who are literally looking for good looking men to hire. I know this because I have overheard their conversations, where they receive a resume with a photo of a good looking man and they clamour to hire him.

Hunter Wallace #racist occidentaldissent.com

[From "Slavery: A Positive Good (2012)"]

Dixie

“But I take higher ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good – a positive good.”
– John C. Calhoun, 1837

Is there a positive case for the domestic institution of negro slavery?

(1) In slave societies, negroes were a wealth generating economic asset: America’s slaves were worth more than its railroads, banks, and manufacturing industries combined.

In 1861, the average slave was worth $800. In 2009 dollars, a single slave purchased in 1861 would be an asset worth $135,000.

(2) In 1860, 49.8 percent of the population of Barbour County (AL) were slaves.

(3) In 1860, there were 2,717 free families in Barbour County (AL). There were 1,143 slaveholders. 42.1 percent of free families were slaveholders.

(4) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley as a whole, there were 47 slaveholders who owned over 100 slaves. If the average slave was an asset worth $135,000, then each one of these super planters in 1860 had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $13.5 million dollars.

(5) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 270 slaveowners who owned 50 to 100 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then each one of these middling planters had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $6.7 million dollars.

(6) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,193 slaveowners who owned 20 to 50 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then these lower tier planters had a fortune in slaves alone worth a minimum of $2.7 million dollars.

Obviously, the planter class in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley was stupendously wealthy by modern standards – those numbers don’t include their non-slave property or investments and are based on the minimum number of slaves required to belong to each tier.

In 1860, there were 1,150 planters in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley. The planters were only 17.3 percent of slaveholders though. How’s that compared to the stock market?

(7) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,637 slaveowners who owned 10 to 19 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then these upper middle class slaveowners had a fortune in slaves alone worth $1.35 million dollars.

(8) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 1,485 slaveowners who owned 6 to 9 slaves. If the average slave was worth $135,000, then the typical middle class slaveowner had a fortune worth $810,000.

(9) In the Lower Chattahoochee Valley, there were 4,100 slaveowners who owned 1 to 5 slaves. 47 percent of slaveowners in the Lower Chattahoochee Valley belonged to this group. Every one of these slaveowners had at least one slave worth $135,000.

(10) In Barbour County (AL), 42.1 percent of free families were slaveowners – surely, the great majority of them were middle class slaveowners, while only a small minority were planters.

How much is the average negro household worth after 147 years of free society? The average negro household is worth $4,995.

As we have learned from Paul Kersey, the average single black woman in America has a net worth of $5, which is over a 99 percent depreciation in value from 1861. A third of blacks have a negative net worth. They are effectively bankrupt after 40 years and countless billions of dollars of wasted Great Society redistributive spending.

Freedom failed doesn’t quite capture the magnitude of the social and economic disaster that was abolition: it is more like freedom was a world shattering catastrophe that nearly crippled American civilization.

In free society, the average White household might have a net worth of $110,000 in 2012, most of which is locked up in the value of their depreciating suburban home – with both parents working in order to pay income taxes to a federal government that redistributes their wealth to millions of idle tax consuming negro voters.

In slave society, if you owned one slave, you had an asset worth $135,000 in 2009 dollars not counting your property or home, those slaves worked in direct proportion to the leisure time of a single male slaveowning patriarch, and there was no income tax because the government was funded with a revenue tariff.

(11) That’s the rub: under slavery, the negro was a fabulous wealth generating economic dynamo, the ownership of which emancipated White families from the drudgery of wage labor and significantly contributed to our national prosperity.

Under free society, the negro is the single biggest economic albatross in the United States and a civilization wrecking menace to public safety who through the genius of liberal democracy can vote himself a living from taxes and fees on the income and property of White families.

(13) Libertarians: What planter ever emancipated his slaves based on the assumption that liberating them would increase his wealth and make his plantation more productive?

(14) As a commodity, slaves were used as a store of value like gold and silver or stocks and bonds: a single slave in 1850 was worth $80,000 whereas a single slave in 1860 was worth $135,000.

(15) Paul Kersey writes:

“Black unemployment rates are directly correlated to the fact that a great many Black people are unemployable in America’s service economy, save for government/public jobs. Not institutional racism.”

The only known solution to this problem is slavery.

There are any number of industries where the millions upon millions of negroes who have an IQ less than 85 could be profitably employed today as slaves.

They could be put to work immediately as stoop laborers in the construction industry or in the fields harvesting fruits and vegetables. Alternatively, they could at least be hooked up to bicycles and used to manually generate cheap electricity to promote America’s goal of energy independence.

Even today, a slave society could find some use for them. Black women could be employed as domestics as they were in the Jim Crow South. They don’t have to become welfare queens shacking up with Mr. EBT to breed little Ja’Quares Walkers or Trayon Omar Washingtons in the Booker T. Washington housing projects.

If negroes were enslaved in such a way, we could empty our prisons, raise property values, raise per pupil spending on White students, slash law enforcement and court costs, fund an expedition to Mars, and slash the soaring cost of healthcare by curtailing epidemic black obesity.

(16) As far back as the 1830s, free negroes in the Northern states were notorious for elevating crime, destroying property values, and burdening prisons and other social services.

In free societies, the cost of negroes is socialized whereas it was privatized in slave societies: abolition eliminated natural masters (who provided employment for White working class overseers) who had a vested economic interest and legal responsibility for curtailing destructive behavior and promoting productive labor.

(17) Any student of the discipline of negro management in the Old South could have told you that emancipating slaves, blaming White people for all their various failings, and giving them access to drugs and firearms was a recipe for disaster. See the 21,000 black people who have been murdered by other black people in Detroit since 1969.

(18) In 1850, a slaveowner could have told you that the return on investment on negro education was quite low because of biological racial differences in intelligence.

(19) In 1850, a slaveowner could have told you that abolition and the politicization of the negro was a recipe for disaster based on previous experiments in abolition in Haiti and the British West Indies.

(20) Slave society promoted conservatism and racial solidarity in the Old South. It also created an indigenous elite that had the wealth and political power to resist the encroachment of the degenerating effects of liberal capitalist democracy.

Note: Virtually all the social ills that are commonly blamed on slavery are actually a consequence of freedom.

Slave societies didn’t tolerate or meekly subsidize negro criminals or flagellate themselves with racial guilt. The negro had no status as a citizen or a voter. He wasn’t a huge drag on our national prosperity as he is today in the 21st century.

Slavery was a positive good. It was a successful social system that broadly distributed wealth among Whites, created an elite invested in white supremacy, cultivated a moral sense based on the cult of honor, and most importantly, acted as a brake on the consolidation of power in Washington.

The success of slavery proved to be its downfall. It was a rival economic system that inspired enormous jealously, fear, and envy of the Slave Power in the North. As we all know, that’s what brought about the War Between the States, destroyed the White Republic created by the Founders, and set America down its path to the present racial disaster.

That’s not the fault of slavery though. It is the fault of slavery’s professed enemies.

Brian Niemeier #wingnut brianniemeier.com

Conservatives are fond of invoking the Ring of Power from J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings as a symbol of government power. It's easy to see the attraction that metaphor holds for them. Having raised individual liberty and limited government to cardinal virtues, a talisman of ultimate control fits their image of the shadowy, vaguely superhuman bureaucracy in Washington.

In Tolkien's masterpiece, the plot was a type of anti-quest wherein the heroes had to overcome long odds--not to recover some powerful artifact, but to destroy it. Meanwhile, a Dark Lord seeking world domination was after the same prize. The spoils were winner take all with no silver medal for second place. Those conditions set a nuclear doomsday clock-sized timer that kept the tension high.

Conservatives' penchant for equating the One Ring with government explains itself when you consider that it lets them cast themselves as the underdog Fellowship striving to destroy the source of tyranny--or in their case, return America to Constitutional government. It's a highly flattering image.

There are a couple of problems with that allegory, though. First of all, the Fellowship's goal wasn't placing checks on the Ring. They were out to destroy it, specifically because its power was illimitable. Following the analogy to its logical conclusion, Conservatives actually propose something more along the lines of Frodo's original idea: managing the Ring by keeping it out of the wrong hands. Due to its corrupting influence, that also meant refusing to use it himself.

Tolkien staunchly resisted attempts to frame Lord of the Rings as an allegory, and here we have a good reason why. Plugging "government" into the story for all values of the Ring results in something more like anarchism. The story itself contradicts this reading, since one of the good guys' victory conditions is crowning a new king. Tolkien's opus can more readily be seen as two groups of monarchists slugging it out with a small faction of distributists deciding which monarchy wins.

The other issue is that it's far too late to destroy the Ring. Proposing a return to the Constitution is closing the barn door after the horses have not only left, but have been shipped to China for stew meat.

[...]

The Conservative project might've had merit while there was still a chance of bringing the state to heel through grassroots organizing and voting in the right people. Now, by their own measure, Conservatives are about as relevant as the Whigs. The folks running establishment Conservatism know this. That's why their operation has shifted toward milking Boomers for cruise money while pushing butt stuff on college kids.

Point this out to Conservatives, and they'll often quote from Lewis' Abolition of Man or Tolkien's line about fighting the long defeat. That attitude makes sense coming from British men of letters who held a vestigial fondness for pagan stoicism and who'd seen the two apocalyptic 20th century wars. One wonders what they'd say if they saw that England will be minority English by next century and heard that the state can rip children from their fathers' arms for summary castration.

Tolkien never showed us what would happen if Sauron won. Now we're seeing it firsthand. Clown World thwarts the Ring metaphor.

Perhaps an alternate timeline sequel to LotR would have seen a daring burglar stealing the Ring back from under the Dark Lord's nose. 2016 actually gave Conservatives the chance to play out that scenario--to try Boromir's way and use the Ring now that all bets are off--or else destroy it. They squandered their last chance to do both. The urge to languish on the sofa and sigh about the long defeat proved irresistible.

Conservatives' utter and repeated failure has taught us at least one thing: The Ring can be wrested from its wielder's hand. Unlike Tolkien's preternatural talisman, government is a human institution meant for human use.

The rising tide of dissenters won't make the same mistakes. Our task is to slowly scale the mountain until we stand where Boromir did. And this time, we'll use the Ring.

For a story where the heroes put this strategy into practice, check out Combat Frame XSeed: CY 40 Second Coming.

various commenters #sexist reddit.com

Just Be A Neo Nazi Bro

image

(StunningResearcher)
That's impossible. I know women, and women wouldn't do that. You altered the picture. There is another story. Women can detect hatred and awful personalities and they judge you harshly on these things. That's why you're incel. I know these things.

(movielover2018)
Personality detector fails again.

(KhalilYousuf3)
Chads jaw always jams it.

(R1415)
Only works for SS-Nazi-Chads.

The racist incels-in-denial who sit in their rooms all day posting Hitler memes aren't getting shit.

(copekoro)
they must have great personalities right IT

(JelqFrost)
In just the last couple weeks I've seen posts here from incels who describe their politics as "so left [they're] practically an anarchist", moderate, apathetic, and there was even one dude complaining about getting banned whenever he tries to explain why he agrees with nazis.

A man's political beliefs don't affect his chances with women in the slightest. You might get kicked out of certain online discussions, but it's your face that determines whether or not you're IRL fuckable.

(Ploard)

Yeah, she's a bad person...

we have: one girl supporting a nazi, one guy who IS a nazi.
And incels use that as a reason to hate women....

The premise of it is that the Nazi is actually bad. And the point you are missing is that there's no such thing as an "irredeemably bad personality" if you are good looking. Sure, not every girl might be into you, but you'd still have plenty of girls throwing themselves at you. "Plenty" as in "more than any average or below average guy could dream of".

https://imgur.com/a/iGcL9

(Crazylikethatglue)
It just shows 1 example of many of womens hypocrite behaviour. You don't get to advocate for womens vile hypocrite behaviour.

(StunningResearcher)

Or not OP because, you know, nazis are scum

Whatever women accept sexually will, by the simple reality of life, be what is passed on to the next generation.

You women really choose well...

Toxicology of Friendship Award

Zorlon #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

This is just idle morbid curiosity, not a real thing I've been told.

Say one night he confesses to you that he was waiting for a train late one night when there was only one other person at the station, and he got to wondering what it would be like to kill a man, so he strangled the guy and buried him in a shallow grave under the platform.

Other than that he's been a very good friend and you have no fear he'd randomly kill you, though he might kill again.

Would you turn him in?

Yes.

It would suck, but how could you not?

I don't know, but my friendships are less based on how decent my friends are as human beings, and more on how decent they are as friends to me.

I don't know what i would do, but I can see myself doing nothing.

unknown #fundie gotquestions.org

Question: "Does the Bible really say that parents should have their rebellious children stoned?"

Answer: This is one of those “Yes, but…” questions that require serious explaining. Leviticus 20:9 says, “If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother, his bloodguiltiness is upon him.”

First, a note on the last part of the verse. “His bloodguiltiness is upon him” basically means that he brought this punishment on himself. He knew what he was supposed to do, and he didn’t do it. Also, it is important to remember that the Mosaic Law was for God’s covenant people, Israel, living in a theocracy. The Old Testament Law is not in force today (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23–25; Ephesians 2:15).

Deuteronomy 21:18–21 expands on the law:

If any man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey his father or his mother, and when they chastise him, he will not even listen to them, then his father and mother shall seize him, and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gateway of his home town. And they shall say to the elders of his city, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey us, he is a glutton and a drunkard.” Then all the men of his city shall stone him to death; so you shall remove the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear of it and fear.

The context of a passage is crucial to understanding what it means. Taking these two verses by themselves, one could come away with a negative attitude toward God and His Word. In the Leviticus passage, this law is part of a section dealing with egregious sins, sins that would tear a nation and family apart. The trespass in question was not a casual, slip-of-the-tongue curse, but a deep-seated rebellion, an ongoing attitude of hatred that had to be dealt with severely. In other words, the punishment was not for minor infractions but for determined defiance.

There are several things to keep in mind about this particular sin and about the law:

The sin was ongoing and continuous. Deuteronomy 21:18 indicates that the punishment was only meted out after a persistent refusal to heed both father and mother and after all discipline had failed. The parents have tried to deal with their son in a loving, firm way, but nothing worked.

It was deep-seated sin. Verse 20 specifies that the son is stubborn in his rebellion. Not only is he recalcitrant, “he is a glutton and a drunkard.” This is not a case of a child who misses curfew or plays ball in the house. This was a true menace, a child who is causing trouble in society and grieving his parents, possibly to the point of endangering them physically and financially.

The punishment was not an impulsive act of anger or vengeance. Verse 19 says that the city elders had to oversee the case and determine the guilt of the child. It is only after the elders pronounced a sentence of death that the execution could take place. The law did not allow an angry parent to arbitrarily stone a child. A modern equivalent of this is when a parent sees news footage of his child committing a crime and subsequently turns the child in to the police. If parents know their child is acting in a way that endangers society, they are responsible to obey the civil authorities and report the crime.

The punishment was designed to preserve the nation. As verse 21 explains, the reason for this law was to purge evil from society and act as a deterrent to further rebellion. Israel was a nation chosen by God to be holy (Exodus 20:6). God gave the Israelites three types of laws: judicial, moral, and ceremonial. This is a judicial law. A child who was actively and deliberately rejecting the laws of the land needed to be punished judicially.

Which brings us to the last and most important factor:

Rebellion against one’s parents is direct rebellion against God. The 5th Command is to honor one’s father and mother (Exodus 20:12). Parents are a God-ordained authority. Disobedience to parents is disobedience to God (Ephesians 6:1-3). Throughout the Bible, there are only a handful of things we are told to fear: God (Proverbs 1:7) and parents (Leviticus 19:3) are among them.

The law requiring rebellious children to be stoned to death was meant for extreme cases to protect God’s people. It would have been heartbreaking for parents to bear the responsibility of initiating such severe measures. However, the Bible never records this law being enforced.

biblicalgenderroles #sexist #fundie biblicalgenderroles.com

The Weinstein Verdict Sets a Very Bad Precedent

As far back as 3500 years ago, the Bible required that there be corroborating evidence in the form of at least two witnesses before someone could be convicted of any crime (Deuteronomy 19:15-20). In other words, you could not just accuse someone of a crime, whatever that may be. The burden was on the accuser to present corroborating evidence of the crime.

And about 250 years ago, Benjamin Franklin stated “That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved.”
But in our post-feminist and humanist society, it is feelings, not facts and logic, which have become the basis for economic and social policies. And the justice system is no exception to this rule. Before the women’s rights movements got rid of protections in the 1980’s, corroborating evidence was required to prove a man raped or sexually assaulted a woman just as you would have to have corroborating evidence to convict a person of any other crime. In other words, prior to the 1980’s the burden of proof was on the accuser of sexual assault, not the one being accused as it had been for thousands of years.

But from the 1980s onward, in any case of a sex crime, the burden of proof was transferred from the accuser to the accused. The only protection left for those accused of sex crimes without corroborating evidence was that most juries would still not convict people for sex crimes without corroborating evidence even though the law no longer required it for a conviction. This is why in most cases prosecutors would decline to prosecute people without corroborating evidence.

The Weinstein Verdict has now broken this legal precedent and many other precedents. Two women accused Weinstein of rapes than occurred more than a decade ago. The defense proved from emails they consented to meeting with Weinstein to have sex with him many times after the supposed rapes occurred. They said they only did so to further their careers.

Weinstein was convicted on two counts of rape, with absolutely no corroborating evidence. The real sad truth is that Weinstein had already been convicted in the court of public opinion and no one on this jury had the courage to stand up to the MeToo mob who wanted their piece of Harvey’s flesh no matter what horrible legal precedent this would set.

Dean T. Olson #fundie raptureforums.com

[From a series of articles titled, "God, Guns and American in the End Time - Would Jesus Carry Concealed?"]

While the title may be jocular, the subject of gun control is a serious end of the age matter. Like many social issues that dominate the headlines in the run up to the rapture, calls for gun control following mass shootings are more than they appear. It isn't just about controlling guns to prevent mass shootings. It's about control, period.

Bible prophecy foretells that in the last days the world will accept a leader called the antichrist who will control the world based on a three-legged stool consisting of one world economy, one world government and one world religion. To accomplish this agenda there must first be control. In order to establish one world government it is necessary to control the populace. An unarmed populace is easy pickings for a dictator.

That is the ultimate goal of all gun control plans; to disarm freedom-loving Americans under the pretense of accomplishing a public good.

[...]

All of the elements necessary for the rise of the antichrist after the rapture and during the tribulation hinge on reducing or destroying Christian America. Here in the US many of our secular progressive/liberal leaders are doing their part in this evil control scheme by enacting regulations that will ultimately result in tyrannical authoritarian power over the masses. A major facet of this scheme is called "gun control." Its goal serves the purposes of Satan in the preparatory steps necessary to install to power, and eventually indwell the antichrist to rule a world lacking much of the restraining power on evil provided by the Holy Spirit after the removal of Christians during the rapture.

[...]

Because America remains a Christian nation containing a majority of freedom-loving citizens, at least until the rapture, Satan is forced to undermine that base of support using a two-pronged attack. First, he influences mentally unbalanced individuals to commit mass shootings that play into the hands of liberals who rush to decry the slaughter by blaming the instrumentality of the crime, firearms, while expressing nary a whisper about the personal responsibility of the killers.

It is important to remember that due to Satan's deceit, every step necessary to usher in the one world government of the antichrist will appear to be logical, wise and irresistible. That is why gun control is so appealing to many of those lacking in spiritual discernment amid a world awash in wanton and unrepentant sin. The second prong works hand in hand with the first. Satan wields one of his most powerful weapons; the propagandists of the secular progressive elites dominating the mainstream media (MSM) to demonize gun owners.

Ken Livingstone #moonbat venezuelasolidarity.co.uk

[From "Remembering Hugo Chavez"]

YOU won’t read about it much in those parts of the media currently arguing for war on Venezuela, but when Hugo Chavez first became president in 1999, Venezuela had endured a wave of economic and social catastrophes in the preceding two decades.

Up to seven in 10 people had been left in poverty. Income per head had collapsed to the levels of the 1950s. Millions were left to live in barrios dangerously clinging to the mountainsides, often without clean water or sanitation. Many had no proper access to healthcare and education

After Chavez’s election in 1998 with a 57 per cent vote, he set about his mission to transform the country.

Two key pillars of progressive change in Venezuela were transformations in healthcare and education, funded by a massive programme of wealth redistribution that redirected Venezuela’s oil revenues to collective social purposes.

Under Chavez, the government built thousands of new clinics, hospitals, and diagnostic centres across the country.

Through Mission Barrio Adentro (Into the Neighbourhood Mission), the main healthcare programme established in 2003, care and treatment were provided free. In Chavez’s lifetime it saved as many as 292,000 lives, cut infant mortality by a third and increased life expectancy by over two years. Mission Sonrisa (Mission Smile) provided free dental care, while Mission Milagro (Mission Miracle) restored eyesight to about 300,000 Venezuelans.

In education, tackling illiteracy was an early priority. In just 18 months, 1.6 million adults learned to read and write, two thirds of whom were women. Beyond meeting this basic need, free education at all levels was made a constitutional right.

Investment in education doubled from 3 per cent of GDP in 1999 to 6 per cent of a much greater GDP in 2011, funding provision such as free nurseries, free school meals and the constriction of more than 3,000 new schools and 40 new higher education institutions. Two million children were added to school rolls, a 25 per cent increase.

Millions of adults were also enabled to return to school to complete their basic education, while Unesco data recorded Venezuela as achieving the fifth highest level of university enrolment in the world.

Free education as a legal right was just one measure of a new progressive constitution instituted by Chavez that guaranteed a wide range of human rights and prohibited discrimination. Turning these provisions into everyday reality against a background of decades of deep-rooted discrimination was never going to be easy, but huge advances were made under Chavez’s leadership.

Women were the main beneficiaries of the social programmes tackling poverty and disadvantage, such as entitlements to social security, help to set up small businesses and co-operatives and advancements of women’s rights in the workplace, particularly through the 2012 Labour Law legislation.

Coupled with these material improvements was a drive to ensure that the concerns of women were represented at the heart of the political process. This led to women substantially increasing their representative and leadership roles, particularly in the 35,000 community councils that form the backbone, along with 130,000 grassroots “Bolivarian Circles” in neighbourhoods and workplaces across the country, of Venezuela’s constitutional commitment to being a participatory democracy.

The new progressive constitution also provided protection for indigenous people and those of African descent, within an acknowledged multi-ethnic and multicultural society. Parliamentary political representation was guaranteed; a Ministry for Indigenous People set up in 2007 and service provision such as medical care tailored to meet specific community needs.

Alongside redistributing 1.4 million acres left idle in large landed estates to 15,000 peasant families, Chavez’s government returned one million hectares to indigenous communities through 40 collective title deeds

While a specific law against racial discrimination was passed in 2011, Chavez — proud of his own African heritage — also promoted the celebration of indigenous and African ancestry and culture.

The 1999 constitution’s fundamental provision that “The state shall guarantee to every person, in accordance with the progressive principle and without discrimination, the enjoyment and inalienable, indivisible and interdependent human rights,” also enabled Venezuela’s LGBT communities to strengthen their struggle against homophobia and transphobia.

The 2012 Labour Law explicitly prohibited “exclusion or restriction in access to work and work conditions” based on sexuality, as well as other forms of discrimination.

Chavez’s programme also included advancing rights for disabled people, rooted in the new constitution’s commitment that “any person with disabilities or special needs has the right to the full and autonomous exercise of his or her abilities.” The 2007 Law for Disabled People helped translate this commitment into effect through various measures, not least the establishment of a specific Mission to meet the medical and social needs of disabled people.

Taken together, all these policies had lifted five million Venezuelans out of poverty by 2011 and transformed the lives of many more.

But to help realise his vision that “another world is possible,” not just for Venezuela, Chavez also led the creation of key regional organisations to unite Latin American voices and provide progressive economic alternatives to neoliberalism, such as the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (Celac), a regional bloc made up of 33 nations, and the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our Americas (Alba), a trade alliance made up of eight countries.

On the global scale, he opposed the disastrous US wars on Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, becoming ever more an enemy of the Bush administration, who (like New Labour’s Denis MacShane) backed the shortly successful coup against him in 2002.
Of course, like any other leader, he made mistakes — and he was known to have regretted not doing more to diversify the economy away from its historical overreliance on oil, which has caused so many difficulties in recent years — but we mustn’t let enemies of socialism delete from history what he achieved.

I was proud to host Chavez as mayor of London when he visited here, and I’m proud to write this article on his achievements and legacy today.

Chavez was the spark for a revival of the Left and Latin American liberation in the 21st century and for that he will always be remembered.

Michael Majalahti #fundie returnofkings.com

The Inglorious Death Of The West

Michael is arguably the most acclaimed and accomplished pro wrestler in history out of Northern Europe, as well as the pro wrestling pioneer of Finland, where he has lived since 1996 after moving from his homeland of Canada. Michael is known as an outspoken figure that bucks the system and swims against the tide. Known in pro wrestling circles as “The Rebel” StarBuck, Michael has been a champion the world over, in addition to being a rock vocalist in three bands, a personal trainer, a voice-over pro, a business owner, an actor, an artist and a husband.

We have obviously come to the end of the West and Western civilization as we know it. No longer does it take a sociological “expert” or someone with a university degree to argue the point. Now it’s apparent all across the board. Our Western culture, whatever that even is anymore, is fastly disappearing and dying. And we’re letting it happen without even putting up a fight. This, I argue, will be to our own deserved demise.

We need to take a cold, hard look at what has led the West down the road of cultural ruin. After all, we’re only getting what we’ve ordered not too long ago.

Nietzsche the Prophet

I steadfastly argue that the single greatest factor that has led the west into the shitstorm it is now faced with is the abolishment of God and its resignation from all things even remotely Christian. Simply, we became inconvenienced with and ashamed of God and His statues regarding how we ought to orchestrate our lives. Even after the founding fathers of the West chose God-fearing, Biblical statutes to orient the ethical direction of the free world, we chose to balk at the freedoms and blessings afforded us under its banner and umbrella. Excuse my bluntness, but what the fuck?

What the hell was the big problem to begin with, that our Western society had to get rid of God and become so secular? Was it the allure of all things dark, forbidden, and sinful, much like the tempting apple in the Garden of Eden? Or was it just rotten, base human nature that tends to fuck up everything it’s given unless its spiritual self wakes up and enlightens the individual to better living? Or perhaps it was it the sins of the Catholic Church at large throughout world history, with its Crusades and and Inquisitions?

Any reasonable, sane person would understand that just because there is a killer loose in Disneyland, it doesn’t imply that the fault lies with Mickey Mouse. Anyone with even the slightest amount of intellect should be able to discern the obvious difference between what is faith and what is religion: one is a belief system that ordains personal decisions and and conduct of life at large, the other is a social construct of political yoke that serves to bind its members to its bylaws, rules and regulations.

Then again, the same applies to any secret society, alma matter, or club at large. So let’s get real for a moment and ask the hard, central question: what was wrong with the statues and morals of the God of Christianity, that we, as the West at large, decided to dump Him and move out from under His protective hand, as it were?

I suddenly recall a report that came out about the public school system in Canada back 1988, after the government decided to pull the Lord’s Prayer from schools in Ontario, where I spent the majority of my youth. What followed was a plummeting of school grades across the board, funny as that may seem. Don’t try to connect the dots, only consider the consequences at face value. The bottom line is, something happened in conjunction with this paradigm shift, and it wasn’t for anyone’s betterment.

Friedrich Nietzsche was right with his “death of God” analogy back in the day. We decided to kill God off from our lives and our society – societies that were largely built on Biblical principles and safeguards to ensure the posterity and safety of its people – and we left the door open for a horde of diverse and tumultuous demons to come in. We made our collective bed, in which we now lay. And the wages of sin is death. How fucking inconvenient for us!

The Fallacy of Relative Morality

There’s really no use or sense in complaining. It was a completely willful and conscious decision by us as a people and a collective society. God didn’t fit into our big picture and so we discarded the nagging voice of right and truth. We wanted our very own, custom-tailored, relative morality. We wanted to all be special snowflakes who would have their personalized cake and eat it, too. And in our deliberately blind gluttony, heresy, hedonism and salaciousness, we laid the groundwork for the inescapable law of reaping as we’d sown. Hey, don’t be fooled!

God is not mocked, and neither is the still, small voice of common sense and conscience within each and every one of us.When the dam broke, we were too ignorant to fix it. We let the landslide advance, unabated. The West let in the aggressive demands and doctrines of the east, the doctrines of which were adverse and foreign to the West to begin with.

The healthy not only tolerated but sought to accommodate the complaints and wishes of the perverse. The waters became muddied, unassimilable, and undrinkable. We were like spectators at the Colosseum, watching our own, unethical passion play unfold before our eyes, amused and sedated by it all at the same time. Things went from bad to worse and we just clamored for more fun, frills, and entertainment to fill our empty heads and void lives. Anything to dull the unnerving voice and moment of truth that kept beckoning to each and every one of us.

We didn’t protect our borders, our customs, our beliefs or our values, because we didn’t respect what we had. Someone else built the house which we inhabited; it wasn’t any skin off our own backs. We had no more sense of collective self, of tribe, clan or us. It became every dog for themselves. Me, me, me and even more me. Not you, not us. Just more of what’s in it for me, for my own, personal benefit, entertainment and pleasure. We took it all for granted, and now it’s being taken away from us.

With the death of God, we adopted new gods, albeit lesser gods at that. Mock gods like those offered at the altar of television, a conduit that taught us to believe whatever was fed through it; the media, who we believed all too eagerly at face value, without enough critical sense to question absolutely everything and ask the crucial and central question: “In whose interest is this message being sold to us?”

Popular music and its altar of indoctrination that has been admittedly so stealthy and shrewd, that even I, as a musical artist for nearly 20 years, can only marvel at its potency in conditioning the behaviors and attitudes of its audience.

Only as you age and grow as a person do you begin to see more clearly, but only if you steer clear of the mass sedation being force-fed all around you. That said, these new faux gods—and many others like the aforementioned—have filled the spiritual vacuum left behind by the absence of light that took immediate effect following the death of God, as foreseen by the accidental prophet, Nietzsche.

The Wages of Sin

In hindsight, we, as the West, have raped, spit on, shamed and insulted the Christian values that our lands were built on. We’ve become so goddamned secular, so boastful in our arrogant pride, that we’ve been ignorant of replacing the dismissed guards of our ethics and societal self with new, virtuous guardians of any kind. We’ve simply let ourselves drift, happily clueless, on our sea of indulgence and hedonistic pleasure. No one saw the hordes in waiting, and now it’s too late.

In our weakened state of constant self-gratification, we, as the West, have become weak. We’ve become milksops: easily offended and readily yielding, fragile individuals who hide behind the cloak of Big Brother. How the prolific words of Benjamin Franklin ring loudly now: “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.” Indeed.

Even what’s left of our weakened, watered-down Christianity has become a feminized, ineffective, dead symbol of religious ritualism and ineffective, empty clamor. Gone are the strong men of old, the spirit of the founding fathers. Gone is the bravado, the chest held high with its breastplate of uprightness, the strong and unmoving fortitude that was ready and able to wield the sword of truth and brandish the shield of faith. Woe to us, for gone is the faith that was steadfast, the powerful beliefs that steered the moral uprightness of entire societies. We’ve got it coming to us, folks. In spades.

Summa Summarum

We need that old time Christian warrior mentality now more than ever. Our lands need it. Our people need it. The West needs it. Because the West will not survive without a return to its Christian roots. The secular mindset will not accommodate laws to protect the West, for were it able to provide that, it would have offered them up already. The proof is in the pudding, we’ve already seen the degeneration and decline of morality and societal spine under the banner of secularism.

No religion, no bullshit. Just rock solid Christian values and respect for the freedoms afforded by the vastly gracious nature of Christian and Biblical beliefs. The proof is in our past, if you need further evidence.What have you got to lose? Only the last, scarce remnants of your personal freedoms that are all being stripped away, falling through your fingers, if you choose to remain embedded in secular indoctrination. And if that be your choice, good riddance.

Gerealtor #sexist reddit.com

RE: BeAuTy iS iN tHe eYe oF BeHoLdEr - said by 10/10 Stacy who is a model

Lol this show how much pretty girls live in delusion and how forgiving/welcoming their world is. She wouldn't be saying this crap if she was ugly.

Half the time they're not actually deluded tho. They know exactly how much it matters and are just perpetuating the "looks don't matter" type statements because they gain likes and it makes them seem less shallow. I've known girls like this irl and when you get to know them better and mention these things in a drunk all-guards-down moment, trust me, they'll openly admit to not believing half the bullshit they spew.

Zyrros #fundie reddit.com

Submitters note: See here for section 1: Incel misconceptions

Many misconceptions among both incels and normies here, explained

Normie misconceptions:

Just get a hooker : Inceldom is about being unwanted. 70% of the point of having sex is the validation, the fact you are being desired. Paying someone for sex doesn't make the cut.

Inceldom is just lack of sex : Inceldom is much more than lack of sex. Is being a genetical inferior human being who nature doomed from birth to failure. Inceldom affects EVERY part of your life beacause looks permeate into everything. Nature hardwired humans to discriminate, shun and hate unattractive people in every area of life, not only dating. Inceldom is about suffering the bad side of genetic determinism. Lack of sex is just a byproduct (the most noticeable) of all this.

Being bitter and misogynistic is what keeps you incel : wrong. Being ugly is what keeps you incel. Many many many guys are openly misogynistic irl in front of girls and yet they drown in validation anyways because they are good looking. Also do you think most incels here act the same way irl? You have to be deluded to think like that. Incel does not mean retarded. In fact most incels that are bitter and misogynistic were not that way before: its what happens afters years and years of negative reinforcement and rejection while suposedly doing everything right.

its your fault you are incel : No. Nature made humans so they are BORN to win or lose in life. 70% of your life is predetermined at birth, genetic determinism is real. Winners of the genetic lottery have to in fact make an effort to fail in life. Losers of the genetic lottery will get things fucked up for the slighest silly mistake. People are NOT born equal. Genes are everything. Nature is an evil concept.

You are a lazy bum that doesnt care to improve himself : And whats the motivation of working so hard to achieve only a fraction of what genetic lottery winners get without ANY effort? Where is the motivation when you know that a genetic lottery winner can in fact work hard too and make the hard work of the loser seem worthless in comparison? Where is the fairness? Also many many people are just beyond salvation. If you are ugly, no amount of hard work/styling/improvement/personality will save you. Most of the crucial things in a man to be attractive to girls (and society in gneeral) are the genetic ones, the ones which can't be self improved.

you are whiny/deal with it : Unfairness is one of the worst things there are. So now complaining about privileges given at birth (genes) that change completely your life is whining? I saw stories of guys who were good looking kids and led happy lives, being popular, well liked and having healthy social circle. Suddenly puberty kicked in with bad genes and they became incel/ugly and their lives turned upside down: from popular to rejected, bullied, loners. And no its not that they freaked out for being ugly: they didnt know their looks to begin with and all of them reported wondering what the fuck happend to get a so radical change in how they were treated, until years and years later they discovered it was just their looks after puberty.

women are subjected to stupid standards too : The only shaming about women is slut shaming, and nowadays its not acceptable anymore, just like fat shaming. But bald shaming, short shaming, smallpenis shaming, uglyshaming (funny that all shaming in women are things they can change, all shaming in men are things that arent under their control and are genetic) is still pretty accepted and not taboo like fat shaming or slut shaming. Don't tell me women have it as hard as men because its a freaking lie. Also personality wise: women can be upfront and social or shy and still be attractive. Shyness is unattractive in men. Women can have a strong or vulnerable personality and still be attractive. Vulnerable personality is unattractive in men. Even personality wise, men have much fewer ways to be attractive (this is all considering looks level is the same)

Matt Forney #fundie mattforney.com

Insecurity is the natural state of woman. How could it be anything else? Given their lack of physical strength, a woman on her own should be frightened as hell without men to protect her. If society were to collapse, all the Strong, Independent Women™ who read Jezebel and xoJane would last about five minutes before they either found a man to cling onto or got raped and killed. In the bellum omnium contra omnes that is mankind’s default existence, a woman who is alone is a woman who is already dead.

One of the most commonly repeated tropes of feminists and manboobs goes something like this:

“You should be happy that women nowadays are independent, because it means that they’re with you because they WANT to be with you, not because they’re dependent on you.”

This is a fundamental violation of the relationship between men and women. Part of our identity as men based in women needing us, if not necessarily in a material sense, then in an emotional one, though material and emotional vulnerability often go hand in hand. That female insecurity is a crucial ingredient for unlocking our inner masculine instincts. If a girl needs me, feels that her life would end if she were to lose me, I’m doubly inspired to be there for her, to shield her from the cruelty of the world. Frankly, it’s pretty hot. If she just wants me, could take me or leave me, my gut response is one of apathy. “Yeah, whatever babe.”

Confidence doesn’t give men erections; vulnerability does.

In order to love someone else, you need to be emotionally vulnerable, more so women than men (as girls are attracted to confident men). You need to be willing to open yourself up, to give yourself over to their judgment, to risk being hurt and rejected. Without this emotional openness, any relationship you have will never go beyond the infatuation stage. But girls today are told to erect gigantic walls around their hearts, cutting them off from an crucial part of their humanity. The emotional dissonance from this feminist social engineering is why antidepressant usage and mental illness are skyrocketing among young women. Ordinarily a depressed or insecure girl would seek solace in the loving embrace of a man, but daily hits from her good friend Saint Xanax short-circuit her feminine instincts.

In squelching her inborn insecurity with you-go-grrlisms and drugs, the modern woman has become an emotional cripple. Like a fat slob eating Big Macs instead of a juicy steak from the supermarket, she substitutes having a dominant and confident man in her life with lotsa cocka and dating where she considers herself an “equal.” She views men as a life support system for a penis, an accoutrement, no different than her Manolo Blahniks or snazzy new iPhone. When she gets bored of her boy-toy, she tosses him in the trash and moves on to a newer, shinier model, and if she can get cash and prizes for trading in her old clunker, that’s just the icing on the cake.

Essentially, “confident” women are incapable of viewing men as human beings.

When manboobs and feminists say you should be happy that women today are “independent,” this is what they’re arguing for; a world in which romantic relationships are impossible. Where men are nothing more than fashion items to help women show how cool or sophisticated they are. Sorry, but homie don’t play that game. If I’m not the center of a girl’s world, I’m not going to be in her world period.

...

Real life fails the Bechdel test.

Feminists can claim that women don’t need men, but their actions put the lie to that; they need us far more than we need them. Girls will all but die without masculine attention. Hell, I’m even starting to think that the feminist agita about “rape culture” is part of this as well. Pushing lies like the claim that one in three women will be raped during her lifetime and their constantly expanding the definition of rape are ways for feminists to indulge their desire for vulnerability in a way that doesn’t conflict with their view of themselves as “strong” and “empowered.”

At the end of the day, there are no Strong, Independent Women™. There are only shrews pleading for a taming. All the posturing, the pill-popping, the whining and demands for “equality”; they’re a cry for help. Girls don’t want the six-figure cubicle job, the shiny Brooklyn 2BR, the master’s degree, the sexual liberation, none of it. They want to be collectively led back to the kitchen, told to make a nice big tuna sandwich with extra mayo and lettuce, then swatted on the ass as we walk out the door.

I say we give them what they want.

Mayocide_Mozart & TotalBasturd #sexist reddit.com

Re: Comments on scene where Secretary gets groped and spanked by Chad professor without consent in the workplace

image

(Mayocide_Mozart)

Women make me sick. They want to criminalize the romantic and sexual desires of unattractive men while simultaneously craving nothing more than being dominated by a high-status Chad. And they are ALL like that. They have no individuality, not variability, they are ALL sexually submissive, socially hypergamous, culturally hypocritical. Maybe we should really replace them with robots one day.

(TotalBasturd)

There is a reason why only guys that look like Harvey Weinstein get MeToo'ed. Chad boss will never get that treatment even if he is a sexual predator

Paul Walker or Elvis had sex with minors and nobody gives a fuck because they were hot. The women want to be with them and the men want to be like them, and the fact that they're sexual predators doesn't have any impact on people.

OctopusGun2 #sexist reddit.com

I've read on the internet and heard conversations IRL of normies about how their GFs won't make the first move, how they wish they one day would wake up to a blowjob without asking, etc...

And that's the result of not being good looking. I've got bad news for you normies but females do make the first move and aren't just "shy" or whatever you think it is.

They only make the first move (or even go as far as beg for sex) with Chad, ONLY. Because Chad is the only one who activates that animalistic urge in females because they have an attractive, masculine face.

G Parameshwara and #fundie independent.co.uk

An Indian minister has sparked outrage by suggesting that a "mass molestation" of women in one of the country's busiest nightlife hubs took place because they dressed "like westerners".

Multiple women were groped during New Year celebrations in Bangalore, the capital of India’s southern Karnataka state, according to local and social media reports.

Photographs of distraught women rushing out of crowds and seeking help from police appeared on both.

But Karnataka State Home Minister, G Parameshwara, caused uproar after said the alleged attacks were the result of Western influences.

“They tried to copy the Westerners, not only in their mindset but even in their dressing,” he said. “So some disturbance, some girls are harassed, these kinds of things do happen.”

Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky #fundie timesofisrael.com

n a responsum to a reader published on Sunday in the ultra-Orthodox daily newspaper Yated Ne’eman, Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky said that “it is forbidden to be in possession of [an iPhone], and one must burn it”; this despite the fact that the reader, a business-owner, said it was “crucial for [his] dealings.”

And lest a contrite Jewish smartphone owner think to hawk his device on eBay and pocket the cash, Kanievsky also warned that it is forbidden to sell the phone to a non-Jew, “just as it is forbidden to sell a weapon to a non-Jew.”


Adam Ford #fundie adam4d.com

[=Calvinisn vs Universalism; The Adam Ford edition=]

Man: I'll tell you one thing that honestly trips me up; the idea election. You know, that God chooses in advance who will be saved and who won't. I know it's biblical, but... I don't like it. It doesn't seem fair. Or right.

Woman: Yeah I've heard people say that before. So I've gotta ask; how would YOU do it, if you where God. What would you do that would seem right or fair ?

Man: Well I certainly wouldn't choose in advance who's in or who's out! I would give everyone an equal chance to be saved. I'd make it so that everyone who has ever lived had a chance to hear the gospel somehow in their lifetime. And everyone would have a fair, equal chance to make a choice without me deciding their fate before they are even born!

Woman: K...but being God would be omnesiant...all knowing...yes ?

Man: Well, yeah. Of course.

Woman: Then you'd aleesdy know someone's every persons eternal fate before you created them. So then, your act of creating them, knowing wether they go to Heaven or Hell is causative. See even within in your system, you would in fact be choosing everyone's eternal destiny in advance. Just by creating them.

Man: I guess the heart of the question is; why does God choose to save SOME people, but not OTHERS. Why doesn't he just save EVERYONE ?

Woman: I asked that question for a long time...but then I had a realization and it didn't come from some hard theological theory but from the basic gospel message I had known since forever ago. Kinda the ground floor of christianity is that we're all sinners. We all need a saviour. We all need Jeus and without him, we have no hope. Right ?

Man: Yeah.

Woman: And we need a saviour becaus we are all sinful and...we all deserve judgement for our sinfulness. Yes ?

Man: Of course.

Woman: We ALL deserve Hell. It's a tough thing to say, but admitting it is a crucial step in accepting Jesus' atoning sacrifice to save us from this terrible fate. So if every single one of us deserves God's judgement, we shouldn't get hung up on the question "Why doesn't God save everyone ?" The question that should really boggle our minds is this..."Why does God save ANYONE ?"

throwaway10812309813 #fundie reddit.com

Paedophile here. Contrary to popular belief being a paedophile doesn't suddenly make you into some kind of monster who has an irresistible urge (or any urge whatsoever for that matter) to molest children. I am a normal person like any one of you and like most people I have a very healthy moral code. There is no inner battle within me on whether or not I should go rape a child. Like any sane person I recognise that doing so would be one of the most reprehensible acts I could ever do.

I go on google image search and find normal pictures of clothed cute little girls and then I fantasise and jack off to them. That's it. Nobody gets hurt and I am not going to apologise for it. My fantasies are not about some kind of horrible rape either but about consensual encounters (and I know that's not something that can happen in the real world, don't worry).

I also oppose the notion that paedophiles should seek therapy. I suppose you should do that if you feel you are a danger to kids but I think most paedophiles simply know that they aren't, so it's not a problem. Any person who actually molests children is probably not just a paedophile but also a sociopath and probably doesn't want help either way.

I do not and have never seen my paedophilia as a problem. I would not opt out of it if I could. I enjoy my fantasies a great deal and they give me a sense of beauty and pleasure I would not want to give up. You normal people, ask yourself if you would want to give up your attraction to adult women/men, or do you in fact love being aroused by them?

My dream is that I'll live long enough to see the invention of matrix-like simulations where I can have sex with virtual children. Most likely I'll die long before such a thing is invented. But hey, I'm OK with that. You take what you can get. Maybe a child sex doll at some point? Either way, it is surprisingly easy to not rape kids. Really. People who do that have much bigger problems than being a paedophile


-

completely understand you, but I don't see why you wouldn't want to opt out if you could.

You compare it with "normal people" giving up their attraction to adult women/men. I don't think you can compare it that easily, because we can have an actual relationship with an adult woman/man if we want to, while you can't have one with children.

TL;DR I accept, but don't understand you


I should say that I am also attracted to adult women. However if I had to chose to get rid of one part of my sexuality it would be adults. I'm a forever alone guy anyway so it wouldn't change much, I'm not bathing in pussy by any means.

As for why, I guess the pedo sexuality simply feels richer than the adult one. I like both girls and women physically (appearance wise). But girls have the added benefit of their cuteness and innocence, and the terrible terrible taboo of it just makes it more exciting. Women feel boring in comparison.

If you still don't understand me, think of it like this. Some guy only likes 2 types of music. Iron Maiden and Mozart. He hates all other music. Out of those two he likes Mozart more. He has to get rid of one of them though. If he keeps liking Iron Maiden he can go to their concerts because they are still alive. Mozart he can only listen to from his record player however. But he likes Mozart much more than he likes Iron Maiden. He could never give up Mozart because the thought of never getting to listen to those symphonies again feels terrible. Like a great loss of beauty that has come to define him as a person.

Hope that helps.

Scott1 #fundie puritanboard.com

There is no biblical rule that requires abstinence from "cinema."

There are, however, biblical principles and commandments that apply to movie going as to many areas of life.

There is much pop culture worldly garbage marketed as entertainment that a Christian ought abstain from.

Is the content geared toward profanity? Blasphemy? Mockery of what is good? Glorification of what is evil?

Is spending the money on it good stewardship?

Is spending the time attending, talking and thinking about the movie good stewardship of time?

One aspect of sanctification will be less tolerance of the profane, more care in spending money, more concern about idleness, less concern about amusing oneself, and more concern about what is true, good and pure.

Lissamine Green #homophobia kiwifarms.net

I moved from the sticks to the big city and learned that gays are mild mannered monogamous good guy citizens, as good as and quite possibly better than anyone else. That their marriages would be no different than normal marriage, and that they would be perfectly competent parents, maybe even more caring than those careless straights who get pregnant by way of reckless boning instead of paying lawyers and gestators and whatever. Then I moved in with a gay dude roommate for a year. Holy shit, was that an education. Not just him but every single one of his friends, acquaintances, exes, and a cast of thousands. A lot of them would talk about having a "life partner" but the guy was only around for like four months, they shared a third boyfriend, and still fucked around with randoms. The amount of nasty sex gear, and how it was just left out in like a communal bathroom or for fuck's sake, kitchen. The sick, deranged comments about like, the junior high school boys waiting for the bus across the street, every male over the age of about 8 who walked by in a 200 foot radius, etc. The CONSTANT comments that if they came from a straight guy would make him a social pariah for the sheer rapiness and sexual harassment. The groping of men and women alike. The inability to keep the libido and id zipped up even for a one hour visit with family. The creepy, gross fetishes overshared constantly. What has been seen cannot be unseen.

Anonymous Coward #conspiracy godlikeproductions.com

Organic foods and chemtrails

We all know that gmo/Monsanto foods are sprayed excessively with poisionous round up and pesticides, but what about your non-gmo and organic foods.


Have you ever considered that chemtrails are lacing your organic foods and the soil that they grow in with poisonous toxins?

This years worst flu hit areas were seeing massive chemtrail spraying the same week as people in the area were becoming severly ill with the "flu".
Was it really flu? or was it something else?

Chemtrails do not stay in the sky, they fall upon the grounds of the areas they're being sprayed.

Organic farms in Hawaii found chemical residue on their organic ponds after being heavily chemtrailed, and their soil
ph levels were rising to almost unusable levels. The nano metals being sprayed are getting into the soil and causing excessive alkalinity. This is making the organic seeds almost impossible to grow, while the raising ph levels are prime for Monsantos GMO seeds.

So, is there a conspiracy there?

Could a major GMO seed supplier be behind chemtrails?

Who benefits from this?

Who has funding to spray the chemtrails on such a massive scale?


And most importantly, is your Organic foods safe after absorbing the chemtrail pollution?

If you care about yourself, your loved ones, and the future for the children of this world, then you need to start thinking and stop being idle while you're being poisoned.

Make others aware.

Research and share what you find with everyone you care for.

nikita46 #psycho #moonbat removeddit.com

https://pilotonline.com/news/government/politics/nation/article_b0281e9f-2c4b-5323-bae9-ba34099407df.html

Fuck off Melanie. You and your kid should be the ones in a cage. You sold yourself to a racist, rapist pig for money and citizenship and stand idly by defending everything that sick fuck does. You're worse than he is...piece of dogshit. I wish someone would fucking deport your fake ass.

Scarlets79 #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

Where's my spare sexual organ?

I don't understand why I have only one sexual organ. What if it stopped working? Then I wouldn't be able to breed, it's such a crucial organ. So why has evolution not given a man two penises as this would increase survival and procreation chances, thanks.
We have two eyes, if one goes at least you have the other one. Women have two breasts, we have two ears, two legs, two arms... why not two sexual organs?

Jake Wilson #fundie researchgate.net

James/Kathleen/Eugene (et al.),It is commonly known that, unless more hypothetical factors are added, the predictions made from the big bang model stand in utter contradiction of what we observe.

The crucial point, however, is not what happened after the bang, but what happened prior to it. Leaving Steady State aside, one can choose between: a) “everything came from nothing” (effect without a cause)b) “everything came from something” Because option a) is idiotic, it was utterly rejected by Fred Hoyle. Making fun of it, he called it sarcastically the “big bang”. Today, it is obviously idiotic not to accept the idiotic option, viz. the miraculous effect without a cause.

I assume this is all part of “the beauty of science”, the evolving ‘facts’, etc. That the current consensus is aligned with the views presented in this thread is perfectly fine. Personally, I prefer option b), and if that merits the designation of “religious fanatic”, then this is fine too. What is not fine is to teach children this miraculous illogical model without giving them the alternative version. And to clear the misunderstanding, – I don’t think the big bang theory is deplorable, it’s merely stupid.

Bombarding children and young teenagers with the stereotype, “13.8 billion years ago blablaba”, without even giving option b), – that is a deplorable crime which rather merits getting a millstone around the neck and to be drowned. I certainly don’t expect my insights to reform the education system anymore, but at least I’d like to air my views.

In response to further contributions: Uniformitarianism is not science but the result of disallowing a Divine Foot in the door. It’s merely the consequence of believing in the above magic, i.e. in an effect without a cause. As for evolution, it can be nipped in the bud right away: life doesn’t arise spontaneously from non-living chemicals, and if someone nevertheless wants to believe in the impossible, then I admire their faith, but I don’t share it and deem it irrelevant for our discussion. If it helps people to believe that they are unaccountable accidents, then I will be the last person to stand in their way.

I don’t know what the “antichrist reference” has to do with our subject, but it seems that the faculty of Atatürk University plus the Turkish government is viewed as a bunch of idiots or anti-science fanatics (this is what I am forced to conclude).

It is a pitiful tactic of recommending science, but I do appreciate the scoffing and also the vehement opposition if a find supports Scripture. Both of these practices prove the reliability of the biblical text. Considering all the redundant prattle, I wouldn’t mind moving on now and look at some (potential :-) autoptic archaeological evidence: Mt. Sinai, the encampment area, the altar of the golden calf, etc. – that kind of thing… any interest? No?

PS: James, – fossilized timber specimen found at the ark site was tested and showed 0.7019% organic carbon (plus 13.04% iron).

closetedxxcishet #fundie reddit.com

Countless times, I've seen trans people on social media utter the sentiment, "Your allies may act like they love and respect you, but if they don't truly see you as a real woman/man, they are your enemies!" The first time I saw this sentiment, it sent a chill down my spine. I was still doing my libfem handmaiden act at the time (even though I was uncomfortable with much of the ideology). It never occurred to me that I had to BELIEVE that people could change biological sex in order to be a decent person.

I couldn't bear the thought of being associated with those evil murdering TERFs! But was it possible that I had been an evil, murdering TERF all along? How many trans people had I forced into suicide? I mean, I had plenty of trans friends and I supported them, told them I loved them no matter what, supported their political goals, respected their pronouns, tried to educate others on their behalf, went to some trans activist events, insisted their interests were part of feminism....but I did not think they had changed biological sex....

Naturally, this is when I found out I had been lied to all along about what a "TERF" is. I realized how little it takes to be called a TERF, that TERF was used to excuse violence, and that to call a woman a TERF is to prosecute her for thought crime. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I was only able to see the madness of the movement when it was my twat on the chopping block. I had previously ignored and avoided anyone deemed a TERF and just accepted that they were awful people. I had to in order to a good libfem foot soldier. Everyone knows you aren't allowed to READ what these women write or HEAR what these women say, even if it's nothing to do with trans issues at all. They are permanently black balled from public discourse.

The issue of thought crime really planted the gender critical seed in my mind, but I kept trying to be a good little ally. I kept thinking that no one would KNOW I thought this and that the thought police were just extremists. Then, I tried to sit comfortably on the fence even though there was a huge post up my ass. I even tried to argue that there seem to be different levels of exclusion and some women don't believe in any exclusion of trans people, they just deep down in their hearts don't believe trans women and cis women are the same. Needless to say, that went over like a fart in church.

...and NO ONE deep down in their hearts sees trans woman as real women or trans men as real men. Whether they admit it is a different story, but I firmly believe NO ONE believes it. The ones that claim they do are just sparing themselves the agony of the Tranish Inquisition. This is why it is so crucial to prosecute thought crime, to suppress speech and writing, to threaten people who dare to be honest, to dehumanize people if they so much as retweet someone who dares to be honest.

The idea that you can commit violence by thinking a thought is beyond ludicrous...I mean, I know there was an episode of Voyager like that, but this is reality. Thankfully, trying to control thought is like trying to put toothpaste back in the tube. A whole lot of people will get really tired of being told that they MUST adopt another's orthodoxy or they are literally the bastard love children of an orgy between Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Leopold II, and Saddam Hussein. Sooner or later, the levee will break...and when the levee breaks, mama, you've got to move!

Reed Benson #fundie churchofisrael.org

What Is a Homosexual?

A homosexual is someone who is suffering an acute spiritual affliction that permeates the mind, creating a physical compulsion for sexual relations with someone of the same gender. A compulsion is an irresistible impulse formed from repeated bad decisions of the past. Homosexuality is not really a mental illness, it is certainly not a genetically predestined condition, and, of course, it is not normal. At its root, it is a spiritual void; thus, only to the degree that a homosexual's relationship with God is restored is the measure to which this condition can be permanently remedied.

That is why formerly Christian nations that disconnect from their spiritual roots always experience a powerful upsurge in homosexuality, as we have witnessed in the United States.

Of course, definitions can change and be manipulated, but for our purposes there are two distinct categories of homosexuals: First, a homosexual is a person who has feelings of sexual attraction for someone of the same gender but does not act upon them. Such people do exist. In some cases they are ashamed of their homosexual impulses, wish they were not present, and would eagerly leave them behind if they knew how to do so. Others are proud of their same gender attraction, but for one reason or another still choose not to act upon their inclinations, referring to themselves as celibate homosexuals.

Second, a homosexual is a person who engages in sexual activity with someone of the same gender. Virtually all homosexuals do eventually slip into the second category unless they choose to get treatment that helps them overcome and leave behind their same-gender sexual attraction. Although homosexuality often involves free-will choices, leaving the homosexual lifestyle is difficult and infrequent because it is more than a choice, more than a habit. It is a compulsion—a psychological addiction that has tentacles rooted in a person’s spiritual core.

Lita Cosner #fundie creation.com

[Justification for the mauling of 42 youths by bears in 2 Kings 2:23-24.]

The mauling of the forty-two youths is a mainstay of the atrocities lists. Once again, the context will show that this is not an unreasonable act at all. First of all, the word that is translated “youths” more accurately means teenagers or young adults. Second, the reference to “bald head” probably refers to Elisha’s shaved head in mourning that his mentor Elijah was taken from him (male pattern baldness was not common in ancient times, so this explanation is the most likely). So a group of at least 42 young men is jeering at Elisha’s bereavement, and “go on up” is probably a threatening wish that the same thing that happened to Elijah would happen to Elisha. Elisha is therefore protecting himself by cursing them (and God obviously agrees because he sends the bears). 42 of the young men are mauled (the word can refer to an injury as minor as a scratch). That two bears were able to injure so many indicates that the youths were fighting the bears, and didn’t scatter.

Furthermore, in the ancient world, what were 42 young men doing idle? They should have been helping their families. They were dangerous juvenile delinquents. A modern day equivalent would be finding one-self in a shady, abandoned part of town, and a gang of young thugs starts jeering.

kirkz2006@yahoo.com #fundie groups.yahoo.com

(Commenting on an article posted entitled "8th Accuser: Al Franken Groped Me ’at a Media Matters Party During the First Obama Inauguration’" http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/06/8th-accuser-al-franken-groped-media-matters-party-furing-first-obama-inauguration/):


And, the claims are getting sillier. One woman on Laura Ingraham's show complained that a Congressman complimented her on her dress and told her take a twirl in it. Juliet Huddy now claims Trump tried to kiss (he missed?).

All this could, though, result in hiring boon for lesbians that look like Rosie O"Donnell. What man would sexually harass her?

KZ

Sparrow's Song #sexist #psycho incels.co

[Story] [Truecel Confession] I've Been Larping Online As A 47yr Old Convicted Child Molester For Two Years Just So I Can Bask In The Hatred People React With

I first got the idea after I got home from shopping at a Wal-Mart a few years ago. This was before I started wearing an eye patch whenever I went outside. I noticed that due to my enopthalmos and asymmetrical brow ridge, strangers would give me these horrible looks like I was the creepiest, inbred child molester they have ever seen. When I was looking up pictures of men with enopthalmos on google, I noticed that enopthalmos literally makes you look like a creepy toddler rapist. Then I looked up child molester mugshots and it appears that enopthalmos is a common trait among child molesters, in fact I would say that enopthalmos is such a child molester feature that any man who is afflicted with enopthalmos is literally a child molester whether they have molested children or not. If you have enopthalmos, society has assigned the role of child molester to you, you don't have a choice... that's how people will see you until you get surgery or rope.

So I decided to to see how people would react to enopthalmos with words because it's not like I talked to all the people irl who gave me looks of disgust and disdain. The best way to see how people react to men with enopthalmos is to see how people react to convicted child molesters. So I started larping as one so I could get an idea of what is going on inside of people's heads when they see my face irl.

A guy literally went tryhard on me and grabbed my IP to find my city and state. Then he looked for 47yr old convicted child molesters who served 10 years for a crime committed in 2007. He couldn't find anyone in my area who perfectly matched the description of my larp I gave him. Eventually, a friend of my friend who was in on the larp told him I was larping and why I was doing it. Then the guy with the IP grabber went around telling a bunch of the people who were spamming me death threats and shit that I was a larper. He was being a soyboy cuck about it and tried to call me mentally ill, I told him I was facially ill and I told him that I'm a convicted child molester no matter what because that's what me face look like. I was pretty upset that he did this because the hatred people had for me and all of the threats were my main cope at the time.

I wish there was a way I could get officially registered as a convicted child molester without actually molesting a toddler. I saw this documentary about a trailer park with for child molesters that were rejected from every other place they tried to live. That would be a great place for me because I wouldn't be getting facemogged or lifemogged that hard by people. there. All my neighbors would be worthless ugly scum just like me and we'd all be hated equally. I hate living around symmetrical faced people who aren't worthless and waiting to die like I am. There needs to be segregation. If facial surgery isn't covered by healthcare, the government should at least offer a program where they falsify records in your behalf so that any ugly faced man can be a convicted child molester without molesting a kid or doing prison time. Just give me the member's card, send me to the pedo trailer park, and give me pedobux. When you have enopthalmos and asymmetrical brow ridge, you have no future, no career, no friends, no relationships... you will die alone hated by the world and seen as subhuman trash... just like old child molester. That's why I identify as Trans-Convicted Child Molester, my lack of child molestation and prison time should not prevent me from having the same status and treatment as a biological convicted child molester, my face is all that should matter.

3g4me #fundie unz.com

@113 Rosamond Vincy: Kudos on a well conceived and written comment. What Nassar did was inexcusable, but the fame-struck and egotistical parents are equally despicable. While I detest our vile court system and judges’ hubris in general, Aquilina struck me as the epitome of histrionic. A la Ruth Buzzie Ginsberg claiming to have been sexually harassed – all jump aboard the “metoo” everlasting estrogen train.

Women need to shut the hell up and get out of most of public life where they are ill-suited, ill-trained, and ill-intentioned. With rare exceptions (and your comment indicates you are one), most women cannot separate the rational from the emotional.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesus-is-savior.com

Conan O'Brien, former host of NBC's Late Night with Conan O'Brien show since 1993, host of The Tonight Show, and now hosting his own show again in California... makes a mockery of Hell. In a despicable song titled “Go To Hell When I Die” by a group of perverts who call themselves The Booty Boys, Conan is the featured singer. Conan has really hit rock bottom with this sleaze. Here are the sinful lyrics:

Editor's note: The lyrics cited in this story may be offensive.

I'm Gonna Go To Hell When I Die
I'm Gonna Go To Hell When I Die
I'm Gonna Go To Hell When I Die
I'm Gonna Go To Hell When I Die

I can't be saved, it's too late for me
I'm going to H-E Double L when I D-I-E
You could say I'm messed up, but I'm keepin' it real
I'll sleep with your mom for a home cooked meal
Give a guy with no legs a new pair of shoes
And give Ben Affleck a bottle of booze
I Call up Nick Lechey, tell him he's gay
Then ask Jessica to spell Chevrolet

Chorus
I sent Al Roker a box of crullers
With a dozen jelly donuts and a staple remover
I sent Abe Vigoda a cookie basket
With some flowers and a catalogue to pick out a casket
Jacked Michael J. Fox for his time machine
Then I grabbed a couple hookers and Charlie Sheen
And got 'em all to take a trip back in time with me
So we could pee on R. Kelly when he turned 14

Chorus
I pick Kirstie Alley up out of the gutter
Throw her in a ring with Sally Struthers
Cover them with syrup and melted butter
And see how long it takes before they eat each other
I challenge Stephen Hawkings to some one on one
Slam dunk on that bitch like Alan Iverson
Tried to race Andy Dick but he lost control
Ran his mother-f**king car into Billy Joel

Chorus
Push an old lady down a flight of stairs
And pull out the rest of Ron Howard's hair
And lock a PETA member in a room full of bears
And hook Gary Coleman up with a job at the fair
Keep an unofficial count of Star Jones' chins
Cast Hillary Swank and Matt Damon as twins
Start a petition that Conan will hate
Get the Tonight Show cancelled in 2008

Do you think God is humored by such wickedness? Do you think God laughs in good humor while unsaved sinners sing about going to Hell. God's wrath rests upon all Christ-rejecting sinners. Psalm 7:11 states that God is angry with the wicked EVERY DAY. We read in Proverb 14:9, “Fools make a mock at sin...”

To no surprise, Conan O'Brien legally officiated over Late Night TV's first same-sex marriage in New York on November 4, 2011. The Jewish wedding between 'Conan' costume designer Scott Cronick and his partner David Gorshein drew nation media attention, as the controlled media told hundreds of networks exactly what to say. It was weird to say the least. You can watch both videos here, the wedding and the media announcements the previous day.

Kindly said, Conan is a fool. In fact, all of the Late Night comedy hosts are fools. Their shows recognize, idolize and promote fools. All they do is joke about sin—homosexuality, adultery, drunkenness and going to Hell. In another episode, Conan portrays Jesus as being a homosexual voyeur (a viewer who enjoys seeing the sex acts or sex organs of others). This is how they portray the sinless Lamb of God on TV. This is the horrible way they mock and desecrate the Son of God.

Most of their guests do the same. Everything is about sex, perversion, illegal-drugs, mocking God, et cetera. Why should God bless America?

Conan sings that he's going to Hell when he dies. Sadly, he will one day be condemned out of the words of his own mouth. Matthew 12:36, “But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.” How much more shall men give account for blasphemy?

Conan's Catholic religion won't help him escape the fires of Hell on Judgment Day. ONLY through the blood of Jesus Christ can anyone be saved; NOT through religion.

One day Conan will meet his Maker and have to give account for his sinful mockery of going to Hell. The Bible teaches in Romans 1:18 that unrighteous men “hold the truth in unrighteousness.” That is, even in the midst of the wickedness they commit, they know the truth. Conan knows that he's going to Hell, and he shakes his fist in God's face. We see the same rebellion in SIN CITY Las Vegas. They call it “sin city” because they know their works are evil. Yet, they don't care because they love the wages of unrighteousness.

I don't condemn anyone, for the Bible condemns all of us as guilty, rotten, hell-deserving, sinners (Romans 3:10-23). For someone to openly sing with cheer that they're going to burn in Hell is truly heart-breaking. Hell is forever!

Conan, just as Mandy Moore, and other God-haters, has sold his soul to Satan. Why would anyone joke of such a horrible place as Hell, where lost sinners burn in fire forever? Evidently Conan doesn't take Hell very seriously. I pray for his salvation; but as Jesus said in Luke 18:24, “How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!”

"In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power." —2nd Thessalonians 1:8,9

Is it a joke to you also? God is not willing for any to perish (2nd Peter 3:9). Please come to Christ while you still can.

yopni kov #conspiracy money.cnn.com

I admire your persistence but you are far too well-informed, insightful, logical and rational to be posting here. Those debating you have been swilling the Kool-Aid for so long it's doubtful they'll ever realize what's really happening; that is, just how powerful the ultra-wealthy really are (the 1% of the world's population that owns 99% of its wealth). The doctor who made the connection between autism (ASD) and vaccines (which is just one of their dangers) lost his license not due to incompetence but because those in power own, among other key industries, what cliche' loving automatons call "Big Pharma" and the largest media outlets (who broadcast the news they want us to hear). Ruining that British doctor/researcher was key to perpetuation of the illusion that vaccines are miracle-working drugs that have saved humans from myriad diseases, etc. The fact that, for example, the House of Rothschild is still one of the world's largest international bank and still, as it has for centuries, sets the price of gold every day in London, and does so with the blessing and assistance of their peer families (e.g. Rockefeller) is neither conspiracy nor theory (as you undoubtedly know). It's just the way it is but good luck successfully explaining that to someone who gets his/her news only from CNN, MSNBC, FOX, et al. (And, I'm almost certain that negative responses to this post will, at best be insults; usually making reference to tin foil hats etc. That's all they have because refuting the truth can't be done anyway.

[second post]

And, I'm almost certain that negative responses to this post will, at best, be insults; usually making reference to tin foil hats etc. That's all some people have because refuting the truth can't be done anyway. You won't read a single genuine refutation of the grip those populating the top of the pyramid have on the planet. You won't read a single rebuttal to the mounds of anecdotal evidence provided by the unfortunate parents whose babies have been brain damaged by vaccines. I happen to work in an industry that has brought me into contact with more of these families than I care to recall. Anyway, instead of beginning their "inquiries" without preconceived ideas and with some objectivity, they'll do what so many "sheeple" do: continue denying obvious truth in order to embrace lies because believing the lies feels a lot better. They don't want to believe that their governments are shams, their leaders are shills and puppets and that whatever their "government" may be, the welfare of the people whom it has subjugated is the lowest of its priorities. (They may want to consult, for example, the survivors of Hurricane Katrina for verification of this claim.) Anyway, they, and most of the rest of the world, will continue to grope for answers to the problems we face. They will scour everywhere except where the answer lies and in fact, ridicule those who dare mention the answer. Divorced from God, we can do nothing right and instead we invite calamity. Yet that truth, not only is sans any political correctness, mostly it serves to rouse the demons of those who have pitted themselves against God and His Christ. Anyway, time for me to go so you can read the derision (troll, Jesus-freak, tin foil hat wearing...etc. etc. etc.) that usually follows a post having too many "truth bombs"; another interesting phrase that's now popular though not anywhere close to my personal favorite: "common sense". Years ago it was...now it's more like "extraordinary brilliance". Best regards...bye for now.

Brett McCracken #fundie thegospelcoalition.org

We didn’t have a #genderreveal moment on social media.

But my wife and I did plan a private celebration to mark the day we found out our baby’s gender.

We had picked two restaurant options where we would have dinner, depending on what the ultrasound revealed. If our baby was a boy, we would celebrate at the local artisan sausage and beer hall. If a girl, we planned to dine at our favorite all-vegetable restaurant in downtown Los Angeles.

We did not have vegetables that night.

A few months earlier, we were in a Vancouver restaurant enjoying an amazing porchetta sandwich. The doors on this restaurant’s restrooms struck me as subversively old fashioned. Instead of plain white triangles or “all gender” notations, these two washrooms had two different labels. One said “meat” and the other said “bread.”

Is food gendered? It sounds ridiculous. But what does it mean that my wife and I immediately knew that brats and fries for dinner were more appropriate to celebrate our baby boy than kale and candied beets? What does it mean that everyone in that Vancouver restaurant knew which bathroom to use, simply by the “meat” or “bread” signs on the door? Why is it that meat and bread—or meat and vegetables—pair so well together?

It’s because they are not the same. They are different—beautifully different—in ways that enhance and bring the best out of the other. They are dignified, not diminished, by their complementary differences. They are part of a ordered cosmos of binaries—man and woman, light and dark, land and sea, salty and sweet—that bring structure, coherence, and irresistible beauty to life.

Stephanie Relfe #conspiracy metatech.org

FRANCE RULES THE WORLD

Most conspiracy researchers believe that the secret power who runs the world from behind the scenes, (shown by sources such as the White House Insider*), is based in the City of London. Our research has led us to believe that, in fact, the English are just the visible “fall guys”, and that the real power is based in France.

*The White House Insider told this amazing story of the little man who tells Presidents What to do.

One piece of evidence when we went looking for evidence for or against the theory that France rules the world was a tongue-in-cheek article which revealed some startling facts:

“Who rules the world? France, of course

My son has made a startling discovery that will confirm the deepest fears of the leader writers of The Sun. Britain, according to French officialdom, is part of the the 99th département (county) of France. So is the United States. So are China, Russia, Gabon, Lithuania and Kazakhstan. In fact, the whole of the rest of the world, save Monaco, is merely the 99th département of France…..

My son is sitting his baccalauréat, the French equivalent of A-levels, next June. He recently had to sign his official examination entry form: …

His form was filled in as follows.

•Name: —-
•Nationality: Foreigner.
•Born: Washington.
•Département: 099.
•Country: United States.
•Département 099? What is département 099?

There are 95 départements, or counties, in metropolitan France, numbered from 01 (A in & near Lyons) to 95 Val d’Oise (north of Paris). Their numbers can be found on all French car numberplates.

There is no département 96…..

All the overseas départements – Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana in the Americas and Réunion in the Indian Ocean – count as département number 97.

Monaco, supposedly a sovereign nation, counts as département number 98…

The whole of the rest of the world, my son explained to me, is département 99….

A little investigative journalism (one phone call and a trawl of the internet) proved that my son was entirely correct. For the education ministry, all foreigners who take the baccalauréat have been born in département 99. According to the interior ministry, the votes of all French citizens who live abroad are cast in département 99. According to the social affairs ministry, all foreigners who use the French state health and pension system, the Sécurité Sociale, started life in département 99.”

(Ref: www.independent.co.uk)

——-

AMERICAN OLIGARCHS WERE EDUCATED AT SCHOOLS THAT SPEAK ONLY FRENCH

To understand the next piece of the puzzle, it helps to realize that the real “power behind the throne” is never what you see. It is run by military aristocracy* whose names you don’t know, through different systems. The military aristocracy were thugs in medieval times. They controlled then by force.

(I learned the term “military aristocracy” from the excellent book Eleanor of Aquitaine by Alison Weir).

Now, the military aristocracy control through systems that control how people think and act – the media (TV, movies, newspapers, radio, computers, cell phones), as well as controlling the supply of money, schools, churches, the Medical Mafia and toxic food to dumb down the masses. (Ref: Illuminati Defector, Svali).

The next piece of evidence is what first made us suspect that France rules the world. We found it in a series of videos about Jodie Foster. She is rumored to be the most powerful woman, and one of the most powerful people in Hollywood. Hollywood is about much more than entertainment. It is key to the Illuminati maintaining control over the masses by controlling their minds. For example, it gets them to focus on:

•War instead of peace.
•Weaponry instead of “livingry” (A word made up by Buckminster Fuller).
•Scarcity instead of abundance.
•Perversions instead of morality and goodness.
•Materialism instead of spirituality and love of God.
•Lies instead of honesty.
•Animalistic behavior instead of consideration for others.
•Lust instead of love.
•We learned that Jodie Foster went to a school in California where ONLY FRENCH is spoken for all lessons!

Only someone who has lived in America could fully appreciate how bizarre this fact is. French? What Americans cares about French? In fact, since Americans are generally so insular and tend to do little travel to other countries, what Americans care about any language (except maybe now for Spanish)? For most people, France is just a place that sells cheese and wine that they hardly ever hear or think about.

The fact that the most powerful woman in Hollywood was educated at a school that spoke ONLY French indicated that this was a fact of Conspiracy Research that had been left out of the bigger picture.

The school is Le Lycée Français de Los Angeles. It is a private, bilingual, and international school founded in 1964 by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Kabbaz. whose motto is “We Teach the World”. There are other branches in other American cities.

[...]

From the school’s website, Jodie Foster said,

“I feel so lucky to have been educated in The French system. Le Lycée Français de Los Angeles gave me a classic education that not only prepared me for the rigors of an ivy league but opened my mind to a wider sense of the world.“

Question: What is “The French System”? Is this more than just the “official curriculum issued by the French Ministry of Education”? It sure sounds like it. Normal French people don’t seem to have minds that have been opened to “a wider sense of the world.”

The military aristocracy rule the world through SYSTEMS, and intelligence gathering and propaganda are a crucial part of that.

Why does this oligarch school use only French? We assume that this has at least two reasons. The main one is that the oligarchs can communicate clearly with the underlings that they have trained in the schools, such as Jodie Foster.

It’s possible that it’s also because French is a hard language to learn properly. It helps to keep things hidden, and to recognize who’s “in” and who’s “out” by whether or not they speak and understand fluent French.

[...]

FRANCE IS A COCOON FOR THE ILLUMINATI

Cocoon: “a cover that keeps someone safe or warm“.

It is as though France has been walled off from the rest of the world. Both English and French are hard languages to learn. By speaking French, the rest of the world has not much of a clue what is going on in France, except for what the Illuminati want them to know. By not speaking English, the majority of French people are locked off from new discoveries and information that may help free them, such as awareness of how socialism is keeping them enslaved.

We believe that the Illuminati made English the language of business so that the world would be easier for them to steal from, create wars in and take it over; but kept France largely separate so that they had a nice, beautiful, super-safe hiding place for themselves.

THE FRENCH HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THE WORLD

The Illuminati may have based themselves in France, because they know that the hearts and metaphysical abilities of the French are the most powerful in the world.

Once the French throw off the Satanic holds which bind them, they can free themselves and bring peace, happiness and prosperity to themselves and earth.

Dawn Pine #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

(Submitter’s Note: this is only half of the screed, cut for the sake of brevity)

11 TIPS ON RAISING YOUR DAUGHTERS ON THE RED PILL
[…]
Dawn Pine (aka TheMaleBrain) is an Israeli 40+ divorced father of 2, former casualty of the blue-pill. Since he has taken the red pill his hobbies are: working out, writing, mentoring, harem management and self improvement.
[…]
As a divorced father of two daughters, and a RVF active member, I see articles on raising sons (examples 1[http://www.returnofkings.com/93261/5-tips-to-raise-a-strong-son], 2[http://www.returnofkings.com/90283/5-things-i-learned-from-my-brothers-on-how-to-raise-a-son], 3[http://www.returnofkings.com/91029/why-you-must-raise-your-son-to-be-a-warrior] and 4[http://www.returnofkings.com/80115/5-things-i-will-teach-my-future-son], all from this year alone on ROK). Raising a son is an important matter, as most of us here at ROK are boys.

But wait a minute! 50% of the population is females. Those of us who are fathers (writer included) may also have daughters. The discussions here as I mentioned, are more about sons. What about daughters?

I could sit with myself, complain, or take it to the comments section. But that is not the way the manosphere practices. So I decided to write my own list of tips, based on my know-how so far. I have been on the red-pill for three years now, and I wish to share with my fellow readers what I have learned.

[…]
1. Teach her what guys and girls find attractive
We all know the answer to that one. But a child does not. Children are not blank slate, but they are unaware of “how the world works”. It is my responsibility as the patriarch to show them.

In order to starve the hamster in advance, I give my daughters tools and the language to understand. Kids have a very strong hamster, as do females (we all know that).

Since early times, people have used stories and myths to educate. This is truer at a young age, as they are not yet teenagers. I often use stories and examples, as kids sometime struggle with “concepts” or “genralities”.
[…]
NEXT IS THE CONCEPT OF “THE WALL”
Taking CH advice[https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/08/04/oneitis-and-the-wall-the-two-most-important-life-lessons-you-can-impart-to-your-sons-and-daughters/]:
“Tell her with uncompromising bluntness that she is pretty now, and all the boys notice her, but her prettiness will disappear faster than she knows (or can possibly know at her tender age), and there will come a time, always much sooner than she had hoped, when none of the boys will notice her.’

My daughters know that they should be married by their mid-20s. I use their mom and other moms of their friends and asking: ”How successful will her boyfriend be, if she was single?”. They look at the fathers of their friends, and at least some of the time it is obvious. My eldest told me that her mom told her that being married at 25 is too young. I replied by stating that her mother has actually no strength running after them, and that they as young moms would have the strength to do things with their children. Message well understood.

2. Show her how guys hit on girls
I day game sometimes. I don’t do it much in front of my girls, because they will cockblock me. It happened a few times before I “stopped”. I recall one time that they ran interference at a wedding, when I was about to number close a young hot girl.

But if we are in a restaurant for example, I tease the waitresses. I use pet names, boss them around a little bit and treat her as a small child. The waitresses usually take it very well, and sometime even blush.

My daughters start to giggle. “Dad, I don’t know why, but I feel good when you do that,” my elder told me. “It is because older girls are like young girls. They love it when a successful man makes fun of them” I explained. “Also, you see that the waitress was responding well. She likes it,” I add. They witnessed it, and now they know how it feels and how it looks when a guy hits on a girl and what an interaction between boys and girls looks like.

Lesson hammered again. As a side benefit, now my daughters feel better knowing that their father is “Successful”. I’ll admit that my game level is intermediate at best, but good enough is good enough.

[…]
4. Work on their femininity
We are man and we practice masculinity. Femininity? Red-pill guys? How exactly? One would assume that this is the mom’s job. So what? We all know that women are not to be trusted with responsibility. So I gladly take some of this burden upon myself.

You can do it too. The funny things is that it is not that hard. It also correspond with the red-pill.
[…]
EXAMPLE: CHORES AROUND THE HOUSE
Not my best one (to say the least), but I try to have them do feminine chores around the house: Cook with me, fold laundry and so on. Just because I live alone and do masculine and feminine chores does not mean that my daughters can’t learn it also from me.
[…]
THIRD EXAMPLE: LOOKS
In this case I have a good deal of help from their mom. She emphasizes looks, dresses well and wears makeup. Kids need to have discipline and getting dressed, even for girls is sometimes tiresome. Trust me, I use to be like that. When they sometime complain, I remind them that looks are important (see tip #1). This is where a cooperation between parents really kicks it in, and a lot of people mentioned how well they dress.

Whenever they form an opinion on someone (based on their looks), I hammer it home again. Looks are women’s top and dominant SMV component.

FORTH(sic) EXAMPLE – FUTURE CAREER
Kids do a lot of thinking on what they want to do when they grow up. That may change on an hourly, daily or monthly basis. I had my daughters move from teachers to waitresses to babysitters and to doctors – all in the course of one day.

When they come to me with the new career, I remind them that they will need to also be there for their kids when they are young. Then you see them spin the wheel to show me how it works great with a child (or more). At that time I also remind them that since they will marry a successful man (god, I hope so!) he will be the one providing for them, and they will assist.

5. Reward feminine behavior
[…]
PUNISHMENT THEMES
Taking away their time with me (for example – not getting a bed time story). This is for when they disrespect my time. Time is important to me, as they know I make efforts to be on time.
Tactical anger – my daughters have told me that they fear me. Good. If kids have no fear there will be no discipline. Other dads (or moms) may say that it is not good, and that love is enough. YEH RIGHT! I ignore or take the time to explain that fear is crucial.
Never actually lose your temper. Calm down once the point was made. If you cannot calm yourself, walk away and breathe. Losing one’s temper completely is weakness.
Not paying allowance – if it is disrespect to my money. This happens when they break stuff (on purpose or that it could have been avoided). I use less of this punishment as it correlates poorly from a time perspective.
[…]
REWARDS THEMES
Verbally – most easiest reward. Giving a good word is immediate. One must not abuse it. When you give praise, look into their eyes and mean it. Kids know when you are “half arsing” it.
Treats – you may use this on occasion. Usually amounts to a few dollars. If it is an “all-for-dollar” store even better, It gives them a sense of independence and correlate good behavior with physical reward.
Activity – “You get to pick where will go on Saturday” is one of their favorites. My daughters in particular, and kids in general sometimes like to “steer the wheel”. Giving them that opportunity (not every week!) makes them feel loved and respected, which again is a good correlation between action and reward.

8. Show what happens to “Bad Girls”
There is an appeal for the “dark side”. Even if in movies the bad person gets what’s coming, my daughters (as every other female) have that attraction for “bad behavior”. They see that it is “cool” and has rewards in the form of attention and ability to “do what you want”.

Yes, female behavior should be controlled[http://www.returnofkings.com/73131/women-must-have-their-behavior-and-decisions-controlled-by-men], but that is easier said than done. What can a divorce father do? Spanking is out of the question (legally). I have a problem with blocking the TV and internet completely.

My answer is to inoculate them as much as I can. Introducing the concept of “wrong/bad kind of attention”.

You come across a YouTube clip, say of Katy Perry. “Dad, they are showing the wrong kind of attention,” my daughters come to inform me. “I know. You realize what will happen to girls who do it?” I ask. “They will get use to it, and have a difficult time using their brain or doing stuff because they are use to it,” they answer. “She will do bad things to herself to get attention.”
[…]
11. Pick your battles
My TV fight is a lost cause. I will limit it but not take it out of the house. I will watch with them to provide red-pill guidance. I know that advice on the manosphere is to disengage the MSM, but in this case I choose not to, for my own reasons.

However, I have shown them repeatedly that TV and media should not be trusted. They have witnessed it repeatedly. I sat with them during movies, shows of different kinds and negated the messages (girl power and boys being no good). I had a lot of talks with them about it. But I know that the TV will remain in the house.

I know that some of the fights are not worth fighting. We have a specific amount of energy. You need to pick your battles and not to alienate your kids. Also, sometimes if we win it will be a Pyrrhic victory.

I consider myself stricter than most of the fathers I know, but each year I give them more space and allow them to push the boundaries. It is part of growing up. If you boundary was breached, you can either tactically get angry, or sometimes just say “NO”. But again, know when to lose.

Conclusion
There is a lot of talk about raising red-pill boys. I understand the importance. There is very little discussion on raising girls, at least that I have seen. What I write here is my lesson learned of my last three years of red-pill awakening.

I’m already waiting for the time that they’ll have boyfriends. I may AMOG them, but for sure I’ll have the talk Roosh had with his sister. This is already saved on my hard drive and on my cloud storage. The day will come (in a few years’ time) when it will be relevant. I have practiced it sometimes with girls in my harem, and they all acknowledge that the message is strong and true.

That does not mean I will be successful. I have most of the world against me, including the education system and the media. However I feel comfortable that my daughters will be way less damaged than the rest. Who knows, maybe the change back to patriarchy we are discussing will happen during their generation. In this case they will have an upper hand on other girls.

Dincel_Washington #sexist reddit.com

The irony of the ‘entitlement’ argument

A common claim leveled at incels is that they think they’re entitled to sex and relationships. This argument, in reality, is not only baseless but also backwards. Incels don’t claim to be entitled to sex, nor do they claim to deserve sex simply for existing - in fact, the exact reverse is true. Incels recognize that the only thing which, in practice, entitles anyone to sex is a sufficient amount of sexual attractiveness - nothing else. They acknowledge that in the real world, people who are universally attractive can reasonably expect sex, and people who are universally unattractive can not, no matter how entitled anyone in either group acts.

Ask yourself - how do people act who ACTUALLY feel they are entitled to sex, to the use of women’s bodies? They rape. They sexually assault. They make forceful, unwanted sexual advances towards women in reality. Where does this happen? On forums? Or in Frat houses, bars, slums, and within relationships? And yet the greatest, most concentrated vitriol is directed towards the internet words of isolated, suicidal virgins.

To add to the contradiction, the same people who make these claims tell incels that the only reason they are virgins is because they don’t respect women, or because they aren’t nice to women. The irony here is obvious - it is in fact INCELS who recognize that nothing you do, no amount of niceness, or courtesy, or respect, entitles you to sex. If anyone at all believes that certain acts or behaviors entitle one to sex, it’s those who parrot this deluded, banal advice.

Exactly, I can never fully understand why people are so bothered with us saying that looks matter.

If you say that aliens exist, you get a few chuckles here and there, many just ignore you and heck a few normies and stacies actually agree with you. Yet we have zero proof about extra terrestrials existing.

On the other hand, the second you say that looks matter a lot when it comes to dating, boom the whole world comes onto you like a ton of bricks, despite there being ample evidence out there.

The world only wants your money to be spent on women and nothing else. If you are not getting sex out of it they don't give a fuck.

Men function as resource generators for women - be it economic (betabux), social (cucks/normies), or sexual (chad). If you refuse to generate, it’s off to the scrap heap with you.

It's because they're fucking sadistic pieces of shit who twist reality so they can bully lonely, vulnerable men.

People on IT will (correctly) point out that most sexual crimes are perpetrated by existing sexual partners & male friends... neither of those groups contains any incels. Maybe the latter contains a tiny number but it's trivial.

We aren't the ones going around doing these things to women. It's utterly laughable that IT thinks anyone on these forums has the confidence to grope a woman or whatever. Literally laughable.

Simple, many actual misogynists have paid their dues by being attractive to women. Normies do by showering praise and money. Incels are no use as all we do is reveal the truth about the scam, and that’s a no-no. They have to shut that down at all costs, lest the hamster wheels stop running.

Its all mental gymnastics to rationalize that they hate us simply because were low status and ugly

Many of them are as well. But as long as they convince themselves they’re the ‘good’ virgins, they don’t have to face the fact that they are getting the exact same amount of sex as us despite ‘respecting women’.

No-one feels entitled to something they have never had. Poor people don't feel entitled to a millions dollar trust fund like the son of a rich kid feels entitled to his dads money.

Incels don't feel entitled to stacies pussy like a chad who has had hundreds of girls throw themselves his way.

People who have never been popular or received attention don't feel entitled to becoming a holywood celebrity.

Sure poor kids might grow up dreaming of being rich, unpopular kids might grow up dreaming of becoming famous and incels might grow up dreaming of a loving relationship.

But none of them feel entitled to it lmao, it's the other way around. The jock thinks he will become an athlete/slayer, the popular stacy thinks she will become famous, the rich kid thinks he will inherit his dads money and become a successful businessman.

Exactly. It’s like telling an starving Nigerian “um, you’re not entitled to filet minion” when he’s never consumed more than 17 calories at a time.

Samuel James #fundie patheos.com

First of all, Garbarino’s subtle implication that the reaction from pastors might be different if the mayor were not a “lesbian Democrat” is absurd, unfair and more than a tad manipulative. It also seems strange given that he admits that the request is “disturbing” and “a violation” of church-state relations. Is he implicating himself here?

Secondly, I don’t buy the “evangelism at any cost” argument. Yes, pastors should want government officials to hear the Gospel. Yes, the pastors of Jesus’s flocks should be preaching gospel-centered hope.

But a group of city attorneys’ scanning sermon manuscripts for the words “homosexual,” “gay,” and “sin” hardly constitutes an evangelistic encounter. Evangelism is not merely any in-your-face occurence of Bible + person; otherwise we should be encouraging Christians to–as the mayor’s office is doing–subvert law and order to get the message out, perhaps by trashing an abortion clinic and leaving tracts or by picketing a mosque. When Christians are careful to explain why such behavior is not acceptable, they emphasize that the how of Gospel ministry matters just as much as the what. The how of turning in sermon manuscripts to the city government would be an endorsement of injustice in the name of evangelism.

Third, the phrase “inflammatory untruths” is one that needs authoritative definition. The trick is deciding who has that authority. Does Mayor Parker? Does the Texas legislature? Does each congregation decide? Garbarino?

Arguing that pastors should have nothing to hide is the right response to the wrong issue. If this case involved a local pastor’s running for public office, then we could naturally expect his and his church’s teachings to come under scrutiny. In that case I too would say that pastors ought have nothing shameful to hide. But this subpoena concerns local pastors who aren’t even named in the civil suit against the government. The possibility of embarrassing or unbiblical teaching is as irrelevant here as the possibility that Michael Brown would have grown up to be a criminal. It’s a mistake of sequence: The mayor’s office is unjust and unlawful in demanding these sermons, therefore, the pastors should not have to justify themselves to it.

I understand Garbarino’s concern that Christians maintain primary citizenship in the kingdom of God and not conflate that with citizenship in America. That’s a message that needs to be heard. But it’s not the point here. The point is that submitting to this gross act of bullying would be disastrous not just for religious folk but for citizens of Houston in general. Government transgression of civil liberty doesn’t just happen to one particular group; when it happens, it is a violation of everybody’s civil liberty. Pastoral resistance to Mayor Parker’s demands is crucial for the upholding of law on behalf of everyone in Houston, straight or gay, black or white, pastor or layperson.

Caamib #fundie reddit.com

My parents did two mistakes-

A more obvious one is that they never did anything to help me with a phobia that made me unable to meet girls in the romantic context IRL until I was 18. This was something that can't be forgiven. It was obvious I can't and they did nothing.

In the long run, more importantly but something I can less blame them for - they never taught me to rape and maim women. But that I can understand more since this wasn't needed when they got married and became needed in my county only at the turn of a century in case of men who can't use seduction.

A modern woman is an insane sexual receptacle. She cannot understand the idea of any relationship. She just wants to be fucked and tossed and will hate anybody who fails to do so.

A non-seductive man who doesn't break a woman's legs, spine and teeth is immediately seen as a loser.

Mack Major #fundie facebook.com

"Afterward they traveled from town to town across the entire island until finally they reached Paphos, where they met a Jewish sorcerer, a false prophet named Bar-Jesus. He had attached himself to the governor, Sergius Paulus, who was an intelligent man. The governor invited Barnabas and Saul to visit him, for he wanted to hear the word of God.

But Elymas, the sorcerer (as his name means in Greek), interfered and urged the governor to pay no attention to what Barnabas and Saul said. He was trying to keep the governor from believing. Saul, also known as Paul, was filled with the Holy Spirit, and he looked the sorcerer in the eye. Then he said,

“You son of the devil, full of every sort of deceit and fraud, and enemy of all that is good! Will you never stop perverting the true ways of the Lord? Watch now, for the Lord has laid his hand of punishment upon you, and you will be struck blind. You will not see the sunlight for some time.”

Instantly mist and darkness came over the man’s eyes, and he began groping around begging for someone to take his hand and lead him. When the governor saw what had happened, he became a believer, for he was astonished at the teaching about the Lord." Acts 13:6-12

The example in the scripture passage above provides us with a clear understanding of how witchcraft operates. Witchcraft is used in our day to prevent people from believing the gospel.

A female who practices witchcraft is called a witch. A male who practices witchcraft is called a sorcerer (sometimes referred to as a warlock). *Behind every opposition to the gospel being preached or taught is someone attempting to use witchcraft.

Witches and sorcerers are constantly opposing the gospel message, always standing in opposition to the gospel preacher.

Witchcraft also blinds. That is its power. It blinds would-be believers from being able to understand the gospel message, lest they understand, believe and become born-again.

It also blinds through creating smokescreen arguments and getting the preacher to devolve into back and forth arguing and endless disputation. In this way the message gets drowned out in the noise of senseless bickering.

Whenever you see individuals seeking to get a preacher or teacher of the Bible to argue back and forth with them - whether its online or offline - almost without fail the opposing person is trying to use witchcraft.

Paul recognized this in the instance above. He actually gave us 5 keys to dealing with witches and sorcerers:

1. Be filled with the Holy Spirit. Paul didn't operate against witchcraft in his own human power. He used Holy Ghost power - something no witch can oppose or operate against.

2. He preached the right message. Paul didn't preach fluffy love and sloppy grace. He preached the straightforward authoritarian gospel of Jesus Christ - and He did it with a demonstration of power. There's only one gospel message - not two or three. If you're not preaching and teaching the true gospel, you'll be no match for those using occult power against you. In fact, you'll be aiding them.

3. Paul wasn't afraid to confront and call out the sorcerer. Neither should we be. He knew his spiritual authority. He understood the power in being a servant of Jesus Christ. And it made him wise and fearless. So should we be.

4. Paul stared directly into the eyes of the sorcerer. This is important! You ever hear of something called 'the evil eye?' It's used by serious practitioners of dark or black magic to put a spell on someone.

When Paul looked Elymas directly in his eye, he was pulling spiritual rank over him. He was about to unleash supernatural Holy Ghost power against the guy using supernatural demon power. One serious look from Paul was enough to completely neutralize the evil lurking in the gaze of the sorcerer.

5. This is interesting: the blindness Elymas the sorcerer was attempting to place over the governor so that he couldn't 'see' the gospel fell onto himself instead. In other words: his blinding spell was unleashed against himself, and he temporarily lost his ability to physically see.

This is more proof of the type of spell he was trying to cast over the governor. It was a blinding spell. But when confronted with someone carrying the power of the Holy Ghost, the spell worked in reverse - and the sorcerer/witch ended up being the victim of his own evil intents.

^These stories are not shared in the Bible without reason. God wants us to know how to battle successfully against the forces of darkness that are hell-bent on stopping and destroying us as believers. Right now witchcraft is rampant in the land: especially if you live in America, Canada, England, Australia, India, and many African nations.

As Christians we cannot afford to play with these things, nor can we turn a blind eye (no pun intended) to the reality of these forces. Because they're being unleashed against us in ways like never before, whether we acknowledge it or not. Hollywood, the music industry, internet and social media companies and even politics are chock full of occult activity aimed directly at the Church of Jesus.

We must arm ourselves with HOLY GHOST power and knowledge in order to overcome these opposing forces. And notice it's called the 'Holy' Ghost? That means you must be holy in order to house His awesome power and energy in your life!

You cannot have God's power if you're half-stepping in your walk with Christ. It's time to go all in or be all out - but no more straddling fences!

Are you up to the challenge? I hope you are - because you're going to need His power like never before in this hour. God bless.

various incels #fundie reddit.com

(throwMeAwayAnomous)
Some memories of my youth that should have been telltale signs for an incel future

Sixth grade:

Girls were playing a game where they tapped the crotch of dudes in class and other classes to mark them as theirs until another girl tapped them. As weird as it was, I really wanted to be part of it, but they only did it to the popular boys.

High school:

All of the boys and girls swapping their first school pictures with one another, but nobody wanted to give me one, or get one from me. I tried to give the girl I liked a picture and she threw it on the ground.

Still high school:

A girl in an unmonitored class (no teacher) started hitting me after I told her she was acting like a bitch. I started fighting back, and three chads/normies stood up and told me that if I hit her they'd hit me, forcing me to take her punches. For two years I was called a "bitch" for being beat up by a girl.

More high school:

Some normie stole an English test without the answers sheet, and asked if I could write the answers. After the entirety of the school took the test, some got caught with the answers I created, and tried to rat me out. I lied and said it wasn't me, but the boyfriend of a girl who got caught beat me up after school in an attempt to force me to confess to the school. Nobody ever mentioned the normie who stole the test. Jokes on them though: I told the school I created the answers, but didn't steal the test, and ratted out the normie who stole it. The guy ended up breaking out in tears in front of the gym teacher who was pressing him for answers. He got expelled, and I only got a warning (but I think my mom dying at the start of the school year might have provided me some leniency).

More high school because fuck it:

Boys and girls snickering in class when I told them how my mother died after they forced me to tell them, because they thought I was lying about it to score sympathy points.

There is much more, but the more I begin to remember the things I surpressed, the more I realize how true this place is.

(BrigandEileen)
Remember kids, if you don't want to end up like this loser, unloved and rejected, shower daily and work on your pEr$0nality.

(ThrowChadDownTheWell)
In my country it is customary for men and women to greet by a kiss on the cheek. Not always, but it's common between people who see each other everyday, nothing romantic or anything about it. In high school, girls would do that to everyone with the sole exception of me, they'd only maybe say hi from 5 meters away if they didn't ignore me completely. Really that's how I should have realized back then that I'm seen as someone completely disgusting.

(choosebaseoftwo)
Holy fuck. Sigh. I am terribly sorry man. It's fucking over. This is our lives forever. I was reading something from yesterday about the universe might repeat itself and all this will happen again. We are cursed for always and eternity. I don't know why. Nothing can ever save us. We are stuck in this living hell forever.

(throwMeAwayAnomous)
So even death can't save us... that's actually the one thing I hope can take this misery away from me, so I'm going to choose not to believe what you wrote about it repeating. Fuck this.

(milk-tree)
Damn dude that's rough. Sorry about your mom. My mom was the only female to ever show any type of love to me.

(NihilisticNoose)
Huh, I always thought my middle school was the only one that played that "game". In my old school the day after the nut tap the popular guys grabbed the girls' boobs. Pre-teens groping each other as a part of a """game"""

(throwMeAwayAnomous)
Kids are sexualizing each other from a young age, and it's around that time the bullying begins.

(BlackPillRevolution)
Fuck school... one of the worst years of my life and incredibly pointless and monotonous

You go there to learn how shitty humanity is

(-CANT_STUMP_TRUMP-)
Rough stuff dude.

A girl in an unmonitored class (no teacher) started hitting me after I told her she was acting like a bitch. I started fighting back, and three chads/normies stood up and told me that if I hit her they'd hit me, forcing me to take her punches. For two years I was called a "bitch" for being beat up by a girl.

Damn, that fucking sucks. That's why we gymcel.

David J. Stewart #fundie jesusisprecious.org

Dead Works Are Man's Works

Cain tried to impress God with the work of his hands. Cain worked hard tilling his fields day and night, irrigating and weeding daily. Cain grew some nice crops, a bumper harvest no doubt, and brought the best of the best to offer to God. The Lord instantly rejected Cain's DEAD WORKS!!! They were “dead” because they were based in human effort, and not upon God's redemptive plan for mankind. Isaiah 64:6 warns that all of man's self-righteousness is as “filthy rags” in God's sight. Man's very best is offensive to our holy God. This is a difficult truth for many people to grasp. You could spend your entire adult life helping, building and sacrificially giving to operate orphanages for poor, starving and naked little children, and yet, go straight to Hell to burn in the torments of God's wrath for ever and ever in your sins. No amount of good deeds can counter the evil deeds (Ecclesiastes 12:14), manipulative ungodly thoughts (Proverbs 24:12) and idle words (Matthew 12:36), for which all men must give account at the Judgment Seat of God.

Ungodly Playboy singer and actor, Frank Sinatra (one of the shady “Rat Pack”), donated $100,000,000 of his amassed fortune upon his death to help suffering children in orphanages. That was a nice gesture, but not one penny of Sinatra's philanthropy can buy him out of the Lake of Fire. Sinatra was a lifelong shallow Catholic, trusting in the sacraments of a Mary-worshipping cult to save him. Sinatra was an outspoken critic against organized religion, but he never professed any faith in Jesus Christ either. By all indications Sinatra died in his sins without having ever personally received Jesus Christ as His Savior. So sad! So tragic!

gendercritfem and others #transphobia reddit.com

From /r/"two"xchromosomes: TIM gets excited by forcing other women to change around him, "cuddling" with them at the afterparty. Classic AGP sleepover fantasy.

image

Ah, yes, it's the "small little everyday things", like ogling women in dressing rooms. Oh, I'm sorry, did I say women? I forgot, they're "girls".

“At the end of the night another bridesmaid and I were so exhausted that we slept on each other basically cuddling at the after party.”

You felt up an unconscious woman.

“It was just something girl friends do. All these things are just those small things that all my life I've felt I've been missing out on because of my situation.”

Nope, as a woman, I can assure you that I've never groped any of my unconscious friends before. In fact, it seems like people in your situation tend to do this more than actual women...

“For one of the first times in my life I finally was able to feel like who I really am”

A creep? A sexual harasser?

“a woman.”

Fuck you.

@CallaAETHIOPICA

Me either. I hug my friends for sure, but we aren’t constantly cuddling or even holding hands. TIMs have such weird views about women.

@gendercritfem

This just in: heterosexual men view women primarily through the lens of their sexuality.

More on this breaking story tonight at 10:00.

@ringsofsaturnine

And women find this hard to report, because they're told that if they feel uncomfortable with it, or speak out about it, they're transphobic bigots. Rapists never stop looking for loopholes, and this identity politics shit is their holy grail of loopholes.

@gendercritfem

Yeah, it's really Kafkaesque how a subculture of cross-dressing homosexuals has gotten hijacked by a bunch of straight male predators, and we now have to take them seriously as a political movement.

@Didush

In their endless quest for validation, they absolutely HAVE to push their way into every female space. They've found their way into places like r/tallgirls, r/makeupaddiction, and even fucking r/PCOS (!!!!!). But there's no greater irony than seeing XY men post in a sub called twoxchromosomes. It would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact that people apparently are so willing to concede these spaces to them, which is kinda disturbing

@gendercritfem

The worst is on the lesbian subs, where they're super concentrated because, as it turns out, there are a lot more guys who are into women than there are women.

Also, lmao at them going on PCOS. Yeah, if a TIM ever gets ovarian cysts, I'll consider him fully welcome there, but I'll be thoroughly impressed.

@__Lannister__

I literally just saw a comment the other day in the main lesbian sub made by a TIM saying that lesbians are welcome there. It pissed me off and made me peak again. OF COURSE I BELONG HERE IN A SUB NAMED AFTER ME - an actual lesbian. It's everyone else that doesn't belong there! It was like a house guest eating my cereal telling me I'm welcome to eat my cereal. No shit you fucking freak.

@ringsofsaturnine

They're fucking settler colonialists of gender. You invite them in as a guest, and they shit on your floor and when you complain, kick you out of your own house. And steal your name and start pretending they're you and you never even lived there, never mind existed.

@gendercritfem

Oh dear, I'm just trying to imagine the dread and horror every woman in that sub must feel at the prospect of being compared to a TIM. Imagine how horrified and disgusted they must feel to be told that yes, the worst insults they've ever heard are right, and they really are just the same as a man.

@Iittlewolfie

I just read that post, fuckin barf. So many handmaidens going “Thank you wow our struggles are so similar 💖”, saying he’s a “goddess”.

Libfem women bow down to TIMs. They can’t help themselves. Doing so satisfies their savior complex. It makes them feel good about themselves to go “yaaas queen we are exactly the same”. Same navel-gazing nonsense as always. Not only does it make them look selfless and caring, but they also get to placate men. It’s obvious that even though many women say they see transwomen as exactly the same as us because it’s the nice thing to do, we don’t.

Libfem women don’t treat TIMs like women. They treat TIMs like special men.

@ringsofsaturnine

But how do you know they have XY??? Do you karyotype every person you meet??? Do you know your own karyotype??? No? So Trans. Women. Are. Women. Repeat after me. And talking about chromosomes is literal violence. There are no differences between women, you cisnormative transphobic TERF. /s

AbuIncelAlAustrali & hhhh__ #sexist reddit.com

(AbuIncelAlAustrali)
My "Chad friend" at work today said that I am not successful in attracting foids because I am too nice to them, treat them like human beings and I don't d3grade them.

In the real world I treat foids like how I treat men when it is absolutely necessarily to interact with those foul beasts. As a result Chad thinks I treat them with respect and human beings. Chad said he randomly grabs foids by the ass and other quite rapey things and he said that the foids love it.

I did tell him in reply that all that matters is looks and height but he was adamant that if I treated roasties like s3x objects like he did I would slay.

He is of course incorrect but no fucking way I'm forcing myself to be assholes for those things. This interaction with Chad made me hate roasties even more.

I only talk to him because he used to post on /b/ and misc hence he is not fully cucked. All the other men are white knighting soyboys and of course I am not going to be friends with a foid ever again, they can fucking get r3kt.

(hhhh__)
My Chad friend openly stares at foids like an obsessed stalker, and still gets their numbers. He's treated all his gf's like shit, calling them ugly and whatnot. They stay with him until he ditches them. He won't believe me when I say the only reason he hasn't been metoo'd is because he's 6'1 and good looking.

My other friend, Chadlite, is a total sadist that enjoys making them cry. Not one girl has ever broken up with him, and he's alpha widowed many. Explain that to me, IT.

Tonus #fundie mmo-champion.com

Question for the other guys out there:

How many of you had an experience in college where a girl was initially pretty unresponsive or even kind of weakly defensive but suddenly really got into it after you made a few moves? I certainly did, and it wasn't a situation where she was blackout drunk. She just ended up in my bed on some pretext (I think her roommate was hooking up with someone, but she had other options besides climbing into a twin bed with a single guy so it seemed pretty clear what her intent was). Her actions after getting in bed left me pretty confused, she was totally unresponsive to kissing and groping but didn't stop me. However, when I did the right thing she was suddenly all over me. I kind of figured out the boundaries through trial and error. On subsequent nights, I kept pushing and they gradually expanded too (lol).

I wasn't some sort of sexual predator, I was just a shy kid. I read the (nonverbal) signals correctly and it worked out, we dated for a few months after that.

While you might think this isn't related to the case, I think it is. The cultural (and maybe biological) necessity for the male to be aggressive and the female to put the brakes on things tends to really effect how these things go. And us males are stupid, we don't read the signs nearly as well as women hope we do. However we do share stories, and a lot of guys encourage their friends to be aggressive too, to make moves. That's when things can go wrong. It's messed up but it's also the reality.

Once you get older though, it all becomes a lot more natural and easier. You understand how to read signals and you learn what boundaries not to cross. Girls are also better at communicating those boundaries once they've had a few experiences themselves.

That's why, when I hear something like this, I think: here's a guy who's gotten the wrong message, but he's young and hasn't figured this whole dating/sex thing out yet. Make sure he knows that what he did is very wrong, punish him, but nothing that will impact his life long term. He deserves the chance to prove whether he's learned from his mistake.

Scrod #sexist #psycho mmo-champion.com

[ in response to this article http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/alberta-judge-delivers-blistering-rebuke-of-lower-court-sex-assault-decision-1.3694814 regarding a boy being acquitted for raping a girl depite the girl clearly saying no and fighting back ]

Question for the other guys out there:

How many of you had an experience in college where a girl was initially pretty unresponsive or even kind of weakly defensive but suddenly really got into it after you made a few moves? I certainly did, and it wasn't a situation where she was blackout drunk. She just ended up in my bed on some pretext (I think her roommate was hooking up with someone, but she had other options besides climbing into a twin bed with a single guy so it seemed pretty clear what her intent was). Her actions after getting in bed left me pretty confused, she was totally unresponsive to kissing and groping but didn't stop me. However, when I did the right thing she was suddenly all over me. I kind of figured out the boundaries through trial and error. On subsequent nights, I kept pushing and they gradually expanded too (lol).

I wasn't some sort of sexual predator, I was just a shy kid. I read the (nonverbal) signals correctly and it worked out, we dated for a few months after that.

While you might think this isn't related to the case, I think it is. The cultural (and maybe biological) necessity for the male to be aggressive and the female to put the brakes on things tends to really effect how these things go. And us males are stupid, we don't read the signs nearly as well as women hope we do. However we do share stories, and a lot of guys encourage their friends to be aggressive too, to make moves. That's when things can go wrong. It's messed up but it's also the reality.

Once you get older though, it all becomes a lot more natural and easier. You understand how to read signals and you learn what boundaries not to cross. Girls are also better at communicating those boundaries once they've had a few experiences themselves.

That's why, when I hear something like this, I think: here's a guy who's gotten the wrong message, but he's young and hasn't figured this whole dating/sex thing out yet. Make sure he knows that what he did is very wrong, punish him, but nothing that will impact his life long term. He deserves the chance to prove whether he's learned from his mistake.

Jim #fundie blog.jim.com

Kathy Forth offed herself, leaving a lengthy suicide note in which she accused numerous men of sexually harassing her, and the entire society of ignoring this terrible sexual harassment, thereby driving her to suicide.

Fat, pushing forty, and supposedly suffers unbearable amounts of sexual assault.

Back when she was hot, the amount of sexual assault she suffered was entirely bearable.

All women love drama, all women create drama, and all women create drama because they are looking for a spanking from a strong man. All women are like that. Childlessness and the lack of a strong man in their lives greatly worsens this problem.

Not all women make false accusations of sexual harassment, not all women kill themselves, but all disruptively create drama and problems: The ones not under the authority of an alpha male, and the ones that have remained childless while their fertility is running out, create more disruption, more drama, and more problems.

They are all cruising for a spanking, every single one.

All the sides in this debate that are permitted within the Overton Window are the same insane side. Scott is evil, depraved, decadent, and insane, #metoo is even more evil and more insane, and the fat old cat lady who offed herself was ridiculous, hilarious, evil, sinful and insane, her over the top evil, and her over the top vanity being hilariously funny to any sane person. Any remotely sane person commenting on that reddit thread gets instabanned. Anyone who manages to post twice on that thread is evil or insane, and most likely both. That thread is a conversation in the lunatic asylum.

Every woman lusts for drama. Fat, and pushing forty, people were ignoring her: Men were ignoring her. So she decided to go out in a blaze of glory, the ultimate “Hey look at me” opera, a gigantic soap opera of martyrdom.

Kathy Forth was evil and spent her life ruining other people’s lives out of depraved, foolish, and ridiculous sexual lust.

It is normal, and indeed universal, for childless unowned women who are fertile age, or not very long past fertile age, to destructively and self destructively destroy their social and organizational environment, burn the family assets, disrupt the business, divorce, etc. Kathy took this to extremes.

All Women Are Like That. Kathy more than others.

When a woman creates drama she is unconsciously, and in Kathy’s case quite consciously, hoping to smoke the alpha male out of hiding so that he will take possession of her and give her a spanking. She flat out tells us in her suicide note. In her suicide note she tells of her fantasies for powerful alpha male to take possession of her, to own her, to command her, supposedly in order to protect her from all this supposedly terrible sexual harassment.

This is what female lust looks like. It is not genitally focused like male lust, but that does not make it better, it makes it worse. Much worse.

During her fertile years, a lustful woman is not funny. Past fertile age, a lustful childless woman is hilarious.

Not every woman makes false rape and false sexual harassment allegations, but every woman acts disruptively, every unowned fertile age woman acts more disruptively and causes great damage, childless unowned women even more so, and childless unowned women continue doing so well past fertile age, while women with children calm down as their fertile period ends, particularly women who have previously experienced the firm hand of the father of their children.

Cardinal George Pell #fundie abc.net.au

George Pell sentenced to six years' jail for sexually abusing two choirboys

Cardinal George Pell has been sentenced to six years' jail for sexually abusing two choirboys when he was Catholic archbishop of Melbourne in the 1990s.

Pell, 77, was found guilty by a jury last December of sexually abusing the choirboys after a Sunday mass in December 1996 and then assaulting one of them a second time two months later.

The man who was once Australia's most powerful Catholic sat in the dock dressed in a black shirt and a grey blazer, without a clerical collar, as County Court Chief Judge Peter Kidd delivered his sentence.

The chief judge described Pell's abuse of two choirboys in the sacristy at St Patrick's Cathedral as "a brazen and forcible sexual attack on the victims".

"The acts were sexually graphic, both victims were visibly and audibly distressed during the offending," he said.

"There is an added layer of degradation and humiliation that each of your victims must have felt in knowing that their abuse had been witnessed by the other."

"There was a clear relationship of trust with the victims and you breached that trust and abused your position to facilitate this offending," the chief judge said.

"I would characterise these abuses and breaches as grave."

Pell will serve a minimum of three years and eight months in jail before he will be eligible for parole.

He continues to deny he sexually abused the boys and has lodged an appeal against his conviction on three grounds, including that the jury verdict was unreasonable.

'Breathtakingly arrogant' offending

Chief Judge Kidd said the power imbalance between the victims and Pell as a senior church official was "stark".

"The brazenness of your conduct is indicative of your sense of authority and power in relation to the victims," he said.

"You may have thought you could control the situation by reason of your authority, as archbishop, whether or not that belief was well-founded.

"Such a state of mind would have been extraordinarily arrogant, but the offending which the jury has found you have engaged in was in any view breathtakingly arrogant."

The chief judge said Pell's abuse had had a "significant and long-lasting impact" on the wellbeing of one of his victims, whom he referred to as J.

"J has experienced a range of negative emotions which he has struggled to deal with for many years since this offending occurred … he has found it difficult because of issues of trust and anxiety.

"I take into account the profound impact your offending has had on J's life."

The chief judge said he did not have the benefit of a victim impact statement from his other victim, referred to as R, who died of a heroin overdose in 2014 and never reported the abuse.

"However on the basis of J's account at trial I am able to say your offending must have had an immediate and significant impact on R," Chief Judge Kidd said.

"Whilst it is not possible for me to quantify the harm caused, or articulate precisely how it impacted on R in the long run, I have no doubt that it did in some way."

The chief judge gave permission for the hearing to be broadcast live by media outlets and the court room was packed with abuse survivors, advocates and journalists.

[...]

Pell's crimes committed at cathedral

The court heard that Pell abused the choirboys, who cannot be identified, after celebrating one of his first Sunday masses as archbishop at St Patrick's Cathedral in East Melbourne.

He caught them drinking altar wine in the priest's sacristy, which was off limits to the choir.

One of the former choirboys gave evidence Pell had planted himself in the doorway and said something like "what are you doing here?" or "you're in trouble".

The then-archbishop moved his robes to expose his penis and forced one of the boys' heads down towards it.

The trial heard one of the choirboys asked: "Can you let us go? We didn't do anything."

But instead Pell moved onto the other choirboy. He pushed the boy's head down to his crotch and orally raped him.

After a few minutes, Pell ordered the boy to remove his pants and then molested him as he masturbated.

Pell abused that boy a second time two months later, after another Sunday mass when he pushed him up against the wall of a corridor in the back of the cathedral and groped him briefly.

Evidence of the abuse came from that former choirboy alone, who was the victim of two assaults.

The Court of Appeal is expected to hear Pell's appeal over two days in June.

DebatesNotBans #sexist reddit.com

I dont identify as incel\robot, but I have lurked\contributed to the scene for many, many years now.

Throughout the years, I've gathered some female """friends""" I occasionally hang out and talk about anime\games with. I achieved this through my extremely good personality and understanding of (socially retaraded) women in general.

One girl in particular stood out, however. Over the many years I'd known her, she would drop "hints" of interest. One time, she said she "came to classe sjust to see me", and at a few points, we got to casually discussing how life would be like if we got married. Point being, she said a LOT of intimate shit to subtly show interest.

I had met this girl when I was in middle school, and I had known her for over 10 years at this point. One day, she seemed especially in a romanatic mood, so I confidently asked her out romantically, and she quickly accepted.

A few days later, she was telling me about how she told all her friends about "us". Here's the kicker: About one week after her accepting, she said she wanted to "call this off". She wanted to stop being "official". We havent spoken or seen each other IRL since.

And that was it. Over 10 years of her showing increasingly higher levels of interest. Over 10 years of "building rapport", for about 7 days of being "official", before she -for some reason no doubt unrelated to looks- decided she didnt want it anymore. This didnt exactly phase me though, as I had already digested hundreds of Blackpills. (And I could very easily see this coming)

So, that's my [Looks + Personality] score. 10years x 52weeks = 520 weeks of building rapport for 1 week of GF. That's a 1/520 = ~0.192% "Rapport-to-relationship" ratio. Not even 1\5th of a percent. Beautiful.

MORAL OF THE STORY: You can have THE best personality in the world, and you can MAYBE find a few women who are slightly more interesting than a brick wall. But if your looks arent good enough, they'll NEVER want a relationship with you. Even the ugliest, least physically and mentally attractive women will think you're disgusting to be with. All that personality you've built will mean NOTHING once she looks at your fucking face and body and decides you're "not good enough".

I'm not even mad at this point. I just think they're being retarded. They could be happy with someone they actually connect with, but "OH NO WAIT HOLD UP, the guy's physical appearence isnt 8\10+, so ewwwwww!"

OR, maybe I'm completely wrong. CMV, IT lurkers. I'm listening.

Edit: Oh and please forgive my massive wall of text. I'm fucking stupid, please be patient.

OpposingView #fundie religion.blogs.cnn.com

Most atheists were probably raised by their mommies and not their daddies. Because if they had been raised by their daddies they would have learned some respect (particularly, to have respect for God). Their daddy would have gone up side their head if they had mouthed off or said the wrong thing back to him. Whereas, their mommy only tolerated it. And that's the problem in the world today, too many people have been raised by their mommies and feel they can say anything at all about God, Jesus, or anyone else, and feel it's all okay and people should tolerate it. Some people even go so far as cursing and swearing when talk about others. Clearly such people must have been raised by their mommies, because they have no concept of what respect is. But one thing is clear, whoever it was that raised them, they clearly wasn't raised right…

Matthew 12:26 – But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

Andre Vltchek #fundie 21stcenturywire.com

In Washington, Regime Change Is Truly and Urgently Needed!

I am surprised that no one else is saying it, writing it, shouting it at each and every corner:

It is not Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Iran that are in dire and crucial need of ‘regime change’. It is the United States of America, it is the entire European Union; in fact, the entire West.

And the situation is urgent.

The West has gone mad; it has gone so to speak, bananas; mental. And people there are too scared to even say it, to write about it.

One country after another is falling, being destroyed, antagonized, humiliated, impoverished. Entire continents are treated as if they were inhabited by irresponsible toddlers, who are being chased and disciplined by sadistic adults, with rulers and belts in their hands yelling with maniacal expressions on their faces: “Behave, do as we say, or else!”

It all would be truly comical, if it weren’t so depressing. But… nobody is laughing. People are shaking, sweating, crying, begging, puking, but they are not chuckling.

I see it everywhere where I work: in Asia, Latin America, Asia and the Middle East.

But why?

It is because North American and European countries are actually seriously delivering their ultimatum: you either, obey us and prostrate yourself in front of us, or we will break you, violate you, and if everything else fails, we will kill your leaders and all of those who are standing in our way.

This is not really funny, is it? Especially considering that it is being done to almost all the countries in what is called Latin America, to many African and Middle Eastern nations, and to various states on the Asian continent.

And it is all done ‘professionally’, with great sadistic craftsmanship and rituals. No one has yet withstood ‘regime change’ tactics, not even the once mighty Soviet Union, nor tremendous China, or proud and determined Afghanistan.

Cuba, Venezuela, DPRK and Syria may be the only countries that are still standing. They resisted and mobilized all their resources in order to survive; and they have survived, but at a tremendous price.

The victims keep crying. A few independent countries keep expressing their outrage. But so far, there is no grand coalition, which would be ready to fight and defend each other: “one for all, all for one”.

Until the recent ‘rebellion’ at the UN, no one has been openly and seriously suggesting that international law should apply to all nations of the world, equally.

People talk about ‘peace’. Many are begging the brigands to ‘to stop’, to ‘have mercy’, to show some compassion. But, neither Europe nor North America has ever shown any compassion, for long, terrible centuries. Look at the map of the beginning of the 20th century, for instance: the entire world was colonized, plundered and subjugated.

Now it is all moving in the same direction. If the West is not stopped, our planet may not survive at all. And let us be realistic: begging, logical arguments and goodwill will not stop Washington, Paris or London from plundering and enslaving.

Anyone who has at least some basic knowledge of world history knows that.

So why is the world still not forging some true resistance?

Is Venezuela going to be the last straw? And if not Venezuela, that is if Venezuela is allowed to fall, is it going to be Nicaragua, Cuba or Iran next? Is anything going to propel people into action?

Are we all just going to look passively how, the socialist Venezuela, a country which has already given so much to the world, Venezuela which managed to create beautiful visions and concepts for our humanity, is going to be burned to ashes, and then robbed of all of its dreams, its resources and of its freedom?

Are we all such cowards? Is this what we – human beings – have actually become; been reduced to? Cowards and cattle, selfish and submissive beings; slaves?

All this, simply because people are too scared to confront the empire? Because they prefer to hide and to pretend that what is so obvious, is actually not taking place?

Therefore, let me pronounce it, so at least my readers do not have that ‘luxury’ of claiming that they were not told:

“This world is being brutalized and controlled by the fascist clique of Western nations. There is no ‘democracy’ left in this world, as there is near zero respect for international law in North American and European capitals. Colonialism has returned in full force. Western imperialism is now almost fully controlling the world.”

And begging, trust me – begging and talking of peace is not going to help.

During WWII, fascism had to be stopped. If not, it was going to devour the entire planet.

In the past, tens of millions have already died fighting for freedom and for our mankind.

Yes, some nations tried to compromise and negotiate with Nazi Germany, but we all know where it all ended.

Now, the situation is the same. Or worse, perhaps much worse, because the West has nukes and a tremendous propaganda apparatus: it controls human brains all over the world with ‘mass media’, and ‘education’.

And because the citizens of the West are now much more brainwashed than the Germans and Italians were in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s; more brainwashed, more scared, submissive and more ‘disciplined’.

Look, seriously: are the people who are now writing those “peace essays”, in which they argue with the Western regime about who is right and who is wrong, seriously thinking that they are going to move people like Donald Trump, or Pompeo, or Abrams, or Rubio?

Do they believe that Washington is going to stop murdering millions of people all over the world? Or that the neo-colonialist plunder would stop, after the US Congress and Senate suddenly understands that it has been at the wrong side of history?

This is not some rhetorical question. I am serious: I demand answers!

Does ‘peace movement’ thinks that by amassing arguments it could stop Western expansionism? Yes or no?

Do they believe that Pompeo or Trump will suddenly hit their foreheads and exclaim: “You people are correct! We did not see this!” And call their troops, their thugs and mercenaries back?

If not, if this is not what peace movements believe would be done by North American and European leaders, then why all those thousands of wasted pages?

Would you go near a crocodile that is ready to devour an innocent child, and try to reason with it? Would you, seriously? Do you think it would stop, drop a few tears, wag its tail and leave?

Sometimes I tend to believe that ‘peace movements’ in the West are making things worse. They create false hopes, and they behave as if the empire is some entity that has a soul, and understands logic. They grossly underestimate the threat; the danger.

And they tend to analyze the Western threat from a Western perspective, using Western logic.

It somehow gets lost in interpretation that fascism, terror, and bestiality have to be confronted and fought.

One cannot negotiate with a group of countries which are already bathed in the blood of some 80% of the planet. If it was to happen, it would just be a mockery and it would simply humiliate everyone that is sincerely trying to stop the assassins.

Right now, Venezuela needs solidarity. It requires direct help, actions; not words. And so do many other countries.

Instead, it gets an endless avalanche of best wishes, as well as premature obituaries.

The Bolivarian Revolution has gotten plenty of colorful words. But what it urgently needs is volunteers, money, and internationalist brigades!

I know that billions of people all over the world are now cheering from their armchairs; in fact, doing absolutely nothing, while also spending zero. Their love for Venezuela is ‘platonic’.

I have just left Syria, where I was covering the Idlib war zone. There was not one single foreigner near me, during those days. Eva Bartlett and Vanessa Beeley usually work all over the toughest areas in Syria, but how many others do? And most of the time we work with near zero backing, just because we feel that it is our moral obligation to inform humanity.

I am wondering, how many foreigners are fighting for Venezuela, right now?

Who is going to face the Western spooks implanted into the Caracas and the Venezuelan borders with Colombia and Brazil? A few RT and TeleSur reporters, those true heroes, yes, but who else?

Only direct action can save Venezuela, and the world.

This is no time for debates.

This is worse, much worse than the late 1930’s.

The proverbial crocodile is here; its enormous ugly mouth open, ready to devour yet one more brilliant, proud country.

It is time to stick a big metal rod into its mouth. Now, immediately; before it gets too late.

Let us shout LONG LIVE VENEZUELA! But with our hands, muscles and purses, not just with our mouths.

And let us not be scared to declare: if anywhere, it is Washington where regime change is truly and urgently needed!

various incels #sexist #dunning-kruger #quack incels.co

(Silverandgold)
Even when I was younger and more of a normal man, not a sexually frustrated nihilistic misanthrope, I didn’t think rape was that bad. I thought it was wrong, like stealing a loaf of bread or maybe an expensive TV at worst, but I never thought it was a crime worthy of jail time. I never thought it was a crime that was unforgivable. I always thought it was ridiculous when rapists got lumped in with murderers and child molesters. Rape is really not that serious. Women just don’t like it because the men are ugly. If I was raped by an ugly woman, I would take it as a compliment. Now if she was really fat, elderly, and had smelly genitals that she forced me under gunpoint to lick, I would be mad. I would probably vomit. But I wouldn’t be traumatized for life or believe that the woman deserves to be in prison for 10 years. A hefty fine would be enough. Women who get raped are no virgins. women who get raped have sex with at least 10 men by age 20 so how is it traumatic to take just one more penis? It’s not. Women have too much time on their hands to dwell on things and become neurotic about unimportant situations. If women were in a tribe, they would get raped all the time and wouldn’t even care anymore after one point because they would have more important things to worry about like surviving in the harsh environment. By the way, I don’t want to rape anyone. It wouldn’t turn me on to be with someone who is repulsed by me. I Would never rape someone even if I could get away with it. I’m just thinking out loud. Rape isn’t that bad. By the way, I know a woman who got raped by a black man when she was a teenager and she turned out okay. She is a happy wife and mom now of 3 kids.

(mentalcel666)
depends on the rape, if the rape is brutal with alot of physical harm and injuries then there should be a prison sentence since its the same as assault or something.

but normal rape is just what all animals do, you think the dog or elephant waits for consent? no

same with early humans, im convinced most babies come from rape because woman had no protection from the law, so the strongest male could just take the women and rape her because he is stronger, and since there were no abortions back then they had to deliver the baby,

so most modern women are descendants of women being raped. thats why they like being submissive, its an evolutionary trait passed down from all the females that have been raped for thousands of years before the law was invented

(Dialgatime321)
LOL based, women know this is true, they just crave attention and validation and also shit-test constantly, and thus must always put max effort into appearing to be victims at all times.

My only problem with your post is when you claimed, "Women have too much time on their hands to dwell on things and become neurotic about unimportant situations. If women were in a tribe, they would get raped all the time and wouldn’t even care anymore after one point because they would have more important things to worry about like surviving in the harsh environment."

BS. They're not "neurotic", they don't mind it that much. They may convince themselves that they are victims, but deep down inside they know they're not. They don't "care", they're just using shit like #MeToo to shit-test and gain attention and validation, not to mention ensure that virgins can never ascend.
>Assuming women tell the truth when they say they don't like rape and it's "the most horrible thing ever"
:feelshaha::feelshaha::feelshaha:

One more note, men take care of women entirely, so they're entitled to pussy 100%. The only problem with rape is that it's disorganized, creates hierarchies, and instills no responsibility to caretake on the part of the rapist (there are a few more, can't think of them right now). Therefore, rape damn well should be illegal and is immoral, but under Betrev (beta revolution), women would be paired involuntarily with men who chose them based on a decision made by a bureau of deciding which man is more productive to society, and they would not be obligated to work (in fact making women enter the workforce would be illegal, JFL at MGTOW and MRA who want women to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work just as hard as men, that will never happen and never should).

Women should not even be obligated to do housework, JFL at maledoms who think their "house/tradwaifus" aren't hiding broken glass in the couch cushions to shit-test. In return, every man is entitled to 1 sex a day, no strings attached.