Some of the ladies have been at me about this sort of thing and it’s clearly a challenge to stand up and be counted. One lady wrote:
The downside of feminism is that reasonable young women are now subjected to [it]. Maybe you should post on the young men today who think the answer is to rape them!
I’d agree. It’s the law of unintended consequences and collateral damage. Both the feminists who have wrought their havoc since the 60s, driving a deep wedge between the sexes, some might say irreparably and the monsters of men who have been produced, not just as a result of that but of other malaises as well, the guilty were never going to suffer themselves.
It’s always the innocent who suffer. From these girls who were heckled to Cherie who has none nothing wrong as a woman as far as I can see but has to endure my own anger over the guilty, it’s always the innocent who get it. And in general terms, we all know the crims are getting off and the basically law abiding people who get hit by the law because the law is a coward and will always pick on a weaker target.
The question is where to start on it – chicken or egg? There are not too many political thinkers today who do not see the cultural marxism which has devastated society, from Marcuse and the Frankfurt School to Leary and Zappa and the Californian valley where it all restarted in the 60s – Baez etc. The worrying thing is the background of Zappa and the other main players – military/CIA – it’s all been posted on before.
The intention has always been the breakdown of society, it was stated by Marcuse, Adorno and others, it’s on in Presidential, Congressional and Senate records. Over here, it was alive and well with Tavistock [now Chatham House] and has spread like cancer through Demos, Common Purpose, Total Information Awareness and Political Correctness.
Women have been warned by other women [and I've brought a few of them to this blog] that this is a road to disaster. Erin Pizzey was one of the first to mention it publicly and received death threats over it. I don’t know how to get through the blockage in many people’s minds who refuse to do the actual reading, to find out for themselves but they’ll then swear blind that none of this is happening.
On what basis can they swear blind that none of this is happening? This blog alone has quoted so many sources over the past few years, sources which have not been refuted and I’m just one of many. You can’t take the heckling of those girls or the rape of that girl 90 times in a week or weekend or whatever or any of the domestic violence and not look at its antecedents.
That’s like seeing bleeding and refusing to accept that there might be a wound. It’s a form of insanity, deep denial.
There’s no one cause or rather, there is a cascade of causes. With women wanting everything, this followed the path of least resistance and as Minette Marin pointed out, women did not have it as badly as the feminists make out in the 50s. The feminists find posters of Harry Enfield type “women know thy place” ads and these amaze me because I don’t recall any of the couples in my parents’ circle operating that way and none of the youth did as far as I could see.
I strongly suspect modern artists at work on these posters. And no, it’s not denial because denial, to me, is seeing a truth and denying it. What I’m talking about is that there was little evidence beyond the standard deviation that women were any more oppressed in the 50s than at any other time. As evidence for this are the married couples from the time still together and it is insulting to say it is because the woman acquiesced – rubbish. It was that both respected each other and were used to each other.
On the other hand, the pay disparity was an issue and needed addressing, along with services for working women. The trouble was, the first wave feminists were overtaken by the second wave and these were marxist through and through, pushing everything from abortion on demand to the pill to indiscriminate sex to drugs to all the other evils of leftism which are designed to break down society and destroy the family. Google Shere Hite and Gloria Steinem – not Wikki, delve further – and you’ll see their background, same as Obama’s, same as John Kerry.
And backing them were fellow runners in the marxist intellectuals, the law, medicine, public sector bureaucratic fatcats and the mediocritization of society, destruction of educational standards in favour of “finding myself first” education and so on. And as Yuri Bezmenov called them, these useful idiots played into the hands of the real enemy funding all these people – Them.
Human nature has always been non-accepting of difference. Therefore, men and women, having different ways of looking at things, are at best going to tolerate this in each other in the interests of getting along and of love. That’s the default position. I get along with many women and that’s because neither of us wishes to get into all these issues in RL – life’s too short and we have other motives for staying onside. I also come from a strong tradition of chivalry which ameliorates a lot of the angst and makes living together possible.
Chivalry is a major factor, along with a general moral code and high ethical standards and if you can successfully destroy those, then you have your desired dystopia. So today we have children, boys in particular, who have never known a good father, growing up with a mother who is bitter about men and so into the narrative that she wants it all and still has the nerve to say, as one lady did the other day to me, that “we still have some way to go”.
And what are many of these doing? N1 is caring for herself and her children and not for any male partner, let alone the father. And as men start to develop quite unacceptable attitudes to women, including total lack of respect, the more these women demand it and the less young men are going to give it.
This is combined with the lack of any constraint at school, to the point that there is talk of teachers being armed and at the same time, there is bizarre PCishness at said schools. Result for boys and girls alike – out of control. No constraint, EU human rights legislation and don’t they know all their rights in fine detail? Complete laziness, way under age sex and starting sex does alter one’s perceptions and removes childhood for good, at the same time the emotional maturity is that of a child.
This comes out in draconian overreaction to small things, road rage, rudeness, coarseness, binge drinking, no limits from anyone – parents, schools etc. And the question is – where are the fathers? Where the hell are they?
If they’re bad boys, the only type so many females make eyes at, then those bad boys have left the female in the lurch but no matter, welfare takes care of her, places her in a house by herself and she can bring up any children alone and bring in whatever sex partners she wants for the children to observe and learn how to do it. That’s the example she is setting.
And what’s her excuse? I love my children and my children love me. No one is denying that. What many are now saying is that that is no way to bring up a child because without both the fatherly rock and the motherly nurturing, he has no way to learn proper values, especially as the school is either not bothering any more, giving themselves over to PCism or else throwing up the hands and asking what they can do.
And then there is the world culture, courtesy of Them – getting children clubbing early where they’re away from parents and are more easily influenced, there is the peer pressure itself and everyone knows that’s immense the younger a kid is, there are the films, the games – the whole thing is a steady assault of sick values masquerading as the new toleration. That’s combined with the net and something good is twisted out of all recognition – naturally kids latch onto the bad because it’s more exciting, from ana sites to the real stuff, no constraints again and no adults seemingly either understanding or caring. Those that do are despairing.
And as always, it’s the bad parents who produce bad offspring who influence the good ones and make it impossible for good parents, which comes back to the quote at the top of the post again. Home schooling, going to a desert island – these seem two of the solutions but of course they’re fraught in themselves.
Britain’s always had the bad boy culture and girls are very much half to blame for this. If the girls, en masse, failed to be impressed by bad boys, if bad boys were ostracized, then their behaviour would alter, even those brought up to be yahoos. Yet it seems to have become far worse as other malaises kick in, things which weren’t there earlier.
And much as the maligned Phil McGraw is now out of favour, one thing he wrote stands out still:
Lifelaw 2 – We create our own situation
If we consider that we are no longer children, then we, ourselves, must answer for our own life – good or bad, successful or unsuccessful, happy or sad.
If we don’t like our job, we must answer for it. If our relationships are on the rocks, we must answer for them. It is never completely the other person’s fault. We, ourselves, may also have contributed to this situation.
Although we might accept this in theory, we nevertheless believe that in our particular situation it’s different, of course – we can prove that it is the other person’s fault. This is actually our problem.
Sometimes we then start gathering friends and colleagues together who will agree that we are innocent and that the other person is guilty. In the end, this is a waste of time and energy and helps maintain our self delusion.
However, if we can accept that we may possibly have erred, even a little and that only we, ourselves, are going to get us out of our own troubles, then we can start working on them.
Perhaps forces outside our control did cause our situation but if we allow that situation to continue or if we remain in it – then that’s our own fault.
At the same time, if we choose thoughts that create low self-esteem or which make us angry, this achieves no lasting result and leads us to become alienated and bitter.
Lifelaw 3 – People do what seems to work
We all occasionally indulge in negative behaviour without truly understanding why we do it.
It could be that we make nasty comments, which give us some satisfaction for a short time; it could be smoking, which relieves our stress for a short time; it could be self pity, which helps us cope with the injustice of what has been done to us.
The hard part is identifying exactly what results we get from this behaviour. These results can develop into something extremely unhealthy, such as self-hatred, distorted self importance or simply vindictiveness. There may be a fear of rejection, of not being noticed or from a desperate desire for others to see us as “cool” people.
This fear can be so strong that we’d do anything to avoid it. And we keep on with these behaviours … until one day perhaps, we wake up and start to come out of this negative spiral.
Lifelaw 4 – We can’t change what we won’t admit
In all humans, there is a self-protective mechanism called “perceptual defence”. This protects us from what we do not want to face up to.
If there is something not right within us, we’d prefer to either ignore it or blame it on something or someone else, rather than admit to it and to face up to it.
If we can admit the existence of a possible problem, it becomes much more difficult to allow it to continue and this becomes the first step towards solving it.
Boys will always kick against the limits – it’s part of finding their identity and if there are societal constraints, then he can still be a James Dean rebel without a cause but he knows the limits. What there is today is no limits.
On the train the other day were three yahoos. They wanted to intimidate. Two people got off at the next station and then there was myself and another local guy. There was no one to intimidate. They started running up and down the carriage, kicking things. We didn’t react, except to smile.
So one started fighting the others but it came to nothing. You could see his brain aching for something to happen, for someone to tell him off. He sat there, howling or at least making noises to let out whatever was inside him which was getting no release. I think it would have been a question of time before they attacked us anyway. The end of the line came first.
There’s much talk of zero respect and yet it’s more than just a lack of respect – it’s a sort of anger at … well, they’re not sure what at so they invent things.
And then they spy a girl, a young woman and guess what – she’s on her own because girls do that these days, being equal and as good as any boy and all that. As bad as any boy too. TOWIE. And contrary to what the Narrative tells her, she is NOT able to handle herself. She is an emotional mess for a start, having started sex and drugs early and having no guidance from home.
So these boys see her, as their online porn tells them is the case, as a piece of meat, whereas the girl sees herself as equal to and mixing it with the boys. Two completely different perceptions going on at the one time.
And later, those boys see another girl, only this time she is, as the quote at the top of the post said, a “reasonable young woman”.
Now what is a reasonable young woman?
In the case of the debaters, that was women trying to muscle in on a man’s preserve. Combine that with men being generally sick to death of the way women carry on today and getting bashed by the state on the say-so of women – that’s the perception in the male mind – then what happened was like night following day.
I’m not condoning it, I’m condemning it but it’s easy to see why it happened and it’s a mix of all the things written above. Now what really is the issue here? “Shame on them” or “we’d like these things to stop”?
Shame on them? Yes, of course. Trying to get them to stop? How do you stop all the things above in the post, especially when there is a political culture actively promoting all these things? Even the Queen’s in on it now.
It’s simply not going to stop. It’s going to get worse. Who is the sector of society this political Them wants eliminated or silenced? Men of a certain age of course, brought up in a different era of respect. Women who speak out against feminism and PCism. They’re on the hit list too.
And who is there left for the wronged “reasonable young woman” to appeal to? To the yahoo male on the one hand, the wimpish male brought up by his mother to believe deeply in the narrative or the State itself with its agenda. Great choice.
Sure I’d defend the girls in that debate. But I wasn’t there. Sure I’d take that girl away from the 90 rapists but I wasn’t there and would she come away with me anyway?
Sure I’d try to defend that girl at the nightclub at 1 a.m. but I wasn’t at the nightclub at 1 am. and don’t think it’s “reasonable” for a girl to either be there alone or to go home alone at that time. Other people have different definitions of “reasonable” to what I do.
And remember the 70s and 80s are not the 2010s. It’s dangerous now as PC pigeons come home to roost.
There is this feminist thing also that she should be able to go wherever she wants, when she wants and not be accosted. I don’t know how many times it has to be said – that is not reasonable. Not even I think I can go wherever and whenever – it’s just crazily naive. It’s stupid in fact.
There’s the crux of the matter. The two conflicting mindsets. Now that will never be resolved but one thing I do know – while young women and even older ones persist in that mindset, these things written of today will continue and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
In fact, the longer PCism continues, the worse and worse it’s going to get.
And the innocent will suffer the collateral damage.
Filed under: Politics & economics