Similar posts

HerbN #racist accordingtohoyt.com

As I always say non-white, non-straight, and non-male people make up at least 90% of the population of the planet.

They will tell you the white straight male people have been oppressing the for centuries. Given it is them saying this they have to know they are oppressed.

Have they risen up in rebellion? No, they do naught but demand straight white males be nice to them.

If that isn’t an admission of inferiority by non-white, non-straight, and non-people I don’t know what is.

It is amusing to me, their supposed oppressor, that I have more respect for their abilities than they themselves do.

biblicalgenderrole author #fundie biblicalgenderroles.com

The maturity argument

Dennis Prager, a syndicated radio talk show host has addressed this “maturity argument” many times. Dr. Prager states things like “marriage breeds maturity” and “after marriage having children breeds even more maturity” and he is absolutely right.

In addition to the fact that marriage does mature people, and so does having children, he talks about the need for people to get married younger and have children younger as they used to in the pre-modern era.

I would add to what he has said that as parents in the 20th and 21st centuries we have messed up (myself include in some ways). Each generation of parents over the last century has grown softer and softer on our children.

We hear people say things like, “we have to let children be children”, which basically means that our children have little to no real life responsibility until they reach 18, besides keeping up with their schooling in most cases. Even then we extend the childhood years with college, where they can party and have more fun for about 4 years before they graduate at 22 and are forced for the first time in their life to take on the full responsibilities of being an adult.

In pre-modern times, the idea of a child hood experience with absolutely no responsibility was a very short period. By the time children were 6 or 7 they were being taught the realities of life.

Boys hunted with their dads at a very young age, and girls learned to cook and make clothing at a very young age. By the time most children reached the age of 10, they knew what a hard day’s work was, the boys knew about hunting, farming and fighting, and the girls knew about caring for infants (helping their mother, or cousins or aunts) and they had seen many births. These girls were excited about the day when they would have their first period, and they were excited about when they would be able to marry and have children (usually around 13 or 14).

Atavisionary #fundie atavisionary.com

Western culture has progressively eroded the foundations of the traditional family for at least sixty years. Many on the left claim that the institution of marriage and traditional values are simply a relic of religious prejudice and a symbol of oppression. Part of the problem that allowed such frivolous conspiracy theories to spread was a lack of a comprehensive and objective explanation for why traditional monogamy was instituted in the first place by its defenders on the right. Appeals to divine authority, though effective with some populations, will simply not be sufficient to persuade the minimum number of people necessary in a secular culture to allow it to stay the dominant form of social organization it needs to be to support a thriving civilization. Though religious appeals for monogamous culture should not be thrown out, a secular defense of traditional culture needs to be built up to compliment the arguments of religious authorities.

One of the most useful consequences of a monogamous society is that it unleashes the creative and industrious potential in the largest number of men in society, thereby creating the foundations for a thriving and advancing civilization. In an age of free love, better described as pre-modern love, a significant portion of a man’s energy has to be expended fending off poaching attempts by other males or preventing capricious dalliances on the part of his mate. This is energy that would be much better utilized if directed towards building civilization.

However, the pro-civilizational effects of traditional values are not the only benefits worth considering. Rather than being neutral, the current system of soft polygamy (effective, but not institutionalized polygamy) has active negative attributes. Polygamy benefits men with high sexual market value and young women, but hurts men of middling to low SMV and older women. As high status men take multiple women out of the market place, the supply of women decreases for all other men.

One of the important solutions offered by traditional monogamous values is the prevention of men like Elliot Rodgers from being marginalized in the sexual market place and becoming deranged and violent. In cultures that allow the practice of polygamy, you generate a large underclass of men with no access to women. This leads to an increase in violence, crime, and excessive risk-taking by the frustrated men who are programmed by evolution to do whatever they can to secure reproductive success at any cost to themselves or society. From the standpoint of natural selection, everything is secondary to reproduction. If your current culture reduces your reproductive fitness to near zero, it is a rational, if morbid, instinct to try to disrupt that culture on the part of young men. If you “kick a friendly dog enough times, you get a nasty dog“.

The prevention of this kind of violence is one of the key reasons for having an institution of monogamous marriage. By monogamous marriage, I am not referring to the pale shadow of the institution that exists today. I refer to an institution that provides large disincentives to both men and women against breaking their vows, which is what existed through most of history. Monogamous marriage subordinates the hypergamous instincts of women to the interests of civilization. Those interests ultimately being to create order and general prosperity, which are more beneficial to women than their unbridled pursuit of the highest SMV males. Ironically, monogamous marriage and its motto of “one man, one wife” was probably the earliest egalitarian ideal. Though this ideal is often proven false in practice due to the innate differences between people, in the case of monogamous marriage it has proven the most conducive organization for advancing a prosperous and stable society. We throw that institution away at our peril. I don’t expect this warning to be heeded though, so you can expect many more Elliot Rodgers in the future.

Here is his chilling last video and his autobiography/manifesto.

Craig Read #conspiracy craigread.com

Earth day is just another propaganda day in the war by the eco-cult on modernity and civilization. Supposedly on Earth day you are mandated to partake in a task which will help clean up or ‘repair’ our sorrowful mother earth, while contemplating in a heroic pose no doubt, the vast destruction inflicted by the hairless monkey upon the soft, defenseless outer tissue of goddess Gaia. These contemplations must include the destruction of civilization, modern methods of energy usage, or even perhaps the utter annihilation of mankind [or woman-kind, hybrid-kind, and hermaphro-kind].

This is the true purpose of Earth day and the associated rituals of mourning for mother earth. Guilt. Self loathing. Disgust with all things modern. Pagan cultism. A yearning for pre-modern and anti-Christian feelings and reverence for all things non-human. A desire to return to Rousseau’s romantic illusion of an old world order without society, civilization, constraints or human created paradigms. Earth day is a pagan day and paganism for all its historic importance and curiosity is incompatible with modernity.

The modern world was not created by earth-loving fanatics. Civilisation and its vibrant complexity became quite incompatible with pagan cults and superstition. Christian and scientific rational thought place man somewhere between the beasts and gods – imperfect but not a animal. Pagan earth cults submit man to nature. Christian rationality submits nature to man in a complex and evolving relationship.

Cindy Jacobs #fundie generals.org

In prayer, we came to understand that the Lion's Market was actually the insertion of biblical economics into the financial system of the nation. It has been prophesied that modern-day Josephs will arise and take their place in society to implement God’s plans, reforming the nation back to a biblical worldview and fulfilling the part of the Great Commission that calls us to make disciples of nations. (You can read more about this in my book, Reformation Manifesto.)

We also realized that, through prayer, we needed to "uproot" laws put in place that would restrict the growth of a free-market economy and pray that God's modern-day Daniels would field new legislation to reform laws.

Additionally, with the new world of lightning-speed buying and selling, we prayed against what is known as a "flash crash"—a rapid, deep fall in security prices over an extremely short time period. We also asked God to expose corruption in these kind of transactions and any other transactions being made in the worldwide financial systems.

These represent the broad-brush picture of our strategies, although by no means includes them all. As in 2008, we would wait to see what would transpire as we made prayer journeys later in the day to the Federal Reserve Bank, Federal Hall, the NYSE, and the statue of the bull right up the street (or, as some have called it, the golden calf because people from around the world rub its horns for luck. It is called guerrilla art as it was not commissioned by Wall Street, but just "appeared" there one night.).

At the stock exchange, we were given a tour and were delighted to meet some fellow believers who pray together for the exchange and for each other. This was greatly encouraging to us.

We met at the bull and prayed for the Lion's Market to emerge with biblical economics and the transfer of wealth. We also prayed that God would shake the market in a way that would bring a course correction and avert another Great Depression for the future.

As always, we are grateful for the mercies of God.

We had a prayer meeting at Federal Hall, where George Washington was inaugurated and our first congress met 226 years before. The hall is an impressive structure, catty-cornered to the NYSE. Earlier that day, musicians in colonial garb played the fife and drum, and an actor dressed as George Washington read his inaugural address that evoked Almighty God.

As we gathered to pray and commemorate Washington’s historical inauguration, we had a deep sense that we stood on the shoulders of giants as we cried out for freedom of religion to remain in the land. Our forefathers paid for such freedom with their blood and hammered our Bill of Rights together with iron-clad, irrevocable declarations that now seem in danger of being done away with in our time.

We made our Appeal to Heaven with the flag that George Washington had hung from the Navy ships—those same words emblazoned across the top. We humbled ourselves and cried for a return to the covenants our forefathers made, and we invoked the name of the great Peacemaker for our nation that is seeing rioting in the streets from the pain of racism. We felt the weight of knowing our society has turned from the loving Hand of God who had made us a great people, and we believe that His powerful presence will once again shake our nation with another Great Awakening from sea to shining sea.

TL;DR Award

But I think everyone needs to read this homocidal lunatic's manifesto in order to truly understand and argue against this kind of murderous ideology and its adherents

Anders Behring Breivik #conspiracy info.publicintelligence.net

(These quotes are all taken from Anders Behring Breivik's manifesto, 2083: A Declaration Of European Independence)

As we all know, the root of Europe's problems is the lack of cultural self-confidence (nationalism). Most people are still terrified of nationalistic political doctrines thinking that if we ever embrace these principles again, new “Hitler’s” will suddenly pop up and initiate global Armageddon... Needless to say; the growing numbers of nationalists in W. Europe are systematically being ridiculed, silenced and persecuted by the current cultural Marxist/multiculturalist political establishments. This has been a continuous ongoing process which started in 1945. This irrational fear of nationalistic doctrines is preventing us from stopping our own national/cultural suicide as the Islamic colonization is increasing annually. This book presents the only solutions to our current problems.

You cannot defeat Islamisation or halt/reverse the Islamic colonization of Western Europe without first removing the political doctrines manifested through multiculturalism/cultural Marxism…

....

Political/Democratic/Apologistic Jihad (Rhetorical/psychological warfare)

Thousands of active Islamic apologetics on all arenas (ranging from internet forums to the public debate elsewhere). Their primary goal is to discredit, pacify and silence all whom criticise Islam and Demographic Jihad.

Objectives:
1. Terminate European freedom of speech by replacing it with hate-crime bills.
2. Wage a war of words using charismatic individuals who directly or indirectly promote
and defend Islam.
3. Engage the European public in dialogues, discussions, and debates in colleges, universities, public libraries, radio, TV, churches and mosques on the virtues of Islam. Proclaim how it is historically another peaceful religion like Judaism and Christianity with the same monotheistic faith.
4. Nominate Muslim sympathisers to political office to bring about favourable legislation toward Islam and support potential sympathisers by block voting.
5. Take control of as much of the press, TV, radio and the Internet as possible by buying the related corporations or a controlling stock.

....

Christianity has increasingly become perceived as being linked by some, to a bygone culture, having already lost its political direction, cohesion, and influence. The wall that both Martin Luther and Thomas Jefferson spoke of has switched, in modern times it is no longer a means by which the Church defends its rights and position over the state, as in pre-modern times, but rather how the state increases its power over the Church.

Historically there have always been tensions between the powers secular and the powers religious, which in times gone by through the prides of men resulted in out right conflict between the two; however, with the emergence of the modern secular state and its incumbent ‘ideology of reason’. This ‘wall’, has become the means via which the state has secured power away from the church and is challenging the identity of Christians as well. Attacking our beliefs and values and presenting modern liberal alternatives in short all that makes us who we are as Christians by presenting alternatives with the assumption that these alternatives are better and the polemical engagement of the ‘enlightenment’ elite. The Liberal Moderns command the heights of the wall. This process is called differentiation: where the state, driven by the ‘ideology of reason’, ‘the religion of humanity’, or more simply - Liberal Modernity, seized what were once church roles. This forced conversion of society has pushed the Christian faith back into a metaphysical box, where some argued it would die an irrelevant death. Such as speculated by Marx and others, and assumed by Nietzche!

....

Mapping the enemy (definitions):
Traditional Marxists, cultural Marxists, suicidal humanists, career cynicists and capitalist globalists – all support and propagate multiculturalism Proving each individuals real intention is a complicated process as most of today’s cultural Marxists disguise their true agenda by using humanistic principles and rhetoric (at least publicly) as a basis for justifying their actions. However, we know that a good portion of them (more than 30% of our opposition) use this smoke screen of humanist deception to hide their hatred for everything European.

What complicates this process further is the fact that the ongoing European civil war is not a class war but a cultural war. Motives are overlapping and old definitions are outdated. The old fundamental definitions were nationalists vs. communists, or socialists vs. capitalists. Many of today’s multiculturalists are capitalists and some of today’s cultural conservatives support a very solidaric economical system. More or less every humanist/social democrat etc. is a multiculturalist as they support liberal political mechanics such as family reunification and asylum arrangements which again facilitates Islamic demographical warfare. Some of these individuals are true humanists and just extremely naive, yet others are just hiding behind humanist rhetoric and really want to destroy European culture, traditions, identity, Christendom and national sovereignty.

An estimate showing the opponents of cultural conservative doctrines (antinationalists):

- Hardcore Marxists: 10% (hateful intentions)
- Cultural Marxists: 20% (semi hateful intentions)
- Suicidal Humanists/career cynicists: 65% (suicidally naive/egotistical)
- Capitalist globalists: 5% (greed) 100% of the above support and propagate multiculturalism

....

To qualify to act as a ”Justiciar Knight” the individual has to pledge the Knights Templar oath by completing the “Initiation Rite” (see: The PCCTS, Knights Templar Oath – Initiation Rite) and swear to follow the principles of the PCCTS, to protect the interests of all free, indigenous Europeans, European cultures and Christendom in general through armed struggle. Choosing the path of the Justiciar Knight is to walk the path in pursuit of becoming “The Perfect Knight”. Any candidate prepared to walk this road must be willing to forfeit his materialistic ambitions and embrace voluntary poverty and martyrdom. The Order and Tribunal has concluded that any and all Europeans have not just a right, but a duty to resist through political and military means; cultural Marxist/multiculturalist atrocities and crimes committed against the indigenous peoples of Europe. As such, any European Christian conservative can act as a Justiciar Knight. This includes Christian agnostics and Christian atheists. Although the PCCTS, Knights Templar is a pan European indigenous rights movement we give all Europeans, regardless of skin colour, the opportunity to become a Justiciar Knight as long as the individual is either a Christian, Christian agnostic or a Christian atheist. The European Military & Criminal Tribunal, PCCTS, request that any and all Justiciar Knights of Europe; identify and effectuate punishment for category A and B traitors - cultural Marxist/multiculturalist individuals for the violations specified and included in this document; charges 1 – 8.

....

In order to wake up the masses, the only rational approach will be to make sure the current system implodes. This will cause a lot of short term pain; cut in welfare payouts, increased unemployment even starvation in extreme cases. The bulk of our people will refuse to join resistance movements because they feel they have too much to lose. They have invested several years and a lot of resources in long educations and most people have mortgages/loans which they have no choice but to attend to. Many receive exceptional government incentives to stay “loyal” to the system. All of these responsibilities and incentives cause a symbiosis between the victims (people) and the exterminator (regime) to a degree where we have a collective mass-scale “Stockholm syndrome” (sympathies and loyalty to captor). Our objective is to break these bonds and this can only be achieved through contributing to creating a scenario where the antiEuropean hate ideology we wish to destroy perishes/implodes or dies from a thousand cuts. For every successful operation a new cut is applied and will contribute to this ideology’s demise. Wiping out Marxism in Europe will take us 30-70 years but we will succeed eventually. Every effort counts, have no doubt about that.

....

Once you decide to strike, it is better to kill too many than not enough, or you risk reducing the desired ideological impact of the strike. Explain what you have done (in an announcement distributed prior to operation) and make certain that everyone understands that we, the free peoples of Europe, are going to strike again and again. Do not apologise, make excuses or express regret for you are acting in self-defence or in a preemptive manner. In many ways, morality has lost its meaning in our struggle. The question of good and evil is reduced to one simple choice. For every free patriotic European, only one choice remains: Survive or perish. Some innocent will die in our operations as they are simply at the wrong place at the wrong time. Get used to the idea. The needs of the many will always surpass the needs of the few.

....

The PCCTS, Knights Templar Oath – Initiation Rite [The candidate kneels in front of the altar, while reading the oath out loudly] I, ________, of my own free will and accord, in the presence of Almighty God, the spirits of my ancestors and past martyrs, do hereby and hereon most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, from now and forever, that I will hail, respect and obey the principles of the PCCTS, Knights Templar. I furthermore promise and swear that I will stand to and abide by all laws, rules and regulations of the Military Order and Criminal Tribunal - PCCTS, Knights Templar. Further, that I will always aid and assist fellow Justiciar Knights, their widows and orphans, knowing them to be such, as far as their necessities may require, and my ability permit, without material injury to myself and family. Further, that I will keep a brother Justiciar Knight secrets inviolable, when communicated to and received by me as such. I declare to take freely and solemnly this oath of obedience, this pledge of voluntary poverty and commitment. With this oath I state my strong and irrevocable intent: To pledge my sword, my forces, my life and everything that I own to the cause, defence, honour of my country and of Europe, my people, the Christian religion, of the PCCTS, Knights Templar and of my companions in arms; to the rescue of my country and of Europe as a whole from the tyranny of Marxist and Islamic oppression. To love my brothers the Knights and my Sisters the Ladies and help them, their children and their widows with my sword, my advice, means and wealth, my credit and everything in my power, and will favour them, with no exception, over those who are not members of the order. To fight the infidels and the non-believers with my example, virtue, charity and convincing arguments; and to fight with the sword the infidels and non-believers who attack the Cross with their own sword.

....

Creating patriotic youth movements in phase 1 How can we expect to safeguard our societies against cultural Marxism and Islam in the future (say in 2,3,4,5 decades from now) when Western Europe does not even have any well organised patriotic youth groups? Patriotic youth groups (also referred to as street activists) are the back bone of the resistance and the creation of such political entities should be a primary goal. An intellectual club (consisting of older professionals) who rejects the notion of offering political and intellectual guidance to the youths of the society will have limited impact. A large majority of the current European conservative intellectuals are cowards and unwilling to take responsibility. If they had taken responsibility they would have started to develop a Conservative Revolutionary Movement and/or several patriotic youth movements. If the “anti-Islamisation/anti-totalitarian organisations” refuse to start their own youth groups and start recruitment of patriotic youth then the so called totalitarian-minded, racist or criminal organisations such as Hells Angels will (as we are witnessing today). And when the time comes there will be one impotent “politically correct” intellectual club “without anyone who can physically protect it and its doctrines from “Marxist/Muslim lynch mobs” as most of the youths have been recruited by the other “competing” patriotic alternatives.

yuyuyuyuu #sexist reddit.com

Re: Why are women so fucking dumb

That's what happens when your life is too easy. Women can simply afford to be dumb as bricks and believe in made up shit.

high iq. girls in the countryside do not have the time to believe in anything beyond what their priest tells them.

t. someone who knows girls in the countryside.

I also want to add the other reasons: Femaleness has become irrelevant in modern society, which is dominated by science, logic, understanding and so on. I know this sounds cliched, but in the countryside or in pre-modern times, intuition, knowledge passed from generation to generation and the like was much more important. Women had a confidence and consciousness because they passed on knowledge about sewing, washing, arts and crafts from mother to daughter, knowledge that men were excluded from accessing due to gender roles. They, in effect, used to feel unconsciously less inferior compared to men, and didn't have much of a need for feminism.

Today, when all of these female specific jobs are taken over by factories and scientific accuracy, there is nothing female that is important anymore, there is no knowledge or understanding that is exclusive to women anymore, there is no sphere where women clearly no more than women. I can cite a passage from Plato's Republic where Socrates is asking Glaucon: Aren't there professions where women are clearly more knowledgeable than any man? And he affirms. Think about how this has changed! What's still female is nowadays at the most "emotional labour", i.e. making people feel good about themselves and providing good feelings, as nurses, teachers and the like. But this isn't a "power" and it cannot be conceptualized as such outside of spiritual means.

Women are compensating this loss of esoteric female knowledge with the dark crafts, astrology and spirituality, because it seems to be a way to access knowledge that male rationality and science can not access, you cannot explain it in scientific terms so men are excluded from it. This is precisely why witchcraft is so huge and has this feminist connotation: They think it's a way to access female-only powers that men cannot have, and they gain a self-confidence and consciousness as powerful beings that matter in more ways than being Chad's cocksleeve.

It's female cope.

arcticdementor #fundie arcticdementor.tumblr.com

The opposite of MTD?

Setting aside the praxis vs. doxos dimension of religion (and what constitutes religion), there's also the dimension of "theology/beliefs on the supernatural" versus "morals/ethics/vision of the good life." And it seems to me that a big part of "Moralistic Therapeutic Deism," as contrasted with more Traditional varieties of religious life/practice, is that it retains the former* while discarding the latter in favor of the ethics of the secular mainstream. You know, the sort of folks who say that what's wrong with religion isn't so much the whole "God" thing, or the "going to church/temple/mosque/shrine" thing, but the surviving, "backwards, bad ol'" pre-Modern ethics.

But what does one call the reverse of this? Those who disagree with Traditional religion on the whole "God" question, but think that those parts on dealing with your fellow man were more right than Modern, liberal "ethics"? Who say that while one can credibly dispute whether those who set the words of the Old Testament to parchment had experiences with God, one cannot dispute they had plenty of experience with their fellow human beings. Who might disagree with Saint Paul about the nature of Jesus, but agree with him on the nature of women? What does one call atheist fans of the Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisitions?

*For a time, at least, but the statistics show that churches that "go MTD" tend to die as their congregations — or more specifically, what kids they have — assimilate into the secular mainstream, per the centuries-old criticism of deism as gateway/slippery slope to atheism.

#religion #culture #morality #traditionalism #secularization #atheism #atheist traditionalist #moralistic therapeutic deism #xunzi #roll hard left and die

W. F. Price #sexist web.archive.org

A grandmother from Kent, Washington (a Seattle suburb) has been arrested for forcing children in her care to drink urine and engage in sexual acts with their siblings. Rose Marie Johnson, according to several children and witnesses, has been putting little kids through hell for years. She first came to the attention of social services when a boy accused her of improprieties in 2008, but investigators did not take him seriously.

When we hear about witch burnings in the bad old days, they are usually presented in the context of innocent women irrationally accused by superstitious Christians. If the behavior of women today is any indication, they are capable of doing awful things to people, including children, and were probably all the more likely to get away with it when there was less communication and people had a greater ability to avoid state intrusion.

So when one hears about persecution of innocent women in pre-modern Europe, it should be kept in mind that although some certainly didn’t deserve their fate and were set up for one reason or the other (e.g. Jeanne d’Arc), a lot of them probably had it coming. In fact, today they get away with this stuff with little more than a slap on the wrist, because their victims are just children, after all, and women are higher value human beings in our feminist regime.

Rodegas #homophobia #wingnut deviantart.com

1. Well, Researchers have found that attempted suicide rates and suicidal ideation among Sodomites is comparatively higher than among the normal human beings. (the reason is that somewhere deep inside they know they are wrong)

2. It is well established that there are high rates of psychiatric illnesses, including depression, drug abuse, and suicide attempts, among gays and lesbians. This is true even in the Netherlands, where gay, lesbian and bisexual (GLB) relationships are far more socially acceptable than in the U.S. Depression and drug abuse are strongly associated with risky sexual practices that lead to serious medical problems.

3. According to reports, men with HIV who have sex with other men are 100 times more likely to develop anal cancer than HIV-negative men who exclusively have sex with women. (Almost 620,000 gay and bisexual men in the United States were living with HIV in 2014, and 100,000 of these men were not even aware of their infection)

This suggests that anal cancer is a disease that almost exclusively afflicts non-straight males who are on the verge of, or already have, AIDS – a fact that, again, is likely to ruffle some SJW feathers.

Chris Roberts #racist amren.com

Black Stranglehold on Democrat Party Dooms Bernie Sanders

Pat Buchanan put it bluntly in one of his recent columns: “Consider the most loyal of Democrat constituents in presidential elections: African Americans. They are 13 percent of the electorate but a fourth of the national Democrat vote.” That share may not seem like much, but in a crowded field for the presidential nomination, blacks are can play kingmaker, especially because more than any other group, they vote as a bloc. In general elections, blacks vote Democrat at rates never lower than 80 percent, and sometimes much higher, and during the party’s nomination process, blacks still vote together. In the 2016 race for the nomination, 75.9 percent of blacks voted for Hillary Clinton. The white vote was split almost exactly down the middle: 48.9 percent for Mrs. Clinton and 49.1 percent for Mr. Bernie Sanders.

In 2008, unsurprisingly, Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton among blacks by eight — and sometimes nine — to one. Vox noted that “Obama won every primary in the eight states where more than 20 percent of the population is black.” This included the very important early state of South Carolina. The nomination fight was very close; Mr. Obama beat Mrs. Clinton by less than half a million out of over 35 million votes. Hispanics supported Mrs. Clinton over Mr. Obama almost two to one.

This means that in 2008, black voters – all by themselves – kept Mrs. Clinton from winning the nomination, and eight years later they guaranteed her victory. To win the Democrat nomination, a candidate has to carry the black vote.

This makes the race hard for political outsiders, or even ordinary politicians who aren’t very well known by blacks. Mayor Pete Buttigieg is an example. He is a young, moderate who was in the military, and has earned plenty of support and attention from important media. But he was almost unheard of on a national level before 2019, and despite campaigning hard for months, blacks do not care for him. Politico put it bluntly in a recent article: “‘On life support’: Buttigieg’s struggles with black voters threaten his candidacy.” Its opening paragraphs explain:

Over the past month and a half, he has invested more money advertising in South Carolina, where a majority of Democrats are African American, than any of the non-billionaire Democrats running for president. . . . But the more than $2 million Buttigieg poured into TV and radio ads, some featuring black supporters touting the former South Bend (Ind.) mayor, hasn’t budged his stubbornly low poll numbers in the state — 2 percent among African American Democrats in a recent Fox News poll.

Last November, Michael Harriot, a black writer at The Root, wrote an article called, “Pete Buttigieg Is a Lying MF” — MF stands for “Mother Fucker.” Mr. Harriot wrote about how hard it is to be black and poor in the United States, and suggested that Mr. Buttigieg knows this, but lies about it. In response, the white presidential candidate called the author on the phone in hopes of mollifying him. Mr. Harriot then wrote a column about the conversation, saying he still couldn’t be sure how honest Mr. Buttigieg was, concluding, “The only thing I actually know about Pete Buttigieg is that he is a white man.”

Two months later, “Mayor Pete” has spent about one million dollars for each percentage-point gain in black support in South Carolina. Ethnomasochism rarely impresses non-whites — especially blacks — but Mr. Buttigieg doesn’t have a choice if he wants the nomination. For whatever reason, blacks do not like Mr. Buttigieg, who desperately needs them; all he can do is grovel and buy ads.

Mr. Sanders, whose consistent democratic socialist principles have inspired millions, faces the same problem. His support among blacks has never been high, and South Carolina polls suggest he has not made much progress. Vice President Joe Biden has a commanding lead, at 36.5 percent, with Mr. Sanders a distant second, at 16.2 percent. Meanwhile, in Iowa Mr. Sanders trails Mr. Biden by just 3.3 percent, and in New Hampshire Mr. Sanders is ahead of Mr. Biden by nearly 5 percent. Needless to say, the population of South Carolina is very different from that of New Hampshire and Iowa.

All the same, Mr. Sanders’s popularity has frightened many within the Democrat Party who think he’s a dangerous radical. But the anti-Sanders wing needn’t worry; there is one thing they can, and very well may, do that will certainly torpedo him: have Barack Obama endorse Joe Biden.

If this happens, whatever support Sen. Sanders has among blacks will evaporate and keep it well below 10 percent. As shown earlier, monolithic black support for Mr. Obama in 2008 won him the nomination, and in the general election, 95 percent voted for him. In 2012, 93 percent of blacks voted for Mr. Obama. Throughout his presidency, black approval always stayed above 80 percent — and was sometimes double that of Americans as a whole. Most blacks will do what Mr. Obama tells them.

By all accounts, Mr. Obama is not a fan of Mr. Sanders, and rumors have been swirling for months that he may step in to ensure that the Vermont Senator does not get the nomination. As CNBC reported in November:

Former President Barack Obama on Friday warned Democratic primary candidates to avoid leaning too far left in their campaigns, and raised concerns that certain liberal policy proposals on health care and immigration might have gone further than public opinion. In an unusual address to a room of wealthy Democratic donors, Obama urged Democratic candidates to be pragmatic in their messages to voters. While he didn’t mention any specific presidential primary candidate or proposal, Obama warned that the average American voter does not align with views from ‘certain left-leaning Twitter feeds or the activist wing of our party.’

He was obviously talking about Bernie Sanders.

So although Mr. Sanders inspires millions of whites to get involved in politics, he has a fatal weakness. If he wins Iowa and New Hampshire, Mr. Obama will almost certainly endorse Mr. Biden, and the Sanders campaign will almost immediately lose any chance of victory.

Mr. Obama’s power will not fade any time soon. He is young for a former President: only 58. Assuming he lives to be 80, he has another 22 years to play kingmaker within the Democrat Party, and there is no countervailing force. Former Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are older, white, and less popular. Flouting the wishes of blacks within the party would require a candidate that brings together most whites and most Hispanics. It’s not impossible, but not likely.

Today, many white progressives are full of hope that Mr. Sanders can fight the media elites and the Davos class within their party and win. But for all their hatred of big business, the military-industrial complex, and special interest groups, what most stands in their way is the fact that blacks, unlike whites, vote as a group. To fix that problem they’ll need more than socialism.

Gregory Hood #racist amren.com

Norwegian Girl Disappointed to Discover She’s ‘So White’

“White” has become an “all-purpose insult.” If something is too white, there’s something wrong.

Cornelia Grismo is a young Norwegian woman with about 202,000 subscribers on YouTube. She is a vegan and mostly talks about travel, fitness, and health. Recently, she posted a video called “How NORWEIGIAN Am I Really? DNA Test Results.” She begins by explaining that her relatives researched her family tree, and she is supposedly descended from royalty.

At 5:25, she reads the results, showing she’s mostly from Scandinavia, along with some Irish, Scottish, and Welsh blood. “I’m so white,” she says laughing, and rolling her eyes. “I couldn’t have been more white. No! I had hoped for Asian, African.” “I couldn’t have been more boring than that,” she adds.

Comments were overwhelmingly negative. Her fans were disgusted that she seemed ashamed to be white. There were about 8,600 dislikes compared to about 1,100 likes.

Miss Grimsmo, visibly shaken, responded on April 20 by “addressing the situation.” On the brink of tears, she said she had been receiving threats. She said she had just been was “trying to be funny” and hoped her DNA would show a “cool surprise.”

So it would be cool to discover that her ancestors miscegenated? Somehow, this doesn’t work for Hispanics or blacks. It’s not a “cool surprise” to discover they are whiter than they thought. It’s potentially career threatening.

Matt Forney #fundie mattforney.com

If you’re a girl pursuing anything more than a high school degree, you’re in all likelihood wasting your time.

Encouraging girls to go to college and grad school en masse is one of the biggest mistakes America has ever made. The flood of girls into universities is not only in part responsible for the current economic crisis, it’s made it increasingly difficult—if not impossible—for both girls and men to fulfill their natural roles. At the same time higher education has been degraded by so many unqualified girls getting accepted into college, those girls have seen their egos unjustifiably boosted by their degrees, making them unsuitable to be wives and mothers.

In order for society to be cured, this has to be fixed.

Here are my reasons why girls should be discouraged from going to college.
1. Going to college makes girls less attractive.

Girls, in their socially sanctioned solipsism, assume that men are turned on by the same things that they are. Because girls crave high status men, they assume that men similarly find their high status attractive, which couldn’t be further from the truth. No man alive has ever said, “God DAMN, I love the master’s degree on that girl!” It’s usually “God DAMN, she’s got a rack that could stop a runaway train!” or “God DAMN, this girl’s cooking is to die for!”

As a result, four plus years of college more often than not ruins a girl.

For starters, the extended adolescence that is college encourages sluttiness, which wrecks a girl all on its own. All those hunks splooging in her vagina make it more likely that she’ll end up divorcing the man she does end up marrying. Sluts are emotionally broken, incapable of loving and serving men, squandering their gifts of femininity and beauty, constantly trying to trade up for a bigger, better deal that never comes.

Marrying a slut is like paying full price for a beat-up old clunker.

Additionally, college is problematic because it gives girls the illusion of knowledge. Outside of STEM degrees (which are deficient in their own way), few majors actually impart useful information to girls, yet they still think they’re entitled to respect for having the degree; credentialism at its finest. Girls come out of college without being able to cook, sew, balance a checkbook or perform any of the necessary tasks of modern living, yet they still think they’re smart and independent and don’t you dare suggest otherwise. Don’t forget the massive amounts of student loan debt that these girls rack up, which you become in part responsible for if you’re dumb enough to put a ring on it.

Woman is not a learning animal.

The two most fulfilling relationships I’ve ever had were with girls who hadn’t yet graduated from college—one was midway through her degree and the other had not started yet—because they hadn’t had their minds poisoned by the lies of academia. They were fun to be around, girly, and eager to please. They hadn’t had their hearts broken through countless drunken hookups. When I explained something to them that they didn’t understand, they actually listened to me and did what I told them instead of accusing me of “mansplaining.”

If girls are like gold coins, sending them to college is like dunking them in nitric acid.
1a. Girls who go to college are extremely likely to get sexually assaulted.

Given the massive rape epidemic on college campuses, universities are massively unsafe places for girls. As feminists love reminding us, universities are ground zero for rape culture; one in four girls will be raped before the end of her college tenure. Given this information, why would anyone who cares about their daughter’s well-being let her do something as reckless as going to college?

You might as well parachute her into the worst part of Detroit with a “FREE FUCKTOY” sign taped to her back.
2. Most girls major in useless subjects that contribute nothing to the world.

Feminists love bragging about how girls are now earning the majority of college degrees, but they never bring up the fact that the majority of girls’ degrees are worthless in every way. Girls predominantly major in subjects like ethnic studies, women’s studies, English, communications and the like that require no work of any kind and give them no job prospects. As Aaron Clarey shows in this video, the majority of useful (STEM) degrees are still going to men.

What career prospects does a 22-year old girl with a bachelor’s in Arachnid Sexuality have? Dim ones.

If they’re lucky, they’ll end up becoming lawyers, civil servants or HR commissars, careers whose economic and social value is less than zero; those fields exist solely to employ the unemployable and leech off the productive. A select few might hit the jackpot and enter politics, where they can do an even better job of sucking our blood; Clarey showed in his book Worthless that the majority of American politicians have degrees in useless, parasitical subjects like law (Democrats more so than Republicans). But the vast majority of girls will end up living at home when they graduate, struggling to make their monthly student loan payments on a Starbucks salary.

Clearly, slaving away for minimum wage is way more fulfilling than being a wife and mother.

Furthermore, having all these girls “earning” these pointless degrees has lessened the value of a degree period. It’s common knowledge that the rarer something is, the more valuable it is. When our parents were our age, college degrees were uncommon enough that merely having one guaranteed you a good job, and you could secure most jobs with a one-hour interview. Now that everyone and their mother has a degree, employers cross-examine you like you’re on the witness stand, scrutinizing your GPA, your extracurriculars and making you complete stupid questionnaires that analyze how good of a “team player” you are, none of which has any bearing on how well you can do the job.

In their childish quest for “independence,” girls have made it more difficult for everyone—including themselves—to get a good-paying job.
3. Having girls working makes it more difficult for anyone to earn high wages.

It astounds me how so many feminists have absolutely no knowledge of economics. Here’s a hard lesson for you girls: labor is a commodity. And like all other commodities, labor is subject to the laws of supply and demand. When the supply of a commodity outpaces demand, its price (in this case, wages) goes down; when demand outpaces supply, the price goes up. This basic law is why a Walmart in Canton, Ohio is holding canned food drives for its own employees while the Walmart in Williston, North Dakota has to pay its workers $21 an hour and give them free hotel rooms; labor is plentiful in Ohio and scarce in North Dakota.

Leftists lament how wages have stagnated since the seventies and how the gap between the rich and poor has never been wider, but they can’t admit that feminism is a big reason why Americans are getting poorer by the day. The mass entry of girls into the workforce that began in the seventies conveniently coincides with the stagnation and decline of American wages, as well as the decline of unions. Whereas a man could comfortably support his family on his own back in the fifties and sixties, it takes both parents working to raise a family today, assuming the couple can even afford to buy a house and have children to begin with.

Additionally, the presence of girls in the labor force has feminized the economy and made it less productive as a whole. Because girls are unable and/or unwilling to actually take useful positions in the trades, manufacturing or other blue-collar fields (“Eww, I can’t mine coal! I might break a nail!”), the American economy had to be reconfigured to employ them somehow. The solution was to demonize the trades and create new useless white-collar positions such as “human resources.” Corporations used feminists as pawns to help promote outsourcing and free trade in the eighties/early nineties and push pointless office jobs as the new middle-class ideal. And all of those coveted white-collar jobs conveniently required a four-year degree, enriching the (leftist) universities as well.

As a result, we live in a country where a girl who makes $30,000 a year at a nonprofit is more highly regarded than an electrician who makes three times that.

Not only that, girls have altered the workplace itself for the worst. Government bureaucracies and other female-run institutions are governed by rules both written (e.g. sexual harassment laws) and unwritten that make it impossible to be frank, encouraging cattiness and backstabbing. And with few exceptions, female employees all act as volunteer commissars, ready to blow you in to the bossman the minute you upset their feeeeelings. You can’t be direct or honest because you never know what your co-workers will find offensive, making it difficult to get any work done.

But it gets worse than that: feminism is in part responsible for the current economic crisis.

It was girls’ desire for a never-ending supply of cheap crap (more than 80 percent of consumer spending is controlled by women) that resulted in the outsourcing of American manufacturing to China and the rise of big box stores like Walmart that squash local businesses and pay their workers the bare minimum allowed by law. It’s girls fornicating with wild abandon and divorcing their husbands on a whim that has lead to the epidemic of single moms and the subsequent strain on social services. It’s girls going to the doctor every time they get a boo-boo that has resulted in hard-working, healthy men like me having our insurance premiums skyrocket under Obamacare.

And it’s girls being unable to pay off their student loans that will lead to the next economic collapse.
4. Education (and work) are bad for girls’ physical and mental health.

It makes me laugh to see how effectively corporate America has made feminists into their most favored pets. Whenever feminists crow about the “end of men,” what they’re really saying is “Ha ha, we girls make WAY better slaves than you loser guys!” Jezebel and Gawker Media exemplify this contradiction best; all the girls writing there eagerly sound the gospel of female empowerment to make money for a man—Nick Denton—who pays them barely above minimum wage. “Yes Massa, Pax Dickinson is a misogynist racist asshat! Can I pretty please have a cookie, Massa?”

But beneath this you-go-grrl facade is a well of pain and suffering.

Despite all the feminists telling them that they should be happy to be “liberated,” female unhappiness is higher now than it’s ever been. Far more girls than men are suffering from mental illness, and antidepressant use among girls has gotten so bad that the drinking water of major cities like London is turning into a toxic soup. Every Strong, Independent Woman™ knows in her heart that her life is hell on Earth; it’s only her pride that keeps her from admitting the truth.

Recently, a friend of mine who quit her job to become a homemaker and returned to the workforce when her children grew older admitted to me that she preferred being a housewife. Why? It was less stressful. When she didn’t work, all she had to worry about was taking care of her kids, cooking and keeping the house clean. While she and her husband are wealthier now that they have two incomes, her life is never-ending misery. Her (female) boss constantly belittles and abuses her; her co-workers are gossipy do-nothings who refuse to pull their weight, making her pick up the slack; her health has deteriorated to the point where she’s developed stress-related carpal tunnel.

From the kitchen to the cubicle; isn’t freedom grand?

The reality is that girls always submit to men. It’s unavoidable. The only question is what kind of man she submits to. Will it be to a husband who protects her, provides for her and will love her until death do them part? Or will it be to a CEO like Nick Denton or some other corporate manager who views her as a tool to enrich himself, who will kick her to the curb as soon as she’s no longer useful? Even feminism itself is an invention of men, specifically Rousseau and the philosophers of the Enlightenment; Mary Wollstonecraft and other female “thinkers” were never more than sideshow freaks.

Deep inside, girls know what they want; they just need authoritative men to give it to them.

If you’re a girl, you should only go to college if you can meet one or more of these criteria:

Major in something useful. Here’s a pointer to figuring out if a degree is useful; does it involve math? If not, you’re wasting your time. I recommend Aaron Clarey’s Worthless if you want more info.
Go to a quality school. If you can’t make it into the Ivy League or another high-quality institution such as UVM or Binghamton, you have no business going to college.
Have your parents pay for it. I don’t mean co-signing your student loans, I mean having daddy take his wallet out and cover your costs in full. If you’re rich enough that your parents can afford college without any loans, it doesn’t much matter what you do.

The rest of you girls? We’re here to take you back to the place you secretly long to be, the place where you belong: the kitchen.

Now, on your knees!

CH #racist heartiste.wordpress.com

The Schlomo-Shitlib Axis convulsed themselves into a heavy menstrual flow this past week over the Fake Atrocity of bawlin’ beanlets being temporarily separated from their beaner parents for processing by border control officials. The real atrocity is of course the child abuse committed by the parents for hauling their leetle darleengs across hundreds of miles of hot desert, beset by child smugglers, cartel murderers, rapists, and pedophiles at every pit stop, passing through the non-shithole country of Mexico en route to invading the oppressively racist country of America, to live la vida loco.

Naturally, Trump and his supporters are to blame for being Nazis or something. The media said so. It’s all connected. You just have to abandon your senses of sanity and hyperbole.

So many leftoid crocodile tears shed for bawlin’ beanlets dragged by their parents thousands of miles away from their homelands, while not a single tear spared for poor White kids who live a few towns over. Tears for the former are grace and empathy personified, while tears for the latter are gauche. That’s how moral enlightenment looks once refracted through the twisted shitlib mind.

“How dare you?” shrieks the anchorshitlib in high dudgeon when her Void-Cunt Conformism Test is defied by a wompin’ White man whose sympathies are more realistically and sincerely situated closer to home. “These poor (brown) children are being separated from their parents! IT’S A NATIONAL DISGRACE,” she screams through red face and eyes bulging with fire and brimstone. To which the only needed response is, “lol suk a dik, you leftoids are off your rockers. ‘Tender age’ kids are separated every day from their parents…it’s called elementary school!”

CRY ME ANOTHER RIVER OF SALTY TEARS, YOU INFANTILE FREAKS

But the shitlib won’t stop her descent into infantilism. There’s too much at stake, such as the much better moral high she can get from effortlessly sympathizing with faraway people who don’t look like her. Sympathizing with kin closer to home comes with expectations of real assistance, and why work for her hit of methamphetapreen when she can emote ineffectually over illegal aliens who can only trip her guilt from a distance.

The poster beanlet for this virtue signaling mass hysteria is a toddler girl who was photographed…wait for it…crying. Yes, stop the presses, a toddler was crying. It’s the next Watergate. Or Waterworks.

The aztot immediately became iconic to one half of the country. She was even featured on a Time fagazine cover:

...

The suspiciously coordinated Chaimstream Media moved quickly to action to give their shitlib audience what it craved: a narrative injection about no good, very bad, horribly racist BadWhites and the evil Trump Administration tearing a little crying girl from her mother. Never mind that the separation policy is twenty years old, enforced by Gay Mulatto and Trump alike.

Yellow journalism isn’t the right term for what’s going on today with the media, which is much worse than mere sensationalism. The media is now into passing off lies and suppressing truths to whip up fervor among their remnant shitlib followers in the hopes of inciting either an impeachment or an assassination of Trump. It’s that bad.

Manufactured emotionalism is the Chaimstream Media’s sole purpose now. Truth? Objectivity? Journalistic ethics? Sanity? Toss it in the bin, because the only thing that matters is winding up a bunch of hysterical cat ladies, urban sluts, and soyboys over the phony plight of foreign invaders who use their kids as “get into the US free” props. The media’s mottos can be condensed to “Anything to Get Trump” and “No Lie Too Big”.

It only took a day of media fluffing to give Shitlib America wood. Protests erupted. Celebrities jizzed themselves in ropes of self-righteous indignation. Trump officials were hounded out of restaurants and leftists threatened ICE patriots with bodily harm on Twatter (account suspensions delayed pending review of what level of incitement to violence is permissible if the threat is carried out by a leftoid…turns out, quite a lot).

But a funny thing happened (again) during this combo platter two minutes hate + two minutes sanctimony: the central figure — the core conceit — of the shitlib narrative collapsed, and made a farce of what was already a sham.

The bawlin’ beanlet was never separated from her mother.

The morbid humor doesn’t stop there. In the midst of the anti-Trump frenzy, ethical journalists at the Daily Caller and Breitbart reported a host of details that put the lie to every cherished mythology of the Left in their manufactured crisis du jour.

...

Trump was right. They really aren’t sending their best.

(left unstated: the toddler grows up to be a fat waddling adult bean who gives birth to five ms-13 gang members. #GenesMatter #RaceMatters)

Even when the Left thinks they have scored a battlefield victory, their delusions are exposed by the countervailing facts that inevitably surface a few sanity-check days later to put the lie to their anti-White narrative.

It’s almost clockwork-like now:

a propaganda photo of Browns Behaving Heartwarmingly goes viral
shitlibs celebrate their good fortune at getting the chance to once again paternalistically emote over a nonWhite while denouncing Trump and TrumpWhites who insufficiently grovel before the Equalism Monolith
a disingenuous moral panic ensues, recharging shitlib batteries depleted by the Trumpening and the creeping realization that their noble savage worldview is on the verge of implosion
as shitlib menstrual cycles are synchronizing, a trickle and then a deluge of contradicting facts escapes from dissident media outlets, destroying any slim justification for the shitlib hysterics
shitlibs and their media symbiote ignore the contradicting facts, pretending their entire narrative wasn’t just discredited (but enough realtalk pierces their bubbles that another bout of cogdis pushes them one step closer to the funny farm)

That last item is important, because it’s proof that shitlibs don’t really care about the bawlin’ beanlets. If they really cared about the leetle crying beanlet, they would express relief that she wasn’t actually separated from her mother. They would be happy that their worst fear wasn’t realized. Instead, they ignore the heartening news to continue slandering Trump with the melodramatic blood libel that he’s building concentration camps for the saints.

The Great Bawlin’ Beanlet Hoax of 2018 was always about Trump and what he and his followers represent: a disturbing lack of faith in the value of histrionic anti-White moralism. It was, yet again, a theatrical piece of agitprop around which shitlibs could coalesce into an uptalking choir of smarmy self-righteousness revealing an increasingly fragile superiority complex over those deplorable Whites who don’t commute to work via bike lane. Every modren day madness roiling the Hajnalsphere is just another front in the IntraWhite War.

It’s virtue signaling all the way down. Don’t let the torrent of tears fool you. (For one, shitlibs cry over anything. They aren’t known for emotional continence.) The tears aren’t for the children; the tears are for other shitlibs: briny droplets of estrogen that serve as club membership dues and backstage passes to polite society. When the tears streak in unison, shitlibs experience something akin to a mass hypnotic event; their atomized striver existence is, for a brief window, mutually connected to a larger community and social purpose that evokes a feeling of religious transcendence and earthy authenticity which they commonly lack and consequently endlessly try-hard to achieve.

In truth, children have always only ever been one of two things to the typical White shitlib: inconveniences, or soldiers to recruit for the cause. Satanic, really.

The scum who pushed the Bawlin’ Beanlet blood libel on gullible Whites by exploiting a bug in their high trust, guilt-based, empathobesic code should be reminded up front and as often as possible that America is not the fucking daycare center of the world. Beanlets separated from their parents because the parents tried to invade a foreign country? PARENTS’ FAULT. Claiming anything else is simply opportunistic moralism leveraged to tactical advantage by SWPL elites and sub-elites desperate to keep out of their halls of power and striver circles any incursions by declassé Whites riding a wave of revolutionary churn.

A slim majority of Americans is sane enough to understand the moral calculus, but a disconcertingly large minority prefers moral inversion, because the goal here isn’t moral clarity. It’s battlefield advantage. Precursors to Civil War 2…

dailyantifeminist #sexist dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com

Make Testosterone Great Again (By Legalizing Rape)

A society in which a man is not afraid to put a women in her place (by raping her) is a society where you can fuck a 12-year-old teenager just to know what it feels like. In other words: White Knightism and Blue Knightism are inseparable. And both are directly correlated with the ongoing sissification of society.

We are living in a low-testosterone, high-estrogen world. My point in this is not to promote some silly “machismo” or something. Rather, it’s a simple and even obvious proposition: the modern modes of communication and more importantly the very thought-patterns have become womanish. People today are passive-agressive, petty, uninspiring, catty, and snarky. It used to be that women were bitches; now men are also bitches.

MRAs talk a lot about “the war on boys,” and while they are correct, the issue is much bigger than that. There is an all-pervasive thought-police, run for the benefit of Feminists and serving their interests, that has completely obliterated any healthy expression of male sexuality; now men are in the passive position, because women hold all the power – “power” meaning the ability to have one’s will done.

Right now, as I’m sitting on the bus, I can remember all the recent instances when women have “bagspread” against me. It’s always women who do the bagspreading, isn’t it? Yet everyone talks about “manspreading” (they don’t even call it legspreading – it’s specifically men who are accused of it) as if that’s the only issue going on.

In reality, #MeToo has been going on for several decades straight. And all along the way, it is “beta males” who suffered the most for it; the alphas play by their own rules, while betas do what society (read: women) tells them to do. And you don’t have to tell me that what I’m saying is nothing new. I realize it perfectly well. The question is: what does the alternative look like?

To me, it looks like an environment that accepts the full scope of male sexuality is one where I can actually use my hand to touch the knee of the woman currently sitting on the bus seat to my left and get away with it. In such a society there is no issue of men being commandeered by women, nor is it illegal to disregard the word “no,” which is more often than not merely a token gesture, anyway.

Legalization of rape is the single most effective way of eliminating the phenomenon of Knightism in all its manifestations. When I know that a woman’s only means of resisting my advances when we’re alone in a secluded area is her physical force, which is inferior and outright meager compared to mine (statistically speaking), I know that indeed, I am a man, and she is a woman. And she would know it just as well.

Legalization of rape can bring the backbone of masculinity – back. Sperm counts will rise sharply. Women will get pregnant again (one way or another). The TFR will make your run-of-the-mill alt-righter contented. The sissification of male behavior will stop. Legalization of rape, as outlined in that post that I wrote, is as pro-social as it can ever get. Political Correctness doesn’t stand a chance when I can legally assert my masculinity by forcing the neighbor’s putative teenage daughter to suck me off.

Far from constituting a “problem,” rape is an integral ingredient of the solution. 90% of social ills would be gone with this one simple trick. Everything falls into place when there is no law in the book of laws that says “a man can’t compel a woman to fuck him.” There shouldn’t be any such laws, whatsoever.

Rape is good. And raping 12-year-olds is perfect.

MikeinSD #fundie forum.catholic.com

[Response to an article "New UK Law: Restaurants Must Permit Gays to Publicly Exhibit Affection; Bed and Breakfasts Must Admit Homosexual Couples"]

Public decency certainly would be lowered by homosexuals. Their catty comments about fashion choices of fellow restaurant patrons. Remarks about the freshness of the ingredients of the meals. And the freshness of the waiters. Even the decor will not be spared.

Somehow I think this degradation continues, law or no law. Any way decent people can get homosexuals out of the restaurant and hospitality industries? They seem infested with sodomites! One can just imagine where the hands, serving our plates and making our beds, have previously been!! It's enough to put one off one's tea.

Bill P #sexist unz.com

Witchcraft was popular during the Reagan presidency as well. I was privy to it at the time because I was a young boy and the women engaged in it, including a former nun who taught me in fourth grade, deemed me and my friends inconsequential. The “witches” used to have seances at my friend’s divorced single mother’s house.

I think it’s just a normal part of female spirituality. It’s institutionalized in Korea, and probably Mexico, too.

If men have their own, countervailing organizations, things are balanced out. The problem here is that we don’t, and a lot of contemporary Anglo men stubbornly ignore the fact that this is a problem.

As much as I respect and admire certain women, such as Ann Coulter and Mollie Hemingway, we men have to have our own woman-free institutions not only for rational discourse, but peace of mind as well.

Christian Talour #racist amren.com

What Chinese College Students Think About Race

As an English teacher at a Chinese university, I spend a lot of time with young people. As a result of friendships I’ve developed, I have learned a lot about what they think about race and ethnicity.I’m particularly well positioned because my university has an especially large number of students from Pakistan and sub-Saharan Africa. Most identitarians believe the Chinese are traditional and realistic in their attitudes towards race. For now, this is true, but the Western mentality is rapidly infiltrating Chinese society and corrupting the minds of young people. The old ethnonationalism that protected Chinese identity is evaporating under the pervasive forces of globalization and liberalism.

The girls’ disgust is often combined with fear, and they associate blacks with crime. This gut attitude from Chinese girls can be perplexing because it arises from those who have often never met a black person, or have seen them only in passing. It seems to me this association of black people with danger and violence is almost innate for Chinese people, especially women. I’ve also noticed that black African young men have absolutely no luck trying to date Chinese girls, who see them as weird, ugly, and aggressive.

This contrasts sharply with Chinese girls’ typical reaction to whites. From my own observation, and from what I hear from others, they practically throw themselves at white guys. In our class introductions at the beginning of the semester, I usually have at least four or five ask if I will date them—they flirt with me right in front of the class. Many more make advances privately. The Pakistani boys have mixed results. Some of them are successful, but if they are too traditional in their Islamic behavior, the Chinese girls reject them.

My male students mainly see blacks as basketball players and hip-hop rap artists, and they often describe them as “cool,” “fashionable,” and “strong.” Many of them idolize black people. However, Chinese boys are not attracted to black women and would never think of marrying one. I was once in a group discussion in which it was jokingly suggested China should invade Africa to acquire women to fill the sex gap plaguing China (thirty million Chinese boys have no girl to marry). One of the Chinese men in the group looked perplexed, and said: “But there are no women in Africa for us to marry; there are only dark-skinned people there.”

Although there is basic agreement that blacks are not attractive, I am still amazed by how differently Chinese boys and girls think of blacks, especially of black men. In part, this may be because Chinese young people are more segregated by sex than American young people, so they may have different ideas about other things as well. Many boys are afraid to talk to the girls, which keeps them even further apart.

What I’ve described is the Chinese “gut reaction” to black people, but the issue is becoming more complex as the Chinese government “opens up,” as my students call it. As a foreigner, I don’t see everything that goes on within the Chinese education system, but I gather from my students that the government’s approach is a contradictory combination of an enthusiastic embrace of globalism with a form of nationalism that protects the government. The results can be surprising.

Despite their obviously low opinion of blacks, when I ask my students whether blacks are as intelligent as whites and Asians, they almost universally reply, “Yes.” This is because of their schooling. Almost all of them cite the phrase “all men are created equal,” even though many of them don’t know where it comes from. They tell me their teachers taught them racial equality when they were in school. When I ask them why they believe this, they cite the line from the Declaration of Independence as if were scientific proof of equality.

I often get interesting reactions when I explain the actual IQ scores for each race. My students’ first reaction is laughingly to celebrate the Asian results: “Ha! We’re smarter than white people!” After we joke about this, I ask them what they think about blacks being so far below whites and Asians. Almost without exception, they cite the arguments made by the American Left: “It’s because of white racism,” “It’s because of European colonialism,” “It’s because they have bad nutrition,” or “It’s because they don’t have proper education.”

I was initially shocked by this. I couldn’t imagine how they’d been trained to say these things when they spent their whole lives in Chinese schools. Many of them say their teachers taught them Africa was poor because white people stole all the natural resources. It seems that racial egalitarianism has spread farther and deeper than most of us would have imagined.

Part of this can be blamed on Chinese government media (which is almost all media). In an effort to delegitimize American society and inspire nationalism, the authorities portray the United States in a bad light. This includes reporting on gun violence, and constant coverage of “police shootings of young black men,” which they portray as evidence of American “racism.” At the same time, Chinese seem to equate globalism with Western culture and, especially, Americanism. All things American are fashionable and cool.

Increasing Chinese globalization will probably accentuate these contradictory trends, and the Chinese government is not consistent on race. It teaches that America is evil because of “racism,” while simultaneously making it impossible for non-Chinese foreigners to get permanent residency. Allegedly, there is a way to get it, but no one, to my knowledge, has ever successfully done so. The government condemns Europe for not taking in more refugees while enforcing some of the strictest border controls and visa restrictions in the world. To us foreign residents, this is highly hypocritical.

My students sometimes claim America and Europe are “racist” for not allowing mass immigration, or they suggest I must be “prejudiced” against Mr. Obama because he’s black. When I ask them if they want the Chinese president to be black, or China to invite millions of Japanese immigrants, they react with horror and bewilderment. Their common response is something timid and confused, such as, “That’s just not the Chinese way.”

This deligitimizing of America is coupled with officially encouraged hatred of the Japanese. The Japanese are denigrated every year on the annual Anti-Japanese Day—yes, it’s really called that—which was created to memorialize the Nanking Massacre. My students often say shocking things, such as, “Why didn’t America kill all the Japanese people in WWII?” or “Please nuke the Japanese again,” within the same conversation in which they criticize American “racism.” I’ve heard this same, inconsistent attitude echoed by senior university officials.

My race-realist perspective is almost always vindicated when my students travel to America with foreign work programs. One of my students worked in Ohio over the summer. When he returned, I met him in a tea shop and asked him what he thought of America. The first thing out of his mouth was: “The black people . . . they’re so . . . dangerous.” I got a similar unprovoked reaction while I was sitting at a gate in the Shanghai airport. A complete stranger was returning from Massachusetts and suddenly delivered a rant about how blacks were brutish and weird.

When African students began arriving at my university in higher numbers last year, the Pakistani and Chinese students were initially excited about getting to know them. I watched the excitement turn to confusion and disgust.

A Pakistani friend decided to have an African as his roommate. I warned him against it, but he went ahead with his plan. For the next six months, he enlivened our conversation with horror stories about the absurd and outrageous incompetence of his apartment mate.

Unfortunately, academics will probably grow to adopt the liberal American perspective on racial equality and compatibility, but actual exposure to diversity is usually a cure. There are ways to speed up the process. One of my Chinese friends couldn’t believe there was evidence for blacks having lower IQs and higher crime rates than whites and Asians. I pulled up Jared Taylor’s American Renaissance video “Race Differences in Intelligence” on YouTube and let her watch. I then showed her videos of the Ferguson riots, flash mobs carried out by “youths,” and videos of the knockout game. Her perspective changed in a single evening. She was shocked, and told me her whole perception of America and race relations had changed. She’s been “red-pilled” ever since.

Egalitarian illusions are taking root in China, but they are not as firmly implanted as in the United States. Direct experience or a dose of countervailing evidence is often an effective cure. But the cultural influence goes only one way: Illusions flow from the West to China. It is impossible to know how badly they may eventually poison the minds of young Chinese.

As in the West, older Chinese seem to have a stronger instinctive dislike for blacks than young people. I’ve been told by friends that African students have trouble renting apartments from older and middle-aged Chinese landlords. Personally, I have very limited interaction with older people, so my impressions are mainly second hand.

Young Chinese who do not attend college have more traditional racial views than the more educated, but they are still influenced to a great degree by American pop culture, and are instructed in primary school by teachers who have been influenced to some extent by American thinking. Their beliefs are still moving towards egalitarianism, though more slowly.

The long-term solution, of course, is to eradicate the illusions at their source, which is the United States. I have come to realize the importance of this effort, not just for whites but for the entire world.

Jim #sexist blog.jim.com

Women cannot do men’s jobs, and the pretense that they can and are is doing immense damage to men’s work and the creation of value by men.

Women in men’s positions subtract value. Women in powerful male positions subtract enormous amounts of value. Men at work get paid for creating value, and are forced to pay women for destroying the value that men create.

The reason for female under representation among top engineers, scientists, etc, is that women are slightly less competent on average and have a narrower distribution.

The reason for female under representation among CEOs is moral and emotional, unrelated to competence. Women are very competent managers. A woman has always managed my affairs, and generally done so very well, but women are uncomfortable running things without a strong alpha male supervising them and approving their work from time to time. If they don’t get the supervision that they emotionally need from someone masculine, patriarchal, and sexy, they start acting maliciously, and self destructively, running the operation off the road and into the ground in a subconscious effort to force an alpha male to appear and give them a well deserved beating. The problem is that if she does not get the supervision that she emotionally needs, she will maliciously run the operation into the ground, like a wife married to a beta male husband whom she despises, destroying the family assets and the lives of their children.

Happens every single time, as near to every single time as makes no difference, no matter how smart and competent and hard working they are. Exceptions are so rare as to be nonexistent for all practical purposes.

...

I would explain the fact that a company with a female founder was one eighth as likely to get follow on funding by the fact that absolutely none of them should have received funding, and the only reason that any of them got any follow on funding was that the venture capitalists wanted to deny that anything was wrong. The official and enforced explanation is that it is proof of irrational hatred and misogyny by venture capitalists. And if you doubt this, you obviously must hate women.

So, to decide between these two explanations, let us look at company acquisitions. When venture capitalists fund a company, they intend it that if it succeeds it will be acquired by a big company. If a company is not acquired, the venture capitalists have pissed away their money. Most times they lose, sometimes they win big.

So, that eleven percent of companies with all male founders were acquired represents the venture capitalists winning one time in nine.

With all female founders, they won one time in two hundred and seventy. With all female founders they had only one thirtieth the chance as with all male founders.

One might suppose that this indicates that women are one thirtieth as likely to be able to operate a company as a man, but obviously this conclusion is absurd. The companies must have been acquired for political brownie points, not because they were being operated successfully. It is as plain as the nose on your face that women are absolutely disastrous when given this kind of authority, but official sources will deny what is spitting in their faces and kicking them in the balls, so how do we check this? Are they insane, or am I insane?

Answer: Look at companies with both male and female founders. If the reason is misogyny, then the female founder will have no effect, because the purchasers will assume she is only there for decoration and to warm the bed of the real founders.

So, if misogyny, companies with mixed founders should be purchased at roughly the same rate as companies with all male founders.

If the problem is that women are just naturally incompetent as CEOs, then companies with mixed founders should be purchased at a somewhat lower rate, as the male founders carry the female founders on their backs while the purported female founders paint their nails, powder their faces, and discuss their most recent booty call from Jeremy Meeks.

If, however, the problem is that women in power just invariably and uniformly act like feral animals, as if they had been raised by apes in the jungle, then zero companies with mixed founders will be purchased. If the problem is that the female founders need to be placed in cages and put on leashes, but the male founders are not allowed to do so, then zero companies with mixed founders will be purchased. If the problem is that these days women are no longer subject to the restraints of civilization, then zero companies with mixed founders will be purchased.

Well, guess what.

If a woman has a strong husband who is himself wealthy and powerful, and she washes his dishes and sorts his socks, then she can be a good CEO. Today, however, husbands are generally weak, and therefore competent female CEOs correspondingly rare.

Females can no more do large group socialization than they can chop wood with an axe, or clear a path through the jungle with a machete. Females in or near positions of power have a disastrous effect on the social cohesion of the group to which they belong, on the propensity of group members to cooperate with each other, on the asabiyyah of the group, on the group’s capability to pursue goals in common.

It is a standard psychiatric finding that women are supposedly more agreeable than men, and in very important ways they are.

If tell a woman I have mislaid my keys, she will find them. In this sense women really are more agreeable than men.

If I tell a woman to get me coffee, she will get me coffee. In this sense women really are more agreeable than men.

If I slap a woman on the backside, she will yelp and jump, but then smile and laugh. In this sense women really are more agreeable than men.

But who is it that interrupts the boss?

It is always a woman. Yes, she interrupts in a supposedly friendly, supportive, and agreeable manner, but interrupting is in reality unfriendly, undermines him, and is in fact disagreeable.

Women are catty. Two women are friends, three women are a contest to see which two will become friends. Women are disruptive. They never stop shit testing their bosses. If a woman interrupts her boss, talks over her boss, even though her interruption is supposedly friendly, supportive, and all that, as it always supposedly is, she is disrupting and damaging the organization.

Women take advantage of and abuse restrictions on physical violence, and other rules commanding prosocial behavior, which abuse undermines prosocial behavior and impairs large group cooperation between males. Women are bad for and disruptive of any large group that attempts to cooperate to get something done. They undermine asabiyya, throwing sand in the wheels just for the hell of it. They are always throwing down shit tests to find which male is alpha enough to subdue their bad behavior, always disrupting, always looking for a well deserved spanking.

The psychiatric category of “agreeableness” is cooked to support the doctrine that women are wonderful. It conflates going along with bad behavior, with going along with good behavior. It declares resisting bad behavior to be disagreeable, while ruthlessly and cynically imposing on good behavior is supposedly not disagreeable.

Yes, women really are wonderful in their proper sphere. In power, they are only tolerable to the extent that strong males keep them in line.

A more accurate analysis of female behavior is that females are bad at, and bad for, large group social dynamics. Female or substantially female businesses fail, often fail very badly. Women are better at one on one dynamics than men – all women, all the time. Worse at large group dynamics than men. All women, all the time. All women are like that.

It is obvious to me that women are having a devastating effect on male efforts to create wealth, and I have long been puzzled at other people’s inability to see what is not merely right in front of their faces, but repeatedly spitting in their face and then slapping them.

A business appoints a female boss because progress. She acts in an angry hostile manner, infuriating customers and vital employees, disruptively knocking the business off track instead of keeping it on track, as if the business was a beta husband, and she wanted a divorce with the house, the children, and alimony. Business goes down the tubes. No one notices. Supposedly the business ran into mysterious head winds that have absolutely no connection to the new boss whatsoever.

When males aggress, they get in each other’s faces, they shout, there is always a hint of the possibility it might turn physical, a suggestion of physical menace. Women aggress and disrupt in a more passive manner, and these days we are not allowed to react to female aggression by shouting at them and getting in their faces, by menacing them. It used to be, within living memory, within my memory, that female misbehavior was met with a male response that hinted at the possibility that she might get spanked, put in a metaphorical cage, or put in metaphorical or literal irons, just as an aggressively misbehaving male got then and gets today a response that hints at the possibility of a punch in the face or imprisonment. Women today therefore routinely aggress and disrupt in a manner I find shocking, crazy, disgraceful, bizarre, and extreme, and do so with shocking and disgraceful impunity, as if within my lifetime women came to be possessed by demons, and everyone is walking around like zombies pretending to not notice. Recall in the infamous interview, Jordan Peterson looks away from Kathy before calling out her bad behavior, because if he looked her in the face while calling out her bad behavior it would have been socially unacceptable, because women are supposedly wonderful.

A male quarrels with a male. They get in each other’s faces, you feel that violence might happen, or at least one of them will call security and have the other shown the door. They have the body language of two male goats about to butt heads over possession of a female goat.

A female quarrels with a male. She interrupts him and talks over him in a supposedly friendly and supportive way “So what you are really saying is …”

A male who intends to aggress against another male who is ignoring him intrudes into the other male’s space and just plain gets close enough that the male he is aggressing against has to drop what he is doing and pay attention. Again we see the body language of two male goats about to butt heads over a female goat.

A female who intends to aggress against a male who is ignoring her also intrudes, but not so close, and proceeds to interrupt what he is doing and distract him with some halfway plausible excuse as to why he has to stop what he is doing and pay attention to her, which excuse is something that in theory should not irritate him, and he has trouble understanding why he is irritated, and why she lacks any real interest in the nominal justification that she supposedly has for demanding his attention and interrupting his activities. Supposedly she is helping him in a friendly pleasant nice way, though her “help” is hostile, nasty, angry, disruptive and entirely unwanted, and she ignores his forceful denials that he needs any such “help”.

We need a society where women feel that if they act like Cathy Newman did in that infamous interview with Jordan Peterson, they might get slapped in the face, or sent to the kitchen and the bedroom and restricted from getting out except on a short leash. But if Jordan had responded to her bad behavior by getting in her face as if she was a man, they would probably have called security and tossed him out. Notice that whenever Jordan calls out Cathy Newman’s bad behavior he looks away and gives a little laugh. If he called out her bad behavior while looking at her, it would have been socially unacceptable. What needs to be socially acceptable is that her husband should have given her a slap in the face for publicly disgracing his family with her bad behavior. The same government policies that helicoptering women into powerful positions are allowing them to act badly and destructively in those positions.

As affirmative action makes the differences between men and women starkly and dramatically visible to everyone, at the same time it makes it a criminal offense to notice, or even think about, those differences.

A woman in power is like a woman who finds herself the breadwinner, and her husband is a kitchen bitch, like a dog who finds himself the alpha male of the household, like a woman who intrudes into a males space and proceeds to feminize it and make it hostile to males. She behaves badly in an unconscious effort to smoke the alpha male out of hiding by provoking him to give her a beating.

Supposedly the reason there are so few female CEOs is because of evil sexism, not because boards keep appointing female CEOs and those CEOs keep driving their companies into the ditch. From time to time some big important Harvard expert informs us that female headed or female founded companies do better than male companies, but they will not show us their data, which data conspicuously flies in the face of common sense, anecdote, and casual observation. And if you ask to see their data, you are a racist sexist islamophobic misogynist, and the only reason you could be asking such an obviously hateful question is because you just hate women and are trying to harm them by asking hate questions about hate facts. Also, you are anti science and a global warming denier. We ignorant hateful hicks who keep asking to see the evidence that women can do a man’s job are just like those ignorant hateful hicks who keep asking to see the evidence for global warming. We are anti science, because the science is settled.

Well, fortunately, a surprisingly truthful feminist chick went looking for the data.

Her graphics were truthful, but somewhat misleading, as she de-emphasized and partially hid the most important and dramatic datum, so I edited her graphics for clarity. The graphic at the start of this post is mine, but based on her data and graphics.

kikii07 #fundie #sexist reddit.com

#PrettygirlCurse

I just stumbled on a YouTube video of a girl talking about she had 20+ jobs and she wasn't able to fit in because she's pretty and has to deal with catty women. I'm just going to be a bit blunt and correct me if I'm wrong but, I'd take the pretty girl "curse" any day than the torment I go through for being ugly. I understand everything has its advantages and disadvantages but the advantages of being pretty beats the disadvantages. I can't even get a temporary job yet there is someone who can hop scotch from job to job even being a brand embassador? Talk about life on easy mode for these women.

I've gotten more attractive in the last 7 years but before that I was picked on constantly and treated like crap by my peers, particularly men.

My biggest problem now as an "attractive woman" is how annoying it is when guys persistently hit on me. Its not comparable to how shitty it feels the other way around. These people couldn't even begin to imagine how awful it is to be an outcast all because you're not pretty enough. Talk about soul crushing.

I agree with you sis. Also congratulations on maxxing

I hate it when they play the victim. Girl, your entire worth is your looks and yet you somehow think they are a curse??? Lmao, try living a week without them and then tell me how it went.

They know it but will play I don't know what wha wha card

Yeah I may come across as harsh but I really don't give a shit about their apparent #prettygirlproblems. Like I feel a lot of the issues they complain about are exaggerated or rooted more in their individual personalities as oppose to them actually being pretty. From what I've seen women tend to flock to attractive women and want to befriend them, they also automatically find them more trustworthy and give ugly women all the negative connotations of 'jealous, bitter' etc. They also have had so many people treat them with so much kindness that when they encounter somebody who treats them like the average joe, and assume (if it's a woman) that she must be jealous. If it irks them so much when women are catty towards them then they can come together with us and deconstruct lookism to the best of our ability, thus in turn removing capitilism, patriachy and so on. But they won't because they know the pros outway the cons for them.

Tbh most people who I've encountered who have catty, condescending and rude have been pretty women. I think just a quick look online can show numerous pretty women with horrible personalities. They know they have a privilege and I wish we could take that away for a day, and let them see how geniunely awful it is to be an ugly woman.

Sadly when you begin to talk about how badly ugly women are treated they shut their ears wiggle their heads saying nope, it's your problem you have no confidence. I knew this Naomi (light skin) who claimed to be a humanitarian and caring about mental health and individual struggles to be extra likable and I tried to talk about the struggles I face, and she had the "amused" facial expression and told me that all women get the same treatment and ugly girls or their problems are non existent. Mind you while I was telling her about problems that I as an ugly girl go through and others, she had the most unamused facial expression only to act shock in the end. These women know the pros of being attractive outweigh the cons yet they'll play "muh don't know what you are talking about" card. They know it and I respect someone like Cynde Black who acknowledged the fact.

PS: This Naomi lives off a betabuxx as well.. No shit freaking Sherlock.

Give me pretty problems any day

The Rev. William H. Grimes #fundie conservatism.referata.com

Sermon 21: Against Materialism

By The Rev. William H. Grimes

1 Timothy 2:9 says: "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;"

1 Peter 3:2-5 likewise says "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands"

Let's talk about these women these days. They go out, trying to look good, with all of this jewelry and this makeup and all of these garments that are immodest and exist solely for them to show off their wicked curves and breasts and whatnot. There is all of these cosmetics, taking HOURS AND HOURS to get ready just to put it on, and then wearing this floral perfume with the raspberry and the vanilla notes or whatever, instead of taking that time to read the Word of God! Get yourself out of the bathroom and into the den reading the Gospel of Matthew! Stop going to the mall to shop and be catty and gossip and all of this, and read the Book of Judges! Get your head into Genesis and not going and buying "cute" garments at Victoria's Secret or Forever 21!!!!!!!! I GUESS THEY ARE ALL TRYING TO LOOK LIKE TAYLOR SWIFT OR SOMETHING!!!! OWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!

There are even so-called "Christian" women who belong to Roman Catholic or mainline Protestant or even weak sauce "Evangelical" groups such as the Southern Baptist Convention who go about this pursuit of immense and unmitigated vanity!!!!!!!! WHERE ARE THE REAL CHRISTIAN WOMEN GOING AND PROTESTING OUTSIDE OF VAIN AND SICKENING DISPLAYS OF VANITY LIKE ALL OF THESE SEPHORA OUTLETS POPPING UP IN MALLS ALL ACROSS THIS NATION WHILE GOD FEARING CHRISTIANS IN AFRICA ARE STARVING?! WHERE IS THE LOVING AND TOLERANT LEFT ON THIS ONE? OH, BUYING THEIR LIBERAL IPHONES AND IPADS AND IMACS AND IPODS INSTEAD OF GOING AND PROTESTING THESE JEWELERS AND MAKEUP AND PERFUME AND EXPENSIVE IMMODEST GARMENTS LIKE THESE LEGGINGS AND CARDIGANS AND CROP TOPS AND ALL OF THIS OTHER SATANIC TREACHERY! GET A SPINE, YOU MEN! YOUR SO-CALLED "CHRISTIAN" WOMEN ARE TOO WEAK TO TAKE A STAND! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

LET'S ALL MAKE SURE THAT WE PUT AN END TO THIS MADNESS!!!! NO MORE!! God's people said AMEN!

William Grimes #fundie conservatism.referata.com

Sermon 5: Giving Up Childish Things
By Rev. William H. Grimes
Let's take some time to talk about 1 Corinthians 13:11 today. It says "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." This is a particular favorite verse of Bro. James Wilson, so I thought I'd take some time to preach on it.
Here at New Testament Baptist Church, we don't mind holy fun. Staying up late and drinking coffee and having desserts in fellowship with other believers is fine. However, we don't condone sinful "fun" like alcohol, dancing, and lewd comments and actions. This corrupt society and so-called "Christians" partake of these things. Can you tell me why grown adults get drunk and urinate outside and make jokes about it? The Bible even says that " And it came to pass, when he began to reign, as soon as he sat on his throne, that he slew all the house of Baasha: he left him not one that pisseth against a wall, neither of his kinsfolks, nor of his friends." in 1 Kings 16:11. CHILDREN URINATE OUTSIDE AND SPEAK GIBBERISH! WHY DO ADULTS WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO BE MATURE GO AND GET DRUNK OF STRONG DRINK AND DO THE SAME THING?! PUT AWAY CHILDISH THINGS AND FIND A TOILET AND SOCIALIZE SOBER! HAVE A BIBLE STUDY! STOP GOING TO PUBS AND ACTING LIKE IMMATURE COLLEGE STUDENTS! GOD HATETH STRONG DRINK! DRINK WATER!!!!!!!! BE MATURE AND SHOW SOME RESPECT FOR YOURSELF!
A common problem with marriages these days is that women are neglected while men salivate over sports and video games and they consume strong drink with their buddies! Think they're all manly when their wives are over there lonely! You were already weak enough that you succumbed to your lust and married to avoid fornication! Why are you now neglecting your wife for childish garbage? Kids play sports and video games! PUT AWAY CHILDISH THINGS AND PUT ON THE WHOLE ARMOR OF GOD! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Women can't stop gossiping about others! 30 year old women are in the office gossiping about others like immature catty high school yuppies! An abomination unto the Lord is someone who IS A BUSYBODY AND CANNOT PUT AWAY CHILDISH THINGS AND PUT ON THE WHOLE ARMOR OF GOD!!!!!!!!!
PEOPLE WONDER WHY SOCIETY HAS DENIGRATED TO THE POINT THAT OUR PRESIDENT IS A CREEPY OLD PERVERT WHO CANNOT PUT AWAY CHILDISH THINGS AND HAD BRAGGED ABOUT UNRIGHTEOUS GENITAL GRABBING AND RATES WOMEN BASED UPON THEIR PHYSICAL APPEARANCES LIKE AN IMMATURE RANDY MIDDLE SCHOOL BOY! WHAT A SIMPLETON! GOD HATETH AMERICA BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT PASSES OFF AS A CHRISTIAN IN THIS CORRUPT SOCIETY! PORNOGRAPHY IS ILLEGAL AND OBSCENE BUT IT REMAINS ONLINE! GROWN MEN PLAY SPORTS AND VIDEO GAMES AND WATCH CARTOONS! WHEN ARE WE GOING TO PUT AWAY CHILDISH THINGS AND HAVE A GROWN UP SOCIETY THAT IS MATURE AND GODLY? IT NEEDS TO START NOW!!!!!!!!! God's people said AMEN!