The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Fred Reed ArchiveBlogview
The Sisterhood and a Profound Weariness
Unbiased Analysis

Having for decades been exposed to the hostility of radical feminists, to the enormous harm they have done the schools and universities and the military, to relations between men and women, to their ashen tediousness and endless fury, their victimhood, I finally began to yell, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” At least, not quietly. Some thoughts, expressed with the gentility characteristic of this worthy column:

To begin with, there is the problem of forged credentials. Radical feminists do not represent women. They represent radical feminists. Other women typically say that they are feminists, meaning in favor or equality of pay and opportunity, but explicitly reject the ideological baggage of the radicals.

Nor do feminists bear demographic resemblance to other women. For example, it is a good bet that no feminist voted for Trump, but CNN’s exit polls have 42% of women, and 53% of white women, voting for him. Further, few feminists seem to be married with children, and comparatively few are heterosexual. None of these conditions is morally wrong, but suggest not much commonality with most of humanity.

The ideological baggage is great. Radical feminism is not just about women, or perhaps even mostly about women, but rather a package of far-left causes, usually including open borders, Islamophilia, affirmative action, gun control, socialism, unisex bathrooms, environmentalism, compulsory diversity, opposition to abortion, opposition to free speech (“hate speech”), hostility for white men, support for bigger government, intense focus on nonstandard sexuality, and using the schools as indoctrination centers.

Some of these things may be reasonable or even desirable, but how such a porridge can be called feminism is hard to imagine. It certainly is not the feminism of the suffragettes, of people who campaigned for various forms of equality. It has given way to neurotic anger looking for targets. It combines the vitriol associated with antisemitism with the intolerance of Scientology.

Typical exudate, from something,called Femsplain.“Dear dumb, entitled, insecure, angry men of the world: I am tired of you.” Ain’t no misandry here, and no sexism. Not a trace. thank god.

Sometimes feminism borders on psychosis, though on which side of the border is not always clear. “Psychosis” means “detachment from reality.” For example, years ago one radical feminist told me, “three-quarters of men want to hurt women.” She meant it, cold sober and not in the heat of argument. Another told me, “Sixty percent of men are misogynists.” This is loopy, around the bend, Haldol time. Among themselves men say with wry resignation that women are mildly crazy and have PMS, and women complain about the position of the toilet seat and why don’t men ever pick up after themselves. All true, but doesn’t approach hatred.

Note that feminists tend strongly to be of the middle or upper middle class and well educated, much like members of the Red Army Faction and other virulently bored revolutionaries.

Invariably they describe as “women’s issues” things that are not. Abortion is a prime example. Check photos of any rally against abortion and you will see that a high proportion of the participants are women. An issue is not a women’s issue merely because some women favor it. Some women will favor socialism or compulsory military service, or longer hours for the library, but these are not women’s issues. They affect all.

Pregnancy simulator, forced on the military by feminists supposedly so that soldiers will understand the difficulties of pregnancy. (The military exists to understand the difficulties of pregnancy.) Can anyone believe that the purpose was other than to humiliate the hated macho male?

Pregnancy simulator, forced on the military by feminists supposedly so that soldiers will understand the difficulties of pregnancy. (The military exists to understand the difficulties of pregnancy.) Can anyone believe that the purpose was other than to humiliate the hated macho male?

Much of radical feminism evinces a profound dishonesty–though sometimes it may be simple confusion. Feminists paint opposition to abortion as hostility to women. Of course nobody opposes abortion for this reason. They oppose it because they think it morally wrong. Sane people may disagree on the notion, it isn’t misogyny.

The dishonesty appears again in their attitude toward rape. Rape is packaged as a women’s issue, the implication being that men are unconcerned about sexual attacks on their mothers, wives, daughters, friends, and for that matter women in general. Oh sure. The fact is that a man’s usual response to hearing of rapes involves either rude surgery or a rope–but what do radical feminists know about men?

Lena Dunham Posts Video Celebrating the ‘Extinction of White Men’ on Twitter”

Ain’t no misandry here neither. Imagine the hooha if a man celebrated, or hoped for, the extinction of white women. (Let’s see, I have a wife, an ex, two daughters, a granddaughter, and a stepdaughter, all of whom I care greatly for, not to mention a conviction that without women, white or otherwise, the world would be unutterably boring. So I want extinguish women, right?)

When there is conflict between concern for women and allegiance to leftist causes, the causes win. Feminists disapprove of rape, real or imagined, only when committed by groups they don’t like, such as white men. It has been infinitely documented that black and Muslim men are far more given to rape than white men, but they are “people of color,” and part of the coalition against white men, so they get a pass.

Honor Killing: Two Men In Pakistan Rip Sister’s Eyes Out, Cut Her Feet Off

If Donald Trump did this, he would get unfavorable press. Not Pakistani men, though. Have you seen radical feminists screaming to keep these animals out of the US, in which they would be utterly justified? Nope. Muslims are People of Color. Even when they are not.

It is telling that feminists do not criticize women who lie about being raped. Such prevarication puts innocent men in danger of having their lives ruined, being expelled from work or school, and jailed. Why no outrage from feminists? Would it not be moral to prosecute real rapists, and also prosecute the liars?

Apparently not. Why?

Well, Tawana was a black. The Duke-Lacrosse liar was black. Lena Dunham was a Democrat and feminist. All were women. Identity trumps gender. This behavior supports the view that radical feminism is just misandry wrapped in shiny cloth. I.e., a hate group like any other.

From the Rolling Stone piece, written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely about an alleged rape of one Jackie Coakeley by fraternity members at the University of Virginia:

ORDER IT NOW

Seven men took turns raping her, while two more – her date, Drew, and another man – gave instruction and encouragement. She remembers how the spectators swigged beers, and how they called each other nicknames like Armpit and Blanket. She remembers the men’s heft and their sour reek of alcohol mixed with the pungency of marijuana. Most of all, Jackie remembers the pain and the pounding that went on and on.

Almost predictably, she turned out to be lying. A jury found the author and Rolling Stone guilty of defamation and awarded damages of $3 million. Why did this happen? Because of rape hysteria created entirely by feminists, a population accustomed to routine attacks on men, a female writer, a co-ed trained by the zeitgeist to think rape fantasies carried no consequences, and a lefty (usually good) magazine eager to make a splash.

When a black rapper called on other blacks to gang-rape Sarah Palin, feminists did not rise in rage that I saw. Why? Because they don’t like Palin, and because blacks are People of Color. This is racism. Bill Clinton, a serial forcible rapist, gets a pass, as does Bill Cosby, while Donald Trump, accused of groping, is a monster. Identity politics. Misandry. Sexism.

One sees the same thing in their criticism of “Islamophobia.” Islam probably the most misogynist philosophy on earth. Islamic societies genitally mutilate young girls, kill them if they are caught kissing a boyfriend, forbid them schooling, and have far and away the worst track record for sexual assault. Not a peep from feminists.

fmgmap

Identity, identity, identity.

For the record, female genital mutilation consists in a group of women holding a young girl down, forcibly spreading her legs, and cutting out her clitoris with a razor blade and no anesthetic. Speaking as a man, I believe that everyone involved in this, specifically including the father who allowed it, should be killed in some exceedingly unpleasant manner. Feminists are OK with it. Mustn’t criticize People of Color. If strong of stomach, click here.

Do you notice a correlation between genital sadism and Groups Whom We Must Not Criticize?

Invariably feminists portray themselves as victims, when the American variety are the most privileged of their sex in the world. This desperate victimhood is the bedrock of radical feminism, without which it would have nothing to complain of. When your sense of self depends on being oppressed, you cannot afford to run out of oppression. Yet for all their obsession with imaginary misogyny, they practice a robust misandry. (A cynic might ask, can anyone be more sexist than a feminist, or more racist than a black? But I am not a cynic.)

The enmity to men, sometimes disguised, never called sexism, sometimes open, runs through the culture today. This is hardly a secret. There is for example the endless portrayal on television of men as milquetoasts and buffoons in need of instruction by women, the now normal beating up by women of a hundred pounds of men of one-eighty. Misandry.

download-2Men seldom challenge feminists on this free flowing snot and bile because normal men like normal women. Again, they are our wives, daughters, dentists, and neighbors. It is easy to hit back at the bad temper and ill breeding (“Name one thing, with a moving part, that was invented by a radical feminist.”) but hard to do so without offending normal women, whom we do not want to offend. Further, men have a sufficient track record of achievement in the arts and sciences as not to feel greatly threatened by the calling of names. So we roll our eyes and think, “Yeah, yeah, Rachel. Yeah, Yeah. Oh god, I need a drink.”

The above, currently lurching around the internet to much complacent clucking, encapsulates the curiously delusional thinking of the tribe. It is insulting to men, and intended to be. Misandry. Men are dangerously violent, killers even; you have to watch them every moment. Simultaneously men are strutting foolish little things, their delicate vanity always vulnerable to a witty sally from Sally. All of this is of course pure misandry–that is, sexism.

Are they wacky enough to believe this? If so, they are, again, psychotic. If not, dishonest. Normal women are not afraid of being killed by men. (“Ah, but Fred, you can see it in their eyes as they creep through the streets, staying behind cover, glancing furtively about, frightened, ever expecting the knife….”) If anybody is more blisterishly sensitive even to disagreement, much less to ridicule, than a radical feminist, I haven’t encountered him. Or her. Or it.

Yes, the cheerleader can devastate the class dweeb by saying that she wouldn’t date him on a bet, or the quarterback crush the not-so-pretty girl by saying that she looks like a box car with warts. But few normal people, either cheerleaders or quarterbacks, are so cruel. And men in general do not speak of women with the venom of feminists speaking of men. Most of us date women, even marry them, regard them as the most attractive part of the social landscape.

Though, of course, at any moment we may kill them.

Fred can be reached at jetpossum-readers@yahoo.com. Put “pdq” in the subject line, without the quotes, to avoid autodeletion.

(Reprinted from Fred on Everything by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Feminism, Political Correctness 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Speaking of

    ashen tediousness and endless fury

    have you read any of your articles lately?

    Speaking of Haldol, did someone forget his? Hmmmm?

    And when the hysteria turned to paranoia about Muslim rapists I gave up.

    Note to Fwed: Don’t worry your pretty little head about Muslim rapists. Despite your obvious cameloid disposition and likely looks and perfume, I doubt even the most desperate of them would give you a second glance.

    I’m not even wondering how it all turned out.

    • Replies: @U. Ranus
    Looks like you did notice a correlation between genital sadism and Groups Whom We Must Not Criticize.
    , @Father O'Hara
    LOL !! I can see Fred worrying about his honor and purity! With that mug hes got no worries,LMAO! Now if Fred were a 6 year old boy...why of course,that would be different. Some cute little guy...nice and sweet,right Jacques?

    Theyre not going to rape Fred. His wife,his daughters...??
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/freed/the-sisterhood-and-a-profound-weariness/#comment-1712835
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Well, what passes for feminism these days, just like ‘anti-racism’ and other identity bullshit, is a way to sabotage the struggle for common interests by splitting the population into small segments that hate each other, and constantly accuse each other of having and abusing some mythical ‘privileges’. Divide and rule.

  3. The gender war was insidious and victory was swift and decisive but in the context of the times, not unusual. The resultant disenfranchisement of the entire female gender continues intact but is not recognized now as a legacy of theft. It is universally regarded as simply the way things are.
    In a scant seven or eight millenniums, the more benign behaviors that assured successful human existence during the passage of incredible amounts of prior time were stripped from the future and left us as we are: murderous, fanatical, patriarchal and now possibly, doomed. more

    https://robertmagill.wordpress.com/2016/12/26/eve-was-a-war-prize/

  4. (A cynic might ask, can anyone be more sexist than a feminist, or more racist than a black? But I am not a cynic.)

    Fred,

    Sexism and racism are defined by the Left (and the left defines everything) to be attitudes wedded to power. If one is “oppressed”, and therefore powerless, one cannot be sexist, racist or any other form of oppressor.

    Only heterosexual white males are oppressors, all others are the oppressed.

    Can’t you understand logic?

    • Replies: @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yep. Our modern religion's version of original sin.

    White males are the source of all past (and present) evil in the world; therefore, we must atone. But, of course, you can never atone enough. Well, that's not true. You can die.

    Wait, you say, what about the achievements of white males and the fact that modern civilization - and all the goodies that it brings - owes its creation to our work and ingenuity? Well, you'd be wrong, of course. All of those discoveries and the implementation of those discoveries would have happened without white men; indeed, we would be further along. Why? Because white men suppressed the creativity and productivity of everyone else on the planet.

    Yes, the world sure will be swell when these white guys finally disappear.

    If anyone chuckles reading this, don't. A large number Americans - including many whites - believe this in their hearts.

    We are engaged in a war with religious fanatics backed by a very savvy, very wealthy people.
  5. Mr. Reed I usually appreciate the view expressed in your articles, but regarding FGM I find your point to be biased or at least misinformed. By no means FGM is mandated or approved or even recommended by Islam. I have spent many years as an expat in black Africa in countries where Christian religion prevails (e.g. South Nigeria) and I have found FGM to be widely practiced. However I can agree on the fact that some Islamic countries, regardless of mandated prohibition by the law of such a barbaric practice have failed in uprooting it.

    From Wikipedia:
    FGM’s origins in northeastern Africa are pre-Islamic, but the practice became associated with Islam because of that religion’s focus on female chastity and seclusion.[q] There is no mention of it in the Quran. It is praised in several hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) as noble but not required.[r][141] In 2007 the Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research in Cairo ruled that FGM had “no basis in core Islamic law or any of its partial provisions.”[142][s]

    [q] Gerry Mackie, 1996: “FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.

    [r] Gerry Mackie, 1996: “FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.
    [141] De-linking Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting from Islam
    Ibrahim Lethome Asmani – Maryam Sheikh Abdi (USAID)

    http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/De-linking%20FGM%20from%20Islam%20final%20report.pdf

    [142] Fresh progress toward the elimination of female genital mutilation and cutting in Egypt”, UNICEF, 2 July 2007; UNICEF 2013, 70
    [s] Maggie Michael, Associated Press, 2007: “[Egypt's] supreme religious authorities stressed that Islam is against female circumcision. It’s prohibited, prohibited, prohibited,” Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa said on the privately owned al-Mahwar network.”[143]
    [143] Maggie Michael, “Egypt Officials Ban Female Circumcision” , Associated Press, 29 June 2007, 2.

    • Replies: @Son of Dixie
    I had a lengthy conversation with a negro savage from Eritrea. Moslem fellow. The conversation went from Jews, he was shocked that a White American was aware of the JQ, to them this is common knowledge, eventually to FGM.

    To him it was a perfectly logical thing. He explained to me that at times women could have too much of a sexual appetite, and of course men get tired. Solution: FGM, "just a little" as he put it.

    As we spoke - he was dawned in full Moslem garb - I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation? Growing up in the 80's I did not know that a nation called "Eritrea" existed. Had absolutely no idea about East Africa. Didn't care. I didn't know what a Somalian was.

    Really is amazing how many of these throwbacks now roam within our borders. According to "Turn Coat" Fred... No bid deal. Of course being married to a Jewish woman will cloud a man's mind and skew morals.
    , @Bill Jones
    I've heard that before that it's a cultural not religious issue.
    , @ogunsiron
    I think FGM originated with herders who dwelt in the Sahara during its wet period.
  6. I find your point to be biased or at least misinformed.

    At least he’s consistent.

    For a dude who claims a high IQ, he sure comes up with some low class crap.

    Fwed, yer discrediting the Muscadin Mensa Munchkins. Just thought you oughtta be aware of it.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Can you quote and cite Fred's claim to having a "high IQ"?

    That Fred may be misinformed about Islam and FGM isn't much of a point since his whole case was about radical feminists and is completely unaffected by his not portraying the perpetrators of FGM and why they do it with scholarly accuracy. BTW did you notice that Mahomet is quoted in the hadiths as approving the practice?
  7. Thank you Fred. I’ll go a step further. I am sick of tiptoeing in bunny slippers around the venality of Lesbians as a political force in the world.

    Venality. First, let me say, I’ve known and befriended enough gay men in my 69 years, that I have dined with them, studied with them, traveled with them.. danced the night away with them.. with balloons tied to my backside to keep me from getting lost in the malaise of a Long Beach dance floor on New Years Eve.

    But lesbians? Whole nother story. I’ve been close up and personal to the Gay thing long enough to say with authority… [and so many gay men agree, including Milo the mouth]…

    Lesbians are an angry, petty,vindictive and energetic, grotesque mutant force for evil … they represent the worst of men and the worst of women… wherein I’ve seen so many gay men as the best of both sexes.

    Like the half black Obomination… he/she/they uncomfortable with both races or genders.. hating both themselves and a world they ENDURE – while they use what ever unique talents they have to wreak havoc and vengeance on a world that doesn’t value their “brand”.

    Unless they give away houses and cars on daytime TV.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I'm sorry you haven't come across the kind of lesbians who, apart perhaps from those who are their sisters, heterosexual men are most likely to come across. While I can think of the odd butch lesbian and amiable enough art administrator the four who come immediately to mind were attractive when young and married and had children but ended up paired with other women.
  8. “Further, few feminists seem to be married with children,”

    Unless they are of the sort simulating ersatz marriage with one another, or several, and purchasing babies via test tube implant or surrogate. Sometimes mistakes are made, and a white feminist then complains about getting a baby with African DNA, revealing how even more intolerant ze really is. At least they can raise the baby to become a deviant as well, unless teenage rebellion interferes.

    “compulsory diversity, opposition to abortion” — I think you meant support for abortion.

  9. What I don’t understand is why the feminists never scream and protest about sub-Saharan women being genitally mutilated or the oppression of Muslim women. I also can’t recall a campus protest concerning a black man who raped a black woman.

  10. Heh, I remember back in Virginia early 2000-2005 or so, “marriage” between lesbians was legalized in Vermont, Massachusetts, maybe New Hampshire, too. The lezzies would birth with donated sperm or adopt children after these “marriages” and yet, birth certificates and adoption papers still listed one partner as paternal, one maternal.

    When the inevitable lesbian “bed death” set in and one wanted to be rid of the other, the “maternal” half of these unholy marriages would run off with the children to Virginia’s most conservative jurisdictions and the “paternal” half of the coupling would try to claim rights to visitation in said Virginia court. Big disappointment then that their Vermont “marriages” weren’t recognized and the courts would issue restraining orders to keep the spurned lezzie away. So, sometimes, the Patriarchy was appreciated by radical feminist lesbians. To this day, there are still courts in rural Virginia that refuse to recognize the marriages of lezzie couples from up North in these child-custody cases.

  11. @Mario64
    Mr. Reed I usually appreciate the view expressed in your articles, but regarding FGM I find your point to be biased or at least misinformed. By no means FGM is mandated or approved or even recommended by Islam. I have spent many years as an expat in black Africa in countries where Christian religion prevails (e.g. South Nigeria) and I have found FGM to be widely practiced. However I can agree on the fact that some Islamic countries, regardless of mandated prohibition by the law of such a barbaric practice have failed in uprooting it.

    From Wikipedia:
    FGM's origins in northeastern Africa are pre-Islamic, but the practice became associated with Islam because of that religion's focus on female chastity and seclusion.[q] There is no mention of it in the Quran. It is praised in several hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) as noble but not required.[r][141] In 2007 the Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research in Cairo ruled that FGM had "no basis in core Islamic law or any of its partial provisions."[142][s]

    [q] Gerry Mackie, 1996: "FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.

    [r] Gerry Mackie, 1996: "FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.
    [141] De-linking Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting from Islam
    Ibrahim Lethome Asmani - Maryam Sheikh Abdi (USAID)
    http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/De-linking%20FGM%20from%20Islam%20final%20report.pdf

    [142] Fresh progress toward the elimination of female genital mutilation and cutting in Egypt", UNICEF, 2 July 2007; UNICEF 2013, 70
    [s] Maggie Michael, Associated Press, 2007: "[Egypt's] supreme religious authorities stressed that Islam is against female circumcision. It's prohibited, prohibited, prohibited," Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa said on the privately owned al-Mahwar network."[143]
    [143] Maggie Michael, "Egypt Officials Ban Female Circumcision" , Associated Press, 29 June 2007, 2.

    I had a lengthy conversation with a negro savage from Eritrea. Moslem fellow. The conversation went from Jews, he was shocked that a White American was aware of the JQ, to them this is common knowledge, eventually to FGM.

    To him it was a perfectly logical thing. He explained to me that at times women could have too much of a sexual appetite, and of course men get tired. Solution: FGM, “just a little” as he put it.

    As we spoke – he was dawned in full Moslem garb – I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation? Growing up in the 80′s I did not know that a nation called “Eritrea” existed. Had absolutely no idea about East Africa. Didn’t care. I didn’t know what a Somalian was.

    Really is amazing how many of these throwbacks now roam within our borders. According to “Turn Coat” Fred… No bid deal. Of course being married to a Jewish woman will cloud a man’s mind and skew morals.

    • Replies: @Mario64
    Eritrea Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to recent estimates, 50% of the population adheres to Christianity, 48% to Islam, and 2% of the population follows other religions including traditional faiths and animism.
    Eritrea FGM (Wikipedia)
    The government of Eritrea surveyed and published an official FGM prevalence rate of 89% in 2003.

    Ethiopia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2007 National Census, Christians make up 62.8% of the country's population (43.5% Ethiopian Orthodox, 19.3% other denominations), Muslims 33.9%, practitioners of traditional faiths 2.6%, and other religions 0.6%.
    Ethiopia FGM (Wikipedia)
    The WHO gives a prevalence of 74.3% for FGM in Ethiopia (2005).

    Liberia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2008 National Census, 85.5% of the population practices Christianity. Protestants form the largest Christian grouping, followed by Roman Catholics. These denominations were brought by Black American settlers. Muslims comprise 12.2% of the population, largely represented by the Mandingo and Vai ethnic groups. Sunnis, Shias, Ahmadiyyas, Sufis, and non-denominational Muslims constitute the bulk of the Liberian Muslims.
    Liberia FGM (Wikipedia)
    Female genital mutilation is prevalent in Liberia.

    Just three examples showing that FGM is a tribal barbaric practice forced on women independently of religion. Affirming that FGM is an Islamic practice is definitely biased and ignorant.

    For more informations see Wikipedia "Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country"

    , @Corvinus
    "As we spoke – he was dawned in full Moslem garb – I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation?"

    Because the Founding Forefathers granted Congress with the power to confer citizenship. And, it's not "my" nation, but "our" nation.

    It's similar to when an Englishman in 1600's New York talked to a Dutch man and echoed your same thoughts. Why is he here, he is different than me?

    It's similar to when the ancestors of that Dutch man talked to an Irish man and said the same thing. Why is he here, he is different than me?
    , @A Chigurh
    Donned. He was donned in garb. Jesus.

    But yeah--why is he here? An elemental question Americans seem incapable of asking. It's taken as a matter of course that the world's flotsam and jetsam naturally washes ashore here and it is somehow our duty to gather it in. That's what 50 years of cultural-Marxism begets.
  12. @jacques sheete
    Speaking of

    ashen tediousness and endless fury
     
    have you read any of your articles lately?

    Speaking of Haldol, did someone forget his? Hmmmm?

    And when the hysteria turned to paranoia about Muslim rapists I gave up.

    Note to Fwed: Don't worry your pretty little head about Muslim rapists. Despite your obvious cameloid disposition and likely looks and perfume, I doubt even the most desperate of them would give you a second glance.


    I'm not even wondering how it all turned out.

    Looks like you did notice a correlation between genital sadism and Groups Whom We Must Not Criticize.

  13. @Son of Dixie
    I had a lengthy conversation with a negro savage from Eritrea. Moslem fellow. The conversation went from Jews, he was shocked that a White American was aware of the JQ, to them this is common knowledge, eventually to FGM.

    To him it was a perfectly logical thing. He explained to me that at times women could have too much of a sexual appetite, and of course men get tired. Solution: FGM, "just a little" as he put it.

    As we spoke - he was dawned in full Moslem garb - I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation? Growing up in the 80's I did not know that a nation called "Eritrea" existed. Had absolutely no idea about East Africa. Didn't care. I didn't know what a Somalian was.

    Really is amazing how many of these throwbacks now roam within our borders. According to "Turn Coat" Fred... No bid deal. Of course being married to a Jewish woman will cloud a man's mind and skew morals.

    Eritrea Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to recent estimates, 50% of the population adheres to Christianity, 48% to Islam, and 2% of the population follows other religions including traditional faiths and animism.
    Eritrea FGM (Wikipedia)
    The government of Eritrea surveyed and published an official FGM prevalence rate of 89% in 2003.

    Ethiopia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2007 National Census, Christians make up 62.8% of the country’s population (43.5% Ethiopian Orthodox, 19.3% other denominations), Muslims 33.9%, practitioners of traditional faiths 2.6%, and other religions 0.6%.
    Ethiopia FGM (Wikipedia)
    The WHO gives a prevalence of 74.3% for FGM in Ethiopia (2005).

    Liberia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2008 National Census, 85.5% of the population practices Christianity. Protestants form the largest Christian grouping, followed by Roman Catholics. These denominations were brought by Black American settlers. Muslims comprise 12.2% of the population, largely represented by the Mandingo and Vai ethnic groups. Sunnis, Shias, Ahmadiyyas, Sufis, and non-denominational Muslims constitute the bulk of the Liberian Muslims.
    Liberia FGM (Wikipedia)
    Female genital mutilation is prevalent in Liberia.

    Just three examples showing that FGM is a tribal barbaric practice forced on women independently of religion. Affirming that FGM is an Islamic practice is definitely biased and ignorant.

    For more informations see Wikipedia “Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country”

    • Replies: @CK
    Islam has adapted many barbaric practices and given them new names.
    In that way Islam is a lot like any other " religion of the book."
    , @utu
    FGM is practiced among some Indian tribes in Columbia. So I have learned from NPR recently. Apparently they must have invented the procedure and its justification independently of whatever transpired in Eastern Hemisphere.
  14. FGM is a goid idea… As punushment for being a fat, ugly, short-haired, dungaree-wearing, Andrea Dworkin-quoting, frumpy, yentering feminist SJW.

  15. The feminists operate like a mafia much like the militant homosexual lobby. Like Fred said, they only mount their high horses when white guys mess up. Non-white males always get a pass and are never responsible for their actions. Post 1965 feminism is just a weapon devised by butt ugly Jewesses like Andrea Dworkin to destroy the white family and depress its birth rate. They have been wildly successful.

    Most white American women have been infected by feminism to some degree which has taken its toll on cohesion between the sexes. It has not affected blacks or Latinos nearly as much. I’m not aware of any Muslim feminists. That must be because they stone their feminists to death, so they’re finally on to something.

  16. @another fred

    (A cynic might ask, can anyone be more sexist than a feminist, or more racist than a black? But I am not a cynic.)
     
    Fred,

    Sexism and racism are defined by the Left (and the left defines everything) to be attitudes wedded to power. If one is "oppressed", and therefore powerless, one cannot be sexist, racist or any other form of oppressor.

    Only heterosexual white males are oppressors, all others are the oppressed.

    Can't you understand logic?

    Yep. Our modern religion’s version of original sin.

    White males are the source of all past (and present) evil in the world; therefore, we must atone. But, of course, you can never atone enough. Well, that’s not true. You can die.

    Wait, you say, what about the achievements of white males and the fact that modern civilization – and all the goodies that it brings – owes its creation to our work and ingenuity? Well, you’d be wrong, of course. All of those discoveries and the implementation of those discoveries would have happened without white men; indeed, we would be further along. Why? Because white men suppressed the creativity and productivity of everyone else on the planet.

    Yes, the world sure will be swell when these white guys finally disappear.

    If anyone chuckles reading this, don’t. A large number Americans – including many whites – believe this in their hearts.

    We are engaged in a war with religious fanatics backed by a very savvy, very wealthy people.

    • Agree: Kyle McKenna
    • Replies: @another fred

    All of those discoveries and the implementation of those discoveries would have happened without white men; indeed, we would be further along. Why? Because white men suppressed the creativity and productivity of everyone else on the planet.
     
    As Fred Reed has explained, all those "discoveries" and the wealth of the West were just low hanging fruit, the rights to which were taken by white men as they elbowed the oppressed of the world to the side.
  17. @Mario64
    Mr. Reed I usually appreciate the view expressed in your articles, but regarding FGM I find your point to be biased or at least misinformed. By no means FGM is mandated or approved or even recommended by Islam. I have spent many years as an expat in black Africa in countries where Christian religion prevails (e.g. South Nigeria) and I have found FGM to be widely practiced. However I can agree on the fact that some Islamic countries, regardless of mandated prohibition by the law of such a barbaric practice have failed in uprooting it.

    From Wikipedia:
    FGM's origins in northeastern Africa are pre-Islamic, but the practice became associated with Islam because of that religion's focus on female chastity and seclusion.[q] There is no mention of it in the Quran. It is praised in several hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) as noble but not required.[r][141] In 2007 the Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research in Cairo ruled that FGM had "no basis in core Islamic law or any of its partial provisions."[142][s]

    [q] Gerry Mackie, 1996: "FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.

    [r] Gerry Mackie, 1996: "FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.
    [141] De-linking Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting from Islam
    Ibrahim Lethome Asmani - Maryam Sheikh Abdi (USAID)
    http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/De-linking%20FGM%20from%20Islam%20final%20report.pdf

    [142] Fresh progress toward the elimination of female genital mutilation and cutting in Egypt", UNICEF, 2 July 2007; UNICEF 2013, 70
    [s] Maggie Michael, Associated Press, 2007: "[Egypt's] supreme religious authorities stressed that Islam is against female circumcision. It's prohibited, prohibited, prohibited," Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa said on the privately owned al-Mahwar network."[143]
    [143] Maggie Michael, "Egypt Officials Ban Female Circumcision" , Associated Press, 29 June 2007, 2.

    I’ve heard that before that it’s a cultural not religious issue.

  18. @Citizen of a Silly Country
    Yep. Our modern religion's version of original sin.

    White males are the source of all past (and present) evil in the world; therefore, we must atone. But, of course, you can never atone enough. Well, that's not true. You can die.

    Wait, you say, what about the achievements of white males and the fact that modern civilization - and all the goodies that it brings - owes its creation to our work and ingenuity? Well, you'd be wrong, of course. All of those discoveries and the implementation of those discoveries would have happened without white men; indeed, we would be further along. Why? Because white men suppressed the creativity and productivity of everyone else on the planet.

    Yes, the world sure will be swell when these white guys finally disappear.

    If anyone chuckles reading this, don't. A large number Americans - including many whites - believe this in their hearts.

    We are engaged in a war with religious fanatics backed by a very savvy, very wealthy people.

    All of those discoveries and the implementation of those discoveries would have happened without white men; indeed, we would be further along. Why? Because white men suppressed the creativity and productivity of everyone else on the planet.

    As Fred Reed has explained, all those “discoveries” and the wealth of the West were just low hanging fruit, the rights to which were taken by white men as they elbowed the oppressed of the world to the side.

  19. “Female genital mutilation”, “genital sadism”, it is as if this anti radical feminist article (at least the Islam parts) was written by a radical feminist!!

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate. Or at least be consistent and call male circumcision MGM and call for all the physicians who practice this barbaric practice to be painfully executed as well.

    I thought this was an Alt-Right sort of site. People here are generally informed about r/K theory, no? Well, female circumcision is a practice that predates Islam by millennia which is overwhelmingly concentrated amongst the most r selected of Muslims in order to help them control their genetic propensity towards promiscuity, unstable marriages etc. Both male and female circumcision can be thought of as a partial neutering in order to control the sexual appetite.

    And whereas female circumcision is practiced mainly by African Muslims, all Muslims engage in “MGM”, so if anything Muslims should be attacked for their systematic misandry. And the whole “holding the kid down, spreading the legs, and using a razor with no anesthesia” thing applies equally to the boys, especially before modern medicine. They used to do it at age 3 where my family is from in India, they dressed the kid up, had a big party, and afterwards the “mutilated” boy would get a bunch of gifts. Too bad Fred wasn’t there to painfully kill my grandfather for his sadism!

    Mr. Reed put up that map where FGM was practiced. Perhaps he should put up another map of Africa right next to it showing the # of deaths due to AIDS over the past 30 years. My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths; perhaps idealistic white people should not seek to destroy the means by which they accomplished this.

    One more thing. Mr. Reed, you bash the deleterious effects of feminism on Western societies. Then you bash the misogynistic barbarity of Islam that ensures feminism could never indigenously gain a foothold in Muslim societies. And you do both in the same article!
    I find this confusing. You yourself are so sick of your own women that you fled to Mexico and married a native, so forgive me if I find your credentials for giving advice on gender relations somewhat lacking.

    P.S. The whole “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    http://top101news.com/most-popular-top-10-list/2017-2018-2019-2020-2021/others/countries-highest-rape-crime-world-worst-dangerous/

    • Replies: @Talha
    Guilty as charged - I must also admit to allowing people (they called themselves pediatricians or something) to mutilate the genitals of my three boys! Oh the shame! Oh the disregard for the Hippocratic Oath! Oh the sacredness of the foreskin!

    On the other hand, my daughter was not mutilated - could be something having to do with me (like the majority of Muslims) following the Hanafi school...nah, I must be some kind of ultra-feminist.

    I think I should attend therapy now. In my defense, my father stood by while I was mutilated...violence breeds violence.

    Peace.

    , @Randal

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate.
     
    That was the term generally used in English, certainly, up until a few decades ago.

    It was changed because it implied an equivalence with male circumcision. Presumably this was a combination of a deliberate piece of linguistic cultural manipulation by campaigners against the practice, combined with backing from certain influential groups who didn't want their own practices tarred with the brush increasingly being used against the practice in relation to females.
    , @utu
    "My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths"

    Are you suggesting that male and female circumcision reduces HIV infection? How so?
    , @Wizard of Oz
    If it isn't a "bald faced lie" to equate as you do male circumcision with FGM it is obtuseness and ignorance. Much of FGM equates to destroying all the nerves in the last inch or so of the penis. Try having a sex life after that.
    , @KenH

    P.S. The whole “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?
     
    No doubt most of the nations in the top 10 list deserve to be on that list, but Sweden is made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation. Sweden long ago stopped compiling stats since the offenders were African and Islamic Middle Easterners instead of native Swedes.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html

    From the article:
    It said: “Over the past 10 to 15 years, immigrants have mainly come [into Sweden] from Muslim countries such as Iraq, Syria and Somalia. Might this influx explain Sweden’s rape explosion?

    “It is difficult to give a precise answer, because Swedish law forbids registration based on people’s ancestry or religion.

    “One possible explanation is that, on average, people from the Middle East have a vastly different view of women and sex than Scandinavians have.

    And might the incidence of rape in Muslim nations be understated because the burden of proof is on the female? And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Even Australia was having problems with sexual assault at some of their beaches (by Lebanese Muslim men) until Aussie men grew a pair and resorted to diplomacy by face rearranging and skull bashing using fists, bats and blunt objects (note: there is a total gun ban in Australia). Not surprisingly the problem ceased at least for a while.

  20. @Qasim
    "Female genital mutilation", "genital sadism", it is as if this anti radical feminist article (at least the Islam parts) was written by a radical feminist!!

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate. Or at least be consistent and call male circumcision MGM and call for all the physicians who practice this barbaric practice to be painfully executed as well.

    I thought this was an Alt-Right sort of site. People here are generally informed about r/K theory, no? Well, female circumcision is a practice that predates Islam by millennia which is overwhelmingly concentrated amongst the most r selected of Muslims in order to help them control their genetic propensity towards promiscuity, unstable marriages etc. Both male and female circumcision can be thought of as a partial neutering in order to control the sexual appetite.


    And whereas female circumcision is practiced mainly by African Muslims, all Muslims engage in "MGM", so if anything Muslims should be attacked for their systematic misandry. And the whole "holding the kid down, spreading the legs, and using a razor with no anesthesia" thing applies equally to the boys, especially before modern medicine. They used to do it at age 3 where my family is from in India, they dressed the kid up, had a big party, and afterwards the "mutilated" boy would get a bunch of gifts. Too bad Fred wasn't there to painfully kill my grandfather for his sadism!

    Mr. Reed put up that map where FGM was practiced. Perhaps he should put up another map of Africa right next to it showing the # of deaths due to AIDS over the past 30 years. My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths; perhaps idealistic white people should not seek to destroy the means by which they accomplished this.

    One more thing. Mr. Reed, you bash the deleterious effects of feminism on Western societies. Then you bash the misogynistic barbarity of Islam that ensures feminism could never indigenously gain a foothold in Muslim societies. And you do both in the same article!
    I find this confusing. You yourself are so sick of your own women that you fled to Mexico and married a native, so forgive me if I find your credentials for giving advice on gender relations somewhat lacking.

    P.S. The whole "Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault" is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    http://top101news.com/most-popular-top-10-list/2017-2018-2019-2020-2021/others/countries-highest-rape-crime-world-worst-dangerous/

    Guilty as charged – I must also admit to allowing people (they called themselves pediatricians or something) to mutilate the genitals of my three boys! Oh the shame! Oh the disregard for the Hippocratic Oath! Oh the sacredness of the foreskin!

    On the other hand, my daughter was not mutilated – could be something having to do with me (like the majority of Muslims) following the Hanafi school…nah, I must be some kind of ultra-feminist.

    I think I should attend therapy now. In my defense, my father stood by while I was mutilated…violence breeds violence.

    Peace.

  21. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “three-quarters of men want to hurt women.”

    I think 3/4 of women want big dongs, so they don’t have problem with the hurt. They seem to invite it.

    “Sixty percent of men are misogynists.”

    Given that women love rap music and hip hop where women are called ‘bitchass hos’, they seem to like misogynist men. I mean how many women buy and listen to Mr. Rogers records? He’s a gentleman.

  22. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “For the record, female genital mutilation consists in a group of women holding a young girl down, forcibly spreading her legs, and cutting out her clitoris with a razor blade and no anesthetic. Speaking as a man, I believe that everyone involved in this, specifically including the father who allowed it, should be killed in some exceedingly unpleasant manner.”

    But should it be legal if the woman is of adult age and freely wants it as an individual?

    After all, if a man says he’s a woman and goes to a doctor and asks for his penis and testes to be removed to make room for a fake ‘vagina’, that is allowed.

    I think the female genital removal is an issue because it’s done to young girls without consent. But then, circumcision is done on young boys without consent in many parts of the world.

    But if a surgical process were to be created that allowed medical removal of the clitoris, is it any worse than a man asking a doctor to remove his dick and balls in order to be a tranny?

  23. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Feminism is really dead. It was killed by Negroes, Muslims, and Homos-Trannies.

    It tries to remain alive as an anti-white-male ideology, but it doesn’t make much sense these days.

    After all, white males the tamest bunch of guys in America. Maybe Asian guys are tamer, but they don’t show up on the cultural radar. Due to so much anti-white-male-bashing, white males have become very careful about whatever they say and do. The UVA case shows that the MSM has to create fake rape stories about blonde Nazis to keep the Narrative going. It’s like A&E had to pay some dinky remnants of the KKK to do Hollywood KKK stuff.

    Because of ‘intersectionality’, feminism has to make common cause with many groups that have different views. So, feminism cannot complain about lots of things by various groups that could be construed as ‘anti-feminist’ or ‘misogynist’.
    For instance, feminists are mum about rap music that is mostly about loud black men yapping about guns, rape, violence, and calling women ‘bitchass hos’. Feminists used to be anti-porn, but once porn has turned into interracist propaganda and encourages white women doing Negro men and white boys reduced to cuck status, feminists are mum about porn too. Feminists are mum about Muslim male violence in Europe because the Narrative says ‘western values’ are all about ‘inclusion’ and not stereotyping non-whites. And in the US, being pro-Islam is a kneejerk proggy position because bashing Muslims is one of the few permissible ‘hates’ still allowed for the Conservatives. Even though some denounce ‘Islamophobia’, one doesn’t get fired or blacklisted for it. In the US, you can talk about Rotherham, Muslim rape in Europe, Muslim terrorism, and female genital mutilation. You won’t lose your job. In some quarters, you will be rewarded. But if you say, “blacks rape the most” or “Jews control porn that degrade white women into c*mbuckets for Negroes, or Israel used Slavic women as sex slaves in brothels”, you will be destroyed forever by both Liberals and Conservatives for whom Israel can never do wrong.

    Also, as feminists are dependent on rich white/Jewish men for access, power, and privilege, so much of lewd behavior among powerful white/Jewish men is tolerated as long as those people support ‘feminism’. Consider how much bad stuff Bill Clinton was allowed to get away with because he signed onto ‘feminism’. And Hollywood and Music industries are filled with rich white or Jewish execs who use their positions to bang lots of chicks who will do anything to have a chance. And Washington politicians use their power to get lots of pooter. Again, feminists don’t care about that since it’s about Power Sex. Powerful feminists are in the Game.

    [MORE]

    And of course, feminists are mum about how homos run the fashion industry and idealize these super-thin and super-tall women, thereby making a lot of women feel physically inferior because they don’t measure up to fashion mag standards. Homo men run fashion. And homo men also run much of TV and music industry. As homos tend to be narcissistic, nihilistic, excessive, vain, hedonistic, crass, shallow, and bungish, they come up with outrageous stuff for girls that encourage really bad stupid behavior. You can bet that the idols like Britney Spears, madonna, Christina Agorilla, Miley Cyrus, and etc are surrounded by homo men who make them wear stupid dress and act trashy. It’s all ultra-capitalist, consumerist, materialistic, and culture-of-greed and megalomania, but feminists go along with it because they are allied with homos.

    Also, there is elite feminism and egalitarian feminism. Egalo-feminism still survives in some college departments. Many such women are fat, ugly, gross, gunky, and look like Andrea Dworkin. They lack drive, ambition, and creativity. They are only good for bureaucratic work or teaching some stupid college in class about ‘oppression’. As these fat ugly hagulas have nothing going for them, their meaning of life derives from hooking up with some ideology, cause, or whatever. Anything to piss off the System, even though they are enabled and funded by the System. But no one really pays any attention to them. They are boring and dull. They are like the tardo girl in OLEANNA.

    So, the real power of feminism is in elite feminism. The odd thing is that egalo-feminist, though far less powerful and privileged, have absolute power in their domain, whereas the elito-feminists, though far richer and more powerful, are still at a disadvantage in their chosen fields. The women’s studies department at a college will be totally ruled by egalo-feminists. But no one really cares about this fat pig hagulas, and they never gain great wealth or access.
    In contrast, women like Sheryl Sanderg in Silicon Valley and top female agents in Hollywood make big bucks. And some of them are leading players. But they still lag behind the males in the upper echelons of power.
    The difference between egalo-feminists and elito-feminists is that the former really hate men(not least because men hate them too for being fat, ugly, disgusting, and vile) whereas the latter really want to compete with men, win in the Big Game, and marry some super-ideal guy with big bucks, smarts, and success. They love successful men and wanna gain success themselves to marry the best men.

    Ostensibly, egalo-feminists and elito-feminists are allied against men, but they have little in common. Egalo-feminists, being fat-ugly-gross-mediocre-morbid, have given up on men and just stick to the puritanical man-hating ideology. It is their crutch. They will cheer on the elito-feminists in the corporate world in the name of fighting male domination and patriarchy, but they also secretly resent the elito-feminists who have a much greater chance of genuine success(in the real world) and are looking for successful/powerful men to marry or have sex with.
    The alliance is like between the high school cheerleader on honor roll and zit-faced fatassed girl who just gets B’s. The smart cheerleader may spout all the right-sounding stuff about equality and etc, but she has ambitions to make it and meet the best guy. In contrast, the zit-faced fat-butted hagula won’t amount to much and just sulks in resentment.

    Elite-feminists seek parity with rich and powerful. So, when they talk about ‘equality’, they mean equality with the ‘best’ kind of people in the Elite World. They are not talking about equality with rest of humanity, most of whom are suckers and losers. No way they will marry a mexican dishwasher or ‘deplorable’ security guard.
    Sheryl Sandberg’s idea of equality is rubbing shoulders with billionaire men. Hillary Clinton’s idea of equality is being president and restarting cold war with Russia. Merkel’s idea of equality is running for president again and sitting her fat bare ass down on the face of Germany.

    Anyway, we have one kind of feminism run by fat loseresses who claim to stand for the powerless, and we have another kind of feminism practiced by winneresses whose dream is to rub shoulders with the powerful and marry rich men. The contradiction is too big. Imagine a men’s movement where one bunch of guys are fat tards who look like Eric Erickson yammering about equality with all of loser humanity and another bunch of guys who are smart/ambitious and wanna be equal with the oligarchs of Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Las Vegas and marry the most desirable women.

    But we have to blame the men too for feminism. The fact is a lot of Western/modern fathers did a lousy job. They were too materialistic, too immature, too individualistic, too excessive, etc. They forgot how to be patriarchs, and they failed to instill true culture in their girls. They didn’t know how to be like Don Vito Corleone. They never grew up, watched too much TV, didn’t introduce their girls to race, culture, history, and morality. So, the girls grew up on the two PC’s: pop culture and political correctness.

    Also, the problem of feminism, along with individualism and careerism, is that it puts materialism above organismicism. Indeed, this is the problem of modernity. It favors ideas and materials over life. This is a huge misconception since ideas and material goods are useless & can’t exist without life. Humans are animals. Before anything else is possible, there must be life. So, any understanding of meaning of human-ness must begin with life. Each human is born of father and mother. Since it is a complex process to raise a kid, it is a moral duty for man and woman who produce life to commit to one another and to the life they produced. That is the core of morality based on biological truth. But so many ideologies of modernity attack this. Feminists attack it as patriarchal. Feminists, being into sisterhood or individuality, thinks only of what the Woman wants. So, if she wants be a wife, that is okay. But if she wants to be single-mother and deny the kid a father, that is good too. Or, if she wants to kill the kibbler through abortion, that is good too.
    Feminists don’t understand life. All they care about is women’s choice, women’s rights, women’s freedom, women’s freedom, and etc. They never think to ask, “Why do women exist in the first place?” Women, like men, exist because of father and mother. Thus, every child should be the responsibility of father and mother. And since the kid in the womb belongs as much to the father as to the mother, abortion should be a decision made by both parties. Why should the woman have the sole right to choose to kill the kid? The woman may argue that the kid is in HER BODY, but it’s in her body ONLY BECAUSE the man fertilized her egg with his seed. Now, if the man takes off, the woman should make the decision on her own. But if the man and woman decided together to have a kid, the man should be consulted too if the woman suddenly decides to kill the kid. It’s like money in the bank. The money may physically be in the bank, but it was deposited by the customer. Just because the money is in the bank doesn’t mean the bank can do whatever it wants to do with it. Likewise, every kid in a womb is the result of man depositing his sperm inside the woman. If it was rape, the woman should abort. Otherwise, it is a far more complicated moral issue.

    Anyway, our understanding of human-ness must begin with life. And the meaning of life comes from family. Man having a wife, woman having a husband, and they raising a family. While some jobs may be rewarding in their own right, most jobs suck. Even better kinds of jobs, like doctoring and lawyering, are mostly drudgery. The real meaning comes from family life. Indeed, we can see it in the generosity within the family. A doctor may perform invaluable service to his clients, but why? For money. He doesn’t really care for all those strangers. He treats them for money. Once they are out of his office, he doesn’t care about them, and they don’t care about him. And he wouldn’t spend money on them. He works on them to take money from them. But a parent spends money on his kid out of love. That is meaning of life. True meaning of life is based on love of close ones to whom one gives without thought of material reward. Emotional reward is enough, indeed the best kind of reward. Also, it is through the kids that parents live on in story, memory, and etc. Jews understood this. The kid hears the story of his father and grandfather. So, once grandfather dies, the story remains, and it is carried down through the generations.

    The problem with our age is amnesia. We don’t believe in family history anymore. Kids are not raised by patriarchs. Instead, from a young age, kids are made to identify with pop culture idols and emulate the likes of Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus. From a young age, kids see TV. It’s like in the movie AVALON by Barry Levinson. Before TV, the young kids heard stories from parents and grandparents. And he read books and etc. Also, kids got to know nature by playing outside and going on trips. Now, it’s all zip-zap pop culture that extinguishes all memory. Also, as America is the center of the world, all the world is following the American Model. After all, one needs only 5 yrs residence in the US and love of shopping to be a ‘good American’.

    But real meaning comes from family, and family is about life created through sex bound by moral laws that make love(than mere lust) possible. So, jobs exist mainly to allow people to afford to have families. Men need families. Without them, they are leading dead-end lives. And we can see the result in White Death. Women may work to afford families too, but jobs are far more important for the men because men without jobs cannot have families. The simple general fact is most men will marry women without jobs, but most women will not marry men without jobs. So, if you take job away from a woman, you are not taking away her chance at family. But if you take away job from a man, you are taking away not only his job but his chance at family.
    But feminists are too nasty and selfish to see this.

    When women take too many good jobs, they are robbing men of the chance of having families. This is esp true in our world when women’s expectations for marriage have risen so high. Back in New Deal days, a woman was willing to marry some high school dropout with factory job. Now, women want a much better kind of men, but with so many good jobs held by women, there are far fewer men with the kind of jobs that attract women. Indeed, feminism is self-defeating because as women rise higher and higher in economic ranks, their standards also go higher and higher. They are less and less willing to marry men who are deemed ‘not good enough’. But since more women in upper ranks means fewer men in upper ranks, it means fewer men for ambitious women to marry. Worse, many women who gain good jobs don’t even want families. They just want to enjoy the good life of travel, affairs, and materialism. So, they hog a good job, make all that money, and blow it all on themselves. If a good decent man had that job, he might have spent the money to raise a family than just on himself.

    We need a new view of life that puts life first. We need to say life comes first since the only reason we exist is because we are alive, and we are alive cuz we have father and mother. So, life is most important. And since we don’t live forever, our lives continue as memory in our kids, who are also life. And it just so happens to be the case that men who want to get married need jobs. So, even though women should not be banned from jobs, careers must be prioritized to serve men. In serving men, jobs also serve women who can marry the men, and it will serve the kids who will be born into stable families. Feminists will cry foul because such a system favors men for jobs, and from a purely libertarian-feminist perspective, their complaint would have merit. Libertarianism puts ideas and individual choice above all else. So, the idea of liberty and freedom beats all. But the core meaning of life comes from life itself. What is use of liberty or freedom if there is no life? And life imbued with moral value is about family. So, the core meaning and purpose of humanity is to have family. That being the case, society should be ordered so that it maximizes the chance for men to have wives and families. It is a form of biological socialism. It might be called Bio-Social-Security. If men and women were asexual and interchangeable, I would agree with the libertarians. And if we lived in a BRAVE NEW WORLD kind of society where the state makes all the people, family would be unnecessary. But we still create life through family. And the true meaning of life is found not at work but when one comes home ot family from work filled with colleagues and strangers. (Though co-workers may be close friends, they are still not family. If a co-worker decided to quit and go elsewhere, that’s just part of work. But imagine if the spouse left or a child ran away. Or if they died. It’d mean a lot more.) It is when the man comes home and hugs his wife, kids, and dog and cat that he finds true meaning. Why? At home, it’s not about dollars and cents. He gives himself to wife and kids out of love. At work, he did stuff with others to make money. It’s like an accountant will serve any old folks, but it’s for money. But he will do stuff for his own parents out of love. He works for money, but the money gains most meaning when spent on family. The main purpose of work is to allow men to afford family. When women take too many good jobs, they not only hurt men but women who want to be wives/mothers. Suppose a bunch of women want to be good wives/mothers, but it is difficult to find men who can support them. Why? Cuz too many women hog the good jobs… and these women don’t even intend to get married and just lead Sex-and-City lives of piggishness.

    The main problem of our materialist-consumer society is it puts money and jobs above life and family. Our society pretends as if money and jobs are ends in themselves when, in fact, they are just means to have families(for people with true bio-moral sense).
    After all, consider two men: one is a libertarian who is just into me, me, me materialism. He spends all his money on videogames, fancy cars, travel, expensive man-child toys, collectibles, record albums, and etc. Now, all those things are nice, and I’m not against having stuff. But are they the ultimate meaning of life?
    The other man uses his earnings to mainly afford a family, have a wife, and have kids.
    Suppose a lot of time passes, and both are old and near death. The second guy is surrounded by kids and grandkids. He has memory of life well-lived with wife whom he dearly loved. The first guy is all alone in some hospital surrounded by Filipino nurses and Nigerian assistants who don’t give a rat’s ass about him. In his house are lots of stuff — games, books, records, and etc — that don’t care about him and will end up in some trash heap or Salvation Army after he dies. Who led a more meaningful life? Charles Foster Kane dies with lots of stuff, but he has no family. It’s miserable. But George Bailey is surrounded by family at end of IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE. And Don Vito Corleone died meaningfully as his family remembers him and dearly loves him.
    When consumer-material society put jobs, money, and individualism above life, family, and culture/community, it committed a great crime against humanity.
    In this sense, the National Socialist model was most sound. Now, Nazism ended up doing horrible stuff with WWII and Holocaust. Its imperialism and radical racism were hideous and worth denouncing for all time. But when it came to national policy on family and economics, it came closest to a model that found a meaningful covenant between the need of materiality/economy and need of the biology/family.

    This has meaning for men, women, and children.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/86/03/13/860313faff843e305aeff1c0b096c3e4.jpg

    http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/24fafb2d081d4b918a791e2de6a482eb/kalenberg-peasant-family-1939-adolf-wissel-1894-1973-nazi-germany-g950ha.jpg

    We need some socialism on the matter of family, a kind of bio-socialism.
    If socialism is about sacrificing individual wealth and liberty for the good of the whole where necessary, then it should be considered in relation to biology.
    After all, Social Security program too is bio-socialist. The earnings of young individuals are passed to old individuals. Purely from a libertarian viewpoint, it might be called unjust since money is taken from one bunch of individuals and given to another bunch who didn’t work for it. But the biological fact is older people are weaker, wearier, and sicker. So, they can’t work like young people. And golden yrs should be somewhat pleasant. So, young workers make sacrifices for older folks.. and also, young will not remain young forever. They will become old one day and they will receive social security paid for by the new young.
    Then, we need bio-socialist considerations when it comes to men and women. Men and Women are different. Men cannot have kids. And women generally will not marry men without jobs, esp good jobs. So, jobs matter more to men than to women. Also, even though money is nice to spend on fun consumer stuff, money is ultimately a means for creating and raising a family. While one can spend all the money on non-family stuff, it is ultimately meaningless since a man who dies along surrounded by dead stuff or material goods is at a moral/cultural dead-end. Also, it is within the family that men, women, and children share in something truly meaningful. If we are life, then we must life mainly for life, and it is from the family that we came from, it is the family which we must create, and it is the family that we must leave behind once we die. (Another way to enact bio-socialism is to allow women to have good high-paying jobs but taxing them at much higher rates and passing that money to men so they can afford families. After all, men need the extra money to have families. Since women take good jobs and chance of families from men, the state can take a chunk of the women’s paycheck and give to men to raise families.) Western Society is so proud of its social safety nets and social security, but it has failed because it has forgotten how to create life and family. The fact that aging white folks in the US and EU must talk about importing masses of non-white immigrants to work to support social security for old white folks who left few or no children behind reeks of failure. What does it matter if white folks created lots of stuff and wealth IF they failed to create life that will love them, cherish them, take care of them, and remember them and carry on with their stories and memories? The question is do you wanna be like Vito Corleone or like Jack Nicholson in CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, a man who got the sex and girls but failed as a real man with family? If the aging West has to import tons of non-whites to take care of old whites, then it has failed big time. It has favored materialism over organismicism. West forgot that, above all, we are organisms. We need life before we can have ideas and ‘stuff’.

    Even Soviets had sounder concept of family that what happened in the consumerist west.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a0/d7/29/a0d72952783a931b43fe77cac4e74399.jpg

    This is one of the most beautiful images of fatherhood. From Tarkovsky’s MIRROR:

    In the end, feminism is irrelevant. Yes, earlier forms did good in allowing freedom to women and giving them chances to develop their minds. And etc. But in the end, most women are not Madame Curies. Most of them never used their freedom to do good work or achieve remarkable things. Same with the men. Less than 1% of people change society in any real way. Most people live not for great fame or fortune but for family. And the advance of second wave feminism, in concert with perpetual youth-ism, materialism, hedonism, piggerism, shamelessism, and etc. led to a social disaster. Even the affluent who do better than other are soulless and lost, worshiping garbage like ‘gay marriage’ and trannies. It is a life out of balance, like in KOYAANISQATSI, where individuals are made to favor the ever disposable insta-delights over things that have meaning over the long haul.

    Fatherism or neo-patriarchalism is the only thing that will save society. Not just masculinism but father-ism because every man was born a son, and every man can only pass down his identity, story, and culture to his son. (A man has moral and cultural power over his own kids that he has over no other. A Jewish father can make his son Jewish and tell him the story of his people. But he can’t do that to any other kid who isn’t his own.) We need a culture that makes boys grow up and put away childish things and act with honor like young Vito Corleone. And has a sense of culture beyond superhero movies, video games, and sports dominated by the Gros who are trashy and tattooed all over. (We are so far away from the time of Jackie Robinson who had some class, at least in public.) We need men who have enough sense not to graffiti their ass and arms with tattoos. Or get dumb piercings or get gay-ish haircuts. Male culture is a disaster because it’s geared to churning out Perez Hilton-imitators than Vito Corleones. A NYT article says gaydar no longer works since even straight urban males now dress and act like fruits.

    Imagine that: “HIPSTERS BROKE MY GAYDAY”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/opinion/sunday/hipsters-broke-my-gaydar.html

    THAT IS WHAT PASSES FOR MALE CULTURE IN THE MODERN WEST. And men are looking pretty fruity in Japan, what with all those ‘herbivores’. No wonder so many Japanese men would rather play video games for life than be fathers.

    This, btw, is a homo idea of family. Needless to say, certain sicko Jews have been at the center of both radical feminism and homomania.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/da/fc/54/dafc5497243c4f4ea55ecc687422bfa8.jpg

    • Replies: @Miro23
    Good essay but I would have left out the Corleone references (bad career choice).

    Solzhenitsyn would have agreed with you.

    He wrote about pre-Soviet Russian Prime Minister Stolypin's conviction that a sound basis for Russia had to come from giving opportunity to individual families to develop their lives as a unit in the most productive way possible. They had the right to gain and hold property and formed part of a locality with participative government (the Zemstvo) that held real political power, and usefully resolved local problems to do with education, medical care etc. but of course, Stolypin was murdered and the system was quickly destroyed by Communist rhetoric (freedom, milk and honey) and Bolshevik Jewish inspired violence.
    , @Authenticjazzman
    Agree with most of what you say other than your rip of scientology , I am not a scientologist, however I am fully aware of what a brilliant human being LRH was.

    L Ron Hubbard :

    " When women gave up their traditional roles this was the beginning of the end of civilization"


    Authenticjazzman "Mensa" Society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.
  24. @jacques sheete
    Speaking of

    ashen tediousness and endless fury
     
    have you read any of your articles lately?

    Speaking of Haldol, did someone forget his? Hmmmm?

    And when the hysteria turned to paranoia about Muslim rapists I gave up.

    Note to Fwed: Don't worry your pretty little head about Muslim rapists. Despite your obvious cameloid disposition and likely looks and perfume, I doubt even the most desperate of them would give you a second glance.


    I'm not even wondering how it all turned out.

    LOL !! I can see Fred worrying about his honor and purity! With that mug hes got no worries,LMAO! Now if Fred were a 6 year old boy…why of course,that would be different. Some cute little guy…nice and sweet,right Jacques?

    Theyre not going to rape Fred. His wife,his daughters…??

  25. http://www.unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/People-Belly.jpg

    Pregnancy simulator, forced on the military by feminists supposedly so that soldiers will understand the difficulties of pregnancy. (The military exists to understand the difficulties of pregnancy.) Can anyone believe that the purpose was other than to humiliate the hated macho male?

    Bizarre events like this can only come out of Washington and its SJW, Counter Cultural leftist activism.

    If politics was done locally (with taxes raised and spent at County/State level) with a minimal role for the Federal government – as envisaged by the 10th Amendment, none of this would happen.

  26. Radical feminists do not represent women. They represent radical feminists. Other women typically say that they are feminists, meaning in favor or equality of pay and opportunity, but explicitly reject the ideological baggage of the radicals.

    This is of universal application to “minority” identity group lobbyists, equally applicable in general to lobbyists for homosexuals, blacks, or jews. Inevitably the most extreme and obsessive types dominate the lobbying business.

    The real problem is that identity group loyalty or perceived self-interest often prevents members of the wider group from properly disowning the actions and opinions of the extremists.

    The result is that the groups targeted (men, whites, whatever) must actively defend their own interests using similar methods, or see them progressively supressed. It’s a profoundly corrosive process that seems particularly prevalent in liberal democracies.

    Another told me, “Sixty percent of men are misogynists.” This is loopy, around the bend, Haldol time. Among themselves men say with wry resignation that women are mildly crazy and have PMS, and women complain about the position of the toilet seat and why don’t men ever pick up after themselves. All true, but doesn’t approach hatred.

    Again, the false and dishonest conflation of disapproval or dislike with “hatred” is a common feature of identity lobby group methods, seen regularly from feminists, antiracists, anti-homophobes and anti-anti-Semites, and especially common in censorship justifications and speechcrime laws.

  27. @Qasim
    "Female genital mutilation", "genital sadism", it is as if this anti radical feminist article (at least the Islam parts) was written by a radical feminist!!

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate. Or at least be consistent and call male circumcision MGM and call for all the physicians who practice this barbaric practice to be painfully executed as well.

    I thought this was an Alt-Right sort of site. People here are generally informed about r/K theory, no? Well, female circumcision is a practice that predates Islam by millennia which is overwhelmingly concentrated amongst the most r selected of Muslims in order to help them control their genetic propensity towards promiscuity, unstable marriages etc. Both male and female circumcision can be thought of as a partial neutering in order to control the sexual appetite.


    And whereas female circumcision is practiced mainly by African Muslims, all Muslims engage in "MGM", so if anything Muslims should be attacked for their systematic misandry. And the whole "holding the kid down, spreading the legs, and using a razor with no anesthesia" thing applies equally to the boys, especially before modern medicine. They used to do it at age 3 where my family is from in India, they dressed the kid up, had a big party, and afterwards the "mutilated" boy would get a bunch of gifts. Too bad Fred wasn't there to painfully kill my grandfather for his sadism!

    Mr. Reed put up that map where FGM was practiced. Perhaps he should put up another map of Africa right next to it showing the # of deaths due to AIDS over the past 30 years. My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths; perhaps idealistic white people should not seek to destroy the means by which they accomplished this.

    One more thing. Mr. Reed, you bash the deleterious effects of feminism on Western societies. Then you bash the misogynistic barbarity of Islam that ensures feminism could never indigenously gain a foothold in Muslim societies. And you do both in the same article!
    I find this confusing. You yourself are so sick of your own women that you fled to Mexico and married a native, so forgive me if I find your credentials for giving advice on gender relations somewhat lacking.

    P.S. The whole "Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault" is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    http://top101news.com/most-popular-top-10-list/2017-2018-2019-2020-2021/others/countries-highest-rape-crime-world-worst-dangerous/

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate.

    That was the term generally used in English, certainly, up until a few decades ago.

    It was changed because it implied an equivalence with male circumcision. Presumably this was a combination of a deliberate piece of linguistic cultural manipulation by campaigners against the practice, combined with backing from certain influential groups who didn’t want their own practices tarred with the brush increasingly being used against the practice in relation to females.

  28. Randal,

    You are making more than one good point there.

    MGM in the form of circumsion should not be allowed until informed consent is possible.

    Likewise, any form of FGM.

    FGM has a spectrum, from a combination of clitoridectimy and trimming then sewing the labia shut, so the husband can enjoy a realy rapey feeling by cutting before the first penetration, to trimming the labia alone. which is closely comparable to MGM as circumsion. There are many combinations in between. None are permissible by a rational person.

    While living overseas, I had a copy of the Rationalist Society’s magazine, the article was by a man, who, with his newly wedded wife, decided to have their honeymoon in the honeymoon district of Port Said in Egypt. By his account, they were unable to consumate their marriage that night because of the
    constant screams of brides under the worst condition I state above.

  29. @Anon
    Feminism is really dead. It was killed by Negroes, Muslims, and Homos-Trannies.

    It tries to remain alive as an anti-white-male ideology, but it doesn't make much sense these days.

    After all, white males the tamest bunch of guys in America. Maybe Asian guys are tamer, but they don't show up on the cultural radar. Due to so much anti-white-male-bashing, white males have become very careful about whatever they say and do. The UVA case shows that the MSM has to create fake rape stories about blonde Nazis to keep the Narrative going. It's like A&E had to pay some dinky remnants of the KKK to do Hollywood KKK stuff.

    Because of 'intersectionality', feminism has to make common cause with many groups that have different views. So, feminism cannot complain about lots of things by various groups that could be construed as 'anti-feminist' or 'misogynist'.
    For instance, feminists are mum about rap music that is mostly about loud black men yapping about guns, rape, violence, and calling women 'bitchass hos'. Feminists used to be anti-porn, but once porn has turned into interracist propaganda and encourages white women doing Negro men and white boys reduced to cuck status, feminists are mum about porn too. Feminists are mum about Muslim male violence in Europe because the Narrative says 'western values' are all about 'inclusion' and not stereotyping non-whites. And in the US, being pro-Islam is a kneejerk proggy position because bashing Muslims is one of the few permissible 'hates' still allowed for the Conservatives. Even though some denounce 'Islamophobia', one doesn't get fired or blacklisted for it. In the US, you can talk about Rotherham, Muslim rape in Europe, Muslim terrorism, and female genital mutilation. You won't lose your job. In some quarters, you will be rewarded. But if you say, "blacks rape the most" or "Jews control porn that degrade white women into c*mbuckets for Negroes, or Israel used Slavic women as sex slaves in brothels", you will be destroyed forever by both Liberals and Conservatives for whom Israel can never do wrong.

    Also, as feminists are dependent on rich white/Jewish men for access, power, and privilege, so much of lewd behavior among powerful white/Jewish men is tolerated as long as those people support 'feminism'. Consider how much bad stuff Bill Clinton was allowed to get away with because he signed onto 'feminism'. And Hollywood and Music industries are filled with rich white or Jewish execs who use their positions to bang lots of chicks who will do anything to have a chance. And Washington politicians use their power to get lots of pooter. Again, feminists don't care about that since it's about Power Sex. Powerful feminists are in the Game.

    And of course, feminists are mum about how homos run the fashion industry and idealize these super-thin and super-tall women, thereby making a lot of women feel physically inferior because they don't measure up to fashion mag standards. Homo men run fashion. And homo men also run much of TV and music industry. As homos tend to be narcissistic, nihilistic, excessive, vain, hedonistic, crass, shallow, and bungish, they come up with outrageous stuff for girls that encourage really bad stupid behavior. You can bet that the idols like Britney Spears, madonna, Christina Agorilla, Miley Cyrus, and etc are surrounded by homo men who make them wear stupid dress and act trashy. It's all ultra-capitalist, consumerist, materialistic, and culture-of-greed and megalomania, but feminists go along with it because they are allied with homos.

    Also, there is elite feminism and egalitarian feminism. Egalo-feminism still survives in some college departments. Many such women are fat, ugly, gross, gunky, and look like Andrea Dworkin. They lack drive, ambition, and creativity. They are only good for bureaucratic work or teaching some stupid college in class about 'oppression'. As these fat ugly hagulas have nothing going for them, their meaning of life derives from hooking up with some ideology, cause, or whatever. Anything to piss off the System, even though they are enabled and funded by the System. But no one really pays any attention to them. They are boring and dull. They are like the tardo girl in OLEANNA.

    So, the real power of feminism is in elite feminism. The odd thing is that egalo-feminist, though far less powerful and privileged, have absolute power in their domain, whereas the elito-feminists, though far richer and more powerful, are still at a disadvantage in their chosen fields. The women's studies department at a college will be totally ruled by egalo-feminists. But no one really cares about this fat pig hagulas, and they never gain great wealth or access.
    In contrast, women like Sheryl Sanderg in Silicon Valley and top female agents in Hollywood make big bucks. And some of them are leading players. But they still lag behind the males in the upper echelons of power.
    The difference between egalo-feminists and elito-feminists is that the former really hate men(not least because men hate them too for being fat, ugly, disgusting, and vile) whereas the latter really want to compete with men, win in the Big Game, and marry some super-ideal guy with big bucks, smarts, and success. They love successful men and wanna gain success themselves to marry the best men.

    Ostensibly, egalo-feminists and elito-feminists are allied against men, but they have little in common. Egalo-feminists, being fat-ugly-gross-mediocre-morbid, have given up on men and just stick to the puritanical man-hating ideology. It is their crutch. They will cheer on the elito-feminists in the corporate world in the name of fighting male domination and patriarchy, but they also secretly resent the elito-feminists who have a much greater chance of genuine success(in the real world) and are looking for successful/powerful men to marry or have sex with.
    The alliance is like between the high school cheerleader on honor roll and zit-faced fatassed girl who just gets B's. The smart cheerleader may spout all the right-sounding stuff about equality and etc, but she has ambitions to make it and meet the best guy. In contrast, the zit-faced fat-butted hagula won't amount to much and just sulks in resentment.

    Elite-feminists seek parity with rich and powerful. So, when they talk about 'equality', they mean equality with the 'best' kind of people in the Elite World. They are not talking about equality with rest of humanity, most of whom are suckers and losers. No way they will marry a mexican dishwasher or 'deplorable' security guard.
    Sheryl Sandberg's idea of equality is rubbing shoulders with billionaire men. Hillary Clinton's idea of equality is being president and restarting cold war with Russia. Merkel's idea of equality is running for president again and sitting her fat bare ass down on the face of Germany.

    Anyway, we have one kind of feminism run by fat loseresses who claim to stand for the powerless, and we have another kind of feminism practiced by winneresses whose dream is to rub shoulders with the powerful and marry rich men. The contradiction is too big. Imagine a men's movement where one bunch of guys are fat tards who look like Eric Erickson yammering about equality with all of loser humanity and another bunch of guys who are smart/ambitious and wanna be equal with the oligarchs of Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Las Vegas and marry the most desirable women.

    But we have to blame the men too for feminism. The fact is a lot of Western/modern fathers did a lousy job. They were too materialistic, too immature, too individualistic, too excessive, etc. They forgot how to be patriarchs, and they failed to instill true culture in their girls. They didn't know how to be like Don Vito Corleone. They never grew up, watched too much TV, didn't introduce their girls to race, culture, history, and morality. So, the girls grew up on the two PC's: pop culture and political correctness.

    Also, the problem of feminism, along with individualism and careerism, is that it puts materialism above organismicism. Indeed, this is the problem of modernity. It favors ideas and materials over life. This is a huge misconception since ideas and material goods are useless & can't exist without life. Humans are animals. Before anything else is possible, there must be life. So, any understanding of meaning of human-ness must begin with life. Each human is born of father and mother. Since it is a complex process to raise a kid, it is a moral duty for man and woman who produce life to commit to one another and to the life they produced. That is the core of morality based on biological truth. But so many ideologies of modernity attack this. Feminists attack it as patriarchal. Feminists, being into sisterhood or individuality, thinks only of what the Woman wants. So, if she wants be a wife, that is okay. But if she wants to be single-mother and deny the kid a father, that is good too. Or, if she wants to kill the kibbler through abortion, that is good too.
    Feminists don't understand life. All they care about is women's choice, women's rights, women's freedom, women's freedom, and etc. They never think to ask, "Why do women exist in the first place?" Women, like men, exist because of father and mother. Thus, every child should be the responsibility of father and mother. And since the kid in the womb belongs as much to the father as to the mother, abortion should be a decision made by both parties. Why should the woman have the sole right to choose to kill the kid? The woman may argue that the kid is in HER BODY, but it's in her body ONLY BECAUSE the man fertilized her egg with his seed. Now, if the man takes off, the woman should make the decision on her own. But if the man and woman decided together to have a kid, the man should be consulted too if the woman suddenly decides to kill the kid. It's like money in the bank. The money may physically be in the bank, but it was deposited by the customer. Just because the money is in the bank doesn't mean the bank can do whatever it wants to do with it. Likewise, every kid in a womb is the result of man depositing his sperm inside the woman. If it was rape, the woman should abort. Otherwise, it is a far more complicated moral issue.

    Anyway, our understanding of human-ness must begin with life. And the meaning of life comes from family. Man having a wife, woman having a husband, and they raising a family. While some jobs may be rewarding in their own right, most jobs suck. Even better kinds of jobs, like doctoring and lawyering, are mostly drudgery. The real meaning comes from family life. Indeed, we can see it in the generosity within the family. A doctor may perform invaluable service to his clients, but why? For money. He doesn't really care for all those strangers. He treats them for money. Once they are out of his office, he doesn't care about them, and they don't care about him. And he wouldn't spend money on them. He works on them to take money from them. But a parent spends money on his kid out of love. That is meaning of life. True meaning of life is based on love of close ones to whom one gives without thought of material reward. Emotional reward is enough, indeed the best kind of reward. Also, it is through the kids that parents live on in story, memory, and etc. Jews understood this. The kid hears the story of his father and grandfather. So, once grandfather dies, the story remains, and it is carried down through the generations.

    The problem with our age is amnesia. We don't believe in family history anymore. Kids are not raised by patriarchs. Instead, from a young age, kids are made to identify with pop culture idols and emulate the likes of Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus. From a young age, kids see TV. It's like in the movie AVALON by Barry Levinson. Before TV, the young kids heard stories from parents and grandparents. And he read books and etc. Also, kids got to know nature by playing outside and going on trips. Now, it's all zip-zap pop culture that extinguishes all memory. Also, as America is the center of the world, all the world is following the American Model. After all, one needs only 5 yrs residence in the US and love of shopping to be a 'good American'.

    But real meaning comes from family, and family is about life created through sex bound by moral laws that make love(than mere lust) possible. So, jobs exist mainly to allow people to afford to have families. Men need families. Without them, they are leading dead-end lives. And we can see the result in White Death. Women may work to afford families too, but jobs are far more important for the men because men without jobs cannot have families. The simple general fact is most men will marry women without jobs, but most women will not marry men without jobs. So, if you take job away from a woman, you are not taking away her chance at family. But if you take away job from a man, you are taking away not only his job but his chance at family.
    But feminists are too nasty and selfish to see this.

    When women take too many good jobs, they are robbing men of the chance of having families. This is esp true in our world when women's expectations for marriage have risen so high. Back in New Deal days, a woman was willing to marry some high school dropout with factory job. Now, women want a much better kind of men, but with so many good jobs held by women, there are far fewer men with the kind of jobs that attract women. Indeed, feminism is self-defeating because as women rise higher and higher in economic ranks, their standards also go higher and higher. They are less and less willing to marry men who are deemed 'not good enough'. But since more women in upper ranks means fewer men in upper ranks, it means fewer men for ambitious women to marry. Worse, many women who gain good jobs don't even want families. They just want to enjoy the good life of travel, affairs, and materialism. So, they hog a good job, make all that money, and blow it all on themselves. If a good decent man had that job, he might have spent the money to raise a family than just on himself.

    We need a new view of life that puts life first. We need to say life comes first since the only reason we exist is because we are alive, and we are alive cuz we have father and mother. So, life is most important. And since we don't live forever, our lives continue as memory in our kids, who are also life. And it just so happens to be the case that men who want to get married need jobs. So, even though women should not be banned from jobs, careers must be prioritized to serve men. In serving men, jobs also serve women who can marry the men, and it will serve the kids who will be born into stable families. Feminists will cry foul because such a system favors men for jobs, and from a purely libertarian-feminist perspective, their complaint would have merit. Libertarianism puts ideas and individual choice above all else. So, the idea of liberty and freedom beats all. But the core meaning of life comes from life itself. What is use of liberty or freedom if there is no life? And life imbued with moral value is about family. So, the core meaning and purpose of humanity is to have family. That being the case, society should be ordered so that it maximizes the chance for men to have wives and families. It is a form of biological socialism. It might be called Bio-Social-Security. If men and women were asexual and interchangeable, I would agree with the libertarians. And if we lived in a BRAVE NEW WORLD kind of society where the state makes all the people, family would be unnecessary. But we still create life through family. And the true meaning of life is found not at work but when one comes home ot family from work filled with colleagues and strangers. (Though co-workers may be close friends, they are still not family. If a co-worker decided to quit and go elsewhere, that's just part of work. But imagine if the spouse left or a child ran away. Or if they died. It'd mean a lot more.) It is when the man comes home and hugs his wife, kids, and dog and cat that he finds true meaning. Why? At home, it's not about dollars and cents. He gives himself to wife and kids out of love. At work, he did stuff with others to make money. It's like an accountant will serve any old folks, but it's for money. But he will do stuff for his own parents out of love. He works for money, but the money gains most meaning when spent on family. The main purpose of work is to allow men to afford family. When women take too many good jobs, they not only hurt men but women who want to be wives/mothers. Suppose a bunch of women want to be good wives/mothers, but it is difficult to find men who can support them. Why? Cuz too many women hog the good jobs... and these women don't even intend to get married and just lead Sex-and-City lives of piggishness.

    The main problem of our materialist-consumer society is it puts money and jobs above life and family. Our society pretends as if money and jobs are ends in themselves when, in fact, they are just means to have families(for people with true bio-moral sense).
    After all, consider two men: one is a libertarian who is just into me, me, me materialism. He spends all his money on videogames, fancy cars, travel, expensive man-child toys, collectibles, record albums, and etc. Now, all those things are nice, and I'm not against having stuff. But are they the ultimate meaning of life?
    The other man uses his earnings to mainly afford a family, have a wife, and have kids.
    Suppose a lot of time passes, and both are old and near death. The second guy is surrounded by kids and grandkids. He has memory of life well-lived with wife whom he dearly loved. The first guy is all alone in some hospital surrounded by Filipino nurses and Nigerian assistants who don't give a rat's ass about him. In his house are lots of stuff -- games, books, records, and etc -- that don't care about him and will end up in some trash heap or Salvation Army after he dies. Who led a more meaningful life? Charles Foster Kane dies with lots of stuff, but he has no family. It's miserable. But George Bailey is surrounded by family at end of IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE. And Don Vito Corleone died meaningfully as his family remembers him and dearly loves him.
    When consumer-material society put jobs, money, and individualism above life, family, and culture/community, it committed a great crime against humanity.
    In this sense, the National Socialist model was most sound. Now, Nazism ended up doing horrible stuff with WWII and Holocaust. Its imperialism and radical racism were hideous and worth denouncing for all time. But when it came to national policy on family and economics, it came closest to a model that found a meaningful covenant between the need of materiality/economy and need of the biology/family.

    This has meaning for men, women, and children.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/86/03/13/860313faff843e305aeff1c0b096c3e4.jpg

    http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/24fafb2d081d4b918a791e2de6a482eb/kalenberg-peasant-family-1939-adolf-wissel-1894-1973-nazi-germany-g950ha.jpg

    We need some socialism on the matter of family, a kind of bio-socialism.
    If socialism is about sacrificing individual wealth and liberty for the good of the whole where necessary, then it should be considered in relation to biology.
    After all, Social Security program too is bio-socialist. The earnings of young individuals are passed to old individuals. Purely from a libertarian viewpoint, it might be called unjust since money is taken from one bunch of individuals and given to another bunch who didn't work for it. But the biological fact is older people are weaker, wearier, and sicker. So, they can't work like young people. And golden yrs should be somewhat pleasant. So, young workers make sacrifices for older folks.. and also, young will not remain young forever. They will become old one day and they will receive social security paid for by the new young.
    Then, we need bio-socialist considerations when it comes to men and women. Men and Women are different. Men cannot have kids. And women generally will not marry men without jobs, esp good jobs. So, jobs matter more to men than to women. Also, even though money is nice to spend on fun consumer stuff, money is ultimately a means for creating and raising a family. While one can spend all the money on non-family stuff, it is ultimately meaningless since a man who dies along surrounded by dead stuff or material goods is at a moral/cultural dead-end. Also, it is within the family that men, women, and children share in something truly meaningful. If we are life, then we must life mainly for life, and it is from the family that we came from, it is the family which we must create, and it is the family that we must leave behind once we die. (Another way to enact bio-socialism is to allow women to have good high-paying jobs but taxing them at much higher rates and passing that money to men so they can afford families. After all, men need the extra money to have families. Since women take good jobs and chance of families from men, the state can take a chunk of the women's paycheck and give to men to raise families.) Western Society is so proud of its social safety nets and social security, but it has failed because it has forgotten how to create life and family. The fact that aging white folks in the US and EU must talk about importing masses of non-white immigrants to work to support social security for old white folks who left few or no children behind reeks of failure. What does it matter if white folks created lots of stuff and wealth IF they failed to create life that will love them, cherish them, take care of them, and remember them and carry on with their stories and memories? The question is do you wanna be like Vito Corleone or like Jack Nicholson in CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, a man who got the sex and girls but failed as a real man with family? If the aging West has to import tons of non-whites to take care of old whites, then it has failed big time. It has favored materialism over organismicism. West forgot that, above all, we are organisms. We need life before we can have ideas and 'stuff'.

    Even Soviets had sounder concept of family that what happened in the consumerist west.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a0/d7/29/a0d72952783a931b43fe77cac4e74399.jpg

    This is one of the most beautiful images of fatherhood. From Tarkovsky's MIRROR:

    https://youtu.be/9Yn9q25NWAw?t=1h6m56s

    In the end, feminism is irrelevant. Yes, earlier forms did good in allowing freedom to women and giving them chances to develop their minds. And etc. But in the end, most women are not Madame Curies. Most of them never used their freedom to do good work or achieve remarkable things. Same with the men. Less than 1% of people change society in any real way. Most people live not for great fame or fortune but for family. And the advance of second wave feminism, in concert with perpetual youth-ism, materialism, hedonism, piggerism, shamelessism, and etc. led to a social disaster. Even the affluent who do better than other are soulless and lost, worshiping garbage like 'gay marriage' and trannies. It is a life out of balance, like in KOYAANISQATSI, where individuals are made to favor the ever disposable insta-delights over things that have meaning over the long haul.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOIvJTuCrlE

    Fatherism or neo-patriarchalism is the only thing that will save society. Not just masculinism but father-ism because every man was born a son, and every man can only pass down his identity, story, and culture to his son. (A man has moral and cultural power over his own kids that he has over no other. A Jewish father can make his son Jewish and tell him the story of his people. But he can't do that to any other kid who isn't his own.) We need a culture that makes boys grow up and put away childish things and act with honor like young Vito Corleone. And has a sense of culture beyond superhero movies, video games, and sports dominated by the Gros who are trashy and tattooed all over. (We are so far away from the time of Jackie Robinson who had some class, at least in public.) We need men who have enough sense not to graffiti their ass and arms with tattoos. Or get dumb piercings or get gay-ish haircuts. Male culture is a disaster because it's geared to churning out Perez Hilton-imitators than Vito Corleones. A NYT article says gaydar no longer works since even straight urban males now dress and act like fruits.

    Imagine that: "HIPSTERS BROKE MY GAYDAY"

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/opinion/sunday/hipsters-broke-my-gaydar.html

    THAT IS WHAT PASSES FOR MALE CULTURE IN THE MODERN WEST. And men are looking pretty fruity in Japan, what with all those 'herbivores'. No wonder so many Japanese men would rather play video games for life than be fathers.

    This, btw, is a homo idea of family. Needless to say, certain sicko Jews have been at the center of both radical feminism and homomania.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/da/fc/54/dafc5497243c4f4ea55ecc687422bfa8.jpg

    Good essay but I would have left out the Corleone references (bad career choice).

    Solzhenitsyn would have agreed with you.

    He wrote about pre-Soviet Russian Prime Minister Stolypin’s conviction that a sound basis for Russia had to come from giving opportunity to individual families to develop their lives as a unit in the most productive way possible. They had the right to gain and hold property and formed part of a locality with participative government (the Zemstvo) that held real political power, and usefully resolved local problems to do with education, medical care etc. but of course, Stolypin was murdered and the system was quickly destroyed by Communist rhetoric (freedom, milk and honey) and Bolshevik Jewish inspired violence.

  30. Great insightful article Mr.Reed and this video dovetails nicely with comments from some who are involved in the indoctrination.

    Apr 11, 2013 Children Of The State

    The destruction of the family unit is an essential step to take towards achieving totalitarian rule. Radical feminism and global collectivism are slowly but surely eradicating individuals and families alike paving the way for a one world government controlled by the state.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "The destruction of the family unit is an essential step to take towards achieving totalitarian rule. Radical feminism and global collectivism are slowly but surely eradicating individuals and families alike paving the way for a one world government controlled by the state."

    Congratulations on your own indoctrination, compliments of the Alt Right. Bravo!
  31. Reed tellingly said:

    “It combines the vitriol associated with antisemitism ….”

    While he ignores who the influential ‘feminists’ are and who promotes them.

    But in fact:

    ‘Antisemitism’ is simply a logical reaction to the lies, thievery, violence, destruction, and hate that is perpetrated and advocated by Jewish supremacists.

    Fred, bow to your masters.

    “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”

    • Replies: @Lil Johannes Ainger
    So... Antisemitism exists but Jews are responsible for it?
  32. @Son of Dixie
    I had a lengthy conversation with a negro savage from Eritrea. Moslem fellow. The conversation went from Jews, he was shocked that a White American was aware of the JQ, to them this is common knowledge, eventually to FGM.

    To him it was a perfectly logical thing. He explained to me that at times women could have too much of a sexual appetite, and of course men get tired. Solution: FGM, "just a little" as he put it.

    As we spoke - he was dawned in full Moslem garb - I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation? Growing up in the 80's I did not know that a nation called "Eritrea" existed. Had absolutely no idea about East Africa. Didn't care. I didn't know what a Somalian was.

    Really is amazing how many of these throwbacks now roam within our borders. According to "Turn Coat" Fred... No bid deal. Of course being married to a Jewish woman will cloud a man's mind and skew morals.

    “As we spoke – he was dawned in full Moslem garb – I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation?”

    Because the Founding Forefathers granted Congress with the power to confer citizenship. And, it’s not “my” nation, but “our” nation.

    It’s similar to when an Englishman in 1600′s New York talked to a Dutch man and echoed your same thoughts. Why is he here, he is different than me?

    It’s similar to when the ancestors of that Dutch man talked to an Irish man and said the same thing. Why is he here, he is different than me?

    • Replies: @Wally
    Seriously?

    Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims.
  33. @Agent76
    Great insightful article Mr.Reed and this video dovetails nicely with comments from some who are involved in the indoctrination.

    Apr 11, 2013 Children Of The State

    The destruction of the family unit is an essential step to take towards achieving totalitarian rule. Radical feminism and global collectivism are slowly but surely eradicating individuals and families alike paving the way for a one world government controlled by the state.

    https://youtu.be/JtjsD0gplHE

    “The destruction of the family unit is an essential step to take towards achieving totalitarian rule. Radical feminism and global collectivism are slowly but surely eradicating individuals and families alike paving the way for a one world government controlled by the state.”

    Congratulations on your own indoctrination, compliments of the Alt Right. Bravo!

  34. @Corvinus
    "As we spoke – he was dawned in full Moslem garb – I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation?"

    Because the Founding Forefathers granted Congress with the power to confer citizenship. And, it's not "my" nation, but "our" nation.

    It's similar to when an Englishman in 1600's New York talked to a Dutch man and echoed your same thoughts. Why is he here, he is different than me?

    It's similar to when the ancestors of that Dutch man talked to an Irish man and said the same thing. Why is he here, he is different than me?

    Seriously?

    Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims."

    First, Muslims are not neanderthal-like, they are homo sapiens.

    Second, Europeans on the mainland were NOT united by race. Rather, ethnic rivalries prevailed. One such example was the Swedish War of Liberation in the 1600's. Swedish nobleman Gustav Vasa successfully deposed the Danish-Norwegian king Christian II. White Europeans did not play nice with each other. Refer to the Germanic tribes and their squabbles with their neighbors.

    Only in the United States did the world bear witness to the melting of European hostilities as marriage between ethnic groups became commonplace. We are mutts, my friend.
  35. @Wally
    Reed tellingly said:

    "It combines the vitriol associated with antisemitism ...."

    While he ignores who the influential 'feminists' are and who promotes them.

    But in fact:


    'Antisemitism’ is simply a logical reaction to the lies, thievery, violence, destruction, and hate that is perpetrated and advocated by Jewish supremacists.
     
    Fred, bow to your masters.

    "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize."

    So… Antisemitism exists but Jews are responsible for it?

    • Replies: @Wally
    Call normal, logical criticism & reactions to the hateful behavior of Jews 'antisemitism' if you wish.

    again:

    so called ‘antisemitism’:
    a logical reaction to the thievery, violence, destruction, and hate that is perpetrated and advocated by Jewish supremacists

    "Alone the fact that one may not question the Jewish "holocaust" and that Jewish pressure has inflicted laws on democratic societies to prevent questions—while incessant promotion and indoctrination of the same averredly incontestable ‘holocaust’ occur—gives the game away. It proves that it must be a lie. Why else would one not be allowed to question it? Because it might offend the "survivors"? Because it "dishonors the dead"? Hardly sufficient reason to outlaw discussion. No, because the exposure of this leading lie might precipitate questions about so many other lies and cause the whole ramshackle fabrication to crumble."

    - Gerard Menuhin / Revisionist Jew, son of famous violinist
     
    Dr. Tony Martin - The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut7I75Q_-zA
  36. @Wally
    Seriously?

    Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims.

    “Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims.”

    First, Muslims are not neanderthal-like, they are homo sapiens.

    Second, Europeans on the mainland were NOT united by race. Rather, ethnic rivalries prevailed. One such example was the Swedish War of Liberation in the 1600′s. Swedish nobleman Gustav Vasa successfully deposed the Danish-Norwegian king Christian II. White Europeans did not play nice with each other. Refer to the Germanic tribes and their squabbles with their neighbors.

    Only in the United States did the world bear witness to the melting of European hostilities as marriage between ethnic groups became commonplace. We are mutts, my friend.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Corvinus,

    Good points, especially the Swedish one. The Danes and Swedes have been beating each other down for centuries. My Swedish in-laws still have an issue with looking at Danes historically as meddlesome occupiers.

    Peace.
    , @Wally
    Muslims certainly are neanderthal-like, observe their behavior wherever they reside.

    Certainly European royal families had rivalries, but that was not indicative of the masses.
    The royals manipulative the masses for their own ends, just as was / is done worldwide.
  37. I’m still convinced feminism is largely bitter white girls resenting daddy, with a few Asian/Indians tagging along. Black and Latino feminists seem… different. They have the same self-righteousness, but less of the vindictive rage/hate towards men that the white ones try to hide.

    In the end, systemic gender inequity is still the way to run a society. If white fathers had controlled their daughters better, we wouldn’t be dealing with tattooed hambeasts foisting their dogshit ideas on the rest of the world.

  38. @Corvinus
    "Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims."

    First, Muslims are not neanderthal-like, they are homo sapiens.

    Second, Europeans on the mainland were NOT united by race. Rather, ethnic rivalries prevailed. One such example was the Swedish War of Liberation in the 1600's. Swedish nobleman Gustav Vasa successfully deposed the Danish-Norwegian king Christian II. White Europeans did not play nice with each other. Refer to the Germanic tribes and their squabbles with their neighbors.

    Only in the United States did the world bear witness to the melting of European hostilities as marriage between ethnic groups became commonplace. We are mutts, my friend.

    Hey Corvinus,

    Good points, especially the Swedish one. The Danes and Swedes have been beating each other down for centuries. My Swedish in-laws still have an issue with looking at Danes historically as meddlesome occupiers.

    Peace.

  39. Feminists paint opposition to abortion as hostility to women. Of course nobody opposes abortion for this reason.

    I do. Women’s sexual freedom has turned into a disaster, and we need to roll it back so that we can restore a healthy patriarchal society.

  40. Profound weariness is an appropriate term. I would say that feminism rides on top of the eligatarian delusion to its natural, ridiculous conclusion. Naturally, it leads to excesses where it goes far beyond any notion of equality into heretic hunting to destroy the lives of anyone who might object to their illusions.

    I don’t usually accuse the West of much, but thanks. This particular curse is one that I shall wholly and completely blame the West for its modern incarnation.

    • Replies: @Miro23

    I would say that feminism rides on top of the egalitarian delusion to its natural, ridiculous conclusion.
     
    I would agree with that, Liberalism in the past was a positive aspect of US Democracy, pushing for equal opportunity for Jews, Blacks, homosexuals and women in a unified society.

    The problem is that it has evolved into the present "victims rights" disaster with culture wars, BLM and an upper class of Jewish untouchables running a private racial patronage system, with their press incessantly attacking White Christian Americans, and trying to amplify and radicalize any "victim group" they can find or manufacture, generally getting conflicts going and breaking up society (other than their own).

    And there are different Freedoms. "Our Freedom" is the right to enjoy wall to wall media sleaze, and "Their Freedom" is the right to loot the US economy, print their own money, outsource whole US industries , put the public $20.000.000.000.000 in debt and get the 0.99% to pay and fight their wars while they try to criminalize any objections.
  41. @Mario64
    Mr. Reed I usually appreciate the view expressed in your articles, but regarding FGM I find your point to be biased or at least misinformed. By no means FGM is mandated or approved or even recommended by Islam. I have spent many years as an expat in black Africa in countries where Christian religion prevails (e.g. South Nigeria) and I have found FGM to be widely practiced. However I can agree on the fact that some Islamic countries, regardless of mandated prohibition by the law of such a barbaric practice have failed in uprooting it.

    From Wikipedia:
    FGM's origins in northeastern Africa are pre-Islamic, but the practice became associated with Islam because of that religion's focus on female chastity and seclusion.[q] There is no mention of it in the Quran. It is praised in several hadith (sayings attributed to Muhammad) as noble but not required.[r][141] In 2007 the Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research in Cairo ruled that FGM had "no basis in core Islamic law or any of its partial provisions."[142][s]

    [q] Gerry Mackie, 1996: "FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.

    [r] Gerry Mackie, 1996: "FGM is pre-Islamic but was exaggerated by its intersection with the Islamic modesty code of family honor, female purity, virginity, chastity, fidelity, and seclusion.
    [141] De-linking Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting from Islam
    Ibrahim Lethome Asmani - Maryam Sheikh Abdi (USAID)
    http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/De-linking%20FGM%20from%20Islam%20final%20report.pdf

    [142] Fresh progress toward the elimination of female genital mutilation and cutting in Egypt", UNICEF, 2 July 2007; UNICEF 2013, 70
    [s] Maggie Michael, Associated Press, 2007: "[Egypt's] supreme religious authorities stressed that Islam is against female circumcision. It's prohibited, prohibited, prohibited," Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa said on the privately owned al-Mahwar network."[143]
    [143] Maggie Michael, "Egypt Officials Ban Female Circumcision" , Associated Press, 29 June 2007, 2.

    I think FGM originated with herders who dwelt in the Sahara during its wet period.

  42. @Mario64
    Eritrea Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to recent estimates, 50% of the population adheres to Christianity, 48% to Islam, and 2% of the population follows other religions including traditional faiths and animism.
    Eritrea FGM (Wikipedia)
    The government of Eritrea surveyed and published an official FGM prevalence rate of 89% in 2003.

    Ethiopia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2007 National Census, Christians make up 62.8% of the country's population (43.5% Ethiopian Orthodox, 19.3% other denominations), Muslims 33.9%, practitioners of traditional faiths 2.6%, and other religions 0.6%.
    Ethiopia FGM (Wikipedia)
    The WHO gives a prevalence of 74.3% for FGM in Ethiopia (2005).

    Liberia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2008 National Census, 85.5% of the population practices Christianity. Protestants form the largest Christian grouping, followed by Roman Catholics. These denominations were brought by Black American settlers. Muslims comprise 12.2% of the population, largely represented by the Mandingo and Vai ethnic groups. Sunnis, Shias, Ahmadiyyas, Sufis, and non-denominational Muslims constitute the bulk of the Liberian Muslims.
    Liberia FGM (Wikipedia)
    Female genital mutilation is prevalent in Liberia.

    Just three examples showing that FGM is a tribal barbaric practice forced on women independently of religion. Affirming that FGM is an Islamic practice is definitely biased and ignorant.

    For more informations see Wikipedia "Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country"

    Islam has adapted many barbaric practices and given them new names.
    In that way Islam is a lot like any other ” religion of the book.”

  43. @jacques sheete

    I find your point to be biased or at least misinformed.
     
    At least he's consistent.

    For a dude who claims a high IQ, he sure comes up with some low class crap.

    Fwed, yer discrediting the Muscadin Mensa Munchkins. Just thought you oughtta be aware of it.

    Can you quote and cite Fred’s claim to having a “high IQ”?

    That Fred may be misinformed about Islam and FGM isn’t much of a point since his whole case was about radical feminists and is completely unaffected by his not portraying the perpetrators of FGM and why they do it with scholarly accuracy. BTW did you notice that Mahomet is quoted in the hadiths as approving the practice?

    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey WoO,

    The truth requires precision. There are no hadith approving FGM, there are some hadith approving female circumcision.

    According to the Hanafi school (which I and most Muslims follow) the evidence just is not there to support the custom, so only male circumcision is done as a Sunnah. The Maliki and Hanbali consider is a commendable act, but certainly not required. It is the Shafi'i school that considers circumcision for men and women to be required based on the evidence.

    Let's see how they define it:
    “In Nihayah 8/35, after mentioning the official position of the Shafi’i School, that circumcision is obligatory for both men and women, Ramli defines what it means for a woman. He says that it is the removal of some skin from the clitoral prepuce.”
    “The narration (‘Leave it bulging, do not exaggerate in cutting. Indeed, that is more enjoyable for the woman, and the husband will like it better.’- reported in Abu Dawud) describes the manner in which the practice is to be performed. It clarifies that the procedure is minor and the reduction is slight; in fact, the verbs used are commands, which indicate obligation. Meaning, to go beyond this contravenes what the Prophet (pbuh) commanded.”
    http://shafiifiqh.com/question-details.aspx?qstID=173

    This is also confirmed by the Shafi'i law manual on my shelf that uses almost the exact same wording about it being just concerning the prepuce and not the clitoris itself.

    It is amazing, but the image Mr. Reed posted almost maps exactly with the presence of the Shafi'i school; for instance, do you see that small area in Iraq where it is most prevalent, those are the Kurds and they have traditionally been Shafi'i in a sea surrounded by Hanafis and Shiahs.

    So basically, really only the Shafi'i school emphasizes it while the others don't pay much attention or merely recommend it. And by 'it' I mean female circumcision as described above. The gross acts (done by either Muslims or non-Muslims) that are culturally prevalent have no sanction from our sacred law and should come under the rubric of FGM.

    However, I found the following two articles fascinating reads. This one deals with a culture that is SubSaharan, but not Muslim:
    "She also challenges some common misconceptions around FGC, like the belief that it is forced on women by men. In fact, elderly women often do the most to perpetuate the custom. I thought African girls were held down and butchered against their will, but some of them voluntarily and joyfully partake in the ritual. I thought communities would surely abandon the practice once they learned of its negative health consequences. And yet, in Shell-Duncan's experience, most people who practice FGC recognize its costs—they just think the benefits outweigh them....The sort of feminist argument about this is that it’s about the control of women but also of their sexuality and sexual pleasure. But when you talk to people on the ground, you also hear people talking about the idea that it’s women’s business. As in, it’s for women to decide this. If we look at the data across Africa, the support for the practice is stronger among women than among men. So, the patriarchy argument is just not a simple one. Female circumcision is part of demarcating insider and outsider status. Are you part of this group of elder women who have power in their society?"
    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/04/female-genital-mutilation-cutting-anthropologist/389640/

    And this is regarding how women are often now paying for cosmetic surgery on their genitals and how this is seen (rightly in my opinion) as hypocritical by other cultures:
    "The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines FGM as “all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.” The label ‘FGM’ applies to a variety of procedures, which are more numerous and varied than most people might imagine...“I find it very difficult to see the difference between Female Genital Mutilation and Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery. Is there a difference?”, she asked. She went on to note that in 30 per cent of cases, patients undergoing Female Genital Cosmetic surgery will suffer painful complications, many of which are similar to those suffered by victims of FGM. In order to get around the “non-medical” clause in the WHO definition of FGM, cosmetic surgeons justify FGCS on the basis that the young women seeking the surgery will suffer psychological distress due to a perception of abnormality. However, the majority of young women seeking this surgery have perfectly normal, healthy labias."
    https://www.varsity.co.uk/comment/7694

    Peace.

    , @jacques sheete

    Can you quote and cite Fred’s claim to having a “high IQ”?
     
    Yes, I can.

    I'm surprised that a Whiz genius such as yourself is unable to master Google.

  44. @gustafus
    Thank you Fred. I'll go a step further. I am sick of tiptoeing in bunny slippers around the venality of Lesbians as a political force in the world.

    Venality. First, let me say, I've known and befriended enough gay men in my 69 years, that I have dined with them, studied with them, traveled with them.. danced the night away with them.. with balloons tied to my backside to keep me from getting lost in the malaise of a Long Beach dance floor on New Years Eve.

    But lesbians? Whole nother story. I've been close up and personal to the Gay thing long enough to say with authority... [and so many gay men agree, including Milo the mouth]...

    Lesbians are an angry, petty,vindictive and energetic, grotesque mutant force for evil ... they represent the worst of men and the worst of women... wherein I've seen so many gay men as the best of both sexes.

    Like the half black Obomination... he/she/they uncomfortable with both races or genders.. hating both themselves and a world they ENDURE - while they use what ever unique talents they have to wreak havoc and vengeance on a world that doesn't value their "brand".

    Unless they give away houses and cars on daytime TV.

    I’m sorry you haven’t come across the kind of lesbians who, apart perhaps from those who are their sisters, heterosexual men are most likely to come across. While I can think of the odd butch lesbian and amiable enough art administrator the four who come immediately to mind were attractive when young and married and had children but ended up paired with other women.

  45. @Mario64
    Eritrea Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to recent estimates, 50% of the population adheres to Christianity, 48% to Islam, and 2% of the population follows other religions including traditional faiths and animism.
    Eritrea FGM (Wikipedia)
    The government of Eritrea surveyed and published an official FGM prevalence rate of 89% in 2003.

    Ethiopia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2007 National Census, Christians make up 62.8% of the country's population (43.5% Ethiopian Orthodox, 19.3% other denominations), Muslims 33.9%, practitioners of traditional faiths 2.6%, and other religions 0.6%.
    Ethiopia FGM (Wikipedia)
    The WHO gives a prevalence of 74.3% for FGM in Ethiopia (2005).

    Liberia Religions (Wikipedia)
    According to the 2008 National Census, 85.5% of the population practices Christianity. Protestants form the largest Christian grouping, followed by Roman Catholics. These denominations were brought by Black American settlers. Muslims comprise 12.2% of the population, largely represented by the Mandingo and Vai ethnic groups. Sunnis, Shias, Ahmadiyyas, Sufis, and non-denominational Muslims constitute the bulk of the Liberian Muslims.
    Liberia FGM (Wikipedia)
    Female genital mutilation is prevalent in Liberia.

    Just three examples showing that FGM is a tribal barbaric practice forced on women independently of religion. Affirming that FGM is an Islamic practice is definitely biased and ignorant.

    For more informations see Wikipedia "Prevalence of female genital mutilation by country"

    FGM is practiced among some Indian tribes in Columbia. So I have learned from NPR recently. Apparently they must have invented the procedure and its justification independently of whatever transpired in Eastern Hemisphere.

  46. @Qasim
    "Female genital mutilation", "genital sadism", it is as if this anti radical feminist article (at least the Islam parts) was written by a radical feminist!!

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate. Or at least be consistent and call male circumcision MGM and call for all the physicians who practice this barbaric practice to be painfully executed as well.

    I thought this was an Alt-Right sort of site. People here are generally informed about r/K theory, no? Well, female circumcision is a practice that predates Islam by millennia which is overwhelmingly concentrated amongst the most r selected of Muslims in order to help them control their genetic propensity towards promiscuity, unstable marriages etc. Both male and female circumcision can be thought of as a partial neutering in order to control the sexual appetite.


    And whereas female circumcision is practiced mainly by African Muslims, all Muslims engage in "MGM", so if anything Muslims should be attacked for their systematic misandry. And the whole "holding the kid down, spreading the legs, and using a razor with no anesthesia" thing applies equally to the boys, especially before modern medicine. They used to do it at age 3 where my family is from in India, they dressed the kid up, had a big party, and afterwards the "mutilated" boy would get a bunch of gifts. Too bad Fred wasn't there to painfully kill my grandfather for his sadism!

    Mr. Reed put up that map where FGM was practiced. Perhaps he should put up another map of Africa right next to it showing the # of deaths due to AIDS over the past 30 years. My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths; perhaps idealistic white people should not seek to destroy the means by which they accomplished this.

    One more thing. Mr. Reed, you bash the deleterious effects of feminism on Western societies. Then you bash the misogynistic barbarity of Islam that ensures feminism could never indigenously gain a foothold in Muslim societies. And you do both in the same article!
    I find this confusing. You yourself are so sick of your own women that you fled to Mexico and married a native, so forgive me if I find your credentials for giving advice on gender relations somewhat lacking.

    P.S. The whole "Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault" is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    http://top101news.com/most-popular-top-10-list/2017-2018-2019-2020-2021/others/countries-highest-rape-crime-world-worst-dangerous/

    “My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths”

    Are you suggesting that male and female circumcision reduces HIV infection? How so?

    • Replies: @Qasim
    Are you suggesting that male and female circumcision reduces HIV infection? How so?

    I am suggesting that cultures that inculcate chastity and successfully prevent promiscuity reduce the incidence of all STDs, HIV included. Now this is done by various means, such as imposing conservative dress codes, limiting interaction between the sexes, and telling people they risk going to hell if they fornicate/commit adultery.

    However, another tool people have been using for thousands of years is circumcision. If you step back and think about it, the whole custom is REALLY strange. Why would such a custom get such wide traction? Did someone in prehistory say "I have a great idea, let's cut off part of our son's penis!!" And even if one believes God commands it, then why does He command it? Can one really say it is just about hygiene?

    Considering the foreskin is highly innervated, it stands to reason that at least part of the purpose of male circumcision is to diminish the pleasure of the sex act in the hopes that controlling their lusts will be made more manageable.

    And some more r selected groups of people feel the need to go further and extend this practice to their women.

    And if one takes a Burkean view of culture, one should not blithely dismiss the practices of people that have persisted over millenia, and assume one can get rid of this or that practice and be certain the whole edifice will remain standing.
  47. @Qasim
    "Female genital mutilation", "genital sadism", it is as if this anti radical feminist article (at least the Islam parts) was written by a radical feminist!!

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate. Or at least be consistent and call male circumcision MGM and call for all the physicians who practice this barbaric practice to be painfully executed as well.

    I thought this was an Alt-Right sort of site. People here are generally informed about r/K theory, no? Well, female circumcision is a practice that predates Islam by millennia which is overwhelmingly concentrated amongst the most r selected of Muslims in order to help them control their genetic propensity towards promiscuity, unstable marriages etc. Both male and female circumcision can be thought of as a partial neutering in order to control the sexual appetite.


    And whereas female circumcision is practiced mainly by African Muslims, all Muslims engage in "MGM", so if anything Muslims should be attacked for their systematic misandry. And the whole "holding the kid down, spreading the legs, and using a razor with no anesthesia" thing applies equally to the boys, especially before modern medicine. They used to do it at age 3 where my family is from in India, they dressed the kid up, had a big party, and afterwards the "mutilated" boy would get a bunch of gifts. Too bad Fred wasn't there to painfully kill my grandfather for his sadism!

    Mr. Reed put up that map where FGM was practiced. Perhaps he should put up another map of Africa right next to it showing the # of deaths due to AIDS over the past 30 years. My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths; perhaps idealistic white people should not seek to destroy the means by which they accomplished this.

    One more thing. Mr. Reed, you bash the deleterious effects of feminism on Western societies. Then you bash the misogynistic barbarity of Islam that ensures feminism could never indigenously gain a foothold in Muslim societies. And you do both in the same article!
    I find this confusing. You yourself are so sick of your own women that you fled to Mexico and married a native, so forgive me if I find your credentials for giving advice on gender relations somewhat lacking.

    P.S. The whole "Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault" is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    http://top101news.com/most-popular-top-10-list/2017-2018-2019-2020-2021/others/countries-highest-rape-crime-world-worst-dangerous/

    If it isn’t a “bald faced lie” to equate as you do male circumcision with FGM it is obtuseness and ignorance. Much of FGM equates to destroying all the nerves in the last inch or so of the penis. Try having a sex life after that.

  48. @Lil Johannes Ainger
    So... Antisemitism exists but Jews are responsible for it?

    Call normal, logical criticism & reactions to the hateful behavior of Jews ‘antisemitism’ if you wish.

    again:

    so called ‘antisemitism’:
    a logical reaction to the thievery, violence, destruction, and hate that is perpetrated and advocated by Jewish supremacists

    “Alone the fact that one may not question the Jewish “holocaust” and that Jewish pressure has inflicted laws on democratic societies to prevent questions—while incessant promotion and indoctrination of the same averredly incontestable ‘holocaust’ occur—gives the game away. It proves that it must be a lie. Why else would one not be allowed to question it? Because it might offend the “survivors”? Because it “dishonors the dead”? Hardly sufficient reason to outlaw discussion. No, because the exposure of this leading lie might precipitate questions about so many other lies and cause the whole ramshackle fabrication to crumble.”

    - Gerard Menuhin / Revisionist Jew, son of famous violinist

    Dr. Tony Martin – The Jewish Role in the African Slave Trade

  49. @Corvinus
    "Comparing Europeans with other Europeans is not the same as comparing Europeans to neanderthal-like Muslims."

    First, Muslims are not neanderthal-like, they are homo sapiens.

    Second, Europeans on the mainland were NOT united by race. Rather, ethnic rivalries prevailed. One such example was the Swedish War of Liberation in the 1600's. Swedish nobleman Gustav Vasa successfully deposed the Danish-Norwegian king Christian II. White Europeans did not play nice with each other. Refer to the Germanic tribes and their squabbles with their neighbors.

    Only in the United States did the world bear witness to the melting of European hostilities as marriage between ethnic groups became commonplace. We are mutts, my friend.

    Muslims certainly are neanderthal-like, observe their behavior wherever they reside.

    Certainly European royal families had rivalries, but that was not indicative of the masses.
    The royals manipulative the masses for their own ends, just as was / is done worldwide.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Muslims certainly are neanderthal-like, observe their behavior wherever they reside."

    They are other than neanderthal-like in their conduct. They act as human beings.

    "Certainly European royal families had rivalries, but that was not indicative of the masses."

    The masses felt EXACTLY like their leaders. Who do you think fought in those wars?

    "The royals manipulative the masses for their own ends, just as was / is done worldwide."

    In essence, you are saying that most white Europeans are easily duped by their leaders and that they are incapable of making decisions. That is an anti-white comment. Repent for your racial sins.

    "so called ‘antisemitism’: a logical reaction to the thievery, violence, destruction, and hate that is perpetrated and advocated by Jewish supremacists."

    One could easily replace "antisemitism" with "European imperialism" and "Jewish supremacists" with "the white race". So I would be careful with making wild generalizations.

    According to the research of Eli Faber from 1998, he posits that Jews did NOT play a LEADING role as the financial backers or transporters in the transatlantic or Caribbean slave trades. For starters, no ship fitted out for the slave trade that originated in Great Britain was under the direct or indirect control of a Jew. From 1709-1807, there are 934 recorded voyages in which Rhode Island merchants were responsible for procuring 106,000 slaves. Now, Jews arrived in Newport as early as 1858. On the eve of the Revolution, they were estimated to be around thirty families. According to historical records Faber used (e.g. naval office shipping lists, censuses, tax records) that identified merchants and planters as Jewish, there were 347 slave ships sent to Africa by Rhode Island slave traders from 1761-1774, with 21 being funded by Aaron Lopez, a Portuguese Jew. That means 326 voyages were underwritten by non-Jews during this time frame. Of course, Jews played a role in the peddling of human flesh. The extent in this particular case is nominal compared to other ethnic groups.
  50. but rather a package of far-left causes, usually including open borders, Islamophilia, affirmative action, gun control, socialism, unisex bathrooms, environmentalism, compulsory diversity, opposition to abortion, opposition to free speech (“hate speech”), hostility for white men, support for bigger government, intense focus on nonstandard sexuality, and using the schools as indoctrination centers.

    Not one of these causes is a far left cause, or even a leftist cause. And in the case of open borders you’re as wrong as anyone could possibly be – this is very much a right-wing cause.

    What you (and most people today) perceive as leftism bears not the slightest resemblance to actual leftism. I’m a leftist and I’m virulently opposed to open borders, Islamophilia, affirmative action, gun control, socialism, unisex bathrooms, environmentalism, compulsory diversity, opposition to abortion, opposition to free speech (“hate speech”), hostility for white men, support for bigger government, intense focus on nonstandard sexuality, and using the schools as indoctrination centers.

  51. @utu
    "My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths"

    Are you suggesting that male and female circumcision reduces HIV infection? How so?

    Are you suggesting that male and female circumcision reduces HIV infection? How so?

    I am suggesting that cultures that inculcate chastity and successfully prevent promiscuity reduce the incidence of all STDs, HIV included. Now this is done by various means, such as imposing conservative dress codes, limiting interaction between the sexes, and telling people they risk going to hell if they fornicate/commit adultery.

    However, another tool people have been using for thousands of years is circumcision. If you step back and think about it, the whole custom is REALLY strange. Why would such a custom get such wide traction? Did someone in prehistory say “I have a great idea, let’s cut off part of our son’s penis!!” And even if one believes God commands it, then why does He command it? Can one really say it is just about hygiene?

    Considering the foreskin is highly innervated, it stands to reason that at least part of the purpose of male circumcision is to diminish the pleasure of the sex act in the hopes that controlling their lusts will be made more manageable.

    And some more r selected groups of people feel the need to go further and extend this practice to their women.

    And if one takes a Burkean view of culture, one should not blithely dismiss the practices of people that have persisted over millenia, and assume one can get rid of this or that practice and be certain the whole edifice will remain standing.

  52. @Wizard of Oz
    Can you quote and cite Fred's claim to having a "high IQ"?

    That Fred may be misinformed about Islam and FGM isn't much of a point since his whole case was about radical feminists and is completely unaffected by his not portraying the perpetrators of FGM and why they do it with scholarly accuracy. BTW did you notice that Mahomet is quoted in the hadiths as approving the practice?

    Hey WoO,

    The truth requires precision. There are no hadith approving FGM, there are some hadith approving female circumcision.

    According to the Hanafi school (which I and most Muslims follow) the evidence just is not there to support the custom, so only male circumcision is done as a Sunnah. The Maliki and Hanbali consider is a commendable act, but certainly not required. It is the Shafi’i school that considers circumcision for men and women to be required based on the evidence.

    Let’s see how they define it:
    “In Nihayah 8/35, after mentioning the official position of the Shafi’i School, that circumcision is obligatory for both men and women, Ramli defines what it means for a woman. He says that it is the removal of some skin from the clitoral prepuce.”
    “The narration (‘Leave it bulging, do not exaggerate in cutting. Indeed, that is more enjoyable for the woman, and the husband will like it better.’- reported in Abu Dawud) describes the manner in which the practice is to be performed. It clarifies that the procedure is minor and the reduction is slight; in fact, the verbs used are commands, which indicate obligation. Meaning, to go beyond this contravenes what the Prophet (pbuh) commanded.”

    http://shafiifiqh.com/question-details.aspx?qstID=173

    This is also confirmed by the Shafi’i law manual on my shelf that uses almost the exact same wording about it being just concerning the prepuce and not the clitoris itself.

    It is amazing, but the image Mr. Reed posted almost maps exactly with the presence of the Shafi’i school; for instance, do you see that small area in Iraq where it is most prevalent, those are the Kurds and they have traditionally been Shafi’i in a sea surrounded by Hanafis and Shiahs.

    So basically, really only the Shafi’i school emphasizes it while the others don’t pay much attention or merely recommend it. And by ‘it’ I mean female circumcision as described above. The gross acts (done by either Muslims or non-Muslims) that are culturally prevalent have no sanction from our sacred law and should come under the rubric of FGM.

    However, I found the following two articles fascinating reads. This one deals with a culture that is SubSaharan, but not Muslim:
    “She also challenges some common misconceptions around FGC, like the belief that it is forced on women by men. In fact, elderly women often do the most to perpetuate the custom. I thought African girls were held down and butchered against their will, but some of them voluntarily and joyfully partake in the ritual. I thought communities would surely abandon the practice once they learned of its negative health consequences. And yet, in Shell-Duncan’s experience, most people who practice FGC recognize its costs—they just think the benefits outweigh them….The sort of feminist argument about this is that it’s about the control of women but also of their sexuality and sexual pleasure. But when you talk to people on the ground, you also hear people talking about the idea that it’s women’s business. As in, it’s for women to decide this. If we look at the data across Africa, the support for the practice is stronger among women than among men. So, the patriarchy argument is just not a simple one. Female circumcision is part of demarcating insider and outsider status. Are you part of this group of elder women who have power in their society?”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/04/female-genital-mutilation-cutting-anthropologist/389640/

    And this is regarding how women are often now paying for cosmetic surgery on their genitals and how this is seen (rightly in my opinion) as hypocritical by other cultures:
    “The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines FGM as “all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.” The label ‘FGM’ applies to a variety of procedures, which are more numerous and varied than most people might imagine…“I find it very difficult to see the difference between Female Genital Mutilation and Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery. Is there a difference?”, she asked. She went on to note that in 30 per cent of cases, patients undergoing Female Genital Cosmetic surgery will suffer painful complications, many of which are similar to those suffered by victims of FGM. In order to get around the “non-medical” clause in the WHO definition of FGM, cosmetic surgeons justify FGCS on the basis that the young women seeking the surgery will suffer psychological distress due to a perception of abnormality. However, the majority of young women seeking this surgery have perfectly normal, healthy labias.”

    https://www.varsity.co.uk/comment/7694

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks for the information. Not that I am enthused at the idea of Mahomet expressing views on any form of female circumcision except "if adult women of their own free will wish to have surgery on any part of them then that is their business, but no female of any age should have it done under pressure from others or even influence to follow an alleged tradition". And that is what I would hope would be the position of every school of Muslim thought today.

    As to male circumcision I am indifferent as it is most unlikely to be harmful and can be medically desirable. There is also the argument that it can make some men better lovers from a female point of view. So a small possible positive against virtually no negative. Not the same for female "circumcision" I think unless for aesthetic purposes freely adopted.
  53. @Daniel Chieh
    Profound weariness is an appropriate term. I would say that feminism rides on top of the eligatarian delusion to its natural, ridiculous conclusion. Naturally, it leads to excesses where it goes far beyond any notion of equality into heretic hunting to destroy the lives of anyone who might object to their illusions.

    I don't usually accuse the West of much, but thanks. This particular curse is one that I shall wholly and completely blame the West for its modern incarnation.

    I would say that feminism rides on top of the egalitarian delusion to its natural, ridiculous conclusion.

    I would agree with that, Liberalism in the past was a positive aspect of US Democracy, pushing for equal opportunity for Jews, Blacks, homosexuals and women in a unified society.

    The problem is that it has evolved into the present “victims rights” disaster with culture wars, BLM and an upper class of Jewish untouchables running a private racial patronage system, with their press incessantly attacking White Christian Americans, and trying to amplify and radicalize any “victim group” they can find or manufacture, generally getting conflicts going and breaking up society (other than their own).

    And there are different Freedoms. “Our Freedom” is the right to enjoy wall to wall media sleaze, and “Their Freedom” is the right to loot the US economy, print their own money, outsource whole US industries , put the public $20.000.000.000.000 in debt and get the 0.99% to pay and fight their wars while they try to criminalize any objections.

  54. @Qasim
    "Female genital mutilation", "genital sadism", it is as if this anti radical feminist article (at least the Islam parts) was written by a radical feminist!!

    The term FGM is Orwellian, female circumcision would be a lot more accurate. Or at least be consistent and call male circumcision MGM and call for all the physicians who practice this barbaric practice to be painfully executed as well.

    I thought this was an Alt-Right sort of site. People here are generally informed about r/K theory, no? Well, female circumcision is a practice that predates Islam by millennia which is overwhelmingly concentrated amongst the most r selected of Muslims in order to help them control their genetic propensity towards promiscuity, unstable marriages etc. Both male and female circumcision can be thought of as a partial neutering in order to control the sexual appetite.


    And whereas female circumcision is practiced mainly by African Muslims, all Muslims engage in "MGM", so if anything Muslims should be attacked for their systematic misandry. And the whole "holding the kid down, spreading the legs, and using a razor with no anesthesia" thing applies equally to the boys, especially before modern medicine. They used to do it at age 3 where my family is from in India, they dressed the kid up, had a big party, and afterwards the "mutilated" boy would get a bunch of gifts. Too bad Fred wasn't there to painfully kill my grandfather for his sadism!

    Mr. Reed put up that map where FGM was practiced. Perhaps he should put up another map of Africa right next to it showing the # of deaths due to AIDS over the past 30 years. My point is the cultural/religious practices of African Muslims saved them from millions of deaths; perhaps idealistic white people should not seek to destroy the means by which they accomplished this.

    One more thing. Mr. Reed, you bash the deleterious effects of feminism on Western societies. Then you bash the misogynistic barbarity of Islam that ensures feminism could never indigenously gain a foothold in Muslim societies. And you do both in the same article!
    I find this confusing. You yourself are so sick of your own women that you fled to Mexico and married a native, so forgive me if I find your credentials for giving advice on gender relations somewhat lacking.

    P.S. The whole "Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault" is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    http://top101news.com/most-popular-top-10-list/2017-2018-2019-2020-2021/others/countries-highest-rape-crime-world-worst-dangerous/

    P.S. The whole “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?

    No doubt most of the nations in the top 10 list deserve to be on that list, but Sweden is made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation. Sweden long ago stopped compiling stats since the offenders were African and Islamic Middle Easterners instead of native Swedes.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html

    From the article:
    It said: “Over the past 10 to 15 years, immigrants have mainly come [into Sweden] from Muslim countries such as Iraq, Syria and Somalia. Might this influx explain Sweden’s rape explosion?

    “It is difficult to give a precise answer, because Swedish law forbids registration based on people’s ancestry or religion.

    “One possible explanation is that, on average, people from the Middle East have a vastly different view of women and sex than Scandinavians have.

    And might the incidence of rape in Muslim nations be understated because the burden of proof is on the female? And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Even Australia was having problems with sexual assault at some of their beaches (by Lebanese Muslim men) until Aussie men grew a pair and resorted to diplomacy by face rearranging and skull bashing using fists, bats and blunt objects (note: there is a total gun ban in Australia). Not surprisingly the problem ceased at least for a while.

    • Replies: @KenH

    but Sweden is made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.
     
    Should read, "but Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.
  55. @KenH

    P.S. The whole “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie, where are you even coming up with this B.S?
     
    No doubt most of the nations in the top 10 list deserve to be on that list, but Sweden is made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation. Sweden long ago stopped compiling stats since the offenders were African and Islamic Middle Easterners instead of native Swedes.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html

    From the article:
    It said: “Over the past 10 to 15 years, immigrants have mainly come [into Sweden] from Muslim countries such as Iraq, Syria and Somalia. Might this influx explain Sweden’s rape explosion?

    “It is difficult to give a precise answer, because Swedish law forbids registration based on people’s ancestry or religion.

    “One possible explanation is that, on average, people from the Middle East have a vastly different view of women and sex than Scandinavians have.

    And might the incidence of rape in Muslim nations be understated because the burden of proof is on the female? And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Even Australia was having problems with sexual assault at some of their beaches (by Lebanese Muslim men) until Aussie men grew a pair and resorted to diplomacy by face rearranging and skull bashing using fists, bats and blunt objects (note: there is a total gun ban in Australia). Not surprisingly the problem ceased at least for a while.

    but Sweden is made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    Should read, “but Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    • Replies: @Qasim
    Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    Even if this is true, it doesn't change the fact that asserting that “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie.

    And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc. This obviates the need to develop much internal self-control. I am not sure people who are born in the West can fully grasp how sexually provocative it must be for some young man who grew up in a society where every woman a man sees outside his immediate family is completely covered to then come to a place where women wear bikinis and what not in public. A woman in a bikini is 96% naked! What if such visual stimulation is the equivalent of a naked stripper giving a lap dance to an average Westerner? Or maybe Arabs and Africans are just more prone to sexual assault and developed their strict cultural norms as an effective deterrent. Who knows? But the claim that the average Egyptian woman has a greater likelihood of being raped than the average European seems very implausible to me.
  56. @Wally
    Muslims certainly are neanderthal-like, observe their behavior wherever they reside.

    Certainly European royal families had rivalries, but that was not indicative of the masses.
    The royals manipulative the masses for their own ends, just as was / is done worldwide.

    “Muslims certainly are neanderthal-like, observe their behavior wherever they reside.”

    They are other than neanderthal-like in their conduct. They act as human beings.

    “Certainly European royal families had rivalries, but that was not indicative of the masses.”

    The masses felt EXACTLY like their leaders. Who do you think fought in those wars?

    “The royals manipulative the masses for their own ends, just as was / is done worldwide.”

    In essence, you are saying that most white Europeans are easily duped by their leaders and that they are incapable of making decisions. That is an anti-white comment. Repent for your racial sins.

    “so called ‘antisemitism’: a logical reaction to the thievery, violence, destruction, and hate that is perpetrated and advocated by Jewish supremacists.”

    One could easily replace “antisemitism” with “European imperialism” and “Jewish supremacists” with “the white race”. So I would be careful with making wild generalizations.

    According to the research of Eli Faber from 1998, he posits that Jews did NOT play a LEADING role as the financial backers or transporters in the transatlantic or Caribbean slave trades. For starters, no ship fitted out for the slave trade that originated in Great Britain was under the direct or indirect control of a Jew. From 1709-1807, there are 934 recorded voyages in which Rhode Island merchants were responsible for procuring 106,000 slaves. Now, Jews arrived in Newport as early as 1858. On the eve of the Revolution, they were estimated to be around thirty families. According to historical records Faber used (e.g. naval office shipping lists, censuses, tax records) that identified merchants and planters as Jewish, there were 347 slave ships sent to Africa by Rhode Island slave traders from 1761-1774, with 21 being funded by Aaron Lopez, a Portuguese Jew. That means 326 voyages were underwritten by non-Jews during this time frame. Of course, Jews played a role in the peddling of human flesh. The extent in this particular case is nominal compared to other ethnic groups.

  57. @KenH

    but Sweden is made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.
     
    Should read, "but Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    Even if this is true, it doesn’t change the fact that asserting that “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie.

    And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc. This obviates the need to develop much internal self-control. I am not sure people who are born in the West can fully grasp how sexually provocative it must be for some young man who grew up in a society where every woman a man sees outside his immediate family is completely covered to then come to a place where women wear bikinis and what not in public. A woman in a bikini is 96% naked! What if such visual stimulation is the equivalent of a naked stripper giving a lap dance to an average Westerner? Or maybe Arabs and Africans are just more prone to sexual assault and developed their strict cultural norms as an effective deterrent. Who knows? But the claim that the average Egyptian woman has a greater likelihood of being raped than the average European seems very implausible to me.

    • Replies: @dfordoom

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc.
     
    I think there may well be a good deal of truth to this. If immigrants come to a society in which promiscuity is taken for granted, sluttiness is celebrated and pornography is all-pervasive then obviously you're going to have problems.

    We in the West have to accept that our civilisation has become very sick indeed. We have a "civilisation" that is toxic for our own people and equally toxic to people from other cultures who are exposed to it.
    , @dcite

    "but some of them voluntarily and joyfully partake in the ritual."
     
    Well, a six year old doesn't really understand what she's getting into until six or seven women hold her down, the hag with the razor squats over her, the cutting and sewing starts and about 20 minutes later the girl looks like a plastic Betsy Wetsy doll, complete with a pinhole opening. Normal is quickly forgotten and the procession of woes that follow are just what God wills. Read "Prisoners of Ritual" by Hanny Lightfoot Klein who lived among the Sudanese for a year. Years ago they thought men would not marry them if they were in tact, but nowadays it's up to the women to stop it. The men wouldn't mind at all once they got used to it. Whatever their decisions, I wish they'd stay in their own lands. People still struggling with this mentality should not be settling in Stockholm or Minneapolis.

    But it's all mind control by blood and trauma. Done to both sexes over the ages. Western cultures have tried through fits and starts, to move on from bloody sacrifice, secret societies and pizza parties and social engineering "artists" notwithstanding -- the lunatics just glow in dark more than the normal person. Among the sane and respectable, when we made first communion it was Jesus body in the form of a piece of bread we were given to swallow and not the brain of kin or enemy. And they thought of that 2000 years ago. Now that was progress.
  58. @Qasim
    Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    Even if this is true, it doesn't change the fact that asserting that “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie.

    And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc. This obviates the need to develop much internal self-control. I am not sure people who are born in the West can fully grasp how sexually provocative it must be for some young man who grew up in a society where every woman a man sees outside his immediate family is completely covered to then come to a place where women wear bikinis and what not in public. A woman in a bikini is 96% naked! What if such visual stimulation is the equivalent of a naked stripper giving a lap dance to an average Westerner? Or maybe Arabs and Africans are just more prone to sexual assault and developed their strict cultural norms as an effective deterrent. Who knows? But the claim that the average Egyptian woman has a greater likelihood of being raped than the average European seems very implausible to me.

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc.

    I think there may well be a good deal of truth to this. If immigrants come to a society in which promiscuity is taken for granted, sluttiness is celebrated and pornography is all-pervasive then obviously you’re going to have problems.

    We in the West have to accept that our civilisation has become very sick indeed. We have a “civilisation” that is toxic for our own people and equally toxic to people from other cultures who are exposed to it.

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I think it is of amusement that as 4chan notes: the best way to be a true rebel now is to promote traditional morality, live a clean life, and basically be decent as it used to be defined. Advertise it and you'll get hated on, too.

    We truly have managed to turn what was white into black, and vice versa.
  59. @Qasim
    Sweden only made the list due to the Afro-Islamic invasion of that hapless Nordic nation.

    Even if this is true, it doesn't change the fact that asserting that “Islamic societies have far and away the worst record of sexual assault” is just a bald-faced lie.

    And if this is all wrong and Islamic societies are bastions of chivalry towards women then why do Muslim men commit so much sexual assault and rape when they arrive in European nations?

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc. This obviates the need to develop much internal self-control. I am not sure people who are born in the West can fully grasp how sexually provocative it must be for some young man who grew up in a society where every woman a man sees outside his immediate family is completely covered to then come to a place where women wear bikinis and what not in public. A woman in a bikini is 96% naked! What if such visual stimulation is the equivalent of a naked stripper giving a lap dance to an average Westerner? Or maybe Arabs and Africans are just more prone to sexual assault and developed their strict cultural norms as an effective deterrent. Who knows? But the claim that the average Egyptian woman has a greater likelihood of being raped than the average European seems very implausible to me.

    “but some of them voluntarily and joyfully partake in the ritual.”

    Well, a six year old doesn’t really understand what she’s getting into until six or seven women hold her down, the hag with the razor squats over her, the cutting and sewing starts and about 20 minutes later the girl looks like a plastic Betsy Wetsy doll, complete with a pinhole opening. Normal is quickly forgotten and the procession of woes that follow are just what God wills. Read “Prisoners of Ritual” by Hanny Lightfoot Klein who lived among the Sudanese for a year. Years ago they thought men would not marry them if they were in tact, but nowadays it’s up to the women to stop it. The men wouldn’t mind at all once they got used to it. Whatever their decisions, I wish they’d stay in their own lands. People still struggling with this mentality should not be settling in Stockholm or Minneapolis.

    But it’s all mind control by blood and trauma. Done to both sexes over the ages. Western cultures have tried through fits and starts, to move on from bloody sacrifice, secret societies and pizza parties and social engineering “artists” notwithstanding — the lunatics just glow in dark more than the normal person. Among the sane and respectable, when we made first communion it was Jesus body in the form of a piece of bread we were given to swallow and not the brain of kin or enemy. And they thought of that 2000 years ago. Now that was progress.

  60. @dfordoom

    Again, assuming your point about Muslim men committing so much rape is true, perhaps this can be explained as a failure of multiculturalism more than anything else. Muslim societies solve this potential problem by imposing conservative dress codes, separating the sexes etc.
     
    I think there may well be a good deal of truth to this. If immigrants come to a society in which promiscuity is taken for granted, sluttiness is celebrated and pornography is all-pervasive then obviously you're going to have problems.

    We in the West have to accept that our civilisation has become very sick indeed. We have a "civilisation" that is toxic for our own people and equally toxic to people from other cultures who are exposed to it.

    I think it is of amusement that as 4chan notes: the best way to be a true rebel now is to promote traditional morality, live a clean life, and basically be decent as it used to be defined. Advertise it and you’ll get hated on, too.

    We truly have managed to turn what was white into black, and vice versa.

  61. @Anon
    Feminism is really dead. It was killed by Negroes, Muslims, and Homos-Trannies.

    It tries to remain alive as an anti-white-male ideology, but it doesn't make much sense these days.

    After all, white males the tamest bunch of guys in America. Maybe Asian guys are tamer, but they don't show up on the cultural radar. Due to so much anti-white-male-bashing, white males have become very careful about whatever they say and do. The UVA case shows that the MSM has to create fake rape stories about blonde Nazis to keep the Narrative going. It's like A&E had to pay some dinky remnants of the KKK to do Hollywood KKK stuff.

    Because of 'intersectionality', feminism has to make common cause with many groups that have different views. So, feminism cannot complain about lots of things by various groups that could be construed as 'anti-feminist' or 'misogynist'.
    For instance, feminists are mum about rap music that is mostly about loud black men yapping about guns, rape, violence, and calling women 'bitchass hos'. Feminists used to be anti-porn, but once porn has turned into interracist propaganda and encourages white women doing Negro men and white boys reduced to cuck status, feminists are mum about porn too. Feminists are mum about Muslim male violence in Europe because the Narrative says 'western values' are all about 'inclusion' and not stereotyping non-whites. And in the US, being pro-Islam is a kneejerk proggy position because bashing Muslims is one of the few permissible 'hates' still allowed for the Conservatives. Even though some denounce 'Islamophobia', one doesn't get fired or blacklisted for it. In the US, you can talk about Rotherham, Muslim rape in Europe, Muslim terrorism, and female genital mutilation. You won't lose your job. In some quarters, you will be rewarded. But if you say, "blacks rape the most" or "Jews control porn that degrade white women into c*mbuckets for Negroes, or Israel used Slavic women as sex slaves in brothels", you will be destroyed forever by both Liberals and Conservatives for whom Israel can never do wrong.

    Also, as feminists are dependent on rich white/Jewish men for access, power, and privilege, so much of lewd behavior among powerful white/Jewish men is tolerated as long as those people support 'feminism'. Consider how much bad stuff Bill Clinton was allowed to get away with because he signed onto 'feminism'. And Hollywood and Music industries are filled with rich white or Jewish execs who use their positions to bang lots of chicks who will do anything to have a chance. And Washington politicians use their power to get lots of pooter. Again, feminists don't care about that since it's about Power Sex. Powerful feminists are in the Game.

    And of course, feminists are mum about how homos run the fashion industry and idealize these super-thin and super-tall women, thereby making a lot of women feel physically inferior because they don't measure up to fashion mag standards. Homo men run fashion. And homo men also run much of TV and music industry. As homos tend to be narcissistic, nihilistic, excessive, vain, hedonistic, crass, shallow, and bungish, they come up with outrageous stuff for girls that encourage really bad stupid behavior. You can bet that the idols like Britney Spears, madonna, Christina Agorilla, Miley Cyrus, and etc are surrounded by homo men who make them wear stupid dress and act trashy. It's all ultra-capitalist, consumerist, materialistic, and culture-of-greed and megalomania, but feminists go along with it because they are allied with homos.

    Also, there is elite feminism and egalitarian feminism. Egalo-feminism still survives in some college departments. Many such women are fat, ugly, gross, gunky, and look like Andrea Dworkin. They lack drive, ambition, and creativity. They are only good for bureaucratic work or teaching some stupid college in class about 'oppression'. As these fat ugly hagulas have nothing going for them, their meaning of life derives from hooking up with some ideology, cause, or whatever. Anything to piss off the System, even though they are enabled and funded by the System. But no one really pays any attention to them. They are boring and dull. They are like the tardo girl in OLEANNA.

    So, the real power of feminism is in elite feminism. The odd thing is that egalo-feminist, though far less powerful and privileged, have absolute power in their domain, whereas the elito-feminists, though far richer and more powerful, are still at a disadvantage in their chosen fields. The women's studies department at a college will be totally ruled by egalo-feminists. But no one really cares about this fat pig hagulas, and they never gain great wealth or access.
    In contrast, women like Sheryl Sanderg in Silicon Valley and top female agents in Hollywood make big bucks. And some of them are leading players. But they still lag behind the males in the upper echelons of power.
    The difference between egalo-feminists and elito-feminists is that the former really hate men(not least because men hate them too for being fat, ugly, disgusting, and vile) whereas the latter really want to compete with men, win in the Big Game, and marry some super-ideal guy with big bucks, smarts, and success. They love successful men and wanna gain success themselves to marry the best men.

    Ostensibly, egalo-feminists and elito-feminists are allied against men, but they have little in common. Egalo-feminists, being fat-ugly-gross-mediocre-morbid, have given up on men and just stick to the puritanical man-hating ideology. It is their crutch. They will cheer on the elito-feminists in the corporate world in the name of fighting male domination and patriarchy, but they also secretly resent the elito-feminists who have a much greater chance of genuine success(in the real world) and are looking for successful/powerful men to marry or have sex with.
    The alliance is like between the high school cheerleader on honor roll and zit-faced fatassed girl who just gets B's. The smart cheerleader may spout all the right-sounding stuff about equality and etc, but she has ambitions to make it and meet the best guy. In contrast, the zit-faced fat-butted hagula won't amount to much and just sulks in resentment.

    Elite-feminists seek parity with rich and powerful. So, when they talk about 'equality', they mean equality with the 'best' kind of people in the Elite World. They are not talking about equality with rest of humanity, most of whom are suckers and losers. No way they will marry a mexican dishwasher or 'deplorable' security guard.
    Sheryl Sandberg's idea of equality is rubbing shoulders with billionaire men. Hillary Clinton's idea of equality is being president and restarting cold war with Russia. Merkel's idea of equality is running for president again and sitting her fat bare ass down on the face of Germany.

    Anyway, we have one kind of feminism run by fat loseresses who claim to stand for the powerless, and we have another kind of feminism practiced by winneresses whose dream is to rub shoulders with the powerful and marry rich men. The contradiction is too big. Imagine a men's movement where one bunch of guys are fat tards who look like Eric Erickson yammering about equality with all of loser humanity and another bunch of guys who are smart/ambitious and wanna be equal with the oligarchs of Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Las Vegas and marry the most desirable women.

    But we have to blame the men too for feminism. The fact is a lot of Western/modern fathers did a lousy job. They were too materialistic, too immature, too individualistic, too excessive, etc. They forgot how to be patriarchs, and they failed to instill true culture in their girls. They didn't know how to be like Don Vito Corleone. They never grew up, watched too much TV, didn't introduce their girls to race, culture, history, and morality. So, the girls grew up on the two PC's: pop culture and political correctness.

    Also, the problem of feminism, along with individualism and careerism, is that it puts materialism above organismicism. Indeed, this is the problem of modernity. It favors ideas and materials over life. This is a huge misconception since ideas and material goods are useless & can't exist without life. Humans are animals. Before anything else is possible, there must be life. So, any understanding of meaning of human-ness must begin with life. Each human is born of father and mother. Since it is a complex process to raise a kid, it is a moral duty for man and woman who produce life to commit to one another and to the life they produced. That is the core of morality based on biological truth. But so many ideologies of modernity attack this. Feminists attack it as patriarchal. Feminists, being into sisterhood or individuality, thinks only of what the Woman wants. So, if she wants be a wife, that is okay. But if she wants to be single-mother and deny the kid a father, that is good too. Or, if she wants to kill the kibbler through abortion, that is good too.
    Feminists don't understand life. All they care about is women's choice, women's rights, women's freedom, women's freedom, and etc. They never think to ask, "Why do women exist in the first place?" Women, like men, exist because of father and mother. Thus, every child should be the responsibility of father and mother. And since the kid in the womb belongs as much to the father as to the mother, abortion should be a decision made by both parties. Why should the woman have the sole right to choose to kill the kid? The woman may argue that the kid is in HER BODY, but it's in her body ONLY BECAUSE the man fertilized her egg with his seed. Now, if the man takes off, the woman should make the decision on her own. But if the man and woman decided together to have a kid, the man should be consulted too if the woman suddenly decides to kill the kid. It's like money in the bank. The money may physically be in the bank, but it was deposited by the customer. Just because the money is in the bank doesn't mean the bank can do whatever it wants to do with it. Likewise, every kid in a womb is the result of man depositing his sperm inside the woman. If it was rape, the woman should abort. Otherwise, it is a far more complicated moral issue.

    Anyway, our understanding of human-ness must begin with life. And the meaning of life comes from family. Man having a wife, woman having a husband, and they raising a family. While some jobs may be rewarding in their own right, most jobs suck. Even better kinds of jobs, like doctoring and lawyering, are mostly drudgery. The real meaning comes from family life. Indeed, we can see it in the generosity within the family. A doctor may perform invaluable service to his clients, but why? For money. He doesn't really care for all those strangers. He treats them for money. Once they are out of his office, he doesn't care about them, and they don't care about him. And he wouldn't spend money on them. He works on them to take money from them. But a parent spends money on his kid out of love. That is meaning of life. True meaning of life is based on love of close ones to whom one gives without thought of material reward. Emotional reward is enough, indeed the best kind of reward. Also, it is through the kids that parents live on in story, memory, and etc. Jews understood this. The kid hears the story of his father and grandfather. So, once grandfather dies, the story remains, and it is carried down through the generations.

    The problem with our age is amnesia. We don't believe in family history anymore. Kids are not raised by patriarchs. Instead, from a young age, kids are made to identify with pop culture idols and emulate the likes of Justin Bieber and Miley Cyrus. From a young age, kids see TV. It's like in the movie AVALON by Barry Levinson. Before TV, the young kids heard stories from parents and grandparents. And he read books and etc. Also, kids got to know nature by playing outside and going on trips. Now, it's all zip-zap pop culture that extinguishes all memory. Also, as America is the center of the world, all the world is following the American Model. After all, one needs only 5 yrs residence in the US and love of shopping to be a 'good American'.

    But real meaning comes from family, and family is about life created through sex bound by moral laws that make love(than mere lust) possible. So, jobs exist mainly to allow people to afford to have families. Men need families. Without them, they are leading dead-end lives. And we can see the result in White Death. Women may work to afford families too, but jobs are far more important for the men because men without jobs cannot have families. The simple general fact is most men will marry women without jobs, but most women will not marry men without jobs. So, if you take job away from a woman, you are not taking away her chance at family. But if you take away job from a man, you are taking away not only his job but his chance at family.
    But feminists are too nasty and selfish to see this.

    When women take too many good jobs, they are robbing men of the chance of having families. This is esp true in our world when women's expectations for marriage have risen so high. Back in New Deal days, a woman was willing to marry some high school dropout with factory job. Now, women want a much better kind of men, but with so many good jobs held by women, there are far fewer men with the kind of jobs that attract women. Indeed, feminism is self-defeating because as women rise higher and higher in economic ranks, their standards also go higher and higher. They are less and less willing to marry men who are deemed 'not good enough'. But since more women in upper ranks means fewer men in upper ranks, it means fewer men for ambitious women to marry. Worse, many women who gain good jobs don't even want families. They just want to enjoy the good life of travel, affairs, and materialism. So, they hog a good job, make all that money, and blow it all on themselves. If a good decent man had that job, he might have spent the money to raise a family than just on himself.

    We need a new view of life that puts life first. We need to say life comes first since the only reason we exist is because we are alive, and we are alive cuz we have father and mother. So, life is most important. And since we don't live forever, our lives continue as memory in our kids, who are also life. And it just so happens to be the case that men who want to get married need jobs. So, even though women should not be banned from jobs, careers must be prioritized to serve men. In serving men, jobs also serve women who can marry the men, and it will serve the kids who will be born into stable families. Feminists will cry foul because such a system favors men for jobs, and from a purely libertarian-feminist perspective, their complaint would have merit. Libertarianism puts ideas and individual choice above all else. So, the idea of liberty and freedom beats all. But the core meaning of life comes from life itself. What is use of liberty or freedom if there is no life? And life imbued with moral value is about family. So, the core meaning and purpose of humanity is to have family. That being the case, society should be ordered so that it maximizes the chance for men to have wives and families. It is a form of biological socialism. It might be called Bio-Social-Security. If men and women were asexual and interchangeable, I would agree with the libertarians. And if we lived in a BRAVE NEW WORLD kind of society where the state makes all the people, family would be unnecessary. But we still create life through family. And the true meaning of life is found not at work but when one comes home ot family from work filled with colleagues and strangers. (Though co-workers may be close friends, they are still not family. If a co-worker decided to quit and go elsewhere, that's just part of work. But imagine if the spouse left or a child ran away. Or if they died. It'd mean a lot more.) It is when the man comes home and hugs his wife, kids, and dog and cat that he finds true meaning. Why? At home, it's not about dollars and cents. He gives himself to wife and kids out of love. At work, he did stuff with others to make money. It's like an accountant will serve any old folks, but it's for money. But he will do stuff for his own parents out of love. He works for money, but the money gains most meaning when spent on family. The main purpose of work is to allow men to afford family. When women take too many good jobs, they not only hurt men but women who want to be wives/mothers. Suppose a bunch of women want to be good wives/mothers, but it is difficult to find men who can support them. Why? Cuz too many women hog the good jobs... and these women don't even intend to get married and just lead Sex-and-City lives of piggishness.

    The main problem of our materialist-consumer society is it puts money and jobs above life and family. Our society pretends as if money and jobs are ends in themselves when, in fact, they are just means to have families(for people with true bio-moral sense).
    After all, consider two men: one is a libertarian who is just into me, me, me materialism. He spends all his money on videogames, fancy cars, travel, expensive man-child toys, collectibles, record albums, and etc. Now, all those things are nice, and I'm not against having stuff. But are they the ultimate meaning of life?
    The other man uses his earnings to mainly afford a family, have a wife, and have kids.
    Suppose a lot of time passes, and both are old and near death. The second guy is surrounded by kids and grandkids. He has memory of life well-lived with wife whom he dearly loved. The first guy is all alone in some hospital surrounded by Filipino nurses and Nigerian assistants who don't give a rat's ass about him. In his house are lots of stuff -- games, books, records, and etc -- that don't care about him and will end up in some trash heap or Salvation Army after he dies. Who led a more meaningful life? Charles Foster Kane dies with lots of stuff, but he has no family. It's miserable. But George Bailey is surrounded by family at end of IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE. And Don Vito Corleone died meaningfully as his family remembers him and dearly loves him.
    When consumer-material society put jobs, money, and individualism above life, family, and culture/community, it committed a great crime against humanity.
    In this sense, the National Socialist model was most sound. Now, Nazism ended up doing horrible stuff with WWII and Holocaust. Its imperialism and radical racism were hideous and worth denouncing for all time. But when it came to national policy on family and economics, it came closest to a model that found a meaningful covenant between the need of materiality/economy and need of the biology/family.

    This has meaning for men, women, and children.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/86/03/13/860313faff843e305aeff1c0b096c3e4.jpg

    http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/24fafb2d081d4b918a791e2de6a482eb/kalenberg-peasant-family-1939-adolf-wissel-1894-1973-nazi-germany-g950ha.jpg

    We need some socialism on the matter of family, a kind of bio-socialism.
    If socialism is about sacrificing individual wealth and liberty for the good of the whole where necessary, then it should be considered in relation to biology.
    After all, Social Security program too is bio-socialist. The earnings of young individuals are passed to old individuals. Purely from a libertarian viewpoint, it might be called unjust since money is taken from one bunch of individuals and given to another bunch who didn't work for it. But the biological fact is older people are weaker, wearier, and sicker. So, they can't work like young people. And golden yrs should be somewhat pleasant. So, young workers make sacrifices for older folks.. and also, young will not remain young forever. They will become old one day and they will receive social security paid for by the new young.
    Then, we need bio-socialist considerations when it comes to men and women. Men and Women are different. Men cannot have kids. And women generally will not marry men without jobs, esp good jobs. So, jobs matter more to men than to women. Also, even though money is nice to spend on fun consumer stuff, money is ultimately a means for creating and raising a family. While one can spend all the money on non-family stuff, it is ultimately meaningless since a man who dies along surrounded by dead stuff or material goods is at a moral/cultural dead-end. Also, it is within the family that men, women, and children share in something truly meaningful. If we are life, then we must life mainly for life, and it is from the family that we came from, it is the family which we must create, and it is the family that we must leave behind once we die. (Another way to enact bio-socialism is to allow women to have good high-paying jobs but taxing them at much higher rates and passing that money to men so they can afford families. After all, men need the extra money to have families. Since women take good jobs and chance of families from men, the state can take a chunk of the women's paycheck and give to men to raise families.) Western Society is so proud of its social safety nets and social security, but it has failed because it has forgotten how to create life and family. The fact that aging white folks in the US and EU must talk about importing masses of non-white immigrants to work to support social security for old white folks who left few or no children behind reeks of failure. What does it matter if white folks created lots of stuff and wealth IF they failed to create life that will love them, cherish them, take care of them, and remember them and carry on with their stories and memories? The question is do you wanna be like Vito Corleone or like Jack Nicholson in CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, a man who got the sex and girls but failed as a real man with family? If the aging West has to import tons of non-whites to take care of old whites, then it has failed big time. It has favored materialism over organismicism. West forgot that, above all, we are organisms. We need life before we can have ideas and 'stuff'.

    Even Soviets had sounder concept of family that what happened in the consumerist west.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/a0/d7/29/a0d72952783a931b43fe77cac4e74399.jpg

    This is one of the most beautiful images of fatherhood. From Tarkovsky's MIRROR:

    https://youtu.be/9Yn9q25NWAw?t=1h6m56s

    In the end, feminism is irrelevant. Yes, earlier forms did good in allowing freedom to women and giving them chances to develop their minds. And etc. But in the end, most women are not Madame Curies. Most of them never used their freedom to do good work or achieve remarkable things. Same with the men. Less than 1% of people change society in any real way. Most people live not for great fame or fortune but for family. And the advance of second wave feminism, in concert with perpetual youth-ism, materialism, hedonism, piggerism, shamelessism, and etc. led to a social disaster. Even the affluent who do better than other are soulless and lost, worshiping garbage like 'gay marriage' and trannies. It is a life out of balance, like in KOYAANISQATSI, where individuals are made to favor the ever disposable insta-delights over things that have meaning over the long haul.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOIvJTuCrlE

    Fatherism or neo-patriarchalism is the only thing that will save society. Not just masculinism but father-ism because every man was born a son, and every man can only pass down his identity, story, and culture to his son. (A man has moral and cultural power over his own kids that he has over no other. A Jewish father can make his son Jewish and tell him the story of his people. But he can't do that to any other kid who isn't his own.) We need a culture that makes boys grow up and put away childish things and act with honor like young Vito Corleone. And has a sense of culture beyond superhero movies, video games, and sports dominated by the Gros who are trashy and tattooed all over. (We are so far away from the time of Jackie Robinson who had some class, at least in public.) We need men who have enough sense not to graffiti their ass and arms with tattoos. Or get dumb piercings or get gay-ish haircuts. Male culture is a disaster because it's geared to churning out Perez Hilton-imitators than Vito Corleones. A NYT article says gaydar no longer works since even straight urban males now dress and act like fruits.

    Imagine that: "HIPSTERS BROKE MY GAYDAY"

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/opinion/sunday/hipsters-broke-my-gaydar.html

    THAT IS WHAT PASSES FOR MALE CULTURE IN THE MODERN WEST. And men are looking pretty fruity in Japan, what with all those 'herbivores'. No wonder so many Japanese men would rather play video games for life than be fathers.

    This, btw, is a homo idea of family. Needless to say, certain sicko Jews have been at the center of both radical feminism and homomania.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/da/fc/54/dafc5497243c4f4ea55ecc687422bfa8.jpg

    Agree with most of what you say other than your rip of scientology , I am not a scientologist, however I am fully aware of what a brilliant human being LRH was.

    L Ron Hubbard :

    ” When women gave up their traditional roles this was the beginning of the end of civilization”

    Authenticjazzman “Mensa” Society member of forty-plus years and pro jazz artist.

  62. @Son of Dixie
    I had a lengthy conversation with a negro savage from Eritrea. Moslem fellow. The conversation went from Jews, he was shocked that a White American was aware of the JQ, to them this is common knowledge, eventually to FGM.

    To him it was a perfectly logical thing. He explained to me that at times women could have too much of a sexual appetite, and of course men get tired. Solution: FGM, "just a little" as he put it.

    As we spoke - he was dawned in full Moslem garb - I kind of spaced out on what he was talking about and just wondered, why is this man in my nation? Growing up in the 80's I did not know that a nation called "Eritrea" existed. Had absolutely no idea about East Africa. Didn't care. I didn't know what a Somalian was.

    Really is amazing how many of these throwbacks now roam within our borders. According to "Turn Coat" Fred... No bid deal. Of course being married to a Jewish woman will cloud a man's mind and skew morals.

    Donned. He was donned in garb. Jesus.

    But yeah–why is he here? An elemental question Americans seem incapable of asking. It’s taken as a matter of course that the world’s flotsam and jetsam naturally washes ashore here and it is somehow our duty to gather it in. That’s what 50 years of cultural-Marxism begets.

  63. @Father O'Hara
    LOL !! I can see Fred worrying about his honor and purity! With that mug hes got no worries,LMAO! Now if Fred were a 6 year old boy...why of course,that would be different. Some cute little guy...nice and sweet,right Jacques?

    Theyre not going to rape Fred. His wife,his daughters...??

    Bless me Father, for I have sinned. Many times. ;)

  64. @Wizard of Oz
    Can you quote and cite Fred's claim to having a "high IQ"?

    That Fred may be misinformed about Islam and FGM isn't much of a point since his whole case was about radical feminists and is completely unaffected by his not portraying the perpetrators of FGM and why they do it with scholarly accuracy. BTW did you notice that Mahomet is quoted in the hadiths as approving the practice?

    Can you quote and cite Fred’s claim to having a “high IQ”?

    Yes, I can.

    I’m surprised that a Whiz genius such as yourself is unable to master Google.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Well I have Googled for variations on "what is fred reed's iq" and got a lot of interesting references to our Fred, including a Wikipedia article on him which a search shows not to mention IQ at all, and elsewhere no reference to his measured or claimed or estimated IQ.

    So, please come up with those citations. And in aid of your fellow commenters please show us how to use Google to find Fred's claim to a high IQ.

  65. @Talha
    Hey WoO,

    The truth requires precision. There are no hadith approving FGM, there are some hadith approving female circumcision.

    According to the Hanafi school (which I and most Muslims follow) the evidence just is not there to support the custom, so only male circumcision is done as a Sunnah. The Maliki and Hanbali consider is a commendable act, but certainly not required. It is the Shafi'i school that considers circumcision for men and women to be required based on the evidence.

    Let's see how they define it:
    “In Nihayah 8/35, after mentioning the official position of the Shafi’i School, that circumcision is obligatory for both men and women, Ramli defines what it means for a woman. He says that it is the removal of some skin from the clitoral prepuce.”
    “The narration (‘Leave it bulging, do not exaggerate in cutting. Indeed, that is more enjoyable for the woman, and the husband will like it better.’- reported in Abu Dawud) describes the manner in which the practice is to be performed. It clarifies that the procedure is minor and the reduction is slight; in fact, the verbs used are commands, which indicate obligation. Meaning, to go beyond this contravenes what the Prophet (pbuh) commanded.”
    http://shafiifiqh.com/question-details.aspx?qstID=173

    This is also confirmed by the Shafi'i law manual on my shelf that uses almost the exact same wording about it being just concerning the prepuce and not the clitoris itself.

    It is amazing, but the image Mr. Reed posted almost maps exactly with the presence of the Shafi'i school; for instance, do you see that small area in Iraq where it is most prevalent, those are the Kurds and they have traditionally been Shafi'i in a sea surrounded by Hanafis and Shiahs.

    So basically, really only the Shafi'i school emphasizes it while the others don't pay much attention or merely recommend it. And by 'it' I mean female circumcision as described above. The gross acts (done by either Muslims or non-Muslims) that are culturally prevalent have no sanction from our sacred law and should come under the rubric of FGM.

    However, I found the following two articles fascinating reads. This one deals with a culture that is SubSaharan, but not Muslim:
    "She also challenges some common misconceptions around FGC, like the belief that it is forced on women by men. In fact, elderly women often do the most to perpetuate the custom. I thought African girls were held down and butchered against their will, but some of them voluntarily and joyfully partake in the ritual. I thought communities would surely abandon the practice once they learned of its negative health consequences. And yet, in Shell-Duncan's experience, most people who practice FGC recognize its costs—they just think the benefits outweigh them....The sort of feminist argument about this is that it’s about the control of women but also of their sexuality and sexual pleasure. But when you talk to people on the ground, you also hear people talking about the idea that it’s women’s business. As in, it’s for women to decide this. If we look at the data across Africa, the support for the practice is stronger among women than among men. So, the patriarchy argument is just not a simple one. Female circumcision is part of demarcating insider and outsider status. Are you part of this group of elder women who have power in their society?"
    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/04/female-genital-mutilation-cutting-anthropologist/389640/

    And this is regarding how women are often now paying for cosmetic surgery on their genitals and how this is seen (rightly in my opinion) as hypocritical by other cultures:
    "The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines FGM as “all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.” The label ‘FGM’ applies to a variety of procedures, which are more numerous and varied than most people might imagine...“I find it very difficult to see the difference between Female Genital Mutilation and Female Genital Cosmetic Surgery. Is there a difference?”, she asked. She went on to note that in 30 per cent of cases, patients undergoing Female Genital Cosmetic surgery will suffer painful complications, many of which are similar to those suffered by victims of FGM. In order to get around the “non-medical” clause in the WHO definition of FGM, cosmetic surgeons justify FGCS on the basis that the young women seeking the surgery will suffer psychological distress due to a perception of abnormality. However, the majority of young women seeking this surgery have perfectly normal, healthy labias."
    https://www.varsity.co.uk/comment/7694

    Peace.

    Thanks for the information. Not that I am enthused at the idea of Mahomet expressing views on any form of female circumcision except “if adult women of their own free will wish to have surgery on any part of them then that is their business, but no female of any age should have it done under pressure from others or even influence to follow an alleged tradition”. And that is what I would hope would be the position of every school of Muslim thought today.

    As to male circumcision I am indifferent as it is most unlikely to be harmful and can be medically desirable. There is also the argument that it can make some men better lovers from a female point of view. So a small possible positive against virtually no negative. Not the same for female “circumcision” I think unless for aesthetic purposes freely adopted.

    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey WoO,

    Again, since I adhere to the Hanafi school, this is not really much of an issue. I just don't like it when people (not you, I'm talking others) try to put words in the mouth of our tradition.

    I for one am glad that the proponents of female circumcision (like the Shafi'i school) actually have a hadith to back them up which specifically declares the limited nature of the procedure. This is why those scholars have pronounced the guidelines as I mentioned and (with the hadith as evidence to back them up) can fight against the ignorant and extreme practices some Muslims have introduced - without the Prophet (pbuh) having spoken up, they wouldn't have much to back them up other than something that is implicitly derived from external cultural and medical understanding. Good luck changing a culture with only that (especially when you read that article I referenced in the Atlantic and find that some cultures realize the harms, but simply see more benefits). The Russians that get pissed-drunk on vodka every weekend know (medically) they shouldn't, but, here we are.

    Interesting also were these notes on a research paper I found on the site for "US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health" on this very complex topic:
    "There are many forms of circumcision, broadly grouped as excision and infibulation, distinguished by whether labial edges are fused after the genitalia are incised (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Excision entails cutting or removing part or all of the clitoris with or without the labia minora and majora. Some women have only the clitoral prepuce removed. Infibulation (radical circumcision) is excision accompanied by suturing closed the introitus leaving a small opening for passage of urine and menstrual blood. Local customs dictate the timing and form of circumcision chosen....Infibulation is mainly practiced in the horn of Africa; over 80% of circumcised women in Sudan and Somalia are infibulated. The prevalence of mild forms, such as removal or cutting of the clitoral prepuce (analogous to male circumcision) is unknown, although it has been described in the literature."
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497147/

    Basically we have Muslims going against recorded Islamic guidelines (even by those who hold a minority position). I should probably stop getting surprised at both that; 1) many Muslims keep doing things in contradiction to their religion yet using their religion to justify it and 2) Islam gets blamed for the actions of its ignorant followers who go against its very teachings.

    Peace.

  66. @jacques sheete

    Can you quote and cite Fred’s claim to having a “high IQ”?
     
    Yes, I can.

    I'm surprised that a Whiz genius such as yourself is unable to master Google.

    Well I have Googled for variations on “what is fred reed’s iq” and got a lot of interesting references to our Fred, including a Wikipedia article on him which a search shows not to mention IQ at all, and elsewhere no reference to his measured or claimed or estimated IQ.

    So, please come up with those citations. And in aid of your fellow commenters please show us how to use Google to find Fred’s claim to a high IQ.

  67. @Wizard of Oz
    Thanks for the information. Not that I am enthused at the idea of Mahomet expressing views on any form of female circumcision except "if adult women of their own free will wish to have surgery on any part of them then that is their business, but no female of any age should have it done under pressure from others or even influence to follow an alleged tradition". And that is what I would hope would be the position of every school of Muslim thought today.

    As to male circumcision I am indifferent as it is most unlikely to be harmful and can be medically desirable. There is also the argument that it can make some men better lovers from a female point of view. So a small possible positive against virtually no negative. Not the same for female "circumcision" I think unless for aesthetic purposes freely adopted.

    Hey WoO,

    Again, since I adhere to the Hanafi school, this is not really much of an issue. I just don’t like it when people (not you, I’m talking others) try to put words in the mouth of our tradition.

    I for one am glad that the proponents of female circumcision (like the Shafi’i school) actually have a hadith to back them up which specifically declares the limited nature of the procedure. This is why those scholars have pronounced the guidelines as I mentioned and (with the hadith as evidence to back them up) can fight against the ignorant and extreme practices some Muslims have introduced – without the Prophet (pbuh) having spoken up, they wouldn’t have much to back them up other than something that is implicitly derived from external cultural and medical understanding. Good luck changing a culture with only that (especially when you read that article I referenced in the Atlantic and find that some cultures realize the harms, but simply see more benefits). The Russians that get pissed-drunk on vodka every weekend know (medically) they shouldn’t, but, here we are.

    Interesting also were these notes on a research paper I found on the site for “US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health” on this very complex topic:
    “There are many forms of circumcision, broadly grouped as excision and infibulation, distinguished by whether labial edges are fused after the genitalia are incised (Figure 1 and Figure 2). Excision entails cutting or removing part or all of the clitoris with or without the labia minora and majora. Some women have only the clitoral prepuce removed. Infibulation (radical circumcision) is excision accompanied by suturing closed the introitus leaving a small opening for passage of urine and menstrual blood. Local customs dictate the timing and form of circumcision chosen….Infibulation is mainly practiced in the horn of Africa; over 80% of circumcised women in Sudan and Somalia are infibulated. The prevalence of mild forms, such as removal or cutting of the clitoral prepuce (analogous to male circumcision) is unknown, although it has been described in the literature.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497147/

    Basically we have Muslims going against recorded Islamic guidelines (even by those who hold a minority position). I should probably stop getting surprised at both that; 1) many Muslims keep doing things in contradiction to their religion yet using their religion to justify it and 2) Islam gets blamed for the actions of its ignorant followers who go against its very teachings.

    Peace.

Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Fred Reed Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Not What Tom Jefferson Had in Mind
Sounds Like A Low-Ranked American University To Me
Very Long, Will Bore Hell Out Of Most People, But I Felt Like Doing It
It's Not A Job. It's An Adventure.
Cloudy, With Possible Tidal Wave