6 March, 2008

Brazen Feminism Becoming Routine, Men Remaining Silent About It

Posted by Socrates in feminism, jewed culture, Socrates at 5:37 pm | Permanent Link

A feature of our Judaized culture: men are expected to adopt women’s roles. Outcry? Opposition? There isn’t any [1][2]:

[Article].

[1] about feminism: [Here]

[2] Dr. Kevin MacDonald on the Judaization of Western culture (scroll about 3/4 down the page): [Here]


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 08/25/18 Feminism: What Is It? 51% similar
  3. 08/02/13 Feminism 46% similar
  4. 07/22/15 The Evolution of Authority: First, Men Had It, But Now Women Have It 39% similar
  5. 07/28/14 Anti-Feminism Online? 39% similar
  6. 03/04/17 On Feminism 38% similar
  7. 93 Responses to “Brazen Feminism Becoming Routine, Men Remaining Silent About It”

    1. New America Says:

      in reply to Roxanne Satinspar:

      you wrote:

      Why do things like the men’s movement (what a strange concept, usually the people running things don’t need movements- is it an admission of defeat to a degree that now it really is needed?) that they need a “commercialized” aspect. Retreats, books, ‘programmes’ and scripts (”Now Bob Wildman will read a poem while Mike Ironheart will play drums and chant, feel the Power!”).

      in reply:
      Essentially, it is an attempt to redefine a model that was truly spiritual in nature, and was truly unspoken. It was learned through nonverbal behavior, to a remarkable degree. Thus, attempts to reduce it to a written formula are inherently doomed, as the spiritual truths we are dealing with existed before the formation of words, which can only dimly describe them.

      Formulae are required for marketing purposes, more than anything else, and are a measure of the desperation felt by those who need it.

      On the other hand, the desperation is so great that rowboats will be seen, not as lifeboats, but as the ship, itself. Worse, they will look at the trip in the rowboat as the functional equivalent of the greater voyage, itself.

      Such is what happens when you substitute materialistic formulae for spiritual growth.

      you wrote:

      I agree with the ‘give space and let them work stuff out on their own’ as opposed to the “therapy” model (AKA Mommy will take over and make everything OK, give you “to-do lists”, this is what you need, mother knows best.” and keep you busy with behavior modification , make-overs, etc .) Might as well put a collar around your neck. Don’t have to decide anything on your own, let Mom take care of everything.

      in reply:
      But, that is exactly what the JUDEO-feminist totalitarian state does.

      That is why the nation is not the country – the land itself – or the State – a legal framework for organization.

      The nation derives organically, spiritually, from the Family – the Family, as the microcosm of the RACE, the RACE as the macrocosm of the Family, and RACE as the Living Bridge between Family and Culture.

      Materialistic reductionism MUST fulfill its purpose directly at the expense of the inherently spiritual organic process of development.

      Thus, “proposition nations” eventually degenerate, and are defeated, by “blood and soil” nations, even as the goddamned JEW created and controlled Soviet Union was defeated by the White Russian people.

      Incidentally, look at the quality of Leadership called forward by the Russian people; Putin is smart, strong, and a Man’s Man, in the fullest sense of the term. The fact that he is a world class martial artist, as well, is all the more impressive.

      The demonic Jews, however, have either “female” leaders, or male figureheads who are so soft they might as well be taking estrogen treatments…

      you wrote:

      This “Promise_keeper” stuff I don’t get. Trying to reclaim manhood as sort of religion and sports stadium mixed together? It reeks of formulaic, not dynamic, “follow my recipe” thus feminine.

      ** Recipes are not based on ever-changing decisions.** Recipes are based on consistency and making predictions about what to do based on the same stuff happening over and over because it works. Cooking. Drinking liquids when one is sick, or teaching young children to read

      Recipes are for food. If you are a good cook, you can deviate from the recipe and make up your own. If you aren’t very intuitive about what goes with what, you better stick to form.

      In the women’s circle, or world, one benefits greatly from our own circle teaching things, advice on children, food, illnesses,etc., because of what I said about redundancy, and the same stuff happening over and over again. Most ideas traded are how to make these chores and problems easier, or handled well. It’s unchanging as the progression of children from babies to adults will always require the same stuff, physical, mental, emotional support, over and over. Chores, keeping things running in a circle , like a wheel, but the man is supposed to drive the car someplace, not just go ’round and ’round.

      in reply:
      Form is all the feminine societies have to offer; their Substance, in terms of making the world a better place, is exactly nil.

      you wrote:

      As I said before, women’s influence is not necessarily decision, not should it be. Men resent the hell out of that- well, most do, the kind that like being led seem to love it. Usually though, men don’t look in a reflecting pond ( like a woman) and say, “That is reality, the reflection, that is the way things should be”. You look in to get ideas and get your own wheels spinning. At rare times, the pond will reflect the same thing you are thinking.But that happens by ‘accident” or “coincidence” , not by the man “agreeing to terms”.

      in reply:
      But “women’s influence” BECOMES “decision,” de facto, as she refuses to accept the situation as it is, and bitches, moans, and complains until HE makes HER decision THEIR decision.

      To many men in intimate relationships, the relationship, in time, seems to be little more than “bait and switch,” with her having “baited” him with all manner of unconditional support and approval during courtship, which suddenly became quite conditional, following his commitment to marriage.

      Suddenly, the invisible range of State powers and sanctions can become all too visible to him, all too soon, as HER decisions are now the STATE’S decisions, and are backed by court-ordered enforcement.

      Is there any reason young men look at what the divorce bomb – the original “capitalist weapon,” if ever there was one – did to the men they relied upon to teach the the Learning of Men, and said, “Marriage? No way, unless there are a wall of circuit breakers (prenups, entity protection, asset protection systems) between me, what I have created, and the divorce bomb.”

      Talk to young ladies about this, and they really report strong feelings of betrayal – by their Older Sisters.

      And rightfully so.

      you wrote:

      The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion men are better off figuring out how to be men on their own, and amongst their own, they need to figure things out on their own-take the initiative without being led.

      in reply:
      But. the Mommy State’s Shadow is the Totalitarian States, the goddamn JEWISH State, where all that is not allowed, is forbidden.

      And, Mommy States don’t want Men around, save as controlled, gelded, indentured servants.

      By controlling The Dogs, as in “Animal Farm,” the Form of the Mommy State masks the Substance of the Totalitarian State, just as JUDEO-Christianity masks offers the Form of Christianity, but masks the Substance of Judaism.

      Men need time in the company of Men to become Men, preferably engaged in the shared Work of accomplishing a greater Purpose.

      The most successful Masculine organizations – the Jesuits, the U. S. Marine Corps – have this in common.

      And that’s why the demonic Jews, and their Feminist entities, hate them…

      And the Boy Scouts.

      So, congratulations.

      Gelded, Feminine Europe – the Mommy State – needs the Father of strong, certain (Orthodox!) Christian Russia, to counter the Masculine forces of Islam.

      If the bitches don’t want to end up wearing burkas, they had better shut the fuck up, and work to develop the Eurasian Nation, as the West’s Masculine Christian response to JUDEO-Asiatic Hegemony…

      While they can.

      New America

      An Ideal Whose Time Is HERE!

    2. hoosier Says:

      Reading through this thread, and thinking a bit – I think I’ve come to a tentative plan. I don’t have a GF or wife or “significant other” at this point in my life, and I don’t feel like a “loser” for not having one either. I have certain personal goals I am persuing. I believe, for the most part, I’ll just keep working on them, and not worry about “getting a woman”

      if something happens to happen along the way, that’s fine. If nothing happens, that fine too. I’m not going to worry about it, so let the chips fall where they may. I can think of one exception to my general plan, and I may “check her out” and see what she’s up to these days. But I’m not planning on killing myself pursuing her either. We’ll see.

      What was once a straightforward, simple thing, has become hopelessly complicated in Judeo-America – which is probably exactly what they wanted to happen.

    3. Stronza Says:

      Men need a good woman to tie them to the earth whilst they work on their great, creative, seemingly impractical plans. The two work together, maybe unconsciously, but necessarily. If anyone knows of a great, creative man who was able to come up with what he did, without some woman or other in the apparent “background” – mother or wife or girlfriend – I would like to know his name.

      Socrates needed the shrewish Xanthippe. He could not have accomplished what he did without her. No one, male or female, can be highly successful without someone to assist him or her, and oftentimes that “assistance” is, to the viewer, a harsh presence.

    4. Marwinsing Says:

      Just seek out a real racist white woman who’s besotted over Hitler – at worst you acquire status of becoming her pet German Shephard or Pedigree Pitbull – whichever’s most appropriate for whenever.

    5. Hoosier Says:

      Yes, true, Stronza. dammit, now I have to rethink my plan.

    6. Stronza Says:

      When I was in my twenties, I met a reasonably successful man, a leader, who was probably about 50 or so. I don’t know what the conversation was, but he said to me, “If it wasn’t for my wife, I would be walking the streets, homeless and in rags.”

      Of course, nowadays, men say, “Because of my wife, I am walking the streets in rags…” and unfortunately, they are often correct. Plus ça change, etc.

    7. Hoosier Says:

      Well, I’d like to avoid the type of woman who’d ruin my life – I’ve had one of those, but I was lucky in a way, as a girl friend I had later – turned out to be truly wonderful, and “cured” me from a lot of the damage My “Wonderful Ex Wife” inflicted.

      My ex wife was physically very attractive – but she did not like herself. For that reason, she became very draining to be around over time. She started fucking someone else pretty early in the marriage, and it hurt like hell.

      She said it was because I didn’t pay attention to her, and she was right about that. Because she didn’t like herself, she seemed to need so MUCH attention, and no matter how much you gave her, it was never enough, so I was giving up trying.

      My girlfriend, on the other hand, was not as physically attractive, but she was a real Christian woman. She operated from a spiritual base. The thing that became apparent to me early on was that she DID like herself.

      I remember blurting out at dinner when we first started dating, “You LIKE yourself. (Name of ex wife) never liked herself, but I can tell you LIKE yourself and it’s so nice to be around you” and it was.

    8. New America Says:

      in reply to Hoosier AND Stronza:

      To bring it back to the beginning, think of it from the first post in this thread:

      Joshua Coleman, a San Francisco-area psychologist and author of “The Lazy Husband: How to Get Men to Do More Parenting and Housework,” said equitable sharing of housework can lead to a happier marriage and more frequent sex.

      “If a guy does housework, it looks to the woman like he really cares about her — he’s not treating her like a servant,” said Coleman, who is affiliated with the Council on Contemporary Families. “And if a woman feels stressed out because the house is a mess and the guy’s sitting on the couch while she’s vacuuming, that’s not going to put her in the mood.”

      Now, consider the soft process of gelding that took place in that example, and how easily we lose our sense of Purpose.

      THIS is why I ask one and all to consider this process in the context of converting to White Nationalism in a process not unlike religious conversion.

      Then, I ask them to consider writing alternative biographies for people like Yankee Jim, and Kevin Alfred Strom, AS IF THEY HAD NEVER BEEN MARRIED.

      Consider Yankee Jim.

      Suppose he had the Vision of White Nationalism, and he identified with the damn sense of joy you could hear in his voice on VNN FTL.

      Suppose he realized the marriage as a matter of Substance was over, and only remained as a matter of Form.

      My Vision has him selling the house, splitting the proceeds, and moving to Kalispell, Montana, playing “The Best Of The Sixties” music and doing a live radio show from a hotel in Kalispell.

      Happiest man in the world…

      Consider Kevin Alfred Strom.

      My Vision has him as the heir to Pierce, and Oliver, working with Eustace Mullins to refine a comprehensive analytical history, and defining the path to a better future – a MUCH better future – for our Families, and our RACE.

      Perhaps, assuming Kevin Alfred Strom rejoins society, we should all learn from his, and Mrs. Kevin Alfred Strom’s, experiences.

      My most focused single lesson would be this:

      If you and she do not totally and actively agree on your Plans, your Goals, and your Dreams, for this life, then make it easy on all parties, and DITCH THAT BITCH, before she starts using sex as a weapon…

      God, can you imagine the geldings in the example?

      “Honey, if you vacuum the house REALLY GOOD, I might surprise you with the illusion of carefree random sex later on, and then again, I might not…

      Just to keep you on your toes.”

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    9. Hoosier Says:

      New America

      One thing I know as an absolute fact: In a relationship with a woman, I have to be the leader. While not a guarantee it’d work, it’s the only way it can possibly work. I tried the “partnership” way, and even “let her lead” way, and it always ended up in disaster. In the cases when I was the leader, although imperfect, things went pretty well.

    10. Hoosier Says:

      I think I’ll stick to my plan, and not worry about women for awhile. Now that I have that settled, I can go to bed! Night all.

    11. New America Says:

      Admin:

      I think another one got caught in the SPAM filter.

      Thanks!

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    12. Socrates Says:

      New America Says: “Admin:

      I think another one got caught in the SPAM filter.

      As of right now, no. Maybe it has already been posted?

    13. Marwinsing Says:

      One thing I know as an absolute fact: In a relationship with a woman, I have to be the leader.Damn right M.

      * * *

      I think another one got caught in the SPAM filter.

      Thanks!Re-read what was said — and chew on it — then ponder upon how YOU led in all those previous failed relationships. I too have been down that road with the amazonians, the feministas, the the…

      …and with similar disappointing outcomes. That above post was posted for the pure and simple reason that I’ve found an approach with someone — AND IT SEEMS TO BE WORKING — therefore I wish to share it with you. Dogs are allowed to lead; especially when the one in tow ‘is a bitch’.

      * * *

      But don’t call me a spammer.

    14. roxanne satinspar Says:

      “Joshua Coleman, a San Francisco-area psychologist and author of “The Lazy Husband: How to Get Men to Do More Parenting and Housework,” said equitable sharing of housework can lead to a happier marriage and more frequent sex.

      “If a guy does housework, it looks to the woman like he really cares about her — he’s not treating her like a servant,” said Coleman”>

      What retarded logic, this Coleman. #1 why is doing things for someone you love considered a “lowly” position? Even if it is serving someone, when you are serving the one you love, there is no insult.
      #2 Assuming because a man might help you wash a dish (or give you money , trips, whatever) that necessarily = love is also retarded logic.
      #3 whether he helps or not, what does housework have to do with sex? Is it a little game of,”if I can make you do this, then you can have some of this?” Men have to want to do stuff, not be coerced, or it’s all crap.

      Sure it is nice when someone wants to help you, or is a good organizer, or you work out who is best at which chores , whatever, but watching men do dishes as a turn-on ? In some places men pay to have women boss them around whilst they scrub floors-but everyone must be wearing leather or some bizarre-o context. Just don’t get how the housework relates to whether anyone “gets some”.. ?
      The other part this Coleman said, get them to play with their own kids, “do more parenting” well that is just sad if they don’t want to play with their own kids.
      Main thing: it’s not Coleman’s business what people work out on their own period. Know it all pop-culture books, ain’t they grand?

    15. New America Says:

      in reply to Marwinsing:

      My post about the spam filter concerned one of my posts, that I thought was trapped in the spam filter.

      It seems it was trapped in the Zone of Lost Things.

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    16. Hoosier Says:

      “The Zone of Lost Things” probably has a lot of my socks that come up missing after doing the laundry. I hate when that happens.

    17. Hoosier Says:

      roxanne satinspar Says:
      11 March, 2008 at 10:57 am

      Sure it is nice when someone wants to help you, or is a good organizer, or you work out who is best at which chores , whatever, but watching men do dishes as a turn-on ?

      I suppose his point is, when a woman sees a man helping with things like the dishes, it’s a sign that he really cares about her. Her reaction will be, according to him, something like “Wow, hubby is pitching in and doing the dishes, instead of plopping himself down and watching TV. He’s not treating me like a servant! I think I’ll ball his brains out tonight!”

      Actually, in theory, it’s not a bad thing – if it were true. If all it took was to get sex whenever a man wanted, was to help out with the dishes, then I can say with some assurance I’d have dishpan hands. Hey, at least I’m honest.

      But the underlying problem that he doesn’t address, and it’s been mentioned already, is so many women have some sort of entitlement mentality. A man can go out and work, pay the bills, put a roof over her head, and even do all the yard work, and she’s entitled to it.

      Raising the kids, and doing the housework? That’s “servitude” If he wants sex, well, that’s not part of the package, and it’ll cost him extra. Isn’t it enough for a man to do the usual things, and expect to have sex on a regular basis, if it’s a quid pro quo thing?

      Funny how he doesn’t mention the stuff that most guys do, and how much “servitude” a man is expected to perform. How in the world did they get modern day women to think they had it so rough, and needed to be “liberated?”

    18. Ich Bin Laden Says:

      Roxanne Satinspar: “…the men’s movement … what a strange concept, usually the people running things don’t need movements- is it an admission of defeat to a degree that now it really is needed?”

      If (white) men were really running things, do you think we would have set up a system of discrimination against ourselves? The oppression (white) males are facing today is more real than any women have encountered in the 150 years of the women’s movement. Yes, we need our own movement. And no, we were not defeated, for the simple fact that men didn’t know they were under attack. Until now, that is. As New America said, “War is OUR game.” Better watch out.

    19. Roxanne Satinspar Says:

      IBL: (smile) you got my point, if you(men) were still running things, the idea of these men’s groups would not be necessary, but rather laughable, redundant. They probably weren’t called “men’s clubs” then because everything was for men (probably a phrase like “men’s club” meant like a playboy club, the same way “adult” today is code for porno, not “grown-ups”).

      You made such a good point , if I have this right , if not let me know – about the way men have had much more taken away : loss of power/opportunities/security/freedom (you can add your own, you’re a man, you should know)- than women have had things they have not “been allowed to do” . I mean, if someone says “No” to something most women don’t want anyway, is that so much of a loss?

      Taking away the things from White men they have earned and enjoyed since time immemorial , is like killing off their masculinity.
      Eunuch-izing.
      And “our” (women’s) microcosmic false gains ( many cases “gifted” , like affirmative action) came at such a horrible cost to you. It is so much better when a Man chooses to share, by his own volition, than be harangued or worse, as I believe NA said forced by ” Mommy-State USA “.

    20. Ich Bin Laden Says:

      New America: “Get a movie – it’s available on DVD. It is one of the most important movies you will ever see, especially if you are a Man who is trapped in the Jewtrix. It’s called ‘FIGHT CLUB.'”

      See, this is what I mean by macho bullshit. Can men not find a way to be masculine without resorting to senselessly beating the crap out of each other? This is why the feminists are winning — because men simply refuse to drop the lone cowboy act and show a little solidarity. Women know they are women, and they treat us as “others,” but men simply refuse to see themselves as a group with its own distinct interests and organize around that.

      Try this: instead of treating other men as rivals, treat them as your friends, and treat women as your rivals. Stop holding doors for women but hold them open for other men (I promise no one is going to call you a fag for doing this; except jealous women, perhaps). In general, start treating men with the same courtesy with which you are used to treating women, but treat women like the antagonists they really are (don’t forget: this is how many if not most women treat men). You might feel uncomfortable acting this way at first, perhaps a little guilty, but this will pass as you get over your anti-male, pro-female conditioning. Believe me — women have this coming. They really, REALLY deserve it.

      Just so as to not be misunderstood, I saw Fight Club a few years ago and enjoyed it, and I’m not knocking it (pun intended). I’ll probably rent it again soon (or download it… fuck you, Hollywood!). It’ll be interesting to see what new meanings I might glean from it after several years. I also agree that activities like boxing are good for young men (and men of any age, really). Not only do they keep you healthy and teach valuable self-defense skills, but they also build discipline and character. A man who is able to go into a ring and trade punches is less likely to take shit in other areas of his life.

      It would also be good if more fathers took their sons out hunting and fishing as in days gone by.

    21. Ich Bin Laden Says:

      Hey Roxanne, don’t take anything I say too personally, I can tell you’re one of the good ones ;-)

      A notable difference between the way women were supposedly “oppressed” in the past and the way men are being oppressed today is that the latter seems to be almost entirely based on hatred, envy, and resentment, whereas the worst that you could say about the former is that it may have been a little patronizing. It certainly wasn’t hateful or mean-spirited. When men let women and children go on the lifeboats while they chose to stay on the sinking Titanic and drown, are we really supposed to believe that men did so because they hated women or considered women beneath them?

    22. New America Says:

      in reply to Ich Bin Laden:

      you wrote, quoting me:

      New America: “Get a movie – it’s available on DVD. It is one of the most important movies you will ever see, especially if you are a Man who is trapped in the Jewtrix. It’s called ‘FIGHT CLUB.’”

      you replied:

      See, this is what I mean by macho bullshit. Can men not find a way to be masculine without resorting to senselessly beating the crap out of each other? This is why the feminists are winning — because men simply refuse to drop the lone cowboy act and show a little solidarity. Women know they are women, and they treat us as “others,” but men simply refuse to see themselves as a group with its own distinct interests and organize around that.

      in reply:
      I have been dumfounded at how our young men are literally walked around in a damn near hypnotic stupor, and realize that focused, disciplined anger is required to break through this hypnotic state.

      In this case, a wall of Wordism acts to effectively neutralize them as Men; in effect, it is a soft gelding.

      And, the only answer to this is NOT to “greet, eat, meet, and retreat.”

      The answer – which allows them to transcend the circuit breakers of Wordism on their Minds – is the Spirit’s functional equivalent of a universal solvent.

      Violence.

      “Violence Solves Everything.” (DAMN, I wish I had that in Latin!)

      Violence – constructive, controlled, disciplined by the experience of Men – allows their Minds to transcend the narrow limits of linear thought, allowing them the kind of non-linear thinking used by Alexander when he solved the “problem” of the Gordian Knot.

      This requires integrating the Shadow into their persona, and allowing themselves to access the incredible power the Shadow conceals beneath the surface Awareness of one and all.

      Having integrated the Shadow, they can work with this denied Aspect of their persona, and use this power Creatively, to transcend the limits placed on their Minds by others, particularly the demonically Jew-controlled tools of color television and Wordism.

      THAT is why I urge watching “Fight Club” THREE times: once, to get the plot; once, after you realize who “Tyler Durden” is; and once, to see it from the perspective of Men who can accept the existence of the Shadow today, and work actively with the Shadow, tomorrow, to build a new social system, based on Family, as the microcosm of RACE, RACE, as the macrocosm of Family, and RACE as the Living Bridge between Family and Culture.

      Beating the Hell out of each other senselessly?

      That’s pretty much what we are doing now; we just aren’t Men enough to actually attack one another, so we allow the demonic powers of JUDEO-Christianity and JUDEO-Feminism to drain the life from our Culture, and replace it with an artificial type of life, with the Forms, but not the Substance, of the kind of Life only the White RACE can create, and which, as a byproduct, leads to Civilization.

      Which only the White RACE can sustain, much less Create.

      “First Rule of Fight Club IS…?”

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    23. roxanne satinspar Says:

      Ich: Thanks for your kind words. I try to act in good faith, don’t take what you say personally- I know I am an anachronism.

      Again , you make another important point, the contrast between how male oppression took shape versus what you describe as “patronizing” – Now because this word has been poisoned.

      There is much hostility- men resent/don’t want responsibility/authority-women resent this “patronizing”,don’t want “guidance” or “protection”.
      Word has more than one meaning-
      http://www.bartleby.com/61/77/P0117700.html

      but of course we tend to go with the most used or common definition- “to condescend ”
      which is NOT the same meaning as how a father speaks to a child, or one unknowing , or a teacher- that is not an insult.
      It has been developed as an insult, but it “ain’t necessarily so”.
      If we *accept* it as so, it becomes so. Thus becomes “if you teach me, I am “less than” because I don’t yet know. My father is a professor- to me, teaching me is loving me, not “patronizing” me, in the “modern Communiverse” sense. He always took great joy when I learned something from him, then went further with it , or came up with a new angle on something. It was anything but “condescending” or “insulting”. So we can choose not to believe in “The Great Evil Patriarchy”, which is a foreign concept if one has respect and love for their father- when one is being taught something, one shuts up and listens, and appreciates that someone cares enough to bother teaching you. Perhaps this is not the popular modern American woman view.

      WE are the ones who need reject Judeo-convenient definitions –
      the way they seize upon twisting and redefining words/usage etc. -which leads to accepting/forming incorrect and warped beliefs .

      from root “patr” Latin/Germanic/Greek
      http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE410.html , the root of which , patr/patri/patria
      also used in Repatriate/expatriate
      return to fatherland/ leave fatherland..

    24. Hoosier Says:

      Since we’re having an adult level conversation, l’ll throw this out here:
      Are women really “winning” in the brave new Judeo-American civilization we’re in? I see a lot of single mothers out there, and they don’t look very happy. I’d like to hear a woman’s reply.

      This topic has dropped to the second page, so I can’t see how continuing this is going to disrupt anything.

    25. Ich Bin Laden Says:

      Hoosier: “Are women really ‘winning’ in the brave new Judeo-American civilization we’re in?”

      By the objectives set out by the women’s movement, they are, but not otherwise. Once you strip woman of her reproductive function, what are you left with? A mediocre man?

      In the future, I think a lot of women are going to be none too grateful to the women’s movement for having encouraged them to put their careers or “just having fun” over having children and raising them. Feminism of the sort we’ve been seeing the last 50 years goes against nature, and lots of women are going to feel robbed when they reach menopause without having given birth.

      And since women have tried to have it both ways, they may very well end up losing it all when the backlash comes. They will end up losing the kind of respect that made men give up their lives so that women could have seats on the lifeboats, and at the same time, they will lose the supposed “gains” that were made for them by the women’s movement.

    26. A Man Without a Woman Says:

      Re: Stronza

      “Men need a good woman to tie them to the earth whilst they work on their great, creative, seemingly impractical plans. The two work together, maybe unconsciously, but necessarily. If anyone knows of a great, creative man who was able to come up with what he did, without some woman or other in the apparent “background” – mother or wife or girlfriend – I would like to know his name.”

      Are you that uneducated? What about Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms, a lot of mathematicians, and well, even Hitler (Eva Braun hardly qualifies as great woman behind him). Well the vanity of women like you, Stronza, doesn`t know bounds, does it?

    27. ein Says:

      “Joshua Coleman, a San Francisco-area psychologist and author of “The Lazy Husband: How to Get Men to Do More Parenting and Housework,” said equitable sharing of housework can lead to a happier marriage and more frequent sex.
      “If a guy does housework, it looks to the woman like he really cares about her — he’s not treating her like a servant,” said Coleman”>

      I’ll wager there’s a good chance his name was not Coleman until he aryanized it. Coleman or Cohen? Joshua sounds to me more like a Cohen.

    28. Stronza Says:

      To: A Man without a Woman. I don’t blame you for replying to my post the way you did. I think I should’ve been more clear: If men are to accomplish great things, yet have a happy, “normal” life, they need a woman in the background, propping them up (in a positive sense), normalizing the details of their lives for them – not a bad situation. I believe that women were intended by Creation to help men in this way – by looking after the details, while the men did their great works for the advancement of their society.

      Nowhere did I say that great men ideally had “great” women behind them. (please re-read your post.) They had GOOD women behind them, enabling them to have a satisfying life while doing the necessary work of advancing their societies.

      I would humbly suggest to you that Beethoven and the others you mention were unhappy & sick precisely because they did not have women doing so many “little” things for them that are so shamefully taken for granted. Men can indeed accomplish great things by themselves with no woman in sight, but they can’t be happy while doing it. The greatest of them all, J.S. Bach, wasted no time remarrying after his first wife died.

    29. Hoosier Says:

      # A Man Without a Woman Says:
      13 March, 2008 at 4:15 pm

      Re: Stronza

      “Men need a good woman to tie them to the earth whilst they work on their great, creative, seemingly impractical plans. The two work together, maybe unconsciously, but necessarily. If anyone knows of a great, creative man who was able to come up with what he did, without some woman or other in the apparent “background” – mother or wife or girlfriend – I would like to know his name.”

      Are you that uneducated? What about Beethoven, Schubert, Brahms, a lot of mathematicians, and well, even Hitler (Eva Braun hardly qualifies as great woman behind him). Well the vanity of women like you, Stronza, doesn`t know bounds, does it?

      Well we WERE having an adult level conversation. She’s right in principle; a good woman will enhance a man’s life, whether he’s working on A Great Creative Endeavor or just trying to figure out where his socks disappear to after doing laundry.

    30. Hoosier Says:

      Thanks for answering, Ich Bin Laden. I get the impression of – like you mention – that they’ve been robbed, and they don’t know it yet. Like something has been torn away from them.

    31. New America Says:

      in reply to Hoosier:

      They HAVE been robbed of something that is intangible, but manifests with irresistible force, and that is the chance to correctly do what they are uniquely positioned to do, and that is Motherhood with a Husband who loves them, and is crazy about the kids, as well.

      As a Rule, the Cultural purpose of marriage is to provide a safe, positive environment in which to raise children. Girls get so see a Man as a positive force, as well as a Protector. Boys get to have the benchmark in which they will define themselves.

      When those critically important component of spiritual development are missing, gaps are created in the Personae that need filling, and it will usually be by the Shadow of the positive force Men bring to Families.

      Thus, Girls become Whores – there is a LOT of that going on lately – and Sons become trapped in either Negative Behavior – Loser Gangs, where they can have a Shadow Father in the Gang Leader, or, worse, common, degenerate homosexuality, as they literally do not have a positive model of Masculinity to rebel against.

      Then again, remember this:

      Both the Gir/Whore and Boy/Pseudohomosexual are reacting to the ABSENCE of a spiritual force in a materialistic manner; admittedly, this is the Extreme Shadow at work, leading to a meterialistic dead-end for the, their lives, and their society.

      Which is what the demonic Goddamn Satanists known as JEWS wanted all along…

      Have I mentioned tonight how much I hate these demons, these Goddamn JEWS, who walk the Earth in human bodies?

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    32. A Man Without a Woman Says:

      Re: Stronza

      I glad, you don´t blame me for the tone of my comment. I was perhaps a bit harsh. But your question was a bit provocative, you have to admit. Since you appreciate the work of Bach, I will try to be nicer in this post: It seems that your general idea of the roles of men and women in a relationship is sound, even if others might find it old-fashioned. If I would dare to be patronizing in an old-fashioned way, I would laud you for that. But you and I know, that the chances to find a woman, who has that view and – more important – can realize it in the real world are very slim. Of course, that is not your fault. (Are you married and have realized that view? You don´t need to answer that question, only if you wish):

      What still bothers me a bit is the Freudian twist you give the life of Beethoven, when you call his life “unhappy & sick”. It is of course a matter of taste, whether you prefer Bach or Beethoven (I prefer the latter). But I would suggest, that Beethoven did his job, so he did lead a great life in my view. And I would even suggest that his life was from his male perspective a “happy” one.

      I think the big difference beetween Bach and Beethoven was that the latter lived after the French Revolution (instigated by jews via British freemasonry). I think after that event it was impossible to be a great man and be a happy familiy man at the same time. I would explain it so: After the French revolution the greatest men knew, that there was an evil conspiracy surrounding them. And they couldn´t communicate it to a woman. So they had to be alone to do their work. That is the birth of a tragic genius.

    33. Hoosier Says:

      Yes, NA. Of course kids will grow up screwed up – they need a Mom AND Dad, not Wimp-Dad and Career-Mommy.

      I like this video,

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyZOEJjjul0

      I don’t know what the rest of Kenny Chesney’s vids music is like, but this one shows how normal and happy life was – if you watch the old clips – and how good it could be again. Moms and Dads everywhere, spending time with their family.

      Fast Forward to 2008:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBG-pul6gOw

      Depression, cutting, pregnancy, suicide. Probably not too many stable households amongst this group.

    34. New America Says:

      Look at this, for “Fight Club”

      http://dailycamera.com/news/2008/mar/13/fairview-students-ticketed-over-fight-club/

      THIS is the phrase that pays:

      Fairview Principal Donald Stensrud said he has taken some disciplinary actions against the students who have been cited, but he did not disclose details because of confidentiality rules. He said suspensions are a possibility.

      “It’s a blood sport,” Stensrud said. “It is so antithetical to what we want our young men and women to do, and what we teach them to do.”

      And why do you think that is?

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    35. Hoosier Says:

      That’s easy, NA, because they want the students to be easily herded sheep. Christ, when I was a kid, all we did was fight fight fight. Fighting and wrestling around, and playing sports any chance we got, all day, every day. If i was a kid today, they’d probably have me on ritalin or have given me a lobotomy. Back then I was considered normal, although on the “rowdy” side.

      These guys have the right idea:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Td3TF2HXA9E

    36. Ich Bin Laden Says:

      New America: “And, the only answer to this is NOT to ‘greet, eat, meet, and retreat.'”

      I wasn’t suggesting that the solution to our problems is for men to cry, hug each other, and spend the weekend in teepees wearing loinclothes. Just that for men to beat the crap out of each other seems counterproductive. Our anger should be directed at our enemies, not at ourselves. With feminism, we are dealing with a powerful, ruthless, highly organized political force, and I don’t see how knocking each others’ teeth out in empty parking lots is going to help us defeat that.

      A lot of your analysis seems to derive from Jungian psychology, which I must admit, I am not well versed in, so perhaps your point is going over my head.

    37. Stronza Says:

      “A Man without a woman” asks me (Stronza) if I am married and if I have realized the (heh heh) exalted kind of man & woman relationship I was describing as being ideal. A fine question, sir. Inasmuch as my husband is an Objectivist it causes me some grief that I am not able to help him change the world into the way he would like it to be, and he does try. But fair is fair, and he laughs at me for my racially realistic views. You would not believe the mirth in this household of ours. I try to “straighten him out” and he thinks I am just a silly pig-headed little woman.

      Next paragraph! Regarding Beethoven. The whole purpose of music composition is to work out one’s deepest feelings & challenges. Some people do charitable work, some have a bunch of kids and treat them well or poorly, others (a very tiny number) compose. Bach’s musical greatness, I’d suggest, indicates a sane and uniquely intelligent man (for his time).

      Beethoven’s music, while loved by many, is music of extremes. Some of his “greatest” works are full of turmoil, it is see-saw music, loud & thumpy, then soft/sad/sweet. “Rage over a Lost Penny” is of course not a major work, but a little cameo representing LvB’s anguish. They say he had lead poisoning from the wine, and it made him both crazy and deaf. I am not criticizing, I do like most of his music, but JSB it ain’t. You are right, Beethoven might have been happy in some meaning of that word. He did fulfill himself, if fulfillment is your definition.

      3rd paragraph: I don’t necessarily see the French Revolution as the dividing point between ignorance and awareness of the demonic conspiracy that has overtaken the world. How about Martin Luther?

    38. Ich Bin Laden Says:

      Stronza: If you’re a race realist, whereas your husband wants to “change the world into the way he would like it to be,” wouldn’t that make you more of an objectivist and him a subjectivist?

    39. Stronza Says:

      Hello, IBL: That is a conundrum. You are clever!

    40. New America Says:

      in reply to Ich Bin Laden:

      I wrote:

      New America: “And, the only answer to this is NOT to ‘greet, eat, meet, and retreat.’”

      you replied:

      I wasn’t suggesting that the solution to our problems is for men to cry, hug each other, and spend the weekend in teepees wearing loinclothes. Just that for men to beat the crap out of each other seems counterproductive. Our anger should be directed at our enemies, not at ourselves. With feminism, we are dealing with a powerful, ruthless, highly organized political force, and I don’t see how knocking each others’ teeth out in empty parking lots is going to help us defeat that.

      A lot of your analysis seems to derive from Jungian psychology, which I must admit, I am not well versed in, so perhaps your point is going over my head.

      in reply:
      I am talking about the “Fight Club” metaphor for the fact that we MUST have some sort of system that allows us to reach, and work with, the sheer sense of anger – Hell, RAGE! – that is the foundational emotional response to the feeling of helplessness – learned helplessness – that are at the foundation of anger.

      They have denied the Awareness of this anger, at a Conscious level; the System deals with them by hitting them with enough tranquilizers that only mask the symptoms.

      So, they need something like “Fight Club,” in the absence of anything better. What IS better are structured environments, like judo studios, where they can learn to deal with this anger in an appropriate manner, with MASCULINE, disciplined, focused Leadership.

      This opens the door to the true Deep Learning, which occurs at a level of Soul to Soul.

      And, the movie, “Fight Club,” has a LOT more to say, on so many levels, on the choices we have been encouraged to make that only lead to us being subpotent geldings – which we are TOLD is simply wonderful…

      The Masculine Soul rebels against this.

      And, I use Jungian psychology as a starting point because it begins with us as spiritual beings – “Psyche” was the Goddess of the Spirit” – which is the proper foundation of the Study of Man, unlike the demonic, materialistic JEWISH model, of us as, well, “livestock,” soulless Beasts of the Field.

      It is from this unique Aspect of the Western Soul that, eventually, it Creates National Socialism as the proper governing order for Western Men – and Women!

      That, however, is for another time.

      New America

      An Idea Whose Time Is HERE!

    41. Hoosier Says:

      # Stronza Says:
      17 March, 2008 at 8:02 pm

      3rd paragraph: I don’t necessarily see the French Revolution as the dividing point between ignorance and awareness of the demonic conspiracy that has overtaken the world. How about Martin Luther?

      Stronza, are you saying you think Martin Luther is the cause of our present situation?

    42. Stronza Says:

      No, not at all. I am saying that Martin Luther was on to our enemy. And this was before the French Revolution. I would suggest that prior to that time there were others who understood what was going on. We just don’t know who they are.

    43. Hoosier Says:

      OK. I interpreted it at first as the opposite of what you meant, and it seemed inconsistent with other things you’ve written.