Tuesday, February 11, 2020


    I don't whether or not anybody noticed, but Hollywood staged the Academy Awards the other day. I just caught a couple of the main features on some vloggers' commentary. Apparently some drug addict went on a tedious anti-Civilization farrago and a pair of the Coneheads from 70's Saturday Night Live praised Karl Marx. Those were about the most interesting points of the whole sideshow.

   The guy in the first picture is named Joaquin Phoenix. His whole speech sounded like a lecture from a postmodern Sociology professor who'd overdosed on Barbiturates while watching The Don Lemon Show the night before and hadn't come around yet. At one point he talked about social oppression of cattle: now that's Liberal White Male Guilt with a vengeance! 

  While reflecting on this disgusting display, I came across a really good blog post from Adrienne. What she has to say about neo-Marxist impositions on gender roles is spot on. 

  The whole notion of obliterating sexual differences in society is not a new one, although it's fairly new in America. The French Jacobin Terrorists and the Russian Bolsheviks tried to enforce 'gender equality' and the results were so disastrous that the dictators who overthrew these regimes---Napoleon and Stalin---rescinded the laws. The wily Stalin even banned Feminism in the Soviet Union although he funded such movements in the West as a way of fomenting social instability in Capitalist nations. In hindsight, it was one of Uncle Joe's most brilliant strategic moves; and we in the West are still feeling the detrimental effects of it to this day. Stalin's successors Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Andropov followed the same policy. 

   The movement really never gained any traction in the US until the 1990's although a big media push during the 1970's brought it to public awareness, it fizzled out during the Reagan years. The Clinton Co-Presidency revived it, and---with political backing---it's continued ever since. This has emboldened some incompetent Academics and Media perverts to declare that we've entered some utopian phase of Social Evolution whereby sexual differences and preferences no longer exist. 

   It can't be stressed enough that this view is pure pseudoscience. It's based upon no evidence whatsoever. So far from being an evolutionary leap forward, it's actually an evolutionary atavism, throwing gender relations back to prehistoric barbarism and beyond. 

   Here is a picture of a chimpanzee, which species Evolutionists claim is Man's nearest relative among the apes:

  Now, can anyone look at this photo and say whether this is a picture of a male or female ape? Probably not. Among apes, there's really no especial gender differentiation within their colonies except during breeding season. In their depictions of Prehistoric Man, we see some gender differentiation of labor, but little else to distinguish the genders.

   At the Dawn of Civilization, men and women began taking on definite and distinct forms. But note that female features appear more masculine than our concepts of beauty today:

    We can see that the Roman woman in the last photo is softer and more feminine than the Egyptian and Greek ones. Rome was on a far higher plane of civilization than any other nation up to that time. And we see the progression to a more distinctly feminine form in these portraits from the 16th, 18th, and 19th Centuries:

   And throughout the 20th Century:

  This observation wasn't lost on Psychologists and other Social Scientists. It was learned through studies of infants and toddlers that---while the young ones are aware of gender differences, they begin to differentiate in social interactions about the age of 5. Thus it became obvious that---in both personal development and social evolution---that gender differentiation widens, not narrows, as man becomes more civilized. 

  Whether one believes this phenomenon occurs through Divine Providence or by Evolutionary Necessity is irrelevant: the results are the same. It stands to reason that, as Civilization grows more complex, the need for interdependence or, complimentarian gender roles grows greater and not more restricted. Thus the fantasies promoted by the Feminists, Red Pills, and Gay Mafia are nothing but a tissue of falsehoods. All of their futuristic schemes are doomed to fail, because Nature is moving in the opposite direction. And these same schemes are actually leading society back to the ape and not to a higher plane of humanity. 

   The Feminists, Manosophereans, Homo Activists, and Hollywood/Beltway idiots typically are sexually dysfunctional themselves and can't compete within Nature's parameters. They envy those who can; and that's why they want to change the paradigm---to their own advantage. Fortunately, more and more Americans are seeing through their charade and are going on to be the best men and best women they can. 





  1. Thanks for the shout out, Night.

    I didn't know that about men and women taking on definite and distinct forms as we progressed. Silly me! But it makes sense.

    One thing I really dislike is when women behave like men - all tough and hard.

  2. Interesting & excellent discussion of this complex subject, Night Wind! This is something that will engage all of us for many years to come, as we conservatives fight to maintain a level of sanity regarding gender discussion against the libtoid ignorance of far too many of those around us!