Saturday, 29 September 2012

A definition of feminism

Feminism is the ridiculous idea that it is either moral or sustainable to let women do men's jobs badly while neglecting their own work.

Irreversible decline happens when your society no longer respects the institution of marriage

‎Daryll Christopher:

"The more a woman pays her bills, the more I will love her. Occidental males are too preoccupied or trained to act as gentlemen. We should see women as our enemies and competitors, this is who they are, we should never love our enemies, nor should we shower them with gifts."

Most black men think like Daryll. This is why blacks in America have an 80% illegitimacy rate.

That is why female promiscuity is so destructive to your society and civilisation in the long term.

Feminism and female promiscuity, having destroyed the attractiveness of women to men and vice versa, your women become rotten, and so do your men, and then your children.  The next generation is noticeably degenerate and worse, rotting rotting rotting away ....

While this process of putrefaction takes place, no one will say anything. The men who know about feminism will complain but that is all they will do.

Even if they said anything, no one would listen to them.  Have you noticed a single political party in the land supporting marriage?   Even the nationalist ones?  Of course not.

To make marriage attractive to men, you will have to make it attractive to selfish cautious suspicious men  like Daryll who don't really like women and don't really want to help others and will only look after Number One.

Daryll will not be marrying any woman because, under the system of no-fault divorce that we have, any wife of his can divorce him for any reason and take half his stuff.

Like any man who wishes to preserve his property, he understandably does not want to find a woman he hates and then give her his house.

Denouncing men like Daryll will not change their behaviour, however.

Daryll will tell any male offspring of his son noo get married and he will spread the cancer of SSMs in his own little way.  He thinks having one child is enough and it is in any case all he can afford.

Therefore the demographic time-bomb of the West will mirror the demographic time bomb of China, where they have a one-child policy.

The smarter men with money will behave like Daryll and only the stupid ones with no money will get married because they have nothing to lose. Or they are men who are happy with the idea of marrying an older woman for her money while forfeiting their opportunity to be a father and a husband.

And so racial and national degeneracy entrenches itself further.

Nothing short of a Cultural Revolution will change things. The die is cast and the spiral is downwards.

So now we know the importance of this thing so many people call "just a piece of paper" You won't miss it till it's gone and when it's gone your nation will just die of the slow poison of feminism.

Onwards, to barbarism. Onwards to decline. Onwards to becoming slut and bastard members of a Third World Third Rate nation.

With a bit of luck we can look forward to becoming a nation like Liberia or Sierra Leone or Haiti.

Thursday, 27 September 2012

All healthy societies have a healthy loathing of the promiscuous female. Western society is sick and dying.

Any healthy society has this VISCERAL loathing of sluts. Stored in the memory of every race and society is the memory of how things turned to SHIT when they let sluts take power like they have now.

All societies made the same mistake at some time in their history.

Socialism, feminism, communism and atheism are just ideologies that says it is OK to be an SSM  and are just Man's periodic attempts to rid himself of this memory that Free Love kills your civilisation.

Those who forget the lessons of history are condemned to re-learn them again - the hard way.

The only good matriarchy is a dead matriarchy.

Wednesday, 26 September 2012

Suzanne Moore makes libellous and threatening comments about me

Suzanne Moore is tweeting about me at

Clare Khaw thrown out of BNP for being too extreme,thinks disabled children should die and single mothers be convicted. Not a happy bunny
1:20 AM-26 Sep 12

I was expelled for saying what I said even though I never represented myself as a member of the party.

At no point did I say that "disabled children should die".

What I meant to say, but never was given the chance to say it, was that parents of disabled unviable unwanted babies should be given the option of disposing of them without getting into trouble with the law.

Turns up events photographing and documenting her enemies. She needs to be careful as she incites violence. Thats all for now.
1:22 AM - 26 Sep 12

I had every right to turn up at the Orwell Prize Award since I had entered my blogs for the prize.  Evidence of this is at

Actually, I have whinged loud and often about the injustice of that Prize and the bias of the liberal establishment ad nauseam at

I have not to my knowledge incited violence, though it is possible that Suzanne wishes to be violent towards me.

@NickCohen4 she poses occasionally in some Nazi hardware. But no match for you . Take her out.
1:24 AM - 26 Sep 12 has all the gun and flag photos as well as photos of me.  I posed in solidarity with David Jones who was being given a hard time by The Star at when he was running his last election campaign and to draw the attention of nationalists to myself.  It worked a treat and they all know who I am now.  

Exactly why I did so is explained in full at
It is unlikely that Suzanne meant for Nick Cohen to take me out on a date.

It is more likely that she wants me to be "whacked".   So, dear Reader, if anything should happen to me, the police will have a good idea who dunnit and who put Nick Cohen up to it.

For an enemy of the people I am doing just fine. But just letting you know you dont need to tell me about it. Been years of it X
1:26 AM - 26 Sep 12 

This shameless woman is proud that she is an enemy of the people!

Tuesday, 25 September 2012

Suzanne Moore - feminist, socialist and SSM - an Enemy of the People?

Suzanne Moore the feminist, socialist and SSM

This woman has three daughters by three fathers and never married any of them.

Natalie Cassidy too is another SSM.

There are Reds under the bed, and there are Reds on your bed ...

The enemy within is invisible and unacknowledged.


"All truths that are kept silent become poisonous."

If you cannot subvert a society through open revolution, you use their women as agents of subversion.  If this works, you will have their society run for the benefit of the most feckless, most stupid and most immoral of their  women - the SSM - as well as their variously-fathered feral bastards. explains my categories of unmarried mothers of whom the SSM is the most morally culpable.

Did you know that most babies born in Britain are now bastards?

Women like her - feminists - spread illegitimacy like a muck spreader spreads muck.

A muck spreader spreading muck the way feminism spreads widespread illegitimacy

Is there a reason why we should tolerate widespread illegitimacy just because women like her tell us we must tolerate sluts and bastards in the name of liberalism, Free Love and indiscriminate tolerance and compassion of all that is harmful to society?

What have women like her done to for the morals of this nation except to make it acceptable for sluts and bastards to be tolerated?

What is fornicatress but a slut?

The difference between a slut and an SSM is the difference between a suspected criminal and a convicted criminal.   Suzanne Moore has been convicted three times.

If this country were Muslim she would incur a total of 300 lashes: 100 for each illegitimate offspring.

You may think this sounds unduly harsh, but it is probably the only language the stupid and the sluttish understand.

Sadly, however, in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland, the Land of Compulsory Fornication, this is what passes for normal and acceptable.

Where do you think all our social problems and crime come from?

Is it now finally time to tell feminism to fuck off?   

The French have fallen to the matriarchy represented by their Justice Minister Christiane Taubira

Christiane Taubira, the French Justice Minister, a divorced single mother wants to shove gay marriage down the throats of white heterosexual Frenchmen and Frenchwomen.   

Wow. Check out the degradation of white heterosexual people taking this SHIT lying down from a black DSM. explains what a DSM is, and other kinds of unmarried mothers.

"The head of the French Catholic Church Cardinal Philippe Barbarin warned followers last week that gay marriage could lead to legalised incest and polygamy in society."

The Pope won't help you now, mate.  He counts it a good day if he gets through his day without being called the Pope of Paedo Priests.

Only Islam can save the West from this filthy shit of the demented matriarchy whose tentacles have reached all parts of the Western world.

Remember, the Reds are not under your bed, they are on your bed, and most of you sleep with the enemy.

Who is the enemy?  The SSM and their running dogs.   Who are the running dogs of the SSMs?  Anyone who says it is OK for women to be SSMs.

There is a Facebook page dedicated to denouncing SSMs at

Like it and begin the fightback against the foul feminist matriarchy!

[Can someone translate the above into decent French for me?  I want French people to hear about me too.  I fight on behalf of Western civilisation against the foul demented matriarchy that worships SSMs and Free Love and is bent on destroying all that is good and decent about Western civilisation.]

Monday, 24 September 2012

Feminism destroys the institution of marriage by making sex both too cheap and too dear

To destroy feminism you need to simultaneously:

1. Abolish the welfare state

2. Repeal the Equal Pay Act

3. Repeal the Sex Discrimination Act

4. Reintroduce fault into divorce by imposing the requirement that all couples who marry must have a marriage contract

5. Abolish child benefit

Women who want things to go back to the good old days have to give up their privileges.

Men as individuals are helpless against feminism. The government needs to step in, but it does not. But even the people who say they are against the corrupt oligarchy are themselves afraid of fighting feminism.

Even the nationalist parties who denounce the LibLabCon are themselves afraid of feminism and the Running Dogs of feminism - the SSMs, their morally compromised parents, the men who impregnanted them, and SPOSSMs (Sex Partners of SSMs) because too many sluts and bastards now have the vote.

They are all infected by the same virus - the virus of feminism that causes effeminacy, irrationality, cowardice and hypocrisy.

Currently, the market for sex between men and women is opaque and confusing. The buyers and sellers of sex do not know what they want or what the price is. It is either too cheap or too dear. Sometimes, it appears to be completely free, but there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Marriage is the equaliser in this crucial transaction.

That is why the institution is considered sacred to sensible humans whether or not they believe in God.

If you get marriage, you understand the past and have an idea of how the past affects the present and how the present affects the future. Past, present, future are all abstract ideas.

If you do not get marriage, you really cannot see beyond your own base desires and, without marriage, people like you will revert to the barbarism that is common to all lower animals.

The point to remember is that there is no such thing as a free lunch.  No-strings sex is not really free.  Someone has to pay for it later, even if it is not you.

Your children pay for it, the next generation pays for it, your race, your nation, your civilisation, when they become the sluts and bastards they become if they do not respect marriage.

The idea of Yin and Yang is the preservation of the balance of power between the sexes. This is key to a harmonious society. Once you get that right, everything good will follow. If you get this wrong, everything evil will follow.

Marriage and the system of rules governing marriage is the key to getting the balance right between Yin and Yang.

It should therefore be reformed as a matter of greatest urgency.

Sex is too cheap for alpha men and too dear  for beta men.

The alphas are corrupted by the cheapness of sex for them and the sub-alphas are ruined by the cost of  no-fault divorce.

Yet no political party will admit this is a problem much less propose a solution, because they fear alienating the female vote.  That is why not a single political party in the UK has proposed any policy that might support marriage.

What policies might support marriage?

Why, anything that might make marriage an attractive proposition to men, of course. 

Thursday, 20 September 2012

Christina Blacklaws - another prominent member of the matriarchy who trashes marriage and promotes degeneracy
From around 6:50 AM

Christina Blacklaws
This woman says the law should reflect social attitudes however wrong they are.  If  most people think it is OK to have bastards then the law should treat it as OK to have bastards and treat unmarried couples as if they were married couples with the rights of married couples against each other, she has said on the Today Programme today.

This means trashing the institution of marriage, but what does this matriarchal feminist cow care about marriage?  She is yet another feminist in a position of power who will shit and piss on the institution of marriage, and be allowed to say such things on air without ever being questioned or challenged by any scummy liberal BBC journalist.   Bet she supports gay marriage too.  Her sort would.  They want to perpetuate the free for all fuckfest that is Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland.

Why do British men allow women like her to be in charge and tell them what to do?  Cos they are degenerate pieces of effeminate shit.

Tuesday, 18 September 2012

Why white men in their 40s kill themselves more than they did before

If you went to public school you are likely to have more money, which makes it more likely for your wife to divorce you once she tires of you and your little ways.

The strategy aims to combat this as part of its new strategy and will set aside £1.5million for new research into how to tackle suicide and self-harm.

Well, I can tell them for free that if you are in your 40s and you have been divorced, deprived of your home and your children and told know that no woman is going to look at you again because you are no longer the good looking young man you once were and you are skint and scared of women, then you might just want to kill yourself, mightn't you?

Remember, FEMINISM KILLS.   Kill it before it kills you and your civilisation.

Remember:  The divorce rate is over 50%, 70% of divorces are initiated by women.  

Declare an Official Marriage Strike

Is there any political party that has a policy against feminism?

Who is a feminist?

Anyone who declines to reintroduce fault into divorce, for starters, and who says it is OK for women to be Slut Single Mums.

Not all mothers are single mothers and not all single mothers are Slut Single Mums (SSMs).

SSMs are the mothers of illegitimate offspring ie bastards.   They are the cause of racial and national degeneracy, and male politicians are afraid of them because too many of them now have the vote.

The solution is simple: disenfranchise those parasitical and promiscuous women whose bastards will only be brought up to grow up to mug you, burgle you or rape your daughter.

Only the BNP is beginning to make noises about it as you can see at further discussed at

What about UKIP?   Well, they should, but they are probably too pussy now to do anything of the sort.  Whatever the BNP says, you can trust them to say it more weakly and much much later.

BNP finally picks up my anti-feminist message

Fighting Feminism
This Sunday we learn that God's purposes in redemption are to restore, and not corrupt or undermine, the created order. This applies to the closest of all relationships: that between a man and a women. Yet again the institutional Churches are failing both God and man in this matter, as they addle up to Satan and his wiles in the corruption - through feminism and political correctness - of both manhood and womanhood. The apostle Paul lays down guidelines however, backed-up by Christ Himself whose apostle he was, as to how we as faithful Christians can withstand the wiles of the world, the flesh and the devil in this matter, as in every other.

The Reverend Robert West's sermon transcribed and paraphrased

Feminism and the Need to Fight Feminism

I am very concerned that the churches are not doing enough to fight feminism both within their midst in the church and beyond their midst within society generally.  

The early church had female converts of high status who expected to retain their high status within their new religion.   

But they were soon put right by Paul.   

The woman is made for the man and not vice versa. 

The man is the head of the woman.

The man is for the glory of God, the woman is for the glory of man.   

The woman is not to compete with the man in a "feministical" way.

By fulfilling her man she also fulfils herself.   

I have met a lot of modern women, but I have never met a feminist who looks fulfilled.  I have never come across a feminist who looks at ease with herself and her world and I have never looked at a feminist who is contented.

I have come across a lot of feminists but not one of them looked peaceful, at ease or normal.  They looked somewhat icy and cold however their careers, houses or beau boyfriends they have accumulated, they just don't look right on the inside - perhaps they don't feel right on the inside either.   

Satan's whole object is to destroy or to corrupt the divine pattern.  He has devilishly inspired heathen religions especially and in the ancient world we not only had female priests but we have female goddesses.

In some of our modern churches we have female elders so-called - or should I call them "eldresses"? 

A female eldress in church is akin to a heathen priestess to be shunned.  Why?

The purpose of the New Testament is to get us back to Genesis.  The purpose of redemption is to restore the divine pattern not to destroy it.  Hence the Apostle Paul a minister of the gospel of redemption continually refers back to the creation and the design as the Church's guide for the role of redeemed women.  That is the Christian woman's guide.  

When men allow women in the Church to behave like that - in a way that usurps the authority of men - they are setting a bad example and they are confederate in their sin.  For the woman was made for the man and that is still her instinct.  That is why, I am sure, so many feminists just look so odd and ill at ease with themselves.

When feminists decry Paul or Peter for that matter, that is because feminists speak of heathenism and not of the things of God.

No one can heed the things written by or spoken by Paul unless the Holy Spirit first opens their hearts, but feminists - both male and female - reject Paul and attack him?  Why?  Because their hearts have not been opened by the Holy Ghost to heed the things of God spoken through Paul.  

Jesus said of the apostles that "Those who hear you hear me and those that hear me hear Him who sent me."

If we do not receive the Apostles' teaching then are we part of the one Apostolic and Catholic Church? 

Feminists, in rejecting Paul, and setting yourselves up as independent teachers, and even as priests, are you part of the one Apostolic and true Church known to God, however many churches you intrude into?

What a dreadful thing to do - to intrude into the true church and the true ministry when by your very deeds and stance you are not even a part of the truth church.  

I fear that there is a lot more involved than we normally think of in purporting to ordain women and in not submitting ourselves to the divine design in our Creator.

If we give way to this it will greatly damage the Church in the generations to come. We must be faithful to God, not to heathens or to feminism. 

Let us be faithful to the Apostles, lest we find ourselves no longer part of the Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The Lord that ordained that women should be the helper of men, grant unto them and us the grace to fulfil their role in Creation as restored to us in redemption ... "

Will the BNP be promising to repeal the Equality Act 2010 in the Corby By Election then?

If they do, will UKIP promise the same?

Once that is done, the snowball will become an avalanche, and feminism will be crushed.  

When feminism is dead, the entire West can return to rationally small government.

But only when feminism is dead.

The only good matriarchy is a dead one.

Saturday, 15 September 2012

If psychopathic behaviour is rewarded by sex, why should men bother being pro-social? Stupid immoral women reward murderous men. Why is this unpunished? Because men are no longer men.

"The fact of the matter is that social rewards are backwards. A man will get more attention and fame through infamy than accomplishment. As a whole, people can often identify serial killers better than Nobel Prize winners. Not to mention that current gender roles and culture norms devalue hard working "good guys". Women, in turn, follow that social information, popularity, and status when assessing who to select as a "mate". So, we have a mess.

 "My point is a simple behavioral one. People perform behaviors where rewards outweigh punishment. Holmes found all punishment and no social reward in doing the right thing. Many other men face that similar situation. Holmes has subsequently found more reward in infamy (no matter how he is punished). How long before other men become disillusioned, disempowered, and follow suit? How long before doing "good" is so unrewarding and punishing for guys that deviant behavior is actually the better option?

"Sure, we can rely on the empathy and morality of these men to not go in that direction. But, does that mean they are any less tortured or desperate? Shouldn't we fix the desperation and change the reward structure, rather than just shaming men into enduring punishing "good" behavior that gets them nowhere?"


A way of discouraging them would be to name and shame these women. Their letters could be opened and photocopied and their names and addresses put online when they say how much they want to be the sex partner of these mass murderers.

My Facebook friend Rookh Kshatriya:

"Women are interested in males who prove themselves superior above other males and who are dominant. Physical violence is the most trivial way on demonstrating your dominance.

If a male rebels against the rules of the group, commits crimes and or kills other people, especially other males, he proves himself to be capable to physical violence, disobedience and fitness. This elevates him immediately in the sociobiological pecking order.

This can be effectively noticed already in the elementary schools, where the bullies are the most popular boys and how the girls have crushes on the bullies.

Women are slaves of their hormones. Women are far less capable on rational thinking and to control their emotions than males, and women will always make their decisions on emotional grounds and never rational. When women see a man is a killer, their hormones interprete this man is an alpha male and a good father candidate. Which makes them to fall in love with the most vicious and violent of all men. It can be safely estimated that 70% of all women would rather be a death row groupie than marry a nerd.

That is why murderers have groupies but scientists don't.

Violence and viciousness is a good procreation strategy for a man in the sociobiological sense. Violent and criminal men get a lot of mating opportunities and they get to copulate often. What they lose in spousal quality they win in quantity.

Generally speaking, marital fidelity is an extremely poor procreation strategy for a man. A man who wildly copulates with as many women as possible is likely to pass his genes on with far greater probability than a husband who is true to his wife.

Even if James Holmes is sentenced to death, he will still have opportunities to mate and procreate. If he manages to pass his genes on before he is executed, he will be an evolutionary winner.

And that is all what really counts."


Rookh Kshatriya:

"I believe that women's economic independence (along with their expanding reproductive, monetary, and legal dominance) have given women historically unprecedented unilateral discretion over mating. As such, women are indeed unconstrained by any other concerns and able to pursue "hot" men (more aptly "high status" men). This is also driven by the fact that women's general sexual preference is towards hypergamy - desiring to mate with a partner who is of higher social status than themselves.

Taken together then, we have a group of powerful, high status women, who don't "have to settle" for any old husband to take care of them, and can hold out for mating with a high status or popular male (politician, celebrity, rock star, local hero, famous serial killer, etc.). Because men in general have become socially devalued, beaten down, and are not motivate to succeed, the pool of men that are of higher social status than the average woman is also rapidly shrinking. In addition, women's mating choices are more sensitive to social information. So, when society devalues most men, women take notice and find them unappealing. They also take notice of the few men the media and society highlight. Basically then, a ballpark figure is something like 80% of women are all chasing the top 20% of socially popular, famous (or infamous), and high-status men.

That is the situation that leads to the problem of the "average" man not being able to find love or sex. Because society has devalued them, women again don't find them worthy. Instead, women too become frustrated, because they are all chasing the same "attractive" men, not wanting to "settle", but never being able to get those attractive men to commit. Of course, those men are feasting! So, why would they commit to a monogamous relationship, when they can have a different woman a night?

All of this leads to the mistaken perceptions and confusion. Women often believe that "all" men have women throwing themselves at them (a comment above said 5 women to 1 man). BUT, those women are only counting the men they DESIRE, the other 80% of men are invisible and uncounted. So, those women feel that THEY are at a disadvantage...not because there are NO men available as they perceive, but because they have been socially conditioned to not even consider the 80% of men in their count. Therefore, these women end up competing for and "settling" with casual sex from high status men. Nobody is happy...except the 20% of men getting all the sex.

Of course, I'm speaking in GENERAL. Some high status men commit. Some women love and marry "good" and "average" men. Other women get sick of chasing "attractive" men and "settle" for an average guy later in life. In general though, marriage is on the decline and divorce is on the rise. The hook-up culture is becoming the dominant one.

My (long winded) point in all of this is that the majority of people are unhappy. When society started to devalue and disrespect "average" and "good" guys, it also began punishing them and holding them back. It also persuaded women that those men were not good enough to be lovers, spouses, and fathers. So, women began chasing a select group of men, frustrating those women, and further socially and reproductively punishing the large group of men. So, we're now on a downward slide...unless we take notice and turn it around."

Thursday, 13 September 2012

How well do women like Ruth Dudley Edwards understand the principle of free speech?

Do women like Ruth Dudley Edwards understand the principle of free speech? 

My Facebook friend Ruth Dudley Edwards' response to this story this morning at

We hugged the thugs who kicked our son to death... then found one a job
Read more:

was just one word on her status update: "Humbling."

I am afraid this rather set me off.

I reproduce the exchanges on her wall that led to her deleting me as her Facebook friend.

Kevin Taylor
Ture Christians in every meaning off the word  [If you look at the photograph, you will find Mrs Donovan wearing a Star of David cross.]

Pippa Gwilliam
That is extraordinary.

Claire Khaw
They can't have loved their son much, eh?

Claire Khaw 

Claire Khaw
Christianity is the religion of slaves and women, of course, and self-abnegating masochists who make a virtue of being self-abnegating masochists. Soon, these damned Christians will run out of cheeks to have slapped.

Claire Khaw
I knew you women would love this sort of thing.

Claire Khaw
Perhaps you ladies (I mean you too, Kevin!) will exercise your imaginations and imagine yourselves murdered after being kicked to death for no particular reason except for the amusement of these these thugs. And then imagining your spouses and offspring hugging your murderers ....

Such an extraordinarily *humbling* thought, is it not? But of course!

Ann Mitchell
I'm not sure I would be able to find that compassion in myself but I hope I would. Thank you Ruth.

Derek Torrens
I would hug them but with a weapon in hand to gut them with ;-))

Claire Khaw
Don't you think, Ann, that doing this would encourage more thugs to beat the sons of more parents to death for no reason at all, or do such things considerations not enter your pink and fluffy mind?

Perhaps you have a son you wish beaten to death?

Claire Khaw
Only Derek Torrens so far has given a response that I would call normal and moral.

Claire Khaw 
I see that you are an actress, Ann, and therefore rational thought is not prized in your profession, only the ability to emote and enjoy your emotions.

Claire Khaw
How tragic for this country that the criminal justice is in the hands of you women and the likes of Kevin Taylor. I am sure he is very popular with the ladies with the morbidly effeminate views that he expresses.

Claire Khaw
Let us imagine that you are the murdered son and are now a ghost. Let us imagine that there is an afterlife and that you saw your parents hugging your murderers.

You have the power to be severely malign towards your parents who hugged the murderers who murdered you so callously and capriciously. What would you do to them?

Ruth Dudley Edwards
I have asked you before to stop hogging my Wall, Claire. I believe in free speech, which is why I put up with you, but there's no profit or enjoyment in debating with you. I won't be doing it any more either here or on twitter. And if you continue to be offensive to good people like Ann Mitchell, I'll unfriend you.

Claire Khaw
I wouldn't call what you have here "debate" anyway, Ruth. It is more like a series of repeated and daily invitations for your friends to agree with you and praise and express thanks to you.

Claire Khaw 
Why is there no profit or enjoyment in debating with me? Is it because you know that by even answering my questions you are providing me with ammunition? Is that why you refuse to answer my questions viz:

How does George Galloway demonstrate "his love of dictators"?

What is wrong with George Galloway's attitude towards Israel?

What is wrong with the company George Galloway keeps?

Claire Khaw
How is Ann Mitchell a good person?

Pippa Gwilliam
Shut the fuck up Claire. It's the only debate you understand.

Claire Khaw
WHAT is the only debate I understand, Pippa?

Claire Khaw
Oh, you mean the fact that you ladies refuse to engage and/or threaten me every time I ask an awkward question that you cannot answer?

Mellifluous tones of Prof Elizabeth Cooke enables her to turneth away wrath, and delay indefinitely urgent reform

Law Commission Review of Divorce Settlements

Divorce laws in England and Wales have not seen reform in almost 40 years – but now the Law Commission is asking the public to help update them. Consultation began this week on how non-matrimonial property and assets should be shared and the need for financial support. The role of prenuptial agreements is also being assessed. Professor Elizabeth Cooke, one of the Law Commissioners heading the Consultation joins Jenni, along with Family Lawyer Julia Thackray of Penningtons Solicitors LLP, to discuss what divorce might look like in the future – and how the changes might affect women.

Wednesday, 12 September 2012

The matriarchy prefers expense, uncertainty and unfairness to cheap and simple solutions in divorce

The Law Commission is starting a consultation on the question of what should happen to property in a divorce case owned by the individual partners before they are married, in an effort to come up with guidelines for England and Wales. Ayesha Vardag, a leading divorce lawyer, and Prof Elizabeth Cooke, one of the law commissioners, discuss the question of divorce and property.

The solution is simple: marriage contracts for all.  

Will this simple solution be taken on board and implemented?

Of course not: it is too cheap and too simple and too rigorous.  The matriarchy will hate it.  They will take a few more years to sit on the idea and piss and poo all over it.

I once suggested to a female solicitor the idea and she looked at me as if I were mad.  I suggested it to another one and the same thing happened. What is the matter with these evil bitches that they want people to suffer?  

Why do these bitches dislike the marriage contract?  Because it means that fault will be attributed and we all know ex-wives can do no wrong, don't we?  Yep, it is all a feminine conspiracy to appropriate the property of men and then treat them like shit.

Time to tell feminism to fuck off, peeps.  Tell them now.

Don't fucking bother with the Law Commission - it is more than their job's worth.  Call a solicitor who does family law and ask that parasitical cunt why not.

The Muslims have marriage contracts.   Why can't non-Muslims have them too?

Because such a sensible and fair solution is something the matriarchy hates.   They want half their husband's property even if they were the ones who ran off with the milkman, so to speak.

Tuesday, 11 September 2012

Disgusting totalitarian censorious women at MOTHERS AT HOME Facebook group have banned me permanently

I have been expelled from

These women are mostly educated and graduates, yet they could not countenance the asking of a few awkward questions.   

Clearly, they were not taught about free speech at any time during their tertiary education.  

Women are in charge and they do not tolerate dissent.  Their suppression of dissent and legitimate criticism is swift and ruthless.   

Look at what happened to Lord Glasman, a Jew who had his career destroyed by the feminists in the Labour Party.  

Left: Lord Glasman of Blue Labour whose career was destroyed because he offended the feminists of the Labour Party

That is why feminism must be destroyed.  

Destroy feminism - an evil unnatural ideology - before it utterly destroys your civilisation.   

Do it NOW.   There is no time to be lost.   

75% of new mothers want to be housewives with husbands

How to challenge and defeat feminism in 3 easy steps

  1. Get the NF to have anti-SSM and pro-marriage policies
  2. Get the BNP to have anti-SSM and pro-marriage policies
  3. Get UKIP to have anti-SSM and pro-marriage policies
UKIP are having their conference at Birmingham Town Hall on 20-21 September 2012.  A pro-marriage and anti-SSM demonstration could be held. is where you can get a special UKIP discount if you want to meet UKIP activists that weekend and urge them to have anti-SSM and pro-marriage policies in their manifesto.   

See you there!

Monday, 10 September 2012

Why are middle-aged white males at such high risk for suicide?

Because of no-fault divorce.

Their wives divorce them on a whim, take half their stuff and deprive them of their children.

Does anyone remember an episode of The Simpsons in which Millroy's dad was separated from his mum and stayed in apartments called Bachelor Court?  Every night you could hear the sound of men crying and sobbing themselves to sleep.   Every morning yet another resident has been discovered to have committed suicide.

Funny? Of course.  The women are giggling to themselves.

Feminism is very very very funny indeed.  The destruction of your nation, the death of your civilisation, having men pissed on and shat upon by women from a great height - tee hee!

The men take it like lambs too.  They just lie there and turn themselves over occasionally so they get a more even covering of piss and shit.   What do the political parties say and do?  NOTHING.

What do the fringe political parties say and do?  NOTHING.

UKIP will say NOTHING.  The BNP will say NOTHING.

NOTHING will happen.  Nothing will work because the men have turned to women.  They feel no shame because they no longer have any pride.   It has been bred out of them by five decades of feminism.