Masculinity is dangerous

The Committee for Women’s Equality and Patriarchy Abolition has found that it is now hate for people without vagina to engage in activities exclusive to them. This is an adjustment to Article IX, Section 16 which stipulates that there be no more “male-only spaces” since this is discriminatory and fosters an atmosphere of misogyny, patriarchy, and sociopathy, better known as masculinity. Henceforth all voluntary associations must comply with these rules or face legal reprimands and/or social pressure. We must forcefully make androgynous all areas of life, public and private, for the propagation of equality and the eradication of male privilege.

Earlier this year another milestone on the path to tolerance and equality was reached when openly homosexual teenage boys were accepted as members, thus ending the heteronormative disenfranchisement of the LGBTQ youth community. Now our Committee can happily declare our work in having girls admitted to the Boy Scout national jamboree has been successful. Just read the words of confidence from these two girls who intend on out-competing the boys and showing them that girls are equally as good, probably even better, than the boys,

Welles and Virginia McGhee can’t wait to go whitewater rafting on the nearby New River.

Along the way, they won’t mind showing the boys a thing or two.

“If we can surpass them, that’d be great, to show them that we’re just as tough as they are,” Virginia McGhee said.”

Society must be forced to understand that girls are just as physically capable as boys. Permitting them to compete against each other is a good way of demonstrating gender equality. In fact, it will be a boon for the boys since girls will introduce new values into competition which will make competitions fairer. This will also allow for boys to learn how to better interact with girls through sharing,

“”My daughter walked anywhere and a boy would open up his bag and go, ‘I’ll trade you because you’re a girl with anything I’ve got.’ She got everything she wanted when she was at jamboree,” Kagawa said. “”We tell all our girls that you’ll get any patch set you want.””

Alright let’s get real here. What this forced mixing of the sexes is all about, at heart, is to hinder the development of masculinity in boys. At the same time girls are being catered to, and placed on a pedestal, in another aspect of life; which is the last thing society needs. We have girls being told they will get whatever they want, have the boys kowtowing to their every demand so as to be considered “nice”, and boys forced into competing against girls.

Males are now being forced, de facto, into sharing the entirety of their lives with women, not being allowed to develop independently, and simultaneously being taught a warped version of chivalry. We lose our separate sphere while having to cater to those who were never invited in the first place. Men like to get away from women, we do not want to be around them all the time yet if we say “this is for men only” it becomes a hate crime. If you expect this to have anything but horrible results, you are naïve. Boys learn to be men through interacting with other guys in a masculine atmosphere. Girls, and primarily their feminist parents, want to end this.

There is no equality

(h/t Hipster Racist)

The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal.“*

Aristotle

Simply put there is no such thing as equality. The worst tragedies of our age stem from the insidious notion that all people are equal. We can be equal before the law but not anything more. One particularly damaging result of this idea is that men and women must be equal. Feminism is supposedly (although I certainly do not believe it) about achieving equality between the sexes. Such a goal is untenable because to make such an attempt is the equivalent of trying to make apples equal to oranges. How can it be done? The answer is basically: it cannot.

Men and women have complementary natures and, thus, different roles to play. This is not about oppression; it is about acknowledging the laws of nature. Consider the story of Adam and Eve. God first made Adam (man). But God saw that Adam needed a partner, he was not fulfilled by his lonesome. Therefore God created Eve (woman) from the body of Adam. Woman was created from man, for man. Her body was created to receive his. Eve was the comforter of Adam, in body and soul. In her Adam finally found wholeness, and in making him whole Eve was fulfilled.

This is not about whether Adam was equal to Eve. It was about completion of the human person which could only be found in the unity of the sexes. Homosexuality is wrong and polygamy is wrong because they both reject this union. Man cannot be whole with another man and he cannot be whole with more than one woman. Those in rebellion against this eternal truth are denying the complementary natures of the sexes. One must believe that sex is interchangeable, that we are all essentially the same. But it is not true; common sense should dismiss that as lunacy.

A common mischaracterization of scripture would have us believe that men and women, in marriage, are called to “mutual submission”. This is simply not true. Only one person can be the leader in a marriage just as only one can be the captain of a ship. A woman is called to submit to her husband and a husband is to love and give himself up for his wife. This is not something radical, it is fairly simple. It amounts to deference of leadership and most decision making to the husband where he makes choices while honestly considering his wife’s interests.

The idea that men are to submit to their wives was created so as to prevent the Bible from appearing sexist. To require only women submit is to reject equality. However, this overlooks the fact that a man is then tasked with the difficulty of decision making and self-sacrifice for his wife. All feminism has done in terms of liberating women is removing them from submission to their husbands and instead making them submit to indifferent bosses/employers. Add to that the burden of difficult decision making which had once been removed from their shoulders has now been placed back on.

In the end, men want a refuge from the harshness of this world and women want to be that refuge. Why deny what we really want? The feminine is attracted to, and attracts, the masculine because the one wants what it does not have. This is how life works, how humans are made. Our physical bodies are even demonstrative of this complementary nature, of who is to give and who is to receive, who is to submit and who is to dominate. I have to wonder how this is not obvious.

*This first appears in 1974 in an explanation of Aristotle’s politics in Time magazine, before being condensed to an epigram as “Aristotle’s Axiom” in Peter’s People (1979) by Laurence J. Peter

Be careful with empowered women

Apparently the actor Michael Douglas, who was diagnosed with stage 4 oral cancer in August 2010, has revealed that the cause was not smoking or drinking. His particular oral cancer was the result of performing cunnilingus on an empowered woman. She had a case of HPV which was then transmitted to him when he used his tongue on her strong, independent vagina.

Understand that in modern Western society people no longer have self-respect or any degree of decency. Sex is little more than a consumer item which men will take when offered and women will offer after several months of dating, a couple dinners and a movie, or after hearing “you’re hot” by the smooth talker at the bar. For those of us who have self-respect (i.e. the “losers”) we find this to be disgusting. Some, such as me, will even go so far as to think this is a just punishment for those who are perverts.

Ramzpaul’s video is hilarious and accurate (I am not sure about the part concerning British women’s vaginas, though). When it is actually good advice to carry around a latex glove and know how to make a dental dam when thinking about sex with a particular woman, maybe you should not be with said woman. But if you have any interest in an empowered lady then certain precautions should be taken.  It is a good idea to know that most women in America have been penetrated by 11 men in their lifetime.

So much for those “virtuous” Moslems

I have said it before, and I will keep saying it until I run out of breath or a deranged feminist kills me, you must find yourself a virgin bride. Not only that, but men should also not be ‘sleeping around’. No one has to have sex, you do have free will.

Samsung goes feminist

(h/t Dannyfrom504)

You have to love feminism. It has become so thoroughly accepted in our society that commercials such as this are not even seen as controversial. The truly unfortunate thing is that people will not even recognize how disgusting it is.

The woman is obviously smart, sophisticated, and successful, however her boyfriend/husband (why is it that today we cannot tell the difference anymore?) is portrayed as retarded, lazy, and a slob. She plugs in an ‘Evolution kit’ into the TV then imagines doing that to him where he does all the woman’s work while, and this is just a crazy guess, she is off at her empowering job. All that while a song about a “real good man” is playing. Eventually she is awoken from her daydream by him farting (all men are no better than pigs, you know) and on the screen is written, “At least Samsung TVs are Evolutionary”. Obviously they are implying men are not.

I just wonder if the shoe was on the other foot, how it would be received. Imagine the same commercial, but switch the man and woman. She is depicted as retarded, lazy, and a slob, her boyfriend plugs in an evolution device and she got to work doing what she should be doing and end it with “At least Samsung TVs are Evolutionary”. How many people think that would make it onto the airwaves? How many would like to bet the feminists would go insane and probably try to sue Samsung?

Welcome to Nude York City

(h/t BwanaSimba)

In the name of “gender equality” the New York Police Department has officially declared that they will no longer arrest a woman for simply being topless. This is, of course, declared a victory for “freedom” and “equality” by the Liberals. The arguments goes, if a man can walk around shirtless without that being a crime than a woman, too, should be able to walk around without a top. Bare chests are obviously the same for men and women, no differences there.

The men supporting this are thinking this will mean they get to see hot women walking around with their breasts free. Guess again. If you believe anyone except ugly femcunts are going to be showing off, you are wrongly mistaken. Trust me, unless you have really low standards, you are going to be repulsed not aroused. I doubt those men really thought it through.

Nevertheless, the argument is that it is discriminatory to tell women they cannot go topless yet allow men to. They are correct, it is discrimination. But discrimination is often a good thing. Women and men do not have the same bodies. Breasts are not non-sexual parts of the female body; ask any straight man. Heck, even ask women. Why else would so many choose to wear low-cut shirts which show cleavage except to display their bodies for male attention? Admittedly most Americans exaggerate the importance of breasts beyond reasonable limits, but that does not mean having women walking around with them exposed is the right answer.

The most important problem with this law change is not that women are now allowed to show their breasts in public. That is an issue, but not the most important. Rather it is the justification for allowing women to expose themselves. We are being sexist if we tell women, “Your chest has an innate sexual nature that men’s do not.” For anyone paying attention it should be obvious that this is part of a larger campaign to force society into believing the (false) notion that men and women are the same. The goal is to deconstruct nature itself, but nature does not allow itself to be deconstructed. Work against nature and you will lose. There is no ‘might lose’ or ‘could lose’, you will lose.

We have become a savage society, having decayed from the highest point of civilization ever achieved by man to the lowest point in only 150 or so years. Unfortunately we are still descending. Society is already starting to fall apart with out-of-wedlock births at record highs, same with divorces, those who never marry, importation of third world immigrants, abortions, selfishness, atheism, debt, and overall degeneracy. Last night I was listening to the Orthodox Christian Network and the speaker noted how the 20th and 21st centuries are a period wherein the great lie, the one first spoken by the serpent in the Garden of Eden, has achieved power as never before. The idea that man can become like God through the idolization of the self is the lie. Moral relativism is what it is better known as today, that you make your own morality, your own truth, and are your own master.

Feminism is the belief that we can recreate the sexes and sex relations along any lines we want. They believe the Word of God is evil and that (wo)man knows more than some book of desert fairytales. Yet it was that book of desert fairytales that allowed for Europeans to create true civilization, one that only began to decay when it abandoned that book. Better we believe ourselves God than submit to truth.

Obsequium est non infirmitate

One modern notion I have found quite perplexing is that a woman submitting to a man is a sign of weakness. How is a woman fulfilling the feminine role weak? I suppose it would appear that way to those people whom believe the only strength is masculine strength and that we are to judge both men and women by one standard. What applies to men does not always apply to women. In fact, that which is considered a negative in men can often be considered a positive in women. Submission is one such example.

If a man placed himself in the submissive role it would be a demonstration of weakness of the masculine character. However, if he places himself in the leadership role it would be a demonstration of strength of the masculine character. Most moderns have unfortunately assumed this to apply universally and so if a woman wants to be a leader that makes her strong, hence the cheering on of the “strong, independent woman”. But is there really strength in defying one’s nature? No. Did Eve eating the apple after clearly being commanded not to make her a strong woman? No, it made her a weak, stupid woman.

Rebellion against nature is always weakness, regardless of how one tries to spin it. Feminists have done nothing for women except make them into poor examples of men. Most women today remind me of when boys are in their early teens and start cursing a lot thinking it makes them men. It does not; it makes them fools. The other night I was witness to women in their early 20s saying things, which they thought were funny, that I have not even heard men say. Vulgar, obscene, and disgusting are the words that come to mind when recalling those “ladies”.

Modern society is in large part a creation of feminism which must have been a movement led by women with mental disorders. I recall a quote by the Sage of Baltimore, H. L. Mencken, who said, “Misogynist — A man who hates women as much as women hate one another.” In most cases, men do not hate women. It is actually women who hold a far greater resentment towards one another than most “evil men” ever could.  For whatever reason, this translated into women deeming femininity to be some sort of enslavement and weakness. Feminism could best be described as contempt of femininity.

The solution to liberation from this feminine enslavement was obviously to ape men. But women cannot be men no matter how hard they try. There is a reason real femininity is so desirable to men and that even the Liberal men have begun to say they want “good girls”. The masculine is attracted to the feminine just as the feminine is attracted to the masculine. A man is as much put off by a woman acting like a man as a woman is put off by a man acting like a woman.

How can you keep a woman feminine? The answer is by keeping her in a position which allows for femininity to exist. That is done by a woman remaining under the leadership of a respected man which would first be her father then her husband. Of course to modern ears that is akin to slavery and treating her like she is property, which could not be further from the truth. You do not make a man by keeping him sheltered and always obedient to someone else’s commands, so how do you expect to make a woman by having her compete in a world which requires masculine traits for success?

Throw a woman to the wolves and she will turn cold. Have her make all the decisions in her life with no male direction and she will begin to lose her feminine essence. Let a woman sleep around and she will become jaded. All of that tears down the feminine, which is supposed to be the refuge of men from the coldness of life. Is it any wonder almost everyone today is so darn unhappy? Women have become cold as men and men have no fire by which to warm themselves.

For women, submission is feminine strength because it is part of the feminine ideal. The feminine ideal is always complementary with the masculine ideal, which is leadership. Men are protectors and women the protected. Men are to be respected and women are to be loved. One acts (men) and the other is acted upon (women). This is even symbolically expressed in the physical bodies of men and women. Women receive the man; the man does not receive the woman. She is penetrated, he is the penetrator. Even with nature breathing down our necks, moderns still refuse to accept anything short of “gender as a social construct”.

During the times of the Roman Republic, Cato the Elder said, regarding the breakdown of sex relations,

“Woman is a violent and uncontrolled animal, and it is useless to let go the reins and then expect her not to kick over the traces. You must keep her on a tight rein . . . Women want total freedom or rather – to call things by their names – total licence. If you allow them to achieve complete equality with men, do you think they will be easier to live with? Not at all. Once they have achieved equality, they will be your masters .”

Nevertheless, I am optimistic that there are many men and women who are coming to this realization. What we have been told all our lives does not always stick. As previously mentioned, even Liberal men are beginning to desire the feminine girls. Feminists have gone too far by making men more like women and women more like men. There is a reaction building, perhaps slowly for now, of men and women trying to return to what their ancestors had. Hopefully it is but a matter of time before the feminists are seen by society at-large as crazy and destructive.

Previous Post: De puellis intactis et matrimonio

Next Post: Lectiones bonae pro diebus pluviius