|Introduction||1. Physical Strength|
|2. Mentality||3. Personality|
|4. Creativity||5. Personal Morality|
|6. Welfare State||7. Childbearing|
|8. "Strong" Women||9. Feminist Movement|
|10. The Family||11. Number of Births|
|12. Intelligence Level||13. White Men|
|14. Young Women||15. Light psychopathy|
Feminism's main message is that women and men are in fact completely alike, apart from their physical appearance. Women are a kind of men, the feminists feel, who, by the will of destiny, have developed some insignificant fat deposits at chest level, but are fully capable of fulfilling men's functions as managers, commandos or fighter pilots - but, however, not as sewer workers.
The feminist triumph, combined with women's emancipation, is the basic cause of the cloud of political correctness that rests heavily over Denmark and the entire Western World.
There are many brilliant exceptions, as we all know, but in broad generality, women are not particularly interested in the future of their country and their people or the nation's economy.
Tyra Banks' bra burning in her TV talk show in the US.
Women are just as intelligent as men. They have always been good at
listening to what the teacher and other authorities say, and learn these attitudes by heart. But they do not think a lot about them, they are concerned about other more personal things.
Thus, they have also learned all the modern ideas of democracy, tolerance and human rights, without considering what they will entail. In everyday life, their thoughts are in many other places, and they only pull up the great ideas at special occasions as self-evident truths, such as the Election Day.
Women are the politicians' preferred voting cattle. In 2009, the leading Danish politicians feared that there would be too small turn out for the EU parliamentary elections. Therefore they decided to put a constitutional amendment on female royal succession to vote simultaneously, although there was no shortage of princes, and there was nothing in the present situation that called for such action. The effect did materialize, the feminists turned out in large numbers to help Queen Margrete to introduce equal gender rights in the Royal Family, and the turnout was 59%.
We all recognize the situation. Maybe three or four couples are gathered around a dinner table and chatting cozily about this and that. One of the men introduces a conversation subject on history, economics or similar political issue. So, the women punctual like following a command turn to each other and begin to chat about what is of interest to them, for now, the men will cultivate their special interests, they seem to think.
Demonstration for women's rights.
When an election is approaching, the women will declare that one thing is certain, they will vote for a woman. And not only this, the selected political woman must represent the real female values such as more women in senior positions, support to the poor and marginalized in society and openness and tolerance towards other races and religions.
They typically perceive themselves as more good, open and tolerant than men. That their country one day may be taken over by Muslims is in their views some overwrought nonsense, "they are really SO nice and polite," they will say, They simply cannot see so far ahead and they probably do not care. For them, progress in women's rights is much more important.
This circumstance is the reason why many political parties nowadays have women as presidents. The vast majority of female voters are not interested in political details or intricate political theories, they just want to vote for a woman, who represents the soft female values and decent feminist attitudes. Since women constitute more than half of the voters, the political parties feel that they must pick up those votes by having women as foreground figures.
Muslims in Friday prayers at a Paris street.
This combination of feminism, women's suffrage and political opportunism may ultimately cost the Danes our country. Until now the politicians have invited nearly half a million Muslims to live in the country because they felt so sorry for them. And since the same Danish women, who support this immigration, find it inconvenient themselves to have children, the Danes can in a foreseeable future come in the minority in their own country.
I believe that the vast majority of men deep in their hearts know that the feminist victory is complete. Women have the entire group of judges of the courts, the social workers and the politicians behind them. They have the power. Men know that by even the slightest mistake the woman can take the lone child by the hand and march out the door, she will then be granted parental rights, she will get housing and all forms of financial support, paid by taxpayers.
Modern men are fully aware of the distribution of power, often they dare not even think an oppositional thought. In the break between the dishes and the laundry, they virtuously sit reading Swedish crime novels to confirm woman's moral superiority.
Afa Powel leading Olympic stafet.
George Orwell called political correctness for double thinking, which describes the ability to have two opposing views simultaneously.
We sit at the coffee table watching the Olympic final in a sprinter distance. All finalists are muscular American Negroes. There is perhaps one white male in the final group, and he will invariably pass the finish line as the last one. Those negroes are just so impressive, we say. After the final we will again turn against each other and confirm that racism is a disgusting theory, everybody are equal and there is really no difference, and there is no such thing as race.
Similarly, we know from daily experience that women and men in countless ways are two different kinds of beings, but it does not prevent us to recite the feminist gospel, that women and men are completely equal and identical.
Let us imagine that three men meet. They open a few beers and have a chat about this and that. They will also feel it quite natural to comment on recent political events and listen to each others' views.
Following the nature of the case, I have never been present, when for example, three girlfriends meet in a cafe. But I'm completely sure that they will not talk about politics. We could get the idea to ask our wife or girlfriend when she returns home: "Did you speak about politics?" Then she would reply something like, "No honey! It's not what we have together," a little condescending, with an indulgent smile.
Demonstration for womens' rights around 1970.
Most modern Western women often have an ironic distance to political discussions. They just now and then present their noble female values of tolerance, kindness and openness, not because they have thought deeply about it, it's just a way to orchestrate themselves or a habitual feminist tradition of being in contradiction of the patriarchal rulers. They go to the ballot box firmly decided to show them that they are not in charge of everything!
There are many brilliant exceptions that would be too extensive to list. But the vast majority of modern women has no natural interest in the country's economy or our motherland's future existence. It's not something they give many thoughts.
The Muslims are like a young cuckoo chick, it grows bigger and bigger, and one day it will push the other chicks out over the edge of the nest.
Now the immigrant debate has raged for decades, and it has developed into a wearing trench warfare, where all arguments have been used again and again without coming to a breakthrough.
Now, it is such that slightly more than half of the voters are women. They make up a compact and conservative segment in the democratic debate. All arguments bounce off on them because they have already profiled themselves as representatives of special female values.
Very young people have the politically correct attitudes that they learned from their school-mistress. Only when they get setbacks in life and get experiences, they may begin to think more deeply about things and thus become open to arguments.
The true Muslim immigrants and their supporters and followers are also a very large and growing segment of voters, which in no way can be affected.
So, all in all, there are maybe 60 to 70 percent of voters, who may not readily be influenced by logic and arguments.
"Never argue with a lady", said James Bond. Thus many men probably have viewed things for many years and let women have their feminist attitudes in peace because they liked them so much. But now we have to do something about it, otherwise, it may cost our descendants their country, our fatherland.
It is necessary to bring feminism to fall and eliminate the moral halo from women's heads. It is the only chance, we have to save our people in a democratic way.
Women and men are born equal, the feminists claim.
Feminists burn their Bra in Atlantic City 1968.
Only because of the unjust socialization during upbringing men have come to power in society. Just as blacks are discriminated against because of their color, thus the patriarchal rulers discriminate against the women because of physical differences, namely some very insignificant deposits of fat on the breast and a similar negligible difference further down on the body.
Feminists believe that this discrimination against women because of an insignificant difference in physical appearance is discrimination comparable with racial discrimination and persecution of religious minorities.
Their political goal is that men and women must be treated fully equal and uniform throughout the community because they believe that the sexes are precisely equally strong and equally intelligent.
But as we all know, the International Olympic Committee has another opinion. In all sports will be held separate competitions for men and women, because men are significantly physically stronger and more enduring than women. There are significant differences in male and female sports performance. Men run faster, jump longer, throw farther and beats harder.
It is routine for talented young male athletes to challenge women's world record in their sport.
An even very talented female footballer would be a hopeless Humpty Dumpty on an international male soccer team.
It is precisely in order not to expose women to such humiliations that in all sports separate competitions are arranged for women and men.
However, feminists argue that sport is only a kind of entertainment.
Serious and industrious girls in the classroom.
In our modern high tech society physical strength means really nothing, they say; we have machines and computers for all the rough work. It is only about being smart and intelligent, press the right buttons, analyze, hold meetings and talking on the phone. And therefore, they argue, women and men are equal and identical in all areas that are important.
Yes, feminists will very often say that women are better qualified than men, because they are smarter than men they say; because girls often get good grades in school and at the university.
To this, we must say that it is probably true that girls generally are good in listening to what the teacher says and remember, however, without thinking too deeply about it.
If the subject does not concern some of feminists' key issues, female students will usually not dig very deep, they will not question a theory's assumptions, they will not speculate on whether it is indeed logically consistent or whether the theory, in general, can be useful in practice. They will simply memorize it, go for the exam and get a good grade.
From left to right: Husserl, Kirkegaard, Wittgenstein og Platon.
Throughout the long history of philosophy from Plato and Socrates to Wittgenstein, Kirkegaard and Husserl not even a single woman appears.
Out of 39 world champions in chess not a single woman appears, although the tournament is open also to women. Yes, there is actually a chess tournament for women only so that they can compete with each other on more equal terms.
In the subjects of economics, physics, chemistry and medicine only about 4% of Nobel Prize winners are women. Within the group of Nobel Prize winners in the areas of peace and literature, only about 12% are women.
The famous Russian mathematician Gregori Perelman solved in 2002 a difficult mathematical problem, which for a hundred years had been considered insoluble, only simply because he found it interesting.
The Russian mathematician Gregori Perelman.
The problem was called "the Poincare conjectures" and focused whether a simply connected compact three-dimensional volume (without borders) necessarily is homeomorphic with a three-dimensional ball. He earned no money by his achievement, and he refrained from receiving the American Fields medal.
Only a man can immerse himself so intensively on a narrow topic only because he thinks it's interesting.
Women are undoubtedly just as intelligent as men, but in general, they lack the ability or motivation to think more deeply about topics that are not connected with their personal life. Instead, they often have a reliable assessment in all social topics.
Women and men are genetically different, not only in terms of physical strength and how they use their intelligence but also in terms of personality.
The German filmmaker Monika Treut has made a documentary, "Female Misbehaving", about women, who not only are excluded from society but also from the respected feminist circles.
The film consists of four parts, the last one, "Max", is a portrait of Max Valerio, who formerly used to be Anita Valerio, a lesbian woman from San Francisco.
The woman Anita Valerio became to the man Max Valerio.
Anita felt no longer comfortable in her female body. She decided to identify herself as the heterosexual man, Max Valerio, and started her struggle to become a man.
In the film, the former Anita tells about the effectiveness of the treatment with male hormones, which she received in connection with the gender-change surgery. She reported that her energy level suddenly increased dramatically, sex drive as well. Her mood was enormously affected, and she saw herself unable to cry so much and as often as before.
It proves that in order to create a true male behavior, one must have the right balance of male hormones in the body. And of course, conversely, to create a convincing female behavior, one must have the right mix of female hormones in the body.
Drag Show - It's easy to see that it is her in the blue blouse, who
is a real woman.
Some rumors say that male "women" can be so good that they can cheat a real man right up until the moment of truth late in the night when the last veil falls. But maybe the unfortunate man was severely affected by alcohol.
Now, hormones are normally something you have in your body as an inborn attribute. Men are born with a disposition to male hormones, and women are born with female hormones.
But if the feminist claim, that the respective male and female behavior is purely a result of upbringing and socialization, is true, then it would not be necessary to provide hormones in connection with a sex change operation. It would be enough to give the new "man" a book that describes the male behavior; possibly enroll "him" to a course in masculine behavior.
It proves, what most of us have known all along, that there is a genetic dependent female personality that distinguishes from the typical masculine personality.
The psychologist Hans Eysenck was born in Germany but moved to England at an early age, where he became a famous psychologist. He wrote 75 books until he died in 1997. - Initially, he characterized a personality on two continuous scales. Introverted (withdrawn) versus outgoing (extraverted) and emotionally stable versus unstable (neurotic).
Hans Eysenck 1916-1997.
However, in his later years, Eysenck found a third personality scale, which he called psycotism, also a continuous scale, ranging from a social well-adapted personality at one end to a distinctly psykotistisk personality type in the other end. A person with psykotistic personality type has, according to Eysenck, not necessarily psychotic problems, but is simply more exposed to get such.
A pronounced psychotic personality type involves such things as a certain recklessness and ruthlessness, a down rating of common sense and inappropriate emotional expression. Some have found that people with a very high score on psycotism also often have a hostile attitude to cultural norms and authorities, they may appear immature and somewhat insensitive and they score on other hostility scales as well.
Eysenck used his theory psycotism to explain creativity.
He wrote that creative intelligence essentially can be characterized as a search process in the brain that seeks to find not generic solutions - as different elements from memory are brought together to generate possible solutions to problems.
Eysenck believed that there are strong indications that this quest for new solutions is always driven by conscious or unconscious ideas of relevance. Thereby, he disagrees with other psychologists, who believe that the intellectual quest for alternative solutions is a totally chaotic and random process in the brain.
A socially well-adjusted person will, according to Eysenck, have some pretty narrow notions of relevance; they will instinctively exclude potential solutions, which they do not feel to be socially appropriate, and therefore they instinctively will be more conventional and restrictive in their quest. Because they are more limited in their search for potential solutions to problems, they will be less creative.
Self Portrait by Vincent van Gogh with a bandage on his cut ear.
Artists have always sought to present themselves as eccentric and a little crazy in order to make it probable that they are creative.
On the other hand, less socially adjusted persons, who will score higher on his psycotism scale, will have ideas about relevance, which are wider and more spacious than the better socially adapted person's ideas of relevance. Deep in their minds, they put less emphasis on cultural standards, authorities and other social contexts, and therefore such considerations will not unwittingly restrict their search for alternative solutions.
Now it is such, that women in general really are somewhat more socially well-adjusted than men. As it is said, they talk and talk, and they are always very aware of others' reactions to their words and social initatives.
I would not say that I believe that women are some unoriginal social nodding dolls, and men are ruthless psychopaths. I only think that men on average will score a few percents higher on an Eysenck psycotism scale than women. Therefore, they can be presumed to be more creative on average, but not necessarily more intelligent.
Modern emancipated women lack moral attitudes. Right from childhood, they have been told that female emotions and the female intuition is something true and noble beyond the simple desire, which motivates men. They have no inclination to try to suppress a feeling that rises in their mind.
In the old days, woman would read the romantic womens' magazines, when they began to dream of new men, but present days feminist women want the real thing.
Few feminists say directly that woman is the morally superior sex.
But the claim is nonetheless implicit in all feminist writings, through their ceaseless representation of men as evil and violent, and women as the innocent victims. How can they claim that they believe in the sexes' "moral equality", while they simultaneously and persistently claim that the men should have "exploited" and "oppressed" women in any society, which have ever existed?
The claim about women's moral superiority is a built-in prerequisite in all Swedish crime dramas as well as in many other TV series and Holywood movies. The crimes to be investigated, very often show up to be something about that a white man in his prime has assaulted a woman, likely a minor or of another ethnic origin. When a white man in his prime is introduced during the plot of a movie, and he is not the hero, we know that he will later show to be the bad guy, or at least to fail the good cause in the end.
Women's presumed superior natural goodness is the reason that they almost automatically win all custody cases. The judges assume automaticaly, that mother-love is much stronger than father-love.
A lone mother with her son.
Everyone knows that divorce is not good for children's development. They lose a feeling of security in life, which other children have. Boys, who grow up without a father, will find it hard to fall into a male role. Divorce children are often emotionally spoiled because father and mother compete in proving that they are the best.
But, when modern liberated women begin to dream of new men, they do not let the children's best interests come in the way of their divorce. Women initiate most divorces. Alternatively, they just reject sex through some time, until the man has understood the message. Then comes the usual touching explanation: "We simply developed in opposite directions."
Women's relationships today follow a very predictable pattern, writes Michelle Langley:
- They push men for commitment.
- They get what they want.
- They lose interest in sex.
- They become attracted to someone else.
- They start cheating.
- They become angry and resentful.
- They begin telling their partners that they need time apart.
- They blame their partners for their behavior - and eventually, after making themselves and everyone around them miserable for an indefinite, but usually, long period of time, they end their relationships or marriages.
"If you're a male, like most other males, you would probably never suspect that your partner is cheating, not only because of your wife's or girlfriend's seeming disinterest in sex; but also because you have the belief that your wife or girlfriend is a "good girl" - "Unfortunately, males are frequently left/divorced by their wives and girlfriends without ever knowing about their wives' and girlfriends' infidelities." ("Women's Infidelity" by Michelle Langley - see link below)
Western feminist women have no personal morality, but they perceive themselves as more good, tolerant and understanding than the patriarchal rulers (men). They usually have many moral ideas about, what society and taxpayers should do.
Our feminized culture has so far been the reason, why we without any resistance have submitted part of our motherland to about 400,000 Muslims - because it was so sorry for them!
True feminists believe that women are unduly suppressed because of some minor physical differences from men; many of them believe also that the patriarchal rulers in a similar way suppress people of different ethnic origins and believing alternative religion. Therefore they feel that freedom-loving women must stand in solidarity with other oppressed groups, who also fight against the patriarchal rulers for freedom and equality, such as for example the gays and the unfairly treated poor muslims.
In the safe environment of the welfare society, the feminists realize their hottest dreams. They can really do without men, they say.
In the Danish welfare state, single women with children receive social welfare benefits, rent subsidy, children allowances and numerous other grants for this and that. They can send their children to kindergartens and day nurseries with public subsidies and free of charge schools and colleges, and they can make use of free of charge medical and hospital services and many other offers entirely or partly financed by the taxpayers.
Greetings from the welfare state.
They feel that they do not need a man to create safety and economic security in their lives. They can choose their "partners" entirely free and can replace them as often as they want, without it affects their basic economic security.
Women are usually doing very well socially. They talk a lot, and apart from their feminist ideas they seldom have deviating opinions or interests that can throw sand in the social network machinery.
Single women seem to do fine without men if it had not been because of the economy; although they can have much money from the public, they still dream of a life in luxury and status.
Men are generally less socially well adapted than women. However, they usually have a better personal economy.
Left: Statue on the square in the city of Ringkoebing, which symbolizes the triumph of feminism. An overweight woman is supported by a skinny man. With a scale, she carefully measures out her rights.
Right: Revolutionary postcard from the French Revolution, which shows the third Estate, carrying the other two estates on the back.
Single men feel more lonely, and the prospect of a life without a woman and family seem most men rather gloomy.
From the feminist's point of view, the main duty of men is to pay taxes. They never write or say so, but abundant tax payments are an obvious precondition for the emancipation of women.
Women in relationships have an enormous power that they never talk about. They can any time take the lone child by the hand and march out the door, and then they will be supported by the almighty welfare state with everything they need.
In the Danish "Welfare Commission's" report of May 2004, "Future Welfare does not come by itself" has been calculated, respectively, men's and women's expected net contribution to the public coffers over a lifetime. (Section 13.3 page 381 - see link below)
The net contributions for men and women across the life cycle have almost the same profile, but the men's contributions are at a higher level. The reason for that is that men have a higher employment rate and a higher salary. For women, the net contribution sums up to about 80,000 in their mid-40's, while men on average are reaching almost double that amount at the same age. Even in retirement, men have a higher net contribution than women, mainly because women live longer than men and that the pension is higher for single persons, and probably also that older women use health services more often than older men.
Net contribution to the welfare state by men and women from the "Future Welfare does not come by itself" report, section 13.3.
A newborn girl can expect to receive 2.4 million more in net present value from the public coffers than she pays in, if current tax rates, benefit indexation, the use of the support possibilities, etc. are maintained through the woman's life at the same level. By comparison, a newborn boy can on average expect to pay in 0.8 million net to the public coffers through his life.
This discrepancy is due to, as mentioned above, women's lower average net contribution in their working age and longer life expectancy.
Total expected present net contributions to the welfare state for men and women for a lifetime - from "Future Welfare does not come by itself" Section 13.3.
If fiscal sustainability must be assured through an increase in the tax base, both men's and women's net contribution will be increased. The increase will be greatest for men because of their higher average incomes. Thus, an increase of the female net contribution of 0.3 million. million will be matched by an increase of 0.5 million of the male contribution over a lifetime.
By raising taxes on "the rich" to fund increased welfare and public projects, which might result in a Danish socialist election victory in 2011, it is obvious that men will suffer relatively even harder.
A true feminist must feel it as a profound injustice to womankind, that it is women, who give birth to children.
Demonstration on the International Women's day.
However, it is God's will and nature's whim that children have to be born by women, and they feel a natural connection to the mother in their first years of life.
An obvious fair solution, that feminists are busy to implement, is of course that really liberated women concentrate on their career and the free life as singles, and therefore choose not to have children. Thus the desired equality between sexes will be achieved since none of them have children.
Women in Eastern and Southern Europe are already well advanced in this development. For example, Ukraine has a fertility rate of 1.26 children per woman, Russia's rate is 1.41 children per woman and in Italy, each woman gives birth to an average of 1.31 children. The EU believes, however, that a fertility rate of 2.1, corresponds to a stable population size.
But if humanity should not cease to exist, then it is inevitable that pregnant women and women with small children are in a situation, where they can not expose themselves to the same physical hardships as men can. Women, who choose to bear children and assume the important and meaningful task to care for and educate their own children, may naturally not have the same career opportunities as men.
Feminists call for women to turn their backs on family and go for a career. But in reality, only a minority of women have a higher education and thus possibility for making a genuine ascending career. Women with a non-academic education, who are the majority, often can look forward to routine jobs in factories and shops only, if they follow the feminist call to liberate themselves from the oppression in the family.
To care for and educate one's own children may, in fact, be the most interesting and meaningful work for anybody. It is a ridiculous claim that it would be more dignified and meaningful for a woman to work at an assembly line, behind a desk in a store or with filling in standard form on a computer.
There may come a day when such a mother sits alone in her home, listening to the flies buzzing in the window. The children are busy with their own, or they have left home, and her husband is away from home for many hours a day at his career job. It is a problem that we all must contribute to solving.
Angelina Jolie as Lara Croft in Tomb Raider.
The feminist claim is that women really are a kind of men, who only have developed some fat deposits on the chest. However, the patriarchal rulers in their historical evil have discriminated against them because of this unimportant visible difference and reduced them to sex objects, birth-giving machines and pram pushers.
But - thanks to women's emancipation, they have blown their shackles and are now fast approaching to take the leading positions for which they are entitled by virtue of their physics, intelligence, creativity and superior moral level.
In almost all modern film a sexy beauty is acting, who however really is a terrible killing machine, computer expert, sharpshooter or kong fu fighter, far superior to any man in their discipline. In the Alien films, Sigourney Weaver plays the role as Ripley, who surpasses every man in the fight against the alien monsters. In Tomb Raider, Angelina Jolie plays the role of Lara Croft, who are all men superior in close combat strength and intelligence.
It began innocently with "Annie get your Gun" and Disney's "Mulan", and so far it has culminated with the icy hacker and computer expert Lisbeth Salander. Nowadays, such a female man shows up in every movie or series.
Left: Sigourney Weaver as Ripley in the Alien film.
Right: Female soldiers.
In many TV series are the main female characters taking the scene in the end as
strong women, while the male persons in the play are sneaking out behind the scenes as withdrawn characters with incurable psychological problems. It feels very natural to look at when you have got used to it.
This is because up to half of the customers to modern films and series are young and old hard-core feminists, who harbour heated dreams about overturning men in all social positions, as action heroes, police officers, commandos, as prime ministers and chief executives. They want to be confirmed in their dreams of surpassing men in all areas.
It's very piquant and politically correct with women as soldiers.
But a large number of female soldiers is to gamble with our motherland's security. War is really about to kill the enemy - with high-tech weapons - well, but also with physical strength and brutality. Anyone can figure out that an army or a navy with a high percentage of female soldiers will not have many chances in a real war.
Sailors, shipyard workers, construction workers, farmers, commercial divers and police officers are mostly men. Now and then they will be accompanied by a few women for the sake of political correctness, but they will rarely last very long. After a few years, they will get one or another problem with knees, shoulders, neck, psyche or similar and seep out of the profession again.
Poster for Gone with the Wind.
Broad shouldered male police officers are more calming to potential troublemakers than female officers.
"Gone with the Wind" is the woman novel overall precisely because it reflects women's nature. Scarlett O'Hara uses her whole personality in the fight for her beloved Tara, intelligence, charm, vigor and sexual charisma. She manipulates at least three different men to achieve what she wants.
Only derailed feminist women can dream of achieving fame by fighting monsters from outer space or surpass all men as a computer geek and hacker.
Natural women can dream of a life like Scarlett's, a life where they have opportunities for social ascent by making impression on men with power and status with their charm, personality and sexual charisma.
The original women's movement from the last century demanded equal rights, i.e. voting rights, eligibility and in general equality before the law. Today, not many will refuse women this.
Bra-burning in Toronto 1979.
However, the modern women's movement demands equal results, which is not the same as equal rights.
For feminists, women and men are identical apart from some unimportant details, therefore, after their opinion and following the statistical laws, they should be represented by approx. 50% in all areas of society. Then they conclude that in those areas of society, where women are represented with less than 50%, some kind of discrimination must have taken place. They deny flatly that women and men can have different talents, interests and different motivations.
For example, there is a very small representation of women in the management boards of shareholder companies, and that feminists take as an infallible sign that an informal discrimination has taken place. This is why feminists want to impose a law on a minimum female ratio in all community councils, boards and the like throughout the whole society, as it for example already is the case in Norway.
This will result in that members of company boards and other boards will not be appointed for their skills, but for what they have and have not behind their shirts and pants.
In fact, the feminist women's movement already has won privileges. For example, in legal disputes concerning parental rights in connection with divorces women will almost automatically be the winners only because of their gender. In numerous cases of sexual harassment and alleged violence in marriage, a woman will most likely win without particularly strong evidence. It is very likely that large companies have already introduced female quotas in their human resources policies because they fear that if they can not present a certain proportion of female managers, they will be stigmatized as old-fashioned and reactionary companies.
Right from the start of feminism in the sixties, they have ceaselessly attacked the family and made home-working women completely clear that they are nothing but the men's obedient sex slaves, birth-giving machines and pram pushers.
Bra-burning in Atlantic city in 1968.
The American feminism's "grand old women", Betty Friedan, referenced to the family as "a comfortable concentration camp". -
Sheila Cronan claimed that "Freedom for women can not be achieved without elimination of the marriage."- Andrea Dworkin wrote: "Marriage as an institution has been developed from rape as practice" and elsewhere "Marriage is a legal license to rape". - In "Sex and destiny - the politics of human fertility" by Germaine Greer she described how the nuclear family is a bad environment for women and for the upbringing of children. - "It is a simple fact that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be a true feminist" and Marilyn French said: "The family is the primary place of woman's oppression, which mainly is implemented through sexuality,".
A woman in a marriage is seen by feminists as a kind of gender traitor, however, they see the promiscuous woman as a heroine, as a kind of freedom fighter in the struggle against the patriarchal rulers' primary oppressive institution, namely marriage.
While feminists are raging against the family, they insist to maintain their claims of moral superiority and the superior maternal love.
A lesbian couple.
Thanks to the welfare state and the furious attacks by the feminists the family today is in a sorry state. Roughly one-third of the sixteen-year-olds are now living apart from their biological father.
The other day I saw a talk show on Danish TV2. The participants were adult persons, celebrities of about forty years, I estimated. They discussed seriously, which traits they found attractive or repulsive by their "boyfriends" and "girlfriends". In the first glance, I thought, it was sort of joke because at their age they should not have "boyfriends" and "girlfriends" as teenagers and adolescents have, they should have wives and husbands, I thought. But it was no joke. In the trendsetting cultural inner circle in the Danish capital, it seems like the family now has been totally dissolved.
A TV 3 entertainment program was called "For dinner at -". The actors Farshad Kholgi and Anne Louise Hassing and the singer Trina Gadeberg were invited to dinner with the politician Pia Kjaersgaard, who served Greek cuisine. A journalist for the nationwide newspaper, Politiken, named Per Munch wrote in his review: "We're talking about a woman, who admits that she gives her porcelain figurines Christmas caps on, and on a daily basis is living happily in surroundings, which we other people only see on ski holiday in Austria, and who has been together with her husband, since they were respectively 13 and 14 years old."
Previously, a divorce was a sad event that was not something to strive for. For the journalist, it seems to be a completely natural thing, perhaps even evidence of an active and dynamic emotional life. It shines through, that he may believe, that when a couple has lived together for so many years without getting divorced, it suggests a certain lack of zest for life.
This whole moral dissolution process can only take place because the Almighty Welfare State extends its safety net under the emancipated individuals.
Social solidarity in the Danish welfare state goes much like this that parliament adopts some laws that impose the local municipalities to have an obligation to provide their citizens this or that social service. If a citizen becomes poor, the municipality must help him with money, if a citizen becomes sick the municipality must supply medical treatment. The municipality ultimately represents all the other hundreds of thousands of taxpayers. The family is almost nonexistent in this form for social solidarity.
There are other forms of social solidarity.
China is not a welfare state. Social solidarity here is mainly a family affair. The law on marriage specifies the family members' mutual social responsibility.
The law on marriage, section 20 requires husband and wife to support each other in all aspects of life, including financially.
Section 21 requires children to support their parents financially if they themselves are not capable of or do not have the opportunity to work and earn money. The same article gives parents the obvious duty to take care of their children.
Section 28 gives the grandparents the duty to support their grandchildren if their parents die or otherwise become unable to take care of their children. The same section imposes grandchildren to support their grandparents in the case that their parents die or otherwise become unable to themselves to take care of the elderly.
As the tax pressure in this country is negligible, they seem to be able to support their children and parents economically.
An important milestone in the feminists' rise to power was the adoption of the law on free abortion in 1973. It gave women full control over the reproduction. A woman who wants to have an abortion before the 12. week of pregnancy is not required to give any reason or explanation, to obtain consent or consensus, or simply to inform the father.
Young girl demonstrating for free abortion.
In Denmark, about 15,000 abortions are performed each year. This makes up that since 1973 about half a million abortions have been performed. If these foetuses had been born, they would have been walking around among us this day as fellow humans, and we did not have to listen the constant complains, that Denmark lacks the manpower to provide service to the large group of baby boomer pensioners.
We need to allow immigration, many politicians and leading businessmen declare, otherwise Denmark will come to a standstill.
It is a problem we have created ourselves, we did for sure not allow the necessary manpower to be born.
Before 1983, when the liberalization of the laws on immigration and refugees was passed, Denmark was almost exclusively inhabited by Danes. Fertility was a record low, about 1.4 children per woman. We were very far from the 2.1 children each woman, required to maintain a constant population size.
Left: Modern liberated woman, who decides over her own body.
Right: Young conscripted men - the nation and the military decides over their bodies and their lives.
This low fertility was due to a number of cultural factors such as the free abortion, women's new education and career opportunities and the general adoption of new feminist attitudes.
These cultural factors are still valid, yes they have actually been reinforced, and therefore it is logical to assume that ethnic Danish women's fertility, in reality, is still lower than 1.5 children per woman, and the following population increase since 1983 has been solely due to immigration and the immigrant women's far higher fertility.
This low fertility of Danish women, I believe, that most Danes can convince themselves of by looking around in their circle of friends and family; many ethnic Danish women have remained childless, or they have only born a single child.
The population in Denmark in 1983 was 5.116.464, almost exclusively ethnic Danes; it has since grown to 5.560.628 in 2011. This means that an increase of 444.164 persons must roughly have come from immigration because ethnic Danish women did not give birth to enough children to maintain our number since then.
So there must be at least 400.000, more likely half a million inhabitants, added by immigrants and their descendants. This means that approximately every tenth inhabitant in Denmark today is a result of immigration, which is also the impression one gets by walking in the streets looking at ethnic types.
This means that the half million abortions, we have allowed since 1972, that represents the half million Danes, we did not allow to be born, largely have been replaced by immigrants and their descendants.
Abortion in progress in a hospital.
Women, who want an abortion, are not obliged to give any reason for their choice, but we have all heard the most common explanations. They are typically something about that the woman just now is busy with her education and therefore it is inconvenient for her to have children for the moment, or that she does not love the child's father enough to marry and have children with him.
In fact, in many ways, it is optimal to get one's children during the education time. The actual confrontation teaching time, for example at university, rarely makes up to more than 20 hours per week, and if you are unable to attend a lecture, you can always borrow a fellow student's notes; The holidays are numerous. Should it happen that you do not pass a few subjects, then you can simply try again next semester.
The argument, that the woman does not love the father high enough, and that a marriage therefore invariably would lead to a divorce, is just as false. Modern women, who typically find their one and only in a relatively late age after years of searching, will with increasing statistical certainty be divorced again. However, couples who before 1972 married for compelling reasons, often stuck together for the rest of their lives.
It is easy to imagine that a woman's real reason to want an abortion is that she deep in her mind finds it too early in life to commit herself to a particular man, she still dreams about having an interesting life, loved by passionate men, until she maybe eventually one day will have to settle with the neighbour's son.
Children on the Faroe Islands.
On the Faroe Islands, the Danish law on abortion of 1956, which in Denmark was replaced by the law on abortion of 1973, still applies. According to it, abortion can only be allowed, if the mother's life is in danger, or the pregnancy in question is a result of a rape or incest.
That is precisely why the Faroe Islands has Europe's highest fertility rate, namely 2.1 children per woman, and the islands also in modern times have been able to maintain its population size without considerable immigration.
The Danish "Socialistist Peoples Party" and "Women's Association" have 2004 in vain demanded that the Danish government should force the Faroe Islands to introduce contemporary Danish law on abortion. The Socialist Peoples Party's member of parliament, Kamal Qureshi, said that he believed: "All women in the Danish commonwealth shall have the right to abortion, whether they address a hospital in Thorshavn or a hospital in Copenhagen." While "Women's Association" said: "We in Denmark have too long allowed the Faroe Islands to be dragged down in an old culture." Member of Parliament Naser Khader (Conservative) asked: Why "the right to abortion is a cultural issue. Are women's fundamental rights a cultural issue?"
The fact is however that the Faroe Islanders have a far more healthy and more original attitude to life and death than feminist-dominated Denmark.
It must be so that if many red-haired women chose not to have children, so there would not be born so many red-haired children.
And again, if many intelligent women prefer career and the free life rather than children and family, so there will not be born as many intelligent children as before.
Anyone can look around in his own circle of friends and family, and he will most likely notice that women, who have been ambitious and smart enough to achieve some kind of higher education, they have given birth to none or perhaps one child in a late age. There will be exceptions, but this is the main trend. And thus it has been since 1973.
Therefore, one must assume that the average level of intelligence in the population is declining. Which is also reflected in public school's and universities' lesson plans that make still fewer demands on the students. Lately, the municipality of Copenhagen has abolished homework in public schools in recognition of students' lack of ability and motivation.
The present Danish Children- and Education Minister, Christine Antorini, have repeatedly taken initiatives to attract intelligent and highly educated foreigners, she knows very well that Danish young people are not very sharp.
Now, some will probably argue, that it is only theory, which cannot be demonstrated empirically, IQ tests are unfair, IQ is many things, even the kids are not good in math, they are very social and so on.
But we must trust our own judgment, and the facts and logic are standing abundantly clear in front of us.
Feminists often express that their cause is to save their suffering fellow sisters from men's oppression and exploitation.
In the Islamic culture, women are so legally incapacitated and discriminated as they practically can be. As Lars Hedegaard has pointed out, women in the Muslim culture are heavily suppressed.
How can it be that committed feminists do not organize one demonstration after another out of Wolls Mose, Gjellerupparken, Mjoelnerparken and other Muslim ghettos - against the extensive Muslim oppression of women? There's really something to deal with!
David Hume wrote: "Reason is, and should only be, a slave of the passions, and it can never pretend to have any other purpose than to serve and obey them."
He believed that feelings are the first cause of reason and its logical conclusions and thus our actions. For example, we have a feeling of hunger, and therefore we activate our reason to work out, how we can get some food. Or a feeling tells us that we would like to have some sex, and therefore we activate our reason to work out a logical and realistic plan for how to achieve this.
But what is the feeling that motivates feminists for their fight? It cannot be compassion for their unfortunate oppressed fellow sisters, for they seem quite indifferent to the muslim oppression of women.
The basic feeling of feminists' heart and mind must be and is - hatred of the "patriarchal rulers". The real core of feminism is that they will tilt their own men of the stick. They have no problems with muslim males and other ethnic men. They perceive them only as allies in the fight against the evil white men.
Young women promote themselves as good, emancipated and sensitive and market their special feminist values of tolerance and understanding. In their world, it is self-evident that they must struggle to tilt their own men of the stick, and that women should take over their positions as top managers, commando soldiers, lawyers, judges and politicians. They believe, or rather feel, that the evil white men must learn to understand that there are other men in the world, other ethnic men.
Dreaming young women - photo sovets.net.
Women live in their dreams and feelings, and the biggest danger with feminism is that we lose contact with reality. We dream of a harmonious and happy multicultural society, although reality and history show that it only will be the end of our own people. We speak loftily of multiculturalism and tolerance, although in reality it simply means acceptance of the Islamic immigration and the doom of our own culture. We dream of a society supplied by energy only from wind and sunshine even the the wind only blows when it pleases and the sun only shines now and then. When a woman once has found an attitude, which is in tune with her feelings, no arguments, logic or facts will be able to move her from this.
All men rival for the love of women, but some seek unconsciously to impress women with their beautiful political correct opinions about tolerance, kindness and understanding, thereby distancing themselves from their rivals, the other men. They may indicate that although an unhappy fate has equipped them with a penis from birth, they are not one of them. By having steel in the face, strange hair, wearing an inverted base-ball-cap or pixie cap in summer and indoor like Africans, they can send the message that although they have had the misfortune to be born as males, they do not belong to the group of evil white men.
Young women are deeply fascinated by exploring the power that they have, simply because they are women. Consciously or subconsciously, they want to experiment and explore their ability to influence and manipulate men.
Many women have a light-psychopathic gene - forgive me the expression, but it can not be described more accurately - That is to say that they like to use their emotional power to harass their husbands and boyfriends emotionally - in little the same way as psychopaths can find it interesting to play emotionally with their victims, as a cat plays with a mouse.
Take for example the classic situation, where the husband and wife are invited to a sociability, to which they are invited to a specific time. The woman will easily see that there is something that her husband would like to do, namely to respect his commitment to the host and arrive on time. Therefore, she places herself in front of the mirror and does her makeup one more time, or finds other pretexts to drag her feet, while she enjoys her husband's limbo. He is in fact paralyzed by two opposing wishes - namely, on the one hand to ask his wife to hurry up, and on the other to maintain harmony at this critical time.
Men love women more than women love men, which opens for manipulative women - in history, this tendency has been counteracted by women's greater need for safety and security, but these needs are today fulfilled by the almighty welfare state - foto fra pinterest.com.
Or let's imagine that the man would like that they visit his family as a couple. She feels immediately intuitive that he would like to do something, and uses the opportunity to harass her husband or boyfriend emotionally on his conflicting feelings for her and for his family. She put forward arguments not to visit, for example, that she feels she is being overlooked, they talk about his former fiancee, the food is very traditional, some family members have wrong attitudes and so on and so forth.
Or let's say that a man has some furniture or other items that are important to him personally, and which he also had when he lived with a former partner. Although they are expensive and beautiful and unique, the woman will intuitively put forward that they are old-fashioned, outdated, impractical and so on. Not that she does not think that he loves her, on the contrary; precisely because he loves her, these items represent an incomparable opportunity to play with his emotions.
Or, the man is somewhat older than the woman. He is grateful that she loves him anyway but feels yet deep down that he would have been more sure of her love if the age difference had been less. Intuitively the woman feels it immediately. She will in words declare that she loves him regardless of age, but will still frequently find his gray hair, appoint his possible wrinkles, tend to pot belly or old-fashioned non-youthful attitudes, not because it means something special to her in itself, but because it offers an opportunity to play with his emotions.
Similarly with feminism and multiculturalism: The woman intuitively feels that it irritates her husband when she expresses such irresponsible views of tolerance and openness, which opens the opportunity to play with his emotions. The man is paralyzed in an emotional limbo: On the one hand he wants to bring his girlfriend or wife to her senses, but on the other hand, he is afraid of losing her love by being labeled as sexist and racist.
It is a national tragedy that the so-called women's liberation and voting rights have caused the present mass immigration of muslims, what really is the case. Women did not join feminism and multiculturalism after deep and careful thoughts to what will be best for their nation. They just spontaneously and without deeper reflection joined these attitudes, simply because they open for so many opportunities to challenge and play with men's feelings.
Women are not good to be loyal to their own group; they have never been, and will never be because it's not in their nature. They have shown time and again that they are quick to carry favor with men, whom they feel are strong and dominant, whether they are part of their own group or not. European women quickly found along with German soldiers, Japanese and Vietnamese women quickly found together with American soldiers, and so it has been throughout history.
American soldiers socialize with young Japanese women. Photo Black Pigeon Speaks.
Women's psychology has always been on adaptation. In the past, if women from a defeated tribe did not adapt to their new masters, they would face death like their husbands, brothers and fathers had done. Even today, women are attracted by aggressive men, which tendency has been stamped into their psychology after thousands of years of "survival of the fittest". This means that dominant and powerful men, criminals, gangsters and drug dealers always unconsciously will be more attractive to women than hard-working honest men.
The Stockholm syndrome became known, when four employees, three women and a man, in 1973 were held captive for five days by bank robbers in the bank Kreditbanken in Stockholm, and in this short period, they developed sympathy for the robbers and their cause.
In 1974, the 19-year-old American millionaire heiress Patricia Hearst was kidnapped by a terrorist organization. She was found after 19 months, during which time she had joined the terror group and participated in several of their actions. She was not a particularly rebellious or weak character, she was just an ordinary young woman, who was attracted by seemingly powerful, dominant and aggressive men.
German soldier socializes with young European women. Photo Black Pigeon Speaks.
In 2016 a 16-year-old ethnic Danish girl from Kyndby at Holbaek planned to bomb a Jewish school and her own former municipal school following the instruction of a Muslim jihad warrior, who had returned from Syria. "She's the type, who is dressed in a hood and is looking down," the neighbor's son said, he thought that she seemed introverted. She was not particularly wild or rebellious, but just a shy and insecure Danish teen-age girl, who followed her female biological instinct and sought comfort by adapting to an aggressive, dominant and seemingly powerful man.
The sensitive, compassionate man stands in contrast to what women biologically are predisposed to desire. Young women - if they are honest - are attracted to dominant psychopathic scoundrel types. It is stamped in their biological DNA. Just to give an example: "the vast majority (87%) of women experience orgasm if they are raped." But this is a pure biological repsonse, which in most cases does not influence their judgment.
- It is no coincidence that several Danish women have married the murderer Lundin in prison. Recently, one of the chosen ones even borne him a child. Peter Lundin strangled his mother in the United States and was in Denmark convicted of having killed and dismembered his girlfriend Marianne Pedersen and her two sons.
- It is no coincidence that many women want contact with prisoners in the US death rows.
- It is no coincidence that it is precisely female teenagers, who stand screaming and howling outside famous pop stars' hotels.
- It is no coincidence that one of womens' most common sexual fantasies is being mercilessly handled in rough sexual intercourse by a big, dominant and demanding, unknown dark stranger.
Young European girls welcome men from the upcoming muslim master race. Photo Black Pigeon Speaks.
This phenomenon the advertising industry is fully aware of. Therefore, when they depict a loving couple, the man will be a dark, almost middle eastern type, while the woman will be a light Scandinavian type. The motive - middle eastern type man with a Scandinavian type of woman - is found in advertisements casually, as background or in flimsy ultrashort video clips. It is believed that in this way the message will encounter less resistance and more easily sink into the subconscious mind, where it will be welcomed by women's innate submission genes.
Is it contrary to advertising for something with family and children, where they will typically choose a male model of European type.
These phenomenons are all manifestations of the woman's inborn biology, which makes them prone to submission and adaptation - which also affects their political views. Since women have got the right to vote the Western nations developed into still gradual dissolution.
Let us give the floor to Confucius:
Confucius (551 - 479 BC).
"Following the will of Heaven, every person is born into a social network of responsibilities and duties. In this relations, a Confucian gentleman must follow the four virtues, which are love, justice, decency and wisdom. There are six types of relationships between people, in every relationship between two people are a senior and a junior, a superior and a subordinate."
"A nation's strength depends on its families' honesty," he wrote.
"To bring order into the world, we must first establish order in the nation," says Confucius' wisdom. "To establish order in the nation, we must first establish order in the family; to create order in the family, we must first improve our personal lives, and to improve our personal lives, we must first cultivate our hearts."
Now we for many years have only heard about women's rights. Now, it must be about time that we should hear something about women's duties.
Modern feminists seem to believe that the only thing they have to do is to listen to their feelings and find out, what they really want, that will settle all moral doubt.
When will they ask themselves: "How do I become a good wife?", or "How do I become a good daughter?" Most liberated women never doubt that they are good mothers, though many of them - but not all - without hesitation expose their children to grow up without their father.
I have always been fascinated by that part of Plato's Symposium, where he lets Aristophanes give his contribution to the subject: What is love?
"In the second place," Aristophanes said, "the primeval man was round, his back and sides forming a circle; and he had four hands and the same number of feet, one head with two faces, looking opposite ways - He could walk upright as men now do, backwards or forwards as he pleased - Terrible was their might and strength, and the thoughts of their hearts were great. - and they made an attack upon the gods and attempted to scale heaven."
"Doubt reigned in the celestial councils. Should they kill them and annihilate the race with thunderbolts, as they had done the giants, then there would be an end of the sacrifices and worship, which men offered to them."
Zeus divides the original androgyns into two.
Zeus discovered a way. He said: "I think I have a plan, which will enfeeble their strength and so extinguish their turbulence; men shall continue to exist, but I will cut them in two and then they will be diminished in strength and increased in numbers; this will have the advantage of making them more profitable to us. They shall walk upright on two legs, and if they continue insolent and will not be quiet, I will split them again and they shall hop about on a single leg."
"After the division, the two parts of man, each desiring his other half, came together, and throwing their arms about one another, entwined in mutual embraces, longing to grow into one, they began to die from hunger and self-neglect because they did not like to do anything apart."
Again, Zeus conceived a plan. He turned their heads 180 degrees so that their face now turned toward the front, and he tore them apart and mixed them all thoroughly. The two halves of the original androgynous we call now for men and women. Ever since they were divided, they have been searching for their original second half. When they find it, they will do nothing but to throw their arms around each other and never let go.