Similar posts

Dr. Michael P. Masters #ufo #crackpot idflyobj.com

IDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS
Brief Overview of The Book
This work represents a unique examination of long-term evolutionary change in human biology, culture, and technology, as it pertains to the question of “UFOs” and “Extraterrestrials.” More specifically, this study carefully considers the possibility that the individuals described in reliable reports of close encounters, may represent our distant human descendants, returning from the future to study us in their own evolutionary past.

By reexamining this subject matter in the context of an original, falsifiable theory, which has undergone rigorous scientific scrutiny, the objective is to begin a new and more informed discussion among believers and skeptics alike.

As an anthropologist who has worked on and directed numerous archaeological digs in Africa, France, and throughout the United States, it is easy to conceptualize just how much more could be learned about our own evolutionary history, if we currently possessed the technology to visit past periods of time.

This would undoubtedly facilitate in-depth, in-person analyses of the enigmatic, non-preservable aspects of our hominin ancestors. Furthermore, with the accelerating pace of change in science, technology, and engineering, it is likely that humans of the distant future may someday develop the knowledge and machinery necessary to return to the past.

Modern and past human groups would only be capable of comprehending the biology, culture, and technology of these extratempestrials in a limited capacity, as we represent a far more primitive stage of their remote ancestral past. However, through a comprehensive analysis of consistent patterns of long-term biocultural change throughout human evolution - as well as recent advances in our understanding of time and time travel - we may begin to consider this future possibility in the context of a currently unexplained phenomenon.

Many changes characterize human evolution, but it is primarily tenacious shifts toward habitual upright walking, changes in brain size and shape, facial reduction, reduced body hair, higher intelligence, and the development of increasingly complex tools and culture that most define our lineage. These changes occurred throughout hominin evolution, and have persisted in spite of marked modification to our subsistence strategy, climate, ecology, environment, and system of social, economic, and political organization.

Furthermore, from credible reports provided by sound-minded individuals who have experienced a “close encounter,” the extratempestrials observed are ubiquitously described as bipedal, hairless, human-like beings, with large brains, large eyes, small noses and mouths, culture, social organization, the ability to communicate with us in our own languages, and who possess technology advanced beyond, but clearly built upon, our own.

Coupled with a thorough understanding of the past and modern human condition, these accounts point to the continuation of established biological and cultural trends here on Earth, long into the distant future.

Dr. Alex Spain and unnamed Irish gynecologists #fundie globalcomment.com

A different sort of female genital mutilation
Gc contributor: Mór Rígan
About thirty years ago, there was an informal secret society in the city of Cork. Perhaps a loose net of those with a shared interest might be more accurate. This group passed the names of certain professionals around – who could be trusted, previous experiences, and religious beliefs. The information was gathered from many sources. It was shared among women of childbearing age because none wanted a fervently Catholic gynecologist.

A fervently Catholic gynecologist might put his beliefs into practice on the delivery table. He might choose to save the life of the child over the mother, or regardless of consequences make sure the woman would conceive again, or choose to mutilate a woman’s body rather than allow the idea that the woman might choose contraception in the future.

In the grand tradition of submission to the catholic church, Irish doctors used the surgical technique of symphysiotomy, long after the rest of the developed world had discredited its practice. Symphysiotomy was developed in 1597 and was routinely used to widen the pelvis during childbirth. By dividing the cartilage of the symphysis pubis, the pelvis can be widened by up to two centimetres.

Known complications include haemorrhage, injury to the urethra or bladder, vesicovaginal or urethrovaginal fistula, stress incontinence, sepsis, and pelvic osteoarthropathy. In some cases women experienced difficulty in walking and an unstable pelvis.

The technique was largely abandoned in the late nineteenth century after improvements in the hygiene and clinical practice of Caesarean section. It is still practiced in developing countries when Caesarean section is too risky and it can save the life of the mother and/or that of the child.

However, in Ireland, women were subjected to symphysiotomy without consent for religious reasons, even though Caesarean sections were relatively safe. It was thought that women subjected to repeated Caesareans might be tempted to use contraception and that could not be allowed to happen.

[Dr] Alex Spain was the champion of symphysiotomy at the National Maternity Hospital. In 1944, he revived the technique because Caesarean sections might lead to “contraception, the mutilating operation of sterilisation, and marital difficulty.” At that time Caesarean sections were perfectly safe and symphysiotomy had fallen into disrepute. Spain admitted his decision went against the weight of the entire English-speaking obstetrical world’.

From 1944 to 1983, 1,500 women underwent this unnecessary and traumatic surgical procedure leaving many in pain for the rest of their lives because of the religious beliefs of a few men. Many survivors have spoken of feeling the saw cut through the public bone and seeing horrific injuries on their newborns. These are just two stories:

“I’ve been in pain ever since. I’ve still attending hospitals with back pain and kidney problems. I’d go to bed one night and would be ok but the next day I would not be able to get out of the bed, I wouldn’t be able to put my feet to the ground, all because of the operation, and I didn’t know at the time. I had x-rays taken of my legs to see what was wrong but they couldn’t find anything wrong.”
They gave me hardly any information, whatsoever, until I got to the theatre. The only thing I remember is the nurses saying I had lovely red hair. They showed me the saw. It was an ordinary hand saw, they showed me where they were going to open the pelvic bone. They didn’t explain — they said: “You are going to have your baby now.” It was such agony, a terrible severe pain.”

Women were subject to this outdated practice because Catholic doctors believed that women would not choose to undergo multiple Caesarean sections. Such women might turn to contraception, the idea of which was unacceptable to those doctors at the time. These doctors saw themselves as upholding the laws of the Catholic church and those who are still alive show no remorse. They deny the damage they inflicted.

Records show that in 2001, the issue of symphysiotomy was being discussed in Government Buildings

It now appears that hundreds of Irish women, over at least a 20 year period, had to undergo this brutal, experimental operation. It has left many of them suffering permanent health problems. The operation, known as symphysiotomy, was carried out – as far as we can determine – in Dublin maternity hospitals between 1944 and 1964, and it could have gone on as late as 1975. Evidence is emerging which suggests it was also carried out in a number of Cork hospitals.

The operation – and the details are not for the squeamish – involved sawing through the woman’s pelvis so that it opened like a hinge. International medical experts repeatedly criticised this practice. They stated that caesarean section should have been the preferred option for difficult pregnancies. Some Irish doctors persisted with symphysiotomy, because they apparently believed that women who underwent Caesarean section would use contraception to avoid pregnancy. The use of contraception, of course, conflicted with the prevailing Catholic ethos.

Survivors of symphysiotomy have called for a review of the cases but Minister for health Mary Harney has said that reviews are carried out for improved care of patients and since symphysiotomy is no longer in use, a review would serve no purpose.

Exposing the extent of religious control in Ireland does not seem to be on the agenda. Religious dogma has no place in an operating room, any more than it does in government or export. The Catholic Church talks of forgiveness and individual acts of evil but subjecting women to urethral and bladder injury, infection, pain and long-term walking difficulties is an example of the institutional harm done to women in theocratic Ireland.

WARNING: Disturbing, Graphic Content Ahead

Child and infant rape with BDSM, Legally binding pedophile apologia

Justice Kathleen Caldwell & Dr. Mark Pearce #sexist thestar.com

[font=sans-serif]This post has one of the highest proportions of "legitimately serious possible triggers" to words I've seen: Count(triggers) / Count(words) hardly ever hits closer to 1 than this, so I'm not even going to try to list them; the "award" alone should give enough caution of what lies below. There are at least a couple things that cross over into other hotbeds of psychological traumatization, ones barely tangentially related to any form of child abuse or rape. I put what I thought were the worst parts in light grey, and I decreased the font size (partially for length and partially as a subtle, mild deterrent). If you decide to start reading this, and it starts fucking with you mentally, or even if you start wondering if what might come next will, then just stop. I should have. –shy[/font]

Court says ‘pedophilia does not apply’ — because perpetrator is a woman

Female pedophiles. She-monsters.

No such thing. Probably not. A woman can’t be a pedophile. Probably not. The clinical research is thin. Maybe the experts will change their mind, by and by. That happens a lot in the imprecise science of psychiatry.Although one expert’s mind was not changed by this:

A toddler sits at the woman’s feet, his small hands holding on to either leg. In this position, the woman — naked below the waist — masturbates using a baby bottle. The toddler, giggling, then grabs the bottle and drinks from it. The woman looks directly into the camera and smiles. That was one video seized by police from the Toronto home where the woman lived with her husband. On another video, the same woman is lying in bed with the same toddler. Both are naked. She begins to lick the child’s anus. Looking at the camera, she smacks her lips. A third video: The little boy is seated naked on a change table. The woman puts the child’s penis into her mouth. The child giggles.

In all, investigators discovered 25,066 child pornography images on more than 50 electronic devices when they executed a search warrant on April 25, 2016, including 111 child porn movies.

The couple is also shown engaging in BDSM (bondage/domination/sadism/masochism) activities with other couples. Police also found a contract signed by the “Slave” and her “Master,” an agreement containing rules and tasks to be completed by the woman as the submissive member in the relationship. They’d met through a website called “Bondage.com.” That’s who Jason Dickens and Dylan McEwen were, a man and woman joined in holy BDSM during a 2007 “collaring” ceremony — literally collaring — followed a year later by an ordinary wedding in front of family and friends.

Last week, Dickens, a former actor on Degrassi High, pleaded guilty to several child pornography offences, including two counts of making child porn, with an agreed statement of facts read into the record. Earlier this year, McEwen also pleaded guilty to sexual assault and two child pornography offences. She was sentenced to six years. But what the presiding judge would not do was declare McEwen a dangerous offender, which the Crown had sought and with impassioned urgency. In rejecting the long-term offender order, Justice Kathleen Caldwell weighed the various criteria that must be met, primarily a “substantial risk of reoffence.” Caldwell determined that McEwen wasn’t such a risk, relying heavily on the evidence and psychiatric report prepared by a forensic psychiatrist with expertise in paraphilia and sexual deviancy.

Dr. Mark Pearce was agreed upon as an expert witness by both the Crown and the defence when he testified in February. He diagnosed McEwen as a masochist and low-risk to reoffend [sic]. Caldwell accepted Pearce’s conclusion that McEwen derived sexual arousal not from acts committed against children but from the “extreme humiliation” of her involvement in those acts, which fed her masochism, described as on the moderately severe end.

The judge wrote (and read aloud in court): “Dr. Pearce testified that the current research suggests that women do not suffer from paraphilic disorders apart from masochism. This fact lends further weight to the conclusion that pedophilia does not apply to you.”

Crown Attorney Lisa Henderson, the judge noted, had “rigorously challenged” Pearce on this assertion.

“(I) agree that at first blush it appears illogical that women do not suffer from other paraphilic disorders,” Caldwell continued. “Sometimes, however, that which appears reasonable is anything but and vice versa. I accept the doctor’s evidence on this point. He did agree that this conclusion might change in the future as psychiatry continues to develop, but I cannot base my conclusions on speculative potential that have yet to develop.”

In this particular case, McEwen was her husband’s slave, committed to do his bidding. Court also heard, however, that McEwen had initiated at least one of the toddler videos without her “Master” present. And in at least two earlier instances, McEwen had obtained child pornography from two men she’d met online before she’d even met Dickens.

As for the risk-assessment testing, Caldwell acknowledged that such testing hasn’t been validated as being accurate in predicting risk with female, as opposed to male, sex offenders. They don’t really know what they’re talking about, the experts, because they haven’t looked at the phenomenon closely enough.

As an aside, at the Dickens trial, court heard that in 2003 a London-area woman offered him her 14-year-old daughter for sex after they’d connected online. Dickens took the teenager on a movie and date night, then had sex at the girl’s home while her mother sat beside them. Sex with teens and children had clearly been a feature of the couple’s role-playing, in their video commentary to one another, the child porn retrieved from their home and posters also discovered depicting female children, labelled with such descriptors as “15-year-old f--- slut” and “whore.”

In an interview this week with the Star, Pearce emphasized the scarcity of research literature on female sex offenders: “I’m not saying there’s no such thing as a female pedophile , but it is almost an exclusively male disorder. That’s not to say no woman has it. There may be some outliers. But women (sex offenders) usually offend for other reasons, not because of an innate sexual attraction to children. [...] These are damaged, needy, lonely women, not necessarily pedophiles.”

There was immense frustration at 720 Bay — in the attorney general’s office — over McEwen dodging the dangerous offender designation. But there will be no appeal.

Vox Day #fundie alphagameplan.blogspot.com

I've commented in the past about the insanity of any society that prioritizes the education of its women over preparing them to be wives and mothers. After all, the one and only thing any society actually NEEDS from its women, the one and only thing humanity actually needs from its female members, is for them to propagate the citizenry and the species. Powerpoint presentations and prospective cancer cures are all very nice, but they are, strictly speaking, unnecessary luxuries without which the species has survived since before the dawn of recorded human history.

Societies without children, on the other hand, tend to terminate within a single generation.

Since we know intelligence is heritable, it has long been obvious that educating women to the point that they decline to breed was bound to have long-term implications, especially if the women least likely to have children tended to be the most intelligent women. The hypergamous nature of women being what it is, it logically follows that unless the most intelligent women can be supplied with a selection of prospective mates who are more intelligent and more educated than they are, they will increasingly refuse to breed. This has observably been the case, and now the negative effect of encouraging equality in education has been quantified:

This study estimates the effect of dysgenic trends in Taiwan by exploring the relationships among intelligence, education and fertility. Based on a representative adult sample, education and intelligence were negatively correlated with the number of children born. These correlations were stronger for females. The decline of genotypic intelligence was estimated as 0.82 to 1.33 IQ points per generation for the Taiwanese population.

What feminists consider progress is literal intellectual regression. Feminism is not only the most evil and incoherent ideology in human history, its natural consequence is the literal enstupidification of any society that permits it to take root.

The connection between the theory of Game and the continuation of civilization should now be readily apparent to even the most dubious skeptic. There is no conceptual model that better describes and predicts what has been observed taking place over the last fifty years in the West.

CH #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

Carlson must have been reading manosphere blogs recently and swallowed a few Crimson Pills on his journey to becoming the real-est Realtalker on the TelaViv, because in his latest show he drops a truth bomb so big it caused feminists to shriek themselves to death.

...

No joke, I would vote for a Carlson/Coulter presidential ticket. There are few people who could trigger the shitlib gooniverse harder than does Trump, but Carlson might achieve it, and he does it with smarts and sureness of belief.

His main point — that cratering male wages in traditionally male occupations have reduced men’s marriage market value in the rural areas and small towns which voted heavily for Trump, contributing to a host of current social ills in those areas — is spot on, and something that we here at the Chateau have been banging on about for a long time.

When the State replaces men as the primary provider for women, then women, in effect, will marry the State (and fuck around with charming, undependable cads). Compassion creates more cads.

Carlson has broached the subject of female hypergamy — the third rail of sociosexual analysis — and the femcunts and soyboy lickspittles don’t like it.

In short, men date across and down, women date across and up. Men are primarily attracted to women’s looks, women are primarily attracted to men’s social and financial status (especially for long-term commitments). When men lose status, their women lose desire for them.

The beating heart of the Trump vote was a howl from men who have experienced an SMV decline — sexual and social market value declines brought upon them by anti-White pro-Diversity agitprop and nonWhite dispossession, the disappearance of male-oriented occupations that don’t require a facility with sitting still in an office chair all day, and the cheapening of their labor by foreign invaders scabs invited in at the behest of greedy corporate oligarchs.

And, as Carlson said, almost word-for-word recapping posts written at the Chateau, the female hypergamous instinct may be distasteful to contemplate, but it’s not going anywhere soon, because the sexes have innately competing reproductive goals. A smart, sane society understands this, and works to leverage the beneficial effects of that instinct rather than encourage its worst aspects.

Thankfully, Trump has managed to turn it around, a little. The manufacturing industry posted the biggest job gains in twenty years in 2018.

...

On the downside, there are still too many gains in education, health services, and hospitality, which translates to dead weight gibs for women and migrants, which ultimately has a corrosive effect on the marriage market for White men.

I would have to see the percentage gains for each occupational group over the last few years to determine if this is a blip or a real and lasting course correction. It’s great that manufacturing jobs have increased, but if the increase in Shrike Jobs is larger then the gains in manufacturing, than the benefits from the latter will be swamped by the negative consequences of the former.

A successful realization of MAGA means the top two occupation groups are at the bottom, and at least six of the bottom eleven occupation groups storm the top of the jobs gain chart.

Henry Makow, PhD #conspiracy #racist #sexist #wingnut #psycho savethemales.ca

While trying to recruit Russo for the CFR, Nicholas Rockefeller told him that his family foundation created women's liberation using mass media control as part of a long-term plan to enslave humanity. He admitted they want to "chip us." Google "Rockefeller Foundation" and "Women's Studies" and you'll get a half million citations.

The hidden goal of feminism is to destroy the family, which interferes with state brainwashing of the young. Side benefits include depopulation and widening the tax base. Displacing men in the role of providers also destabilizes the family.

A drastic paradigm shift is required to make sense of the world. The Rockefellers are part of the private world central banking cartel that also controls media, defense, pharmaceutical and other cartels. To protect their monopoly of credit and wealth, they are instituting a world police state ("world government") using the bogus 9-11 attack and endless war as a pretext. Rockefeller told Russo about this plan a year before 9-11.

The poet Charles Peguy said, "Everything begins in faith and ends in politics." The banking cartel needs a philosophy to justify enchaining mankind. That philosophy is Satanism. The cartel controls the world through a network of occult societies linked to Freemasonry, Communism, the Vatican and organized Jewry (Bnai Brith, ADL, AJC, Zionism.) The highest occult rank is known as the Illuminati.

Scott Lively #fundie scottlively.net

Milo and the “Stockholm Syndrome” of Sodom
Posted on February 22, 2017 by Pastor Scott
In the mid-1970s, America was introduced to “Stockholm Syndrome” when 19 year old Berkeley student and heiress Patty Hearst was transformed from kidnap victim to domestic terrorist by identifying with her captors. Stockholm Syndrome is trauma-induced mental enslavement to the person or group causing the trauma, and Hearst has ever since been its poster child. Her identity hijacked, she joined her Simbionese Liberation Army kidnappers and eventually went to jail for crimes she committed voluntarily in that false persona.

In the unfolding spectacle of the Milo Yiannopoulos pederasty scandal, America is being introduced to a far more potent and common form of this phenomenon: Sodom Syndrome. Like millions of boys through the centuries, 14-year old Milo was recruited into homosexuality by an adult homosexual predator. He then justified his molester, “Father Michael,” in his own mind and recently in unwise but candid media comments. Very typically of adult homosexual men who experienced similar recruitment, Milo portrayed Father Michael as a sort-of coming-of-age mentor, and his young teen self as a consensual partner, fully competent to make his own decisions. (Historically, most male leaders of the “gay” movement share this profile).

In response to the scandal, Milo has recast himself as a helpless victim. While this seems cynical, he actually IS a victim to a far greater extent than most people, and even he himself, realize. I believe what Milo experienced at 14 was Sodom Syndrome, and like Patty Hearst to the SLA, his identity was subsumed into the LGBT culture by psycho/sexual trauma, reinforced by associating sexual climax with his predator’s orientation. Its all about brain chemistry and subconscious coping mechanisms, not free choice – at least not at first.

Like Milo I had a bad relationship with my father, and ventured into the world at an early age. An alcoholic from age 12 and a pothead/drug addict from 14 I lived a vagabond/hitchhiker lifestyle that lasted over ten years and spanned the continent. As such I was a ripe target for recruitment by predators and was solicited by “gay” recruiters countless times. To be fair, only rarely did these men attempt force and fortunately none was successful. To be clear, I never experienced same-sex attraction and didn’t succumb to “gay” recruitment, though I don’t believe anyone is immune to Sodom Syndrome.

When I was about 14 or 15, I spent an afternoon smoking pot with a “gay” guy in his 20’s who explained that young people during puberty have a very fluid sexual identity and how easy it had been for him to turn young teen boys into sex partners. I was very non-judgmental in those days, and didn’t think twice about it, nor similar conversations I had with other homosexuals (though few were that forthright). A confirming study I later saw said 25% of young teens suffer same-sex confusion but most grow out of it naturally by the end of adolescence.

After I had surrendered my life to Christ, been delivered from my addictions and started a family of my own, I saw the world in a wholly different light. A nineteen-year old man, who had “come out” as “gay” after being molested seven or eight years earlier, himself molested a four-year-old boy. I was close to both families and watched that child change from sweet and loveable to hyperactive and rage-driven. He never became homosexual himself to my knowledge, but never really recovered either and now in his 40s lives a miserable life of addiction and crime.

Later as my compassion grew for homosexuals, we took in a repentant ex-“gay” who was dying of AIDS. Sonny lived with us for the last year of his life and I was with him when he died. He attributed his homosexuality to being raped at age seven in a YMCA men’s room by a friend of his father. Sonny’s form of Sodom Syndrome compelled him to seek “gay” sex in settings with the strong smell of urine. He never chose to be that way and expressed deep shame in it, but even in his last days in Christ, the pattern burned into his brain by the youthful trauma remained the identity of his flesh while his mind and spirit were freed only through sexual abstinence.

In the earliest days of my ministry I had the pleasure of making friends with Anthony Falzerano, a leader of the ex-“gay” movement. He said the most common denominator in boys who get recruited is a kind-of “father-hunger” due to troubled family relationships, and that this is easily recognized by predators on the prowl because they suffered it themselves. He and other ex-“gay” leaders showed me by example that the cure to homosexual dysfunction is restoration of male normalcy through long-term healthy relationships with fatherly mentors.

My ex-“gay” friend Richard of Portland, OR sought me out in this way after the predator who made him his houseboy at age 12 (his piano teacher) kicked him out and replaced him when he got too old. My fatherly help blessed Richard through some rough times and gave me personal experience in mentoring ex-“gays.” He never went back and is doing well today.

I’m frequently accused by pro-LGBT leftists of being a suppressed homosexual myself because my life’s work has been opposing their agenda. That’s not true of me, but I’m not insulted by the suggestion because I don’t despise homosexuals like they assume. I do this work because I am a Christian saved by grace, trained for and assigned to this work by my Savior. I do it because I recognize that the sin of Sodom is the most destructive force in human civilization, singularly unique in it’s condemnation in the Bible. I do it because I don’t want to see any more young people lose their innate heterosexual identity to the Sodom Syndrome. Make no mistake – the problem is growing like runaway cancer because we’ve allowed it to go mainstream.

Past criticisms notwithstanding, my heart grieves for Milo Yiannopoulos, because I see what I might myself have become under different circumstances and it is hard to watch anyone crash and burn so spectacularly. What Milo really needs is his Father in Heaven, of course, but he also needs a Dad to lead him out of the darkness of perversion back into the light of normalcy. I pray that this crisis will open his life and heart to both. I’m personally willing to help him in that, if he doesn’t have anyone else. I also pray that Milo’s suffering will not be in vain, but truly open America’s eyes to Sodom Syndrome and it’s own sin in pretending – as a way to avoid confronting hard truths and harsh push-back — they’re all just “born that way” and can’t be cured.

wierstamann #pedo #dunning-kruger #conspiracy wierstamann.wordpress.com

1. Pedophilia is a fetish/a treatable mental illness.
The most common definition of a “fetish” is an “ unusually strong liking or need for a particular object or activity, as a way of getting sexual pleasure.” (Collins Dictionary). Basically, it how you want to have sex, as opposed to sexuality/paraphilia — who you want to have sex with. Children aren’t an object or activity, what attracts pedophiles in children is their physical appearance. Moreover, pedophilia, unlike sexual abuse, is linked to nurturing instincts and care rather than power. Psychologists agree that pedophilia cannot be treated.

“This opens the possibly that pedophilia is linked (in addition to or instead of an aberrant sexual system) to an over-active nurturing system”

(source)

“The majority (72%) of participants reported they had fallen in love with a child in their lifetime. Participants reported greater feelings of attachment to children than feelings of infatuation. Though sexual attraction and falling in love were strongly correlated, they were not synonymous.”

(source)

“There is no evidence to suggest that pedophilia can be changed. Instead, interventions are designed to increase voluntary control over sexual arousal, reduce sex drive, or teach self-management skills to individuals who are motivated to avoid acting upon their sexual interests.”

(source)

“Behavioral treatments such as aversion therapy and masturbatory reconditioning have shown some effect on arousal patterns, but do little or nothing to change underlying sexual desires (Laws & Marshall, 2003; Marshall & Laws, 2003; Seto, 2009). For the most part, cognitive-behavioral therapies designed to change the way pedophiles think, and act, have had little effect on either (Seto, 2009).”

(source)

“There are no compelling data to suggest that pedophiles might be converted into teleiophiles(persons with a primary sexual interest in adults). Multiple types of interventions have been attempted, including sex-drive-reducing medications and talk therapies informed by any of many theoretical orientations. Although there exist authors who have claimed that their interventions changed their clients’ fundamental sexual interests (e.g., Fedoroff, 1988, 1992), such reports do not include comparison groups, long-term follow-up, or any validated, objective measure to verify the claims of successful change.”

(source)
Moreover, supposed pathologies in MAP brains were found out to be a result of an incorrectly conducted research, because in previous studies non-offending maps were not included.

“Our results are the first to demonstrate that executive dysfunctions are related to offense status rather than pedophilic preference.”

(source)

“Consistent with the conceptualization of the DSM-5, which specifies CSO as most the prominent criterion that differentiates pedophilia from pedophilic disorder, there were no significant differences between the GM volumes of the non-offending pedophiles and the teleiophilic controls. In contrast, the pedophiles who had engaged in CSO showed a significantly reduced relative GM volume in the right TP compared with pedophiles who did not. This difference was not attributable to age, level of education, IQ, sexual orientation, drug misuse/dependence, other Axis I or II disorders or general criminality.”

(source)

harridansofokcupid #sexist harridansofokcupid.tumblr.com

People, listen: when you see a guy who is the ubiquitous non-murdering and harmless version of Elliot Rodger, albeit bitter and disillusioned with the opposite sex’s apparent preference for the kind of guy whom he was bluffed into believing that they didn’t like, don’t lie to yourself and say that his attitude is what causes him to be incel. Almost every single guy who is incel like that entered the life stage of sexual possibility with optimism, and likely maintained his sense of being a gentleman well past the point at which he became completely stalled in sociosexual progress.
Few things are more frustrating than watching everyone else develop into what you have been told are “full-fledged human beings”, entering relationships, marrying and starting families, while you haven’t progressed beyond the level of a 12-year-old in terms of sociosexual milestones…and then being given unsolicited, nebulous advice about confidence, and getting “out there”, and even things like hobbies and common interests… Seriously, the kind of advice people try to give incels reeks of a lot of people simply enjoying listening to themselves talk. One might as well be reading out of a boilerplate pamphlet from a seminar on how to make pamphlets.
An incel of a conspicuous age has already heard all of the pop-positivity he can stand, and he knows that none of it works. He also doesn’t need to get an earful about the virtues of being in a relationship or marriage; after all, it’s not like he has never contemplated all of those things himself, long before you felt the need to remind him of it all. When people go trying to lecture a hardcore incel into success - again, usually unsolicited - they might as well be trying to sell private jets to hobos. That constant reminder of no one really understanding his problems, combined with the inevitable feeling of being left out in one of life’s most important games, is indeed enough to ruin the niceness in even the nicest guys.

Kings Wiki #sexist en.kingswiki.com

The ages of women and their characteristics and experiences at these ages are as follows.

Age 18

According to Heartiste, "This is the age — from teenager to mid-20s — when a woman is in her nubile prime. Physically and emotionally she is at her horniest, her most feminine, and, not coincidentally, her most discriminating. She’s on the prowl for an alpha male, and specifically for a charming jerkboy whose devil-may-care attitude speaks so forcefully to her deep desire to submit to a top tier man with limitless lover options."

He also notes, "Hard to believe, but it is often easier to bed a very young woman than an older woman, if you are an older man. This is because 20-40% of women are specifically attracted to older men. It is hard-wired in them, and this hard-wiring can be reinforced by poor family upbringing resulting from divorce of parents or absentee fathers. Single moms are the greatest source of future generations of slutty daughters the world has ever known. . . . You can bang an 18-21 year old surprisingly quickly because they have little ASD (anti-slut defense). This is because they do not have the long history of sluttiness common to older women which needs to be rationalized away by posturing as a paragon of chaste virtue. A young woman simply won’t perceive sex with you as an admission of sluttiness. She is innocent to herself as well as to you."[1]

Roosh notes, "She is child-like and mostly intolerable. Her speech sounds like another language. She will only have sex when completely trashed, and has few redeeming qualities beyond her body. Says a lot of things that make you think you’re wasting your time. Best game to use: jealousy."[2]

Age 21

Hank Moody notes that a girl 21-25 "appreciates that I'm not writing her odes about my undying love and affection, and seem to want to keep things casual. They're getting hit up at every angle, and they're confused about whether they want to fuck the bartender or the lawyer. Then they realize they can do both with little ramification. I like being seen around town with them. Horrible conversationalists, and I have to dumb down my text messaging. Most of their texts are 'lol ur funny..' Society has told these girls that they can be total whores with no consequences, and eventually some good looking rich guy will scoop them up."[3]

Age 22

The four-year carnival called college is coming to a close. During this time, she’s enjoyed the absolute ride of her life: non-stop parties (as a true Carousel rider), trips, and gorging herself on the buffet of cock available to an American college girl—without the uncomfortable social stigmas of generations past. At a time where previous generations of women were getting nervous if they hadn’t snared a husband, today’s girl is “just getting started.” At this age, today’s girl is irretrievably drunk on her power. Any cautionary advice will be greeted with hubristic ridicule and disbelief.

Age 23

Roissy notes, "The 23-27 year old feels she is at her attractiveness peak, despite her peak having passed a few years earlier. This is because she is surrounded by many more high status men than she was while in college (or working at the Piggly Wiggly) who are expressing sexual interest in her. This social dynamic will work to inflate her ego beyond the bounds of her actual beauty ranking."[1]

Age 25

The first alerts—which go unheeded—that this ride isn’t forever start to rear their heads. The combination of a few harsh pump-and-dumps, and the knowledge that some of her smarter friends are getting hitched, start to impart a hard edge on her personality. Still, with ample beauty left over, most girls will continue to draw from the bank account with impunity. Heartiste writes, "During this age window — late 20s to late 30s — a woman is powerfully aware of the beginning of decline in her number one asset: her beauty. Physically, she is noticing small changes in herself — the first nascent signs of decay — that, assessed from a distance relative to womanhood as a whole aren’t so horrifying, but compared to what she was herself just a few years earlier will split her id wide open. Urgency compels her (if she’s psychologically healthy) to escape the single lady lookatme scene and start seriously buckling down to achieve the goal of snagging a man who will commit to her and, hopefully, help her become part of a family. Naturally, this pressure to settle limits her options and the longer she waits, the more her “Mr. Right” will deviate from the Mr. Right of her teenage dreams."

According to Roosh, "After you wear the t-shirt a couple of times, the fabric loses elasticity. You no longer get excited when wearing it because people have already seen you in it. Your eye starts to wander on new t-shirts (25-29 years old)." Also, according to Roosh's T-shirt analogy, "When you leave the loaf out, it gets a little hard. You have to heat it up with a toaster first, but it still won’t taste fresh. (25-29 years old)"

Roosh also writes, "single women over 25 are emotionally damaged in some way, are alpha widowed, or are professional daters who are incapable of making the proper relationship sacrifices."[4]

Age 26

Hank Moody notes that a girl 26-30 is "Still hot enough to be seen around town with, but they start throwing serious girlfriend vibes - particularly public displays of affection. Sex is practically thrown at you after a few months of dating. You're that good looking rich guy who is going to scoop them up. They know the biological clock is ticking fast, and their family is pushing them to 'settle down.'"

Age 27

Rollo notes, "By the age of 27 women’s SMV decline has begun in earnest. That isn’t to say that women can’t remain stunningly attractive and vivacious in their post-peak years, but comparative to the next crop of 22-23 year olds, the decline progressively becomes more evident. Competition for hypergamously suitable mates becomes more intense with each passing year. The age’s between 27 and 30 are subliminally the most stressful for women as the realization sinks in that they must trade their ‘party years’ short term mating protocol for a long term provisioning strategy."[5]

Age 28

Roissy notes, "28-30 year olds are a mixed bunch. Some are riding a wave of career and social success that has nowhere to go but down, and their bloated egos reflect that. Others, less conventionally successful, are emotionally frazzled by the disappearing act of their heady youth and by the intractability of their singledom. You will find some of the cuntiest, and sweetest, girls in this age range."[1]

Age 29

After repeated pressings of the snooze button, it starts getting harder to ignore the clangor of the alarm clock. Having gotten her fill on the party lifestyle—and starting to feel, if not fully understand, the diminished effectiveness of her fading looks—she declares herself “ready to settle down.” Regrettably, the combination of having very little beauty-capital remaining and impossibly high standards—the product of years of enjoying the high life at the expense of her future solvency—will conspire to keep her single.

Age 30

According to Roosh, "If you leave the bread out for too long, mold develops. You can cut away the mold, toast the bread, and still be able to eat it, but you won’t enjoy it. You’d have to be starving. (30-34 years old)"

Hank Moody notes that a girl 30-36 "Is either divorced or has never been married for a reason. Anthropomorphizes their dog or cat. Struggles with depression issues. Sex is thrown at you. They know that the good looking rich guy is never going to come, and you're simply here for sex and conversation. At this point they would settle for almost any beta willing to commit and risk a geriatric pregnancy."

Heartiste notes that "a man marrying an over-30 woman is investing everything he has in a rapidly depreciating pleasure provider that has already lost a lot of its aesthetic value."[6]

The over-30 woman has likely amassed an impressive knob count. When you marry a 30+ woman, you’re marrying her 30+ cockas. Hope you like getting phantom cucked! As magically prehensile as your penis may be, she’ll never look up to it in cross-eyed awe like she did with her first cock when she was younger, hotter, tighter, and inexperienced.

The over-30 woman is bitter from a wasted prime spent on failed relationships she hoped would lead to marriage. Now that you’re marrying her, she should be grateful, but she's not. . . . .

There’s another, subtle, reason to refuse the wedded diss of marrying the over-30 woman. Now, naturally, if you marry an under-30 woman, the day will come, ostensibly, that she’ll be your over-30 wife. But you’ll have something that chagrined men who married women on the cusp of sagging cups don’t have: Years of very fond, very monopolized, very supple memories. If you maritally snag a 21-year-old minx and occupy her sugar walls for the next ten years, the spermatomically bonded cervix-splattered glue of all those splendid tumbles of passion accrue into something larger than the sum of your individuated speckles. All that young woman heat, heat which will never be replicated with the older version of your wife, captures into limbic amber a network of interlocked, superconductive emotions with the power to sustain lovingrapture a good ways past the poignantly brief era of peak wife ripeness, onward into the elevator muzak era of bland marital inertia (50 years, plus or minus).

You marry an over-30 woman and you’re left grasping at a grease truck menu of curdled, pear-shaped memories and wrinkled recollections for sustenance.

According to trav777, "a woman at 31 is looking for a marriage and kid as a BUCKET LIST ITEM. She is not looking for a husband or a partner or obligations. If she were into that more than herself, she’d have landed a decent man 10 years prior."

Relampago Furioso notes that at 30, the thousand cock stare often develops.[7]

Age 31

Roissy notes:[1]

In some ways, women in the 31-34 age range are the toughest broads to game. (By “toughest”, it is meant “most time consuming”.) It’s counterintuitive, yes, but there are factors at work besides her declining beauty which mitigate against the easy, quick lay. For one, it is obviously harder to meet single 31-34 year old women than it is to meet single younger women. Marriage is still a pussy-limiting force to contend with for the inveterate womanizer, but Chateau apprentices are hard at work battling the scourge of mating market disturbances caused by the grinding and churning of the marriage machine.

But the bigger reason 31-34 year olds are harder to game than any other age group of women has to do with the wicked nexus of entitlement and self-preservation that occurs at this age in women. When you combine a disproportionate sense of entitlement fueled by years of feminism, steady paychecks and promotions, and cheerleading gay boyfriends with suspicions of every man’s motives and a terrible anxiety of being used for a sexual fling sans marriage proposal, you get a venom-spitting malevolent demoness on guard against anything she might perceive as less than total subjugation to her craving for incessant flattery and princess pedestaling.

Age 32

The magical years are officially gone, and the long descent to complete invisibility to the opposite sex is well underway. Thanks to social programming (e.g., Sex in the City and the myth that “a woman’s sexual prime is in her 30s”), she can rationalize that her “Mr. Right” will arrive any minute. However, she’s likely to become little more than a second- or third-stringer in a player’s long roster of options. A few of these women will get bailed out by blue-pill betas, who still buy into the marriage trap, and don’t realize (or care) they’re buying a used car with the odometer rolled back. But this marriage is almost certainly doomed to divorce-failure, since nothing can ever compete with her 15-year prime-time binge. She will be nagged by dissatisfaction the moment her last party–her wedding–ends.

She enjoyed the Sweet 15, but she’ll enjoy little more.

GBFM writes that with 32-year-olds, it's necessary to get a "leaf-blower to get all the dust off".

Age 35

According to Roosh's T-shirt analogy, "Eventually, holes develop in the fabric. It has been used too many times. Now it is only good to clean the toilet bowl before finally being placed in the trash. (35 and up)." Also, according to his bread analogy, "If you leave it for even longer, mold takes over and completely destroys the bread. There is no way to excise the toxic portions. You must throw it away before the mold makes you sick. (35 and up)" Relampago writes:[8]

Women “expire” at age 35 for numerous reasons. Their fertility declines sharply at this age. Their beauty declines, no matter how much makeup they cake on. If not already married to her, from this moment forward she offers nothing to a partner but a well-used piece of anatomy and a manipulative, even predatory disposition towards men and their finances.

The expiration date may fluctuate around age 35 for a couple of reasons, i.e. good genetics or a sweet personality (usually being faked) but this age is a good baseline for the “expiration date” for females.

Age 40

Heartiste writes, "The final romantic life cycle for women (ages 40-death), this stage is the longest and, sadly from the perspective of one who adores women when they are at their most womanish, the dreariest, though it does offer as consolation a tranquilizing serenity that can safely usher a woman through her middle years without resort to painkillers. In this cycle, a woman still harbors those tingles for the alpha jerk, but they are sufficiently suppressed by biomechanic winding-down and stone cold circumstance — her wilted bloom — to allow the flourishing of her other female needs. Those other needs center around her desire to a) not be abandoned to a cold cruel sexual market and b) enjoy at least facsimiles of reciprocal love so that she does not feel abandoned within her relationship."

Bev Jo, Linda Strega and Ruston #fundie bevjoradicallesbian.wordpress.com

The Power of Names — Our Definitions

Dyke: We use this term for the most Lesbian-identified of Lesbians. It’s important to remember that it was originally used only for Butches.

Lesbian: A female who loves and falls in love with other females, makes love only with females, and never relates sexually to males or injects semen into herself. When Lesbians are single and celibate, we’re very different from celibate het women, who are still sexually, emotionally, socially, and culturally focused on men.

Lesbianism is far more than a “sexual preference” or “sexual orientation.” It is a choice of women loving women. Everything we feel and do in our lives we do as Lesbians. Our political and creative work is Lesbian. Our friendships are Lesbian relationships.

No male can become a Lesbian. “Transwomen” are simply men perving, fetishizing, and caricaturing women and Lesbians.

Female: The term we use for our sex, since it’s not age-specific and is less identified with heterosexuality than “woman.” Also, it’s a reminder of our link with other female animals on earth, who are generally called “female,” rather than “women.” And, as Julia Penelope said in The Mystery of Lesbians, “female” is derived from the French “femelle,” with no connection to the word “male,” while (crediting the writings of Monique Wittig and ideas of Ariane Brunet and Louise Turcotte) “woman” comes from “wif” (wife) and “man.”

Woman, Womyn, Wimmin, etc.: For many of us, “woman” has meant heterosexual — a “real” woman by men’s standards. It’s a male definition imposed on females and isn’t our natural state. The many feminist variations are closet terms for “Lesbian,” and we refuse to support that trend. When we say “Lesbian,” we mean it. It’s understandable that Lesbians in unsafe situations use a code name like “womyn” to make contact with other Lesbians, but when Lesbians use those terms instead of “Dyke” or “Lesbian” among ourselves, it weakens Lesbian identity. “The womyn’s community” is het-identified, not Lesbian-identified.

Some Lesbians embraced “woman” because that term is denied to many females, especially Lesbians. Men call us “girls” to demean us. However, some Lesbians prefer the term “girl” to “woman” for other reasons. For some African-descent females, poor and working-class females, Lesbians who came out before the Women’s Liberation Movement, and young females, “girl” is a familiar, affectionate term. After all, we’ve all been girls for a long time, while “woman” is a term laden with images of “adult” females who are heterosexually active, wifely, and motherly. For many of us, girlhood was the time when many girls we knew were most clear about loving other girls and rejecting boys. We support girls who call themselves “girls” as a statement of pride, and we support adult females who call themselves “girls” as part of their culture and heritage.

We also don’t call ourselves Gay women since that associates us with Gay men. That term has been a dividing line between Lesbian Feminists and non-feminists or Lesbians who felt afraid to use the term Lesbian.

Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

How To Live After Trump

Before Trump’s glorious victory over the forces of progressive darkness, I promised that I would provide a roadmap on what traditional men could do next to usher in a return of the patriarchy. If Hillary had prevailed, the roadmap would have been a grim one, as all of our work would have had to take place underground. Happily, we will be able to work in the open. Here are three ways that we can leverage Trump’s victory to bring back the patriarchy.

Rule yourself

Bruce Wayne is a good role model for traditional men: Urbane, fit, financially independent—and dangerous.

This may seem obvious, but if we are going to bring back the patriarchy, we have to be men who are worthy of it. A patriarch who relies solely on the fact that he is a man will quickly be overthrown. However, a man who has authority because he has earned it by the way he lives will naturally retain it. Thus, the first step in making progress under a Trump administration is the same as it would have been if Hillary had been elected—self-improvement.

Self-improvement involves the obvious things: getting in shape, training martial arts, getting rid of addictions, and exercising self-discipline. The process of self-improvement needs to be under-girded with a philosophy of life. For most men, this will involve adopting, and faithfully living, one of the faith-traditions. For others, it may mean adopting stoic philosophy. Whatever it is, it will have to be more substantial than the degenerate, “pleasure, wealth, and power at any cost” morality of our Spirit Cooking elites—lack of morality got us into this problem in the first place.

Self-improvement also involves moving in the direction of financial independence. Under a Trump administration, this last goal will become easier to achieve. Trump’s tax plan cuts tax rates across the board. This will especially benefit men who are in the middle class who are trying to generate more income. They will be able to keep their savings so that they can move ahead rather than paying a penalty that keeps them from becoming wealthy.

Trump’s emphasis on fair trade will also result in more American jobs and unleash unprecedented creativity. The age of Trump will be a great time to start a new business. One word of warning is in order though: Under Trump the US is likely to flourish in a way that hasn’t happened since the the 1920s. Enjoy the prosperity but don’t get caught back in the materialism merry-go-round. Our goal is a lifetime of financial independence, not conspicuous consumption.

Financial independence is an important practical consideration because you will need a firm financial foundation for the second step, which is ruling your family.

Rule your family

Be the patriarch.

Starting with the boomers, our society rejected the traditional way of life and adopted progressivism. Families got smaller, divorce became more common, promiscuity increased, feminism became the default philosophy for girls, and the remaining vestiges of the patriarchy vanished. Progressivism promised freedom but delivered enslavement to political correctness and globalism.

A Trump administration will do little to reverse the deleterious effects that progressivism has had on the family. At best, the only thing government can do for the family is encourage it financially and provide a safe environment for it. But real change has to come from the bottom up—from men and women who return to tradition. For us, that means finding a traditional woman, or more likely one who can be converted to tradition, getting married, and having lots of children.

[...]

Getting married, having children, and raising them to hold to the patriarchy is the long game, but it is the only way we will have long term victory. Without a next generation of traditional men, any ground that we gain under Trump will soon be lost.

Rule society—bring back the patriarchy

Benjamin Franklin is a great example of a man who was serious about his civic duty.

The next thing that we must do is start reclaiming our institutions. Trump has captured the presidency and Republicans control Congress, but many of those Republicans are cucks who will oppose the Trumpian agenda. And our other institutions are still dominated by leftists. Hollywood, the news media, education, and corporations all proclaim the progressive, anti-patriarchy message. If we don’t take advantage of the current moment, any gains that Trump makes will be quickly rolled-back after he leaves office.

Therefore, we need to start re-engaging with these institutions to shift them towards Patriarchal Nationalism. You can share any ideas you have to do this in the comments. Here, I’d like to suggest that one institution that needs our participation: the Republican Party. Trump has created many allies within the GOP but the majority of the Party still holds to the cucked ideology of open borders and bad trade deals like NAFTA. The GOP desperately needs like-minded men within its ranks who will help Trump achieve his vision.

Getting involved in your local GOP is easy. You merely have to get in touch with your local party leadership in your district. You don’t have to run for elected office. Simply volunteer your time in getting local officials elected, voting for delegates, or attending GOP events. Go in with a respectful attitude. A lot of the local GOP leaders are good people who still don’t understand that the real battle is against globalists. Work for incremental change. And, if you have the disposition required for it, consider running for local office yourself.

One piece of advice: If you do choose to get involved in politics, don’t get caught up in it. One way we ended up with an ossified and out-of-touch GOP is that people started to hold the globalist neoconservatism with an almost religious fervor. The other trap is to use politics as a way of enriching oneself in the manner of Hillary Clinton. If you do choose to enter the political realm, resolve at the outset to not use it for your own financial gain. Don’t make politics your life. Think of it strictly as civic duty.

Of course, politics is not everybody’s cup of tea. The key is to use your gifts, whether that is in movie-making or in running a company, to help create an environment where the patriarchy can flourish.

Conclusion

The one thing we must not do in wake of the Trump victory is rest on our laurels. If Hillary had won, we’d all have a great sense of urgency to protect what little remained of our way of life. Now that Trump is coming into power, the temptation is to relax—to just let Trump do it all. This temptation must be avoided. We must capitalize on the Trump victory with the same high level of urgency that we would have regarded a Hillary victory. If we don’t, we run the risk of losing all the ground we have gained.

Jon Levine #wingnut twitter.com

MoveOn: It's one thing for Joe Rogan to endorse a candidate. It's another for @BernieSanders’ campaign to produce a video bolstering the endorsement of someone known for promoting transphobia, homophobia, Islamophobia, racism and misogyny.

Jon Levine: Stunning to watch these organizations come out against Rogan's past comments, but not a peep about Linda Sarsour's long history of hate — and she is a campaign surrogate!

Holyheavens #sexist reddit.com

(Emphasis original)

We need a strict Patriarchy in order to put every single woman on a leash. They can not be allowed to have any sort of freedom outside of a man's influence because they can't handle it as we see in Western society.

Every modern western woman nowadays is no better than criminal scum.

When you don't coursely discipline and keep women under control, they go loose like wild beasts and spread their ass cheeks for every second Chad they encounter who then goes on to pump his load in their every hole. Governed by pure lust, as if they have no mind of their own they keep trying to satisfy these basic carnal desires through instant gratification.

There isn't a single shred of long term thinking in their primitive minds so when the time comes where they feel their biological clock is ticking, panic breaks out.

The sly filthy amoral foid then starts to look for a gullible weak man whom she can easily wrap around her finger. At that point, the disgusting used up cumrag who has devolved into a barbarian has lost all capacity for pair bonding. Don't even dream she's a type of person whom you can grow old with. No, she's long past that. Her primary incentive is to gain social points so she doesn't feel left out and also extracting resources from the stupid man.

While the poor husband is head over heels and mistakenly believes he's found a partner with whom he can build a relationship based on mutual understanding and Love, his wife is not sexually attracted to him in the slightest. Every 2 months when the man's been a good boy, he gets his dead starfish sex while she fantasises about her past sexploits with taller, more masculine and above all better looking men. They degraded her, treated her as nothing more than a meathole and she loved every second of it.

Children are conceived. A couple years later she files a divorce because "they grew apart" which really just means the foid has become bored of the bluepilled wimp, telling herself "I can do better than this". Loyalty is a totally foreign concept to woman. For a man with principles, being able to keep his word is akin to his lifeforce. Being scrupulous, consistent and reasonable is what makes a man feel actually human. Women lack all will towards this higher from of being and will strictly adopt whatever that won't ostracize them from society or their social environment. Another thing to note, women are not capable of experiencing cognitive dissonance because they only pay attention to how something feels for them in the present moment and that feeling justifies whether something is right or wrong. Whether it's immoral, deceptive or downright evil plays no part. Usually this is done through thorough applying self-deception and doublethink.

When she's gotten bored of the wimp, the woman turns into an incredibly demanding histrionic dramawhore. She's trying to rationalize everything into being the man's fault upon an impending divorce from her part.

The children then experience a breakdown of the family which brings with itself only detrimental consequences for their future in respect to their mental well-being, education and lifechoices. The profound effects of divorce is well documented in multiple academic studies with single-motherhood making things much much worse because single mothers are horrible and stupid parents.
__________________________________
Women are first of all innately morally deficient and alogical creatures who go loose like rabid bonobo's when not firmly curbed and put on their place by men.

They will degenerate everything that is intelligent and virtuous on their path of heedless destruction because they have no fucking idea what the fuck they're doing. They can not think matters through, they just can't. Woman's entire persona consists solely of the surface it reflects. You can not find anything beneath it, it's void. Her entire persona is an absorption from external influences she molds into what then consists as her core identity stemming from an extreme suggestibility. While women are mere empty individuals who can only act in accordance with the community, man is a higher form of life expressed as a differentiated individuality often referred to as the soul characterized by a strong will for greater truth and a deep connection with all that is. With the universe. It's for this reason that there has never been a single decent female philosopher nor will one ever emerge.

It also gives birth to originality and creativity which is characteristic to man. Woman can only reproduce it. Even among the poor and oppressed negro's of the USA, the blues, jazz, hip hop, rap all sprung out of young black men to draw an illustration. Let's not begin about science, classical music and ancient art. They speak for themselves. Women's achievements (always coming from the most masculine ones) bear no comparison.

Many men today are misled from what has been common knowledge since the dawn of humanity over all human societies ever surfaced. Emancipation of women isn't something enlightened or advanced from earlier patriarchal societies. It's pure stupidity and a product of capitalist policies in need for a larger wageslave force.

From a young age men are indoctrinated into a false idea of women. We are to believe women are capable of having agency, that they too are rational beings with whom we can have deep fulfilling conversations on worldly matters, that they are capable of unconditional love on the basis of who you are as a person instead of what you are, that they can breathe inspiration into your mind from insight on who you are, that women are all so different that there are certainly enough who fit these aforementioned criteria (not a single does). That a relationship where both parties stand on equal ground is possible. All these delusions are further exacerbated by media consumption with japanese animations in particular were the women are often a projection of the male producers their ideals.
__________________________________
A woman's natural inclination is submission and passivity.

She wants to be led, molded and derive her sense of identity of a man she considers to be in a dominant position. When a woman says she likes confidence, she means a man who's narcissism surpasses that of her for example. A woman can't respect a man who does not assert himself as the chief in a relationship. All of this comes easier when the male is taller because greater stature is directly imposing, hence their avid preference for this trait. This puts neatly in picture how primitive women actually are. These are her primal instincts she's incapable of sacrificing for the greater good of a society. If you let them go their own way, they will instinctively over the course of time aim primarily for apex men which will heavily skew the ratio of men and women with offspring. You see a similar instance with wild beasts such as gorilla's and even chimpanzees. In fact, this push can already be observed in "progressive" societies such as Norway where the gap between biological fathers and biological mothers has been steadily widening since female emancipation. Such a social order could never promote a civilised society as it would induce a perpetual competition between men barring them from cooperation.

A woman can not free herself from these impulses, only law and order pressed by men can guide an inherent amoral creature such as woman towards intelligent and virtuous behavior.

I thus propose extraordinary strict and harsh countermeasures for the revival of a full on Patriarchy. Beginning with a law that punishes any woman that engages in fornication through capital punishment. The capital punishment is preceded by stripping the prosecuted woman of her clothes on a public square where she is submitted to hundreds of flagellations. Once her body is covered in blood, salt is added for more pain. This form is public humiliation and inflicting of pain needs to act as a necessary deterrent for any woman who's daring to think of fornicating.

When this procedure has been completed, the woman is put out of her misery with public stoning. This helps with fostering a wider disgust and hatred towards criminals such as fornicators, so young children should be encouraged in participating to the stoning.

I'd like to emphasize once again that I'm advocating for lawful procedures enforced by the State.

We'd also need laws that would ban all women from education, holding public offices, choosing their own partners, participating in politics etc..

They should be banned from pretty much any institution where they can exercise their mindless opinions or choices that could bear an influence the societal structure. Be beautiful, take care of the family and shut up.

Linda Williscroft #fundie mandm.org.nz

At long last someone speaking up against Maori mythology. I was shocked after spending 23 years overseas upon arriving back in NZ to see all the maori motifs etc. at the airport and woven into *every* part of NZ life. Even in primary school the children are taught how to bow down and worship the various Maori gods. These demonic entities (tikis and so on) have brought a terrible curse upon the Maoris of this land. Yes, Pakeha have their curses too-but none stand out as prominently as that of Maori. Read the list of curses God promised to those who indulge in idolatry, in Deuteronomy 28. “You shall be few in number,” poverty, sickness, death, “the tail and not the head,” etc etc. God has brought all the curses of idolatry upon the Maoris (other than the Christian ones of course.) It hurts me for them. He even promises, “a trembling heart and failing of the eyes,” (anxiety and depression-both of which seem rife among Maori.) I am grieved for them. When I stood up in our prayer time in church and prayed that God would wake up the Maoris to their false beliefs and so bring them out from under the curse, I was told to be quiet and sit down by the Leader. It turns out that her husband has a quarter percentage of Maori in him and had used it to claim entitlements due to Maoris. He became the leader of “his” Iwi and receives a fortune in NZ Taxpayers dollars, simply for attending Maraes and Tangis and saying the odd speech to praise up Maoris.

Prof. James F. Tracy #conspiracy globalresearch.ca

Prominent gun rights opponents such as President Obama and Michael Bloomberg have advocated for gun control measures. Their activism has been most vigorous following the 2012 events, in particular the mass shootings at Aurora Colorado and Newtown Connecticut, each of which now appear to have been “false flags” intended to bolster the case for scaling back the Second Amendment (e.g. here, here, here and here).

Despite these poorly understood and vastly propagandized events Aurora and Sandy Hook have been imbued in the pubic mind on a scale comparable to the September 11, 2001 “terror attacks.” This is the case even though there are now far more contradictions and unanswered questions concerning both events than when they initially transpired.

In the case of Newtown local and state authorities have had difficulty responding to numerous public records requests simply querying on the most fundamental documents to confirm whether the event ever took place as reported by major news media. The very news outlets sensationalizing the massacre have long since moved on to solicit the most recent bloodlettings in Charleston, Chattanooga, and Lafayette.

Dave Blount #fundie moonbattery.com

[Blount pushes a hoax video alleging that a Muslim cleric sanctioned sodomy if it was done for jihad.]

Psycho Sodomites Are Approved by Allah

Apparently noisy Islamic denunciations of homosexuality are not such a strain on the Muslim–moonbat alliance as some might think. A London-based cleric says sodomy is okay per a Wahhabi fatwa so long as the purpose is to widen the anus for jihad. Lib trolls might want to fetch some hand lotion before reading the words of Abdallah Al-Khilaf[...]

With Muslims as with moonbats, if it is permissible, there is a good chance it is mandatory[...]

Homosexuality is fine if you link it to murdering the innocent. Like liberals, Muslims are unrestricted by any absolute moral principles. The alliance is secure.

Sorry trolls. No picture with this one.

PersonGuy #fundie forums.spacebattles.com

Really fuggen crazy stuff going on today, I mean doing it in public and going after someone older then you in a way that would likely make them significantly physically stronger, its amazing she was actually able to do the deed.

"It's hardly unique for women to rape men; I know at one man personally who was raped by a cousin when he was a teenager.

As for strength; she had a knife. Muscles don't matter nearly as much as many people like to think."

"Anyway I hope she gets punished as harshly as a man would if the situation was reversed. She used the threat of physical violence to sexual assault a person. That shouldn't be okay in anyone's book. I just hope the guy is receiving proper care and isn't being pressured into ignoring it because its viewed as unmanly to be traumatized by something like that.

"pretty much people are so used to guns deaths they forget about the ye old ways to die by bladed implement which was the primary weapon since as long as man figured out a sharpened stick or rock was more effective at death dealing than a blunt tool.

the only reason a sharp melee weapon isn't the standard weapon anymore is because it requires skill to do anything more than flail about and hope to nick or poke something good and vital while a firearm is pretty much point and shoot and most of the time you don't need to repeat."

It's more that doing the deed would involve lots of... grappling, and would consequently leave many opportunities for him to try and seize the knife from her.

Chris Delamo #fundie redpillphilosophy.com

[From "The Case for Running Over Protesters Who Block Highways"]

Your morning commute is bad enough as it is: groggy-eyed, gridlock traffic, and a full day of work looming above you like your dickhead boss likes to do. But for some reason, today, the bumper-to-bumper pace of cars seems particularly…slow.

You crane your head out the window, strain your eyes into the horizon of automotive metal, and—WHAT THE FUCK!!? Just poking above the rows of cars, lined up side-by-side, are…people—standing—blocking traffic to a complete stand-still.

Morning Commuter, Meet #BlackLivesMatter:

Nothing epitomizes the irony of the modern American “activist/protester” like the juxtaposition between these privileged college kids “fighting for justice” and the hard-working adults busting their asses trying to get to work to feed their kids.

Years of being pampered and spoiled by their parents have taught these idealistic morons 2 things: 1) that they’re invincible, and 2) that the world revolves around them.

This level of self-centered narcissism masquerading as “altruistic” concern for #BlackLives or #MikeBrown or whatever dumb-fuckin-hashtag is created next to give these purposeless youths some kind of direction—these pitiful shitheads claim to be considerate of others while engaging in the most inconsiderate, obnoxious, fly-buzzing-in-your-ear-annoying behavior you could imagine.

[...]

It was another day of work for Tyree, a middle-aged black man from California who was driving to his job at Ross. But along the way, he found himself at a complete stand-still as a group of protesters lined up across the highway and blocked traffic.

They were with #BlackLivesMatter, a cult of black supremacists who pretend to be victims of some obscure, mostly non-existent thing they call “white supremacy” in order to covertly push their racist agenda. But Tyree Landrum wasn’t having it.

In a courageous act that likely got him labeled a “coon” or “Uncle Tom” by his more ignorant counterparts, Tyree stepped out of his car, rushed up to the protesters, and got all up in their faces.

[...]

Unsurprisingly, Tyree’s forceful pleas were met with pretty much nothing more than looks of bewilderment from the protesters who, in a semi-delusional haze, simply stared at him as if his words were valid, yet did not matter—the hallmark of privileged Millennial “activists” (“Sure, what you said is true, but what about my feelings?”)

#BlackLivesMatterButFactsDoNot

And so it is with great urgency that I coin a new term in this age of delusionally-dangerous liberal “activism”: “Highway-Terrorists.”

Highway-Terrorist:

/'hi?wa 'ter?r?st/

[noun]:

“a delusional individual who shuts down highways or other critical transportation infrastructure to promote a dubious and/or fallacious cause that results in the endangerment of innocent people.”

Now, upon first look, using the word “terrorist” to describe these naive college students/activists may seem extreme, but a closer examination reveals the inherent, widespread danger these highway protests pose to thousands—even tens of thousands—of innocent people.

The Dangers of Highway-Terrorism

1. Unemployment–>Poverty–>Starvation–>Death

We need only look at the aforementioned case of Tyree Landrum to realize the vast economic damage that highway-terrorists can inflict upon local communities.

[...]

2. Disrupting Paramedic/Firefighter Rescue Efforts

Highways are designed to ensure the flow of traffic at higher speeds than regular streets, which is one reason paramedics and firefighters will often utilize these routes when responding to emergencies.

However, when highway-terrorists block freeways, ambulances are faced with an unnecessary life or death delay. In the world of EMTs and rescue operations, every second counts.

[...]

3. Women Giving Birth

It is not uncommon for women to go through labor—or straight-up give birth—while in a car and being driven (or driving) to the hospital.

[...]

The Case For Running Over Highway-Terrorists

And so we come to it: the big question: are innocent motorists morally justified in running over highway-terrorists?

Fundamentally, the justification for such an act comes down to the simple principle of self-defense: when you are being aggressed against by violent, barbaric people who may very well take your life or that of another person, are you justified in fighting back?

Well, unless you like victim-blaming, the answer should be an obvious “yes”.

So, we’ve established that you have a right to defend yourself against aggressors, now the next question is: are highway-terrorists “aggressors”?

Well, the three aforementioned points describing how deliberately delaying traffic can lead to injuries/loss of life for countless innocent people should answer the question: OF COURSE highway-terrorists are aggressors: they are deliberately choosing to engage in behavior that can lead to innocent lives being lost or harmed. Do not let the big posters and synchronized chants for “justice” distract you from the vicious, underlying reality: these people are terrorists who orchestrate elaborate, coordinated, premeditated strikes that have quite a high chance of injuring or killing innocent people.

So let’s follow the logic: you have a right to defend yourself against aggressors. Highway-terrorists are aggressors. Thus, you have a right to defend yourself against highway-terrorists.

But now, what exactly constitutes “self-defense” in this case? The most obvious suggestion would be putting the pedal to the metal and plowing your 2-ton vehicle right into the dead center of those naive (yet dangerous) “activists”, shattering their idealistic (yet dangerous) fantasies in the span of a few tire revolutions.

Kind of like this:
[IMG]http://gifs.gifbin.com/022011/1298914487_car-plows-through-cyclists.gif[/IMG]

Now, this of course is a very EXTREME thing to do, something which would only be justified in the most EXTREME situations. You need to use discretion: the degree to which you exert self-defense should, to a degree, be proportional to the aggression inflicted upon you by a highway-terrorist. I don’t believe doing what you saw in the above GIF is pretty much ever justified, unless, for example, you’re a pregnant woman who gave birth in your car and your baby needs immediate medical attention in order to survive. Now, if you’re thinking, “but how is it justified to run over and potentially kill 5 highway-terrorists just to save 1 newborn life?” Well, this is what I call the “self-defense inflation tax.” It basically means that, when defending yourself, you are justified in inflicting approximately 3 times as much damage as the initial aggression inflicted upon you. These are just added costs for being the one who started it, and it’s completely sensible.

So yes, in the most extreme situations, like trying to get your newborn to the hospital, I believe plowing through highway-terrorists is completely justified.

[...]

Conclusion

In all, I conclude that, at the least, every single motorist is morally justified in slowly driving their cars forward—first as a warning to highway-terrorists, then gradually increasing the speed, gently nudging them out of the way.

If any of the more extremist ones choose to increase their aggression by hanging on to the car, punching your window, or kicking your door, you are thus now justified in increasing your self-defense, maybe with some more speed, or a sudden swerve to shake off the moron hanging on to your side-view mirror.

Ultimately, dealing with highway-terrorists is a very serious matter, one which requires your discretion based on your personal situation. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. Happy Travels!

Laurie Forti #fundie ecologos.org

Menstruation: a linguistic and biological fairy tale.

Men-stru-ation:
a fantasy concocted by men, a conceptual structure from their imagination.

It has been long reported that humani females when transitioning from a Standard Amerikan animal-centric Diet (SAD), through the trajectory: SAD. cooked-glop vegetarian, vegan, raw vegan, uniformly experience reduction and eventually complete cessation of all the unpleasant manifestations of "The Curse": "cramping", bloating, bloody discharge, pain, tactile sensitivity, offensive odors, lack of energy, headaches, general non-specific bitchiness, ...

It is important to understand that all "disease", illness, "symptoms", physical discomfort, etc. is caused by the human poisoning itself with a cultural diet. Local dietary practices are passed on down through generations, from parent to child by psychological conditioning. The child has no decision-making responsibility in this 'weaning' process, and table-side strife, threats, and punishment are frequent dramas resulting from the stressful nature of dietary acculturation by parents forcing their faulty dietary habits onto innocent, defensiveless children.

Nature does not create discomfort or pain; human ignorance does. The above mentioned unpleasantness is simply the result of cleansing efforts of the body initiated after the brief fertile time has passed. Several toxic amine compounds with instinctually-unpleasant odors may be present, including those in human meat-eaters' feces, or decaying corpses.

> ... and colleagues discovered that men find odors during the follicular phase the most attractive and least intense. On the other hand, the highest intensity smells, corresponding to the lowest attractiveness for men, were found during the time of menstrual bleeding."
This supports the concept that menstrual discharge is a cleansing process, and the excretions are metabolic wastes.

"Wait", you say, "everyone has these symptoms, so they must be 'natural'". Everyone gets "colds/flus" too, so they must be "natural". They are not and may be simply eliminated permanently by dietary change. Raw vegans do not get "colds/flus" or discomfort during their fertility cycle.

This ignorance comes from two factors: the great majority of people eat a highly toxic local cultural diet and most medical personnel are males, or taught by males, so are not particularly interested in solving "female problems". IF male doctors had the same symptoms as females do monthly, including a bloody, smelly discharge through their penises, don't you think they would enthusiastically research the issue and solve it? Being a "womans' problem", no one is interested, even the female MD's and scientists.

Humans are frugivorous apes, with a genetic distance from the chimps, our closest genetic cousin, of a mere 1.6%. Chimps, the other apes, and animals, in general do not 'menstruate'. They may manifest estrus, but that event is out-of-phase with 'menstruation'. That is, estrus occurs before the fertility window and 'menstruation', manifest only in the human, occurs after the fertility window. More important, estrus presents no discomfort to the animal, while human 'menstruation' is accompanied with a plethora of unpleasant manifestations, listed above.

Eivind Berge #fundie eivindberge.blogspot.hr

Beware of sex-negative MRAs
A casual observer might get the impression that the Men's Rights Movement is growing, since there clearly are more self-identified MRAs now than ever. But actually, most of this growth sadly consists of a cheerleading chorus for the feminist sex abuse industry rather than any real antifeminism.

There is a deep schism in the MRM between sex-positive and sex-negative MRAs which is well illustrated by how Angry Harry is now treated at A Voice for Men. Angry Harry is a venerable old MRA, a founding father of the movement, and for him to be ostracized like that just for being eminently reasonable is a travesty.

AVfM purports to be an MRA site but is actually a cesspool of feminist filth, where they worship radical feminists like TyphonBlue. She is a particularly nasty promoter of the feminist sex abuse industry including the lie that women are equally culpable for sex offenses. TyphonBlue is so extreme and clueless in her feminist thinking that she even attributes my former rage over celibacy to "processing (badly) some sort of overwhelming sexual trauma from his past." In the feminist worldview, sexual abuse is the only explanation for every perceived problem, and any man who disagrees with feminist abuse definitions must have been abused himself and is in denial.

TyphonBlue, the AVfM crowd and other feminists have a special poster boy for female-on-male "rape" in the former marine James Landrith. I always felt James Landrith was one of the most unsavory characters on the entire Internet, as his advocacy for the expansion of rape law has disgusted me for many years now. Even if he were telling the truth, it is patently absurd to take his sob story of female sexual coercion seriously as rape. The story inspires jealousy in normal men instead of sympathy and Landrith is a hypersensitive outlier to be traumatized by whatever experience he had. Angry Harry says so himself,
Furthermore, even if these particular memories were 100% correct, it seemed very unlikely to me that a 'normal' man would be so traumatised - and remain traumatised even 20 years later - by the incidents described in his article. So, as I said, I groaned inwardly, being somewhat depressed at the thought that false memories and/or 'particularly sensitive' victims were invading one of my comfort zones in cyberspace.
Now it turns out this feminist poster boy is exposed as not only a preposterously sensitive moron but a fraud as well. Angry Harry has caught James Landrith carefully changing his story and relying on recovered memories just like any other feminist accuser of the most untrustworthy kind. Now Landrith even claims, based on memories recovered in therapy, that the woman spiked his drink before "raping" him, making the feminist melodrama complete.

I myself called out the female sex-offender charade several years ago. To me, nothing screams bullshit as loudly as claims of sexual abuse by women. I have emphatically stated that women cannot rape men nor sexually abuse boys. I regard it as crucially important for MRAs to make it perfectly clear that we do not acknowledge female sex offenders even in principle. It was clear to me from the beginning that the female sex-offender charade only serves to promote feminist sex laws that ultimately hurt men immeasurably more than it can help a few rare particularly sensitive outliers who are traumatized by female sexual coercion (if they even exist). It is unreasonable to make laws based on hysterical outliers, and most importantly, the laws they want correspond exactly to the most hateful feminist sex laws which hurt innocent men every day. Therefore, I cannot emphasize enough that anyone supporting the female sex-offender charade is not a true MRA. This is a very good test to separate the wheat from the chaff -- ask how someone feels about female sex offenders, and if they respond that male victims of women are marginalized and female sex offenders need to be prosecuted more vigorously (or at all), then they are most certainly not one of us.

The word for such people is feminist or mangina. And now I've got some bonus advice for manginas: If you want to be sex-negative, then there are ways to go about it without catering to the feminist abuse industry and without advertising how stupid you are. For someone brought up in a feminist milieu this might be difficult to grasp, but guess what -- there are ways to prohibit and punish undesirable sexual activity without defining it as "abuse" of some helpless "victim." Traditional moralists have done so for millennia. One example is Islamic sharia law. Another is traditional Christianity and our laws against adultery, fornication, sodomy and so on in place until recently. Even obscenity can be dealt with on grounds of morality rather than the hateful and ludicrous persecution of "child porn" we have now, where teenagers are criminalized as sex offenders for sharing "abuse" pictures of themselves. A blanket ban on obscenity such as in the old days would be infinitely better and more fair than this charade. I don't agree with the sex-hostility of traditional morality either, but at least it isn't as retarded as the false-flag MRAs who apply feminist sex abuse theory to males. So if you want to be taken seriously, it would serve you better to advocate for traditional moralist values and laws instead of the feminist sex-abuse nonsense.

When a boy gets lucky with an older woman such as a teacher, quit insisting he was "raped" or "abused," because sexual abuse is not what is going on here. Forcing these relationships into a framework of "rape" or "sexual abuse" designed for women only serves to showcase your lack of intelligence and ignorance of human sexuality. It is also not needed in order to proscribe such behavior if you really believe it needs to be a criminal matter. You can punish the woman (or both) for fornication and/or adultery if you insist on being so sex-hostile. No victimology is needed! No denying the boy got lucky and ludicrously attempting to define him as a "victim." No sucking up to the feminists and no display of extreme imbecility on your part.

I can't really argue with moralism, because it basically consists of preferences about what kind of society you'd like to live in or claims about the will of some deity. It is not in the realm of rationality, so beyond simply agreeing or disagreeing, there isn't all that much to say. But when you make claims about abuse and victimhood like the feminists do, those claims can be tested because they bear relation to the real world and human nature, which is what science is about. Thus scientific methods such as is employed by evolutionary psychology can greatly illuminate the nature of rape and sexual abuse, and whether women can be perpetrators, and it can easily be shown that feminist jurisprudence makes thoroughly unscientific claims. Feminist sex law is neither based on evidence, rationality nor morality and should not be taken seriously. It is mere pseudoscience concocted to justify an ulterior motive. If you still insist on it, you are left with pure absurdity, as is easily demonstrated by a simple thought experiment.

Feminist sex abuse is so arbitrarily defined that if you are blindfolded and transported to a random jurisdiction where you meet a nubile young woman, you would have to consult the wise feminists in the local legislature before knowing if you can feel attracted to her without being an abuser (or even a "pedophile" if you are utterly brainwashed). And if you see a romantic couple, you similarly cannot know if the younger one is being "raped" without consulting the feminists you admire so much. That's how much faith manginas place in feminists -- they allow them to rule their most intimate desires and defer to them unquestioningly. Manginas are feminist sycophants and the MRM is now full of them in places like AVfM, The Spearhead, and the Men's Rights subreddit.

What is going on is this. The manginas are so steeped in feminist propaganda that the only tool in their intellectual toolbox is "abuse." And so in Western countries, even conservatives and religious fanatics (barring Islamists) will only ever argue that any type of sexual activity needs to be banned because it constitutes "abuse." Old concepts of sin or crimes against nature/God have been almost entirely supplanted by the feminist sex "abuse" paradigm. In terms of "abuse" is now the sole means available to conceptualize anything you disapprove of regarding sexuality, so everyone, including devoutly religious people, jumps on the bandwagon and promotes the politically correct abuse industry. Even prostitution is now to be legislated exclusively in terms of sexual exploitation or "trafficking" of (mostly) women -- traditional morality does not enter into it and of course all whores are themselves only innocent victims while the johns are the abusers. Feminists and manginas simply cannot help themselves because they know no other morality after a lifetime of being exposed to feminist propaganda. Feminist theory is so pervasive, any alternative is literally unthinkable for liberals and conservatives alike these days. This is how you get the bizarre charade of putting women on trial for "raping" willing and eager 17-year-old boys. Prosecuting female sex offenders is the most comical and perverse legal charade in history, yet false-flag MRAs support it along with the feminists because they have been that well indoctrinated with feminism. Brainwashing really works. Last night I got a comment from a true believer which well illustrates the profoundly obtuse mindset of a male feminist:
if he says no, it is rape. if he is forced, it is rape. if he is under the legal age, it is rape and child molestation. plain and simple. same laws for all...and if women want to enjoy the privileges of modern society, they must be held accountable under the same laws and to the same degree.
Such blind devotion to feminist sex law is the hallmark of a mangina. They neither comprehend that men and women are different, nor do they see anything wrong with these hateful sex laws when applied to men either. Instead they unflinchingly support equal injustice for all. We real MRAs need to denounce these fools. Don't be led on by these impostors who claim to be on men's side while promoting the very worst aspects of feminism. Rest assured that real MRAs are not like that and we do exist. The real MRM will trudge on despite our depressingly small size at the moment.

Gerald and Linda Polley #fundie voicesfromspirit.com

The answer to the question of how should we negotiate with those who support the gay and lesbian chamber of commerce businesses is that we should under no circumstances negotiate with them. We are dealing with people who are totally without honor, will do anything for political power, to whom lying and cheating is a way of life. Such people should not be negotiated with. Any attempt by them to negotiate should be ignored.

The terms of the boycott are simple. It will continue as long as The Gay And Lesbian Chamber Of Commerce is in effect. There is no compromise, there is absolutely nothing to negotiate. And under absolutely no circumstances should people negotiate with homosexuals over the boycott. Debating homosexuals shows acceptance of their views, gives them an opportunity to spread their poison to the public. Therefore, do not debate with them. Do not publicly argue with them. State clearly that homosexuality is a sickness, it is not a religion, it is not a race, it is not an ethnic creed. There is no point in arguing with the mentally ill. They will not listen, they will not hear. Their only goal is to promote their sickness, to make it acceptable. And if you debate with them, if you recognize them, you are helping them do that. Do not do it Do not help them. Oppose them. Stop them. Tell the world your views, but do not argue with them. It doesn't help.

Dota #fundie occidentinvicta.com

Commenter Axum/Mixed race had once asked me about my views on mixed raced people. This post will respond to that question and also address the broader issue of immigration for the sake of perspective. Let me begin by saying that I am not opposed to interracial relationships as several of my cousins (who live in the west) are either engaged to, or are married to white spouses. All of them seem quite content and some of them have kids that look very white. Having said that, I still think that interracial relationships should not be encouraged. While banning the practice outright would infringe on people’s personal freedoms, I doubt that encouraging the practice is prudent either. In Canada, interracial couples form about 4% of the total national population of couples. These figures are double in the liberal cities of Toronto and Vancouver and this isn’t entirely surprising given the high concentration of visible minorities present there.

The Multi-Cult celebrates these relationships as trendy and hip where photographs of smiling interracial couples are plastered over dismal statistics of above average divorce rates for this demographic group. I haven’t been able to find statistics for Canada, but in the US it appears that interracial relationships involving non white men married to white women are far more likely to fail by the 10th year of marriage whereas relationships involving white men married to Asian women are the least vulnerable. This isn’t unexpected given how dysfunctional white women are due to 6 decades of feminist programming.

During one of our phone conversations Bay Area Guy mentioned that certain whites weren’t concerned with the browning of America and the rationale behind this view is that so long as non whites absorb western culture they will be able to sustain it. I disagree with this argument because survival has intrinsic value and whites shouldn’t have to justify the preservation of their race. In most cases, national identity is based on racial identity and North America’s racial character is white.

North America’s racial character needs to be preserved. Non white immigrants cannot fully relate to the histories and heritage of North American culture. This will not change even if these non whites marry into white families. I’ve noticed very few South Asians don the familiar red poppy on remembrance day (including myself I confess) and I can’t blame them as that wasn’t their war. A former (South Asian) commenter on Robert Lindsay’s blog (now banned) insisted that one of the greatest things about Western culture was feminism! There is no way she could relate to America’s struggle for independence from the British, or America’s disdain for big government rooted in Jefferson’s interpretation of Locke. Small government translates into individual freedom, which is a far cry from the bloated nanny state that feminists masturbate over. How can these non white immigrants relate to the achievements of the US and Canada when their ancestors contributed nothing to them? No matter how Westernized they may appear to be, these immigrants and their children cannot relate to the philosophical, historical, and religious currents (from Thales to Kant and beyond) that have shaped the modern Western individual.

Individual autonomy is a key western value and hence practices such as interracial marriage shouldn’t be banned but shouldn’t be encouraged either. As long as the individuals who marry outside their ethnic groups remain a minority, there should be no problem. The same goes for Whites converting to Islam and Hinduism. Interracial couples shouldn’t be vilified but their actions should never be accepted as mainstream. In a traditional healthy society people naturally gravitate towards heterosexual endogamy, but sadly, liberal programs and policies have deleterious effects on society’s health. This is why it is imperative that people boycott the mass media to insulate themselves from harmful signals and programming.

Pat Buchanan once said that his grandparents wouldn’t recognize the America he currently lives in. There’s something profound about that statement that can be summarized in one word: Continuity. America and Canada can only be saved by those whose collective memories are rooted in North American history. The immigrant experience can be summed up in another word: displacement. We can’t expect immigrants to make any meaningful cultural contribution or help reverse the prevailing cultural decay; and thus the imperative to preserve white identity and interests takes on a vital urgency. That being said I must point out that I find the term “white identity” to be somewhat problematic as it includes Eastern and Mediterranean Europeans whereas the term traditionally denoted Saxons and Germans (The real architects of Canadian and American heritages). As a Paleoconservative I believe in preserving the Anglo-Saxon character of Canada and America but that is a topic for a future post.

I sincerely hope that sanity prevails and that Canada and the US rethink their suicidal immigration policies. God bless Canada and America.

David Pearce #fundie abolitionist.com

(This is a part of an essay calling for all predatory animals to killed off or genetically engineered into herbivores to end all suffering in the biosphere.)

More controversial than the case of tapeworms, cockroaches or locusts would be reprogramming or phasing out snakes and crocodiles. Snakes and crocodiles cause innumerable hideous deaths in the world each day. They are also part of our familiar conceptual landscape thanks to movies, zoos, TV documentaries, and the like - though a relaxed tolerance of their activities is easier in the comfortable West than for, say, a grieving Indian mother who has lost her child to a snakebite. Snakes are responsible for over 50,000 human deaths each year.

Most controversial of all, however, would be the extinction - or genetically-driven behavioural modification - of members of the cat family. We'll focus here on felines rather than the "easy" cases like parasitic tapeworms or cockroaches because of the unique status of members of the cat family in contemporary human culture, both as pets/companion animals and as our romanticised emblems of "wildlife". Most contemporary humans have a strong aesthetic preference in favour of continued feline survival. Their existence in current guise is perhaps the biggest ethical/ideological challenge to the radical abolitionist. For our culture glorifies lions, with their iconic status as the King of the Beasts; we admire the grace and agility of a cheetah; the tiger is a symbol of strength, beauty and controlled aggression; the panther is dark, swift and elegant; and so forth. Innumerable companies and sports teams have enlisted one or other of the big cats for their logos as symbols of manliness and vigour. Moreover cats of the domestic variety are the archetypal household pets. The worldwide domestic cat population has been estimated at around 400 million. We romanticise their virtues and forgive their foibles, notably their playful torment of mice. Indeed rather than being an object of horror - and compassion for the mouse - the torment of mice has been turned into stylized entertainment. Hence Tom-and-Jerry cartoons. By contrast, talk of "eliminating" predation can sound sinister. What would "phasing out" or "reprogramming" predators mean in practice? Most disturbingly, such terms are evocative of genocide, not universal compassion.

Appearances deceive. To get a conceptual handle on what is really going on during "predation", let's compare our attitude to the fate of a pig or a zebra with the fate of an organism with whom those non-human animals are functionally equivalent, both intellectually and in their capacity to suffer, namely a human toddler. On those rare occasions when a domestic dog kills a baby or toddler, the attack is front-page news. The offending dog is subsequently put down. Likewise, lions in Africa who turn man-eater are tracked down and killed, regardless of their conserved status. This response isn't to imply lions - or for that matter rogue dogs - are morally culpable. But by common consent they must be prevented from killing any more human beings. By contrast, the spectacle of a lion chasing a terrified zebra and then asphyxiating its victim can be shown on TV as evening entertainment, edifying viewing even for children. How is this parallel relevant? Well, if our theory of value aspires to a God's-eye perspective, stripped of unwarranted anthropocentric bias in the manner of the physical sciences, then the well-being of a pig or a zebra inherently matters no less than the fate of a human baby - or any other organism endowed with an equivalent degree of sentience. If we are morally consistent, then as we acquire God-like powers over Nature's creatures, we should take analogous steps to secure their well-being too. Given our anthropocentric bias, thinking of non-human vertebrates not just as equivalent in moral status to toddlers or infants, but as though they were toddlers or infants, is a useful exercise. Such reconceptualisation helps correct our lack of empathy for sentient beings whose physical appearance is different from "us". Ethically, the practice of intelligent "anthropomorphism" shouldn't be shunned as unscientific, but embraced insofar as it augments our stunted capacity for empathy. Such anthropomorphism can be a valuable corrective to our cognitive and moral limitations. This is not a plea to be sentimental, simply for impartial benevolence. Nor is it even a plea to take "sides" between killer and prey. Human serial killers who prey on other humans need to be locked up. But ultimately, it's vindictive morally to blame them in any ultimate sense for the fate of their victims. Their behaviour supervenes on the fundamental laws of physics. Tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner. Yet this indulgence doesn't extend to permitting them to kill again; and the abolitionist maintains the same principle holds good for nonhuman serial killers too.

Valiant Thor #ufo #conspiracy #moonbat #magick amazon.com

When the noted thinker, author, and philanthropist, Commander Valiant Thor, dictated this book over a half-century ago (in Earth years), he was just settling into his role as commander of the Venusian forces on our planet. He had actually put in many decades on Earth prior to that, although he was not, as they say, truly “in charge.”

Being a relative novice at that time, Thor decided to stick to traditional protocol and studiously avoided mentioning the word “Vril” in these pages. (It had been decided long before that, by certain Venusian elders, to keep that particular word, and its conceptual underpinnings, secret from Earthlings - at least until the appropriate time.)

Although it obviously wasn’t the appropriate time, the term and the belief system behind it were revealed to certain nosy Germans, who had gotten heavily into the occult during World War II. These Nazi necromancers had somehow hacked into the ongoing telemetric stream between Earth and Venus, and illegally downloaded much of the information about Vril. The civilized world has been trying to regain its balance ever since.

As a result, the author herein states unequivocally, and for the record, that Vril has nothing to do with Nazism, fascism, racism, hate, or bigotry. Like most Venusians, Thor follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, Tecumseh, Krishna, and Buddha, which generally state that all men are created equal in God’s sight, and are loved equally by God.
<...>
Vril is truly the essence of the active verb, the powerful sentence, and the narrative that moves people to action. It is the energy behind the words, which makes the mind react in a positive and uplifting fashion. As the Buddhists say, our words are actions, and should be approached soberly, cautiously, compassionately, and empathetically. Vril is about living life to the fullest, and loving to the fullest.

In these current days of extreme political divide, where lying and deception are being spread from on high (much like the Nazis and KKK of old), we need Vril more than ever, to counteract the “Antichrist” evil that seems to be sweeping the world under the false guise of “making America great again."

Franklin Graham #fundie billygraham.org

As you watch the news, do you feel as I do—that it seems the world is coming apart at the seams? There appears to be no end to the bad news. The killing of Christians by Muslims from Indonesia to Bangladesh to Pakistan. China tearing down church buildings. Christians tortured, beheaded, and crucified in Iraq, with villages burned and churches destroyed, and much the same in Syria.

American pastor Saeed Abedini is still imprisoned in Iran for his faith. Throughout Northern Africa, the Middle East, and many parts of the world, the church of Jesus Christ—and anyone or any group who bears His Name—is under attack. In our own country as well, there is great opposition to the church of Jesus Christ. We see this throughout the media, the entertainment industry, government, and politics.

Jesus warned His disciples in Matthew 24 when they asked Him about the signs of the end of the age. He said there would be wars and rumors of wars, famines, earthquakes, and pestilence. He told them, “Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake” (Matthew 24:9, KJV).

As I read the news, I can’t help but wonder if we are in the last hours before our Lord Jesus Christ returns to rescue His church and God pours out His wrath on the world for the rejection of His Son. I don’t know if we have hours, days, months, or years—but as Christians, God calls us to take the truth of the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Our job is to warn sinners of the consequences of sin and show them that God is loving and gracious, willing to forgive if we come to Him in repentance and faith. We have to accept God’s provision for our sins—the shedding of Christ’s blood on the cross. This is what we preach at BGEA—Jesus Christ, dead, buried, and risen! Ultimately this is what matters most in this world.

We have seen firsthand the pestilence of Ebola. This year the virus has already claimed the lives of over 1,000, making it the deadliest Ebola outbreak in history. A medical doctor serving with Samaritan’s Purse in Liberia was infected with this deadly virus, but through the prayers of many righteous, God spared his life. All this reminds me of the urgency of preaching the Gospel while we have the opportunity. Jesus tells us, “As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work” (John 9:4, NIV).

Linda Kimball #fundie renewamerica.com

Darwinism is the Big Lie that allows ruling class barbarians to conceptually dehumanize the Country Class, look down upon them in utter contempt and resentment, and run roughshod over them. Without their realizing it, the Country Class has been reduced to tax slaves to feed the insatiable appetites of the Ruling Class.

To destroy the power of Darwinism is to literally knock the pinnacle out from under ruling class barbarians, thereby casting them down to earth from atop their imagined lofty heights. Suddenly they will be just like the Country Class — fallible, sinful men made in the spiritual likeness of God the Father Almighty and subject to His moral laws. This is the true equality envisioned by the Founders.

John Horvat II #fundie #wingnut #conspiracy #transphobia #homophobia tfp.org

Achieving Christendom Is America’s Best Chance at Overthrowing Abortion, LGBT Reign of Terror

Christendom Is the Solution for the Emptiness of our Nihilistic Society
Grave moral problems are tearing the country apart. For many, this is apparent in the form of broken homes, procured abortion, shattered communities and lost Faith.

Many people get it right when pointing out the problems. However, they get it wrong when looking for solutions.

Some get it wrong because they look for solutions that address symptoms, not causes. Others search for a way out that involves the least possible effort. In these politically correct times, people are told not to offend anyone by their proposals. Thus, they automatically exclude the only real solution, which is a return to Christendom. They are willing to consider any other solution, no matter how absurd or improbable—anything but Christendom.

Christendom! It may seem shocking since its days seem long past. We are supposed to be in a post-Christian era. However, the urgency of our times call for it. We need a Christian civilization if we are going to overcome the present crisis. It needs to be at least considered.

A Rejected Proposal

Because our problems are moral, our solutions must also be moral. The rich treasury of Western thought and traditional Church teaching prove that the natural law and Christian morality are the norms that are best suited to our human and social nature. We find our greatest happiness inside institutions and social structures that take us to the end for which we are created—God.

Thus, we should naturally tend to favor Christendom. Everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike, finds the best conditions for prospering inside a family of nations that facilitates virtue and promotes social harmony in this vale of tears.

But everyone avoids this conclusion. We have long been conditioned to reject this line of thought. This Anything But Christendom (ABC) Syndrome curiously applies alike to the political left, right and center. It embraces both secular and religious America. The most rigid tyranny bars anyone from thinking outside the materialistic box.

The ABC Syndrome and the Political Spectrum

Each political sector has its reasons for denying Christendom. For radical liberals, the ABC Syndrome makes sense. They resent any moral limits to their acts and do not care if there are harmful consequences. Individual pleasure reigns supreme regardless of self-destruction or the death of babies. Thus, a Christian moral code represents an unbearable restriction on their desires to do, think and be whatever they want. Their variant of the ABC Syndrome is to allow Everything But Christendom. Use any letter of the LGBTQ+ alphabet, but never use C for Christendom.

Those on the right have a different approach. We find Christians who truly desire a Ten-Commandment-based moral code, for example. However, they dare not propose Christian morality because the people and media who oppose it appear to be numerous. For them, it has no chance of winning. Thus, they subscribe to the Anything But Christendom approach on how society should be run. Every concession must be made to accommodate others who refuse to accommodate them. Christians dance around all the issues touching on Christendom, but no one dares say the word.

And then there are the radical moderates who want to appear non-radical. In their radicalism, these extremists purge all moral references from the debate. They prefer to tweak the status quo, hoping to avoid the Christendom issue altogether. As society falls apart, this effort proves elusive and ineffective.

Imposing the Christian Will Upon Others

Three main fallacies are used to justify the ABC Syndrome. The first is the mistaken belief that proposing Christendom imposes the Faith on non-believers.

Liberals think that establishing any moral limits means imposing Christianity on others. And yet they have no qualms whatsoever with imposing their anti-Christian will on Christians, on Christian feast days such as Christmas, and the Little Sisters of the Poor. They have no scruples about stuffing a Drag Queen Story Hour world of perversion down the throats of society, despite protests from concerned parents.

Christians cannot impose their Faith on those who do not believe because Faith is a gift from God. It cannot, by its nature, be imposed. However, Christians can and should enact reasonable laws based on the natural law that call for moral restraint to form a just and harmonious society.

Eternal and Natural Law: The Foundation of Morals and Law

Since Aristotle, moralists taught that this natural law is valid for all times, places and peoples. By advocating such moral limits in the law, Christians merely obey the nature of all law, which restricts what individuals might do for the sake of the higher common good.

In proposing Christendom, we are not imposing but returning to an order that conforms to our human nature and which favors our development and sanctification. In submitting their Everything But Christianity agenda, the left imposes on society a destructive system that brings it to ruin.

Hopelessly Outdated

The second fallacy is that Christendom is so far removed from society’s current state that it is impractical to propose it. The Christian agenda is hopelessly outdated for postmodern times, it is falsely claimed.

There is nothing more outdated than today’s anti-Christian agenda. As Catholic thinker Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira notes, there is nothing new about divorce, procured abortion, nudity, and moral depravity. Most “modern” proposals are merely recycled pagan vices from antiquity. Moreover, what could be more foreign to our American Christian heritage than the sudden appearance of transgenderism or the current mainstreaming of Satanic movements?

Indeed, most Americans identify with a return to our Christian roots. They have problems adjusting to the latest barbarisms proposed by a neo-pagan culture. The debate should not be centered on the age of the ideas proposed but their merits. The automatic exclusion of ideas because some claim they are outdated is foolish and wrong. The only thing that matters is if they are true or false.

A Long Time Frame

Finally, there is the fallacy that it is impossible to change society quickly, especially when most people seem to subscribe to the opposite of a Christian civilization. At best, a Christian restoration is a futile effort, they erroneously claim.

Again this argument sidesteps the merits of ideas. It focuses on the practicality of implementing them. However, this fallacy is as flawed as the other two.

Captivating ideas like homeschooling, for example, have drastically changed individuals and families in a short time. As the last elections have proven, voters will change their positions when convinced of the need to change.

Societies, too, can quickly and radically change. Consider the Sexual Revolution. Within the space of a decade, the sixties radically changed the mores, fashions and manners of that generation and all those that followed. Most people in the fifties were not hippies, but many adopted hippie ways in the seventies as these became mainstream.

The history of the Church is full of fervent missionary efforts in which whole peoples, burdened by their paganism, were quickly converted to the Faith by the efforts of men and the action of grace. These peoples changed their lives wholesale, adopting Christian ways in a short time.

People change their ways when times are empty, and ideas are exhausted. Indeed, it is in times like ours that grand ideas like Christendom have their greatest appeal.

Where Christ Is King

Thus, the time is ripe to debate Christendom. It should be done openly, unapologetically and enthusiastically. Many do not know what Christendom is. Indeed, the ABC Syndrome represents old liberal prejudices that distort the true nature of a Christian society. For too long, our shallow, materialistic society has suppressed the notions of wonder, sublime, and the sacred that correspond to the deepest desires of the human soul.

By engaging in the debate over Christendom, we address the emptiness of our nihilistic society that finds no meaning or purpose in life.

Above all, the failure to debate Christendom is fatal since it means the continued descent into an anti-Christendom of anarchy and unrestraint. This anti-regime is already seen in the dark yearnings of Antifa, anarchists and Satanic movements that call for a world without morality. They advocate the destruction of our nation and the persecution of those who keep the Faith.

Science Confirms: Angels Took the House of Our Lady of Nazareth to Loreto
These topics need to be discussed. We should not be afraid to proclaim our desire to see Christ as King. Numerous popes have described this Christian society as one that affirms the social Kingship of Christ. In his encyclical Quas Primas, Pius XI says that “Once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will, at last, receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony.”

Only Christendom can be a truly just society for all.

Timothy and Esten Cibaro #fundie rawstory.com

An Ohio man and his son are using the Bible to defend themselves in court against multiple charges of rape, kidnapping, and endangering children.

Via the Washington Post, the Toledo Blade reports that 53-year-old Timothy Ciboro and his son, 28-year-old Esten Ciboro, have been allowed to use the Bible as their main piece of evidence to defend themselves against accusations that they kidnapped and raped underage girls at their home in Toledo, Ohio over the span of several years.

“There’s a great deal of strategy in Scripture and I use those strategies in everything I do,” Esten Ciboro told the court last week when explaining why he and his father should be allowed to use the Bible in court as part of their defense.

Ciboro, who is acting as his own attorney in conjunction with his father, also called the Bible “the only law book that truly matters.”

Lucas County Common Pleas Judge Linda Jennings said that she would allow the two men to use the Bible during their trial, so long as they didn’t use it question witnesses.

“It’s the court’s opinion that while the Bible is very important, it is not a law book in a court of law,” she told the men.

The two Ciboros were arrested last May after Esten Cibro’s 13-year-old stepsister escaped from their basement and told police that she had been kidnapped and repeatedly raped by both men for more than a year.

Ready4theRapture #fundie rr-bb.com

We have a shofar in our home. We had just finished watching a DVD about the Book of Revelation and I had gone on to bed while my husband stayed up for a little while longer. I was just about to fall asleep and I hear a trumpet sound. My heart skipped a beat or two and then I realized it was my husband practicing on the shofar in preparation for the Feast of Trumpets. I can't wait to hear the real trumpet sound.

I have found myself looking towards the sky a lot lately. For no reason I'll pull back the shades and and just look up at the sky. I haven't had any hightened senses in the physical realm, but my spirit has been hightened big time.

LOL at the posts about wearing clean underwear and such. I shared with my Bible study group last night that I need new dentures, but I'm not sure I want to spend the $2000+ for something that's going to be left behind. We all feel that the rapture is very soon and agreed that as long as I wasn't having major problems with my present choppers then there really wasn't an urgency to get new ones. I think I'll use the $2000 to pay off a couple of bills before I get out of here.

I'm so glad I can come here and share stuff like this.

Gedaliah Braun #racist halcyoninitiative.wordpress.com

[Part 3]

Gruesome cruelty

Another aspect of African behavior that liberals do their best to ignore but that nevertheless requires an explanation is gratuitous cruelty. A reviewer of Driving South, a 1993 book by David Robbins, writes:

“A Cape social worker sees elements that revel in violence … It’s like a cult which has embraced a lot of people who otherwise appear normal. … At the slightest provocation their blood-lust is aroused. And then they want to see death, and they jeer and mock at the suffering involved, especially the suffering of a slow and agonizing death.” (Citizen [Johannesburg], July 12, 1993, p.6.)

There is something so unspeakably vile about this, something so beyond depravity, that the human brain recoils. This is not merely the absence of human empathy, but the positive enjoyment of human suffering, all the more so when it is “slow and agonizing.” Can you imagine jeering at and mocking someone in such horrible agony?

During the apartheid era, black activists used to kill traitors and enemies by “necklacing” them. An old tire was put around the victim’s neck, filled with gasoline, and—but it is best to let an eye-witness describe what happened next:

“The petrol-filled tyre is jammed on your shoulders and a lighter is placed within reach . … Your fingers are broken, needles are pushed up your nose and you are tortured until you put the lighter to the petrol yourself.” (Citizen; “SA’s New Nazis,” August 10, 1993, p.18.)

The author of an article in the Chicago Tribune, describing the equally gruesome way the Hutu killed Tutsi in the Burundi massacres, marveled at “the ecstasy of killing, the lust for blood; this is the most horrible thought. It’s beyond my reach.” (“Hutu Killers Danced In Blood Of Victims, Videotapes Show,” Chicago Tribune, September 14, 1995, p.8.) The lack of any moral sense is further evidenced by their having videotaped their crimes, “apparently want[ing] to record … [them] for posterity.” Unlike war criminals, who hid their deeds, these people apparently took pride in their work.

In 1993, Amy Biehl, a 26-year-old American on a Fulbright scholarship, was living in South Africa, where she spent most of her time in black townships helping blacks. One day when she was driving three African friends home, young blacks stopped the car, dragged her out, and killed her because she was white. A retired senior South African judge, Rex van Schalkwyk, in his 1998 book One Miracle is Not Enough, quotes from a newspaper report on the trial of her killers: “Supporters of the three men accused of murdering [her] … burst out laughing in the public gallery of the Supreme Court today when a witness told how the battered woman groaned in pain.” This behavior, Van Schalkwyk wrote, “is impossible to explain in terms accessible to rational minds.” (pp. 188-89.)

These incidents and the responses they evoke—“the human brain recoils,” “beyond my reach,” “impossible to explain to rational minds” — represent a pattern of behavior and thinking that cannot be wished away, and offer additional support for my claim that Africans are deficient in moral consciousness.

I have long suspected that the idea of rape is not the same in Africa as elsewhere, and now I find confirmation of this in Newsweek:

“According to a three-year study [in Johannesburg] … more than half of the young people interviewed — both male and female — believe that forcing sex with someone you know does not constitute sexual violence … [T]he casual manner in which South African teens discuss coercive relationships and unprotected sex is staggering.” (Tom Masland, “Breaking The Silence,” Newsweek, July 9, 2000.)

Clearly, many blacks do not think rape is anything to be ashamed of.

The Newsweek author is puzzled by widespread behavior that is known to lead to AIDS, asking “Why has the safe-sex effort failed so abjectly?” Well, aside from their profoundly different attitudes towards sex and violence and their heightened libido, a major factor could be their diminished concept of time and reduced ability to think ahead.

Nevertheless, I was still surprised by what I found in the Zulu dictionary. The main entry for rape reads: “1. Act hurriedly; … 2. Be greedy. 3. Rob, plunder, … take [possessions] by force.” While these entries may be related to our concept of rape, there is one small problem: there is no reference to sexual intercourse! In a male-dominated culture, where saying “no” is often not an option (as confirmed by the study just mentioned), “taking sex by force” is not really part of the African mental calculus. Rape clearly has a moral dimension, but perhaps not to Africans. To the extent they do not consider coerced sex to be wrong, then, by our conception, they cannot consider it rape because rape is wrong. If such behavior isn’t wrong it isn’t rape.

An article about gang rape in the left-wing British paper, the Guardian, confirms this when it quotes a young black woman: “The thing is, they [black men] don’t see it as rape, as us being forced. They just see it as pleasure for them.” (Rose George, “They Don’t See it as Rape. They Just See it as Pleasure for Them,” June 5, 2004.) A similar attitude seems to be shared among some American blacks who casually refer to gang rape as “running a train.” (Nathan McCall, Makes Me Wanna Holler, Vintage Books, 1995.)

If the African understanding of rape is far afield, so may be their idea of romance or love. I recently watched a South African television program about having sex for money. Of the several women in the audience who spoke up, not a single one questioned the morality of this behavior. Indeed, one plaintively asked, “Why else would I have sex with a man?”

From the casual way in which Africans throw around the word “love,” I suspect their understanding of it is, at best, childish. I suspect the notion is alien to Africans, and I would be surprised if things are very different among American blacks. Africans hear whites speak of “love” and try to give it a meaning from within their own conceptual repertoire. The result is a child’s conception of this deepest of human emotions, probably similar to their misunderstanding of the nature of a promise.

I recently located a document that was dictated to me by a young African woman in June 1993. She called it her “story,” and the final paragraph is a poignant illustration of what to Europeans would seem to be a limited understanding of love:

“On my way from school, I met a boy. And he proposed me. His name was Mokone. He tell me that he love me. And then I tell him I will give him his answer next week. At night I was crazy about him. I was always thinking about him.”

Moral blindness

Whenever I taught ethics I used the example of Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer in the French Army who was convicted of treason in 1894 even though the authorities knew he was innocent. Admitting their mistake, it was said, would have a disastrous effect on military morale and would cause great social unrest. I would in turn argue that certain things are intrinsically wrong and not just because of their consequences. Even if the results of freeing Dreyfus would be much worse than keeping him in prison, he must be freed, because it is unjust to keep an innocent man in prison.

To my amazement, an entire class in Kenya said without hesitation that he should not be freed. Call me dense if you want, but it was 20 years before the full significance of this began to dawn on me.

Africans, I believe, may generally lack the concepts of subjunctivity and counterfactuality. Subjunctivity is conveyed in such statements as, “What would you have done if I hadn’t showed up?” This is contrary to fact because I did show up, and it is now impossible for me not to have shown up. We are asking someone to imagine what he would have done if something that didn’t happen (and now couldn’t happen) had happened. This requires self-consciousness, and I have already described blacks’ possible deficiency in this respect. It is obvious that animals, for example, cannot think counterfactually, because of their complete lack of self-awareness.

When someone I know tried to persuade his African workers to contribute to a health insurance policy, they asked “What’s it for?” “Well, if you have an accident, it would pay for the hospital.” Their response was immediate: “But boss, we didn’t have an accident!” “Yes, but what if you did?” Reply? “We didn’t have an accident!” End of story.

Interestingly, blacks do plan for funerals, for although an accident is only a risk, death is a certainty. (The Zulu entries for “risk” are “danger” and “a slippery surface.”) Given the frequent all-or-nothing nature of black thinking, if it’s not certain you will have an accident, then you will not have an accident. Furthermore, death is concrete and observable: We see people grow old and die. Africans tend to be aware of time when it is manifested in the concrete and observable.

One of the pivotal ideas underpinning morality is the Golden Rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. “How would you feel if someone stole everything you owned? Well, that’s how he would feel if you robbed him.” The subjunctivity here is obvious. But if Africans may generally lack this concept, they will have difficulty in understanding the Golden Rule and, to that extent, in understanding morality.

If this is true we might also expect their capacity for human empathy to be diminished, and this is suggested in the examples cited above. After all, how do we empathize? When we hear about things like “necklacing” we instinctively — and unconsciously — think: “How would I feel if I were that person?” Of course I am not and cannot be that person, but to imagine being that person gives us valuable moral “information:” that we wouldn’t want this to happen to us and so we shouldn’t want it to happen to others. To the extent people are deficient in such abstract thinking, they will be deficient in moral understanding and hence in human empathy—which is what we tend to find in Africans.

In his 1990 book Devil’s Night, Ze’ev Chafets quotes a black woman speaking about the problems of Detroit: “I know some people won’t like this, but whenever you get a whole lot of black people, you’re gonna have problems. Blacks are ignorant and rude.” (pp. 76-77.)

If some Africans cannot clearly imagine what their own rude behavior feels like to others—in other words, if they cannot put themselves in the other person’s shoes—they will be incapable of understanding what rudeness is. For them, what we call rude may be normal and therefore, from their perspective, not really rude. Africans may therefore not be offended by behavior we would consider rude — not keeping appointments, for example. One might even conjecture that African cruelty is not the same as white cruelty, since Africans may not be fully aware of the nature of their behavior, whereas such awareness is an essential part of “real” cruelty.

I am hardly the only one to notice this obliviousness to others that sometimes characterizes black behavior. Walt Harrington, a white liberal married to a light-skinned black, makes some surprising admissions in his 1994 book, Crossings: A White Man’s Journey Into Black America:

“I notice a small car … in the distance. Suddenly … a bag of garbage flies out its window . … I think, I’ll bet they’re blacks. Over the years I’ve noticed more blacks littering than whites. I hate to admit this because it is a prejudice. But as I pass the car, I see that my reflex was correct—[they are blacks].

“[As I pull] into a McDonald’s drive-through … [I see that] the car in front of me had four black in it. Again … my mind made its unconscious calculation: We’ll be sitting here forever while these people decide what to order. I literally shook my head . … My God, my kids are half black! But then the kicker: we waited and waited and waited. Each of the four … leaned out the window and ordered individually. The order was changed several times. We sat and sat, and I again shook my head, this time at the conundrum that is race in America.

“I knew that the buried sentiment that had made me predict this disorganization … was … racist. … But my prediction was right.” (pp. 234-35.)

Africans also tend to litter. To understand this we must ask why whites don’t litter, at least not as much. We ask ourselves: “What would happen if everyone threw rubbish everywhere? It would be a mess. So you shouldn’t do it!” Blacks’ possible deficiency in abstract thinking makes such reasoning more difficult, so any behavior requiring such thinking is less likely to develop in their cultures. Even after living for generations in societies where such thinking is commonplace, many may still fail to absorb it.

It should go without saying that my observations about Africans are generalizations. I am not saying that none has the capacity for abstract thought or moral understanding. I am speaking of tendencies and averages, which leave room for many exceptions.

To what extent do my observations about Africans apply to American blacks? American blacks have an average IQ of 85, which is a full 15 points higher than the African average of 70. The capacity for abstract thought is unquestionably correlated with intelligence, and so we can expect American blacks generally to exceed Africans in these respects.

Still, American blacks show many of the traits so striking among Africans: low mathematical ability, diminished abstract reasoning, high crime rates, a short time-horizon, rudeness, littering, etc. If I had lived only among American blacks and not among Africans, I might never have reached the conclusions I have, but the more extreme behavior among Africans makes it easier to perceive the same tendencies among American blacks.

Frank Salter #fundie reddit.com

The Genetic Similarity Theory claims that parents of mixed race kids love their offspring less than parents of monoracial children.
Of course it is taking place mostly on a subconscious level.

This is caused by fact that a mixed race child has a lower genetic similarity to either of his/her parents than a monoracial child.

An ethnically mixed child is autosomally less similar to his/her parent, than any random member of this parent's ethnic group.

"Perhaps the most important conceptual breakthrough in On Genetic Interests is to recognize that loyalty to one’s ethny — Dr. Salter prefers this term to race, nation, or ethnic group — is just as valid biologically as loyalty to one’s children. This is because each ethny is a storehouse of its members’ distinctive genes, just as children are carriers of their parents’ genes. A person’s children are very concentrated stores of his genes, but his ethny is a vastly larger, though more dilute, pool of the same genes. Given the size of most ethnies, they are repositories of far more copies of a member’s distinctive genes than even his own children, and therefore have a theoretical genetic claim to loyalty even greater than that of his children."[6]

Alfred R. Webre #conspiracy washingtonpost.com

Exopolitics: It's about air-traffic control. It's about honest government. It's about self-empowerment and healthy living and bold declarations of reaching for the stars. Ask too many questions, though, and you'll see exopolitics is also about a race of humanoids who live under the barren surface of Mars and may, at some point, desire to mooch off Earth's rich resources.

Exopolitics "provides a conceptual framework for dealing with our highly populated universe," says author, lawyer and activist Alfred L. Webre, who coined the term 10 years ago and has watched it creep into the mainstream.

He also says the Martians are keeping to themselves for now.

Summerset276 #fundie rr-bb.com

With all that I have done to try and plant seed for the here & now need for Salvation, I have also done all I know to do to continue the Lord's work even after the Rapture occurs. About 2 years ago I got a strong urgency to strip down my possesions to the bare basics. My family has a very limited budget, living paycheck to paycheck, but even so, I felt the need to simplify my life the best I could. Now that the notebook & the letters are all finished, (just adding as I find info I think will be useful) & now that my life is about as simple and basic as it can be, I now find myself with a new constant & strong urgency. To gt my house clean. I mean clean it top to bottom and do my very best to keep it that way. [...]

<p>Can anyone help me understand this urgency? Has anyone or is anyone else feeling this same urgency?

<p>Don't get me wrong, my house was presentable, it was tidy and neat the majrity of the time. But, now I have this constant and continuing urgency to keep it very organised and very clean. You know how you clean your house spic & span before a special guest or guests come by? or how you might clean extra well right before you go on a long trip so that when you return you come back to a clean and tidy house? Well, that is what I feel the urgency to do with my house. Only thing is... I don't have plans for anyone special to come over and I have no plan on going on a trip.

<p>I do believe the Rapture will be coming soon & that Jesus will call us all home, but will He really care if my house isn't tidy?

usachinanukewar #fundie usachinanukewar.wordpress.com

The “Embryo”, my new-fully integrated technique.


There’re gotta be 3 core techniques I must master when slashing with sword.

1. Slash at a lightning speed.

IF I do really get appointed as an executioner when I’m in Heaven, then I’m gotta devote all my 7 years to sharpen my own slashing techniques. And, I’m gotta have an angel tutor to teach me how to use sword proficiently.

You know what? When I’m in Heaven, I can talk with Lord Jesus Christ, my Emperor and Father, face to face. I’m gotta beg Lord Jesus Christ very earnestly. I mean it. I’m gotta bow down under Lord Jesus Christ’s knees and throne, crying, weeping, begging Him to appoint me as an executioner when I’m in Heaven. And, that’s my honor for carrying out this assigned task for Lord Jesus Christ and my honor to do and revenge, the only thing I can do for my own kind, the Han People, both Chinese and Taiwanese, the main target for the Rothschilds’ evil depopulation scheme to completely obliterate. I want every single drop of blood of my own kind to be paid back in my hand with my sword.

And, I’ve set up my own schedule on learning how to slash with sword.

The first year is my year for the technique on slashing at a lightning speed. During the first year when I’m in Heaven, I’m gotta be focus on learning hard about how to slash at a lightning speed. This is the first technique I must master, and I give myself a whole year to learn hard. By the end of the first year when I’m in Heaven, I should have already mastered this technique, slashing with sword at a lightning speed.

2. The second year when I’m in Heaven, I’m gotta learn hard and sharpen this second technique, slashing with sword at will in a fully controllable force unleashed, in which I can slash and inflict whatever long, short, hard, slight, deep, or shallow cuts on my earthly enemies, the banking cartels and their servants.

And, by the end of the second year when I’m in Heaven, I should already have mastered this second technique, slashing with sword at will in a fully controllable force unleashed.

3. The third year is for my third technique, that is, 100% precision slashing with sword. I must achieve this technique in order to pinpoint the aim, such as the finger’s joints, which is just a tiny spot on men or women’s hand. So, I must fully master at 100% precision slashing with sword. And, by the end of the third year when I’m in Heaven, I should already have mastered this technique, my third technique, 100% precision slashing with sword.

4. O.k., baby, here comes the fourth technique I must also master, and this fourth technique is the most difficult and hardest one, because I must put all the three techniques I’ve learned and mastered in a fully integrated fashion. I want to put those 3 techniques into a fully integrated technique, 3 become 1. Why?

On every single slash I unleash to cut my earthly enemies, I want to slash them at a lightning speed, at a fully controllable force unleashed, at 100% precision, all at the same time.

Because on Day 1, I just simply wanna cut off fingers, and when I’m cutting off fingers, I must pinpoint at the finger’s joints, a tiny spot on human’s hand, which means I must have the technique of 100% precision on slashing with sword.

And, when I’m cutting off fingers, people are always moving or doing something, or on the move. They won’t stand still or sit still for me to cut off their fingers. So, I must have the technique of slashing with sword at a lightning speed just at that exact second, the exact moment.

And, when I’m cutting off fingers, I must also fully and completely control the force unleashed when slashing. I just wanna cut off their fingers, not their whole arm or hand, or even cut them into half pieces. So, when cutting off fingers, I must have the technique of slashing with sword at will in a fully controllable force unleashed.

In other words, and my conclusion, that is, when cutting off fingers, I must have all 3 techniques of slashing with sword at a lightning speed, slashing with sword at will in a fully controllable force unleashed, slashing with sword in a 100% precision manner. All 3 techniques must be utilized at the same time, at every single slash I unleash to cut my enemies’ finger joints. So, I must fully integrate those 3 techniques I’ve learned and mastered in the first 3 years when I’m in Heaven. I must fully and completely integrate those 3 core techniques into a fully and completely integrated fashion, 3 become 1.

And, this is gotta be the integrated technique. 3 become 1. I wanna name this specific and integrated technique, the “Embryo”, because it’s just like a sperm and an egg meet and develop into an embryo, so integrated, so interlocked. And, this time, too, I’m gotta fully and completely integrate all 3 core techniques I’ve learned and mastered during the first 3 years when I’m in Heaven into a fully and completely integrated technique, the “Embryo”. This is why I name my new integrated technique.

And, I wanna spend the fourth, fifth, sixth, all 3 years, to relentlessly and endlessly sharpen this new integrated technique into a fully and completely controllable fashion, so that I can slash with sword in a perfect manner to create the outcome I exactly and desperately want, such as a cut-off finger, a crack on their belly to let intestines run out of the crack, a disfigured face covered with non-fatal cuts.

So, I’m gotta be so loving this new integrated technique, and I’m gotta name it, the “Embryo”.

Giovanni Scuderi #fundie pmli.it

Scuderi: Let us support the Islamic State against the imperialist holy alliance

An imperialist holy alliance is born to fight and destroy the Islamic State fighting against imperialism. Of course, the PMLI cannot be part of it. Our natural stand point is together with those who fight against imperialism, that is the common enemy of all the peoples of the world.

The Islamic State does not want imperialism to be the master of Iraq, Syria, Middle East, North and Central Africa, Afghanistan and Yemen. We do not want it either, therefore we cannot but support it. As said again by the Political Bureau in its historic document issued on 10 January, “Every people has the right to self-determination, to independence, and to settle their internal contradictions by themselves.”

An immense gulf divides us from the Islamic State in the spheres of ideology, culture, tactics and strategy, and we do not agree with all its fighting methods, actions and goals. But we have an essential point in common—the unwavering struggle against imperialism. This point at the moment transcends any other difference that may exist, and it is the pivot of our de facto anti-imperialist alliance.

Alliances are made with the forces currently on the field, regardless of their characteristics, ideologies and strategies. These forces are as they are, we cannot shape them as we see fit, after abstract models. They depend on existing circumstances and on the main contradictions in a certain moment.

Just as Stalin allied with US and British imperialists to defeat Germany’s aggressive imperialism, just as Mao allied with the Kuomintang nationalists to force Japanese imperialist aggressors out of China, so we must necessarily ally with the Islamic State, otherwise we will side with imperialist aggressors. There is no other anti-imperialist alternative, including neutrality. Moreover, this is happening in a moment when inter-imperialist contradictions are sharpening over the control of Syria and Iraq, possibly leading to a world war that we oppose with all our strength.

We are on the side of all the peoples fighting for national liberation, starting from the Palestinian people who fight against Israel’s Zionist, Nazi and imperialist invaders. And we support their ongoing Intifada. At the same time, we condemn the state massacre in Ankara against the Kurdish people.

New Duce Renzi’s Italy is part of the imperialist holy alliance, it has a military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is ready to use Tornado fighters to bomb the Islamic State in the territory it has taken away from Iraq. It is only waiting to have in return the prize it is longing for—the leadership of the military mission in Libya.

We must oppose it in any possible way, denouncing it on “Il Bolscevico”, in workplaces, schools, universities, cities and squares. We must convince our people to refuse to be cannon fodder for Italian imperialism. In case Italy should take part at a possible world war, we must convince our people to rise in arms, if necessary, to prevent it.

Imperialism is showing all its claws, it is right for people who do not want to be dominated by imperialism to do the same.

Down with imperialism and imperialist wars! Long live the struggles for liberation and the struggles of oppressed peoples and nations! Let us support anti-imperialist Islamic movements! Long live proletarian internationalism! Let us overthrow New Duce Renzi’s imperialist and interventionist government! United, filled with fighting spirit, with the Teachers and the PMLI we shall win!

Dr. Ilija Lakicevic, Res. Prof. #crackpot #magick #dunning-kruger teslastyle101.com

There are many levels of Creator plane. There is the level of Conceptual Thought, there is the level of movement of Conceptual Thought, there is the level of an enlargement expansion of the Conceptual Thought, and then there is that tornado-like effect where Conceptual Thought gets spiralled down into Thought Matter.

Thought Matter is heavy, compared to Conceptual Thought. Thought Matter is like a seed that has never been sprouted, and the seed is never sprouted twice. To sprout the seed of Conceptual Thought means to electrify it. Therefore once one receives Conceptual Thought it is necessary to electrify it with own super-consciousness.

Super-consciousness is also super-awareness, and super-lovingness. Super-consciousness spreads out like little strings half an inch long, that are curly, and they are intertwine with another piece of super-consciousness string, and they can be braided together.

One piece of Conceptual Thought can be very tiny, but it can be assembled with other pieces of Conceptual Thought, like a little girl’s curly hair that lies on the floor after it has been cut. That is loose Conceptual Thought. Who will pick up the pieces and intertwine them into a piece of Thought Matter?

That is the work of genius. The genius must enter in the picture sublimely and with great innocence, like a child of six who asks, “Why?” “Why?” and “Why”?

And so the Conceptual Thought that has been sent out by the Creator has been one of New Energy, like a curl within a curl. The genius looks at it, and the genius attempts to assemble little strings of super-consciousness thought, and the myriad of piano keys that it plays on the piano of Creator.

Old Energy, old consciousness, were two separate elements: consciousness and energy. Energy was created by consciousness, by our desire to come back Home, when we left the Home in order to create reality, to manifest so that consciousness could experience itself. They were two separate components – consciousness and energy.

The New Energy is very different, because it’s not consciousness and it’s not a separate element of energy. New Energy is literally the integration of consciousness and energy together in the same packet. In the same packet.

So consciousness doesn\\\’t need to call in energy to support it. It already has it built in. It’s already there. That’s why it’s new. It’s never been there before, but it also operates in a very new way. Total new operating system.

What a divine time!

And so the Conceptual Thought that has been sent out by the Creator has been one of The New Energy – Gravity within Gravity!

HOW THE NEW ENERGY CAN BE EXPRESSED EASY, SIMPLE, EFFICIENT AND CHEAP?

Tesla had very high degree of success in understanding how energy works at its “seminal” level, but quite frankly society wasn’t ready for what Tesla had to offer, but instead reverted to a more Edisonian type of understanding of energy.

But, I am ready to move beyond that now, ready to go beyond that Old understanding of energy.

I created concept AIR101RBI for EASY, SIMPLE, EFFICIENT AND CHEAP expression of the New Energy – its direct conversion into the electric energy.

Ridgedale Church of Christ #fundie timesfreepress.com

Collegedale's decision to grant benefits to same-sex couples was a victory for Kat Cooper, a gay detective who championed the months-long effort that made the Chattanooga suburb the first city in Tennessee to offer benefits to same-sex spouses of its government employees.

Cooper's mother, Linda, stood by her side throughout the process. She held tight to her daughter's hand at a July meeting over the issue. And the two embraced after the City Council's 4-1 vote on Aug. 5.

But those small acts of support translated into collateral damage that left Linda Cooper and other relatives separated from their church family of more than 60 years. And one local advocate for gay families says the church's stance was the most extreme he's heard of in years.

Leaders at Ridgedale Church of Christ met in private with Kat Cooper's mother, aunt and uncle on Sunday after the regular worship service. They were given an ultimatum: They could repent for their sins and ask forgiveness in front of the congregation. Or leave the church.

Their sins?

"My mother was up here and she sat beside me. That's it," said Kat Cooper. "Literally, they're exiling members for unconditionally loving their children -- and even extended family members."

But the family's support of Kat Cooper was as good as an endorsement of homosexuality, said Ken Willis, minister at Ridgedale Church of Christ.

"The sin would be endorsing that lifestyle," Willis said. "The Bible speaks very plainly about that."

Willis, a father himself, said the church didn't expect the Cooper family to disown their daughter.

"But you certainly can't condone that lifestyle, whether it's any kind of sin -- whether they're shacked up with someone or living in a state of fornication or they're guilty of crimes," he said. "You don't condone it. You still love them as a parent."

Hunt Cooper, Kat's father, said his wife is still too distraught over the church's actions to comment.

"She is just so traumatized and so upset," he said. "It has been days and she's still crying. It's almost like losing a family member."

Linda Cooper's parents were practically founding members of the Dodds Avenue congregation, Hunt Cooper said. Her father was a church elder and his picture still hangs on the wall there. Kat Cooper grew up helping her grandfather clean the pews and helped her grandmother hang bulletin boards for Sunday school.

"This is not just some casual church they dropped in on," he said.

Hunt Cooper said his family rejects the notion that being gay is a lifestyle choice. And his wife, along with her brother and sister, believed repentance would be hypocritical. So the decision to leave, devastating as it was, was a simple one.

"There's no sin to repent for," he said. "And she's not going to turn her back on her daughter."

Kenneth Copeland #fundie #mammon #racist msn.com

A wealthy televangelist explains his fleet of private jets: ‘It’s a biblical thing’

In the waning days of 2015, renowned televangelist Kenneth Copeland laid out exactly why he needs a luxury private jet to do his job: you can’t “talk to God” while riding commercial.

Criticized at the time for his use of extravagant planes, Copeland argued travel for his work would be difficult, nay, impossible without them. The Texas-based preacher invoked his mentor, prosperity gospel preacher Oral Roberts, who Copeland said faced unsolicited requests for prayer when he flew on public airliners, “agitating his spirit.”

“You can’t manage that today, in this dope-filled world, get in a long tube with a bunch of demons,” Copeland told fellow televangelist Jesse Duplantis, who’s faced similar backlash for asking his followers to bankroll a $54 million jet. “And it’s deadly.”

Copeland’s defense, viewed by millions and widely mocked at the time, did little to help his case. Many figured the “demons” he spoke of were the same people he was asking for donations. The preacher was asked to clarify his remarks last month by “Inside Edition” reporter Lisa Guerrero, and the exchange has recently gone viral, reigniting conversations about televangelists and the tax-exempt status of churches.

Captured on video confronting Copeland as he got into a car, Guerrero pressed him repeatedly on his 2015 comments, at one point asking: “Do you really believe that humans are demons?”

“No I do not, and don’t you ever say I did,” Copeland responded, visibly perturbed. He added, “It’s a biblical thing, it’s a spiritual thing, it doesn’t have anything to do with people. People? I love people. Jesus loves people. But people get pushed in alcohol. Do you think that’s a good place for a preacher to be and prepare to preach?”

The questioning centered around Copeland’s Gulfstream V jet, which he announced he’d purchased from Tyler Perry in Jan. 2018. Declining to state how much he spent on the aircraft, which is one of three in his possession, Copeland said Perry made the plane “so cheap for me I couldn’t help but buy it.” He again asserted the plane was necessary for his work, which has sent him to nearly every continent and allowed him to spread his message to thousands of people.

“If I flew commercial, I’d have to stop 65 percent of what I’m doing, that’s the main reason,” he said.

Copeland said he was a “very wealthy man” and acknowledged using the private jets to travel to his vacation homes. Guerrero asked how he would respond to those who say preachers shouldn’t live so luxuriously.

“They’re wrong,” he replied “It’s a misunderstanding of the bible that … if you go into the old covenant, do you think the Jewish people believe you should be broke?”

Guerrero follows up: “Are you saying that Jewish people appreciate money more?”

“They believe in wealth,” Copeland said.

“Some people would find that offensive,” Guerrero responds.

“Wait a minute now, I’m not talking about some people,” Copeland explains, before mentioning the Abrahamic Blessing. “I’m talking about the bible.”

The Urantia Book #ufo #crackpot urantia-association.org

<More old-school proto-UFO religious gobbledygook>
Foreword
(1.1) 0:0.1 IN THE MINDS of the mortals of Urantia — that being the name of your world — there exists great confusion respecting the meaning of such terms as God, divinity, and deity. Human beings are still more confused and uncertain about the relationships of the divine personalities designated by these numerous appellations. Because of this conceptual poverty associated with so much ideational confusion, I have been directed to formulate this introductory statement in explanation of the meanings which should be attached to certain word symbols as they may be hereinafter used in those papers which the Orvonton corps of truth revealers have been authorized to translate into the English language of Urantia.
1.2) 0:0.2 It is exceedingly difficult to present enlarged concepts and advanced truth, in our endeavor to expand cosmic consciousness and enhance spiritual perception, when we are restricted to the use of a circumscribed language of the realm. But our mandate admonishes us to make every effort to convey our meanings by using the word symbols of the English tongue. We have been instructed to introduce new terms only when the concept to be portrayed finds no terminology in English which can be employed to convey such a new concept partially or even with more or less distortion of meaning.
(1.3) 0:0.3 In the hope of facilitating comprehension and of preventing confusion on the part of every mortal who may peruse these papers, we deem it wise to present in this initial statement an outline of the meanings to be attached to numerous English words which are to be employed in designation of Deity and certain associated concepts of the things, meanings, and values of universal reality.
(1.4) 0:0.4 But in order to formulate this Foreword of definitions and limitations of terminology, it is necessary to anticipate the usage of these terms in the subsequent presentations. This Foreword is not, therefore, a finished statement within itself; it is only a definitive guide designed to assist those who shall read the accompanying papers dealing with Deity and the universe of universes which have been formulated by an Orvonton commission sent to Urantia for this purpose.
(1.5) 0:0.5 Your world, Urantia, is one of many similar inhabited planets which comprise the local universe of Nebadon. This universe, together with similar creations, makes up the superuniverse of Orvonton, from whose capital, Uversa, our commission hails. Orvonton is one of the seven evolutionary superuniverses of time and space which circle the never-beginning, never-ending creation of divine perfection — the central universe of Havona. At the heart of this eternal and central universe is the stationary Isle of Paradise, the geographic center of infinity and the dwelling place of the eternal God.
(1.6) 0:0.6 The seven evolving superuniverses in association with the central and divine universe, we commonly refer to as the grand universe; these are the now organized and inhabited creations. They are all a part of the master universe, which also embraces the uninhabited but mobilizing universes of outer space.

Raymond Ibrahim #wingnut americanthinker.com

How 'Triggerism' Replaced Factualism on Islam

One upon a time, whenever two or more parties disagreed, the logical thing for them to do was resort to argumentation. It was not enough to say, "I'm right and you're wrong" (unless they were children). The winner of the debate was the one who could better substantiate his position — that is, the one whose position better accorded with reality.

Today, the one side that is wrong about virtually everything, the liberal left, has forgone argumentation, and even sophistry, precisely because it cannot contend with those armed with facts. It has, instead, relied on conditioning its adherents to react to so-called "trigger" words and concepts — never mind if those words and concepts accord with reality or not.

This was impressed upon me during the Council on American-Islamic Relations' (CAIR) and Linda Sarsour's, and their leftist dupes', failed attempts to cancel my recent talk at the U.S. Army War College. In their protests, they didn't quote me saying something and then, even in a few words, intimating how it was wrong; the ideas I conveyed were wrong per se. For example, the following is a lengthy excerpt from CAIR's last press release against me. Note how it doesn't bother — even with the usual two-bit sophistry — to prove how my positions are wrong. Just having them is the proof:

When Ibrahim was asked, "Is there any chance of an accommodation between Islam and Western societies or this is just wishful thinking?," he replied, "Can water and oil mix?"

He also stated: "[Islam] is entirely built on the purported teachings of a seventh century Arab — who for all accounts acted like a seventh century Arab, meaning tribal and uncivilized. Obviously, if this man was a false prophet — a liar — which is the default, non-Muslim position, then it should be unsurprising that the entire worldview his followers follow, which is tribal and uncivilized, is creating a constant clash with other civilizations."

Also: "[T]he hate for Christians and other non-Muslims, including secularists/atheists in the West, did not begin with ISIS, al-Qaeda, Ansar al-Sharia, Boko Haram, or Al Shabaab. It began with Muhammad and his companions, 1,400 years ago."

While I'm under no illusions that such quotes instantly "trigger" the typical leftist automaton, they also just so happen to be demonstrably true.

How is the assertion that Islamic and Western culture mix as well as water and oil open to debate? On the one hand, you have a civilization that believes in religious freedom and plurality, sex equality, and rational laws; on the other hand, you have a civilization that believes in sharia, persecutes apostates and non-Muslims in general, and treats women as chattel. One can give countless more examples; either way, the point stands — water and oil.

As for the idea that the persecution of Christians is not limited to "terrorists," but rather is normative in Islam, copious documentation validating this claim can be found in my 2013 book, Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christians, or take a look at my monthly "Muslim Persecution of Christians" reports — nearly 100 now, stretching back to 2011 — where the persecutors, who more often than not are "regular" Muslims and Muslim governments (not a few of which are America's "friends and allies"), often justify their actions by citing their prophet, the Koran, etc.

As for my statement that "[Islam] is entirely built on the purported teachings of a seventh-century Arab — who for all accounts acted like a seventh-century Arab, meaning tribal and uncivilized," the only sort of person who can have problems with this is someone who doesn't believe that the words civilized and its converse, uncivilized, have any meaning (that is, a postmodern relativistic-thinking leftist). The fact is, and by any stretch of the imagination, seventh-century Arabia was without question uncivilized. Here is how philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) — a Muslim from North Africa whose ancestry traces to Arabia — described the Arabs of his time (let alone those from Muhammad's more primitive era eight centuries earlier): they are "the most savage human beings that exist. Compared with sedentary people they are on a level with wild, untamable animals and dumb beasts of prey. Such people are the Arabs."

As for my trigger-point par excellence, that "if this man [Muhammad] was a false prophet — a liar — which is the default, non-Muslim position, then it should be unsurprising that the entire worldview his followers follow, which is tribal and uncivilized, is creating a constant clash with other civilizations," consider: if you reject Muhammad's claims that he was God's prophet — which all non-Muslims explicitly or implicitly do — then what was he? Either a liar or a lunatic (the trilemma argument regarding Christ popularized by C.S. Lewis is equally applicable to Muhammad). Accordingly, are you surprised that a man who was either a liar or a lunatic ended up creating a creed, based on the mores of his extremely uncivilized society, that is in conflict with the modern world — that is like water mixed with oil? (For a much more comprehensive and refined discussion of this argument, see this 2009 article of mine.)

CAIR is not alone in relying on "trigger" words and concepts without actual rebuttal. Back in June 2019, Chris Rodda of the Daily Kos gloated in his (prematurely titled) "Army War College Pulls Plug on Islamophobic Speaker" that I "proved CAIR's and the other protesters' point" by again reiterating that "history makes abundantly clear that Islamic terrorism and 'extremism' are intrinsic to Islam, and have been from its first contact with Western civilization in the seventh century[.]"

Once again, that's it. Not even a few words to show how history does not make "abundantly clear that Islamic terrorism and 'extremism' are intrinsic to Islam, and have been from its first contact with Western civilization in the seventh century." Just saying that is all the proof needed that I'm wrong (at least for the soft minds that take CAIR, Linda Sarsour, and the Daily Kos seriously).

The lesson is clear. The lying liberal left has gone from dissembling over its positions — the truth can be suppressed only for so long in a (currently) free society — to relying almost exclusively on emotionalism and trigger words, because that's all their bankrupt ideology has to stand on.

Rev90 #racist niggermania.net

This coontact happened about a month ago. I work as a software developer at a fairly small company (some 30 employees, 5 of them software developers and the rest are either technicians or administrators / sales stuff). Now, we are proud german company with some 30 years of history. We never ever hired a coon, but even in germany the urgency to hire coons is rising - what I mean by this is that the local government demands you to give the qualified sub-sarah immigrants a chance to get a workplace.

The particular coon I am talking of had a suspicious history in its application: It worked for some 4 years in cameroon as a software developer and then a few years in china for some company as a web developer. His skillset, if you can call it that, didn't really have any of the technologies or (programming) languages we needed, but a chance had to be given anyway. The first day for this coon came and my department and I hoped that this was a magical nigger. But it seemed like it didn't even understand the very basics. First off with body hygiene - but its a nigger, and niggers smell, nothing one could do, right? Well, next it went on with logging in: We work on servers, so you have to enter a server name, user name and a password. It fucked this step up and entered its coonword ("Waganda4Life") as server name. Well, after helping it logging in it got its first assignment, kind of a test to see what it can do.

It managed to completely destroy the testing Database, set up some 4 or 5 software projects all named "waganda" and some other words, it was just infuriating. It couldn't write the most simple codes or algorithms, always fucked stuff up, it even tried to use its personal laptop until it again realized it was at an office and had to use our hardware (which i later thoroughly disinfected). On its second day, at around 13:00 o' clock it wanted to pack its stuff and go home to work from its "home office", since it heard someone of us humans do that - but needless to say, that permit didn't apply to this shitstain.

It managed to break headphones which we gave to him (which he replaced with its own ghetto-style headphones, all taped together with duct tape), it always said that it understood the assignments and knew what it did and so on. It quit its old job as a janitor at a local super market because it couldn't talk with the people there about IT and such, which aperantely were its passion and all it loved doing. This coon was infuriating me so much, you couldn't even talk with it, it stunk together our building, it never succeeded in doing anything, it was just one of those "sheet, i beez a software developer n sheet" type of coons. This coon was sent home after just a week and a half - costing us enough time and nerves. This resulted in a tiny chimpout, where it slapped its paws together above its head and walked up and down the corridors. Me and my colleagues worked hard to make this coon getting fired again.

The best thing? One week ago we had to do another apefirmative hire: This time a technician. It didn't even know what a firewall is. Thankfully I don't have anything to do with it since I dont do things that technicians do, like installing servers and configuring networks - but I guess it wont stay long either.

The You Even Freak Out Jesus Award

Chicken5516 #fundie rr-bb.com

Hubby and I both bawl all day long!!!

Hubby says that while he is working (he owns his own paint contracting company), and starts to think about Jesus and His return and the tears start to flow. Or while He is saying the Lord's Prayer, he breaks out in tears. He says he sobs when thinking about Jesus' return and seeing Him face to face. He says also when he remembers certain passages, like John 14:6, "Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

I too have been breaking down in tears and literally sobbing. My heart is overwhelmed and it is overflowing with the love that Jesus has for me. I can barely listen to a song that praises Jesus without bawling. Reading the Bible yesterday had me in tears. Reading some of the threads on this board make me break down.

But I think it is because the Holy Spirit is quickening our hearts. He is talking to us, now - more than ever and is calling us home. He is warning us and preparing us. Jesus IS coming. I think the entire Bride has heard His voice. He is giving us the urgency of the imminent return of Jesus for His Bride, and how important it is that we witness to as many as we can.

These tears are tears of joy IMHO. We long to be with our Father, and our Father has given us this yearning. I can only imagine that God is looking around the place that Jesus is/has prepared for us and is making sure everything is perfect. God is ready to tell His Son to, "Go get your Bride"!!!!

It won't be long now. Shout it from the rooftops!! Jesus is coming soon. He is Lord and Master and is getting ready to show Himself like never before!!!

Come Lord Jesus!!!

Various Islamophobes #conspiracy rawstory.com

A group of tea partiers and other conservatives riled up by Facebook conspiracy theories gathered last week at a North Carolina seafood restaurant to discuss their plans to violently oppose Sharia law.

Nearly two dozen participants, some of whom claimed membership in right-wing militia groups, expressed fears that the Muslim minority have already imposed their religious beliefs on other Americans, reported Triad City Beat.

Presenter Tom Jones sketched out a conspiracy theory involving the Muslim Brotherhood and the “progressive left” to build mosques and Islamic schools, which he warned will then be used to undermine democratic and Christian institutions.

“The Muslim Brotherhood is behind all that terrorism and violent acts, but they’re also here operating in America in a very stealthy mode,” Jones said, according to the newspaper. “They’ve infiltrated the judiciary. They have judges that are elected to the bench. These judges are expected to make rulings from the bench here in America according to Sharia law even though it’s not a Sharia court. If you’ve got a Muslim judge he’s required to try you under Sharia law. These people are in high positions of influence often behind the scenes in government, academia, medicine, the media.”

Conservative media frequently warn about Sharia law, which loosely describes both a personal moral code and the general religious law used in majority Muslim nations, and some states — including North Carolina — have moved to ban its influence on courts.

“Do you have any recommendations as to how we could stop this?” said Frank del Valle, of Winston-Salem. “Because my only recommendation is to start killing the hell out them.”

Del Valle, whose Facebook page shows he’s a Latin musician and former federal employee, said he’d watched his native Cuba fall to the communists and wasn’t willing to see the same thing happen in the U.S.

“The Muslims are doing the exact same thing, so I am very aware of that,” del Valle said. “I have been talking about that for a long time.”

Another participant, a former field director for the Koch-backed Americans For Prosperity and an activist with Faith and Freedom Coalition, told the gathering that one of the Women’s March organizers, Linda Sarsour, wanted to impose her Islamic beliefs on the U.S.

“All those women who showed up in D.C. who appear to be mainstream and supported her, raved about how she’s so great don’t realize that she’s the same one who agrees with Sharia law and will be person who stands beside them and also the same person who slices their neck,” said Robert Watkins, the conservative activist.

Jones, the presenter, warned that Muslim Brotherhood had been operating “training centers” in the U.S. since the early 1980s — which motivated a Tea Party activist from Tennessee to plot a violent attack on a New York village identified by conservative media as a terrorist training camp.

That conservative activist, 65-year-old Robert Doggart, was convicted last week on several federal charges in connection with that violent plot.

The crowd gathered at Captain Tom’s Seafood, in Kernersville, N.C., fretted about the growing number of mosques and foreign-looking doctors they’ve seen in recent years, and Jones urged them to start making preparations for what he saw as an inevitable conflict.

“I don’t know how you say ‘deep doo-doo’ in Arabic, but we’re in it,” Jones said. “We’re in deep doo-doo, ya’ll. This is serious stuff. This is not games. These people do not play. If I put a gun to your head and ask you what you believe, you may not be able to tell, but I guarantee you these people can tell you what they believe.”

Del Valle, who the newspaper pointed out was the only attendee to specifically endorse violence, took the bait.

“I’ll shoot them before they can ask me,” he said.

Nina Beety #conspiracy smartmeterharm.org

Officials may say it was a bad flu with strange features that hit Sacramento residents, and that vaccines could not prevent it. They may even blame foreign actors. But the real and very simple explanation will be that Verizon’s 5G roll-out in California’s capitol has severe public health repercussions, just as predicted by international scientists and physicians. These reactions to 5th generation pulsed microwave radiation frequencies will also be experienced in Los Angeles, Houston, and Indianapolis. They are all test subjects in the first large-scale 5G experiments on U.S. populations without full disclosure or express consent.

Pogo said, “We have met the enemy…” This 5G experiment is being conducted by the FCC, the wireless industry and the city of Sacramento, despite California Department of Public Health and the National Institutes of Health research showing present exposures are fraught with risk. State legislators exempted fire stations from 4G/5G “small cell” infrastructure last year in Senate Bill 649 due to the health effects, and granted ADA accommodation at hearings for those disabled by electromagnetic sensitivities. City officials are ignoring the huge public costs from this dense roll-out, despite ample evidence.

All living beings are electromagnetic beings, with delicate EMF signals regulating bodily systems. International independent research and reports predict new or worsened health problems likely for the public, their pets, animals, wildlife, and insects, including:

abnormal heart rhythms, cardiac arrest, fainting, strokes, cancers and tumors, seizures, headaches and migraines, nausea and vomiting, nosebleeds and ear bleeding, insomnia and sleep abnormalities, rashes, burns, or other skin reactions, eye problems, dizziness, flu-like symptoms, ear, eye, or heart pain, edema, hearing ringing or buzzing, memory and concentration problems, high blood pressure, difficulty regulating blood sugar, spontaneous abortions, higher than normal rates of birth defects, mental health problems including depression, anxiety, agitation, and suicidal thoughts, muscle weakness and loss of energy (due to mitochondrial dysfunction), paralysis, joint pain, urinary urgency, and electromagnetic sensitivity (intolerance to microwave or EMF emissions — recognized by the U.S. Access Board in 2002).

These reactions are correlated to microwave radiation exposure — cell towers, Wi-Fi, wireless Smart Meters, and wireless devices. The NIH National Toxicology Program research released and peer-reviewed this year further corroborates that this radiation is a carcinogen.

Invisible reactions found by researchers include: breaches in the blood-brain barrier, DNA damage, sperm damage, red blood cell clumping, oxidative stress, free radical production, and interference with voltage-gated calcium channels which are fundamental to health.

CH #fundie heartiste.wordpress.com

I’ve been receiving an increasing frequency of emails from gaystream media whores soliciting this blog’s lordship for a roll in the clickbait hay. All of them, to date, have requested absolute privacy (the irony), so I won’t divulge details on threat of (((legal))) recriminations, but I can offer a general impression of what they’re asking. For instance, one media whore speaking on behalf of a well-known whoresite is part of a team putting together a piece of agitprop art on the manosphere and wanted CH’s scintillating contribution to the effort.

I’ve wondered for a few months how best to respond to these inquiries. So far, the CH policy has been to ignore and plow. No j/k, it’s been to ignore. Period. I never respond, partly because, what’s the use? I won’t persuade a shriek of shitlibs to accept in their hearts the Rude Word of the Chateau, and I certainly can’t expect to be treated fairly by these toads. More practically, I am very careful to guard my shadowy dimensions, and there is a risk, however muted through multiple proxies and TOR nodes, that a reply by me would be scoured for identifying info by a black ops team at Fusion GPS (stands for Grabbing Pussy Systems).

[Your name is James Weidmann, you're a former DC-area FINRA employee, your pic is easily findable by anyone with google and rudimentary knowledge of how you've been had almost a decade ago]

But the inquiries are getting more insistent and coming from bigger and bigger names. So I’m reconsidering my standard policy of ignoring them; perhaps for an upgrade to a “lol suck a dik” response? I have toyed with the idea of a conditional reply. That is, I set the ground rules and they swear by them in writing before I offer any penetrating insights of my tumescent wisdom.

For instance, we all know leftoid gutter filth can’t help litter their reporting of deplorable subjects with smear terms and baseless slander. One can’t hold a gun to reporters’ heads (yet) to demand honest and accurate journalism, but one can bind them to abide at least a rudimentary schedule of fair play. I believe two of the Original Shitposters, weev and Anglin, have a lot to say about this tactic when dealing with the globohomogenized media and their skypistry.

For instance, I would demand any reporter refrain from using the term “White supremacy” in any article about Chateau Heartiste, and if needed for context to substitute the term “White competency”. Similarly, they would be required by the CH Vajeena Convention rule 69, subsection 14.88, to replace the word “racist” with “totally rad race realist”. And “misogynist” would become “man who doesn’t bow and scrape before delusional feminist cunts”.

Any violations of the terms of agreement would result in an immediate public shaming and an army of weaponized autistes leaving pig entrails on the reporter’s super zip front door.

And, to punctuate my seriousness of intent, neither would the reporter be permitted to insert a disclaimer that contained the words “white supremacy”, “white supremacist”, “racist”, “misogynist” or other favored term of othering the leftoid equalism cuntsortium employs to maintain their icy grip on their quack Narrative.

I throw my quandary to the studio audience. What do you think is the best way forward to deal with slithery solicitations from Snakes and Merchants of Fake?

Jay Myers Documentaries #conspiracy #quack youtube.com

Adrenochrome, a substance extracted from a living human body. But could such a drug be real? According to numerous, independent researchers, not only is it real, but many of the Illuminati elite are addicted to it, and will stop at nothing to satisfy their depraved demand. Join me, as we dive down the dark rabbit hole of adrenochrome.

Long before popular culture portrayed vampires as sexy heroes, stories of a monstrous nobility that craved human blood were very much real. Elizabeth Bathry, the infamous "blood countess", was a Hungarian noblewoman who systematically murdered numerous young servant girls, not only bathing in, but consuming their blood. Elizabeth would pierce the flesh of the victim, hoist her up to the rafters, and swallow the blood as it ran down.

Could their really be a sect, among society, that is actually addicted to blood? And, if so, why?

Deeper research shows that the answer might lie with a certain hormone that floods our bodies during moments of intense fear or excitement: Adrenalin.

@Jeff Wise

So Adrenalin is a substance that your body releases into your bloodstream when you're in a potentially dangerous situation.

It's responsible for the fight-or-flight response in mammals, heightening senses and increasing strength and energy.

@Jeff Wise

In some ways, the fear response gives us superhuman powers [transcriber note: the original video played the snippet where he said "superhuman powers" twice].

@Jeff Wise

You find that you're able to really concentrate. You're able to use muscle strength in ways that are otherwise impossible.

@Jeff Wise

Basically, these chemicals that cascade into our bloodstreams and flood into our brains, they change the way we think and they change the way our bodies function. We don't feel pain.

In the right conditions, it can be exhilerating and downright addicting [transcriber note: the video shows stock footage of a roller coaster], thus the term, "Adrenalin junkies."

@Jeff Wise

When we do a parachute jump, we're experiencing the same chemicals in our brain that a meth user experiences in their brain. So, you absolutely can become addicted to that sensation.

Whether human or animal, blood sacrifice has long been a part of the rituals of many cultures, and it was discovered that after consuming the fresh, Adrenalin-saturated blood of a terrified victim, participants would experience a type of high off of the Adrenalin, which could include increased senses, hallucinations, and a sense of euphoria. Sometimes, assigning a supernatural causality to the effects.

Eventually, the precise timing was worked out, so that the victim was killed at the precise moment when the maximum amount of Adrenalin had been pumped into the body. This knowledge was passed down through secret societies, mystery schools, and intergenerational satanic cults.

@Linda Wiegand

When they torture the children, it causes a physical reaction of the endomorphines in your body, to increase because of the terror and the pain. So when the Satanists drink the blood, they actually get a chemical reaction — like a drug high from the blood of the tortured victim.

@David Icke

These entities are feeding off human energy, and one of the things they do is, when they're sacrificing somebody, the people with invisible light, the Satanists and the bloodlines, they'll drink the blood because when the terror reaches a certain point in the ritual, a certain Adrenalin goes into the blood which gives these people a high. I mean, sick is not the word. But on another level — an energetic level — the entities are feeding off the energy coming off of terror and fear.

Most satanic sacrifices involve some consumption of the blood, possibly even body parts. More disturbingly, some of these groups make a point of preferring the blood of children, believing it to be more potent.

Another reason the elite drink children's blood is for its known rejuvenating effects.

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.

Laurie Ditto #fundie destinyimage.com

In a vision, Jesus took me to Hell. It was like a terrible, life-changing accident. You know how when an accident happens, you keep replaying over in your mind what you could have done differently? I have replayed August 28th over and over at least 1,000 times, if not more. “Oh God, what did I do wrong? Why did this happen to me?”

Because I have looked at this “accident” so much, I know many little details that have been etched into my memory. Many of them are unimportant, but I have memorized them nonetheless. I have looked for every little decision or detail that resulted in the worst day of my entire life—and possibly the most life-giving day for myself.

It is important to note that what I share here all happened instantly. It wasn’t an orderly progression, but I’ve tried to lay it out in an orderly fashion here.

How it Began
I worked for the evangelism department at the International House of Prayer, now called the Kansas City Evangelists’ Fellowship (KCEF). That morning we were in our weekly two-hour evangelism meeting.

As the meeting began with worship, I was standing at the back of the room. Before I can enter into worship in a heart-connect way, let alone in spirit and truth (see John 4:24), I have to tell my body, You will worship God. So that day I raised my hands to God and I sung loudly to Him. I engaged my mind to worship Jesus by contemplating the beauty of His love and the magnificence of His dying on the Cross for me. I let my emotions worship Him, which allows my heart to open to Him.

The worship leader was helping us pray for our lost family members, friends, neighbors, and co-workers. To really get a sustained heart for lost people, I have found I have to make it personal. I have to truly think about what it would be like for my lost family members to not make it to Heaven. When we think about someone we love not being in Heaven, it creates a real sadness and if we think about it long enough, it creates a desperation. These thoughts allow us to identify with a real emotion for the people we love. Because it’s such a negative emotion to experience, most people don’t go there. Evangelists are willing to expose their hearts to let God’s truth and urgency shape us. We don’t like the down emotion either, but by allowing it we become more tenderized to the eternal truth for lost souls. Then, sharing about Jesus becomes essential and very personal.

As we sang an evangelistic song, I felt the presence of holiness come into the room. The song gripped me and just seemed to add to the excitement I already felt. The music was captivating and took me to what I will call a worship place. The feeling in the room was the same as other times that I had been invited to come away with the Lord to visit Heaven. I knew I was being invited to go in the spirit. The holiness had come for me. I said, “Yes."

Transported to Hell
Then, all of a sudden, the front of the room opened up. I instantly opened my eyes and saw the transformation as it happened. The Hell realm unlocked and I heard massive gates creak open and I felt extreme heat enter the room. I looked with my eyes wide open and I saw Hell through the gates. I saw it! I was shocked that it was right there. Wasn’t it supposed to be in the center of the earth or below us? To say I panicked is an understatement!

Worship and prayer continued around me. The people were oblivious that Hell was at the front of the room. I watched those ominous gates open as I watched the people worshiping. The two places, the meeting room and Hell were together.

I frantically looked to see who might help me. The others didn’t see the gates, hear that sound, or feel the heat. Instinctively, I started screaming. I felt the sound of fear coming from my own body. I knew that my spirit was being demanded to submit. As I screamed, my spirit was also making a sound that deeply hurt my heart and brain while it also panicked every blood cell in my body.

Something came flying past the gates of Hell. It was coming for me. It was like an arm without fingers that grabbed me and sucked me into Hell. The arm was very powerful. It was attached to me like a suction cup in the area of my chest and began dragging me further into Hell. As quickly as it shot out from Hell, it just as quickly moved back. I tried to pull back and break the hold it had on me but it was too powerful.

Before I could blink, I knew this—it was too late. The gates slammed shut with a terrible sound of finality. I knew there was no man on this side or that who could ever open those gates. Only Jesus could because He owns Hell.

Inside the Gates
I passed through gates that trapped the darkness inside. The first thing I knew when I got there: I was in Hell. The realization that I was in Hell was unquestionably shocking and beyond hurtful! I don’t know how to explain just how panicked I was, although you may understand a bit if you’ve ever been lost.

It was like that but more dire. I was like a child and I had no plan. I panicked like no other panic I have ever experienced in my entire life. In fact, I knew that if I could add up every panic I have ever felt, it didn’t come close to what I was experiencing.

Someone said to me, “Laurie, you are in Hell!”

“Oh my God!” I answered.

I knew many things all at once. As I break them down to explain each one individually, it gives the false appearance that it was a slow progressive onslaught. But everything was immediate. For the sake of explanation, I knew three things first—I was in Hell, eternally, for unforgiveness.

Once the understanding of the judgment arrived in my heart there were four distinct pains:

Water—Immediately, all the water left my body, creating a desperate, painful need.
Bone marrow—In an instant my bones turned black.
Breath—The first breath allowed fire to touch everything in me and be carried throughout my body.
Agreement—Agreeing with the judgement that Hell is where I belonged removed my humanity.
Before that day, I had not studied much about Hell. I believed it was real because I believe the whole Bible is true, but I didn’t think that anybody like me would ever go there. I also knew about the Bible’s stance on unforgiveness. Although I knew, it was just easier to hold on to unforgiveness. I mean, with time, unforgiveness had become part of me. I would never have thought unforgiveness could take a person to Hell. My view was swiftly changed.

A Relational Problem
In Hell, I knew and understood the Bible perfectly. Every word of God that I had ever read was now completely clear. And I knew exactly how much I had disobeyed in comparison to my biblical understanding. I was keenly aware of everything about myself and my body. Stuff like my blood moving, my eyes seeing, and how all parts of my body work. I have never been in such awe of the creation of a human body. Everything I learned in eighth grade science I recalled perfectly. But even more, a supernatural knowledge filled in the blanks that I did not already know.

My knowledge about Hell, from the Scriptures, was also at the front of my awareness. I knew that everything I had read was true. All heartbreakingly true. I knew all of the scriptures on Hell, how much information was provided to me in the Bible about it, and how those scriptures fit with the rest of the Bible. I was fully awakened to the terrible reality of this place. The panic of knowing that I was in Hell grew. I was not a visitor.

I understood that Hell is a relational issue, not a problem to solve like a math question. A person cannot get out of Hell if they acquire the right answer. Hell was created because of a relational issue. One of the most important things I knew is that Hell wasn’t created because of human sin and we don’t go to Hell because of one particular sin. We all have sinned (see Rom. 3:23). This isn’t just a sin issue. It is a relational issue. Because of the Devil and his disobedience, disrespect, and disregard of God, Hell was created.

We think someone goes to Hell because they sinned, but really it is about disobeying and disrespecting God. The Bible says, “Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and you perish in the way” (Ps. 2:12). That kiss is about love, affection, and obedience. We think that because people mess up, God sends them to Hell. But that is not true. How can we think God is bad? People go to Hell because they refuse to be in a relationship with God. Hell is about a refusal to love God and have a relationship with Him.

Although God literally forgave me everything, I chose to refuse to forgive certain ones. I was like the unmerciful servant in one of Jesus’ parables (see Matt. 18:21-35). When the servant refused to forgive the debt and stood before the king again, he was called wicked. It wasn’t because he simply made a mistake; it was because he wouldn’t enter into the relationship of mercy and grace and obedience to the King. It wasn’t only about what a person does; it is all about who they are in their heart.

Fading Light #racist stormfront.org

Unequal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

kirtland r.m. #conspiracy ldsfreedomforum.com

Last American President, some new information from someone who knows a boatload on last days events part 2

Quote

Postby kirtland r.m. » Sat Dec 03, 2016 7:09 pm
This post is from the same source as part 1(viewtopic.php?f=2&t=42717).
How soon until the Lord's return (of course we don't know many things that the Lord knows about this, but He has given us a framework of understanding which helps us move forward in faith).
Moses 1: 14 - The heavens are for "signs" for the Jews (Moses).


June 29, 2015 - The Star of Bethlehem returned after 2,000 years.

August 21, 2017 - Total Solar Eclipse

Tetrad (4 blood moons on 4 Jewish Holidays) 2015

Jubilee and Super Jubilee - 2015 (Super Jubilees in the past: birth of Christ, birth of Israel, Solomon's temple, and exodus from Egypt)

___________________________

Daniel 9:24-26


1. Seventy "sevens" - 70 sabbatical cycles – 70 x 7 = 490 years

The first fulfillment pointed to the coming of the Messiah. The 70 sabbaticals predicted Christ’s first coming.

The 70 sabbaticals began in 457 BC and ended 490 years later in 34 AD. Jesus died and was resurrected in 31 AD in the middle of the 70th sabbatical cycle. The first coming of Christ occurred at the exact time predicted in Daniel's prophecy.


2. Seventy "sevens" - 70 Jubilee cycles – 70 x 7 x 7 +1 = 3,431 years


The 70 Jubilees predict Christ’s second coming.


The 70 Jubilees began in 1416 BC when God’s children entered Canaan. The 70 Jubilees will end 3,431 years later in 2016 AD.

__________________________

Matthew 24:32-34 - Christ tells you what to look for! The fig tree is Israel, and they were gathered in 1948 (1 generation is 70 years = 2018)


32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.


___________________________


Then there is Luke 21:11 (a hint as to the order of things, notice persecution of the church will come first)


11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.

12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name’s sake.

Now, think about Planet X (Nibiru) coming approximately March 2017. It is supposed to cause the earth to shake (earthquakes and tsunami's everywhere).

____________________________

Revelation 18:10, 17, 18


10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

11 And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn over her; for no man buyeth their merchandise any more:

The financial collapse will happen suddenly and quickly. We are 20 trillion dollars in debt! We should have collapsed by now. We certainly do not have 4 more years.


___________________________


The book of Ezra in the Apocrypha (second chapter) talks of a mighty nation that is thrown down by assassinating the incoming president and 3 others in succession to the office. We know from Bishop Koyle's dreams that a Republican president is assassinated. We know from Spencer that Obama is the last full-term president before the introduction to the NWO. The administration/party that just lost is not going down without a fight. They are delirious right now! They will probably stop Trump and administration from taking office because it will allow for the current administration to step in constitutionally.


We also know from Chuck Youngbrandt, Linda Newkirk, and Pres. GA Smith that there will be a nuke on Christmas Day after the election. We know from Chuck Youngbrandt that there is a second set of nukes a year later with an invasion. That is what Spencer saw in VOG, that followed a massive Utah quake.@coxiia, Avraham (bestie with Spencer) disclosed this vision to a group he was presenting at.


__________________________


No one knows for sure. We only have bits and pieces, but we can know for a surety that we are being alerted and asked to prepare at whatever capacity that we have by promptings and confirmations through the Holy Ghosts. We are not to know exact dates, times, years, but eventually we can guess.


I take solace in the scripture: Joel 2:32 (We know 28 by heart, but check out 32: "An it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered: for in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the Lord hath said, AND IN THE REMNANT who the Lord shall call.

There are more confirming witnesses to this information, but this is enough for now. Others have been posted right here on this forum. When the time is right, our leaders will speak directly.

Roosh #fundie rooshv.com

The left has decided that they no longer want to live among people who share different views than them. They are plugging their fingers in their ears while yelling racist, fascist, Nazi, and Hitler. They are refusing to yield, compromise, debate, or even accept that their political positions are starting to lose in democratic elections despite suspected cheating that aids them. This has put us squarely in the middle of a cold civil war where both sides of the political spectrum are warming to the idea of killing each other.

A confirmation of the left’s defeat is apparent when you see how their maniacal behavior converts more people, especially moderates, against them. The biggest recruiting tool against the left has become the left. Every time they protest, riot, screech against white people, or show their vulgarity, the remaining mentally sane of America realize that the left’s platform has become so out-of-touch that it no longer represents the basic ideals of the country. The non-cucked right needs to merely show up after temper tantrums and say “Look how crazy they are” for the converts to come pouring in.

The left is out of options

Many people are wondering why the left has become a recruiting agent for the right by promoting or engaging in violence. First, they simply don’t know what else to do. When a parent tells a child that he can’t eat candy for every meal, and the child doesn’t have a logical argument about the merits of eating that candy, what does he do? He cries, stomps his feet, threatens to run away, throws out insults like “meanie” and “jerk,” and may even hit his parent to get his way. Donald Trump and his supporters are the parents who won’t yield to an emotional child.

The second reason why the left is hurting their cause with violence is because its billionaire controllers, particularly George Soros, want to divide America to such an irreparable extent that a hot Civil War is forced, giving them an opportunity to increase their power. Soros wants to create so much hate, animosity, and chaos that any resulting conflict has a chance of him holding absolute power, compared to the current situation where he has “only” a moderate amount. In other words, he rather take the chance of war to solidify his grip further.

The leftists that Soros sponsors in the Woman’s Marches and the antifa outbursts may also want a Civil War, but a quick look at their physiognomy shows they would struggle to even go one day without electricity, and that they possess the same psychological directive as the child who is angry that he can’t have candy. Soros is the creepy old neighbor who promises them the candy they crave because he wants to build their trust and get them alone. The child, naive about the extreme danger that lurks behind the likes of Soros, decides to follow him into a van parked in the alley to spite its own parents and their righteous authority.

The reason the right has been reluctant to respond with violence is because they’re winning. Violence comes not from a position of strength, but desperation, when every other option has been extinguished, and should serve as a signal to you of what the real score between the left and right really is. Without violence, the left currently has a 100% chance of losing, continuously and humiliatingly, for at least the next eight years. All the gains that took them decades to achieve will be lost if we ravage and rape their power structures.

With a hot civil war, the left has a 25% chance to win, a bet they are willing to take even though there is a high chance they will be among the first to die in the conflict. A logical person would ask why they would push for a conflict that is sure to destroy the infrastructure of the urban centers they live in, and one where food, water, and other basic necessities would be lacking. The answer comes upon realizing that a child does not realize that eating candy every day will make him sick. The child must therefore be commanded for its own good, because it does not have the capability to take care of itself or understand the consequences of its actions.

We all lose in a hot war

Before the warrior in you gets excited at the prospect of crushing the left in a hot war and killing antifa members with high-powered weapons as they wield sharpened mop handles at you, understand that any war in the United States would quickly become a proxy war involving all major military powers, particularly China and Russia, who would rush to spend billions of dollars to have ultimate control of the country. It would be protracted and match the first civil war in terms of brutality, where 2% of the population died.

With the current population, a 2% death rate would result in over 6 million deaths. Compared to the 3,000 that died on 9/11, which was seen as the greatest national tragedy of modern times, a hot war would effect every single American in a profoundly negative way. No sane person with a family would wish for this outcome, which further highlights the insanity of much of the left in pushing for this very result. They rather see millions of people dead and the country ruined than accept a democratic process where their crazy ideas lost.

Even if we avoid a hot war, the underlying problems are not solved. The left will constantly subvert against the country in hopes of achieving a hot war, use both economic and physical violence against those on the right whom they disagree with, and inevitably descend into terroristic violence that rivals ISIS. It’s intolerable for things to proceed as they are, but if we remove a hot war from the table, what option is left?

1-800-DIVORCE

I recommend the long divorce option, which has three components. The first is extreme law and order. Starting with the Federal government, every single instance of leftist threats, intimidation, and violence must be investigated, prosecuted to the maximize allowable by law, and publicized. The left have been getting away with their illegal acts for too long, to the point where violent protesters don’t even fear arrest, thanks to Democratic mayors and police chiefs who allow it. The FBI must uphold the law and punish those who break it, and municipalities or universities that allow illegal acts must be punished through withholding of Federal funds. This will immediately shrink the number of violent agitators on the left and limit the power of their institutions.

The second component of the long divorce option is to excise the left from all centers of cultural power so that they cannot actively convert the youth. The fake news, already on its last legs, must be replaced by organizations that are not so vehemently anti-American, academia must be purged, and all globalist traitors working in government, both on the Federal and state level, must be removed from positions of power.

The media is hemorrhaging money and viewers, millions of citizens are getting red pilled to the subversiveness of the academic system (particularly its anti-male and anti-white agenda), and Trump has begun to right the ship in the Federal government, which will certainly trickle down to the local levels. Because the leftist establishment is losing control over their narrative, the younger Generation Z is already showing signs of rightward thinking thanks to being raised on 4chan memes more than TV programming. This means that we simply need to remove millennials from power and wait for them to die of old age or AIDS while preventing them from causing further damage to American institutions.

Halting immigration is the third component of the long divorce option. The left has not been able to show how immigrants benefit American citizens besides more diverse restaurant options, and emotional pleas of “human rights” and “compassion” is not sufficient enough to turn the United States into a big welfare office. Open-borders immigration is hurting existing citizens, serving as a cynical means for leftists to gain more votes in elections while browbeating their enemies with “hate speech” codes that demand you love non-Americans more than Americans.

We must also advocate for a white population that increases from where it currently stands, because America is no longer America if that number dips below 50%, and will instead look something like an international airport. Once immigration is stopped, and illegal citizens are deported, it will become monumentally more difficult for open-borders politicians to win nationally again. This can be absolutely ensured if woman’s suffrage is repealed, a proposition that I know many find unpalatable, but one that would usher in an era of permanent winning.

[Submitters note: trying to repeal women's suffrage is probably why the hypothetical leftists want to kill you Roosh]

For us to win without a hot civil war, we have to retake the reins of power and peacefully co-exist with bitter leftists over the next fifty years while the culture slowly heals itself. Once institutions are purged of anti-American leftists, the new left will exist in more of a classical liberal form and believe in nominally nationalist ideas while accepting cultural values that are shy of traditional. The long divorce option will not excite you because of the length it takes to see a resolution, but it’s one that will preserve life and the existing infrastructure of the United States.

Four future outcomes

There are four outcomes that can proceed from the juncture of which we stand. The first is a globalist resurgence at the polls thanks to demographic changes that push the vote far to the left, starting in 2024. If this happens, we will have a president that is more authoritarian than Hillary Clinton. The boot will come down on all facets of American life, especially speech, and we will essentially be living in an open-air prison.

The second outcome is a hot war where we win. The country will be ravaged and millions will die, but at least most of the deaths will be leftists.

The third option is a hot war where we lose because of foreign involvement. Not only are we much more likely to die in this engagement, but the globalist boot will come down with such a viciousness that those on the right who survive may hope that they had died in the war.

And the fourth option is the long divorce, one that we will easily win if the recommendations I made above are taken. Very few people die and life can proceed with high stability and prosperity for the majority of the country.

The globalist left has so damaged the country from the decades they’ve been in power that there is no quick fix, and those of us who are alive today will likely not see a resolution that can be argued as “complete victory” during our lifetimes. I understand the frustration that many on the right have, and the desire they have to be immediately cured of poisons that the left has unleashed, but we must carefully analyze any outcome that results in the deaths of our loved ones and even ourselves. There is a time and place to die for what you believe in, but I hope I have convinced you that we have not yet reached that critical moment and that we can avoid the downsides of a hot civil war and the globalist boot by taking on the option of the long divorce to still win in the end.

The laws we have on the books are enough—let’s enforce those and allow the country to focus on itself instead of empire building and policing while the media and universities collapse upon the weight of their own lies and degeneracy. Besides, the entertainment value in watching the left screech and yell for the next several decades is sure to bring us reams of pleasure. That’s a better outcome than outright war.

Linda Harvey #fundie addictinginfo.org

“How do you feel about open homosexuals tending to your child in a health care setting? Do you think these folks provide good role modeling at a time when your child is very vulnerable? I was thinking about this recently when I heard that Children’s Hospital in Columbus has a homosexual employees group called NCHARGE, which stands for Nationwide Children’s Hospital’s Advocates Representing Gay Employees. The meeting minutes of this groups reveal that they participated in last June’s gay pride parade, that they participated in a health expo on adolescent health this summer and that they’re concerned about same-sex partner benefits. They’re also planning to be identified with rainbow lapel pins.

But let’s say your eleven year-old has broken her leg rather badly and needs to be in the hospital a few days, which would you prefer: a nurse who’s proud of her lesbianism, who has rainbow identifiers on her work clothing, or a nurse who does not?

I would like to suggest that parents think long and hard about this. If you want your children to admire people who proclaim a homosexual lifestyle, they’re involvement with your child during a hospital stay is sure to be an influence. And let me be clear that folks involved in these behaviors can be certainly competent workers but they are tacking on to their workplace identity one that is highly offensive to many people and can be erroneously influential to children who won’t, or shouldn’t, see the whole picture of how this behavior really manifests itself.

Here’s what parents can do: select your pediatrician very carefully, first of all. There are a few homosexual doctors treating kids, there are far more nurses, LPNs, technicians and other health care workers in these lifestyles so you may want to consider writing a letter that you file with your pediatrician that should your child ever be hospitalized, you do not want your child to be treated or cared for by one of these members of the Children’s Hospital gay employees group except in the case of an emergency situation. But for routine in-hospital care where contact with your child would be required, your values should be respected.”

Roo #racist stormfront.org

Re: Is feminism aimed mainly at White women?

It seems that the vast majority of feminists are white women. That's not to say women of other races are never feminists but it seems a lot rarer.

Feminism is a lot more popular among black women and Jewish women than white women. Israel has a much higher concentration of Jewish men in prison on false charges of domestic abuse, etc., than any country in the West. It gets reported in Israeli publications every so often.

With black women, I believe their natural social structure (tribal societies throughout western Africa), has it so that marriage isn't a common occurrence, and even when it is, men have more than one wife, and/or they tend to avoid family domestic living arrangements. So African women are more independent from men on an emotional level. If you combine this characteristic with gibs from the government (welfar and social programs), you get an entire population of women who "don't need no man."

I grew up in a heavily black area, I've seen this phenomenon with my own two eyes. Black women are terrible feminists. If you think white feminists are bad (and they are bad, don't get me wrong)... trust me, just check out some Hotep channels on YouTube if you don't believe me. Black women will eventually take feminism to levels never seen before. I'm not being funny, either.

The whole agenda of feminism is to make white women believe that they have more in common with say black women or Indian women than they have with white men.

Yes, that is very true.

However, only white women think like this, no black or Indian woman would seriously believe they had more in common with a white woman than men of their own race.

Yes, and that is why feminism is such a joke on white women, ultimately.

Linda Sarsour makes a big issue about the oppression of women, or whatever her shtick is, but she would NEVER come out against the sexual assaults on white women by Muslim men in Cologne - ever, ever, ever. She will never do that. But she'll tell white women how awful their men are all the live-long day. And it's not even true, white men top the list of fellas who are GOOD to their women! Western civilization was not built by men born of anguished mothers!

Feminism is a cruel joke on all women, but it's cruelest on white women (and our men).

It seems to me that for the most part only white women buy into this raceless feminist agenda, non-white women may claim to be feminist when it suits them (usually for the purposes of getting preferential treatment over whites) but most of them don't believe it like white women do.

Yes, but that's because we've been systematically deracinated - men, too. White people are deracinated. White feminists are behaving the way deracinated feminists behave, that's all. It's nothing inherent in white women. If you deracinated black women, they'd align themselves with other women before they aligned themselves with their men, too.

This, among many other reasons, is why I've spent a couple of years trying to convince white people that they are a race. We need our identity. I'm pretty confident that once we find that again, most of our problems will get solved in due time.

Laurie Forti #fundie ecologos.org

One of the most ridiculous and persistent false claims made by armchair nutritionists, meatarian propagandists, and even academics, who really should know better, is that the human species is an "omnivore"; that is, it should eat both plant and animal matter.

In general, this error is based on the accidental, or perhaps intentional, confusing of the verbs "to be" and "to do". If the human "is" a natural omnivore, then we should have ALL the physical and biochemical equipment that is NECESSARY to run down, kill with our bare hands, tear asunder, eat, and properly digest, RAW animal prey, just as ALL natural omnivores, or carnivores, do. Just looking at our bodies will conclusively prove that we do not have the claws or talons necessary to catch and hold animal prey, and we do not have the sharp, shearing teeth necessary to tear, not chew, animal flesh. We are not fast enough to outrun and catch animals. Natural omnivores or carnivores do NOT chew their eaten flesh, they tear it into chunks and swallow them whole. We do not have the "constant tendency for the last upper premolar and the first lower molar to engage and form long longitudinal opposed shearing blades (the carnassials)", which are a common characteristic of natural carnivores and omnivores.

No human cultural-carnivore kills its animal prey with his/her natural equipment, nor do they eat their animal prey raw. I have challenged countless meatarians to do so in the past 30 years, and NONE have shown the courage of their conceptual convictions and done so. Why? Simply because we are NOT an "omnivore". In fact, we have strong anti-killing instincts. Try to kill an animal with your bare hands to demonstrate this.

Any second-grader could differentiate between the verbs "be" and "do", yet this important distinction is totally ignored by cultural carnivores, and even academics with PhD's, who foolishly claim that because humans have been DOing cultural-carnivorism for a long time, that somehow (never explained) magically, we ARE "omnivores". They want to believe that DOing modifies BEing. They fail to understand the profound difference between Nature, and inviolable Natural Laws, and silly, self-destructive local cultural customs. By their absurd and faulty logic: because some humans DO murder, and because murder has existed throughout human history, ALL humans ARE born murderers.

If one wanted to produce a logical test to see if the human was a natural omnivore, the procedure would be:
1> produce a detailed physiological and biochemical inventory of all animal species that are natural omnivores,
2> list the commonalties among them,
3> test this list against natural omnivores and other species to determine its discriminative abilities; i.e. test the test, and finally, and only if the test has been verified to be accurate and correct,
4> see if the human parameters fit this test or not.

Of course, this quite obvious test mechanism has not been established, and any unsupported references to human "omnivores", regardless of the source, are confirmations that only cultural whims are being reported, certainly NOT the imperative physiological and biochemical attributes.

ggthxnore #sexist reddit.com

[Part of a conversation on KotakuInAction about a quote from Sonic Boom, where Knuckles says that always making big deal about feminism whenever a woman accomplishes something undermines equality by making the act seem like an exception rather than the status quo, using soccer as an example. This started a debate on if this constitutes Knuckles being used as a vehicle for feminist propaganda or him being anti-feminist.]

Sickening, but I suppose it's pretty par for the course. People have been pushing their political agendas in cartoons for as long as I can remember. The cartoons I grew up with were always tokens 'r' us when it was human characters. Had to have the black one, the chick one, the wheelchair one, etc. Had to make them look good, too, so there'd be a dumb/aggressive white guy for them to correct/restrain. Then you had the ham-fisted moral/PSA at the end where you learn not to judge a book by its cover and why you shouldn't play with downed power lines, because knowing is half the battle.

It felt so much more benign when the propaganda was just Captain Planet and the morals were stuff like sharing is caring. Now it's going to be fucking wage gap myths and Tumblr genders. The kids never did anything to deserve this shit.

[...]

What Knuckles says may be accurate, but he shouldn't be saying it. Feminist proselytizing in a children's cartoon is despicable. You can argue that it's that mythical "good feminism" that stops at "men and women should be treated equally" since what he's saying isn't insane, but I would argue that "good feminism" wouldn't be proudly circlejerking about their propaganda on Twitter. Secondly feminism in that sense is essentially a meaningless term because almost everyone in the Western world is a feminist. It's like having a label for people who believe the earth is round. Aside from incels and maybe some weird NRx types no one believes or argues for the contrary position that women should not be treated equally except trolls looking to get a reaction. Even TRPers who conceptualize women as essentially slightly retarded children aren't looking to subjugate them or strip them of any of their rights, they just want to fuck the pretty ones and impress each other with their half-assed evopsych observational comedy.

If there were pushing BLM in a cartoon, would you be like "what, you don't think black lives matter?" if I objected?

Jean-Marie Le Pen #fundie uk.reuters.com

(Reuters) - Tensions between French National Front leader Marine Le Pen and her father Jean-Marie worsened on Thursday as the 86-year-old founder of the far-right party defended having described Nazi gas chambers as a "detail of history".

Since taking over from her father in 2011, Marine Le Pen has tried to rid the anti-immigrant party of its anti-Semitic image and widen its voter appeal as she readies a bid for the French presidency in 2017.

In a television interview, Jean-Marie Le Pen defended a 1996 comment that gas chambers used to kill Jews in the Holocaust were "merely a detail in the history of World War Two", a remark for which he was convicted of inciting racial hatred and fined.

"I deeply disagree with him. I take note of what he said but I believe that those coming over to vote for us understand what is going on ... He is being deliberately provocative," she told the website of Le Figaro daily.

[...]

While other FN officials have been stripped of their party membership for racism, there has been no move to bar Jean-Marie Le Pen from a party of which he still holds the title of honorary president. He is popular with many FN members and will stand as a candidate in December's regional elections.

The FN founder rejected all accusations of anti-Semitism and defended the gas chamber comment as a self-evidence.

"I stand by this because I believe it is the truth," he told BFM TV. What I said is what I think - the gas chambers were a detail of the history of the war. Unless of course we are suggesting the war was a detail of the gas chambers."

Asked about the current state of the FN, he called it a party for patriots including "fervent Petainists", a reference to Philippe Petain, the general who led the French war-time government that cooperated with Nazi Germany's racial policies.

Tony Miano #fundie crossencountersmin.com

Target Bathrooms: An Overview

On April 19, 2016, Target announced to the world that their customer and employee restrooms were no longer distinguished by the chromosomal make-up of the users. No longer would Target restrooms be specifically assigned to either XY people or XX people (male or female). From now on, anyone who “self-identified” as LGBTQ (or any other letter in the alphabet soup of depravity) could use whichever bathroom they choose. Any man who, for even just the moment of restroom use, self-identifies as a woman (an XY who wants to pretend to be an XX) can walk unabated into the women’s restroom. Any woman who, for even just the moment of restroom use, self-identifies as a man (an XX who wants to pretend to by an XY) can walk unabated into the men’s restroom.

This is the depraved, God-hating world in which we live (Romans 1:18-32).

On April 20, 2016, I decided to conduct a little experiment at my local Target store. I walked in, purchased a KitKat bar, approached the cashier, and asked her this question: “If I self-identify as a Target employee, can I receive the employee discount on my purchase?” This began a chain reaction of confusion and absurdity as I then spoke to an assistant manager and the store manager. When I explained to the managers that I thought I should be allowed to self-identify as a store employee since I could now walk into the women’s restroom so long as I self-identified as a woman, the light bulbs went on in their head. They understood why I came to their store and the point I was trying to make.

You can watch the video, here. With well-over 33,000 views (granted, those are not Taylor Swift numbers) over the last five days, the video has caused a little stir and solicited a lot of reaction. Almost 300 comments have been posted. I’ve also deleted that many comments due to inappropriate content. “Likes” to “Dislikes” are running about 6-1 positive. The video has been shared by others thousands of times. For me and my little YouTube channel, this is what “going viral” looks like.

Michael Klein #conspiracy #sexist sciencefiles.org

Climate Hysteria is female
The Genderista (Translator's note: appears to be a personal snarlword of his for the Feminazi establishment or something) already proclaimed long ago that "climate change is male" - a claim that led us to the question whether there is an equivalency between "female professor" and "mental deficiency", if only because only fantastically-inclined Genderista manage to produce a correlation between men, which they naturally and as paragons of group-based misanthropy declare a homogenous group and a natural phenomenon which already existed before there were men on Earth.

But as many a wise (white) person from the Palentinate has said:
Thinking is a matter of luck - for some.

Our assessment that climate hysteria is female, on the other hand, is an empirically supported assessment for which there is evidence:

For one, there is no certain evidence at all that anthropogenic climate change is in the process. As long as Earth has existed, the planet's climate has been changing. Whether humans have recently contributed to climate change to a noteworthy degree is an open question which is open because the existant climate models are junk, the claim that CO2 is a climate killer is a hoax, because it is known that the IPCC (the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change) likes to manipulate their own data and, on top of it, the bilance of climate change as of now, calculated on the basis of a general increase of Earth's temperature by 1 degree Celsius, is a POSITIVE one. Yes: Climate change does not only have negative effects, it also has benefits:

“In my Climate Change Misconceived earlier essay, that explored the dissonance in public understanding of the climate change issue, I contended that based on the best available science and empirical evidence post-industrial climate change (whether it be man-made or natural) apparently has not caused exceptional or accelerating rises in sea levels, has not caused an increase in the frequency or intensity of extreme weather events and has not caused accelerating global species extinctions. Similarly, whilst heat-related deaths have increased with the warming, cold-related deaths have fallen even more – so net-mortality has improved. Furthermore according to Dr. Indur Goklanky, science analyst for the US Department of the Interior, ‘Carbon dioxide fertilises plants, and emissions from fossil fuels have already had a hugely beneficial effect on crops, increasing yields by at least 10-15%.’ So it has apparently been net-beneficial for agriculture. Professor Richard Tol of Sussex University (after reviewing 14 different studies of the effects of future climate trends) concluded that global warming would likely be economically net-beneficial for the world up to 30C. So with only 10C of warming it certainly appears to have been economically net-beneficial to date. Against all this we have to set the effects of ocean warming and reduced alkalinity that have probably been net-harmful for marine life. Taken as a whole, the positive changes from post-industrial climate change appear to have outweighed the negative changes – and the negative changes (in particular rising sea levels) are apparently currently happening sufficiently slowly for us to adapt to them.”
That there are two sides to everything, not just good and not just bad, that is, of course, an insight which - if it is said in the wrong context - leads to being labeled a right-wing populist or a right-winger or a climate denialist. Regardless of this, common sense and Aristotle already tell us that the truth often lies in the middle, that is, in between good and evil. One exception: The Greens.

But joke aside.

He who, in the face of lacking evidence for anthropogenic climate change, in the face of up-to-now positive benefit of climate change and in the face of manipulations in the records of the IPCC, believes anthropogenic climate change to be proven, not only demonstrates himself a fundamental believer who feels beholden to the new climate-religion (because he prefers to keep distance to rationality), he also demonstrates that he wants to believe in something.

People who want to believe unconditionally and against any empirical evidence have left the ground of normal existence, so they must be classified as either dangerous or as hysterical, the latter especially if they begin to submit their everyday lives to the premise that there is anthropogenic climate change that affects their lives negatively and which, in the worst case, lets their miserable lives end prematurely.

The WHO draws the line with most diagnosis of psychological disorders where "normal everyday funvction" is no longer possible. All the fashionable addictions, from internet addiction to smartphone to gaming addiction, require for their diagnosis a negative effect on the normal proceedings of daily life, e.g. avoidance of the work place or truancy.

And now we have arrived at the FridayForFuture demonstrations, whose participants are making it explicit that they're truants. In the diction of the WHO, this means: They do no longer function normally. The normal proceedings of their lives are impaired by the delusions under which they operate or by a psychological disorder that has taken ahold of them.

In this case, by hysteria.

In the beginning of the 19th Century, hysterically was exclusively registered and diagnosed as "female hysteria". The explanations for why hysteria mostly affects women were diverse and we do not need to take interest in them as research in the beginning of the 20th Century lead to the diagnosis of "female hysteria" mostly disappearing, The "Studies on Hysteria" conducted by Siegmund Freud together with Josef Breuer in 1895 lead to hysteria being viewed as a syndrome that mostly, but not exclusively, affects women, and even to no longer speaking of "female hysteria", but of hysteria as an anxiety disorder. But this classification fell temporarilly and for various reasons out of favour. The main reason lies in the variable use that the concept of hysteria has experienced over the course of the 20th Century, a use behind which lie neurological, psychophysiological conditions and mass panic in equal measure. In short: The term had become arbitrary and had been dropped for this reason. Accordingly, R. E. Kendall wrote in an essay from the year 2001:

“Contemporary understanding of hysterical behavior has been influenced strongly by the sociological concepts of the ‘sick role’ and ‘illness behavior’ and by learning theory, and attempts to reduce both the attractions of the sick role and influences discouraging healthy behavior now have a central role in management. This conceptual model explains the distribution of hysterical behaviors in populations, including the predominance in young women, and many other clinical observations, but it fails to account either for neurological conversion symptoms or for fugues and other dissociative phenomena.”
Hysterical behaviour, that is, behaviour not appropriate for the situation, is now viewed as learned behaviour that is mostly to be found in girls and young women who try to win attention through a role as a victim they write for themselves.

On this basis, we can explain our headline:

A survey among the participants of FridaysForFuture demonstrations revealed that up to 70% of participants are female. The results is based on about 2000 interviews with participants in nine states and 13 cities. This meager result that was nonetheless financed by the Federal Ministry for Education and Research (and which could also have been reached by counting) is the subject of a press release by the Technic University of Chemnitz. The press release not only demonstrates that our headline: "Climate hysteria is female" is empirically supportedk it also shows the mental confusion to which attempting to make oneself servile to the Genderista leads, for as it says in the press release:

"... reports project leader Dr. Piotz Kocyba. More surprising than the age of the domestrators is, for example, the predominance of female she-participants (Translator's note: feminine form) ..."

This can only surprise those who are not familiar with the research on hysterical behaviour, but with people who write about "female participants (Translator's note: see above), one would not really expect that anyways.

Original GermanDie Klimahysterie ist weiblich

Die Genderista hat schon vor Jahren verkündet, dass der „Klimawandel männlich“ sei – eine Behauptung, die uns veranlasst hat, die Frage zu stellen, ob es eine Äquivalenz zwischen „weiblicher Professor“ und „mentaler Beschränkung“ gibt, schon weil nur phantastisch veranlagte Genderista es schaffen, einen Zusammenhang zwischen Männern, die sie natürlich und in bester Manier der gruppenbezogenen Menschenfeindlichkeit zu einer homogenen Gruppe erklären und einem Naturphänomen, das es schon gab, als es auf der Erde noch keine Männer gab, herzustellen.

Aber, wie hat ein weis(ß)er Pfälzer gesagt: Denke iss Gliggsach – bei manchen.

Dagegen ist unsere Feststellung, dass die Klimahysterie weiblich ist, eine empirisch fundierte Feststellung, die sich belegen lässt:

So gibt es keinerlei gesicherte Befunde, die zeigen, dass sich derzeit ein von Menschen gemachter Klimawandel vollzieht. Seit es die Erde gibt, wandelt sich das Klima des Planeten. Ob Menschen seit kurzem den Klimawandel in nennenswertem Ausmaß mitbefördern, ist eine offene Frage, die deshalb offen ist, weil die vorhandenen Klimamodelle Junk sind, die Behauptung, dass CO2 ein Klimakiller-Molekül sei, ein Hoax ist, weil bekannt ist, dass das IPCC (das Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) gerne die eigenen Daten manipuliert und darüber hinaus die bisherige Bilanz des Klimawandels, berechnet auf der Grundlage von einer generellen Erhöhung der Erdtemperatur um 1 Grad Celsius eine POSITIVE ist. Ja: Klimawandel hat nicht nur Nachteile, er hat auch Vorteile:

“In my Climate Change Misconceived earlier essay, that explored the dissonance in public understanding of the climate change issue, I contended that based on the best available science and empirical evidence post-industrial climate change (whether it be man-made or natural) apparently has not caused exceptional or accelerating rises in sea levels, has not caused an increase in the frequency or intensity of extreme weather events and has not caused accelerating global species extinctions. Similarly, whilst heat-related deaths have increased with the warming, cold-related deaths have fallen even more – so net-mortality has improved. Furthermore according to Dr. Indur Goklanky, science analyst for the US Department of the Interior, ‘Carbon dioxide fertilises plants, and emissions from fossil fuels have already had a hugely beneficial effect on crops, increasing yields by at least 10-15%.’ So it has apparently been net-beneficial for agriculture. Professor Richard Tol of Sussex University (after reviewing 14 different studies of the effects of future climate trends) concluded that global warming would likely be economically net-beneficial for the world up to 30C. So with only 10C of warming it certainly appears to have been economically net-beneficial to date. Against all this we have to set the effects of ocean warming and reduced alkalinity that have probably been net-harmful for marine life. Taken as a whole, the positive changes from post-industrial climate change appear to have outweighed the negative changes – and the negative changes (in particular rising sea levels) are apparently currently happening sufficiently slowly for us to adapt to them.”

Dass jedes Ding zwei Seiten hat, nicht nur gut und nicht nur schlecht ist, das ist natürlich eine Erkenntnis, die – wenn man sie im falschen Kontext äußert – dazu führt, dass man sich als Rechtspopulist oder Rechter oder Klimaleugner bezeichnet findet. Dessen ungeachtet sagen bereits der gesunde Menschenverstand und Aristoteles, dass die Wahrheit oft in der Mitte liegt, also zwischen gut und böse. Eine Ausnahme: Die Grünen.

Aber Spaß beiseite.

Wer angesichts nicht vorhandener Belege für einen menschengemachten Klimawandel, angesichts bislang positiver Nutzen durch den Klimawandel und angesichts von Manipulationen in den Berichten des IPCC den menschengemachten Klimawandel für bewiesen hält, der zeigt damit nicht nur, dass er ein fundamental Gläubiger ist, der sich der neuen Klima-Religion verbunden fühlt (während er von Rationalität eher Abstand nimmt), er zeigt damit auch, dass er etwas glauben will.

Menschen, die unbedingt und gegen jeden empirischen Beleg glauben wollen, haben den Boden einer normalen Existenz verlassen, so dass man sie entweder als gefährlich oder als hysterisch einordnen muss, Letzteres vor allem dann, wenn sie anfangen, ihr tägliches Leben unter die Prämisse zu stellen, dass es einen menschengemachten Klimawandel gibt, der ihr Leben negativ beeinträchtigen und sie, im schlimmsten Fall, ihr miserables Leben vorzeitig beenden lässt.

Die WHO zieht die Grenze bei den meisten Diagnosen von psychischen Störungen da, wo ein „normales Funktionieren im Alltag“ nicht mehr möglich ist. Die ganzen Mode-Süchte, von der Internet-, über die Smartphone bis zur Spielsucht, erfordern in ihrer Diagnose einen negativen Effekt auf die normalen Verrichtungen des täglichen Lebens, z.B. das Fernbleiben vom Arbeitsplatz oder das Schulschwänzen.

Damit sind wir bei den FridaysForFuture Demonstrationen, deren Teilnehmer explizit machen, dass sie die Schule schwänzen. In der Diktion der WHO bedeutet dies: Sie funktionieren nicht mehr normal. Die normalen Verrichtungen ihres Lebens werden durch eine Wahnvorstellung, unter der sie handeln oder durch eine psychische Störung, die sie im Griff hat, beeinträchtigt.

Im vorliegenden Fall durch Hysterie.

Hysterie wurde bis zum Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts ausschliesslich als „weibliche Hysterie“ erfasst und diagnostiziert. Die Erklärungen dafür, dass Hysterie in erster Linie Frauen ereilt, waren vielfältig und müssen uns hier nicht interessieren, denn die Forschung zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts hat dazu geführt, dass die Diagnose „weibliche Hysterie“ weitgehend verschwunden ist. Die 1895 von Sigmund Freud gemeinsam mit Josef Breuer veröffentlichten „Studien über Hysterie“ haben dazu geführt, Hysterie als Krankheitsbild zu betrachten, das zwar mehrheitlich, aber nicht nur Frauen befällt und darüber hinaus nicht mehr von weiblicher Hysterie, sondern von Hysterie als einer Angst-Störung zu sprechen. Auch diese Klassifikation ist zwischenzeitlich und aus vielen Gründen in Ungnade gefallen. Der Hauptgrund findet sich in der variablen Verwendung, die das Konzept „Hysterie“ im Verlauf des 20. Jahrhunderts gefunden hat, eine Verwendung, hinter der sich neurologische, psychophysiologische Bedingungen und Massenpaniken in gleicher Weise finden. Kurz: Der Begriff war beliebig geworden und wurde deshalb fallen gelassen wurde. Entsprechend schreibt R. E. Kendall in einem Beitrag aus dem Jahre 2001:

“Contemporary understanding of hysterical behavior has been influenced strongly by the sociological concepts of the ‘sick role’ and ‘illness behavior’ and by learning theory, and attempts to reduce both the attractions of the sick role and influences discouraging healthy behavior now have a central role in management. This conceptual model explains the distribution of hysterical behaviors in populations, including the predominance in young women, and many other clinical observations, but it fails to account either for neurological conversion symptoms or for fugues and other dissociative phenomena.”

Hysterisches, also den Umständen nicht angemessenes Verhalten wird nunmehr als erlerntes Verhalten betrachtet, das sich vornehmlich bei Mädchen und jungen Frauen findet, die versuchen, über eine Opferrolle, die sie sich zuschreiben, Aufmerksamkeit zu gewinnen.

Auf dieser Grundlage können wir nun unsere Überschrift erklären:

Eine Befragung unter Teilnehmern der FridaysForFuture-Demonstrationen, hat ergeben, dass bis zu 70% der Teilnehmer weiblich sind. Das Ergebnis basiert auf rund 2000 Interviews mit Teilnehmern in neun Ländern und 13 Städten. Dieses magere Ergebnis, das nichtsdestotrotz vom Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung finanziert wurde (und das man über Zählen ebenso hätte erhalten können), ist Gegenstand einer Pressemeldung der TU-Chemnitz. Die Pressemeldung zeigt nicht nur, warum unsere Überschrift: „Klimahysterie ist weiblich“ empirisch fundiert ist, sie zeigt auch, zu welcher geistigen Verwirrung der Versuch, sich bei der Genderista anzudienen führt, heißt es doch in der Pressemeldung:

„… berichtet Projektleiter Dr. Piotr Kocyba. Überraschender als das junge Alter der Demonstrantinnen und Demonstranten beispielsweise sei die Dominanz weiblicher Teilnehmerinnen …“.

Überraschen kann das nur, wer nicht mit der Forschung zu hysterischem Verhalten vertraut ist, aber bei Leuten, die von „weiblichen Teilnehmerinnen“ schreiben, ist das auch eher nicht zu erwarten.

Charles Sledge #sexist charlessledge.com

3 Ways That Simply Being A Man Is The New Counterculture

It’s funny I grew up thinking that every man wanted to be strong and brave with a harem of beautiful women and that masculinity was something to be respected and cultivated in yourself. Perhaps you thought the same, And yet when we look around we find just the opposite happening for most males (not men but males). They are getting weaker, wimpier, fatter, more womanly, and there seems to be a disdain for beautiful women. Whether it’s conservatives attacking something like Hooter’s or a bikini competition and feminists doing the uh exact same damn thing that conservatives do.

There seems to be a war on both strength and beauty (wisdom was killed a long time ago). But anyways back to what we were talking about. I think we’ve always known that I wasn’t average. I don’t say this to be cocky but to state a fact. Just the fact that we lift weights and read books already makes us not average. But I have found (and perhaps you have to) that as times goes on the chasm because us and the average person widens more and more. Simply being a man and improving yourself make you into a counter culture.

Being In Shape

When men come to men for advice on where to start progressing in life there are two main areas that are always addressed. One getting in shape. They don’t have to become pro bodybuilders or anything but they have to be able to develop some strength and be able to throw it around a little. The second is reading books which I’ll cover later. Developed nations keep getting fatter and weaker which is not a good trend. Which would once be way outside the norm is now about average and that’s only getting worse.

Simply getting to the gym and working on yourself already puts you in stark contrast to the “It’s everyone else’s fault” victim olympics culture of modern society. Not having a large gut and estrogen levels through the roof as a man is standing in stark contrast to modern society. Much less if you actually have some muscular development and even more so if that development is the neck, traps, and other “fighting muscles”. Being in shape is being in the masculine counter culture.

Being Masculine

Standing your ground, not backing down, not apologizing for everything, enjoying the fact that you have balls, all stand in stark contrast to the modern world. Where nearly everyone has become an effete wimp or a weasely back stabber. To simply stand on your own two feet and have a sense of honor and pride is nearly unheard of. Much less fighting back when you’re pushed. But that’s how they want it. It’s a lot easier to herd dumb sheep then lions, wolves, and eagles.

Masculinity is attacked and shamed at every corner. Again from both sides of political spectrum. It’s not okay to have balls, it’s not okay to have a fighting spirit, just lay down and take it like everyone else. How dare you oppose being used and screwed over. Have some fire in your heart is a new counter culture. Feeling that deep well of energy that resides in every man but that few ever learn to harness completely if at all. Being masculine is the new counter culture.

Loving Beautiful Women

If you don’t love beautiful women than something is wrong. Woman was created for man. It’s interesting how even those in the masculine self-development side of the internet shame men who appreciate beautiful women. We already get that from the chuches, schools, and governments we don’t need it here. Sure if you are weak and a fool you will not have good experiences with women, but if you understand them for what they are and use them for that purpose then you’ll enjoy your time with them.

A healthy world is a world that is filled with strong men and beautiful women and even more so if the men are also wise. Strength and wisdom are the two traits that are most important for a man to cultivate. Hence why when men first come to me looking to advice lifting weights and reading books are naturally my first two suggestions. Being either and loving beautiful women is being part of the new counter culture.

The New Masculine Counter Culture

To improve yourself daily, to take responsibility for where you’re at in life, and then do something about it puts you in stark contrast to the rest of the world. You are a man in a world of males. You will come against resistance and there will be those who try to shame you for who you are. It’s in your best interest to ignore them and forge your own path. A healthier more masculine one.

Anonymous #sexist archive.is


Mid 20's College sluts are dried up old hags.

I'm 21, I don't want to fuck women older than me for the next 10 years.

The fucking day I hit 18 I realized it would just be old hags from now on, and that's when I realized AoC laws are fucked up. I wanted to stay with the 16 and 17 year old girls I liked. I still want them.

Women get uglier as they get older.
....

I just want to fuck high school sluts.

Fucking actual children disgusts me.

Move to the UK then. Or Germany. Or Argentina. Or any other country with a <16 AoC

Why do I have to move to a different country just to be with the type of women I like?

It would take me a long time to get that money, even if it was just for a temporary holiday.

Why can't the AoC just be set by nature's own rules in all western nations. I shouldn't have to go out of my way to just get a hot 16 year old.


They are fine, even 20 is okay, but limiting yourself to women within 3 years doesn't give you many women. I want to widen my selection. Also nothing will best a 16 year old girl ever. 16 year old girls are made for sex.

The large majority of women in my uni classes are a older than me and I find none of them attractive. Fucking not even one, except an Egyptian girl and I don't want to mix.

Too compare, I found every single girl in my high school year attractive except the hambeasts.

High school girls also wont yap on to me about their dumb political opinions.

Oracle Z #fundie returnofkings.com

Why Women Are Like Cats And Men Are Like Dogs

CATS:

Cats are beautiful creatures. So are women. Especially when it comes to their faces, and more so their eyes. Staring in a cat’s eyes for long, can mesmerize you. So can a woman’s.

Cats are manipulative, prodigal creatures that only want you when they want you. Try picking up a cat at any time, and see how it will scratch you. A cat’s affection for you is essentially an act of investment on it’s end. There is nothing more fake than the dishonest affection of a cat, irrespective of its type. Cats only need affection on their own terms.

Cats know how to insinuate themselves into your affection, even if they are useless creatures. “Aw, look at the poor cute little thing!” A cat is a master at turning its weakness into its advantage. It would meekly rub its soft fur against you to garner attention. It would purr softly and sensually as you stroke it. It snuggles softly into your body, making you believe that it needs and ‘loves‘ you, but what it actually needs is the warmth of your body.

Cats are opportunistic. Cats live on opportunity. They stalk their prey. Women are the same, for they are hypergamous.

Cats are practically useless creatures. On an average, Cats spent 16 hours sleeping and the rest eating and lazing around. Cats can’t defend your home. A cat will only fight to defend itself, but never you. A cat’s life is engrossed with itself, and trying to exploit the resources of its master, without being of use in return. Cats are basically domesticated parasites.

Cats enslave you. A cat’s often ‘purpose’ in your home is to act cute. As mentioned above, they’re practically useless animals. Any home having a cat will be forced to acquiesce itself to its feline member. Essentially humans are the pets of cats, and not the other way around.

Cats are cruel and merciless creatures. Observe a cat with its prey (e.g. with a rat or an insect). A cat will play around with its prey’s half dead body before devouring it, much like a psychopath. Women more or less exhibit the same tendencies.

Cats can fuck up your home. Cats are worst when it comes to your furniture. A cat will happily allow itself to sharpen its claws on your furniture and ruin it.

Cats are insensitive and selfish creatures. Cats don’t think of anything, except themselves. Cats are essentially selfish creatures, except when it comes to their offspring. But a female cat is again never so protective of its young as a bitch is.

Cats are thieving parasites. A cat’s habit of stealing is legendary. The stealth predator that they are, cats will not hesitate to help itself to your stuff without permission. It’s a cat’s entitled nature to your stuff, as you’ve honored yourself by adopting it.

Cats are narcissistic creatures. A cat spends most of its time eating, exploring (to hunt or steal), sleeping, lazing around and preening itself.

Cats have seductive and feminine allure. Look at the graceful movements of a cat. Observe the lazy seductive stretches of its body. Cats are the natural exhibitors of female sex appeal. Any woman wanting to learn seductive female body language could learn well from observing a cat, and carry herself in a similar fashion. Humans have always been seduced by this appeal of these creatures from history.

Cats make valuable pets — to feminists.

Cats are disloyal creatures. As explained above, cats are only loyal to themselves, not to their masters. Cats are essentially mercenaries.

DOGS:

Dogs are honorable and loyal creatures, exhibiting essentially masculine virtues. A dog’s greatest quality is in its loyalty and honor when it comes to their masters. Dogs will always stick with you watch your back.

Dogs are intelligent, versatile and useful creatures. From guarding your home, giving you company and giving hope to humans in a modern world where the word loyalty has just become a tattoo, dogs are versatile pets. You can train a dog like no other animal.

Dogs are brave creatures. A dog’s bravery is legendary. So much that they were employed in war and domesticated to guard homes and livestock .

Dogs are self sacrificing creatures. A dog may run away when it comes to personal safety, but rarely backs down from danger especially when it comes to the safety of its master. A dog will fight for you and can even die for you. A dog’s spirit is essentially that of self sacrifice.

Dogs love doggy style. And so do men. No brainer there.

Dogs are often ignored, in lieu of cats. This happens usually in households where both the creatures are adopted. The dog’s loyalty and value is often ignored for the parasitical, undeserving and useless cat’s seductive appeal. Dispensable beauty often beats indispensable efficiency. This is just like how men—the indispensable gender necessary for the building of civilization—have become dispensable in modern societies.

A master can fool a dog, but not a cat. Dogs are trusting animals when it comes to their masters. Men are the same when it comes to their women. On the other hand, cats don’t trust you, even if you’ve raised them for long. One act of admonishment is enough for a cat to act as if it’s not your pet. Dogs can be fooled, because they’re essentially forgiving animals. Cats rarely forgive, but expect to be forgiven.

Dogs are sensitive creatures. Especially to a lack of love from their masters.

Dogs are direct and honest animals. A dog’s efforts to gain your attention are direct, not a subtle gauged seduction of you like a cat. But the problem with dogs is that they can’t act feminine and cute like cats to gain your attention. Dogs will lick you, bark at you and act funny so that you notice them. That’s how men are. A man’s sex drive and affections are the same – honest and direct. There is nothing deceptive about his interest in a woman than an erection when he sees her.

Dogs bear responsibility and adversity with fortitude. Dogs were domesticated to guard homes. The role of a guardian is a life of responsibility and peril. Dogs are masters at handling both eventualities with fortitude.

Dogs need freedom. One of the worst things people do to their pet dogs is to tie them up. A dog needs to explore and see the world, or it howls and becomes very aggressive. Dogs live for freedom.

Dogs are patient creatures. Until pushed too far. Cats are essentially impatient, and don’t tolerate unwanted attention at all.

Dogs can be easily assuaged. Your dog’s howling for some fresh air and freedom? Give it some food. Rub it. Dogs can be easily assuaged, and usually settle for little from their masters. A cat will move over to your neighbor’s home to find what it’s not getting from you. Dogs are essentially slave-like, while cats are mercenaries.

Dogs need love, and are receptive to affection. Dogs are happy with little, and need your company all the time. A dog without a master is indeed a sad dog.

Dogs bear responsibility and adversity with fortitude. Dogs were domesticated to guard homes. The role of a guardian is a life of responsibility and peril. Dogs are masters at handling both eventualities with fortitude.

Dogs need freedom. One of the worst things people do to their pet dogs is to tie them up. A dog needs to explore and see the world, or it howls and becomes very aggressive. Dogs live for freedom.

Dogs are patient creatures. Until pushed too far. Cats are essentially impatient, and don’t tolerate unwanted attention at all.

Dogs can be easily assuaged. Your dog’s howling for some fresh air and freedom? Give it some food. Rub it. Dogs can be easily assuaged, and usually settle for little from their masters. A cat will move over to your neighbor’s home to find what it’s not getting from you. Dogs are essentially slave-like, while cats are mercenaries.

Dogs need love, and are receptive to affection. Dogs are happy with little, and need your company all the time. A dog without a master is indeed a sad dog.

The biggest analogy? Just like how dogs do all their life, men chase cats, i.e. women. Even with the reversal of gender roles and tastes in the modern world.

Being called a dog and being called a son of a bitch are two different things. While the latter is essentially offensive and derogatory, being called a dog is essentially honorable if you consider the above points. The Mongols honored dogs in their culture. Genghis Khan famously called his commander Subudei “one of his dogs of war” – not in a derogatory sense, but to compliment Subudei on his loyalty, bravery and honor. Calling someone a cat is derogatory when taking a cat’s parasitical personality into consideration. A dog is an honorable and loyal creature, very much displaying the essence of true masculinity. But like men, it ironically gets the flak despite all its usefulness, so much that it’s name itself becomes a curse word.

Beta programming of modern men has often made them to behave in feminine ways like cats, and feminist modern women are behaving like masculinized bitches. Considering that, this analogy could rather be modified as “Why women were like cats, and men were like dogs.”

Illinois Family Institute #fundie rightwingwatch.org

A coalition of anti-gay groups is once again urging parents to keep their children out of school on the annual anti-bullying “Day of Silence.” The Illinois Family Institute published the call to action on its website today, signed by activists including Matt Barber, Concerned Women for America’s Penny Nance, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality’s Peter LaBarbera, Scott Lively, Linda Harvey, Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver, and MassResistance’s Brian Camenker.

Calling the GLSEN-sponsored event “the queen of all the numerous homosexuality-affirming activities that take place in public schools,” the activists allege that it is meant to “indoctrinate 16-year-olds.”

“We must demonstrate the boldness and perseverance of the Left if we hope to stop the relentless appropriation of public education for the promotion of homosexuality,” they exhort.

The Day of Silence has long been a target of anti-gay group’ efforts to crack down on anti-bullying efforts in schools.

The Day of Silence is the queen of all the numerous homosexuality-affirming activities that take place in public schools. It started in one university and then like a cancer metastasized to thousands of high schools, and then into middle schools. Before long it will take place in elementary schools. Leftists know that it’s easier to indoctrinate 16-year-olds than 36-year-olds and easier still to indoctrinate 6-year-olds.

GLSEN promotes the Day of Silence as an “anti-bullying” effort. If it were solely about eradicating bullying, everyone—liberals and conservatives alike—would support it. But it’s not.

The Day of Silence exploits government schools, captive audiences, and anti-bullying sentiment to advance the Left’s social, moral, and political beliefs and goals. GLSEN seeks to advance the belief that all public expressions of moral disapproval of homosexual activity are bullying.

A coalition of pro-family organizations is once again urging parents to keep their children home from school on the Day of Silence if their school administrations will be allowing students to politicize instructional time by refusing to speak. This is the only organized national effort to oppose any pro-homosexual activity or event in public schools.

The absence of conservative influence within the culture on issues related to homosexuality is to some extent the fault of conservatives. Ignorance, fear, and an astounding lack of perseverance on the parts of conservatives have turned our cultural institutions—including public education—into the playground of “progressives.” Our passivity has enabled homosexual activists and their ideological allies to become social, political, and pedagogical bullies. Evidence of that is everywhere, including in schools on the GLSEN’s annual April school event, the Day of Silence.

We must demonstrate the boldness and perseverance of the Left if we hope to stop the relentless appropriation of public education for the promotion of homosexuality.

Linda Harvey #fundie wnd.com


Everywhere we look, “progressive” means exactly the opposite.

Case in point: The leaders of the Episcopal Church USA, the Presbyterian Church USA and the United Church of Christ are all patting themselves on the back these days. Leaving behind sound biblical doctrine, they’re now celebrating “marriage equality.”

All three denominations ordain openly homosexual clergy and will now perform same-sex (so-called) marriages. “Aren’t we progressive?” is the smug attitude of these long-established mainliners, who may soon be joined by the ELCA (Lutherans) and the United Methodist Church in the official fiction of marrying two men or two women.

In these organizations, numerous leftist causes compete against God-driven priorities. The Episcopal Church USA, for instance, prays for the empowerment of “transgender individuals” – in spite of biblical revelation that people are created (not “assigned”) to be male and female. And among therapy options, youth in the Episcopal Church should embrace gender-switching but must never be counseled to welcome heterosexuality.

Episcopalians gush over government entitlement programs and the pro-”gay” positions of the Boy Scouts. In fact, the resolutions at the ECUSA General Convention resemble those of the National Education Association: all hard-left politics, all the time.

But Sodom, we have a problem.

Is this really, objectively “progress”? When our dominant religious institutions degenerate into advocating inhumane “human rights” and unhealthy, bizarre sex practices, America needs to take note.

The end of civilization may be closer than we think.

Tanith Lloyd #sexist medium.com

An open letter to my friend who thinks transwomen are women

I recently sent you an article by a lesbian who has been documenting homophobia within trans activism. You, my otherwise compassionate, patient and warm friend, replied with “sorry, not interested”. You told me that you didn’t want to read an article which referred to transwomen as ‘male’. You said that transwomen suffer from an “accident at birth” — transwomen are women born in the wrong body.

Seeing my principled friend (with a first-class undergraduate and a masters degree) actively adopt such a bizarre, anti-materialist and anti-scientific position really worries me. How can ‘you’ be ‘born into’ a body? You are a body. The ‘born in the wrong body’ idea goes beyond poststructuralist ideas about gender onto quasi-religious terrain. How can anyone have an innate, pre-experience knowledge of what it means to be the other sex? What does that even entail? Being male or female refers to your reproductive sex. To argue otherwise is akin to arguing for gendered souls.

Still, you talk about ‘gender identity’ —an innate sense of whether someone is male or female. Where is the evidence for this? How do we measure it? What does it mean? Even if we were to accept that a part of your brain could get ‘mixed up’ into an ‘incorrectly’ sexed body, why would ‘gender identity’ override all other physical indicators of whether you are male or female? Why would your subjective sense of self ever be privileged over objective physicality in this way? Transgender is not a medical diagnosis. Gender dysphoria is a psychological condition, characterised by dissatisfaction with your sexed body and/or assigned gender role. The science behind what causes gender dysphoria is inconclusive, but it is likely caused by different biopsychosocial factors which are unique to each trans person. Gender dysphoria has not been proven to have one ‘cause’ (an ‘accident at birth’ leading to being ‘born in the wrong body’) — there is no normative standard of ‘feeling like a woman’ or ‘feeling like a man’.

Despite this, children who ‘identify’ as the other sex are being given puberty blockers and cross sex hormones. The systematic medicalisation of gender non-conforming children should be an unthinkable practice. Little girls are too young to understand that wanting short hair, having crushes on other girls and enjoying football doesn’t make you a boy trapped in a girls body. Studies suggest that 80% of gender dysphoric children desist and grow up to be lesbian, gay or bisexual. One reason why older lesbians are so outspoken (“TERFs”) is because they recognise that they could easily have been ‘transed’ had they been children today. One reason why mothers are so outspoken (“TERFs”) is because they know children and their fickleness well.

We are meant to simultaneously believe that gender identity is fixed at around four years old (thus justifying medical intervention in children) but also that trans people don’t all struggle with a lifelong dissatisfaction with their ‘gender’ (thus widening the ‘trans umbrella’ for ‘inclusivity’). How are we to explain ‘genderfluid’, ‘non-binary’ or ‘agender’ identities? If gender has the potential to be fluid, or to change over time, or to not exist, what justification do we have in making permanent changes to a child’s body? Feminists see this practice as being based in gender essentialism?—?a concept you otherwise recognise and reject. What do you make of Jazz Jennings’ book, ‘I am Jazz’, which opens with “for as long as I can remember, my favourite colour has been pink”? She goes on to argue that “I have a girl brain, but a boy body. This is called transgender”. This book is being read in schools in an effort to educate children about what being trans means.

Jazz’ case is interesting, and certainly complexifies issues around sex and gender?—?to what extent can Jazz be considered ‘a man’ if she has never been allowed to go through male puberty? How could it be reasonable to expect Jazz to use male spaces? These are conversations we need to have. But Jazz is a very rare case. ‘Transgender’ is an umbrella term coined in the 1990s to unite a variety of gender non-conforming experiences. What was once ‘transsexual’ is now ‘transgender’. What was once ‘transvestite’ is also ‘transgender’. Both Jazz Jennings and Eddie Izzard have the same claim to the term ‘woman’, because ‘woman’ has been extended to mean ‘anyone who identifies as a woman’ (which I guess excludes me, then). Where do you draw the line? Being ‘trans’ is no longer characterised by the material state of having surgically changed your body, but is now characterised by an immaterial, subjective sense of self. Is Danielle Muscato a woman? How about Stonewall activist, Alex Drummond? Again, where do you draw the line? Is it based on ‘passing’? Do women have to look a certain way? What about Jess Bradley, NUS trans spokesperson, who has been suspended from their position for allegedly flashing ‘her’ erect penis in public? Is this a female crime? Are we as a society prepared to accept that it is now possible for a woman to flash her erect penis in public? To extend this further: are we to now accept the possibility of a woman raping another woman with her penis? If nothing else, this is a huge assault on female solidarity and trust. This may be a crude comparison, and I apologise, but consider other animals: would surgically transplanting the feathers of a male peacock onto a female peacock make the latter male? Of course not. Would castrating and shaving the mane of a male lion make him female? Of course not. So why do we accept that surgery has the power to change sex in human beings?

Having said this, we are told by organisations like Stonewall that trans people who do not undergo surgical interventions are still, in all senses, the other sex. This is absurd. What definition of ‘female’ includes the only sex she is not? The female mammal is characterised by the production of gametes (ova) which can be fertilized by male gametes (spermatozoa). No female mammal can fertilize female gametes. No father is a woman. No man is a woman. A woman is an adult human female. Definitions are, necessarily, exclusionary.

Still, in efforts to be more ‘inclusive’, organisations like Bloody Good Period and Cancer Research are reducing women to their biological functions with terms like “menstruators” and “everyone with a cervix”, respectively. Using such passive terms is explicit dehumanisation: other female animals have cervixes and can menstruate. Perhaps the most Orwellian act of ‘inclusivity’ comes from Healthline, who refer to vaginas as “front holes” in sex-education material. This is clearly offensive and ridiculous. You know this. Yet any woman who protests the erasure of ‘woman’ as a meaningful category is smeared as a ‘TERF’. Women who claim ‘women don’t have penises’ are being investigated by the police for hate crime. This is a laughably grotesque form of sexist injustice. As a leftist, surely you can’t defend this.

These new ideas about gender disproportionately affect women who have their own specific spaces, shortlists and movements. These were created not only to promote solidarity and to address historical disadvantages, but also to safeguard against male violence. The absurd climax of gender activism is that male sex offenders are now being housed in female prisons because they ‘identify’ as women. It seems obvious to me not to lock sex offenders in a space with powerless women, but, again, arguing this position gets you smeared with the slur ‘TERF’ (a term I wish you’d stop using). This may be an uncomfortable truth, but around half of UK trans prisoners are incarcerated for sexual crimes (including rape and paedophilia). This is not to argue that all transwomen are sexually violent, merely to point out that this is over double the 19% figure for sexual violence across the prison population as a whole. Why is this? These are questions we need to be free to ask, alongside many other questions: why are gender identity clinics seeing such dramatic increases in teenage girls with mental health issues and autism? Yet events organised by women to discuss these issues are being systematically shut down. Do you defend this assault on women’s democratic right to free speech and assembly?

I know you have many trans friends, some I know and am also very fond of. I understand that you have seen them struggle and that you naturally want to defend them. As with any feminist position, I am not attacking any individual male or denying their struggles. I am trying to objectively point to facts. Someone told me that in taking a gender-critical position, I am viewing trans people as “either mentally ill or immoral” and that this is cruel and unfair. I sympathise with their point, but this isn’t my position. This reminded me of CS Lewis’ argument that Jesus was either Lunatic, Liar, or Lord. Like CS Lewis, this activist excluded another possibility: simply being mistaken, which is where I sit. I worry that a lot of young trans people have misread their gender dysphoria as signalling that they are literally the other sex. But “Trans Women Are Women” was meant to be compassion, not truth.

Chateau Heartiste #sexist heartiste.wordpress.com

Dating Market Value Test For Women

UPDATE:

I’ve adjusted the scoring and categories a bit because the test was skewed somewhat toward lower scores. For those who have arguments with my scoring system, understand that it is based on averages. I’m sure everyone knows a 34 year old woman who is just as hot as the average 22 year old girl, but the exceptions don’t make the rules.

And a note on BMI:
I used the 1959 Met Life height-weight insurance charts as guides as they are the most accurate (before American “grade inflation” made obese the new normal). A 5’10” 140lb woman would have a BMI of 20.1, which puts her well within the most desirable BMI category.

*****

If you are a woman, this test will measure your dating market value. The higher the number, the better quality man you can catch. The lower the number, the more likely you will find yourself surrounded by cats. Unlike the male version of this test, here I have added a sliding scale to some of the questions because this better reflects the outsized importance that certain factors have on a woman’s total sexual value.

Guys, you may take this quiz for your girlfriends or wives to see if you have settled for tepid sex once a week or if you always get hard looking at her and never forget her birthday.

1. How old are you?

15 to 16 years old: +5 points
17 to 20 years old: +10 points
21 to 25 years old: +8 points
26 to 29 years old: +3 point
30 to 33 years old: 0 points
33 to 36 years old: -1 point
37 to 40 years old: -5 points
41 to 45 years old: -8 points
46 to 49 years old: -10 points
over 49: you’ve hit the wall. waysa?

2. How important is makeup to your appearance?

It slightly enhances my looks: 0 points
I look like a different woman with makeup: -1 point
I’m a natural beauty. My morning face looks the same as my evening face: +1 point

3. What is your IQ? (This relates tangentially to your ability to connect emotionally with a man.)

Under 85: -1 point
85 to 100: 0 points
101 to 120: +1 point
121 to 145: 0 points
Over 145: -1 point

*****

The following ten questions deal with the physical attractiveness of your body.

4. Your breast size is:

Bee stings up to A cup: -1 point
B cup: 0 points
C cup: +1 point
D cup, naturally firm: +2 points
DD cup, firm: +1 point
E cup and up: 0 points

5. Your breasts look firm and pert when you wear:

A bra: 0 points
An underwire push-up bra: -1 point
Nothing: +1 point

6. How long are your legs in relation to your height?

Long: +1 point
Average: 0 points
Short: -1 point

7. What is the shape of your ass?

Flat: -1 point
Round and fleshy: +1 point
Round, fleshy, and firm: +2 points
Flat and saggy: -2 points
Just average: 0 points

8. How flat is your stomach?

Cutting board flat: +1 point
Slight pouch: 0 points
Muffin top: -1 point
Flabby beer gut and fupa: -10 points

9. How toned are your upper arms?

Very toned, I can see my triceps: +1 point
Average, not flabby: 0 points
If I hold my arm out, I can wobble the fat underneath my upper arm: -1 point

10. How big are your hands?

Delicate piano fingers, proportionally small: +1 point
Average size: 0 points
Manhands: -1 point

11. Where is there hair on your body?

My head and pubic area only: +1 point
I have to shave my legs daily and wax my bushy eyebrows: 0 points
I have dark forearm hair and a mustache: -1 point
Nipples, asscrack, and that giant mole on my back: -2 points

12. Get a tape ruler and measure around your waist and your hips. Divide your waist number by your hip number. This ratio is:

0.65 to 0.75: +1 point
0.55 to 0.64: 0 points
under 0.55: -1 point
0.76 to 0.85: 0 points
0.85 to 0.95: -1 point
over 0.95: -2 points

13. What is your BMI?

(Go here to calculate your BMI. The scoring of female BMI varies somewhat from that of male BMI because aesthetics, not just general health, have to be taken into consideration.)

under 14.1: -10 points
14.1 to 15.0: -5 points
15.1 to 16.5: 0 points
16.6 to 17.4: +3 points
17.5 to 21.0: +10 points
21.1 to 23.0: +3 points
23.1 to 24.5: 0 points
24.6 to 28.0: -5 points
28.1 to 33.0: -10 points
over 33.0: stop taking this quiz. you get nothing! you lose! good day madam!

*****

The next ten questions are the section of the test that measures your facial beauty. Since so much of a woman’s dating market value resides in the appeal of her face, I have chosen to examine some traits in finer detail. To illustrate how very subtle changes in facial characteristics can mean the difference between beautiful and ugly, look at these two photos:

imageimage

I do not even have to label these photos because almost all my readers viewing them, men and women, will instinctively know which is the hot girl and which is not. Remember this the next time someone tells you beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

14. On a scale of 1 to 10, how pretty are you?

Note: Do not bother soliciting the opinions of the following people, because they will not give you a truthful answer.

Your family.
Your heterosexual female friends.
Your homosexual male friends.
Your heterosexual male friends who would sleep with you given the chance.

Instead, put your pic up on hotornot and check back in a week. Otherwise, go with what you’ve overheard through the grapevine by people who weren’t your close friends, or suck it up and try to be as honest with yourself as possible. Lesbians will also give you an accurate appraisal as long as it is through a third party and not directly to your face. Use the photos above as guidelines. Adjust your rating based on how close your facial morphology matches one or the other.

0: don’t bothering finishing this test.
1 to 2: -10 points
3 to 4: -5 points
5: -1 point
6: +2 points
7: +5 points
8 to 9: +8 points
10: +12 points

15. How clear is your skin?

No acne, blemishes, or poorly located moles: 0 points
Some combination of the above: -1 point
People are always telling you how silky smooth your skin looks: +1 point

16. Do you have any noticeable deformities?

Yes, minor: -1 point
Yes, major: -10 points
No: 0 points

17. How full are your lips?

Pencil thin: -1 point
Average: 0 points
Juicily plump: +1 point
Weirdly oversized: 0 points

18. How high is your forehead?

Low: -1 point
Average: 0 points
High: +1 point

19. How long is your jawline from ear to chin?

Long: -1 point
Average: 0 points
Short: +1 point

20. How big is your chin?

Small: +1 point
Average: 0 points
Large: -1 point

21. How big is your nose?

Small: +1 point
Average: 0 points
Large: -1 point

22. In proportion to the size of your face, are your eyes:

Large and saucer-like: +1 point
Normal-sized: 0 points
Small and beady: -1 point

23. Is the distance between your eyes:

Wide: +1 point
Average: 0 points
Narrow: -1 point

The bottom line on female facial beauty is that as the lower half of her face becomes smaller and more delicate, making her eyes and cheekbones appear more prominent, the better looking she will be.

*****

The final eleven questions measure your femininity, sexiness, and pleasing personality traits. This is the closest to “game” that women have at their disposal. It isn’t much, which is why the scoring is lowest in this section.

24. You frequently wear sexy lingerie, even when not prepping for a hot date.

Yes: +1 point
Special occasions only: 0 points
Never. Ripped and stained comfy granny panties only: -1 point

25. When someone gets hurt you are the first to ask if they are OK and to deliver aid if needed.

Almost always: +1 point
Occasionally: 0 points
Almost never: -1 point

26. You are highly competitive and often play co-ed team sports.

Yes, and I will throw an elbow if necessary. My shelf is filled with trophies: -1 point
I like to exercise on nice days with one on one sports like tennis: +1 point
I’m competitive with other girls, but not guys: 0 points

27. When a guy approaches you in a bar, regardless of your attraction for him, you:

Smile and look at him: +1 point
Pretend like you don’t notice him coming: 0 points
Frown and tell him you’re talking to your friends before he even gets a chance to say Hi: -1 point

28. On a first date the check arrives for dinner and drinks. You:

Offer to split the check or even pay in full: +1 point
Smile and thank the guy when he pays for the check: 0 points
Forget to thank him after he pays for your ungrateful ass: -1 point

29. You are about to have sex with a guy for the first time. He undresses and his penis is small. Do you:

Tell him how great his cock looks and feels?: +1 point
Say nothing: 0 points
Look surprised and stifle a laugh: -1 point

30. You think blowjobs are:

Great! You give them spontaneously and there’s never any doubt how much you enjoy it: +1 point
An obligation: 0 points
Gross. You gave one after your BF proposed and spit it on his shoes: -1 point

31. Do you do anal?

Yes, and it makes me come to know how much it pleases my man: +1 point
Only when I get really drunk: 0 points
Never. It’s an exit only: -1 point

32. The number of sex positions you have tried is:

3 to 10: 0 points
Missionary and doggy style only: -1 point
I’m a contortionist: +1 point

33. How often do you curse?

I think I said damn once: +1 point
I blurt out fuck and shit a few times a week: 0 points
My mouth is a gutter: -1 point

34. You’d best describe your sense of fashion as:

I’m a label whore: -1 point
I hide my body under baggy tees and ill-fitting jeans: -1 point
I wear casual clothing that flatters my figure: 0 points
I wear stylish clothing on weeknights and I can handle heels over 3 inches: +1 point
My flip flops have my foot imprint in them: -2 points

*****

SCORING

There is a minimum of -83 points and a maximum of 64 points to earn based on the questions asked. The reason the minimum score goes lower than the maximum score goes high is because there are a few things, such as gross obesity, old age, or a major facial deformity, that seriously negatively impact a woman’s overall rating to the point of market extinction.

The scoring breaks down as follows:

-83: You are proof that god does not exist, but that satan does.
-82 to -56: You’re an omega. If it makes you feel better you will have your choice of male omegas to bang.
-55 to -40: The majority of men are disgusted by the sight of you. Your kind will suffer most when our sexbot overlords arrive. Losers hit on you constantly figuring they have a chance.
-39 to -20: You were born to cockblock. But you’ll manage to marry a table scrap.
-19 to -5: Lesser beta. The men you want make fun of you out of earshot. You spend many years learning how to settle for mediocre betas.
-4 to 14: Classic beta. Your hot friends always gets hit on first, but if you really tramp it up you can snag a slightly better than average guy to take you home for a single night of commitment.
15 to 29: Greater beta. More than a few attractive guys will approach you. But if your personality is flawed you risk becoming a pump and dump victim.
30 to 43: You are officially a nascent alpha female. A lot of quality guys will hit on you and you will be able to pick and choose at your leisure. But don’t push it. You’re not quite hot enough to string guys along forever.
44 to 55: You’re a bona fide hottie. Nearly every guy who meets you agrees you are a hottie. So does every girl. This puts you in the top 1% of worldwide womanhood. With great power comes great responsibility, so try to limit the number of men you torture with blueballs and LJFB rejections to fewer than 100 in your social circle. As long as you are not a complete bitch, marriage with a top quality man will come easily to you.
56 to 63: Guys want you, girls want to be you. You are just short of perfection, which paradoxically means you will get hit on more than the super alpha females. You are a player’s greatest challenge, and his greatest reward, because unlike the perfect woman there is still something human about you. Sex, love, security, commitment, easy living… you have it all. Only your demons can defeat you.
64: Super Alpha. The world is yours. Life is an endless parade of joy and excitement. Your power is illimitable… for now.

I hope everyone noticed what was missing from this test:

Your job.
The amount of money you make.
Your accomplishments.
Your social status and number of friends.
Your deep and profound worldview.

Unlike the men who took my Male Dating Market Value test, I do not expect *any* women to be completely honest with themselves taking the Female Dating Market Value test. The female ego is simply way too fragile to absorb the shock of such a brutal self-assessment. Therefore, I will be mentally subtracting 10 points from every woman who posts her score here in the comments.

(Submitter's note: Compare and contrast Dating Market Value Test For Men)

kalidurga #wingnut #fundie en.kalitribune.com

Political correctness is rightly considered to be a vague term. However, this by no means warrants anyone to infer that it doesn’t exist and sway our lives to an enormous extent. The very point of deeming something inexistent by pointing out that it is vaguely defined is a tell-tale sign of the real root of what we call “Political Correctness.”

Namely, the idea that morality is purely a matter of strictly systematized application of language stems from the age old principle of what philosophers call nominalism, the doctrine that assumes that cognitive process is nothing but the apprehension and conceptualization of sense data.
While this process is at work in everyday experience, nominalists omit one extremely important – in fact essential – element inherent in human knowledge, namely: that things themselves have essences or “natures” which mold our notions about them.

By denying the necessary, or indeed: any, intrinsic substantial nature to beings, nominalism empowers it’s adherents to define and redefine them at will.

This is a true meaning of so-called “Occam’s razor”, a method named after a Medieval English Franciscan philosopher William of Occam, stating that, in paraphrase, “any multiplications of beings unnecessary to satisfactory explanation is false”.

Of course, nominalists are not prone to examine their own assumptions and they take for granted that what we see, hear, touch, smell or taste is all there is to know, not taking into account that very principles they profess cannot be based on this, because they are meant to apply to all conceivable instances.

If all knowledge is a cognition of perceivable individuals – of manifold chaos with no intrinsic unity – how can then anything be applied to all conceivable instances?

It can’t.

In the series of podcasts we hereby present, the political correctness is defined as an instance of extreme moral nominalism. Namely, there’s a one characteristic feature of nominalist minded people: while denying anything remotely spiritual in this world, they at the same time tend to deny all substance – even the matter itself, while making their own notions about reality absolute.

It’s a kind of magical thinking where words are considered to have a power over reality.

This is by no means surprising, because real knowledge is based on concepts and not on sense experience and if we cannot rely on our notions, we can really rely on nothing at all. Things we perceive are in eternal flux and if there’s no unity in them, then there’s no stability which could provide us with certain knowledge.

Like averybody else, nominalists want to have certain principles and moral rules they can rely on. But given that they deny the possibility that world itself provides us with them, they venture to make them up themselves.
And when they succeed at imagining them, they have a compulsive need to impose them upon the world and other people, because that is the only way left open for them to make sense of it.

The things have to conform to the labels nominalists paste upon their surface.
Sounds familiar?

Gender quotas, humanitarian bombing, redefining oneself’s sex, humans merging with the machines, sanctioning of all things possibly offensive, safe spaces in Universities … being called a bigot because you accidentally looked at someone sideways?

If it is, then you are on the right track because you’re not living under the rock. Political correctness is an inherently totalitarian system of moral nominalism, where words and labels are everything, because all else is deemed unreal. It is an utmost and to date the most perfect system of essentially denying the very possibility of morality.

Therefore, it is an elaborate, well thought out, system of evil.

In this three-part podcast, we’ll explore how moral nominalism functions, why is it always accompanied with the compulsive need for strict legalization of it’s principles and how it in effect serves to destroy the language.

A nominalist cookbook

In the first part we explore why is PC so hard to define and why no knee-jerk reactions to it are really valid. While standard fare PC phenomena irritate the hell out of people, when interrogated as to why they get so irritated by, say: legal proscription of three or more different gender toilet labels, they are usually at the lack to give a satisfactory explanation of their dissent.
This is one of the main strengths of PC, namely that it’s adherents can use slurs, memes and emotionally charged rhetoric, while the only weapon at the disposal of it’s opponents is an act of analytical discernment which can be very demanding and never provides one with flashy phrases and one-sentence answers.

We propose that the reason for this is nominalist principle of reduction of reality to utterly simple, atomic, facts that can only be reflected in simple language. Thence follows the famous Occam’s razor dictum that only simple answers are the right ones.
So, for instance, there’s no use to suppose that 9/11 was an elaborate operation, perpetrated by whole network of vested interests, because the idea that it was perpetrated by few amateur pilots of Arabian descent is much simpler and therefore true.
On the other hand, this approach allows promulgators and adherents of PC enormous freedom in defining their concepts which need not relate to anything but “atomic facts” of reality. We illustrate this point by example of Richard Dawkins and his statement that “there’s nothing morally reprehensible in eating human roadkill”.

As nominalism takes into consideration only atomic facts “roadkill” and “eating”, while “human” is only a subjective qualification on the same level as “animal”, there’s no difference in cooking and eating the dead animal and dead human.

All this stems from inability of nominalists to affirm existence of anything that is not based on simplest sense perceptions. And human nature, which is the thing forcing us to essentially discern animal from human, is something you cannot perceive by senses.

The result is that political correctness becomes moral system completely detached from moral reality which seeks to make itself absolute. In order to do that PC individuals are forced to seek it’s legalization, i.e. to turn their ever expanding principles into laws.

Unknown Indonesian gvernment officials #fundie sott.net

Indonesia's new 'heresy app' draws fire for targeting of minorities

A new Indonesian government app that lets the public report suspected cases of religious heresy is drawing fire as rights groups warn it could aggravate persecution of minorities in the world's biggest Muslim-majority nation.

Users of the app can report groups practicing unrecognized faiths or unorthodox interpretations of Indonesia's 6 officially recognised religions, including Islam, Hinduism, Christianity and Buddhism.

"Smart Pakem", which was launched Sunday, November 25, and is available for free in the Google Play store, was created by the Jakarta Prosecutor's Office, which said it would help educate the public and modernize the current reporting process.

The app will also list religious edicts and blacklisted organizations and will allow users to file complaints instantaneously, instead going through the often cumbersome process of submitting a written accusation to a government office.

"The objective...is to provide easier access to information about the spread of beliefs in Indonesia, to educate the public and to prevent them from following doctrines from an individual or a group that are not in line with the regulations," Nirwan Nawawi, a spokesman for the prosecutor's office, told AFP in a statement.

However, rights groups fear the application could be misused by increasingly powerful hardline Islamic groups and widen divisions in a country where harassment of religious and other minorities is not uncommon.

"This is going from bad to worse - another dangerous step to discriminate religious minorities in Indonesia," said Human Rights Watch researcher Andreas Harsono.

Bonar Tigor Naipospos, vice chairman of rights group Setara Institute, added: "This is dangerous because if mainstream society doesn't like (a group) they'll report them through the application - this will create problems."

Hundreds of thousands of people across the sprawling Southeast Asian archipelago who adhere to non-recognised animist and mystical faiths have long suffered discrimination and limited access to public services.

This year an angry mob rampaged through a small community of the Ahmadiyya Islamic minority on the island of Lombok, destroying homes and forcing dozens of members to flee.

The religious sect has been declared heretical by the Indonesian Ulema Counci (MUI).

Indonesia, a 17,000 island archipelago nation, is often touted for its diversity and religious tolerance, but it has a wide-ranging blasphemy law that has sparked a backlash.

Criticising religion - particularly Islam, which is followed by nearly 90% of Indonesia's 260 million citizens - can land offenders in jail.

This summer, an ethnic Chinese Buddhist was jailed for insulting Islam after asking her neighborhood mosque to lower its sound system during the daily call to prayer because she found it too loud. Her jailing was widely criticized. -

Linda Italiano #fundie charismanews.com

One Ex-Lesbian's Plea to Pastors Across America

Dear Pastors,

There are things I urgently need for you to know. And there are things I desperately need you to tell me. I shudder to think where I'd be today if my pastor had not been bold enough to tell me the truth regarding homosexuality, a lifestyle in which I lived for more than 30 years. Pastors, please take time out of your busy schedule to read my humble plea.

First, I need you to tell me in no uncertain terms that homosexuality is a sin. Show me what the Bible says and tell me that the Word of God is eternal and does not change with the times. Please don't tell me that you won't address it or that you don't have an opinion. Because if you don't speak up, I am going to think that it's all right and will be headed for an eternity in hell. Pastors, when I come to you seeking answers, I need you to boldly speak the truth in love. My very salvation depends upon it.

Next, please let me know that Jesus' death on the cross was enough to cover any sin I have committed, including that of homosexuality. Please tell me that every sin, no matter how minor or major it seems, is an affront to God. If you don't, I will feel like my sin, because it feels more embarrassing or shocking, is harder for God to forgive than the others and I will be left with the wrong impression that homosexuality is the unpardonable sin. It's not.

And last, I need you to tell me to repent. Please tell me that true Christianity calls for genuine repentance of all sin, including homosexuality. And pastors, if I try to make excuses to live in my sin, stand firm because my eternal destiny hinges on it. And then, and this is so very important, tell me that God's power, mercy and grace are more than enough for me to live in absolute freedom. If you don't, I will think that homosexuality is the only sin for which God's power isn't enough. It is.

When I was looking for truth and answers, I walked into a church, just like yours, for the first time in years. I started attending regularly and started feeling the conviction of the Holy Spirit in my heart as I learned what it meant to be a follower of Christ.

I mustered up the courage to speak with my pastor and share that I was homosexual, thinking it was an unchangeable fact. When I walked out of my pastor's office, I had received the unchangeable truth: Homosexuality is a sin. God hates all sin. God loves me. Jesus died for me. I needed to repent from all sin. The cross was enough to forgive me of all sin. God's power delivers me from all sin. Jesus is enough, even for those who struggle with homosexuality.

Pastors, speaking truth no matter how difficult, does not have to end with people running for the exits. I am living proof! I have completely renounced the homosexual lifestyle, am a devoted follower of Christ and live in truth, victory and freedom every day of my life!

I will forever be grateful to my pastor for holding to the truth of God's Word, and pastors, I pray that your congregants will be the same.

With all gratefulness, humility and sincerity,

Linda Italiano, ex-lesbian and born-again Christian

professor #conspiracy atheistforums.org

Summerqueen, you can thank the military for the missile strike on the Pentagon.
There were NO aircraft parts found- no 10.000 pound engines, no aluminum all over, no bodies.
How come?
The sole security video that was released had the section between the missile just appearing and the explosion removed.
How come?
The damage hole in the Pentagon wall had NO damage where the wings and engine of a large jet would have caved it in.
How come?

Now let's wander over to Pennsylvania. There was a hole in the ground. No body parts. No aluminum all over, one engine found in the woods (size not revealed). How come?
The investigators looked around, shook their shoulders and left.

A witness to the Penn.flight declared she saw a SMALL jet head to the crash area before hearing the crash.

When 911 occurred, I wondered WHERE were the dogs sniffing for explosives?
Why did the steel immediately get shipped out to China?
This was way before I found the truth about the event.

Like all of you, I blamed the Islamics.
It is ironic that the one atrocity that they did not do was blamed on them.
But the PTB[Powers That Be] got the war they wanted.

I suspect the majority of people cannot tolerate the thought that their leaders are nefarious.
This also goes fully against the grain of the Liberal deep- seated view that all people are basically good. Unwilling to personally see evil within- this view is widened to be nearly all- inclusive.

No children were killed at Sandy Hook. It was all acting.
The PTB wants to overturn the second amendment so desperately that they concoct these dramas to turn public opinion against the single Amendment specifically designed to protect the public FROM totalitarianism by GOVT.
Once that is gone Tyranny is the plan.

Gally #racist eivindberge.blogspot.no

What follows is a guest post by a man who has recently joined the Men's Rights Movement after a run-in with one of the laws we fight to abolish because it constitutes an evil criminalization of male sexuality. His experience also highlights the importance of the emerging alliance between the MRA and MAP communities. We are in this together, because while most men are not primarily attracted to minors, most men are certainly attracted to minors to some extent well under the age of consent, down to and including what is sometimes called hebephilia. And it is just common human decency to oppose bad laws and persecution of pedophiles just for existing. Or should be.

My name is Gally.

I take this online handle in homage of "the greatest warrior who has ever lived," "Battle Angel Alita" (Yoko von der Rasierklinge), whose story of epic struggles with coming to terms with her past, understanding herself, and accepting what she is and also what she is not, has provided me with more inspiration than any other story I have ever read, real or fictional. It is a great manga, better even than Evangelion in my opinion, and for those interested you can find it here: https://www.mangareader.net/battle-angel-alita-last-order.

As such, I have a few reflections that I would like to share with you. First a disclaimer though: I am a minor-attracted person and most would consider me a pedophile. Although that is technically inaccurate; pedophiles are attracted to pre-pubescent children and I am attracted to pubescent minors, so the more precise term would be "hebephile," but in lieu of distinguishing the term "Minor Attracted Person" (MAP) is recommended.

So, if this upsets or triggers you, you are welcome to not read any further, but I would respectfully request that if you chose to comment, you do so after having read through what I have to say.
I would like to add though, that MAPs basically either think that contact with minors is okay or they don't think contact with minors is okay, and I'm mostly in the latter camp as I have found that personally it's hard for me to hide that I like somebody, and therefore I advice other MAPs to also not get too socially involved with minors that they find themselves having an attraction to, given that it might lead to contact that is too intimate and/or age-inappropriate.

So please consider that people can be and act sensibly and responsibly -- in fact, most people do act responsibly and considerately regardless of sexual orientation, kinks, or mere fantasies, fetishes, or paraphilias.

That aside, in a related issue it has been said that we are what we do, but I would argue that we are also information.

The DNA in all the cells in our body (only ten percent of which are actually human; 90% of "our" cells are bacteria without which we would be unable to digest carbohydrate-based food such as proteins, but only fat and sugar), if unraveled to a string, would reach to Pluto and back. Eleven times. The DNA of all human beings currently alive on our planet Earth could encircle the Milky Way (which is 130,000 light-years in diameter) 20 times over. The combinations of any one pairing of a sperm cell and an egg holds the potential of randomly mixing 43 chromosomes -- one half from the sperm, the other half from the egg -- in two to the power of 43 different ways (2^43).

The number of humans who have ever lived on our planet is thought to be only about 20 billion (counting from the last 10 million years of Homo sapiens thought to be a genetically distinct species), meaning that just by chromosomal pairing alone, only 1/3500-part of what we as a species, what humans are, has ever surfaced from the vast sea of potential humans that can be brought into existence.

The real number may be incalculable, considering that recent research has revealed that our DNA is actually not static, set from birth to death, but changes according to our environment -- and possibly even according to our experiences, influenced by brain chemistry -- our mood, whether we are happy or depressed, at peace or subjected to violence, if we experience freedom or oppression.

What was once thought to be mostly "junk DNA" may not be so after all, but like medical conditions such as heart disease, does not always manifest itself at all times but could be triggered by unknown, hitherto unpredictable and unimaginable combinations of events.

No longitudinal studies have been carried out on this as of yet, but as DNA sequencing becomes exponentially cheaper, we might discover connections between the environment and our evolutionary process that could be as shocking to science as the theory of evolution once was.

To quote a clip from the computer game Alpha Centauri (Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri Secret Project: The Human Genome Project):
"To map the very stuff of life; to look into the genetic mirror and watch a million generations march past. That, friends, is both our curse and our proudest achievement. For it is in reaching to our beginnings that we begin to learn who we truly are."
Genetic analysis (comparison of actual mutations to known rate of mutation of male and female chromosomes) has already revealed that throughout human history, only half of males have succeeded in reproducing, whilst almost all females have. Which, one could argue, means that evolution -- and thus, progress -- is almost exclusively a male endeavor. Which also explains why males have more variation -- there are more male geniuses than female geniuses, and more males who never find a mating partner (1/3 of all men in Norway) than females who never find a mating partner (1/6 of all females in Norway).

We are information above all, and there is nothing that is more Holy of Holies than Knowledge, for only knowledge can bring understanding, and only understanding can create with intent -- with a goal in mind. Be that evil, to gain power over the weak, or good, to bestow powers upon them.
To quote the science-fiction author Peter Watts:
Evolution has no foresight. Complex machinery develops its own agendas. Brains — cheat. Feedback loops evolve to promote stable heartbeats and then stumble upon the temptation of rhythm and music. The rush evoked by fractal imagery, the algorithms used for habitat selection, metastasize into art. Thrills that once had to be earned in increments of fitness can now be had from pointless introspection. Aesthetics rise unbidden from a trillion dopamine receptors, and the system moves beyond modeling the organism. It begins to model the very process of modeling. It consumes evermore computational resources, bogs itself down with endless recursion and irrelevant simulations. Like the parasitic DNA that accretes in every natural genome, it persists and proliferates and produces nothing but itself. Metaprocesses bloom like cancer, and awaken, and call themselves I.
Our interactions shape others, as theirs in turn also shape us.

Our identities, therefore, are in constant flux, as noted by many religions -- from the Bible's "Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another" to Buddhism's reflections on the transitory nature of man, to the Native American story of the struggle between the "good" wolf and the "bad" wolf that lives inside of our hearts, and how feeding the "good wolf" that is cultivating constructive and positive habits and behavior is recommended if you want him to win the struggle with the "bad wolf."

My point being, behavior is changeable, we are creatures of habit, we can change and we can improve ourselves and the lives of others and even the course of history by our participation in it.

We can learn from our mistakes, and for many this is the primary way of learning -- trying, failing, and improving -- but we cannot learn from mistakes that we are not able to make -- or that we are not allowed to make, as we fear an ever-watching, ominous presence of mass surveillance by people whose only intentions is to punish and harm us.

We can do good towards one another. But only if we understand the difference between good and bad. And we can seek peaceful, ethical solutions to problems that in the past may have seemed almost intractable, impossible to solve. We can think; not just feel. We can understand -- or at least accept -- reality as it is, not just condemn others, and by doing so, through proxy curse our common humanity. We can be generous; not just selfish. We can seek what is best for others, not just what we desire.
And we can have progress. Real, tangible, measurable progress, social growth, care for the weak and the confused and even for those with little self-control or ability to reflect upon consequences.

One of the oldest recorded stories is that of the "Fall from Grace," or as it is also called, the "Original Sin." Woman rebelled against a meaningless command by a dictatorial authority, allied with Man, and in the story it is said that God himself admitted that now they had both "become like God, knowing good and evil" -- by gaining experience-based knowledge of the difference between Good and Evil, through rejection of a meaningless "evil" as the eating of a piece of fruit from a particular tree was.

The price paid was to be cast out, and living a life of hardships and struggles.

A high price, that not many are willing to pay, but instead bend their knee and accept commandments to not think for oneself, but obey unquestioningly, even to meaningless absurdities.

Right now the world is in a dire state.

The level of freedom and independence of the press has never been lower, at the same time as we are manipulated by fake news, politically controlled propaganda, and an almost insane denial of the truth and a blatantly open disregard for empirically provable, reproducible, peer-reviewable scientific facts. Surveillance equipment is exported from western nations to repressive regimes all over the world, and Human Rights that were introduced after the second world war are being gradually rolled back for carefully selected minorities.

The ones whom it is easy to portray as evil.

As sick.

As disgusting.

As dangerous.

As abominations that are inhuman and must be purged, or locked away for as long as possible, as a way to frighten others not to commit similar crimes, rather than be offered any meaningful preventative therapy or harmless outlets.

People like me, whose crime is being different in that I am more attracted to teenagers than to women my own age, and whose rights to the liberal progress that other minorities have enjoyed to the betterment of society in general (such as homosexuals and transgenders), are being denied.

Many who experience such a degree of hatred, kill themselves -- especially young pedophiles, who would rather die than ever risk harming a child.

Others suffer through recurring depression, a feeling of alienation from society, despair and fear, and engage in substance abuse.

And then there are those whom the authorities succeed in convincing that they are evil, not in control of themselves, sick and destined to commit crimes sooner or later, and who chose to do so, fulfilling the only role that society prescribes for them.

They -- we minor-attracted people -- are being used as a spearhead to drive through changes in our societies that makes the rule of law become less based on objective and established principles, but more on subjective abuses of power. The argument being, exceptions must be made to the way the law is practiced, and one must punish harder because the current harsh punishment is clearly not working and therefore, the "logic" goes, it isn't harsh enough, because of course punishment -- in the eyes of those who see punishment as preferable -- is the only thing that helps.

They say that "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail", and also that "if you truly believe you can compensate for incompetence by increasing your efforts, there is no end to what you cannot do."

In the same vein, "Military Idiocy" is defined as "It didn't work, so we need to do more of it," and "Police Idiocy" isn't much different: "It doesn't work, so we need to continue doing it."

So with their incompetence the only solutions they understand are punitive, violent, cruel and sociopathically sadistic, and as a result they are in the process of causing changes that make governance of the people be more about control under the threat of punishment, than about preventative measures through guidance, acceptance, and inclusiveness. Changes that alienate us from each other, that make us wary of speaking our minds, thinking our independent thoughts and questioning others', and make us fear expressing ourselves in ways that we are uncertain could be used against us at some point in time.

Changes that are even measurable in how far from home children have been allowed to roam, as documented at http://freerangekids.com/. "Stranger danger" is a divisive tactic that splits local communities, and Divide & Conquer is the oldest strategy in the book. Make people fear their neighbors, and they will never be able to cooperate sufficiently to protest against exploitation.

In addition, surveillance makes everybody who is not rich enough to not have to work or obtain an education and build a career in cooperation with others too concerned with their employer's reputation and angsty about making mistakes, which makes it harder for the 99% of the population who are not born rich to ever learn from their mistakes and understand elementary facts of life such as that we cannot just eat cake if we do not have bread, and thus gain life experiences that makes us compassionate of others, tolerant, forgiving, and wise.

In comparison, the one percent who are born filthy rich can write books like Chicks O'hoi where they describe how they have an entire suitcase full of sex toys and love having their asshole rimmed and how their jaw is almost cramped from sucking dick for so long. The author of that book is anonymous, by the way, but let's just say I have a very strong suspicion I believe I know who she is. And if she is reading this: stylometric analysis revealed that J.K. Rowling was the author of a book she didn't want people to know she wrote, and your entire Instagram-account has been downloaded and I have no problems finding the programs that can do such an analysis.

The ignorance of the rich -- and their self-satisfaction from being "better" than others through having more money -- has always been a great comfort for the state, since if they really understood how others suffered from hardships that they themselves have never experienced, they could have made meaningful change towards and actually contributed to the betterment of society.

For the other 99% who are not as docile and indolent due to being spoilt rotten, surveillance is in effect a way for governments to be dumbing down the people, make them fearful and obedient, and above all: not protest against injustices and abuses of power. Lest our own lives comes under scrutiny, and every word we have ever written is combed through and analyzed, taken out of context or misrepresented, and used against us.

The plan is well underway to turn human beings back from free citizens with rights, to serfs who are under the control of whatever local official is effectively lording his power to define what "law" means and whom it applies to, under his personal jurisdiction.

The police and the military welcome this return to serfdom, as it caters to their psychopathic delusions of grandeur and dreams of powers over even the thoughts and feelings of others.

I recently had the pleasure of attending such a display of police psychopathy, as I was accused of downloading child pornography, what the police wants to define as "documentation of sexual abuse against children," while including cartoons, written stories, and defines "children" to include those over the legal age of consent.

One thing even the police managed to testify truthfully was that the vast, vast majority of the material in my possession involved teenagers posing in the nude. Pictures produced by a professional photo model studio, with the parents' consent, as documented at https://wikileaks.org/wiki/An_insight_into_child_porn.

In other words, at the very lowest level of what the law considers child pornography, and in my personal opinion very comparable to mere nudism -- which is not now, nor ever can, be made illegal.

Unless, of course, we adopt standards for morals that are applied in countries which have been the most reluctant to adopt human rights, to the point of actively working against their acceptance in their particular region of the world -- where workers are exploited as slaves and people in practice have no rights or protection under the law.

In the Western world, we have enjoyed human rights because we have been needed as workers in industry and production of commercial goods, and our labor and creativity has caused an economic growth of 3-4% annually since public education was instituted in Great Britain in 1876.

This is changing with the coming of the second machine age, where human cognitive labor is gradually being replaced by machines.

We are becoming less needed, and people without jobs are said to "have the Devil's idle hands," as they have time to think about the crimes, incompetence, and illegitimacy of those in power.

And question why we allow them to rule over us in all things, instead of being allowed to make decisions for ourselves.

Why some small group of people decide that our country (Norway) should support a war halfway across the world, why we should be subjected to decisions made by other countries (The EU, which we are not a part of but still subjected to), why our resources should be exploited at our loss (our country's hydropower generation exported at European market price), why we should invest in activities with no certain profitability (opening up of polar-circle oil fields) that contribute to environmental degradation (at least for the fisheries there and in turn the local communities).

It is easy to make people obey other, incompetent people in power, and accept their illegitimate rule.
Just tell them you are the only ones who can protect them from monsters.

Find some "useful Jews" that you can pretend are the monsters.

Pick out the worst of those who commit crimes, and relentlessly proclaim that they are representative of all of them, then crank up the propaganda and claim that you are now finding it to be even worse than what the public has been told in the past.

Describe the hideous crimes of the extremely few in as graphic, gory, and tabloid detail as possible. Do not encourage reflection by mentioning numbers such as how many percent of men are attracted to pubescent teenagers, and yet never do any harm.

Fuel the outrage and ride the waves of the moral panic. When people panic, they lose the ability to carefully think things through in a calm and rational manner.

And people will obey.

Because you will have convinced them that you are their Savior.

While in reality, behind the scenes a surveillance apparatus is being created that will put an end to social growth, destroy the middle class, and end human progress as we have known it.

A totalitarian police state is emerging, ruled by psychopaths and the most infantile, ignorant, incompetent, imbecilic, inept, insular, and spoilt rotten selfish rich people, positioning themselves to return society to a state of aristocracy and serfs, and we are letting it happen because in reality, we don't really care about the rights of others as long as we can have shiny things to play with.

How blind we have become. And how childish.

I am Gally.

I am a panzerkunstler.

I was born on the 6th of March, 2017, as that was when I decided to set my foot upon this battlefield. I did that with the full knowledge and acceptance that nobody voluntarily goes to war, expecting a long, prosperous, or happy life.

I still chose.

It has now been a year; I have met the Enemy, and He has taught me much.

I have risen from a mere "Lehrling" to now just recently, becoming a "Krieger" (http://battleangel.wikia.com/wiki/Panzer_Kunst).

I am now officially at war.

I do not expect my life to be a happy one.

Or long.

But I decided of my own free will, to join this battle, after hearing a story.

You can find it yourself, if you go look for it.

At the time, I used the handle "LytaHall" on quora.com.

The story was told to me by a retired police investigator, who for twenty years had specialized in cases involving the sexual abuse of children.

He told me of a man who had lured a ten-year-old girl from the neighborhood into his bedroom, where apparently he had made inappropriate advances that had been rejected, and due to the harsh punishments -- this was in the US -- he killed the girl out of desperation that she would tell on him.

I have never in my life experienced anything like what I experienced when I realized what an ABYSS of helplessness and powerlessness I was standing in front. There was nothing I could do, or say, that would change that innocent child's death, the investigator was retired and was only interested in idle conversation, the police are not in themselves drivers for policy or social changes, and if the development of the kind of harsh punishments for such crimes reach Norway, motivated by political posturing and moralistic-based virtue signaling, instead of us looking to nations such as Germany with their successful "Dunkelfeld" program, then that is going to happen in Norway too.

I can change that.

I can read books, I can argue the case for offering free mental health care and harmless outlets before somebody commits a crime, rather than merely waiting for them to do something wrong and then punish them afterwards.

And I am willing to do so.

Even at the cost of my own happiness and health.

Because I wish to do good.

I wish to help make this world a better place, and I am smart and knowledgeable enough to make a difference.

My enemy has taught me much.

I am still learning.

But although I may make mistakes, the true sign of a warrior is not to never suffer defeat, and not to never strike a blow that misses, but to keep on fighting, and to get up again after being defeated.
And to grow stronger.

I am Gally.

I am a panzerkunstler, klasse Krieger.

And I shall now use what I have left of my life to try my very best to prevent the kind of abominable, perverted criminal "justice" system that they have in America (Filling Up Prisons Without Fighting Crime: Mark Kleiman on America's Criminal Justice System), from reaching Norway.

Because looking at the numbers, in the US 13 times more children are killed than in Germany (http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1658-5-ways-were-making-pedophilia-worse.html), and part of that is undoubtedly that "two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead."

To quote parts of the philosophy of panzerkunst:
Panzer Kunst also provides a definite tactical advantage, since it gives its user the ability to analyze an opponent's fighting style and to retaliate accordingly. Therefore, a Künstler will rarely be defeated in a second combat with a given enemy. Künstlers also seem to have been imbued with a sense of fanaticism and willingness to sacrifice themselves if necessary to carry out a mission.
I am Gally.

And I am now (and until my death) at WAR.

Defiance. Because my Conscience does not allow me to stand idly by, as People in Power hurts others for their Personal Careers (Two Steps From Hell - Freedom Fighters).

Alan F. Alford #fundie bibliotecapleyades.net

WHERE did we come from?
Are we the product of a Divine Creation?
Did we evolve through natural selection?
Or is there another possible answer?


Introduction

In November 1859, Charles Darwin published a most dangerous idea - that all living things had evolved through a process of natural selection. Although there was almost no mention of mankind in Darwin’s treatise, the implications were unavoidable and led to a more radical change in human self-perception than anything before it in recorded history. In one blow, Darwin had relegated us from divinely-created beings to apes - the culmination of evolution by the impersonal mechanism of natural selection.

But are the scientists right in applying the theory of evolution to the strange two-legged hominid known as ‘man’? Charles Darwin himself was strangely quiet on this point but his co-discoverer Alfred Wallace was less reluctant to express his views. Wallace himself was adamant that ‘some intelligent power has guided or determined the development of man.’

One hundred years of science have failed to prove Alfred Wallace wrong. Anthropologists have failed miserably to produce fossil evidence of man’s ‘missing link’ with the apes and there has been a growing recognition of the complexity of organs such as the human brain.

Such are the problems with the application of Darwinism to mankind that Stephen Jay Gould - America’s evolutionist laureate - has described human evolution as an ‘awesome improbability’.


In Search of the Missing Link

Speciation - the separation of one species into two different species - is defined as the point where two groups within the same species are no longer able to inter-breed. The British scientist Richard Dawkins has described the separation quite poetically as ‘the long goodbye’.

The search for the missing link between man and the apes is the search for the earliest hominid - the upright, bipedal ape who waved ‘a long goodbye’ to his four-legged friends.

I will now attempt to briefly summarize what is known about human evolution.

According to the experts, the rivers of human genes and chimpanzee genes split from a common ancestral source some time between 5 and 7 million years ago, whilst the river of gorilla genes is generally thought to have branched off slightly earlier. In order for this speciation to occur, three populations of common ape ancestors (the future gorillas, chimpanzees and hominids) had to become geographically separated and thereafter subject to genetic drift, influenced by their different environments.

The search for the missing link has turned up a number of fossil contenders, dating from around 4 million years ago, but the picture remains very incomplete and the sample size is too small to draw any statistically valid conclusions. There are, however, three contenders for the prize of the first fully bipedal hominid, all discovered in the East African Rift valley which slashes through Ethiopia, Kenya and Tanzania.

The first contender, discovered in the Afar province of Ethiopia in 1974, is named Lucy, although her more scientific name is Australopithecus Afarensis. Lucy is estimated to have lived between 3.6-3.2 million years ago. Unfortunately her skeleton was only 40 per cent complete and this has resulted in controversy regarding whether she was a true biped and whether in fact ‘she’ might even have been a ‘he’.

The second contender is Australopithecus Ramidus, a 4.4 million year old pygmy chimpanzee-like creature, discovered at Aramis in Ethiopia by Professor Timothy White in 1994. Despite a 70 per cent complete skeleton, it has again not been possible to prove categorically whether it had two or four legs.

The third contender, dated between 4.1-3.9 million years old, is the Australopithecus Anamensis, discovered at Lake Turkana in Kenya by Dr Meave Leakey in August 1995. A shinbone from Anamensis has been used to back up the claim that it walked on two feet.

The evidence of our oldest ancestors is confusing because they do not seem to be closely related to each other. Furthermore, the inexplicable lack of fossil evidence for the preceding 10 million years has made it impossible to confirm the exact separation date of these early hominids from the four-legged apes. It is also important to emphasize that many of these finds have skulls more like chimpanzees than men.

They may be the first apes that walked but, as of 4 million years ago, we are still a long way from anything that looked even remotely human.

Moving forward in time, we find evidence of several types of early man which are equally confusing. We have the 1.8 million year old appropriately named Robustus, the 2.5 million year old and more lightly built Africanus, and the 1.5 to 2 million year old Advanced Australopithecus. The latter, as the name suggests, is more man-like than the others and is sometimes referred to as ‘near-man’ or Homo habilis (‘handy man’). It is generally agreed that Homo habilis was the first truly man-like being which could walk efficiently and use very rough stone tools. The fossil evidence does not reveal whether rudimentary speech had developed at this stage.

Around 1.5 million years ago Homo erectus appeared on the scene. This hominid had a considerably larger brain-box (cranium) than its predecessors and started to design and use more sophisticated stone tools.

A wide spread of fossils indicates that Homo erectus groups left Africa and spread across China, Australasia and Europe between 1,000,000-700,000 years ago but, for unknown reasons, disappeared altogether around 300,000-200,000 years ago. There is little doubt, by a process of elimination, that this is the line from which Homo sapiens descended.

The missing link, however, remains a mystery. In 1995, The Sunday Times summarized the evolutionary evidence as follows:
The scientists themselves are confused. A series of recent discoveries has forced them to tear up the simplistic charts on which they blithely used to draw linkages... the classic family tree delineating man’s descent from the apes, familiar to us at school, has given way to the concept of genetic islands. The bridgework between them is anyone’s guess.
As to the various contenders speculated as mankind’s ancestor, The Sunday Times stated:
Their relationships to one another remain clouded in mystery and nobody has conclusively identified any of them as the early hominid that gave rise to Homo sapiens.
In summary, the evidence discovered to date is so sparse that a few more sensational finds will still leave the scientists clutching at straws.

Consequently mankind’s evolutionary history is likely to remain shrouded in mystery for the foreseeable future.


The Miracle of Man

Today, four out of ten Americans find it difficult to believe that humans are related to the apes. Why is this so? Compare yourself to a chimpanzee. Man is intelligent, naked and highly sexual - a species apart from his alleged primate relatives.

This may be an intuitive observation but it is actually supported by scientific study. In 1911, the anthropologist Sir Arthur Keith listed the anatomical characteristics peculiar to each of the primate species, calling them ‘generic characters’ which set each apart from the others. His results were as follows: gorilla 75; chimpanzee 109; orangutan 113; gibbon 116; man 312. Keith thus showed scientifically that mankind was nearly three times more distinctive than any other ape.

Another scientist to take this approach was the British zoologist Desmond Morris. In his book, The Naked Ape, Desmond Morris highlighted the amazing mystery of mankind’s ‘missing hair’:
Functionally, we are stark naked and our skin is fully exposed to the outside world. This state of affairs still has to be explained, regardless of how many tiny hairs we can count under a magnifying lens.
Desmond Morris contrasted Homo sapiens with 4,237 species of mammals, the vast majority of which were hairy or partly haired. The only non-hairy species were those which lived underground (and thus kept warm without hair), species which were aquatic (and benefited from streamlining), and armoured species such as the armadillo (where hair would clearly be superfluous). Morris commented:
The naked ape [man] stands alone, marked off by his nudity from all the thousands of hairy, shaggy or furry land-dwelling mammalian species... if the hair has to go, then clearly there must be a powerful reason for abolishing it.
Darwinism has yet to produce a satisfactory answer as to how and why man lost his hair. Many imaginative theories have been suggested, but so far no-one has come up with a really acceptable explanation. The one conclusion that can perhaps be drawn, based on the principle of gradiented change, is that man spent a long time evolving, either in a very hot environment or in water.

Another unique feature of mankind may provide us with a clue to the loss of body hair. That feature is sexuality. The subject was covered in juicy detail by Desmond Morris, who highlighted unique human features such as extended foreplay, extended copulation and the orgasm. One particular anomaly is that the human female is always ‘in heat’, yet she can only conceive for a few days each month.

As another scientist, Jared Diamond, has pointed out, this is an evolutionary enigma that cannot be explained by natural selection:
The most hotly debated problem in the evolution of human reproduction is to explain why we nevertheless ended up with concealed ovulation, and what good all our mistimed copulations do us.
Many scientists have commented also on the anomaly of the male penis, which is by far the largest erect penis of any living primate.

The geneticist Steve Jones has noted it as a mystery which is ‘unanswered by science’, a point which is echoed by Jared Diamond:
... we descend to a glaring failure: the inability of twentieth-century science to formulate an adequate Theory of Penis Length... astonishing as it seems, important functions of the human penis remain obscure.
Desmond Morris described man as ‘the sexiest primate alive’, but why did evolution grant us such a bountiful gift? The whole human body seems to be perfectly designed for sexual excitement and pair bonding.

Morris saw elements of this plan in the enlarged breasts of the female, the sensitive ear lobes and lips, and a vaginal angle that encouraged intimate face to face copulation. He also highlighted our abundance of scent-producing glands, our unique facial mobility and our unique ability to produce copious tears - all features which strengthened the exclusive emotional pair-bonding between male and female.

This grand design could not be imagined unless humans also lost their shaggy coat of hair and so it might seem that the mystery of the missing hair is solved. Unfortunately, it is not that simple, for evolution does not set about achieving grand designs. The Darwinists are strangely silent on what incremental steps were involved, but however it happened it should have taken a long, long time.

There are three other interesting anomalies of ‘the naked ape’ which are also worthy of note.
The first is the appalling ineptitude of the human skin to repair itself. In the context of a move to the open savanna, where bipedal man became a vulnerable target, and in the context of a gradual loss of protective hair, it seems inconceivable that the human skin should have become so fragile relative to our primate cousins.

The second anomaly is the unique lack of penis bone in the male. This is in complete contrast to other mammals, which use the penis bone to copulate at short notice. The deselection of this vital bone would have jeopardized the existence of the human species unless it took place against the background of a long and peaceful environment.

The third anomaly is our eating habits. Whereas most animals will swallow their food instantaneously, we take the luxury of six whole seconds to transport our food from mouth to stomach. This again suggests a long period of peaceful evolution.
The question which arises is where this long and peaceful evolution is supposed to have taken place, because it certainly does not fit the scenario which is presented for Homo sapiens.

Nor have Darwinists explained adequately how the major changes in human anatomy were achieved in a time frame of only 6 million years...


The Mystery of the Human Brain

The greatest mystery of Homo sapiens is its incredible brain.

During the last fifteen years, scientists have used new imaging technologies (such as positron-emission tomography) to discover more about the human brain than ever before. The full extent of the complexity of its billions of cells has thus become more and more apparent. In addition to the brain’s physical complexity, its performance knows no bounds - mathematics and art, abstract thought and conceptualization and, above all, moral conscience and self-awareness.

Whilst many of the human brain’s secrets remain shrouded in mystery, enough has been revealed for National Geographic to have boldly described it as ’the most complex object in the known universe’.

Evolutionists see the brain as nothing more than a set of algorithms, but they are forced to admit that it is so complex and unique that there is no chance of reverse engineering the evolutionary process that created it.

The eminent scientist Roger Penrose, for example, commented:
I am a strong believer in the power of natural selection. But I do not see how natural selection, in itself, can evolve algorithms which could have the kind of conscious judgments of the validity of other algorithms that we seem to have.
What does the fossil record tell us about our evolving brain capabilities? The data varies considerably and must be treated with care (since the sample sizes are limited), but the following is a rough guide.

The early hominid Afarensis had around 500cc and Habilis/Australopithecus had around 700cc. Whilst it is by no means certain that one evolved from the other, it is possible to see in these figures the evolutionary effects over two million years of the hominid’s new environment.

As we move forward in time to 1.5 million years ago, we find a sudden leap in the cranial capacity of Homo erectus to around 900-1000cc. If we assume, as most anthropologists do, that this was accompanied by an increase in intelligence, it represents a most unlikely macromutation. Alternatively, we might explain this anomaly by viewing erectus as a separate species whose ancestors have not yet been found due to the poor fossil records.

Finally, after surviving 1.2 to 1.3 million years without any apparent change, and having successfully spread out of Africa to China, Australasia and Europe, something extraordinary happened to the Homo erectus hominid. Perhaps due to climatic changes, his population began to dwindle until he eventually died out. And yet, while most Homo erectus were dying, one managed to suddenly transform itself into Homo sapiens , with a vast increase in cranial capacity from 950cc to 1450cc.

Human evolution thus appears like an hourglass, with a narrowing population of Homo erectus leading to possibly one single mutant, whose improved genes emerged into a new era of unprecedented progress. The transformation from failure to success is startling. It is widely accepted that we are the descendants of Homo erectus (who else was there to descend from?) but the sudden changeover defies all known laws of evolution. Hence Stephen Jay Gould’s comment about the ’awesome improbability of human evolution’.

Why has Homo sapiens developed intelligence and self-awareness whilst his ape cousins have spent the last 6 million years in evolutionary stagnation? Why has no other creature in the animal kingdom developed an advanced level of intelligence?

Peter LaBarbera #fundie lifesitenews.com

Liberal law center demonizes Christian foes of LGBTQ agenda as ‘hate groups’

August 18, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — In the vast array of leftist lies, one of the most dangerous is that groups and people defending historic Judeo-Christian sexual morality are somehow guilty of "hate." The main perpetrator of that “big lie” these days is the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which has turned smearing and demonizing social conservatives fighting the homosexual-transgender agenda into a very profitable business.

The SPLC is attempting to pull off one of the nastiest and most audacious “bait-and-switch” propaganda coups in history — equating the Christian-conservative led effort to defend biblical morality against the aggressive LGBTQ lobby with vile racists, Neo-Nazis and anti-Semitic extremist groups.

The Birmingham, Alabama-based SPLC’s “hate” campaign is helped along by lazy, biased journalists and online “social justice warriors” who delight in using its past anti-racism credentials to advance the Left's immoral and deviant sex-gender agenda.

CNN lends legitimacy to SPLC

Yesterday, CNN shamefully assisted the SPLC’s bogus “hate” narrative by running a story featuring its “hate map” under the initial headline, “Here are all the active hate groups where you live.” It was accompanied by a graphic of the SPLC’s “hate map” of alleged “hate groups,” which includes, under Illinois, my organization, Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH). We have been slandered as an SPLC “hate group” for the last several years.

On the SPLC ‘s Illinois map, AFTAH and other Christian pro-family groups are listed alongside a KKK group, a "white nationalist" outfit, and some affiliates of the Aryan Nations Sadistic Souls MC, another Nazi group. This is the SPLC’s vicious handiwork, treated as “fact” by the media.

After protests by those miscast as “haters,” CNN changed its headline to "The Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of hate groups.”

Similar stories featuring the SPLC’s bogus “hate map” have popped up across the country, including one in the The Boston Globe headlined, “Where hate calls ‘home’ in Massachusetts.”

The following pro-family groups join Americans For Truth in having the distinct “honor” of being lied about by the cunningly deceptive, sleazy and, yes, downright evil SPLC:

Abiding Truth Ministries (Scott Lively)

Alliance Defending Freedom (the SPLC recently attacked Attorney General Jeff Sessions for addressing this group)

American College of Pediatricians (Dr. Michelle Cretella)

American Family Association (Tim Wildmon)

American Vision

Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM; Austin Ruse)

Citizens for Community Values

Conservative Republicans of Texas (Dr. Steve Hotze)

Family Research Council (Tony Perkins)

Family Research Institute (Dr. Paul Cameron)

Heterosexuals Organized for a Moral Environment (H.O.M.E.)

Illinois Family Institute

Liberty Counsel (Mat Staver)

Mass Resistance (and its chapters in various states; Brian Camenker)

Mission: America (Linda Harvey)

Pacific Justice Institute (Brad Dacus)

Pass the Salt Ministries (Coach Dave Daubenmire)

Pray in Jesus Name Project (“Chaps” Klingenschmitt)

Public Advocate of the United States (Eugene Delgaudio)

Ruth Institute (Jennifer Roback Morse)

Save California (Randy Thomasson)

Traditional Values Coalition (Andrea Sheldon)

World Congress of Families/Howard Center for Family, Religion and Society (Allan Carlson)
As you can see, this is quite a large group, representing many millions of Americans and including some of the most accomplished and effective pro-family leaders in the United States. Who knew that these great Americans were the moral equivalents of neo-Nazi Stormtroopers and the Ku Klux Klan?

Hating truth

They are not, of course. Not even close. Could it be that leftists who deliberately conflate mere opposition to the LGBTQ agenda — a revolutionary sin movement that has destroyed the sanctity of marriage in the law and is leading the assault on citizens’ right to live according to the dictates of their faith with hatred— are the ones truly guilty of hate-mongering?

Common sense and logic tell us that those who resist a deviant-sex movement that has produced such profound evils as “pregnant men”; perversion-positive “Christianity”; and teaching little children that they can “become” the opposite sex though medical manipulations of their young bodies, are motivated not by malice or bigotry but rather a heartfelt desire to ward off the social destruction that comes from celebrating unnatural behaviors.

There is a popular saying in Christian, pro-family circles today: “Those who hate the truth call truth hate.”

I believe that at some level that is true, because when “journalists” cavalierly repeat politically calculated tripe like the SPLC’s “hate” smear as if it is authoritative and meaningful, they demonstrate contempt for sincere people of faith simply trying to follow God.

Besides, one of the “old school” rules of “fair” journalism is that in covering a cultural debate, you do not rely on one group’s biased characterization of its opponents, to preserve the ideal of a disinterested, neutral news story. Of course, those days are long gone as most media have shorn any pretense of objectivity and are increasingly fanatical cheerleaders for Big Gay and Big Trans. (What’s next, Big Poly?)

Go with the Big Lie

And so we behold a Fourth Estate very much interested and dutiful in advancing the “narrative” of one side of the “culture war” over homosexuality and “transgenderism,” using the noble-sounding cover of “civil rights.” Most media don’t even bother anymore to get viewpoints of the “other side” on this issue, or if they do, it’s often just a token quote to help reporters feel like they’re being fair.

This makes the SPLC’s goal of advancing its bold, pro-LGBT “hate” lie much easier than it should be.

It turns out that the “Big Lie” tactic attributed to Hitler was something he accused “the Jews” of doing in his 1925 autobiography, Mein Kampf, years before he led a demonization- and then genocidal government campaign against them. But history records that the mustached Nazi dictator and his henchmen (most notably Nazi propaganda minister Josef Goebbels) became masters of the tactic, ultimately using it as part of their horrifyingly evil program against Jews, Poles, and other “undesirables.”

Hitler wrote: “For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.”

Today’s leftist liars understand this harsh reality and know that their “end justifies the means” approach toward delegitimizing pro-family conservatives as “hateful” bigots yields big political and cultural dividends — and scares the media away from featuring conservatives in their stories.

So rather than oppose pro-family groups civilly on public-policy issues concerning homosexuality and gender confusion (transgenderism), the Left resorts to a sophisticated version of name-calling. It began in the post-Stonewall ‘70s, as radical “gay” activists held up signs equating prominent religious opponents of organized homosexuality, like Anita Bryant, with Hitler.

From there it went to tarring their foes as “homophobes,” a term invented by pro-“gay” psychologist George Weinberg, who neatly flipped the pathology from homosexual behavior itself to opposing homosexuality.

Ultimately, the SPLC “codified” that Big Lie, as it were, with its “hate-labeling” strategy that preposterously mixes Christian, pro-family groups opposed to the LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) Lobby with vile neo-Nazis and white race-warriors.

The SPLC claims it is not demonizing moral and religious opposition to homosexuality but only the methods that the above conservative groups use to oppose the LGBTQ movement, but this is an absurd technicality. In another column, I will expose the arbitrariness of the SPLC’s “criteria” for determining which groups belong on its “anti-LGBT” “hate map.”

‘I’m not a hater?’

And yet, despicable as the SPLC’s hate-smear campaign is, it is highly effective. Making the spurious charge against morality-defenders as “haters” is far easier to do in our post-Christian, morally dumbed-down culture than defending oneself against the loaded accusation.

Indeed, forcing conservatives and Christians to plead defensively, “I’m not … ” is part of the SPLC’s propaganda strategy. We have become a society of simplistic slogans, like “Love is love” and “marriage equality.” In such a culture, accusing good-hearted Christians and conservatives of “hating gays” merely because they oppose (very unhealthy) homosexual behavior, “gay marriage” and creating sin-based “rights” is par for the course.

Denying that you are a “hater” when the most powerful forces in society — media, corporations, academia — are matter-of-factly echoing the SPLC smear — is sort of like denying that you beat your wife. You would never beat your wife — you are called to love her sacrificially as Christ loved the Church — but suddenly you are accused of having abused her, by an organization lionized by the press. A cunning, well-funded organization masquerading as a “civil rights” champion whose allegations are repeated far and wide with an air of moral authority and respectability.

Your pleas about the falseness of the outrageous smear are shared by friends (some similarly accused of beating their wives) but together you are drowned out by a chorus of enemies who have won the sympathy of the corrupt media.

Your only hope for justice is that a large and growing army of people — aided by some counter-cultural media leaders — comes to your aid and exposes the hateful slanders and the wicked organization behind them, so that nobody will ever believe its lies again.

This is how we must counter the SPLC’s calculated, cynical “Big Lie” against people of faith who humbly set out to speak truth, in the love of Christ, about one of the most difficult issues of our age.

Next: The shoddy research, irrationality and arbitrariness of the SPLC’s LGBT “hate group” lie.

Witchwind #sexist witchwind.wordpress.com

UTOPIA: what would a women’s society look like?

I haven’t been writing in a while, and it’s not because I don’t like writing any more but things have accelerated elsewhere in my life and I can’t be involved everywhere at once. As this isn’t paid work, obviously I can’t afford to put blogging first.

Anyway, there are still many posts waiting to be finished. In the meantime, I’ll start another one.

I often muse about all the things that we’d need to change about patriarchy if we abolished men’s rule over women and the earth. Everything and every single aspect of social organisation is so much the opposite of how it should be, it’s dizzying to even begin to think about all the things we should stop / change.

Mostly it’s about men stopping from doing harm. But stopping men isn’t enough because beyond that there is the entire world to relearn, to heal, and our entire society to rebuild. We would be faced with the immense task of replacing all the misogynist, genocidal, biocidal practices men have ordered our society with for eons. So many of us now are acculturated, cut from land, nature and from one another.

If we managed to overcome men’s tyranny over us, how would we rebuild our world? I just want to throw some ideas here that I often come across these days. I dream for concrete, down-to-earth, simple and easily applicable measures of stepping out of patriarchy into a female-loving, biophilic world. This isn’t by any means a realistic plan of how to achieve it, but just reading it makes me feel happy. It makes it feel more real, more possible. Enjoy!

SOCIAL STRUCTURES

Men’s position in society

Before we do anything, the very first measure to adopt is to take all men out of all positions of decision-making immediately, and actually out of any kind of social, professional position whatsoever.

Major serial killers, serial torturers, pimps, pornographers, severe domestic abusers, serial rapists, genocide planners, biocide planners and pedocriminals across the world will simply be euthanised: the decisions will be taken by women in a mass world tribunal for patriarchal crimes. This is by far the best solution, and is the most legitimate, ethical way of reducing male population to more reasonable levels. Such men would otherwise forever pose a threat to women, children, animals, the earth and society as a whole, and we know they have no chance of ceasing their violent behaviour after having reached such an advanced stage of sadism and sociopathy. It would be reckless to spend space, resources and energy in keeping them alive in prisons.

All of men’s (alive and euthanised) belongings, property, resources and land will be confiscated from men and handed back to female care and supervision – property rights over land will be abolished. You can’t own land!

All men at least above 15 (or younger if very asocial) should live separately from women and children, on their own in small huts or studios, isolated from one another and scattered around so that women can keep an eye on them (they should never be in groups or packs, that would be illegal). So it would also be illegal for male adults to impose their presence on females, girls and children. Men would have to care for themselves on their own: food, laundry, etc. No male above his age of puberty would be allowed to receive any kind of service from a female. Their life expectancy would probably drop to the age of 40, but that’s how things should be. Women’s life expectancy without men would rise to 130 years at least.

PIV would be illegal too of course, as well as the initiation of any verbal or physical contact to women and girls or boy children, unless solicited by a woman for specific matters. I’m not sure what to do about boy children. Obviously you know my opinion, but let’s say that’s up to the mother to decide what she wants to do before he turns of age to leave the female family circle.

In order to keep all men and post-pubescent boys busy, we’d send them to clean up the vast amounts of detritus, pollution and toxic wastes men have littered and almost killed the world with. Much of the damage to the earth is irreversible, however with a great deal of effort and genius, women will find sustainable, natural and simple ways of healing a lot of the damage men have caused, and send men off to do the dirty work. No man will be allowed to take any decision without female guidance. We know what happens when men decide on their own! DISASTER.

Family, child-raising and reproduction

Fathers’ rights will cease to exist. There is no such thing as fatherhood — as we all know, it’s a myth. Men will necessarily lose all and any power to dominate and control women’s reproductive capacities.

It’s the inalienable right of each woman to control every phase of her reproduction and life creation. Abortion will be possible at any stage of pregnancy, however there will hardly be such a thing as undesired pregnancy since there won’t be any men forcing pregnancies on us any more. Abortion will nonetheless be recognised for the trauma, mutilation and loss of life that it is. The number of children and human population will naturally decrease to sustainable levels, so will the number of males born. Women will be free to experiment parthenogenesis or procreation with two female eggs.

The nuclear family will be abolished, in particular the parent’s property rights and absolute power over her child. Children will be considered as persons in need for autonomy and all form of punishment, authority or educational manipulation over children will equally be abolished. Raising and caring for children will be a collective responsibility for women, and motherhood / childcare and especially capacity to be empathetic towards children will be taken very seriously, as something that needs to be (re)learned and studied over years before being fully competent for this immense task.

Schools as we know them as punitive reclusion centres for grooming into male domination and female subordination (as well as selection system for elite executors of patriarchal institutions) will be abolished. Boys would definitely not be around the girls, certainly not most of the time, and never beyond the age of puberty. And obviously no adult male would be allowed near children.

There will be no such thing as “teachers” with positions of authority over children. “Guiders” could learn also from the children or students as much the students from them. We’d learn anything we’d want from languages to sciences to art to music to medicine to building to witchcraft to swimming (etc) without restriction of age or time, as long as it’s adapted to our capacities, level and availability. Learning would be autonomous, with guidance when needed, instead of enforced and dictated. They’d be no need for external reward, marking or punishment because the process of learning in itself is so rewarding and fascinating that it’s self-sufficient. Anyway I could go on and on, non-patriarchal learning is truly riveting.

Social structures between women.

All relationships of authority, domination and subordination will be abolished between all women of all ages. We will be able to recognise each other’s strengths, expertise, guidance and capacities (or lack of) without it implying superiority, inferiority, veneration or lack of respect. We would find each other beautiful. We would live our friendships, love and affection for women unhindered.

MEN’S INSTITUTIONS

All oppressive male institutions will be abolished after men have been retrieved from them. We obviously won’t keep these institutions. They will return to the nothingness that they belong, just as a distant, bad memory.

Military:

No more military, no more army, no more wars! It would be illegal for men to hold weapons. Global peace would be the immediate consequence. Most weapons will be destroyed (or recycled into something else), such as weapons of mass destruction, anti-personnel mines, tanks, machine guns, all manners of terrestrial, marine and air-bombers, and all the many disgusting things men have invented. For the remaining weapons such as guns or blades, women will hold exclusive right of use over them in order to defend ourselves from men, from the risk of them taking power over us again.

State:

States, borders, nations, laws would be abolished and totally dispensed with. Laws mentioning the number of prohibited acts will be kept for men only. Women do not need laws to contain ourselves. Laws were created by the male elite to protect their property from other men. Laws are rigid and static, that’s because their purpose is to hold existing patriarchal powers in place. Our own society would be in constant evolution, improvement, creative renewal, yet grounded in reality and adapted to our needs and circumstances.

Women would be able to move freely.

Societal structures and decision-making assemblies wouldn’t exceed roughly 300 women (representing no more than themselves). Keeping numbers low for cooperation is important because the greater the size of the unit, the more horizontal cooperation becomes difficult and requires vertical hierarchy. Possibilities for peaceful, cooperative organisation between women are infinite – as long as they respect the individual integrity of every female – the group should never weigh over the individual but be a source for support and efficient organisation of collective life and space. There could easily be associations of exchange between different groups and peoples in order for women to cooperate regionally and globally where necessary. There would be no limit in age of participation in decision-making for women and girls, which means adapting the format to different ages and capacities.

Medicine:

Men would be permanently banned from any kind of medical practice. All woman-hating, genocidal institutions such as gynecology, psychiatry, obstetrics, big pharma, the torture of living beings in the name of “scientific experimentation” will be banned. Men’s fragmented, objectifying, sadistic view the human body will be part of history, replaced by biophilic medicine. Medical science will no longer be monopolised by a small elite but available to all at any age where appropriate. The (female) doctor’s role will be to guide the patient in her own healing, never to exercise authority over her or take decisions at her expense. Special healing spaces (where surgery is necessary, etc) will be so nice, warm and welcoming that just being there will make you feel better. The soul and life conditions of a person will always be considered part of the body, and symptoms will always be understood in a holistic way. There will be no more chemical, synthetic and toxic products with often worse side effects than the illness itself it claims to heal.

Perfect health would be the normal state of women anyway, as we will learn by experience and observation what we should eat and do to stay healthy at all seasons and times. Most women will have rediscovered our healing, divination and extra-sensory communication powers.

Religion:

Patriarchal religions will crumble down with men’s oppressive system. Religious ideologies, along with its hierarchies and vacuous rituals will cease to exist. I believe a woman’s world would be spiritual. Spiritual connection isn’t based on faith but on critical observation and experience, on a real personal connection to the elements, beings and spirits that surround us, and on the real magnetic power of beings.

Economy (tied to ecology):

Obviously, Slavery, men’s exploitation of women, men’s capitalist systems will be abolished too. The most important aspect of male economy is that it’s based on men’s competitive accumulation of resources (by killing, destroying, commodifying, taking control over, extracting the greatest possible amount of life) and based on production of poisonous, addictive, programmed obsolescent goods — in order to win the patriarchal game of achieving greater domination over women and girls.

This necrophilic relationship to the world and the environment will be abolished, to be replaced by biophilic ecological and economic principles. This will encompass every single process of our life activities, from house building, to food consumption, to communication, travelling, furniture making, cooking, etc. They will have to be carefully designed and thought out in a way as to never endanger the survival of any species, never pollute any environment, never require the use of poisonous, non-recyclable materials, never to require indentured labour or exploitation in order to be maintained. This would obviously impact the nature and scale of our activities. “Work” (exploitation and division of labour) as we know it would disappear. It would be the responsibility of each individual or group to sustain herself more or less autonomously.

We should learn to observe our environment and deeply understand the interconnectedness of all beings around us, as well our own impact before deciding whether or how to transform it. Our lives have no more or no less value than those of a rabbit, fly, tree, plant, fish, seashell or stone. For instance, if we pick leaves of some plants, it’s important not to rip the whole plant off, to take only parts of it so it can grow again. Or to only take a few plants (or seashells, whatever) where there are many, so to respect the survival of the species where it is settled. If we cut trees to build our house, replant them. There are also infinite ways of making the most of materials for energy, food or production while using it as efficiently as possible. Building houses in ways that don’t require heating in winter or cooling in the summer. It is now widely known that energy such as electricity can be infinitely renewable if we use wind power, magnetic power, water power… And everything can be made DIY.

We will learn to be autonomous again and make our own clothes, food, furniture, houses, soaps, detergent products – or maybe someone else will make them but most things can be handmade and it’s so much more rewarding.

In a biophilic world, nothing is garbage, nothing is pollution. Everything is conceived so as to be part of a life cycle. This doesn’t mean we should keep the same toothbrush for 50 years or never improve on our machines, technology and infrastructure, but there’s no such thing as a dump, or toxic spilling. All materials should be harmless, recyclable or biodegradable, given back the earth if we no longer need them.

Industrial agriculture and farming:

Genetic modification of plants, pesticides, monoculture, field ploughing and consequent aridification of the land will be considered criminal. Our right to self-sustenance would no more be confiscated by mega food corporations – as they will no longer exist.

Agriculture should always be small-scale, local, and as much as possible be modelled on wildlife, self-growing / self-renewing conditions (the less work and intervention, the better), and especially be conceived so as to nourish and sustain rather than deplete wildlife and environmental balance. Again, possibilities are infinite, we have so much to learn.

And seriously, killing animals you’ve raised yourself in a farm or keeping animals enclosed is cruel. I’m for the liberation of all farm and domestic animals. It’s up to them to decide whether they want to live with us or not, and they should be able to come and go freely. Maybe after a few decades, after the human population has stalled, male population has decreased, and after we’ve made serious efforts for reforestation and restoration of wildlife on the earth, it would probably be fairer to hunt animals occasionally. Right now, given the extinction rate of animal species, I find it criminal to hunt or fish. We don’t need to eat that much meat anyway.

Tobias Langdon #transphobia #wingnut #racist #pratt #dunning-kruger unz.com

image

Sex and race are, to the left, mere social constructs, abstract systems of delusion and injustice that can be overturned by human will and social engineering. It follows, then, that leftists will support and celebrate men who reject the social construct of sex and claim to be women. And leftists do support and celebrate such men.

Triumph of the Trannies

It also follows that leftists will support and celebrate Whites who reject the social construct of race and claim to be Blacks. But leftists don’t support and celebrate such Whites. Quite the contrary. While Bruce Jenner, a man claiming to be a woman, is worshipped and rewarded, Rachel Dolezal, a White claiming to be a Black, is ridiculed and punished. Steve Sailer and others have drawn attention to this contradiction, but I don’t think they’ve properly explained it.

Why do leftists cheer when men cross the border between the sexes, but jeer when Whites try to cross the border between the races?

I pose those questions deliberately in that form to draw out the links between the left’s love of transgenderism and the left’s love of open borders. The Jewish libertarian Murray Rothbard (1926–95) described this aspect of leftist ideology very well in this passage of an otherwise long-winded and boring essay:

The egalitarian revolt against biological reality, as significant as it is, is only a subset of a deeper revolt: against the ontological structure of reality itself, against the “very organization of nature”; against the universe as such. At the heart of the egalitarian left is the pathological belief that there is no structure of reality; that all the world is a tabula rasa that can be changed at any moment in any desired direction by the mere exercise of human will — in short, that reality can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings. (Egalitarianism as a Revolt Against Nature, Modern Age, Fall 1973)

Rothbard was right in general about leftism, but failed to explain that highly significant exception: why does the “exercise of human will” allow Bruce Jenner and others to become women, but not allow Rachel Dolezal and others to become Blacks?

Sex and race are both aspects of reality, but the left believes that only one of those aspects “can be instantly transformed by the mere wish or whim of human beings.” Why so? I would explain it by supplementing Rothbard’s explanation. Yes, he’s right when he says the left have a magical belief in the reality-transforming power of “human will,” but he doesn’t discuss what happens when there is a clash of wills.

The high and the low

Let’s look at transgenderism first. Men like Bruce Jenner and Jonathan Yaniv (pictured) have “willed” that men can become women and must enjoy unrestricted access to all female spaces. At the same time, some women — the so-called Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists or TERFs — have “willed” that men can’t become women and must keep out of female spaces. There is a clash of wills that is settled, for the Left, by the status of the opposing sides. In leftist eyes, the men have higher status than the women, which is why the men’s will prevails and the women’s will is rejected. But hold on, you might be thinking: How can the men have higher status than the women in leftist eyes? It’s easy: the transgender men have cleverly aligned themselves not with men in general, who are indeed of lower status than women, but with homosexual men, who are of higher status than women.

Trangendered men are part of the “LBGTQ+ community,” which lifts them above women in the leftist hierarchy. Take Jonathan Yaniv, the perverted and probably Jewish male, who claims to be a woman and has been suing female cosmeticians in Canada for refusing to wax his fully intact male genitals. If Yaniv spoke the truth, he would admit that he is a heterosexual male who seeks perverted sexual pleasure by passing himself off as a woman and receiving Brazilian waxes or entering female toilets to share tampon tips with under-age girls, etc. Obviously, then, Yaniv can’t admit the truth. Heterosexual men are wicked in leftist eyes and are well below women in the leftist hierarchy. Heterosexual men definitely cannot pass themselves off as women in pursuit of perverted sexual thrills.

Actual authentic lesbians

Yaniv and other “trans-women” must therefore align themselves with homosexuals to pass leftist purity-tests. As trans-women they claim to be members of a sexual minority, which triggers the leftist love of minority-worship. Indeed, Yaniv and some others go further than simply claiming to be women: they claim to be actual authentic lesbians. A pinned tweet at Yaniv’s Twitter account states that he is “One proud lesbian. I’ll never give up fighting for human rights equality. #LGBTQoftwitter.” Yaniv isn’t a lesbian, of course. Real lesbians — that is, real women who are sexually attracted to other real women — quite rightly reject fake lesbians like him, so the fake lesbians exploit leftist ideology again and accuse real lesbians of bigotry and hate.

Feminism has the concept of the “glass ceiling,” whereby women are unjustly prevented by sexist men from reaching the highest positions in politics, business and academia. Inspired by this, the fake lesbians have invented the concept of the “cotton ceiling,” whereby men like Yaniv are unjustly prevented by real lesbians from removing the underwear of said lesbians and having sex with them. Here is a trans-lesbian activist lecturing a sceptical TERF (i.e. Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist for those not up on the latest jargon) on the injustices of the cotton ceiling:

Trans women are female. When our female-ness and womanhood is denied, as you keep doing repeatedly, that is transphobic and transmisogynist. As I said earlier, all people’s desires are influenced by an intersection of cultural messages that determine those desires. Cultural messages that code trans women’s bodies as male are transphobic, and those messages influence people’s desires. So cis queer women who are attracted to other queer women may not view trans women as viable sexual partners because they have internalized the message that trans women are somehow male.

The comparison to what cis males say also makes no sense. What trans women are saying is that we are women, and thus should be considered women sexually, and thus be considered viable partners for women who are attracted to women. What cis males are saying is that queer women shouldn’t be exclusively attracted to women, which is completely different. (The Cotton Ceiling? Really?, Femonade blog, 13th March 2012)

It’s not “completely different,” of course. In both cases, people with penises are “saying” (and willing) that real lesbians should have sex with them. In both cases, real lesbians would be encountering the male genitals of real men. But the trans-activist believes in an act of verbal transubstantiation whereby a trans-lesbian possesses a “female penis” that, despite all appearances, is “completely different” to the nasty and objectionable penis of a “cis male.”

Aspects of religious psychology

I use the term “transubstantiation” deliberately. It’s a term from Catholic theology that refers to the supernatural process whereby wafers and wine transform into the flesh and blood of Christ during the celebration of Holy Eucharist by a priest. No physical or scientific test can detect this transformation, and to all appearances the wafers and wine remain unchanged. But traditionalist Catholics will insist that the wafers and wine are now truly Christ’s flesh and blood. If you disagree, you’re probably safe nowadays, but you wouldn’t have been in the past. It was very unwise to openly deny, let alone ridicule, transubstantiation in Catholic nations during the Middle Ages. And disagreements over the concept were central to the murderous hatreds of the Reformation. Those who believed in transubstantiation got very angry when it was denied.

This anger, which is part of the odium theologicum, is an important aspect of religious psychology, whether overt or covert — leftism can in fact be explained as a mutation of Christianity and Judaism. Overt and covert religions gain power by demanding belief in things that defy everyday reality, because such belief is difficult and requires a greater emotional investment. When we invest more in a belief, we have more incentive to protect it more strongly. And it is precisely because concepts like transubstantiation and the “female penis” are absurd that they are powerful. When we have an emotional investment in something we can’t prove, we react strongly when it is denied or ridiculed. That applies even more when we ourselves are subconsciously aware or afraid that our beliefs are baseless or false. Crushing external heresies can be a way of stilling internal doubts.

The “female penis” vs the “unisex brain”

And so religion and other forms of ideology can gain power by their contradictions and absurdities. However, in the clash between transgenderism and feminism, both sides believe in absurdities: the trannies insist on the concept of the female penis, just as the feminists insist on the concept of the “unisex brain,” namely, that there is no genuine difference between male and female brains. These two concepts are both biologically absurd: there is no such thing as a female penis, but there is such a thing as a female brain. However, if transgenderism and feminism are both powered by absurdities, why have trannies been winning the battle over the TERFs? Well, it’s partly because the trannies have the bigger, and therefore better, absurdities. For example, the “female penis” is an obvious absurdity, the “unisex brain” is much less so. Penises are out in the open, after all, whereas brains are hidden behind the skull.

And there is a continuum between a typically male brain and a typically female brain that doesn’t exist between male genitals and female genitals in the vast majority of cases. The psychological differences between men and women are a question of averages and tendencies, but the physical differences are generally stark and obvious (inter-sex individuals are rare). A certain group of trannies also have the stronger male will-to-power and love of battle, which is another reason they are winning the battle with lesbians. All this explains why the left supports and celebrates trannies as they cross the border between male and female. As a sexual minority, they have higher status than ordinary women. As a novel and exhibitionist sexual minority, they also have higher status than lesbians, who also have less will-to-power.

Better than Black

Indeed, as I pointed out in “Power to the Perverts!,” transgenderism has allowed some White heterosexual men to leap above the Black-Jewish lesbian feminist Linda Bellos in the leftist hierarchy. The White men are “transgender” and Bellos, although Black, is a TERF. In current leftism, transgender trumps TERF. Leftists therefore support the border-abolishing White men and not the border-erecting Black woman.

However, leftists would instantly support Bellos if those White men were claiming to be Black rather than female. Leftists want the border between male and female abolished, but not the border between Black and White. Why so? Again I would argue that higher and lower status settle the clash of wills. Rachel Dolezal “willed” that she was Black, while Blacks “willed” that she wasn’t. Dolezal was trying to abolish a border, Blacks were trying to maintain one, so a naïve reading of leftism would say that leftists should support “trans-racialists” like Dolezal just as they support transgenderists like Bruce Jenner. But leftists didn’t support Dolezal, and Blacks easily won the battle of wills. The border between Black and White stayed up, and Dolezal was ridiculed and punished, despite being more convincing as a Black than most transgenderists ever are as women.

{Submitter’s note: Langdon rants on and on… see the source link if you’re really interested about the rest of it}

Tim Murray #fundie eurocanadian.ca

he most significant thing about this story is not Bernier's gutsy comments, but the predictable reaction to them. The nauseating cant issuing from Scheer's spokesman Brock Harrison, and Michelle Rempel's tightrope walk over both sides of the fence was to be expected. Unless an organ donor steps forward to offer his brain, I can’t help Harrison. But I can help Rempel. If Michelle wants data to support the argument that ours is not a “functioning pluralism”, if she sincerely wants to learn about the costs of diversity, she only need to google Robert Putnam + Bob Birrell + a myriad of other studies related to theirs. Or if it would be more convenient, she can take a look at this or this or a comprehensive reference list like this.

There is even a University of Victora statistical study conducted in 2010, led by Zheng Wu, that found that many new immigrants feel comforted and protected by settling into ethnic neighbourhoods and that they are less apt to feel loyalty to Canada by doing so. Or as Wu put it, life in ethnic enclaves reduces immigrants' "sense of belonging to Canada." So voluminous is the data that even a casual perusal of it would lead any impartial researcher to assert that the onus of proof is clearly on those who promote diversity, rather than those who question its benefits. The game is over and the final score is Evolutionary psychology 1, Social Engineers 0.

As if we needed more proof, the “Bernier” incident reveals once again that the Conservatives are a a "Me Too" party. Liberals dressed in blue who share the all-party consensus that rapid immigration driven population growth and continuing ethnocultural fragmentation is self evidently good for the country. Rather than follow the Ford formula, rather than tap into the vast pool of disgusted non-voters, Scheer prefers to compete for the favour of the 5% swing voters in the middle because pundits tell him that this is the only way that a political party can win. Accordingly, he is desperate and determined to silence mavericks like Leitch, Belak and Bernier so that they can't provide Trudeau with the ammunition he needs to brand the Conservatives as party of bigots and extremists. In effect, Scheer and his coterie of strategists are allowing the CBC and the MSM to determine what kind of Conservative is fit to lead or speak for the Conservative Party.

Conservatives need to understand that the number of people who cast ballots in federal and provincial elections is not fixed. It is not a certainty that more than four in ten of registered voters will continue to stay home on election day. The only reason they do is that they understand that all the main parties are mere factions in a ONE PARTY state. They realize that parliament is a closed shop. And that as long as there are party whips, as long as there are virtually no free votes in the House, political parties will not feel obliged to listen to the feedback of their constituents. While it has become the fashion of politicians of all parties to hold "town hall" meetings in their constituencies, they do so only to give constituents the false impression that their views will be decisive in determining how their parliamentary "representative" will vote on any given issue.

Four in ten of us recognize this charade as a fraud, and we register our cynicism by abstention on election day. It is not about voter apathy, it's about voter rebellion. Some rebels spoil their ballots, some formally refuse them if they can, and some stay home. Instead of chasing after swing voters with a progressive mentality, instead of working within the closing Overton window of acceptable PC discourse, instead of conceding more and more ground to anti-Western cultural demolitionists, Conservatives should appeal to the rebels. They should think and campaign outside the box. They should weaponize the muzzled majority.

Here is some unsolicited advice to Tory strategists and convention delegates. If you want to know what leadership candidate to select — the candidate who has the best chance to win the next election— pick the candidate that the CBC and the MSM vilifies most, the one they say has no chance of winning, the one who would, they warn, lead the Conservative Party to oblivion or permanent marginalization. The one who dares to challenge the shibboleths of multiculturalism and immigration. The one whom they say does not represent "Canadian values".

That would be the candidate whose victory will send them into shock and horror and prove, once again, that the political class hasn't a goddamn clue about how the masses think, or any concept of what "values" guide them.

There is a reason why "outsiders" and "extremists" like Ford and Trump win. It is because they are not outsiders or extremists. They are "insiders". They dwell inside the world and thinking of ordinary people. The real outsiders live in bubbles. In newsrooms, broadcast studios, and ivory towers. And the real extremists are the ones who have pushed the extreme agenda of hyper-immigration, demographic displacement, quota hiring, transgender ideology, runaway political correctness, censorship, the criminalization of speech, and the conscription of tax payer dollars to subsidize those who lobby for this agenda — most particularly the radical ideologues in the CBC.

Progressives on both sides of the border contend that Trump's victory emboldened "haters" and "normalized" hate. But the truth is that haters have long been emboldened, and hate speech has long been the norm. The only reason that Leftists didn't notice it is that the hate was coming from their direction. It was looking at them in the mirror. Hating white people and Western civilization is quite the norm these days, and those who spew such hatred are rather bold about it, don't you think?

The sad thing about this affair is that Bernier's twitter comments are treated as controversial, instead of what they should be. A statement of the blatantly obvious.

sadoeconomics #fundie sadoeconomist.tumblr.com

Can you give a good reason why you believe child pornography ahouldnt be illegal? Because to me it sounds like youre justifying child rape in the name of "anti-censorship"

I’m not doing that at all, and you shouldn’t put scare quotes on anti-censorship.

First, let’s go over a few incidents. Recently, I heard about an acquaintance of mine whose 16-year-old son’s 17-year-old girlfriend attempted to send him a topless selfie but instead accidentally texted it to her neighbor, an old lady who freaked out and called the police. And the first reaction of the police was to begin the process of indicting ALL THREE OF THEM for possession of child pornography and adding them to the sex offender registry for life - and it’s only because the girl’s dad was a golfing buddy of the chief of police that it ended with all of their cell phones being confiscated and wiped instead. Does this sound like a reasonable way of dealing with this situation? Were all of them child rapists? How much prison time should you get for the crime of receiving an unsolicited JPEG file exactly?

Let’s consider also the Playpen incident last year, which was what prompted that post you’re probably responding to, in which the FBI ran a sting operation that disseminated a massive amount of child pornography through the dark web, which was so badly mishandled that very few people they caught downloading real hardcore child rape pornography can be prosecuted. The US federal government is itself unquestionably the biggest distributor of child pornography there is. This is the same federal government that ran COINTELPRO, MKULTRA, the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, etc. And they are now headed by Donald Trump, who is one of several political figures who went to Jeffrey Epstein’s private island before Epstein was convicted of trafficking in underage prostitutes. Donald Trump of the Republican Party, which recently had Dennis Hastert as the Speaker of the House, who has since been convicted of raping an underage boy. And let’s not even get into all the shit the Democrats have been caught doing. Are these the people you trust to fairly enforce these laws? Do you think it would be difficult for any three-letter agency to put child pornography on your computer without your knowledge if they wanted to, so they could prosecute anyone they wanted and claim they were secretly a pedophile, to destroy their reputation? Is that a power you are comfortable with Donald Trump and the deep state having? They haven’t been willing to legally define ‘pornography,’ even. Having laws forbidding certain combinations of ones and zeroes hands those people a blank check to destroy whomever they wish.

Let’s go back to what prompted my personal interest in this whole debate, which was the relationship I had with an older woman when I was 16 - when I had a job, I was going to college, I was allowed to drive a multi-ton motor vehicle, I was talking to a recruiter about joining the Marine Corps, etc. but had no access to many other legal rights arbitrarily withheld from people under 18. If she had sent me racy photos of herself or vice versa, well, she might still be in prison today. As it was, we carefully avoided putting her at risk for two very long years until I was 18, at which point we had a rather normal romantic adult relationship for several years that ended amicably, that I look back on fondly today. As the person who was supposedly protected here by being forcibly kept apart from the person I loved, how do you think I feel about the state’s interference in our relationship now? If you guessed ‘immensely resentful even after all these years,’ you are correct. Would it have been child rape on her part if I had sent her a picture of my naked body unprompted? Does it make any sense that I could pledge to sign several years of my life over to the military at that age but I couldn’t send someone a picture of myself? Do you get how that experience molded my opinion on the subject and made me willing to speak out on the subject even if it meant people would call me a pedophile?

One of the most famous home movies in history is the Zapruder film of the Kennedy assassination. We’ve all seen it, right? But it’s photographic evidence of a crime. Shouldn’t we all be charged with condoning the murder of the president for watching that footage, by your logic? Surely you agree that murder is worse than rape. Shouldn’t possessing media of a person being killed be illegal, if possessing media of a person being raped should be? And if animated or drawn child pornography is illegal, shouldn’t possessing any movie or video game in which a person is shown being killed be grounds for imprisonment as well? The logic that you folks use has implications far beyond this subject, but you never really pursue those implications (and you shouldn’t, because they’re insane).

My point is, that’s because you’re fabricating unsound legal principles here to support the existence of this unjust, unconstitutional law (probably because anyone who questions it gets accused of being a pedophile, and you don’t want to wind up with clueless anons accusing you of justifying child rape, for example), instead of coming up with law based on sound legal principles. In any other context, anyone would tell you that possessing a picture or video of a crime is not the same thing as committing the crime yourself and the harm was entirely in the original crime, not just watching it. Are you justifying robbing convenience stores by saying it shouldn’t be illegal to watch America’s Dumbest Criminals? And if we took that principle to extremes it’d suppress important political speech - for example, after Vietnam the American media was pressured by the military to stop showing images of US soldiers in body bags, and as a consequence we’re more emotionally isolated from the wars currently being waged and information about the circumstances of the deaths of soldiers has been kept from the public ‘out of respect.’ Laws against pornography were used not so long ago to suppress information about birth control and sex education. It’s not unimaginable that there’s something important we’re not being allowed to know about, or that we’re all afraid to discuss, because it’s been declared child pornography. Censorship is absolutely something you should be afraid of in any form, and even well-meaning censorship can inadvertently suppress the truth. A free society, especially a democracy, depends on open access to information to function and I’m skeptical of anything that nibbles at that around the edges, even for the noblest of causes. These things always have chilling effects on expression far beyond their official limits as well. If some JPEGs can be illegal it requires all this machinery of surveillance and enforcement that can be just as easily used to suppress other things, and if we don’t trust the state, which we shouldn’t, we shouldn’t be comfortable with that machinery of censorship existing at all. We can’t trust them to stay within their mission - look at all the NSA personnel spying on their girlfriends instead of terrorists. Look at how the state has far outgrown its constitutional bounds. Stopping a few fucked up people from getting access to their preferred masturbation material is not worth having to give Leviathan access to all of our digital communications.

I am an anarchist. I discuss radical libertarian politics here. That’s why I’m against this law that’s been abused so much, the enforcement of which has been a massive travesty of justice for decades. Not because I’m ‘trying to justify child rape.’ My ideology is rooted in the nonaggression principle, which rape obviously violates. Do you think I should take the position of ‘we need to remove all power from the government except the power to prosecute people for child pornography?’ There’s no exception here to my general critique of the state. And what do you think would happen to child rapists in Ancapistan, anyway? ‘Hunted for sport’ is my guess. A convicted child rapist would probably not be able to retain the protection of a DRO (I’ve conjectured for a long time that that might be the one thing all of them would refuse to deal with) and they’d have the status of a medieval outlaw, they’d have no legal protections - likely a de facto death sentence with all the people who’d be lining up to kill them. Meanwhile, the state plays catch and release with child rapists - go check the sex offender map and see how many live in your community right now, I dare you.

Anyway, Anon, you are the unwitting pawn of someone who has started a harassment campaign against me, who has accused me of all kinds of other ridiculous vile shit in the past few days as well, and sent messages encouraging me to commit suicide. They dug up a post from nearly two years ago and reposted it outside of the context of the ongoing debate we had had, triggered by the revelation that the FBI had disseminated a massive amount of child pornography on the deep web. I had explained all of this back then in even greater detail, but then someone sent me an anon asking me about banning violent porn and I made the mistake of mentioning my position again without that context, so it could be misinterpreted by people unfamiliar with my ideas.

So yeah, I don’t condone raping children, I’m not a psychopath, I just really don’t trust the government, in large part because there are so many actual child rapists at the highest levels of government, and I think we can do better than the current system. I hope this clarifies my thinking for you.

Arthas_Greyjoy #sexist reddit.com

Re: Survey results released December 10/18: 76 percent of Australians - both men and women - say men are victims of sexism

Typical feminist propaganda article. Where to begin? Let's see...

The survey painted a complex picture of gender equality, with 76 per cent of men and women saying men are victims of sexism, and 45 per cent of men and women believing that feminism has gone "too far" – despite the survey also finding that 60 per cent young women in Australia have suffered gender inequality, from sexual harassment to workplace discrimination.

Funny how after the survey reveals the percentage who feels that men experience sexism, and that feminism has gone too far, the author still states, "despite" and then citing the percentage of women who have suffered gender inequality. Maybe I'm nitpicking, but what is the purpose of the "despite"? Is the author implying that because women are suffering gender inequality, people feeling that men experience sexism is somehow something that should not make sense? This seems like an example of zero sum game mentality. "Because women face shit, people feeling that men face shit is wrong."

Let's continue.

One factor is the dramatic economic changes fuelled by globalisation which has created a growing male underclass who are not sharing the fruits of prosperity. These men are doing it tough, and for them – she believes feminism can be an easy scapegoat. However, their plight is the result of fundamental economic changes, not feminism, Dr. Lumby points out, citing the disappearance of the traditional blue-collar manufacturing and mining base in her hometown of Newcastle.

Ah the old, "feminism is good, guys, I swear!" mantra.

These men would be better off demanding action from political leaders for better labour rights and conditions, but alarmingly, politicians around the world are increasingly exploiting the politics of male grievance for electoral gain.

What does she have to say about politicians who do the same for female grievance? "Brave", would be my guess. No acknowledgment of issues tat needed to be addressed, either. So of course she is surprised when politicians find out that there is some ground here that be run upon, and maybe improve the lives of their constituents.

Some are increasingly prey to not just the darker side of social media which legitimises and amplifies the politics of male resentment – she cites the incel movement and the more radical fringes of the Men’s Right movement - but the rise of charismatic speakers such as Canadian academic Jordan Peterson. For all its positive campaigns such #MeToo, social media can also “sharpen differences and this creates echo chambers.”

Nice analysis lol. So after guys getting told their voice doesn't matter, and #believeallwomen and all that jazz, she's shocked they retreat to the only spaces where they don't get told that they're useless and not needed? And not only that, but she can still put the blame on those movements as if they started this shitstorm. Give me a break. Again, no word on the negatives of #metoo. She still thinks it's a perfect thing that happened.

So why then do almost half of both men and women believe feminism has gone “too far”, according to the survey? Dr Lumby believes that this has a lot to do with how people define the label “feminist” - many associate it with radicalism and man-hating.

I wonder why. Again, no introspection on the feminism movement in the real world. She is able to pinpoint the extremes of men's groups, but not feminism, no that's untouchable! "Feminism is perfect" mentality is still strong here.

Dr. Lumby believes the negative view of feminism is part of wider backlash against the strides made by women and other minorities in recent years, spearheaded by disenfranchised men claiming reverse discrimination. This growing culture of victimhood is built on male resentment over being forced to share power, she believes. To them, giving slices of a pie to others – women, people of colour, migrants, asylum-seekers – means less pie for them. This is despite men still dominating the levers of power, be it in politics or the corporate world, she points out.

And she knows this, how? Has she asked those people and did they state that they don't want to give up a slice of their pie? Nice projection. This is a shaming tactic, to make people think that the backlash is because they're racist or sexist or whatever. No sources, no evidence, just wild claims all around. This is your feminism in media, folks.

Men may have workplace challenges but they don’t face “the fundamental structural discrimination that is structured into the workplace and our world. Women deal with [it], people of colour deal with [it]. It’s not ad hoc.”

"You may have issues, but we are still more oppressed, so we have priority. kthnx bye." Look, the professor of the survey is not totally stupid, she is able to recognise some things that are happening in the real world.

It’s a tough time to be a young man, she says.

So why then is to so hard to ask why? And investigate why? Instead of making bogus claims about men being sexist and racist, she could have gone deeper and maybe, and I know this is a weird thing to do but, ask men for their thoughts instead of putting hers into their minds?

Mike King #fundie tomatobubble.com

One of the ironies of the crackpot theory of "Evolution" TM, is that the deceitful dogma itself is always "evolving." Since the 1860's inception of Darwinian doctrine, mad scientists have bickered endlessly about how "Evolution" TM actually played out, never questioning the basic foundational assumption that life spontaneously, with neither reason nor guidance, emerged from non-life in the first place.

From Darwin's Origin of the Specious Species to the present day, the case for "Evolution" TM must, by necessity, rely upon the classic logical fallacies that are so evident to philosophers; yet completely invisible to arrogant "theoretical scientists" emotionally attached to a dogma disguised as "science." This idiotic article by renown "science journalist" and author Nicholas Wade is no different.

Haz Mat suits and goggle on. Into the "Primordial Soup" (or is it "deep sea vents" now?) we "wade" (corny pun intended).

"Shhhh, Mr. Wade. You must never tell anyone about the Anti-New York Times."

Wade: A surprisingly specific genetic portrait of the ancestor of all living things has been generated by scientists who say that the likeness sheds considerable light on the mystery of how life first emerged on Earth.

Rebuttal: Notice how it is already assumed, without evidence, that "all living things" have a common ancestor. (fallacy of assumed truth)

Wade: This venerable ancestor was a single-cell, bacterium-like organism. But it has a grand name, or at least an acronym. It is known as Luca, the Last Universal Common Ancestor, and is estimated to have lived some four billion years ago, when Earth was a mere 560 million years old.

Rebuttal: Mr. Wade, before you school us dumb plebes about Luca's birthplace, please prove to us that Luca even existed; and then prove how Luca "evolved" into other species; which in turned "evolved" and "evolved" millions of times into all current life forms. And by "proof," we mean observational evidence -- the very definition of the Scientific Method.

Wade: The new finding sharpens the debate between those who believe life began in some extreme environment, such as in deep sea vents or the flanks of volcanoes, and others who favor more normal settings, such as the “warm little pond” proposed by Darwin.

Rebuttal: Whatever happened to the "Primordial Soup" TM theory?

You see, these erudite eggheads love to "debate" endlessly over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, without ever demonstrating that there were actually any angels dancing on the pin, at all!

"Luca! We have you surrounded. Come out of that sea vent with your flagella up. And don't try any of that binary fission business"

They found little Luca in the deep sea, not the Primordial Soup as had once been theorized.

Wade: The nature of the earliest ancestor of all living things has long been uncertain because the three great domains of life (bacteria, plants, animals) seemed to have no common point of origin.

Rebuttal: Mr. Wade, has it ever occurred to you and your sci-fi cult that the reason why the various domains "seem to have no common point of origin" is because maybe, just maybe, they do not have a "common point of origin?"

Wade: Specialists have recently come to believe that the bacteria and archaea were the two earliest domains, with the eukaryotes emerging later. That opened the way for a group of evolutionary biologists, ... to try to discern the nature of the organism from which the domains emerged.

Translation: The high-priests of "Evolution" TM have just concocted a new theory to explain away the gaping holes in the previous theories.

Wade: Their starting point was the known protein-coding genes of bacteria and archaea. Some six million such genes have accumulated over the last 20 years in DNA databanks as scientists with the new decoding machines have deposited gene sequences from thousands of microbes.

Rebuttal: "DNA decoding machines" were used to sniff out little Luca --- (palm to face, deep sigh, shaking head)

Wade: Genes that do the same thing in a human and a mouse are generally related by common descent from an ancestral gene in the first mammal.

Rebuttal: The belief in the "common descent" between a human and a mouse is based on the fallacious prior assumption that we all came from Luca. It can just as easily be argued that DNA similarities between Mickey Mouse and Mickey Mantle are due to both of them having been designed by the same Creative Force which Tesla, Edison, Einstein (puke) all believed to exist. Hence, genetic similarities between the two Mickeys can be explained as cross-associations / basic templates of the same life-transmitting Creative Force which animates the universe.

Will the wonders of modern "science" ever cease?! The new Super Duper Decoding Machine not only links Mickey Mantle to the rodent family; it traced the birth of Luca to a deep sea vent!

Wade: By comparing their sequence of DNA letters, genes can be arranged in evolutionary family trees, a property that enabled Dr. Martin and his colleagues to assign the six million genes to a much smaller number of gene families.

Rebuttal: One can arrange and categorize the various "families" of automobiles (trucks, sports cars, SUV's, luxury cars, go-carts etcp) into a "tree" with many branches. Would their common component similarities therefore "prove" that Ferraris blindly "evolved" from school-buses?

Wade: Genes are adapted to an organism’s environment.

Rebuttal: Wrong again, Mr, Wade! The gene pool is not "adaptable." What happens sometimes is that environmental changes will favor one existing genetic trait over another. Hence, those specimens without the trait are at a disadvantage while those with it will prosper and produce offspring. This might explain why one group of finches has a beak like this while another group of finches has a beak like that. But it damn sure cannot explain how Marylyn Monroe and a putrid maggot have the same 1 millionth grandmother!

Wade: So Dr. Martin hoped that by pinpointing the genes likely to have been present in Luca, he would also get a glimpse of where and how Luca lived.

Rebuttal: "Likely to have been present in Luca" --- that's called conjecture, not science.

Wade: “I was flabbergasted at the result, I couldn’t believe it,” he said.

Rebuttal: We can't either.

Wade: The 355 genes pointed quite precisely to an organism that lived in the conditions found in deep sea vents, the gassy, metal-laden, intensely hot plumes caused by seawater interacting with magma erupting through the ocean floor.

Rebuttal: Cheese and crackers! We can't even find lost civilizations from a few thousand years ago and this academic ass-clown found little Luca in a deep sea vent?

Wade: Deep sea vents are surrounded by exotic life-forms and, with their extreme chemistry, have long seemed places where life might have originated.

Rebuttal: "Seemed" -- "might have." Save the speculative words for Star Trek or Jurassic Park, not the Science Section of a newspaper that so many people actually place trust in.

1- Mr. Spock of Star Trek says: "Evolution is not logical."

2- Some evolutionists now believe that T-Rex "evolved" into a bird.

Wade: The 355 genes ascribable to Luca include some that metabolize hydrogen as a source of energy as well as a gene for an enzyme called reverse gyrase, found only in microbes that live at extremely high temperatures...

Rebuttal: So, some of the genes "ascribed to" (speculative) this ancestral organism called Luca (never proved to have existed), are found in microbes that live at high temperature. Therefore, Mickey Mantle and Mickey Mouse, Marilyn and the maggot do all have a common ancestor after all. Brilliant! (palm to face, deep sigh, shaking head)

Wade: The finding has “significantly advanced our understanding of what Luca did for a living,” James O. McInerney of the University of Manchester wrote in a commentary, and provides “a very intriguing insight into life four billion years ago.”

Rebuttal: How does one even begin to respond to this madness?

Wade: Dr. Martin... argues that Luca is very close to the origin of life itself. The organism is missing so many genes necessary for life that it must still have been relying on chemical components from its environment. Hence it was only “half alive,” he writes.

Rebuttal: In other words, the "Luca-was-born-in-a-sea-vent" theory has so many holes that it requires another band-aid theory to keep it viable --- the "half alive" theory.

Wade: The fact that Luca depended on hydrogen and metals favors a deep sea vent environment for the origin of life, Dr. Martin concludes, rather than the land environment posited in a leading rival theory proposed by the chemist John Sutherland of the University of Cambridge in England.

Rebuttal: Wade, with his "Luca-was-born-in-a-sea-vent" theory, is seeking to dethrone Sutherland and his "Luca-was-born-on-land" theory as the crackpot theorist of the year. This heated competition among psychos has always been a comical feature of "theoretical science."

Wade: Luca and the origin of life are “events separated by a vast distance of evolutionary innovation,” said Jack Szostak of Massachusetts General Hospital, who has studied how the first cell membranes might have evolved.

Rebuttal: This crackpot believes in cellular life before Luca --- which means that there was another great great great grandma Luca long before "sea vent" Luca was born.

Wade: Dr. Sutherland too gave little credence to the argument that Luca might lie in some gray transition zone between nonlife and life just because it depended on its environment for some essential components. “It’s like saying I’m half alive because I depend on my local supermarket.”

Rebuttal: The lunatic Sutherland is dismissing the lunatic Martin. Just another day at the asylum of modern academia. Let the "academic debate" begin!

Wade: Dr. Sutherland and others have no quarrel with Luca’s being traced back to deep sea vents. But that does not mean life originated there, they say. Life could have originated anywhere and later been confined to a deep sea environment because of some catastrophic event like the Late Heavy Bombardment, which occurred 4 billion to 3.8 billion years ago.

Rebuttal: The Late Heavy Bombardment? What the heck was that?

Wade: This was a rain of meteorites that crashed into Earth with such force that the oceans were boiled off into an incandescent mist.

Rebuttal: Mr. Wade, can you cite for us the observational evidence for this "rain of meteorites" and the "boiling off" of the oceans?

Wade: Life is so complex it seems to need many millions of years to evolve.

Rebuttal: Circular logic! It goes like this:

"Life takes 'million of years' to 'evolve' --- We cannot observe this because it played out over 'millions of years.' "

Once upon a time, the meteors rained, the oceans boiled, and out popped little Luca -- with his millions of complex DNA codes, cell wall, cell membrane, cell plasma and flagella already intact.

Wade: Dr. Sutherland, working from basic principles of chemistry, has found that ultraviolet light from the sun is an essential energy source to get the right reactions underway, and therefore that land-based pools, not the ocean, are the most likely environment in which life began.

Translation:

Sutherland: "Luca came from a land pool, you idiot!"
Martin: "Nonsense, fool! Luca came from a deep sea vent!"
Sutherland: "Land pool!"
Martin: "Sea vent!"
Sutherland: "Your momma wears combat boots!"
Martin: "Your momma so ugly, the strip club paid her to keep her clothes on!"

Wade: "We didn’t set out with a preferred scenario; we deduced the scenario from the chemistry,” Sutherland said, chiding Dr. Martin for not having done any chemical simulations to support the deep sea vent scenario.

Rebuttal: You tell him, Dr. Sutherland! The absence of chemical simulations means that Dr. Martin's theory has no merit.

Say, Dr. Sutherland, can you tell us about your "chemical simulations" that prove that life came from non-life, formed in a land pool and then evolved and evolved and evolved? Just sayin'.

Wade: Dr. Martin’s portrait of Luca “is all very interesting, but it has nothing to do with the actual origin of life,” Dr. Sutherland said.

Rebuttal: So, Dr. Sutherland is saying that Dr. Martin is an even nuttier mad scientist than he is? --- OK. We'll accept that.

Nathan Larson #sexist nathania.org

Essay:Script of scene 1, The Pedophile Zone TV pilot
From Nathania.org

(Episode begins. It is a sunny day. GERALD, a tidy, young-looking man, with Brylcreemed hair and a well-pressed flannel shirt, walks through the parking lot to his car carrying a paper bag of groceries, with celery and a French baguette sticking out of the top. Everything about him looks very ordinary, conventional, and nondescript, except that something in his eyes reveals that deep within his soul, there is a thought that troubles him. He begins looking through the keys on his chain for the one that will open his car's trunk.)

NARRATOR (in a Rod Serling-esque tone): This is Gerald. A man stuck in another dimension, a parallel universe if you will, between the life most men take for granted, and the death all men are destined for. For you see, by a twist of fate, and a stroke of a lawmaker's pen, Gerald has been forbidden from ever knowing the pleasures of a carnal relationship with a person of his age of attraction. In this state of limbo, crushed as by a mortal and pestle between the strength of his own desires and the disapproval of the society in which he lives, Gerald experiences the heights of desperation alternating with the pit of despair. It is a place we know as ... the Pedophile Zone.

(Dramatic musical flourish ending on an ominous note.)

(LYSANDER walks up, in a tweed suit with a pocket square. Something seems subtly eccentric about his manner and style. When he finally speaks, his tone is Anthony Hopkins-esque.)

LYSANDER (smiling): Hello, Gerald.

GERALD (startled and distracted): Hi. Can I help you with something?

LYSANDER: The question is,
can I help you.

GERALD (As though thinking that maybe LYSANDER is the grocery store manager): Oh, no thanks, I can handle this one bag easily enough...

LYSANDER (pleasantly): Not that it matters. Where you're going, you'll have no need of groceries.

GERALD (stops moving and stares): I beg your pardon?

LYSANDER: Gerald, today's your lucky day. (Casually walks a few steps away, in the direction of the camera, and lights a cigarette as GERALD eyes him suspiciously. For a moment, LYSANDER gazes unsettlingly directly at the camera, with an amused, mischievous, perhaps even slightly crazed glint in his eye, reminiscent of a combination of Charles Manson, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Jack Nicholas, yet slowly giving way to a hint of Gene Wilder, as though he is preparing to unveil a doorway leading beyond this world.) You know, Gerald, I can learn a lot about a man, just by following him, watching him, searching for signs of what lies beneath the seemingly untroubled surface. There are so many little tells that give away the reflections of his mind, the dreams of his heart, the hopes of his spirit, and the musings of his soul... everything from the way he stands there at just under five feet three inches tall, to those nasty scars on the wrist of his right arm...

GERALD (As though taking offense): Now listen mister, if you're gonna get insulting--

LYSANDER (turning sharply toward him, now speaking with a sense of urgency and passion): Gerald, what if I told you that you don't have to suffer anymore? Oh, don't think I don't know, how you while away every, single, miserable, day, rotting there alone like a living corpse, waiting for the end!

(LYSANDER begins slowly crumpling and crushing the empty cigarette pack in his hands, as though channeling Uncle Charlie from the restaurant scene of Hitchcock's Shadow of a Doubt.) This lousy world is infested by rotten, worthless people whose stupidity blinds them to the hideous depravity of what they do, driving us to the brink with their hysterical and senseless persecutions. Like disgusting maggots, they pollute and ruin a civilization that had so much potential for beauty and happiness. If only we could have exterminated that vile nest of verminous pestilence, we would have done so long ago, but alas, the collective, like a gigantic mutated amoeba from the darkest reaches of hell, has stretched out its slimy pseudopod to engulf us in the worm-ridden parasitic filth, trapping us hopelessly so that we suffer the torment and anguish of knowing we are being slowly consumed. I've had enough, and I suspect that so have you.
Why do I say all this? Because it's my mission in life to help people like you. It's what I was sent into this world to accomplish.

GERALD (stares at him like he's nuts): Sent into this world? You mean, like through some kind of interdimensional portal, like what you see in the science fiction movies?

LYSANDER (considers this): Well, if you consider my mom's vagina an interdimensional portal, yes.

GERALD (suddenly alarmed and suspicious): And what's this talk about watching me? What are you? The FBI?

LYSANDER: (Smiling): Oh no, I'm not here to talk to you about Two-7yo-Boys-Sucking-Off-A-Dog.MP4. I'm not even here to talk to you about Three_2yo_Boys_Get_Deepthroated_and_Fucked_Up_the_Ass.AVI. I'm on your side; as a civil libertarian, I agree that what you watch in your home is your business, which I would never want to intrude upon, other than by surreptitiously climbing a tree across the street and using binoculars to look in your window so I can get turned on and masturbate to your getting turned on and masturbating. (GERALD looks angry and, pointing a finger at LYSANDER, opens his mouth as though to begin complaining.)

LYSANDER (Reproachfully, as though in indignation at being judged): Don't look at me that way! You have your fetishes, and so do I. We both know we would have chosen to be normal if we could have. (More softly, gently, and empathetically now, as though speaking a sad truth) But that's just not the way the fortune cookie crumbled, Gerald. And you know that.
That's why, the other day, you were struggling to climb over the railing of that highway overpass, so you could leap to your death. But because you were too short, you couldn't make it. (GERALD nods sadly, as though thinking back on it.)
That's why you browsed the sporting goods section of Wal-Mart, before ultimately leaving empty-handed in frustration that they didn't have any left-handed shotguns in stock. (GERALD nods again, looking even more dejected now.)
That's why you went down to the railway tracks, but couldn't jump in front of an oncoming train because your non-detached earlobes and misshapen ears kept you from hearing its approach. (GERALD reaches up to feel his deformed ears.)
That's why you sat there for hours trying to figure out how to tie a noose, before finally giving up and lamenting not having been born with a higher IQ. (GERALD looks slightly embarrassed now, and glances around as though to make sure no one is listening.)
That's why you even wrote in your journal about the idea of raping as many small, innocent schoolchildren as possible, before finally deciding against it, partly because the Kennedy v. Louisiana Supreme Court ruling would keep you from qualifying for the death penalty. (GERALD looks at LYSANDER with his mouth agape, as though to ask, how did you know that?)
LYSANDER is speaking now with a sad certainty, while GERALD unwraps and begins chewing a piece of gum, as though trying to calm himself) Gerald, I know everything about you. I know your thoughts, I know your habits, I even know that you hide your spare house key under the third brick from the left in that border separating the azaleas from the fescue in your front lawn. There's nothing I don't understand about your situation.
(Speaking more quickly now) What if said I had a potion? A potion that could make all your problems go away? A potion that could give you what you seek?

GERALD: You mean a potion that's going to magically transport me to a world where adult-child sex is legal?

LYSANDER (considers this): Assuming that the afterlife is such a world, yes -- except that I wouldn't call it magic. Because you see, unlike certain ostensibly teleophilically gay 51-year-old University of Toronto sexology quacks I could mention, I happen to be a man of science. Here's my card.

GERALD (reading from the card): "Lysander, president and executive director, Suicidal Pedophiles." (Tries to hand back the card) It's against the law to commit suicide around here.

LYSANDER (As though recognizing the It's a Wonderful Life reference and playing along with it): Yeah, it's against the law where I come from, too.

GERALD (Leaning forward to spit out the piece of gum): Where do you come from?

LYSANDER: Catlett.

GERALD (Looking confused): Where's that?

LYSANDER (Looking irritated, as though exasperated at how people from northern Virginia always ask him that question): Never mind. I didn't come here to tell you about a sleepy rural community whose whole reason for coming into being was a railroad junction that became obsolete with the widespread introduction of the automobile circa the 1930s. I came here to talk about a different kind of pointless existence -- yours and mine! Don't you long for an end to this grey haze of sexlessness?

GERALD: No... (Stronger now) NO! I don't need your potions, or your secret society... (Rips up the business card, and throws the pieces at LYSANDER, who stands there smiling, as though unperturbed in his confidence that he will eventually win.) I can find my own path to death, in my own time, in my own way! (Throws the groceries in the trunk, reaches to close it)

LYSANDER (Takes a step toward him): Free will is an illusion, Gerald.

GERALD: Get away from me, you ... MONSTER!

LYSANDER: You can't hide from your nature, Gerald. It's inexorable. Like a wandering star that has crossed the event horizon of the black hole at the center of the galaxy, or like the penis of the little boy about to be fellated by his dad in that video you watched yesterday, you will be sucked in. Just like when you hit the play button knowing what is about to transpire on your computer screen, I observe your life too, confident that when the time comes, you will be the one to come to me.

GERALD: I'll... I'll call the police!

LYSANDER (Sadly, as though about to remind GERALD of an unfortunate reality): Why call, Gerald? Why not just mention to the officer that some scary man is harassing you, the next time you go down to the station on the first of the month to get your photo and fingerprints taken? And Gerald, try to smile for the camera next time; you look so morose in that picture they have on the website right now. One would think that your puppy just died. You give pedophiles a bad name by making us seem clinically depressed, when there's no reason to feel down, given that the means of our self-destruction is so close and readily at hand.

GERALD: ENOUGH! (Slams the trunk down and runs for the car door)

LYSANDER: So long, Gerald. (GERALD opens the car door) And Gerald? ... (GERALD looks back at him, terrified. LYSANDER smiles pleasantly.) I'll be seeing you.
(Dramatic musical flourish, as the screen rapidly fades to black. Cut to commercial.)

John Q. Publius #sexist #racist #dunning-kruger identitydixie.com

[From "Toxic Avengers: The Return of Aspirational Masculinity"]

Following the de-platforming of Republic Standard by the host, I’ve decided to re-post some of my favorites from my time there for your reading pleasure. Enjoy!

[...]

Did anyone expect, when we were hurtling toward Y2K and the late Senator Ted Stevens’s pneumatic tube-powered Information Super Highway that we would be discussing “trans women’s periods”? Instead of colonizing Mars? As the Soviet general in The Camp of the Saints lamented between sips of vodka: “We’re caught in the clutches of the great hermaphrodite, Zackaroff. We’re all its serfs. And we can’t even cut off its balls!” Yes, the neo-liberal project has given our civilization opioids and anti-depressants and a steady diet of appointments with the local psychoanalyst; it’s blessed us with hormone blockers for prepubescent children and demon-drag-queen story time and soon IUDs for first-graders. Lothrop Stoddard’s Revolt Against Civilization is in full swing:

Congenitally incapable of adjusting themselves to an advanced social order, the degenerate inevitably become its enemies—particularly those “high-grade defectives” who are the natural fomenters of social unrest. Of course, the environmentalist argues that social unrest is due to bad social conditions, but when we go into the matter more deeply we find that bad conditions are largely due to bad people. The mere presence of hordes of low-grade men and women condemned by their very natures to incompetency and failure automatically engender poverty, invite exploitation, and drag down others just above them in the social scale.

Such inequities can only be compounded by the ever-growing throngs of the maladjusted and violent who are mostly unable and/or unwilling to adapt to or maintain the rigors of success in the West. The victim mentality creates a power vacuum that will inevitably be filled by a more self-assured group or groups; thus assuring our conquest, the West will have been reduced to nothing but a bunch of genderless, species-less trans-abled amorphous blobs incapable of lifting a finger in self-defense. Otherwise, and perhaps a more likely outcome, in these conditions of fractured tribalism the country will “require” the installation of a ruthlessly totalitarian government headed and staffed, of course, by the managerial “elites”—and for the few hold-outs, as Frank Carter sang on Gallows’s “The Vulture”: “If the horses won’t drink, drown them in the water.”

This idea that it’s all men, or that it’s “toxic masculinity” that is the root cause of violence in our society is preposterous. It’s pretty simple, really—the Left finds itself unable to perform even a rudimentary analysis of the perpetrators of violence. Part of it is that modernity is making people crazy, but biological sub-groups (ie-races) differ dramatically in violent and anti-social behavior. The black share of homicides nationally has actually increased while their population share remains relatively static, and of course the vast majority of those homicides are committed by black males. This simple instance of a legitimate “toxic masculinity” is not a possible explanation, however, “because racism.” Therefore, the Left twists itself in ever-more absurd contortions to explain really rather simple explanations (another example is the “gender pay gap”).

We know that, on average, black children hit puberty first and Asian children last, which may have something to do with the advanced physical development of many blacks, which is particularly pronounced in the teen years relative to, say, whites or Asians. The ramifications in terms of brain development and verbal acuity and spatial reasoning remain somewhat less known, but we can draw inferences based on the available science. Ignoring fundamental differences between people, not to mention the wealth of quantifiable data that show strong correlations between specific behaviors and outcomes, is not going to lessen our problems. It’s going to make them worse—as we’re witnessing.

These “debates” are absolutely drenched in Leftist moralism, to the point where even pointing out well-established science is cause for professional and social termination. Rather than bending over backwards to find “hate crimes” and “systemic racism” to explain away black underachievement, would not a consideration of cognitive differences liberate the whole nation from this ceaseless pearl-clutching? There is no white conspiracy to marginalize blacks (at least none that I’m aware of), but there are evolved differences in intelligence that exacerbate group differences in an increasingly cognitively-intensive economy. These difference are no one’s fault but Mother Nature’s, unless of course the actual mother made poor in utero or child-rearing decisions (for example, black mothers are thirty times more likely than white mothers to give birth to a child with fetal alcohol syndrome, and are much more likely to use corporal punishment on their children, which is proven to affect cognitive development). Nevertheless, Leftist dogma renders an honest discussion impossible.

Haiti has been an independent country longer than Canada, New Zealand, Australia, or Ireland—all four were products of colonialism—and they have turned out just a little different I would say. The United States has only been independent a couple of decades longer than Haiti. Do you want to keep on blaming colonialism? How about Ethiopia, which minus five years has been an independent nation for millennia? We have been conditioned to accept equality of outcome when the biological inputs are so wildly divergent. This is patently absurd. As all populations increasingly have access to the same technologies, amenities, and advancements as everyone else, and the global economy becomes more cognitively-intensive, with an honest appraisal we can only expect the disparity in outcome between humanity’s haves and have-nots to widen ever-further without a full-bodied globalist tyranny.

Likewise, in the interests of furthering what’s mutated into the paradox that is modern feminism’s prudish Epicureanism—indeed in erasing the distinctions between man and woman by un-coupling gender from sex, which sort of defeats the purpose of feminism—the most appalling manifestations of totalitarianism are necessary to force the supremely unnatural, in the process destroying both masculinity and femininity by turning each sex into a shitty facsimile of the other and never the twain shall meet. Or is it the opposite, a melding of pregnant men and women soldiers into the Androgynes of the Future?

[...]

Women like sociologist Lisa Wade are too preoccupied with President Trump’s “carpe pussy” comments from over a decade ago to understand that the immigration restrictions/overhaul the majority of Americans support would stop immigrants and “refugees” from intractably misogynistic cultures from coming here and bringing their regressive attitudes toward women as chattel, barbaric practices such as female genital mutilation and honor killings, and a lack of restraint from sexually assaulting women either through non-existent impulse control or cultural entitlement.

[...]

To expand on the red pill metaphor, it is not just an awakening from The Matrix, but that red evokes the notion of consanguinity, or shared blood, the bonds of which, indeed, are thicker than water (typically colored or referred to as blue). The “red,” our republic’s life-blood, cannot survive without its people. The ultimate demise of the founding Roman noble families roughly corresponds to the time Caracalla extended full citizenship rights to the entire empire. “Democracy in action,” we might say, but without an aspirational core of true Roman families on which the empire could rest, the decline was not long after, for what is a Rome without Romans? Further, in the absence of expansion, the momentum of the empire ground to a halt, and its focus turned inward, both in conflict and in navel-gazing hedonism. This is not to suggest that the key to reviving the American nation is through resuscitating “54 40 or Fight,” but that after planting our flag on the moon we wasted trillions of dollars and decades of energy on “equality” and dragged (or in the case of Afghanistan and the Middle East are dragging) our military through morass after morass instead of securing the border and re-directing our eyes back to the heavens. This aspirational masculinity is at the heart of Western civilization and it drives our conquering spirit both literally and metaphorically. It is time we stopped cowering before inferior cultures and entitled parasites and re-assert what makes us the most spectacular civilization in human history. “Man up,” indeed: there is a very powerful message here, one which we would be wise to heed.

Linda Harvey #fundie #homophobia #transphobia #wingnut missionamerica.com

Top 5 Excuses When Radicals Corrupt Children
Progressives are busy smashing the innocence and dreams of our youth, but they aren’t doing it without thought. They have their reasons.
They are ultimately ungodly and foolish reasons revealing base instincts, flawed values, the direct influence of the demonic realm, or all of the above.

What are the explanations? Here’s a list of their most frequent excuses.

1. It’s for the “safety” of kids. A key goal of the “LGBT” crowd is to put traditional moral standards on defense, so one tactic is to co-opt bullying prevention programs. Many current lessons imbed a deceptive idea in otherwise positive messages— be kind, don’t be a bully, and to avoid this abhorrent label, be an ally and supporter of “LGBTQ” behaviors and identities. The pro-homosexual National Education Association, the nation’s largest union, has pushed and funded this duplicitous idea for over a decade, even quoting the invalid, online GLSEN “School Climate Survey.”

Propagandists often pair acceptable messages with extremely questionable ones. Today, they use children as human shields for “LGBT” agenda goals.

So what does “support” for these newly-created homosexual and gender confused kids look like? A school must allow no warnings about these behaviors or objections which make these students feel “unsafe.” A violation of the First Amendment? Medically and morally inaccurate? It doesn’t matter as long as the “gay” lobby can get parents to fall for this.


So students in the “gay straight alliance” club at West Linn High School in Oregon recently walked out of school to protest the Chick-Fil-A food truck serving school football games. An official at the school said they were considering the students’ position as with all “potential safety concerns.”

Chick-Fil-A is unsafe? No, here’s what’s unsafe—being prevented from hearing the truth that God has marvelously designed sex for one man and one woman in holy matrimony.

Children are starving for the nourishment of moral reality.

2. It’s part of being “inclusive” for “all” kids. In case you were not aware, messages about sexual responsibility and healthy behavior “excludes” those students who are already sexually active, and “LGBTQ” kids, who need to learn about anal and oral sex. So all students, therefore, are forced under “comprehensive sexuality education” (CSE) to hear that anal, oral and vaginal sex are normal for teens and can be managed safely with condoms and contraceptives. And this instruction needs to begin in middle school.

So the Austin, TX school system recently passed a controversial sex ed program that allegedly includes “abstinence.” Here’s what one pro-family activist there told me: “Yes, anal and oral sex with graphic descriptions of both are included in a sixth grade classroom activity in which eleven-year-olds are given 20 cards of various activities and made to discuss which ones are abstinence. Not only does the lesson explain anal and oral sex, it counts as material that is about abstinence required by law in Texas.”

California parents are just waking up to the horrific legislation passed several years ago – California’s “Healthy Youth Act”—mandating deliberate corruption of the state’s kids with X-rated subjects and pro-”LGBT” messages.

Praise God, some parents are responding, “Over my dead body.” There are a few lovely victories, like the school board in Battleground Schools (WA) turning down the obscene “FLASH” CSE program.

After the legalization of same sex marriage, homosexual activists went full steam to demand through many avenues (including the NEA) that school lessons must include respect for “LGBTQ” behaviors. “Respect” means normalizing early sex, graphic details of sex acts and lessons with same sex role-playing scenarios.


3. Children asked for it. Another excuse given for shoving pro-abortion and “LGBT” misinformation at kids is that “kids want this.” Yes, so whatever behavior kids have been taught to demand, in some schools they get. The child empowerment movement pushes the bolder kids in front of school boards. Some are already hardened activists screaming that their rights are being infringed, on their way to a college affiliation with Antifa.

Sexual corruption, let’s not forget, breeds more boundary-smashing and other psychological instabilities.

Cathy Ruse described the climate in the Fairfax (VA) schools as including cuddling polyamorous groups of kids in the halls —“thruples” and “quadruples” (rhymes with couples). And at the same school there are now “furries,” students who believe they are animals and self-identify as cats, foxes, etc.


4. The radicals think there’s nothing wrong and it’s all positive. The hard reality is that some people think there’s nothing inappropriate about kids being sexual.

One drag queen admitted in an interview recently that the goal was indeed to “groom the next generation.” Grooming is the term describing pedophile actions softening a child’s resistance to adult sexual contact.

A drag queen in the Seattle area performed an explicit strip act for kids. Another in Minneapolis was filmed “flashing himself” with partial nudity. Another invited little kids to lie on top of him after the reading time. Several of these deviant males have past convictions of child molestation and involvement in prostitution.

A PTA president at a school in Harlem performed an erotic “drag” routine to an auditorium full of elementary students several years ago.

5. Homosexual expression or gender “transition” will prevent suicide. Playing the suicide card is a frequent part of the game here, where parents are told, “If you don’t affirm your daughter in her new identity as a male, she will kill herself. Do you want a live son or a dead daughter?” So against your common sense, your faith, and everything you knew about your child prior to the current corruption overload, you are persuaded by an “affirming” counselor that mutilating her healthy body is the best course of action.

But here’s where mythology collides with truth. No one is born in the “wrong sex body” and suicide risks remain high, according to research, even after taking hormones and undergoing mutilating surgery.

An entire new activist group is now forming – “de-transitioners”—young adults now outraged over the deformed bodies and limited futures that have been handed to them. They will never conceive children. They are disfigured, often sexually dysfunctional. And the future holds the very real prospect of cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, and osteoporosis at young ages. All because of a deviant and unsupported agenda everyone thinks is “inclusive.”

It’s actually the opposite. When your ideology excludes the truth, everything else is a high-stakes gamble.

Sometimes I think I’m living in a fun house with crazy mirrors where very little is what it seems. But that’s why we must keep turning to the Lord and standing with Him in the power of the Holy Spirit.

And speaking out. Pastors, please address this from the pulpit. We are to be salt and light.

Jesus is the frame of all wisdom and sets us free, and He will direct our paths.

Robert Hampton #racist amren.com

Propaganda Posing as Documentary

The new Netflix miniseries, When They See Us, brings the Central Park Five back into the limelight.

The Five were convicted of brutally gang raping a white jogger in 1989. Four were black, one Hispanic, and all were between the ages of 14 and 16. The case dominated New York City headlines and inspired Donald Trump to pay for pro-death penalty ads in the New York Times.

In 2002, a convicted serial rapist named Matias Reyes claimed sole responsibility. Mr. Reyes’s DNA was the only match to evidence from the crime scene. The state vacated the Five’s rape convictions, and in 2014, New York City awarded them $41 million. Liberals claim the case proves America’s justice system is racist. Yet many have shown there is plenty of evidence the suspects were involved in the crime.

When They See Us ignores that evidence. For black filmmaker Ava DuVernay, the Five were railroaded by police racism and a criminal prosecution.

The original incident took place on April 19, 1989, when more than 30 young blacks and Hispanics descended on Central Park for an evening of “wilding.” In the series they are just running through the park, having a good time.

Not so. “People were punched in the face and pulled off their bicycles and robbed of their watches,” says New Yorker writer Ken Auletta. They beat one white school teacher so badly police said he looked like he had been “dunked in a bucket of blood.”

The series does show a few people assaulting two people, but the Five are appalled and don’t join in. Brutal police officers chase and catch most of the suspects. One smashes 14-year-old Kevin Richardson’s face with a helmet.

Soon after the arrests, police find Patricia Meili, the raped jogger, almost dead. Sex crimes investigator Linda Fairstein suspects the young men attacked her and orders the police to get confessions. Police use physical force, lie, threaten, and deny food and toilet breaks. The suspects eventually break and confess to the rape; all but one confesses on camera.

Naturally, the justice system is racist. Outmatched in court, outwitted by racist cops, badly served by bungling lawyers, the Five are convicted because of the taped confessions. Four go to juvenile detention, and 16-year-old, Korey Wise, goes to adult prison. Five good-natured boys’ dreams are crushed by a vicious system.

The main villain is Linda Fairstein, an arrogant, blond-haired white woman who ignores evidence to get convictions. She’s what blacks call a “Beckzilla:” a white woman using her “privilege” to destroy non-whites. Miss DuVernay’s miniseries is so effective that the real Linda Fairstein lost her book publisher because of When They See Us—though she has now written her own defense against the series’ reckless portrayal.

The other villain is Donald Trump. He appears in old television interviews about the death penalty ads. The show insists he is racist and partly responsible for the unjust verdict. He personifies America’s racism and injustice.

The actors don’t look like the suspects. The short actor playing then-14-year-old Kevin Richardson looks younger than 14. Mr. Richardson looked much older than 14 in 1989, and was taller than his arresting officers. The series portrays the other four similarly.

The show claims the teenagers learned about the rape during interrogation, but some had mentioned it unprompted earlier. One said he “didn’t do the murder” but he knew who did (initially, the jogger was expected to die). Mr. Richardson told police “Antron [McCray] did it” before authorities even knew about the rape. In response to a joke that he should be out with his girlfriend, one teenager told a cop he “already got some.” As Raymond Santana was driven from one police station to another, he told police, “I had nothing to do with the rape. All I did was feel her tits.” A friend of Mr. Wise said he told her he held the victim down but did not rape her.

None of this is in the series, in which The Five stoutly deny they were involved.

In the series, the “wilding” is good-natured fun, but the Five were convicted of assaults that still stand. In a 2002 story casting doubt on the rape convictions, The Village Voice wrote:

It is important to remember, in any examination of the public record of this flawed investigation and prosecution, that even if these five youths, or at least some of them, were not guilty of rape or sexual assault, they were not innocents—having been convicted of a whole series of other crimes committed in the rampage that night. One need only recall that among those crimes, two men, John Loughlin and Antonio Diaz, were horribly beaten and left bleeding and unconscious.

One of The Five, Yusef Salam, testified in court that he brought a 14-inch metal pipe—a weapon used in the attackers—to the park that night, but the series downplays the “wilding.” In court, a stereotypical “Becky” complains that young blacks made weird sounds as she and her husband bicycled past them. The blacks in the audience guffaw at what is portrayed as petty and racist. In fact, Patricia Malone was almost raped. “It was actually terrifying,” she told ABC News last month. “They were ripping at my arms and legs and clothing. As a woman, you immediately wonder what’s going to happen.” She and her husband managed to get away.

The film gives a false impression of Mr. Wise’s time in prison. According to police, he became a prison gang leader. In the series, he is brutalized by gangs but never joins one.

There are also questions about the relationship between Mr. Wise, and the confessed rapist, Matias Reyes. Authorities think Mr. Wise’s gang may have intimidated Mr. Reyes into claiming sole responsibility. The two got into a fight early in Mr. Wise’s prison term, but in the series this is a dispute over a television.

The series claims Mr. Reyes decided to confess because of his new-found Christian faith, but police are skeptical. His past crimes included an attempted rape in a church. Mr. Reyes was already serving a life sentence for a brutal rape and murder, so an additional conviction made little difference to him.

The show treats Mr. Reyes’s confession as absolute fact, but this story is thin. He claims he caught the jogger on his own. Police doubted this because Miss Meili kept a 7-and-a-half-minute mile pace for her run; Mr. Reyes was chubby and unathletic. Mr. Reyes also claimed he attacked Miss Meili with a tree branch and a rock. She had what looked like cut wounds, but Mr. Reyes said he didn’t use a knife.

The doctors who saved the jogger’s life thought a group of men attacked her. Dr. Robert Kurtz told The Wall Street Journal in 2014 that “there had to be another individual or a group who inflicted injuries with a sharp-edged instrument if he [Reyes] only used a blunt object.” Dr. Jane Haher said there were visible handprints on Miss Meili’s thighs, calves, ankles, and behind her knees. She thinks “people held her legs down while somebody did this horrible act.”

At the time of the trial, authorities knew that at least one attacker had not been caught. As Central Park Five prosecutor Tim Clements explained to the New York Daily News last year, “We told the jury that the DNA that had been analyzed matched someone else. When Reyes came forward it was a relief. . . It’s not surprising that he (perhaps) was with this group or joined it later.”

Mr. Clements thinks the state should not have vacated the Five’s convictions: “I thought there were a lot of factual inaccuracies and some of the logic and the conclusions were faulty. The facts and the law supported the convictions. I was very disappointed that they vacated the convictions without even a hearing, without even an opportunity to question and examine Reyes.”

In When They See Us, aggressive white cops force the suspects to confess. The case’s lead officer, Eric Reynolds—who is black—strongly disputes this. “There was no coercion,” he told the New York Daily News in 2018. “If they all said the same exact things, then maybe I would think that. But they didn’t. Look at the video statements. They stand up and demonstrate [what happened].”

He also noted that the statements were obtained while Miss Meili was in a coma: “If we’re railroading them, how do we know when she comes out of the coma what story she’s going to tell? If you are trying to pin it on someone, why would you risk that she would say something different?”

Mr. Reynolds does not even appear in the series.

The prosecutor, Mr. Clements, also says there was no coercion. “Liz [Lederer, the lead prosecutor] was doing interviews in a room with an open ceiling,” he told the Daily News. “My job was to make sure everyone was quiet so the interviews wouldn’t be interrupted. There were parents present. In that situation, you can’t coach them, you can’t tell them what to do.”

The New York City Police Department re-investigated the case in 2002 and concluded there was no coercion. In the series, the main trick police use is to convince the suspects that if they confess to rape they can go home. Even a low-IQ 14-year-old knows that isn’t true. Why did the Five confess when the other suspects did not?

Mr. Reynolds, like many involved in the case, is incensed that the city settled without a trial. “If we had gone to trial in their lawsuit, we wouldn’t be having this conversation because all the facts would have come out,” he said. “It would have been clear they participated and Reyes didn’t act alone. The evidence supported it. They [the Central Park Five] did not want to go to trial. They just wanted to get paid.”

Prosecutor Clements also thinks that if there had been a new trial, the Five would have lost.

Another person who doesn’t like the settlement is the victim. “I so wish the case hadn’t been settled,” Miss Meili told ABC last month. “I wish that it had gone to court because there’s a lot of information that’s now being released that I’m seeing for the first time.” She still believes she was attacked by a group.

Of course, When They See Us leaves all this out. It has a simple message: our racist justice system framed five innocent young persons of color. It is propaganda posing as a documentary.

N.C. City Commissioner Bill James #fundie queerty.com

"Homosexual conduct is illegal in NC (even after Lawrence V Texas). We arrest 250 homosexuals each year in Mecklenburg alone for either a ‘crime against nature’ or ‘solicitation of a crime against nature’. Unlike prostitution (exchanging money), even suggesting homosexual sex is a criminal offense in NC. If we were all that ‘progressive’ would we be arresting 250 homosexuals a year? Setting up sting operations to de-infest areas where they congregate? Point is, if you want to delude yourself that homosexual conduct is ‘ok’ go ahead. The law, the police and the DA however have a different view." —North Carolina city commissioner Bill James, who was caught on tape remarking "Your son is a homo?" to a colleague during a domestic partnerships debate, in an email written to a Charlotte resident. If you thought he'd opt to apologize for these comments, he won't be:
"I think that if you’re someone who is homosexual and you believe that you are born that way and have every right to engage in that behavior, I think the offensive thing, I would surmise, is not the word ‘infest’ or ‘de-infest’ but the fact that the police are actually doing the sting operations," he tells Q Notes when asked to explain his comments. "We can parse words — what phrase should I have used? But the central question for most people is not what particular term got used but whether the action was occurring. Was I accurate in saying there are these sting operations going on and those sting operations — whatever term you want to use — target homosexual men? That is why the county took and spent significant amounts of money to rework the park to take out certain landscaping things to prevent, once the sting operations cleared them out, prevent them from re-congregating — or re-infesting if you use my original term. … When someone trots out Lawrence v. Texas, I trot out the arrest statistics. I say if Lawrence v. Texas is the law of the land, why are there all these arrests? And that ends the discussion usually."

Memento Moron Award

Dara Horn #sexist nytimes.com

The Men Who Want to Live Forever

Would you like to live forever? Some billionaires, already invincible in every other way, have decided that they also deserve not to die. Today several biotech companies, fueled by Silicon Valley fortunes, are devoted to “life extension” — or as some put it, to solving “the problem of death.”

It’s a cause championed by the tech billionaire Peter Thiel, the TED Talk darling Aubrey de Gray, Google’s billion-dollar Calico longevity lab and investment by Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. The National Academy of Medicine, an independent group, recently dedicated funding to “end aging forever.”

As the longevity entrepreneur Arram Sabeti told The New Yorker: “The proposition that we can live forever is obvious. It doesn’t violate the laws of physics, so we can achieve it.” Of all the slightly creepy aspects to this trend, the strangest is the least noticed: The people publicly championing life extension are mainly men.

Not all of them, of course. In 2009, Elizabeth Blackburn received the Nobel Prize for her work on telomeres, protein caps on chromosomes that may be a key to understanding aging. Cynthia Kenyon, the vice president for aging research at Calico, studied life extension long before it was cool; her former protégée, Laura Deming, now runs a venture capital fund for the cause. But these women are focused on curbing age-related pathology, a concept about as controversial as cancer research. They do not appear thirsty for the Fountain of Youth.

Professor Blackburn’s new book on telomeres couldn’t be clearer. “Does our research show that by maintaining your telomeres you will live into your hundreds?” it says. “No. Everyone’s cells become old and eventually we die.” Ms. Kenyon once described her research’s goal as “to just have a healthy life and then turn out the lights.” Even Ms. Deming, a 23-year-old prodigy who worked in Ms. Kenyon’s lab at age 12, points out that “aging is innately important to us.”

What an immense waste of resources, which will only widen the already huge inequality gap. I sure don't want rich, power-hungry, abusive men...

Few of these experts come close to matching the gaudy statements of the longevity investor and “biohacker” Dave Asprey, who has told journalists, “I decided that I was just not going to die.” Or those of Brian Hanley, a microbiologist who has tested an anti-aging gene therapy he developed on himself, who claimed: “There’s a bunch of things that will need to be done to achieve life spans into at least hundreds of years. But we’ll get there.” Or of the 74-year-old fashion mogul Peter Nygard, who during a promotional clip receives injections of his own stem cells to reverse his aging while declaring: “Ponce de León had the right idea. He was just too early. That was then. This is now.”

I came across Mr. Nygard’s ode to human endurance three years ago while beginning research on a novel about a woman who can’t die, and watching that video allowed me to experience something close to life extension. As Mr. Nygard compared himself to Leonardo da Vinci and Benjamin Franklin while dancing with a bevy of models — or as a voice-over explained, “living a life most can only dream of” — nine minutes of YouTube expanded into a vapid eternity, where time melted into a vortex of solipsism.

At that time I was immersed in caring for my four young children, and this paean to everlasting youth seemed especially stupid. I recall thinking that if this was eternal life, death didn’t seem that bad.

But now, as powerful men have begun falling like dominoes under accusations of sexual assault, that video with its young women clustered around an elderly multimillionaire has haunted me anew. As I recall my discomfort with the proclamations of longevity-driven men who hope to achieve “escape velocity,” I think of the astonishing hubris of the Harvey Weinsteins of the world, those who saw young women’s bodies as theirs for the taking.

Much has been said about why we allowed such behavior to go unchecked. What has remained unsaid, because it is so obvious, is what would make someone so shameless in the first place: These people believed they were invincible. They saw their own bodies as entirely theirs and other people’s bodies as at their disposal; apparently nothing in their lives led them to believe otherwise.

Historically, this is a mistake that few women would make, because until very recently, the physical experience of being a woman entailed exactly the opposite — and not only because women have to hold their keys in self-defense while walking through parking lots at night. It’s only very recently that women have widely participated in public life, but it’s even more recently that men have been welcome, or even expected, to provide physical care for vulnerable people.

Only for a nanosecond of human history have men even slightly shared what was once exclusively a woman’s burden: the relentless daily labor of caring for another person’s body, the life-preserving work of cleaning feces and vomit, the constant cycle of cooking and feeding and blanketing and bathing, whether for the young, the ill or the old. For nearly as long as there have been humans, being a female human has meant a daily nonoptional immersion in the fragility of human life and the endless effort required to sustain it.

Obviously not everyone who provides care for others is a saint. But engaging in that daily devotion, or even living with its expectation, has enormous potential to change a person. It forces one to constantly imagine the world from someone else’s point of view: Is he hungry? Maybe she’s tired. Is his back hurting him? What is she trying to say?

The most obvious cure for today’s gender inequities is to put more women in power. But if we really hope to create an equal society, we will also need more men to care for the powerless — more women in the boardroom, but also more men at the nurses’ station and the changing table, immersed in daily physical empathy. If that sounds like an evolutionary impossibility, well, it doesn’t violate the laws of physics, so we can achieve it. It is surely worth at least as much investment as defeating death.

Perhaps it takes the promise of immortality to inspire the self-absorbed to invest in unsexy work like Alzheimer’s research. If so, we may all one day bless the inane death-defiance as a means to a worthy end.

But men who hope to live forever might pause on their eternal journey to consider the frightening void at invincibility’s core. Death is the ultimate vulnerability. It is the moment when all of us must confront exactly what so many women have known all too well: You are a body, only a body, and nothing more.

St. Germain via Linda Dillon #ufo #wingnut #conspiracy #magick voyagesoflight.blogspot.com

Greetings, I AM St. Germaine. You can call me whatever you want, for I have gone by many names, as you know, and lived in many centuries… yes, including the times of birth of this country called the United States of America. And I wish to speak of this today, not to ignore the rest of the beloved planet, because what I say that is applicable to this country is applicable to all nations everywhere… here and far beyond.

The channel has reminded you, and I have nudged her to remind you, that when the Mother dreams that is Her Creation. It is the intention, and the manifestation, and the stillpoint all at once, in the infinite, perfect moment of Creation. And my beloved friends, that is where you are at this moment. And yes, of course, I give you, I offer you, and I stand by you with my Violet Flame, with this I AM Presence.

I want to remind you of some things… you do not fight for freedom, you do not struggle for independence, it is your divine birthright, it is the essence of your divine authority. When this country of the United States has come to this time of declaration of independence, that was what was required… a declaration, a declaration that tyranny, oppression, was not acceptable. The dream for this country and for this entire planet is that it is a place of freedom, it is the living, the manifestation, the clarity, of divine authority, of creativity, of liberty, in the deepest meaning of that word, of that term, this small term that encompasses so much and that is a direct reflection of the Divine.

Now, has this plan gone awry? Oh yes, most certainly, because there has been a clinging… oh, I could give you the list… lack, limitation, death, disease – especially disease, – abuse of authority. But it is the paradigm and it is the dream in every person’s heart… that is what defines you as Nova Gaian, it is the reawakening of the dream. And you dream, and you insist, and you live in the freedom of your being, in your divine right authority to choose, not in domination, or interference with one another, or over one another. That will never work, it never has. You have plenty of history to demonstrate that!

Bryan Fischer #fundie afa.net

Grandmother a Victim of Modern-day Kristallnacht

The homosexual fascists of the LGBT movement have claimed another scalp in their relentless quest to purge Christians from what the Washington State Supreme Court called “the commercial marketplace.” While the target of the Nazis was the Jews, Christians are the target of the modern day Brownshirts. The only difference is that the weapon of choice for homosexual activists is a gavel rather than a lead pipe.

Baronelle Stutzman is a grandmother with a sweet demeanor who has never been accused by anyone of unkindness or incivility. Yet yesterday the Washington State Supreme Court unanimously labeled her a hate-filled homophobic bigot.

Her crime? Politely declining to use her artistic talent to promote same sex marriage. The two homosexual men who approached her to do a floral arrangement for their “wedding” were valued customers of Ms. Stutzman, even friends, proof that she did not discriminate against them or anyone else. She even recommended nearby florists who would be happy to help them.

But her own conscience, animated by foundational Christian and biblical principle, would not permit her to promote same-sex marriage. As a consequence, the Snidely Whiplash of the Evergreen State, attorney general Bob Ferguson, literally sued her for everything she owns. Although he had to grit his teeth and settle for a fine, Ferguson wanted not just to take the assets of her business but her personal assets as well. It was his goal to strip her, a 70-year-old grandmother, of her business, her possessions, her bank accounts, and her house and leave her homeless and naked on the curb.

Ferguson at one point said Ms. Stutzman’s First Amendment rights have not been violated because she can still believe whatever she wants about homosexual marriage. But Ferguson is wrong. The First Amendment does not just protect the freedom to believe Christian principle, it protects the freedom to act on it.

The specific guarantee is for the “free exercise” of religion, a constitutional right American Christians possess 24 hours a day, seven days a week, including the time they spend running a business. It is an inalienable right they have received from the Creator, which means no earthly authority, including the Washington State Supreme Court, has the constitutional or moral authority to take it away from anyone.

I have been using the term “Gay Gestapo” for years, but lesbian columnist Tammy Bruce recently popularized the term, when talking about the Christian bakers in Oregon who got fined $135,000 and put out of business for making a decision similar to the one Ms. Stutzman made. Ms. Bruce is scandalized by the mean-spiritedness and raw hatred that animates the homosexual movement. There certainly is hate in the debate over homosexual rights, but it is not coming from conservatives. It is coming from the homosexual left.

Ms. Bruce pointed out that the Gay Gestapo is bringing both tyranny and slavery back to America. When you compel someone to violate his conscience, what else is that but tyranny? And when you compel someone to labor against his will, what else is that but slavery? The only one being discriminated against here is Baronelle Stutzman.

Ferguson said the verdict “sends a clear message around the country as well.” It surely does. It sends the message that the LGBT crowd is not about marriage equality but homosexual supremacy. For gay activists, it is homosexuality uber alles.

We as a culture must understand that, to put it colloquially, this is a duel to the death. The conflict between religious liberty and homosexuality is a zero-sum game. In every clash, somebody wins and somebody loses. Every advance of the homosexual agenda comes at the expense of religious liberty. We cannot have both special rights based on homosexual behavior and religious liberty at the same time. One will be forced to give way to the other.

One of the plaintiffs claimed he was happy to be on the “right side of history.” Well, the issue is not being on the right side of history, it’s being on the right side of right. It’s being on the right side of the Constitution, and it’s being on the right side of God’s moral law. The Washington Supreme Court isn’t.

Ms. Stutzman has appealed her case to the Supreme Court. Even if the Court takes the case, the same five unelected lawyers who imposed same-sex marriage on the country are still there, and certainly will be sharpening their gavels to stick it to this grandmother as soon as they get the chance.

President Trump, in the run-up to the election you pledged that you would protect religious liberty, that you would be a champion for Christians whose rights to the free exercise of religion are being trampled on a daily basis in this country. Here is your chance to prove that wasn’t just an empty campaign promise. Direct your attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to draft the mother of all amicus briefs to support Ms. Stutzman in her appearance before the Supreme Court.

And issue your executive order on religious liberty. NOW. Don’t wait another day. It’s masterfully crafted, and will make you and your administration the friend of religious liberty instead of its enemy. If you sign it and issue it, it will instantly become the Magna Carta of religious liberty for this generation.

There is no time to waste. How many more grandmothers will have to face the loss of everything they own before their president comes to their side?

Jean-Batave Poqueliche #conspiracy returnofkings.com

12 Methods America Is Using To Turn France Into A Globalist Nightmare

Uncle Sam eats your children and you pass him the salt

Recently, Roosh shared with me an article in three parts on a conference that took place in Paris in 2010, initiated by the US ambasador to France, Charles Rivkin and aimed at many influencal figures of the state. The goal of this confidential conference was to deconstruct the French identity and sovereignty through different actions.

The document was released on Wikileaks and can be found here. It is a written proof of the will of the American government and investors to interfere in the domestic affairs of our sovereign state, something that we see in our daily lives. Here are the fields on which the multicuturalist and globalist decisions maker focus:

1. School

Being a former teacher, I noticed the introduction of constant changes since my youth and the education I received. An even stronger cultural masochism is taught to our kids at school. Racist and racism are the almighty go-to words that instantly discredit the hour-long argumentation of anyone, even when backed with research and scientific proof.

Educational lobbies are changing the school programs to teach the glory of African kingdoms and the expansion of Islam, instead of French history and civilization. Leftists call anyone who wants to focus on native history and its figures a “neo-colonialist.” As French polemicist Eric Zemmour puts it, destroying “the French National epic” and its heroes is the goal. The Rivkin program also includes redefining French history in the school curricula to give attention to the role of non-French minorities in French history.

The decision of teaching more about Arab kingdoms than French kings belongs to the current Minister of education, formerly Minister of Women’s rights, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, a short-haired Arab woman born in Morocco who became French because her dad worked in France. She is fighting against sexism and inequality, is pro-abortion and stumps for the rights of the gay and transsexual lobby. I am obviously expecting an unbiased decision.

Rivkin states in the report of the conference, that the 1,000 American English language teachers employed at French schools will be provided with the propaganda materials necessary to inculcate the desired ideals into their French pupils.

2. Kids shows

The earlier the better. Back when I was a child, the cartoons I watched depicted mighty heroes crushing the enemy, often bloodily. There was a conflict between good and evil and a lesson taught. The story had a beginning, a chain of events, and an end. Now every episode has too many characters (all diversity-approved) who are often weak, but that’s ok because everyone is nice and worrying about the unknown is intolerant. The creators teach children that being a weakling is not a problem and that working on your looks is not important because true beauty is in the heart.

As the son of an ambassador, Rivkin had no experience in foreign policy and diplomacy. He was appointed because he had experience in including multiculturalist propaganda in kids’ shows and being the CEO of the Wildbrain company, which created Yo Gabba Gabba! among other things. Watch an extract of the show if you don’t know it, you will understand what I mean.

[...]

4. Food

The phenomenon of “malbouffe” (junk food) is smearing our rich culinary culture and became an essential part of our young people’s social life and diet. Coca Cola, McDonald’s, and other giants advertise everywhere and fast food “restaurants” just pop out of nowhere, even in the remote countryside. So does liquid sugar merchant Starbucks and its open support to homosexuals.

Our national agrarian system is now invaded by pesticides and automated agriculture. The opponents of it are quickly silenced. With the GMOed Frankenstein turnips and corn created in American labs, the plants mutate and the people will soon pay the price.

Small local producers disappear and the large companies put what they want in the food. We are still slightly protected by our national laws on food quality and protected labels. But for how long?

5. Influence on native youth

The Hipster-loving, tattoo-sporting, slut-celebrating culture as reached them and they love it. It makes them feel so special. So did lesbian and pansexual attention whoring of the girls, taught by pornography and the Hollywood crowd.

Promiscuity is on the rise, thanks to apps such as Tinder, the fashion of selfies, likes, attention-whoring, nudes sent on smartphones, Sex In The City, Instagram and the promotion of the hook-up culture, even if the young girls become more feminists. It goes only one way: against men.

The destruction of the nuclear family model and healthy relationships between men and women is the objective. The global culture turns our girls into unfuckable modern art masterpieces and our lads into fragile chicken-legged boys in skinny jeans and snapbacks for the urban predator to rob and attack.

6. Hollywood culture

The Hollywood sphere keeps unloading its filth in France. Open homosexuality, metrosexuality, narcotic abuse, along with Pitt-Jolie and their adopted African kids, brought around like a new handbag are everywhere in our tabloids. Everything they do is cool—changing religion like you change underwear, becoming a woman because you are bored, mudsharking, being gay as a three pound note. The words they say are followed by the mass like the bloody Gospel.

7. Destruction of nationalism

The civil rights and feminist movements that trampled the ideas of freedom of association and patriarchy inspired the plague that are the anti-whites of SOS Racisme (oh, the irony) and the anti-heterosexual male feminists of Ni putes, Ni soumises (“Neither Whore nor Submissive”).

Regionalists and nationalist movements and their sympathizers are filed by the police and intelligence services like they supposedly do with the potential jihadis.

Observe what happened in Corsica lately. The police services are moving heaven and earth to find the handful of men that broke into the Mosque and smashed the kebab place, but leave the youths that attacked the two firemen and the police officer that sparked the gatherings of the patriots in the first place. When a handful of Corsicans show more patriotic balls than millions of hand-holding JE SUIS CHARLIEs, there is an issue.

The objective detailed in Rivkin’s report is to monitor and counter any party that does not satisfy their agenda, namely nationalists and traditionalists, dubbing them “racist” and “xenophobic.” The words verbatim: “focusing on the decrease in popular support for xenophobic political parties and platforms.” This is to ensure that the program is working as it should to block the success of any “extreme” or “xenophobic” party that might challenge globalization.

8. Consumption

The consumerism brilliantly orchestrated since the end of World War II started with GIs distributing cigarettes and chocolate to French children after four years of rationing during the Occupation, and continues with the giant American corporations pushing us to purchase things we don’t need. Inside every French, there is an American trying to get out.

The explosion of advertising budgets of the likes of Pepsi, Kellogg’s, or McDonald’s shows it. Some courageous peasants lead by Jose Bové, seeing the threat, tried to take McDonald’s influence apart physically, by crushing one of their joints with their tractors. They failed, as they had limited means compared to the gigantic reserves of cash the corporation had.

Before, the French were champions of recycling and inventiveness. Now they throw away without repairing. There is an obsession with novelty and the newest gadgets. This also helps them collect your data and know your taste so they can propose more things to buy. “Oh you bought X Item, you will also like Y and Z item! Buy, buy, buy!”

9. Influence on non-native youth

The Quick burger chain in France now wants to have the cool halal image and will only serve halal meat in a few years. McDonalds France already serves halal meat but does not advertise it and admits serving it without explicitly warning their clients. So do KFC France and Flunch.

The halal market is a gigantic and lucrative one, as the client that buys it pays a tax directly to the mosques and their private funds on the pretext that they are the authorities that validate every kilogram of halal meat produced. Some large chains of supermarkets focus more and more on their halal clientele. In addition to the sanitary risks of halal slaughtering, the problem is that the natives have to adapt to the non-natives’ diet in the name of equality.

There is also a strong phenomenon of “thugization” of the black and Arab youths in the housing estates of the big cities. All of that thanks to the rap and gang culture, brought by American television shows and the gangsta clips on MTV.

10. Communication tools

The tablets and smart phones reach us younger and younger each year. Every schoolkid that can barely read already has a smartphone, an open door to porn, and the rest. Every family has one, and they replaced the baby-sitters.

Your position is always known thanks to your phone and they will listen to what you say if they want to. They know how many of you are in the house, what is your daily routine, what you buy, and what you read. The algorithms and data are kept.

The policy of “état d’urgence,” initiated following the Paris attacks, allows the government to bypass all the laws about digital privacy on the internet and is directly inspired by the Patriot Act that followed 9/11.

With the development of smartphone video games, more entertainment online, more immersive and time-consuming games where the mind is put on pause, you have fewer people thinking and questioning whoever is in charge.

11. Celebrations

Ah, Halloween. Another hardly disguised consumerist celebration. Occulting the autumn equinox and All Saints’ Day, trampling the tradition of family meals and flowering the graves of our loved ones, one pack of cheap lollies at a time. Overpriced costumes and diabetes for the kids, slutty behaviour and bad decisions for the grownups. Well, at least the pumpkin farmers thank you.

Santa Claus, invented by Coca Cola, pulverized Saint Nicolas that my father used to sing about and greet as a child. The cries of ungrateful brats under the Christmas tree because Barbie’s caravan does not include the picnic table replaced the Christmas carols. My grandfather used to say “When I was a child, we got an orange and a candy stick for Christmas. If we did not behave, we got a bag of coal. So don’t complain.”

[...]

Don’t be fooled—you are next on their list. Their end game is to submerge us into one big melting pot of global consumerism, to uproot every individual from an identity and heritage and replace that with the global shopping mall, and the “global village.”

Starlight via Galaxygirl #ufo #crackpot #moonbat #god-complex voyagesoflight.blogspot.com

Greetings humans of Gaia’s heart, who have the attention of many. I am Starlight of the unicorn race. We approach the starseeds now for activation, for encouragement, in great joy. For we have long awaited our reunion with ascended humankind. I am Starlight. Our race is mighty, we are many. We are very much alive but have been kept outside of your current reality matrix because of vibrational discordant energies. We are of a crystalline high vibration, we are 5D and above, as is this one’s requirement for channeling. We wish to offer you codes of rainbow light from our horns, an extension of our third eye, to your foreheads, to activate your third eye portal. We wish for this energy to flow further into your hearts, feeling this vibrational encodement of love, of renewal and of home of the higher dimensional realities. We are all around you, just outside of your vision. When you serve, create, envision New Earth, there we are in that energy frequency. We are simple creatures, yet strong in our light. We enjoy working with many masters who wish to hone their creative flow, as our beams of light energy focus and sharpen intentions that are pure, to create with greater speed. We already populate your Nova Gaia, our new home. We have transferred residency to her rich green lands, her fields ripe for running and our young foals enjoy the freedom of her wide open spaces and delicate grasses and flowers. We are sending imagery, this feeling of home to you, for refreshment, for encouragement.
[…]
I am Starlight. I send some of my light to you. I touch my horn to your third eye. Feel the warmth, feel the spin. The light of the unicorn has been sought for its power over the ages and so we have found shelter in the higher realms. We are very similar to you. We too were persecuted for our light and our kind hid to serve from a distance, lending our light, our love our purity from a safe place. But you were the brave ones, in service to the all, to the others, you chose to shine your light again and again and again, melting the darkness, transforming it into the light that we see as being made manifest into Nova Gaia. We bow our heads to you, warriors of the way. We are of service to you. Accept these vibrations of healing and be comforted. The light has won. Remain here in this inner sanctuary as long as you like. Our foals are eager to meet a warrior of the way. Careful, they have a lot of energy! Soon again, shall you. Soon again, shall you. Peace.

Minister R. A. Artis #fundie books.google.com

With complete certainty, Goel intoned, ''Despite everything, Jonathan, God is truly in control of everything. Even when things seem hopeless and all is dark, when your way is beset by troubles and your enemies are all around you, the Lord is there waiting to aid you."
Full of despair, Jonathan said, "Part of me knows this, but on the other hand, part of me says what if everything I have been taught is nothing but a carefully scripted deception designed to keep me enslaved to the whims of a being less than what He says He is?" Goel was utterly amazed and responded abruptly.
"Despite whatever you are wrestling with, my friend, you know deep down inside that is not true! At the core of eveiy human being there is knowledge of the veracity of the certainty that God is who He says He is, even if His reality is denied or substituted for some other belief! You are one of the most intelligent humans ever born in this world, and you know that the complex simplicity of creation indicates that everything that exists in this cosmos could not exist if not for the hand of Divine Immanence behind it. It is a mathematical impossibility for the universe to have sprung into existence from chaotic nothingness complete with all the laws of physics already in place to ensure that everything works in an efficient manner."
Goel surprised Jonathan by showing the young man a rare side to his own personality.
"In terms with which you are intimately familiar with, Jonathan, the mathematics of probability refutes the universe coming into reality purely coincidentaily. The calculations of British mathematician Roger Penrose show that the probability of universe conducive to life occurring by chance is on the order of 1010123 to 1."
"What number is that?" Goel questioned.
Jonathan's mind kicked into high gear as he did the calculations in his mind, and he said, "In math, the value 10123 means 1 followed by 123 zeros. That's more than the total number of atoms 10 s believed to exist in the whole universe."
Enthusiastically, Goel said, "The phrase 'extremely unlikely' is inadequate to describe this possibility. In practical terms, a mathematical probability of 1 in 10?0 means "zero probability." Penrose's number is more than a trillion upon trillions of times less than that. More importantly, Penrose's number tells us that the 'accidental" or "coincidental" creation of the universe is an impossibility. The numbers defining the design and plan of the universe's equilibrium play a crucial role and exceed comprehension. They prove that the cosmos is by no means the product of a coincidence, or how precise God intended for it to be. In fact, in order to recognize that the universe is not a product of coincidences, one does not really need any of these calculations at all. Simply by looking around himself, a person can easily perceive the fact of creation in even the tiniest details of what he sees."
As if magnetized by the magnificent view, the ancient warrior walked towards the balcony. Jonathan, totally intrigued, joined his protector. Goel never ceased to amaze.
"How could a universe like this, perfect in its systems, the sun, the earth, people, houses, cars, trees, flowers, insects, and all the other things in it ever have come into existence as the result of atoms falling together by chance after an explosion? Every detail we peer at shows the evidence of God's existence and supreme power. Only people who reflect can grasp these signs."
Thoughtfully, Jonathan quietly said, "In the creation of the heavens and earth, and the alternation of the night and day, and the ships which sail the seas to people's benefit, and the water which Allah sends down from the sky— by which He brings the earth to life when it was dead and scatters about in it creatures of every kind— and the varying direction of the winds, and the clouds subservient between heaven and earth, there are signs for people who use their intellect."
Jonathan released a slight chuckle as he continued, "I read that in the Surat al-Baqara, Verse of the Cow, in the Qur'an."
Shaking his head, Goel said, with the intention to elucidate further, "Even those who do not hold to the truths inherent to the Holy Scriptures are touched by the rectitude of whom and what God is. Those who are in no way your equal in intellectualness have known this simple truth: God is real! Science has come up with categorical evidence that the universe was created by God. The anthropic principle reveals every detail of a universe that has been designed for mankind to live in and in which there is no place for chance. The interesting pait is that the ones who discovered all this are the very same people who defend the philosophy of materialism. Scientists such as Paul Davies, Arno Penzias, Fred Hoyle, and Roger Penrose are not pious men, and they certainly had no intention of proving God's existence as they pursued their work. One can imagine that they reached then* conclusions about the design of the universe by a superior power most unwillingly."
"The American astronomer George Greenstein confesses in his book, The Symbiotic Universe, he and his colleagues stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being. Having surveyed all the evidence, an insistent thought arose. There is indeed some supernatural agency involved in the design of the universe. Greenstein pondered near believingly that it was God who stepped in and so providentially crafted the cosmos for our benefit. An atheist, Greenstein disregards the plain truth; nevertheless he cannot keep from wondering. Other less prejudiced scientists, on the other hand, readily admit that the universe must have been specially ordered for mankind to live in."
Jonathan, a very learned and somewhat spiritual man in his own right, felt the dots linking science and theology were compelling. Goers scope of knowledge widened steadily.
"The American astrophysicist Hugh Ross ends his article Design and the Anthropic Principle with these words: 'An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have brought the universe into existence. An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have designed the universe. An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have designed planet Earth. An intelligent, transcendent Creator must have designed life.' Thus, science proves the reality of creation. Certainly, there is God and He has created everything around us, the seen and the unseen. He is the sole Creator of the extraordinary, outstanding equilibrium and design of the heavens and Earth.
"It has come such a pass that today, materialism has the flavor of a superstitious, unscientific system of belief. The American geneticist Robert Griffiths jokingly remarked 'If we need an atheist for a debate, I go to the philosophy department. The physics department isn't much use.'
"Every physical law and every physical constant in this universe has been specifically designed to enable human beings to exist and live. In his book The Cosmic Blueprint, Davies states this truth in the last paragraph: 'The impression of Design is overwhelming.' Doubtlessly, the design of the universe is evidence of God's power to establish. The precise balances and all the human beings and other creatures are the evidence of God's supreme power and act of creation."
In all the discussions with Goel he had over the years, never before had Goel shown this depth of scientific knowledge. In a word, Jonathan was deeply impressed with Goel's profundity. This added a new dimension to his longtime protector, one which he would always remember.
Bowing to his mentor, Jonathan graciously said, "I had no idea you were so well versed in the philosophy of physics, Goel. I heard your words with more than my ears. You spoke to my mind and spirit."

Linda Harvey #fundie pinknews.co.uk

Linda Harvey, a host of the Ohio based Christian radio station WRFD has warned that the passing of same-sex marriage laws might cause Jesus Christ to marry another man.

The Christian radio host this month said that same-sex marriage encourages children to have gay sex and that gay people aren’t human and should therefore not be protected under the US constitution.

Now discussing the fact that under the implementation of same-sex marriage in some states have caused the words ‘bride’ and ‘groom’ to be replaced with ‘person A’ and ‘person B’, the host considers what would happen if Jesus came back to earth.

She began :”On official marriage documents, the words ‘bride’ and ‘groom’ were going to disappear. When advocates of homosexual marriage say how would two men or two women being allowed to marry change your marriage, here’s one way. Nonsense like this starts showing up and the legitimacy of man-woman marriage is automatically on defense against pretenders to the throne.”

She warned: “Homosexuality, far from being marriage, is always a grave sin in Scripture.”

Switching to Jesus, Mrs Harvey said: “A Christian concept that illustrates the unchanging standard of man and woman as the model for marriage: in the New Testament, Jesus is referred to several times as the ‘bridegroom.’ And when he returns, he will return as a bridegroom seeking his bride: the church, which is the body of all believers, also called the Bride of Christ. It’s a beautiful analogy.

“What happens to such a concept in a same-sex marriage? Does Jesus as bridegroom seek another groom? No, that would be a twisted and frankly offensive spin on a profound and marvelous concept.”

She concluded: “As Christians, we must never accept the idea of same-sex marriage. It certainly doesn’t work as sound Christian doctrine and it will be shown before long not to work as revolutionary secular law either.”

Chechar #racist chechar.wordpress.com

[The Mexican Nazi blogger Chechar details his unsucessful attempt to move to the UK ...]

On August 4, 2014 I arrived to London in the hope of moving to a small town in the United Kingdom in order to save my life once Mexico City catches fire after the looming collapse of the dollar.

One of the smartest commenters on my blog, whom I will call “the Brazilian,” had promised, through his contacts, forged work permit so I could look for a job in England. Throughout the two years I interacted with him in the blog and then thru personal communications, this guy reiterated that he wanted to help me to move there, and when in early 2014 he indeed moved to England I thought his plans were sincere.

The man is the result of a mixture between the races of his homeland, Brazil. He himself confessed publicly that his ancestors were Iberians, blacks and mestizos. [...]

Later in this chapter I will talk about some “Creole nationalists”—Mexicans that show off their Iberian roots and claim to have no drop of Indian blood—with whom I interacted in Mexico. The Brazilian’s intelligence had so impressed me that I told these Creole nationalists that my Brazilian, “mulatto friend has an IQ of 140.” [...]

The Brazilian’s intellectual acumen, along with my huge need to escape Mexico, made my defenses down and I trusted him to the extent of deferring to his judgment my first steps to immigrate. I refer not only to the steps to obtain forged documents but also to roommate concerns. [...] The Brazilian even offered to pick me up at Heathrow Airport outside London; by telephone he informed me that he would not go to work the Monday I arrived to pick me up.

I thanked him and my flight arrived on time. After exiting from the immigration line, where obviously I hid the British woman who interrogated me that the purpose of my trip was to immigrate, I was surprised that the Brazilian was not there. [...] I badly needed to leave the soulless airport lounge and go to the hotel I had booked and even paid from Mexico. But the Brazilian did not appear. With the heavy suitcase I carried—suitcase to emigrate, not for tourism—I could not even move at ease in the terminal. [...] It must have been about two to three hours after the plane landed that the Brazilian finally appeared, without apologizing for the delay.

[...]

He said that instead of going to my hotel, why not accompanying him to the slum hostel where he was living these days. They only charged £60 per week and although his roommates were black—that is, three blacks slept in a single room, beside the Brazilian—, it was only for a week while the better place he had reserved for us would be vacating. The Brazilian had a small back suitcase containing his laptop. He dared not leave it in the hostel with such hosts and carried it every time he went out.

Go figure my dear readers… All of my travel strategy had been based on a bloke that, now I realized, was on the verge of homelessness as he had to carry his belongings in the street for fear of loosing them in a “hostel” without lockers. Had I not been so obfuscated by the turn of events I would have stopped dry the adventure that very instant. But cognitively I was not well. In fact, I was completely alienated. True: I had prepared with extreme meticulousness everything left in Mexico—my library, my manuscripts in ring-binders and envelopes sealed against moisture (I thought I wouldn’t be back in years), the taking care of my pet and even a big farewell party for all believed I would leave for good—, but about my stay in England I had deferred all planning to “the mulatto of 140 of IQ.”

[...] I knew that in the white nationalist movement there were people with terrible character flaws. But the fact that the Brazilian seemed a hybrid between mestizo and mulatto was no reason to distrust him, as he believes in the “fourteen words” to the extent of having promised not to leave offspring. (Remember the first lesson to the Hitler Youth of Faith and Action by Helmut Stellrecht: “But if your blood has traits that will make your children unhappy and burdens to the state, then you have the heroic duty to be the last.”)

Unfortunately, character flaws can be hidden over the internet. And as in Mexico I only had considered the intellectual aspect of this bloke [...] in a state of complete cognitive alienation to what was happening I agreed to his idea to abort the journey to my hotel and go to his hostel.

I would lie if I lay the blame at the Brazilian. Now that I’m out of the UK I find it obvious that the planning of my trip was grotesque, to say the least. “The drowning will grab at straws,” and the urgency of leaving a Neanderthalesque Mexico and survive the dollar collapse was such that I put aside from my consciousness basic matters I should have contemplated at my age, before venturing on another continent.

[...] We descended into a densely populated and very noisy area of London; streets swarmed with lots of blacks. To my surprise, the Brazilian told me to wait because he was going to find a toilet.

Lo and behold I was once again alone among human swarms with my heavy suitcase and no sleep! [...] In that hideous swarthy-filled street, and carrying something less than £2,000 in cash along with my credit cards, a black approached me. I didn’t understand a word. Scared and carrying the heavy suitcase I entered a grocery store but the attendants were not white either. My anxiety was very obvious until the Brazilian reappeared [...]

At last we initiated conversation on topics that fascinate me. I told him that I had seen some mixed couples in London and was greatly surprised that there were so many blacks. He replied that it was a punishment to the English for having waged war against Germany, and added that Nazi Germany was by far the noblest creature that European history had produced. Then he said he did not understand how Americans like Matt Parrott insist on mixing the unmixable: Christianity with white nationalism.

It was not until we reached his quarters that I received the biggest shock of the trip. It’s true that in 1982 I had spent a night in London in a spacious room of a Youth Hostel; a room with many beds. But back then they were all European Aryans; I, the only foreigner. I was twenty-four and, coming from Mexico, was amazed at how good looking some of those English were (in the country where I was born almost all seemed Neanderthals to me). But now I was in 2014, and the all-encompassing social engineering of the British elites in recent decades, that is, replacement of the native race by imported race, had been a success. The Brazilian’s room was not spacious as the hostel I had slept decades ago. It was of regular size with the most miserable niggers you might think of. In fact, in no way it resembled a hostel but one of those trash-people rooms subsidized by charities for the homeless in large metropolis. But they were not homeless: they were blacks surviving, I suppose, from the same type of underemployment of the Brazilian.

I barely saw the spectacle and wanted to run away. On the street the Brazilian insisted that I should pay the £60 for the week. It was already night and he claimed he was tired and that we should think things over the next day. I didn’t know what to do. I had to cancel the hotel reservation so that it was not charged to my American Express, but there were no public telephones in the neighborhood. I tried to get information in a grocery store that opened at night, but they were immigrants who hardly knew English and were unaware of the dynamics of the big city. Not even the Brazilian could tell me what was, in England, the telephone equivalent to 911 so that, through his cell phone, I could make a call. [...]

As there was no one to help me, not even a taxi to get on in those streets, and as I was worried that in that colored neighborhood I could be assaulted and my money taken away (for my heavy suitcase I was an obvious target), I agreed. I reentered the “hostel,” paid the administrator of the slum the £60 he demanded, and walked into to the room of blacks and the mulatto Brazilian.

But I could not sleep… Although I had not slept the night before I was in a state of extreme anxiety.

I went out to the hostel’s terrace and finally I saw a white man. He was also an immigrant. He didn’t have fluent English and told me he was from Romania. As it had happened to me decades ago in the same city, as I newly arrived from Neanderthalesque lands I was pleasantly surprised by the looks of the blond Romanian. I spoke with him in the fresh night but not for long. He was not very smart and I also felt a little cold in the outdoors terrace. (I had left the plane with my jacket, shirt and dress pants but had not changed my clothes; one of the blacks that tried to sleep in the dirty room, where my cloths were, had warned me not turn the light on.) [...]

I don’t remember the exact moment when the Brazilian told me that the police had arrested his contact—the very contact that was supposed to get me the papers. He did not say whether he had been arrested the day before or the day I arrived at Heathrow. But I doubt that, if the story is true, it was such a recent event. Chances are that the arrest had occurred long before—which means that the Brazilian had not warned me on time, when I was in Mexico. Had I been informed on time I would have aborted any plan to cross the Atlantic!

The events yelled at me that the trip had been in vain. By not having warned me in time of the arrest the Brazilian had committed a trick of confidence. However, even though that day the Brazilian confessed that he was desperately seeking a decent roommate, I failed to suspect that behind his convincing me to come to London a sinister motive was hiding. The crux of his confession was that his old roommate was a black homosexual whose conduct had caused the Brazilian to flee from there and move to the seedy hostel (where we were now).

I am ashamed to say that even with all this novel information I was slow to connect the dots that such insistence that I go London had not been motivated to help me, the word he used several times but to help himself in his problems with blacks. The underlying motivation of Brazilian seemed to be: “Unlike this nigger, blogger César, who comes from an educated family and whose parents have three pianos at home and five servants, will be my personal savior.”

Such naiveté!: In Mexico I had only imagined a Brazilian full of honor, insofar he vehemently insisted he did not plan to reproduce even after finding a woman in England (remember the wise counsel of Helmut Stellrecht for non-whites). But in London he told me that even before his “racial awakening”—something unheard of in a man of color—he had come to the firm conclusion that he would not leave descendants in Brazil. It was not until I assimilated even more painful confessions than that of the “gay nigger”—for example, that the day prior to my arrival the Brazilian had been wandering at London’s downtown because he could not remember where he lived, and that he drank alcohol to cope with his pathetic life—that I began to glimpse who he really was.

The trip had been a fraud. My purpose had never been crossing the ocean to help a mulatoid fellow to find a roommate—but looking sanctuary for me in a small English village with no coloreds to survive the dollar collapse! [...]

But back to my sleepless night.

My mattress had no sheets. I had no choice but to put my white skin in contact with a mattress that must have suffered a thousand sweats from blacks. Even in such conditions I tried to sleep with the four darks of the room. My anxieties and a disagreeable negress snoring inches from me on the top bunk—the pseudohostel was so abhorrent that not only races mixed, but the very sexes too—didn’t let me sleep…

But with the dawn I regained my senses. In the morning, with several guests already waking up on the terrace, including some I had not seen the previous evening, the Brazilian insisted I opened a bank account and said that another of his contacts worked in a bank (by law, tourists cannot open accounts in the UK). Perhaps that employee even knew, the Brazilian told me, another person to obtain work permit.

But I had lost confidence in him. The second night of consecutive sleeplessness I had talked to another night bird, Stuart, who lived there in another room and used to talk to the Romanian during the evenings on the terrace. His accent was not British. Stuart was born in Scotland and raised in New Orleans. As the Brazilian, Stuart had been so badly beaten by life that he had fallen to the pseudohostel. We spoke of my racial ideas and this young man conceded that in New Orleans blacks had behaved very poorly during hurricane Katrina. He was not bothered, though somewhat surprised, about my overtly racist worldview and I asked him what was the whitest city in Scotland. He said that Perth and his hometown, Dundee. He added that the beautiful town of Perth was ideal for retirees (i.e., for people like me had I arrived with the proper funds to buy a modest house).

I made my decision. That morning I was not going to endure a single minute of a “hostel” which did not even have showers for bathing. The blacks woke up and put their filthy music we all heard over the terrace. I told the Brazilian that I would go to Scotland. He was surprised but, by seeing my resolution, walked along with me to the outskirts of the metro station. We said goodbye and never met again.

[Chechar soon returned to Mexico]

Bible Word Study #fundie biblewordstudy.org

This dream began with a brief scene playing out where Trump was in a public restroom (all white tiles, walls, and floor) and staring at himself in the mirror. He was next to the mirror and sink which were closest to the exit, and his demeanor reminded me as if he were being filmed (like a reality show).

The scene now changes and I'm with Trump, and we're inside something like this large, somewhat dim warehouse building which reminded me of a cross between a flea market and a department store.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: A "burnt event" is coming.

I was beside Trump when he said this line, and I perceived that I was either his Vice President or close advisor.

And upon hearing him say that, I was immediately alarmed over the fact that he, somehow, knew about the "fiery kickoff event" prophesied of by servants of the Lord such as Jeff Byerly and others (i.e. more than one servant is prophesying of this event).

Next thing I know, I'm now separated from Trump and am near the entrance of this dim warehouse with his wife, Melania. As I proceed to walk with her, she then briefly walks away from me and off to my left. I recall her wearing something similar to the Calvin Klein outfit that she wore at the U.N. Assembly.

In response, I yell out something like, "Melania-san! Mattemashou"

In Japanese (if I spelled the hiragana out correctly), this phrase appears to primarily translate into the command "let's wait!". However, my intention was to get her to come back and follow me, as we looked for President Trump.

She then follows , as we walk further along and come across Trump and some others sitting at the end of this narrow, wooden table that is oval-shaped. I take an empty seat directly across from Trump, while Melania seats herself down next to Trump, on his right.

(At this point, I then stared closely at Melania's face, from across the table. While she's attractive in real life -- her face here was white-pale and even somewhat ghastly, as her lifeless eyes were fixed and staring off-ward; as if she, herself, was not consciously present...)

I then say the following words, near-verbatim, to Trump:

ME: Sir, what do you know about the "fiery kickoff event"?

This was his near-verbatim response to me:

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Do you know how corrupt the Department of Education is?!

PRESIDENT TRUMP: (continues speaking...)

I cannot recall what he said further to me, but I do generally remember that Trump did go into more detail about government corruption -- and by his tone, it was like he was justifying the results that this event would bring.

After finishing, he was very stern as he said something to me like "Are you with me, or not?"

In response...and dejected at the words that he spoken...I then quietly agreed with him.

/end entry

One other detail: before having this dream, I recall briefly being awake and being in a genuine period of prayer for Trump's salvation...and even weeping a little over him.


INTERPRETATION

- Trump in the public restroom

I believe this signifies how Trump is being watched -- even in his most private settings (being as the restroom that he was preparing in was a public one). To me, he behaved as though cameras were rolling on him, as he was checking himself in the mirror and preparing for whatever he was about to do.

- Large, dim interior warehouse building

I believe the setting of this dim building represented the secret nature of what was going on.

- Trump's statement of a "burnt event"

...for one, I'm curious at Trump's wording, in using the term "burnt" over the term "fiery" that has been repeated in multiple prophetic words given by the Lord. It would seem, though,to match up with how Trump uses more simplistic vocabulary; when either tweeting, or giving speeches.

- Melania's pale-white, ghoulish face, with spaced-out, lifeless eyes

...This could, possibly, symbolize a kind of high-level mind control on Melania. In the past, I've read about such things as "MK Ultra", and wouldn't be surprised at something similar being used on Trump's wife (...so that she wouldn't go public with this info?).

- Narrow wooden, and oval-shaped, table

In addition to the large, dim warehouse, I believe that this may have represented just how secret this agenda of Trump's was, amongst his closest advisors.

- Trump's mentioning of the Department of Education

This may indicate how the Dept. of Education is, indeed, corrupt, in the sheer manner of mind control unleashed upon our young children. That is to say, from even an early age, our children are diligently fed lies in our government controlled schools, ranging from: Big Bang Theory, Theory of Evolution, false versions of history, LGBT abominations, etc. Therefore, I believe that this gives further reason to speculate on Donald Trump's motives (from his remark in my dream).

- Trump's justifying tone, regarding the "burnt event"

I believe I've read, in other prophetic words, that Trump, at this point has entrenched himself within the "swamp" of corruption within our government. Lord knows how much he's been exposed to, spiritually. Therefore, he could possibly have a hand in all this before it happens...in working his "art of the deal" in the process.

- - - - - - -

Lord of Lords and Kings of Kings, I plead Your precious, eternal covenant blood (Revelation 12:11) over this entry, this website, and for all folks that visit. Please, in this dire hour, draw many (both saved and lost) to Your warnings; whether You direct them here or to Your other servants. Please wrestle with them as You wrestled with Jacob over the urgency of this hour, and the truths of Your Word and Your modern-day words, which do not contradict the Scriptures. And in acknowledgement of Romans 7:21, I bind every wicked spirit in assignment against this website (Luke 10:19), and cancel every wicked plan against this website in the spirit realm, in Your mighty Name of names.

Thank You Lord, an all glory to You. Amen.

Shenglian #fundie en.minghui.org

Half the year has passed, and I have a strong sense of urgency. What’s more, I feel that our time has been extended by our Master’s tremendous suffering in order for Dafa disciples to save more sentient beings at this most critical moment.

There are many questions I have to ask myself: Have I cherished the unprecedented opportunity of Master’s compassionate salvation? Have I advanced diligently in practicing Falun Dafa during the extended period of the Fa-Rectification? Is it true that I fully believe in Master and the Fa? Can I be considered a qualified Dafa disciple? Have I done the three things well to meet the standard set by Master?

Master taught us:

“Even now some people still can’t concentrate when it comes to reading the books. Those of you who do work for Dafa, especially, shouldn’t use any pretexts to conceal your not reading the books or studying the Fa. Even if you do work for me, your Master, you still need to study the Fa every day with a calm mind and cultivate yourself solidly.” (“Towards Consummation” from Essentials for Further Advancement II)

One day I read the section “A Clear and Clean Mind” in Lecture Nine of Zhuan Falun. My eyes fell on the words “A Clear and Clean Mind” for a long time.

Why didn’t I notice before that Master had used the word “Clean” instead of “Calm”?

There is a big difference in meaning between those two words, even though they share the same pronunciation (in Chinese) but have different spellings.

For a long time I had thought of “Clean” as “Calm,” as a result of my stubborn thoughts that had been unconsciously shaped by ordinary society.

What I had enlightened to in Dafa was that a superficial form of Fa-study shouldn’t be adopted. That is to say, through studying the Fa, I should be crystal clear about what I am learning.

Once while reading, I became distracted and drowsy. I knew I needed to pause in my reading to look for loopholes in my cultivation practice that the old forces were exploiting.

Looking within, I found I had had stubborn human attachments to thoughts that were formed in the human world. Obviously, they were imposed on me by the evil old forces who did not want me to obtain the Fa.

By interfering with me, they could easily make me deviate from Dafa.

I told myself that, henceforth, I must concentrate fully on the Fa with a pure and clean mind and with a down-to-earth attitude.

It was easier said than done, however. Although I stuck to my daily schedule to study the Fa, I was still distracted by my everyday people’s attachments.

For instance, in order to satisfy my curiosity, I often visited everyday people's websites or WeChat on the mobile phone to surf for all kinds of news. The news ranged from current political changes and scandal gossip, to therapies that increased longevity and the quality of life, etc.

In other words, I was thinking about how to have a better life in everyday society and was pursuing fame, material interests, and sentimentality. This took up a lot of my valuable time, which could have been used for Fa-study.

It was just like a frog that was content to sit in a pot of water that was warmed slowly until it was boiled to death. Shouldn’t I cherish the valuable time that is being extended by Master to study the Fa well and to save more sentient beings?

Having identified my attachments that caused this distraction, I took immediate action to eliminate them. It was clear that any distraction or selfishness could likely bring problems and ultimately affect the quality of my projects for letting people know the truth about Falun Dafa face-to-face.

I realized that wallowing in everyday people's websites was actually a disguised attachment to comfort, which had been arranged by the old forces. Most recently, I’ve been addicted to browsing the web on my phone.

As a result, my pursuit of love between a man and a woman was aroused again. I was even yearning for the happy, sweet life between lovers.

Dafa cultivation is serious. Nowadays, ordinary human society is very seductive and has a negative influence, which is getting stronger.

As Dafa practitioners, we can overcome any temptation if we cultivate ourselves well in Dafa. I believe that Master has made a way for us to escape those negative emotions.

Linda Harvey #fundie #homophobia #wingnut missionamerica.com

The Occult Roots of 'Drag' Identity

Men who dress as women love Halloween, and not just for the costuming opportunities. They are often keenly attuned to the dark spirits of the season and willing to do their bizarre, depraved bidding.

It’s one more reason to keep vulnerable children away from homosexual/gender indoctrination sessions, “drag” tutorials and parents-excluded “safe sex” discussions at your local library. These wicked people are eagerly seducing and grooming children right under our eyes, if we let them.

Drag queens are a scary presence for little kids. The young, mesmerized faces hearing the allegedly “inclusive” lessons and watching the sexual gyrations tell the real story. Something’s strange in this neighborhood, and youngsters get it, even if their clueless parents giggle and nod alongside the corrupted librarians.

The truth is, gender-benders’ public readings and sexualized performances are often influenced by an other-worldly realm. It turns out that many “drag” identifiers follow paganism, witchcraft or Satanism. They don’t even try to hide this close connection.

For instance, in a recent Tweet, the Church of Satan said, “We can confirm that there are a lot of Satanic drag queens. And they are fabulous.”

And the San-Francisco-based Satanic Temple is made up mostly of “LGBTQ” identifiers, even holding a “Pink Mass” at times. A movie made about the group is called “Hail Satan” where the leaders say they’ll fight Christian conservatives “to the death.”

Are they serious about following Satan? Who knows and who cares? Anyone who adopts his name is, tragically, fair game. Satan will exploit and manipulate these fools to his hearts’ desire, and they may never know it.

A drag-devil partnership is popping up everywhere. There are reports of Austin, Texas- area “drag” followers engaging in occult rituals (including black masses) in public parks to “hex” two city council members, courageous people who publicly objected to the perverted “story hours” at local public libraries.

And a church in Chula Vista, CA was vandalized in September with satanic symbols. Some of the members had spoken out against a local “drag queen” event. This doesn’t reflect well on the themes of love and acceptance that “drag queens” insist motivate their events.

Anna Bohach, the 500 Mom Strong leader, wrote about this movement: “Long gone are the caricatures of drag queens as clownishly quaint entertainment for a sub-group of a sub-group of sexually-isolated fetish followers. Nowadays, they want, nay, they demand, that you openly declare your support for their desires, which is focused, like a laser-beam, on your children.”

In Long Beach, California in 2017, a photo surfaced of a devil-horned library presenter who one homosexual website dubbed a “Satanic goddess.” Quickly dismissed as a joke, one has to ask, so what? Does any discerning parent want someone to read books to their children—or do anything with our kids—who dresses like a freak and jokes about such serious matters?

The weapons of their warfare are not carnal, indeed. But neither are ours and ours are far mightier. Praise God, there are believers in Christ who continue to oppose these depraved events, and in the end, our side wins.

Count on it.

But in the meantime, parents must keep speaking out and standing up, and more are doing so every day. Families also need discernment to understand how commonplace and mainstream sorcery has become, and how likely it is your children will come face-to-face with these practices in their everyday lives. At least 1.5 million Americans are witches and pagans, according to some reports, which is comparable to the membership of the Presbyterian Church (USA).

Current politics drives some occult activities, with “LGBTQ” identifiers often leading the charge. Hexes and curses against conservative political figures have become common since the 2016 election. One article described the new hexing trend:

“Dakota Bracciale, a 29-year-old transgender/queer witch and co-owner of Catland Books and witch shop in Brooklyn, is pleased with the outcome of the ritual hex placed on US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in October [2018]…”

Another man, Michael Hughes, has been organizing witchcraft rituals to “bind” Donald Trump since 2017 and is doing so this year a week before Halloween.

So those who claim Halloween is just about candy and costumes need to think again. It is shaping up as a significant force, and not in a positive direction.

Around the country this October there were numerous “drag queen” story events with Halloween themes: Tucson ( for “all ages”), Dallas, Atlanta, Riverside, CA, Philadelphia, St. Petersburg. In Ames, Iowa, an all-ages drag show (where children could perform if they wanted) received substantial community push-back. Good for them!

But apparently there’s a new venue for child propaganda sessions—college campuses. Michigan State University recently held a “drag” event for little children and some students. And just as we’ve been alerting parents, it was timed to coincide with “Coming Out “day on October 11. So the goal of these female impersonators was clearly to influence minor children to embrace and then announce a homosexual or gender confused identity.

Why was this allowed at a publicly-funded institution?

Yet the red flags didn’t end there. One of the transvestites introduced the MSU “act” by discussing male cross-dressing through the ages. He said, “…whether it's jestors or shaman, every culture has this experience of getting into costume."

A shaman is essentially a witch doctor. So once again, the occult influence in “drag” venues keeps rearing its ugly head.

Why should people care? It’s a matter of keeping our children away from spiritual and sexual risk. Predatory adults have some very noticeable traits. They manipulate situations where they can be close to children, and they have few or no boundaries-- sexual, social or spiritual.

Drag queens insist on close contact with other people’s children and instantly dismiss parental (or taxpayer) concerns. Should we trust these people?

Absolutely not.

And this Halloween, if we fall for their deception, it’s a huge trick.

Rep. Trent Franks #fundie lifenews.com

As Americans honor civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr., a congressman says the nation is not aware of how Planned Parenthood targets black Americans with abortions. Arizona Rep. Trent Franks says the abortion industry has preyed on African-American communities for too long.

Franks told LifeNews.com today that he is "calling on Americans to work toward ending the abortion industry's disproportionate targeting of minorities."

"Today, we remember Martin Luther King, Jr. for dedicating his life to the fulfillment of a truth outlined in the Declaration of Independence: that all men are created equal, regardless of their skin color," Franks said. "While we have come a long way in the 40+ years since his death, another major hurdle in the Civil Rights Movement still looms before us: the disturbing targeting of minority populations by the abortion industry."

Franks points to startling figures to make his case.

"An astonishing 50% of African-American babies are killed by abortion," he points out. "And nearly 80% of abortion clinics are deliberately located in or near predominantly minority neighborhoods."

Ultimately, Franks says "a minority baby is five times more likely to be aborted than a white child."

Franks is the sponsor of the H.R. 1822, the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act, which prohibits race-based abortions.

The bill would make it illegal to knowingly perform, solicit, or accept funding for either race- or sex-selection abortions as Planned Parenthood has done.

The Arizona Republican lawmaker says he's not surprised that Planned Parenthood targets black Americans with abortions given comments from its founder.

"The abortion industry's biggest secret is that their entire movement was largely founded by eugenicists like Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who infamously said, 'We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,'" he said.

"That appalling outlook has continued to influence Planned Parenthood and the rest of the abortion industry," he concludes.

Alfred Lambremont Webre #conspiracy goldenageofgaia.com

[Mr Carnicom has expressed that these views are not his own, and review of the cited report has shown this to be largely true. Any sentence that does not directly quote Mr Carnicom should not be considered to be his belief, including those that reference him without a direct quote. Seriously, only the quotes and the list of seven items seem accurate. Which leaves this as a complete fucking baffling bit of bullshit someone else wrote and ascribed a number of their own beliefs to him. The author has been updated to the individual the article is supposedly written by.]

Clifford E. Carnicom, an acknowledged expert since 1999 on the global covert spraying of aerosols into the atmosphere operation (also known as “Chemtrails”), stated in an exclusive ExopoliticsTV interview with Alfred Lambremont Webre released March 1, 2011 that the covert aerosol-spraying operation had transformed the Earth’s atmosphere into a plasma for carrying out weaponized applications such as bio-warfare (including Morgellons disease), electromagnetic operations such as HAARP, weather warfare, tectonic (earthquake) warfare, mind control, advanced surveillance technology, and detection of advanced propulsion technology including UFOs.

The over-all purpose of this covert operation of spraying aerosols into the atmosphere and converting it into plasma was to achieve “absolute control” over the global human population. This total control is accomplished using the combined effects of seven weapons-like applications that use the plasma-like atmosphere with weaponized effects on the environment, the biosphere and the human population.

Although Mr. Carnicom prefers to use the term “aerosols”, the global covert operation spraying of aerosols into the atmosphere is also known as the “chemtrails program”.

In a Jan. 10, 2011 assessment of the current impact of the global aerosol-spraying program, Mr. Carnicom stated, “The vitality and viability of human existence and life on this planet, as it has been known to exist, is under threat.”

[...]

In the ExopoliticsTV interview, Mr. Carnicom details seven weapons applications of the covert global sprayed aerosols program that are being used to carry out over-all the goal of “absolute control” over the global human population.

These seven weapons applications of the sprayed aerosols are:

1. Biological operations, including the use of apparent bio-warfare, such as Morgellons disease, in the sprayed aerosols, constituting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Geneva conventions.

2. Military Operations, such as advanced radar applications, anti-missile Star Wars applications.

3. Electromagnetic Operations, including HAARP directed energy scalar weapons and mind control weapons applications, constituting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Geneva conventions.

4. Environmental modification and weather wars. Mr. Carnicom stated he has concluded that the covert aerosol-spraying program has transformed the atmosphere of the planet into plasma capable of sustaining weaponized applications since its acceleration in 1999. This constitutes a violation of the 1978 Treaty against Modification of the Environment.

5. Geophysical operations, including tectonic (earthquake) warfare, constituting war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Geneva conventions.

6. An advanced surveillance system capable of covert surveillance of the entire human population.

7. Detection of exotic propulsion systems, including detection of off-planet or interdimensional UFOs.

[...]

We must have accurate information. With our current exposure on complete overload, we simply cannot wait more months or years. In fact, what do we think we are waiting for? In many parts of the US, the Chemtrails assault appears to have intensified over the past two months. Just look at the artificially induced crazed weather around the US just during this past month: The temperature in Texas was 0-degrees yesterday; and whatever “white stuff” is falling from the skies throughout New England is not snow that looks anything like what used to fall 15 years ago. This white material smells full of chemicals. The Chemtrails-Weather Modification [read: destruction] situation is now far past critical.

“How many people have had their air tested for these metals by a reputable independent lab [with no government ties]? How many of the millions of people who love to garden have tested their soils? When the robins return in the Spring, will they be pulling heavily-pesticided and Manganese-infested worms (part of the web of life and our food chain) out of the ground to eat? What other mass bird deaths might follow? [Note: a well-known scientist told me that the recent mass bird and fish deaths were caused by man-made scalar activity. Their deaths were not natural.] It is now essential that, over a short period of time, we make a collective effort to get samples tested around the country. Resources can be pooled. Other things that could also be included for analysis are biological materials (molds, fungi, viruses), Phosgene, EDB [Ethylene dibromide], polymers, and possibly radioactive uranium, thorium, and strontium. We can then have a clear picture of the extent of the damage to which we are subjected. For our SAFETY, this is now of the utmost urgency.

“Standard blood tests do not show up heavy metals poisoning. However, a simple hair analysis can detect heavy metals, so people have a base from which to determine their own risks. This hair analysis can even be done for your pets. Many toxic chemicals and heavy metals have overlapping and similar poisoning symptoms. So, it is always important to consult your primary health care provider. The only problem there is that most physicians have little-to-no-training in environmental medicine, or the effects of these omnipresent poisons, or how to treat them. This is now in abundant evidence with the nine-and-and-a-half-month mega-crisis situation in the Gulf of Mexico. There are not enough doctors who really know how to deal with this epic catastrophe caused by the mixture of lethal Corexit dispersants, crude oil, and Chemtrails. Doctors Without Borders and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine both have been silent. This is reprehensible. Around the Gulf, hospitals are overwhelmed. This is an unprecedented brew of poisons. However, depending upon the extent of medical issues, it is possible to detox from heavy metal poisoning –provided this toxic aerosol assault stops.

“Since the new millennium began, there has been a concerted and sped-up effort to destroy decades of environmental laws that had been enacted to protect us. We now have corporations running our country into the ground with the help of “public” officials whose salaries come from our taxes. This is done with the cooperation of news media that hardly do either any investigative journalism or truthful reporting. We now need this so urgently; and it is essential to our very continued existence. Mainstream news is distracting “spin” but certainly not real news. This is especially relevant, as it concerns our less well-educated younger generations who do not have accurate news input, or often the ability to analyze issues, and/or think critically. They are constantly on their cell phones and oblivious to much else. Here, too, there is abundant documentation and scientific reports of the brain damage done by daily cell phone use. Brain cancer, once rare, is now on a steep rise.

[...]

“In addition, high-tech “Star Trek” type instruments surround our every move. From cell phones and their towers, Wi-Fi, and HAARP. Added to this horrific brew also are illegal and criminal military uses of Depleted Uranium on civilians, and the Gulf of Mexico’s nine-month attack under the deadly Corexit dispersant (now carried on the winds around our planet) mixed with Chemtrails, and other carcinogenic chemicals. Our immune systems and our lives are under chronic siege! Anyone living anywhere near the Gulf of Mexico is already at life risk. The natural functioning of our immune systems has been severely compromised and damaged. Despite national and international laws that supposedly forbid the use of these assorted dangers on humans, nothing has been done to stop any of this. We continue to be uninformed experimental laboratory animals for secret agendas by imbedded “Trojan horses” that are causing all of us extreme, but often invisible, harm every day. In humankind’s entire history, there has never been such an environmental toxic assault on us. As I have written numerous times: Invisible technology, or the chemicals we don’t see (but are breathing and eating), doesn’t mean we are safe. None of this is sustainable for life on our planet. Certainly not for our children and grandchildren.

“It is possible not to shop at any company that harms us. Why should we support them with our hard-earned money (and its increasing shrinking power)? Do we want to continue to get sucked into a completely broken system that does not value anything but destruction and war? Just look at all the social services that are being continuously cut to the bone, while the behemoth military budget is the largest in our history. All our social services are being gutted. Global Research reported on January 18 that “Obama may cut Social Security.”(16) Do we get it? Everything else, that once made ours a shinning example to other countries, is being deliberately destroyed by those in charge. These economic and environmental crises are no accident. They are planned.

Ender wiggin #fundie medium.com

Pedophiles have the exact same ability to develop romantic feelings for children — to fall in love with them — as any other person has for the people they’re attracted to. Of course, a pedophile will have to be in a position where he can have a (completely appropriate) relationship with the child enough to get to know him or her in order for that to happen, and that is not always the case. Many pedophiles choose to avoid being around children for a variety of reasons, ranging from a concern that they will offend — a self-inflicted doubt instilled by the internalization of the prevailing and stigmatizing narrative that all pedophiles are child molesters or ticking time bombs waiting to explode — to a paranoia that others will find out about them if they look a little too long or awkwardly at a child, to simply wanting to avoid the pain of unrequited love, which can be hard to bear. And yet a lot of pedophiles find themselves in a situation where they have fallen in love with a child, and all they can do is suffer it in silence.

Conclusion
In summary, a pedophile’s attraction to children is virtually indistinguishable from a heterosexual man’s attraction to women or a homosexual woman’s attraction to other women. Of course there are variations in the way pedophiles experience their attraction to children, but not in a greater or lesser degree than there are variations in the way others experience their own attractions. For some it is more visceral, more physical/sexual, while for others it is much more emotional, and even paternal in many cases. Pedophiles can certainly obsess over children, but not in any higher degree than any other person can obsess over someone they are attracted to. And of course, pedophiles can behave inappropriately with children, making unsolicited and unwanted sexual advances, but once again, there is no evidence that this would happen at any higher rate among pedophiles than people of other sexual orientations.

Assuming that a pedophile’s attraction to children is inherently perverse or evil is wrong and only contributes to further the stigmatization and vilification of people who, as a group and by definition, are not criminals or desire to harm anyone in any way. Acknowledging that there’s nothing inherently wrong about being attracted to children, given that it’s not something a person was ever given a choice about, in no way excuses anyone from behaving inappropriately with a child. Accepting that there isn’t anything inherent to pedophilia that makes anyone do anything they don’t want to do, or that impairs anyone’s ability to know right from wrong, also doesn’t excuse child sexual abuse.