Feminism: the greatest betrayal of women in our time: 2 of 2

The types of woman I come into contact with

good woman1 The good woman

She has her moments but generally I don’t see much of her as she’s off doing something with or for her family, can be a mother, can in some cases not, includes my mother, mostly apolitical, a floating voter, with some vaguely love everyone ideas but also with a sane head on her shoulders.  This and N2 would be the pool for a partner.

image2 The annoyed good woman

She launches into Twitter and blogs to voice her disapproval of the lunacy going about.  A subset of The Good Woman, she usually works but finds time, often late evening, tired but always sane, often hard-headed, she is my online colleague – the Kassandras, Julias, Sues and Goodnight Viennas, the Rossas.

image3 The love everyone ingenue

She might be called @jacqueline and writes: ♡ please be aware! mistake in this world !♡♡only luv♡♡♡♡from Jacqueline♡ or else she signs off with Nigh nigh all my furry friends and wakes up with Morning everyone, have a beautiful day and let only love come your way.  Sadly, she’s easily hurt by people like N2 and me.

hook up girls4 The “modern” woman

Part of the new “empowered”, never satisfied, into herself N1, hook-up culture serial monogamist with dozens of men, like Pippa, fashion and cosmetics are everything, sites like Jezabel are for her.  Classic case of the woman feminism wrecked, uncannily has it all wrong, chasing false gods.

sjwpennytheredThe silly little cow

Led astray by N6 and the equivalent men, she’s just out of childhood and yet knows everything about the world and all those people quietly doing genuine good for the world, e.g. Nos 1 and 2, she calls them haters and hates them, along with the hated men.  SJW, she can only speak in Narrative, her only language.

harriet harbag6  Evil’s handmaiden

Not necessarily evil herself but hard as nails, she lurks in Common Purpose positions, management of companies, high in the civil service, dominates HR, infests universities – she is the vehicle for all the agendas we are currently fighting so hard.  Frankly a harpy, she is a disgrace to womanhood and is its enemy.

The reason we can do nothing about Nos 3 to 5

Nos 1&2 will always be and are the last hope for civilization, even though so many are from the older age range.  Fortunately, there are enough of these to stave off Nos 3 to 6, percentage-wise, for now but are there enough coming up through Gen Y and Gen Z?  That’s the issue.

N3 will always be, she makes up the numbers of womanhood, there’s not a lot to say, except if she votes Labour, LibDem or Democrat because she thinks they’re the party of love or for the other two, thinking they’re conservative, then she is helping society disintegrate.

Nos 4&5  are addressed below in the transcript of  Christiania’s first vid.  What percentage are these in society?  As types, maybe no more than a third of society but their ideas infect even N1 at times and certainly N3.  Therefore they are the main problem in society today because they simply cannot see that what they’re doing is destructive, they can’t see through N6.

N5 – sadly, the silly little cow becomes the Harriet Harman or Germaine Greer, the Gloria Steinem, the Betty Friedan. What chance any sort of sense enters her pretty little head?  Almost none – see Bezmenov’s comment below.  She’s lost, the new generation will have to take up the yoke.  Percentage in society?  Maybe 10%.

N6 – she needs eliminating immediately from her position before anything can be done to claw society back to some sort of normalcy.  Percentage in society?  Maybe 20% but it’s the 20% which gets to decide things.  If N5 makes the most tin can noise, N6 is the vicious one who can decide.  Usually a bit stupid and limited, e.g. Cressida Dick, if intelligent, she’s as dangerous as a jihadi.

Yuri Bezmenov was directly referring to this type, as well as to the equivalent men such as Ted Kennedy or Russell Brand, the useful idiots who see themselves as doing something good for society:

The result? The result you can see … the people who graduated in the 60s, dropouts or half-baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems. You are stuck with them. You can’t get through to them. They are contaminated.

They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern [alluding to Pavlov]. You cannot change their minds even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still can not change the basic perception and the logic of behavior.

In other words [for] these people, the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To rid society of these people you need another 15 or 20 years to educate a new generation of patriotically minded and common sense people who would be acting in favor and in the interests of United States [or any] society.

[The aim is] to “change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that – despite the abundance of information – no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.”

Christiania’s vid, part one

This is a girl who moved from N1 to N2 [using the nomenclature above]. This is my transcript and might miss a couple of words here or there, it leaves out her housekeeping parts but overall, it’s what she said.  She opens by quoting a blogger:

“I think you should say nothing to them as you can convince the left of zero.”  Isn’t that the truth. “We’re in the market of persuading independents, leftists are mental patients. In this culture war, this political war, the battle’s being fought on many fronts at the same time and we need to wise up and pick our battles.”

Right, I saw an internet quote which went, “Guys don’t know how to treat girls any more.  I believe that’s why the lesbian rate is going up.”

That’s right, they don’t know how to treat girls, that’s because everyone is telling them something different. Women themselves are getting mixed signals.  I would say that guys and girls don’t know how to treat each other any more and there are many reasons for that.

Is there anything guys don’t get blamed for these days? Seriously, everything – women’s issues, family issues, national issues, doesn’t matter what it is, it’s always men, damn those male chauvinist pigs.  I mean – really?  Of all the cross-sections of society to blame these days for our problems …

People act as if women haven’t been liberated yet. As Phyllis Schafly says, “Women are the most privileged creatures to ever walk the face of the earth … in this country at least.”

It seems the thing to be is offended these days. Everything’s offensive to someone, isn’t it? You know, in the age of tolerance, everyone is more offended than ever.  Firstly, I’m offended by the term “empowerment”.  It implies that I am lacking something on my own, I’m not good enough the way God made me.

I don’t need the National Organization for Women to tell me what I’m worth as a woman, I don’t need them.  I don’t need feminists to make me feel decent about myself, to boost my confidence, I don’t even need a successful career to feel fulfilled as a woman.

Right, I want to read an interesting comment that someone posted in response to a comment I posted on someone’s video: Feminists Beat Me Up on the Internet.  Funny and good and sad video.  I commented and said thanks for posting, good job.

Some woman commented on my comment and I quote: “You’re disgusting, one of those insecure women who is lacking in some regard, be it looks, intelligence or otherwise and so clings to the hope that you can be one of the guys by claiming to share the opinion of the most idiotic guys. I say idiotic because most men I have met are feminists. They do believe that women are not lesser than men, which is all feminism is.”

Is that so?  You know, my first reaction would have been to be indignant because of … just the stupidity of that statement but honestly … I feel sorry for this woman.  She actually believes that that’s what feminism is about – the belief that women are not lesser than men. ???  Which is not what it is.  If it ever was about that, it’s not anymore.

Christiania then points out the bleedin’ obvious in the ad hominem about her.  Just look at her and decide for yourself. I’m going to say here, as a man, that she is welcome any time with us boys … as one of the boys. Because she’s a trooper, one of the good guys. I don’t know a man alive who would not feel it great if she came along with us. And that goes for all the N2s at the top – they’re all welcome, as long as we’re welcome with them.

By the way, I understand the crowd she’s referring to, I know those types, I’m familiar with those types, they’re the same kind of girls who will act lesbian with their female friends because [they] think the guys find it hot.  

She [the feminist] can’t fathom that I could disapprove of feminism because I believe it’s disastrous to our culture and because it’s a big fat lie. She thinks the only way I could be an anti-feminist is because I want guys to like me.

Oh?  I’m sorry.

So what is feminism anyway because there seems to be a great confusion, a great misunderstanding between people as to what it actually is?  And what it was and what it is are two different things and then what it is and what it is being sold as are two different things as well.

Let me say feminism is not about women’s rights and opportunities anymore.  That may have been how it started out. Yes, women were not allowed to vote once upon a time.

Feminism is now just a tool of the liberal [read socialist] agenda. In order to really understand how socialists have hijacked the feminist movement, you need to understand that socialism and communism are not dead. There’s not a lot of talk about communism any more.  The red scare of the 50s seems to be over.

That’s because it’s been repackaged, it’s being sold as something else, exact same goals, exact same ideologies, exact same philosophies, different name. There isn’t anything new under the sun, it’s just relabelled, resold as something else.

I’ve said it before – political correctness is cultural marxism.  That’s not insane to say, that’s not wacko, that’s not a little extreme, it’s a fact.  Cultural marxism has been repackaged and sold to the culture as political correctness. Most of the country will not accept “Marxism” under that label.

Feminism is one of the tools – you should read The Naked Communist, by Cleon Skousen.  In that book, [he] outlines how to transform any society into a socialist society.  One of their goals is to destroy the family. The family is the foundation, the framework of a society.

This ties in with what the women said in Part One of this two parter.  In late 1954, McCarthyism was coming to an end and in subsequent years, though Regan and others embraced the Skousen principle, the socialists had won that battle overall and thus we have what we have today.

I’d say that it’s still too early now, as these two posts might also be too early as of December 2015.  Let a few more million invaders in, watch the whole financial structure collapse anyway and then let’s see how well these posts are received.

One of their goals in destroying the family is to get behind the feminist movement because it had been very successful in creating discontent. Betty Friedan who wrote The Feminine Mystique wrote it from the standpoint of a frustrated housewife – that’s what she sold herself as.  She espoused the ideologies which attack full time homemakers and she cultivated this victimology among women.

Later, she admitted that her propagandist views were linked to her belief in communism. She was a very strong communist and she supported Stalin.  Radical feminism was one of the goals of the socialists for bringing about their world view.

If you are a feminist and you cling to the view that feminism is actually about you, is actually about women’s rights, or even about women at all, guess what – you have been played.  You’ve been lied to. You’re one of the useful idiots of whom Stalin spoke, who swallows the lie because it flatters you or it appeals to your sense of entitlement.

I mean, think about it – if feminism was really about women, it would be about whatever women want, right?  It would be about the freedom to pursue whatever you wanted, including nothing.

It would [also] include the freedom to stay home and raise your kids if that’s what you really wanted to do, if that was your heart’s desire.  But feminists are not about women. Sarah Palin should have been championed by the National Organization for Women, right?  Because she was running for vice-president, she was a woman.  

Isn’t that what feminists want?  Women in leadership roles? 

No!  Liberal women [only].

Which tells us that it is not about the woman – it’s about the liberal.

And now Christy gets to the crux of the matter, in which she refers, in my nomenclature at the top, not to women as a whole or to Nos 5&6 whom she’s now dealt with, but to Nos 3&4 in the way they act, the way even potentially normal women have started acting:

Women have gullibly believed that they can take certain actions [and there will be] no reaction, the lie that they do not have choices to make, they can have it all.  You can’t have it all.  Women actually think they can have whatever they want, when they want it and men are supposed to know what and when that is.

Feminists want to be totally independent, except when they’re feeling dependent and if men don’t then step up and allow themselves to be depended on at said time, then they’re insensitive jerks.  

Women want to act unlovably but be loved, to let it all hang out but how dare men notice.  Actually, they’d better notice but not too much because that makes them creeps.

See what I’m saying?  Women want to be fully self-reliant, headstrong, in need of nothing, especially not men of course, yet they also want to be fought for and pursued and protected and cherished.

And ultimately, what feminists want is to be able to act like men but be treated as women.  

[They say] “I’m going to be who I want to be, which is unfeminine, unladylike … but you’re going to treat me like a lady.  I’m going to dress in a manner which makes you think I’m a hooker but I expect you to treat me like I’m a respectable person.

Am I the only one who thinks this is insane?

And if that is so, if she knows her own sex, then the implications are horrendous, are they not?  For anyone in society of dallying age?

For if I approach a woman with a view to forming a bond, and her first words are: “I’m not going to be oppressed by you,” then what possible hope is there?

One which Christy did not go into detail about I, as a man, can take up the baton on.

Boys and men always want nooky, they’ve always wanted nooky, all the chivalry and all the urbanity is towards one end – bedding that woman.  We’ve always misled women with fine poetry, flowers and dinner.  Marriage is having the one you love close to you … plus nooky on more or less permanent tap. Oh yeah … and kids and all that, curtain fabrics and extensions.

Women once had a defensive mechanism, a sorting mechanism and men played along with it – women’s right to say no. When a man wanted her, he had to go through the process, leaving his calling card, she would decide yea or nay, the mother or grand-aunt would protect her.

Chivalry gave women that protection, especially in chaperone days and it was real protection.  It wasn’t the law who’d come after a cad who had maltreated a woman but other men – he had broken the code.  I can’t emphasize that strongly enough.  When almost all men will protect you, that is a powerful thing.

Women have always wanted nooky with their chosen one, the one who’s passed all their tests, they’ve had to discriminate in this, had to ensure the gene pool consisted of fine offspring.  They do not want nooky with the ineligible in their eyes.

Chivalry was the perfect mechanism for letting all this sort itself out but men took advantage of it to keep women under, say in Victorian times. And the fact that men do not do that anywhere like as much now is testimony to us knowing what is right and what is wrong.

Women of types 1 and 2 do not mind the man being nominal head of the family – he’s taller, stronger, a good figurehead, good for clearing drains while she actually runs the show.  That’s not a bad way. She keeps up the flattery, he speaks endless sweet nothings into her ear and reveres her. What’s wrong with that?

But along came the insanity Christy referred to [in blue above] and suddenly the shackles were off the men.  Hey, here was nooky without responsibility and the silly women who saw it as their sexual liberation had no idea it was the removal of protection from all women across society.  Plus young girls they’re the ones really getting it in schools now.

Because now the beast has come out in men.  A feckless monster has been born and as if the indigenous are not bad enough, we now have invaders and Rotherhams.

Coupled with porn, respect has been the first casualty.

Sure men will bed you but it’s the old joke when she says at the end, “Will you still respect me?”  You have to be kidding. You’re a slapper, a hooker.  Good for a bang and that’s all.

And then men look at what’s happening to their fellow men who do do the right thing still – they get taken to the cleaners, do they not?  The State gets behind the lunacy [in blue above] and now there is zero incentive for any young man to commit.

Through the ages, this has been the N1 lament of women – getting a good man to commit. But turning herself into an unstable [see the blue above], often vicious creature who will turn on a man like a savage dog if she does not get her way, but unlike a dog, will use the law to beat a man down – what man will stick around for that?

Particularly if he can satisfy his prime directive – nooky – by going to a club or picking someone up or at work, working out who the slappers are and going with them.  Simple, low cost, multiple nooky.  Devil bless the hook-up culture, eh?

And those type 4 women – how do they respond?  They give it away instead of putting a premium on themselves, thinking this shows they’re “in control of their own sexuality” or some such bilge.  Really?  A slapper who acts as a man is going to score a good man for life?

And those who do semi-respect themselves, who would never have a one-night stand, many of them still do it, like Pippa Middleton, as a serial monogamist. Monogamist or slapper, it’s still multiple partners and no man wants to go slops.

Rita Esposito, in one of those rags, lists Pippa’s men up to the point Nico took over:

· Alex Louden is a former cricket star and was her beau until after Royal wedding.

· Prince Harry — The spark between Prince Harry and Pippa Middleton has been undeniable as I reported on May 16, 2011.

· George Percy is reportedly an old flame, also known as Earl Percy, the heir apparent Duke of Northumberland. The family castle was used to film scenes from Harry Potter. He shared a home with Pippa while at college along with Lord Ted Innes-Ker, the second son of the Duke of Roxburghe.

· Alexander Spencer-Churchill is distantly related to Sir Winston Churchill.

· Guy Pelly was reportedly involved with Pippa although the gossip was never confirmed. The nightclub owner is also a friend of Prince Harry.

· Charlie Gilkes has been dubbed a socialite and also a trendy night club owner.

· Billy More Nisbett is a Scotland noble who was recently engaged.

· Jonathan Jardine Patterson is reportedly heir to a major Hong Kong diamond business.

· Simon Youngman, another London socialite, is also linked to the diamond business.

Pippa, sadly, is used goods and time is running out.  It’s all what comes inwards towards her, not what she gives outwardly.  She’s a high profile example of type 4.

The economic consequences

Now that manufacturing is depressed, the jobs men once did, the bullocking work, has now dropped away, now that men cannot compete with women in tickbox service industries, all of which will crash with the coming economic crash, now that it’s women managing everything below Them level, what happens when the economic crash and the great Muslim push begins?

Are our forces ready?  Are the men trained?  Where are the manufacturing plants?  Will we take them back by force?  What of the outsourced work?

Christiania called it insanity.  Yes, it is.

How to turn it all around

I don’t think the Harmans, Friedans, Penny Reds, the type 4s, many of the type 3s – I don’t think they can be turned around.  It’s the upcoming generation they’re blighting who will be the future but look what they’re doing – transgendering their boys and there is no father about to call a halt to the idiocy. Having prizes for all, giving counselling to anyone even slightly sensitive.

So it’s not just Gen X or Y but also Gen Z who’ve gone all fruitcake to a high enough percentage in society and the first generation who might rebel against this will be the children of today’s toddlers – we’ll be dead by then.

But what we can do in the interim is to block the madness [in blue above] at every turn, to put out posts such as this, to prevent feminazis, as far as possible, doing much more damage.

3 comments for “Feminism: the greatest betrayal of women in our time: 2 of 2

  1. December 11, 2015 at 00:14

    What can I say. I have said almost everything here m’self at some point though perhaps in different, less effective words.

    Comprehensive. A splendid assessment.

    • December 11, 2015 at 12:36

      Yes, saw it over there. A good one.

Comments are closed.