← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 19166 | Posts: 50 | Started: 2005-07-16
2005-07-16 05:56 | User Profile
[B]The Feminization of Everything[/B]
[url]http://www.vanguardnewsnetwork.com/2005/PorterFeminization071505.htm[/url]
2005-07-16 06:06 | User Profile
Oh no. Now I just wonder how long before this article shows up for discussion on the forum.
[QUOTE] The gal who manages a sports team will be likely to make up some silly rule that 34.5% of the team must hail from darkest Africa or down Meh-hee-co way. Chicks are like that. They wanna play nicey-nice all the time - except when it's that-time-of-the-month and Miss Snotty shows up.
[/QUOTE] There are a few things that are true, but this is pretty retarded.
2005-07-16 07:31 | User Profile
This really doesnt really deserve to be read past the first few sentences, much less some commentary. But whatever.
[QUOTE] Is there any part of White, Western culture that hasn't been feminized yet?** Even basketball **has been feminized -[/QUOTE] I could not suppress a guffaw here, dare women disturb that hallowed Western tradition of bas'etball? Nothing says Western like a gaggle of uncouth negroes tossing around a ball into a circle. Nevermind that the basketball leagues are segregated by sex and women have been playing at the amateur level for years.
[QUOTE] the once-godlike male will be seen as just another type of human [/QUOTE] Godlike? Ok, from this we know that mere mortals exist in contradistinction to the gods, simple process of elimination rules that the regular humans must be women. But, we soon learn that our author has not been quite forthright, because women are:
[QUOTE] the new master of the household, a different type of human: one with tits. [/QUOTE] So not only are women just plain human, they are not even that much. This is a "different type" of human, one with (horrors!) TITS! That is right, mammary glands. Some people just cannot be pleased; if the paps which gave our author suck aren't blessed, I'm not sticking around to hear about the womb that bore him.
[QUOTE] All facets of Western society will soon contain 50% little-humans-wearing-lipstick[/QUOTE] Sounds kinda homo, his fear of breasts and wanting to be around men so much. but that is beside the point. Which is, I think, the mortal, lilliputian women, with their breasts and lipstick, ruining the West with their elbowing men out of the office and basketball court. So back to the lecture.
[QUOTE]The gal who manages a sports team will be likely to make up some silly rule that 34.5% of the team must hail from darkest Africa or down Meh-hee-co way[/QUOTE] Uhhhhhhhh, they are already make up by a much larger percentage of blacks and hispanics than that, unless you're talking about hockey. And that isn't because of those flighty, diminutive, lipstick wearing breast bearers, but by Budweiser swilling, TV watching male dolts. You know, the gods.
[QUOTE] except when it's that-time-of-the-month and Miss Snotty shows up.[/QUOTE] The alternative of no ovulation and no menstrual cycle and no reproduction is far more preferable. Of course, the thought of dealing with "tits" probably scared him away from that anyhow.
[QUOTE] Just think: your husky, soccer-playing brother may soon be taking orders in a locker room from a cute little gal who doesn't know beans about the game. [/QUOTE] Sounds kinky.
It might be said that I did not address the substance of this charming essay. Fair enough, I shall attend to that when I find it.
2005-07-16 08:50 | User Profile
Alex Linder is still a fierce and funny polemicist, but his powers of judgment - never his long suit - are now completely atrophied. VNN long ago became a sandbox for bitter defectives to fling turds from - the ethos of its Forum has triumphed over the entire site.
I still maintain that there's much of value in the Spintro and Letters pages, but more and more, I tend to say it under my breath. How does Gresham's Law go again? The bad money will eventually drive out the good. Would that it only applied to currency.
2005-07-16 16:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=il ragno]Alex Linder is still a fierce and funny polemicist, but his powers of judgment - never his long suit - are now completely atrophied. VNN long ago became a sandbox for bitter defectives to fling turds from - the ethos of its Forum has triumphed over the entire site.
I still maintain that there's much of value in the Spintro and Letters pages, but more and more, I tend to say it under my breath. How does Gresham's Law go again? The bad money will eventually drive out the good. Would that it only applied to currency.[/QUOTE]
Nonetheless, today's Western male is usually a wimp who makes his decisions based upon his desire to please his girl. Is that a good thing?
[edited]
2005-07-16 17:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=robinder]Sounds kinda homo...[/QUOTE]
Yes, definitely homo.
2005-07-16 17:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Nonetheless, today's Western male is usually a wimp who makes his decisions based upon his desire to please his girl. Is that a good thing?[/QUOTE]
Sometimes, sometimes not. Depends on the issue and circumstances at hand. There are times when a husband and father has to lay down the law to his family and times when he needs to shutup and listen to their needs and concerns. The more you do the latter, the less you'll have to do the former. A wise man and leader is one who knows which approach is the right one at the right time. Leadership is gained and practiced through serving.
2005-07-16 18:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]A wise man and leader is one who knows which approach is the right one at the right time. Leadership is gained and practiced through serving.[/QUOTE]What the movement needs so much more than anything else. People who can subsume their own ego needs; can build concensus around specific action plans rather than divisive abstractions and ultimate dreams; can cobble together local congregations which confer tangible advantages and benefits on their members; those who can become by example the kind of people that the rest of our race will want to join.
2005-07-16 18:35 | User Profile
Misandry thread.
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry[/url]
Misandry is defined as the hatred of men. I belive that it is almost a cultural fad of sorts. Feminist may argue that shows on t.v. That depict fat men w/ attractive wives, is a male fantasy, but when you look at the personality the fathers and men on the tube are almost always incompetent man-children. There are tons of commercials portraying men as fat lazy man-children. It is common for women on TV to talk down to men. What about desperate housewives and average Joe? Reverse the sex and these shows are sexist. Why is it not sexist to do this to men? . We have all seen this ââ¬Åboys are stupidââ¬Â t-shirts insert blacks or Jews for boys and it becomes hateful.This creates an attitude that it is o.k. To disrespect and dehumanize men. I believe the modern gender stereotype is the workaholic, multitasking, child rearing, women that still has time to maintain her looks and figure and the lazy incompetent inadequate man. This is not true. I believe it is because we lack the voice that women have. And I believe we need to get that voice soon.
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism[/url]
There are groups forming, fathers for justice for example their main issue is custody laws are unfair to men.
[url="http://www.fathers-4-justice.ca/en/"]http://www.fathers-4-justice.ca/en/[/url]
But what has allowed this perception that children donââ¬â¢t benefit from fathers, some women take advantage of the laws to spite their exes lThe stats used to give the gender gap are based on men who have held power for a long time. In other words they use the baby boomers to come up w/ those stats. I aggree its unfair but those boomers are going soon.Check out the fathers for justice web site. For the last 5 years more women are in university across the board. There have been no studies that I have found and Ive looked that suggest that their is still unfairness in that area. Plus when it comes to allot of professions like the trades it is lack of interest on the girls part they are simply not seeking training, in Canada their are thousands of programs to help women with funding for education and trades. Not to mention programs for poor women w/families or to give shelter to women running away from abuse. Their are also programs for female prostitutes to get off the streets. This is wonderful. But one day I had a thought. There are lots of men that are earning shit wages, and poor men w/families, And men that are running away from abuse gay or strait, their are also male prostitutes. But their are no programs for them or allot less. Making all these problems Womenââ¬â¢s issues further victimizes the men suffering these Human issues. There is less awareness. Speaking of man boobs check this out.
[url="http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2005-07-11T172430Z_01_B123178_RTRIDST_0_HEALTH-MEN-MASTECTOMY-DC.XML"]http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/new...STECTOMY-DC.XML[/url]
The awareness campaigns never had any male info. Wear is testicular cancer awareness month? I could give examples all night so I wont go on. Itââ¬â¢s just that coupled w/ the misandristic media, that will influence womenââ¬â¢s perception of how to view men to some degree. Not to mention the unfairness of custody and alimony laws. This is not me trying to take anything away from legit womenââ¬â¢s struggles; I think its time men analyzed their roles and status. I love women; I just think the equality debate needs a reality check. Not up for bashing or anything like that just thought this board would be a good place to share these thoughts. [img]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Earl/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_image001.gif[/img]There is the question of why the media would choose this inadequate incompetent, male model to present. It makes Money. They learned from women along time ago how to market insecurity to promote money spent on beatification. Men are also judged more on their status to begin with. And women spend allot of money on image already (not trying to be smart its true) plus they market the super woman image to girls, as well as encourage self-esteem thru status. We compete against each other in a sense. We have also become more equal in the wrong way. It is not right to encourage hatred from one group to another. Your right turning of the TV, not reading magazines and only caring about actors ability's in movies and not their lives is the one sure way to cure this social ill.
Its been observed that men are more aggresive when it comes to seeking a raise, studies have shown that women tend to wait for the boss to suggest one and men will come out and ask for one. Its rare that a boss will volunteer to give a raise.
| *I found some interesting qoutes by a member of the National organization for Women, Sheila Cronen. "Since marraige constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's right movement must concentrate on attacking marraige. Freedom for women cannot be without the abolition of marraige," and "The simple fact is, every women must be willing to be recognized as a lesbain to be fully feminine." |
Lesbianism as an attack on men? Only proves it is less of an attraction, and more of a deep misguided hatred that is manifesting it self. I am going to be bold here and say a real lesbian should be indifferent to men in general. Women that think like this and say these things are using classic scapegoat techniques to rouse an audience, it appeals to the weak and wounded, always a good source of people for your cause. Just like Hitler. But the idea of lesbianism and attacking marriage or its ideals as being slavery to women is rampant in the media these days. One could argue it is clearly slavery of both or in rare cases heaven for both. Still waiting to see revised laws in the states and Canada as far as custody and alimony? (I can't find em will try again) How do you measure slavery? I say it is stagnation of a persons resources. Its scary these (I hate to use femi-nazi) groups seem to have such a significant impact on the social conscience of women. There is no real empowerment in hatred
Here are the results of some research Please correct if wrong New studies in Canada show gender violence equal. [url="http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050714/d050714a.htm"]http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050714/d050714a.htm[/url] The papers reported 90% -10% last month.
This is funny I tried thru UNICEFs site to find stats on violence against men in America, and sadly this is what came up. [url="http://www.unicef.org/search.php?q=violence+against+men&Go.x=0&Go.y=0"]http://www.unicef.org/search.php?q=...n&Go.x=0&Go.y=0[/url] All the sites are for violence against women and children. Itââ¬â¢s painfully funny.
Here are the custody stats in Canada, I wish they would give stats for the 40% of fathers w/ sole custody, how much time do the kids spend w/ mom? [url="http://142.206.72.67/02/02d/02d_002b_e.htm"]http://142.206.72.67/02/02d/02d_002b_e.htm[/url] Fathers groups claim 80%. Stats can does have an interest in keeping Canada clean for the world.
Here is what I found for the states in U.S.A, scroll a screen down to the first question under custody and support. [url="http://www.ncsconline.org/WC/FAQs/CustodFAQ.htm"]http://www.ncsconline.org/WC/FAQs/CustodFAQ.htm[/url] There must be American stats somewhere? Here are states from early nineties; this is when my gen was coming of age. [url="http://www.menweb.org/throop/custody-divorce/studies/whoGets.html"]http://www.menweb.org/throop/custod...es/whoGets.html[/url]
And here are excerpts from a speech given several months ago Questioning patriarchy I find common of Mainstream feminism, by Jane Fonda, and some counter points put in.
Jane Fonda Speech at the National Women's Leadership Summit Washington, D.C. [font=Verdana]ââ¬Â¦I was still turning myself in a pretzel so I'd be loved by an alpha male. I thought if I didn't become whatever he wanted me to be, I'd be alone, and then, I wouldn't exist. There is not the time nor is this the place to explain why this was true, or why it is such a common theme for so many otherwise strong, independent women. Nor is it the time to tell you how I got over it (I'm writing my memoirs, and all will be revealed). -[The Alpha Male is a pop psychology term, we see it allot in our pop culture landscape, Itââ¬â¢s made a joke out of short,poor or ugly men, and it is used to control menââ¬â¢s perception of role in a negative and stagnating way. Love the book plug][/font]
[font=Verdana]ââ¬Â¦ Now, every group that's been oppressed has its share of Uncle Toms, and we have our Aunt Toms. I call them ventriloquists for the patriarchy. I won't name names but we all know them. They are women in whom the toxic aspects of masculinity hold sway. -[Here she suggests, women and blacks as groups that have been oppressed, Poor white trash ever herd of it ever realize there are millions of white men who are poor because of poverty? Then she seems to blame men for neurotic women, so are all the negative aspects of women the result of men?][/font]
[font=Verdana]And then, of course, there are what Eve Ensler calls Vagina-Friendly men, who choose to remain emotionally literate. It's not easy for them - look at the names they get called: wimp, pansy, pussy, soft, limp, momma's boy. -[Like how she claims to stand up for them being called names then calls them vagina friendly-the only trustworthy man is an emasculated one?][/font]
[font=Verdana]Men don't like to be considered "soft" on anything, which is why more don't choose to join us in the circle. Actually, most don't have the choice to make. Sometimes it comes because our culture rips boys from their mothers before they are developmentally ready -[she should look at some stats.] But, I can assure you, it is true to some extent of many if not most men, and when the extreme version of it manifests itself in our nation's leaders, beware! [Itââ¬â¢s not the greed itââ¬â¢s the penis.][/font]
[font=Verdana]Maybe at some earlier stage in human evolution, Patriarchy was what was needed just for the species to survive. But today, there's nothing threatening the human species but humans. (Yes good point humans) We've conquered our predators, we've subdued nature almost to extinction, and there are no more frontiers to conquer or to escape into so as to avoid having to deal with the mess we've left behind. Frontiers have always given capitalism, Patriarchy's economic face, and a way to avoid dealing with its shortcomings. Well, we're having to face them now in this post-frontier era and inevitably - especially when we have leaders who suffer from toxic masculinity - that leads to war, the conquering of new markets, and the destruction of the earth. [So all the guys on the board that Question us gov must have an inner matriarch in them. We are all so vagina friendly. You cannot argue that patriarchy is to blame when only 2% of the general pop is elite enough to hold power Allot of women have held power since the dawn of time are they not responsible for shaping our world and many of them have been no less corrupt than men.][/font]
[font=Verdana][url="http://womenshistory.about.com/od/medrenqueens/"]http://womenshistory.about.com/od/medrenqueens/[/url][/font]
[font=Verdana]This bothers me because i think it is time we realize humans are corrupt and relize if women were the majority of power they would and have killed and cheated to keep it. Segragation is always stagnation regardless of pc trends. Please have your say. What are all your thoughts on the issues.[/font]
2005-07-16 18:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Nonetheless, today's Western male is usually a wimp... [/QUOTE] A sad but indisputable truth.
2005-07-16 18:58 | User Profile
Henry Makow on feminism:
[url="http://www.savethemales.ca/"]http://www.savethemales.ca/[/url]
2005-07-16 20:42 | User Profile
This little essay is really not so much for or against men or women, but nearly nihilistic and misanthropic. There may well be a good argument to be made against today's feminism, but this isn't it.
2005-07-16 20:45 | User Profile
Hopeless nihilism and sullen misanthropy are indeed common traits of pagan Nazi writings, from Alex Linder to Revilo P. Oliver.
Petr
2005-07-17 01:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=OPERA96]A sad but indisputable truth.[/QUOTE]
Disagree. Disagree COMPLETELY.
I used to think that, but after talking to numerous married friends, I realized this isn't anywhere near the truth. Privately, they all confide in me that after marriage, the woman goes on a "power rampage" and that men do back off their natural leadership b/c they don't want to piss her off.
Compare and contrast married guys with single guys. Nobody calls single guys "wimps". My best friend's wife would threaten divorce on him constantly, and with a kid already, he was nailed to the wall (financially too) if he didn't try to please her.
The system is set up to screw guys. Should we bend over for the wimmin, or the courts? Pick your poison.
2005-07-17 01:46 | User Profile
You see I don't define those things as feminism. I think feminism is when you demonize the stay at home Mom and support abortion. I don't have a problem with Women staying in shape and running and things like that, because that is not feminism. This guy is complaining about stuff not worth complaining about. But then again, that's National Vanguard for you, and that's the modern day laughingstock pro-white movement we have.
2005-07-17 04:33 | User Profile
robinder,
Good and amusing post. I do not think trying to please a girl is a bad thing. I will add I am not sure one should use the word ââ¬ÅFeminine ââ¬Â for activities of the cultural marxists. "Feminism" is not very lady like.
2005-07-17 21:15 | User Profile
the sickening thing is 90% of the guys over there will see in this entire article some type of "holy" unquestionable truths.
I am so tired of seeing this:
[QUOTE] since women are more likely to embrace multiculturalism, homosexuality and other neat-o things. [/QUOTE]Why do people always throw up this line with absolutely no proof, statistics,etc that shows it to be anything more then the opinion of the writer, but of course everyone will agree that it is true somehow, since then all of these problems can be blamed on women. But maybe it is true, after all I see so many men today refusing to embrace multiculturalism, and other "neat-o things"(where did they get that expression from, their 5 year old child) lol.
2005-07-18 01:18 | User Profile
I read this column at VNN, and I can see that like many of the op-eds there, objectivity is non-existent.
2005-07-22 10:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=starr]the sickening thing is 90% of the guys over there will see in this entire article some type of "holy" unquestionable truths.
I am so tired of seeing this:
Why do people always throw up this line with absolutely no proof, statistics,etc that shows it to be anything more then the opinion of the writer, but of course everyone will agree that it is true somehow, since then all of these problems can be blamed on women. But maybe it is true, after all I see so many men today refusing to embrace multiculturalism, and other "neat-o things"(where did they get that expression from, their 5 year old child) lol.[/QUOTE]Proof? Most interracial couples that I've seen are White woman/Black man or even the latest one I'm frequently observing is White woman/Asian man. I know that the common myth is that White women don't date Asian men but the exception to that rule is the Asian men with dark brown skin who are more dark than the stereotyped Yellow.
Also, in college it is only White men who oppose multiculturalism. Several times there have been uncomfortable moments for a Liberal teacher where a White male student is challenging the unlimited Mexican immigration, the idea of "Mexicans taking over" is apparently never an important issue for White females because I've never seen them speak up. The problem with women and politics is that they don't normally perceive collective interests because to them it is merely an abstract theory which they don't "feel".
Homosexuality? Have you ever actually met a suburban White female who had a problem with gay men? How could they? Liberal Hollywood usually inserts a gay male friend for the lead White female in most of the "chic flicks" so the general idea is that "it is good to have a gay friend"
2005-07-22 10:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Franco]Nonetheless, today's Western male is usually a wimp who makes his decisions based upon his desire to please his girl. Is that a good thing?
[edited]
-----------[/QUOTE] I know wimpy men who are currently dating women who have Anti-Male bumper stickers on their cars. Men will tolerate virtually any form of abuse from females just as long as they can "keep getting some".
2005-07-22 11:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=robinder]This really doesnt really deserve to be read past the first few sentences, much less some commentary. But whatever.
I could not suppress a guffaw here, dare women disturb that hallowed Western tradition of bas'etball? Nothing says Western like a gaggle of uncouth negroes tossing around a ball into a circle. Nevermind that the basketball leagues are segregated by sex and women have been playing at the amateur level for years.
Godlike? Ok, from this we know that mere mortals exist in contradistinction to the gods, simple process of elimination rules that the regular humans must be women. But, we soon learn that our author has not been quite forthright, because women are:
So not only are women just plain human, they are not even that much. This is a "different type" of human, one with (horrors!) TITS! That is right, mammary glands. Some people just cannot be pleased; if the paps which gave our author suck aren't blessed, I'm not sticking around to hear about the womb that bore him.
Sounds kinda homo, his fear of breasts and wanting to be around men so much. but that is beside the point. Which is, I think, the mortal, lilliputian women, with their breasts and lipstick, ruining the West with their elbowing men out of the office and basketball court. [/QUOTE]Such typical pseudo-jock rhetoric that always empowers women and weakens men. Anytime men oppose female power "they must be gay". Funny but I don't see females calling each other lesbians when they speak out in favor of each other.
2005-07-22 15:23 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Yggdrasil]What the movement needs so much more than anything else. People who can subsume their own ego needs; can build concensus around specific action plans rather than divisive abstractions and ultimate dreams; can cobble together local congregations which confer tangible advantages and benefits on their members; those who can become by example the kind of people that the rest of our race will want to join.[/QUOTE]
There are far too many would-be Generals in the Movementâ⢠and not enough Grunts. Being a Grunt involves much more work than glory, donchaknow?
2005-07-22 15:50 | User Profile
Not only do a majority of White women befriend homos, are sympathetic to negroids, and hold a visceral hatred for White men, they are also the leaders of the Cult of Materialism/Keeping Up With The Jones's which means YOU go broke accomodating their fantasies. (which I don't do btw with my wife, but it was NOT easy at first!!)
Our women are lost, fellas. Your choices in dealing with the modern career woman, or even non-career woman for that matter, are: You can either be right, or you can be happy, but you can't be both.
2005-07-23 00:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=MadScienceType]There are far too many would-be Generals in the Movementâ⢠and not enough Grunts. Being a Grunt involves much more work than glory, donchaknow?[/QUOTE] True. :cowboy:
2005-07-23 03:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=starr]the sickening thing is 90% of the guys over there will see in this entire article some type of "holy" unquestionable truths.
I am so tired of seeing this:
Why do people always throw up this line with absolutely no proof, statistics,etc that shows it to be anything more then the opinion of the writer, but of course everyone will agree that it is true somehow, since then all of these problems can be blamed on women. But maybe it is true, after all I see so many men today refusing to embrace multiculturalism, and other "neat-o things"(where did they get that expression from, their 5 year old child) lol.[/QUOTE] I think actually MacDonald does talk about this in Chapter 8 of [I]Culture of Critique[/I], under the theme of the particular vulnerability of western woman toward pathologization and pathologic (in an evolutionary biology sense) behavior.
Sort of like the tendencies of western people's in general, but which are particular pronounced with them.
2005-07-23 03:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]I think actually MacDonald does talk about this in Chapter 8 of Culture of Critique, under the theme of the particular vulnerability of western woman toward pathologization and pathologic (in an evolutionary biology sense) behavior.
Sort of like the tendencies of western people's in general, but which are particular pronounced with them.[/QUOTE] There is no doubt that western women have serious psychological issues. The biggest trend today is this bizarre power game of White women surrounding themselves with attractive male "friends" even when they already have a husband or boyfriend. The only motive for it seems to be the need to put pressure on the spouse or partner as a hostile message of "look how many men want me, see?" and this pressure forces the partner to act more submissive to her demands. This is behavior that only White western men would tolerate. If a woman in South America tried something like that her husband would probably hit her in the face with a pan.
2005-07-23 04:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=OttoR]There is no doubt that western women have serious psychological issues. The biggest trend today is this bizarre power game of White women surrounding themselves with attractive male "friends" even when they already have a husband or boyfriend. The only motive for it seems to be the need to put pressure on the spouse or partner as a hostile message of "look how many men want me, see?" and this pressure forces the partner to act more submissive to her demands. This is behavior that only White western men would tolerate. If a woman in South America tried something like that her husband would probably hit her in the face with a pan.[/QUOTE]Yes, that sounds like women adopting extreme individualistic/hedonistic behavior. Of course it also says something about the men today, not only her principle but all her "friends" that they are willing to be used in such a really sadomasochistical way. Must be something about Fromm's prediction for a "matriarchial society" bearing full fruit.
Here's what MacDonald said about women BTW
[QUOTE]Another critical component of the evolutionary basis of individualism is the elaboration of the human affectional system as an individualistic pair-bonding system, the system that seemed so strange that it was theorized to be a thin veneer overlaying a deep psychopathology to a generation of Jewish intellectuals emerging from the ghetto (Cuddihy 1974, 71). This system is individualistic in the sense that it is based not on external, group-based social controls or familial dictate but, rather, on the intrinsically motivated role of romantic love in cementing reproductive relationships (see pp. 136--139). The issue is important because Western cultures are typically characterized as relatively individualistic compared to other societies (Triandis 1995), and there is reason to suppose that the affectional system is conceptually linked to individualism; that is, it is a system that tends toward nuclear rather than extended family organization. Triandis (1990) finds that individualistic societies emphasize romantic love to a greater extent than do collectivist societies, and Western cultures have indeed emphasized romantic love more than other cultures (see PTSDA, 236-245; MacDonald 1995b,c; Money 1980). This system is highly elaborated in Western cultures in both men and women, and it is psychometrically linked with empathy, altruism, and nurturance. Individuals who are very high on this system--predominantly females--are pathologically prone to altruistic, nurturant and dependent behavior (see MacDonald 1995a). On an evolutionary account, the relatively greater elaboration of this system in females is to be expected, given the greater female role in nurturance and as a discriminating mechanism in relationships of pair bonding. Such a perspective also accounts for the much-commented-on gender gap in political behavior in which females are more prone to voting for political candidates favoring liberal positions on social issues. Women more than men also endorse political stances that equalize rather than accentuate differences between individuals and groups (Pratto, Stallworth & Sidanius 1997).
In ancestral environments this system was highly adaptive, resulting in a tendency toward pair bonding and high- investment parenting, as well as intrinsically motivated relationships of close friendship and trust. This system continues to be adaptive in the modern world in its role in underlying high-investment parenting, but it is easy to see that the relative hypertrophy of this system may result in maladaptive behavior if a system designed for empathy, altruism, and nurturance of family members and others in a closely related group becomes directed to the world outside the family.
The implication is that Western societies are subject to invasion by non-Western cultures able to manipulate Western tendencies toward reciprocity, egalitarianism, and close affectional relationships in a manner that results in maladaptive behavior for the European-derived peoples who remain at the core of all Western societies
-Chapter 8, Culture of Critique[/QUOTE]
2005-07-23 06:10 | User Profile
[QUOTE][QUOTE=OttoR]Proof? Most interracial couples that I've seen are White woman/Black man or even the latest one I'm frequently observing is White woman/Asian man. I know that the common myth is that White women don't date Asian men but the exception to that rule is the Asian men with dark brown skin who are more dark than the stereotyped Yellow.[/QUOTE]And what about the white male/asian woman phenomenon? [QUOTE] Also, in college it is only White men who oppose multiculturalism. Several times there have been uncomfortable moments for a Liberal teacher where a White male student is challenging the unlimited Mexican immigration, the idea of "Mexicans taking over" is apparently never an important issue for White females because I've never seen them speak up. The problem with women and politics is that they don't normally perceive collective interests because to them it is merely an abstract theory which they don't "feel". [/QUOTE]All I see all around me is white men and women totally immersed in the shit culture. I don't see a whole lot of either men or woman even in private conversations saying much to indicate they oppose multiculturalism. Most of them seem, for lack of a better term, fat, happy, and completely clueless.lol. When I was in college I don't remember barely anyone saying anything about mexican immigration, or expressing any opinions that were not perfectly PC. I did a few times and got bitched at by my extremely liberal white male instructor.
[QUOTE] Homosexuality? Have you ever actually met a suburban White female who had a problem with gay men? How could they? Liberal Hollywood usually inserts a gay male friend for the lead White female in most of the "chic flicks" so the general idea is that "it is good to have a gay friend [/QUOTE]I can somewhat agree with this just in that it seems white women do have less of a problem, and are more accepting of homosexuality. but while it does seem men are much more "intolerant" of male homosexuality, they take a different opinion when it comes to lesbians. They seem to have some twisted little fascination with them.
[QUOTE] If a woman in South America tried something like that her husband would probably hit her in the face with a pan. [/QUOTE] And is that how proper white men should act to get their women in line?
2005-07-23 06:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr]Hopeless nihilism and sullen misanthropy are indeed common traits of pagan Nazi writings, from Alex Linder to Revilo P. Oliver.
Petr[/QUOTE]Neither Linder nor Oliver are/were either pagans or Nazis. Nihilism and misanthropy are in the eye of the beholder; Oliver spent his adult life happily married but childless; Linder has a child now but I am unfamiliar with his marital status.
Far too many people here project their own reactions to the writings of others and assume certain things about the personal life or inner life of the writer in question which often have little or no basis in reality. Of course the objects of their criticism often return the favor.
2005-07-23 08:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=grep14w]Neither Linder nor Oliver are/were either pagans or Nazis. Nihilism and misanthropy are in the eye of the beholder; Oliver spent his adult life happily married but childless; Linder has a child now but I am unfamiliar with his marital status.
Far too many people here project their own reactions to the writings of others and assume certain things about the personal life or inner life of the writer in question which often have little or no basis in reality. Of course the objects of their criticism often return the favor.[/QUOTE]Well I'll return the favor, because at least in the case of Linder, I don't see how your denial of his paganess or Naziism has any basis from what he's wrote.
2005-07-23 10:05 | User Profile
[QUOTE=starr][QUOTE]And what about the white male/asian woman phenomenon? All I see all around me is white men and women totally immersed in the shit culture. I don't see a whole lot of either men or woman even in private conversations saying much to indicate they oppose multiculturalism. Most of them seem, for lack of a better term, fat, happy, and completely clueless.lol. When I was in college I don't remember barely anyone saying anything about mexican immigration, or expressing any opinions that were not perfectly PC. I did a few times and got bitched at by my extremely liberal white male instructor.
I can somewhat agree with this just in that it seems white women do have less of a problem, and are more accepting of homosexuality. but while it does seem men are much more "intolerant" of male homosexuality, they take a different opinion when it comes to lesbians. They seem to have some twisted little fascination with them.
And is that how proper white men should act to get their women in line?[/QUOTE]My post may have seemed harsh against White females but I was only bringing it up because it was on topic. However, I also have negative feelings about a lot of today's White males. There is a type of male who is essentially just as useless in the field of ideas and that is the stoner or pothead guy, he is the one who says "whatever man" when any serious topic comes up as he's already shut out the world beyond his sensory bliss.
I was not recommending that White men begin hitting women but I was merely using an example of how far it has gone in the opposite direction in which White men are now expected to tolerate every kind of psychological game-playing that their wives engage in.
We are not stupid, mass media has pushed this men and women being "friends" stuff because they know that it is an illusion and that people naturally only select attractive members of the opposite sex to be around. The "friends" junk is a way of eliminating boundaries and blurring what is really occurring. It is only another step in the Marxist "without barriers" attitude. The same people who have sex with so-called "friends" are also the ones who will buy into the Pro-Gay nonsense that "Love doesn't know a gender so I'm entering into a gay relationship because of their personality!" Maybe this is a first in the history of the Right Wing movement but I'm calling this junk MARXISM..any false rhetoric which seeks to tear down clearly defined distinctions is more Far Left Wing rubbish.
A friend of mine from High School became a victim of this nonsense. He foolishly bought into the media garbage of "men and women being friends" and later discovered that his wife was having sex with 3 out of the 5 male "friends" that she was associating with. In the 1950's a man would have caught on immediately that his wife was hanging out with other men and he would have scared those guys away with his fists or a shotgun, **but today thanks to the Oprah mentality of "YOU GO GIRL!" women are told to hide behind lies and to use the defensive strategy of accusing the husband of 'trying to control her' if he tries to prevent her from seeing other men. "HE DON'T OWN YOU GIRL!" :furious: **
2005-07-23 10:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=grep14w]Neither Linder nor Oliver are/were either pagans or Nazis. Nihilism and misanthropy are in the eye of the beholder; Oliver spent his adult life happily married but childless; Linder has a child now but I am unfamiliar with his marital status.
Far too many people here project their own reactions to the writings of others and assume certain things about the personal life or inner life of the writer in question which often have little or no basis in reality. Of course the objects of their criticism often return the favor.[/QUOTE] As a former member of VNN I can say that Alex Linder is most definitely an Atheist. "Nazi" is a vague term, what does it actually mean by today's standards? Alex Linder wants "living space" in Eastern Europe? An end to the Versailles Treaty restrictions on Germany? Alex considers Nordics superior to Slavs? Really? I've never seen him focus on any of those topics.
Anti-Semitism? Is that really Nazism? There sure was a lot of Anti-Semitism before the Nazi party was even created, about 2,000 years of it to be exact.
2005-07-23 10:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE=OttoR] "Nazi" is a vague term, what does it actually mean by today's standards? Alex Linder wants "living space" in Eastern Europe? An end to the Versailles Treaty restrictions on Germany? Alex considers Nordics superior to Slavs? Really? I've never seen him focus on any of those topics. [/QUOTE]Generally I think unqualified hero-worship of Hitler qualifies one as a Nazi today, even if one doesn't repeat every one of the 25 points or their successors every day.
2005-07-23 11:01 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Generally I think unqualified hero-worship of Hitler qualifies one as a Nazi today, even if one doesn't repeat every one of the 25 points or their successors every day.[/QUOTE] I always got the feeling that Linder was rather new to the White Nationalist ideology and he openly admits to being a former Libertarian.
There is no doubt that the hero worship of Hitler goes too far. However, the other side of that is when people talk bad about Hitler merely to impress the mainstream with the image of "Look how normal we are!"
2005-07-23 21:59 | User Profile
I understand that Hitler has a nice writing in Mein Kampf and that he opposed Jewry, but he's no model citizen, and he certainly wasn't a conservative. He was pro-abortion and believe me he didn't think too positively of the right to bear arms. When he ran out of adults he sent children, CHILDREN, to protect from on-coming Russians. Also his last order (which his generals never carried out) was to have Germany destroyed. Why anybody would want to idolozie him or be like him must be solely on the Jewish issue, but aside from the Jewish issue, he wasn't a good guy. Of all the anti-semites which you could idolize, why the h*ll would you choose a guy like Hitler?
I understand idolizing his writings but why would you idoloize him as a person?
2005-07-23 22:37 | User Profile
[QUOTE=kane123123]I understand that Hitler has a nice writing in Mein Kampf and that he opposed Jewry, but he's no model citizen, and he certainly wasn't a conservative. He was pro-abortion and believe me he didn't think too positively of the right to bear arms. When he ran out of adults he sent children, CHILDREN, to protect from on-coming Russians. Also his last order (which his generals never carried out) was to have Germany destroyed. Why anybody would want to idolozie him or be like him must be solely on the Jewish issue, but aside from the Jewish issue, he wasn't a good guy. Of all the anti-semites which you could idolize, why the h*ll would you choose a guy like Hitler?
I understand idolizing his writings but why would you idoloize him as a person?[/QUOTE]Where is your evidence that Hitler was pro-abortion? I only know of abortions being done on Jews and the retarded/mentally ill. On the Hitler Youth (children) issue, the Soviets were raping hundreds of thousands of German women, why not defend them with every possible male soldier available? If Alex Linder wants to idolize Hitler that is his business, I don't consider it my job to stamp out other people's heroes. This totalitarian dogma which states that everyone has to fall in line and condemn the same historical/political figures is an act of hysteria and conformity.
2005-07-23 22:54 | User Profile
[COLOR=Purple][FONT=Arial][B][I] - "I only know of abortions being done on Jews and the retarded/mentally ill. "[/I][/B][/FONT][/COLOR]
You may want to take a look at this essay:
[url]http://sex-theory.narod.ru/materials/love-3-eng.html[/url]
[COLOR=Blue] [FONT=Georgia]"As Bormann hoped, that evening Hitler chose the second policy and the next day he told Bormann to issue population control measures for the occupied territories. Bormann developed an eight-paragraph secret order that one historian termed [B]"[I]perhaps the most extreme policy statement ever issued from the Fuhrerhauptquartier[/I]."[[/B]4] It included the following:
[I] [B]When girls and women in the Occupied Territories of the East have abortions, we can only be in favor of it; in any case we should not oppose it. The Fuhrer believes that we should authorize the development of a thriving trade in contraceptives. We are not interested in seeing the non-German population multiply[/B].[5][/I]
This was not the first such statement. On 25 November 1939, shortly after the occupation of Poland, a Nazi SS organization called the Reich Commission for Strengthening of Germandom (RKFDV)[6] issued this decree:
[I] All measures which have the tendency to limit the births
are to be tolerated or to be supported. Abortion in the
remaining area [of Poland] must be declared free from
punishment. The means for abortion and contraceptive
means may be offered publicly without police restriction.
Homosexuality is always to be declared legal. The
institutions and persons involved professionally in
abortion practices are not to be interfered with by
police.[[/I]7]
This policy was confirmed on 27 May 1941 at a Ministry of the Interior conference in Berlin. [B]There a group of experts recommended population control measures for Poland that included authorization of abortion whenever the mother requested it.[[/B]8] On 19 October 1941, a decree applied the measures to the Polish population. [B]Hitler's 23 July 1942 decree extended it to other parts of Eastern Europe. [/B] Hitler confirmed his order on August 5.[9][/FONT][/COLOR]
Petr
2005-07-23 22:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][color=purple][font=Arial] - "I only know of abortions being done on Jews and the retarded/mentally ill. "[/font][/color]
You may want to take a look at this essay:
[url="http://sex-theory.narod.ru/materials/love-3-eng.html"]http://sex-theory.narod.ru/materials/love-3-eng.html[/url]
[color=blue] [font=Georgia]"As Bormann hoped, that evening Hitler chose the second policy and the next day he told Bormann to issue population control measures for the occupied territories. Bormann developed an eight-paragraph secret order that one historian termed "perhaps the most extreme policy statement ever issued from the Fuhrerhauptquartier."[4] It included the following:
When girls and women in the Occupied Territories of the East have abortions, we can only be in favor of it; in any case we should not oppose it. The Fuhrer believes that we should authorize the development of a thriving trade in contraceptives. We are not interested in seeing the non-German population multiply.[5]
This was not the first such statement. On 25 November 1939, shortly after the occupation of Poland, a Nazi SS organization called the Reich Commission for Strengthening of Germandom (RKFDV)[6] issued this decree:
All measures which have the tendency to limit the births are to be tolerated or to be supported. Abortion in the remaining area [of Poland] must be declared free from punishment. The means for abortion and contraceptive means may be offered publicly without police restriction. Homosexuality is always to be declared legal. The institutions and persons involved professionally in abortion practices are not to be interfered with by police.[7]
This policy was confirmed on 27 May 1941 at a Ministry of the Interior conference in Berlin. There a group of experts recommended population control measures for Poland that included authorization of abortion whenever the mother requested it.[8] On 19 October 1941, a decree applied the measures to the Polish population. Hitler's 23 July 1942 decree extended it to other parts of Eastern Europe. Hitler confirmed his order on August 5.[9][/font][/color]
Petr[/QUOTE] That is in the Occupied territories. I'm talking about on Germans, we all know that Nazis hated Slavs.
2005-07-24 00:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I understand that Hitler has a nice writing in Mein Kampf and that he opposed Jewry, but he's no model citizen, and he certainly wasn't a conservative. He was pro-abortion and believe me he didn't think too positively of the right to bear arms.[/QUOTE] German citizens [i.e. non-Jews] could own a gun with a permit in Nazi Germany. In fact, the Nazi gun law weakened the prior gun-control law in Germany.
2005-07-24 00:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I understand that Hitler has a nice writing in Mein Kampf and that he opposed Jewry, but he's no model citizen, and he certainly wasn't a conservative.[/QUOTE] It depends on what your definition of "conservative" is.
If your definition of "conservative" means "preserving your culture," then yes, Hitler was a conservative.
2005-07-24 01:08 | User Profile
Strange is it not, that many American white women willingly copulate with blacks and produce the unacceptable?
Strange is it not, that many consider the German patriot and fighter as Nazi - in terms of insult?
It is no insult.
It is no longer regarded as such. The German man understands his history and accepts it with pride and consideration. For their Grandfathers died for Germany.
We care little what others, our enemies, may think or pronounce. We crawl to no one.
For we have a certain belief and outlook that is unmatched.
And words mean nothing.
Mentzer
2005-07-24 01:19 | User Profile
Conservative means limited Government, like Ronald Reagan. Hitler need not apply. If you are Communist and preserve that, it wouldn't be conservative.
So being conservative has nothing to do with preserving things, it has to do with standing on certain platforms and ideologies.
Of course in terms of the economy Hitler was a little more conservative, but not on social issues. Suprisingly, Stalin actually outlawed abortion so politics is not one-dimensional, as Stalin was extremely liberal on economic issues being a Communist.
2005-07-24 01:28 | User Profile
[QUOTE]If you are Communist and preserve that, it wouldn't be conservative.[/QUOTE] True, because the prior order in any country, after a communist coup, was not created by the communists who overthrew the government and created a communist regime [e.g. Cuba]. In other words, the stable country that existed before a communist coup was not created by communists.
But "conservative" need not mean simply "limited government." Read about Argentina in the late 1970s.
[edited]
2005-07-24 01:31 | User Profile
Who else is excluded from the Club of Conservative thought?
Or perhaps, the inclusion: the homosexuals, the lesbians, the Muslims, the Jews, the Blacks, the half-black-white, and so on, and so on.
What is a Conservative but a wealthy coward.
Mentzer
2005-07-24 01:41 | User Profile
Or perhaps, the inclusion: the homosexuals, the lesbians, the Muslims, the Jews, the Blacks, the half-black-white, and so on, and so on. Most homosexuals (including lesbians) are not conservive. Actually many Muslims are conservative, in fact some are even more conservative as they want theocracy, which is having religion linked right into Government. Jews are divided into three groups, orthodox (conservative), conservative (conservative), and liberal (liberal, bigger than the other two combined). Most Jews are liberal outside of Israel but most Israeli Jews are more conservative. I'd say only about 20-30% of blacks are conservative, and about the same for half black half white.
I'd say the conservative agenda is to cut spending, cut taxes, balance the defecit, stop crime, allow freedom of religion from the Government stopping it, and to be isolationist (in other words, try to avoid war), and to be pro-life/pro-guns/anti-gay.
2005-07-24 02:20 | User Profile
Oh and by the way the Republicans are not conservative on every issues such as, border control, immigration, segregation, and war. They are neo-cons, not conservaties.
The only thing that the Democrats have that are conservative is that they aren't pro-war and that they are for economic protectionism. On almost every other issue they are not. They used to be pro-segregation but of course that changed.
2005-07-24 02:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Mentzer]Who else is excluded from the Club of Conservative thought?
Or perhaps, the inclusion: the homosexuals, the lesbians, the Muslims, the Jews, the Blacks, the half-black-white, and so on, and so on.
What is a Conservative but a wealthy coward.
Mentzer[/QUOTE]The ideology of Individualism within a nation only works if every other race is no longer a collective. Unfortunately this is not the case, the Hispanics all over the southwest want to take back their "ancestral lands" whether the Whites living there want low taxes and individualism or not. I would say that most Whites are too focused on smaller issues and never look ahead to what society is becoming. When they finally wake up it is usually too late.
The Conservative movement also has other basic ideological errors which don't adjust to today's reality. When I visit the state of Georgia I see White teenagers bouncing around in their cars listening to rap music. When I visit the state of Ohio I see White teenagers doing the exact same thing. In other words, the whole outdated notion of "State's Rights" can't apply anymore because with a mind control mass media brainwashing each successive generation, every state is producing the same carbon-copy type of person! In a survey of High School Seniors in Cobb County Georgia in 1998 65% of them stated that they had no problem with homosexuality. It will only take a few more decades of the media brainwashing before gay marriage does become approved in most states across the country, all it takes is for the older generation to die off and be replaced by people who have spent their entire lives watching Pro-Gay themed shows like "Dawson's Creek" and "Will and Grace"
As much as I like Pat Buchanan, even he can't offer a solution because most so called Republicans are hopelessly addicted to TV and Hollywood movies. It is simply not possible to boycott only the "Liberal" shows or movies, Liberal themes are inserted into about 65%-70% of the total mass media output. The Marxist propaganda of "cool" Black male and idiotic White male continues to grow year after year.
2005-07-24 02:56 | User Profile
You'll be happy to know that Pat Buchanan has quit the Republicans, I think he did around 2000. He switched to the Reform Party.
2005-07-24 02:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=OttoR]I always got the feeling that Linder was rather new to the White Nationalist er, Nazi> ideology and he openly admits to being a former Libertarian.
There is no doubt that the hero worship of Hitler goes too far. However, the other side of that is when people talk bad about Hitler merely to impress the mainstream with the image of "Look how normal we are!"[/QUOTE]Whatever. I find it interesting though that the refrain about VNN and Linder, "prove they're Nazi's" usually seems to morph immediately to "he's not all Nazi, and even if he is a Nazi, so what".
2005-07-24 03:11 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]er, NaziWhatever. I find it interesting though that the refrain about VNN and Linder, "prove they're Nazi's" usually seems to morph immediately to "he's not all Nazi, and even if he is a Nazi, so what".[/QUOTE] Linder isn't going to rise up and become the next president so I'm not sure why we focus so excessively on shouting all of these labels at people who clearly aren't harming anyone. For all we know, Linder might be currently working for the Southern Poverty Law Center and Morris Dees so his apparent "Nazi" beliefs could all be a massive smokescreen.
According to the media, anyone who has racial opinions is a Nazi so why should share their paranoid obsession of looking for Nazis and stamping them out? Whether someone admires Hitler or not, what difference does it makes in 2005? Why is how someone feels about Hitler used as some kind of litmus test which proves their validity?