The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Islam Is Right About Women?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

As commenter EliteComInc would say, Laughing:

The reporter and those he talks to are unsure who the fliers “target”. So completely does Wokeism forbid intellectual curiosity of any kind that the simple message could be making a statement intended to provoke those reading it into ponderment cannot be given any consideration. The women interviewed are merely unsure of whom the Who? is and who the Whom? is, and so are uncertain of how to react. Their consternation is our amusement.

There is the usual psychological projection, too. At 59 seconds in a woman says, “I think it’s short-sighted. I think it’s unfortunate.” Questioning the compatibility of Western liberal views on gender equality and Islamic teachings on the importance of sexual distinctions in many aspects of life is short-sighted? No, what is recklessly short-sighted is cramming the two together and expecting harmonious co-existence as the result.

The reporter wraps up by mentioning that the police are determining whether or not the placement of these fliers constitutes a criminal offence. What, for littering? If this is criminal, then innocuously noting that it is okay to be white must be downright felonious. Uh oh…

Anyway, since the news affiliate and all the people they talked to feign bemusement over what the incoherent word salad that is simultaneously deeply offensive could be alluding to, let us utilize the World Values Survey to help them out.

The following table shows the percentages of people who either “agree” or “strongly agree” that “men make better political leaders than women do”. All majority-Muslim countries in the project’s latest survey wave are included. For comparative purposes, four Western countries are also included. The percentages of residents by country, in descending order, who think men make better political leaders than women do (N = 33,974):

Country BetterPols%
1) Egypt 86.4
2) Qatar 85.4
3) Yemen 83.3
4) Jordan 80.5
6) Palestine 79.3
6) Iraq 79.3
7) Nigeria 76.8
8) Kuwait 75.7
9) Uzbekistan 75.5
10) Libya 74.6
11) Tunisia 72.5
12) Pakistan 72.0
13) Algeria 71.6
14) Azerbaijan 70.0
15) Malaysia 69.6
16) Turkey 68.0
17) Kazakhstan 64.1
18) Kyrgyzstan 63.6
19) Morocco 57.4
20) Lebanon 56.8
21) Germany 19.8
22) United States 19.4
23) Sweden 10.8
24) Netherlands 10.6

The same, except the statement being evaluated this time is “men make better business executives than women do”:

Country BetterExecs%
1) Egypt 79.7
2) Azerbaijan 74.7
3) Yemen 73.5
4) Pakistan 73.4
5) Jordan 71.0
6) Nigeria 70.4
7) Libya 69.1
8) Uzbekistan 66.9
9) Iraq 65.9
10) Turkey 64.1
11) Tunisia 62.4
12) Palestine 62.0
13) Kuwait 59.6
14) Algeria 59.2
15) Qatar 59.0
16) Malaysia 58.3
17) Kyrgyzstan 55.7
18) Morocco 54.1
19) Kazakhstan 51.9
20) Lebanon 41.3
21) Germany 24.8
22) United States 11.7
23) Sweden 8.4
24) Netherlands 8.2

Whether you’re in agreement or in dispute with the assertion that “Islam is right about women”, it is clear that Islam’s view of women is distinct from that of Europe and its diaspora. Difference is a prerequisite of diversity, after all!

Wave six WVS variables used: V51, V53

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Foreign Policy, Ideology • Tags: Islam, Sex, WVS 
Hide 187 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. There exists no Muslim nation called Palestine.

  2. =================
    ISLAM SAYS WOMEN
    GET TRIGGERED BY
    AMBIVALENT SIGNS
    =================

  3. Sid says:

    Steve Sailer on Twitter asked whether it was more of a hate crime to say, “Islam is RIGHT about women,” or, “Islam is WRONG about women.”

    I said claiming it’s right about women is far more subversive and hence a hate crime. If you say Islam is wrong about women, the censors can retort that “true” Islam is feminist (even though none of them have even read the Koran). In contrast, stating it’s right about women means there’s no snappy reply.

    wrt to the shortsighted statement:

    There ultimately is no easy way to reconcile Islamic cultures with Western beliefs and practices. I can testify from personal observation that the Soviet Union spent decades trying to secularize Islamic societies. To some extent, they succeeded while they were around. But once the USSR collapsed, a lot of old Islamic beliefs and practices snapped back into place. Just look at your graphs!

    Anyone who tells you that All We Need to Do is one or two things to reconcile Islam and the West almost surely has no idea what she’s talking about.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  4. Jim Smith says:

    I’ve often reflected that although we’re going to lose our Western culture, nations, and even civilization (thanks to a destructive and corrupt elite class)…at least we’re not going to have to put up with all the feminist bullshit anymore. Fair trade? I just observe. You decide. 🙂

  5. Talha says:

    This campaign is brilliant and earns epic trolling points for causing massive cognitive dissonance in Left-liberal societies.

    Well played, huzzah!

    I wish I could see those numbers broken down by gender; I can guarantee you that in many cases in Muslim countries, the majority of women will reply in the affirmative that men make better leaders.

    Peace.

    • LOL: TomSchmidt
  6. Jason Liu says:
    @Talha

    It confuses just as many boomer conservatives who can’t imagine Islam might be right about anything.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Duke84
  7. Talha says:
    @Jason Liu

    That too – again, it is an absolutely brilliant campaign on so many levels. Bravo!

    Five words = mass confusion

    Peace.

  8. Svevlad says:

    Tbh any society that scores below 50% on those deserves a nice purge. The lower the score, the nicer the purge. Quality over quantity and that shit.

  9. LondonBob says:

    Judaism is right about women.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
  10. I’m copying this from Sailer’s blog, but: put up a sign that says

    Jews.

    That’s it.

    See what happens.

    🙂

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  11. For the next experiment, someone should put up some flyers that say Islam is right about women and others that say it’s wrong about women. That way, when the angry mob attempts to gather for a struggle session, they won’t be able to agree on what they just saw. That would break their brains.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  12. @Cagey Beast

    How about we really stoke the flames and put up a sign that says

    “Islam is both right and wrong about Jews.”

  13. I saw this on Black Pigeon Speaks, hilarious. White guys in those ridiculous Sociology classes should always speak up with such comments, like “We should treat our women more like Islam”, and if challenged by the Woke Becky, then play the liberal, hand to heart, “Oh my gosh..you aren’t suggesting how Islam views women as negative are you? Or is…is bad for women are you?” Woke Beckys should never be allowed to take any position without countering.

    If she says it’s sexist, you counter “are you actually saying that Islam is bad or women…OMG! You are scary…does your employer know how you feel about Islam?”

    If she says it’s Islamophobic, you counter, “are you actually inferring from the statement ‘Islam is right about women’, that it’s saying something bad about Islam…OMG, I actually think all women should be in hijab…are you saying that’s wrong for women? Why do you hate Muslims so much? Gosh…you’re scary…wow….”

  14. Thomm says:

    Why did it take until 2019 for such flyers to appear? Why didn’t it happen in 2002?

    This must mean that cuckservatives are no longer numerous enough to suppress the people who actually want to fight back.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    , @TomSchmidt
  15. @Thomm

    Hopefully. Or it could actually be posted by a Muslim.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Audacious Epigone
  16. @LondonBob

    If you redefine as Orthodox Judaism, you might cause just as large a stink.

    Except: Orthodox Jewish Women, who are the only Jewish female group growing in numbers, would agree.

  17. @Thomm

    Murray Rothbard was sometimes called a happy warrior. But most conservatives seem to live a life of dour depression. Meming pranksters have finally won.

    In 2002, there were other things to laugh about. Now, this is the only safe way to get laughs.

  18. Talha says:
    @RadicalCenter

    Muslims haven’t reached this level of trolling yet, we’ll get there – but the West was way ahead of the curve with guys like Chesterton, the original epic troll master:

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  19. Rosie says:

    To the extent being a “good business executive” means maximizing profits at any cost, I take the view that we aren’t as good at it as a compliment.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  20. Rosie says:
    @95Theses

    Hardy har har. Anyway, when women talk about our feelings, we’re often trying to fair to you. It’s considered good communication practice to express your feelings rather than accuse others.

    Do say:

    When you don’t clean out your junk drawer, I feel like you don’t care about my efforts to keep the house tidy.

    Don’t say:

    You don’t GAF about keeping a tidy house, you miserable slob!

    • Replies: @95Theses
    , @iffen
  21. Litteringwould be about the only crime I see. Though an ambitious cop might charge “Hindering government operations” since the pages were posted on traffic control signs.

    • Troll: KenH
  22. @Rosie

    Thanks for offering a first-person example of why Islam is right about women.

    • Replies: @SaneClownPosse
  23. In response to the article I did some homework. I thought the the statement interesting. I really had not much of an idea what Muslims say about women. All the Muslim men I know seem quite undone by women and pursue them with no small amount of zeal. Nor have I noticed any particular disrespect. Even they think my admonitions to be celibate strange and are delighted that the Qu’ran has no such restraints, so they say. However, I must confess my first response was . . .

    Laughter —– and I am smiling now. I think the author correct, even if one found the flyer off putting, it leads one to ask, what it is that Muslims say about women in the first place besides the same things that they say that is typical among men who are of other faiths. And in answering that question, it appears that it depends on which Muslim one is talking to or about.

    What the Qu’ran says and how it is understood and practiced

    http://s.telegraph.co.uk/graphics/projects/koran-carla-power/

    Muslim Opinions about women

    https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-women-in-society/

    I am not a Muslim, but whether or not there’s any universal agreement about women among Muslims seems to depend on location, particular faith and practice of the Qu’ran and the particulars of culture in which said Muslim comes and how some verses in the book are interpreted.

    But in spite of all that women triggered by an innocuous flyer’s comment reaching ro leaping to rip it down, for the crime of defacing either their sensibilities or government property still evokes

    more than a chuckle . . .

    Snicker . . snicker —

    Laugh

    • Agree: 95Theses
    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Talha
  24. 95Theses says:
    @Rosie

    I originally wasn’t going to respond to this because sometimes it’s almost as though you’re looking to take offense, of which I meant none.

    Also, because I posted this classic cartoon as it relates to the hemming and hawing dissonance of the women in the video, a little levity seemed in order.

    Back to your comment. Communication breakdowns between husbands and wives, men and women is as old as Adam and Eve. So I’ve always just assumed that men and women could never really see their intentions through the eyes of the other. And while I have purchased literally scores of books and CDs to this end, none could quite achieve the undertaking.

    But then a couple years ago I was listening to the Dennis Prager program during his male–female hour (a Wednesday feature), and Alison Armstrong happened to be his guest for that day. And sister, I was never more interested in hearing a woman describe the dynamics of what is actually going on in the heads of men and women in trying to relate to each other as I did for that hour. Alison Armstrong is a genius as far as I’m concerned.

    Ms. Armstrong maintains a website called understandmen.com and I cannot recommend it enough – to anyone. That’s all I will say of it (which is plenty) the rest I leave to you to explore.

    I wish you all the best. Really.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  25. Note:

    Regarding the issue of mutilation — men in these communities experience circumcision — it is not a one way street. Not approving or disapproving just making note.

  26. Rosie says:
    @95Theses

    a little levity seemed in order.

    I quite agree, and I wasn’t the least offended. I can take a joke. I was just trying to offer some insight. I take it you’re a married old hat, but not everyone around here is.

  27. Yes, look at Western European countries led by women and how they’ve “progressed” in the past decade, and you might reach the same conclusion.

    OK, I realise it’s not about Islam, but at their roots, Islam and Judaism seem to share more than a few traits.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Dr ExCathedra
  28. Rosie says:
    @The Alarmist

    Yes, look at Western European countries led by women and how they’ve “progressed” in the past decade, and you might reach the same conclusion.

    Because White countries led by men are doing so much better.

    • LOL: Talha, The Alarmist
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  29. Malcolm Y says:

    Yeah, but did you see how low the “scores” of the US and other western nations were? Sam’s Club must be making a fortune on bulk sales of Astroglide and doughnut cushions.

  30. Talha says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    admonitions to be celibate strange and are delighted that the Qu’ran has no such restraints, so they say

    Being celibate before marriage is mandatory. Choosing a life of celibacy as a matter of principle (meaning avoiding marriage) is prohibited (with only exemptions being giving in certain circumstances).
    “Marriage is part of my sunnah, and whoever does not follow my sunnah has nothing to do with me. Get married, for I will boast of your great numbers before the nations. Whoever has the means, let him get married, and whoever does not, then he should fast for it will diminish his desire.” – reported in Ibn Majah

    Peace.

  31. Talha says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Also, thanks for that article from the Telegraph, very nice read.

    Peace.

  32. @Rosie

    I defy you to name one white country led by a real man.

    • LOL: Rosie
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  33. @Cloudbuster

    I remember when the idea of women as political leaders was touted to reduce the wars caused by toxic masculinity.

    Then we get Madeline Albright and 500,000 dead Iraqi children is acceptable.
    Hillary Clinton and ‘We came, we saw, he died,’ regrading Libya.
    Victoria Nudelman serving cookies at Euromaidan.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  34. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    Okay, let’s put the concept of junk drawer into the same category as thermostats. That is, things that women cannot understand.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Rosie
  35. Talha says:
    @iffen

    Hey, we don’t understand why they need more shoes than we own shirts so it goes both ways.

    Peace.

  36. SOME RELIGIONS

    ARE RIGHT

    ABOUT SOME THINGS

    (“some people did something”)

    • LOL: Talha
  37. Rosie says:
    @iffen

    Okay, let’s put the concept of junk drawer into the same category as thermostats. That is, things that women cannot understand.

    I’ll cop to the thermostat thing, but I understand junk drawers just fine.

    When you’re picking up and you come across some unidentified object the belongs you know not where, you stick it in the junk drawer so hubby can put it where it goes during the weekly junk drawer purge.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  38. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    I’ll cop to the thermostat thing, but I understand junk drawers just fine.

    A primer on hangers:

    Cheap plastic ones: lightweight t-shirts.
    Expensive, metal ones: heavy sweatshirts.
    Thin plastic, no–slip grip ones: button-down shirts.

    Varieties of suit hangers will be a lesson for another day.

    Of course, you don’t have to put away the laundry, but if you decide to “help” because we’re sick or 9-months pregnant or something, put these guidelines on a sticky note and you’ll have a much neater closet with fewer broken hangers and shirts rumpled up on the floor.

    • Replies: @Talha
  39. In my area many of the Muslims are actually devout. They don’t drink, actually wait for marriage to have sex, and don’t rape anybody. Women stay home to take care of the children.

    This shows me how Islam is designed to work – in a smaller city, there is a much tighter community, thus greater accountability. In this conservative corner, they get along ok with the Christians (there are almost no SJWs here).

    When they go to a larger more liberal city like Toronto, you see them joining gangs, raping (in Europe), joining the Negro culture, etc.

    I’m not naive about Islam – I’m sure the knives will come out once their numbers are large enough. They should not be here. But in ideal circumstances, I see it working with my own eyes.

    Social conservatism works. And it incorporates “diversity” better than leftism. We all have our own tribes to support but share some basic values. Ultimately diversity will always fail but I can see where SoCons might be coming from.

    I guess my point is that I prefer conservative Muslims to white SJWs. I’ve discovered this after moving to a conservative area. That said, Muslims and people like me cannot co exist within the same borders forever. So my goal is to improve my own Race in every way.

    • Replies: @Talha
  40. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    Nice Chesterton quote.

    [MORE]

    Though I haven’t answered your last reply to me, I might if I get around to it before the comment window closes, which I probably won’t. But anyway, someone was talking about some website called Christian Mingle being sued into allowing gay dating, and I did a little research (if you can call Wikipedia research, that is). I would call it an abuse of the legal system, but considering the owners apparently settled out of court by agreeing to the gay dating conditions rather than taking any line harder than a jellybean, the legal system didn’t really get a chance to screw up here. And I really can’t blame the owners either– given some of the options on their site are ”Interdenominational”, ”Non-denominational”, or ”Not sure yet” it doesn’t seem that hard lines were ever something they were much interested in.

    But anyway I had to comment as it is always a good policy to encourage Chesterton quotes.

    • Replies: @Talha
  41. anon[286] • Disclaimer says:

    It is interesting how many people both here and at iSteve cannot see the forest but focus on a tree. It does not matter whether Islam is “right” about women or not. The flyer creates unease in the progressive mind because it joins two special categories of people in a way that no progressive ever encounters.

    This was a little campaign by /pol or someone similar to induce cognitive dissonance. It succeeded wonderfully.

    To say that the flyer is “true” is to be a hater of women, a misogynist; to say the flyer is “false” is to be a hater of Islam, an Islamaphobe, to ignore the flyer in a public place is not possible. Progressives are placed on the horns of a dilemma by their own mental contradictions. Thus the flyers must be torn down, ASAP!

    Listen to the Unitarian woman as she stumbles at the end of her quote – she’s tripping over her words because she’s about to commit crimethink in the classic Orwellian sense.

    The newsreader closing line concerning “Was it a prank, or was a law broken?” simply underscores the mental disorientation that a simple piece of paper with words on it causes in the progressive brain.

    One words sums it all up: kek.

  42. Anonymous[177] • Disclaimer says:

    EliteCommInc. (name frozen out?)

    “Being celibate before marriage is mandatory. Choosing a life of celibacy as a matter of principle (meaning avoiding marriage) is prohibited (with only exemptions being giving in certain circumstances)”

    I have never met a Muslim who agrees that this is expected in their faith. I had assumed that was the case. However, I have been informed, I was incorrect.

    As someone who leans heavily in the direction of scripture — for believers in Christ this is not really optional, if single.

    • Replies: @Talha
  43. @Talha

    Amalgamating the results of all the majority-Muslim countries, the percentages agreeing that men make better leaders than women do, by sex:

    Men — 80.3%
    Women — 65.6%

    False consciousness, I guess!

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Talha
  44. Duke84 says:
    @Jason Liu

    They also don’t want to admit Islam might be wrong about something either.

  45. Rosie says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    False consciousness, I guess!

    Well, it’s not like false consciousness isn’t a thing. Just look at how entire generations of Whites have been convinced to celebrate their own destruction.

  46. Talha says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    I figured; these attitudes are pretty common in women in Muslim societies. Islam is pretty solid in delineating gender roles and spheres of influence:
    “And the male is not like the female…” (3:36)

    And this really is the crux of whether you believe “Islam is right about women”.

    Having learned with traditional scholars for decades now, none that I could think of would consider giving leadership positions to women to be preferable except under dire circumstances, but neither would they consider this to be a slight on women any more than considering men better at cage-fighting; these are not what women were made for, they have better things to do with their time and more important contributions to make to society.

    Peace.

  47. Talha says:
    @Anonymous

    I have never met a Muslim who agrees that this is expected in their faith.

    Then you have met some plum ignorant Muslims. This is something considered general knowledge of the faith; fornication is as forbidden as pork or alcohol. There is zero difference of opinion on this subject.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    , @YetAnotherAnon
  48. Rosie says:
    @SaneClownPosse

    I remember when the idea of women as political leaders was touted to reduce the wars caused by toxic masculinity.

    Then we get Madeline Albright and 500,000 dead Iraqi children is acceptable.
    Hillary Clinton and ‘We came, we saw, he died,’ regrading Libya.
    Victoria Nudelman serving cookies at Euromaidan.

    We don’t make policy based on exceptions, except when those exceptions can be used to justify a crackdown on women.

    Of course, it’s conceivable that women who seek political office are more like men than women in general.

    In any event, I note the dearth of evidence go support this view that men make better leaders than women, short of appeal to consensus.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @Cloudbuster
  49. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    Maybe he knew some Shiites who were talking about their temporary marriage thing?

    • Replies: @Talha
  50. @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    A campaign of “X is/are”, invoking a search engine auto-fill suggestion?

    Jews are

    Men are

    Muslims are

    etc.

  51. @RadicalCenter

    For years, I thought Islam was our implacable enemy.

    Increasingly, I find myself struck by this creeping feeling that it may be our salvation.

  52. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    it doesn’t seem that hard lines were ever something they were much interested in.

    It’s a question of priorities; they have to make money after all. The more they restrict, the smaller their profit margins – data storage doesn’t pay for itself.

    It is always a good policy to encourage Chesterton quotes.

    Agreed.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  53. @Audacious Epigone

    Wrong.

    Islam is a dead religion for low IQ brown people. Brown people are spiritless. Only Christianity (specifically, Protestantism) can uplift the beautiful and pure spirit of the white race (specifically, Anglo/Nordic/Celtic/Aryan).

    However, it is sure kicking our asses into shape. How embarrassing for Christians to see Muslims not cucking on any issues, and being more successful while churches are closing. Being around Muslims has made me change my outlook; I’m very open when discussing my socially conservative views now.

    Islam will not be any white folks’ salvation. But it should be a wake-up call; and a model which we can follow. Basically, we keep preaching the Bible unapologetically.

    Islam can be a model, but never a solution.

  54. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    Hmmmm…interesting possibility. However, I would counter that I have known plenty of young Shiah men that totally took advantage of the temporary marriage thing while in a target-rich area like college. However, none of them would talk about it as anything other than marriage. They stuck to the rules (which are admittedly pretty lax for that situation) and would not consider it simply fornication. They were, at least from what they told us, pretty up front with the girls they were contracting it with that it was indeed a marriage (though of a temporary nature). They even got with some Sunni on-the-margins girls with it.

    Though one thing – never bring up whether they thought it would be cool if someone did temporary marriage with their sister, those were fighting words. We Sunnis used to roll our eyes at that.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  55. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    Thanks for the insights, make sense.

    I’ll add one you missed.

    Thin metal ones (the kind from dry cleaners): what plenty of Desi parents threaten to whup their kids with when they get out of line.

    Peace.

    • LOL: Rosie
  56. Talha says:
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    So my goal is to improve my own Race in every way.

    Problem here; Muslim is not a race.

    How do you deal with Muslims that are white (and growing) and have no qualms about considering the land that they are born in as their birth right?

    I mean, I guess people can have a conversation with him about how he doesn’t belong here:

    Peace.

  57. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Audacious Epigone

    For years, I thought Islam was our implacable enemy.

    Increasingly, I find myself struck by this creeping feeling that it may be our salvation.

    That’s the path I’ve travelled as well.

    One day you realise that the people you thought were the good guys were really the bad guys. And the people you thought were the bad guys were, if not actually the good guys, then at least the not-so-bad guys.

    Who would have thought that we would reach the point at which the only forces capable of defending civilisation would be Islam and the Chinese Communist Party. But here we are. It’s a turvy-topsy world.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @iffen
  58. Smith says:

    This messes up the enemy’s brain, it’s a good campaign.

    Women absolutely need to be controlled for a fruitful society, every ancient society knows this.

  59. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    the only forces capable of defending civilisation would be Islam and the Chinese Communist Party.

    Needless to say that this only works if you leave out quite a bit of what is considered “civilization.”

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  60. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    the only forces capable of defending civilisation would be Islam and the Chinese Communist Party.

    Needless to say that this only works if you leave out quite a bit of what is considered “civilization.”

    The real problem is that we have already lost so much of what is considered “civilisation” that we no longer have any good options left to us.

    • Replies: @iffen
  61. “Then you have met some plum ignorant Muslims.”

    Well,

    I am not going to challenge the sincerity of their faith, far too unfamiliar with the faith and practice. I will just take a step back and consider that I misunderstood what they were saying or i confused their honest admissions as something else.

    I have no cause to doubt either their knowledge or the sincerity in their faith in that I will take the his and simply say — I may have misunderstood the tenor of the discussion.

    • Replies: @Talha
  62. I hate to keep using this term, socialization. But in a previous conversation on the honesty of women the stats suggest that women are on par with men when it comes to the matter of integrity in business.

    When this type of discussion is introduced, I like to step back and consider the wide view. Never in history has the US had more women in positions of influence than today. And by all accounts

    Business ethics is at an all time low

    Educational performance all time low

    Government performance an all time low

    Even the US military is taking hits

    These are generalities, admittedly. Whether the details turn on the inclusion of women, the quality of women, the ability of women, response to women, or something entirely different requires digging into them. I remember being surprised by a study several years ago about sexual harassment. That the incidence by women was on the increase. One of the suggested conclusions: harassment is not a male prediliction, but one centered on power dynamics that women in power were inclined to engage as well a men.

    I consider the influence of women as a moderating force to male risk taking, such as what occurred on WS, and the financial industry regarding the last economic dip (I think we are still in its wake) never have there been more women in “high finance” and yet those behaviors seem to have run amock among men and women like. The assumption that womanhood alone brings better decision making, honesty, wealth, etc. to the fore is not born out by the results. Whether its Theros, HP . . . there’s nothing that convinces me women by definition are more ethical, trustworthy than men in these areas.

    l’est I be accused of leaning my misogyny — I was mentored by women and worked second to women, one for nearly 20 years. She still calls on me to lecture on rhetorical discourse and argumentation and even coach despite my no longer being affiliated officially with the institution.

    It was easy to make these accusations when men were up front, center and exposed to view. Now that women are in those same positions: no better decision making about Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Yemen, etc. I have a female acquaitence in high finance, nice women one on one, sensitive, funny, warm tender . . . her comments about about 2008.

    She has two wonderful kids

    “Just wait until you see what we do next.”

    Laughing, I was taken aback.

    ——————————-

    My favorite women, and I mean I fall all over myself around them, I become so unarmed have been nurses (stereotype?). And while not in any way disavowing my own celibacy . . . I have never been touched with by any women like nurses . . .

    until two tears ago after being hit by a car while riding. That nurse, wanted me to get the heck out of the hospital as fast I could . . .

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Feryl
  63. Talha says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    the sincerity of their faith

    Neither would I, only God can judge this. I am saying they are ignorant about basic rules. One can be both sincere and ignorant at the same time, this can also lead to zealotry.

    I’m not talking about what some random Muslims do, I’m talking about core, undisputed rules of praxis for 14 centuries – it’s that simple.

    Peace.

  64. @The Alarmist

    ‘I defy you to name one white country led by a real man.’

    Turkey.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  65. @Audacious Epigone

    ‘For years, I thought Islam was our implacable enemy.

    Increasingly, I find myself struck by this creeping feeling that it may be our salvation.’

    What’s mildly interesting about that is that I have always objected to the idea that Islam is our enemy. On the other hand, I certainly have no desire to be ‘saved’ by it.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  66. Tipsy says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    According to Belloc, in his essay On Usury:

    It must be remarked that one of the principal factors of success in the Mohammedan over-running of half Christendom between the 7th and 8th centuries was its active penalizing of Usury. This leading tenet of Islam in its social morals gave immediate relief to myriads of debtors in North Africa, Syria and Mesopotamia.

    It appears for many mired in debt slavery, Islam was indeed as a salvation.

    https://oldthunderbelloc.blogspot.com/2014/01/on-usury.html

  67. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    a target-rich area like college.

    The downsides of going to an engineering school…

    Interesting. The only Shia I can recall ever knowing very much of, personally speaking, were Bohras; if they ever approved of temporary marriage they certainly didn’t tell me.

    • Replies: @Talha
  68. Rosie says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I hate to keep using this term, socialization. But in a previous conversation on the honesty of women the stats suggest that women are on par with men when it comes to the matter of integrity in business.

    False. The ringleaders are almost always men. The most you can say is that women, absent a critical mass, have failed to show enough spine in standing up to them.

    I’d like to see any stats you have to the contrary.

  69. Rosie says:

    Regarding the matter of women in leadership, my general point of view is this. As long as the likes of L. Woods are tolerated around here, I can see no reason to even consider the idea of leaving political office to men alone. That kind of trust would require absolute assurance that our interests are secure.

    Political power is not an end in itself, but it is a means to an end: the neutralization of those who would degrade and enslave us.

  70. @Colin Wright

    Isn’t that Olive?

    Russia seems the obvious choice.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Colin Wright
  71. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    Yeah, the Bohras can be quite distinct. I don’t even think the Twelvers consider them Muslim to be honest. I’m actually not sure what their status is as far as Sunnis are concerned – they weren’t even mentioned in the Amman Message, so I have no clue whether they are considered Muslims in the first place.

    They are pretty insular and can be quite strict about rules. I actually know a guy who was Bohra, but switched out to regular Sunni. Some people can’t hang with the idea of being a sect within a sect within a sect and believing that 1 million people have the correct secret-sauce recipe that somehow a billion+ others missed. And of course, some are fine with it.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  72. Talha says:
    @The Alarmist

    I think Erdogan is the only white leader not to have pulled one of these:
    So I think, that may be what Colin is getting at, maybe he’ll clarify.

    Peace.

  73. @Rosie

    All you have to do is look at the voting records of women since women’s suffrage passed. The women’s vote was instrumental in transforming the US into a leftist welfare state. Many key elections and decisions would have gone the other way minus the women’s vote. That’s enough to know I don’t want women in power.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  74. @Rosie

    “Support for military action” yes or no, by itself, is not indicative of good or bad judgment when presented without context. It’s interesting to note that the chart is broken down not by the actual military action in question, but how much different groups of the popular kids are involved — that seems a typical feminine way of looking at it. I’m also fascinated by the higher female than male numbers in “None of these” and “Don’t know.”

    • Replies: @Rosie
  75. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    All you have to do is look at the voting records of women since women’s suffrage passed. The women’s vote was instrumental in transforming the US into a leftist welfare state.

    The fact that someone doesn’t vote like you is not a reason to disenfranchise them. The welfare state is popular. Deal with it.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Colin Wright
  76. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    I’m also fascinated by the higher female than male numbers in “None of these” and “Don’t know.”

    Reserving judgment when you lack expertise is generally considered a virtue.

    It’s interesting to note that the chart is broken down not by the actual military action in question, but how much different groups of the popular kids are involved — that seems a typical feminine way of looking at it.

    Inane gibberish.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  77. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    Cloudbuster, what do you do for a living? Is it robot-proof? If not, your confidence that you will never need the welfare state may not be well-placed. I suppose that is some comfort: people like you will get knocked down a few pegs.

    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2018/04/24/a-study-finds-nearly-half-of-jobs-are-vulnerable-to-automation

    Funny thing is, men in the future will probably need the welfare state more than women. Worst comes to worst, we can always hook. You all, on the other hand, will be really and truly superfluous. In Third World hellholes with no welfare state, men are often totally dependent on their prostitute relatives or wives for their daily bread.

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    , @Cloudbuster
  78. @The Alarmist

    ‘Isn’t that Olive?

    Russia seems the obvious choice.’

    Well, if you actually go to Turkey, you’ll see that they look like Greeks — if anything somewhat lighter in complexion and more heavily built — ‘whiter’ in short. Here are some pictures of some Turks from deepest darkest Turkey — around Konya, once the Seljuk capital.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2sbOonoqiwrNnJDZ3BfUWNkRmc/view?usp=drivesdk

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2sbOonoqiwrQ0tjWGt2bi13ejA/view?usp=drivesdk

    I was being deliberately provocative when I posted, but the point is that by any standard that defines Greeks or even Spaniards as ‘white,’ Turks are ‘white’ as well. And in point of fact, the original Turkic invaders notwithstanding, most of their genes must come from the previous populations of Anatolia, Greece, and the Balkans. It’s my belief that what distinguishes them from ‘Greeks,’ practically speaking, is not blood, but religion.

    However, yeah: Russia would be the other white country led by someone with actual testicles. Trump probably has them as well; he’s just got various other limitations.

  79. @Rosie

    ‘…Funny thing is, men in the future will probably need the welfare state more than women. Worst comes to worst, we can always hook. You all, on the other hand, will be really and truly superfluous. In Third World hellholes with no welfare state, men are often totally dependent on their prostitute relatives or wives for their daily bread.’

    Well, there is always looting and pillage.

    In your dystopian prognostication, you’re being curiously optimistic in your assumption of continued law and order.*

    *And I just took the prize for most five-dollar words in one sentence.

  80. @Rosie

    ‘…The fact that someone doesn’t vote like you is not a reason to disenfranchise them…’

    Lol. It strikes me as the best possible reason to disenfranchise them. Conversely, if they vote as I wish, they can be the neighbor’s dog — let them continue.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  81. Rosie says:
    @Colin Wright

    Lol. It strikes me as the best possible reason to disenfranchise them. Conversely, if they vote as I wish, they can be the neighbor’s dog — let them continue.

    In that case, you are asserting that power > process. I do not share that assumption.

  82. Rosie says:

    In your dystopian prognostication, you’re being curiously optimistic in your assumption of continued law and order.*

    There’s nothing especially curious about it. A semblance of law and order continues alongside abject poverty throughout the world.

  83. @Talha

    “fornication is as forbidden as pork or alcohol”

    When the last-one-but-five “grooming” cases in the UK came out, BBC Asian Network radio (yes, there is such a thing) sent a reporter, a British Sri Lankan chap called Nihal Arthanayake (Buddhist parents), to Muslim areas to ask the youth and elders what they thought.

    While some tsk-tsk’d and said the offenders weren’t proper Muslims, a lot of people said pretty much that if the girls were asking for it, there was no problem with providing it.

    I was surprised how up-front respondents were when a bearded, brown-skinned guy is putting the questions. BBC Asian Network is a lot less PC than other BBC channels.

    • Replies: @Talha
  84. Talha says:
    @YetAnotherAnon

    a lot of people said pretty much that if the girls were asking for it, there was no problem with providing it.

    Sure, and I’m fairly certain plenty of these guys do drugs, go to clubs and drink alcohol too and who knows if they catch any of their daily prayers. There are many Muslims that are pretty lax in their practice of the faith. I personally feel these guys should not be in the West; they are damaging themselves (spiritually, and often physically) and causing harm to their society.

    I’m not surprised that there are plenty of Muslims in places like Britain looking to score with white women – I’m certain many of them come here for that specific reason, especially if they watch whatever shows are currently marketed to their countries (which I don’t, but I presume give the impression that all white girls are loose, immoral and easy to bed).

    I’m simply talking about doctrine, and again, there is no wiggle room on the subject. Fornication is completely out – you are not even supposed to touch or be in seclusion with a female that you are not related to. Did the guy interview any scholars on the subject? I will guarantee you, you will not find a dissenting voice.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Feryl
    , @Feryl
  85. anon[312] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    Your “ought” does not negate the existence of what “is”.

    Acta non verba.

    • Replies: @Talha
  86. “False. The ringleaders are almost always men. The most you can say is that women, absent a critical mass, have failed to show enough spine in standing up to them.”

    I think you are making excuses. The contention is that more women would result in a more humane and successful, environment. The invitation here, do women make better leaders than men.

    It doesn’t matter whether the women lack backbone, which I suspect is not the case. The question is whether the evidence indicates that women are better, one way to measure that is to consider the impact since women have entered said male environments.

    The advocacy by women was to invade: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon. etc. The women in leadership overwhelmingly approved, advocated these mistaken gambits and when considering the new series of contentions, that we should invade for cases of rape there’s n o evidence that women are better at resolving these issues via diplomacy.

    Your complaint that these women are weak, suggests that in fact women are by definition too weak to engage in leadership as referenced. You simply cannot have the argument both ways. Women are their own agencies and as such must accept responsibility for their choices, and that includes poor foreign policy choices.

    And history rejects your, claim: Catherine the Great, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Victoria, Golda Mair, Mary Queen of Scotts, PM Theresa May, PM Margaret Thatcher, Speaker Pelosi, Indira Ghandi. Sec./Sen Hillary Clinton, Eleanor Roosevelt, Sec/NSA Condoleeza Rice (swoon – she can harass me all she wants), Winnie Mandela every single one of these women stand by their own right . . . and that list is less than atom thin.

    I am going to exercise my misogyny here and lay claim that each of these women mentioned have stood to toe with men and are responsible for their choices. And I have no doubt that Sec. Rice (swoon) would call your reference to her weakness as incorrect in every way. Marine le Pen, weak — nonsense. I think the biggest barrier to women being successful is other women, and make the perfect example.

    Harriet Tubman was a weak woman — give it a rest.

    Shirley Chisolm, Rep. Michelle Bachman, Annie Besant, Aruna Asef Ali, excuse me Congresswoman Barbara Jordon —

    You might want to spend some time take a look at women in leadership

    • Replies: @Rosie
  87. And few women are as brave as these women were —

    http://prohibition.themobmuseum.org/the-history/how-prohibition-changed-american-culture/womens-rights/

    And remain braver than most and perhaps only bested by women against the murder of children in the womb.

  88. Rosie says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Your complaint that these women are weak, suggests that in fact women are by definition too weak to engage in leadership as referenced. You simply cannot have the argument both ways. Women are their own agencies and as such must accept responsibility for their choices, and that includes poor foreign policy choices.

    Hold on one minute there, champ. You are the one advocating for denial of rights to an entire group of people. We do not have to show that we are better. You have to show you are better to justify same. The fact remains that men generally take the initiative in crime, not women. If anything, we should be debating whether men’s rights ought to be excluded from business leadership, given said fact. But of course, men’s rights are always sacrosanct. Women’s are up for debate.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  89. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    You simply cannot have the argument both ways.

    Yes, I can. It’s perfectly reasonable to suppose that a small number of women cannot really change an otherwise male-dominated business culture, but that a critical mass of women would in fact change that culture. I can’t prove that, but it is nevertheless a perfectly valid hypothesis.

    Notice anything about the least corrupt countries in the world?

  90. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    we no longer have any good options left

    Choose up sides and fight is a pretty good option.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  91. Jay Fink says:

    What I value more than anything in life is eye candy in public. I like to see women wearing sexy clothes like heels and short skirts. I also like to see women wear heavy makeup and I have a fetish for stiletto nails. The Muslim value of female modesty is absolutely horrifying to me.

    I rank countries based on the freedom women have to dress sexy in public. Eastern Europe and Latin America would be the best regions. The U.S is middle of the road. There is too much emphasis on comfort instead of being stylish here. This has gotten worse over the years. I see the obesity epidemic as having Muslim overtones because it makes women sexually invisible.

    The Muslim world is the worst with some variation. I like Bosnia because it is very secular. Turkey used to be good but women are starting to wear the hijab there which is offensive to me. Still, the Turkish women who don’t wear Muslim garb dress sexier than American women. I like Assad because he keeps Syria secular and let’s women look attractive on the streets, I liked Saddam Hussein for the same reason and was sorry we killed him.

    I like Iran better than Saudi Arabia. Both governments are terrible but my impression is many Iranian women would like to wear Western clothes if they could while Saudi women want to wear their black tents. My worst countries are the ones where women wore Western fashion as recently as the 1960s but now are totally burka. Countries like Egypt and Afghanistan would fit that description. I wish some type of international entity could force these countries to ban the burka.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @anon
  92. @Rosie

    Is it robot-proof? If not, your confidence that you will never need the welfare state may not be well-placed. I suppose that is some comfort: people like you will get knocked down a few pegs.

    It certainly is robot-proof. I have spend my entire life funding the welfare state — the welfare state rides on the backs of White men. And, like a low time preference White man, I have made it my business to see that I will never have to rely on the welfare state.

    Those pegs you hope I’ll get knocked down a few of? I paid for them.

    And this, gentlemen, is what the enemy within the gates looks like — barely contained glee at the thought of successful men getting their comeuppance. Islam is right about women.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  93. @Rosie

    Oh, Rosie. Bless your heart. The “None of the above” and “Don’t know” categories are the categories where women favor military action over men. That hardly speaks of restraint in the face of ignorance.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  94. “Hold on one minute there, champ. You are the one advocating for denial of rights to an entire group of people.”

    I am not sure where I do that in this discussion or anywhere for that matter.

    Your response is that

    1. women are not present in enough numbers

    2. they are too weak to stand up to men

    What I am saying is that the evidence that women are better leaders, executives, etc. looks mighty thin. And i am saying that women should be held accountable for their choices as are men.

    I think your numbers might have some salience, if not for the fact that you indicate that women at present are too weak of mind. Given that it matters not how many women – because in your view women are weak anyway and will follow men.

    I think the evidence is that women can and ought to be judged on their merits. You seem to find a reason to undermine the very value of women to be rated on their own accord in nearly every argument so they have virtually no accountability – it’s always the male’s fault.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  95. @Rosie

    Nope. Certainly not the point I’m sure you are trying to make.

  96. Talha says:

    I wish some type of international entity could force these countries to ban the burka.

    The solution is relatively simple. If non-Muslim men feel entitled to look at the hair and other body parts of Muslim wives and daughters, they should simply pick up rifles and invade these countries in order for the right to do so – meaning force the ban. Plenty of Muslim men are willing and ready to die to ensure that does not happen…how many non-Muslim men are willing to die for the right to see more skin from Muslim women?

    Because ultimately, this is what it comes down to…I don’t think much of the Muslim world is in any mood to be part of the sexual revolution and the train wreck that it has wrought on Western societies. Any patriarchy that takes itself seriously doesn’t compromise on the modesty of women in its society.

    Even in previously secular places, things are tending toward religion – one can read about the resurgence of Islam among Tatar women here:
    https://www.academia.edu/31932436/_Islam_as_a_Pillar_Muslim_Tatar_Womens_Narratives_on_Tatars_Identity_and_the_Future

    This is a fairly good insight from an Orthodox priest on the subject:

    Peace.

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
  97. @Jay Fink

    The voice of societal degeneration.

  98. anon[372] • Disclaimer says:
    @Jay Fink

    Lol, dude, if you are all about being poolside then what are you doing in places like Iran, Saudi, ‘Stan? I think you’re just trolling. But if you’re serious, go to the Emirates or Qatar, maybe Beirut; that’s where all the middle class and upper class Muslims go to do the stuff they won’t admit doing back home. Including the Shia temporary marriages.

    Really, though, you’re just trolling.

  99. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    The “None of the above” and “Don’t know” categories are the categories where women favor military action over men.

    Women never, ever favor military action over men. You are either stupid, a liar, or both.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @anon
  100. Rosie says:
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    White; protestant

    Individualistic and principled, both of which preclude any mainstream acceptance of the reactionary animus against women on display here.

  101. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    And this, gentlemen, is what the enemy within the gates looks like — barely contained glee at the thought of successful men getting their comeuppance. Islam is right about women.

    “I got mine,” says the selfish, entitled boomer.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  102. @Rosie

    Seriously? I didn’t make or post the chart. It’s right there.

  103. @Rosie

    If you think the welfare state is the solution to other people already “having theirs” you’re a typical socialist leftist. People don’t want welfare, they want jobs. Welfare doesn’t provide jobs; quite the opposite, it’s a crushing burden on the economy and corrosive to the morals of both the recipient and the distributor. It’s the welfare state that is stealing the futures of post-boomer generations. You’re a muddled, sloppy thinker, and that’s being charitable.

    Not only do I have mine, I spent most of my life subsidizing the welfare state enjoyed by others. But that’s not good enough for you. Nice gratitude, there. I have nothing but contempt for people like you.

    You’re the caricature of the typical socialist. You won’t be happy until we’re all equally miserable.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  104. anon[256] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    Women never, ever favor military action over men.

    Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughter Christabel say “Hi!”

    https://infogalactic.com/info/White_feather

    You are either stupid, a liar, or both.

    LOL!

    • Replies: @anon
  105. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    Not only do I have mine, I spent most of my life subsidizing the welfare state enjoyed by others. But that’s not good enough for you. Nice gratitude, there. I have nothing but contempt for people like you.

    Of course, you’re not dead yet, and you may well turn out to be a net tax consumer after Medicare keeps you alive for twenty more years at the expense of younger, poorer generations who can’t afford health insurance for themselves.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @dfordoom
  106. @Rosie

    Yes, Medicare is one of the welfare programs bankrupting the nation. Thanks for making my point for me. I would have to consume a truly heroic amount of healthcare to become a net tax consumer, but the socialist welfare state policies have provided the average person every incentive to do so. Thanks for helping me make the argument against the welfare state. It apparently doesn’t occur to you at all that Medicare/Medicaid is *why* younger generations are poorer and can’t afford health insurance for themselves.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  107. Rosie says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    I think your numbers might have some salience, if not for the fact that you indicate that women at present are too weak of mind. Given that it matters not how many women – because in your view women are weak anyway and will follow men.

    I think the evidence is that women can and ought to be judged on their merits. You seem to find a reason to undermine the very value of women to be rated on their own accord in nearly every argument so they have virtually no accountability – it’s always the male’s fault.

    Hmmm. I specifically criticized women for not standing up for what is right, did I not?

    On the other hand, your assumption that a critical mass of women could never succeed where a small minority of women has failed is not warranted.

    Ultimately, this is an empirical question. Do women have a positive influence on business ethics? If so, how many does it take?

    I’m willing to keep an open mind and follow the evidence where it leads. Are you?

  108. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    It apparently doesn’t occur to you at all that Medicare/Medicaid is *why* younger generations are poorer and can’t afford health insurance for themselves.

    Right. It’s not because greedy executives have exported our economy to China.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  109. @Colin Wright

    Less moored than you, I swing more readily from one end to the other. But I think you have been and continue to be correct.

  110. @Rosie

    That’s not an either/or choice. More than one thing can be bad for the economy and for workers.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  111. Talha says:
    @anon

    Sure, but that applies across the board everywhere. There “ought” not to be gay pride parades in Western countries, but there “are”. Westerners “should” be having more kids , but they “are not”. And of course stuff like this:

    So, what to do? Relatively simple; make it illegal for Muslim males to interact with non-Muslim females except in business circumstances. First infraction; equals a fine. Second infraction; jail time. Third infraction; expulsion and revocation of citizenship. You see, in Muslim-majority countries there are often laws to prevent non-Muslim males from having relationships Muslim females. In classic Islamic law, seducing a Muslim woman was grounds for revocation of the dhimmi contract. The West can learn to be a little more assertive in this regard. I would very much support a change in legal codes in this direction, too many of my fellow Muslims are too spiritually compromised to be living in the West and strict laws keeping them from sinning and violating the rights of others will be in their best interests in the afterlife.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
  112. “Hmmm. I specifically criticized women for not standing up for what is right, did I not? On the other hand, your assumption that a critical mass of women could never succeed where a small minority of women has failed is not warranted.”

    I am going to walk carefully here because I want to avoid making comments that suggest you are making up something I have not even suggested such as the above. But I have not comments that even close to what you claim I am saying. So I have no response to your comments, it resembles nothing I have stated.

    In response to your stats comment. We have been this route in which I provided studies on the truthfulness of women on several areas, business being one of them. In those studies there was no definitive answer that women were more moral, including in business environments. it was a lengthy discussion that included multiple studies/

    “On the other hand, your assumption that a critical mass of women could never succeed where a small minority of women has failed is not warranted.”

    To the above I made no such comment or reference.

    “Ultimately, this is an empirical question. Do women have a positive influence on business ethics? If so, how many does it take?”

    Again, based on your own critique of women, how many simply doesn’t matter.

    I think the answer is clearly no. There’s nothing about being a woman that by definition improves any business community — there’s nothing about being a woman that by definition indicates better business decisions. Certainly not in any and every environment. Hence my comment about getting into the details, which we have done previously regarding morality or truth telling. The study results were mixed or comparatively similar.

    I took a step back and looked at the environments from a broad perspective and given some manner of evaluative impact on rating them — there is nothing that suggests women make any environment I referenced better merely by being included as participants. In fact, I state given the overall impact or status, in several areas the reputation/effectiveness of some environments is in decline since the advent of women — I make room that women alone are not the sole cause. But improvement overall — not so much or at all.

    Note: one might want to avoid making up what the other might be saying or you might get accused of being disingenuous.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  113. Two major areas

    Several years ago there was a large push that girls in elementary school were in some maligned from being effective students. The impact was enough to used in a promo ad in a super bowl game. The ad looked at how young boys reference girls running funny or different from boys, how that delimits a young girls prospects in the classroom, I am unclear, nonetheless so went the contention. Yet, not a single research data point has ever been offered to support the claim. Not a single study, not even a survey of opinions at the time supported it.

    Millions of textbooks have printed regarding the pain expression of various ethnicities in hospitals. Those text books have been used to train millions in the field of medicine — evidence to support those claims – none.

    Now that is in my view advances stated to be based on research that simply was not conducted — and as such the women authors have engaged in Fraud — that impacted the medical and academic professions as well as the overall social construction. I am dubious that these women were the obedient underlings of men.

  114. Rosie says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    “On the other hand, your assumption that a critical mass of women could never succeed where a small minority of women has failed is not warranted.”

    To the above I made no such comment or reference.

    “Ultimately, this is an empirical question. Do women have a positive influence on business ethics? If so, how many does it take?”

    Again, based on your own critique of women, how many simply doesn’t matter.

    Translation: “I never denied that numbers matter. Numbers don’t matter.”

    • Replies: @Rosie
  115. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    Again, based on your own critique of women, how many simply doesn’t matter.

    This is asinine, as if there is no strength (and courage) in numbers.

  116. “This is asinine, as if there is no strength (and courage) in numbers.”

    In response to both comments.

    If in fact women are too weak of mind as you claim then how many women there are simply don’t matter because in your estimation they follow men anyway.

    (something I profoundly disagree with – your grasp of female influence in the US muchless the planet is woefully bereft)

    Ask HP men if they ignored the ambitions of Mrs. Carly Fiorina, when she was HP CEO. Go tell the Russians that Catherine the Great was an addled brain male appeaser. Go tell every man who has ever gotten out of bed at two in the morning to ensure that strange noise was no intruder, that women have no influence. I have noted very specific examples of women leaders who have taken on men — your generalized assessment is wrong. I have even noted a small cadre of women and two movements in which women lead in change prohibition and the end of the same in women were major players. And as with many agendas numbers a plenty

    Laugh

    Now one might say the end of prohibition, those women were addled brained male appeasers, but the women of prohibition — appeasers they are not and never were. I find it odd that someone such as myself routinely called a misogynist should have greater depth of female empowerment or capability than you.

    Merely stating that women are weak minded is certainly a critique, but it is not holding them accountable for their choices.

    In fact, you routinely give women excuse to avoid accountability for their choices and blame men. If we are going to measure leadership then whether there are ten or 10 million, women must be held to account for their choices —

    • Replies: @Rosie
  117. And even by your own reckoning that women are too weak of mind, they inevitably follow men anyway — that too is a choice.

  118. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    we no longer have any good options left

    Choose up sides and fight is a pretty good option.

    You mean there’s a side worth choosing in the modern West? If there is I’m not aware of it.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @iffen
  119. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    You mean there’s a side worth choosing in the modern West? If there is I’m not aware of it.

    The anti, alt, disaffected, etc. is a side, but whether it can ever develop and coalesce into an effective political force that has a positive ideology is very much in doubt. At least the proto-rudiments are there. That’s the first step.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  120. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    I recently came across the following quote by Alexander Hamilton and I think that it is going to stay with me for a while because until recently I did not seriously entertain the idea that the answer to such a question might be no. I think that we would benefit if more people would give serious consideration to the question, or perhaps I am just late to the game.

    … to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  121. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    The anti, alt, disaffected, etc. is a side, but whether it can ever develop and coalesce into an effective political force that has a positive ideology is very much in doubt.

    If it’s the alt-right or the dissident right or any other variety of disaffected right then include me out.

    Is there an alt-communist side I can join? Or maybe a paleo-socialist side?

    What we need are some other alt movements. Some alt-Trotskyists would be fun. And some alt-Maoists!

    Maybe some alt-Christians. Some alt-Episcopalians. Episcopalians who embrace extremist views, like belief in God. And some alt-Catholics.

    At least the proto-rudiments are there. That’s the first step.

    Well the disaffection is there. That can be a first step, but it can be a first step to a restoration of sanity or a first step to complete insanity.

    Are there any dissident movements at present that aren’t composed mainly of Feds or people who’ve forgotten to take their medication?

    • Replies: @iffen
  122. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    I recently came across the following quote by Alexander Hamilton…

    “… to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice”

    It would be reassuring to be able to point to a single example of such a thing having happened in practice.

    In reality I doubt that there’s been a single political movement based on the rational reflections and choices of ordinary people. There’s always a revolutionary vanguard that actually makes all the decisions. This seems to apply to every single political movement, from traditional Toryism to Whiggism, from liberalism to Marxist-Leninism, from neo-conservatism to New Deal socialism.

    Political movements that claim to be democratic or populist are in practice led by a revolutionary vanguard and they’re the ones who call the shots. In practice there’s as much reflection and choice in Mao’s doctrine of the mass line as there is in supposedly democratic or populist movements. In other words, not very much.

    Incidentally, Mao was a populist.

    There’s not a lot of evidence that ordinary people have any interest in participating in the establishment of good government from reflection and choice, much less that they have the ability to do so.

  123. Rosie says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Merely stating that women are weak minded is certainly a critique, but it is not holding them accountable for their choices.

    I never said women are weak-minded. I said they have failed to stand up to male criminals as they should have.

    To appreciate the difference:

    I routinely criticize men for outsourcing our manufacturing base to China for profit. Does that mean I think they are too greedy, short-sided, and disloyal to rule? No. It means they messed up and need to learn from that so they can do better next time.

  124. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    That’s not an either/or choice. More than one thing can be bad for the economy and for workers.

    Trade restrictions are welfare for men. It is a subsidy. Consumers pay more for manufactured goods so that men can have a higher standard of living.

    I’m fine with that, but you have already said that you think wealth transfers are unjust, so you’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do.

    • Replies: @Peter Frost
  125. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @Rosie

    “Trade restrictions are welfare for men. It is a subsidy. Consumers pay more for manufactured goods so that men can have a higher standard of living.”

    You’re using a weird definition of subsidy. If taxpayer money is used to keep criminals from breaking into your home, are you being subsidized?

    Implicit in your reasoning is the libertarian argument that borders are “unnatural.” Fine. But so is law enforcement. In the natural state of things, the strong are free to beat you up and take everything you have. Your only “natural” recourse is to fight back with your own means or to hire a security guard.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Rosie
  126. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    If it’s the alt-right or the dissident right or any other variety of disaffected right then include me out.

    What?

    We can be in a common front with commies but not fascists? 🙂

    I was using alt in a generic sense.

  127. dfordoom says: • Website

    I was using alt in a generic sense.

    Yes, I realised that. I was just expressing my disillusionment that most of the alts seem to be on the right, rather than the left (where they should be).

    We can be in a common front with commies but not fascists?

    Now we can have one of those lengthy discussions about whether fascism is a movement of the Left or the Right!

    I can tolerate the Mussolini brand of fascism. Paleo-fascism, if you like. The later versions are not so pleasant.

    • Replies: @RSDB
    , @iffen
  128. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Of course, you’re not dead yet

    Rosie, don’t you understand that libertarian opponents of the welfare state don’t get sick and they don’t get old? Getting sick and getting old are just bad life choices. If we eliminate the welfare state no-one will get sick or old.

    I’m sure there are books on libertarianism that explain all this.

    • LOL: Rosie
    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Audacious Epigone
  129. RSDB says:
    @dfordoom

    The later versions are not so pleasant.

    Hitler wasn’t pleasant (I know, on UR quite a few people will contradict me here) but who else do you mean? Codreanu?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  130. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    Getting sick and getting old are just bad life choices. If we eliminate the welfare state no-one will get sick or old. I’m sure there are books on libertarianism that explain all this.

    If not, they could just look to the Ayn Rand example.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  131. @Talha

    Third infraction; expulsion and revocation of citizenship.

    That’s step one for me, whether they interact with non Muslim women or not.

    • Replies: @Talha
  132. iffen says:
    @dfordoom

    I was just expressing my disillusionment that most of the alts seem to be on the right, rather than the left (where they should be).

    They can’t be on the left because most of them are true social Darwinists. Their disillusionment and dissatisfaction stem from their objection to the welfare state (for what it’s worth) which works against a “proper” thinning of the herd.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  133. “I never said women are weak-minded. I said they have failed to stand up to male criminals as they should have.”

    Same difference, they are not strong enough to stand — that is a choice. Here’s your exact quotation,

    “False. The ringleaders are almost always men. The most you can say is that women, absent a critical mass, have failed to show enough spine in standing up to them.”

    They lack spine or are unwilling to demonstrate a challenge. but of course this comment is countered by the examples of women who gave stood toe to toe with women. And the fact that critique women women who support outsourcing is smoke screening because in your view they are merely following men. There’s no wiggle room here.

    either women are influential by their own right – their own agency

    or

    they are merely so weak of will, of mind, of spine that they follow males and their influence is but to support immoral behavior (which by way of excuse — men are in a constant state of spine control over women – removing any agency) in which case your are critiquing the wrong gender — because in your view women are simply incapable of standing on their own. Something nearly every one of the women I reference would challenge and further as demonstrated by the examples — is entirely false on its face. As demonstrated by any number of single female leaders and by women in concert on issues. And to date, whether society is better off with female leadership has yet to be demonstrated even when they participate in large numbers.

    Your reasoning fails here as does your attempt to make contentions that I am not and then arguing against those as if you have squeezed out of your self created dilemma.

    I take it your unwillingness to admit the faulty reasoning here is due to the fact that men have relieved you of your ability to stand on your or by your own analysis as admit, you simply made a mistake.

    http://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&id=2FB5BBCE3886CB6A7191BAE9C9A577F303F8A4FF&thid=OIP.9XyBwHg60uCX6RC_6Q0XxwHaD4&mediaurl=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F-YdAClmQGKRY%2FVeeLJOGNIBI%2FAAAAAAAAFbI%2F4z7ixY762ck%2Fw1200-h630-p-k-no-nu%2Ftinaturner.jpg&exph=341&expw=650&q=turner+tina&selectedindex=47&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&ccid=9XyBwHg6&simid=607997841578264995&sim=11

    You are certainly welcome to tell the above women she has no spine to stand up to male criminality.

  134. dfordoom says: • Website
    @RSDB

    The later versions are not so pleasant.

    Hitler wasn’t pleasant (I know, on UR quite a few people will contradict me here) but who else do you mean? Codreanu?

    If you count Hitler as fascist then yeah, definitely not pleasant. Some of the other regimes that get labelled as fascist are probably not quite true fascist regimes (I wouldn’t count Franco as fascist although lot of people do). In fact an awful lot of people labelled as fascist aren’t, fascist being a generic term liberals use for anyone they don’t approve of (just as communist is a generic term for people right-wingers don’t approve of).

    But it was the little Austrian painter with the moustache I was thinking of.

    My initial point was in regard to unpleasant rightists of the present day rather than specifically to fascists. I’m not sure fascists actually exist any more, although unpleasant right-wingers certainly do exist.

    • Replies: @Talha
  135. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    Getting sick and getting old are just bad life choices. If we eliminate the welfare state no-one will get sick or old. I’m sure there are books on libertarianism that explain all this.

    If not, they could just look to the Ayn Rand example.

    Indeed. It’s amazing how flexible libertarians can become when they discover to their horror that they can actually get sick or old.

    In fact it’s amazing how flexible libertarians can become whenever they suddenly discover they need some agency of the hated state to rescue them.

  136. dfordoom says: • Website
    @iffen

    I was just expressing my disillusionment that most of the alts seem to be on the right, rather than the left (where they should be).

    They can’t be on the left because most of them are true social Darwinists. Their disillusionment and dissatisfaction stem from their objection to the welfare state (for what it’s worth) which works against a “proper” thinning of the herd.

    Yes they do seem to be quite fond of the idea of the unfit being culled. And their certainty that they will never be among those selected to be culled is quite touching in a child-like way.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  137. Talha says:
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    That’s step one for me, whether they interact with non Muslim women or not.

    Which is fine, but you have to learn to walk before you can run. If a society is not ready to at least expel immigrants that have committed predatory crimes against its citizens, how are you going to convince it to wholesale expel non-criminals like doctors, businessmen, grandmothers, etc.?

    We can all waste our time talking about dream scenarios and maybe I’ll find a dragon egg somewhere and be able to dunk over Shaq also…maybe. But perhaps it’s best to be realistic. So, in that vein, I will repost a suggestion I had made in a previous comment about a realistic strategy you might want to employ:

    I get that you don’t want Islam here. It is definitely alien to most of the West and I can completely empathize that aspects of it are incompatible with the current incarnation of the West. If you feel strongly about this, I suggest getting with your congressmen/senators and proposing legislation to add amendments to the Constitution to make exceptions to the religion-neutral clauses to make exceptions for Islam and Muslims. A super-majority will likely be required. A good strategy would be to come up with a strong single-issue advocacy group like the NRA (in fact, you may want to work with them and get guidance from them). Once this initial step is accomplished, the doors will be open legally for; 1) stripping Muslims of citizenship, 2) excluding them from certain areas of influence, 3) consigning and forcing them into certain regions/areas/locales or 4) expelling them to Muslim lands (with or without compensation).

    Come up with a single-issue organization that votes as a bloc on only one thing; legal relocation of Muslims from the West – forget abortion, foreign policy, economic trade pacts, welfare, etc. Make every representative know they will be graded and publicly made known. I would suggest working with the NRA (the preeminent one-issue group) to get tips on how to proceed – you will likely have a good amount of overlap:

    https://www.nrapvf.org/grades/

    Since I’m a law-abiding citizen, when I get my federal notice that my citizenship has been revoked and I have an X number of time to go; I will get with the wife and make plans to sell the house and leave.

    A guy like me has no problems going back to the briar patch, my brother is about ready to bail and in fact, if the US goes to war with Iran, that may be the final straw for him. The people who’ll be kicking and screaming about being expelled are the Muslims that have drunk too much Koolaid and love and are mesmerized by the bling, bling the West has to offer. If I was here for that, I’d be worried too.

    Now the wife may have issues since she is a white convert who has some bizarre notion like she has a right to be here.

    And again, as far as white converts like Brother Hodges – you want to have that conversation with him about expulsion face to face? He’s a power-lifter and does Brazilian Jiu Jitsu – let me know how it goes.

    Peace.

  138. Talha says:
    @dfordoom

    In fact an awful lot of people labelled as fascist aren’t

    This is a major problem of the age; everyone throws around terms at anything they dislike which robs these words of any lexical significance.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Dr ExCathedra
  139. Talha says:
    @Talha

    The people who’ll be kicking and screaming about being expelled are the Muslims that have drunk too much Koolaid and love and are mesmerized by the bling, bling the West has to offer.

    In fact, this may lead to a legal conundrum since many of these people only have a tangential relationship to the faith and – if threatened with expulsion – I could easily see them apostatizing en masse in order to stick around for the booze, women, etc. Then what? Are you going to seriously toss out some guy who says he converted to Christianity from Islam and send him to a Muslim land? Given that he might not exactly have the best reception on arrival?

  140. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Talha

    This is a major problem of the age; everyone throws around terms at anything they dislike which robs these words of any lexical significance.

    Yep. And inaccurate use of terms leads to inaccurate understandings of what’s really going on.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Talha
  141. Talha says:
    @dfordoom

    I don’t know where one of my sons learned it, but he started throwing around “that’s racist” at every little thing until I sat down with him and had a talk about what that term meant and where one could legitimately apply it. I’m wondering if others are having these conversations with their children or if they are simply letting the zeitgeist run their knowledge about these things? If they aren’t being corrected, then it is apparent to me that plenty of them are being propagandized at an early age and we are going to pay a further price as a society as these kids come of age.

    Peace.

  142. Mark G. says:
    @dfordoom

    Who is really more child-like, the person who takes care of himself or the person who expects big daddy government to take care of him? Socialists would be more convincing if they could point to a country where socialism actually works. They usually point to a country like Sweden that had a long capitalist period and then switched to socialism after they became wealthy. When countries try to jump directly from feudalism to socialism, as did Russia, they fail. Socialism is good at redistributing already created wealth but can’t create any new wealth. When a country adopts socialism and the previously created wealth eventually runs out and the collapse starts the socialists who previously were proclaiming “I’ve seen the future and it works” then scurry off to find their next socialist paradise that they can point to as an example of socialism working.

  143. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Mark G.

    Who is really more child-like, the person who takes care of himself or the person who expects big daddy government to take care of him?

    I’d say that the person who just blithely assumes that everyone will always be able to care of himself and that misfortunes only happen to people who deserve misfortune is the most child-like. They’re people who inhabit a fantasy universe.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  144. @Mark G.

    It’s probably not worth your time at this point. When the proponents of the most thoroughly and consistently discredited social and economic system of all time start coming out of the woodwork, arguing with them is like arguing with flat-earthers.

    There can’t be an honest discussion because they’ve already determined their opponents are evil capitalists who are eager to see the poor die.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  145. Peter Frost says: • Website
    @Mark G.

    “Socialists would be more convincing if they could point to a country where socialism actually works.”

    Libertarians would be more convincing if they could point to a country where libertarianism actually works. Whenever I confront them on this point, some will say that true libertarianism has never been tried (many Marxists will use the same cop-out).

    Others will point to Switzerland. Yes, Switzerland is a nice country with a much less invasive government. But it still has a government and an advanced welfare state. More to the point, it’s full of law-abiding people who don’t have to be terrorized into obeying the law.

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @anon
    , @Feryl
  146. anonymous[425] • Disclaimer says:
    @Peter Frost

    I’m opposed to free trade, so I sympathize with this view, but the problem with this argument is that trade is not analogous to criminals breaking and entering into your home, so it’s ultimately ineffective as a political argument.

    Most people engage in foreign trade because either they genuinely prefer the foreign article or find them just as good or cheaper than domestic alternatives. So they engage in willful transactions to exchange their money for foreign goods. Nobody ever prefers or invites criminals to break into their homes.

    Trade restrictions absolutely are a subsidy, one that is generally needed. People are prevented from making transactions they would rather make, such as buying a Mercedes or Toyota, in order to get them to buy Chevys and support the domestic car industry.

    • Agree: Rosie
  147. Rosie says:
    @Peter Frost

    You’re using a weird definition of subsidy. If taxpayer money is used to keep criminals from breaking into your home, are you being subsidized?

    The short answer: yes.

    The long answer:

    Trade restrictions use the force of law to prevent competitive products from reaching your consumers, with the result that you can charge higher prices and pay higher wages. Those very same consumers who eat higher prices so you can have a higher standard of living are perfectly justified in their expectation that you will pony up for your fellow citizens in need.

    When you get a fat paycheck at the expense of consumers who have been denied the opportunity to buy cheaper, competing goods, you can’t cry foul when you’re called upon to share. Being a nation means you support your own.

    In the state of nature, men don’t go hunting just for themselves and their own children. They go hunting for the whole group. Your belief that you alone are entitled to what you kill is a departure from socialism (the state of nature). If you are going to reject socialism, you don’t get to just reject the bits you don’t like and keep the others. If you owe no duty to your neighbor, your neighbor likewise owes no duty to you.

    Nothing I am saying is remotely controversial to anyone with any knowledge of the subject.

    https://opentextbc.ca/principlesofeconomics/chapter/34-1-protectionism-an-indirect-subsidy-from-consumers-to-producers/

  148. @dfordoom

    I understand this is tongue-in-cheek, but living below your means and having children together solves this problem for 90%+ of those who do it.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  149. @dfordoom

    If you cultivate Dunbar’s number, it can easily take care of you in your dotage.

  150. anon[344] • Disclaimer says:
    @Peter Frost

    Whenever I confront them on this point, some will say that true libertarianism has never been tried (many Marxists will use the same cop-out).

    There have been a couple of places where something like libertoonianism actually happened. Both cases were homogeneous societies at the edge of larger civilizations. When everyone is literally reading from the same book – King James in one case – and is from the same genetic stock, very little government is needed. An elected judge, an elected sheriff, a selected pastor and maybe a hired teacher suffices.

    Now the closest thing is perhaps the Amish. Perhaps. No Libertoony would last in any of these societies.

    New Hampshire circa 2019 doesn’t even count. The Free State project…not working.

  151. anon[344] • Disclaimer says:
    @anon

    The silence of troll Rosie speaks volumes.

  152. Feryl says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    These are generalities, admittedly. Whether the details turn on the inclusion of women, the quality of women, the ability of women, response to women, or something entirely different requires digging into them. I remember being surprised by a study several years ago about sexual harassment. That the incidence by women was on the increase. One of the suggested conclusions: harassment is not a male prediliction, but one centered on power dynamics that women in power were inclined to engage as well a men.

    This isn’t surprising; I recently read a theory that the greater participation of women in the (often tense and competitive) workforce is altering hormones. Women are more lean, muscular, impulsive, and competitive than they were as recently as the 1960’s. Incarceration rates for women have increased at a higher rate than they have for men (in other words: the gender ratio of prisoners is less male heavy than it was 50 years ago). Women’s voices have been measured as being deeper these days than they were in the 1970’s. Fred Reed has expressed his disgust at the increasingly unappealing nature of American women, and it’s not hard to see why.

    Then there’s also the cultural shift away from women playing up their charm early, and maintaining it, to attract a suitable guy early in life and hang onto him. Since the 70’s, age of first marriage has gone up and length of marriage has declined quite a bit, in large part due to the increasing disinterest that women express in most men. As women have raised their standards (while average male wages stagnated and then declined relative to living costs) many of them can barely conceal their hostility to most men. Though Boomers were heavily responsible for this cultural shift, they didn’t really come of age when it was all that bad. Whereas people born after circa 1970 can remember high schools and colleges, by circa 1990, having quite a few youngsters who were snobbishly “above” many of their peers, which dove-tails with an ever growing share of the population seeking credentials and wanting “the best” in life.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Audacious Epigone
  153. Feryl says: • Website
    @Talha

    I’m not surprised that there are plenty of Muslims in places like Britain looking to score with white women – I’m certain many of them come here for that specific reason, especially if they watch whatever shows are currently marketed to their countries (which I don’t, but I presume give the impression that all white girls are loose, immoral and easy to bed).

    They may also have noticed that neither family, nor local community, nor state or federal law enforcement, can be relied on to quickly pursue, capture, and punish a male who exploited a naive and vulnerable girl for sex. In Western countries, since the 1960’s, it’s been increasingly common to permit mixed sex gatherings w/no mature adult supervision, and also “sexual freedom” has been encouraged. The end result is, yes, a target rich environment for horny guys. Neither the perpetrators nor the victims of sexual decadence carry the same sort of stigma or shame that they once did. This is great for lusty sociopaths, and a disaster for normal people who need to treat sex, and their bodies, as sacred. Of course, we’ve toned down some of the worst aspects of the 60’s/70’s counter-culture (e.g., use of marijuana is less these days, drinking isn’t as common these days, violence has diminished, and of course people don’t hitch-hike like they once did) yet we still have serious social dysfunction from flawed socio-cultural policies about permissible conduct.

  154. Feryl says: • Website
    @Talha

    I’m not surprised that there are plenty of Muslims in places like Britain looking to score with white women – I’m certain many of them come here for that specific reason, especially if they watch whatever shows are currently marketed to their countries (which I don’t, but I presume give the impression that all white girls are loose, immoral and easy to bed).

    They may also have noticed that neither family, nor local community, nor state or federal law enforcement, can be relied on to quickly pursue, capture, and punish a male who exploited a naive and vulnerable girl for sex (nor do we shame girls who put themselves in dangerous situations). In Western countries, since the 1960’s, it’s been increasingly common to permit “sexual freedom”. The end result is, yes, a target rich environment for horny guys. Neither the perpetrators nor the victims of sexual decadence carry the same sort of stigma or shame that they once did. This is great for lusty sociopaths, and a disaster for normal people who need to treat sex, and their bodies, as sacred. Of course, we’ve toned down some of the worst aspects of the 60’s/70’s counter-culture (e.g., use of marijuana is less these days, drinking isn’t as common these days, violence has diminished, and of course people don’t hitch-hike like they once did) yet we still have serious social dysfunction from flawed socio-cultural policies about permissible conduct.

    • Replies: @Talha
  155. @Talha

    I don’t know who this “Brother Hodges” is, but it’s typical of a 3rd worlder to use the “muh dick” argument.

    I would tell this Brother Hodges right to his face that he is a traitor and a sellout to his race. 100% he wouldn’t have the balls to swing.

    • Replies: @Talha
  156. Rosie says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    I understand this is tongue-in-cheek, but living below your means and having children together solves this problem for 90%+ of those who do it.

    Assuming this is true, the very nature of the welfare state is that it is a kind of insurance. The point is to share the risk that you won’t be in the 90%+. Often, you’re not paying out money that you’d otherwise get to keep. You’re just replacing regressive private insurance (which falls harder on lower-income families) a kind of progressive public insurance.

  157. Rosie says:
    @Feryl

    Then there’s also the cultural shift away from women playing up their charm early, and maintaining it, to attract a suitable guy early in life and hang onto him.

    Lol. Why do they need to do that? I thought it was women who weren’t interested in men, not the other way around?

    In any event, the “suitable guy” is precisely the one who doesn’t expect you to be someone you’re not. You can’t spend your whole life pretending.

  158. “Though Boomers were heavily responsible for this cultural shift, they didn’t really come of age when it was all that bad . . . ”

    Laugh . . .

    Uh oh, don’t start mentioning the impact of women entering the workplace via male chivalry, and lowered standards — same thing I suppose, and the negative impact of policies carelessly applied. You’ll get pinned with the scarlet letter of “misogynist”.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  159. @Cloudbuster

    It’s amusing when you realize that this entire part of the thread on the welfare state, trade, tariffs, etc. is one elaborate sidetrack by Rosie to avoid the original topic.

    It basically went

    Me: Women have demonstrated by their revealed political preferences that they are not the sorts I want in power.

    Rosie: Oh, yeah? Well, the welfare state is awesome and you’re a greedy, self-centered capitalist who needs to be taken down a few pegs. In the future men like you are going to get what you deserve.

    … thus confirming my original point better than I ever could have done.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  160. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    Rosie: Oh, yeah? Well, the welfare state (including trade restrictionism) awesome and you’re a greedy, self-centered capitalist who needs to be taken down a few pegs. In the future men like you are going to get what you deserve.

    Hmmm. It would seem that a defense of the welfare state is precisely the appropriate response to the argument that women should be disenfranchised on account of our self-evidently wrong socialist leanings.

    It looks like Cloudbuster is a sore loser who doesn’t like being challenged on his double standards.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  161. @Rosie

    I haven’t lost anything. You keep demonstrating who you are and proving my point. I don’t need to spend days going back and forth about the welfare state. It’s tiresome and reality is doing that work for me.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  162. @The Alarmist

    It’s not far wrong to say that Islam is Old Testament Israelite religion taken to its logical term.

  163. @Talha

    It has been my experience that the great majority of people think in cartoons and speak in slogans.

  164. Feryl says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    “Uh oh, don’t start mentioning the impact of women entering the workplace via male chivalry, and lowered standards — same thing I suppose, and the negative impact of policies carelessly applied. You’ll get pinned with the scarlet letter of “misogynist”.”

    It wasn’t chivalry, it was growing pursuit of status by both men and women. In the 70’s, abortion was legalized to make it easier for women (and narcissistic fathers) to get rid of something that could get in the way of status climbing. Since these sorts of measures of corruption have been getting worse since the 70’s, it’s not surprising that nobody is making much of an effort toward 86’ing affirmative action, sensitivity training, diversity mandates etc. because we all know that women and non-whites rely on these things to gain and hold onto various jobs. Jettisoning this non-sense would require everyone to acknowledge that whites and men ought to be accepted as the most talented at many things, and the other groups just need to relax and accept what their natural talent level lets them do. But keep in mind that in this venal era, many white guys are just fine with Aff. Action BS. After all, what is a corrupt era if it isn’t full of lying, fraud, cheating, and cynicism? Furthermore, the top 20% usually do well enough in a crappy era that they don’t feel all that obliged to reform the system to be more fair to the other 80%. Only with the return of noblesse oblige will this state of affairs change. Until then, expect to see women and non-whites continue to benefit, shamelessly, from policies designed to boost their status. And expect our “leaders”, even the white men, to look the other way. After all, even the “conservative” party has done basically nothing about the disasters wrought by affirmative action over the last 50 years.

    Also, for the record, in a more wholesome era women will voluntarily accept the “demotion” of spending more of their life on domestic duty. We won’t have to “force” this, although junking gender based affirmative action would hasten this return to normality.

    P.S., the mere entry of large numbers of women into the workforce greatly accelerated competitive tension/resource competition. Ergo, large numbers of people exiting the workforce would also relieve tension and allow greater success to accrue to those who remained in the workforce. Western countries have basically self-imposed a lot of grief onto themselves by having lots of women in the workforce while also jacking up the population via high immigration levels. More people, more pop. density, more competition for scarce resources=misery.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  165. Anonymous[775] • Disclaimer says:

    EliteCommInc. (again my name is blocked out(?))

    “It wasn’t chivalry, it was growing pursuit of status by both men and women.”

    Maybe his is the case among upper income echelons, but no one dumps trash in pursuit of status symbol. No. Among most of the population this was men being chivalrous, as indicated as police, fire departments, the postal services, etc., all lowered their standards to accommodate them in the workplace. What goes on amongst the elite that they tout as policy has a different meaning and consequences, amongst the larger populations. Roe regretted her choice to murder her child, but by then the die were cast the consequences far beyond her usefulness.

    And then you come to it. AA as though that has been of major benefit to any population in magnitudes to matter in comparison to how further perpetuated the very issue to was intended to redress. Because the policy has benefited whites and the more it serves as complaint against blacks, especially the deeper the complainers either demonstrate ignorance or complicity. 70% plus goes to the white population —-

    key indicator of white power dynamics engaged chivalrous opportunity to benefit white women which of course is to their advantage — so the faux complaint is all smoke and mirrors. This ought to be old news since the number since the 1989’s was upwards of 60% plus.

    I stand where I came in.

  166. Talha says:
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    to use the “muh dick” argument.

    What’s your argument; we came here first?

    Look, any efforts to expel citizens will require force if they do not comply. That force is done either by oneself or hiring out boots and rifles to force people out of their homes (at gunpoint if necessary). This is implicit in any desires (as you expressed) to remove/expel certain people from a land.

    Now, I’m a law-abiding citizen, so I don’t mind obeying the law if my citizenship is revoked and I’m asked to leave by the US government. Fine and dandy. If some random guy tells me to leave, well that’s his opinion – so who cares?

    I literally gave you a game plan on how to go about it, so make it happen.

    100% he wouldn’t have the balls to swing.

    I mean yeah, he probably would let you take the first swing so that he isn’t in a legal position of getting charged for assault:

    Peace.

  167. Talha says:
    @Feryl

    Spot on – it’s not a good situation. Again, any Muslim man that is here trying to bed girls is causing further ruin to a bad situation and damaging his own soul. If he can’t get that under control, it is in everyone’s interest that he is removed from the environment.

    Peace.

  168. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    You keep demonstrating who you are

    Right. A person who doesn’t support authoritarian collectivism when it suits me and then turn around and demand libertarian individualism when that is more to my liking.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  169. Rosie says:
    @Feryl

    P.S., the mere entry of large numbers of women into the workforce greatly accelerated competitive tension/resource competition. Ergo, large numbers of people exiting the workforce would also relieve tension and allow greater success to accrue to those who remained in the workforce. Western countries have basically self-imposed a lot of grief onto themselves by having lots of women in the workforce while also jacking up the population via high immigration levels. More people, more pop. density, more competition for scarce resources=misery.

    Theoretically, fewer women in the workplace would help everyone, but until immigration is controlled, there is no point discussing the matter. We will just be replaced by foreigners.

  170. @Rosie

    You’re funny, Rosie. You’ve spent this whole time assigning labels and positions to me on slight to non-existent evidence then throwing strawmen at what you imagine I think. You definitely are not someone I’d want with any authority over my life.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  171. Rosie says:
    @Cloudbuster

    You definitely are not someone I’d want with any authority over my life.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  172. @Rosie

    Let’s hope peaceful separation can be accomplished, then.

  173. @Feryl

    Women are more lean?!?!

    I sort of get what you’re driving at but it might need some qualification.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  174. Feryl says: • Website
    @Audacious Epigone

    Non-anorexic women and non-obese women back before circa 1970 had softer bodies due to lower levels of male (e.g. growth) hormones. After circa 1970, with all the girls growing up in broken homes, having sex at a young(ish) age, living with adult male strangers at a young age, playing sports at the behest of “caring” fathers, being told to put off family formation for the sake of a career, etc., it’s not surprising that women, esp. younger women, are much more masculinized than they were during the New Deal era (ya know, the time that Boomers remember as having adult men being stoic and women being caring). Shame on the Me Generation (those born from 1940-1960) for debauching the upbringing and socialization of later generations. I can’t imagine why people want to just blow the whole thing up and start from scratch.

    Aud. Ep., I know that people born after 1960, whether they conceal it or not, are absolutely furious at what’s been done to Western society by the hippie turned neo-liberal generation.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  175. Feryl says: • Website
    @Peter Frost

    Others will point to Switzerland. Yes, Switzerland is a nice country with a much less invasive government. But it still has a government and an advanced welfare state. More to the point, it’s full of law-abiding people who don’t have to be terrorized into obeying the law.

    It’s almost as if character and intelligence matter as much, or more than, the ideology itself…..Nah, Puerto Rican libertarianism would would work better than Canadian communism. Or would it?

    There’s also Dan Moynihan’s Canadian border effect, or rather, the historical (and genetically proven) ability of Northern people to impose their culture and DNA on Southern people in many of the world’s regions, which is the case because tribes from colder climates must be well organized and mentally tough in order to survive difficult winters with scarce resources (for example, if you watch football games you’ll notice that black players are much more likely to start arguments and cry after being injured than white players are; both are evidence of weak psychological character that Ice People evolved to avoid). These traits make Northern tribes effective at warfare (note also that American Indian tribes, who evolved in the extreme climate of North America, were much better at fending off European conquerors than Central American jungle dwellers who never experienced a frost-snap; there’s a reason white Americans frequently picked Indian mascots and names for college and pro sports teams).

    Arguments regarding economic ideology are a luxury afforded to Ice people. Desert people are more drawn to religious and cultural arguments, while tropical people (esp. when not “polluted” by Northern invader DNA) can’t sustain much at all, politically or culturally. Stefan Molyneux often points out that the Western countries founded by Ice People are being swamped by Desert and Tropical People who have no time for debating libertarianism, or whatever.

  176. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Feryl

    Shame on the Me Generation (those born from 1940-1960) for debauching the upbringing and socialization of later generations.

    Insofar as generational stuff has any validity the classic Me Generation thinking characterises the 1935-45 and 1945-55 birth cohorts. That’s why the cultural decadence that you (rightly) deplore had such a firm grip by the late 60s.

    I know that people born after 1960, whether they conceal it or not, are absolutely furious at what’s been done to Western society by the hippie turned neo-liberal generation.

    The 1955-65 birth cohort was the first to notice that something was wrong. We blamed the hippies, whom we despised. We were partly right and partly wrong. The hippies were disgusting but they were merely puppets. We didn’t understand the forces behind the scenes pulling the strings. None of the subsequent generations understood that either.

    • Replies: @Feryl
  177. Feryl says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    Insofar as generational stuff has any validity the classic Me Generation thinking characterises the 1935-45 and 1945-55 birth cohorts. That’s why the cultural decadence that you (rightly) deplore had such a firm grip by the late 60s.

    I’ve been looking at lists of musician who died young, and drug overdoses/alcohol abuse is uncommon among those born in the 1930’s. But it soars among those born in the 1940’s. So I’d put those born from 1940-1954 as their own distinct cultural generation, the highly Left-leaning, New Agey, and openly hedonistic “Sixties generation”. As you get further past 1950, Boomers were less likely to be anti-war protestors (too young), less likely to easily attain prosperity, and more likely to be pro-family/pro-life Reaganites. That being said, marijuana use among high school seniors still peaked in 1979 (and speed use peaked in 1982, and cocaine/crack use peaked in 1985), while Boomers born in the late 50’s and early 60’s have had the most unstable marriages of all cohorts. The GSS shows that people born from 1946-1964 (the chronological Boomer cohort) are heavier drinkers than older or younger generations. Reported deaths from AIDS are highest among chronological Boomers, too. So it’s fair to say that “the Seventies Generation” (those born from 1955-1967) has as spotty a track record as the more famous “Sixties Generation”. The real improvements in responsible behavior are seen with the “Eighties Generation” (those born from 1968-1980) and the “Nineties Generation” (those born from 1981-1995).

    The 1955-65 birth cohort was the first to notice that something was wrong. We blamed the hippies, whom we despised. We were partly right and partly wrong. The hippies were disgusting but they were merely puppets. We didn’t understand the forces behind the scenes pulling the strings. None of the subsequent generations understood that either.

    The later Boomers (and very early Gen X-ers) have exhibited even greater self-destructive tendencies than the early Boomers, but the difference is that later Boomers didn’t pretend that getting high or drunk was part of some rebellion against The Man. Yeah, I’ll admit that later Boomers have cooler personalities than either preachy early Boomers or nihilistic and bummed out early X-ers. But the over behavioral profile of those born from 1940-1967 is pretty similar….And pretty ugly.

  178. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    There was a joke about an old Scottish woman who split from her splinter of the Kirk. Someone asks her: “Do you really think that no one now on Earth will be saved except you and your coachman Jock?”

    She thinks a bit and replies “Aweel, I’m nae sae sure aboot Jock”.

    That said, sometimes the consensus is wrong. Anyway, most people (this includes me) don’t think entirely rationally about religion; if they did we would all either have the same religion or maintain at least a slight agnosticism.

    The Bohras seem mostly to be pretty decent people; the only beef I have with them is that they have occasional grand international conventions and then you can’t get a room anywhere for love or money.

    • Replies: @Talha
  179. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    It’s a question of priorities; they have to make money after all. The more they restrict, the smaller their profit margins – data storage doesn’t pay for itself.

    Sure, it’s just that I’m not going to go on a protest campaign for them.

  180. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    She thinks a bit and replies “Aweel, I’m nae sae sure aboot Jock”.

    LOL! Reminds me of this:

    sometimes the consensus is wrong

    In Islamic doctrine it is impossible for the Ummah to come to a consensus (unanimity) on what is incorrect. If the ulema are in agreement on a point, then it is true – that is partially where Sunnis get our name from:
    “All Muslims are guided by the Sunnah, but Sunnis stress it, as well as consensus (ijma; the full name of Sunnis is Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Ijma, people of the Sunnah and consensus).”
    http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e2280

    most people (this includes me) don’t think entirely rationally about religion

    Fully agree – the human being is far too complex to simply boil down to one aspect of their cognitive faculties.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  181. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    Reminds me of this

    Great minds think alike?

    There is also a version in Scott’s Heart of Midlothian which I found when vainly looking for the original of my own version.

    In Islamic doctrine it is impossible for the Ummah to come to a consensus (unanimity) on what is incorrect.

    Yes, we have our own version of this. But I was using “consensus” in a less strict sense– say, that the consensus of Roman society in 100 AD was that Christianity was total nonsense, or the consensus of the medical profession in the mid-1800s was that Semmelweis was nuts and it was insane to suppose doctors not washing their hands might be killing their patients. Somehow I doubt the world’s obstinate refusal to all be Bohras is in quite the same category, but they would probably say different.

    • Replies: @Talha
  182. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    But I was using “consensus” in a less strict sense

    Got it – makes sense.

    Peace.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS