Saturday, 23 March 2013

Why everything is shit

Sunday, 17 March 2013

"Religion is only valuable to the extent that it suppresses women."


‎Rookh Kshatriya who blogs at http://www.anglobitch.com:

"Religion is only valuable to the extent that it suppresses women. A religion that does not suppress women, children or the lower orders (and make them behave better, in a social context) has no reason to exist. Modern Christianity is pointless, for that reason."

Tuesday, 12 March 2013

Why female bishops are dangerous to male bishops


I wonder if Lord Rennard is feeling just a little betrayed by his party after all those years of  helping the party.  The LibDem women for some reason decided to complain about his lechery that happened over two decades ago, and his male comrades have basically hung him out to dry.  One of them, Tim Farron, even called the cops about Lord Rennard's "sexual impropriety" too.

Tim Farron, President of the Lib Dems: Would you trust this man to run a whelk stall without calling the cops for back-up?


The question of how to handle the claims against Lord Rennard will be considered not only by the party but by the Specialist Investigations Command of the Metropolitan Police.

The meeting between the Met and Lib Dem officials on Tuesday comes after Lib Dem officials approached the force.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21583533


On Monday night, a Scotland Yard spokesman said: "The Metropolitan Police Special Investigations Command has been approached by officials in the Liberal Democrat Party and is working with them to ascertain whether or not criminal activity has taken place."

A Lib Dem spokesman said: "We can confirm that the party has had an invitation to attend a 'stakeholder meeting' at Scotland Yard to discuss the involvement of the police in any investigation into Chris Rennard. The party will fully engage with the police on this issue and continue to encourage anyone with allegations of a criminal nature to contact the police."

http://www.standard.co.uk/panewsfeeds/police-probe-rennard-allegations-8509310.html


Amidst such terrible scenes of betrayal and mutual backstabbing, it is clear that the concept of honour amongst thieves does not exist in the minds of  the LibDem men and women.  Party discipline is singularly absent and Clueless Clegg limps on while the LibDem men call the cops on each other at the behest of treacherous LibDem women.

If these weak, treacherous and stupid women are still going on about it decades after the event, then their contribution to British political life is NEGLIGIBLE if not UNDESIRABLE.  Too bad LibDem men whose brains  have turned to shit, their guts to piss and their balls to mince, cannot bring themselves to say this or form this view independently, let alone articulate it.  

From http://www.dodsmonitoring.com/downloads/2012/House_Issue_Supplement_10_Guide.pdf at page 24, you can see that the woman allegedly groped by Lord Rennard was on perfectly good terms with the LibDems as recently as April 2012.


"Bridget Harris is the deputy prime minister’s agent in the House of lords. She is one of a number of departmental advisers who represent the lib Dems and their leader across government departments where the liberal Democrats don’t have a lead cabinet minister.

These advisers were appointed to give the lib Dems more clout in areas of policy they don’t have a direct control over at ministerial level."

She reminds me of a certain woman who did the dirty on Nick Griffin at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/chronology-of-events-leading-to-sunday.html

The rule for women who are being sexually harassed must surely be "Either tell them in no uncertain terms that you want them to cease and desist, or forever hold your peace."

This woman has subsequently gone on to call the cops on Eddy Butler the former BNP National Organiser for allegedly assaulting her, apparently withdrawing those accusations, and then renewing them, apparently according to whim and time of the month.


Look at the list at https://twitter.com/1party4all/journalists/members if you don't believe me, and note not just the number of female journalists but also the number of editors who are female and Commie Pinko Liberal Feminist.

I hate to say this, but the brains of men fall out when they see a woman they fancy.  Yesterday, a male friend who is educated, professional and legally-trained (but who identifies himself as a UKIP-Conservative) was cooing about Anna Soubry and Harriet Harman.

I am considering only letting ugly, but clever and good people enter politics when I am Dictator of Britain.

It now occurs to me that the niqab was really to protect men from women.  


Should men allow themselves to be held to ransom by women like that?  Will the country be better governed as a result?  I rather think not.

This is yet another reason not to have female bishops.

I urge Cameron to dump that bunch of losers without further delay and form a coalition with Labour instead.

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/libdems-to-ban-women-from-workplace-and.html
LibDems to ban women from the workplace and propose khalwa laws?

Friday, 8 March 2013

Why don't powerful men support men's rights?

http://ozconservative.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/why-dont-powerful-men-support-mens.html


Because they


  1. do not want to associate with victim men
  2. think victim men are beyond contempt
  3. think victim men probably deserve what they get for being limp-dicked sub-alphas and gutless whingers
  4. think they or their friends could never become victim men and that this sort of thing only happens to other people
  5. would not acknowledge their victimhood by whingeing about it even if they themselves really have been victims

These days only a female with the mind of a man can fight feminism.


A few tips for anti-feminist men:



  • The term "feminazi" and "matriarchy" should be used to command the terns of discourse. Do NOT talk of yourselves as victims.
  • Only when men have the courage to call themselves anti-feminist will the challenge to feminism really begin.
  • The very idea of "victim men" is nauseating and repulsive. No wonder alpha males shun the very idea of helping sub-alpha victims in case their pariah status rubs off on them, like a kind of social leprosy.
  • Men will never be able to compete with women in the field of victim status. The idea is repugnant anyway.
  • Your best bet really is not to argue this point yourself but to hire me to do it.   Most anti-feminists are by definition sub-alphas and therefore bound to create the impression that they deserved whatever bad treatment they have suffered.   Mike Buchanan is a case in point.  View his performance at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkPCwvsYrjA  Definitely sub-alpha: sour, angry, short and rather  unattractive.  Women will not fancy him, especially if he is criticising feminism, and men just won't want to identify with him at any level.   I am more likely to charm and amuse people than a sub-alpha male victim of feminism. 
  • Steve Moxon seems reasonably attractive but UKIP dumped him because he wrote something controversial about the Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik in his blog.   http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17911131  But perhaps his stripey jumper was reason enough.  Have a look at that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwqTi6HN0pM&feature=endscreen


What do you have to ask for to destroy the matriarchy and feminism as a viable, rational and moral ideology?

  1. The reintroduction of fault into divorce so the bitch cannot divorce you and take your house as soon as she is bored and irritated by you.   
  2. The repeal of the Equality Act 2010 if you live in the UK or your country's equivalent of totalitarian thoughtcrime anti-discrimination employment legislation.   
  3. The abolition of the welfare state.  (That should be easy because Western governments can no longer afford to the upkeep of this sacred cow anyway.)

LibDem Mangina Richard Reeves calls for more housework to be done by men for women

Tim Farron - Liberal MANGINA who called the cops on Chris Rennard  for allegedly groping the treacherous Bridget Harris about 20 years ago
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9863557/Single-parents-less-effective-at-raising-children-than-married-couples.html

Richard Reeves: has he got MANGINA written all over his face?  Look more carefully and you may yet see the words.  Maybe he is just a pretty face, unlike Chris Rennard. No woman would complain if he touched their knee, I suppose, unless he is fat and bald, which he is not .. yet.  

Richard Reeves, the deputy prime minister's former director of strategy, claimed that while fathers have ''greatly increased'' their contribution to childrearing and housework ''women continue to get the sharp end of the stick''.

He called for breadwinning and childrearing to be shared equally to help improve modern family life and warned it would take more legal equality of rights and greater childcare to help that happen.

A transformation would help single mothers currently struggling to raise their children and ease the problem lower and middle-income families have giving their youngsters enough attention in the face of demanding work, he said.

By 2043, if we are successful, the terms 'career man', 'working father' or 'stay-at-home Dad' will have lost their novelty.

Is this what you want for yourselves by 2043, guys?   Any person with a male sex organ who says yes to this question should immediately castrate himself, cook his sex organ and serve it to his female partner for tea pronto.

Manginas - Betrayers Of Men

Manginas are pseudo-men who fixate their lives on getting a sniff of the female genitalia (figure of speech) at the expensive of others and by betraying real men.

Manginas see women as an ultimate being, places them on a huge pedestal, mind focuses only on sex or the satisfaction of women all the while not giving two bits a damn about his fellow man. Chivalrous and illogical are two definite traits of being a mangina.

A mangina is not a man, and we wouldn't dare honor them by gracing them with the title. A mangina is a pseudo-man who will first and foremost put women above men. This can take the form of buying into sexist stereotypes about men, trolling for pussy, or playing Captain Save-a-ho and reinforcing bad behavior from women.

A Mangina seeks continuous approval from females thereby becoming their servant.

Manginas support women's issues which are against his fellow men. Someone who espouses feminism but is really being suckered into a form of chivalry in which women's interests take precedence over men's. Unaware that they are merely "useful idiots", doing what women want in the vain/hope of getting laid. When his usefulness is over she tosses him out with the rest of the rubbish. Usually can be identified by his spouting the latest feminist clichés. A man who has been p-whipped but doesn't quite realize it. A man who thinks that women will like him if he does what women want (little knowing he is being used and will be dumped for the first alpha male/thug who shambles out of county lockup).

A Mangina is a self-depreciating man who subconsciously hates himself and blindly believes women are superior to him. He has been raised to think masculinity is inherently wrong - perhaps even a genetic/evolutionary/social flaw - and must be corrected by embracing his "feminine side" to the point of losing the very qualities that make him male. He believes women are beautiful, innocent angels and men are filthy animals who need to be controlled. His entire world-view is built on an absolute lie supported and propagated by a Feminised, Liberal culture and morally bankrupt Media. Ultimately his entire life is nothing more than a sad illusion....

He not only betrays himself, friends and family, but all men by sucking up to women in return for favors. A mangina is basically the proverbial Uncle Tom of the male populace. This is why manginas are betrayers and enemies of men.

Types Of Manginas

Here are the types of manginas:

1) The unenlightened. These guys are dangerous, not because they're adverse to our cause, but because they simply do not know any better. These guys have been raised to treat women with respect, to be kind and courteous to women, and when appropriate, to assist and defend her. As I said before, what makes these guys so bad isn't that they have an anti man agenda, so much as it is that they don't know better, and there are so many of them. Imagine that you're the only person in a crowded arena who knows that there is a bomb about to detonate, and you're trying your best to escape while everyone else is standing around doing nothing. That's what these guys are.

2) The horny. Ok now we've crossed into the "dangerous and evil" zone. These guys may not inherently hate men, but they love pussy so much that they are willing to justify anything in the name of pussy. Different from the unenlightened because even the unenlightened realizes that there are some women (bad girls) who you should just stay away from. The horny worships pussy, and will do anything in the name of pussy.

3) The worshipper. We're deep into the "dangerous and evil" zone, and reaching the mentally ill level. Like the horny, these guys will justify anything in the name of pussy. However unlike the horny (or maybe just like the horny), there are no limits on what pussy he'll worship. It doesn't even have to be pussy that he'd fuck. To him, pussy == superior human being. Acts that would be unconscionable to people with common sense, people in level 1, and even some people on the far border of level 2 are completely OK with the worshipper, so long as it's done in the name of pussy. These are the killers and sadists who kill people on their girlfriend's whim.

4) The nut-less. Dangerous. Evil. Mentally ill. Or just a Pathological liar. Basically, Hugo: in this person's mind, all logic, reason, cause, effect, and circumstance is overridden by a hatred for men and the prime directive that women are always right, and always to be obeyed no matter what. No matter what any woman says, this person agrees with them. There is no reasoning, rationing, or convincing this person of anything, no matter how obvious it may be to the rest of the world

The "Hugo" variety, the quasi alpha male who uses feminism to get female attention. Also uses feminism as an excuse to place themselves higher on the male feeding chain by taking the moral high ground as "protector" of women. For ex: politicians who pass laws like VAWA (highly biased, one-sided) which give ever more power to the state.

Any politician that voted for policies such as VAWA and IMBRA. Call it a subspecies of Mangina.

Definition

Man·gi·na
-noun-
1. A women-firster.
2. A pussy-worshipper.
3. A male who behaves or acts toward men in an overly aggressive way once feminist Maxims are questioned.
4. Teacher of lies and half truths.
5. One who believes violence against women is more wide spread than violence against men.
6. The major party of financial transactions to feminist and their misandric programs.
7. A cruel and vicious robber of freedoms.
8. A male lackey of the feminist movement (called a 'male feminist'), who views women as superior to men and always bows down to and agrees with women in an attempt to curry favor.
9. Males who cater to women so that women might like them more.
10. A woman's doormat, personal servant and cuddle buddy.

http://antimisandry.com/essential/manginas-betrayers-men-13392.html#axzz2Mx97SwTi

THE LIBDEMS - a contemptible collection of MANGINAS and gutless wimps not worthy to be called men.   

Roger Scruton the Conservative philosopher evasive and prevaricating on feminism


CK to Roger Scruton
1 March 2013, 15:14
Subject: Re: What does the Conservative party believe any more?

May I know your views on feminism, Mr Scruton?  Do you think a Conservative can be a feminist?

CK to Roger Scruton
On 3 Mar 2013
May I take it that you have no intention of being drawn on this matter?    If so, I will proceed to point out at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/ that


  1. all emasculated British men are afraid of discusing feminism
  2. Western philosophy is not wise and is in fact vacuous as well as  a waste of the three years it would take the student to complete this pointless and fraudulent degree
  3. Western philosophers are milquetoasts afraid of criticising feminism
  4. there is no English Conservative philosopher worthy of that name if Roger Scruton is afraid of discussing feminism
  5. since Roger Scruton is not prepared to discuss feminism or answer my question of whether it is possible to be both a feminist and a Conservative, then there is no English Conservative philosopher worthy of that name
  6. since there is no English Philosopher worthy of that name that post should be declared vacant and applicants invited to fill that post


Roger Scruton to CK
3 March 2013, 17:55
Subject: Re: What does the Conservative party believe any more?

Lack of time, rather than evasiveness. Not a feminist, tend to take the same view as Christina Sommers,
RS

CK to Roger Scruton
3 March 2013, 19:10
Subject: Re: What does the Conservative party believe any more?

Thank you for drawing my attention to Christina Sommers.  I had not heard of her before.

You will find that Simon Sheppard states the anti-feminist case more boldly.
http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=simon+sheppard


  1. Are you in favour of repealing the Equality Act 2010?
  2. Are you in favour of reintroducing fault in divorce to be reflected in the divorce settlement?
  3. To this end, are you in favour of making it compulsory to agree a marriage contract first before people can marry?
  4. Are you in favour of stigmatising never married mothers?
  5. Would you be prepared to say so publicly and unambiguously?



I guess the answer is a big fat NO.   

Scruton is probably too old and doddery to discuss these subjects now anyway, and has served only to bring Conservatism into disrepute by his dullness and dreariness and complete inability to take any kind of unambiguously moral position on anything at all except ask questions while being shy of answering them himself.  

Moral courage, your name sure ain't Roger Scruton!

If he is no longer fit for purpose and is fit only to be put out to grass, I am perfectly prepared to step into the breach.   I am culturally English if nothing else, and am quite prepared to define and articulate the principles of Conservatism.  I am also happy to say that no one can be both a feminist and a Conservative, unlike Roger Scruton, who is clearly too afraid to say so, having himself been feminised by decades of feminism and is afraid, probably of his wife and his female friends, relations and descendants.  A Conservative believes in respecting the institutions of marriage and feminism is all about trashing marriage.  Marriage is eugenic, feminism dysgenic.  Dygenic means that you will preside over the progressive degeneracy of your populace if this cancerous idea, which has now spread to all the major organs of state, is allowed to continue to exist unchecked and unchallenged.  

But Roger Scruton is silent.   

Too old and doddery, dreary and dull to dare to discuss feminism or answer my questions.  Roger Scruton: what is he for?

Tuesday, 5 March 2013

Libertarian Conservative Jp Floru does not wish to be seen to be plotting against the matriarchy




Jp Floru::

Andrew Lilico: "the best way to stimulate the economy is to go through New Labour's economic measures and to undo them one by one" at the Free Enterprise Group's'Pre Budget Briefing IEA.


Antony Millard   Very surprising, isn't it? Because you'd have thought that true entrepreneurs like Gordon Brown, Ed Mlliiband, Ed Balls and Tony Blair wold have brought their huge experience of business and private sector know-how together to create something extraordinarily successful and amazingly useful and efficient.

Jackson Wright The only thing standing between the nanny state and a rationally small government is feminism which requires totalitarian laws to prop it up, such as the Equality Act 2010.

Antony Millard Jackson makes an early bid for the "conflation of the week" award.

Jane Gould dodgy ground Jackson - but having listened to the special pleading on R4 just now, i'm not sure you're wrong.

Jackson Wright Have you not noticed that no political party in Britain will implement policies that actually support marriage?

Jackson Wright It has been argued that only a theocracy would return Britain to rationally small government now. You are all libertarians or Conservatives, I assume?

Jackson Wright We know what happened to Maurice Glasman for offending the feminazis, don't we?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/20/blue-labour-conservative-female-subservience

Blue Labour was the only hope Labour had of ever getting into government again.

Antony Millard I agree that radical feminism is pretty vile Jackson, but my point is that by saying "the only thing" you're suggesting it's the sole and root cause of big government, a position I do struggle with.

Jackson Wright Have you not heard of this thing called "Cultural Marxism", Antony?

Jackson Wright Have you not worked out that that is feminism by another name?

Jackson Wright I am not proposing anything that radical, Antony, unless you think the sky will fall in if the Equality Act is repealed. Do you know how many THOUGHTCRIMES there are in there? You are a libertarian. Don't you care that you have THOUGHTCRIME legislation in your country?

Tim Lord Roll back the state and leave it to organised crime - that is the market solution after all. xx
Jackson Wright How you going to roll back the state when you have a Conservative government that talks about the Big Society and nobody works out that it is Big Government under another name?

Antony Millard Maybe I'm not being clear Jackson, the causes of big government are far wider in my view than mere feminism or indeed throughtcrime.

Jackson Wright Indeed. Indiscriminate universal suffrage was a grave and tragic error. But one thing at a time, Antony, eh?

That can be reversed by proposing the narrowing of the franchise to taxpayers only.

Tim Lord This is a quite a scary thread.

Jackson Wright Why?

Jackson Wright I suppose to most of you feminism is a Sacred Cow. Perhaps you think I have blasphemed against your deity, Tim?

Jackson Wright I acknowledge I may have breached a taboo. But we are all mature and educated people capable of having a rational discussion without getting frightened, are we not?

Jackson Wright http://www.revolucionantifeminista.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/principles-101-feminism-manhood-and-you.pdf

The only way to break this dysfunctional cycle is to tell the truth; candid expression functions as the enemy of irresponsibility. It does not allow unhealthy perspectives to remain unexposed. Only language that avoids self-serving euphemisms and intellectually dishonest mischaracterizations
can effectively diagnose our real condition.

Yet our feminist society condemns candid expression as offensive, hateful and dangerous

. It claims that we only mature through rewards and encouragement (read: bribery) while deeming punishment and candor to be barbaric relics of a patriarchal society.

This philosophy has been put to the test over the last half century, and its fruits are telling:

• A debilitating recession, caused largely by irresponsible borrowing
• Subsidized, state-sanctioned single-mother households
producing the majority of today’s criminals and troubled
youths
• A nationally failing school system
• Online social networks facilitating a culture of narcissisism
• America now officially the fattest nation in the world


Tim Lord It just seems unlikely that the right answer would involve withdrawing the vote from women in those democracies where they have it. Also given the long and unambiguous history of the oppression of women in many societies and the ongoing poor treatment of women in many parts of the world it could be considered a bit stupid and possibly offensive. Worse, unless carefully drafted, such comments could be interpreted as supporting such oppression.

Kevin Newbold I wouldn't just stop at the economic measures. Socialism = equal share of misery

Jackson Wright Are you familiar with the term MANGINA, Tim?

Jackson Wright Are You A Mangina?

Every now and then you’ll see the word “Mangina’ pop up in one of our posts. For those who do not know what one is. Fred X has done a great job on his blog defining what the Mangina is.

Sometimes referred to as pro-feminist, sell-out or traitor, this pathetic excuse would rather ruin his fellow man’s lives with falsehoods and misinformation.

Often spawned from feminist mothers and raised alongside ‘empowered’ females, the Mangina will often sell his soul in order to attain one-night stands.

In other cases, the Mangina will suffer from a deep self-loathing, which manifests itself into campaigning for all things that will hinder his ‘oppressive’ gender.

The Mangina is not a friend of the Men’s Movement and must be treated with contempt at all times.

Example:

Sue: My husband received a 1st in his thesis yesterday.
Gina: What was the subject?
Sue: A Feminist Perspective on Patriarchal Western Civilization: The Role of The Trans-gendered ‘Other’ in a Male-Dominated Environment.
Gina: Mangina Studies then.
Sue: Yes.

Jackson Wright I am not proposing to withdraw the vote from women because they are women, Tim!

My idea is not exactly original either for Ian Cowie of the Telegraph has already proposed it.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ianmcowie/100010127/a-tax-based-alternative-to-the-alternative-vote/
A tax-based alternative to the Alternative Vote – Telegraph Blogs

Jackson Wright It is just that women left unchecked will become parasitical if they are not criticised for being bad mothers and making bad reproductive choices ie having singly-parented illegitimate children who are not fit for to join the labour force of tomorrow.

This is why successive governments conspire to allow immigration even as they know how much their voters hate it.

Jackson Wright But I am optimistic, for it is only an ideological battle, which can be very easily won.

Men, once they have grasped the degree of their oppression, will wish to cast off the yoke of feminism.

The arguments are not hard to make either since the facts are INCONTROVERTIBLE.

What might happen is that men will find themselves frozen out by their female partners and things may be a little difficult domestically.

I do not advise married men with property to discuss this openly with their wives, who will probably divorce them without hesitation, take half their stuff and then deprive them of their children after accusing them of paedophilia.

I would advise men to discuss this only with each other for the moment.

Jackson Wright Men are half the voters. Once we have the men onside they will need to persuade the women that feminism has been very bad for them indeed.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/281795/four-legacies-feminism-dennis-prager
Four Legacies of Feminism

Jackson Wright Most mothers really do not want to work.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1219131/What-women-REALLY-want-Forget-working-Superwoman-ideal-mothers-value-time-home-children-Cristina-Odone.html

Jackson Wright The views of women who are not mothers can then be safely ignored.

*****************************

This was yesterday.  Jackson Wright has now been blocked by Jp Floru on Facebook.

Man or Mouse?  Is he afraid of being seen to be plotting against the matriarchy?  He is certainly reluctant to be seen to be hosting the discussion of such a transgressive subject on his Facebook wall.  He may be what is known as a "mangina".   


Feminists want prostitutes dead while the Koran tolerates brothel-keeping



http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/05/hatred-prostitutes-feminists-brutality?CMP=twt_gu

Magnanti reminded us of Julie Burchill's observation in her 1987 essay "Born Again Cows" in the book Damaged Gods: "When the sex war is won prostitutes should be shot as collaborators for their terrible betrayal of all women." This would seem crazed were it not for MSP Rhoda Grant, who is sponsoring an "end demand for sex trafficking" bill in the Scottish parliament, declaring violence against sex workers a price worth paying to secure her proposals. As Magnanti tweeted: "Let that sink in. Politician thinks it's OK if people die b/c of her bill. No one bats an eyelid."

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/verse-in-koran-implicitly-condones.html
Verse in the Koran implicitly accepts and tolerates the existence of brothels.

Could it be that the Koran is more tolerant than feminazis?

Why do feminists want to stop women from doing what they are good at, ie being mothers and providing sexual services to men?

Are feminists really self-hating women?

Are feminists evil, or just stupid and misguided?

Do feminists hate women even more than they have made men hate women?

Four ways feminists have harmed women.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/281795/four-legacies-feminism-dennis-prager


  1. The first was the feminist message to young women to have sex just as men do.  
  2. The second awful legacy of feminism has been the belief among women that they could and should postpone marriage until they developed their careers. 
  3. The third sad feminist legacy is that so many women — and men — have bought the notion that women should work outside the home that for the first time in American history, and perhaps world history, vast numbers of children are not primarily raised by their mothers or even by an extended family member. 
  4. And the fourth awful legacy of feminism has been the demasculinization of men. For all of higher civilization’s recorded history, becoming a man was defined overwhelmingly as taking responsibility for a family. That notion — indeed the notion of masculinity itself — is regarded by feminism as the worst of sins: patriarchy.

Is feminism dangerous to free speech?


https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=416352078456452&id=221315967999943&notif_t=notify_me
Is feminism dangerous to free speech?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/investigation-into-debaters-allegations-of-anti-feminism.20412131?utm_source=headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%2Balert

GUU president David Lockhart, who chaired the final, issued a full apology to Ms Valles and Ms Meredith. Disciplinary action, ranging from financial penalties to suspension from the union, may also be taken against the culprits.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/marlena-valles/misogyny-at-glasgow-ancients-a-response/10151264345151784

The sexism of the GUU isn’t quaint and it is not a tradition to be jokingly celebrated.  I appreciate the efforts of members within the GUU to make it better and maybe that incident needed to happen because we were told by many senior GUU female members that they couldn’t do anything about it without being laughed down.  Until this is genuinely dealt with, as the director of training for the Edinburgh University Debates Union, I would be incredibly wary of sending female first years to Ancients next year and will certainly not be attending in the future unless there is assurance that this won’t happen again.

What does Marlena Valles mean by "genuinely dealt with"?  Their heads on a platter or just their balls?  

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/9907930/Cambridge-University-students-boycott-prestigious-debating-competition-over-sexist-heckling.html

Would men debating a controversial subject with other men have complained in this way?

Rebecca Meredith, left, and Marlena Valles 

Monday, 4 March 2013

"British culture is allowing your daughter to have fuck buddies"




http://www.youtube.com/user/bigpaapi11


Tony Hassan:

British culture is allowing your daughter to have fuck buddies...let me tell you people, if you come to the UK get ready for your daughters to be forced to become whores...muslims need to keep their values and their traditions...keep your kids away from this disgusting british whore culture..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=TmNJZ7J6xh0

This man seems to think that British women have no self-respect and neither do British men, who say it is OK for their women to be sluts.

Even nationalist parties such as the BNP, NF etc, say it is OK for their women to be sluts.

It is because the men in these parties don't care where they get their sex from as long as they get it.  As we know, sluts are the source of no-strings sex for men who cannot afford to marry or find a nice girlfriend.  These men have to take whatever that is going if they are going to get any.

Sluts are the unofficial deities that degenerate atheist liberals worship.  This can be seen from a typical discussion about fornication with liberals at https://www.facebook.com/groups/446037948795604/permalink/478138738918858/ :

Is watching Jackson Wright self harming a form of voyeurism?

  • John Richards Do you think he realises that he is alienating the 50% of the population that he would like to have sex with?
  • Graham Knight Does he cause excessive addiction to masturbation and porn?
  • Jackson Wright I don't want to have sex with sluts, unlike the rest of you.

    http://henrymakow.com/2013/03/men-take-your-mind-off-sex.html
  • Peter Bevan Could you please refrain from using that word to describe women? It's both offensive and contrary to the agreed rules of conduct for this group
  • Jackson Wright It is obvious that the ones of you who don't care where you get sex from will agree and flatter any feminist in order to get sex from her. If most women in your society are sluts and most men have to compete against women with the laws biased in their favour, then that is what you are reduced to, in order to get sex. You will want sex as cheap as possible from women as easy as possible from the stupidest and most irresponsible of your women whom you will proceed to knock up and abandon. [It is interesting that Peter Bevan appears to be saying that all women are sluts, is it not?]

    This will of course have implications for the next generation, though most liberals are too feckless, slutty and stupid to see this.
  • Peter Bevan Ok asked nicely, you seem to have ignored that polite request.

    That's disappointing as we try to be friendly here.

    I know you'd like us to ban you and prove whatever childish point you're making about free speech, but be aware that your exclusion from these discussions wouldn't represent censorship - merely a group of friends ignoring someone who choses to be as rude as they can.

    Please desist with this line of abuse, it's not even a debate any longer - you're jut acting like a child (or possibly actually are one pretending) who's just discovers the Internet
  • Peter Bevan Also the language you are employing is abusive and therefor outside of our agreed mode of conduct... Which is extremely rude
  • Cam Berry Mr Wright, what do the letters in the acronym of Claire KHAW's surname stand for?



NOTICE
I have deleted and banned 'Jackson Wright' and deleted all the members he added as suspect alternative identities for him. He violated group rules of respectful, good natured obscenity- free debate.
Seen by 13
  • 3 people like this.
  • Peter Bevan Agreed - "he" was obviously a fake account attempting to make some futile (and misguided) point about free-speech - Clearly not understanding the difference between censorship and being sent to coventry by peers!
  • Cam Berry Mr Wright did imply that he holds fascist nazi beliefs, that's extreme dogma and goes against other people's freedom, including freedom of speech. His was the only 'speech' that he would accept or allow, so in the interests of democracy I feel the correct decision was made for the benefit of the group. Interesting he should appear just as we discuss free speech tho! lol
  • John Richards He probably has a programme to notify him when the subject of 'free speech' comes up.
  • Cam Berry Is that even possible?
  • John Richards Google offer that as a service so it's likely to be possible with Facebook too, although they may try to make it difficult.
  • Peter Bevan None of this content is available to google - so won't be that - probably his spider-sense was tingling