When you teach women that they are the same as men, then there are consequences. Making them into masculine not-women is just the first.
Women begin to think they should perform an ersatz masculinity. This is pronounced in corporate or military situations, where rank matters. How can a promoted woman give orders to a man? Only by performing masculinity. Then, if you fix the game so these not-women can win with less effort than men, which in most scenarios is the only way they can, it gets worse.
As a result the route to success success becomes ‘being masculine’ when it should mean ‘being a great mother’. The more masculine women are, the more success they are likely to be given, in our culture, while motherhood is decried as an impediment to their ‘careers’. (By which they mean ‘jobs.’ Equality of exploitation in wage-slavery, what a victory.)
But at the same time, masculinity repulses men and mothering qualities attract them. (see Freud.) So men begin avoiding these women as sexual partners. I mean, who the fuck would marry Cathy Newman? So career success, for women, increasingly equals ‘catastrophic personal life.’
Feminism is a deception perpetrated on women and society by a small group of females, in order to implement a Communist Revolution. If you don’t believe me, read Gloria Steinem: ‘the only thing Marx got wrong is that the means ARE the end’.
The sex-doll issue, which was bubbling in the news-feeds as feminists set it up for attack — until COVID-19 stole the show — is illustrative of how they use sex to exercise power over men. No women are harmed in a sexual exchange between a man and a piece of plastic, yet somehow it is still ‘demeaning to women’ for this to happen. How is that even possible? It’s a SEX TOY.
I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig. Andrea Dworkin
LeNTAS: Let’s Not Talk About Sex. That’s what ‘SOGIE’ really means. For those who have not heard of this utter nonsense, the initials SOGIE stand for ‘Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression’. It is an excrescence of so-called ‘queer theory’ — something that has no scientific basis whatsoever, so should be called ‘queer opinion’.
Anyway, this particular dose of bunkum has at its centre the propaganda that Sexual Orientation (whom you are attracted to) has nothing to do with either your ‘Gender Identity’ or how you ‘Express’ that.
‘Transgender’ is a catch-all term that is used, today, to include all forms of ‘Gender Non-Conformity’ or (better) ‘Sex Non-Conformity’. These are expressions in which individuals, for a variety of reasons, reject the social norms of dress and behaviour. Most ‘transgenders’ in the West today are in fact expressing fashionable youthful rebellion, just as hippies, punks, New Romantics and Emos did, in their turn.
However, there are some for whom this is a much deeper issue. Individuals of one sex who wish to appear to be and even live as a member of the opposite sex, do exist, although the numbers are hard to pin down.
To understand this, we need to quickly recap on sex, sexuality and gender.
Frenchman Michel Foucault (1926-1984) is one of the most important characters in the development of Cultural Marxism and through it, Identity Politics and the Social Justice Left. Normally considered to be a Postmodernist, Foucault mixes the ideas of his great heroes, Jean-Paul Sartre and the Marquis de Sade (1740-1816).
There is little good to say of Sartre, a typically French, bourgeois self-loather much like Foucault himself, but I shall return to him in another piece. De Sade is another kind of fish altogether.
It’s well known that women live longer, on average, than men do. Partly, of course, this is due to the fact that men tend to have more dangerous jobs, in our modern world.
That was not always the case: until little more than a hundred years ago, men’s life expectancy was relatively much longer, because of the high levels of death in childbirth. But most men don’t die in mining accidents or in wars. So what actually kills men? Could it be that not having sex is what kills them?
Today is not the first time that feminism has threatened to destroy civilisation. It’s very interesting to note, if you study the mythologies of the ancient Levant on which Christianity is based, how the Goddess, symbolic of women, became identified with Satan.
The serpent and the dragon (just a bigger version) were always creatures of the Goddess. The day aspect of the Goddess in Sumerian mythology was called Inanna (later Ishtar) whose uncle, Enki, was her closest ally. Enki frequently appeared as a snake. Feminism is just the modern version of an ancient evil.
Bisexualism has a chequered history. Beloved by its proponents, it lacks convincing support, at least in the West, where it is taken to mean, more or less, ‘equal attraction to both masculinity and femininity’. Actual studies are conflicting and the consensus must be that more depends on the way the question is put than reality. Look at the following pictures. Can it really be possible to be sexually attracted as much to the one as the other?
I don’t think so. Yet there is one form of bisexualism in males that is well-supported and documented. It is a function of Autogynephilia. a very common fetish of straight men.
This video is about the potential pitfalls facing older men who decide to get married to young Asian girls. There is no need to do this and you should not. There are plenty of other ways to get sex. You can just pay for it on an as-required basis or you can just hire a maid and service provider for a very modest sum. Or you could find a sweet ladyboy, with whom the pressure will be much less — and the sex will be just as good. But marriage, especially to teenage Asian girls, implies a whole lot of other things that you should consider very deeply.
I’m slowly copying all my videos from YouTube and the other platforms I have and self-hosting them. This may take some time!