Blogger and frequent commenter Insanitybytes wrote an article yesterday critiquing yet another of the Game Cult's justifications for domestic violence and attacks on a Christian blogger. The Game blogger who goes under the name of Dalrock attacked the Rev. Sam Powell, in much the same way that he previously attacked Mary Kassian.
Dalrock's argument essentially boils down to the dishonest claim that Christian bloggers who write on the topic of gender roles are covertly relying on the Duluth Model of Abuse. The Duluth Model was constructed by Feminists; hence he argues that those who employ it are likewise corrupted by Feminism. The dishonesty in his arguments comes in because he defines following the Duluth Model as essentially whatever contradicts the Game Model. It's a circular argument designed to discredit anyone as Feminist who doesn't subscribe to the Game Cult.
Here is an excerpt from Powell's article, which Dalrock claims represents the Duluth Model:
"The husband does not rule by power and control. He governs his home by service and love...Why do so many who claim the Name of Christ believe that women are to be controlled by entitlement and power? The husband isn't the boss, the commander, the chief or the king. All of that belongs to Christ."
To which Dalrock rejoins: "Hierarchy, leading, believing you are the head of the household (in any non-feminist sense) is abuse and Satanic, according to Powell."
Actually Rev. Powell said nothing of the kind. It is especially telling, though that the Gamers consider a husband 'governing his home by service and love' to be an unholy act of apostasy. What exactly then, do the Gamers advocate as the proper paradigm? Hierarchy is the answer claimed here.
A Christian then might naturally wonder how, in such an arrangement, the two become one flesh. The Game Cult sees this a metaphysical impossibility. Dalrock derides Powell for arguing this very point, as Powell says here: "The goal of marriage is the one flesh relationship, rather than the antagonistic and abusive relationship that characterizes the kingdom of the Devil."
One does not have to read very far in Game literature to comprehend that it is entirely premised in mutual gender antagonism, along with abuse and control. This is why Game preaches a hierarchal relationship, though often called by them Biblical Headship. Like the earlier attack on Mary Kassian, the purpose of the attack on Powell was to set up a false dichotomy under which the Game Cult appears to represent the true and uncorrupted faith.
Powell says in his article the following: "The husband's job is not to rule over his wife, enforce the rules, or be the commander and king of his home in the castle, for it is not his castle. The home belongs to Christ. He is not to usurp Christ's role as King of Kings, but he is to emulate Christ in only one way, according to the Scriptures. He is to love her."
And that, according to the Game Cult, is Feminism co-opting the Church.
What it is in reality, is the Church teaching what it always has. The Game Cult is not anti-Feminist at all, it is anti-Christian. It is in fact, much closer to Feminism than it is to Christianity. Fortunately, there a few clerics like Powell who see it for what it is.
Thursday, September 22, 2016
UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT THROWS TANTRUM; GOES TO SAFE SPACE
Morton Schapiro, president of Northwestern University lashed out yesterday at critics who oppose his politically-correct policy of creating safe spaces. Safe spaces, along with trigger warnings, and speech codes, are supposedly put in place to protect people from what the Academic Mafia calls microagressions. Microaggressions are what normal people refer to as irritations; but here in the Prozac Nation, minor irritations rise to the level of national emergencies, and so Schapiro---as a Cultural Elite---steps up to his duty.
One would assume that, with the ability to fleece tuition to the tune of over $70,000 a year per student and a with a fat $1.33 million salary, Schapiro would be living in a very safe space. Not so. What occasioned Schapiro's outburst was that the University of Chicago---in a sudden and involuntary spasm of Common Sense---issued a policy statement renouncing safe spaces and other such nonsense---on the grounds that college students should be treated like adults.
In the 2016 Northwestern commencement speech, Schapiro exploded into proper Ameroboob outrage.
"The people who decry safe spaces do it from their segregated housing places, from their jobs without diversity, and from their country clubs!" the Dean thundered, "It just drives me nuts! If those people say that you shouldn't be warned to prepare yourself psychologically for traumatic content---that is somehow 'coddling'---then those people are lunatics!"
Schapiro then got to the heart of the issue, stating that "I remember every microaggression I've ever experienced. Such incidents cut you to the very core. Those who deny the existence of microaggressions are idiots!"
Statements like these indicate very clearly that this man is a neurotic. By any respectable theory of psychology, anyone who claims to be traumatized by every perceived slight and sees these slights all around him, is seriously mentally ill. The illness is even more pronounced when such persons project their delusions on society at large and seek to hide in so-called safe spaces. We are not inclined to throw such accusations around lightly here; any of our readers may consult Freud, Koffka, Adler, Menninger or any other psychological authority to confirm this assertion.
And yet this man not only is the millionaire head of one of America's prestigious universities, he is considered by other degenerates among our Cultural Elite as a great intellect. Schapiro has written allegedly scholarly editorials, such as for the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, wherein he defended black students' decision to segregate themselves as creating a safe space. In August, he wrote an editorial, co-authored by another PC administrator in the Los Angeles Times (a subsidiary of Tronc Inc.). Here he defended the riots on campuses by stating:
"As college presidents ourselves, it is our preference that students work with faculty and administrators rather than occupy offices, shut themselves off from others with whom they disagree, or leave school. But we recognize and accept that these students are coming of age in a time of political, social, and economic turbulence unseen in a generation. This year's presidential rhetoric only makes things more volatile."
Since we're speaking of feelings, how do Americans feel about spending millions of tax dollars keeping people like Morton Schapiro rich and famous? Do you feel better knowing that top educators think of you as idiots and lunatics if you don't agree that their personal traumas are national issues? How does it feel knowing that people educated by people like Morton Schapiro are going to be running the country some day?
Unfortunately, most Ameroboobs are too full of amphetamines to feel much of anything. Except feeling outraged; which characters like Morton Schapiro are only to happy to accommodate.
One would assume that, with the ability to fleece tuition to the tune of over $70,000 a year per student and a with a fat $1.33 million salary, Schapiro would be living in a very safe space. Not so. What occasioned Schapiro's outburst was that the University of Chicago---in a sudden and involuntary spasm of Common Sense---issued a policy statement renouncing safe spaces and other such nonsense---on the grounds that college students should be treated like adults.
In the 2016 Northwestern commencement speech, Schapiro exploded into proper Ameroboob outrage.
"The people who decry safe spaces do it from their segregated housing places, from their jobs without diversity, and from their country clubs!" the Dean thundered, "It just drives me nuts! If those people say that you shouldn't be warned to prepare yourself psychologically for traumatic content---that is somehow 'coddling'---then those people are lunatics!"
Schapiro then got to the heart of the issue, stating that "I remember every microaggression I've ever experienced. Such incidents cut you to the very core. Those who deny the existence of microaggressions are idiots!"
Statements like these indicate very clearly that this man is a neurotic. By any respectable theory of psychology, anyone who claims to be traumatized by every perceived slight and sees these slights all around him, is seriously mentally ill. The illness is even more pronounced when such persons project their delusions on society at large and seek to hide in so-called safe spaces. We are not inclined to throw such accusations around lightly here; any of our readers may consult Freud, Koffka, Adler, Menninger or any other psychological authority to confirm this assertion.
And yet this man not only is the millionaire head of one of America's prestigious universities, he is considered by other degenerates among our Cultural Elite as a great intellect. Schapiro has written allegedly scholarly editorials, such as for the Jeff Bezos-owned Washington Post, wherein he defended black students' decision to segregate themselves as creating a safe space. In August, he wrote an editorial, co-authored by another PC administrator in the Los Angeles Times (a subsidiary of Tronc Inc.). Here he defended the riots on campuses by stating:
"As college presidents ourselves, it is our preference that students work with faculty and administrators rather than occupy offices, shut themselves off from others with whom they disagree, or leave school. But we recognize and accept that these students are coming of age in a time of political, social, and economic turbulence unseen in a generation. This year's presidential rhetoric only makes things more volatile."
Since we're speaking of feelings, how do Americans feel about spending millions of tax dollars keeping people like Morton Schapiro rich and famous? Do you feel better knowing that top educators think of you as idiots and lunatics if you don't agree that their personal traumas are national issues? How does it feel knowing that people educated by people like Morton Schapiro are going to be running the country some day?
Unfortunately, most Ameroboobs are too full of amphetamines to feel much of anything. Except feeling outraged; which characters like Morton Schapiro are only to happy to accommodate.
A LESSON FOR THE CHARLOTTE CHARLATANS
For a second night, outraged citizens here in the Prozac Nation are killing one another in the streets of Charlotte, North Carolina. Egged on by the Corporate Media and George Soros' Black Lives Matter anarchists, one person is dead and seven more police injured (so far). Property damage has been extensive. For whatever it's worth, NC Governor Pat McCrory declared a State of Emergency.
"Any violence directed towards our citizens or police officers or destruction of property should not be tolerated." McCrory said, after tolerating it for two days.
In contrast to this, a wonderful story appeared in SANA News. SANA is the official news agency of Syria, and gave an instructive lesson of how people rise above uncontrolled violence when they still have a sense of humanity left.
SANA reported that in the city of Lattakia, a town liberated from the terrorists shortly after the Russian Expeditionary Force arrived, a mass-wedding took place involving 120 couples. The grooms were soldiers in the Syrian Army and the brides were women who were widowed or orphaned during the fighting. The ceremony was sponsored by the Syriatel Communications Company, which had arranged two previous mass-weddings.
Syriatel sponsors these wedding as part of a program launched by the company's directors, called Our Martyrs, Our Responsibility. The program reaches out to assist families whose male providers have been killed in the Civil War---unfortunately a very high number of families in today's Syria.
The event's theme was "In Good Times and Bad" a phrase from the Islamic wedding ceremony. The event featured a pageant honoring fallen soldiers, along with some traditional Arab dances and a wedding feast in honor of the 120 newlyweds.
Alaa Salamour, one of the executives of Syriatel told SANA: "Syriatel has a doctrine that we all believe in, that is to stand by the side of the Syrian Arab Army heroes. And being loyal to the martyrs comes through supporting their families. This is an event of national victory, embodying the culture of life and hope."
"The culture of life and hope." What a stark contrast to the death and destruction wreaked on the streets of Charlotte. Wouldn't it be a better thing if, like the directors of Syriatel, George Soros thought that sponsoring weddings in the black community would be better than sponsoring riots?
But we no longer have a culture of life and hope. Our martyrs are dead white males and abortion, homosexual unions and adoptions, Feminism, and the Game Cult dominate American family policy. Marriage and children, not so much. This is one reason why the Obama-Clinton-Soros policy towards Syria has failed. They badly underestimated the character of Syrian people---because moral character is something that they do not comprehend.
So while Charlotte burns, Lattakia lives on, with the promises of new lives and new loves as the horrors of the recent Al-Qaeda occupation recede into memory. There's a lesson to be drawn from this contrast, if we really hope to make America great again.
Good Men and Women Doing Good Things
"Any violence directed towards our citizens or police officers or destruction of property should not be tolerated." McCrory said, after tolerating it for two days.
In contrast to this, a wonderful story appeared in SANA News. SANA is the official news agency of Syria, and gave an instructive lesson of how people rise above uncontrolled violence when they still have a sense of humanity left.
SANA reported that in the city of Lattakia, a town liberated from the terrorists shortly after the Russian Expeditionary Force arrived, a mass-wedding took place involving 120 couples. The grooms were soldiers in the Syrian Army and the brides were women who were widowed or orphaned during the fighting. The ceremony was sponsored by the Syriatel Communications Company, which had arranged two previous mass-weddings.
Syriatel sponsors these wedding as part of a program launched by the company's directors, called Our Martyrs, Our Responsibility. The program reaches out to assist families whose male providers have been killed in the Civil War---unfortunately a very high number of families in today's Syria.
The event's theme was "In Good Times and Bad" a phrase from the Islamic wedding ceremony. The event featured a pageant honoring fallen soldiers, along with some traditional Arab dances and a wedding feast in honor of the 120 newlyweds.
Alaa Salamour, one of the executives of Syriatel told SANA: "Syriatel has a doctrine that we all believe in, that is to stand by the side of the Syrian Arab Army heroes. And being loyal to the martyrs comes through supporting their families. This is an event of national victory, embodying the culture of life and hope."
"The culture of life and hope." What a stark contrast to the death and destruction wreaked on the streets of Charlotte. Wouldn't it be a better thing if, like the directors of Syriatel, George Soros thought that sponsoring weddings in the black community would be better than sponsoring riots?
But we no longer have a culture of life and hope. Our martyrs are dead white males and abortion, homosexual unions and adoptions, Feminism, and the Game Cult dominate American family policy. Marriage and children, not so much. This is one reason why the Obama-Clinton-Soros policy towards Syria has failed. They badly underestimated the character of Syrian people---because moral character is something that they do not comprehend.
So while Charlotte burns, Lattakia lives on, with the promises of new lives and new loves as the horrors of the recent Al-Qaeda occupation recede into memory. There's a lesson to be drawn from this contrast, if we really hope to make America great again.
Good Men and Women Doing Good Things
Wednesday, September 21, 2016
ANARCHISTS VENT BLIND RAGE IN CHARLOTTE AND DEIR EZZUR
Once again the Soros-funded Black Lives Matter gang and other assorted Anarchists have broken out in violent outrage, this time in Charlotte, N.C.. The angry mobs exploded into the streets after the Charlotte Police reported shooting a black man brandishing a gun at them. As is typical in these cases, the Ameroboobs went berserk and rampaged through the streets against racial injustice before any official inquest was conducted, or even before learning that the officer involved was, himself, also a black male.
According to local reports, the rioters rallied on social media with slogans like "We out like the Taliban!" and "This ain't no m----------g game, nigga!" and "This ain't no one-day action. This the first time people standing up!" Which serves clearly to illustrate both the commitment to social justice and the relative intelligence directing the Charlotte Anarchists.
Twelve police officers have so far been injured during the uprising. The Corporate Media on the scene referred to crowd as "protestors" and "demonstrators" even as the mob engaged in such acts of civil disobedience as burning cars and buildings, blocking I-85, and breaking into a Wal-Mart. The police employed tear gas, but the Corporate Media withdrew after the protesters began stoning them, allegedly knocking out one cameraman with a rock.
While it is certainly true that the American Criminal Justice System is in need of serious reform, shooting police, looting department stores and adopting the Taliban as a role model does not bring reform about. Nor does planting explosive devices in residential areas of New York and blaming it on so-called Islamophobia.
The Charlotte Riots are yet another example of Narcissism-Run-Wild, as are all of these so-called 'protests' against alleged police violence. There is not the slightest concern among these street rabble for the lives, families, or interests of the people they attack---none of whom had any involvement in the shooting.
We do not even know whether or not the police were justified at this point. And what is of especial interest here is that there were no protests---peaceful or otherwise---in the US over our government's deliberate murder of 90 Syrian soldiers over the weekend. That---like the hundreds of civilian deaths our government is responsible for in Syria---is sloughed off by the Corporate Media, the Cultural Marxists, and the public in general as an error in judgment.
Our priorities in the Postmodern US are seriously flawed. A police officer who in the line of duty takes a human life and whose actions will face review by his peers occasions a riot where innocent people are harmed. A government who illegally attacks another country for defending itself against terrorists and murders innocent people by hundreds is not even held accountable in any way, shape, or form.
It would almost seem as though the only consistent factor in any of these events is that innocents are the ones who suffer the consequences. And that is actually unsurprising. When a society breaks down, is to devolve upon its earlier stages of civilization. What we are witnessing in the Charlotte Riots, the NYC bombings, and the Syrian War Crimes are a reversion to barbaric and primitive societal norms. When a primitive people suffer what they perceive to be an injustice, their first thoughts turn to revenge and to human sacrifice to appease their anger---which they typically project onto some higher power. Among earlier savages, these were offended idols, in modern times the sacrifices are made to more abstract concepts. But the principle is the same.
Civilized peoples operate under a Rule of Law. As corrupted as our system is, the legal mechanisms for peaceful conflict resolutions still exist. They are not being employed because of our tendencies towards Narcissism and the desire for effortless solutions to complicated problems. It's easier to find and sacrifice a scapegoat and return to narcotic tranquility afterwards than to change things in meaningful and lasting ways. Therein lies a fundamental difference between what our Nation was, and what it has become.
According to local reports, the rioters rallied on social media with slogans like "We out like the Taliban!" and "This ain't no m----------g game, nigga!" and "This ain't no one-day action. This the first time people standing up!" Which serves clearly to illustrate both the commitment to social justice and the relative intelligence directing the Charlotte Anarchists.
Twelve police officers have so far been injured during the uprising. The Corporate Media on the scene referred to crowd as "protestors" and "demonstrators" even as the mob engaged in such acts of civil disobedience as burning cars and buildings, blocking I-85, and breaking into a Wal-Mart. The police employed tear gas, but the Corporate Media withdrew after the protesters began stoning them, allegedly knocking out one cameraman with a rock.
While it is certainly true that the American Criminal Justice System is in need of serious reform, shooting police, looting department stores and adopting the Taliban as a role model does not bring reform about. Nor does planting explosive devices in residential areas of New York and blaming it on so-called Islamophobia.
The Charlotte Riots are yet another example of Narcissism-Run-Wild, as are all of these so-called 'protests' against alleged police violence. There is not the slightest concern among these street rabble for the lives, families, or interests of the people they attack---none of whom had any involvement in the shooting.
We do not even know whether or not the police were justified at this point. And what is of especial interest here is that there were no protests---peaceful or otherwise---in the US over our government's deliberate murder of 90 Syrian soldiers over the weekend. That---like the hundreds of civilian deaths our government is responsible for in Syria---is sloughed off by the Corporate Media, the Cultural Marxists, and the public in general as an error in judgment.
Our priorities in the Postmodern US are seriously flawed. A police officer who in the line of duty takes a human life and whose actions will face review by his peers occasions a riot where innocent people are harmed. A government who illegally attacks another country for defending itself against terrorists and murders innocent people by hundreds is not even held accountable in any way, shape, or form.
It would almost seem as though the only consistent factor in any of these events is that innocents are the ones who suffer the consequences. And that is actually unsurprising. When a society breaks down, is to devolve upon its earlier stages of civilization. What we are witnessing in the Charlotte Riots, the NYC bombings, and the Syrian War Crimes are a reversion to barbaric and primitive societal norms. When a primitive people suffer what they perceive to be an injustice, their first thoughts turn to revenge and to human sacrifice to appease their anger---which they typically project onto some higher power. Among earlier savages, these were offended idols, in modern times the sacrifices are made to more abstract concepts. But the principle is the same.
Civilized peoples operate under a Rule of Law. As corrupted as our system is, the legal mechanisms for peaceful conflict resolutions still exist. They are not being employed because of our tendencies towards Narcissism and the desire for effortless solutions to complicated problems. It's easier to find and sacrifice a scapegoat and return to narcotic tranquility afterwards than to change things in meaningful and lasting ways. Therein lies a fundamental difference between what our Nation was, and what it has become.
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
RED PILLS CLAIM HATRED AS A CHRISTIAN VIRTUE
The Game Cult, which has come to dominate much of US Internet blogging, preaches a degenerated philosophy which throughout the course of the current decade has co-opted much of the Men's Rights Movement, a solid portion of the political Alt-Right, and has a fair media presence. Although atheistic in its origins, the Game Cult has taken on an increasingly religious tone; often adopting Christian motifs to justify its positions. Their philosophies are based largely on Evolutionary Psychology and rightist reverse-engineering of already-flawed Cultural Marxist socioeconomic theories. Mostly the Game Cult is characterized by a hatred for women, Jews, and ethnic minorities.
One of their shamans, Matt Forney, has a blog which recently featured a guest post by one John Saxon titled "Hate is Great; A Philosophical Defense of Misogyny" which mostly features selected quotes from various philosophers and theologians which support Saxon's position.
His position essentially is the same as the Feminist one: that previous generations were dominated by some ethereal patriarchal conspiracy predicated on misogyny and centered on controlling female sexuality. Saxon basically accepts this as valid; only he argues that this paradigm was based in sound policy. The problem from the very beginning here is that the Feminist Interpretation of History upon which he bases his arguments is, itself, false.
Instead of taking a few intellectuals out of context, we get a much clearer picture of things by looking at Western popular culture. From the extent Greek and Roman plays and poetry to Mediaeval writers like Chaucer and Boccaccio to Hollywood's Golden Age; what we see is that Western Culture has never bothered to restrain female sexuality very much, if at all. Outside of esoteric theory---in real life---men and women get attracted to one another and things happen. Thus it is a falsehood for Saxon to claim that:
"Thus in the West, both secular and Christian authorities have proposed positions contrary to Feminism and Women's Rights, based on a philosophical anthropology which sees women not only as innately inferior to men, but having dangerous propensities if left uncontrolled."
Wrong---the purpose of Western laws in these regards was the recognition that unrestrained human sexuality in general has dangerous social propensities if left uncontrolled. The Postmodern West, with its huge number of fatherless and orphaned children; rampant homosexuality and gender confusion; widespread sexually transmitted diseases---these are all testimonies to what happens when sexual social norms are abandoned. And by both genders, besides.
Saxon goes on to state that: "The greatest thinkers from antiquity to the modern day have seen that there is a very dark side to women, that if ignored by socially constructed b------t such as romantic love and a misplaced reverence for women, would lead to individual men and society coming undone." Note well the part which we have bolded, because this is also a Feminist argument, imported by the Feminists straight from Marxism.
These same thinkers that Saxon quotes believed in general that all of humanity has a dark side. Christian writers, especially, speak of original sin, and how such sins could lead to social collapse. And it's also especially worth noting that Christian writers in particular stressed romantic love as an archetype of spiritual love and also preached respect for women. Nowhere in the New Testament is misogyny taught anywhere. It is however taught that by their fruits you shall know them---an important maxim to keep in mind when reading Red Pill treatises.
Saxon concludes all this by saying: "Therefore even if a position does constitute misogyny, insofar as it expresses a position of strong dislike for women, or makes harsh criticisms of them, it cannot be dismissed for that reason alone."
Yes, it can: for the simple reason that hatred for women is unnatural to men. Men have to be taught to hate women; either by Red Pill indoctrination, negative experiences with women; or exposure to homosexuality. A general idea of this mindset and its reliance on great thinkers can be gathered by glancing at the sidebar of Forney's blog. Along with Saxon's article, some of the top posts are:
"Observations on Dating and Banging Girls in the Philippines"
"How to Crush a Girl's Self-Esteem"
"How to Beat your Girlfriend or Wife and Get Away With It"
"Why Fat Girls Don't Deserve to be Loved."
"If Your Girlfriend Drinks, She's Cheating on You"
Misogyny is apparently not only a virtue to the Game Cult, but making a virtue of necessity.
Suffice it to say, there is nothing Christian in any of this. Saxon's Christian sources are largely from some of the more deranged writers of the 15th and 16th Century Witch-Hunts, whom he claims "based most of their cases on classical literature as well as texts from the Old and New Testaments, as did later misogynist writers...if misogyny is a problem, conventional Christianity must go." Of course he fails to mention that the Church condemned the writings of all of the authors he mentioned---even at the time they were published. He also cites Tertullian in connection with the Game Doctrine of the Sin of Eve without noting that Tertullian had left the Church and converted to the Montanist heresy at the time he wrote the treatise which Saxon quoted.
Saxon does mention in passing that St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas "believed in a natural subordination of women while believing in their spiritual equality." Although he fails to mention that both writers stressed the duty of men in providing for and protecting women because of this spiritual equality.
The sad thing about these writings is that, given our culture's lack of formal education and religious training, ideas spread by the Game Cult actually have a significant following. Yet they are patently false ideas, and dangerous ones at that. Given this cult's history of co-opting other ideologies, it is prudent for all of us to be aware of its teachings and its ulterior motives.
One of their shamans, Matt Forney, has a blog which recently featured a guest post by one John Saxon titled "Hate is Great; A Philosophical Defense of Misogyny" which mostly features selected quotes from various philosophers and theologians which support Saxon's position.
His position essentially is the same as the Feminist one: that previous generations were dominated by some ethereal patriarchal conspiracy predicated on misogyny and centered on controlling female sexuality. Saxon basically accepts this as valid; only he argues that this paradigm was based in sound policy. The problem from the very beginning here is that the Feminist Interpretation of History upon which he bases his arguments is, itself, false.
Instead of taking a few intellectuals out of context, we get a much clearer picture of things by looking at Western popular culture. From the extent Greek and Roman plays and poetry to Mediaeval writers like Chaucer and Boccaccio to Hollywood's Golden Age; what we see is that Western Culture has never bothered to restrain female sexuality very much, if at all. Outside of esoteric theory---in real life---men and women get attracted to one another and things happen. Thus it is a falsehood for Saxon to claim that:
"Thus in the West, both secular and Christian authorities have proposed positions contrary to Feminism and Women's Rights, based on a philosophical anthropology which sees women not only as innately inferior to men, but having dangerous propensities if left uncontrolled."
Wrong---the purpose of Western laws in these regards was the recognition that unrestrained human sexuality in general has dangerous social propensities if left uncontrolled. The Postmodern West, with its huge number of fatherless and orphaned children; rampant homosexuality and gender confusion; widespread sexually transmitted diseases---these are all testimonies to what happens when sexual social norms are abandoned. And by both genders, besides.
Saxon goes on to state that: "The greatest thinkers from antiquity to the modern day have seen that there is a very dark side to women, that if ignored by socially constructed b------t such as romantic love and a misplaced reverence for women, would lead to individual men and society coming undone." Note well the part which we have bolded, because this is also a Feminist argument, imported by the Feminists straight from Marxism.
These same thinkers that Saxon quotes believed in general that all of humanity has a dark side. Christian writers, especially, speak of original sin, and how such sins could lead to social collapse. And it's also especially worth noting that Christian writers in particular stressed romantic love as an archetype of spiritual love and also preached respect for women. Nowhere in the New Testament is misogyny taught anywhere. It is however taught that by their fruits you shall know them---an important maxim to keep in mind when reading Red Pill treatises.
Saxon concludes all this by saying: "Therefore even if a position does constitute misogyny, insofar as it expresses a position of strong dislike for women, or makes harsh criticisms of them, it cannot be dismissed for that reason alone."
Yes, it can: for the simple reason that hatred for women is unnatural to men. Men have to be taught to hate women; either by Red Pill indoctrination, negative experiences with women; or exposure to homosexuality. A general idea of this mindset and its reliance on great thinkers can be gathered by glancing at the sidebar of Forney's blog. Along with Saxon's article, some of the top posts are:
"Observations on Dating and Banging Girls in the Philippines"
"How to Crush a Girl's Self-Esteem"
"How to Beat your Girlfriend or Wife and Get Away With It"
"Why Fat Girls Don't Deserve to be Loved."
"If Your Girlfriend Drinks, She's Cheating on You"
Misogyny is apparently not only a virtue to the Game Cult, but making a virtue of necessity.
Suffice it to say, there is nothing Christian in any of this. Saxon's Christian sources are largely from some of the more deranged writers of the 15th and 16th Century Witch-Hunts, whom he claims "based most of their cases on classical literature as well as texts from the Old and New Testaments, as did later misogynist writers...if misogyny is a problem, conventional Christianity must go." Of course he fails to mention that the Church condemned the writings of all of the authors he mentioned---even at the time they were published. He also cites Tertullian in connection with the Game Doctrine of the Sin of Eve without noting that Tertullian had left the Church and converted to the Montanist heresy at the time he wrote the treatise which Saxon quoted.
Saxon does mention in passing that St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas "believed in a natural subordination of women while believing in their spiritual equality." Although he fails to mention that both writers stressed the duty of men in providing for and protecting women because of this spiritual equality.
The sad thing about these writings is that, given our culture's lack of formal education and religious training, ideas spread by the Game Cult actually have a significant following. Yet they are patently false ideas, and dangerous ones at that. Given this cult's history of co-opting other ideologies, it is prudent for all of us to be aware of its teachings and its ulterior motives.
Monday, September 19, 2016
EDWARD SNOWDEN AND MEDIA TREACHERY
The Washington Post last Sunday ran an editorial demanding that the heroic Edward Snowden be repatriated to the US, and not be issued a presidential pardon. The Post went on to denounce Snowden stating that, if he really believed in the justice of his cause, he would be willing to go to prison for his beliefs. And, of course, that Snowden has no credibility "as an avatar of freedom for seeking asylum in Vladimir Putin's Russia."
The "Editors"---who are actually neocons Fred Hiatt and Jackson Diehl---asserted that Snowden belonged in jail for the damage he allegedly did to national security. These same editors however had no qualms about the Post publishing Snowden's revelations and then accepting a Pulitzer Prize for it. The Post's CEO, Marty Baron said 2014 when awarded the prize:
"Disclosing the massive expansion of the NSA's surveillance network was indeed a public service. In constructing a surveillance system of breathtaking scope and intrusiveness, our government also sharply eroded individual privacy. All of this was done in secret, without public debate, and with clear weaknesses in oversight."
In other words, when The Post could cash in on the Snowden revelations, he was a whistleblower doing a public service. Now that Russia-bashing is where the money's at, Baron and the Smart Boys feel safe throwing Snowden under the bus. And, as we've pointed out here, Baron's boss Jeff Bezos has lucrative government contracts in intelligence, foreign affairs, and defense; so it is unsurprising that his henchmen Hiatt and Diehl would favor practically every interventionist policy the Beltway proposes. Hilary Clinton, who awarded Bezos a $16.5 million State Department contract, has proposed censoring Russian media or setting up agencies to counter it. No doubt Bezos would be among the beneficiaries of a such a policy.
While it's probably no surprise to anyone that men like Bezos, Baron, Hiatt or Diehl would stoop to this shameful level of duplicity; the real problem with the Post editorial was addressed by British journalist Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald also publishes Snowden's material:
"In doing so, the Washington Post has achieved an ignominious feat in US media history: the first-ever paper to editorialize explicitly for the criminal prosecution of its own source."
Greenwald was absolutely correct here pointing out this extremely dangerous precedent. The protection of media sources is a longstanding tradition upon which a free press needs to function. The purpose behind protecting media sources is obvious. If the media is to safeguard the public by passing on information, then a source must be safe from the retaliation from the corrupt elements it is exposing. By betraying Snowden, the Post has established that the media considers its sources as essentially expendable.
We have spoken before about the dangerous tendencies in the media to excuse outright demagoguery as informative not prescriptive, in that it incites antisocial behaviors then disclaims responsibility for them. The Washington Post has taken this already-low media standard and dropped it even further. They willingly published and profited off of a credible source, then call his revelations a crime and disavow any complicity in it.
The leadership of the Washington Post can hide behind all the phony prizes and awards they want to, but at the end of the day, Edward Snowden is still a hero while Bezos, Baron, Hiatt, and Diehl are still a collection of degenerates. Yet they are what passes for a Cultural Elite in Postmodern America, while men like Snowden are forced into exile.
The "Editors"---who are actually neocons Fred Hiatt and Jackson Diehl---asserted that Snowden belonged in jail for the damage he allegedly did to national security. These same editors however had no qualms about the Post publishing Snowden's revelations and then accepting a Pulitzer Prize for it. The Post's CEO, Marty Baron said 2014 when awarded the prize:
"Disclosing the massive expansion of the NSA's surveillance network was indeed a public service. In constructing a surveillance system of breathtaking scope and intrusiveness, our government also sharply eroded individual privacy. All of this was done in secret, without public debate, and with clear weaknesses in oversight."
In other words, when The Post could cash in on the Snowden revelations, he was a whistleblower doing a public service. Now that Russia-bashing is where the money's at, Baron and the Smart Boys feel safe throwing Snowden under the bus. And, as we've pointed out here, Baron's boss Jeff Bezos has lucrative government contracts in intelligence, foreign affairs, and defense; so it is unsurprising that his henchmen Hiatt and Diehl would favor practically every interventionist policy the Beltway proposes. Hilary Clinton, who awarded Bezos a $16.5 million State Department contract, has proposed censoring Russian media or setting up agencies to counter it. No doubt Bezos would be among the beneficiaries of a such a policy.
While it's probably no surprise to anyone that men like Bezos, Baron, Hiatt or Diehl would stoop to this shameful level of duplicity; the real problem with the Post editorial was addressed by British journalist Glenn Greenwald. Greenwald also publishes Snowden's material:
"In doing so, the Washington Post has achieved an ignominious feat in US media history: the first-ever paper to editorialize explicitly for the criminal prosecution of its own source."
Greenwald was absolutely correct here pointing out this extremely dangerous precedent. The protection of media sources is a longstanding tradition upon which a free press needs to function. The purpose behind protecting media sources is obvious. If the media is to safeguard the public by passing on information, then a source must be safe from the retaliation from the corrupt elements it is exposing. By betraying Snowden, the Post has established that the media considers its sources as essentially expendable.
We have spoken before about the dangerous tendencies in the media to excuse outright demagoguery as informative not prescriptive, in that it incites antisocial behaviors then disclaims responsibility for them. The Washington Post has taken this already-low media standard and dropped it even further. They willingly published and profited off of a credible source, then call his revelations a crime and disavow any complicity in it.
The leadership of the Washington Post can hide behind all the phony prizes and awards they want to, but at the end of the day, Edward Snowden is still a hero while Bezos, Baron, Hiatt, and Diehl are still a collection of degenerates. Yet they are what passes for a Cultural Elite in Postmodern America, while men like Snowden are forced into exile.
US SPECIAL FORCES DRIVEN OUT OF SYRIA
Turkish President Erdogan stated to that country's press today that the US commandoes accompanying his troops in Syria had been withdrawn and returned to Turkey. Erdogan stated that the "attitudes" of our brave men and women in uniform made cooperation with Turkish allies in Northern Syria impossible.
"The militias do not want the US Special Forces' assistance because of their behavior towards the Syrian opposition." Erdogan announced. "Our troops escorted out 30 US Special Forces troops from the armed conflict zone."
The decision followed the Special Forces' humiliating retreat from the Syrian village of Al-Rai on Friday. A team of about a half-dozen commandoes entered Al-Rai. A scuffle quickly broke out between the troops and members of the FSA militia in which punches were thrown and the militiamen mobbed the soldiers, who cursed them in Arabic. The commandoes fled the scene, pelted with stones, bottles and invectives from the villagers and back to the Turkish lines.
A video released by a local militia commander summed up their sentiments: "We and other FSA groups fighting in and around Aleppo say that we remain a free army and refuse to fight on the side of Americans who support the terrorists...We are halting all military operations until US troops leave the region."
"Such rhetoric is not acceptable." huffed Josh Kirby, spokesman for the LGBTQ-friendly US State Department, "We have to keep in mind the greater goal of the operation."
The Pentagon decided to embed Special Forces with the Turkish forces operating in Syria largely for diplomatic reasons. Anti-American sentiment is at an all-time high in Turkey today. Many---if not most---Turks believe that the Obama Administration was complicit in last month's coup attempt against Erdogan.
In a statement given prior to the incident, Pentagon spokesman Jeff Davis assured the Corporate Media that the FSA around Al-Rai had "been vetted." No doubt they were vetted by CENTCOM commander Joseph Votel who in May "accidentally" bombed the FSA during a battle with ISIS, much as he "mistakenly" bombed the Syrian yesterday. In Iraq, Votel is best known for 'unintentionally" dropping weapons and supplies on ISIS positions. His vetting skills were made apparent in June when the Jordanian contractors he'd hired were caught selling US weapons on the Black Market.
With our commandoes in their safe spaces in Turkey now, the Allies reported that they had recovered the positions captured by ISIS after yesterday's US airstrike. The death toll from that attack has reached 90, as ten more Syrian troops have died of their wounds. Syrian President Dr. Bashir Assad addressed the nation today, assuring them that the enemies of Syria ultimately will fail.
"They are depleting all their energy and resources to maintain the terrorist war in Syria." Assad said. "Whenever the Syrian State achieves tangible progress either on the ground or in national reconciliation, the nations hostile to Syria increase their support for terrorist organizations, and the most flagrant example of this was the US aggression against Syrian Arab Army positions in Deir Ezzur for the benefit of ISIS."
"The militias do not want the US Special Forces' assistance because of their behavior towards the Syrian opposition." Erdogan announced. "Our troops escorted out 30 US Special Forces troops from the armed conflict zone."
The decision followed the Special Forces' humiliating retreat from the Syrian village of Al-Rai on Friday. A team of about a half-dozen commandoes entered Al-Rai. A scuffle quickly broke out between the troops and members of the FSA militia in which punches were thrown and the militiamen mobbed the soldiers, who cursed them in Arabic. The commandoes fled the scene, pelted with stones, bottles and invectives from the villagers and back to the Turkish lines.
A video released by a local militia commander summed up their sentiments: "We and other FSA groups fighting in and around Aleppo say that we remain a free army and refuse to fight on the side of Americans who support the terrorists...We are halting all military operations until US troops leave the region."
"Such rhetoric is not acceptable." huffed Josh Kirby, spokesman for the LGBTQ-friendly US State Department, "We have to keep in mind the greater goal of the operation."
The Pentagon decided to embed Special Forces with the Turkish forces operating in Syria largely for diplomatic reasons. Anti-American sentiment is at an all-time high in Turkey today. Many---if not most---Turks believe that the Obama Administration was complicit in last month's coup attempt against Erdogan.
In a statement given prior to the incident, Pentagon spokesman Jeff Davis assured the Corporate Media that the FSA around Al-Rai had "been vetted." No doubt they were vetted by CENTCOM commander Joseph Votel who in May "accidentally" bombed the FSA during a battle with ISIS, much as he "mistakenly" bombed the Syrian yesterday. In Iraq, Votel is best known for 'unintentionally" dropping weapons and supplies on ISIS positions. His vetting skills were made apparent in June when the Jordanian contractors he'd hired were caught selling US weapons on the Black Market.
With our commandoes in their safe spaces in Turkey now, the Allies reported that they had recovered the positions captured by ISIS after yesterday's US airstrike. The death toll from that attack has reached 90, as ten more Syrian troops have died of their wounds. Syrian President Dr. Bashir Assad addressed the nation today, assuring them that the enemies of Syria ultimately will fail.
"They are depleting all their energy and resources to maintain the terrorist war in Syria." Assad said. "Whenever the Syrian State achieves tangible progress either on the ground or in national reconciliation, the nations hostile to Syria increase their support for terrorist organizations, and the most flagrant example of this was the US aggression against Syrian Arab Army positions in Deir Ezzur for the benefit of ISIS."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)