In Praise of Class

The reason why wealthy people prefer to hire Third World nannies and gardeners has very little to do with money. Sure, they don’t actually like to pay things like insurance, Social Security, disability, etc., but that’s not the whole point. The point is that Third Worlders and people who don’t speak English well know their place.

In our “classless society” ordinary people don’t. It gets awkward.

With a language barrier, one is not “friends” with The Help.

Marriage also, by the way, once benefited from class.

The idea of having one’s outcomes pretty well guaranteed by The Master and Mistress is not such a bad thing. Depending on Government to guarantee one’s outcomes leads to dissatisfaction and all matter of Government dystopia.

It is also not such a bad deal for women to surrender their agency to The Patriarchy in exchange for State-guaranteed outcomes.

For whatever it’s worth, I have no idea of what is my own true “class”. Supposedly, in my parents’ and grandparents’ day “Education” trumped all. I suspect that this idea was borne out of The Great Depression such that observing the misery of the farmers losing pretty well everything was enough to make those who presumed to be of a class above the farmers to not in any way—no how—be farmers. Even if they were.

Supposedly, “Education” insulated oneself from being starved and degraded, with the hereditary estate surrendered to The Banks. No wonder no one wanted to have “class” anymore.

The myth that farmers are somehow illiterate and poorly educated also sprang out of that era, in my opinion. After all, back in the days of the original U.S. Colonies, according to John Taylor Gatto, farmers had vocabularies that would put the average tenured academic of today to shame.

During The Winter, while the livestock rests in straw-fermentation-manure-heated barns, there’s not a lot to do. Reading books of more challenging bent than today’s pulp was the norm. Children were educated and apprenticed into useful activity. There was no such thing as “adolescence.” Not such a bad life, by my reckoning.

However, homesteading is not for everyone. Sometimes people starved or were stormed by savages. Outcomes were not guaranteed by The State. Oh well. That’s where God comes in.

At least one branch of my family tree were indentured servants. That could easily be a miserable life. However, one of the inducements of The Revolutionary War, which that particular bastard son of a Scottish Earl, and two other ancestors (Scotch-Irish, Pennsylvania Dutch, Huguenot, English, French, German, etc.), partook in, was the sense of “gentry” that exceeded the immigrants which came later. Investing by means of risking one’s life as a new arrival in a new nation has benefits.

However, servitude, where one’s outcomes are guaranteed by the prosperity of The Master or Mistress is not necessarily such a bad life. If that is one that one is cut out to be. Not everyone can be the boss, and who really wants to be? Naturally, not all bosses are equal, but wise ones realize that investment over time involves shared outcomes.

Again, not really knowing my class but having more than one “educator” in the family tree, back when “educators” were sort of like “snake oil salesmen” in terms of their trustworthy factor, I intuit based on conversations that it was extremely important for my Depression Era grandparents to represent themselves as “educated”.

However, they were evenly divided between “the industrious” and “the grande dame”. I suspect that some of that last was then, as now, sort of a consumerist/celebrity/media driven/Feminist hybrid.

When I was a child, the “Southern” grandparents had a Black maid. We all called her by her first name; however, she never became overly familiar with any of us. I suspected that she liked it that way. That way, she could go home to her real life after work.

Many years later, I spent some time with those grandparents at their newer (before I was born) “Yankee” digs in Long Island. They had a new Black maid but were unhappy with her chosen name as not being dignified enough. She introduced herself to me as “Sammy” or something, while my grandmother corrected her with, “Samantha is so much nicer.”

I was not very close to this dirtfarmer-cum-educator-cum-putting on Yankee “educated” airs side of the family.

“Did you really have to rename her, grandmother?”

For what it’s worth, the best four years of my life were spent as the servant of Axel. It was not a lofty existence living in a flat in North Philadelphia then in a fifth wheel in Long Beach, California. My job was to rise before him and have his lunch, breakfast, thermoses, handrolled cigarettes, and ironed shirts ready. When he would order me to do something—anything—I would jump to fulfill it. When he came home, dinner was at least at the planning stage and was on time, kept warm, or ready to serve at 6:00 PM every day.

I also cleaned the place, shopped, laundry, did some computer work for him, or really anything he wanted. There was nothing that was beneath me. Far from it. Pleasing him was my whole life.

As a skilled craftsman/tradesman he outclassed me. Being of service to him was an honor.

I think that it is just media and consumerism which tells women that this job is somehow degrading.

It is an affront to Feminists.

I hate Feminists/Socialists who would put the responsibility of all outcomes in the hands of government.

It is not demeaning to separate oneself from the outcome-guaranteeing class.

Sometimes life happens though and here I am, without Axel, at the mercy of those who could not care less about me.

And so I speak my mind.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Self-Sacrifice as Virtue

Martyrdom is only a powerful force in society if the narrative of a martyr is promoted as heroic or religious myth. In the case of the RMS Titanic disaster, a much celebrated myth with no connection to maritime law arose:

Women and children first.

Perhaps this myth was promoted for public relations purposes by the passenger ships.

In other maritime disasters, women tended to fare poorly. According to a study by Mikael Elinder and Oscar Erixson of Uppsala University, a more accurate cliché is the following:

Every man for himself.

This just goes to show that for most men, women and children are a luxury to be enjoyed during good times rather than a life necessity beyond the mere sexual.

Hence, self-sacrifice among men is generally framed as a duty under State, Church, or ideology, with such duty often enforced at the barrel of a gun. In addition, there might be a reward by way of payment for services, or the possibility of social advancement through glory, assuming that one survives the experience; or payment to the survivors if not.

Alternatively, civilian life might offer so few rewards that the adventure itself is the reward.

Who then is to promote self-sacrifice among women as virtue when even the slightest limit on a woman’s choices is framed as “Patriarchy?” Other women is who.

Essentially, women police other women to ensure that the social behaviors of the particular circle are maintained as a standard. Men will also police other men.

Meanwhile, martyrdom of women being severely psychologically wounded (that is raped and degraded) at the hands of Jihadists is surely beginning to penetrate popular consciousness. However actual deaths at the hands of Jihadists are surely higher on men. Besides, paradoxically, women tend to distance themselves from female victims except to promote convenient political narratives.

In a sense, withstanding the advances of these rapefugees is being framed as necessary civilian sacrifice in service to the noble objective of “compassion”.

Exploitation of women by the narratives promoted by other women well exceeds anything that non-Islamic heterosexual men can devise.

I am one of the few voices so far who dares to include within Jihad the largely overlapping movements of La Raza and Black Lives Matter. Given that we have a Catholic Pope who is an Islamic appeaser, as well as the reality that oil producing nations in Latin America are politically subordinate in terms of oil economics to Mideast interests, La Raza becomes a weapon of Jihad whether by default or design. Drug economics also play a role in terms of the rise of Hispanic gangs in the U.S. and throughout Latin America, along with cooperation with Islamic-based drug trafficking.

Myriad pressures of rival gang activity to include outright genocide, the flood of drugs themselves, and lack of entry-level jobs for citizens together put a terrible pressure on the Black American community to convert to Islam, and for lower class Whites to adopt the mantle of the supposed menace of White male fraternal societies. All directed rage on the part of Whites creates the boogieman with which all grievance politics dance.

In addition, a fair amount of both funding and personnel in Black Lives Matter has an Islamic flavor, with cop killers thus far being overwhelmingly Islamic influenced. A lot of that conversion occurs in prison.

Similarly, Communist/Socialist elements to include Feminism and LGBT advocacy by default or design serve Islamic creep by hamstringing competitive interests such as Fundamentalist Christianity.

Meanwhile, other Christian and Jewish organizations are receiving funding from multiple sources in order to relocate Islamic “refugees” into the West.

It would almost seem that the rhetoric of these advocacy groups is incidental toward an Islamic objective or “creep” throughout society. Even Atheism or the supposed religious neutrality of Western governments is being used to disproportionately elevate Islam into protected status.

Anti-Smoking and other Healthism serves an Islamic creep objective by eliminating ways for non-Islamic male-dominated socialization to occur. This rhetorical imposition of silence and submission onto non-Islamic men effectively forces a rhetorical martyrdom upon them, right along with a very real economic marginalization, until learned helplessness and suicide together accomplish a slow genocide.

A society that provides no limits in female choice, whether in consumerism, sexuality, commitment, political power, spiritual beliefs, or loyalty vs. conciliation with rival interests basically makes that society ever more vulnerable to invasion. Therefore, bestowing unlimited choice among females of a particular society is effective martyrdom of the entire society.

Assuming women are even capable of making choices that even benefit themselves or society at large is a projection based on myth, consumerism, and Democracy.

Ironically, women through their own professed sexual fantasies and erotica geared toward them, desire to be subjugated sexually and every other way by powerful men. However these desires compete with what they are told that they want by major media and advertising. Moreover, the myth that rebellious hoodlums are preferred by self-proclaimed “sluts” over gentlemen, ignores the reality that “the third option”, that is a strict patriarchal leader, is infinitely more arousing to the majority of women, all rhetoric to the contrary. However, such a creature is increasingly rare.

Those who are not already as busy as they can handle are being driven out of The West, sacrificed, or forced into hiding.

In the face of the strong irrational desires which guide most women, attempts to appeal to women using rationality with regard to the creeping threat of Islamification are bound to fail. Simply promoting Christianity and societies and governments created under it as being “more respectful” toward women than Islam is not going to be effective. Rather, the very fear mongering with regard to the supposed criminality of Christian Patriarchy is its own pornography. Therefore rationalizations are almost counterproductive or even self-fulfilling prophecy. Furthermore, if the “moral” arguments for according special status to Islam comes with the threat of marginalization for all who disobey, then women, who depend more on society’s approval than men do, are going to reject countering arguments outright, regardless of how reasonable they might be, unless they come from authority.

An example of such a rationalization:

(My comment.)

Harems are inevitable without large scale female martyrdom. Are they to be government harems or Islamic harems? Men are going to assign outcomes to women, and not likely through mere rhetoric. Rather, the most aggressive are going to win out over the gentlemanly reasonable. In a sense, authority represents the most aggressive viewpoint even if the official rhetoric is mere “tolerance” for that aggression.

How many women would prefer to be able to choose both non-Islamic and non-Feminist servitude rather than be conquered by Islam? My guess is that, paradoxically, those most likely to speak up on behalf of their own desires have the least amount of both rationality and humility. A woman such as myself, for instance, has very few romantic chances in the way of incentive to promote my own humility. I therefore speak my mind. It is my own way of self-sacrifice for a greater good.

I doubt that I will achieve either glory or reward for this…on Earth.

 

 

 

Inconvenient Truths

One of the reasons that I decided to be a technical writer rather than a journalist or political wag was that I suffered under the conceit that the truth had value.

When it comes to a valuable software and/or hardware package that costs a fortune to install, the time of all parties concerned has value. Therefore, it was my mission to make all of the technical publications I created accurate, efficient, and well-indexed. To that end, music to my ears was the voice of a product manager bellowing over the phone within my earshot:

“Did you read the manual? Read the manual!”

Persons on all ends of the product experience would congratulate me on the wonder of picking up a manual (of some 200 to 500 pages, depending on the product), thumbing through the index, finding the topic of interest, turning to the page, reading the short series of instructions, performing those instructions, and having the correct result achieved. This was my peak. I am today nowhere near as efficient or clear-headed.

Naturally, I put my heart and soul into this objective. Actually achieving recognition other than professional respect and of course the bottom line was never my aim. In other words, I was a fool.

To be placed upon a pedestal that one does not want is a prison. However, in a world where media and celebrity is king, such a concept does not compute to most people. Just the same, I appreciate living in a world where I exist. I write therefore I am.

There exists no attorney or district attorney who would want me on a jury. I’m all about consistency. Such a thing is rarely politically convenient except by providence.

Given my professional success it is somewhat of a mystery to many why I am not a Feminist and am even an outright regressive. Why would I deny other women the professional success I have achieved? What kind of monster would?

The answer is that this world does not actually materially, professionally, or socially reward truth. Therefore, putting the most vulnerable in positions such as the voting franchise such as to arbitrate “truth” is a gamble on the resilience of hope.

A Leftist “religion” has arisen such as to reward those who are in possession of the correct feelings with regard to truth. However, the mystique which surrounds its various priestesses—and femininity and emasculated men well prevail—is starting to become undone. It is my hope that in reaction women start to voluntarily withdraw from social arbitration and decision-making. Madison Avenue may tremble from such a prospect, but, I believe, is all for the best.

 

 

Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death

Remembering Patrick Henry:

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death

When tyranny is a woman, what then?

It is no wonder that it is primarily women who are opposed to legal arms, for guns in The West are more often used in suicide than murder.

It is no wonder that it is primarily women who under the guise of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) instituted a police state of random stops, blockades, “Papers Please,” and bureaucracy to prevent men from enjoying themselves among themselves without a schoolmarm present to police their speech.

It is no wonder that it is primarily women who engage in smoking cessation propaganda dissemination and other tobacco elimination tactics, while curiously resistant to the math of a bureaucracy which depends on taxation of the very vice that swells its coffers.

The U.S. Civil War was funded by liquor taxes. Were Unionist women jealous of Confederate women for having a field of men who appeared to serve them? (Only the tiniest minority of Confederate women, by the way.)

It would seem that any energy expended in something that does not directly benefit the Feminocracy must be outlawed under pain of incessant nagging. Surely war would seem to be a preferable outcome to their husbands.

It is no wonder that it is primarily women who engage in Health Nannyism of all sorts to prevent the possibility that somewhere a man is enjoying his food rather than catering to the Feminocracy in dull, dour, or “rabbit diet” austerity.

At what point will women cease this relentless drive to enslave men and all women who appeal to men’s rebellious and independently-driven natures?

When women and men are segregated from each other into government harems and cannon fodder, respectively, in the quest for a Globalist Socialist Caliphate? Only the most ruthless in each camp will survive. Then what?

 

My Boyfriend Wants a Threesome! What Should I do?

Every once in a while I subject myself to the crap that most young women are reading to the detriment of society. I do this in order to keep my finger on the pulse of this pathetic trajectory.

This article inspires me: What Men REALLY Want When They Ask For A “THREESOME”

Here’s a taste:

For a guy who’s spoken for, threesomes seem like a relatively accessible form of sexual adventure, says Carol Queen, Ph.D., staff sexologist for Good Vibrations. He gets to double up on all the things he loves to do between the sheets, while also doubling up on his favorite fantasies: sex with two women and girl-on-girl action. Threesomes are basically the dude version of walking in a new pair of Jimmy Choos while eating cake.

Stop the world. I want to get off. Wearing impossibly expensive shoes that likely won’t survive a year while stuffing one’s face with flour, sugar, eggs, water, and baking powder, frosted with more sugar with perhaps a little plastic blended in for smoothness? This is what young women think is “sexual adventure”?

How repulsive.

Now it is time for a different and probably illegal counterpoint.

First of all, I’ve lost count as to how many threesomes I’ve participated in, with the majority being two females, one male. The very best ones I’ve participated in were driven by me and a girlfriend, that is, we discovered it was pretty fun to essentially take a man by surprise, assuming he was receptive, which was the case by definition.

Us two girls were pretty good friends, both pretty strange, and pretty hot. She had curly strawberry blonde hair and more toward “curvy” in the sexy rather than modern sense of the word, plus freckles, whereas I played up more of the tanned, straight blonde hair, “Amazon” thing. We had a lot of fun until various life events tore us apart.

I have no regrets with that last. Like most females of my past, she expected me to be the one to shoulder responsibility for outcomes as well as lead us into adventures, that is, she like so many women today, punished me for my leadership without following my direction when it counted. No one forced her to follow me and furthermore I never submitted myself to her leadership. To the women of my generation, it’s all egalitarianism all the time or nothing. No thanks.

Anywho, although I have zero interest in any more lesbian experiences with females, I know that a lot of men like it, and so I would do it, for the right guy, as an exercise in exhibitionism and submission. However, if the point of such an exchange is that us two females are to somehow form a household together? I would just assume not. I can share just fine without having sex with another woman. How about you two go play without me? Invite one of her girlfriends to join you!

That would be way better than being burned by yet another woman and having to stomach either servicing her or her trying to get me into a vulnerable position. That’s just how it is. Besides, I really could go for the rest of my life without receiving any more cunnilingus. I’d submit to it, again, as an exercise in exhibitionism and submission, for the right guy. If I have anything to say about it however, I would just assume that if cunnilingus is going to happen it is by ‘him’ not yet some other ‘her’ with an agenda. If I were to submit to it, it would be for his benefit, rather than my own. As to whether or not I would be able to orgasm, that would depend on whether my anatomy responds to his technique. Period. So, enjoy the taste, Sir, if that’s what you want, and if you’d like to learn what works and what doesn’t, please try not to hurt me non-erotically in the process. Thanks.

So, back to the article. Say he wants a threesome, and is capable of seducing two women himself in order to realize this experience for himself. I say, “Go for it.” I’ll take that night off to wax my legs or something. If I am in a serious relationship with him it is because I trust his judgment. Otherwise, we would not be in such a relationship.

Say he wants a threesome, and wants me to be a part of it. I am going to have learn what his objectives and fantasy are, that is, whether if I am to be an actor for purposes of demonstrating my submission to him while engaging my exhibitionistic side for him? Or whether this is a step toward some sort of more permanent three-way relationship.

Say he wants a threesome, and wants me to find the other woman. Yeah right. That’s just not going to happen. Can it be done? I wouldn’t know as it is impossible to prove a negative only that my insight into the female mind has been proven to be highly inaccurate. Would I give it a shot as an exercise in submission and exhibitionism? Sure. I’ve done it before, however, my record is somewhere on the level of one out of a hundred times? Chances are, if the man and I are in a relationship, his own success level with women would well exceed mine. Most of the females with whom I have partaken some sort of sexual activity volunteered for it, and I went along.

As for what goes on in other womens’ minds? I can’t speak for them, and would really prefer these days not to have to find out personally. The media geared toward women is repulsive enough for me.

 

 

Race Realism

It is frustratingly frequent on the internet for me to be greeted by “race realists” under the presumption that I am one, just because I can laugh at a good race joke, and don’t think that either forced multiculturalism or welfare is moral.

Some of these refreshingly scrappy but misguided characters would appear to harbor the expectation that it would be preferable for me to become a self-sufficient Wonder Woman, or submit myself to a Catholic Convent, than to even consider a romantic relationship with an “other,” such as (oh horror of horrors) a Black man, Jew, or Mexican.

I’m going to need a moment to have a self-flagellating fit to even consider such a fate. Far better were I to marry a criminal con artist Chinese man. Oops. Been there. Done that.

On the other hand, as a member of the world’s most privileged minority, a Blonde, White American Protestant-born Woman, who hasn’t yet physically fallen apart, I realize that wherever I am to go or whoever I am to align with, catfights, whether in real life or by proxy through Oedipal-Complex-burdened menfolk, are my life going forward.

It would seem to me, however, that it is the spouses of aforementioned privileged demographic who are so pussy-whipped by same that it is far safer to focus one’s attention on issues of race than dare be less than a gentleman as concerns the Feminist or female-exceptionalism views of one’s spouse.

After all, if she’s upset, she can make his life a living Hell.

I imagine that the same dynamic applies to the Black American community. I’ll venture that the Reverend Jesse Jackson’s absurd innovation in renaming them “African Americans” was more distraction in the same vein.

I’ll venture that giving The Jews a theoretical “homeland” was more of the same.

So, without a “homeland” of my own, how the Hell am I to know where I am to go and what I am to do for the rest of my life, assuming my current impoverished but don’t-dare-actually-earn-anything-that-will-just-be garnered-in-service-to-unholy-objectives-that-exclude-me-status is not sustainable?

I have a few ideas but it isn’t as if I have a whole lot of confidence in my own instincts as concerns my own well-being after the love of my life died and my previous great farming venture in Venezuela went all to Hell. On some level, I crave something familiar but not toxic-familiar such as is the case with my own family. On the other level, I truly am the sort of woman to simply lash myself to a man’s venture such as to be useful in whatever way according to my talents, capabilities, and ability to learn that I can be so.

As for my female peers, I am not sure what’s worse—catfights or blind devotion to Leftist rhetoric. It makes me daydream about having a sex change, so that I can be a gay male or pretend to be a transwoman—a “straight” one, with a surprise surprise functioning snatch.

I am truly sad as to what has happened to the Welfare class, which is disproportionately Black in the U.S. I don’t blame race but rather The Great Society, a White Liberal invention, and but a continuation of The New Deal, a Pyramid Scheme. How it is that Leftist adventurism always has such grandiose names, like Great Leap Forward, and predictably regressive outcomes?

However, the backlash, that is, overly optimistic growth, coming out of an obliteration of culture, connection, and history, such as what was promoted by the Post World War II Nuclear Family, is but a volatility venture with a predictable looming disaster:

Similarly, the multiple-ideological consensus of the glorification of motherhood and infancy as the only allowable outcome if one has a sex life, along with the parallel disqualification of homosexuality as a moral lifestyle choice, would appear to be a trap set for men.

Since I don’t have a man to cook for and work for in terms of something worthwhile, I have plenty of room to work on my writing craft, as an outlet from my overly excitable brain combined with my jaded and discouraged viewpoint. I also keep working on my appearance in the hope that such attracts to me something more alive and interesting than the aforementioned even knowing that such is unlikely to occur here in Southwest Florida, and probably not in the U.S. either.

However, somehow, I doubt that women abroad will be delighted to meet me either, and, women are part of the package in every society except the monastery or the gay male lifestyle.

Recently, I listened to an audio program put on by young Black women of the new right:

Kira Davis talks about purifying one’s heart with forgiveness. I found it inspiring.

I agree that I need to purify my heart in terms of learning to stop blaming women for being stupid and to stop blaming men for allowing women to reach overblown influence in society, to the detriment and reduced opportunity of outcome for children.

I cannot yet however forgive The Church as an institution in terms of Monogamy, because that is a serious demographic math error and rejection of their own doctrine. Grade: C-.

The inevitable bureaucratic matriarchy is not so different from the politics of Africa, or the harem.

 

Leftist Rape Camp

I am so fed up with Leftist, Liberal, and “What about my Legacy?” Republican whining that I have decided to confess. With enough torture I can be persuaded to spill my guts all over their parade and, what’s worse, irregardless of further whining to the contrary, this idea of mine is one that they’re going to like.

Peace shall reign.

First of all, let us identify the problem. (Inspired by David Cole’s, Black Cop, Drunk Jew, White City):

One of the many sociologically damaging effects of smoking bans is that places where people tend to talk—live—with each other, such as cafes, diners, and bars, now function as portable offices, get-them-in-get-them out affairs, and fermentation tanks. Back before smoking bans, a cop could show up at a cafe, diner, or bar, drink some coffee or soft drinks, smoke, and chit-chat with the owner, employees, and patrons such as to find out about new developments in the precinct and perhaps thereby prevent crimes of greater sociological significance than smoking infractions.

—Excerpted from my Disqus comment.

Is it possible, that the recent smoking ban in New Orleans has set off a powder keg?

In California, youth-obsessed but perpetually parched, desert-dwelling, and well-divorced women effectively run the politics of the state. I’ll venture that perhaps tobacco smoke is not compatible with the lungs of fat-free vegetarians and therefore, perhaps, a tad more offensive to same than paranoia-inducing marijuana.

A more serious issue however that applies to every state in the U.S. is that there is a severe man shortage!

My recommendation to solving these problems is that lovely spa-like Non-Profit, Sliding Scale Bordello/Mental Health centers be built in California or, better yet, perhaps some of its prisons can be revitalized and re-purposed with green spaces, gardens, and meditation centers.

Men can be encouraged to volunteer to perform community service at these Life Enhancement Centers by first submitting to “Line Ups” and then allow the well-moneyed to bid on them or even virtuously donate them to their less endowed sisters, for a well-supervised, politically-correct, hour long “session”.

Women could pay for luxury accommodations therein and pay into funds for purposes of accommodating their less fortunate sisters.

Hospitality lobbies of all sorts could also be encouraged to donate, as well as solicit donations from their patrons.

Of course, these Feminine Massage Centers would be smoke free, provide healthy snacks, and safe sex materials.

Meanwhile, the rest of the nation can be free to lift all smoking bans.

Ruminant Politics

At my farm in Venezuela, I raised goats; chickens, guinea fowl, and waterfowl; a couple of cows; German Shepherds, and there was one cat.

I don’t have a lot of experience with sheep except from observation. In addition to my fascination with the populations that dot the Mendocino coast of California, I have stayed on sheep farms in France and Germany, but as a tourist not a volunteer. My observation is that Mendocino and Alsace-Lorraine sheep (I don’t know the breeds) are very efficient albeit shy lawnmowers.

I have not had much experience at all with intact rams, only whethers. Nor bulls.

I have six years of experience with intact male goats. Perhaps this explains my great affection for them.

My experiences with all of my animals inform many of my observations in terms of sex-dynamics of predators vs. prey, and were what spurred me to start blogging when I read a piece on race by the incomparable Janet Bloomfield a.k.a. “Judgy Bitch.” A second piece of hers inspired me to write: Diet, Behavior, and Violence in Under Nourished Creatures.

Although I don’t have a lot of experience with rams, I have for some reason been seriously romantically involved with more than my share of Aries men. I don’t inform my knowledge of rams exclusively by those experiences but I do see how it is that the characteristics common to the sign of Aries would be inspired by the archetypal ram. In retrospect, I believe that my record with Aries men illustrates my own historical lack of capability in distinguishing between Dominance and Authority. This deficiency of mine became clear to me after marrying a criminal Aquarius, escaping him, and then meeting the love of my life in a Capricorn.

I do not mean to cast aspersions on various astrological signs, only to create an analogy in terms of my own relationships with them. This piece that I write today is not about astrology, it is about Dominance and Authority as concerns The Left.

It is my understanding that when it comes to cattle breeds, the more docile females tend to be counterbalanced by the more aggressive males. For example, a darling little miniature Jersey cow female has a fiery little mate. I will venture a guess that the reason that Spanish Bullfighting doesn’t use Jersey males is because they are far too fast and dangerous with their sheer persistence. Therefore, it is contraintuitively safer to use larger breeds.

Not always, but, usually. Matador is mauled to death in horrifying footage showing first bullfighting fatality in Spain this century

What applies to cattle breeds also applies to sheep and rams. Specifically, one can be wandering along, minding one’s business, when suddenly one is rammed hard by a mean little fucker who has snuck up behind you while you are distracted and then tears forward like some sort of Kamikaze. It’s one good reason to both castrate and dehorn one’s rams!

I am speaking of the animal, not men who happen to be born under the sign of Aries. I think that my world needs more masculinity not less of it. Without it, we have a Man Shortage.

When it comes to the Parrot Sheep of The Left today, it would appear that the White breeds are largely self-castrating, and carry bullhorns. Whereas the Black breeds, if they survive long enough, are slaughtered about the time that they reach the age of being put out to pasture. There is definitely some overlap in these two types of populations. How about a little less of the vegetarian feedbag, guys, and a little more in the way of, say, lamb?

My late great Axel (Capricorn) drew this:

Parrot Sheep

By Axel (with Caprizchka), November 13, 2013

Just how long does The Left believe that it can survive an attack by wolves? Perhaps it is time to heed the German Shepherds who are trying to lead you guys to safety rather than merely assume that protection equates to predation.

Slaughtering your protectors is not going to change this dynamic for the better.

 

 

 

 

Man Shortage

I’ve been reading up on Margaret Sanger lately, reputedly the inspiration for Wonder Woman:

Superman débuted in 1938, Batman in 1939, Wonder Woman in 1941. She was created by William Moulton Marston, a psychologist with a Ph.D. from Harvard. A press release explained, “ ‘Wonder Woman’ was conceived by Dr. Marston to set up a standard among children and young people of strong, free, courageous womanhood; to combat the idea that women are inferior to men, and to inspire girls to self-confidence and achievement in athletics, occupations and professions monopolized by men” because “the only hope for civilization is the greater freedom, development and equality of women in all fields of human activity.” Marston put it this way: “Frankly, Wonder Woman is psychological propaganda for the new type of woman who should, I believe, rule the world.”

—Jill Lepore, author of the book The Secret History of Wonder Woman writing in The New Yorker.

Lepore continues:

In May, 1942, F.D.R. created the Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps. A hundred and fifty thousand women joined the Army, filling jobs that freed more men for combat. The corps “appears to be the final realization of woman’s dream of complete equality with men,” Sanger wrote in the New York Herald-Tribune. But she was dismayed that the government didn’t provide contraceptives for WAACs and adopted a policy of dismissing any woman who got pregnant. “This new women’s Army is a great thing, a real test of the woman’s movement,” she said. “Never before has the fight for woman’s equality narrowed down to the real issue, sex.”

In 1943, Marston wrote a Wonder Woman story called “Battle for Womanhood.” It opens with Mars, the god of war, angry that so many American women are helping with the war effort.

“There are eight million American women in war activities—by 1944 there will be eighteen million!” one of Mars’ female slaves reports, dragging a ball and chain.

“If women gain power in war they’ll escape man’s domination completely!” Mars thunders. “They will achieve a horrible independence! . . . If women become warriors like the Amazons, they’ll grow stronger than men and put an end to war!”

Later in the article we learn about the evil male machinations which prevented women from creating a Wonder Woman utopia, in both fictional and historical fashion.

As I write this, there have been a rash of shootings of male police officers. These are the men who women rely on to keep us safe in an unsafe world, given that our own fathers, husbands, brothers, and sons have been hamstrung from doing so, legally, sociologically, politically, “morally,” and demographically—in some states more than others.

Recently, I tried to watch an hour-long videotaped conversation between Christina Hoff-Sommers and Camille Paglia, two women who have had a great influence on me. One, a wife and mother, and the other who calls herself “gay”. In her landmark book, Sexual Personae, Paglia describes her own persona as “male,” particularly as related to sex with women.

Try as I might, I could not concentrate for an entire hour on the mutual love-fest, which attempts to distinguish their versions of Feminism to the fright which Feminism has become.

In a sense, they are blonde Wonder Women, whose invisible and uncredited powers are men.

Some of the fawning and outright worshipful comments that I have heard and read from men of my generation and older with regard to the creative output of these two Amazons give me pause.

Similar remarks have been made about me, a “strong, independent, intelligent” woman. What? I have never been independent. I have no idea how to even navigate this world that I’ve been dropped in after 17 years of being isolated from it by The Han.

If being casually sexually serviced did it for me, I’d be in great shape. It doesn’t. The preponderance of offers to do just that leaves me cold.

These same men were delighted to live in what was once a Wonder Woman utopia of beautiful women giving out sex freely and seemingly taking over the responsibilities of men. What did they imagine was going on in the rest of the world at the time? Was their existence really that protected and insulated from demographic reality?

Where the policemen and security guards who enabled that utopian existence invisible to them?

The men sent to Vietnam certainly were.

Paglia of course has blatantly and “controversially” repeatedly identified within her independent works that it is men who create and maintain our world. However, in the above video, reminiscing of how good Feminism used to be, Paglia and the camera keeps the focus on the “feminine” woman with the invisible husband, in a lovely hairdo and make-up.

It’s the gentlemanly thing to do.

Black Lives Matter has been framing the protection and enforcement of laws by police officers as racist or of operating out of a disregard for the lives of Black Men. However, under our current methods of taxpayer-paid compensation to nonworking women, the life of a Black Male fails to have value to a Black Baby Momma when he is either not impregnating her or slipping her protective or monetary provisioning. In other words, he has a short shelf life.

However, the political and economic value of being a celebrity widow would appear to be worth a whole lot. Especially if the Hillary Clinton campaign guarantees it.

The movie I recommend on the phenomenon is Bonfire of the Vanities, particularly the character Annie Lamb. I’ve heard that the movie bombed at the box office. Gee. Any idea why?

Poor Morgan Freeman.

16yk98

Once all protective and strong men of The West of any color have either been sent overseas, slaughtered, or disincentivized from lifting a finger to protect women, the entire West will inevitably be a Muslim Caliphate, unless some magic Atheist Scientology-loving Technocratic force decides that such a thing is contrary to their own interests, or Vladmir Putin decides that our lives matter.

As Brad Pitt’s character explains in the last scene of Killing Them Softly, the United States is “just a business.”

Margaret Sanger Was Framed!

I am inspired by a Mike Wallace interview of Margaret Sanger today and wonder how many quotes attributed to her were planted and fabricated by entrenched interests with less than holy agendas:

https://youtu.be/HsrOPDdbTzM

The video starts out as an ad for unfiltered Phillip Morris cigarettes. I love the ad.

Filters on cigarettes disguise the presence of cheap fillers and substandard tobacco. Cheap product is inevitable after all the taxes added in by overblown agendas of all sorts, in order to pay for their overblown agendas. It is a tax on smokers to pay for Dogooderism, specifically, “anti-smoking bureaucracy” which tends to attract women as employees and administrators.

The smoke itself is also more likely to offend. It’s stale and cheap.

Smoking cessation chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers step in to form public/private partnerships. They hire women preferentially too, such as to force prisoners, mental hospital inmates, school children, and all other captive individuals to listen to these product shills promoting fabricated statistics.

Must listen to the women! Doesn’t matter that they’re peddling complete crap. Not allowing them uninterrupted access to our minds is somehow “unchivalrous”.

Nicotine, like any phytochemical, is no more addictive than any other phytochemical. Some phytochemicals are estrogenic; whereas nicotine is testosterogenic and provides benefits to cognition, mental focus, and anti-plaque of the brain. Hence it has been the preferred contemplative aid to writers and storytellers since it came to exist.

Whereas women who demand that everyone listen to whatever they have to say regardless of their own addiction to affirmation that they are paid to indulge is a matter of values not Science.

If nicotine was so addictive, so many smokers would not find it possible to quit smoking with no “help” from Dogooders or chemicals at all! Besides, there’s always the nicotine in tomatoes, eggplant, and califlower if one wants to stimulate one’s brain to produce anti-Dogooderism wit, assuming that comedy can survive forced pandering to regressives demanding that entertainment and expression of all sorts be “filtered”.

When smokers are unable to afford cigarettes except those comprised of stale tobacco, then two things are likely to occur:

  • Foul-smelling cheap cigarettes reinforce the idea to Dogooders that “tobacco is bad”.
  • Bootleg cigarettes containing better quality tobacco appear, as promoted by criminals, by definition. ‘Criminals are bad! Tobacco is bad!’ shriek the regressives.

Men idly contemplating anything rather than pandering to the women around them looks like a problem that “Science” can solve. The cigarette becomes the hot, slim, and sexy competitor to the Feminist agenda of universal male enslavement, along with the enslavement of all attractive young women to monopolist agendas.

However the regressives also say that Black is good and White is bad! Therefore, when a very small time tobacco criminal dies, then, it must be White people’s fault! Bad bad White Men!

I think it is hilarious that it turns out that a Black female sergeant has been charged with not effectively supervising the arrest of Eric Garner. Her fellow officers of course chivalrously defend her because she is an attractive young woman. Perhaps she is not intrinsically qualified to supervise anyone simply from Blackness or Femaleness. Or perhaps she is not tall enough to see!

Chivalry is not quite dead…yet.

What Pro-Lifers and Pro-Choicers can both agree on is that regressives, single women with children, young women driven by hormones, and most failed women in general, are easy to pander to by rhetoric alone, or you can lift them up on your shoulders.

Thank God for Citizen Ruth. The bottom line is money, honey. Even a glue-sniffer could figure that out.

Women are good! Men are bad! Women need more babies! Women whose only claim to societal usefulness is reproduction are, as Ann Coulter points out, narcissistic. https://youtu.be/QI3FE4pI_kw

Here’s a little uncomfortable demographic trend math from my lips to your ears, Dear Reader:

As regressives increase in numbers, they engage in mob actions such as BAMN. Regressives can be found among each and every ethnic group.

Throwing more babies at regressives who depend on mob knee-jerk reaction to all “bad” ideas defies rationality, unless one is profiting from mob knee-jerk reactions.

As I continue to watch the Margaret Sanger interview, I take note that Sanger has a stronger grasp of Arizona agricultural conditions than do most virtue-signalers condemning the words of Russell Pearce:

“A lot of lazy people seem to have mistaken the government for a charity. That’s not how things were meant to work,” Pearce said. “And food stamps are draining the budget faster than it takes a drunkard to kill a bottle of whiskey. And this is not the case with Arizona alone, this is going on nationwide. We need to put this under control or else we’re looking at bankruptcy. And everybody is making jokes about it instead of trying to find a solution. Well, I have.”

Pearce then went on to explain how “we need to limit food stamp access to women who have been sterilized,” and how “that’s the only way of separating the ones who are willing to work for food from those who aren’t.” Asked whether that means women will, effectively, be made to give up the prospect of having children in the future simply because of the fact that they’re poor, the former state senator replied, “In order to be able to feed a baby, you first need to be able to feed yourself. That’s a pre-requisite in this case. What can I say, there’s no such thing as a free lunch.”

Senator George McGovern apparently disagreed with Margaret Sanger’s mathematically-driven conclusions that there are limits on what land can produce in terms of crops. Chemical fertilizers and gas-guzzling machinery comprised his “Green Revolution” in order to produce crops as promiscuously as regressive babies popping out of regressive mothers.

The “filter” on nutrient deficient food such as to disguise its empty taste is the suppression of taste buds by means of poor training of those taste buds from formula to commercial baby food. Even if that junk is free.

If you have no taste then you don’t miss what you’ve never had, except that it will be forced upon you with promiscuous consumption movies and “entertainment” such that all it takes is a sledgehammer to your neighbor’s door and all that yummy “taste” can be yours.

Arizona as a state, then as now, defies quantity of agricultural yield (paid for by monopolist multinationals with an eye toward generations of dependence), except that which is trucked in.

Sheer numbers of regressives benefit a host of entrenched interests, from The Church to The Bureacracy, from the Democratic Party to Lotharios, from the door to door saleswoman (or her son), to the one collecting for “charity”, from Industrialists to Slavers.

Elite investors of course benefit from the volatility of forcing inflated populations upon each other.

How many women does any society need? Lots of them! The stupider the better. In that sense Muslims Are the True Feminists.

Anything that might disturb the quietude of regressive women must be filtered away or covered in a burkha. There there. You don’t have to look at or listen to that! Now spread em, Baby.

The Government Harem awaits you with open arms. All you need to do is make more of you, and money like goodness will rain down upon you.

Pay no attention to bad women like Margaret Sanger who understand simple math. Math is bad.

She just had to be a bad eugenicist. Right? I was wrong. I admit it. I was fooled.

Trucking in regressive population overflow from Latin America and Islamic countries won’t cause the Arizona desert to bloom with anything good-er than bodies.