Posts Tagged ‘feminist theory’

I love language, don’t you? And I hate very few things –but one of them is the word-police, who are all hypocrites, bullies, and control freaks.

Another is cultural imperialism–in this case, white American women trying to impose their politicized view of words on non-first world peoples. To white, middle class American women, the word cunt is a bad werd–regardless of the hundreds of positive meanings it has in other cultures.

But my first fun, un-fettered, sexxy thoughts came from the dictionary! And there are people in the world who would burn them, if they had half the chance.

The classic stereotype is always some prude, begging some scunt:  “talk dirty to me,” as she moans like a cow with a prolapse. We all know her, don’t we?

Then I guess she’s not the prude we thought she was…;-)

Then, after they get their clothes back on and leave the key at the front desk, that/those prudes march all about the world regulating bad ideas, and bad words, which leads to the further regulation of speech, ideas, and essentially, communication itself–which is the root of all commerce. Hypocrites.

Then, once they get you trained to see it and say it their way–  onward to imperialist wars for capital!–but there is no reason involved in emotional responses to words, only control impulses and repressed sex drives that cause conflict, while seeking to create herd behavior around buzzwords-simple as that.

But real Women Love Cunts, and so do I.  No, wait–that came out wrong. Maybe I should say–we tolerate them? Or: sometimes people who have vaginas act like real cunts.

No…that’s not it either. Hmmm…it’s hard explaining this conundrum.

Well, Sex Negative women are  women who act like cunts anyways…er, wait a minute…Cunts are vaginas, and sometimes, they are lots of other fun useful, productive things,  too. Sex positive men and women love vaginas, even when they are called cunts, or act like cunts.

Total vaginal prolapse, post-partum, cow, side...

HUGE RED FLAG: The whole dialogue about the word cunt has prolapsed. Any woman who hates the word cunt, is a big red flag for me, and I have known a few of them first hand...

Did that clear it up?

Well, you can do the thinking your self, if you would like to, but  language is the original aphrodisiac, and any woman who despises the word CUNT is a huge red flag.

The word is so full of history that it would be a shame to lose it–and the women that can’t pull their heads out of their emergency of dialectic prolapse long enough to realize that, have no clue what it really means.(See link below to Mathew Hunt)

Dialectically, word policing  is a tool of the middle and upper classes to control and manipulate the lower classes. It is the klitorisvorhaut that covers over sensitive dialogue, and it has even less of a purpose.

If you would like to see this prolapse in action, and how this dynamic of gendered class control works, go here, here, or here , use the word in any forum, and then, go here for the only uncensored opposition conversation on the internet.

Imagine that! Women and sex-negative ( they aren’t getting any) men all rallying around the word cunt, and using it to reinforce class boundaries and gender roles! They are actually trying to sound sex positive, but they really sound ‘sex negotiable,” as in “if you use words we tell you to use, you might get some vagina in our crowd.”

So–cunt isn’t the password to the magical kyriarchal pyramid? How about the holy giver of love fluid? No? Umm…the dark tunnel of deeper and deeper knowledge?  No? The  “pink padded room of sanity for the pre-negotiated benefit of the insane penis posse”? No…?

Got it! How about “twelve year old Coochie Snorcher?(1)”  Well, that one seems to make the ‘radical feminists‘ horny.

Why? Because that is what class is composed of–kyriarchical sliding doors of entrance, or denial of entrance, into the pyramid, depending on whether or not you use the right password!

The most humorous part of it is, that they say the word cunt “belongs to women.”

Try Telling that to Mike Hunt, or his brother Mathew…

But this is from Mathew Hunts compilation and etymology of the word Cunt.

The Etymology Of Cunt By: Mathew Hunt

The etymology of ‘cunt’ is actually considerably more complex than is generally supposed. The word’s etymology is highly contentious, as Alex Games explains: “Language scholars have been speculating for years about the etymological origins of the ‘c-word'” (2006). A consensus has not yet been reached, as Ruth Wajnryb admits in A Cunt Of A Word (a chapter in Language Most Foul): “Etymologists are unlikely to come to an agreement about the origins of CUNT any time soon” (2004), and Mark Morton is even more despairing: “no-one really knows the ulterior origin of cunt” (2003).

Also, from the same etymology, which I highly recommend, are these variants on uses of the word. Enjoy some cunt today!Well, no matter which cunt YOU choose to play with today, play with them nicely, have fun, and stay away from all those sex negative cunts!

1) In the original published version of Eve Enslers Vagina Monologues, she fantasized about having sex with a 12 year old girl. She later changed that girl character to a fourteen and then a 16 year old girl.

From Wikipedia’s sex positive feminism page ( the anti-academic citation source):

“Statutory Rape Laws

Also there is debate among sex-positive feminists about whether statutory rape laws are a form of misogyny.[6] As illustrated by the controversy over “The Little Coochie Snorcher that Could” from the Vagina Monologues, some sex-positive feminists do not consider all consensual activity between young adolescents and older people as inherently harmful, and there has been debate between feminists about whether statutory rape laws are misogynist.[7]”

  • Army Service Cunts’ (‘Army Service Corps‘)
  • ‘bargain cunt’ (‘person who claims to offer a discounted price via the grey market, though is unable to do so’, a pun on Bargain Hunt)
  • ‘beat the cunt out of’ (‘beat up’, a variation of ‘beat the crap out of’)
  • ‘big cunt’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘bucket cunt’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘bunt’ (‘fat female stomach’; a combination of ‘belly’ and ‘cunt’)
  • ‘bushel cunt’/’bushel-cunted’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘C’ (‘cunt’)
  • ‘c and c’ (‘clips and cunts’ television programmes)
  • ‘CGI’ (‘Cunt Gap Index’, ‘measurement-scale for vagina sizes’)
  • ‘CHODA’ (‘Cunt Hair On Da Ass’)
  • ‘coming the old cunt’ (‘being unkind’)
  • ‘cooint’ (‘vagina’, Yorkshire variant of ‘cunt’)
  • ‘cow-cunt’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘cunker’ (‘cunt’)
  • ‘cunch’ (‘cunnilingus’, ‘combination of ‘cunt’ and lunch’)
  • ‘cunnifungus’ (‘vaginal secretion‘)
  • ‘cunnimingus’ (combination of ‘cunnilingus’ and ‘minger’)
  • ‘cunnylicious’ (combination of ‘cunnilingus’ and ‘delicious’)
  • ‘cunshine’ (‘pornographic images printed on highly glossy paper’)
  • ‘cunt!’ (exclamation)
  • ‘Cunt Act’ (‘Deserted Wives and Children’s Act’)
  • ‘cunt and a half’ (‘very idiotic’)
  • “cunt-arse” (‘idiot’; Verne Graham, 2005)
  • ‘cuntbag’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-ball’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-beten’ (‘impotent’)
  • ‘cuntbitten’/’cunt-bitten’ (‘syphilitic’)
  • ‘cunt book’/’cunt-book’ (‘in the bad books’/’pornography’)
  • ‘cunt bread’ (‘vaginal yeast infection’)
  • ‘cunt-breath’ (‘halitosis’)
  • ‘cunt bubble’ (‘vaginal fart‘)
  • ‘cunt buster’/’cunt-buster’ (‘erection’)
  • ‘cunt butter’ (‘vaginal fluid’)
  • ‘cunt candle’ (‘outstanding idiot’)
  • ‘cunt cap’ (‘military hat’)
  • ‘cunt carpet’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunt-chaser’ (‘womaniser’)
  • ‘cunt-cleaner’ (‘gynaecologist’)
  • ‘cunt-collar’ (‘pussy whip’)
  • ‘cunt cock’ (‘clitoris’)
  • ‘cunt cork’ (‘tampon’)
  • ‘cunt-cuddling’ (‘masturbation’)
  • ‘cunt-curtain’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunt dentist’ (‘gynaecologist’)
  • ‘cunt down’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘Cunt Dracula’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunted’ (‘drunk’/’vaginal penetration’)
  • ‘cunteen’ (‘unpleasant quantity between thirteen and nineteen’)
  • ‘cunt-eyed’ (‘narrow-eyed’)
  • ‘cunt face’/’cuntface’/’cunt-faced’ (‘ugly’)
  • ‘cunt fart’ (‘vaginal fart’)
  • ‘cunt flump’ (‘tampon’, from The Flumps)
  • ‘cunt for hire’ (‘prostitute’)
  • ‘cunt-fringe’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • “cunt-fucked” (‘vaginal sex’; Jim Goad, 1994[d])
  • ‘cunt grunt’ (‘vaginal fart’)
  • ‘cunt guff’ (‘vaginal fart’)
  • ‘cunt-hair’/’cunt hair’/’cunt’s hair’ (‘tiny amount’)
  • ‘cunt-hat’ (‘felt hat’)
  • ‘cunt-hatred’ (‘misogyny’)
  • ‘cunthead’ (‘idiot’)
  • “cunthood” (‘femininity’; Jim Goad, 1994[c])
  • ‘cunt hook’ (‘car used to attract women’)
  • ‘cunt-hook’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-hooks’ (‘fingers’, a pun on ‘cant-hook’/’person’)
  • ‘cunt-hound’ (‘sex-obsessed’)
  • ‘cunt-house’ (‘venue populated largely by women’)
  • ‘cunt hunt’ (‘on the pull’)
  • ‘cunt-hunter’ (‘womaniser’)
  • “c[u]ntie” (‘little cunt’; Robert Burns, 1786)
  • ‘cuntikin’ (‘little cunt’)
  • ‘cuntinental’ (‘patron of an outdoor British cafe’)
  • “cuntiness” (‘the state of being a cunt’; Britain’s Biggest C**ts, 2008)
  • ‘cunting’ (intensifier, a variant of ‘fucking’/’knickers’, a pun on ‘bunting’)
  • ‘cuntingency plan’ (‘alternative source of sexual gratification’, a pun on ‘contingency plan’)
  • ‘cuntino filet with white sauce’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘cuntion’ (‘gumption’)
  • ‘cuntish’ (‘stupid’)
  • ‘cuntispiece’ (‘frontispiece of a pornographic book’)
  • “cunt-ist” (‘heterosexual man’; Jeffrey Merrick and Bryant T Ragan, 1996)
  • ‘cunt-itch’ (‘sexually aroused’)
  • ‘cuntitude’ (‘bad attitude’)
  • “cunt-jugal” (a pun on ‘conjugal’; Nick Gomez, 1997)
  • ‘cunt juice’ (‘vaginal fluid’)
  • ‘cuntkin’ (‘little cunt’)
  • ‘cunker’ (‘vagina’, euphemism for ‘cunt’)
  • ‘cunt-lap’/’cuntlap’ (‘cunnilingus’/’idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-lapper’ (‘cunnilinguist’)
  • ‘cunt-lapping’ (‘cunnilingus’/’disgusting’)
  • ‘cuntlashed’ (‘very drunk’)
  • ‘cunt-leg’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cuntlery’ (‘utensil used to dilate the vagina’)
  • ‘cuntless’ (‘without a cunt’)
  • ‘cuntlet’ (‘little cunt’, a pun on ‘cutlet’)
  • ‘cunt-lick’/’give cunt licks’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘cunt-licker’ (‘cunnilinguist’/’idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-licking’ (‘cunnilingus’/’disgusting’)
  • ‘cuntlifters’ (‘old ladies’ knickers’)
  • ‘cunt light’/’C-light’ (‘pornographic film lighting’)
  • ‘cunt-like’ (‘vaginal’)
  • ‘cunt like a Grimsby welly’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘cuntlines’ (‘seams between the strands of a rope’; variant of ‘contlines’)
  • ‘cunt-lips’ (‘labia’)
  • ‘cunt man’/’C man’ (‘sexual athlete’)
  • ‘cuntmeat’ (‘women’)
  • “C[u]nt-mending” (‘gynaecology’; John Wilmot, 1680)
  • ‘cunt mumps’ (‘woman’s excuse to deflect chat-up lines’)
  • ‘cunt-munchers’ (‘cunnilinguists’)
  • “cunt-mutilation” (‘vaginal mutilation’; Jim Goad, 1994[e])
  • ‘cuntock’ (‘idiot’; abbreviated to ‘ock’)
  • ‘cuntocks’ (‘labia’; abbreviated to ‘ocks’)
  • ‘cunt of all cunts’ (‘incredibly stupid person’)
  • “cunt-palaces” (‘attractive vaginas’; Raymond Stephanson, 2004)
  • ‘cunt-pensioner’ (‘pimp’; abbreviated to ‘cp’)
  • ‘cunt pie’ (‘vagina’)
  • ‘cunt plugger’/’cunt-plugger’ (penis’)
  • ‘cunt plugging’/’cunt-plugging’ (‘sexual intercouse’)
  • ‘cunt positive’ (‘liberal feminist’)
  • “cunt-pounding” (‘sexual intercourse’; Media News, 2005)
  • ‘cunt-power’ (‘female energy’)
  • ‘cuntprick’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-rag’ (‘sanitary towel’)
  • ‘cunt-rammer’ (‘penis’, an extension of ‘rammer’)
  • ‘cunt-rats’ (‘tampons’)
  • ‘cuntrified’ (‘public houses converted into wine bars’)
  • ‘cunt ruffler’ (‘provoker of women’)
  • ‘cunt rug’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cuntryside’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘cunt’s blood’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunt-simple’ (‘sex-obsessed’)
  • ‘cuntsman’ (‘womaniser’)
  • ‘cunt smoke’ (‘no problem’)
  • ‘cunt scratchers’ (‘hands’)
  • ‘cunt-screen’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunt-shop’ (‘knocking shop’)
  • ‘Cunts In Velvet’ (‘City Imperial Volunteers’)
  • ‘cuntsmith’ (‘gynaecologist’)
  • ‘cunt splice’ (‘partially spliced rope’; variant of ‘cont splice’/’cut splice’)
  • ‘cunt-stabber’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stand’ (‘sexually aroused’)
  • ‘cunt-starver’ (‘errant ex-husband’)
  • ‘cunt-sticker’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stirrer’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stopper’ (penis’)
  • ‘cunt-stretcher’/’cunt stretcher’ (‘penis’)
  • ‘cunt-struck’ (‘sex-obsessed’)
  • ‘cunt stubble’ (‘constable’)
  • ‘cuntsucker’/’cunt-sucker’ (‘cunnilinguist’)
  • ‘cunt-sucking’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘Cuntsville’ (‘hometown’)
  • ‘cunt swab’/’cunt-swab’ (‘knickers’)
  • ‘cunt-teaser’ (‘a man who sexually excites a woman’)
  • ‘cunt-tickler’/’cunt tickler’ (‘moustache’)
  • ‘cunt torture’ (‘sadomasochistic sex’)
  • ‘cunt trumpet’ (‘cunnilingus’)
  • ‘cunt tug’ (‘pubic wig’)
  • ‘cunt-up’/’cunt up’ (‘mistake’, variation of ‘belly up’)
  • ‘cuntuppance’ (‘punishment for male infedility’, a pun on ‘come-uppance’)
  • ‘cunt wagon’/’cunt-wagon’ (‘passion wagon’)
  • ‘cuntwank’ (‘meaningless sex’)
  • ‘cunt warren’ (‘brothel’)
  • ‘cuntweep’ (‘vaginal fluid’)
  • ‘cunt-wig’ (‘pubic hair’)
  • ‘cunty’ (‘idiot’/’worthless’/’feminine’)
  • ‘cuntyballs’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘cunty booby’ (‘confusion’)
  • ‘cunty chops’ (‘beard’)
  • ‘cunty Italian’ (‘Italian-American woman’)
  • ‘Cunty McCuntlips’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘decunt’ (‘withdraw the penis from the vagina’)
  • ‘dirty cunt’ (‘unclean vagina’)
  • ‘doss cunt’ (‘stupid idiot’)
  • ‘double-cunted’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘dumb cunt’ (‘stupid idiot’)
  • “encunten” (‘to call someone a cunt’; Britain’s Biggest C**ts, 2008)
  • ‘eyes like sheep’s cunts’ (‘hangover’)
  • ‘fish-cunt’ (‘woman’)
  • ‘flatter than a cow’s cunt’ (‘horizontal’)
  • ‘full cuntal lobotomy’ (‘male sexual arousal’, a pun on ‘full-frontal lobotomy’)
  • ‘get some cunt’ (‘male sexual gratification’)
  • ‘go cunt up’ (‘go wrong’)
  • ‘gunt’ (‘fat female stomach’; a combination of ‘gut’ and ‘cunt’)
  • ‘ICBM’ (“Inter Cuntinental Ballistic Missile”: ‘penis’; Roger Mellie, 2005)
  • ‘KFC’ (‘Knob Filled Cunt’)
  • ‘kipper’s cunt’ (‘very smelly’)
  • ‘knock the cunt out of’ (‘knock out’)
  • ‘lazy cunt’ (‘menstruating vagina’)
  • ‘LC’ (“LOW CUNT” and “LAP CUNT”; James van Cleve, 19–)
  • ‘make a coffee house of a woman’s cunt’ (‘coitus interruptus’)
  • ‘make a lobster kettle out of someone’s cunt’ (‘coitus interruptus’)
  • ‘mouth like a cow’s cunt’ (‘talkative’)
  • ‘petit-cunt’ (‘petit-bourgeois idiot’)
  • ‘pox-ridden cunt’ (‘diseased vagina’)
  • ‘pushing the cunt envelope’ (‘taking idiocy to new limits’)
  • ‘RCH’ (‘Red Cunt Hair’, ‘hair’s breadth’)
  • ‘scabby cunt’ (‘diseased vagina’)
  • ‘scunt’ (‘idiot’)
  • ‘siffed-up cunt-hole’ (‘diseased vagina’)
  • ‘silly cunt!’ (‘stupid idiot’)
  • ‘sluice-cunted’ (‘large vagina’)
  • ‘smelly cunt’ (‘malodorous vagina’)
  • ‘stick it up your cunt’ (‘get stuffed’, a variation of ‘stick it up your arse’)
  • ‘stinky cunt’ (‘malodorous vagina’)
  • ‘sweet cunt’ (‘lovely vagina’)
  • ‘talking cunt’ (‘verbal seduction’)
  • ‘that’s not cunt it’s peehole’ (‘underage girl’)
  • “three cocks to the cunt” (‘with gusto’; Profanisaurus, 2007)
  • “Treecunts” (‘tree branches resembling female genitals’, in Just Sluts And Cunts photographs; Jan Willem Verkerk, 2007)
  • “Two C’s in a K” (‘two cunts in a kitchen’: two housewives in an advertisement; Stephen King, 1981 [also “2CK”; Sam Delaney, 2007])
  • ‘WRAC’ (‘Weekly Ration of Army Cunt’
Boadicea Haranguing the Britons

Boudica, wherefore art thou, Boudica?

[Warning: This post contains links to a story of old goats bullying young goats. Also, I am writing under high stress due to the fact that I am surrounded by a herd of 5 human females–one of them obscenely stuffing  her boob in a little persons mouth! Appalling, really…*]

Ophelia Benson writes books. That is how she makes her money.  And she is a misandrist, a sexist, and a snob who uses violent words, the repression of words, and tribal politics to stir up violence against other women.

Female’s bullying females is autocachthonous** within the chemistry of a war-like culture.

She advises her friends to target, and bully others. ( I won’t cite that because I am against encouraging violence, and hesitant to send any onlookers to her site, but I recommend learning self defense at every opportunity.)

Well, one of her recent targets is Abbie Smith, a virologist by trade, and a blogger who is one of the few on the internet who does not censor speech–which is really the censorship of ideas, and criticism of ideas. These types of people who are bullying Smith claim that they are battling trolls, but really, that is a hollow argument–they are actually pushing political agendas, and actively silencing dissent.

Abbie Smith has stood against the assaults of an entire internet community of misandrists, and bullies who demanded that she “get in line” and “know her place” in a social hierarchy of white middle class values.

And Ms. Smith didn’t do that. So they all piled on her–like a gang rape. I won’t link to their vile posts and blogs, but I will point to Ms. Smiths bold and unusual method of resistance to female bullying.

The thread I point to is worth the time to read, and often hilarious; and quite likely an actual evolutionary bang–the place of the abiogenesis of a new way of looking at old wormy, worn out issues that have proven themselves to be false narratives.

Many women are bullies the way that Ophelia Benson is a bully.  Part of my thesis is that this female bullying  largely goes unnoticed by the wider society–and this combines leads to other related behaviors, which are seldom studied in terms of female specific forms of social violence.

Feminist criminology is itself exclusively devoid of terminology to deal with female crimes and actual bad behavior, which  leads to larger, bigger forms of bullying–not least of which is what you see in action at the ERV blog, and those who call for censorship against it.

In fact, the lack of examination of women’s violence against women, and women’s violence and aggression against children, is the central part of my thesis. I believe it leads to war. I also believe that by not discussing, critiquing, or analyzing female violence outside of the feminist paradigm creates and perpetuates a dualistic male/ female paradigm wherein violence is more likely to occur.

I thought I had a friend, once,  an aged old silver back who was cannibalized in the feminist culture-wars and who was blind to the female half of imperialist actual wars,  who told me something about evolution which I have never forgotten–well, most of it anyways.

My former imaginary internet friend said: “There are four F’s that describe all of animal behavior; which leads to gene transfer; which leads to evolution. ”

1. Females. 2. Food 3. Fighting 4. Fucking.

I am sure there was another one or ten F’s in there but those are the basics of how it all happens. And it is also the basics of how violence begins in a herd as well. ( I mean, sure, there’s feeling, friskiness, finagling, flippant face farting and so forth that all figure into it , but they aren’t the big ones.)

No–don’t EVER presume that violence begins  merely over food–quite not. In fact, violence is a herd behavior  that is a constant, and bigger violence, which begins like a spark in a herd that is composed of females of varying ages foraging for food ( picture goats with their butts in the air, tails twitching, circled around a haystack), leads to male competition for the females–a sexual–and dialectical resource.

(male violence is a whole ‘nother issue, but most often in a herd it is one on one.)

But most conflict almost always begins when an older female initiates some form of aggression or violence against a younger female–or, in simple terms, old goats bully young goats.  And, in this case, Ophelia Benson, et al, is bullying Abbie Smith–not that the goat analogy fully fits humans mind you; we are more like chimps, or gorillas, or…ahem.

Well, you can read through it if you want to and figure out who is who. Go here for a primer.

Oh! if only women would be the actual warriors they claim to admire! Boudica, wherefore art thou? Why hast thou forsaken the white middle class feminist woman?

Ms. Benson goes on and on ( you know how they do!) about the oppression of women, and so forth. Despite the fact that she is clearly middle class, well off, and some kind of atheist or another, she still believes in demons–men are all  demons to her, and her friends.

Well, needless to say, she is also a white woman–which fits my thesis: no single group, social class, caste, race, or identity has ever made more money, or profited in one way or another from the violence of the world than white women.

If hearing that bothers you–run along! There is nothing we can say to each other. And, if in some way, you agree with that statement ( and of course there are exceptions indeed) continue to follow along if you want to. I promise I won’t hurt you 😉

But no single class race, or gender has ever avoided more prison time, been raped fewer times, or been sold less often, much less been held accountable for their aggression than white females. And their core belief is always to start shit, and then run! Let the police, and the soldiers do the fighting for them! You know–the little people who uphold the privilege.

Her thesis, which is odd coming from someone who claims they are a humanist.  Ah–but therein lies the rub–she was a feminist first!  Which explains why she makes her money through aggressively pursuing other women, and policing their behavior.

Old feminists in the herd ALWAYS means violence is just around the corner…Don’t say I didn’twarn you.

For more on females bullying females, click me!

* The obscenity is that they are a book club talking about how appalling the conditions in Africa are, with (totally puking now) a copy of Alice Walker in their hands–but the little guy on the boob seems to be hungry enough (I mean–he’s on the breast, not just on the boob discussing Walker’s worn out, quasi-truthful, misandry riddled account  of male female interactions). But the epitome of actual appalling is not drawing age appropriate boundaries between mother and child.

**autocachthonous is my big word of the day. It means originating where it is found.

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Original caption states: "Nobel Laureate ...

Wangari Maathai, the first Central Kenyan woman to ever get a doctorate, author of Unbowed, asked to be remembered as a person who was very concerned about the environment.

NAIROBI, Kenya, Sep 26 – Prof Wangari Muta Maathai, the 2004 Nobel Peace Laureate who died of cancer on Sunday night would want to be remembered as an environmental icon.

I will be reading more about the life, and death of Dr. Wangairi Maathai in the next few days, considering she is one of a very rare breed of women who actually was willing to suffer for her beliefs, rather than to market herself, or sell out to the military industrial complex.

In her book, Unbowed--available on Amazon.com for Kindle–she remembers her life as a child sharecropper–a child worker within a family of male AND female workers, who existed in  unfair economic disparity within the kyriarchical pyramid. Unlike western feminists, and their causes, she knew that resources are limited, and that to each his or her own is a mantra of the past.

But she also recalled her place in the human family, and the human tribe as one that requires evolution from ideas about divisive conquests for power and the oppression of others, to ideas of a world safe for every person in it.

She spoke truth to power, for which she was beaten, abused, and whipped like a slave, or a man–because she spoke out against the horrors of environmental degradation, patriarchal violence, and western feminism’s ever present matriarchal hunger, which demands more, and ever more of the resources of others.

She refused to “know her place,” or adopt the diffusive, self and body centered politics and the inherently flawed paradigm of western white feminism. She was always just to busy to waste time in American white feminist paradigms to engage herself with  “for-me-and-mineism,” speaking instead to everyone, and everything living thing about environmental issues that affect us all.

But I should just shut up, before I appear too much like a western feminist–overlaying every issue with divisive constructs of power, and selfish, sexualizing dialogue; and just honor her in the way she asked  be remembered.

This way, from Al Jazeera and Capitalfm, Kenya:

The Tree Mother of Africa and the founder of the Green Belt Movement, asks us to-

” record her as a person who was very concerned about the environment, “very concerned about what we do with the species we cohabit this planet with and one person who really felt that the humans ought to have a greater respect for other species than we do at the moment because in respecting other species, in respecting members of the human species we are more likely to survive on this planet earth.”

The Kenyan environmentalist, womanist, first centralKenyan fermale doctorate, and daughter of hard working sharecroppers died on Sunday night while undergoing treatment at the Nairobi Hospital where she had been admitted for a couple of weeks.

Her Personal Assistant Lucy Wanjohi said Maathai succumbed to ovarian cancer, for which she was being treated. She was diagnosed with the cancer last year.

Related articles

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

America Loves Men--dead men, that is.

Duane Buck couldn’t have a more tragically ironic name than “Buck” considering how white men and women used, capitalized upon, hunted, and exploited ‘black bucks’  and how some white women today still refer to black men  in some way that echoes as ‘big black bucks’ in attempts to re-capitalize upon that racist image.

America has long loved it’s men to death, and Duane Edward Buck is about to get some love, American style. In fact, being a lovable man requires that you are willing to die–and you are more lovable if you are dead.

BIG BLACK BUCK, an examination of black buck stereotype,by Donnie from 2003. “Mama’s little baby is the backbone of that order.”

The death penalty is no exception to the truism of dead men. Here is the pecking order of who gets to be loved to death by Americans, and especially as concerns the death penalty.

race chart 1

CLICK HERE FOR MORE STATISTICS

CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION OF CLEMENCY FOR BUCK.

America also has a sliding scale of ‘privileges’ based on race, class, and gender’ that puts all men at the very top of the list when it comes to being loved to death. It is a male privilege to be more likely to face the death penalty.

Of all who do and will face death and or incarceration in America, only white females are a protected class who seldom if ever are suspects in crime, or violence. All other categories of people face threats to their lives and their health daily.

Most juries are overwhelmingly white, and white women are disproportionately represented in the jury pools.

White men fill death row in greater numbers, yet Ethnic men or black men,  are MORE likely to get the death penalty, and even more likely to get it if their victim is a white and female. However, men who are willing to die to uphold white female privilege get extra points, and extra nookie cookies for their efforts at upholding white female privilege, at least while they are alive.

Buck, like thousands of men before him, was “unfairly sentenced to death based on testimony that was racially tainted by psychologist Walter Quijano [a Latino], who repeatedly told juries that black or Hispanic defendants were more likely to commit future crimes.

“That he made a career of such testimony would ultimately earn him a denunciation by the American Psychiatric Association. His reputation was further sullied when his pronouncements turned out to be dead wrong,” according to the Houston Chronicle.

To get an idea of how bad or evil Quijano is, keep in mind that almost all definitions of ‘what is a crime/or a criminal,’ define purportedly male behavior, and stem from the American Psychiatric Association’s DSM-4 categorizations.

Or, in other words, the APA , which was once headed by Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron who notoriously tortured mental patients, is not only a sexist organization, but one whose foundational basis and definitions of crime, behavior, and mental illness has at times broken all known ethical guidelines by experimenting on human beings like lab rats, torturing them, and testing drugs on them.

Which makes Buck look like he deserves a shot at life, and the system that convicted him pretty guilty. But it makes Quijano look like just another Adolf Eichmann, doing his job from within his own set of b dangerous, predatory  personal biases.

Related articles

Catharine MacKinnon

Today I declare the Save the Vagina's Before it's Too Late initiative in honor of Catharine MacKinnon, feminist legal scholar, and author of the Vagina Monolith's, and the Soccermom Diatribes. Now make sure you get home before midnight, Cindy!

Let’s get the the dull, academically fraudulent, sex negative, sexist stuff from two notoriously angry, manipulative, controlling women, out of the way right from the start.

But first! A public service message: Do you sit awake nights, worrying about hungry, sick, starving vaginas all over the world?  You CAN make a difference in the life and health of vaginas.  SAVE A VAGINA TODAY!  by donating to women’s cervical cancer research.

Now back to the porn wars: Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon got an anti-pornography statute passed  that is still lurking on the books in the City of Minneapolis:

Pornography and Civil Rights
A NEW DAY FOR WOMEN’S EQUALITY by ANDREA DWORKIN and CATHARINE A. MacKINNON
Copyright © 1988 by Catharine A. MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin
“Pornography is central in creating and maintaining the civil inequality of the sexes. Pornography is a systematic practice of exploitation and subordination based on sex which differentially harms women. . . .”  Their completely new legal approach–in which pornography is defined as sex discrimination and therefore a violation of civil rights–would allow anyone injured by pornography to fight back by filing a civil lawsuit against pornographers.
—————————————————————————————————————————-
Wheeew, smells like a cat box up there–reeks like the turds of  little captive animals that claw furniture and ask you for food all day long, and then snuggle all night. MeeeEEEow till I get what I want, claw furniture if I don’t….

So dualistic–so negative–so typically feminist, but indeed, undeniably, pornography IS differential in the treatment of the subjects involved. Civil rights? Meh.

I better go to the dictionary on that one. Not Civil rights, silly–we know how hard feminists work against those!

But Pornography–wha tis it? The free download of the Sage Dictionary , a dictionary for linguists, gives me a common working definition of pornography: Creative activity (writing or pictures or films etc.) of no literary or artistic value other than to stimulate sexual desire.

Pornography depicting coitus, cunnilingus, felatio, sodomy, BDSM, and the many other etcetera’s of sexual action is everywhere you look–three mouse clicks or less  from every man, woman and child in the ‘civilized’ world of cyberspace.

 [warning: you are three clicks away from free, virus- free, relatively harmless adult sexual material here ]

That may or may not be a bad thing, but the dialogue about porn is important, and definitely headed in the wrong direction–because it is actually a dialogue about speech. You can decide for yourself. I will wait as you peruse the hundreds of various links–after all, their actually is something for every-BODY.

Straight, LGBT, TS, hard and softcore bodies everywhere you look–we are all different.

But the more important dialogue about pornography has yet to take place, and that dialogue has its roots in the same definition of pornography that is in common use, a dialogue that is the most important dialogue of our next decade; one that hasn’t taken place yet because it has been constrained, AND restrained.

War pornography. War pornography is how we bully young males into submission, and objectify them, via images of men as tools, objects, and perpetrators of violence. Good men, bad men: soft-core, and hard-core males. Either way, men are more disposable than used condoms, and always presented in dualistic terms.

It begins with shame. Male shame. Shaming males into submission.

Pornography, by the definition, involves ‘creative activity’; that portion of the definition is not really in dispute by anyone. Porn is a created product, and is often quite creative as well. The big bone of contention seems to be the next part “other than to stimulate sexual desire.”

What does THAT mean? We are all different–stimulation begins in the brain.

But I have a bone to pick with such a vapid generalization [Sage… dictionary, definition 1, not 2, because definition 2 at least uses the words ‘flavor’, and ‘tang’ to describe ‘vapid’? The use of the letter V anywhere can arouse me, by design of the current feminist propaganda [V-day and the Vagina Monologues are sooo in your face every year, whether I want it or not].

But ‘flavorful tang???’  I am blowing my top…Even the propagandists missed that shameful naughtiness in the word ‘vapid,’ while they were hyper-focused on ‘vaginas’ [ Sage, vagina: definition 2 a moist canal in female mammals]. Western propagandists make their money from pandering to vaginas.

Flavorful tang…I am going full bore boner!  My penis is suddenly a weapon of thought! An underwear-agent in a propaganda war!! Tang, is like ‘poontang’; and then,  by a stretch, the coochie is tangy??  I am dick-dog rape crazy, according to the feminist literature.  I gotta run out, and rape all of the holes in Coochie right now! Holes, plural, IN coochie?

 Poontang and coochie  are words that likely have Chinese or Korean origins, as their form mirrors Korean and Vietnamese language structures. But the popularity and use of these words directly mirrors American imperialism in Asia. Cu Chi, a city in Viet Nam, is most likely where we get the word coochie. Ouch–look out for the booby traps, and holes full of bamboo spikes…but I digress.

No wonder all the boys, and radical feminists, are lost on Asian porn..

I apparently can’t help myself, according to the rhetoric of the current crop of feminist propagandists. I am a natural born rapist. Engendered male, porn is only one of ‘my tools’  for oppressing ‘all’ women, and especially gender feminist, lesbian academics–both male and female– who feed off of them. These people actually, physically,  wage war on me with the rhetoric of ‘men and porn’, by making me a sexual suspect in their rhetoric, and then, an actual suspect under the law.

Then, they invest in Hillary Clinton’s war chest, so she can save America from the Libyans. Either way, it wasn’t, and it won’t be anytime soon, me raping women overseas, for male or female warlords, or anywhere else to feed American women’s children with a soldiers pay.

But full-bore boner-words, phrases, ideas, and pictures that make me horny–even if no one is around!? I might make my own money off of that–and I will fight to be able to use words, images, pictures and text to understand my world.

Me–all by myself, drowning in the Onanist impulses of symbols and language, I can conjur fantasies of sex–without those ‘real’ women like Kate and Dre!  I really don’t need pictures–they are just nice accessories to remind me exactly why I prefer my own company over the company of weirdo’s who want to interpret what I feel for me, and extrapolate what it ‘could’ mean–or try to  tell me what ‘my’ mind is thinking, before they sweep out their own heads.

Nurse Ratched: Aren’t you ashamed?
Billy: No, I’m not.
[Applause from friends]
Nurse Ratched: You know Billy, what worries me is how your mother is going to take this.
Billy: Um, um, well, y-y-y-you d-d-d-don’t have to t-t-t-tell her, Miss Ratched.
Nurse Ratched: I don’t have to tell her? Your mother and I are old friends. You know that.
Billy: P-p-p-please d-d-don’t tell my m-m-m-mother.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073486/quotes

Shame on me. More shame on me….guilt, guilt, guilded male–and then more shame on me. They did all the thinking for me, and porn is killing, and oppressing everybody, most of all, women, children,  and vaginas. Shit–what do I do now to assauge my guilt?? Do I combat the capitalists who drop depleted uranium on children? Do I just vote for Hillary in the next election, because Dick Cheney supports her?

No! I should run out and save a vagina today! Blame it on da pornz! War is all about oppressin’ da wiminz.

Dear Woman: Here’s some free or low cost sperm–hell, you can have my nuts–but please raise a cop or a soldier who will protect the vaginas, and your vagina! Here’s a pedestal–keep your vagina up there! I will even cross the street if it helps you to trust me again, and makes you feel less scared of my weiner!

There’s some stainkin’ thankin’…

Think for yourself, and everything turns out o.k. I promise; but let them inside your sexuality? Let them define you? They will wage war.  You become the deviant in their construct–because you let them inside!

And they will tell you more about themselves in one sentence about their own construct of a purely hypothetical construction of ‘you’ than you could ever learn about them by torturing them to death in a snuff porn film. Just don’t tell them that even idiots know the CIA is the only American talent agency that actually makes snuff porn.[Nick Berg: poor dead guy; and here, too.]

What is striking in every way is how narrowly focused the gatekeepers of knowlege are in attempting to limit my full-bore brain-boner: academics, militarists, feminists,  and anti-feminists have been  limiting the discussion to thoughts about ‘womens bodies’ for centuries, instead of the vagizillions of other forms of pornography that don’t seem to ruffle their feathers.

My first full-bore boy-boner was the dictionary.

We should regulate the sale of dictionaries to children–because if even words can make us horny, what is next?  ‘It’s for the children‘, they always say–then they shut them up early, and keep the kids illiterate.  Besides, they rage, one of them damned Webster’s dictionary people supported the Fugitive Slave Act a hundred and fifty years ago!(1)

What next?? The children?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So, in the feminist paradigms, language is the true oppressor. It’s high time to outlaw dictionaries. And apparently, boners kill women and children, and are big enough to intrude on civil rights.Never mind the inherent contradiction when they tell you men have tiny dicks…

How easy it is  to obliterate, or ‘snuff’  from the definition of pornography the portion of the definition that talks about “creative,” and focus instead on “stimulation of sexual desire,” and in so doing, to create the appearance that everything, and every image with a woman is potentially pornographic, and thus, every image without a woman is somehow NOT pornographic, or that images that lack women are nearly snuff porn.

So what ARE those type of images, devoid of patriarchy? Oh, yeah–empty headed Fabio…or Pat Califia’s dick…

What is commonly called "girl porn",--romance novels-- aren't even close to the 'meat' of the issue of women's actual objectification of men.

What is commonly called "girl porn",--romance novels-- aren't even close to the 'meat' of the issue of women's actual objectification of men..

Just try to imagine, an image without women. Next thing you know, imagination is imagery, according to them, time to clean your mind of it’s filth–your mind, I remind you, not their projections.

These folks are counter-productive in the least, snuffing themselves out like that. Counter-productively snuffing me, too, with their preemptive, eternal rhetoric of objectification.

It leaves  the nasal impression–the stench– that images of men ‘with’ women have a lurking and deviant sexual intent; images of women with women is ‘slavery’ performed before patriarchy–despite kyriarchal advancement; images of BDSM,or leather boys and girls  in Hitler gear, schtupping each other; ‘ one  is re-enacting ones own subjugation,’  but mostly, the actual stench is the carcases of dead heterosexual men, and ‘othered’ men and women not worthy of eroticism, mere bodies, filthy, and pornographic in or of ourselves, tossed into a dumpster, or a heap of fire in yet another war zone that was created to feed hungry western capitalists, both male and female.

Men have been denied the truly erotic–they tell us that images of women and ‘others’ are objectifying and pornographic, and images of men are not. You don’t have to be gay to figure out that cuntnundrum*

But simple analysis of any and all images tell’s us with certainty–that you must ask yourself, or ask the image,  not those who tell you that the moon is made of Swiss cheese, and poke holes in you for impact. Images provoke thought, and thought can produce desire. Words do that too–ALL WORDS. Humans have evolved to communicate with each other.

Hence, communication in any form is the essence of the erotic; the seeds of desire, regardless of the method of transmittal.

But what IS that desire?  Is it exclusively physical and sexual, a thought that leads only to action related to that thought, as they try to force us to believe? Each and every word, image or filmic representation spoken or shared one person to another is a symbol, a communication of some form of desire, a piece of the bigger desire. Yet a desire to talk about the meaning of words does not equate with any action other than to talk to someone about desire, or it’s opposite.

Add images and films? They are just word enhancers.

And words that we say only to ourselves about actions, or non-actions are certainly meaningful as well; if not the singular most important thing, they are the second. Our inter-persona, intra-psychic communication doesn’t necessarily equate with a desire for actual ‘sex,’ at all, any more than a desire for ‘communication’ of our ideas, some of which are about sex, but some of which are about other things too.

Does looking at the expensive dress in the window equate with buying the dress? Sure–for the rich, the hedonistic, the bored, the selfish, or the foolish. Those who are bought, buy as well. But what if you can’t be bought?

So, if anything IS or can be pornographic, it isn’t the ‘creative’ portion of the definition. We are all producers of creative impulses, and many enjoy the intellectual processes caused by viewing  porn . But definitions of porn are in fact the relational, superimposed and interpretatational, relative, objectification of intentions  by others with whom we interact, and communication which takes place, or could take place from those objectifiers have the explicit intention of preemptively circumventing your personal interpretation of your own intentions.

It is not a concrete, monolithic absolute that porn hurts viewers at all, or even most actors involved.

Porn is fantasy communication, like thoughts one could have for a conversation with Gandhi, Dworkin, or Freud. Porn creates a psychic space that is an intellectually, or emotionally safe distance from which to have a fantasy dialogue with others–and with yourself. THAT is where you stand the largest chance to begin fulfilling the ‘desire’ that images can create–in defining for yourself what you are perceiving, and then communicating that desire–in words to others, if it all works out.

And viewing idealized body images increases personal satisfaction for some people.It’s no stretch to imagine similar things about naked bodies and sex.

Adding the gross misrepresentations and anecdotes of abuses that have taken place in some forms of sex pornography is akin to adding hot-pepper to your morning oatmeal, and telling you that’s what oatmeal is.

Viewing images of dogs can invoke feelings of affection, security, comfort, and a thus, a whole host of other feelings potentially related to sexual expression that could take place in a home  (and which I suspect can also stir up the oxytocin releasing, orgasm producing mechanism in the brain). Emotions are, at their base in the lymbic system,  related to those that produce sexual feelings; images of families, or images of children ( see dogs and families), are no stretch if one wished to conflate images and political agendas.

If we accept the paradigm that viewing pornography does NOT equate with having actual sex any more or less than images of dogs equate with family, home or security, we cannot say that images and video’s of nude people are pornographic any more than the word ‘vapid,’ snapshots of Fido, or militaristic  propaganda pictures of flags waving.

Those who are in porn enter the psychic space by our own consent–whether they are ‘victims’ or not is a separate issue entirely.

Yet if we accept the feminist and militarist, and by rote and association, the judicial definitions of pornography as a tool facilitating ‘rape, power, or sexual violence, that enslaves, or steals from women and children’ ( a common pro-war feminist trope*),  we must also then say also that sexualy stimulating pornography for them are the body counts in the news, the stories of conquest of ‘othered’ men, images of ‘othered’ men cleaning up dead male bodies,  images of men at Abu Ghraib, or images of dead babies who have been exposed to uranium, because these images stir up feelings of ‘power,’  whose only relation is to ‘desire’.

Patriarchy and modern feminism are inseparable mates in the creation of pornography.

Images of power relationships cause arousal, according to the definition, and MacKinnon- Dworkin, and all other sex negative feminists. So, the  images of disemboweled, oppressed, enslaved, or dead men, women and babies, whether written or photographed or filmed, are not merely ‘vacant’ images [vacant, ala Sage: definition 1 , cancel officially; definition 2 ‘leave behind, empty], but also images that cause dialogue;  leads to creative impulses, and hence, as per the puppy= security paradigm, can cause female arousal which can be termed sexual.

The debate has been constrained thusly: it is most always limited to discussing women’s bodies, women’s sexuality or women’s perspectives about sex; it is always spoken from one monolithic feminist to another; and it has in recent years engaged the gay community, and sex positive feminists in other dialogues about other forms and perceptions of sexual stimulation through pornography; it has informed the discussion that there are many perspectives of what is sexually stimulating.

But it is the actual communication that has provably opened the doors to sexual liberation–talking to each other makes us horny.

Yet the dialogue has never sufficiently addressed every day images of men that on the surface are not  prima facie sexually stimulating; by THEIR definition.  Yet images of men, dogs, and families have the wider effect of being ultimately, sexual in their evocation of sexual possibility, sexual power, and their portrayal of the myth of home and family, where masculinity and femininity in union, and in dialogue, ‘create’.

These types of images cause dialogue–and  oxytocin levels to rise in the brain.

The soldier in uniform; the basket ball player in sweats; the  cop beating a peace protester or a mentally ill man to death is especially dear and stimulating to militarists and “radical” feminists who openly call for the exertion of power to cause male death; and images of  men conquering men certainly causes some pornographic dialog window to pop-up for these ‘domestic’ types.

And words which women use to describe men, writing what they have written about men– entire women’s studies departments at any major university that discuss, or employ images of men;  any ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ blog which employs competitive themes,  and any discussion where power is present, is a hotbed of pornographic representations of masculinity. The spaces wherein definitions of pornography or men are debated, are urgent, hormonally charged, verbose environments full of pornographic illustrations–and thus, are also pornographic by definition.

Which is why I am NOT a feminist–nor an anti-feminist, or a militarist: because according to the truth of MacKinnon and Dworkin, “exploitation and subordination based on sex which differentially harms women, “ is what porn is.

That might be true indeed, if I were a woman.  Differentially only means different. And if I could choose, and not let them continue to choose for me, or pursue me against my will? I choose NOT to have my body photographed at Abu Ghraib; photographed while being water-boarded,  have a mugshot taken, or be photographed dead.

Differential? Of course, by definition, nude representations can be sexist–differential only means different. That certain forms of pornography consume the dialectic? Preferential in the dialogue? Definitely. Men are over-represented in most imaginings of male–represented in a pornographic manner–dead, and truly voiceless–we expect that of men.

We expect that by their definition of men, and patriarchy, without ever discussing women who are pro-war in the dialectic and in their votes, whether feminist or not is subsidiary to the fact that they conceive men for war.

But I might add, theirs is a literally vapid, vacant definition, too, because male voices are missing in that discussion–prohibited from openly declaring any ideas thatrelate to themselves as exploited persons; voices missing even in their own bodies, which are conceived as war objects, while female voices, their panderers,  and their patrons just bitch about camera angles and perspectives.

It leaves ME feeling used, and counting days till I pass on into the next life–if there is one.And there isn’t.

[ cue the oompa-doom-papa porn music]

Given the choice, I would give those murderous fuckers–those voyeuristic, predatory  bitches and bastards–all the boner shots they want of me reading my dictionary–into eternity, if photos, and pornographic representations in words can live that long.

And get ready–where are those sun-glasses? But here’s the cum-shot: You can all go fuck yourselves for awhile (but in a sex positive way, of course), until you figure out if you are able to know what porn even is: as the Felix Frankfurter once said in  Butler v. State of Michigan about obscenity, and which applies to current feminist ideation in this area”you burn down the house to roast the pig.”

Or the sows who capitalize on your ignorance–your silence– in this dialogue.That perverse, feminist, domestic-war-mongering has been conflated for decades with naked, living people and pornography, and today seeks ownership of the industry–not moral high ground, but pure profit potential.

And limiting the definition of pornographic representation to women’s bodies? Now that’s obscene, even by the early definitions of pornography.

But you aren’t. I am not.

War is.

Yet no one really see’s it, ever, much less ‘get’s that’, because of all that pussy in your face. And now, I am not talking about the raging Coochie, or the Poon Tang,  either. I am talking about you. Walking talking porn of one sex or another, even if you never lifted the cover of Playboy magazine–a magazine that CIA feminist, and publisher Gloria Steinem is attempting to own and control right now.

Now go cast some stupid vote for Them or theM, a vote that kills, maims, or chemically alters the DNA of some actual babies, and  ‘othered’ men– their fathers no matter which side you are on.

But stop worrying about internet porn. It will outlive you. Your son, if you have one,  may not.

*trope: language used in a figurative or non literal sense. In this case, a myth of culture that is espoused by militarists, feminists, and so forth, which is encouraged and enhanced by the presumption that only women and children comprise a ‘literal’ family, sans males or fathers.

*cuntnundrum: the illogical logic that is employed in feminist rhetoric. Like Christian rhetoric that says “first their was G-d,then everything eklse, so, everything =G-d,”  radical feminists posit “patriarchy, thus it’s all mens’ faults.’

1) Peoples History of the United States, Zinn, Howard. pg.177 (1995 edition, chap 9, ‘Without Submission’ )

Schizophrenic, homeless California man, Kelly Thomas cries for his father as six Fullerton, CA police officers beat, and Taser him to death. Thomas’ father is a retired cop.

Question: what state of mind, what social conscience–what social constructs— leads to a mindset that men should be beaten to death? See if you can spot the fascists in, or outside of the video.

Fascism begins with fear, then the ‘othering’ of races, classes, or nationalities, and displays itself as any form of ‘us versus them’ mentality. Men’s bodies are generally less than valuable, unless they can be used by the fascist society for work, or war; commodities that can also be loaned out or traded.

Male bodies are tools, objects, and entities’ that are a threat to police and the upholders of police state violence.

News footage and eyewitness account.

Does your version of humanism, or  feminism talk about men as tools, or objects? You might want to rethink that answer…or are you one of those “better HIM than ME” types?

Each time yet another man is killed or tortured, or beaten by police or state power, it is snuff porn, sung to the  American national anthem.

Kelly Thomas, beaten to death by police officers.

This content is password protected. To view it please enter your password below: