Show post
Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

8 Factors That Are Destroying Healthy Relationships Between Men And Women

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of 'Man's Fight for Existence'. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature. Visit his new website at primalexistence.com

Most men, even if they’re still swimming in ocean of blue pills, have some awareness that something has gone awry with the relationship between men and women. Statistics prove this as well as divorce has been epidemic for a while now with record-number of children growing up with single parent around the world while young people are having less sex than before. And whether you be a feminist or part of the manosphere, I think both sides can agree on one thing: that a war between the sexes have been heating up in the recent years.

Why is all this happening? While men and women tend to play the blame game to avoid taking any responsibility, there are greater forces at play. The fact is, the continuing transformation of our society is making the antagonism between the sexes inevitable. Feminism is just a symptom, not the cause of our problems.

Before we look at why today’s sex relations are in a dismal state, consider the single factor that makes relationships prosper: Mutuality based on different but compatible roles.

All relationships work best when two parties have something different to share for their mutual benefit. For example, humans and horses have enjoyed a close relationship together throughout history (unlike, say, humans and bears). The relationship works because in exchange for food, protection, and care that humans provide, the horses offer themselves as transportation.

The relationship between men and women was also mutually beneficial for the entirety of human existence with men offering their services in exchange for having the women bear their children. But now, with the advent of modern society and its conditions, things have changed drastically.

1. “Equality”
image
At least these men had their male privilege.

“Equality” for women is the most abominable lie to have ever perpetuated on mankind.

Men have always provided for women. Men hunted for food, labored to build everything, and fought battles to defend their tribe. To say that men oppressed women throughout history is an insult to all those who sacrificed themselves in the factories, the coal mines, and the trenches. If women didn’t have certain rights that feminists like to cherry-pick, it’s because women weren’t drafted to fight wars. In exchange for their toil, the only thing men asked of women was to be supportive in their roles as wives and mothers.

But fast-forward to today, now that women have “achieved” social and political “equality” and even various advantages just for being born a female, many women today no longer feel that it’s necessary to exchange values with men for mutuality. It’s like when humans developed automobiles and didn’t need horses anymore. The difference is, humans and horses don’t need to be together; men and women do.

However, men’s sexual desire—which is greater than that of females—is still alive and kicking. So what we have today is a situation where women have gotten their social equality while sexual inequality persists for men (which is why many men choose to give up sex entirely to level the playing field). This is what happens when you standardize human beings into economic units.

2. Education and career over family

Stressed out from balancing between work and family? Yup, it’s the men’s fault that you tried to do both.

To maintain their advantage over men, women today are dedicating themselves to their education and career. Western women, in particular, have been so thoroughly sold on the idea of status and consumerist orgy that they are no longer interested in relationships. More and more women today are delaying marriage (if not outright rejecting it). And when they do get married, they are using it as a means to trap men into donating their sperm and cash, only to bail out when they want to.

3. Slut culture
image
Wow, what an achievement! I’m sure your failed parents are just as proud.

The advent of contraception and the decimation of whatever feminine decency that was left has turned the vast majority of young Western women into drunken sluts. The increasing number of sluts is diminishing the availability of quality women that men want to start a family with and has social implications for the society as a whole.

4. Government supplanting men
image

The only way women were able to “liberate” themselves from their supposed oppressors was by latching themselves on to a new alpha provider: the government. As said before, men form relationships with women by exchanging values, with his strength to provide and protect being his greatest asset. But now, the government (along with corporations and education system) fulfills those roles that men previously occupied. And not only that, but the government is deeply involved in the affairs of marriage, sending professional white-knights to extort and arrest men who’ve been used up and thrown away by women.

It also doesn’t help that the government is increasingly monopolizing violence, one of the most important value that a man possesses. And that leads to my next point.

5. Too few wars, too many men
image
I doubt these men had to think of ways to entertain women like a monkey to get their attention.

The recurring theme across patriarchal societies of the past and present are violence and warfare. And the most commonly associated traits of masculinity are also traits of warriors such as strength, bravery, aggression, discipline, and so on. It’s quite simple: the more violent the environment is, the more masculine men become. And the more conflicts and wars there are, the more the women depend on men—thus keeping the collective value of male population high.

It’s no coincidence that Western societies have started to feminize as they endured decades of relative peace since the end of WWII. The lack of warfare also means that there are now more young men per woman (practically 1 to 1) than there normally would have been under a warring society. Excess of men—who are also emasculated and feminized—means that the collective value of average men has dropped to a historical low, upsetting the balance of sexual marketplace in the process. Only the top 5-10% of men with the warrior traits and wealth are able to enjoy a semblance of a balanced relationship with women—and even they have to play the game.

6. The decimation of Western women

Declining marriage rates? Don’t worry, some simps will try to put a ring on their fingers.

Many Western women have been corrupted by our toxic materialist society. They are fatter, uglier, more narcissistic, more entitled, hedonistic, superficial, less faithful, and seem to think that having bitch attitude makes them hip. Women can afford to stoop low because their sex drive isn’t the same as men’s, while they couldn’t care less for love and companionship when they’re too busy with their travels and careers.

And because of all the thirsty men, women’s collective sexual market value hardly suffers while the value of those who are merely average becomes inflated beyond their real value. You only need to check out the gross discrepancies between the sexes in dating sites and apps to see how bad things are.

7. Anti-male culture

Men are all rapists waiting to be hatched out of their facade, men merely uttering a word to a woman is a harassment, men are always “mansplaining” to women, men are insecure cry-babies, men open their legs too much when they sit, men and their toxic masculinity need to be controlled, men have to do more for women, men are dominating in tech fields because of sexism, men shouldn’t say this, men shouldn’t do that, etc, etc… And of course, if men push back, they’re “misogynists.”

And we’re we still wondering why relationships are getting harder to form these days?

8. Lack of shared values

As social beings, we humans need more than economic incentives and passions to form a relationship for a family to prosper. There must be shared values.

With traditional family values under constant attack from all directions, the bonding between males and females have been reduced to mere hook-ups and economic unions. To make matters worse, many from both sides are resorting to predatory behaviors to exploit one another for either money (for women) or sex (for men), augmenting the distrust between the two sexes. Others, who either don’t want to play games or have become overtly hostile to the opposite sex, have given up on relationships entirely. This is the end result of atomization and extreme individualism under a system that destroys all values for the sake of economic advancement.

Conclusion

The destruction of sex relationship is having a negative effect on society as a whole and is transforming the demographic landscape of many Western nations. Unlike what the aesthetically-challenged feminists and the man-children crying their own way believe, men and women are not adversaries. You don’t have to be a traditionalist to see that the sex relations have gone awry due to the development of modern society and its destructive cultures.

Many Western men have already checked out or gone out to find traditional women elsewhere. But that is merely adapting to the situation; it doesn’t solve the problem at a societal level. The continuing antagonism of the sexes will eventually spread around the world. Unless the current course is somehow reversed, we can only wait and see how far the damage will run its course.

Show post
Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

It looks like the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of America’s premier ethnic shakedown organizations, is running low on donations again. This week, they announced the new edition of their “hate group” list, a record of supposed white supremacist, far-right terrorist organizations operating in the United States. Most notably, Return Of Kings has been added to the list as a “male supremacy” organization, alongside men’s rights’ group A Voice For Men:

Also, for the first time, the SPLC added two male supremacy groups to the hate group list: A Voice for Men, based in Houston, and Return of Kings, based in Washington, D.C. The vilification of women by these groups makes them no different than other groups that demean entire populations, such as the LGBT community, Muslims or Jews, based on their inherent characteristics.

This isn’t the first time that ROK publisher Roosh has been targeted by the SPLC: in 2012, he was named in one of the organization’s “Intelligence Reports,” alongside A Voice for Men and my old site In Mala Fide. Roosh later cited the experience as the final push that moved him to the dissident right.

It’s clear that the SPLC is going after AVFM and ROK in an attempt to scare liberal old biddies into giving them more money, because their attack was sloppy and poorly-handled. For example, the SPLC claims that ROK is headquartered in Washington D.C., even though it’s a website with no physical address or full-time employees.

Most hilariously, the SPLC’s dossier on alt right figure Richard Spencer confused him with Robert Spencer, the founder of Jihad Watch, suggesting they outsourced the research to a stupid intern.

Having said this, the SPLC’s attack can’t be handwaved away. Much like the Anti-Defamation League, the SPLC’s purpose in naming organizations as “hate groups” or individuals as “extremists” is designed to incite violence against them. Ever since the election of Donald Trump, the left in America has become increasingly violent, and the SPLC’s list is a dog whistle to antifa and other groups with the intent of hurting or possibly killing Roosh and other targeted individuals.

How The Southern Poverty Law Center Fuels Leftist Violence

The SPLC, ADL, and other related organizations like to masquerade as legitimate news organizations who are merely calling attention to violent, anti-government extremists, but this is as far from the truth as possible. In actuality, the SPLC functions as an intelligence-gathering operation for antifa and other violent leftists, compiling dossiers on chosen targets with the implicit message of, “It’s okay to hurt, maim, or kill these people: they’re Nazis/misogynists/homophobes, after all.”

“Hate group” lists compiled by the SPLC have been used by leftist criminals in the past to identify targets for assassination. For example, in 2013, a left-winger committed a mass shooting against the Family Research Council after seeing them named by the SPLC as an “anti-gay” group. More recently, we’ve seen leftists openly going after Republican politicians and public figures, such as the attempted assassination of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise by Bernie Sanders supporter James Hodgkinson.

This is not the first time that figures in the dissident right have been targeted in such a way. Last summer, the ADL released a hit list of alt right and alt lite figures such as Mike Cernovich, Richard Spencer, and myself, with the purpose of inciting violence against us. In response, Cernovich and several other alt lite figures launched the #ADLTerror hashtag on Twitter with the intent of bringing attention to the fact that their lives were now in danger.
Lies, Damned Lies, And Lists

Moreover, the SPLC can’t even be consistent with the criteria it uses to evaluate “hate groups.” In response to their attack on A Voice For Men, ex-feminist filmmaker Cassie Jaye (creator of the documentary The Red Pill) revealed that in 2016, the SPLC told her that AVFM didn’t fit their criteria for a group since they lacked an “official group policy,” due to the fact that AVFM was just a website and a forum. The SPLC has not yet revealed to Jaye why they changed their policy.

Regardless, it is clear that the international left is ramping up for a broader attack on the dissident right. While the alt right was the focus of much of the left’s ire last year, the movement has been weakened due to systematic deplatforming, failed stunts such as Charlottesville, and personality conflicts between its major leaders. As a result, the left now feels confident in going after sites like Return Of Kings that had previously been out of the line of fire.

Dissident right and alternative media figures should prepare themselves for an onslaught from the globalists in the coming months. With the 2018 midterm elections coming up and the Russia investigation in the U.S. unraveling, the left is looking to strike out at anyone who challenges their power or narrative. As the SPLC’s actions show, they are not above physically hurting or killing their enemies to achieve their goals.

Show post
David G. Brown #sexist returnofkings.com

5 Men Who Substantially Upgraded Their Women

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there's something worth tweeting here.

The sexual marketplace need not suck all the time. Plenty of men have laid out the path for you, often initially shacking up with the women they felt they deserved and then moving onto greener, hotter pastures. If you’re in doubt, take a look at the following men who saw the light and found themselves a better-looking woman.

[...]

Have you got the courage to find someone better?
image
If your relationship with a woman honestly works, all power to you. For many men, however, things are not so rosy. In a number of cases, these guys will be much better off by cutting their losses and finding someone they not only think but know is better. Are you one of those men who might need to make a change? Think it over.

Show post
Kyle Trouble #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Ways Our Modern World Is A Pale Simulation Of The Past

Kyle is an entrepreneur and nomad who has been living abroad since 2016. He blogs at This Is Trouble. Follow him on Facebook.

When I was living in Kiev, Ukraine, I was spending a lot of time at business lunch. Essentially, it was a 3-5 course lunch time meal that restaurants in Kiev would do to entice people to come in and eat. Those 3-5 courses would usually cost about $3-$7 when it was all said in done. The most expensive restaurant in the city offered it for $6. Juice, bread, salad or soup, and a main course. It was a killer deal. My friends and I would go to one of these restaurants Monday through Friday, every day.

One of the major topics that always came up was the way that so many things in our modern world are simulated. Things that used to be typical in older times are now existent in our current culture, in a sort of fantasy. To me, there were five things that now exist in the world that basically simulate what people in the past used to do.

When we weren’t talking about how to handle Ukrainian women and the state of our dating lives, we had a lot of time to talk about life, how things have evolved in the last few years, and to bring these points into a more concise view of the world and how they have directly impacted modern day men. They deserve as much credit as I do for this post.

In short, these things all result in lower testosterone, depression, and a multitude of other symptoms that all can be traced back to what we’d consider to be the problems of modern society. These problems aren’t just pertinent to men, however.

1. Sports Replacing War

Gladiators used to fight in the Roman Coliseum for sport. These days, it’s simulated with things like football. “Violence and blood,” so to speak. Now, don’t get me wrong–if you’re active and participating in sports, it’s great. But it’s a substitute for literally going to war and killing off other tribes. Perhaps this is the one simulation on the list that isn’t a bad thing, on paper. Everybody should lead active and healthy lives. But then you look around and realize that many men are simply being spectators to sport.

Spending twelve hours on Sunday watching the NFL as a fan. It’s scary that the games kick off at 1pm EST and end at nearly midnight, if you watch the late game. Major League Baseball has 162 games in their season. I know that quite a few guys out there watch all 162 games of their respective teams.

It’s a simulation of replacing the long lost battles fought against other tribes. Instead, your “tribe” paints colors and logos on your face and goes to “war” with the other team’s fans. I don’t think you need to cut out sports (watching), and definitely don’t think they are 100% poison. Everybody needs a way to unplug once in a while. It’s not the worst vice you could have.

However, you must cut it down to manageable bits each week. Watch your favorite team’s football game. And when it’s done, it’s done. Don’t let it affect your mood for the rest of the week (or even day).

2. Porn, Dolls, and Virtual Reality, Replacing Sex

Everybody by now knows that porn is really, really bad for you. But people aren’t stopping their use of it.

Many men in Asian countries have all but thrown in the towel on having any sort of love life. They would rather use porn and blow-up dolls that simulate sex—pretty damn close to the real thing, I hear. Western men would rather stay home and jerk off to increasingly-disturbing levels of porn rather than travel abroad to remote places to meet Serbian women or Colombian girls. Hell, with the advancement of technology, blow-up dolls may be far more skilled at giving head than real girls in the not-so-distant future. Looking at the doll in the photo above is scary. You can tell she’s fake if you look closely, but from afar, I could be fooled.

With men, it’s all about the end release when it comes to sex. Women use porn (or at least say they do) at a less drastic rate. They also don’t seem to have quite the addiction to it. That’s because for women, the sex is all about the journey through it. It doesn’t matter if they have an orgasm. When you can simulate sex and still get the end release, it’s an effective simulation as opposed to the real thing—which isn’t that hard to get.

3. Pets Replacing Children

Dogs are a man’s best friend, but the way some people treat their pets is utterly pathetic. In a world where people are repeatedly being told now to have children (or to put it off in the case of women), they are finding other way’s to simulate raising children.

The entire biological point of our existence is to pass on our genetics. And yet people are being told that they really shouldn’t. Instead, they get dogs that fit into purses. And the sad part is that then those people become so reliant on the dogs that it’s the humans that need the dogs just so they can muster the courage to get on an airplane.

It’s disturbingly easy to get an emotional support animal these days.

4. Video Games Replacing Achievement

I’ve suffered from video game addiction myself. It’s a real thing. And I know exactly what achievement porn is. Video games suck you in now and don’t let you out. As men, we do work to achieve stuff. We get good feelings and a sense of accomplishment from it.

Video games take it up a level by adding fantasy to those achievements. Even though you’re pouring hours and hours into something pointless, you feel good because it’s accomplishment. It’s a false sense of working hard. The sad thing is, if you took those ten hours playing video games (a day) for achievement porn, and spent just three of them on building a business–you’d have a hell of a lot to show.

5. Food Replacing Pleasure

Food is a way to numb the pain for a lot of people. It’s a distraction from the day to day life of the office grind. You could throw alcohol into this discussion, too.

People are so disconnected from each other on a personal level, that’s it’s more comfortable to eat food instead of confiding in your friends and peers. Combine this with the sedentary lifestyle of the 9-5 grind, television (see #1), and it’s a recipe for disaster. It all goes full circle.

You’re now addicted and dependent on food for numbing pain. You have a “tribe” which just makes you sit on the couch more and more. You have a pet that replaces offspring, and a doll that replaces a lover.

That’s the life of simulation. And the worst thing? Most will never even realize what they’re doing. It’s time to wake up.

Show post
David G. Brown #sexist returnofkings.com

Do Not Try To Help A Woman Who Is A Victim Of “Domestic Violence”

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there's something worth tweeting here.

Helping women who claim to be victims of “domestic violence” is one of the best ways to suck up your own time, not to mention inject unnecessary emotions and drama into your life. Most of the time, your attempts to help will not be met with gratitude and, in fact, will frequently garner hostility from the person you are trying to “save.” Moreover, the target of your rescue mission generally doesn’t want to be saved anyway.

There is no need for anger or bitterness when you wash yourself of a woman claiming domestic violence, as hard as suppressing those emotions may be. Like someone dependent on drugs, an obese person, or another kind of addict, plenty of women are addicted to the rush of either a violent man (who is part of a small minority of men) or the thrill and attention of claiming to be the victim of a violent man who isn’t actually violent. Any logical, rational advice you give will invariably engender her opposition or inaction.

Particularly if a woman returns to her “abusive” boyfriend or husband after you have tried to save them, helping someone claiming domestic violence leads over and over again to unnecessary, sometimes aggressive or violent conflict with third parties. Even when this does not happen to the worst extent, you find yourself invested in an emotionally unstable woman, whether she causes the instability herself or not.

Most important of all, there is usually no evidence to support claims of domestic violence, bar the fickle testimonies of the couple. If you choose to help, you are almost certainly engaging in a wild goose chase with next to no merit. In today’s climate, asking a woman to do the dishes is probably considered domestic violence.

My experiences

Does the helping hand really help? Most times it doesn’t.

I learned fairly early on in adulthood that helping women “abused” by men is typically a fruitless exercise. For example, around the age of 19, I attempted to intervene in a situation where a female friend was being told, among other things, that she was worthless by her boyfriend at the time. At one stage, he even told her to kill herself. With zero sexual interest in the girl, I simply thought the guy’s behavior was wrong.

Yet, rather than thanking me for my assistance, my advice to this girl was greeted with histrionics and ingratitude. It also attracted a series of threats from her boyfriend, none of which eventuated. I had brought myself into heated verbal exchanges with this guy, without it having any impact whatsoever on the girl. If anything, the whole saga solidified her feelings for him. Aside from maybe interjecting in the “kill yourself” part, I had wasted my time completely. Nevertheless, it was a great lesson to learn so young.

I came to realize that women like this ex-friend are positively attracted to men like him. No amount of investment in time or energy would deter what were emotional longings for Mr. Demeaning. Second-hand experiences I had before and after this situation suddenly began to make sense.

#WhyIStayed and other similar bullshit

The internet exploded with questions about [Janay Rice] … why didn’t she leave [Ray Rice]? Why did she marry him? Why did she stay? I can’t speak for Janay Rice, but I can speak for Beverly Gooden. Why did I stay? … Leaving was a process, not an event. And sometimes it takes a while to navigate through the process. I believe in storytelling. I believe in the power of shared experience. I believe that we find strength in community. That is why I created this hashtag. I hope those tweeting using #WhyIStayed find a voice, find love, find compassion, and find hope.”

— #WhyIStayed “creator” Beverly Gooden promoting Beverly Gooden

Yes, because hope, rather than self-preservation, will save a woman who is a victim of actual domestic violence.

In addition to biological drives that impel women to stay with or seek out domineering sex partners, boyfriends, and husbands, good old feminist “storytelling” also motivates females in sticking by or returning to men that they claim hit them or, much more ambiguously, “mistreat” them. A whole cottage industry has developed to support the narrative that women can and should stay with supposedly abusive partners.

If we’re being brutally honest, #WhyIStayed and other feminist call signs keep swarms of feminist typists gainfully employed. They sustain the small rate of actual domestic violence so that these typists can continue to publish articles, despite them being highly exaggerated ones.

Of all the modern-day battles we could say are uphill because of perverse cultural conditioning, seeking to assist a woman who claims to be abused takes the cake. Realistically, what are your prospects of dissuading a woman from what is usually a self-determined, psychological, or biological course of action? If you say your chances are relatively high (whatever that means), is the expenditure of time and energy really worth it? The impact on your own life is likely to be much more than you anticipate.

An exception to the principle for sisters, female cousins, etc.

Doing more for family still makes sense, with limits.

There are some common sense exceptions to what I have been saying. If you or your family have more skin in the game and find one of your relatives in trouble, you obviously should try harder. Inasmuch as family units have been eviscerated in recent years, blood and similar ties still count for something nowadays.

Bear in mind, however, that many of the same limitations you have with female friends or acquaintances will apply in large part to your relatives. Maybe you will draw the biggest line when it comes to protecting your (future) daughter, but the rest of the time you are probably gnashing your teeth over sisters, cousins, or other female relatives who will just not listen to you (and who are in all likelihood gilding the lily about the level of mistreatment, too). If laying down the law doesn’t work the first or second time, cut your losses and move on for the time being.

There may come a point when you need to involve police for the very small minority of cases that truly warrant it. That is your call. And, of course, I am not advocating against helping women when you know at the gut level that they need it. What I am saying is that you need to avoid being a martyr in circumstances where being a martyr, literally or figuratively, is against your own interests.

Remember, most women either don’t want to be saved or are willing to cost you your state of mind and resources should you put yourself on the line for them.

Show post
Max Roscoe #fundie returnofkings.com

Japan Bans Chicks With Dicks

Max Roscoe

is an aspiring philosopher king, living the dream, travelling the world, hoarding FRNs and ignoring Americunts. He is a European at heart, lover of Latinas, and currently residing in the USA.

At the risk of breaking a personal journalistic rule of devoting far too much time to an incredibly miniscule and unimportant issue, I must draw attention to a recent win for masculinity. The island nation of Japan recently made a common sense decision regarding the extremely minute portion of its population that is dealing with the first world problem of its genitalia not matching the perceived sex of the owner, known in the West as transsexuals or “gender questioning individuals” to use the word salad nonsensical parlance of the day.

image
Sure thing, toots, just as soon as you lose the balls.

First, I should clarify that no one is being banned, deported, or shipped out of the country in a way that a more aggressive nation like Saudi Arabia might handle this issue. Instead Japan has a simple policy which efficiently handles the transsexual question—one that seems to bewilder and confuse the Western world, who must devote weekly news articles, federal legislation, prime time (((television programming))) and endless discussion on how to handle this fraction of a percentage of its population.

It works like this: do you have a penis? If yes then you cannot be a chick. It’s as simple as that.

With that one universal test, Japan has disposed of the endless head-scratching and policy making by Western politicians, critics, and social justice warriors about how to describe their private parts on government identification cards or which restrooms to pee in. In Japan you will be considered a man as long as you have a penis. End of story.

Likewise, if you have a vagina, you will be considered a woman. No matter what clothes you are wearing, how deep your voice is, or how you choose to “identify” that day. The beauty is in the simplicity.

image
Japanese Sex Change Operation

While Western nations must debate and compromise, legislate and propose, carving out exceptions for this or that behavior and endlessly consulting irate social justice warriors in a futile attempt to placate them, Japan disposes with the entire question of transsexual people with the simple question.

In the Japanese system, Bruce Jenner would not once have been a news story during my lifetime, as he has done nothing newsworthy since winning a 1976 Olympic medal. If and when he actually removes his penis and replaces it with a surgical vagina (Sugina from hereon), only then could he be properly considered a female and could announce he would like to be referred to as Caitlyn. (A person changing their sex is still not a newsworthy story to me, but I suppose there are those who would be interested to know what happened to this former hero of theirs).

image

Japan is a fascinating nation. As an island nation, it is naturally more isolated than most cultures, and is able to control physically and culturally what enters its society. Japan is one of the more difficult countries to immigrate to, and I have been told that Japanese will never fully accept Westerners, even if you take a Japanese wife and live there for decades (and why should they, as those actions will make you no more Japanese than Bruce Jenner installing a sugina will make him a woman).

Japan is one of the only societies in the world that was never controlled by Europeans. It holds on to its traditions, and has a strong history of physical fitness including the samurai warrior. While Westerners are committing virtual seppuku because they touched a woman’s butt in 1984, Japanese businessmen will glibly walk to a vending machine and purchase a high school girl’s panties for sexual purposes.

image
An oddity to a westerner, but in Japan men are not ashamed to be men

Odd? Sure, and I’m not going to even go down the road of weird Japanese kinks and bizarre pornography, but the point is the Japanese are proudly Japanese, and will not let others shame them into changing their behavior. I will always remember the line from James Bond’s You Only Live Twice concerning women and men, which made an indelible impression on me since childhood.

image
In Japan, men always come first. Women come second.

What Is A Woman?

Outside of the West in The Current Year, I doubt anyone has given this question serious thought, but today, sadly, it is necessary. If you ask yourself what truly makes someone a woman, It comes down to whether they have a penis or a vagina in their pants.

image
“OK is She REALLY a man or a woman?” Can only refer to one thing.

While there are levels of masculinity and feminity which vary between the sexes, at the end of the day, if you really want to know someone’s sex, you want to know what genitalia they have. All Japan is doing is confirming, yes, that is exactly what sex means.

TransTrenders: Belittling Those Who Are Truly Victims

Just as feminists are opposed to true diversity, the public discussion of sexual dysphoria is a distraction from the minority of people who have real problems with their sexual identification.

Just as those who suffer from the horrible crime of violent rape do NOT want to publicly discuss their traumatic past, those who suffer from rare sexual disorders or chromosomal mutations that affect their sexuality are embarrassed and saddened by their condition. Those who truly have a medical condition which causes their genitalia to be deformed, or not match the sex they mentally feel, or who were a victim of a botched (((circumcision))) want to quietly rectify the problem and live life without others knowing about the unpleasant thing that happened in their past.

The LAST thing they want is to publicly exclaim that they were one sex and are now the other. Which seems to be ALL that being a trans-trender is about. Watch a Youtube video of a prominent transtrender like Justin “Riley” Dennis, and all you were hear is endless talk about their gender identification or their transition (despite the fact that they have rarely if ever actually snipped off the bits and therefore have transformed nothing).

Common Sense: A Lost Idea In The West

image
Dr. Wang, Japan’s Top Sex Change Doctor

By forcing those who claim their sex is “wrong” to surgically correct their sex, Japan is calling their bluff and separating the trans-trenders from the trans-genders. There is no further debate or discussion needed with such a policy. While the West is trying to fire, fine or even imprison academics for using the wrong (read: gramatically correct) gender pronouns when referring to snowflake students, Japan has a simple system: If you want to be a woman, you need to have a vagina. If you weren’t born with one, get one first and check back with us.

A Win-Win Policy

While most of us probably aren’t comfortable with the idea of going to bed with someone who was born a man, the truth is, if one are attractive enough, and has a vagina, men will want to sleep with you, especially if they don’t know about your past (this is a universal truth, not specific to trannies). So if potential trannies really want acceptance by men in the sexual marketplace, this is exactly the model they should be following.

Show post
André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Qualities That Dying Empires Lack

André is a young European who left his decaying country in 2012 for greener pastures. He enjoys exploring subterranean places, reading about a host of interconnected topics, and yearns for Tradition.

Along with blue pill and global governance comes the Hollow Empire. We live in the golden age of marketing, public relationships, and propaganda. Many people are good at crafting appearances and virtue-signaling by the standards of the degenerate mainstream. The cities are littered with awesome, hip images, but this world is full of it.

Cities are full of useless bureaucrats, con artists, effeminate men, and man-jawed women. People are fake. Interests and excessive desires are either veiled under passive-aggressive forms or openly communicated through sheer assholery. No mystery why stoicism came back into fashion among conscious men: when your day is full of fake smiles, you’re better off working on your inner fortress. (And when you’re stoic and poor, bulking on a budget makes you better off as well.)

In such a world, some human qualities are sorely lacking. They are often perceived as signs of weakness, naivete, or as antics. Or some start counterfeiting and misdirecting them.

1. Loyalty

Sheep dogs are amongst the most loyal breeds out there. Have you seen a lot of them in metropolises? Bourgeois bohemians prefer small, frail dwarf dogs that cost a small fortune. Or cats, whose displays of egoism and moodiness are always overlooked because they’re sooo cute.

Loyalty is a noble trait. It supposes courage, constancy, straightforwardness. A loyal parent cares. A loyal citizen does his duty and tends to become a pillar of his community. A loyal friend is someone you know you can count on. Unfortunately, loyalty has been both abused and derided. Since the 60s, the media started associating it with purportedly “oppressive” and narrow-minded people while encouraging sheepish behavior towards the latest craze.

Being loyal to a girl who would only remain if you treat her badly would be foolish. Beyond this, it is hard to be a loyal patriot once you know how much nation-states sent Europeans kill each other for nothing but neoconnish interests. As French writer Louis-Ferdinand Céline said, “you think you’ll die for your country but what you’ll really lose your life for is bank vaults.”

2. Kindness

According to the dictionaries, being kind means having a benevolent, friendly, helpful disposition. In a normal society, kindness would be the sign of a good nature and it would be rewarded. In The Current Year, kindness towards women or strangers will have you exploited then called a loser or hypocrite. Men with low self-esteem started to serve women in exchange for absolutely nothing: this warped beta niceness has become a patron for kindness in general.

‘I’ve tried speed dating and all the dating Apps, but every time I put my real age, all I get are idiots and losers,’ she told the New York Post. ‘I figured, why not make them useful and have them help me around the house?’

She found a match with a man wearing overalls and wielding a hammer in his profile photo and invited him over to install her air conditioning… After he successfully carried out the installation, Bloom asked him to leave and didn’t answer his messages asking her to go on a proper date. (Daily Mail)

Displaying kindness towards freewheeling female hypergamy is the same than being loyal to a brand that makes millions out of sheeple. A sane mind doesn’t do it.

3. Politeness and courtesy

Both words refer to a kind of high culture: refined interests, a genuine concern for arts and belles lettres, a tactful and gallant temperament. Polite, courteous manners thrived during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. They were derided as bourgeois by Bolshevists and promiscuous bohemians. Today, loud-mouthed girls know nothing of it, and both have been turned into either mild-mannered spinelessness or pure snobbery.

The arts associated with politeness, such as theatre or classical music, were appropriated by old money whereas the masses are fed with pop garbage. Actually, you can be polite and courteous if you hop in the right context, then use it as a folding screen for game, Sandor Szavost-style. Otherwise you will come across as formal or distant or snobbish. Indeed, neither do boyish immaturity nor grrly aggressive narcissism provide good grounds for taking a woman’s hand and leading her through an impeccable tango.

4. Forgiveness

Jesus Christ extolled forgiveness beyond revenge. Clear the slate, turn the other cheek. Just like toleration, forgiveness works best when it is reciprocated: I’ll forgive your misdeeds because you will forgive mine, I’ll tolerate your antics because you will accept my eccentricities. When the reciprocal aspect wanes, these qualities turn into sheer weakness. Forgiving a BLM activist who sent your brother into a coma only means giving him a pass so he’ll do the same to you.

The Golden Rule, just as any of its derivatives, only works within a context of reciprocation and mutual trust. German jurist Carl Schmitt noticed the Latin Bible told about forgiving the inimicus, the disagreeable guy you’re squabbling with, not the hostis or foreign enemy who will take your head as soon as he can. There is no point being forgiving towards an enemy you have nothing in common.

Unfortunately, the chaotic Current Year destroyed most boundaries. It is sometimes hard to say who’s an inimicus or occasional yet brotherly rival you can forgive, and who’s a hostis you should always be vigilant of.

5. Patience

Arno Brecker did nothing wrong

As the saying goes, the early bird catches the worm. Being patient, planning, delaying gratification, is part of achieving great things. (Unless you’re picking up a Western whore whom you should bed early). The occult elite does not want you to be like that. Rather, those on the top want you to look for instant gratification.

The social media crack pipe, junk food, porn, and video games are designed so you get a massive rush of dopamine early on and get back there for more. If you go down this road you’ll become impatient, addicted, unable to work long hours without some unnatural gratification.

Of course this mindset makes you dependent, frail, unable to provide for yourself over the long term. Impatience is often associated with neuroticism, immaturity, and seeking external validation.

Being patient—without being passive—is required to tread the long path towards the top of the mountain.

Conclusion

Patience can be exercised alone on a purely Stoic fashion. Being patient only requires mastery of oneself, not of others. The four other qualities are essentially social but hard to exert in an anomous, low-trust society. Our natural propensities, from loyalty to the desire to provide, were misdirected and exploited. This made us wary of society in general and of other individuals in particular. When people are foreign to each other they are bound to screw and get screwed.

The better angels of our nature, yet, are still there. In spite of constant bickering and backstabbing the dissenters are closer to each other than to degenerate normies. Some girls can become reliable housewives. Hipsters who snark at old-fashioned qualities are the kind of people who build nothing. If we manage to build thick relationships again, we will effectively foster a civilization renewal.

Show post
Ted Deveer #conspiracy returnofkings.com

Is The US Government Planning A Fake Alien Invasion?

I’m Ted, I read old books, and my interest in Stanley Kubrick has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with my interest in conspiracy theories, not at all, no way. And I like my privacy.

As utterly insane as it sounds, it seems possible that the US Government is preparing to try to convince the world that there is an alien invasion about to happen, in the largest “false flag” since 9/11.

You’re probably bursting out laughing now and asking yourself, “Why would Roosh allow such a crackpot to write an article?” and I’d like to preemptively respond by (a) asking you to give me the benefit of the doubt for the course of these 1,000 words, (b) noting that this is just a hypothesis that we will see proven or disproven over the next months, and (c) making clear: I don’t believe in UFOs or alien lifeforms but I do believe that the media puts on large-scale coordinated shows in conjunction with the government.

Here are five reasons why I think the show—which I’ll call the “Aliens (Bio)attack!” Show—is likely to happen over the next months.

1. The US government is suddenly talking about UFOs

First, in December, the NY Times had an expose which argued that (a) the Department of Defense has videos taken by Air Force pilots of what it believes are UFOs (the video is included in the article at that link); (b) the DoD has some of the materials collected from these UFOs secretly that they are studying; (c) the DoD has a secret department dedicated to tracking UFOs; and (d) many high-level people within the DoD, who have access to classified intelligence that we don’t have access to, believe in UFOs.

This leads me to one of only two conclusions: either aliens exist or the US Government wants us to think that aliens exist. I’m going to make an assumption—that may or may not be true but it’s just a belief I have—that either aliens don’t exist or if they do they’re not in contact with the US government.

I’m a bit too scientific, not to mention too skeptical of what the government tells us, to believe in extraterrestrial intelligence. If you believe the US government is in contact with aliens, then click away—the rest of this article isn’t for you. This leaves me with only one conclusion: for some reason, the DoD wants us to think aliens exist. Why would they want to do that?

2. The media is excited to spread UFO theories

Second, this article is part of a deluge from the mass media of alien articles over the last months. And we know that the US federal government has deep ties to the press. Just days before the NY Times expose, Newsweek published “Alien Life: Europa Plate Tectonics could be Feeding Life on Icy Jupiter Moon” (Dec 5th 2017) and “Do Aliens Exist?” (Dec 8th 2017), presciently predicting the trend of the month. Google Trends shows how it’s suddenly being spoken about online non-stop out of the blue.

Incredibly, the CIA’s official Twitter account is now tweeting with instructions on how to take photos of UFOs. In October, NASA claimed that a cylindrical asteroid-like object that they can’t identify is flying 100,000 mph in our solar system, but it is from another solar system, the first time ever an object is in our solar system that originated in a different one. It has apparently been named Oumuamua, which doubly-presciently means “messenger” in Hawaiian.

All the articles before the expose and the official CIA tweets about it make it harder to argue that it’s just a cool topic for the media to talk about since the expose; it must be deeper than that.

3. Aliens make for a great external threat that can get citizens to rally behind the government

Third, it makes sense for the government to do this, from their eyes. It’s a way to unite the entire country (or world) against a common enemy, while also an excuse for a power grab. And an easy way to steal more money—oh, we need vaccines against alien viruses, my friend’s company happens to make them and it will cost $10 billion—but we need it!

Plus, if the deep state is in a war against the President, as seems to be the case, then the deep state probably needs to activate some pretty extreme contingency backup plans it had been planning for a long time. Break glass in case of emergency.

4. Alien-obsessed Blink 182 singer is deeply connected to the CIA/NSA apparatus

Fourth, there’s a weird connection with Tom DeLonge, the singer of Blink 182. He just created a UFO-seeking company whose board and advisors are all the first rate CIA/NSA operatives. And he goes on Joe Rogan’s podcast and has a bizarre interview in which he seems to know nothing about UFOs or his new company.

The best synthesis of DeLonge’s weird behavior—creating this UFO company, somehow getting all these top CIA/NSA operatives as his advisors, yet knowing nothing about any of it—is that he’s a front man, trying to use his huge following to bring more widespread acceptance to his “belief” in aliens.

5. The “aliens attack” plan was long ago revealed through code name Project Blue Beam

Fifth, there have been conspiracy theories in which people have been whispering about this for decades. Just Google “Project Blue Beam” or “Serge Monast” and many articles, from decades ago, will discuss these multi-decade plans. A good starting point is a speech Monast gave summarizing Project Blue Beam 20 years ago, shortly before his mysterious death.

Another good starting point is RationalWiki’s page about it, which—although it argues this is a fake conspiracy theory and doesn’t exist—is an excellent summary of the idea. Plus reading and considering both sides of any debate with an open mind is essential to intellectual honesty.

How will it play out? I have no idea. But I’m willing to put forth a testable hypothesis: over 2018, we’re going to see more and more media about aliens, including more top scientists (“Stephen Hawking”—name in quotes on purpose) and Hollywood celebrities believing in UFOs and that they’re coming. This is testable using Google Trends to track what’s being discussed online. All this chatter led by the Mainstream Media will build up to some sort of attack, likely a bioattack, that may or may not happen in 2018.

Lets see how this plays out, but regardless of whether it happens or not… we live in interesting times.

Show post
Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

7 Ways Modern Women Treat Men Like Dogs

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of ‘Man’s Fight for Existence’. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature.

For all the feminist criticism of men supposedly treating women like dogs, it is actually today’s feminism-infected women that are treating men like domesticated animals.

While the majority of women still prefer masculine men for relationships, I’ve been noticing how more and more women today are defying their biology for ideological reasons and are pursuing long-term relationship with men they’re not even attracted to just because they are supplicant and effeminate. If this trend continues unabated, I expect the entire male population to turn into weak and feckless bonobos who grovel around to serve female interests.

Observe the following comparisons to see how men are being turned into dogs for both women and the state:

1. Dogs are optional

Dogs as pets are optional. People get a dog only when they want one; it’s not a necessity. Men today are also increasingly becoming an object of utility for a woman rather than a man whom she forms a bond with for a nuclear family. She will marry a man when she wants to (if at all) and she will dump him when she feels like it.

2. Once attached, dogs offer unconditional loyalty

If you want a picture of what the feminists want from men, just imagine a world where all men are male feminists.

Once dogs have a human to call a master, it doesn’t care whether he is a scumbag, loser, criminal, or homeless. Dogs are faithful no matter who their master is and what he does. In fact, they’re so loyal that they’ll even remain with an owner that mistreats them. And that’s exactly what feminists want men to be.

If you observe the rhetoric of the feminists, you’ll notice two general themes: first, the desire to be free from all criticisms. And second, for men to believe them and “support” them no matter what. Feminists want their prospective low-testosterone boyfriends and husbands to fully accept them for who they are no matter how disgusting, slutty, crass, and toxic they are. They want their men to show unconditional loyalty so that they can openly cheat on them and brag about it. And men, if they don’t want to be called a misogynist, must never question their partner’s past or present behavior and remain faithful even if they’re treated like garbage.

3. Dogs do what they’re told

Once the owner has secured his dog’s loyalty, he can train it to behave on command. Some owners enjoy the power they have over their companions and they will order their dogs around for fun.

Western women today have discovered that there are truck loads of desperate men who will do just about anything for them to win an ounce of female approval. These women have successfully used men to take them out on expensive dinners (only make fun of them on their blogs afterwards), buy pizza for them for free, shovel snow for them, and so on. The women who order these men around like dogs didn’t even have to train them as they’ve already been conditioned from birth by the society to do what women tells them to do.

4. Dogs are treated for good behavior
image
Dogs need to be treated to reinforce good behavior; the same is true when you want to domesticate men as second-rate citizens.

Women understand just how desperate the general male population is for affection and sex. Women today are leveraging this power over men to make them behave the way they want them to, rewarding these simps with faked compliments so that they’ll continue being good boys.

5. Dogs defend their masters
image
One serves a man, the other serves the government and its harem of women.

Besides companionship, the main roles dogs play is to defend their masters. In spite of all the calls for equality, the reality is that women still expect men to defend and save them. The men suffering from white knight syndrome will go as far as sacrificing their own lives to rescue women they don’t even know.

Feminists also don’t mind that many men are serving the police and military force to serve their alpha boyfriend: the government. Women are innately attracted to power and the government is the new protector and provider of women that grows bigger and stronger each day while ordinary men are becoming weaker and irrelevant.

6. Dogs are neutered

Although men aren’t getting physically neutered the way dogs are, other methods are being employed to psychologically castrate men. This includes the epidemic use of ADHD drugs to tame boys, ridiculous laws aimed at controlling men’s sexual interactions with women, and the overall cultural currents to shame masculinity while promoting all sorts of degeneracy that dilute it. Today’s wives don’t even want to get sexual with their husbands.

7. Dogs that are not domesticated are pests

“Masculine men are organizing a meeting? They must be rapists!”

When a dog is not owned by a human being, it is considered a pest that needs to be controlled.

Men today who do not submit to the feminist agenda are constantly attacked as being losers, sexists, misogynists, rapists, and so on. In today’s feminist society, you either serve the female imperative or you’re a Neanderthal who is out of touch with the times. Steps are already being made to control every aspect of male behavior in public.

You should also remember that dogs are natural pack animals (think of their cousins, wolves). By being removed from the pack, they become isolated and dependent on their masters. Can you see how the same applies for today’s men?

The Differences

In addition to being dogs, men are also expected to serve as drones to keep the feminist nanny-state running.

In spite of all the similarities, there are differences that need to be addressed.

First, unlike dogs whose owners house them and feed them, men are not supported by women. Women are free to throw men away like used tampons or divorce their husbands to extract their cash. If anything, men are usually the ones who must provide for their wives.

Second, whereas dogs are under the responsibility of their owners, men are expected to be fully responsible in all their interactions with women. It is the man’s job to ensure that a woman is giving consent even if both parties are drunk; it is men who must watch over their own behavior to ensure that what they say is non-offensive and conforming; and it is men who must ensure that women feel perfectly safe and comfortable in all their interactions. If you so much as walk past a woman in the wrong manner, you’ll be accused of rape. Again, it is the man’s responsibility to ensure that he is acceptable enough to share the same space as women, not the other way around. Feminists want “equality” without accountability.

Are men becoming collectively domesticated?
image
The domesticated cows we see on farms didn’t end up the way they are now naturally. It was through thousands of years of herding and selective breeding that they became smaller, more passive, and accepting of their conditions. But the fact is, it doesn’t take thousands of years to transform entire species. In this article which I recommend you read, a Soviet project to domesticate foxes have shown that it only takes several generations of selective breeding to transform wild foxes into effeminate and tamed versions of themselves.

The global testosterone level around the world has been mysteriously dropping for the past few decades. While chemical toxins in all the products we consume and come in contact with has been given as one possible explanation, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that we as species are gradually becoming emasculated at a genetic level through the selective breeding process. In other words, we are becoming socially engineered to be effeminate. It’s not something impossible when you consider that easily tamable beta males, the sperm donors, are usually the males women select as their mates after they themselves are done riding the cock-carousel. I think it’s a factor we should consider besides the emasculation through cultural degeneracy that we’re already familiar with.

Men are supposed to be men unleashing their primal energy through raw adventure instead of getting tamed into submission. I have no doubt that the systematic domestication efforts of today is what is causing collective male nihilism, depression, and frustrated energy. Men who are awake must allow themselves be men.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Show post
Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

10 Feminist Fantasies That Could Become A Reality In The Near Future

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of ‘Man’s Fight for Existence’. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature.

Around 2013 when I first discovered the manosphere, I knew things were bad in our society in terms of sex relations along with the corroding effects of feminism. But at the time, I didn’t appreciate just know how bad. In just few years since then, I’ve seen enough madness to know which direction we’re headed and it doesn’t look good. We already live in a feminist society and the harpies are pushing to make things even harder for ordinary men who just want to get on with their lives. The following will demonstrate what will happen to our society if we were to give into all the demented demands of today’s feminists.

Although this article is meant to highlight the craziness of it all, note that many of these concepts are already starting to take shape in our societies to become a reality.

1. Expansion Of Hate-Crime Laws
image
“You can’t save Mary Jane anymore, Spiderman. It’s ‘benevolent sexism’, and therefore, a misogynistic hate-crime.”

In England, trying to pick-up a woman or even just whistling at her is considered a “hate crime” if the woman gets upset by it. It is a real possibility that this law might spread to the rest of the West and expand to include other misogynist offenses including: looking at a woman (what feminists call “stare rape”), calling a trans-woman a he (there’s already a similar law in New York), arguing with women online, manspreading, mansplaining, helping a woman, and so on.

2. Consent Forms
image
Since women get to dictate the terms of all sexual interactions, consent forms will have to become a necessity in the future. And not just for sex, but in all forms of interaction like being able to approach a woman on the street. Maybe an app will be developed where a woman could consent to sex, conversation, or being looked at so that she could screen out all the low-life misogynists who want to compliment her for her looks.

3. Anonymous Rape Accusations + 100% Belief In Woman’s Testament
image
All men are rapists; we need to believe her because she’s a woman. It’s a perfect circular logic.

Feminists claim that the reason we live in a patriarchal rape culture is because our society discourages rape victims (always women) from coming forward and also because their words are not taken seriously. So, what they’re proposing is clear: rape accusations should be done anonymously and the “victims” should always be believed against evidences that are biased because… patriarchy.

Men have already lost their jobs, kicked out of school, jailed, and even murdered for false rape accusations while their accusers faced no legal consequences (and got to keep their anonymity). So, we’re not really that far from reaching that level.

4. Feminist Re-Education Camps
image
This book is not a mandatory reading in kindergartens yet. What more proof do you need that we are all oppressed by the patriarchy?

With feminism taking over the educational institutions and already working to reprogram men to serve the system, it won’t be long before men who have been found guilty of misogynist hate crimes to end up in re-education camps. We already have sensitivity training in jobs while colleges are adding courses on toxic masculinity to re-define what it is to be a man on feminist terms. It probably won’t be long before “toxic masculinity” is added to DSM as a mental disorder (in place of homosexuality) and treated like a disease in mental health institutions.

5. Government-Sponsored Feminist Tribunals
image
Canada already has an actual social justice tribunal.

Since it’ll be difficult to charge men of bogus hate crimes against women with nothing more than a woman’s feelings as a proof, the government may introduce tribunals similar to the kangaroo courts in universities and HR departments at workplaces, all in the name of creating a harmonious society free of hate. Those who enter these tribunals will also be destroyed by the media and have no chance of being employed and be subject to permanent social ostracism even if they’re found not guilty.

6. Systemic Castration
image
As I’ve mentioned in my other article, docile and compliant dogs are the ideal that feminists aim for in their efforts to domesticate men. A significant number of boys are already on ADHD medication to have their behaviors controlled while male sex offenders are given chemical castration. If all men are violent hooligans and rapists as some feminists claim, then the next logical step is to let the government control men’s testosterone levels to an “acceptable” level. Note that we already have many parents who are letting their children take hormones to alter their “gender.” This practice will likely become more common in the future.

7. Non-contact Sex
image
“She did not consent; I must not touch.”

Feminists have been so effective in terrorizing the beta males that many of them are afraid to interact with women in any shape or form. Consider that we already live in a world where walking past some deranged woman will get you accused of sexual assault. In the future, all physical contact with women may become sternly discouraged or even forbidden that more men will retreat to porn and sexbots as alternatives. Haptic technology for sex is already being developed to pave the way for a culture of non-contact sex.
8. Bachelor Tax
image
Did you think you pesky “MRA’s” could escape the gynocentric order by refusing marriage and going your own way? With the drop in number of men who are manning up that coincides with the rising number of single mothers who need to leech the welfare state, it’s not too unreasonable to expect a push for bachelor tax that will penalize men who refuse to put a ring on an aging, post-slut sow.

Knowing that it will cause a major backlash, the bachelor tax will probably not come into being in an obvious way. Instead, it will be introduced under the guise of supporting the poor single mothers and helping to foster families. Heck, considering how men are the primary tax payers while women are the primary beneficiaries of the welfare state, you could say that we already have a gynocentric taxation system in all but name.

9. Polyandry
image
Women already practice ‘Alpha fucks, Beta bucks’ strategy. So why shouldn’t an empowered woman be allowed to do it openly without shame?

With the institution of marriage already destroyed and with many men already accepting cuckoldery as the norm in the form of “open marriage,” women may as well be allowed to have multiple husbands. And why not? We already know that there are far too many men for the number of women in our society and that those lazy men should do more to support women. Is it that crazy to have one husband for sex and another three for money? I’m sure many desperate simps will have no issue sharing a wife with several other men as long as they get some cuddling action when she’s not too busy banging her more attractive husbands. The implementation of bachelor tax, mentioned above, will also make marriage more desirable.

10. Concentration Camps For Men
image
The final solution to the testosterone problem.

If the above measures to protect women and ensure equality are implemented, it’s likely that all the misogynists will grumble in anger and resist them. If that is the case, it might be best to take the advice of the feminist, Julie Bindel, and place all men in concentration camps. No man, no problem! If you’re wondering how feminists could even achieve this, know that there is already an army of goons called the police who will gladly do as they’re told to maintain the gynocentric order.

Conclusion

As I’ve said in an older article of mine, feminism is practically a terrorist movement that demands more and more political, social, and cultural oppression of men for the sake of radical women who play the eternal victim and cry for never-ending privileges. While you may think that the above nightmare scenarios are over-the-top and unlikely to happen, I bet those who lived just few generations ago couldn’t have imagined what we’re witnessing today either. Feminism, by colluding with the government, will continue to grow like a tumor and it will not stop until you make it stop.

Remember that if we don’t fight back, no one else will.

Show post
David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

Straight Men Will Soon Be Called Homophobic For Not Sleeping With Gays And Trannies

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there’s something worth tweeting here.

In 2017, straight men who refuse to date biological males dressed like women were shamed on a number of occasions for being “transphobic.” We should expect that at some stage, very possibly in 2018 or 2019, heterosexual males will also begin to be attacked en masse for not wanting to have sex with men.

Obsessions over “gender fluidity” and the rise of SJW brainwashing amongst kids, including those in elementary school, mean that expressing a perfectly normal and healthy heterosexual preference is becoming increasingly hard. In Australia, one notorious transgender Marxist, Roz Ward, went so far as to make up “statistics” saying that half of all teenagers are sexually attracted to their own sex. What will the claimed figure be in 2018 or 2019 and how will that impact on guys who know they are only attracted to women?

You don’t have a right not to date transgenders

After straight men understandably began to report transgenders messaging them on Tinder, outlets such as The Huffington Post came to the rescue, decrying the rampant “transphobia” in the dating market. In another instance of typical SJW hysteria, a contestant on The Bachelorette got into hot water for verbalizing a common enough concern of men, namely that heavily dolled-up transgender “women” regularly try to pass themselves off as biological women. With this sort of putrid political climate, it is very easy to imagine a time when not being sexually attracted to Barry or Steve will be equated with anti-gay “bigotry” as well.

Indicating the warped social totem pole that is regularly putting transgenders above women, straight females are also being shamed, albeit to a lesser extent than heterosexual men. CNN, for example, just couldn’t figure out why the majority of women weren’t open to dating this transgender “man,” as if genitalia were a completely irrelevant part of sexuality. Who would have known!

The stage is set

SJWs do not want tolerance. They want a kind of uniformity, where the groups we are meant to accept and praise actually end up dictating what someone else can or cannot do sexually. The failure of most men (or women) to want to date a transgender is a setback, for sure, but this will not stop SJWs from continuing their agenda in the same and other ways.

Even “men’s” magazines are now part of the fray, joining a series of outlets celebrating supposedly straight males who screw gay guys. GQ continued its abysmal fall in 2017 by publishing “The straight men dating men and the gay men who fall in love with them.” Salon, however, is a very unsurprising offender for its long-term pushing of straight men’s “malleable” sexualities. All we are missing at the moment are widespread calls for men to stop being “homophobic” and give themselves to other men fully.

Just wait and see

As a result of the negative reception most folks gave to the idea of dating a transgender, some might say that this article is alarmist. Well, I would counter that since we have already seen the sexualization of children according to SJW ideology, it is perfectly foreseeable that straight adult males will be encouraged or shamed into wanting sex with men. If this article is proven wrong, it will be either due to blind luck or because we see positive, long-awaited developments in the West.

Remember, probably well over 50% of discussions about sexuality nowadays concern lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender experiences, despite people of these orientations comprising perhaps 4% of the population. If this is not a sign that your heterosexuality is considered abnormal or not fully acceptable by SJWs and their enablers, I don’t know what is.

Show post
Christopher Leonid #sexist returnofkings.com

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

Defining male agency during the collapse of the Sexual Revolution.

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

image
#Iwouldnt

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

Free Love Wasn’t Free

A core premise of our sexual dystopia is:

‘My body my choice.’

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

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

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

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

The Gynocentric Interpretation

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

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

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

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

‘brought together by a common experience.’

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

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

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

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

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

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

Feminism’s Finale

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

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

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

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

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

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

What for men in 2018?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Show post
James Miller #sexist returnofkings.com

The Case For Gendo-Nationalism
image
James Miller is a political strategist and policy intellectual from New York City. He is the founder and president of the James Miller Foundation.

The alt-right and their leaders have often stressed the need for the establishment of a ethno-state on the North American continent. While I can understand many of their concerns as a middle-class white guy who lives in a gated community in the suburbs of New York City, I honestly do not have to deal with the minority problem on a day to day basis.

Whether the Bronx is being flooded with new arrivals is simply not my problem. Thots, on the other hand, affect us wherever we live. It doesn’t matter how great your neighborhood is or even how religious your state is. America has become a degenerate nation, and thottery has pervaded all aspects of American life—Northern and Southern, Protestant and Catholic, conservative and liberal, normie and alt-right.

image
A thot prepares to flash her breasts to a crowd of onlookers in a ‘conservative’ state in the Deep South.

Traditionalism Is Hopeless

Many on the right advocate for traditionalism. They think we can just return to the days of a nuclear family, reverse all three waves of feminism, and let women assume their traditional role. While I respect the arguments made by traditionalists, I have concluded that any sort of rollback is now politically impossible in the United States. We have lost the culture war. There is no going back. Sure, you can flee to a country where remnants of traditionalism still exist, but they are merely a little further back on the ongoing global shift towards female ‘liberation’ and the dissolution of family life.

Furthermore, while this problem has been substantially amplified in recent years, it is certainly not a modern one. Thots have consistently been the downfall of powerful men throughout history. John F. Kennedy was compromised by the Soviet Union as a result of depraved female temptresses. Even Adolf Hitler’s defeat in the Second World War can be attributed largely to the presence of Eva Braun. Cleopatra’s betrayal of Mark Antony the moment a more alpha chad arrived on the scene surely serves as one of the clearest demonstrations of the subversion of the opposite sex.

Richard Spencer similarly and correctly recognizes a return to the days of actual white supremacy is impossible and undesirable, and instead advocates for a white ethno-state, building on the momentum of left-wing identity politics movements. Although I respectfully disagree with him on that issue, his fundamental analysis is correct. We cannot return to an undefined point in the past when things were somehow better on the issues that we care about. All we can do is seek to influence the future. I have thus come to the conclusion that the only solution to our current thot debacle is peaceful separation between the sexes, and a resulting male gendo-state.

Now, this notion may sound absurd. Most traditionalists love and respect women, and simply wish for them to return to their historical place in society, rather than be done away with altogether. They must come to understand that separation has now become a necessity.

image
We may reach the point of open conflict with the opposing gender.

Separation Is Necessary

Cultural feminism has degraded women to the point where co-existence is a net negative to males. Women weaken men by their very presence, co-opting and hijacking even traditionalist movements by embracing the rhetoric and yet leaving much to be desired in terms of the personal example they set.

As the last few weeks have shown, women are able to completely destroy the reputations of decent, upstanding men through false accusations of sexual abuse. Women compete with us in a job market that is rigged against us by politicians who have come to see women as an essential voting bloc to appease. Women now even proudly declare that they do not need or want men in their lives.

Why don’t we put that to the test? Let us see how well the opposing gender fares when left completely to their own devices. In this way, we could use the rise of feminism as force of acceleration in order to promote our bid for nationhood. It is ironically fairly likely that the world’s first gendo-state will consist of pink haired female ogres LARPing as Amazons. But once the precedent is set, males will have a unique opportunity to seize the moment and build the case for our secession.

The Vision

Gendo-nationalism would involve near-total separation between men and women. A physical border would be erected between the respective male and female nation-states, and travel between these gendo-states would be tightly controlled and require permission from the governing authority of the gendo-state being entered. In the male gendo-state, which I have little doubt will be far more successful than its female competitor, male chauvinism will be the zeitgeist of the new order.

In addition, we need to think about the only real thing we need women for—sex. Advancements in robotics in recent years are quickly making this need obsolete. Future improvements in cloning technology may even allow us to replace women for the purposes of reproduction. Until the point at which a solution is devised, the gendo-state could have a work visa system which prostitutes and surrogates could utilize without permanent settlement in our new nation.

image
Soon, we will no longer need women to lead fulfilling sex lives.

The Path Ahead

Before we can have separation, we need to have a general sense of male identity. Now, I believe this to an extent to be inherent and hardwired, hence the presence of so many all-male social groups in our society. Nevertheless, we must promote the importance of masculinity and push close identification with our gender’s collective interests as a component of that.

Subsequently, we need to urge our fellow men to gradually start removing all emotional attachment to women. They’re to be seen as a tool, not a crutch. Emotional attachment makes men the weaker sex because women are inherently able to exploit it, and ensures the perpetuation of the anti-male status quo. Once it is overcome, the foundations for a gendo-state can be laid.

Free from the shackles of womankind, men will be able to embrace their true potential. We will have hours more in our days which would otherwise be wasted on entertaining vacuous thots. We will no longer be treated like second class citizens in the very nations we built and shed our blood for. Our inherent physical and mental supremacy will give us a substantial edge in the world marketplace. Much as ethno-nationalist movements played a major role in defining the 20th century, my hope is that gendo-nationalism will define the 21st.

Show post
Bryce Lockwood #fundie returnofkings.com

A Guide To Weimerica

Bryce Lockwood is a straight white male who works at a university in a blue state and thus cannot use his real name. He writes, he lifts, he has skin in the game, and he lives at Ground Zero for Weimerica. He possess an ever-present sense of humor that would have seen him quip, “Merry Christmas, ya filthy animal!” had he been the SEAL that capped Bin Laden. He also has a masochistic streak that has expressed itself by climbing Mt. Tammany in the rain and reading the citation sections of various history books. He recently had to buy a new wardrobe as his waist shrunk from his workout and he just passed day 60 of the NF challenge. Friendly to stray dogs, hostile to stray thots.

“Weimerica,” an amalgam of Germany’s pre-Nazi era Weimar Republic, is a term you’ve probably heard in the past year if you’ve been active in the ongoing political maelstrom that is social media. Some alternatively call it “Clown World.” I prefer “Weimerica” as it more specific to what the United States has become recently and hints at a cataclysm yet to be.

This “guide” to Weimerica was written on the fly in-between back-to-back New England snowstorms, originally for an audience of one person. The genesis of this guide was the impending first-time visit to the US of a friend of mine from Lebanon. I wrote it not to show how bad things are, but instead to show how ugly things are. Not to frighten, but to inform on the many unpleasant realities that are all too quickly (and conveniently) forgotten about on a day-to-day basis. How indifference is the order of day despite the ever-tightening noose around the necks of most people.

So what is Weimerica, you ask? Read on and find out.

What is Weimerica?

Weimerica is….

…homicides being up 20% from 2014 (equivalent in raw numbers to more than the September 11th attacks).

…the 17,250 confirmed homicides of 2016 being more than any other year since 1997 (when there were 18,208).

…66,324 drug overdose deaths in a 12-month period (the Vietnam War saw 47,434 hostile deaths over 15+ years).

…44,193 suicides in 2015, with suicides being at 30-year highs in 2016, and suicide being one of the top ten causes of death in Weimerica.

…23,000,000,000 views on Pornhub in 2016 (729 per second every single day non-stop for the whole year) with there being only 7,466,964,000 people on Earth.

…70% of Weimerica being on prescription medication with 20% being on more than five medications at once (and life expectancy still dropping).

…real income showing little to no gains for decades on end.

…being worse off financially than your parents.

…a decrease in the average household income in New Jersey from 2005 to 2015.

…everything being fleetingly temporary, you won’t have that long lasting job, house, car, marriage, etc., like your parents and grandparents did.

…nearly half of all pregnancies being unintended.

…Weimerica is a colossal, dystopian shopping mall filled with 325 million atomized, rootless individuals with no common culture, cause, language, religion or background, united only by their shared consumerism (“Did you see the Giants game last night?” “Oh my Gawd, Stranger Thingssss!”).

The Motto for Weimerica: “NO LIVES MATTER”

A seven-time convicted felon and five-time deportee fatally shoots an innocent passerby in the back with a stolen 40-caliber Glock handgun on a public pier? Acquitted.

A crying father begging for his life shot to death crawling on his hands and knees towards a SWAT team aiming AR-15s and screaming at him? Acquitted.

A bride-to-be gunned down in front of her house in her pajamas when a police officer sitting in his squad car suddenly draws and fires pointblank into her face? No charges.

22,000 attend a country music festival surrounded by high walls and patrolled by security guards and police officers in the most heavily surveilled city in the Western hemisphere? Gunned down by the score with total impunity in the biggest mass shooting of all time.

926,190 abortions in 2014, with an estimated 98.3% being elective (meaning unrelated to rape/incest and medical complications).
Everything Is Fake

Zillow.com and other real estate websites photoshop clouds, grass, and trees around properties and present them in a way that makes them appear much larger and more modern than they actually are.

These two pictures are of the same person:
[pictures omited]

Wall Street rating agencies graded $400 billion worth of subprime mortgage bonds without knowing what was in them, giving many of them the highest “AAA” rating (effectively making them rating agencies in name only).

The 5-star Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas employed an unregistered, unlicensed illegal immigrant as a security guard.

Love To Hate

Everything being either “awesome,” “insanely good,” or “the best ______ ever,” or “shit,” “shitty,” or “the worst _______ ever,” with little to no middle ground and/or reasoned opinions. For example, the discrepancy in reviews for The Last Jedi and nearly every one of the 100+ reviews I read for the Ford Fusion being either “BEST CAR EVER” or “Should be recalled, WORST CAR EVER.”

Every piece of media being heavily and ridiculously scrutinized down to the last detail for any inane reason to hate it. For instance, one of the top comments on a YouTube video for “Shout” by the Isley Brothers accused the video’s author of not including enough black people dancing in his/her photo montage and further asserting that this lack of inclusion was deliberate.

Hating something because it is successful/popular just to go against the grain. For instance, actual “professional” reviews of Dunkirk being “Yeah, yeah, it was great, but why weren’t women the main characters?” and “Yeah, it’s good, but Christopher Nolan and his Nolaniods….”

The hate-watching of TV shows (Keeping up with the Kardashians, Jersey Shore, etc.) propelling them to ultimate success.

Insane Anti-Social Atrocities Are The New Norm

4 out of the 5 worst mass shootings in Weimerican history took place in the past five years.

The worst mass shooting in US history (600+ gunned down) disappears from the news and thus collective consciousness in the space of a week.

The Sutherland Springs massacre (which featured babies being executed at pointblank range by rifle fire) disappears from the headlines within a day or two. This shooting would have ranked as the worst in Weimerican history as recently as 2007.

The mass shooting body count record for Weimerica was broken in 2017 a mere 15 months after the now-second worst mass shooting in Weimerican history occurred.

The firearms technology used in recent mass shootings has been around for decades, and gun laws as a whole have never been stricter and mental health resources have never been more available (remember 70% of the population is on prescription medication), so why is this happening now?

War Is The Default State

After 16+ years in Afghanistan and 14+ years in Iraq (and 6,935 total US deaths), war is the default state of Weimerica and no longer afforded special or notable status (in contrast, the major combat phase of the generation-defining Vietnam War was seven years).

0.4% of the population is active-duty military, meaning ~95% of the population most likely is not emotionally invested and/or cares minimally about whatever combat is/was taking place (or will take place).

The Everyday Absurdisms Of Weimerica

Prescription medication used to combat anxiety, depression, and suicidal/homicidal thoughts and actions causes anxiety, depression, and suicidal/homicidal thoughts and actions as a side effect.

A Rutgers University professor lamenting the Sandy Hook massacre so much that he made a YouTube video about it, but still believing in infanticide up to one year of age.

New Jersey has the highest paid police officers in the nation with an average salary of $100,000/year, but also has three cities in the top ten for “worst homicide rate” and those officers still have the right to shoot you to death if you don’t follow their conflicting orders to the letter while having a gun pointed at your head.

Parents working and saving money for twenty years to send their kids to college only for them to return home after graduation hating them, their country, and themselves in addition to being tens of thousands in debt.

One-fourth of graduates leaving college with a four year degree in hand are no better off than if they did not go to college at all from a wage perspective.

The maintenance staff at a college making more than most of the graduates of that college because they are unionized.

Consensual sex (“fuck me in the butt!!!”) being redefined as “rape” with such concepts as “enthusiastic consent” (Yes.=Rape, YES!=not rape), “continuing consent” (“ask every ten minutes if it’s okay to keep going”), and “affirmative consent” (“Can I hold your hand? Stroke your thigh? Whisper into your ear?”).

The wife of “American Sniper” Chris Kyle saying she married him because “he was a nice guy.”

“I do not care, I am a millionaire, I do not give AF.”

Some Classic Weimerican Quotes

“I was naked underneath my clothes.” ~A woman explaining her #metoo moment.

“CRAWL TOWARDS ME! IF YOU FALL, YOU BETTER FALL ON YOUR FACE!” ~A police officer’s reasonable and coherent order that must be obeyed upon penalty of death.

“He was turning his life around!” ~The classic family/friend lament of a dead victim/perpetrator with a less than stellar background.

“He changed into something he wasn’t.” ~The pathetic attempt of a high school chum of a mass shooter to cover up for the fact that he somehow missed what a psycho his friend was.

“Russian interference!” ~A viable excuse for anything and everything.

“The hoes are laughin’? YEP!” ~An exchange between a confused TV doctor and a 14-year-old aspiring female rap artist.

“He was COMPED!” ~The humblebrag of the coked up brother of a mass shooter/pasty.

“Stay in the car.”~A plea to do nothing and ignore the situation, whatever it may be.

When Did America Become Weimerica?

No firm answer, I first noticed it in the spring of 2009 when there was a constant stream of family murder-suicides and mass shootings, some of them recession related. Afghanistan also escalated that year (with death tolls doubling for both Britain and the US from the year prior) under the election promise of “I’ll get us out of Afghanistan, take that to the bank!”

Things really picked up steam in 2012 when large public mass shootings began occurring with increasing regularity, labor force participation hit a three decade low (meaning there was no economic recovery), and drug overdose deaths had already jumped 211% (in the Northeast) in comparison with 2010.

Show post
Maximus Decimus Meridius #fundie returnofkings.com

The Orthodox Church Is The Answer To Reviving Christianity In Europe And Saving The West

Maximus is a Man, capital M, period. Love. Truth. Justice. Liberty. Respect. These are the lodestones pointing true to magnetic masculinity in a polarized feminist west. His goal for writing on ROK is to be the gadfly that provokes thought and counters groupthink. You can find more of his writing at A Dream That Was Rome .

First let us take a look at a Christian faith that is strong, vibrant and alive.

Christianity is a beautiful faith. For all my previous criticism of its intellectual formulation, the one thing it gets 100% correct is that it actually enshrines the nuclear family unit – Father, Son and virgin Mother. In that respect, it is more patriarchal than Islam in overtly formulating The Father as divine authority, The Son as heir to that authority, and the virgin Mary as model all women should aspire to be as wife and mother. The video above is a 26 minute silent reflection on life inside a men’s Orthodox Christian monastery in Abkhazia. The power of the documentary is palpable for its very lack of speech and thus quiet testimony to the essence of Christian truth – the worship of God through Jesus Christ.

After the passionate response to my last essay, I went on YouTube to look up what I could find on the Eastern Orthodox faith. Here is a great video series I would like to share with you all.

For Christianity to return and thrive in Europe & The West, there must be unity.

The single biggest advantage of the Orthodox faith is its unity. There is simply too much division and conflict in almost all flavours of Christianity outside the Roman Catholic Church. Historically, the Orthodox faith does not have a real history of theology (per se). That is, the Orthodox don’t think too much or question too deeply about their faith. They accept. They believe. They practice. Most importantly, they do not allow any change – none – to what they believe is the original church handed down to humanity from St. Paul.

For the Orthodox, it is not about the intellectual foundations (i.e. theology) so much as the community of worshipers and keeping to past traditions. They keep to what their ancestors practiced and see no need to change anything. Doing so would be a grave break and violation of the past, a complete insult to the body of Christ and the family tradition that has been passed down for generations to preserve the faith.

Eastern Orthodox Christianity has kept the original Byzantine rituals and formulations for worship. A good example of its seriousness and unwillingness to change is the fact that they will not let anyone who is not Orthodox to take part in communion. They see communion as a serious ritual, the true taking in of the body and life of Christ, His word, and His salvation. To allow just anyone to partake without proper preparation, proper orientation, and proper intention, is dangerous. The liturgy and hymns are also old. They go back all the way to the original church over 1000 years ago and more. The swinging incense pots is not some ornate flashy thing they do, there is real spiritual purpose and foundation to everything in an Orthodox liturgical mass.

What I have just described is practiced by all Orthodox churches which may strike many American Protestants and Evangelicals as odd. The different designations (Greek, Ukrainian, Russian, etc.) are nothing more than jurisdictional boundaries. If you are Russian, you want to go to mass in your language and with your people. Each church is local and loosely affiliated with the others, but there is no over arching official hierarchy, no Pope as it were for the ENTIRE faith. What unites them as Orthodox is not a single authority ON doctrine (per se), but common faith IN practice (de rigueur).

In many ways, Martin Luther was a revolt against the Pope having authority over how to worship by the local community. His opposition to Indulgences and a paper titled “The Pagan Servitude To The Church” are reminiscent of my own intellectual wrestling trying to understand Christianity. For Luther, it was ultimately about a return of faith to the followers of Christ, not blind obedience to papal authority for which he saw no authority given to it.

@Martin Luther ~ Wikipedia

His theology challenged the authority and office of the Pope by teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge from God[3] and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptized Christians to be a holy priesthood.

Ironically, in Eastern Orthodox, the power of the church rests in the local faithful and has forever been this way. In one video, a story is told about an Orthodox priest who was invited to a world religions syncretic type seminar where he was quoted at the end of the conference as saying “Yes, there are many paths to God and all are valid.” When he returned to his local church and went to put the key in the door, the local church members had already changed the locks!!! How many Catholics would like to do that to the current Pope?!?! This is why the East rejected authority of Rome over THEIR religion. Christ belongs to the people, from God, and the Eastern Orthodox have protected this faith and non-hierarchical organization since the beginning of Christianity.

Why is it that Eastern Christians are agreeable about this? Why don’t they clamour and agitate for new stuff, for revision, for updating? The reason is that in the East, we expect the faith to actually do something. It isn’t just a matter of having the right institution, or having the right theology, though I believe the Orthodox church does have those things. That’s not what does it, really. It’s that we expect that practicing this faith will change people. And you know what? We see that it actually does. We see it over and over again. We see it in contemporary lives. We see people actually transformed.

To an Orthodox, they practice because it works, not just because it is right.

This… that single statement… would unite all Christianity. Gone would be the divisions, the arguments, the 1000s of flavours of Christ by each Protestant wanting to be a Pope.

If I ever become Christian, it will be in the Orthodox faith. This single video series has proved to me beyond a shadow of doubt that what the Orthodox has works. It works because…

Even after over 70 plus years of Communist oppression & outright murder, the faith has rebounded

Russians are Orthodox because faith in Christ works, not just because it is right. If you have ever known a Russian, you know how much they value what works and not what is bullshit. My intellectualization and analysis of Christianity is precisely the problem in The West. No single Christian tradition in The West, outside of the Catholic faith, can truly claim that what they have works, but they have ALL argued and warred for centuries about being right.

If Western Christianity did work, people would not have left. Leaving aside the massive hurdle of getting Westerners to actually stop being atheists or completely ignoring God, a Christian faith that can actually claim to work is precisely what will get someone like me back in the church. A claim I must repeat, that is actually backed up by evidence, not rhetoric.

The final video I want to close off with is an Orthodox explanation of salvation.

This… brought tears to my eyes. It actually answered one, if not THE, core complaint Westerners have about Christianity as they know it – you are condemned to hell if you reject Christ, and no amount of good works or deeds or repentance can save you if you do not accept Christ, the end. Of importance to note, this priest refers to God only when explaining the Orthodox version of salvation; it is God, not Jesus that is the focus of Eastern Orthodox faith. I suspect this is why the Protestants split from The Vatican and we can see it in their further splintering right up to today; Protestants wanted more Jesus and less God talk from the Pope because it was Jesus that truly saves. (Once again, you can see why a non-Christian starts to scratch his head in puzzlement.)

This Orthodox version of salvation is one I have never heard from any Christian priest or pastor in The West. If Europe, if America, were to hear the message of God in the Orthodox faith, I think you would have a revival like none we have ever witnessed in the past. In fact, the whole Theoria YouTube channel is, I suspect, a production created for just that reason. Thousands of disillusioned Protestants and other long lost former Christians are filling the Orthodox churches. The Theoria video series was created to help orient and guide the newly faithful. Is their any other church outside Catholicism that is seeing this kind of resurgence? (Assuming Catholicism is seeing an influx, I do not know and just speculating because it too has a good history of unity in faith and would be The West’s oldest incarnation of Christianity.)

Conclusion

Putin is demonized in the West for many things, but the one reason “they” hate him the most? Putin and Russia are a walking, talking, living reminder of a faith they thought was all but extinct by their design and command. Putin’s Christian message is not just reaching America, but the entirety of Europe. Note as well that Putin is an astounding example of the claim to proof that the Orthodox faith works.

He has single-handedly inserted himself in Syria and reversed what was not just the holocaust of Syrian Christians, but the globalist plan to balkanize the region with Iran being the last Muslim nation standing in their way. For all those who claim Islam is favored by the elites and want it to take over Europe, just look to Muslim lands where, regardless of how you feel about Islam as a religion, the homeland of Muslim faith is being literally bombed into oblivion in a way Christian “Muslim invasion” Europe is not. Make no mistake, after Islam’s “victory” in Europe, it will be up next for targeted wholesale destruction by they who hate God more than they hate humanity.

I have no doubt that if Europe and The West can find its way back to Christianity, our future will look as bright as Russia’s. From even this most minimal and cursory review of the Eastern Orthodox faith, it is the only path back to Christ in Europe and The West that I can see actually working.

What Christianity needs is unity of faith, unity of belief, unity of practice and unity in God. All of this is found in the Eastern Orthodox church and nowhere else.

[Emphasis original]

Show post
Michael Witcoff #fundie returnofkings.com

3 Reasons To Join The Eastern Orthodox Church

Michael is a Christian, a copywriter, an author, and a marketing consultant. He believes the West is experiencing divine wrath for turning our backs on God, and that the only hope for salvation is to unite under one faithful banner as our enemies have under theirs.

Friends and brothers, it’s been quite a while since I last wrote to you. Between my consulting business and my growing interest in the world of blockchain technology, I’ve had a lot on my plate lately.

But the time seems right for me to come back to Return Of Kings and share a bit more of my journey with you. The rhythm I aim for in life is to learn and grow, then share and teach.

Today’s topic, Eastern Orthodoxy, is something I’d never even heard of when my last article here was published. But since discovering what it is and delving deeper into its mysteries, it’s consumed an enormous amount of my time and attention.

So much of it, in fact, that I recently decided to leave my Wesleyan ways behind and become a full-fledged member of the Orthodox Church. Today, I’d like to share with you my top three reasons for doing so.

1. It’s The Church That Jesus Planted

During my time as a Protestant, it never even occurred to me that a denomination existed reaching all the way back to the time of the apostles.

Once I realized there was an unbroken chain of tradition reaching back nearly 2,000 years, I began to ask an entirely new kind of question. What did they teach? How did they worship? What did they believe? How did it get transmitted through time like that?

I’ve always believed that, whatever you’re trying to do in life, it’s usually better to go straight to the earliest sources than to adhere to newer interpretations. It’s as true with Christianity as it is for copywriting, and I still consider the old Schwartz and Hopkins advertising books to surpass almost everything that’s come out since.

I discovered that the students of the Biblical apostles had written down a fair amount of material regarding ancient Christian practice and belief. From that point on, I could never really look at Protestantism in the same light.

After all, why would I follow the doctrines of the 16th century when I could follow the doctrines of the 1st century instead? It simply made no sense to me that someone who didn’t personally know Christ or the apostles could have more understanding and insight than the men who did.

Christ gave the apostles pretty specific directions, and Paul taught those traditions to all the churches he planted and visited during his ministry. The students of the apostles upheld the traditions and taught them to their own students, and so on and so forth right up until the present day.

Best of all, Orthodox services feel like being transplanted directly into the ancient Christian world. That sense of reverence, holiness, and solemnity can inspire the soul in a way that electric guitar music simply cannot.

Being surrounded by the Saints is a very humbling experience.

2. It’s Untainted By Cultural Marxism

It is not unusual, among Protestant churches, to hear preaching that’s fully aligned with Social Justice ideology and the Cultural Marxism that spawned it. This takes on different forms and manifests to different degrees, but it can reach levels that—at its worst—makes the preaching of a church utterly indistinguishable from what you’d hear at a typical liberal arts college.

This is not only revolting to most normal and healthy men, but also tends to result in lower church attendance. It is well-documented that “the more liberal the church, the emptier the pews.”

Between the ordination of unrepentant sinners and the preaching of the “prosperity gospel,” it is not surprising that Protestantism is losing its core male audience. This is more than a statistic; it is a tragedy.

Scripture tells us, in no uncertain terms, that men are to lead both church and home. With a lack of masculine leadership forming a new generation of young boys into developed and effective leaders, all of society suffers.

However, you will find nothing like these problems in Eastern Orthodoxy. 100% of the clergy are men, and they follow an ancient tradition of hierarchy and rank.

This tradition—for thousands of years—has naturally taught younger men the healthy dynamics of both obedience and command. The fruit of this effort is an endless chain of men who are prepared for their role as leaders in society.

Equally important, there is little to no trace of the Evangelical Zionism which I was already frustrated with before I’d discovered Orthodoxy. Unlike most Protestant denominations, Orthodoxy follows the proper Scriptural understanding that believers in Christ are the true “people of Israel.”

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus tells the apostle Peter that “the gates of Hell will not overcome” His Church.

You can decide for yourself whether lesbian Zionists or alpha male patriarchs better represent the Church that Jesus had in mind.

3. It Offers Deeper Theology And A Richer Experience

I am not trying to attack all of Protestantism with this article. I am still friends with the people I met there, and maintain a deep love for my pastors and their passion for God.

I’m profoundly grateful for my experience in the Wesleyan denomination, and I would never be where I am today unless I had learned the basics of Christianity there.

But that’s just it… it stops at the basics. Jesus died for your sins, now you’re saved, and that’s where it ends.

Orthodoxy, drawing on monastic wisdom going back to at least the 4th century, invites the seeker into a deep mystical understanding of God that far surpasses the typical experience.

“Hillsong? Never heard of her.”

I’m not going to sit here and tell you that I have any real understanding of the Orthodox mystery, because I have barely even knocked at the door. However, I can feel the power coming from the other side and greatly look forward to exploring it further.

Each day of my studies draws me in deeper and deeper, as new levels of both God’s glory—and my own sinfulness by comparison—are revealed to me. It is humbling, it is powerful, and it’s a fuller experience than I knew existed just a few short months ago.

Protestants have the appetizer; the Orthodox serve the meal.

If you are ready to deepen your relationship with Jesus Christ or even to start one…the way that all the apostles and their students did…I highly recommend you check out an Orthodox service sometime and examine it for yourself.

The priests are incredibly helpful to inquirers, and several of them have taken the time to guide me towards various resources or respond to my questions via e-mail.

Even if your nearest Orthodox Church is 20 or 30 minutes away, I think it will be worth your time and effort to make it to a Vespers (on Saturday night) or a Divine Liturgy (on Sunday morning) to see if what it offers matches what you’re looking for.

God bless and Merry Christmas.

Show post
David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

Would You Rather Live In A Society Controlled By Sharia Law Or Social Justice?

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there’s something worth tweeting here.

If the flame of the West is snuffed out and the choice is between Islam and “social justice,” I’m choosing the former. Return Of Kings has long pointed out the travesty of open borders migration, which brings in hordes of anti-Western young men from the Middle East. Notwithstanding this, Islamized societies are much more preferable to the many social sicknesses pushed by SJWs.

Should our values be basically exterminated, aside from private contrarian opinions, I am certain that at least superficially going along with Islam will be the right choice for readers of this website as well. The legitimate criticisms we might have of Islam and its applications within countries pale in comparison to the anti-civilization core of so-called social justice. At least we can say that Muslim men are motivated by basic notions of patriarchy and an acknowledgment of gender differences.

The better of two bad situations

Here are just some of the advantages a society based on Sharia Law has over a “society” predicated on social justice principles:

* Unless you fall afoul of a member of the social or political elite, a false rape accusation against a man is extremely unlikely;
* No affirmative action quota is apt to take your job or promotion away from you and give it to a woman;
* The court systems will not buttress the power of activists and others who insist that your child has the “right” to be injected with hormones of the opposite sex and remove the genitals they were born with;
* Crime in your neighborhood will be dealt with, instead of local authorities or the judiciary determining punishments based on gender or race;
* Female hypergamy will be kept in check; and
* When couples divorce, the wife will know that she will almost never be unjustly enriched, like women with little earning power who get multimillion-dollar payouts from husbands for the rest of their lives.

Put simply, the average man will face far less persecution in an Islamized society than one run by SJWs. Without being defeatist, should the West need to die for a time, embracing Islam is the logical choice for someone who wants to make the most of a collapsed political order.

There’s weight in numbers, too

In addition to the rough ideological affinities we share with patriarchal Muslims, demographic realities support the idea of choosing Islam over leftism (if a choice could ever exist). Germany, the United Kingdom, and France are all projected to have Muslim populations of around 20% mid-century. A social laboratory like Sweden will be nearly a third Muslim by that time. Moreover, the political salience of these communities will be even greater than these soon-to-be massive numbers suggest, including the ability to use, like now, aggressive tactics to further Islamic interests.

The mostly pozzed non-Muslim majority will have to kowtow much of the time to the newer arrivals and their descendants. By 2050, expect the incompetence of SJWs to be fully laid to bare, with the authorities powerless to stop the encroachment of strict Muslim values in, say, a “liberal” France or Sweden. Given the option to join with either self-respecting Muslims or obsequious leftists, I know what decision I will be making, potentially long before 2050.

What’s your plan?

Roosh recently spoke about the black pill and the need to accept that all we can sometimes do is enjoy the social decline around us. Likewise, the Age of Trump hasn’t changed many of the deleterious SJW influences within our universities, media outlets, and “popular culture.” The end is not right around the corner, but a lot is still wrong with our societies.

Once the actual fall comes, however, people will have to stop observing and make choices. Inasmuch as we cannot predict everything, the probable successors to Western civilization are already known to us. As of 2017, adopting Islam in the future is the more common sense course of action.

Show post
Michael Majalahti #fundie returnofkings.com

The Inglorious Death Of The West

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

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

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

Nietzsche the Prophet

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Fallacy of Relative Morality

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Wages of Sin

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

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

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

Summa Summarum

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

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

Show post
Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

[WARNING: STAR WARS THE LAST JEDI SPOILERS]

[The whole review is dumb and should be examined as bad, disingenuous criticism, this submission is just highlighting the more ideologically-charged nonsense]

Pretty much everything about The Last Jedi is a conscious slap in the face to Star Wars’ white male fans. For example, all of the leading generals in the Resistance are women, including Princess General Leia (Carrie Fisher), which explains why they went from running the galaxy in the previous movie to being reduced to a handful of ships in this one. All of the First Order’s soldiers and generals save one are white men, while the Resistance is staffed entirely by non-whites and women, with the exception of Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac).

Poe is by far the most interesting character in the movie, even considering how the script goes out of its way to shit on him. You can practically hear the writers muttering, “Fuck you, toxic masculinity!” every time he’s on screen. Despite being forward-thinking and courageous, Poe is constantly slapped down by his female superiors for being too “hot-headed.” For example, despite his bravery in taking out one of the First Order’s cruisers at the beginning of the movie, Leia demotes him for being “reckless.”

Later on in the movie, after Leia falls into a coma after miraculously surviving being blasted into open space (don’t ask), Poe discovers that her replacement, the purple-haired (yes, I’m serious) HR lady Holdo (Laura Dern) is planning to evacuate the Resistance’s last cruiser into unarmed transports, a suicidal and cowardly move. He intelligently proclaims a mutiny, only for Leia to side with Holdo, whose plan ends up getting all but two dozen members of the Resistance killed. Heckuva job, Holdy!

The film’s C-plot, starring Finn (John Boyega), is equally insipid. Frustrated with HR lady Holdo’s complete inability to lead, Finn teams up with Rose Tico (Kelly Marie Tran), a communist Montagnard with Down syndrome, to find a codebreaker who can keep the First Order from tracking the Resistance through hyperspace. They go to the resort planet of Canto Bight and literally start murdering people for the crime of being rich. This is Ghostbusters–tier dumb.

But none of this compares to how The Last Jedi rapes the character of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill). The main plot follows Rey (Daisy Ridley), the Mary Sue feminist street urchin, as she tries to convince Luke to help the Resistance and train her to use the Force. Luke initially refuses, whining about how the Jedi “deserve” to end, before reluctantly agreeing to Rey’s demands. Hamill’s performance is embarrassingly bad and Luke’s character arc is a sick joke, rivaling how The Force Awakens depicted Han Solo as a deadbeat Peter Pan.

One good thing about The Last Jedi is that Rey is given far less screen time then in The Force Awakens. She’s just as smarmy, unlikable, and unrealistic—her bizarre telepathic dialogues with antagonist Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) are a case in point—but this is still an improvement. Unfortunately, the addition of SJW masturbation fantasies like Rose and Holdo—who I’m pretty sure was given purple hair as a deliberate middle finger to the fans—drowns out this positive move.

...

Finally, General Leia somehow manages to completely evade responsibility for Kylo Ren falling to the dark side of the Force, even though she’s his mother. The plots of both The Last Jedi and The Force Awakens have Darth Bugman focusing all his rage on Han Solo (his father) and Luke Skywalker, with Leia somehow skating off. And despite the fact that Leia’s son is the second-in-command of the First Order—meaning she is directly responsible for the galaxy being plunged into war—nobody has a problem with her serving as one of the Resistance’s senior leaders.

...

The central problem with the new Star Wars movies—or revivals of any classic franchise, for that matter—is that contemporary filmmakers don’t understand what made the originals good. Star Wars was a product of the 1970’s: an epic tale of good vs. evil, drawing on cultural motifs familiar to Americans of the time. Bugmen like Rian Johnson or J.J. Abrams can see the surface elements of Star Wars, but without being immersed in the cultural milieu that birthed it, the best they can do is high-budget fan fiction with SJW nonsense drizzled on top.

That’s all The Force Awakens or The Last Jedi are: cosplay with CGI. The X-wings and lightsabers and aliens may look like the ones in the original trilogy, but the heart and soul aren’t there. In their place is poor writing, left-wing agitprop, and dumb jokes. The Force Awakens was dull and boring, but The Last Jedi will leave you longing for the earnestness of Jar Jar Binks. Yes, it’s that bad.

The irony is that Kylo Ren’s nihilistic mantra of “let[ting] the past die,” while completely inappropriate for a Star Wars movie, is precisely how modern moviegoers should treat the franchise itself. Star Wars is dead, nerds. It’s not coming back. It’s time to take it behind the woodshed and put a bullet in its brain. The original movies were great and some of the video games were pretty good, but the monkey’s dead and the show is over.

Show post
Ned Kelly #fundie returnofkings.com

AUSTRALIA’S GAY MARRIAGE VOTE MAY LEAD TO SPECTACULAR FAILURE FOR THE LEFT

Australia is currently voting in a postal survey on whether to legalise gay marriage. A clear majority of Australians support gay marriage but I predict that the “No” side will win the vote. When this occurs, the radical left will have no one to blame but themselves. There is a strong feeling of a Trump or Brexit type upset in the air, but the main reason that the “No” campaign will win is because the “Yes” side’s campaign has alienated the sensible center.

Australia is one of the few countries in the world that has compulsory voting in elections but this postal survey is not compulsory and I would be surprised if turnout is much over 50%. Opinion polls over recent years have consistently shown that around two thirds of Australians support gay marriage, but the expected low turnout makes the result of the postal survey hard to predict. Just as the “silent” Trump voters skewed the exit polls in the 2016 US Presidential election, there is probably also around 5% of Australians who are telling pollsters that they support gay marriage but who will in fact vote no.

The “Yes” and “No” campaigns

The “Yes” campaign is led by around half of the ruling centre-right Liberal/National government, including Australia’s Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, plus the opposition centre-left Labor Party and the far-left Greens Party. Almost all prominent Australians are supporting the “Yes” campaign.

The “No” campaign is led by religious organisations and a few conservative politicians. The fact that most Australian Muslims will undoubtedly vote no is an ironic turn for the leftists who have campaigned so hard to allow them into the country. The overwhelming support for the “Yes” side amongst prominent Australians from politics to media to entertainment to sport is reminiscent of opposition to Trump in the US and to Brexit in the UK.

The “Yes” side is not really making much of an argument, they just keep saying “love is love”. Presumably they do not think that incest, paedophilia or polygamy are ok because “love is love”, but they haven’t elaborated.

The “No” side is not making much of an argument about gay marriage either. Instead, it is arguing that gay marriage is another step towards political correctness and denial of free speech and religious freedom. Australia’s former conservative Prime Minister Tony Abbott is urging a “no” vote to “stop political correctness in its tracks”.

The left’s counterproductive tactics

The left is making two key strategic errors in its campaign. Firstly, it is arguing that there should not be a public debate or public vote on this issue. Secondly, it is bullying, persecuting and harassing anyone brave enough to declare that they will vote “no”.

The left has long argued against a public vote on same sex marriage saying that it will hurt gay people’s mental health and that straight people should not have the right to decide if gay people have “human rights”. The left does not appear to understand that people don’t like being told what they are and are not allowed to discuss, debate, say or think.

Some of the more radical leftist individuals and groups have also harassed, bullied and persecuted people who oppose gay marriage. On September 22, a “Yes” campaigner head butted Tony Abbott. A former champion boxer, Abbott assured the media he was “entirely unscathed” but said that he worries about “the brave new world of same-sex marriage if this is how some of the people who are most enthusiastically supporting it are behaving”.

In Canberra, an 18-year-old woman named Madeline was fired from her job at a children’s party business for advocating a “no” vote on her private Facebook wall. Capital Kids Parties owner Madlin Sims said she fired Madeline because “advertising your desire to vote no for SSM [same-sex marriage] is, in my eyes, hate speech”.

In Brisbane, the National Union of Students organised a rally outside a church to harass the attendees at a “vote no” meeting. The rally turned violent and one woman was arrested.

When “no” campaigners hired Skywriting Australia to write “vote no” in the sky above Sydney the business was abused on social media and the business owner received a torrent of harassing text messages including the following:

…you really are a shit human. You’re definitely the biggest piece of shit in Australia today. Probably tomorrow too. Hope you’re proud of yourself. Don’t be surprised by the hate coming for you. Titt for tatt, it’s only fair, right? You stupid, ignorant, remorseless, pathetic, old, LOSER.

The organisers of the skywriting later reported that GoFundMe “has decided to freeze our funds, until we give our names and locations. This is on the back of a massive amount of hateful messages we have received by people who want to silence our message and personally attack us.”

Of course, there are people on the “No” side who have behaved inappropriately too. The difference is that within the “Yes” camp the arguments that there should be no debate, or that those who oppose gay marriage should not be allowed to state their views, is mainstream.

Unlike the United States, Australia does not have constitutionally protected free speech. The Australian Parliament has passed laws imposing fines of up to $12,600 for anyone “vilifying” or “intimidating” another person during the gay marriage debate. I expect these laws will be enforced selectively against “no” campaigners for “homophobic” comments.

Lessons for the right

We shouldn’t underestimate the radical left, but we shouldn’t overestimate them either. Let them be themselves and they will alienate ten people for every one they convert. We on the right must not get down into the gutter to fight with these radical leftists or we will come out at least as dirty as they are. Let’s maintain the moral high ground and promote civilised debate, free speech, and non-violence.

Show post
Jean-Batave Poqueliche #sexist returnofkings.com

It is grim to realise that we have reached a point where our contemporary society is so sick, that it could be healthier for everyone if women were imposed the legal status of property instead of being free individuals. The fact that this absurd method could indeed create a safer society shows how cancerous our “progressive” Western world has become.

...

Women would keep the status of human beings even by becoming property. They would become the asset of a Senior Male Authority (SMA) from birth until his death or their own. In practice, the bond between man and female property would resemble the one between a legal guardian and a minor, incapacitated senior or mentally handicapped adult.

With women being children in adult bodies, the comparison is appropriate. But where the authority of the legal guardian expires in time, the right over female property would not be finite. All decisions would be taken by the SMA (father, older brother, then husband). The auction of a young woman from a father to a suitor of his choice would be agreed upon by setting a dowry.

Purchasing power would be in the hands of the SMA, preventing women to spend male income on frivolous and useless items like female “holidays” (the real sex tourism), designer clothes, drugs, club entrances and the like.

...

This measure would include the right of repudiation for the husband in case of serious misconduct. The decision would have to be studied and approved by a jury of adult all-male peers.

Repudiation would be efficient to keep women in line because they greatly fear being called out, held accountable, and losing resources or status because of self-inflicted behaviour, and this proposal would not deprive them from love. On the contrary, because of the affection that a man shows towards his property (added to the blood or family bound), the women he acquires will be safer. His “investment” has both a financial implication in addition to an emotional one.

To the triggered liberals, women are already property in Islam. But all I hear about it from the left on social media are crickets. Contrary to Shariah law, my theory does not include whipping, gang rape, honour killing, beheading or stoning when women are at fault.

...

10 societal benefits of declaring women legal property

1. No women in the military or police, so men and women would die less.

2. Divorce would plummet and single mommery would become a rarity.

3. No access to funds (under SMA supervision) for women would benefit the global economy.

4. Being a negotiable asset, women would be under constant male protection.

5. Women (and men) would die less of drug, tobacco, alcohol abuse and the heart diseases, cancers and violent or accidental deaths caused by it.

6. Due to heavy competition, women would have to be thinner, reducing the epidemic of obesity and the health risks that it involves.

7. Less child mortality and death during childbirth (women giving birth younger combined with better healthcare hence greater chances of survival).

8. No more left-leaning parties elected as women would be deprived of the right to vote.

9. Conservative governments elected by men would favour traditional families over leeches and degenerates.

10. Less domestic violence as women would avoid damaged men, having no personal resources (and hitting your woman would be like keying your own car: pointless).

...

7 ways this proposal would bring balance to the sexual market

1. No more welfare policies encouraging women to remain single or raise bastards. Welfare would be focused on those who need it the most, like veterans or the elderly.

2. No more inflated ego and instant gratification through attention whoring on social media. Its restricted access would create saner women. Promotion of degeneracy would be greatly reduced in the mainstream and social media.

3. No Instagram prostitution for wealthy sheikhs, being defiled for platform shoes and handbags with “stylish” patterns worthy of a child doodle.

4. Women would actively seek males based on their ability to provide, as they would have no alternative access to wealth.

5. Males would access a healthier sexual market, their hard work being rewarded by regular sexual intercourse, relative loyalty and children.

6. No more violent third world hordes imported by the votes of bitter women. No more homosexual agenda, gateway to the next great taboo, the pedophile-friendly agenda.

7. Professional advancement and success earned by women through sexual favours, like the one popular in Hollywood, would virtually disappear as adultery would be a valid reason for repudiation. “Promotion through horizontal refreshment” would only be used by already repudiated women, nothing of value would be lost.

...

It is not a panacea. The nature of women can’t be changed, but women-as-property would be finally held accountable after the “empowered” ones spent such a long time driving the Western world into the ground.

Show post
PrometheusReturns #sexist returnofkings.com

Yes, giving women the "right" to vote is privilege. Men fought for the "right" to vote and won it because it was and still is men that are forced to enlist in the military. Women are not. It's men that are forced to protect a country that is chock full of a stupid, indoctrinated, self-righteous, leisure class - women.

The day that men get special privilege that women have enjoyed in the West (aka White countries) for thousands of years then we can talk about "equal." There is no such thing as "equal." There's just a bunch of women and non-White parasites screaming Marxist slogans. This isn't going to last and the sooner it dies the better.

Show post
Tuthmosis Sonofra #sexist returnofkings.com

5 Reasons To Date A Girl With An Eating Disorder

Nothing screams white-girl problems louder than a good old-fashioned eating disorder.* But they’re more than that. Eating disorders have been—quite appropriately—declared a luxury reserved for only the most privileged members of the female race. In other words, the presence of one of the classic eating disorders is a reliable predictor of various socio-economic, cultural, and personality traits in a young woman–features that, in the end, are desirable to today’s American man. In a world where the “retail price” on the typical Western woman continues to skyrocket—while their quality continues its precipitous decline—there are some real gems to be found in the bargain bin.

I’ve dated several girls with eating disorders—in various intensities—and all of these traits have applied to each of them.

*While obesity is, in most cases, also an “eating disorder,” this list doesn’t apply to emotional eaters, food addicts, and fatties with no self control.

1. Her obsession over her body will improve her overall looks.
A girl who spends inordinate mental and physical energy on her looks is rarely fat. If you were to get into a long-term relationship with one of these girls, she’s also less likely to become complacent about her physique over time. Girls like this are usually deft at properly dressing their body type, which translates into a more stylish girl overall. And, because cheap clothing lines—like H&M—are shaped with straight cuts that are less labor-intensive and therefore more inexpensive, they look good in even the cheapest of shit. While they may have a “distorted body image” on the inside, that usually means staying trim and fit on the outside. Let’s not forget that fatties too, in the majority of cases, have a “distorted body image,” but in the unattractive direction.

2. She costs less money.
You can go out to nice restaurants and order take-out with the confidence that your expense on her will be minimal. In most cases, she’ll get a small dish–like a side salad–or just eat a little bit of whatever communal dishes you order. If you’re a hungry bastard, you can even finish off her plate. “Are you going to finish that?”

3. She’s fragile and vulnerable.
The case has repeatedly and persuasively been made that an inflated ego and an unearned high self-esteem are among the most unattractive traits in a girl. You-go-girlist “confidence”—grounded in little more than years of being told she’s a unique and special snowflake for no other reason than she was born female—renders a woman into an insufferable turd who thinks the world revolves around her.
An eating disorder often translates into the direct opposite: a girl who’s modest, fragile, and vulnerable. Instead of having to constantly wrestle with a difficult and obnoxious girl, you’ll be dealing with a tastefully insecure girl, who’s eager to please, and wants nothing more than your approval. She’s quick to apologize for transgressions, and will make the extra effort to see you–instead of flaking on you constantly. This level of vulnerability often brings out the best in men, whose protector instinct can’t help but get activated.

4. Probably has money of her own.
They aren’t too many poor girls with eating disorders. These girls come from money, and often continue to wield that spending power right into their adulthoods. Her instinct to please you will translate into her picking up tabs, coming to your door not empty-handed, or buying you little gifts.

5. She’s better in bed.
It’s a well-known fact that crazy girls are exceptional in the sack. A girl with an eating disorder has just the right cocktail of pent-up insecurity, neuroses, and daddy issues to ensure that your whole building knows every time you’re beating it up.

Say what you will, a girl with a mild-to-moderate eating disorder—that hasn’t excessively marred her appearance—is today’s best-buy in the West’s rapidly plummeting dating market.

Show post
Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

How “Being Nice” Creates Serious Problems For Men

As I’ve watched the US and European nations destroy themselves through idiotic policies, I’ve often wondered how we got into this predicament. After much thought, I am convinced that most of our ills are attributable the drive to be “nice.” Here are some examples of how niceness is destroying us.

Being nice poisons our relations with women

Being a nice guy is the kiss of death if you want to get and keep a woman. This may sound odd because every woman, when asked, says that she wants a nice guy. In truth, women despise nice guys. What they really want is a strong man—a man who will lead them. But it is impossible to lead while always being nice.

Niceness is what leads men to beta orbit women on social media and in real life. The manosphere has been out here for years but I still see men posting comments like, “You look really beautiful,” to mediocre-looking women on Instagram. What do these men gain from commenting on an attention-whoring photo? What do you think the chances are that the woman who posts these pics will choose to date one of the 50 thirsty men who commented on her photo?

Being nice is even more of a liability in marriage and long-term relationships. It may be nice to ignore your mission to please your spouse, but it will repel her over the long haul. This is because niceness is inherently beta and women do not want beta males. I know two cases of men who had their wives cheat on them. In each case, there was nothing that the man did wrong. Neither man cheated on his wife, gambled away the family fortune, or developed a heroin addiction. They were both outstanding providers and fathers.

Their only fault was they were too nice. Their marriages could’ve have been saved if they had been more willing to unapologetically take the lead in the relationship.

Niceness in religion

Christian teaching has been deeply affected by the “will to niceness.” I recently read a discussion on Twitter between three theology students, one male and two females, at the Dallas Theological Seminary. DTS was once a conservative Evangelical seminary. Now it seems it has succumbed to therapy culture. The discussion consisted of the man challenging feminist talking points, but then conceding the argument to the women because he was told that he ultimately “could never understand being a woman.”

Sacrificing truth at the altar of niceness is not just something done by Protestants. In the past 50 years the Catholic Church has also de-emphasized its more difficult moral doctrines in the hope that it would become more welcoming. It has gotten so bad that some are teaching that having nice manners necessitates that the Church drop certain moral teachings altogether.

Of course, niceness in religion has the exact opposite of its intended effect. Rather than removing impediments to faith, it waters down that faith to the point where it is so insipid that there is no reason to even bother.

Being nice is destroying the West

Pretty much everything that ails Western countries is the result of someone’s stupid attempt to be nice to one group or another. Girl power was built on the premise that girls might feel bad about themselves and that is why they chose not to go into disciplines that are dominated by men. Gay marriage is the law of the land because we bought into idea that the homosexual men were sad that they could not enter into lifetime monogamous commitments.

When a few Social Justice Warriors complain about Confederate statues (most blacks don’t seem to care), conservatives quickly agree to take them down because they value being popular more than sticking to their principles. Europe and the US’s immigration policy is similarly driven by niceness. These nations are willing to sacrifice the lives of their citizens rather that make people who live in Islamic countries feel bad.

In reality, it is not possible to govern a country without offending someone. Trying to do so can only lead to foolish decisions.

Being good is not the same as being nice

Don’t be afraid to embrace your inner asshole.

You can’t go through life being nice to everyone. Sometimes you gotta say fuck it.

— Ed Latimore (@EdLatimore) August 23, 2017

One of the most common misconceptions of being nice is that it is the same as being good. This misconception even affects many otherwise red-pilled men. The truth is that being nice is often the exact opposite of being good.

The reason for this is that the compulsion to be nice springs from an inordinate desire to be popular and loved. The conservatives at National Review capitulate on every major cultural issue because they want to remain members of progressive society. Christian leaders who water down doctrine do it because they have a greater desire for the acclaim of the crowd than they do the salvation of souls. And beta orbiters on social media prefer to get a “like” from an internet thot to improving themselves.

By contrast, being good means you will sometimes have to assume unpopular positions. This is especially true on modern society where good and evil have been completed inverted. If you share the same political opinions your grandfather held, you will be branded as a fire breathing racist. You may lose your job because of it. If you want to restore the patriarchy, you will be shunned as a troglodyte.

Although there is a cost to being good, it is important to remember that history is never made by “nice” men, but by those who dare to hold lofty ideals even when it goes against popular opinion.

Conclusion

We must wage a holy war against “being nice.” But this holy war is not targeted at any external enemy but at the “nice guy” who lives inside each of us. You must oppose him every time he wants to beta orbit a girl online or in real life. Slay him when he urges you to put your woman before your mission. Crush him if he suggests that you should tone down your political or moral views to avoid offending others. At all times choose to do what is right and good, not what is nice.

This is a battle that lasts a lifetime. We were all programmed to be nice guys. Getting over that programming is not easy, but the rewards are worth it: you’ll will experience true freedom when you end the tyranny of nice.

Show post
Larsen Halleck #conspiracy returnofkings.com

3 Reasons Why Men Should Avoid Soy Products
Don't become a soy boy....!

Soy. The boogeyman of masculine men everywhere. Indeed, the term “soy” (and derivatives such as “soy boy”) itself has become a slang term encapsulating all that we hate about the state of modern manhood: weakness, effeminancy, soft facial features, and more.

But is that the case? We all know that soy is the only complete vegetable protein—which is to say it’s the only vegetable protein that has all of the essential amino acids—but is it really so bad for people in general and men in particular?

The short answer is: for “people” as a vague concept, no. It’ll keep you alive and functioning. But for MEN, specifically, seeking to be the best possible men they can be, the answer is a resounding yes.

What It Does, and Why It’s So Common

As I said above, soy will keep you alive—it is a complete protein, which means it will indeed give you enough protein to trudge through your daily life. That much, even I will not dispute.

As many have pointed out, soy is indeed an extremely common foodstuff and food additive, not just in its native East Asia but increasingly in the other four cardinal directions of the compass rose as well. Note that the three largest producers of soy beans, which make up a majority (80+%) of the world’s crop are all in the Western Hemisphere: the USA, Brazil, and Argentina.

And indeed, when I say it’s extremely common, I mean it with no hyperbole. In addition to just being eaten in its natural state, soybeans are processed into many foodstuffs such as the famous tofu and tempeh and vegetable oil. If that weren’t enough, textured vegetable protein, or TVP, is a soy product that is used as a filler/substitute in many meat/dairy substitutes and as an enhancer.

Why is it so common? While some conspiracy theorists would undoubtedly posit that this is all some fiendish Illuminati/Judeo-Satanist plot to emasculate men around the world, I don’t think that’s the case. Frankly, I’ve always believed in Hanlon’s Razor, the idea that you can never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity—and I would paraphrase “laziness” for stupidity.

The simple reason for the preponderance of soy in the modern diet is simply that it is cheap, and corporations are primarily—and entirely— businesses, seeking to maximize their profits and minimize their expenditures. Thus, a cheap source of protein like soy is common, nevermind the side effects. And what are those side effects that deliberately harm men?

1. Hormonal Distress

Soy products are confirmed to inherently contain phytoestrogens, which can have estrogenizing effects on the human body. Indeed, they have been linked to positive effects for women, including the reduction of risks of certain types of cancer—and this happens to be the same effect that can occur with certain types of estrogen supplementation.

Since this is the case, we can also discuss the inverse (i.e. the same estrogenizing effects that are good for women will of course be bad for men). Of course, the issue is a matter of debate, but more than one study has reported negative hormonal effects of soy in men.

2. Decreased Male Fertility

Related to the above, a soy-heavy diet has also been linked to fertility dysfunction in men: lowered sperm counts and decreased semen quality. If you read this website, you’ve probably picked up somewhere or other that testosterone levels in the Western world are lower than they were in previous generations, and not only that, several studies have confirmed that testosterone and sperm counts are being lowered THROUGHOUT all Western countries.

Again, it’s not likely that this is a deliberate conspiracy, so much as an unfortunate side effect of cheapness and decreased quality of life.

3. Flatulence

And now going in a completely low brow direction, eating an excess of soy products has been linked to gastrointestinal distress. And needless to say, being associated with flatulence stink won’t do much for anything that you’re attempting to do, whether it be physical fitness, seduction, or business.

While one may not believe in the phenotypic changes associated with the stereotypically weak, spindly, soy eating male, the three reasons cited above are enough for any man to avoid this food.

What To Do

Seeing as soy isn’t required in the diet, avoiding it shouldn’t be so difficult. Just read all food product labels, avoid anything with soy, and avoid eating it directly. Replace it with animal proteins instead.

Make these simple changes, and see health and masculinity improve.

Show post
Eusebius Erasmus #fundie returnofkings.com

How To Become A Catholic Priest

I know what you’re thinking: “How can a man be celibate for the rest of his life?” I will gladly address that glaring concern, but first, hear me out.

The Church needs masculine leaders. Far too many priests are weak, cuckolded, beta men (and a few are child abusers). This is in stark contrast to the Church’s historical martyrs, like St. Jean de Brébeuf, who withstood harsh winters, month-long canoe trips, and gruelling torture, to spread the Gospel in Canada. Masculinity reflects Jesus Christ’s own human nature, as well as God the Father’s patriarchal attributes.

The question of celibacy is important: we men are wired to spread our seed. This issue can be addressed in two ways. First, after you have sowed your wild oats, and had your fill of hedonistic game, then you can join the priesthood; fornication does not yield lasting fulfillment, after all, and marriage is a rigged lottery. Indeed, the skills you learn by practicing game will be useful for the Church.

Second, consider joining an Eastern Catholic Church, which permits ordination after marriage – the downside of this is that you may need to be fluent in Ukrainian, Greek, Arabic, or some other language. In this article, however, I restrict my attention to the Church of Rome.

There are general requirements: you must be Roman Catholic, unmarried, and male. The Church often pays for your training, after which you attain a bachelor’s degree in theology or philosophy. Eventually, you are ordained a priest, taking solemn vows. This gives you the power, through Christ, to perform the sacraments: baptism, confirmation, reconciliation, marriage, and anointing the sick. After this, your Bishop or Superior may decide that you require further education, sending you to get a master’s degree or PhD.

You must decide whether to become a Diocesan priest, or to join a religious order. In the former case, you need only make vows of chastity and obedience – thus a Diocesan (secular) priest can own property and start a business. However, you are generally restricted to a single geographic area, making it difficult to move.

Religious orders, on the other hand, may require you to also pledge poverty, meaning you cannot own property, aside from simple personal items like a toothbrush. The upside is that you live in a community of likeminded men, and can travel or have other careers: teaching, research, medicine, etc. Each order has its own spirituality, and it is worth discerning this before you commit.

There are, perhaps, hundreds of religious orders to choose from. In what follows, I provide a summary of a few notable ones.

The Jesuits

Founded in 1540 by former soldier St. Ignatius of Loyola, the Society of Jesus is the most popular Catholic order. In addition to vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, Jesuits make a special vow of obedience to the Pope. Historically, the Jesuits were an important part of the Counter-Reformation and Vatican II.

The heart of the order is Ignatian spirituality, which requires you to “Find God in all things.” Ignatius, a military man, realized the importance of drills, and therefore composed a series of spiritual exercises for Jesuit men to follow. These exercises are performed in a 30-day silent retreat.

Jesuits have a reputation for liberal theology and politics, but there have been conservative Jesuits, like Cardinal Dulles. The order does not permit monasticism, since it requires Jesuits to be active in the community.

Franciscans

‘Franciscan’ is not an order as such, since it encompasses several orders, such as the Friars Minor, Saint Clare, etc. However, these orders all adhere to Franciscan spirituality.

St. Francis of Assisi, after whom this spirituality is named, was a medieval Italian friar who was a hippy, living in the wilderness, preaching to birds, and conversing with flowers. During the Fifth Crusade, he tried to convert a Muslim Sultan of Egypt, without success. Franciscans carry on St. Francis’s spirit, finding harmony in Nature, wearing a friar’s habit, and ministering to the community.

Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter

The Fraternalitas Sacerdotalis Sancti Petri (FSSP) is a traditionalist order, which grew from a rift between members of the Society of Saint Pius X. The order harkens to a pre-1964 Catholic Church, emphasizing the traditional Roman rite, in which all masses are said in Latin.

I have attended the ancient Tridentine Mass, and it is absolutely beautiful and sensuous, arresting your nose with incense, your ears with melodic Latin hymns, and your eyes with simple elegance. Needless to say, the men who work in this order are traditionalist and conservative in outlook. They are also fairly young, the average age being 37.

Conclusion

The Catholic Church is one of the few powerful institutions, in our modern world, that stand for Western values, and against degeneracy. It needs masculine leadership to ensure that it remains the rock upon which Jesus and St. Peter founded it. Prayerfully consider joining the priesthood, and improving the Church from within.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh and Stephen B. Tippins Jr. #sexist returnofkings.com

[From "When James Bond Met A Lesbian"]

There was a mediocre article recently in The American Conservative about the enduring masculinity of James Bond. It had one great quote worth sharing…

That’s what a half-century of self-entitlement does to a society: it takes the backbone out of people while simultaneously giving them notions of grandeur. This makes them malleable. Make enough people malleable and you can make them, en masse, believe in any fancy or whim. Want to know why gay marriage is inevitable? Because today’s man, coerced into believing in his own emasculation, would introduce himself to a lesbian named Pussy Galore by saying: “I respect your lifestyle choice.” When James Bond met a lesbian named Pussy Galore, he slept with her.

James Bond: the opposite of self-entitlement.

The reason that liberalism gets attacked so frequency in the manosphere is that it’s seen as the ideology that promotes entitlement and emasculation. Conservatives are full of enablers as well, but liberalism seems to lead the way. If you consider that feminism has used the liberal platform to advance its agenda, this shouldn’t come as a surprise.

Show post
Eric Crowley #sexist returnofkings.com

WHY PATRIARCHY IS THE GREATEST SOCIAL SYSTEM EVER CREATED

In the feminist creation myth, patriarchy is original sin. It is the Lucifer from which all evils flow. Without patriarchy, we would all live in a genderless role-less feminist garden of Eden.

However, just as the name Lucifer actually means light-bringer, patriarchy is actually an enlightening influence which has brought humanity out of the mud into civilization. Feminism only exists in the shadow of the massive abundance produced by patriarchy. Patriarchy is not the enemy. Patriarchy is the greatest social system ever created.

soarfrank

The Myth of Patriarchy
Feminists ascribe all social ills to patriarchy. Like a medieval inquisitor looking for evidence of the devil, patriarchy’s influence is supposedly all around us – our media, our schools, and even our most intimate relationships. Patriarchy is responsible for domestic violence, lost promotions, mean comments on twitter – even women’s own feeling about themselves.

Anyone who doesn’t subscribe to feminist dogma is believed to be possessed by the influence of patriarchy and in need of exorcism by an ordained Priest of the Cathedral of gender studies theory. They are forced to renounce their views, or face excommunication from the public sphere. In more honest times, the dominant religion simply called freethinkers “heretics” and burned them at the stake.

Origins Of Patriarchy
In reality, there is nothing so mysterious about patriarchy. Patriarchy is a division of social roles based in natural biological gender differences.

Males and females have very obvious self-evident biological differences. Women can have babies. Men cannot. Women’s bodies are designed for nurturing, with wombs, breasts, and hormonal cycles. During pregnancy, women are unable to physically exert themselves. Men’s bodies are designed for physical exertion, and as a whole, physically stronger.

Imagine you are part of a small tribe in a survival situation. Conquest, war, famine, death – any of the four horsemen could strike at any moment. How would you divide social roles?

As Jack Donovan states in The Way of Men:

Because your group is struggling to survive, every choice matters. If you give the wrong person the wrong job, that person could die, you could die, another person could die, or you could all die. Because of the differences between the sexes, the best person for jobs that involve exploring, hunting, fighting, building, or defending is usually going to be male. This is not some arbitrary cultural prejudice; it is the kind of vital strategic determination you need to keep your group alive.

frank_frazetta_tarzanandtheantmen-smaller

In other words, traditional roles are the basis of our survival as a species.

The Sacrifice Of Men
In patriarchy, men sacrifice their energy, their time, and sometimes even their lives for the betterment of women and children, and women give themselves to nurturing children and families.

Feminists define patriarchy as a system of dominance, in which men oppress women. This redefines men’s sacrifice as an act of control, rather than love. Many men are perfectly happy to have sex with women without offering any protection or value to the woman or her resulting children. It is an act of love that men willingly give up their freedom in order to provide for women, and their young.

Patriarchy is about love. It is about the love of human beings in families, tribes, and small communities working interdependently for the benefit of one another.

Feminism Was Created By Capitalism
Feminism in it’s modern form began in the last hundred years, when industrialization moved our economic survival from requiring hard labor to requiring skilled labor. Work used to require hours of physical lifting, now it requires sitting at a desk. This transition made it possible for even the weakest women to work.

Employees are much easier to manage as interchangeable cogs than as gendered individuals with unique needs. In fact, convincing women to work doubles the size of the work force, allowing employers to half everyone’s wages. It’s simple supply and demand. As the book Revolution From Above chronicles, early feminist movements – even Marxist feminists – were bankrolled by major capitalists in order to increase the workforce and lower wages.

CapitalismAndTheExploitationOfWomen

Feminism is a product of capitalism. The “you can have it all” message is an attempt by corporations to swindle women out of their biological needs. If you’re a feminist, you’re a capitalist, because you’ve make work a greater priority than community, children, or love.

In families, each member is irreplaceable, but in a company everyone is replaceable. In patriarchy, women toiled for one man who loved her and the children he gave her. In capitalism, women work for many men completely indifferent to her and willing to disposes of her the moment cheaper labor appears.

Feminism Commodifies Relationships
In patriarchy, selfish relationship impulses were restrained. In capitalism, they are encouraged. Each member of a tribe of community works for the benefit of those around him, but in capitalism men and women are independent agents, with no loyalty or duty to anyone else.

Roles that were traditionally played by family are now outsourced. Group homes for the elderly, day care for the children. Even mentors and friends can be bought in the form of therapists and life coaches.

This system destroys intimate relationships. It selfishly benefits a woman to bear the children of strong lone alpha’s rather than the man providing for her. It selfishly benefits a man to impregnate every available fertile woman with no intention of further contact. Alpha fucks, beta bucks.

Feminism has created a war between the sexes with each side trying to maximize their profits in the sexual marketplace while spending as little as possible. We’re all little atomized corporations united only by the laws of bio-mechanics.

steinberg_war-of-the-roses

Men Have Lost Reason To Work
This new dynamic has freed men from work. In his new book Bachelor Pad Economics, Aaron Clarey advocates a minimalist approach to money – buy only what your need and using your time for your benefit rather than a corporation’s. This approach is already being taken as men drop out of the system, earn less than women, and avoid higher eduction.

The reason men worked hard was to provide for their families. Men didn’t work long hours out of self-interest. They did so out of love. Most men can subsist on very little. It’s been said that civilization was created to impress the opposite gender. Without reward, there is no reason to work. No carrot, no jump.

As a society, we’ve reached a point where technology has eliminated the need for everyone to work. Just as capitalism freed women from their natural role, it’s freed men from theirs. Masculinity has been reduced to a fashion statement.

Return To The Natural Order
While we understand that animals exists in natural groups – a herd, a flock, a pack – we forget that man is an animal too. Man’s natural group is the tribe. Humans are mammals. We learn through relationships, rather than instinct.

Ajna-Nursing-Acorn-Community-Virginia-2006-650x486

Children require love, attachment, and stability that can only be found in emotional bonds with present adults. They are not interchangeable cogs. You can’t buy a mother’s love or a father’s wisdom. Love cannot be outsourced. Authentic love is only possible within patriarchal community.

To a company, non-working children are a nuisance. The epidemic of single motherhood, plummeting birthrates, and mental illness is due to the rejection of traditional roles. If society wants healthy happy children and loving stable communities, it must embrace the lost values of patriarchy.

In the early tribes, humans were entirely dependent on one another. Now they are independent and unsatisfied. Returning to traditional roles means living interdependently, and align with the natural order not because we have to, but because we choose to. We could exist alone, but we are fulfilled together.

Of course, feminists will call this oppressive. They want you to be free – free from community, free from belonging, free from love. A mass of apes fighting over the highest value mate behind a gilded cage.

ffleft

Back to the mud, or back to the kitchen, the choice is yours.

Show post
André du Pôle #sexist returnofkings.com

Considered from a long memory point of view, feminism is quite recent, owing its exponential development to a very specific modern historical context. The matriarchal tribes Leftist anthropologists have been crazy about are but a historical aberration. All civilizations and peoples who were able to go beyond the small tribe stage and erect kingdoms or empires were patriarchal.

The irony of modernity lies in men having invented most of what exist out there, toiled in steaming factories, dug up dark mine drifts, fought in bloody wars, and managed to produce an incredible wealth—for the result of work to be taken away by entitled, ungraceful womyn.

If you look closely, the suffragettes and their ilk did not revolt because “oppression of women”, but to the contrary, in a context where men were already weak and womanly ways were already dominant. Nineteenth century American prostitutes had many things wives did not—like money, glamour, the ability to travel and fuck many wealthy guys, and even men’s attention—and they have set a precedent.

Likewise, if you look at the Belle Époque (roughly 1870-1914) art, it overflows with sensual, bewitching beautiful women, accompanied by high-status or wealthy men orbiting around. Men of these times had already turned into weaklings, proud to be mesmerized by some lipstick-wearing bitch. Far from being “oppressive”, these men were dependent, and spoiled women could easily gauge money and power from them.

This trend of female takeover, be it through seduction, subtle social power-grabbing or direct threats against men, has shaped many of last century changes. Our masculine potentialities were buried in taboo and oblivion by the blue pill, and now that we are developing ourselves again, it is becoming increasingly obvious that we have to roll back the degeneracy and illegitimate powers we were taught to take for granted. With this is mind, we need a traditional, extra-modern perspective from which to stand and strike hard at the Libtard Church.

The Law Code of Manu, an ancient Hindu legal code, is exactly the kind of content that can feed a “neo-traditional” perspective. Its rich contents led me to write on it twice on ROK, and now is a third and last Law of Manu piece specifically about relations between the sexes. What did an allegedly supra-human lawmaker say on women—and that allowed for a civilization standing the test of time?

...

To regulate the market and prevent an unholy alliance between party girls and notches-racking assholes, the Code states that a man must be older than the girl he woos: “a 30 year old man should marry a charming girl of 12 years, or an 18 year old, a girl of 8 years or sooner” (9.94). In other words, instead of giving way to the temptation and throwing themselves in a cutting-throat competition for notches, young men have to master their own desires while getting a betrothal with younger girls. Then, as a well-deserved reward, they get a good spouse, each of them peaks at the same time, each can naturally enjoy the other—the 30 year old enjoys the young female who enjoys an older, dominant male—and build a home.

...

3. Women ought to be made dependent for their own good

The Code states:

" Even in her own home, a female—whether she is a child, a young woman, or an old lady—should never carry out any task independently. As a child, she must remain under her father’s control; as a young woman, under her husband’s; and when her husband is dead, under her sons’. She must never seek to live independently. (5.147-8)"

If women depend from their families and ought to be traded or cared of by men, this makes pairing easier and more straightforward. Being traded, women can focus on their own value and avoid being damaged by their own foolish choices. Also, as they are hypergamic, women ought to be made socially inferior for their own satisfaction: if they get equal to men, they will despise men of equal value and want for a higher value one at the expense of whom they should pair with.

Women belonging to their families are limited in their ability to lure any male into their traps: if they do, they will likely get the wrath of their responsible relatives.

" Day and night men should keep their women from acting independently; for, attached as they are to sensual pleasures, men should keep them under their control. (9.2)

Drinking, associating with bad people, living away from the husband; travelling, sleeping, and staying in the houses of others—these are the six things that corrupt women… Lechery, fickleness of mind, and hard-heartedness are innate in them… Recognizing this, a man should make the utmost effort at guarding them. (9.13-6)"

...

5. Husband and wife do not have to be “equal”

Some things ought to be checked as relatively equal between a husband and a wife, such as the caste, social value, or being in one’s prime, for the marriage to work well, with the exception of “times of adversity” when higher caste men can marry down. Everything, though, does not have to be the same.

A woman realizes herself and flourishes through her place in the family. She ought to be dutiful to have her proper center and dignity. Therefore,

" Though he may be bereft of virtue, given to lust, and totally devoid of good qualities, a good woman should always worship her husband like a god. For women, there is no independent sacrifice, vow, or fast; a woman will be exalted in heaven by the mere fact that she obediently served her husband. (5.154-6)"

On the other hand, a husband can go away for years on which his wife ought to maintain the home, provided he secures some resource for her to live on (9.74-6). He is also free to repudiate his wife if she loathes him without a proper reason. Specific reasons are specified by the Code, such as if he turns into an unrepentant alcoholic, or becomes “foul-mouthed” (9.81).

Men and women’s respective roles and different, complementary, and unequal. Modernists should get over it instead of wrecking social life in the name of an equality between non-existent abstract individuals.

A man’s striving expresses mostly on the public scene, outside from the house, while the man’s quest finds its center in himself and larger projects. A man ought to be able to thrive outside, whereas his wife, by being supportive, realizes herself at the same time that she helps him. Also note that risks are properly shared here, as the woman may seem in a more risky situation at home, when the husband meets with the risks outside.

...

Conclusion

That the modern trends of “emancipation” of women would actually unravel into a catastrophe for most men, not to mention our civilization as a whole, could have been predicted by the wise men living millennia ago. Particular vocations, social equilibrium, good chances and fair trade were ensured by the wisdom and fidelity of traditional men.

As we toil for taking back our institutions, countries and civilization, it is also necessary to glean discernment from (almost) timeless Scriptures. Odds are, the most familiar we become with antique wisdom, the more specifically modern trends will look like blind or monstrous deviations. This may be unsettling. I could bet my last penny, though, that in the long run it will be understood as a necessary step for getting outside the rotten world we were born in and avoid falling for the same mistakes again and again.

Show post
Harry Lime #sexist returnofkings.com

3 THINGS I LEARNED FROM DATING A LATINA FOR ONE YEAR


In keeping with Kyle Trouble’s recent post, this article will look at three key observations I’ve gathered from dating a Latina for over a year. Prior to this relationship, I never seriously dated any Latin American women and only heard secondhand what this breed of dames were like—in and outside the bedroom.

With a year of experience under my belt, I really haven’t looked back to the emotionless, tired, bland and masculinized (feminist translation: strong, independent) pool of women that lurch limply around my city, Toronto, like zombified worker bees. After you go Latina, there is really no need to look back.

As Toronto is virtually ground zero for non-feminine women, I was very fortunate to meet and hook up with a real lady here—one who embraces her femininity, believes in God, and cherishes traditional family values (naturally, she wasn’t raised in Toronto, but El Salvador). While those three qualities of Latinas were discussed in this ROK article, there are some other things I’ve learned from dating a Latina that, like with Mr. Trouble, have modified my overall views of male-female relationships.

1. It’s okay to put her on a pedestal—if she’s earned it

Only if Sofia’s earned it…
Rightfully, red-pill men believe that putting a girl on a pedestal is a bad decision and will eventually lead to her taking advantage of this freebie chivalry. This is certainly true with Western women because, despite their feminist facade, deep-down they know they are not behaving in a way that deserves male courtly love. In a progressive society, all things being equality™, women see themselves as men after given the ability to game the system by manipulating their other half’s chivalrous impulses that have been warped and suppressed by our anti-male culture.

In turn, red-pill men have rejected the pedestal and regard it as a man’s willingness to be exploited by Western women. This essentially boils down to the idea if women don’t act like women, why should we treat them like women? But Latinas do act like women and actually view the pedestal as a very masculine gesture. It shows that you care—that you respect and appreciate their feminine gifts.

However, the pedestal is not to be hoisted up indiscriminately. Latinas are not perfect and can lapse into bad female habits (lateness, attention-seeking behaviour, jealousy traps, annoying shit tests), at which point you drop the pedestal immediately and hold frame. Latinas are very intuitive creatures and will detect your display of discipline and self-respect. Once she realizes your pedestal is conditional, this will only strengthen the relationship and ensure you both cherish each other according to your own masculine/feminine principles.

2. They reject feminism, value motherhood

Motherhood first is the Latina mantra.
Let’s put it this way: there have been times when I, a writer at Return of Kings, have to cool down my Latina girlfriend after she powers through an anti-feminist rant. She endorses my standing at ROK and I constantly catch her reading articles on the site and snickering in response by saying “this is sooooo true.” Regularly, she comes home from her job, slams down her bags, and bickers, “I honestly don’t know how men survive here.” (The answer: they don’t, they just leave).

After my Latina girlfriend took up her 9-5 corporate gig, she now comes home, crashes to the bed with exhaustion, and admits that this job makes her want to become a mother even more. She sees all the sour women around her, riddled with penis envy and bitchy attitudes, and fears the prospect of becoming “that”. She rues the degenerateness of a gender neutral-equal society where non-traditional lifestyles are celebrated over nuclear families.

Further, when I audited one of Jordan Peterson’s lectures, she insisted on attending with me. When we heard the University of Toronto professor explain in-person what women can do about receiving better pay, she went out and bought a book on how to become a better negotiator.

The rare thing about Latinas is they are sort of, almost a little… accountable. While wild in the sack, they are not promiscuous if held in check by a strong, protective man. They are truly independent, as they value themselves but also understand the role of a man in their life and admit that there are times when they want and need a man—her novio.

3. They have a healthy “daddy complex”

Latinas tend to have strong, alpha, masculine fathers — which informs their expectations of men.
It’s true that all women view men as a reflection of their father (or lack of one). A weak or absent father generally produces a woman with poor expectations of men. A strong or involved father generally produces a woman with high expectations of men. For the latter, she dates up the dominance hierarchy and expects her man to treat her with the same level of reverence and love given by papi.

In turn, you are expected to fulfill your role as the alpha male, be a provider, and make decisions on your and her behalf. You must lead unapologetically. Latinas love men who stand by what they say, even if that stance enrages them. With a Latina: YOU MUST ALWAYS HOLD FRAME. They can be firecrackers—real vixens—but that passion is just them testing their man’s boundaries—to see if he can take them and if he really cares about the relationship.

Since Latinas tend to hold their fathers in very high regard, they hold their men to that same standard. In turn, you will find you grow as a man because you constantly have to stay sharp, firm, and honorable if you want to keep her. In return, you will have her committed loyalty.

Dating a Latina is built on a productive exchange of your most masculine virtues in return for hers. It is a rewards-based arrangement that brings out the best in your manhood—because that is what the relationship demands of you for it to last. While there are always exceptions to the rule, there is a good reason why Latinas are in such high demand in Toronto for men. They are part of a dying breed of strong, genuinely feminine group of women.

Show post
André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

[This definitely veers into SSTDT but the greater point is too broad for that]

Most ROK readers should find the idea of vocation intuitive. Women have purposes specific to their sex and should not attempt to steal or destroy manly places. However, the caste hierarchy and relative leveling of vocations may seem extraneous to American readers: the US were founded over the idea that neither a centralized Church nor a nobility should exist. Did not the Founding Fathers reject the caste system from the start? Indeed—but I am neither American nor conservative enough to put them on the same footing as sacred texts.

...

A hierarchy where manly men have authority over feminine women works well. Each one has a role fit to its nature and can realize one’s own purposes with the help of the other. An inverted, matriarchal hierarchy where women would rule, on the other hand, is dissatisfying: women would look like caricatures of men by being bossy, let their defects such as conformism and group-thinking tendency express, and turn men into slaves or short-term driven pleasure-seekers. None of the parts would be able to realize its better tendencies, such as loving and caring for women, or meeting with challenges for men.

Likewise, the four-caste hierarchy is the good or fairer one. A society following it and having proper individuals at each level would be the most harmonious one, even in poverty. When the regular order gets messed up, so does the whole society: Kshatriya pretending to spiritual authority start subordinating it to political interests, just as the Protestant princes of Europe did in the sixteenth century; Vaishya pretending to power end up commercializing everything, turning politics into a marketplace where lobbyists and sellouts abound. “Inferior” castes cannot help but bring their essential ethos with them no matter where they go or what they pretend to be.

The lesson, here, could be that modernity has been mostly synonymous with a “vaishya-ization” of society: universities have turned into an academic niche market, politics have become a market as well, and the process have been aggravated by women trying to play men—especially upper bourgeois women pretending to political power. Each “inferior” caste denythe “superior” ones their rights and prerogative have made the world poorer.

As for myself, I have no problem with the idea that some, even men, should not have the right to financial independence: libertarianism may work well among men of Mensa, but a 70-IQ people clearly need some paternalist management not to drown into their own stupidity.

“Even a capable Shudra must not accumulate wealth, for when a Shudra becomes wealthy, he harasses Brahmins.” (10.129) Some wealthy people fund seditious, divisive groups such as BLM, some who enjoy a small authority act like power-tripping small chiefs, some women get beta orbiters and management power… A fair hierarchy is not one with equal chances or opportunities to get promoted, but one where each one can reach his rightful place.
Conclusion

Alt-Right blogger Lawrence Murray contrasted Buddhism, which enjoys some cultural status and association with the upper classes in the West, with an “intensely alien Hinduism.” Practicing yoga, reciting a handful of mantra and mingling with other bourgeois bohemian while sipping fair trade green tea seems indeed easier than vindicating such a frankly non-modern order.

Modernity in general and the so-called American Dream in particular entertain a deep trend of anti-traditional, anti-dharmic thinking which promotes an abstract and formally autonomous individual able to do has he wants. “Gender” or the negation of biological sex in the name of a chosen or psychological sex is but the last product of the trend.

If you could choose between a society where Hillary Clinton had won the election and a society with castes and sacred fires, would you have the guts to choose the second option—knowing that women would be women but also that you may be, say, a Vaishya and thus not entitled to (for example) give a scholarly opinion about what the Bible says?

Whatever your answer, remember that modern ethical theories come and go with the Zeitgeist, whereas dharmic cultures still exist today side by side with modern technology. I could bet anything that in a hundred years the Law Code of Manu will still be studied while Anita Sarkeesian’s name will be forgotten.

Show post
Ryan Ashville #sexist returnofkings.com

How Anime Is Programming Men To Be Weak And Submissive

[...]

The first anime I chose from the list, was about a teenage girl named Misaki, who joined an all boys school which recently opened to girls. She works as a maid to support her family as her father had abandoned them.

The “Does Not Like Men” Female Protagonist

image
A female protagonist that openly hates men

Misaki never trusts her male counterparts, and beats them up if they tried something she didn’t approve of. The whole show is centered on how girls can be better than boys, where she terrorizes men, and how these men are portrayed as nothing but pervs, violent, thirsty mindless jerks.

Usui, the male character, after being yelled at for no reason, is strangely drawn to her, and so are the other boys of the school. This hyper misandric woman deemed ‘attractive’ in the eyes of both anime characters and the male fans. This show is targeted towards girls who call it “one of the most romantic anime”.

I was extremely disgusted and had to quit watching within 10 episodes. I couldn’t have a place in my mind to understand how men watch shows like this and enjoy it.

[...]

These shows are not only designed to destroy the male image and present it as inferior, but also to ruin their self confidence as human beings for being male. In dozens of anime, males are portrayed as either weak, or stupid, similar to how Daddy pig in the cartoon Peppa Pig is simply made to be laughed at, or how the main male cast of the Simpsons slowly degraded into ambition-less couch potatoes and the women becoming political figures.

Go-Girl-ism And Male Bashing
If you grew up watching TV in the 1990s, there is no way you escaped seeing at least a few episodes of Sailor Moon. It redefined the “magical girl” genre in its native Japan and its overseas influence has shown up in girl-power shows like The Powerpuff Girls and is the definition of a feminist anime. Haruka and Michiru, the series’ Sailor Uranus and Neptune, were a lesbian couple who helped girls around the world come to terms with their sexuality. The series also makes a point of commenting on how the less traditionally feminine girls have trouble coping with gender roles, like how Makoto learned to cook because she was teased for being a tomboy.

image
One of the most notable feminist anime works

The “girl power” concept is counter productive, but unfortunately it’s an inescapable void of entertainment, Charlies Angles, Steven Universe (where the male character is a boy who learns from women), Taylor Swift videos, etc. Australia’s national women’s soccer team the Matildas lose 7-0 to an under FIFTEENS boys’ side, we know that story.

[...]

Male disposability in anime was the right word I was looking for. Naruto has plenty of scenes where he is beaten up by women. Not to forget, where I thought Gintama would be free of male bashing, where Shimura Tae, a smiley woman constantly beats up a ‘hairy’ man – simply for asking her out.

Is this supposed to be comedy?

There’s plenty of hentai anime, like Girls Bravo for example, a blue haired boy who is mocked for being short by his female school mates, he is bullied to the point where he’s even ‘allergic’ to women. (Imagine an anime where a girl was treated like trash because she was fat). In one scene of the first episode, the boy accident walks into the bathroom where his female neighbour was taking a shower. She screams and throws a tantrum, she brutally beats him up, where his nose begins to bleed, until he falls into a tub, where he is eventually woken up in a planet where there are only women, however, since he was the only male on the planet, he is sexually harassed constantly through out the episodes and women molest him.

Show post
Pax Masculina #sexist returnofkings.com

[A promotion for a short-film the author made about an alternate US where a totalitarian theocracy takes over and prevents women from gaining the vote (the author intends this as utopian btw)]

Fellow ROK fans, tired of every new film having a militant feminist theme? Want to see a universe on video in which men create a paradise on earth with their wise rule, and insolent women causing trouble are given their just reward? My short film (18 minutes) is called Pax Masculina (Latin for Peace of Men) and is an alternate history science fiction movie.

It all started when I posed the question “What would the United States be like today if women had never received the right to vote?” Check out the two minute trailer below. I think you will love the PAX universe.

...

In Pax Masculina, a theocratic totalitarian regime takes over the United States in 1910. Under this government, women have few rights like in Old Testament or Victorian England culture. The suffragettes were defeated and women never got the vote.

Uninhibited by the influence of women, what follows is a century of peace and prosperity, known as the Pax Masculina. Out of disgruntled suffragettes evolved the Women’s Resistance Movement (WRM) which violently opposes the regime. The movie takes place in 2016 when the WRM has increased aggression in its opposition to the governing patriarchy in their fight for equality of the sexes.

The Women’s Resistance Movement uses assassinations and bombings to create terror and kill without mercy. Seduction and murder of policemen and government officials are common tactics. The government induces its own terror with televised torture and execution of captured women soldiers. The movie’s Facebook site gives more details and many behind-the-scenes photos from the film.

The following photos represent the philosophy of the regime:

image
image

The conflict between the regime and WRM is really a battle for the hearts and minds of young women who might join the WRM. When a girl turns 16, she is eligible to be married. Husbands pay the father a dowry and there is a transfer of property. There is an all-girls high school where harsh teachers use ruler and paddle freely to discipline unruly females.

Girls are forced to watch public hangings of captured WRM soldiers on classroom televisions. In the photographed scene below, one girl jokes around about the threat of hanging beside a victim she has just had to watch.

...

A symbol on the wall of all classrooms remind them of the consequences of having a bad attitude. Gentlemen, how many times have you wanted to tell a woman to “lose the attitude”? In this universe, it is official policy!

image

The beautiful women of the WRM wear steampunk inspired uniforms designed for combat and seduction as they engage in hand-to-hand combat with police. Authorities have better weapons but hesitate to use them since they want to capture these arrogant women alive for public display.

...

Captured WRM soldiers are hanged publicly with a worldwide TV broadcast of the event as if it was the World Cup or Superbowl. There is no drop and a large diameter rope is used to haul them up into the air so they slowly strangle, preventing permanent damage to necks or windpipes. There is a good possibility that they will be half hanged (let down before dead) to be made a sex-slave to a deserving man. This discourages young women from joining the WRM while entertaining the populace.

As for the status of the film, the cut is finished and being submitted to film festivals. To stay up to date about its release, follow the Facebook page. The world premier of Pax Masculina will be at Comicpalooza in Houston May 12-14. The exact screening time and date will be posted on the aforementioned Facebook page.

I made this film to express my view and to share my artistic vision, not to make money. Eventually it will just be posted on YouTube or Vimeo to be viewed for free. But for now, festival rules prevent that to retain eligibility. My goal is to make a full length feature film which expands the story line of the PAX universe. But that is a year or two away. Now, I just want to share the vision with like-minded individuals such as ROK readers. I hope the trailer whets your appetite andI would love to hear feedback. My best estimate for release of the short film for public viewing is six months.

I admire Roosh more than I can say after having experienced similar harassment by the social justice warriors against me. Maybe he will agree to be a consultant on the feature film? I made this movie with a balanced perspective instead of the expected female empowerment manifesto. But the mere hint that a government which excludes women might be successful has led to an effort to silence my creative voice.

Instead of reasoned debate, some think I shouldn’t be permitted to express my artistic opinion. In addition, I have openly promoted the men’s right movement (posted links to ROK articles for example), and I have dared to say some positive things about President Trump. I have been vilified and my reputation decimated with lies.

Having practiced engineering for over 40 years, I am used to dealing with truth and facts. I have learned that the artistic community is in general close-minded and truth means nothing to them. I am astonished at their ability to lie without hesitation, without guilt, without apology. Some “artists” show a total lack of character and honor. Any deviation from political correctness is not tolerated. That will be the focus of a future post. For now, I plan to continue to make movies that tell the truth and present an alternative viewpoint.

Show post
Ryan Ashville #sexist returnofkings.com

From comics, movies, anime, gaming, and now the more recent kids shows, feminists will use any kind of tactic to promote their evil. Stories like Rapunzel or The Sleeping Beauty have been a part of our childhood, teaching us about gender roles and the importance of them. Now they have been changed in various ways to suit modern women, giving them unrealistic expectations of what they can be. Here are nine characters that show how they have infiltrated entertainment.

Steven Universe

The show deals with an entire species that is genderless but has feminine traits (female human forms), Steven is a male protagonist that is not masculine in a lot of ways. Rather than being the strong fighter type, he acts through femininity despite being male. He cries for help from women rather than helping himself. The show contains trans, queer and homosexual characters which is typical for a show like this. They have women of different sizes and has quite a dark story line for a show aimed for children. Cartoon Network is now giving a way for brainwashing, glorifying obese women and unhealthy diets.

They even place the emphasis on disguised leftist concepts like:

Tolerance – Praising of everything non-white, non-male and non-heterosexual
Minority – non-whites, non-male and degenerates
Inclusiveness – Accepting everything non-white and degenerate
Emancipation – Disregarding rules made by conservative males

But despite all these teachings, SJWs bullied a Steven Universe artist to attempt suicide because she drew Rose (an obese female character) too thin. Hypocritical? Yes. It certainly has one of the most cancerous fanbases, consisting of bronies and white knights.

Wonder Woman

Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don’t want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are. Women’s strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman.”

– William Moulton Marston, in a 1943 issue of The American Scholar.

Comics publisher Max Gaines asked him to create a new superhero for their comics, to fill the void he felt existed with something new. The creator knew that he wanted his hero to embrace love over violence, and to value peace over war. He assumed that women value love and peace. He valued independent, educated, and unconventional women.

Wonder Woman remains a feminist icon 75 years after her creation, because she symbolizes the idea of female domination. According to NY Post, Wonder Woman was not ‘feminist’ enough for Social Justice Warriors, because SJWs and feminists are never happy with anything in society until white men are silenced. Most wonder woman comics were terrible, but the media keeps pushing it on readers that they HAVE to give in.

BatGirl

Buffy the Vampire Slayer creator Joss Whedon is allegedly a woke male feminist ally. He’s a mangina allegedly known for directing “strong female characters”. His characters are unrealistic as women simply can never be tough. He cares about fake women’s issues like the pay gap and the alleged success of lady Ghostbusters. Joss is directing Batgirl, the story about a super heroine who is basically Batman but a woman. Currently he’s facing back-lash on Twitter, but in smaller amounts due to more and more people accepting these kind of reboots.

Overwatch

This game is tainted by women who blame their problems on men. Basically, every character in Overwatch has different victory pose animations that a player can unlock and choose from. And for the time-traveling character Tracer (one of the female characters in the game), her victory pose gives players a wonderful view of her buttocks, clad in skin-tight leggings. Obviously, if men are enjoying something there must be feminist intervention, so Blizzard changed her appearance and stated:

We’ll replace the pose. We want *everyone* to feel strong and heroic in our community. The last thing we want to do is make someone feel uncomfortable, under-appreciated or misrepresented. Apologies and we’ll continue to try to do better.

Women expose themselves to men in conventions, and when they are assaulted they complain that “men should respect women,” even when their own clothes were designed to attract men. But when a character in a video game wears skimpy clothing, there is an outright backlash against it. Overwatch is even taking strides to be LGBT inclusive. This marks the end of straight white man in entertainment.

Wandering Son

Wandering Son follows two fifth graders who do not identify with the genders they were assigned at birth. Shuichi Nitori identifies as a girl, and Yoshino Takatsuki identifies as a boy. This series marks the end of an era, modern anime has come to suit feminist tastes. The rest is pretty self explanatory.

Splash

The 80s film, starring Tom Hanks and Daryl Hannah, is set for a reboot with Channing Tatum starring as the “merman”. The original Splash was about a man, Allen Bauer (Hanks), who falls in love with the mermaid (Daryl Hannah) who rescued him when he was a boy. Their relationship is hampered somewhat by the fact that the mermaid (who later names herself Madison) has to return to the sea after just a few short days, and also by the deranged scientist determined to prove that merpeople are real by throwing water at her.

Since the announcement, many feminists have been celebrating the gender swap on social media – particularly Tatum’s casting as a merman as some kind of feminist victory… but why? Because of the casting of a white, straight male in a role that was originally held by a woman. Hollywood’s content has become more man-hating than ever before. Seeing men in feminine roles is a way of brainwashing men to be submissive and less masculine.

Gender swapping is fast becoming a fail-safe way for Hollywood to shut up anyone who kicks off about equality without actually having to write anything new: Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmatians, Ghostbusters. All these films have either been made or are in the works and all of them have some kind of “feminist twist”. I’ve seen these gender bends in anime too, although no one seems to notice because anime gender bending is normalized.

Undertale

Your character is non-ambiguous (genderless) and non-white, which one could assume it is Asian or Mexican. They never refer to you as “him” or “her”. Despite having a small amount of characters, it managed to include homosexual relationships and a transgender robot. There are more homosexual couples than their opposite counterparts, and both the prominent female characters break out of gender roles. Undyne being the best fighter in the underground, another unrealistic feminist expectation that women can be better than men.

Do you see where “progressiveness” in gaming is really heading? Because the game pushes “progressive propaganda”. One of the major themes of the game that people have been gloating about is the notion that gay relationships are wonderful and perfect, straight relationships are doomed, diversity is strength, promoting inter-species romantic relationships, and it’s primarily because of this thematic content that the game gets praised. That is why Tumblr is spamming the votes, and the media is circle-jerking over the game. Nearing the end of the game I dawned upon the similarities of this game and Steven Universe. There’s nothing particularly special about the game except for discreetly lecturing you about homosexuality and political correctness.

Sailor Moon

It redefined the “magical girl” genre in its native Japan and its overseas influence has shown up in girl-power shows like The Powerpuff Girls and is the definition of a feminist anime. Haruka and Michiru, the series’ Sailor Uranus and Neptune, were a lesbian couple who helped girls around the world come to terms with their sexuality (lesbian propaganda). The series also makes a point of looking down on femininity, by showing how the less feminine girls have trouble coping with gender roles, like how Makoto learned to cook because she was teased for being a tomboy.
Though, I somewhat find it astonishing that the creator of the site anime feminist doesn’t care about “fanservice”, which is short softcore porn scenes, it occured to me because they know about the female supremacy in anime.

Life Is Strange

The creators of the game met with resistance to make the protagonist female. It’s a story about a girl named Max who learns that she can time travel. Life is Strange are some of the few games that are telling women’s untold stories in ways that make it seem as if women have it harder.

It’s simply a game made to exaggerate and show how cruel men can be to women (almost every man in the game is either a loser or a woman beating trash). It attempts to lecture you and say things like “these men need to be in check” whenever it finds the chance to. This game was published by SQUARE ENIX who also published Tomb Raider. Why is it that those people who push equality so much then decide to make a game where it’s about the girl, never around the male?

Conclusion

Modern entertainment is becoming more about social justice than hardware, software, story, gameplay, or animation, while we get to endure feminists complain about everything they don’t like, ruining entertainments we were once able to enjoy.

Show post
albouski #sexist returnofkings.com

Last year, I decided to stay over at an old friend’s apartment, who had been my roommate back in college. A couple of weeks of residing there, every time I moved in and out of his room, my old buddy would be watching anime on his laptop. His door had a poster of his favorite anime, ‘Sword Art Online’.

He wasn’t an otaku or a dumb weeb, rather to simply put it, it was his pass time or a hobby, to relax from the stress that men face in the modern day world. I remember watching anime as a kid, and I admit, I enjoyed it…

But not anymore.

When he watched anime, he stared at the screen with fascination, as if he was a scientist waiting for the rocket to land on the moon. I was curious, so I asked him to recommend me some anime that he enjoyed. This is where I realized the ugly, misandric nature of anime that teens are exposed to.

The first anime I chose from the list, was about a teenage girl named Misaki, who joined an all boys school which recently opened to girls. She works as a maid to support her family as her father had abandoned them.

...

The “Does Not Like Men” Female Protagonist

Misaki never trusts her male counterparts, and beats them up if they tried something she didn’t approve of. The whole show is centered on how girls can be better than boys, where she terrorizes men, and how these men are portrayed as nothing but pervs, violent, thirsty mindless jerks.

Usui, the male character, after being yelled at for no reason, is strangely drawn to her, and so are the other boys of the school. This hyper misandric woman deemed ‘attractive’ in the eyes of both anime characters and the male fans. This show is targeted towards girls who call it “one of the most romantic anime”.

I was extremely disgusted and had to quit watching within 10 episodes. I couldn’t have a place in my mind to understand how men watch shows like this and enjoy it.

...

This is a common formula used by anime and manga creators to depict a strong independent woman who doesn’t need a man. Female superiority is rising within anime, and young may become some of those ‘nice guys’ who get used by women.

The common genre for anime girls called “tsundere“, which refers to a stubborn woman who is abusive to the man she likes, is very popular, shows like Sword Art Online, Bleach, Toradora, DBZ, etc. I could name a hundred more, but that would mean I would include almost every anime. And not just any people are influenced, but the most desperate men across the world. Men who have never had any luck with women are always attempting to fulfill a woman’s most dangerous desires just to keep her.

These shows are not only designed to destroy the male image and present it as inferior, but also to ruin their self confidence as human beings for being male. In dozens of anime, males are portrayed as either weak, or stupid, similar to how Daddy pig in the cartoon Peppa Pig is simply made to be laughed at, or how the main male cast of the Simpsons slowly degraded into ambition-less couch potatoes and the women becoming political figures.

...

Go-Girl-ism And Male Bashing

If you grew up watching TV in the 1990s, there is no way you escaped seeing at least a few episodes of Sailor Moon. It redefined the “magical girl” genre in its native Japan and its overseas influence has shown up in girl-power shows like The Powerpuff Girls and is the definition of a feminist anime. Haruka and Michiru, the series’ Sailor Uranus and Neptune, were a lesbian couple who helped girls around the world come to terms with their sexuality. The series also makes a point of commenting on how the less traditionally feminine girls have trouble coping with gender roles, like how Makoto learned to cook because she was teased for being a tomboy.

...

The “girl power” concept is counter productive, but unfortunately it’s an inescapable void of entertainment, Charlies Angles, Steven Universe (where the male character is a boy who learns from women), Taylor Swift videos, etc. Australia’s national women’s soccer team the Matildas lose 7-0 to an under FIFTEENS boys’ side, we know that story.

I decided to look up on the internet for further research. Apparently many men have the same opinion. As I’ve read on an MGTOW (anti-feminist, red pill) site:

" “…my friend’s been watching this anime called great teacher onizuka and it makes me fucking cringe. The women in that anime do terrible things to the main character. for instance, there’s a girl who lures him into a laundry mat promising sexual favors, but instead, she takes off her clothes, takes his shirt, puts in on, tears it up a bit, and makes him wear all these kinky things only to scream and call for the police claiming sexual assault. The teacher eventually just acts like it wasn’t a big deal. Also, there’s an episode where a female student of his runs into a building she knows is going to be bombed because she wanted to save a fucking piano.

“…today i witnessed something really disgusting in that anime. The students are on a field trip to a tropical island and one of the boys is kidnapped by three other female students. He’s a small, submissive type so he doesn’t fight back. They tie him up and blind fold him before leading him deep into the jungle. Basically, the leader of the three females wanted to leave him there to die because she hated how much of a loser/crybaby he is. She expressed disdain for how he just listened to whatever people told him to do (sounds familiar). Eventually, the girls realize they’re lost and start blaming the boy for everything. They tell him to man up and get them out of the situation and when he starts to take authority by telling them to remain calm… “"

...

Male disposability in anime was the right word I was looking for. Naruto has plenty of scenes where he is beaten up by women. Not to forget, where I thought Gintama would be free of male bashing, where Shimura Tae, a smiley woman constantly beats up a ‘hairy’ man – simply for asking her out.

Is this supposed to be comedy?

There’s plenty of hentai anime, like Girls Bravo for example, a blue haired boy who is mocked for being short by his female school mates, he is bullied to the point where he’s even ‘allergic’ to women. (Imagine an anime where a girl was treated like trash because she was fat). In one scene of the first episode, the boy accident walks into the bathroom where his female neighbour was taking a shower. She screams and throws a tantrum, she brutally beats him up, where his nose begins to bleed, until he falls into a tub, where he is eventually woken up in a planet where there are only women, however, since he was the only male on the planet, he is sexually harassed constantly through out the episodes and women molest him.

Being an Hentai (porn/pervert/sexual) anime, aimed for men, abusing boys seems to be normalized. In most households of Japan, women control all the finances. I wonder if Japanese men get domestically violated by women the same way as in anime.

Low Birth Rates In Japan

...

Feminization of men is also an issue, perhaps the decline in population is simply because of this hidden feminism in Japan. In Btoom!, a hunger games styled anime, Himiko always carries a stun gun whenever she goes because she is afraid of being touched by men. Her fear of men stems her past experiences with men who attempted to rape her. Her trauma is so severe that she announces to Ryota that every man on the island is her enemy. On two separate occasions when she is about to lose to a man, who is usually attempting to sexually assault her, she was willing to kill herself along with the enemy using a bomb. Almost every man in the anime attempts to assault her. The male protagonist of the story is a ‘wussy’ who simply allows her to treat him with distaste (yet another stereotypical main male character in anime).

While I was on my final anime, which I watched for research, Mirai Nikki, the female character Yuno will resort to cruel and usually violent methods, most of the time coming out of nowhere, that generally end in bloody deaths of anyone who tries to get in the path of the boy she likes, even if they are his close relatives, effectively making her a “Yandere“. The young girl seems to be having the “othello syndrome”, a type of delusional jealousy, marked by suspecting a faithful partner of infidelity, with accompanying jealousy, attempts at monitoring and control, and even violence. Many men often suffer when their wives who are extremely jealous, where as this “yandere” genre is particular that of a girl who stalks her lover, keeps him away from everyone he loves simply because she wants him as her property.

...

I also stumbled upon an incomplete game, about a playable Yandere girl, which had many references to Mirai Nikki, on starting the game I had a picture on what it was about. Your character is simply an emotionless teenage girl who harbors feelings for a guy who doesn’t even know she exists. Your mission is to stalk him, and try to eliminate “rivals”, so that she has him for herself. By eliminate meaning, to kill. The game would even include your crush’s sister, who has a chance of being a rival. (Think of a scenario where a boy would be stalking a girl, taking her belongings, sniffing or licking them to gain arousal, where he tries to keep her friends away from her, there would be a different response)

In the basement of the game, one would come across tape recording, when played, it reveals that your character’s mother (I assume) murdered everyone close to her crush, and tied him down onto a chair, forcing him to give in to her requests.

...

Recently, I was informed that the developing team had added a tsundere character and a pedophile teacher into the game, who would seduce him perhaps, I don’t feel the need to talk anymore about it.

A pedophilic female teacher who preys on a teenage boy’s sexuality. There’s plenty of harem (a anime with one guy and many female characters) where he is eventually mistreated by his female counterparts. Even many of Hayao Miyazaki’s films are centered on young “strong empowered” girls. When asked about it, he said:

"“When we compare a man in action and a girl in action, I feel girls are more gallant. If a boy is walking with a long stride, I don’t think anything particular, but if a girl is walking gallantly, I feel ‘that’s cool’. Maybe that’s because I’m a man, and women may think it’s cool when they see a young man striding. At first, I thought ‘this is no longer the era of men‘.But after ten years, I grew tired of saying that. I just say ‘cause I like women’. They are more reality.”"

All these point out why there are sites entirely dedicated to feminism in anime.

Yesterday, I decided to get in touch with my friend, to ask him about his life and job. He’s a stereotypical “nice guy” who remains friend zoned. He lets women pinch his cheeks and push him, when he just laughs it off. If a woman does something unfair to him, he simply sweeps it under the rug.

“I’m not interested in dating currently” he said when I asked him if he had a girlfriend. Either anime had terrorized him to protecting his virginity, or he’s simply happy being treated like a loser in a tsundere anime by his female co-workers, just like the great teacher Onizuka.

Show post
Dr Harry Longabaugh #sexist returnofkings.com

The Truth About Women In STEM

Over the weekend, I was treated to some truly hearty laughs when a group of computer programmers posted on GitHub the specifications of a feminist programming language. (It has since been removed and posted to bitbucket.) As a professional software developer and recreational critic of Social Justice Warriors, this article felt tailor-made to my interests. If either of those descriptions applies to you, feel free to check out the link above, it’s worth it.

“I wonder how long it would take an offended “feminist” to overreact to this article?” I thought. Turns out, not so long, as a feminist coder posted her response almost on cue, complete with “trigger warnings”, using the original post as 75% of her article content, the whole nine yards (check it out here).

Naturally, I was reminded about the infamous Adria Richards “Donglegate” incident, which has become somewhat legendary in the tech world, where a female employee of Sendgrid got two men fired because she overheard them making a joke about “dongles” in private at a conference. I couldn’t help but to think of Beavis and Butthead snickering and saying “huh huh, huh huh, she said dongles”. Crude? Maybe. Reason to lose employment? Absolutely not. And yet when “Donglegate” was all said and done, and Adria Richards got fired because sweet justice exists, the feminists and social justice warriors got the last laugh. For weeks, I saw Adria Richards on TV, playing the victim, distorting the story so hard that I was reminded of a famous Simpsons episode I saw on TV.

That was the Adria Richards coverage in a nutshell, and to someone who was not as invested in the story as I was (which is roughly 99% of people) it seems like another chapter in the long continuing narrative of “The evil ‘bro-grammer boys club of STEM fields that hates women and wants to make their life a living hell’”.

This narrative has always pissed me off because I can tell you firsthand that it is not true. In fact, in just about every aspect it has been the opposite. High schools, universities and employers try to fight so hard against the “boys club” stereotype that they end up giving women some rather unfair advantages. How do I know this? I graduated from one of the top science and engineering schools in the country.
College Years

When I was a college freshman in the Computer Science program, I immediately noticed that there were a lot more men than women. No biggie, people do what they like. I didn’t think much of it. It was widely accepted that computer science was one of the tougher majors in our university and students would routinely change majors when they started being overwhelmed by the incredibly demanding course load.

How demanding? During sophomore year my roommate and I pulled so many all-nighters that we inadvertently learned the rules of cricket (the cricket world championships were broadcast from halfway around the world, live, in the middle of the night, and it made for better background TV than infomercials.)

I first realized something was wrong when I got into trouble with the housing department of our school. My crime? Being a nerd hitting on the hottest girl in the dorms next to ours. Apparently, this was labelled as harassing behavior, and the only thing that saved me from being kicked out of on-campus housing was a friend of mine, who was an RA and member of some housing committees, vouching for me and promising everyone there that he would remedy the problem in private. Once again, I didn’t think much of it, we talked it out, and I was actually believing that what I did was wrong. But that’s a story for another time.

Some time later, I saw a student giving a tour to some high school kids, but then I noticed that the high schoolers were all girls, almost all of them wearing matching t-shirts. This was our state’s program to get more girls interested in science and math. Boy interested in science and math? You’re on your own there, buddy. The next year, it was touted as a success—many more girls enrolled in our schools science and math programs than they ever have. Except the numbers were still overwhelmingly male, I think the overall ratio moved by half a percent. I didn’t think much of it then.

As I progressed through my classes, I would see the same faces over and over again. By your senior year you will probably be in at least 1 group project, study group or circle with about 25% of your major by incoming class year. And while there were some brilliant, exceptionally bright and hard-working women, they were outnumbered by women who took the easiest duties in group projects and just coasted. How some of these girls ended up in Junior and Senior Level computer science classes at my school was a miracle. There were numerous instances where you would have to explain basic concepts to them. It blew my mind. And we encouraged them! We either took the harder group project roles because we did not want a bad grade, or we acted as complete supplicating chumps and ended up doing about 80% of these girls homework assignments thinking it would win us favors (it didn’t).

It’s not like the school had a shortage of resources to help them. Quite the opposite. There were several women’s organizations to help ensure the success of these ladies by helping them with tutoring, counseling, etc, for free. But these resources were often ignored in favor of the easy group projects and thirsty men.

There was a computer lab that stayed open all night. There were only 1-2 girls there pulling all-nighters at a time. But lots of dudes. Lots and lots of dudes. Because of the course load, people were dropping out left and right, but I can only recall one instance of a girl I knew dropping out, compared to the dozens of guys I knew.

And then came the job fairs. Because of my school’s prestige and reputation, many prominent companies and organizations recruited from our school. And you can guess what happened. All of the girls that coasted, all of the girls that cheated, “short cut” and gilded their way through college, ALL, without any exception, got job offers at these prestigious companies with those sweet high STEM salaries. I have known several guys that could not find work in their field while grinding hard for up to a year on the same exact prestigious degree. This was demoralizing. But, you know, male privilege.
More Examples.

“But maybe you’re just nitpicking and biased?” OK then, I will give you more examples from outside of my college career.

One of my friend’s girlfriend, on the surface, has a STEM career (computer software to be exact). If you google her name you will find several articles about her, talking about the challenges, hardships, and all the other bla bla bla that women face in computer science. The thing is, I am pretty sure this girl has never written a single line of code. And no, my friend is not dating Adria Richards. Companies are so desperate to employ and tout women, to be seen as that “progressive” company, that many create non-technical positions to fill that role, and then pat themselves on the back for it.

Another example: an ex-girlfriend, a hard science PhD, would routinely complain about the sexism at her job. As a caring and doting boyfriend, of course I took those things seriously, until I realized that the issues were not sexist – they were with her work. When you’re doing research-based academic work that kind of thing tends to happen. You are constantly under scrutiny, your bosses are people that haven’t been outside of academia for any parts of their lives, you get paid shit money, and it’s generally an unfriendly and unwelcoming environment. I realized this when I met more PhDs, male and female, from various fields. All of them had the same story. This girl mistook difficulty for sexism. Getting a PhD is so hard that there is a popular niche comic describing the rigors of professional academia (PhD Comics). Their humor won’t resonate with everyone, but every single PhD I know loves it.

So yes, STEM is indeed easier for women. Everyone wants then to succeed. Everyone needs them to succeed. No matter what the cost.

But you know who I respect the most? The grinders. The girls that work hard, the girls that learn, the girls that try to make a difference in the world on the same playing field as boys. Because, in reality, there is no sexism in science. In fact, there is no “-ism” in science. It’s a meritocracy, with knowledge and achievement as the main focus. And I can respect that.

This is exactly why the “bro” culture will persist. Science can not be held to the same politically correct standards as plain old office work. Because if I’m working with you at 4 am, fueled by pizza, mountain dew and cricket matches on TV, no matter who you are, man or woman, you’re gonna be my bro. Because that’s the only way anything will get done.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

“My sexual promiscuity is more important than a dirty little baby’s life.”

Hands off my uterus! Who wants that barren piece of anatomy, anyway baby?

How many methods of contraception do women have today? There is a veritable cornucopia of methods available to women to prevent pregnancy from happening in the first place. But, rather than taking responsibility and actually using one of the dozen and a half methods below, feminists refuse to show the world how Strong and Independent™ they really are by preventing conception and instead opting to fight to the death for the right to kill their unborn children in utero.

Feminists, why not try one of these methods rather than sucking children out of the womb through a tube as is the case in a first trimester abortion, or dismembering them and crushing their skulls as is the case in a second and third trimester abortion?

Abstinence
Birth Control Sponge (Today Sponge)
Birth Control Patch
Birth Control Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing)
Birth Control Pills
Birth Control Shot (Depo-Provera)
Birth Control Implant (Implanon and Nexplanon)
Female Condom
Cervical Cap (FemCap)
Outercourse
Diaphragm
Fertility Awareness-Based Methods (FAMs)
Pull Out Method (Withdrawal)
Morning-After Pill (Emergency Contraception)
Condom
Spermicide
Sterilization for Women (Tubal Sterilization)
IUD

How sadistic are you bitches anyway, to push for abortion rather than personal responsibility, and valuing life rather than presiding over the death of your culture at the hands of your own selfishness?

Show post
Samson #fundie returnofkings.com

I'm always reminded of the scene from the first Taken movie, when he's watching a bunch of assholes bid on his daughter. If I remember correctly, she went for double what all the other girls did simply because she was still a virgin. If disgusting, lowlife, piece of shit sex traffickers and old, fat, perverted pedophiles can recognize a woman's virginity as making her more valuable (even if it is from a financial perspective), then why can't Western women? So there you have it: even degenerate pedophiles and scumbag sex traffickers have more sense than feminists.

Show post
Samson #fundie returnofkings.com

Bravo Michael, excellent article. Tip of the cap as well to Mr. and Mrs. Duggar. I read that either he or his wife chaperone all of their daughters' dates to ensure that their chastity stays intact. Of course the feminists mocked them and said it was "ridiculous" and "creepy", but I assume they're just mad because their vaginas have more mileage on them than a '72 Pinto whereas his daughters' are still factory fresh. They can't seem to grasp the simple fact that a woman's virginity is her greatest asset and the greatest gift she can give her husband, and no matter how much you call yourself a "Born-Again Virgin" on your wedding day by not fucking your fiance in the six months leading up to your marriage, that white dress doesn't make you any less damaged goods.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

(part of an article titled "What The Anti-Trump Feminist March On Washington Really Means")

Here’s what feminists are really saying when we read through the lines.

“I’m a selfish bitch.”

What does Charlize Theron have to be upset about? Being worth $110 million for playing pretend for a living just isn’t enough?

What more do Anglo women possibly want? They already spend 90% more money than they earn in the economy. They gobble up 66% of public spending from the welfare state while men pay 75% of the taxes to support this gynocentric system. Women hypocritically make up 80% of all spending decisions in the materialistic, extremely wasteful and environmentally destructive economy they later complain about as not being “green” enough.

They then hypocritically say they Don’t Need a Man™ while statistics prove them dead wrong. Without men for the government to rob women would be up the creek without a paddle.

What’s most satisfying about the Daily Mail article was reading the “Best rated” comments below the article. Nobody is buying the propaganda establishment media is crapping out anymore. User Right Auntie wrote:

I’m not quite sure what they are protesting. Women in America can drive a car, get an education, get a mortgage and purchase a home. They can be doctors, lawyers, architects, engineers. They can be ministers or atheists. They can have children without men. They can speak their minds. I’m positive that they can still do these things now that Trump is president. This just looks like a giant hissy fit because their candidate lost. Being a sore loser is never a good thing.

Indeed, what are these women protesting? They live such decadent lives they’re literally killing the goose that lays the golden egg as the future belongs to those whose children will be in it, and the men who made their exorbitant, selfish existence possible are either breeding with other ethnic groups or becoming genetic dead ends.

Show post
Corey Savage #fundie returnofkings.com

(part of an article titled "The 5 Biggest Heroes of 2016")

Last, we have Vladmir Putin who has been leading the Russian nation against the globalists and the cancerous Western influence that is wrecking the world. Like the other men listed here, Putin has been on the receiving end of relentless media attack to defame him as a corrupt and tyrannical ruler and even a war criminal. He has become the boogie man in the West used to blame everything from the US election results to the war deaths in Syria, as well as serving as an excuse for NATO to expand to the East even when it is the US that is to be blamed for re-starting the Cold War.

Putin’s role in making Russia the main resisting force against the globalists and a stabilizing influence in the world is wholly unappreciated. It was Putin who stepped in to stop the West from completely destroying Syria as they had done with Libya, it was with the help of Russian airforce that the Syrian armed forces were able to achieve the victory they did this year, it was Putin who maintained his cool and tamed Turkey so that the two countries could work together even after Turkey downed one of its aircraft. You can tell just how much the world is stacked up against Putin and Russia by how the Western media has been silent on Russia’s humanitarian aid to Syria and the death of Russian paramedics in the hands of the “moderate” rebels even as the West lies and sheds crocodile tears about the situation in Aleppo.

Some people still hate Putin because they see him as the enemy of America and a threat to the West, but these people need to realize that it was not Putin’s decision to stir conflicts. He’s merely been reacting to the West’s efforts to undermine Russia. It is the US and its allies that chose to be Russia’s enemy, not the other way around. And if the West continues to expand its globalist influence around the world, Putin’s Russia will continue to fight back against it.

Closing Words

We have heroes not just so that they may lead us, but so that we be inspired by them. We shouldn’t merely worship great men, but strive to be one ourselves. Because no matter how great, an individual man by himself cannot change the world. All the men above did not act alone but had others who followed their lead. If you are truly interested in changing the world, you must become one yourself.

Show post
John Doe #fundie returnofkings.com

10 Reasons Why Foreign Women Are Better Than American Women

1. American women have unreasonable standards.

They expect you to have a big house in the suburbs and a salary of at least 150,000 dollars from a high status job (e.g. doctor, lawyer, CEO). Foreign women on the other hand, are content with a man, as long as he is a nice person and takes care of her and the family sufficiently.

2. American women have the highest obesity rate out of any other women worldwide.

Look at your average American woman nowadays— she is fat and looks like a hog. American women lose their beauty by age 30 and become very ugly, wrinkled, and fat. Foreign women, on the other hand, take care of themselves, exercise, and generally have very sexy bodies. Foreign women continue to be beautiful and attractive into their 40s, because foreign women take care of themselves and have a much healthier diet than American women.

3. American women see nothing wrong with cheating on her man.

Just look at the culture of America today. Women are glorified for slutty behavior. Foreign women, on the other hand, have not been raised to act like whores. They generally are far more chaste and loyal than the vast majority of American women. This is no doubt due to the more traditional cultures that non-Western countries have.

4. America has the highest rate of divorce in the world.

Considering that 90 percent of divorces are initiated by women, the vast majority of divorces are the woman choosing to leave the man. American women are divorce happy, and will divorce their husbands over extremely trivial reasons. The divorce system in America is also extremely biased in women’s favor, and many women will divorce their husbands simply to “cash out” (to take all of the man’s money and assets). Foreign women, on the other hand, have a much more loyal mindset to their men and won’t just abandon their husband because she read the latest chick book like Eat Pray Love and decides she “needs to find herself.”

5. American women have the worst attitudes in the world.

Pretty much every negative quality you can think of, American women embody it—selfishness, immaturity, narcissism, fake personalities, arrogance, and anger. In short, American women are a real pain in the ass to be around. This is just one of the reasons why I chose to cut all contact and friendship with American women and only maintain friendship with non-American women. Foreign women, on the other hand, are generally pleasant people to be around. They don’t have the massive chip on their shoulders like American women do, and are much more down to earth, humble, and genuine.

6. American women have no sense of humor.

If you tell a joke in front of an American woman, and it is even slightly politically incorrect, it can literally cost you your job. American women tend to be extremely vindictive and they get offended over the slightest things. Foreign women, on the other hand, are much more relaxed and not as psychotic as American women. Even if they do find something offensive, they will generally overlook it and not create a scene. This is because foreign women are not as insecure as American women and don’t feel the need to constantly prove themselves.

7. American women don’t know how to cook.

It’s like American women barely even know how to boil water. A home cooked meal to an American woman means boxed Mac N Cheese or Ramen Noodles. Foreign women, on the other hand, know how to cook complex multi-course dishes. The complexity of Indian cooking or Chinese cooking is something that would take an American woman years to master.

8. American women are more brainwashed by feminism than any other country on earth.

Feminism in America has transformed into a a man-hating movement that is reflected in the attitudes of American women. According to an American woman, “independence” is equal to acting like a spoiled, loud mouthed brat. Foreign women, on the other hand, may support feminism but they have a much more realistic view of what feminism means—equality. Feminism to a foreign woman means simply being treated with respect, instead of wanting to dominate the man, like American women.

9. American women have the highest rate of mental illness by far than any other women on earth.

Let’s face it—American women are pretty screwed up as a whole. They are emotionally unstable, mentally unstable, and suffer from delusions and are out of touch with reality. An American woman is living in her own movie, with herself as the star. And this narcissism is reflected in their mental health, as well. Foreign women, on the other hand, are very mentally stable, and aren’t prone to psychotic outbursts like American women are. Foreign women are much more down to earth and do not suffer from narcissistic delusions of grandeur as a result.

10. American women are superficial and fake.

They expect their men to also be superficial and fake. You have to put on a false image and be someone who you are not just to be considered as acceptable in America. Dealing with American women is exhaustive because of the amount of games you have to play.
Foreign women, on the other hand, are genuinely warm-hearted people and you can just be yourself around them. You don’t have to wear a mask or be a fake person in order to get a foreign woman to like you. That, in the end, is probably one of the best things about foreign women. You can relax and just be yourself and have a genuine relationship with a foreign woman.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

What The Anti-Trump Feminist March On Washington Really Means
Cutting Through The Hamster Rationalizations With The Realtalk Shiv


Anxious to show the deplorables they still have balls and still cling to bitter Penis Envy, feminists were out in force in Washington over the weekend with their Starbucks lattes in hand. Establishment media was all over the event like a fatass, glouring feminist at an all you can eat buffet. Daily Mail had such a lengthy article about the “Women’s March on Washington” one might think they were covering a huge story like extraterrestrial life being discovered, when in reality all the story involved was a regurgitation of the same male-hating, anti-children, anti-family bile feminists have been spewing for half a century.

Unfortunately for them, feminists haven’t realized playing the victim card doesn’t work anymore. Anglo women are already the most coddled, pampered, and spoiled individuals on this planet, and the best they can do is fight for the right to kill their children in utero? What the hell? When one sees a spectacle like this, replete with such cultural pirates as Michael Moore, Cher, Charlize Theron, some washed up actress named Jessica Chastain and an aging Ashley Judd preaching the matriarchal evangel, it’s easy to see why white America is demographically dead and disappearing.

Incidentally, this is the insanity I gladly left behind for “fertile” and feminine shores elsewhere.

The red pill man knows never to believe anything women say. One of the most important skills men can learn in their dealings with dissimulating females is to watch what they do instead. Here’s a convenient translation guide to understand what the statistically sterile, solipsistic androgynes really mean when they peer into the camera lenses at the event and seek the attention and sympathy of weak White Knights and sleeping Beta males. But as we all know, women fuck bad boys and only seek to clean out good guys’ wallets.

Anyway, on to the list. Here’s what feminists are really saying when we read through the lines.

[wall of text commences, involving abortion, sexism and NWO conspiracy theories]

Show post
André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

And here is the major fault line. The leftists deny or value—they often go from the former to the latter—the replacement of native European population, the aggressive and tribalistic stance of “minority groups” towards the silent majority, the forced inclusion of individuals into sick identity politics games, the perpetual hostility and institutionalized prejudice against whites and males… Either the leftists utterly deny what we are aware of, for example when they say that whites are not under replacement, or they demonize it as a remnant of some “privilege” or “prejudice.”

All their talk about “oppressed minorities” dissimulates the very real disenfranchisement of the white majority, of non-white meritorious and integrated Westerners, and serves to deny us from our rights to public empathy, to dignity, or to even basically survive in a world of our own. They work on language and representations because their job consists in manipulating these, thus brainwashing us into seeing the world through their lenses and denying the legitimacy of any other vision.

The importance of shared awareness explains why we united on the Internet. A lot of us were closet nationalists years ago, and still are. We could not, and often still cannot, be nationalists in public, or we would have been excluded from normal social life by the local leftists and cowards. Leftist hegemony was and is still real in the mainstream. You know hegemony when you see it and spend countless hours thinking about how you can thrive even when living under it.

In the mid-2000, I found out about the information website [i]Fdesouche[/i] (“Native French”) quote. By the standards of today, this news aggregator seems hardly interesting: it mostly collates pieces written by others. But then, it was fantastic. Here I could recognize what I already felt about the world—that something was wrong with all these non-whites thugs holding the streets and getting lavish promotion when they bragged about it. It was all concentrated before my eyes, and others were talking about what they went through daily as well. At least, others felt and saw the same as I did! I was not crazy, not bound to a life of unauthenticity or forlorn solitude among the almighty left. We were assembling. And we were on the Internet.

As most of us found ourselves under attack from non-native Frenchmen, and knowing intuitively that identity goes deeper than the fleeting winds today called culture, we often despised immigration in general. But eventually things changed, thanks to Alain Soral, mostly, who emphasized how racial struggle was leading to sterile battles among disenfranchised people while letting the truly powerful off the hook. Mathias Cardet, a black journalist who worked with Soral, showed how gangsta-rap culture was injected and nurtured among non-whites by powerful interests.

After all, one can be black or Arab and wanting to live in peace as a free individual, not as an identity politics pawn who spends his life attacking another social category.

Being pro-white, pro-masculinity and pro-tradition does not require being white: I often felt closer from Muslims with good intentions, i.e. Muslims who were genuine believers and not rancorous people using Islam as a mask for anti-white tribalism, than from white liberals. The Muslims would not share my blood, but they would share some of my awareness and yearning for Tradition, two things that white liberals eagerly reject.

The Internet is immaterial. It is, basically, a network where information flows. Awareness, and the will to spread it, are immaterial as well. This is why we could meet and act on the Internet. After all, the Alt Right and manosphere have been sharing ideas, media contents, memes, advises—and only later proceeded to meetups, panicking the totalitarian liberals in the process.

Trump’s victory is a major one. Regardless of what The Donald will actually do, it is an event of considerable historical magnitude. But it is only the beginning—make no mistake about that. The libtards’ establishment still holds loads of money, of institutions, of cultural territory. It has started to crumble and leak, yet it is still there.

Major battles are waiting ahead. We have to further our awareness, make thorough research on every aspect of leftism, and develop more proper cultural references.

Always remember the libtards never cared one second about us. They would have let us die off, alone, poor, childless, traumatized and demonized, had we not chosen to follow the path of the red pill.

America is a first-tier power, but it is still a battlefield among others. Wherever we are, it is time to thicken our mutual relationships and cooperate more closely. It is a battle, not between nationals and foreigners, but between workers and parasites, between those who feel the void and wrongness in the rotten core of postmodernity and those who dwell in the last liberal trend, between the realists who want freedom and responsibility in a healthy world of values and cultures against those who ravel in blue pill, media bullshit, complacency, parasitism and cucking for the empire of nothing.

We are the future. It doesn’t matter where we are. We are those with true awareness, those with genuine and healthy values, those who struggled to hone their abilities, and most importantly those who actually deserve to inherit the Western world. So, save it and conquer it, country after country, institution after institution, outlet after outlet—or there will be nothing left.

Show post
André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

image

The 9th of November 2016 was a great day. We will remember it as well as our parents remember the first moon landing in July 1969 or the fall of the Berlin wall. Liberal mainstream media—almost a pleonasm—are either stunned or agitating. Some of these crybullies clamour to themselves how “fearful” they are, lament on the “destruction of the West”—a curious expression as it seldom appears under leftist pens—or have difficulties to acknowledge that the man they have despised and defamed every day for months will be the 45th President of the United States.

Outside the US, The Donald’s victory is creating waves, too. So many liberals allegedly connected to the Canadian Immigration website to crash it. In France, the bourgeois bohemians who work in the media, academia and everything that constitutes the big left establishment do the same posturing than their American counterparts, whereas the petits blancs (impoverished, disenfranchised whites) and local “righters” rejoice.

In Brazil, where your humble servant lives, the official media is making some tedious comments that deliver a flabby criticism. Local leftist talking heads condemn the “white protestants” and reality shows in a very cliché posturing that mixes anti-white prejudice with a critique of capitalism, whereas some new traditionalists, among whom some have been avid readers and makers of Alt-Right content, are grateful.

This is our victory.

A pro-Pepe Facebook group has had a substantive discussion about where a red-pilled foreigner considering moving to the US after the Donald won should go. To make a long story short, some have advised potential newcomers to go live in the Midwest, in Texas as long as one stays away from Houston or Dallas, in Wyoming for the gun rights, in Pennsylvania excluding Philadelphia and the urban areas, close to the Appalachian mountains if one enjoys outdoors, while staying away from Illinois. Most of those who participated were whites, but I have spotted some Latino and Arab names. Some made jokes on these names but no fuss.

And here the following question arises. What defines us? Liberals have been shrieking about “xenophobia” or “racism” all the time. Yet, strictly national boundaries are much less relevant than before, even for us, even when we all rejoiced about Trump’s promise to make a wall. All over the world we are rejoicing around the GOP candidate’s victory.

American “Trumpists” undoubtedly feel closer to non-Americans who have been dissenting from the NWO on the Internet and wanted the Donald to pass than to American libtards. A lot of us are OK with having non-whites around: we don’t pander to arrogant, aggressive anti-whites, but that does not mean we would have to be “racists” as the liberal caricature wants us to be. To cut in more personally, I know of no genuine red-pilled or Alt-Righter who would have rejected me as a frog, although I remember some stars and stripes cucks blaming me for daring to speak about American politics without owning a US passport.

So, once again, what defines us? Why are we a “we”? Race plays a role for sure. We struggle to keep the white people from getting dissolved into the acid bath of wide-scale miscegenation and dispossession. We want a right to solidarity based at least partly on race, i.e. on lineage and identity, just like all the pseudo-minority groups out there. We fight the double standard that allows them to be communitarian, tribalistic, nepotistic, without being ever responsible of what they do, whereas we are supposed to keep our heads down and be taught everything by liberal social engineers in a world where we would have no freedom, no future, no dignity.

But even then, there have been Blacks, Latinos, and many women who participated into bringing The Donald to the White House. I have a race-mixed friend who supported Trump all along. This is not to say “I’m not a racist!,” afraid cuckservative-style, but to show there are some and we know it firsthand.

It is no mystery why most of us are white: we are united around a civilization that was primarily built by people of European descent. But there is more, too.

And this “more” that, I think, defines and binds us; this “more” is shared awareness.

We are all aware, broadly speaking, of the same phenomena and trends. We have witnessed the break-up of families and harmonious relationships between men and women. We have been faced with the untold prohibition to make the least critic of feminism, “minority groups” aggressive identitarianism, and with the pervasive omnipresence of these leftist norms commonly referred to as political correctness. We have seen neoliberalism allowing a handful of careless, irresponsible assholes sending the jobs overseas, importing third-world immigration, then force us into a life of chronic unemployment or endless struggles against other low-wage individuals for a small place under the sun.

We saw how conservatism was a sham that never faced the genuine problems. We witnessed societies crumble, conflictual “minoritarian” group identities being crafted by the likes of Soros, and the meritorious worker or professional—whatever his race—getting exploited to the benefit of the lower and upper parasites. We saw the liberal establishment using various social categories like pawns to create horizontal struggles and depopulation.

Of course, some disagreements can be found on this or that particular issue, but we all see the same devastated landscape in lieu of the brilliant civilization the West once was.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

With the help from MediaWiki expert Raymond Kertezc, I have launched Kings Wikis, a wiki centered around the themes of masculinity and nationalism. After a one-month beta run, we are now ready for a wider launch with over 300 articles already published. Here are the most developed articles we currently have:

Neomasculinity
Female Body Types
R/K Selection Theory
#NoHymenNoDiamond
Cockblocking
Female hair length
Dark triad
Secret Internet Fatty

For a list of all articles, click here.

The goal with Kings Wiki is to have a wiki resource that presents truthful information from a masculine viewpoint. Instead of competing with Wikipedia, Kings Wiki will focus on subjects that are most relevant to our sphere. When these subjects are Googled, the public will be able to easily find our take, especially since Google ranks wikis very highly in their results. I view Kings Wiki as a long-term project to build influence. While it’s not an active destination like ROK, it does have new daily content that will make it worth frequent visits.

...

Of course a wiki is not possible without users who edit it, so I encourage you to participate in the project by editing an existing page from clicking the “edit” button or creating your own page from simply typing a phrase in the search box and then clicking the red create link. Here is a wiki editing guide to get you started. You can also check out the forum thread on the wiki to participate further. If you create a page, drop the link in the comments so we can take a look.

Show post
Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

3 Reasons Why You Should Apply For A Job In The Trump Administration

With the election over and done with, America is turning its attention to the transition from President Obama to President Trump. In barely two months, the Donald will take office, ejecting the Democrats’ coterie of corrupt courtiers and beginning his mission to right America’s wrongs. But President Trump can’t do it alone: he needs good, talented people to work under him and carry out the hard work of making America great again.

That’s where you come in.

The Trump administration is now soliciting people to apply for jobs for when the man himself takes office in January. We are officially calling on all ready and able Return Of Kings readers to submit their applications and take up any job offers. Here’s why you should consider a job in President Trump’s administration (beyond obvious reasons such as money and prestige)…

1. It’ll help keep President Trump accountable

While the media is lying about Trump reneging on his campaign promises, it’s still a good idea to give the man more reasons to keep his word. By staffing his administration with committed nationalists, we’ll make it easier for President Trump to fulfill his political program, as well as make it more difficult for him to go back on his promises. Remember, it was rank-and-file FBI agents who forced James Comey to reopen the investigation into Hillary Clinton; a leader needs loyal men in order to carry out his agenda.

2. You’ll be able to make history

Given the momentous task of rebuilding America after eight years of Obama’s perfidy and failure, you almost have a civic duty to help President Trump in his mission. Expecting America to become great again all on its own is delusional; we need to do our part to restore this nation’s glory. By working with the Trump administration, you’ll have a direct role in reshaping America for years—possibly decades—to come.

3. You’ll help trigger the left

Despite their massive losses in the election—beyond Hillary Clinton’s defeat, the Democrats now control only a handful of state governments and failed to dent the GOP’s Congressional majority—the leftist mainstream media is trying to order Trump around and persuade him to staff his administration with the same flacks who filled Bush’s and Obama’s. Right now, they’re freaking out over [i]Breitbart[/i] executive chairman Stephen Bannon being appointed as Trump’s chief strategist.

By joining the Trump administration, you’ll have a hand in helping trigger the left into conniption fits and spasms of impotence. Nothing horrifies them more than losing access to the levers of power, which they’ve controlled for decades. Watching leftists squirm and cry is one of the biggest fringe benefits of Trump’s victory, and we need to keep the triggering up for years to come.

If you think you have the job skills, Return Of Kings highly recommends you apply for a job in Trump’s administration. President Trump may have started the fire, but it’s our job to help the fire rise.

Show post
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.

Show post
Jon Anthony #fundie returnofkings.com

1. Dismantle The Mainstream Media

As more and more of us start to wake up, the media will begin to sense this—in fact, they already have. Have you wondered why they’ve started to cover anti-Hillary stories? It’s because they realize that they’re losing credibility.

The mainstream media is very well aware that they’re losing their chokehold on the American public’s mind, so in a last ditch effort, they’re trying to seem unbiased. Do not buy into their lies—it’s all a giant farce; an attempt to regain their former credibility.

Over the next four years, it will be extremely important to start dismantling these outlets. It’s time to call them out for what they are. Start sharing alt-right stories on Facebook and Twitter, get our message out there. Don’t watch any mainstream media. Don’t buy mainstream magazines, don’t watch their news shows, hell, don’t even pay for cable. Do everything you can to bleed their pockets dry.

As more and more money moves away from the mainstream media, it will naturally move towards alternative news sources—sites like Return Of Kings, Info Wars, Matt Forney, and Danger and Play will become the new media.

Don’t expect this to happen at first, however. In one final cry, before its gory death, the media will proclaim that there is a new “racist, xenophobic” enemy that helped Donald get into office: the alt-right. Expect them to demonize us. Expect them to lie about us, to scream and shout, and to protest. This is fine, however—for we are anti-fragile. The alt-right is in a very unique position.

Any and all hatred towards the alt-right will be a net win for us. Why? It’s simple: any publicity is good publicity. A single mention of an alternative news site by the MSM can, and often does, net us tens of thousands of new viewers. In other words: if they ignore us, we continue to grow in power. If they attack us, we grow even faster. They can’t win.

2. Drain The Swamp

Everything that we’ve done up to this point to get Donald in office will be completely pointless if we don’t drain the swamp. This is our one chance—we have four years to do this.

In order for us to bring about permanent change in this country, we need to hold the cucks and libtards accountable for their actions. Anyone who pushed the pro-Islam agenda, rape culture, or feminazi philosophy must be called out for the traitors that they are.

The elites, the corrupt bankers, and the globalists must all be brought to light. In order for us to bring about true change, and to prevent a globalist dictatorship from happening in the near future, we must ensure that at least 25% of Americans are aware of the elites’ “conspiracy” by the next election.

This is a grass roots movement, and it is growing in power—but we must take away power from those who tried so hard to fight us. Now is the time to cause a ruckus and email your representatives. Now is the time to demand Hillary be thrown in prison. Every single person involved in Hillary Clinton’s private email server must be thrown in jail. Pedophiles and Satanists such as Anthony Weiner and Marina Abramovic, and traitors such as Huma Abedin and Comey must be thrown in jail for their crimes.

Now is the time to clear out the murky waters—to sift through the dirt and rotten garbage lurking below. I believe, that once all is said and done, America will enter into a new age of prosperity. The patriarchy will return.

3. Normalize Straight Males

For too long have men been oppressed, by the very civilization which we created. We have let the SJW’s and culture warriors back us into a corner, but we’ve finally started to fight back. More and more men, upon being exposed to the manosphere, are starting to wake up and take the red pill. We’re starting to realize, as a nation, that there is no reason to be ashamed of being white or being a man.

Once we start to dismantle the mainstream media and drain the swamp, most of this should happen naturally—it was only through the artificial social engineering that being a white male became a crime.

But, we can’t stop here—it’s time to start slowly red-pilling our blue-pilled friends. The best way to do this, is simply through osmosis. Don’t try to convince them with logic, because they did not arrive at a blue-pilled position through logic. They did so through emotion.

Simply be a beacon of masculinity. Be confident in yourself, be assertive, and don’t cave into ridiculous HR requests or political correctness social pressures. Again, once the mainstream media is dismantled and the manosphere grows in popularity, our movement will gain strength exponentially.

The normalization of males, especially white males, is essential for our culture to continue—the second that we started to become ashamed of our heritage and of our nationality was the second that the cucks started closing in. We cannot give them an inch, or they will take a mile.

This is not to say that our country shouldn’t accept immigrants—IF they go through the legal process. How did it get so far that it became socially unacceptable to shame ILLEGAL immigrants? Again, ILLEGAL immigrants? Like I said, it got this way due to an overwhelming amount of white guilt. Do not be ashamed of your heritage, men.

We have made a gigantic step towards national sovereignty with Donald Trump being elected as president, and we cannot let this victory go in vain. We must push onward and continue to normalize what is NORMAL. Being a straight male, white or note, should be the norm, not being a transgender, green-haired, SJW.

Show post
Jon Anthony #fundie returnofkings.com

Gentlemen, I am filled to the brim with joy. We have successfully thwarted the globalist’s plans to ruin America—we’ve fought against the big banks, we’ve fought against the Satanic pedophile Elites, and we’ve fought against the corrupt mainstream media.

But, the battle is not over yet. We still have much to do if we wish to make America great again. This will not be an easy fight, for we will certainly face much resistance along the way. Expect the cucks and liberals to throw temper tantrums as their safe spaces come tumbling down, expect the mainstream media to demonize the alt-right, and expect the elites to do everything they can to stop us.

They will not stop us, though—no, we are far too powerful. The wheels of truth do in fact turn slowly, but alas, they turn! And they are growing in speed as we blaze towards victory.

[...]

As our grass roots movement picks up more and more steam, I believe that the pressure we create will naturally push judges and lawmakers to change our corrupt legal system.

First things first, we must create laws that treat men and women as they should be treated. Too many laws are skewed in favor of women. Now that women have the right to work, we must remove alimony—it’s ridiculous that men should have to pay $10,000 a month to their ex-wives, because she “got used to” a certain living situation.

We must remove corrupt anti-male divorce laws, ridiculous “hate-speech” laws which infringe on our freedom of speech, and ultimately, SJW “rape” laws. I, along with many other ROK men, have been falsely accused of rape. It’s time to remove all of these ridiculous laws that make it illegal for men to simply talk to women, and that were built into the system by the elites in order to wage war against men.

The law should encourage freedom of speech; the fact that Twitter has not been held accountable for banning Milo Yiannopoulos is absolutely absurd. Information and social media platforms should be held to the same standards that the American people are.

Google needs to stop censoring search results—and if they don’t, it’s time for us to create laws against this type of behavior. Allowing Google to filter search results is like a regression back to Medieval times. For one entity to selectively edit our version of reality is unacceptable.

Most importantly, judges and lawmakers that have taken bribes should be thrown in jail…indefinitely. Anyone who took a “donation” from George Soros or any other member of the Bilderberg group should be imprisoned for crimes of treason.

Summary

We are on the path towards victory, men—but it will not be without many hiccups. The first thing that the mainstream media will do is demonize the alt-right, but again, this will only make us stronger. It will expose our view points to a larger audience.

Expect it to get darker just before the dawn. Expect feminists, SJW’s, cucks, and libtards to protest and scream and shout—but, it will all be in vain. Too many men are starting to wake up. Too many men are starting to see the lies that have been shoved down our throats, and there is no going back.

The next four years will be more important than ever. Our primary objective is to dismantle the mainstream media through natural means. It’s time for them to be exposed as the liars that they are. Simply eliminating the MSM will be most of the battle—remember, this is a war of information, and when the alt-right starts to control the news, there will be sanity.

We must also focus on draining the swamp. We must rid our corrupt political establishment of the people who’ve betrayed us. We must normalize the family unit and white men—no longer shall we feel ashamed of our gender or sexual orientation.

Then, from here, the laws must change. Remember: this will not be easy. There will be much resistance along the way, but we’ve come this far. We’ve beat all odds and elected Trump as the president of our nation…and it’s time to make America great again.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

The media doesn’t even try to hide its shameless pro-Socialist bias these days. Since nobody really pays attention to them anymore, you might have missed some of the more entertaining butthurt spouted by shameless propagandists posing as journalists.

Election night coverage on the propaganda news channels is a lesson in hilarity when examining the reaction of lamestream media talking heads. What is most entertaining about Trump’s ascendancy to the Oval Office is that it was totally unexpected, catching cocksure Marxists at CNN and other alphabet channels completely off guard.

[...]

Anyone who has the capacity to perform an iota of critical thinking knows the mainstream media is NOT on the side of the average American. It hates and seethes at traditionalists and works to tear down every institution of Western civilization while attempting to impale the most hated of creatures on this planet, the Evil White Male.

The rebuke of a sorry candidate like Hillary when the socialist shills thought she was a shoe-in caught the smug son of a bitches off guard. Their reactions are priceless, and need to be documented and remembered. These reactions are undeniable proof that blogs like Return Of Kings and web sites like Breitbart and Drudge are sorely needed, indispensable resources in this day and age.

We have not been getting the truth from media for generations. And now, as alternative voices appear, the rift between the two versions of reality grows wider and deeper. The once mainstream media have become nothing but shameless activists for New World Order socialism. The election night “horror show” only solidifies this point.

We should be proud to be activists pushing our own agenda, if nothing else to balance the scales. The media are NOT friends of the American public. Ultimately, the tired old Socialist media must be dismantled in order for freedom and traditionalism to survive.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

It will be easier to find a fellow traveler

Men who hold our beliefs have long ago learned that we can’t go around sharing them in public to those who are not vetted. If you’re like me, you first “test” a new man you meet with a masculine comment to see how he responds, such as remarking on the attractiveness of a woman or how you’ve heard of a community online that trolls liberals without mercy. We’ve even had to devise a special “pet shop” code to know if a man is aware of the teachings that are found on ROK or the forum. We now have a easier shortcut in Trump.

If a man tells you that he voted for Trump, it’s safe to say that he is favorable to strong borders, nationalism, masculinity, and beautiful women. On a basic level, you will be able to get along with this man and build a bond. It also works the other way around where you bring up Trump to screen out those who are offended by him. It’s fine if someone is politically indifferent, but if a man opposes Trump then I have to anticipate him attacking or sabotaging me in the future. I will distance myself from him for my own well-being.

The cultural decline will halt

We now have a President who will not encourage anti-male propaganda, rape culture, and female victimhood. While I do have minor concerns on the influence of his feminist-minded daughter, Ivanka, Trump will not continue the attack on men that has been institutionalized since the sexual revolution and accelerated during the eight years of Obama. Because our current cultural dystopia is the result of intense long-term manipulation, it is more than enough for Trump to simply not touch the gender issue to allow the culture to return to a more patriarchal order. Stop feeding the rot and it will die off, allowing biology to naturally reassert itself.

We’ve experienced so many changes in the past decade that we haven’t had a chance to understand what’s going on and adapt. Instead, we’ve been reacting from one blow to the next, whether it’s the loss of our jobs through witch hunts or the rape culture horror that has turned a banal consensual hookup into possible incarceration. Trump’s victory gives us room to begin pushing back against the fictions that have put men in harm’s way.

Conclusion

Paradoxically, the benefits of a Trump presidency will not involve specific actions from Trump. His presence automatically legitimizes masculine behaviors that were previously labeled sexist and misogynist. While we may still get heat for them, it will be less severe and we’ll be less likely to sustain serious damage. Liberals will have no choice but to silently stew on our words and we can more effortlessly connect with men not only for male bonding but also to push back against a demoralized and fractured left. Victories will be far easier to achieve under Trump than Obama.

This is our moment. The door is opening for a renaissance of masculinity where men can take pride in being men, and the best part of it is that we don’t need to wait for Trump to do anything. His victory is more than enough for us to apply our own individual strength in seizing the bull’s horns where we can come out of the politically incorrect closet and assert our beliefs and behaviors. It would be icing on the cake if Trump rolled back anti-masculine laws and policies, but it’s not required, because the power to change ourselves and our country is within our hands. Return Of Kings opened in 2012, and the only surprise for me is how quickly the name is being fulfilled.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

What Donald Trump’s Victory Means For Men

The celebrations have ended and we’ve all come to absorb the fact that Donald Trump is our next President, an outcome that many of us have aggressively worked for in the past several months. Now that we’ve gotten what we wanted, it’s time to describe exactly how a Trump presidency will improve our standing.

If the President can say it then you can say it

The biggest effect we’ll see is the death of political correctness. We now have a shitlord for President who has insulted ugly women as “fat pigs,” and whose private macho talk, which all masculine men have done, was relentlessly attacked by the press but not punished in the voter booth. This means that when you talk like Trump, the first thought your listener will have is, “He sounds like the President of the United States.”

What excuse will they now have for limiting your speech if one man was able to gain the highest office in the land because of it? Either Trump was elected because voters liked a person who makes those kinds of statements or they didn’t care enough that he made them. Whichever explanation you accept means that the will of the American people has stated that you can exercise your free speech, your opinions, and your desire to flirt with attractive women without having to obey a speech police force that evaluates everything you do based on how offensive it is to a kaleidoscope of races and loony identities. You can begin removing your politically correct filter.

I’m in a state of exuberance that we now have a President who rates women on a 1-10 scale in the same way that we do and evaluates women by their appearance and feminine attitude. We may have to institute a new feature called “Would Trump bang?” to signify the importance of feminine beauty ideals that cultivate effort and class above sloth and vulgarity. Simply look at his wife and the beautiful women he has surrounded himself with to remind yourself of what men everywhere prefer, and not the “beauty at every size” sewage that has been pushed down our throats by gender studies professors and corporations trying to market their product to feminist fatsoes. The President of the United States does not see the value in fat women who don’t take care of themselves, and neither should you.

Liberals will be forced to tolerate us in a way they didn’t have to before

There are so many of us that we can ease out of the closet and not be afraid of persecution like before. What are they going to do, fire everyone who supports Trump? Accuse every man who voted for him of rape? The way the establishment has been able to marginalize us is to corner men individually and apply intense pressure, but now we have natural allies in all men who back Trump, even if they don’t subscribe to our particular interpretation of masculinity.

Liberals will not be able to point and shriek to get you to withdraw like before. They will not have easy victories by using labels like “racist” or “sexist.” They will have to endure us in their midst and bite their lip when we offend their degenerate ideals, knowing that the price of attacking us is becoming too costly. It may be as simple as whipping out your MAGA hat, as if it’s a bat signal, and having fellow Trump supporters come to your aid. I know that if I see a Trump supporter in trouble, I will help him, regardless of his race or station. Liberals will be forced to share space with those whom they hate, instead of trying to exile them like in the past.

Show post
Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

The Elite have completely divorced themselves from non-elites

In the past, Europe had an aristocracy. This aristocracy had a close relationship with the rest of the people in the country. The aristocracy was expected to defend the nation in case of war. They also had the same religion as the rest of the country. We already knew that the modern “aristocracy” of the globalist elites has no responsibilities toward the rest of us, but, thanks to WikiLeaks, we have now learned that they don’t even share the same religion.

WikiLeaks revealed that Hillary Clinton and her campaign manager are close friends with Marina Abramovic, a Serbian artist who performs occult rituals she calls “spirit cooking.” Spirit cooking appears to be set of magical rituals that use bodily fluids such as menstrual blood, urine, and semen to achieve certain goals, usually sex-related. It also involves at least minor sacrifices: one “recipe” calls for cutting one’s figure and “eat[ing] the pain.”

While spirit cooking is certainly grotesque, it is not my intention to focus on it except to point out that it has become a sort of initiation ritual into the US globalist elite. Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, Jay-Z and Beyonce, Lady Gaga, and Gwen Stefani have all attended these rituals and I would not be surprised to learn that many other politicians, CEOs, and bankers also participate. Getting invited to one of these spirit cooking sessions means that you have gained entry into the wealthy elite in the US. There are probably similar groups or rituals for the modern day European elites.

There are several things at work here. Most of the spirit cooking participants probably don’t believe in the efficacy of the spirit cooking ritual. It is more like a college fraternity initiation. It only means something in terms of one’s social standing. Also, the satanic imagery of spirit cooking and its sexual overtones are big middle fingers to Christianity which our elite regard as the religion of the unwashed masses.

In both of these ways, our modern “elite” have separated themselves from the rest of us. They don’t share the same destiny as us. If the country starts going to hell, the wealthy elite can just pick up and move to another country or they can live in small, heavily guarded compounds, untouched by the damage their policies have caused. And they even lack a common morality with us. In their own eyes, their wealth has somehow put them beyond the traditional moral code that guides the rest of us.
The fact that the elites have no regard for the rest of the country does not bode well for them. The aristocracy of old knew that their fortune was bound up with that of their countrymen. The modern elite lack this wisdom. Once enough of the hoi polloi realize it, it is only a matter of time before these pseudo-elites are deposed from their pedestal.

Conclusion

With Trump’s election, the problem of federal government being used for political purposes will be mitigated. However, the problems with our indulgent pseudo-elite will continue to be a force that prevents the patriarchy from returning. In any case, we can be grateful that the election of 2016 has exposed some of the cancers that are eating away at our society.

Show post
Jean-Batave Poqueliche #fundie returnofkings.com

Is Hillary Clinton’s Entourage Involved In A Satanic Pedophile Ring?

The latest batch of the Podesta emails shared by Wikileaks add a darker dimension (if it was even possible) to the sordid culture of corruption, lies and depravity that surrounds Hillary Clinton, explaining why the FBI has been calling her for quite some time now, the “Antichrist personified”.

It is a possibility that Hellary’s clique attends and organizes Satanic rituals, involving mock-up scenes of cannibalism and sexual abuse involving children.

One of the emails directed at Tony Podesta (John Podesta’s brother) contains the following sentence:

“I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place.

Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining?”

This really does not sounds like much until you discover the author of this invitation.

She, who walks in the footsteps of the Beast

This is the woman who sent the email, Marina Abramovic.

(image of Marina Abramovic dressed in red and holding the skinned head of a dead goat)

Dressed in red and holding the skinned head of a dead goat, a clear reference to the occult character Baphomet

There is proof that the Clinton Foundation directly transferred Abramovic ten thousand dollars in at least one instance for her “services.”

A self-proclaimed artist, Abramovic hails from Serbia and regularly organizes “performances” and events using what she calls “Spirit Cooking”.

This “spirit cooking” includes mixing semen, breast milk, urine or fresh blood before consuming it or splattering it over various things such as life-sized representations of young children, like shown below:

MARINA ABRAMOVIC SPIRIT COOKING

This performance included spelling with the body fluids, the following stanza:

With a sharp

knife cut deeply into the

middle finger of your

left hand

eat the pain.

Other examples of her “art” (nowadays any revolting expression of bad taste if sporting the correct pair of problem glasses) include public dinners, where politicians, Hollywood stars, singers and decision makers gather to eat cakes that depict a naked human corpse or feast on the fake (I hope by all that is sacred) blood contained in a coffin where swims another human body.

Celebrities that use demonic symbols in their persona such as Lady Gaga rush to participate to Abramovic’s events

Another heavy user of the occult symbols, Jay-Z, is a big fan of Marina

These codes are all directly copied from rituals such as black masses or Sabat night reunions and popularized by figures such as Aleister Crowley from whom Abramovic draws direct inspiration.

It is part of this growing phenomenon where the elites and celebrities close to power get caught, intentionally or not, showing symbols celebrating the ancient Babylonian rites or the worship of the Devil.

On November the 4th, Clinton chose Jay-Z in a last bid to draw crowds to her empty rallies. Coincidence?

Innocent children involved in that mess

There is hard evidence that Bill Clinton traveled at least 26 times (sometimes without his bodyguards, it is all in the pilot logs) to billionaire and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s Island on board his plane, dubbed the “Lolita Express,” as it is in this plane that the guests could allegedly have sex with minors.

With this in mind, it is disturbing to notice that other Podesta emails refer to children as being the “entertainment” at pool parties almost entirely attended by middle-aged men involved in politics.

Other emails involve strange references to food such as “pizza”, “cheese”, $65,000 worth of “hot dogs” for a party that attendees “dream of” and “recipes” that many sources suggest are code words for orgies involving minors and extremely young children. You can read more about it here.

The Whole Clinton Bag of Crooks reeks of unnatural sexual behaviour and reproachable acts and we will certainly know much more in the days to come, as Hillary Clinton is still under FBI investigation as we speak. This follows the scandal surrounding Huma Abedin (Clinton’s right hand and confidant) and her estranged husband, sex offender and champion one-handed texter, Anthony Weiner.
It will take some time before they go through Weiner’s 650,000 emails and decide of a course of action regarding these dark revelations and other atrocities of the Clinton crime family.

La plus belle ruse du diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas

These heavy accusations of Satanism remind us of the sexual blackmail practices said to take place among the popular hip-hop and Hollywood communities, as Roosh described in his related article, or other rumours linked to suspicious reunions involving the secret ceremonies of the elite such as the ones of the Bohemian Grove or the Rothschilds’ parties of the 70s.

If those recent speculations turn out to be true, it could have the effect of a bomb and mean a revolution.

Observe the symbols of cannibalism, eerily similar in the three following pictures. Those are respectively: a scene of the Rothschild’s “surrealistic bal,” a painting hanging in John Podesta’s office and one of Abramovic’s dinners:

(images of a scene of the Rothschild’s “surrealistic bal,” a painting hanging in John Podesta’s office and one of Abramovic’s dinners)

I will let you be the own judge of the conclusions inspired by those images. My father is a very Cartesian fellow and a saying of his comes to mind:

Just like Saint Thomas,

I only believe in what I see.

And what I see unsettles me.

Show post
Luke Stranahan #fundie returnofkings.com

The Good Of The Country Over That Of The Individual

Long gone are responsible Democrats like Kennedy who told us to ask what you can do for your country. Every recent Democratic President, from Carter to Obama, and most of the Democrat Congressmen, view the working middle class of the country as simply a group to exploit for their pet special interest groups. Trump is the first candidate in a long time who isn’t for the blacks, or the gays, or the Muslims, or the feminists, or whatever, and that matters a lot.

The reason why not being for a special interest group (which is ALL that Hillary is for, with her youth vote, black vote, women’s vote, gay vote, etc.) is so important is that these groups, even put together, do not matter when it comes down to the good of the country. Don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty of good, hardworking black people, just like there’s the same for women, and for gays, and for young people, but these hardworking folks from all these groups aren’t going to be part of the BLM, or La Raza, or Lamda, because they’re too busy being productive Americans. Activism is for unemployed people.

What’s going to happen if we don’t placate BLM and just ignore them? They riot a bit more and some get arrested? What if we told them that people that commit crimes to protest being treated like they commit a lot of crimes is ass-backwards thinking and counter-productive to their goals? They’d quit rioting.

What would happen if we shut the Mexican border down to illegal immigration, but made a straightforward, but strict, path to citizenship for Hispanics that wanted to be citizens? What if we said, this is America, we appreciate your culture and encourage to preserve it and your language in your children, but the national language IS English, and all business and schooling will be done in it, and in it only, and it’s your choice to not learn it, but the difficulties that will arise from that choice are all on you? They’d be Americans, proud of their heritage and their legal immigration and citizenship as well.

What would happen if we told gay people that it’s cool if they have civil unions under the law, and have the same rights as everyone else, but it’s not cool trying to pick a fight with a Christian bakery to make the government hall monitor come drive them out of business just because their belief in their God and that you’re sinning makes you uneasy and worried that they might actually be right?

What if we told them it’s ok to do whatever you want with another consenting adult, but you don’t have to try to make five-year-olds decide if they’re gay or straight when they shouldn’t be wondering about that till puberty hits? They’d be normal Americans who just happen to like sex with the same gender, and they’d quit pushing their agenda and being obnoxious and in the rest of our faces.

What would happen if we talked to Muslims and said that there is a huge, deafening, silence when it comes to the subject of Islamic Terrorism from them that makes it hard to trust any of them? What if we told them that we needed their help to bring the religion out of its tacit acceptance and support of terrorism, and part of that help means supporting us vetting Muslims coming here more strictly until they are no longer statistically more likely to be terrorists than people of other religions and ethnicities? They’d go along with that and maybe realize we’re fixing a problem, not hating a people.

What would happen if we told women that feminism has all but killed modern marriage due to universal punishment of divorced men and that no punishment for false-rape accusers both makes men not trust women and insults any real rape survivor? What would happen if we told them that giving them jobs for their genitalia over their skills is destroying industries by lowering the only standard that matters, that of merit; that of excellence?

What if we told them that gender ratios and quotas may fix the macro view of sexism, but make the man passed over for the position solely because you were female pissed as all hell towards women and, when you do that to the majority of men, you’ll be just as successful, and just as hated by men as men were and were hated by you in years past? They’d realize that it’s not a competition, it’s a cooperation, and maybe skill should be valued over sex.

What would happen if we stopped all these divisive issues that really don’t do anything other than tear us apart and work on a better economy, on rights for all, on border security? What would happen if we simply looked at each other as Americans, and put us, all of us, first? What would happen if we ripped out the crap in the Federal government that overtaxes people, or deploys armed forces against our own countrymen? What would happen if we made the Supreme Court Constitutional again, and made term limits a reality for Congress? Maybe we could get a government for, by, and of the people again. Maybe America can indeed by great again like the man says.

Conclusion

I’m not in a special interest group. No President, outside of George W. Bush right after the September 11th attacks, that I can recall since my childhood, has been for me as an American. I’ve always been someone to be taxed, to be disarmed, to be hated, to be blamed. It’s not racism or bigotry to want us all to be treated as equals and not be penalized for real and imagined wrongs that occurred in the past before I was born, or more recently yet with which I had nothing to do.

I’m not part of the problem. I’m an American; the people who say I am part of the problem are the problem. Their candidate, mired in scandal, corruption, and treason, is Hillary Clinton. Mine, with a message of hope for the country, not just some groups in it, is Donald Trump.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

Will There Be Riots In America The Day After Donald Trump Wins The Presidency?

(photo snapped in Ferguson as thugs burned the city down)

The above photo was snapped in Ferguson as thugs burned the city down. Could we see a repeat of that fateful event and perhaps a worsening of it soon to a city near you?

The election is the focus of every news channel ad nauseum. But few people are focused on the day after the election. No matter who wins this year’s presidential “selection” the possibility of civil unrest the day after election day and beyond is a real possibility. Are you ready for chaos if it develops?

The nation is so divided we are likely to run into problems.

The ugliest scenario for the day after election day plays out if Trump wins. If Trump wins, get ready for Black Lives Matter, the Black Panthers, The Race (La Raza) and other racially motivated anti-white groups to come out and possibly start burning cities down again. After all, they have been given carte blanche all year long to do so in Ferguson, Baltimore, Charlotte, and San Jose. A worrisome precedent has been set.

Of course, Trump won’t be in power the day after election day (we have to wait until Inauguration Day for him to clean up any potential messes) so Barack Hussein Obama is likely to give the racial hate groups the green light once again while the media whips out their collective Stradivarius, plays my heart bleeds for thee, and sympathizes with the devils destroying the nation.

If Hillary wins, there’s the real possibility of protests the day after the election, and the social conditioning of whites to be polite and docile even as they’re railroaded in what was formerly their nation may not hold this time around. A Hillary win means the chaos and possibly violence could wait until she starts stripping constitutional rights away. Then, we are likely to see conservatives finally come out and start raising some righteous hell. There could be racially motivated clashes on the horizon as white people standing up for themselves goes against a long-established narrative that they’re all evil racists.

Few people think of the effects civil unrest could have on their livelihood and well-being. It’s time for a little education on just how thinly stretched the American supply chain is, and what could happen with only a short-term disruption in it.

Here’s a scenario – just one of many possible scenarios. Video of rioters stopping and then looting a semi tractor-trailer in Charlotte is worrying because if trucks stop, America stops. If attacks on truckers happen often enough, truckers may decide it’s not worth the risk to their lives to continue moving freight around and stop driving. Within a day, bedlam could ensue as the supply chain runs on a razor’s edge in modern America and everything from food to medication to gasoline starts running out.

Supply Chain

According to the American Trucking Association (ATA) a disruption of 24 to 48 hours means hospitals and nursing homes would run out of food. Fuel supplies at gas stations would also run out in that time frame. Garbage would start to pile up. Most grocery and retail stores would start to run out of food and merchandise. ATM and bank cash supplies would also run out.

The tight rope the corporate system walks quickly breaks when merchandise stops moving.

As an example, the ATA tells us this is what happens during a hurricane. Imagine what would happen with days or weeks of rioting in major cities.

In a hurricane situation, supplies that would normally last a few days, such as water, powdered milk, and canned meat, typically disappear within one day. Given these inventory rates, this means that perishable goods could be depleted in a matter of days and non-perishables in just a few days. Runs on food and non-food staples during hurricanes, and even before big winter storms, provide a good example of how fast some retail inventories can be depleted during panic buying. The same quick depletion of inventories could occur if trucks stopped making deliveries for any reason.

Panic buying means no food on the shelves. When people don’t have food at home and then the grocery store doesn’t have food, rioting will intensify. Things could get ugly in a hurry as one small disruption leads to a domino effect, after which Bedlam ensues.

So, it is best to be prepared with non-perishable items just in case things get out of hand. Have at least several weeks food supply on hand. But, how do you stop people from coming and taking your stash?

Be Armed

Contrary to gun propaganda from the media, you absolutely want to be armed in the event the election and its aftermath don’t pass peacefully. What happens when stores no longer have food and gas stations no longer have gas? Gangs form looking for homes that do have those items.

They’re going to pick out the weakest home in the neighborhood and pounce.

A home with guns is a safe home. Just as this YouTube video shows, armed thugs may bust into a house looking for money or food, but they started jumping through plate glass windows and scrambling like cockroaches once the homeowner came out with guns blazing.

Several handguns with extra ammunition are advised. Know how to use them. Be steady with the trigger. And don’t be afraid to use them if looters come to your house.

The police will NOT be there to protect you as they’ll have their hands full with the chaos.

Better To Be Safe Than Sorry

With the meltdown of America happening right before our very eyes, we are entering an unstable period in the nation’s history, to say the least. No matter who wins the election the nation we once knew and loved is passing away. Trump may be able to turn things around temporarily, but even if he does the country now has so many immigrants it will be impossible to assimilate them all.

We are entering a period in which America will resemble a third world country more and more. The demographics of the nation are being changed on purpose so white people are diminished at the ballot box and Democrats will gain a lock grip on the levers of power in the nation in the coming years. Divisions between rich and poor will grow, and the evil media will be there stirring the pot with racial, class, and gender division every step of the way. Peace will become a thing of the past as squabbling factions compete with each other for dominance.

In this transition from prosperity to despotism, it is best to be safe than sorry. The day after election day will be telling in that it will set the tone for the next four years. It may be a somewhat peaceful turn towards Communism if The Bitch wins, or it may not be.

But my money is on a steady degradation of civil society in the coming years. Tend your own garden, as I know I will be tending my own. My military friends are already discussing what will happen in SHTF scenario. You should be thinking about it, too.

Show post
Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

Voter Discouragement

image

Fivethirtyeight doing its best to discourage Trump voters.

Another way that that system is rigged is that the legacy media conspires to discourage Trump voters from going to the polls. One way they do this is to over poll Democrats to make it look like Trump is losing. For example, one recent poll placed Hillary 12 points higher than Trump. But even Obama was only able to beat McCain by 7 points even though he was packing stadiums of 70,000 people. And Hillary doesn’t command the sort of adulation that Obama did in 2008.

There is a huge motivation gap between Trump and Clinton. Recently, Trump held a rally in Tampa where 28,000 people showed up. Some of these people waited in line for 12 hours for the chance to see Trump. A day later, Hillary hosted a rally in Florida where only 1000 people showed up. And some of those were likely paid plants. Her running mate Tim Kaine did even worse barely getting 30 people to show up for one of his events.

Why does the legacy media report polls that show Trump losing by a landslide? Because it is designed to dishearten Trump voters.

Conclusion

Will Trump be able to overcome the rigged system? It will be a heroic achievement if he does. One thing is certain: This is not the time to give up but to fight with all of our might. The elites want us to be discouraged, to give up hope, to lie down and die. That is the one thing we will never do. Even if the host of hell rise up to oppose you, go to the ballot box on November 8th. Regardless of what you may hear otherwise, your life will be very different under President Trump than it will be under globalist pawn Hillary.

Win or lose, our battle to bring back the patriarchy will not end on November 8th. A Trump victory would give us breathing room to start restoring our society in the open. A Hillary victory, heaven forbid, would signal that our work will need to be underground. Either way, our battle is just beginning. In future columns I will outline the way forward for traditional men.

Show post
Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

Voter Fraud

The first way in which the election is rigged is through voter fraud. In his Gettysburg address, Trump outlined some of the ways in which this occurs:

According to Pew, there are 24 million voter registrations that in the US that are either invalid or significantly inaccurate. 1.8 million dead people are registered to vote, and some of them are voting. I wonder how that happens? 2.8 million people are registered to vote in more than one state. These are numbers folks. These are numbers. 14% of noncitizens are registered to vote.

Liberals always object to any sort of voter identification requirement. They say that it negatively affects minority voters, who may not have any identification. But this is obvious nonsense. The real reason liberals oppose voter identification is because it would make voter fraud more difficult.

By raising concerns about voter fraud, Trump is firing a warning shot. He is saying that he will fight voter fraud, unlike prior GOP candidates who preferred defeat to calling out cheating by the other side. Simply putting the Democrats on notice may cause them to cheat less than they would have otherwise. The only question is whether Trump will be able to muster enough votes to overcome the amount of cheating that will take place.

The Lügenpresse

A second way that the system is rigged is through the legacy news media. These include the three oldest television news networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) as well as the newer ones (CNN, MSNBC, Fox). It also includes the remaining newspapers, especially the New York Times, Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal. Of these, the only ones that are reliably conservative are Fox and the WSJ, both of which are owned by Rupert Murdock. But even here, it is more accurate to call Fox and the WSJ “neoliberal” rather than conservative as they both push the globalist message of open borders and unenforced trade.

Trump is very media savvy. He’s been in the public eye since the 1980s and his philosophy has been that no publicity is bad publicity. Trump has used this to highlight his policies. By making controversial statements, he has been able to force the media to cover his positions. Still, the nonstop smear campaign has hurt Trump’s numbers particularly among older voters who still get their news from legacy sources.

New media outlets like Return of Kings, Breitbart, and Danger & Play have been more favorable to Trump but the most highly funded new media such as Daily Beast, Heat Street, Buzzfeed, and Huffington Post all push the globalist message. The end result that Trump is fighting an ocean of disinformation with only a handful of allies by his side.

Show post
Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

Donald Trump And His Supporters Are Fighting A Rigged System

At the third debate, Donald Trump was asked if he would accept the results of the election. Trump responded that he would have to look at the process to determine if everything was done fairly before he could accept it. The media went berserk claiming that Trump was undermining democracy. But is the US system really rigged? And if it is, can Trump overcome it?

Why rig the system?

Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. Revelation 12:12

It is human nature to want to accumulate wealth. It is also human nature to want to keep what you have. One of the ways that the wealthy do that is through influencing the political process to ensure it is favorable to them. A democratic republic is particularly easy to influence. The wealthy elite can “buy” candidates through donations to them or to their superpacs. They can make voting patterns more favorable to them by changing the country’s demographics. Or they can influence voters through the supposedly unbiased news media that they control. In the US, the wealthy elite use every one of these levers to rig the system.

For example, liberal voters often favor a progressive tax system where high earners pay greater percentages than those who earn less. It sounds like a populist policy but it is not. Progressive taxation is put in place to prevent middle class people from rising into the ranks of the truly wealthy who have already accumulated their wealth and are taxed at the much lower capital gains rate. Progressive taxation keeps the rich on top and keeps the plebs down. That’s why no matter which political party is in power, we are still stuck with progressive taxation.

Everything goes well as long as both parties don’t rock the boat. But once you get a true wildcard like Trump, the system must spring into action to stop the threat to the established order. That’s what we are seeing now. The elite are using every tool in the arsenal of the rigged system to ensure Trump does not upset their gravy train. The elite sense their time is short.

Show post
Steve McMahon #fundie returnofkings.com

Women Should Not Be Allowed To Vote

At the dawn of the 20th century, Britain had the greatest empire the world had ever seen. It stretched from the boreal vastness of Canada to the ice floes of the South Pole, from the scorching deserts of Egypt to the steamy jungles of New Guinea.

In 1900, British king Edward VII ruled over a quarter of the world’s population. His navy was the largest, most modern, and most ruthlessly efficient fighting force on the planet. His was the empire on which the sun never set, the undisputed global leader in science, technology, and commerce.

BEgoods

And then, in 1918, the British Parliament made a historic mistake. It gave women the vote. In 1920 the United States followed. Women’s suffrage rapidly spread around the world. Nearly 100 years later, how’s that working out for us?

Men were free in 1900
A man in Britain or the United States was free to say what he liked, subject only to the ancient laws on slander, treason, and incitement to crime. Men were the heads of their households, and they commanded respect as fathers and husbands. The majority paid no income tax. You were free to start a business without having to fend off legions of government busybodies. There was no welfare state, the only people who expected to live off their fellow men were beggars and drunks.

Western civilisation was unashamedly patriarchal and capitalist. Masculine virtues had propelled Europe out of the dark ages and colonised the New World, creating mighty new nations from scratch. Freed from feudalism and serfdom, the fertile mind of Western man produced an incredible series of discoveries and inventions. These allowed our forefathers to tame the forces of nature which had dominated and immiserated human beings since the first primitive hominids gazed in wonder and fear at a sunset on the African savannah.

Electricity let us push back the night. The steam engine brought us factories, mass production, and railways, which made mass prosperity and mass transit possible for the first time. Modern agriculture eliminated the ancient evil of famine in every country that bathed in the light of Western science. The world began to knit together as the primordial forerunner of the internet—the telegraph—brought regions and then nations and then continents together in almost instantaneous communication.

tesla_3

The intellectual crowning jewels of the West lay in its universities, from the medieval institutions of Europe to the Ivy League. These were places where serious and ferociously bright young men studied law, philosophy, and science. Where the secrets of the atom were probed, life-saving medical advances were made, astronomers mapped the cosmos, and engineers dreamed of ways to take us there, one day, into space.

The Western world in 1900 was not Utopia. There was poverty, bigotry, and injustice, but opportunity was real and a man with grit and ability could make something of himself. Many of the richest and most famous men of that era had been born poor and were self-taught.

Where stands Western civilisation today?

Men are not free in 2014
Most Western countries have a labyrinthine code of laws designed to jail you for saying the wrong things. Even in the United States, which stubbornly clings to its First Amendment, a man’s career can now be ruined and his reputation traduced if he offends against the latest dictates of political correctness.

Half or more of your income ends up in the pockets of the government, thanks to its bewildering array of taxes. Fathers and husbands—when they’re not being ridiculed as the butt of every joke on television—are second class citizens. If your wife decides she wants to take your house and your children away from you, she easily can with the full force of the law behind her.

If you try to start a business, you will find that not only are you not free to hire whoever you want, but you must also satisfy every whim of town planners, environmental bureaucrats, and health and safety commissars—all of them paid for by you, the taxpayer, to tell you what to do.

Another thing that you, the taxpayer, are funding is the welfare state. The welfare state exists to allow lazy people who don’t feel like working to live off you without going to the trouble of begging you for your money. The welfare state pays single mothers to squat out feral kids by multiple men without having to hold down a husband to pay for it all. The welfare state means the government is substitute Daddy for these women and their bastard offspring.

One fifth of US households now claim food stamps. That’s 47 million Americans, living in the richest and most successful society that has ever existed, where food is cheap and plentiful beyond the wildest dreams of people living 100 years ago, who are supposedly so pathetic and helpless that they need the government to feed them, as if they were children.

Our universities have become a bizarre combination of daycare facility, pick-up joint, and grotesque circus of left-wing drama. Universities are no longer places for serious thinkers to hone their minds. They’re places where braying young idiots go to learn to parrot feminist and Marxist slogans before reality punches them in the face with the realisation that their joke degrees are worthless.

gammamale2

The days have gone down in the West. Behind the hills, into shadow.

How did it come to this?
The state of modern society is a disaster for many fathers. But of all the self-inflicted wounds perpetrated on Western civilisation, votes for women was the most easily avoidable. It must have seemed like a good idea at the time, in 1918 and 1920, when Britain stood at her peak and the United States looked to the century ahead with supreme confidence. But women are not like men. They don’t think in the same way. They don’t understand or value freedom the way men do. Women have a herd mentality. Rugged individualism, healthy masculine debate, and raucous male laughter offend their sensibilities.

As soon as American women were allowed to vote, alcohol was banned in the United States. The temperance movement had been a female dominated nuisance for decades, but now hopelessly misguided female busybodies had electoral power. It was a farce that turned a nation into lawbreakers and birthed organised crime on a massive scale.

Slowly but inexorably, the United Kingdom and the United States, and other societies that allowed women to vote, began to tilt leftward. Welfare states were created, largely because women feel that it’s not “fair” to allow people to succeed or fail on their own merits. And it’s not “fair” that a woman should have to rely on the father of her children to support her, when she can make men in general pay for her upkeep through the tax and welfare systems.

Government, which had once been small and limited, began to spread its tentacles like a rape-beast from the sickest Japanese anime porn until it penetrated the lives of every citizen. Taxes started to rise in order to pay for all these new entitlements and programmes, and an entire caste of useless bureaucrats emerged to run them. Family and divorce law gradually warped into the anti-male Kafkaesque nightmare it is today because of politicians chasing female votes.

As with most female demands, capitulating to women’s suffragists didn’t satisfy them. Not content with invading the traditionally male space of political affairs, women started insinuating themselves into every other masculine sphere. The universities admitted them, which is why male students today find themselves harangued about imaginary “rape culture”. They swarmed into the workplace, which is why working men today find themselves terrified of sexual harassment or discrimination accusations from spiteful female co-workers. Even the military became feminised and sensitised, with deleterious consequences for the fighting man.

suffragewants

The modern religion of the West—political correctness—is every feminine vice writ large: bossy, deceitful, petty, and false. Almost everything that is wrong with modern life can be traced to the decline of masculine virtues and their replacement with feminine vices. For civilisation itself is the triumph of masculine energy, vision, and courage.

For the sake of our civilisation, for the sake of all men and women, we must undo this historic wrong turn. Women have no business voting in elections for public office, let them stick to voting for things they understand, like the X-Factor. This may seem like a quixotic idea. But remember—so was women’s suffrage, once.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Show post
Luke Stranahan #fundie returnofkings.com

image

The American Presidential election looms ever closer, with the liberal candidate Hillary Clinton seeming to still win the (rigged?) polls despite ever increasing scandals. I want to use today’s space to examine some of the apparent inconsistencies of the left, the underlying motivations of their views, and how those views are fundamentally incompatible with the ideas of us here at Return Of Kings.

Modern liberalism, or leftism if you prefer, possesses several contradictions that make it seem logically impossible to hold all their ideas at one time in your head without suffering from an extreme case of cognitive dissonance. Whether it be simultaneously embracing the gay rights movement and feminism while having sympathy for fundamentalist Muslims, or how you can be for gun control to save all the toddlers who were lucky enough to survive your pro-abortion policies, any liberal platform point is so weak that any rational person sees his point made and won with no effect at all; the lefty simple rattles on to their next talking point without having the good sense to know that they lost.

How can someone have an unreasonable political philosophy that is self-defeating and irrational and still hold their head up as a person of sense? They can’t, and the reason that they appear to do so is because we are mistaking modern day liberalism as a movement of rational thought and philosophy.

It’s not. It’s a religion. More accurately, it’s a cult.

[...]

What can you do?

You can’t reason with a fanatic. The greatest debates are had when there is either no proof, or there is, but one or more sides will simply not listen. We can extol conservative or libertarian values all day long and point out how they are backed up by reality, but, if they are blinded, they will not see.

If Trump wins, do not gloat to these people, for their machine will take a long time to dismantle, and even a headless snake is dangerous. If Clinton wins, do not lament around them either, for you merely mark yourself as a target.

The best thing to do is to get people of the left out of your life the best you can. Friendships can be stopped, and acquaintances through social activities can be distilled down to only interactions of that activity, though you should really ask yourself if a hobby that is shared with liberals is really worth keeping. Same thing with churches, although it is hard to find a church that is still traditional and not yet corrupted by feminism and liberalism.

Work will be a difficult one. We have covered being in a “man’s field” before, and that helps to a degree. Beyond that, simply not speaking with leftist coworkers other than necessary conversations for business should be your goal, and this will go double if you have one for a boss.

Conclusion

We’re in a transitory stage between reasonable and friendly disagreement and open physical violence being the norm. Open sabotage and various legal and illegal acts used by the left against their ideological foes is the order of the day.

We must be hard targets against the hate of the left, as there is nothing that a liberal hates more than a successful, middle-class, white, Christian, straight man. Do not allow them access to any vulnerabilities, but do not draw attention to yourself either. Great forces are at play during these current times, much can be accomplished by simply stepping out of the way at the right time.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

The Media Uses A Strategy Of Reporting On False Rape Accusations To Destroy Men

When a politician isn’t behaving or going along with the elites’ master plan, a coordinated and underhanded rape attack is the first line of offense. The Marxist media, being prostitutes of the elite power structure, specialize in this type of character assassination. Posing as the Fourth Estate while really acting as “for hire” attack dogs is how they make their livings and curry favor with those in the corporate-government complex. When called upon, they collectively aim at a target and commence with “drive by” attacks in 90 second news stories.

It’s really quite easy to perform a character assassination on someone in a sexually repressed culture. Pick an emotional issue, like women being sexually assaulted in a culture that pedestalizes them, and then commence with endless attacks while ignoring Hillary’s endless scandals. That’s exactly what has happened with baseless accusations of sexual misconduct by Donald Trump, repeated and replayed ad nauseum in a last ditch effort to neutralize the threat to globalism posed by his candidacy.

The “Victims”

Suddenly, a senior citizen named Jessica Leeds, a former stewardess, pops up out of nowhere and is emotionally distraught by a groping that supposedly happened 37 years ago. Except her claim is baseless. She claims Trump “raised an armrest” on a flight she worked then proceeded to grab her, but the first class seats on that flight did not have adjustable armrests.

Not only that, an eyewitness said Leeds was throwing herself at Trump, as women tend to do around rich men but that she got rejected. The press would hear none of that because it would deflate both their agenda and ratings, and it would cast holier than thou females in an unholy light. Eyewitness Anthony Gilberthorpe told the press:

I have only met this accuser once and frankly cannot imagine why she is seeking to make out that Trump made sexual advances on her. Not only did he not do so (and I was present at all times) but it was she that was the one being flirtatious.

It seems the pain of that rejection led her to make up a false story.

Why do the marionettes in the media dig up these old hags and baseless sexual harassment claims? Because it works in a culture in which women can do no wrong. The media even pulled a sexual harassment character assassination attempt back in 2008 with the old battle horse John McCain.

Here’s how they did it. The New York Times did a hit piece featuring Vicki Iseman accusing John McCain of sexual conduct. Here’s the kicker: The New York Times later settled a libel suit brought on by Iseman after the campaign had ended. This is how big media and big politics operate.

The veracity of the claims matter little to a gaggle of “journalists” who would slit someone’s throat for a scoop. Similar to the documented practice of some fireman to set fires to keep their jobs, the media create scandals to gin up ratings and dehumanize those not going by the New World Order playbook.

Predictably, once one woman gets the ball rolling, a dogpile of victims ensues in a culture that lionizes victims instead of winners.

Mindy McGilliavray came out and told the press Trump “nudged” her. She told the fellow travelers in the media:

All of a sudden I felt a grab, a little nudge. I think it’s Ken’s camera bag, that was my first instinct. I turn around and there’s Donald. He sort of looked away quickly. I quickly turned back, facing Ray Charles, and I’m stunned. This was a pretty good nudge. More of a grab. It was pretty close to the center of my butt. I was startled. I jumped.

Hey, kino works that way, especially for billionaires. That’s assuming it’s true. It’s funny that instead of confronting The Donald immediately she waited 13 years to bring it up.

Kristen Anderson claimed Trump grabbed her vagina.

Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos claims Trump harassed her, even though she kept in contact with him and even sought out Donald’s help with her business. If she was emotionally scarred by Trump, why would she continue to associate herself with him?

A race is on to see who can turn being the worst “victim” into being the biggest winner of notoriety and 15 minutes of fame.

Show post
John Carver #fundie returnofkings.com

(part of an article titled "6 Reasons Progressives, Leftists, And SJWs Are (Literally) Hitler")

1. They Both Use A Stupid Looking And Impotent Arm Gesture

The Nazi salute or “Hitler’ salute was a gesture used as a greeting to powerful Nazi officials, and to glorify the German nation under the Third Reich. The salute was performed by extending the right arm to at least eye level, and straightening the hand so that it is parallel to the arm.

The George Soros-funded domestic terrorist group “Black Lives Matter,” which has a great deal of sympathizers and supporters from the political left, has also adopted their own (ultimately meaningless) arm gesture. Conservatives, libertarians, and the Alt-Right simply don’t bother with such try-hard tough and faux-fascist nonsense.

Progressives and SJW’s are (literally) Hitler!

2. They Both Want Heavy Firearms Restrictions Or Outright Confiscation

In the build-up to Nazi Germany going on the war rampage, Hitler made damn sure that the non-military German populace (Jew and Gentile alike) would be thoroughly disarmed of any projectile firing weapons, as to prevent any kind of civilian insurrection or rebellion against his fascist regime.

Progressives and SJW’s in the United States by and large hate guns, and repeatedly call for heavy restrictions on firearms or outright Hitler, Stalin, and Mao style confiscation.

On the other hand, conservatives, libertarians, and the Alt-Right (including neomasculinists) all respect and value the right to bear arms in order to stymie out-of-control criminality and keep government oppression in check. Not to mention it’s a damn good idea to have most of the population armed as a major deterrent against outside invaders.

Just ask Switzerland, who successfully avoided all of the chaos in Nazi-occupied Europe due to both their mountainous geography and by having the most strapped-up civilian population in all the land.

Progressives and SJW’s are (literally) Hitler!

3. They Both Blame All Of Society’s Ills On One Segment Of The Population

Despite being responsible for about 95% of all major technological and medical advancements for the past 600 years, and the upholders or creators (along with Northeast Asians) of the most advanced infrastructure, high-income, low-corruption, politically stable, and peaceful countries on the planet (i.e. highly desired for migration for people of all races and colors around the world), progressives and SJW’s almost never have anything positive to say about white males.

Every real or perceived societal issue must be caused by the white man and his “supremacist” outlook on life and his “racist” institutions, and no personal responsibility must be accepted for what plagues the African-American, Native American, or Chicano communities. The finger of righteous indignation can simply point straight back to heterosexual white males, who are “privileged” beyond all comparison.

(But please, keep it quiet that many Asian minority groups are economically outperforming white people and are being imprisoned far less per capita. Ok? You’ll ruin the leftist narrative.)

In similar fashion, the Nazi’s blamed just about everything that caused pain to Germany on the mannerisms, behaviors, and business practices of Jews.

Progressives and SJW’s are (literally) Hitler!

Show post
Davis M.J. Aurini #fundie returnofkings.com

(about what Donald Trump said in the 2005 video)

The milk sops who are attacking Trump over this comment are criticizing his lack of politeness—the meek language we adopt whenever we find ourselves in mixed company. If his statements had been made in public they might have had a point—a frank conversation about bowel movements belongs in the doctor’s office, not at the dinner table, and telling a woman you barely know that you’d like to “grab her pussy” is the sort of social maladjustment that suggests a temperamental problem—but this was nothing more than a small clip of a long conversation, all of which happened behind closed doors, and exclusively amongst other men. Nobody present was offended—Bush’s own replies affirmed and agreed with Trump’s—and any man who denies having had a similar conversation is a bald faced liar.

Yes, the conversation was rude, but rude is not immoral; the behaviour that married couples get up to in the marital bed is also rude, and yet St Paul commands married couples to do it well, and to do it often. If you walked into a confessional and told the priest that you wanted to kiss pretty girls, he’d give you five Hail Marys for wasting his time, and even a nun like Mother Angelica can enjoy a bit of rude humor: after reading a Galatians 15:21 on her television show, she joked, “…drunkenness, orgies, and other things—oh my; I’m curious about what these other things might be!”

What sort of world is this where we expect Donald Trump to be better behaved than a Catholic nun? And what sort of hypocrites make up the Republican establishment, if this off-hand remark offends them? Do the indiscretions of the Democrats in general, and the Clintons in particular, even warrant a mention at this point? Or can we simply state that we’re living in a world of puritanical hypocrites, who promote the most depraved and debauched culture seen on this planet since the fall of Rome, but who are more than happy to scream “Pervert!” at their enemy because he once patted his wife’s derriere while boarding a plane?

Show post
Davis M.J. Aurini #fundie returnofkings.com

(about what Donald Trump said in the 2005 video)

The rank hypocrisy of this pearl clutching is astounding. This form of locker room talk is the nothing more than simple, healthy, virile, masculinity. Since the dawn of humanity, men have sat around discussing the beauty of women, bragging about how popular they are with the ladies, and making crude sexual comments about what they’d like to do with them behind closed doors. While feminists might scream “Rape culture!” and “Objectification!” these are nothing but the ejaculates of diseased minds. Feminists have a pathological fear of healthy male sexuality, and so they conflate the admiration of beauty with the devaluation of personality, and the desire for a woman with the intent to take her by force.

It is a biological fact that men are the initiatory sex, and that women are the alluring sex. Throughout all of the animal kingdom, males have to prove their worth before a female will accept them as a mate, and it is the female’s alluring nature which drives them to compete in the first place. Locker room banter is just one of the many ways that the males of our species psych one another up in preparation. It isn’t just normal—it is morally correct.

Show post
Relampago Furioso #fundie returnofkings.com

A man with a functioning libido is public enemy number one in the increasingly bizarre United States of America, a debased nation that liberalism is destroying. Putting tampons in men’s restrooms is just fine, creating 600 genders out of thin air when every other species gets by with two genders is fine, but a rich and powerful man talking about having sexual desire for women and making accurate comments about how women let alpha males do whatever they want has caused the castrati in the media to call into session an impromptu kangaroo court of persecution. Trump is also being given the Julius Caesar treatment by his own party.

The same feminist nation that bought 80 million copies of Fifty Shades of Grey, a book women got hot and bothered reading that features far worse language and actions than the secret recording of Trump, is suddenly aghast when a real life billionaire is revealed to have been talking about trying to fuck some chick and making moves on women. Tepid comments have been enough to cause a stir in the Cucklican establishment, in which anything but gelded deference towards women is verboten. A recording of Trump made my a lowlife media jackal named Billy Bush caught him making the following thought crime comments:

"Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything. When you’re a star, they let you do it… You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait."

Any man with two functioning testicles and any level of experience with women knows Trump is exactly right. Women turn into instant sluts around rich and powerful men. Hypergamy is the most powerful force in the universe. They absolutely “let you do it.”

Trump is also being called a sexist for making these comments about Nancy O’Dell.

"I moved on her and I failed. I’ll admit it. I did try and fuck her. She was married. And I moved on her very heavily. I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look."

Why is this even an issue when it’s a recording of a supposedly private conversation? Do the sycophants in the media think Slick Willy talked any differently when he was discussing the women he was diddling when he was the governor of Arkansas and later the President? Or when he was flying down to a pedophile’s private island?

Even though Hillary’s obvious pathological lying, criminality and health issues have been swept under the rug, a man displaying a modicum of testosterone was enough to send the 2016 campaign into a frenzy, and the media into overdrive conducting one of their infamous witch hunts against those not in the Marxist/globalist claven.

They did not seem to be bothered by, and even glorified Fifty Shades of Grey, however, a book featuring explicit erotic scenes of dominance and submission, bondage and discipline and BDSM conducted by a sadistic billionaire. The irony, as usual, is completely lost on vapid mediaites.

Show post
Louis Stuart #fundie returnofkings.com

However…

Hillary Isn’t Effective

Aside from his charisma and persuasive abilities, the reason Barack Obama was so successful in selling his “fundamental transformation of America” was because he was almost a blank slate. He arrived with such meteoric velocity that he was more myth than man. Comparatively little was known about him. In four years, he went from obscure Illinois lawmaker to President-Elect. People could fill in the blanks with whatever they wanted to.

Hillary Clinton lacks this too. Everyone’s known her for decades. Her image can’t change. Young regressives voted overwhelmingly against her in the primaries and her lead among Millennials is dismal at best. Even Bernie Sanders, who drew massive crowds, barely drew 200 for Hillary. Millennial turnout will likely drop with black turnout. It’s hard to get excited about Hillary. Her reputation is just as negative among Millennials as everyone else. What’s Hillary running on? What’s the aspiration she’s selling?

There are many indications that there’s such little excitement for Hillary that even if she were to win, she would be a terrible salesperson for the regressives. They don’t like her and her ability to rally them is doubtful.

The spread of social movements isn’t only related to their truthfulness, but often with the status they convey on adherents. Accusing someone of witchcraft centuries ago was a way to decrease the status of the accused and increase that of the accuser by showing his or her piety to the prevailing orthodoxy. It’s no different now when someone is accused of whatever label that regressives like.

Barack Obama had a “coolness” factor allowing him to elevate the regressive left in power and status, from which it could look down on benighted souls that dared to dissent. Hillary lacks much of this. She may promote the regressive left and will work on its behalf, but it’s far from certain that she’ll continue to make it “cool.” It is instead possible that regressives will lose status because of her sheer incompetence and terrible salesmanship.

In the meantime, the counter culture that we’re part of will grow because of the lame symbol that is Hillary Clinton. It is to this counter culture that you can position your enterprising efforts, and I’m hedged in that way because one of my projects will be more relevant if Hillary wins.

So while Hillary Clinton will legally strengthen the regressives, it’s far from certain that she will add cultural force to them. She may in fact wind up weakening them with her lame and incompetent administration.

'Just Chilling In Cedar Rapids': Hillary Clinton Sends Snapchat Video… And It's Awful

Warhawk Resurgence

The biggest danger Hillary Clinton poses is that she’s never seen a war she hasn’t liked. Hillary has repeatedly called for a no fly zone over Syria, which would mean shooting down Russian aircraft. Moscow considers her an existential threat, and she reportedly believes that Putin would “back down.”

In truth, the Syrian conflict is probably more dangerous than anything in the Cold War. You have two sides armed by opposing powers in conflict with one another, and aircraft from those major powers flying sorties in the same narrow airspace. This is not something I want Hillary Clinton, a warmonger and an incompetent one, anywhere near.

There’s a reason why the GOP’s neocons have lined up behind Hillary. If she wins, we can at the very least expect continued destabilization of the Middle East and possibly other areas, which means even more “refugees” imported into the West and an increased risk of terrorism.

Conclusion

A Hillary Clinton presidency must be avoided at all costs. It’s vital for every ROK reader who is eligible to vote to turn out. This year’s “gender gap” is a reversal of the norm—Hillary Clinton is having deep trouble with men. It may just be men like you and I that decide things.

But if there is a silver lining to the worst case scenario, it may be that Hillary’s total lack of persuasive ability and her thoroughly corrupt reputation shred whatever credibility the establishment has left. By any reasonable measure her presidency would be a disaster, but in disaster lies opportunity. Perhaps this is being overly optimistic, and I understand that sentiment. But as Scott Adams remarks, you can interpret almost anything as good or bad news, so I try to find what good I can.

Show post
Louis Stuart #fundie returnofkings.com

What Would Happen If Hillary Clinton Wins?

Although I predicted a Donald Trump victory last fall, and my confidence in this outcome is higher now than ever, we must still prepare for the worst. As he himself mentions in The Art of the Deal, “prepare for the downsides and the upsides will take care of themselves.” A Hillary Clinton victory is still a big possibility and still the favored outcome on paper. We must therefore manage our expectations. If the worst were to happen, how bad would it be, and what can be done to survive and thrive?

While a Hillary Clinton presidency represents several unmitigated disasters that must be avoided at all costs, there are still, in my opinion at least, a few surprising silver linings that enterprising men can take advantage of, as disaster has always provided opportunities to those who saw them.

Gridlock

Whoever wins this election will be the most unpopular person ever elected President. This will make it very difficult for that person to govern. However, unlike Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton has no charisma. The result will be a regime that is deeply unpopular and distrusted, and will remain that way.

While Donald Trump may be able to use his powers of persuasion effectively, Hillary Clinton has no such powers. The media will certainly be on her side, but the media is already overwhelmingly distrusted and declining in influence rapidly. The proof is in the money. “Journalists” barely sell books, and Hillary Clinton couldn’t even sell 3,000 in its launch week. For a presidential candidate of a major party with a united establishment behind her, this is utterly embarrassing.

Time and again, the pattern has been: the more the public sees of Hillary, the more it dislikes her. Truthfully, there’s no better symbol to discredit the establishment than Hillary Clinton, whose incompetence, corruption, and lack of charisma and persuasive abilities will be symbolic of its moral and intellectual bankruptcy.

As people look for alternatives, whether in politics or in their personal lives, opportunities will open, and there’s no better symbol to stage a contrast with than Hillary Clinton (a face is always the best thing to attach a thought to, as per Scott Adams, and her face is guaranteed to generate strong emotions).

Supreme Court

Regardless of how unpopular she is, Hillary Clinton, if elected, could end up filling two or three vacancies if some older liberal justices decide to time their retirement for the occasion. This will likely permanently realign the court and make it a rubber stamp for any “social justice” endeavor that the regressive left wants to pass.

“Social Justice” Culture Will Get Worse

Men, especially on college campuses, will have to take special heed. It may become necessary to record all interactions with women if, as seems possible, the “misogyny” pilot program underway in the UK expands. This is especially so if “misogyny” becomes paired with the increasingly nebulous concept of “harassment” (all words engineered to shut down critical thinking and operate on confirmation bias).

Black Lives Matter will increase in power. Violence against dissenters will become more open and encouraged through selective enforcement. Islam will continue to demographically expand through accelerated “refugee” resettlement. More terrorist attacks in the US and Europe are certain, and the creep of Islam in mainstream culture will accelerate.

Decrees mandating the increased presence of “social justice” related initiatives in college, at the workplace, and in your neighborhood could well be passed. It’s possible that cuckolding culture will take off, with media blitzes about how “progressive” and “not sexist” it is. What better way to control your “toxic masculinity” (and to promote female desires at the expense of men)?

Show post
David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

Hillary Clinton Pulls Out The Lie Book To Try And Stump The Trump At The First Presidential Debate

Monday night’s first Presidential debate, held at Hofstra University in New York, lacked some of the rhetorical fireworks between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton that many had anticipated. Still, the performances of both candidates confirmed earlier assessments made by Return Of Kings. Republican nominee Trump highlighted how America is continuing to lose out economically, socially, and in terms of its national security to other states and organized groups, including ISIS. By contrast, Clinton deployed a series of diversions and straight-out lies to bait again those perennial victims brainwashed by Democrats over decades: millions of blacks, Hispanics, young people, and non-SJW women.

The First Presidential Debate: Hillary Clinton And Donald Trump (Full Debate) | NBC News

(starts at 26:00)

The problem with Clinton’s performance is that she relied on “zingers,” as the mainstream media calls them, which are considered factual and superb just because she says them. They are either inaccurate or, just as bad, banal platitudes about “justice,” “fairness,” and “equality.” These feel-good lines are devoid of either context or proof. Compare this to Trump, who zoomed in perfectly on the cancers afflicting the US: deference to rivals and enemies, failing to ask allies for proper support, and a basic refusal to act in the ways that are best for America.

Here are three key areas in which the Trump-Clinton divide was most prominent during last night’s debate:

Hillary can’t shake off her globalist past—and future

Trump astutely homed in on Hillary Clinton’s previous “gold standard” description of the toxic Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) “free trade” proposal, support which the Democratic nominee claimed to have backtracked on only months ago. He linked this praise to her fawning endorsement of NAFTA in the 1990s. NAFTA, as Trump pointed out, has led to the erosion of American manufacturing and the strange situation where Mexico is allowed to export its goods into America with much smaller financial barriers than the reverse. The TPP promises to do the same and, when it comes to US based-interests, will only benefit transnational corporations.

Clinton was unwilling to categorically rule out backing the TPP again if elected President and avoided criticizing Barack Obama for wanting it implemented. She also said nothing of substance in relation to combating China’s extremely anti-free trade behavior, most notably the constant devaluation of its currency. In the context of a $20 trillion US national debt and trade deficits that balloon ever more, the likely Democratic inaction on this front is alarming and only surrenders national, rather than corporate interests. What she did do was to try to placate those wanting a welfare state, promising things like “debt-free college” and a minimum wage rise. But how can those she will get the money from, “the wealthy,” pay for both these shopping items and simultaneously pay down the debt?

When the topic switched to terrorism, the Democratic nominee refrained from discussing how ISIS began its rise when she was Secretary of State, an inconvenient truth she was quickly reminded about. Expanding on this bad judgment point, Trump alluded to a related national security failure of the “experienced” Secretary Clinton: the United States’ persistent bankrolling of other states’ safety at the direct expense of its own. The whole point of NATO is that it is an alliance, but America always seems to foot the bill, just as it does in its relationship with Japan. In response, Hillary Clinton was unable—or simply refused—to articulate how this is either a desirable or affordable state of affairs. This is telling as nationalist vs. globalist arguments grow more salient within the current American political discourse.

Gender pay gap madness

Hillary Clinton unsurprisingly brought up the gender pay gap, a long-discredited myth that ignores how women, even those employed full-time, work on average less hours than men. This political fiction, one perpetually drawing in millions of self-victimized female voters and emasculated white knights, fails to acknowledge the greater presence of men in higher-skilled and therefore higher-paying industries as well.

Despite the certainty that this kind of argument would be raised, Clinton took it to a new, far more delusional level by suggesting that women deserve the same pay for inferior work. She claimed that Donald Trump “said women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men.” He actually did not say this, as a fact check used in a [i]USA Today[/i] article illustrated months ago.

Yet even if he had made the statement, this is perhaps the least controversial soundbite, real or imagined, that anyone has ever used to try and discredit Trump. The falsely attributed words are one hundred percent in line with the idea of “equal pay for equal work.” If your work is not of the same quality as your peer, you should not get equal pay. How, for example, is a junior female lawyer who brings in less clients and billable hours than her male counterpart deserving of equal pay? What Trump did say is that he favors paying employees based on performance.

Necessary corrections aside, Hillary Clinton’s line is merely a prelude to the affirmative action she will unleash upon the American economy if elected. Having already implied that women deserve equal pay even if their work and performance cannot be described as equal, expect concrete legislation that will force employers to hire women over men, irrespective of their credentials, socioeconomic backgrounds (preferential treatment allows many Middle American men to be leapfrogged by women from privileged families), and the real requirements of the job.

Race-baiting… again

Hillary Clinton reverted to re-peddling the tired old fantasy that 2016 is the new Jim Crow laws era. Forgetting that countless non-blacks are in jail for non-violent offences, too, she falsely portrayed African-Americans as the victims of police harassment and racist hysteria over crimes that are not murder, rape or serious assault. To boot, she pushed aside the higher involvement of blacks in violent felonies. Clinton further outlined how outright (white) racism, not certain cultural values and black-on-black brutality, purportedly explains almost every conceivable problem confronting African-Americans today. Plus, she did not ever call out the truly deplorable rioters in Charlotte, nor condemn overall the opportunistic troublemakers that comprise Black Lives Matter.

Trump absolutely schooled his opponent, however, when it came to the astounding rate of violence in Chicago, Clinton’s city of birth. In a metropolitan area where gun laws are amongst the most restrictive in the nation, black-on-black crime especially has decimated African-American communities. Clinton’s crude racial politics quickly became stuck and the candidate herself appeared to be flustered. After all, Chicago, which Trump was using as an example of the general malaise of crime found across the country, is controlled locally by Democrats, like most major cities.

The desperation of Hillary Clinton, a representative of a party which has failed America’s minorities and made them poorer, became evident when she mentioned a racial discrimination lawsuit, not a finding of guilt, brought against Trump forty years ago. With nothing to offer blacks and Hispanics, other than the same old dud policies on a national and municipal level, she had to invent a boogeyman to distract people.

But the media still lauded Clinton

Regardless of her cheap antics at the debate, almost every mainstream media editorial from CNN’s to the LA Times‘ waxed lyrical about Clinton’s supposedly epic performance on Monday night. That sycophancy will only grow from now until election day. But if takes so much concerted, stooge-like media support to help her win, what does that say about her as a candidate?

Right now, though, we should be both proud of and amazed at where Trump is at the moment. Only six months ago, people were bellowing that he would still lose the Republican nomination. He could never ever win, the experts said. Moreover, just a year ago, his candidacy was considered a laughing stock by elites and nearly all supporters of the Democrats.

So who’s laughing at Donald Trump now? Not many people, and certainly not a very concerned Hillary Clinton.

Show post
Max Roscoe #racist returnofkings.com

Asians are naturally thin, petite, and healthy—IN ASIA. The country with the longest lifespan is Japan, which is one of the most isolated Asian nations, physically, culturally, and economically. The average Japanese person lives until age 80 for males and 87 for females (America is ranked #34). However, when Asians move to the west and adopt our culture, diet, and lifestyle, they become overweight, slutty, and often mutilate their bodies and experiment with gender fluidity.

Show post
Michael Augustus #fundie returnofkings.com

Women Would Rather Be Raped By Invaders Than Stuck With Beta Males

She is dying for you to put her in her place, beneath you. A woman wants to be conquered, she wants to submit to power, she wants to give up control, but first she has to test to see if “it” exists within you. To submit to a lesser man is rape, to submit to a superior man is harmony. Feminism and other female SJW endeavors are societal shit tests. If you fail, they’ll push the boundary again, and again, and again… If you give them an inch, they’ll take a mile.

The female imperative was never supposed to be 100% successful, though. Eventually, some man somewhere is supposed to not put up with her shit and put her in her proper place: beneath him and one half-step back. A woman’s job is to see you fail. For if you fail, you were never “worthy” in the first place. Western culture is now embracing that very failure.

The Beta That Broke The Western Cultures’ Back

Betas occur naturally in the wild, but over the past several decades, governments, corporations, media, and academia have attempted to artificially manufacture them en masse beyond natural levels with the assistance of female nature (stated earlier). They’ve indoctrinated man into believing blue pill sexual strategy that women despise. They’ve stripped fathers from the home and had females infiltrate male spaces containing masculine role models. And they’ve legally restrained a man’s ability to discipline and properly set boundaries in the home, the very same discipline and boundaries that women instinctively seek. All with the proud help of women.

So what’s left? A whole generation of men raised by women and the state, taught to be pussies and supplicate to females and authority.

Now, the feminization of man has hit critical mass and women’s amygdalas notice. Women are unknowingly witnessing their own creation and are left disgusted, wondering, “Where have all the ‘good men’ gone?” Now women are seeking another tribe…

The Invaders

“[…] women actually want strong male authority figures in their life.

But will deny it until the day they die.

If they admitted to it, it would allow non male authority figures (beta men) to emulate alpha qualities.

They want men that just get it. Even if that means takeover of Western European / u.s. Culture by Islamic militants.”

— /u/antariusz (Source)

Europe is currently witnessing female nature being expressed freely on a societal level without a civilized, masculine balancing factor. The truth of the matter is, women have no in-group loyalties. Whoever the powerful are in that moment, women drift their way with their asses bent over, knees quivering, and legs dripping with tingle juice. They want to be conquered, but they don’t care by who. Whether it’s daddy government, her father, a boyfriend, Chad Thundercock, violent criminals, or a horde of rapefugees doesn’t matter.

In times of war, women are constants. Men and boys are killed off, but women are simply transferred and assimilated into the new tribe to be the sperm receptacles of the victors.

Observing the weakness of many European men, women want a different set of male suitors. They call this initiative “diversity” or “multiculturalism.” In plain terms, women want to import men they perceive to be powerful and masculine to replace the weaklings they are stuck with. Women LOVE playing multiple men against each other to battle for her vaginal affections. It’s basically the plot of a every rom-com and romance novel.

Thanks to the 1984 police state, politicians and social media titans like Angela Merkel and Mark Zuckerburg, that new tribe so happens to be the biggest group in history to never reform itself to Western society: Muslims (over 2 billion of them). They give absolutely zero fucks about Western Civilization and their inhabitants. They never back down. These people are not just willing to die and be imprisoned to defend their beliefs, but kill: “There is no law, but that of Allah.”

This is attractive to women. Women LOVE violent males. Women love their conviction. It’s extremely arousing to them. The fact that it’s backed by a mental illness doesn’t matter. These Muslim immigrants are violent, they don’t break frame, and are becoming powerful. That’s seen as masculine. That’s sexy.

Most modern Western man doesn’t stand a chance. Rape and sexual assault has skyrocketed since immigrants have been allowed to settle into Europe, yet women and feminists were silent on the subject. Why? Because they would rather live under the threat of rape by invaders than settle with skinny beta manginas protesting at slut walks and minoring in gender studies. There are even instances where European girls refused to report their immigrant sexual assailants in the name of multiculturalism and fighting Islamophobia or just because they felt bad for them. But that’s bullshit. The power of the rapists gave her tingles and then she tried to rationalize it.

Conclusion

With Open Gates: The forced collective Suicide of European Nations - Watch with Audio below

You see that, betas of Europe? That’s your future.

The only thing saving North America from being Cologne, Sweden, or Britain is that there are two oceans separating us from Africa and the Middle East. But Obama seeks to change that by importing thousands of Syrians into small traditional family towns (view: Roosh’s video). Not to mention the education system, specifically the colleges here, are getting brainwashed to the max with anti-white “diversity.”

Betas of the United States and Canada? Keep it up, and women will encourage the same thing to happen here, embracing the enemy with open legs.

Show post
Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

Let’s face it. Humans, like other mammals, have a pecking order. Everyone knows that sometimes a person is “out of their league” when it comes to romance. Although every woman wants to be married to an alpha male, alphas are by definition scarce. So most women know they will have to settle for a beta or a gamma if they want to get married.

Everything about Trump triggers these women. He is everything that they want but know they cannot have. He is tall, fabulously wealthy, and even at 70, still pretty handsome. He’s a man’s man. Even though he has an Ivy League education, he can converse comfortably with plumbers and construction workers. He’s virtually fearless and he’s knocked off 16 of the GOP’s best candidates while fighting an unfriendly media.

What is worse is that Trump is married to a gorgeous model who is 24 years younger than him. In other cultures, a 24-year age difference is not scandalous, but it is in the SJW-controlled United States. This is enormously triggering to dowdy women because they know in their hearts that even if they were able to marry an alpha, he would eventually leave them for a younger, more beautiful woman.

Trump’s entire family is an affront to these women. His daughter Ivanka is a reminder that a woman does not have to be fat, even after they have children. And his handsome sons are painful reminders to a dowdy woman of what her children would have looked like if she had been able to score an alpha.

What recourse do these women have? The best revenge in the world: Trump’s opponent is a fellow dowdy woman. That’s why they will support her even though they know she is corrupt.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

Hillary will be far worse than Obama

Obama was the “race” president, and look how badly he has damaged race relations in only eight years. Hillary will be the “gender” president. The future we have in store should be absolutely clear to you if she happens to defeat Trump.

Not only will she move to establish a techno-matriarchy where men are second-class citizens to any female, but she will ensure that no movement or organization will be able to challenge her or her establishment cronies ever again. This isn’t a trivial matter of getting banned from a web site like Twitter or Youtube—many of you will be forced to escape the country for no other reason than you happening to be a man who found himself on the wrong side of the establishment.

Many men say that Trump is controlled opposition. The evidence to that has been wholly uncompelling based on the genuine establishment attacks he’s received, but even if he’s lying about all of his policies, including building a wall, the one guarantee we can make about him is that he won’t attack men. There’s absolutely nothing in his candidacy or behavior in the past 40 years of his life that suggests it.

If Trump happens to win and does attack us, I will proudly wear egg on my face, with the depressing realization that our last hope for some semblance of normality has been destroyed and the dark age will be brutal for us all.

A vote for Trump is a vote for self-preservation

My vote for Trump is based on self-preservation for myself, my brothers, and all the men who support me. If Trump wins, I’m confident that we will be able to exercise our free speech without unfair persecution and not be wrongly tried in courts for masculine behaviors. If he does only a scrap of what he promises, we’ll be able to pursue our constitutionally given freedoms without fear of destitution, imprisonment, or worse.

I predict that a masculine renaissance will occur upon his victory, where men can once again focus on their own individual goals with Trump as a patriarchal role model. I would devote more of my energy to helping men successfully pair bond with women, like I started my writing career with, instead of having to play political defense as masculinity becomes retroactively classified as hate speech.

But if Hillary wins, we’re doomed. I’m not saying this out of emotion but out of careful consideration of the globalist master plan and the increased speed of their advancement in the past ten years. What you saw against us in February is just a warm-up of what will come to hundreds of individuals and organizations on the right, all while the justice system pushes genuinely insane laws that force all men to prove they are not rapists after their sexual encounters. I do not look forward to how my life will be like if Hillary does win, or having to wake up every day to see if the “big” attack has started against us or not.

I therefore urge all American readers of mine to vote for Donald Trump on November 8, 2016. While I am skeptical of some of his promises, and wonder if America is too far gone to make it great again, Donald Trump must win so that the pause button can be pushed against this nightmare of insanity that is already crushing men. He will allow us to regain our footing after being forced to watch in disbelief at all the negative changes that have been recently forced upon us. Let us all breathe a sigh of relief if he wins, and pray to God for safety if he doesn’t.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

If Donald Trump Doesn’t Win, We’re Screwed

In the past year we’ve been the target of establishment attacks. Since then, I’ve had the privilege of speaking with insiders who understand the globalist master plan. Combining my own analysis with those discussions lead me to conclude that if Hillary Clinton wins the 2016 Presidential election, attacks against us and ideologically similar right-wing groups will explode in number, with the goal of shutting down our counter-narrative platforms and ensuring a Donald Trump figure never gets populist support again.

It’s easy to stay apolitical as long as political forces leave you alone, but the second you become a threat to the existing order, politics will become a painful part of your daily existence as pressure increases on your speech and behavior. Many young men in universities are finding this out right now as false rape and harassment charges ruin their lives before it gets started while men working in corporate America are already aware that they are one “sexist” or “homophobic” statement away from losing their livelihoods. The fact that many men are now recording their consensual sex encounters shows how badly men are being targeted.

Hillary will attack us on multiple fronts

If Hillary Clinton wins, there will be a huge increase in “acute” attacks against individuals and groups. At the same time, there will be a rapid introduction of dystopian new laws that serve as the leading edge of the “chronic” front. All men will be negatively affected under a Hillary presidency in one way or another, meaning that the globalist boot is fast approaching our faces.

The acute attacks will be witch hunts from the media, local politicians, and the Federal Government. They will target us, the alt right, alternative media, patriot groups, survivalists, traditionally conservative groups, and anyone else who strongly supports Donald Trump, tradition, or masculinity. The purpose of acute attacks is to psychologically break down, impoverish, and imprison those who have a powerful ability to counter the narrative or those who have the strength and organizational skill to resist tyranny with arms.

If the media can’t take someone down through their focused lies and distortions, like with what happened to me in February with the meetup outrage, the task will then be handed off to the Federal Government to pursue bogus “hate speech,” “extremist speech,” and “incitement to violence” charges, as is already being done in Europe (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). The IRS will be involved to wear down groups with targeted audits, like they did with the Tea Party, while the FBI will infiltrate and subvert groups that are meeting physically using COINTELPRO tactics.

The chronic attack phase will include passage of unconstitutional hate speech laws (or malicious interpretations of previously banal laws) that a compromised Supreme Court will not stop. A stricter variant of “Yes means yes” laws will be passed nationally, making every man who has consensual sex guilty of rape until he can definitively prove otherwise. Just as globalist insider Ezra Klein stated, the goal is for you to feel a “cold spike of fear” when interacting with women. So it shall be done.

Talking to girls in public will be illegal harassment or “hate crime,” and be enforced any time you make a girl feel bad for whatever reason, even if you merely stare at her the wrong way (such laws are currently being beta tested in the UK before wider rollout). Blatantly discriminatory “gender equality” laws in the workplace will lower the incomes of all men so that less qualified females can receive job positions and promotions at male expense.

In addition, the law will be selectively applied to maximize pain against men. Those who break the law against you will be allowed to walk, just like Hillary did after the charade of her FBI investigation, while you will be prosecuted for the most minor of missteps that the other side gets away with. The veneer of justice will be removed and only raw power will remain.

Show post
Bob Smith #fundie returnofkings.com

10 Words And Phrases Girls Habitually Use That Prove They Are Mindless Robots

Have you ever noticed that most liberal Western women utilize the following 10 words and phrases as the mainstays of their vocabulary? They utter these words and phrases in the exact same ways, using the exact same vocal inflections:

1. Amazing

(Spoken as, uh-MAYYYYY-zing)

2. Oh my god

(Spoken as, OHHHHH my god or OH. MY. GOD.)

3. So good

(Spoken as, SOOOOO good, or SO. GOOD. – as in, “That chocolate dildo tasted – SO. GOOD. – right after I banged myself with it.”)

4. Thank you

(Spoken as, THANG-cue, or THANG-kuh yoooo-WUH)

5. Like

(Typically utilized in conjunction with the other four words above, such as in the following sentence, “OH. MY. GOD. – like, that orgasm was…SO. GOOD. It was uh-MAYYYYY-zing! THANG-cue.”)

6. Really

(Spoken as, REEEEE-lee, and typically utilized in conjunction with the other five words and phrases above, such as in the following sentence, “OH. MY. GOD. – like, that orgasm was…SO. GOOD. It REEEEE-lee was uh-MAYYYYY-zing! THANG-cue.”)

7. Right

(Spoken as, righ-EET?, and typically utilized in conjunction with the other six words and phrases above, such as in the following sentence, “OH. MY. GOD. – like, that orgasm was…SO. GOOD. It REEEEE-lee was uh-MAYYYYY-zing! Righ-EET? THANG-cue.”)

8. Cute

(Spoken as, CUE-wut, or KEE-ute, and utilized in conjunction with the other seven words and phrases above, such as in the following sentence, “OH. MY. GOD. You’re so CUE-wut. Like, that orgasm was…SO. GOOD. It REEEEE-lee was uh-MAYYYYY-zing! Righ-EET? THANG-cue.”)

(Thanks to ROK reader Andrew, who pointed out that I had forgotten to include No. 8 above, in my original list of words and phrases.)

9. Awesome

(Spoken as, AWE-sum, and utilized in conjunction with the other eight words and phrases above, such as in the following sentence, “OH. MY. GOD. You’re so CUE-wut. You’re so AWE-sum! Like, that orgasm was…SO. GOOD. It REEEEE-lee was uh-MAYYYYY-zing! Righ-EET? THANG-cue.”)

10. No

(Spoken as, NO-wuh, and typically utilized separately from the other nine words and phrases above; such as in the following, extremely common man/woman exchange – Man: “Did you get banged last night while you were supposedly visiting your sister, Sunshine?” Woman, pouting: “NO-wuh.”)

The 10 words and phrases above are often utilized whenever a woman is trying to deflect attention away from her sexual shenanigans. By strategically utilizing them at critical junctures, she maintains an innocent, teenage-girl vibe, while pretending to be really into you—above all other men.

This greatly appeals to your nurturing, protective side, not to mention your ego, and might allow her to distract you from the curious matter that exhibited itself only a few moments earlier.

She will often bust out the above words and phrases if she suddenly exhibits new physical skills that she didn’t used to possess, such as snapping a bath towel, or being able to play a brand-new type of card game, which are overt signs that she is a cheating slut who has picked up new tricks from some random dipstick she has been banging on the side.

These robotic, mindless, incessantly jabbering sluts are as common as crotch crickets and are literally everywhere, and you can quickly replace one with another, just by going down to the corner bar and telling some other vacuous broad that your great-uncle left you $10 million dollars which you will be collecting in 12 short weeks.

At which point, your newest bimbo-of-the-week will utter the same 10 words and phrases listed above, while simultaneously complimenting you on your good looks, your sense of style, your incredible scent, and your great sense of humor, shortly before whisking you off to her place.

Like, amazing!

Show post
John Carver #fundie returnofkings.com

It Doesn’t Matter If Women Win Gold Medals At The Rio Olympics

The U.S. mainstream media is hailing the record number of female athletes which are heading to Rio de Janeiro for the Olympic Games, with a total of 292 out of the 555 American competitors being women. Because you know, gender gaps are worthy of congratulations and applause just as long as there are less men and more women stepping up to the plate.

In truth, this is actually a sad state of affairs. It means that the U.S. Olympic team will have less than a 50% chance of seeing a real champion, rather than a 2nd rate gold medalist from the weaker sex, achieving athletic glory on the world stage.

I’ve said it before in my previous article “Anything Women Can Do, Men Can Do Better,” and I’ll say it again in 2016. The best females can never outclass the best males in sport and athleticism.

Denial Is A River In Lefty Land

Feminists always love to espouse that women can be “just as good as any man” in sports, but this has always been a preposterous falsehood. The average women only has roughly 60% of the strength and muscle characteristics of a comparable man, and the greatest gender difference in upper body strength can probably be attributed to the fact that women tend to have a significantly lower proportion of their lean muscle tissue distributed in the upper body.

In other words, women will NEVER reach the stratospheric heights of the best male boxers, weightlifters, javelin throwers, hammer throwers, rowers, swimmers, pole vaulters, and a host of other Olympic events where upper body strength is pivotal to reaching the podium.

But what about feats of agility and stamina where upper body strength is not quite as vital? Such as Association Football (Soccer) and most running and jumping events at track and field? Well grab your adult coloring books and head to your “safe space” SJW’s, because the best male runners at the marathon (the biggest combo test of speed and stamina) are routinely faster than the best women.

“At every distance up to the marathon, the gap between men’s and women’s world record times is nine to 10 percent—and it’s a similar or even higher percentage among recreational runners.” – Runner’s World, April 2015 Edition

Get it? Due to irrefutable biological characteristics, women just don’t have the strength, speed, and physical fortitude to run faster or perform better at the same sport than the best men. Case in point, the Australian national women’s soccer team (which is participating at this Olympic games) was absolutely humiliated earlier this year by a 7 – 0 loss to the Australian national under FIFTEEN’s boys side (which is not participating).

Even in Olympic events which do not require overt displays of speed, stamina, or brute strength—such as gymnastics—denial dwelling SJWs and white knights may resort to saying that female gymnasts are more “graceful” and agile than their male counterparts.

Oh really? I beg to differ. Just watch British freerunner Will Sutton take a stroll around the Isle of Man, combining incredible acrobatics, athleticism, speed, stamina, and landing dangerous jumps that not a single woman has been able to emulate thus far.

Authoritative Quotes On Male And Female Physiology

‘Agility depends upon the ability to decelerate and accelerate fast, and men – because of their larger muscles – will always have an advantage,’ – Harry Brennan, Exercise Physiologist

‘There was a period in the Seventies when women equaled or broke more world records than men, but that was before the fall of the Berlin Wall.’ – Harry Brennan, Exercise Physiologist

(Translation: this was the era when Eastern Bloc coaches were feeding female athletes steroids like sweets. They were outright cheaters.)

‘The male skeleton is bigger and gives them an inherent advantage – larger bones are generally stronger,’ – Ignac Fogelman, Endocrinologist Professor

‘Faster men’s times for 100 to 800 meters are mostly due to men, on average, having greater muscle mass—and a larger portion of it is fast-twitch, which allows them to generate greater force, speed, and anaerobically produced energy’ – Chris Schwirian, Biological Sciences lecturer at Ohio University

World Athletic Records Men Vs. Women

100m Dash World Record

9.58 s – Usain Bolt (Men’s)

10.49 s – Florence Griffith Joyner (Women’s)

High Jump World Record

2.45 m – Javier Sotomayor (Men’s)

2.09 m – Stefka Kostadinova (Women’s)

Hammer Throw World Record

86.74 m – Yuriy Sedykh (Men’s)

79.58 m – Anita Wlodarczyk (Women’s)

Conclusion

Whenever female athletes are awarded a “gold medal” at the Olympics, it should just be a giant knockoff of that cheap Hanukkah gelt (chocolate gold coins) that Jewish children get for the holiday season. After the brief surge of excitement that they have won “gold” (and attention whore themselves with it on Instagram), they can peel off the tin foil and feast on the chocolatey goodness inside until it’s all gone. “You go girl!”

After all, since women are ultimately just big children, they merely deserve to have big children’s candy. The REAL gold medals should be allocated to the real champions of a sporting discipline’s top tier, which will always be men.

Unfortunately, “equality” obsessed feminists and SJW’s will be absolutely thrilled when women take home gold medals at the Olympic games, even though their competitive talents and event completion times will be noticeably worse than many male athletes who will return home with nothing.

So best of luck to all the male athletes in the Games of the XXXI Olympiad! Go for gold! (And I do mean the real kind).

Show post
Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

In the days after Wikileaks released the emails, leftists went berserk, claiming that the Russians were behind the hack (with no proof whatsoever), accusing Vladimir Putin of trying to influence the presidential election, and even accusing Donald Trump of being a Manchurian candidate for Moscow. Curiously, none of them have taken note of the multitude of other countries who are also sticking their hands into the American cookie jar, most notably Mexico, whose government has been funding riots at Trump’s rallies.

It’s quite telling that the only country that leftists don’t want influencing the government is a white, traditionalist, Christian one. The left’s anti-Russian hysteria isn’t simply repugnant: it’s a throwback to the anti-communist fervor of the early 1950’s. The difference is that while Joseph McCarthy’s claims that communists had infiltrated the government had validity, the left’s hatred of Russia is rooted entirely in their paranoia and hatred of healthy, prosperous societies.

...

Before and during the Cold War, leftists were in love with Russia. The Soviet Union represented the end goal of leftism: total state control over every aspect life. Because of this—and also because the Soviets extensively funded efforts to infiltrate Western institutions—the American and European left sided with Russia at every opportunity. For example, during World War II, leftists promoted the idea of opening a second front in Europe with the goal of taking pressure off of the Soviet Union, when the militarily smart move would have been to let the Nazis and Soviets destroy each other. The Normandy invasion was completely unnecessary; all it did was enable the U.S.S.R. to colonize much of eastern Europe.

Similarly, in the 1950’s, leftists in the media and government smeared Senator Joseph McCarthy when he courageously pointed out that Soviet agents were deeply embedded in the State Department and other prominent federal agencies. The Venona Papers—a collection of decrypted messages from the Soviet Union’s intelligence agencies released in 1995—later vindicated many of McCarthy’s claims. Later, in the 1980’s, leftists vociferously opposed Ronald Reagan’s aggressive stance towards the U.S.S.R., claiming it would lead to war; Ted Kennedy even begged the Russians to intervene in the 1984 presidential election and help defeat Reagan (irony).

The love between the Western left and Russia died when the Soviet Union collapsed. Since the end of the Cold War, Russia has transformed itself from a failed socialist state into a patriarchal, traditionalist one, reasserting its place as a world power. Christianity has been revived and takes a central role in Russian life, open homosexuality is frowned upon, and George Soros-funded front groups have been banned from the country. The reason why Russian (and other eastern European) women are known for their femininity and beauty is because these nations resist the moral turpitude of the West.

All this naturally makes Russia an enemy of the degenerate left. Anti-Russian feelings among leftists exploded in 2012, when members of Pussy Riot, a Western-funded leftist agitator group, were arrested after they broke into an Orthodox church and disrupted a mass in process. Leftists began foaming at the mouth a year later when the Russian government formally banned homosexuals from distributing propaganda to minors. When Russia began attacking ISIS last year—and actually made progress towards dismantling the Islamic State—Barack Obama shit a brick and “moderate” Republicans such as John Kasich and Lindsey Graham began speaking of war with Russia.

The left’s fear of Russia is simply their fear of normality, of white heterosexual men taking back what’s theirs. They’re aided by clueless cuckservatives who still think the Cold War is on and Russia is the Red Menace. Additionally, a large number of Russian Jews in the American political establishment, such as neocon Max Boot (a prominent #NeverTrump Republican) and radical lesbian activist Masha Gessen, have spent their careers agitating for more conflict with Russia. (Ilya Sheyman, another Russian Jew, is the head of MoveOn.org, which was behind the riot that shut down Donald Trump’s rally in Chicago last March.)

...

Common Filth and other commentators have quipped in the past that the U.S. will start World War III with Russia over the issue of gay rights, and those predictions are disturbingly close to coming true. The left’s irrational hatred of Russia combined with our constant meddling in their internal affairs (for example, see Ukraine, where we helped instigate an anti-Russian coup right in their backyard) ensure that tensions with Putin will continue to escalate.

This is lunacy. Beyond the fact that Russian society is one that we should aspire to emulate, Russia is a superpower with a nuclear arsenal. Vladimir Putin is not some tinpot potentate of a third-world hellhole; he’s a crafty leader with a strong military and a nation of hundreds of millions behind him. Hillary Clinton will almost assuredly escalate tensions with Russia, possibly bringing us to war, destroying what is left of America with it.

The left hopes to distract Americans’ from the Democrats’ corruption and malfeasance by ginning up a Red Scare 2.0, and we can’t let them get away from it. Leftists’ hatred of Russia, combined with the apocalyptic ramifications of war with Putin, are too significant to ignore.

Show post
John Hydenius #fundie returnofkings.com

Study: Homosexuals And Bisexuals Are More Likely To Be Mentally Ill, Drug Abusers

It’s summer now, and in Sweden that means it’s pride parade season. One thing that’s different this year is that the very gay Milo Yiannopoulos is coming here to lead a parade on July 27th. The reason is that this particular parade will go through Tensta, a suburb comprised of mostly immigrants, a lot of them Muslim. We’ll see how that goes.

In other gay news: a new survey has found excess health problems in gays, lesbians and bisexuals. These groups reported more health problems than straight men and women.

More prone to smoking and heavy drinking

The study was done in the US, with nearly 69,000 participants. The National Health Interview Survey has been around for many years, but in 2013 and 2014 it included a question about sexual orientation for the first time.

The researchers conclude that gay, lesbian and bisexual adults “were more likely to report impaired physical and mental health, heavy alcohol consumption, and heavy cigarette use, potentially due to the stressors that (they) experience as a result of interpersonal and structural discrimination.”

The results show that lesbians, compared to heterosexual women, are 91 percent more likely to report poor or fair health. Lesbians are also 51 percent more likely, and bisexual women more than twice as likely, to report multiple chronic conditions, compared to straight women.

Gays, lesbians and bisexuals are more likely to indulge in heavy drinking and smoking. 26 percent of gay men and about 40 percent of bisexual men reported at least moderate psychological distress, compared to about 17 percent of heterosexual men.

In the case of women, about 22 percent of heterosexuals had at least moderate psychological distress, compared to about 28 percent of lesbians and about 46 percent of bisexuals.

Gilbert Gonzales of the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, who worked with this study, thinks so-called “minority stress” may account for health differences between heterosexuals and gay, lesbian and bisexual people. He thinks bisexuals have it worse than the rest because they may not always be accepted by gay, lesbian and transgender communities.

Right off the bat, you know the researchers aren’t exactly unbiased in this matter, since they talk about “structural discrimination” of these minority groups in America, a country where they are constantly praised in the media and by the elites. But leaving that aside, their study does show some interesting results.

I can’t say that I’m surprised. There are many possible reasons why the LGB (and likely also T) community is having more psychological problems than heterosexuals. One reason could be that some people do treat them badly on account of them being so strange (there’s a reason why they’re called queers). If they insist on acting act out their weird sexual desires in public, it’s understandable that some will take offense to that.

Some might even go so far as to discriminate against them. A business owner with more traditional values might deny them service—for instance, refuse to be the host of a gay wedding. That could well cause the gay couple to feel distress. (Although I would say that that’s the business owner’s right in a free country.)

But I would argue that there are other factors that affect LGBT people’s mental health more than real life discrimination, which can’t be that common in Western countries. The fact that their situation is often described as a lot more bleak than it is, is something that surely must affect them in a negative way. If they’re constantly being told about how oppressed they are by white, cisgender men, and “the religious right” (but not Muslims, we can’t say that), then of course they’re gonna be worried about their safety and future.

In the same way, if you tell a black person enough times that the police are after him and want to shoot him to death, for nothing more than walking down the street, eventually he’s going to believe it and start resenting cops and society in general.

Why celebrate sexual deviance?

But there’s one other factor that I want to bring to this discussion. I’m not a scientist like Gilbert Gonzales, and I’m definitely going to sound like a prejudiced asshole saying this (although it wouldn’t be the first time), but I think there’s something fundamentally wrong with gays, lesbians and bisexuals. Wrong in the sense that they weren’t created as they were supposed to be.

People are, like all animals, supposed to mate with each other, otherwise we wouldn’t still be here. Hence, we’re meant to be heterosexuals. Ergo, gays, lesbians and bisexuals were born with a faulty constitution. And since they’re faulty, it’s no wonder if that reflects on their mental condition.

I’m not saying that there’s necessarily something morally wrong with being gay, just that they’re a small minority of the populace for a reason. It’s not something we should encourage people to be—the results of the study presented above support that case.

Should someone feel pride over being born faulty? Should it be paraded around in the street like it’s something we should celebrate? Should we embrace a condition that impedes our species’ ability to survive? I’m not sure I can agree with that.

Show post
Jon Socrates #fundie returnofkings.com

Patriarchal nationalism is a political and social framework based on red-pill wisdom, articulated by ROK’s own Roosh Valizadeh and Michael Sebastian. This framework is an antidote to the poison that has corrupted virtually every facet of Western civilization, now drawing ever closer to systemic collapse. If you haven’t already, you should read the article on patriarchal nationalism now.

...

Liberalism in the most general sense is an ideology of individualism, in which the individual is paramount. For classical liberals, a man’s active self is sacred, such that individual labor, opinions, speech, liberty, equality under the law, and safety from others are valued by society, which serves as a policeman. For modern liberals, a man’s passive self is sacred, such that individual needs, desires, feelings, equality of outcome, and safety (including from natural consequences) are valued by society, which serves as a nanny.

Liberalism is an ideology in which society exists to serve individuals; how adult or childish those individuals are expected to be is merely a secondary consideration. The first sin of liberalism is its myopia, its doctrine that individuals are the only fundamental, essential units of the human species.

The second sin of liberalism is its idealization of individual morality and reason as the foundation of society, the faith that the individual as an institution is strong enough of mind and character to hold as the center around which all other facets of society revolve. Such an idealization grossly underestimates how much people can value taking over contributing, being over doing, feeling over thinking, and wishing over seeing. Sufficiently degenerated, men will beat their plowshares into televisions; they will forgo the sowing season to glut upon seeds.

...

Through the myopia of liberalism, individuals are seen as the fundamental units of the human species, while all larger units are merely groups in which individuals participate in order to achieve useful results. Families are formed in order to secure companionship and to share burdens. Tribes and nations arise in order to facilitate trade and collective security. For the liberal, the larger units are only utilitarian arrangements for individuals.

The benefits of larger social units are obvious. However, a more careful analysis reveals that these larger units, the family and the tribe, are not just useful, but are essential to the survival and thriving of both human individuals and the human species.

Show post
Aurelius Moner #fundie returnofkings.com

Let me first state that any philosophy allowing for rights in abstraction from the norms of objective morality, is Liberal—and this includes almost all of what calls itself “Conservatism” in the Anglosphere (and, increasingly, beyond). At the heart of Liberalism, aka Modernism (in the technical terms used by Catholics such as myself), is the incoherent and irrational endowing of error with rights, often consequent to an incorrect valuation and application of the good of tolerance.

The first manifestation of this new philosophy in the West was Protestantism, which as Don Felix Sarda y Salvany said, “begets by nature tolerance of error.” I do not say this to be offensive, but descriptive; it was the first manifestation of the feeling that men are entitled to their own opinions on ultimate questions, and ought to be “free” to act in accord with their conscience on these opinions—and that, therefore, authority must yield more or less to individuals’ rights of conscience.

[Picture of Liberty Bell with "Freedom of Conscious" and "Freedom of Religion," with the caption "Concepts as Flawed and Broken as the Bell that Stands for Them"]

One can see that there is essentially no difference between this and the maxim of Justice Kennedy, which he penned to uphold worthless whores’ rights to murder their children without so much as notifying their husbands, the fathers: “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” I spit upon such damned nonsense; this is literally a carte blanche to do whatever the hell you want. The story of Western Civilization from about 1500 A.D. to the present, is the story of how this absurd idea has played out in successive waves of incoherence and irrationality.

The only limit on this “right to define one’s own concept of existence” is the flimsy protestation that “your rights end where mine begin,” or, put otherwise: “don’t inflict your morality on me!” This sounds good to the person who has not analyzed it critically, but in fact it is a complete impossibility. We all live together in society. Any view that one enshrines as the societal ideal is automatically and inevitably going to inflict itself upon everybody in that society, and will frustrate or contradict their own “concept of existence,” to some extent.

Indeed, it is a wildly tyrannical idea, because it is tantamount to saying that everyone who does not consider their concept of existence to be totally private, relative and arbitrary, has no right to implement their views in society. Yes, as we see, even Libertarianism advances this radically hegemonic principle, squelching all opinions and beliefs that reject the relativistic premise. For, even to advocate that one should not inflict his moral views on someone else, is already an attempt to inflict one’s moral views on someone else! And in the absence of an objective norm of morality, there is really nothing stopping the Supreme Court from interpreting the Constitution to mean that your right not to bake cakes for sodomites, ends where a sodomite’s right to demand cakes of you begins. That this is even an issue, is proof of the absurdity of our system.

...

I, for example, believe that there are objective principles of morality, and a moral and rational role for the state; I believe it is absolutely right and just and salutary for society to be run on these principles, and that this means making definite judgments upon certain ideas and behaviors, “inflicting” this system upon everybody. I also believe that I am morally obliged to prefer this system of governance, and to reject a Liberal one.

The Liberal, Libertarian or “Conservative” will recoil in horror; but, they are reacting to the mere candor of my position. The fact, is that their viewpoints also require me to shut up, forsake my dearest religious and moral principles, and submit to a society organized along their preferred principles, which I know to be not only immoral, but also impossible and irrational.

When members of society install a form of specious relativism as their governing principle, they are inflicting their moral view upon me. They limit the scope of my social and moral action; they compel my submission to what they accomplish via their appeal to the mob; they shackle me to the moral drift and societal decline of a state piloted by the demagogued masses. They are denying my moral view that a just, rational and even divine social order should reign over society, and that, far from according “power to the people,”

I should hold the uninformed dissent of infidels and fools in contempt, regarding this latter as the infallible source of civilizational decadence. If they succeed in preventing me from implementing my moral vision and living in the society I would form for myself and others, they have succeeded in inflicting their moral vision upon me. They have nullified my moral and social aspirations. They have compelled me to live in a State where a chimerical relativism bulldozes my sublimer views without scruple.

...

That’s the heart of all this. Since we no longer believe that the only basis of rights is objective uprightness, and since we no longer orient our society towards this (allowing the masses, instead, to simply assert their whimsies as “rights”), and since we have founded a society based on the irrational attempt to accord rights to this tangled abyss of error, we are doomed to pretend that we are not inflicting ourselves on each other, despite the fact that any set of social norms—even the norm of pretending to reject norms—inevitably inflicts itself upon everyone. Unless we repent, this already bitter crisis will keep playing out to the bitter, bitter, bitterest end.

I used to think people would wake up. Yet most still seem oblivious to the manifest inevitability of “inflicting a view,” despite the steadily escalating clash of moral inflictions in the name of forbidding moral inflictions over five centuries. This has now entered a critical stage, because, having moved on from disagreement about less obvious points like the Trinity and Papal Primacy, sane people are now being asked to acquiesce even to palpably absurd ideas: collusion in sodomy = holy matrimony; Bruce Jenner = woman; up = down; square = circle.

The only thing for it, is to stop worrying about inflicting “a” view, and to start worrying about inflicting the right one. Until men with just convictions no longer fear to take up the sword of a righteous authority, and to smite those who demand the right to dissent from justice and just authority, the West will continue to tear itself apart with a specious and manifestly prevaricating, passive-aggressive, intolerant “tolerance.”

Show post
Rex Infidelis #fundie returnofkings.com

How Fast-Approaching Sexbot Technology Is Making Women Fearful

I just had a funny experience that illustrates the imperious power of the female narrative in our society. I was sitting in my living room with a 25-year-old, who we’ll call Teri, watching a technology documentary when a segment came on about sex-bots and the technological advancements that are making ever-more realistic ones possible.

At first she seemed intrigued and amused at the sight of dozens of featureless rubber torsos hanging from hooks, waiting to have nipples painted on before being attached to jointed metal frames; but a moment later, there was an interview with a guy who had journeyed to the shop to help design a mechanized companion that was being made just for him, and Teri’s expression changed. Here was a man, neither creepy nor overtly awkward, and exhibiting no outward sign of disability, stating without shame that he would rather pay $7,000 or more for a silicone-and-circuitry simulacrum of a woman than take a real live one out to dinner.

She wasted no time with subterfuge (I like that about her), her id marching indignantly to the forefront as she huffed, “I don’t know about all this. It seems like they could just replace women with those things.” As you might expect, I failed fantastically in my attempt to stifle the ensuing chuckle.

A New Enemy Emerges

While most females will never be as direct as Teri, preferring instead to couch their arguments in talk of “dehumanization” and “exploitation,” the truth is they are scared of the competition. It’s bad enough that we already have FleshLights and RealDolls, but the thought of a fully functional female shaped robot who walks, talks, laughs, fucks like a pornstar, and (if designers are smart) knows how to cook and clean?

Plus you never have to feed it, take it shopping, meet its parents, or listen to it cry? Now the ladies are starting to sweat. They know that access to this sort of technology will compromise their bargaining power with men. While you may be tempted to point out that women have had access to dildos, vibrators, and even more complex contraptions involving power tools for quite a while and it has failed to replace us, you would do well to remember that women don’t want the same things from men as men want from women. Men look to women to be their companions, keep their homes, and provide sex. Women, on the other hand, look to men for everything else.

Narrative Under Attack

If women en masse had some way to meet their needs for shelter, protection, child-rearing resources, and status without trading their beauty, companionship, and homemaking skills for it, the power of a man to secure himself a desirable woman through the cultivation of superior provisioning skills would be greatly diminished.

Oh wait… that already happened. If men succeeded in leveraging half the power through technological innovation that women have managed to through modern governments and their myriad social justice programs, the dynamics of the marketplace would tip dramatically in their favor. Basically, the mass production of sex-bots with all the above traits could cause as tumultuous a tremor in the sexual market as the advent of feminism itself, only this time with men getting the better half of the deal.

In today’s world, the men we call betas and deltas, or those who actually produce all the wealth SJWs are so busy redistributing, are incentivized toward all this surplus production by the dream of having a woman to love who will both admire them and help raise a family in their image. While this American dream remains attainable for a select minority, modern society and its many forms of “progress,” feminism chief among them, continuously drive that goal farther into the realm of fantasy for the average man. As women gain more and more “freedom” and use it to pursue and attain (briefly) the minority of men who they desire, your average Joe must submit to ever-intensifying erosion of his bargaining power if he is to even scavenge the leftovers.

As the MGTOW movement illustrates, men have already been feeling the squeeze for a while now, and many are starting to drop out even with the knowledge that this will likely lead to childlessness, loneliness, and a lack of a support network in old age. If that’s already the case, how many men will join them once sophisticated robo-lovers and artificial wombs consign these worries to the dustbin of history? Is our society prepared for the potential results of a precipitous drop in its productive and innovative capacity? The next generation of men could turn a century’s worth of social engineering on its head by dropping out and refusing to produce the wealth that feeds the various organs of the globalist machine.

[...]

Conclusion

We live in exciting times, to be sure. The war of the sexes, like all other wars, has long been influenced by technology. Females of late have been given a huge leg up from male-made technology in the form of birth control, egg-freezing, and in-vitro fertilization. But while women love to shout about how independent they are, deep down they realize they are only afforded a soapbox by the same “patriarchy” they so disdain and the men who pay the taxes to run it.

If sex-bots become as ubiquitous as some hope and others fear, men may find themselves with less and less incentive to maximize their productivity as they opt in large numbers for cheap robots over expensive families. Women better hope the Campaign Against Sex Robots is successful (it won’t be), lest the next generation of men truly go their own way, leaving women to prove how capable and independent they really are.

Show post
Bob Smith #fundie returnofkings.com

9 Secrets About Female Nature Told By A Hot Girl Dying Of Cancer

Many years ago, I became friends with a very hot blonde in her early 30’s who was dying of cancer. Due to her impending death, she decided that it was okay to relay a vast amount of inside information to me, regarding what women were really all about. She volunteered this information. I have never forgotten what she told me, and it has served me quite well over the years.

Here is a summary of the ten things she told me about the true nature of women, which were related to me over the span of a couple of weeks, shortly before her passing:

1. Women are exactly like little children

We are constantly poking, prodding and testing a man, in order to find out what his boundaries are. If he has no boundaries, we will destroy him, especially if he loves us. A man has to have boundaries, and he has to outline them precisely, and he has to force us to adhere to them with the power of his conviction and the power of his action. If he doesn’t do that, we will beat him over the head with his weaknesses (his lack of boundaries) until he breaks.

2. Women put up a false front about virtually everything

Our faces are fake (makeup), our hair is fake (dyed), our boobs are fake (some of us), everything about us is fake. Most especially when it comes to what is inside of us. We lie constantly, because we are far worse, character-wise, than even our closest friends or lovers will ever know, and we desperately fight to keep all of that hidden.

We are looking for our true daddies, basically – the idealized daddies that we never had – somebody who can see through all of our false fronts and call us out on our bullshit and put us in our place. The problem is, those type of men are very few and far between.

3. If a woman ever tells you, “If we don’t have trust, we don’t have anything,” she is either cheating on you or planning to cheat on you

There are no exceptions to this rule. We use that as cover, to try and make the man feel guilty for questioning our fidelity. What we are really saying here, is, “I will fuck whomever I want and you’d better keep your nose out of it or I’ll cut you off from my pussy and I’ll ruin your freaking life if you keep pressing the issue.” If we really cared about you, and if we really weren’t cheating on you or planning to cheat on you, we would tell you something like, “I am not cheating on you, I love you, and I would never do that. I don’t care if we have to stay up all night, for the next week, and go over every single shred of doubt that’s currently troubling you about this. I have nothing to hide, I would never cheat on you, and I don’t want you thinking these things about me. Please tell me exactly why you think I am cheating, point by point, and I will do anything and everything that I have to do to prove to you that I’m not cheating, in order to ease your worried mind.”

4. Women are much hornier than men

Vastly, exponentially, hornier than men. A woman will do just about anything, sexually speaking, so long as she is fairly certain she won’t get caught. For example, we will occasionally go out of town in order to rendezvous with a man we’ve been longing to fuck, and/or to have multiple sex partners in the same evening, and/or at the same time.

This is something that hot women do, most especially. In our minds, it is a natural desire, and a natural thing, and so long as nobody else finds out, it’s “game on”. Women are receptacles for cock, that’s how we have been biologically designed. Nothing feels better to us than being completely filled up with multiple penises, than being the center of sexual attention, than being the object of unbridled group lust. Since it’s something we can’t risk doing on our home turf (don’t shit where you eat), we have to think outside the box, in order to get our boxes completely satisfied. And you might find this shocking, but many women – many, many women – have sex with dogs on a routine basis. This is just one example of how insatiable we truly are.

I can see why you might not believe it, to which I say, look really hard at all of the women you know who have dogs. Look at women who have dogs whenever you see them out on the street, in the act of walking those dogs. Or at the park. You will notice that most of them have male dogs – the vast majority, in fact. This isn’t a coincidence. And look at all the female teachers who are exposed in the media for having sex with underage students. We have no self-control when it comes to sex – or anything else, for that matter. To our way of thinking, losing control is what makes sex great. Doing anything that is taboo is what makes sex great.

5. Women do not have female friends—they have female competition

We lie to our so-called female friends and pretend we are loyal and faithful to them, just like we do with the men in our lives. Secretly, we are jealous of each other, and we want all of the desirable things that other women have—most especially when it comes to our female friends’ things.

And we consider men to be things. If one of our friends has a hot man, we want him to want us. We will do everything we can to seduce him. Not because we really want him—we don’t really want anybody. We do it because we are rarely happy, and we don’t want our girlfriends to be happy, either, and we want to boost our own egos more than anything else.

And after we get him to fuck us, when our girlfriends find out that he has had sex with us, that’s when we finally get what we wanted in the first place. If we break up the previously happy couple, that’s fine, too. It’s all about our pussy, not hers. It’s about winning.

6. Women always lie about the number of sexual partners they’ve had

They also lie about not wanting men with large penises. If we told the actual truth about the number of different men and women we’ve slept with, and if we told the actual truth about our fervent desire for big dicks, our pool of potential suitors would shrink drastically, to the point where it would completely dry up. So we lie. Most often, we will claim that we’ve had between three and eight sexual partners in our lifetime. And, to our way of thinking, it isn’t a lie, because if we had five sexual partners last Saturday evening, and our man asks us how many sexual partners we have had, and we answer, “Five”, well, technically, we aren’t lying.

7. All women dislike themselves

And because we dislike ourselves, we fervently hate any man who doesn’t see through our bullshit. The more a man loves us, the more we hate him. The more he overlooks our sins, and the more he fails to see how corrupt we are, and the more he gives us the benefit of every single doubt – the more we despise him. We will escalate our bad behavior until we finally break him and he wakes up and realizes how worthless we are and what a fool he has been for believing in us.

8. Women want what they can’t have

We want a man whom we can’t have. We want a man who honestly doesn’t give a fuck about us, who doesn’t care if we come or go. That’s the kind of man we will pursue. Call them bad boys or call them whatever you want, that’s the kind of man we want – period. The kind of guy who will make us orgasm, crudely, and give us a huge sexual thrill in the bedroom, and then discard us like used toilet paper, and fuck our female friends afterwards, just because he can. (Just like we would do with his male friends.)

9. All women are masochists

And all hot women are narcissistic masochists. We hate it when things are going well, especially if they continue to go well for long periods of time. We know down deep that we are fucked-up and not worthy of anything that is truly good. So when things are going well in a relationship, we eventually sabotage it. We just can’t help ourselves in this regard.

We could have the greatest, most handsome, most well-hung husband in the world—a one-of-a-kind man who makes all of our girlfriends jealous; we could have the greatest children in the world, who are beautiful, well-behaved and ambitious; we could have the most enviable career imaginable; we could have all of the money and prestige and the truly good things in life, and we could repeatedly tell ourselves over and over, and believe, on the surface, that we would never cheat on our husbands. But down deep we know that it’s a lie. Because one day, we could walk into a grocery store, and some bad boy could whisper just the right combination of words in our ear, and the next thing you know, we’re at the Motel 6 getting it in the ass. That’s just how we are, and any woman—especially a hot woman—who says otherwise, is a liar.

Over the years, my deceased friend’s words have proven to be spot-on, in the vast majority of cases. And if they ring true from your own personal experience as well, then I am more than happy that I shared them with you here today. I know that my deceased friend would be thrilled to know that I have shared this information with the manosphere. After all, she used to be a hottie, and she’s now dead, and by giving me the inside scoop on her female competition, she continues to beat them—she continues to “win”—even from beyond the grave.

Show post
Jon Bergeron #fundie returnofkings.com

Hillary Clinton’s Socialist Manifesto Shows Why Women Shouldn’t Be Involved In Politics

It is no surprise that most men are inclined towards freedom and individualism, while most women are inclined towards security and collectivism. Building on this dichotomy, we have many examples of women finding the preference of security and collectivism illustrated in large, bloated welfare government.

For one, the Pew Research states “Women lean Democratic by 52%… unmarried women 57%”. In a similar article, “Since 1990, women have been consistently more likely than men to identify as Democrats or lean Democratic.” Nothing is closer to socialism and statism in modern America than the American left and the Democratic party. In case you didn’t know, they have an actual socialist running in the primaries. The Democratic party continues to represent women and their beliefs of security and collectivism.

You Must Love Big Brother

The ultimate caricature of the left, Hillary “the woman” Clinton, illustrates her ideas of collectivism in her creepy 1996 Communist Manifesto, It Takes a Village. The title of her book itself should give you shivers. The book illustrates its eerie socialist message of collectivism and state security. An excerpt from the Chapter “Brave New Village” from Jonah Goldberg’s book, Liberal Fascism, exemplifies Clinton’s idelogy of state controlled community accurately:

"…(the) notion of the ‘common good’…she (Clinton) indisputably draws her vision from the same eternal instinct to impose order on society, to create an all-encompassing community, to get past endless squabbles and ensconce each individual in the security blanket of the state. Hers is a political religion, an updated Social Gospel- light on the Gospel, heavy on the Social- spoken in soothing tones and conjuring a reassuring vision of cooperation and community…The village may have replaced ‘the state’, and it in turn may have replaced the fist with the hug, but an unwanted embrace from which you cannot escape… (Goldberg, 357)"

The idea of women embracing the left and socialism is not new to modern America, either. Throughout history we have many examples of such behavior from women. In John Derbyshire’s 2009 classic “We Are Doomed” (a must read), he explains:

"The ‘gender gap’ in political attitudes has been remarked on since at least 391 B.C. That was the year Aristophanes staged his play ‘The Assemblywomen’ (Ecclesiazusae). In the play the women of Athens, disguised as men, take over the assembly and vote themselves into power. Once in charge, they institute a program of pure socialism:

‘Everyone is to have an equal share in everything and live on that; we won’t have one man rich while another lives in penury, one man farming hundreds of acres while another hasn’t got enough land to get buried in…No one will be motivated by need: everybody will have everything…the children will regard all older men as fathers…’

The play wright grasped the essential point… Women incline to socialism much more naturally than do men.” (Derbyshire, 88)"

Mr. Derbyshire continues:

"George Orwell, whose insights into these matters were very deep, also noticed this (women’s inclination to Socialism)…Winston Smith, the protagonist of 1984, observe(s):

‘It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers-out of orthodoxy… ‘

I (Derbyshire) saw the same thing myself when living in communist China in the years just after Mao. If you wanted to hear a total-credulity, utterly unreflective parroting of the Party line, a woman was always your best bet.’ (Derbyshire, 88)"

In America, when women were granted the right to vote, it opened a solid voting bloc for Left statists for years to come. Ironically, gyno-con Ann Coulter (a brilliant conservative woman; yes, they exist, but rare) states:

"It would be a much better country if women did not vote. That is simply a fact. In fact, in every presidential election since 1950 — except Goldwater in ’64 — the Republican would have won, if only the men had voted. – “An appalling magic” in The Guardian (17 May 2003)"

Gentlemen, it all went to shit when we gave them the right to vote. We even hear it from a woman, Ann Coulter. Women became a huge and powerful voting bloc that rarely change its tune—the numbers show very little fluctuation in their leftist leaning, as explained earlier.

One can only imagine a country where statists, leftists, cuckservatives, and neocons might not have existed if women had not been granted the vote. Whatever the case, a large statist government is now a pressing issue, with much of it being the responsibility of idealistic, dumb, and dangerous policies supported by women and feminized SJW men.

To take this a step further, the world becomes more feminized each day and traditional sex roles get reversed—look no further than the new Star Wars and Mad Max to see the effects of this feminization. In modern culture, we have women being glamorized in roles of power and “strong, independent, women” that can do what men do. This propaganda easily translates to the ballot box.

The feminization of everything is a weak attempt to indoctrinate young men to believe that women are leaders and that women are masculine. In response, weak men are followers of their causes and beliefs. This is something men, young and old, should strive to be conscious of every day.

We, as men, must be aware of this political bloc illustrated in the Democratic party. As we can see in the chart previously discussed, men tend to fluctuate their vote based on the individual, women vote based along strict party adherence. Women are one solidarity voting bloc for large government and Democratic party lines.

This is dangerous, because it is determining the fate of our country and our future. We are now on a path to destruction and drastic change must occur. The fate rests in the hands of men, not idealistic, statist, Leftist women, nor SJWs.

We must take back our country, if not by the voting box, then by any means necessary.

Show post
Jack Package #fundie returnofkings.com

Black Cricket Player Fined $10,000 For Asking White Reporter Out On A Date

Over the past week, another example of non-issue hysteria has been created in the Australian media, further feeding the need for female indignation. The following interview is what started the response:

Chris Gayle Flirts With Reporter Mel McLaughlin During Live Interview in Big Bash League

The man being interviewed is Chris Gayle, a professional cricketer from Jamaica. The interview was held shortly after Gayle left the field after being dismissed in a T20 match for Melbourne vs. Hobart. Gayle currently holds the record for the highest score in a domestic T20 game of 175 not out. This is only one of the many records that Gayle currently holds. His full player bio can be found here.

Off the field, Gayle has always been known as a smooth “ladies’ man.” It is his on-field performances, and his laid-back attitude and flamboyant lifestyle off the field, that have made him one of the more known and likable characters in world cricket today. It is also because of his character that he behaved in this way in the interview with Mel McLaughlin

The response from Mel McLaughlin

The response in the days after the event from the journalist who interviewed Gayle has to be applauded. McLaughlin could have easily used this to set herself up as a professional victim. However, her take on this is that while she was uncomfortable at the time, it isn’t a big a deal. Notice in the interview here she was continually trying to get those interviewing her to get over it as she wanted to talk about what she is actually paid to talk about… cricket.

Even though McLaughlin has accepted that Gayle didn’t mean to cause offence and she wants to move on, others in the media couldn’t accept this and are continuing with their assault on Gayle. While pretending to care about the welfare of McLaughlin, the people interviewing her in the video above don’t seem to care that she was feeling uncomfortable in continually having to answer the same question as to whether she felt harassed or not.

The media response

Chris has currently been fined $10,000 for this “offence,” but even the most novice of fortune tellers could have predicted that wasn’t the end of it. There are currently countless articles vilifying Gayle’s actions from a plethora of media channels on this issue, but the worst of all these is that the most respected source for cricket news the world over (ESPNCricinfo) has published these articles.

Much in the same way that Gamergate began with articles claiming that “gamers are dead,” cricket journalist Dan Brettig is also trying to lecture to men that we need to bend over backwards to accommodate women into another section of what used to be a male space. This was then backed up by a “cricket feminist” claiming that women’s cricket is just as good as men’s, as well as the usual garbage of wanting to introduce quota systems onto cricket administration boards.

Out of fear of becoming the next target for feminist sabotage, the chairman of Cricket Australia Jamie Sutherland has shown support for those wanting harsh penalties on Gayle. The media are currently and quite successfully calling for Gayle to be sacked, and it is now likely that Gayle won’t be part of the next season. Similar to how Bill Cosby had his name tarnished by claims of harassment in the name of publicity, so too has someone come out months after the event allegedly occurred to say that Gayle exposed himself to a female journalist in Sydney during the Cricket World Cup in February 2015:

This journalist is from the same company (Fairfax media) where Gayle was previously employed as a guest columnist. Even though Gayle has denied the allegations and there hasn’t been a single piece of evidence shown to prove this allegation, we can safely assume that Gayle won’t be employed to contribute any columns to this paper in the future.

The public response

The public response to this has been much polarized. After reading the comments sections from various new sources, there have been a surprising amount of people who are getting sick of being lectured to by leftist PC thought police. A lot of people are seeing this “incident”—a man complimenting a woman and then asking her out for a drink. There are, of course, those of the public who have joined the media in blowing this out of proportion.

People are now rightly so comparing this incident to one of Maria Sharapova flirting with a male journalist in a press conference:

Sharapova flirts with Aussie journo

This issue has nothing to do with whether Gayle made the journalist uncomfortable or not. The PC zombies are instead outraged that a man would take steps to fulfill his own sexual strategy rather than passively waiting in line so that women have full control in fulfilling theirs. Gayle putting a woman on the spot scares women and manginas because he is showing that they don’t always have full control. This is also why the red pill is so offensive to most women.

This issue will more than likely blow over in the next couple of days. However, with more and more examples of issues like this coming up each day, it might have the same effect of opening the eyes of a number of men to the feminizing of society.

Show post
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.”

Show post
Max Roscoe #fundie returnofkings.com

10 Things My Dog Taught Me About Women

I discovered ROK around the same time I became the owner of a puppy, and there are many parallels I have noticed while I am out with my dog about women and relationships. Here are a few observations:

1. Always be the master, not the slave

While I allow my dog the occasional freedom of running off-leash, at all times it is clear that I am his master, and he has certain boundaries. He knows he must stay within eyesight of me at all times. No barking or aggressive behavior towards others will be allowed.

He is constantly looking back to me for approval that what he is doing is allowed. With women, it is important to maintain frame at all times. If you are successful with establishing yourself as the dominant partner in the relationship (you make the calls, you decide the dates), then your woman will be far less likely to attempt reversing the roles and become dominating and vindictive.

2. A well trained partner will cause fewer problems

I enrolled my dog in a six-week training course, where we learned basic commands. More than the simple act of learning that the English pronunciation of “sit” means to place the rear end on the ground, however, is the importance that the dog learns that you are the master and you have certain expectations.

A well trained dog will know when it misbehaves, and will sense the disappointment or anger of its owner when it breaks the rules. Likewise, a woman should be trained to behave properly. Since Western civilization has abdicated its role in training members of both sexes how to behave politely and what proper roles are, men must take up this duty on our own.

If you firmly but politely lay out your expectations for your partner (no flaky behavior, I appreciate you cooking meals for me that we can enjoy together, you are to dress feminine but not slutty when we are in public, etc.), in my experience, the woman enjoys doing her part, the same way we enjoy our masculine role.

3. Slight corrections are needed from time to time

My dog knows how to walk on a leash, next to me, without dragging me all over the place. However, smells, sights of other dogs, and outside stimulus often get the better of him and he will wander too far away. A gentle tug on his leash and a verbal correction will quickly bring him back in line. Paying attention to the small details and “nipping it in the bud” before he’s off the sidewalk will bring him back to my side.

Likewise, it is far easier to maintain a happy relationship by addressing small missteps as they occur, before letting them blossom into major problems. Tell her to hit the gym when she’s gotten a bit out of shape, but don’t wait until she’s gained 20 pounds. Give her a limit on how much alcohol she can drink. Tell her she must inform you who she is going out with and where.

As we know, women are essentially large children, and like a teen who will gradually test the limits of his boundaries, a woman will push the rules to see how much she can get away with. Treat her like a father would his child, and let her know she is not to behave this way in the future. She will not only stop the harmful actions, but come to respect you even more.

4. Positive reinforcement works

The best way to train a dog is by offering treats, and giving strong, enthusiastic, loving verbal reinforcement when it does what is expected. The dog is happy that it is making its owner happy, and any owner can see this. Likewise, a woman’s instinctual nurturing side will blossom and she will be happy when she is pleasing her man. Kind of the inverse of happy wife, happy life.

The wife is happy because she is pleasing her husband, and she enjoys fulfilling her role in the relationship, the same way we naturally enjoy the rewards of hard work, the satisfaction of fixing things, and kind actions which bring a smile to the face of a woman who earns and has our affections.

5. Pay attention to details

The next time you see a dog, look closely. Does it have well groomed hair, or a matted, dirty, coat full of debris? Does it have a face of enthusiasm and happiness, or is it aggressive and violent? Does it playfully engage its owner and strangers, or is it skittish and anti-social? Does it respond well to its owner?

Likewise, there are visual clues that let us know the quality of women we are approaching. Does she groom herself well, with long, feminine hair, trimmed and painted nails, and conservative clothing? Does she smile? Does she interact socially with others, or is she glued to her smart phone screen and unable to hold a real conversation?

Does she have clear, radiant skin, or is her body mutilated with shrapnel and graffiti? Some women, and some dogs, simply are too far gone, and should be avoided, due to their unpleasant past.

6. The laws of Nature are supreme

Even a bad dog owner who has taught his dog no discipline, and has no control over his pet, cannot get around the fact that the dog relies on the owner for food, shelter, and water. The dog is subservient to its owner, and even in the worst of owners, this fact of nature cannot be reversed.

Likewise, a woman is naturally and normally the submissive partner to the man. No amount of short haircuts, business suits, you-go-girling or education can reverse the natural role than women play in the world. Women are different from men, and men are the more physically powerful, mentally strong, and emotionally caring of the two sexes. The unhappiness feminism has wrought on society is due to its attempt to subvert the natural order of things.

7. Dogs will test boundaries

My dog greets me every day when I come home by enthusiastically running to greet me in the yard, smiling, and begging to play, much the way a traditional father from the 1950s would be greeted by his family when he returned home from work. His time is a rare commodity, and the family was excited to talk to him, and to be in his presence.

Occasionally when I arrive, my dog will fail to rush out to meet me, and will just sit in the porch, wagging his tail, waiting for me to approach. When this happens, I will stop, and wait until he runs out to greet me, as I am accustomed, before walking any further. Likewise, with a woman, when she slowly stops the nice little extra things you appreciated, cleaning your bed after sex, making you a snack, whatever it is, you must immediately address and reinstate before things slip further.

8. Dogs don’t understand you

You can talk in a kind voice to a dog, and he will understand your loving happiness, and reciprocate, but beyond that, dogs are incapable of understanding you, interpreting your thoughts, empathizing, or using logic.

Likewise, it is a waste of time to get into deep discussions with women, expect them to rationalize or understand things, or even to truly empathize or love a man. This may upset you, but it is true. While a dog or woman can respect and honor you, and make you feel good, they cannot truly understand you, or love you the way you love them.

9. They appreciate small treats

A tiny reward can go a long way. The item itself is of less importance than the meaning behind it. Dogs respond well to a new toy or special treat like a bone for learning a new trick, or behaving especially well.

Likewise, when your woman deserves it, or just because you are happy with how she is treating you, feel free to give her a small token of appreciation. Cook a special meal she likes. Take her out to a movie. Have a picnic with her. Make her feel special. When you are rewarding good behavior, you are encouraging it to continue.

10. Dogs are accessories meant to bring happiness

A dog is an optional thing a guy can bring into his life if he wants something to occupy his time, and reward him emotionally. The same should be true with women. Never enter into a relationship simply because “you’re single” or due to outside pressure from family. Never stay in a relationship that is not productive or meeting your needs.

Having a dog is a hobby, one that requires a little work every day to maintain, but should always be pleasurable to the owner. Having a significant other is the same. If the woman is not doing things for you that make you happy, move on. If she is unresponsive to the basic training that a dog would adopt, then she is failing at a very fundamental level, and you would like be much happier with a pet than a nagging girlfriend.

Conclusion

Finally, remember that while having an obedient one by your side is rewarding and comforting, there are thousands and thousands of them available, so never become too attached to one.

However, when speaking of dogs, they are incredibly loyal, protective, and offer unconditional love, and will in some ways be more consistent, reliable, and rewarding than a woman. It’s often said that sexbots will be the end of the modern feminist. Dogs provide most of the positive benefits of women except sex, and owning one can benefit a man greatly.

They are also a great yardstick of comparison. If your woman is not making you happier than your dog, it’s time to next her.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #fundie returnofkings.com

Does Ancient Muslim Wisdom Have Answers To Modern Western Problems?

Western civilization was not the only producer of wisdom. I stumbled upon some useful Islamic quotes, many of which are from Ali ibn Abi Talib, the leader of the Islamic caliphate from 656-661 AD and cousin of the Prophet.

[...]

Sex differences

"‘The good characteristics of women are the bad characteristics of men: pride, cowardice and stinginess. If a woman has pride she will not allow herself to be taken advantage of; if she is stingy she will guard her wealth and her spouse’s wealth; and if she is cowardly she will be cautious of everything that confronts her.’" (Iman Ali)

Obeying

"Obeying women is the ultimate ignorance.

[…]

Obeying desire corrupts the mind." (Iman Ali)

[...]

Sexual pleasure

"Beware of too much passion for women and being seduced by the sweet temptations of this world, for passion for women is trying and being seduced by worldly temptations is humiliating." (Iman Ali)

[...]

Virgins

"‘The archangel Gabriel descended to the Prophet (SAWA) and told him, ‘O Muhammad, verily your Lord extends salutations on you and says, ‘Verify the virgins from among your women are as fruits on a tree, which when they ripen must be plucked otherwise the sun rots them and the wind alters them. So when young women reach marriageable age, they have no other recourse apart from husbands, otherwise they will not be safe from corruption.’" (Iman al-Rida)

A suitable wife

"He who marries a woman solely for her beauty will not find anything he likes in her, he who marries her for her wealth will be deprived of it as soon as he marries her, so look to marry women of faith.

[…]

The beauty of a woman’s faith must be given priority over the beauty of her face." (The Prophet)

An evil woman

"‘Beware of the verdure growing in manure.’ When asked what verdure growing in manure was, he replied, ‘It is the beautiful woman that comes from an evil environment.’" (The Prophet)

Happy husband

"Woe unto the woman who angers her husband, and blessed is the woman whose husband is pleased with her.

[…]

If I was in a position to command anyone to prostrate in front of anyone else, I would command the woman to prostrate in front of her husband." (The Prophet)

Husband’s duty

"The right of a woman on her husband is that he feeds her, clothes her, and does not cause her to lose face [by insulting her or chiding her].

[…]

Verily the man who lifts a morsel of food to his wife’s mouth is well rewarded" (The Prophet)

A woman’s jihad

"The sacred war (jihad) of a woman is to be of excellent service to her husband." (Iman al-Kazim)

Marital mistreatment

"If a man has a wife who mistreats him, Allah does not accept her daily prayer, nor any other good deed she performs, even if she was to fast all her life, until and unless she relieves him and pleases him…and the husband will bear the same burden and punishment if he mistreats or oppresses his wife." (The Prophet)

Cursed woman

"Cursed! Cursed indeed is the woman who troubles and distresses her husband; and blessed! Blessed indeed is the woman who honours her husband, does not trouble him and obeys him in all matters." (Iman al-Sadiq)

Cursed man

"Every man who is controlled by his wife is indeed cursed." (Iman Ali)

Nobility

"Habituate yourself to performing noble deeds and tolerate the burdens of losses, and your self will be noble." (Iman Ali)

[...]

While many of us here do not agree with the sometimes violent spread of Islam to European lands, their views on the sexes and marriage fully account for the true nature of women that we’re all too aware of.

Islamists understand that a woman can become feral if not constrained by a strong patriarch in the home. When a culture fails to incorporate this understanding, the result is what we have in the modern West, of women who trade having a healthy family to become degenerates and sterile freakshows. Islam is not without its problems, but if their higher birth rates are of any indication, their gender strategies should be duplicated to some degree in the West.

Show post
Roosh Valizadeh #conspiracy returnofkings.com

A term that kept coming up in my research on modern governments was “Hegelian Dialectic.” I spent some time studying it to understand not only what it was, but how it is being used by the ruling class to manipulate the public into fulfilling a pre-determined agenda.

First described by Enlightenment German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, the Hegelian Dialectic is a mechanism to arrive at a final truth or conclusion. Right now you probably use the Aristotelian method for arriving at truth, which is to observe all the facts of the situation and then make the most logical conclusion based from those observations. Hegel explained a process where truth is instead arrived through the friction and conflict between one force (the thesis) and its opposite (the antithesis). The final result from that clash, the synthesis, is the best conclusion.

In all likelihood, the synthesis is not the final and absolute truth. It becomes the new thesis where a new antithesis forms to oppose it. The conflict between them leads to a second synthesis. This process repeats until the final synthesis is revealed, which theoretically is absolute truth.

In plain terms, the Hegelian Dialectic is the battle of two extremes to get a result that is somewhere in the middle. That result will develop an opposing force of its own and the ensuing battle yields another result. The objective reality we have right now has incorporated within it all previous “battles” of thesis and antithesis since the beginning of time, meaning that—according to the theory—we are living in a progressive arc to absolute truth and world perfection.

Examples of thesis and antithesis

Thesis: British and French power hegemony after World War 1
Anti-thesis: Hitler
Synthesis: USA hegemony

Thesis: Traditional conservatism
Anti-thesis: Marxism
Synthesis: Globalism

Thesis: USA government losing domestic power
Anti-thesis: 9/11
Synthesis: Patriot act, NSA spying

Thesis: Feminism
Anti-thesis: PUA, MRA, neomasculinity
Synthesis: ?

The nation dialectic

Hegel proposed his dialectic as a natural way of arriving at the truth, but had in mind that the nation itself was the vehicle to create new syntheses. Like most Enlightenment thinkers, he threw god away and made the nation-state god instead. The modern elite has taken this a step further by pre-determining a synthesis (a specific agenda) and then developing events that arrive at that synthesis through artificial means.

If the elite has a result they would like to have, whether it be increased authoritarian rule or a war that solidifies their power, all they have to do is devise an anti-thesis that will lead to the outcome they want. This is commonly done through false flag attacks, where the government of a nation attacks itself so that it can respond in the way that it had wanted to all along, because it’s only through that attack would citizens agree to the planned synthesis. False flag attacks are in fact a common way for governments to fulfill their goals.

Here are two Hegelian loops we may be currently living through:

Problem (thesis): Russia refuses to enter the New World Order
Reaction (anti-thesis): Destabilize Ukraine and Syria, forcing Russia to act aggressively
Solution (synthesis): Create pretext for removing Russian leadership and installing Western rulers,

Problem: Nationalism in Europe
Reaction: Allow millions of Afro-Islamists
Solution: Strengthening of United Nations and European Union to “protect” people from social unrest

People use the dialectic in their own lives when trying to solve problems:

Problem: Not receiving enough attention
Reaction: Invent drama, catastrophes, diseases
Solution: Receive attention from family, friends, strangers

What the ruling elite does, and have been doing for centuries, is create reactions which requires solutions they had wanted all along. The reaction (e.g. 9/11) puts citizens in a state of fear and anxiety that allows easily implementation of the solution without resistance. Would Americans have protested the Patriot Act more strongly if 9/11 had never occurred? They’d probably laugh at its proposal, just like how they laughed at George W. Bush’s attempts to privatize Social Security at the start of his second term.

Beware of government “solutions”

One way you know the government is using the Hegelian dialectic to fulfill their agenda is when they have a ready-made solution immediately after an event, all without public debate. This is most commonly seen in the United States with gun control, where after every mass shooting, calls for limiting sales of guns are made by the media and government. Strict gun control or outright confiscation is a pre-determined solution in the USA that will certainly be attempted in the future.

"From Nero burning Rome to Hitler burning the Reichstag, power-mad leaders across the decades have manufactured crises in order to present the public with situations where their Police State solutions “make sense”.

“Give up your rights — it’s for your safety…”

[…]

Every major financial crisis America has experienced in her history has followed this same Hegelian dialectic pattern with the outcome being another incremental step toward world financial domination by an elite few. [Source]"

A related use of the Hegelian dialectic is to create the appearance of healthy governmental opposition. We see this in the United States where both Democrats and Republicans are two heads of the same body. They create a theater show for the public that two opposing forces are debating and compromising to serve the interests of the nation when they are actually both controlled by the same globalists who donate money to both parties. The cuckservative phenomenon has shown that mainstream conservatives are nearly identical to the left besides a few hot button issues like abortion and religion (they have even converged on homosexual marriage).

"In the West the choice is basically between a controlled ‘left-oriented’ information, and a controlled ‘right-oriented’ information. The conflict between the two CONTROLLED groups keeps an apparent informational conflict alive. Unwelcome facts that fall into either camp are conveniently forgotten. Books that fall into either camp can be effectively neutralized because they will incur the wrath of both ‘right’ and ‘left’. The faster the cattle run, the faster the treadmill takes them to nowhere.

[…]

The Hegelian dialectic is being employed to secure and sustain absolute world power and authority to an elite. [Source] […]

…the Hegelian dialectic requires a thesis and an antithesis, a pro and a con. Are these not absolutes? Is not the very concept of left and right, east and west, black and white, etc., required by the dialectic a confirmation of absolutism itself? [Source]"

It’s effortless to rule when you have citizens programmed to demand the changes that match your agenda:

"The disturbing aspect to Alinsky’s approach for “radical social change” is his belief in the Marxist-Leninist method of always keeping the masses demoralized so they will demand change, or even insist the system be abolished altogether. [Source]"

Many of us are already aware of what the elite is doing to society in order to maintain control. The Hegelian dialectic allows us to see how they are doing it, adding an important piece of the puzzle to more easily recognize their authoritarian schemes.

Whenever a crisis occurs that politicians, governments, world organizations like the United Nations, IMF, World Bank, US Fed, or countless other quasi-governmental entities have a solution for, three things are certain:

1. Their solution will not solve the original problem.
2. The problem was possibly created themselves in order to introduce their desired “solution.”
3. The engineered process of Problem-Reaction-Solution is reducing your liberty and making you more dependent on the state.

After violent catastrophes and global events, think for a moment to see what their real agenda is based on the reaction by those in power, and consider resisting if you have the strength to do so. To be on the safe side, you can assume that just about any non-local solution by the government is part of a plan to hurt you, and that it will have the opposite stated effect if allowed to be implemented.

Show post
David Garrett #fundie returnofkings.com

(Submitter's note: SPOILER ALERT!)

Why Star Wars: The Force Awakens Is A Social Justice Propaganda Film

Spread my warning across the galaxy, Padawans.

The Force Awakens is spectacularly replete with the handiwork of the avowed Social Justice Warrior JJ Abrams. So where can I possibly start in my criticisms? From the casting, which puts minorities and women incessantly and ridiculously in your face to make a political point (not tell a story), to the laziest of all space battles, the problems with the Episode 7 are more than numerous.

Let’s make no mistake: Abrams is a capable filmmaker, when he wants to be. Parts with General Hux, especially his speech and the destruction of the Hosnian system, are glorious. The visuals, not just those with CGI, are stunning. Abrams’ mission, though, is to distract viewers with impressive scenes and some chunks of capably written dialogue so as to implant his take on “girl power” and safe spaces for non-whites.

The Mary Sue of all Mary Sues

Is there anything she can’t do after reading a third wave feminist tract?
The female Rey, who it is heavily implied is Luke’s daughter, is the most underdeveloped character yet in over 14 hours of Star Wars films. Her story arc is practically-speaking non-existent and only the veneer of her sadness about her family leaving her on Jakku is painted over it. Whereas with other major Force-wielders in the series their abilities have previously developed or are developed over years, Rey seemingly does it in less than 12 seconds, rather than parsecs. Her whole trajectory in the film reeks of “god mode”, which for non-gamers like myself refers to the cheat codes that make a game character invincible.

Big question: did she fart in the wind on Jakku and the blowback from the desert winds grew her Force powers to monolithic proportions? That’s the only possible explanation.

In the case of Anakin Skywalker in the prequels, by contrast, we learn that he is the only human pilot to engage in pod racing. His mechanical know-how has been honed over some years, culminating in his construction of both his own pad racer and the droid C-3PO. And when he destroys the droid control ship above Naboo, it is largely as a result of his good fortune, not just long-acquired skill. A decade later and with continuous training, he additionally fails to best Count Dooku on Geonosis.

Two hours into the first film, with no training, Rey beats Kylo Ren. Four hours into the original trilogy, and with the training of Ben Kenobi and Yoda, Luke loses his right hand. Go girls!
Cast your mind back to the original trilogy, too. Aside from a little kid’s play with his father’s lightsaber at Ben Kenobi’s hermit pad and onboard the Millennium Falcon, Luke does not wield the weapon at all in A New Hope, let alone in combat against the likes of a Vader. He does destroy the Death Star as a very novice X-wing pilot, but this is after years of him taking out his stuck-on-bloody-Tatooine frustrations on womp rats in his T-16. Moreover, Luke would have been burnt space toast without the intervention of Han Solo and the Falcon. Oh, and in The Empire Strikes Back, after the tutelage of Yoda, he still gets his hand cleaved off by Vader.

So I am meant to believe that Rey could savage and nearly kill her presumed cousin Kylo Ren, whether he is injured or not? Ren is not yet a Vader in his powers. That much is clear. But this is the man who helped slaughter, as a boy or teenager, basically all of the talented pupils of Luke Skywalker. Luke then disappears and Kylo Ren is given more or less free rein, only to be wounded once by Chewbacca’s crossbow, once by apparently non-Force-sensitive Finn (“This is for slavery, whitey!”) and three times by Rey (“Fuck the patriarchy!”). Fuck off—that’s a plot fueled by meth.

To boot, Rey’s piloting and mechanical skills, to the point of knowing everything, is mind-boggingly “get more women in STEM” in its motivations. When she starts teaching Han Solo about the Falcon, things become breathtakingly contrived. It’s as if Abrams was paid by a female science scholarship foundation to drum up some public service announcements via film.

The plot is IQ-damagingly dumb

They put twenty times more effort into the parade than organizing the base defenses. And they didn’t learn from either the first or second Death Star debacles. Or Abrams and his writing team were too busy making Rey a goddess.
I take no issue with some of the artistic license Abrams uses in The Force Awakens. How the First Order managed to create a sun-sucking super weapon on a preexisting ice planet can be explained one day by some talented PhD graduate from the University of Coruscant. So, too, can the appearance of the Starkiller’s death beams and the destruction of the Hosnian system in the sky above far removed Takodana.

What matters, though, is the plot. Scientific ambiguities and inaccuracies can be tolerated if the story functions. But it’s entirely lacking here. For a start, the film borrows from or plain copies so many elements of A New Hope that I lost count. A non-exhaustive list would include a girl being held captive at the flagship facility of a military junta, a space battle to prevent the noble guerrillas’ base from being obliterated, and the death of an older character just as the younger infiltrators are about to leave for home. For the sake of free words, I cannot mention them all.

Beyond just the formulaic plot, here are a few of the frankly stupid elements of the story:

Finn just happens to be an ex-sanitation worked at Starkiller Base, in a galaxy where the First Order forces are now so numerous and powerful that the New Republic has to use the Resistance as a weak proxy to fight it. So he knows where to find the oscillator, which will destabilize and then obliterate the planet if destroyed. Makes perfect sense!
Both in its size and complexity, Starkiller Base makes the two Death Stars look like plasticine renderings. Yet there is no fleet to protect it? And a paucity of very ineffective turbolaser batteries and TIE fighter squadrons? A Resistance member at their headquarters light years away mentions them losing half their X-wings during the battle, as if that was so hard when they launched about, um, three and a half of them.
The amazingly overblown female character Captain Phasma is held at gunpoint and forced to lower Starkiller Base’s shields. These shields can be lowered so easily and without the immediate knowledge of General Hux or someone else? Oh, please, spare me.
Han Solo exits hyperspace no more than a few hundred metres from the surface of the Starkiller planet. And he announces it with “Now!” Hooray! Base infiltrated with common sense!
Finn is likeable but nevertheless a glorified white knight. Trained from just after birth to be a fighting machine, he does nothing relative to Rey and devotes the whole film to trying to protect her.

Tick the boxes with plenty of female and non-white characters

Game of Thrones’ Jessica Henwick was a cast a female X-wing pilot. Again, cast for her race and gender.
You can sniff out Abrams’ leanings from the start. As First Order troopships prepare to land to take out a village on Jakku, the first villager who pulls out a a blaster in defense is a woman. And it is some sort of big, mounted-looking one! This girl power is really paralleled in our world, where millions of young Western girls are so keen to protect their village or country that they won’t even join up, as their male contemporaries are forced to, in places like Finland and South Korea during peacetime. Or make the slightest squeak about the double standard. Well done, JJ.

Captain Phasma is given command of the First Order’s elite stormtroopers but she has the same biology as in our world, where no woman has ever passed the Marine Corps’ Infantry Officer Course. Another female stormtrooper reports to Ren about the failed attempt to locate Rey. And, after years of pretty much male-only recruitment, the New Republic’s affirmative action policies have been copied by the First Order, with large numbers of female military panel operators, technicians and officers.

The same goes for the racial choices. Insert a token female Asian and black male pilot. Black and Asian pilots were actually first done long ago (in Return of the Jedi) but JJ needs more, more, more! All while the plot suffers. Funny how an overwhelmingly male military combat force in a film is considered “unrealistic” when it is almost a carbon copy of our own reality in 2015.

Do not watch this film (at least by paying)

Pretty much sums it up.
Somebody has to watch it and for ROK that person is me. Our proprietor Roosh has refused to and all power to him and anyone else who has abstained. It helps when a limited few of us view it, to pick it apart piece by piece. An understanding of how entertainment is being used to propagandise acceptable social narratives is important.

It’s laughable how critics can butcher the revelation in the prequels that the Force is just the interaction of symbiotic organisms called midi-chlorians and other living things but laud The Force Awakens as a piece of sophisticated, “progressive” filmmaking. Some outlets have even resorted to naming and implicitly shaming critics who disliked this new addition. For a good parody of the pro-SJW obsessions of The Force Awakens, see Steven Crowder’s recent takedown.

For the time being, when it comes to deciding whether to see this film, take evasive action. It’s a trap.

Show post
Max Roscoe #fundie returnofkings.com

Why We Should Reinstitute The Dowry

Marriage rates are declining, and some sociologists fear that an entire generation is choosing to opt out of marriage. While there are many causes, from the financial and personal risk of divorce, to the fact that men can today receive any benefits a woman could offer him without marrying her, to the simple fact that virgin brides are in such scarce supply, one step that would go towards reinforcing a patriarchal family unit is to reinstitute the Dowry.

[...]

Practical reasons for the dowry

What are some reasons to bring back the dowry?

1. Recognition of the true costs of marriage

Dowry recognizes that the groom is taking on a financial (not to mention emotional) burden by taking a bride, and dowry attempts to level the playing field a bit.

2. A wiser use of dad’s money

The new family could start out with a nice nest egg, land to build a house on, assets, and cash, or they could just blow 20 grand on a crappy DJ and some overpriced dresses.

3. Reinforces the value of virginity

A dowry is a significant financial commitment, and a father would not risk the loss of this investment because his daughter was impure.

4. Clearly states the value of marriage

While this was more obvious in the past, when a woman would be more of a burden on her father or husband, a dowry recognizes that marriage is the end goal, because the father will have to keep supporting the daughter financially until she finds a husband.

5. Protects women in case of neglect, abandonment, or divorce

A dowry is an insurance policy for women who are in a truly bad marriage.

6. Discourages divorce

Women today can financially *benefit* from divorcing a husband, and there is no test of love or neglect required. A woman can divorce “Cause feelings” and find herself receiving a free income for life. In the case of dowry, a woman would forfeit her dowry, and have to pay again to a second husband if she attempted to divorce and remarry.

7. Feminists hate dowry

Finally, if feminists hate it, it must be good. Social media is full of anti-dowry propaganda. Considering that dowry was originally instituted as a protection for women who upheld their end of the marriage contract, one must be very suspicious of this opposition.

Indeed in several countries, men are threatened with imprisonment for taking part in this institution that is fundamentally a part of marriage itself. It’s a shame we don’t see any of the “defense of marriage” types rally to support dowry.

Show post
Terry “Death to Equality” Xu #racist returnofkings.com

All diversity is conflict - you don't need to wait until there's terrorism/rape/sharia law to oppose it

Even in better off countries like the US the population gets riled up at the slightest mention of race relations

All societies should progress towards the ethnostate - multiculturalism is something to be dealt with through nationalism, assimilation, or just plain xenophobia. The western world confuses empathy with rational thought because it's too feminized, and values the opinion of its women too much

Show post
wisdom seeker #fundie returnofkings.com

Canada is finished.

Trudeau is the epitome of a mangina, 100% the complete opposite of Vladimir Putin. Even his voice sounds gay. Some even speculate he actually is gay.

With him at the helm, Canada will quickly become just like Ontario: a Marxist paradise with insurmountable debt.

Legalized marijuana, full abortion rights, higher taxes, the list is endless.

O Canada!

Show post
Roosh #fundie returnofkings.com

Someone recently recommended I take a look at Ted Kaczynski’s Manifesto, stating that Kaczynski foresaw a lot of problems with modern culture that we write about here. After reading it, I have to agree that the “Unabomber” clearly understood what society was up against, a full decade before the development of the manosphere.

The media has done a good of painting Kaczynski as a deranged madman, but I found his writing to be clear and perceptive. His manifesto connected some loose dots I had between Neil Postman’s work, which described what we have lost through technology, and this community’s observations that the juggernaut of leftism is destroying what remains of traditional culture.

Kaczynski states that leftism and technology go hand in hand, because the collectivism and control that leftism requires cannot be accomplished without technology. The more advances we have with technology, the more it will be used to further progressivism, which includes a decrease in individual rights and an increase in authoritarian state control. I recommend you read the entirety of the manifesto here. In the meanwhile, the most important passages are below.

...

Kaczynski’s manifesto made me realize that the solutions I have proposed to improve modern society would not stem the tide of advances in technology and leftist degeneracy. By the time we identify one problem, isolate it, and solve it, more degenerate leftist causes would have been pushed down our throats alongside technological advances that make our counter-movement all seem fruitless. Up to this point, we’re hacking at little branches, especially when we attack the useful idiots in the form of individual feminists and social justice warriors, while the roots of evil are becoming ever stronger.

As long as the system is in place, any victory we achieve will only be short-term in scope. Such a victory could last a couple generations, but once the dust settles and the globalists re-gather their footing, they will use the existing technological, industrial, and banking frameworks to not only gain what they lost, but learn from their past mistakes and control humanity even tighter.

The question we must ask ourselves before proceeding is if we want the system to die or not. Kaczynski suggests that it is all or nothing, and assuming he’s right, we either have to get ready to throw away urban living, industrialization, and virtually all technology, or be reduced to putting out small fires that don’t begin to reverse a worldwide societal decline. As a man who has never lived in a rural setting, I remain undecided about how best to continue.

In spite of my hesitation to hop on board with Kaczynski’s message that the entire system must be destroyed, I am convinced that as long as it’s in place, we will continue to see a neverending drive towards authoritarian liberalism and parasitic globalism that erodes national sovereignty and our individual humanity. A worldwide economic collapse may temporarily bruise the elite and usher in a mini-age of traditionalism, but once the world recovers, they’ll likely resume right where they left off.

Show post
Brian McGonagall #fundie returnofkings.com

“[Religion] is the opium of the people” – Karl Marx boldly declared this, as he set about creating what he perceived to be a new and better utopia. Even though Communism as an idea is nowadays morally spent, it is easy to see that its equally dangerous cousin, Socialism, lives on and has never been better.

The two share the ugly trait of militant atheism – not only aggressively discarding religion as the sum of all evils but also attempting to stamp it out in a blind rage. If a modern SJW is probed as to why his hatred of religion is so unwavering, he will more than likely fail to provide a reasonable explanation, preferring instead to hurl tired old Marxist buzzwords such as “Christian oppression.”

This is to be expected. What worries me, however, is that good, intelligent men are often infected with the same virus, failing to comprehend its Marxist roots. They claim that Christianity is a religion of the weak, that it caters to people who want to lead a sheltered life, that it stifles free thought.

After the evisceration of much of organized Christianity at the hands of Marxists and their allies since the 1960s, it is easy to fall for the trap of identifying with such leftist claptrap and claim that the proof is in the proverbial pudding. In the following piece I wish to present the argument to the contrary – Christianity is a red pill religion if its precepts are abided by.

[...]

Christianity promotes strength and sacrifice

Let’s cut straight to the chase on this one. This aspect of Christianity is best illustrated when the ethos of pre – “enlightenment” Europe is considered, before everyone started receiving illusory “rights of man” from their government with no responsibilities added.

Take the Crusades. “But these evil Europeans went over to the Middle East to rape, pillage and conquer peace loving people of different faiths” – immediately exclaims the chump who has been drinking the PC cool aid all his life. Not quite. True, the Crusades did have their negative aspects (such as the unwarranted detour to Byzantium during the Fourth Crusade) but I am referring to the overall picture.

Thousands of men, rich and poor, dropped everything to fight and die for an idea – to regain the Holy Sepulcher for Christendom and help their eastern brothers who were being crushed under what seemed like an invincible tide of Islam.

Many nobles sold everything they had to buy weapons, armor, and supplies for the journey. Thousands of peasants left their villages and families to follow them. Most knew they would never come back to their homeland, yet still chose to go.

Look at the mentality of the leaders who took part. Fredrick Barbarossa of Germany was one of the most powerful people in Europe at the time. He did not have to go anywhere, he had it all. Barbarossa died as many did on the perilous journey, drowning in an attempt to cross a river on the way to the Holy Land.

Richard the Lionheart, King of England, spent three years under the walls of Acre waiting to starve the defending Saracens into submission. Three years! He was reported to personally lead assaults on the walls, scaling the siege ladders with his men under a hail of arrows. I realize that we live in different times, but leaders of such fortitude and courage are sorely missed today.

These men embodied the very ethos of Christianity. Their attitude was uncompromising – they did not try to make excuses but gave their best efforts to whatever was required of them, not afraid to pay the ultimate price.

Christianity de-pedestalizes women and encourages positive gender relations

Most people notice that something is amiss in modern gender relations. Women are often valued over and above men and unduly pedestalized. At the same time, male traits such as aggressiveness, competition, and dominance are encouraged over traditional feminine traits such as gentleness and humility in same women. Go figure. The results of this erratic social engineering have already been discussed ad nauseam.

The Christian Bible has a few interesting things to say about gender relations, going back to the Garden of Eden. Eve was created as a “helpmate” for Adam, not some kind of “soulmate” or “better half.” Their union was then blessed by God, creating the first marriage.

It is clear that the Bible did not envisage women to rule over their men. One of the Biblical punishments of an unruly and unfaithful people in the Old Testament was allowing the women and children to do just that:

"As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” (Isaiah 3:12)"

I am sure this is not a popular verse amongst the politically correct. However the same motif is repeated later on by St Paul, who tells the early Christians: “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.” (1 Timothy 2:12) Therefore, it is the man’s job to be the leader, both in the Church and in the household.

At the same time this should by no means be interpreted as a license to be a tyrant. Women are not expected to be men’s slaves, walk whatever amount of paces behind men, or generally be bullied. In fact, men are called to love their wives as Christ loves the Church. This is a sacrificing love, which is pure, unwavering, and understanding. Women are not there to be used and abused.

If what is described above is not a model for healthy gender relations, than I really don’t know what is.

Conclusion

It is impossible not to notice that Christianity is under ferocious attack in the Western world. Its rites are mocked. Its precepts are attacked as oppressive. Its heritage is presented as an everlasting shame to mankind.

Let me remind you that this was also the case in the Soviet Union and anywhere else Communism reared its ugly head. As cultural Marxism is slowly but surely building its layer in the Occident, its communistic roots are at once discernible through the preponderance of militant atheism. It is important to know one’s enemy so that he is not able to deceive.

Perhaps it is worth stopping for a moment and asking the simple, but tremendously important question: why is Christianity viewed with such hostility by our increasingly socialist governments and media? Does it hold a valid message which could inspire and uplift the men of today? Is it a threat to the ruling kleptocracy? Does it present an alternative to the mentality of servility our overlords are so keen for us to adopt?

Show post
Roosh V #fundie returnofkings.com

Compelling new scientific research has shown that female insects and mammals are able to absorb foreign DNA throughout the cells of their bodies. In human beings, this phenomenon has been conclusively shown to occur in women during pregnancy where genetic material from her growing fetus becomes fused within areas of her brain, affecting her chances of developing Alzheimer’s disease.

The evidence now shows that female animals can incorporate sperm DNA from her prior sex partners. This foreign DNA winds up in future children after the woman successfully reproduces with a completely different male. In the human world, this means that the children a man has with a promiscuous woman could possess genes from previous sexual partners he has never seen or met.

...

The above study has two seismic implications. The first is that a woman can absorb enough DNA during her lifetime that it changes her phenotype (i.e. her appearance and overall health state). There could be some truth to the phrase “slut face” in which highly promiscuous women suffer a change to their appearance because of all the variable sperm from different males that have been deposited inside them.

The second implication stems from the fact that it’s scientifically conclusive that single mothers have DNA of their bastard children residing permanently within their bodies. Any man who reproduces with a single mom will have a child that contains DNA from the bastard spawn, which of course includes DNA from the absentee father. This means that men can be genetically cuckolded without being traditionally cuckolded, and that having a baby with a single mom is essentially giving the father of her first child a bonus prize in the game of evolution.

...

For thousands of years, a woman’s purity was cherished above all else when it came to creating a family. Now the scientific community is confirming the validity of that practice. Until the science is settled, men who insist on reproducing with a promiscuous woman should at least demand to interview her previous sexual partners so he can become familiar with the men whose genes may be passed on to his future children.

Show post
Andrew Levinson #fundie returnofkings.com

Christians in general, and Catholics in particular, are portrayed as puritanical and anti-sex. This raises a question: if Catholics hate sex so much, then why did they historically tend to have so many children? As recently as 100 years ago, child rearing was considered the proper object of marriage and sex. The blue pill script – go to college, get a good salaried job, marry young and for life, have two or three kids – retains its staying power because it used to be sound advice. The manosphere exists in part because it is sound advice no longer.

Pope Paul VI, who reigned from 1963 to 1978, was in many ways a weak and vacillating man. His predecessor, Pope John XXIII, described then Cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini as, “our Hamlet,” always indecisive to the last. In an uncharacteristically bold move, he published the encyclical letter Humanae Vitae in 1968 that reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s opposition to all forms of artificial contraception.

At this point, many RoK readers may be thinking, “I’m sure this is terribly interesting to you Levinson, but I’m not a Catholic and the pill and the condom have been great for my sex life. Why should I care about this?” You should care because Paul VI called it: the easy availability of contraceptives paved the way for no-fault divorce, unleashed hypergamy, and sodomite “marriage.”

Marriage Then

Most of us take atomistic individualism for granted, in contrast to the ancient understanding of man as the political animal. “Who are you to say what two consenting adults can and cannot do in private?” is taken to be an unanswerable rejoinder to traditional understandings of sex and marriage. Sex seldom remains a purely private affair, especially in the era of social media. Among other things, sex can lead to love, marriage, hate, murder, children, disease, happy homes, broken homes, social cohesion and social disintegration.

As Pope Paul described it:

"Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage. Though this fidelity of husband and wife sometimes presents difficulties, no one has the right to assert that it is impossible; it is, on the contrary, always honorable and meritorious. The example of countless married couples proves not only that fidelity is in accord with the nature of marriage, but also that it is the source of profound and enduring happiness."

In other words, marriage was once considered a more public institution than it is today, not through legislation but through social convention. Young men were incentivized to make themselves good husband material if they wanted sex and children. Young women were encouraged to remain chaste and marry young. Divorce was unthinkable for our great-grandparents. Then, as now, women were much more ruthless about slut shaming than men.

Above all, marriage was ordered toward children:

"Finally, this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchange of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyond this to bring new life into being. “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the procreation and education of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute in the highest degree to their parents’ welfare."

Marriage Now

In paragraph 17, Pope Paul predicts the consequences of the contraceptive mentality:

"Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law [emphasis mine – AL], and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection."

Players and sluts ye shall always have with you, but the world now incentivizes us to be this way. Men must constantly perform or else their unhaaaappy wives will blow up the marriage for cash and prizes. That is, if men choose to marry at all. Fewer do, and in all honesty, I can hardly blame them. Why should they? If they want sex, they can find plenty of willing ladies provided they have even a modicum of game, and they won’t have to risk losing their homes, their jobs, their children, and their sanity in the divorce grinder.

Women too have grown to devalue men. Would the carousel exist to the extent that it does if it weren’t for the pill? If they can have consequence-free sex, then they will pursue the apex alphas and ditch the frustrated betas who were the good husbands and providers of yesteryear. Women are more exquisitely sensitive to social pressure than men, and the social cues that existed in our great-grandparents day aren’t there anymore.

The key here is that artificial contraception radically separated marriage and sex from child rearing. Marriage used to be a recognized public institution that carried with it certain legal and social obligations to which the couple was expected to conform. If children are removed from the occasion, then marriage becomes all about romantic feelings.

Fuzzy Feels Are Optional

If marriage is nothing but a public declaration of romantic feelings, then two consequences follow: if the feelings go away, that’s a legitimate reason to end the marriage; and if sodomites have romantic feelings for each other, then what reason do we have to exclude them from marriage?

Traditionally, Christianity has taught that if you burn with lust, you should marry. The specific woman you married was a question of prudence like choosing a career or a new house. Nowhere did the Church say that God had created “the one” or your soulmate. Unfortunately, this thinking has infiltrated all Christian churches today with disastrous consequences.

Jesus Christ famously prohibited divorce in the Gospels but many Christian churches have creative methods for getting around that. In theory, the Catholic Church has stood strong alone among all Christians. Strictly speaking, she does not recognize divorce but she makes “declarations of nullity,” which means a couple never formed a sacramental marriage at the time of their wedding vows. The American Catholic Church in particular has been handing out annulments like candy for fifty years, so it’s understandable why outsiders think of them as Catholic divorces.

The Basis Of Civilization

The building block of civilized society is not the individual but the family. The great evil of our time is that our progressive overlords actively undermine the family at every turn. My tradcon friends vacillate between believing game is either a placebo or a set of irresistible Jedi mind tricks cads use to deflower innocent virgins. The media wonders why young men refuse to grow up, man up, and marry those sluts. I say the men of today are responding rationally to the incentives of a world gone mad.

Be honest gentlemen: if Marriage 1.0 were still the rule instead of the exception, how many of you would happily marry? The contraceptive regime radically disrupted the natural formation of families. Sex became an end in itself. From that conviction came the scourge of pornography. The logical conclusion is the development of sex bots. And an elderly, celibate Italian bishop saw it all coming more clearly than all of the experts.

Show post
Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

Last week, the mainstream conservative press went apoplectic with rage at the epithet “cuckservative,” a popular insult in alternative right and neoreactionary circles. For the uninitiated, cuckservatives are right-wing politicians and pundits who make a big show of defending traditional values, yet when push comes to shove, they roll over for the left on every issue out of fear of being called “racist,” “sexist” or “homophobic.”

Conservatives like Red State’s Erick Erickson who throw tantrums over the term “cuckservative” are doing so because the term describes them perfectly. If you’re wondering whether you might be a cuckservative, Return of Kings has put together this handy guide to show you. Read on and discover if you’re the kind of conservative who enjoys watching your nation get brutally gang-raped by cultural Marxists…

...

4. You think the reason Detroit and other major U.S. cities are falling apart is because of unions

Cuckservatives are so desperate to avoid being called “racist” that they completely deny the role of race in American society. For example, National Review’s Kevin Williamson absurdly blames the dysfunction of Detroit on unions run amok and not the fact that the city is more than 80 percent black. While socialist policies will eventually ruin a nation, white liberal areas such as Vermont and Oregon have considerably higher standards of living than black areas with the same politics.

...

6. You support corporations, despite their advocacy for leftist causes

Cuckservatives are vociferously opposed to any government action that limits the power of corporations, from higher taxes to environmental regulations to minimum wage increases. These corporations have rewarded cuckservatives by eagerly shoving left-wing degeneracy down Americans’ throats. Not only does Hollywood and other popular media glorify homosexuality, transsexuality and other perversions, most corporations enforce leftist orthodoxy, contrary to the left’s claim that big business is pro-Republican.

For example, following the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing gay marriage, a whole host of corporations, from Google to Facebook, suddenly put up rainbow flag logos in solidarity with the LGBT movement. Here in Chicago, Allstate currently has posters plastered all over the L featuring two men holding hands. Just a few days ago, the WWE acceded to left-wing hysteria about “racism” by firing Hulk Hogan solely because he used a racial slur in a private conversation nearly a decade ago.

Even supposedly right-wing corporate figures are further to the left than the average American. For instance, the Koch brothers, favorite boogeymen of the left, are in favor of open borders. Yet despite being turkey-slapped repeatedly by their corporate masters, cuckservatives are all too happy to spread their cheeks for these multinational purveyors of leftist degeneracy.

...

Unfortunately for cuckservatives, their reign of squeezing their clammy mitts around conservatism’s balls is coming to an end. The sudden popularity of the “cuckservative” epithet shows that grassroots right-wingers are tired of the movement’s spinelessness and groveling to the left. With Donald Trump on the rise and cuckservatives on the run, reversing America’s decline has never looked more possible.

Show post
Quintus Curtius #fundie returnofkings.com

As everyone knows, on June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___(2015). At issue was whether “marriages” between gay couples would be recognized legally. By a narrow majority, the Court found that homosexual marriages were in fact a “fundamental right” worthy of societal acceptance.

The concluding paragraph of the majority decision rose to a disturbing level of opaque sentimentality. Inappropriately condescending to identify emotionally with one of the litigants, the Court issued this maudlin pronunciamento:

No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.

And that was it. With one stroke of the pen, the Court found fit to overturn the definition of marriage (as a union between man and woman) that had attended humanity for thousands of years. The arrogance and presumption of the opinion was truly breathtaking. To understand why Obergefell was wrongly decided, we must do something the Court studiously avoided doing: we must trace the experience of history.
Historical Background

As an institution, marriage indeed appears to predate man. Biologists tell us that in certain bird species, males and females will live together for long periods. Gorillas and orangutans live together as males and females, with their offspring, in familial units.

Among humans, marriage has had a long and variable history among different cultures. Anthropologists tell us that among many primitive tribes (e.g., the Yakuts of Siberia, the Orang Sakai of Malacca, and certain Tibetan peoples) the marriage union could be freely terminated by either man or woman at any time.

In old Tibet, we even find “mass marriages” between groups of males and females, unifying collectively at once. Polygamy has seen institutional acceptance in some Middle Eastern societies, within certain boundaries and limitations.

gay2

The modern conception of marriage, as between man and woman, apparently arose to address a number of social needs: (1) care and rearing of the young; (2) the need to regulate sexual activity within acceptable bounds, so as to prevent social disorder; and (3) the need to pass on property to one’s kin in an ordered fashion. These practices predate history. We can conclude that marriage as the union of man and woman has existed for tens of thousands, perhaps even hundreds of thousands, of years.

Always, the union of marriage has been defined as the relationship between a man and a woman. As we survey the peoples of the globe, we cannot find one single society, primitive or modern, in which marriage was ever accepted as a union between man and man, or woman and woman. It simply has never existed. We do not find gay marriage historically among Europeans, Asians, Africans, American Indians, Polynesians, or native Australians.

Social institutions develop in response to the needs of humanity. Those institutions that stand the test of time do so for a very good reason: they have served as a net benefit for social order.

This is not to say, of course, that homosexuality has not existed since the dawn of history. Without doubt it has. Whether through environment or genetics, or a combination of both (the question is not one I am qualified to answer), some humans find satisfaction in what may be called “sexual inversion”: that is, the inverting of sexual desire from the opposite gender, to one’s own gender.

gay3

But even though homosexuality has existed in every society, it has always been confined within specific limits. It was never permitted to gain official sanction as actual “marriage” co-equal to a normal marriage between a man and woman.

Proponents of gay marriage like to toss around historical “examples” of institutionalized homosexuality in history as somehow supporting their arguments. History does not support their argument.

Homosexuality was tolerated, for example, in the classical world, as well as in ancient China, India, and Persia. It also makes its appearance in the medieval period in nearly every civilization on record. But it was permitted to go only so far, and no further. This makes all the difference.

Among the ancient Greeks, we find an acceptance of the practice in all the major city-states; it was not stigmatized, but at the same time, the thought of two men living together as “husband” and “wife” would have been unthinkable. Aristotle himself puzzled at the practice’s ubiquity; he believed it was a social defense against overpopulation.

More likely it was an outgrowth of the strict segregation of the genders in Greek society, where both men and women spent most of their time with their own genders.

In any case, the point here is that we must distinguish between homosexuality as a practice, and homosexual marriage as an officially-sanctioned institution. The former has a long lineage; the later has never existed in history. In the classical world, the attitude towards homosexuality was generally this: it was accepted as a fact of life, and as long as its practitioners did not proselytize their views or threaten the established social order, they were generally tolerated.

Again, the point needs to be made here—which was lost on the Obergefell majority—that there has not been a single society, ancient, medieval, or modern, that has extended the definition of “marriage” to mean a union between two men or two women.

This is the fact that proponents of gay marriage have no answer for. They have no answer because there is no answer. If a social institution—marriage—has been defined for countless thousands of years as between two different genders, then this fact carries authority. It cannot be brushed aside. We cannot say that we, in the past fifteen years, have suddenly gained a greater insight and wisdom into human nature than all the generations before us.
Rationales

Same-sex marriage

It is characteristic of the feebleness of gay marriage proponents that they refuse to respond to this fact. When pressed on why they think gay marriage is appropriate, their answers are always a version of these arguments:

1. “It doesn’t matter anyway, because marriage itself is a ruined institution.” This is not a meaningful answer. One does not refute a flawed proposition (gay marriage) by stating that the object of that proposition (marriage) is a ruined thing. Despite all its flaws and abuses, marriage remains what it always has been: the cornerstone of social order.

2. “They have a right to be happy.” Civil unions could have given homosexual couples nearly everything they claim to have wanted. Yet it was not enough; they wanted to become co-equal with traditional marriages. One cannot get everything one wants in life; the hard reality of life is that some behaviors are socially acceptable, and some will remain only acceptable within certain boundaries.

The Court’s ruling will not be used as an invitation to further test the boundaries of acceptable conduct. The Court’s decision claims that religious institutions need not fear they will be forced to perform homosexual marriages; yet it is difficult to see exactly how this can be squared with their ruling.

gay4

The Obergefell decision undermines the status of both men and women. It denigrates the roles each of them play in a traditional marriage, and presumes to assert that two men can act as husband and “wife,” and that two women can behave as “husband” and wife. The indoctrination will now commence with greater intensity in the schools, the media, and in other spheres of social activity. Dissenters will be marginalized, and then penalized.
The Real Winners

One wonders how the collective experience of many thousands of years could be consigned to the trash bin so easily. The answers are there, but are deeply unsettling. The reality is that those who hold the levers of power do not really care about homosexuals. They care, in truth, very little about the “rights” of the gay community. Gays are being manipulated and used by the power structure, which has its own agenda.

What is this agenda? Control. The power elites want to see the traditional institutions of society neutered. They want to see the educational system shaped to serve their needs; they want the curricula dumbed down to accommodate the needs of the compliant masses. They want traditional morality (as espoused by religions) undermined, as it stands in the way of creating the perfect consumer zombies that they love so much.

When the social bonds which preserve order become frayed, the state is forced to step in and impose its own rules. In this way creeping authoritarianism moves forward, slowly but steadily, under the guise of liberation and empowerment.

And finally, they want to see the family unit, with the roles and authorities of the father and mother, neutered. They want the real mother and father to be them, the state. Marriage has now become meaningless with the Obergefell decision. By undermining marriage, they enhance their own power over their consumer-driven citizens, and replace themselves as every citizen’s surrogate parent.

They gay community thought it won a big victory with Obergefell, but they lost along with the rest of us. It will turn out to be a hollow victory. Authoritarianism is laughing. Obergefell opened the door to yet more government intrusion into the personal lives of individuals and families; for when the family unit is weakened, only the state wins.

The gay community got played. They got used. They just don’t know it yet.