Posts Tagged ‘Sexual objectification’

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

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.

Do you hate getting beat up, raped, or otherwise physically assaulted as much as I do? (warning: the first link is NOT work or children friendly) If your answer is no–and you are a rape and bondage fetishist, or just curious go here.

But if you are tired of being afraid, try some Krav Maga–you can use more of what you learn with real actual self-defense in ten lessons of Krav Maga than you will EVER need to learn in ten years of Gong Fu, Tai Qi, or karate. Don’t believe me? Watch this video below.

There are defenses against hair pulling, bear hugs, chokes, and even being picked up off of the ground! Here is one example of a defense against a common assault: from behind, while loading groceries!

Did that look hard? It’s not! But the blogosphere is constantly buzzing with fearful dialogues about real, and often, imaginary rape, and women rally around rape anxiety, but how often do you spend the time to learn about self defense?

The best defense against rape is learning how to NOT get raped–how NOT to be a victim. Krav Maga can teach you more about actual self defense in ten lessons than any other martial art, and the last incredible Krav Maga instructor I met was a middle aged white woman.

Most of Krav Maga is based on techniques of actual street fighting–not theoretical martial wisdom, or ‘spiritual’ based disciplines. It is also one of the most adapted and adaptable forms of martial arts I have ever participated in.

And I bet you can do most of those moves you saw up there, too, but you just need to practice the more developed stuff with a trained instructor.

Well, if you live in the Minneapolis Saint Paul area, you will have a chance to do just that. Internationally renowned Krav Maga trainer Tamir Gilad , a Global Instructor for the International Krav Maga Federation, trainer to Israeli police and soldiers, women and children, is coming to Minneapolis on October 25th, but you have to register in advance, because his classes are popular.

Here below, Gilad talks about how he trains you–and the police that you call when you are in trouble as well.

The event is from 6 to 9 p.m., October 25th at Conga Nightclub in Nordeast Minneapolis!

For details call Gail at 612-558-2284, and tell her pornalysis sent you, or go to http://kravmagampls.com or send an e-mail to info@kravmagampls.com

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

One Million Moms, an organization affiliated with the American Family Association, announced a boycott of Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream over a new flavor called “Schweddy Balls.” The group said Friday on its website:

“The vulgar new flavor has turned something as innocent as ice cream into something repulsive. Not exactly what you want a child asking for at the supermarket.” read more about offensive Schweddy balls here.

Original Schwetty balls skit on Saturday Night Live.


Apparently, mom’s everywhere are united in their stance against rum-flavored ice cream, and sex-negative feminists and conservative mothers remain united against testicles as well. They are protecting their children from Schweddy Balls ice cream because the name “Schweddy Balls,” makes boys and girls giggle.

“Heeheeheehee,” said one fifth grader interviewed for this article, when asked “what are you laughing at?”

“Nothing….heeheeheehee…and I can’t tell you anyways in front of her,” he said, pointing to a clench-fisted, dowager-faced, plump, red-headed girl across the sandbox.

“She will make fun of me and beat me up,” he said, turning red between chuckles.

In their statement One Million Moms ask that current and future supplies of Schweddy Balls be cut off:

TAKE ACTION

Please send Ben & Jerry’s Public Relations Manager, Sean Greenwood, an email letter requesting that no additional Schweddy Balls ice cream be distributed. Also, highly recommend they refrain from producing another batch with this name or any other offensive names or you will no longer be able to purchase their products.”

They are calling for a boycott of the “Playboy Club” television show as well, united in their stance against adorable widdle kewt bunnies everywhere, and joining in the modern war on words and language with Gloria Steinem, who is currently seeking ownership of the Playboy franchise

I can’t wait to see how this turns out–because we all know American Moms can’t resist Ben and Jerry’s ice cream.

Just imagine if we could get all of that female energy focused on topics that really matter…but who ever said any or all of the feminisisms cared about what really matters? There’s just so much false activism out there, and so many kinds of free market feminisms to choose from these days. Plus, real activism is scary compared to arguing over ice cream cones.

Ben and Jerry’s Promo here

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

Saddam shortly after capture by American force...

Saddam speaks from his grave " they came to cover up the CIA paper trail. Control the body, control the narrative. But some bodies--bodies of damning evidence of US war crimes--must be disposed of quickly..."

UPDATE: The United Nations and Libyan Rebels summarily executed Muammar Gaddafi October 20th, 2011, after he was in their custody. He was the longest serving U.S. and Europeasn “partner-dictator” in history, ruling Libya and it’s oil fields for 42 years. END.

Discovered Files Show U.S., Britain Had Extensive Ties with Gaddafi Regime on Rendition, Torture.

Human Rights Watch has uncovered hundreds of letters in the Libyan foreign ministry proving the Gaddafi government directly aided the extraordinary rendition program carried out by the CIA and the MI6 in Britain after the 9/11 attacks. The documents expose how the CIA rendered suspects to Libyan authorities knowing they would be tortured.” More here…

Dictator good if dictator help CIA torture ‘bad men’. Dictator bad if dictator threatens to tell. Good men torture, bad men tell. Got it.I am a feminist now–I understand the pardaigms of power over the human body.

So naturally, we bomb his country, and cover-up all evidence of United States war crimes that were perpetrated there, and talk about how evil patriarchy did it all. Have you noticed how every dictator that collaborates with the CIA  and America’s dirty war crimes, ends up dead after we invade his country?Control the body, control the narrative.

To the victors go the hidden war crimes.

Men might just need some cultural, or erotic capital to combat being turned into the war pornography that the powerful jerk off to, and swap over the Langley servers.  But one thing for sure: war kills mangles and tortures male bodies.

Gnu-feminism 101: Down with Patriarchy! Up with CIA exploitation of the third world! [following Gloria Steinem and Henry Kissingers model of feminism]

Or, like this ass fungus internet troll Raging Bee says about American foreign policy of installing and assassinating dictators “It’s way more complex.”

Yeah–torture, and violations of International treaties, and international law are complex and exceptional when YOU, or your country do it, but a simple matter of rendering “justice” when the other guys do it.

That is so reminiscent of Saddam being hanged–so Hitler hunkered in a bunker…killed himself? Um, right. I get it now. Collaborators must be shot…!

And I am no longer buying in to the paradigm of this mis-use of state power.

No, Hitler’s not dead : he is alive and well in America–I hear he became a DNA sample and donated himself  to the CIA; or he’s been cloned as Dick Cheney’s stoney heart…or is he actually Henry Kissinger...or Hillary Clinton?!

War crimes trials? That’s for the little guys who mess with the big diamond brokers to deal with, not U.S.

And Holocausts? Who cares about those, as long as they happen to othered people, a few thousand here, a few hundred thousand there?

Those tricky murderous spooks always keep us guessing! But one thing is certain: United States Foreign policy has taken on a distinct flavor of illegal and unconscionable covert activity that destroys evidence of war crimes, and is against the law.

And that hurts every body.

[Christopher Hitchens‘ trial of Henry Kissinger here.]

Female judge busted for taking pee pics in men’s restroom!

Women and women’s Sexual Voyeurism are coming out of the closet–and bathroom stalls. Female judge busted for taking pee-pictures in men’s restroom!

Long after lesbians and other female sexual ‘deviants*,’ like sex positive feminists have revealed themselves as normal people who are biologically homosexual, or just intellectually kinky, it is no longer a surprise or an anomaly, but just a fact of life–hey, guess what? Women vary in their sex drives and fantasies like racing Matchbox cars, and their kinks are all over the Kinsey scale!

Now STFU!!

Or not: real equality of the sexes demands that we explore womens actual sexual deviance and ‘perversity’–by the same standards that men have been judged, and imprisoned, by for centuries.[Marquis de Sade, etc]

[If feminism has anywhere to go after the charade of ‘elevatorgate’ it is in examining women as human beings, with both human functions, and dysfunctions.]

Florida Traffic court Judge Rhonda Hollander, 47, was arrested for trying to take pictures of a man using the urinal at here courthouse.

Part of the profile of women’s deviance is that they are at least as capable as men of most of the sex acts and ‘sexually deviant behaviors’ defined by the DSM-4. But we don’t actually or ‘actively’profile, investigate, suspect, or prosecute women as such, and so we have the occasional woman getting caught by random chance doing what human beings often do: spying on others sexual and quasi sexual practices.

Female voyeurism is perhaps as old as time, and all of the stereotypes apply,yet there is a biological twist involved: women, long idealized as ‘nurturers’ and ‘concerned, maternal protectors’ are revealed at times in the modern society as mere voyeurs.

Why? Is it because a womans ‘drive’ to ‘nurture’ has long included the role of examining sexual organs for medical necessity? Is it because women have for so long been cast in the role of mothers that they cannot help themselves but desire exposure to genital functions? Is it the lack of intimacy, and a whole range of other dysfunction that makes women thus?

Or is it an innate drive or sense of ‘allo-licking’ behaviors that all female mammals share, that drives them to bathroom stalls, and their childrens bath-tubs[…] to examine genitalia and nude humans, with human body functions?

We may never know, but one thing IS certain: women’s sexual ‘deviance’ is once again being examined, and the questions above are just a starting point.

The currentr tendency is to ascribe deviant sexual behavior to male bodies–sexual deviance is constructed as the exclusive territor of men and boys, because for all of history, women’s sexuality has been repressed, or suppressed by social forces, according to the literature.

Whereas the societal expectation and indeed, encouragement of men’s sexuality has been profiled, criminalized, and penalized, women’s sexuality has been mythologized, idealized, and stereotyped into behaviors that exclude ‘perversity’. And as of this writing, most women, and especially feminists, derive direct benefits from, appreciate, and endorse that reasoning, despite claims toward equality.

In fact, it would be accurate to say that feminists as a whole not only exclude women’s actual criminal deviance as a topic of discussion, but work actively against engaging in the topic in public forums, and social discourse.

However, the future is not so bleak: many women in the social services have taken notice, and do stand up against female sexual deviance in its true, egalitarian manifestations, like rising rates of incarceration for female child sex abusers.

Here are some links to truly sex-positive feminists and resources that examine women’s sexual deviance:

http://feministing.com/2011/04/09/clpp-2011-sex-positive-feminism-101/

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2011/05/09/towards-my-personal-sex-positive-feminist-101/

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Sex-Positive+Feminism-a01073863023

*deviants: defined by prevailing social and psychiatric models, deviance is roughly, anyone and any behavior that is outside of ‘normal’ constructs; defined by standards that ‘we all agree’ upon, sans political affiliation, gender, sex, race, etc.

Cover of "I AND THOU (Scribner Classic)"

Cover of I AND THOU (Scribner Classic)

Ich-Du: I and it; I and Thou by Austrian philosopher Martin  “Mordechai” Buber, is a book about object relations. I think he was talking about objectification more profoundly than Freud, and more clearly and intuitively than any feminist, ever, with the possible exception of Julia Kristeva–who also ‘get’s it,” when she manages to extricate herself from the word mangler.

The major theme of Buber is that humans find meaning in relationships. As a religious person, he felt that all relations could be understood from an object, subject perspective, “I’ and “It”, whatever that it may be to the one defining or discerning the relation,  and that the final unknowable, infinitely incomprehensible relationship was one with G-d, or “I” and “Thou.”

His G-d was a patriarchal G-d, one that could easily be understood by anyone; his paradigm a simple paradigm: I understand what I can understand, and once named or understood, the I becomes an it. In I to thou, however, thou can never be understood fully, and thus never fully objectified.

The last several decades have us wondering about the ‘objectification of women’ due in large part to feminist theory. My personal illusion of their ‘objectives’ was once that I envisioned feminists as human rights advocates, and companions in a struggle for equality, rather than as cold blooded murderers, collaborators with International banksters, and imprisoners of male bodies.

I was wrong, but not their fault–my own, for I trusted their cause, blindly.

Like it or not, want it or not, we have all been ‘subjected’ to the feminist ‘object’ paradigm by women who “object” to what they see as a patriarchal society. Yet their objection is/was notably silent about kyriarchal relations, and the paradigm I was presented of patriarchy is inherently–deceptively flawed.

Or, in simple terms, by co-opting, and ‘naming’ patriarchs and patriarchal concepts, feminism renders patriarchy as an “it” rather than as a “thou”, while rendering the world in reverse.

In simpler terms, objectifying men.

And in this generation, the kyriarchs were marching on your perceptions before you even knew what hit your father–your patriarchal Saint Not-Present-Enough (so they tell you-ever-wonder-why?), dearest Dad. They were all sleeping with your mother while he was away. But  patriarchs like Martin Buber, und Sigmund had been busy not long before– busy defining object relations, rather than being merely subjected to them.

And if feminism got one thing right about waging brutality, it was in that co-option of the power of naming, and in thus ‘taming’ of what they felt ‘objectified them’ and rendered them as “it’s” instead of “thou’s”. And it gave them the basis to wage war as women. And no century, ever, has seen more war or death than the last one.

So, no matter how smarmy, mid-to-late-month funky, or how finally fragrant or chastened that paradigm is to you, it is a paradigm that you have been face to face with, whether you know it, wanted it, or not. Think “Oprah Winfrey,” and discussions about the privilege of excess fatness; or the View, and the letter V, on “V-Day”. They are the matriarchy TO the patriarchy, the other half of war and death–that other V-Day.

Men as subjects to objectified women; subjective reality versus objective reality. Objectified realities, subjecting subjects to objectification. Subjectively, I object…

Shit–even I am confused. Maybe I, too, schlepped[sic] with my mother too long??

It’s in your face one way or another, and not because you asked for it. It’s there because you have been subjected to it, beyond your powers to just “turn it off,” because it’s everywhere.

It is an object lesson gone wild.

Having the big V in your face is not necessarily a bad thing, if that’s what you go in for, and Oprah–even with her billions–is kind of-?- vagiriffic- except the part where she and they all conveniently left out any mention of kyriarchy, and consent–yours; for your child’s future or present. And all that before you even know what hit you.

Now there’s a paradigm that has some teeth–and not just the kind of tooth that craves fresh chomped testicle, either, because after all, they are using your kids in wars all over the world ( I don’t have stats, or facts and figures about Oprah’s money–if anyone has that I would kiss your belly button for them).

Kyriarchy suggests that all people have relative power–some women have more power than some men; some men with massive cash have less power than women with big…big…umm, ideas, for instance.

Throw out patriarchy! Throw out oppression! Throw out…morality( a construction of patriarchy…)?!

Big ideas like waging illegal war in Libya under the foreign policy of single mother raised Barak Obama, and his foreign policy wonk, Hillary Clinton–after all, the patriarchs do it too! Never mind higher ground, or silly morals. Kyriarchy demands that we get to the top of the pyramid, using whatever tools are required to get there–power is not centered at the top.

Jennifer Lopez, and her war against sperm donor Mark Anthony, for instance, is an object lesson in kyriarchy, as the two are divorcing.  Who couldn’t have predicted that preying mantis to mantis outcome? After all, any man worth his beans wouldn’t have knocked her up except for the money–she’s worth twice as much as he is, and her sexuality is inherently more marketable.

The paradigm of patriarchy does notapply, as she likely has more power in one phone call to her sugar daddy than Anthony could ever have in a Mexican disco.

A crippled person from any American suburb on television talking about the disabled has more power than a legless boy on a push scooter who sells Chicles’ in Juarez, Mexico,or Oaxaca for example.

A woman–a white housewife in the suburbs of America has more security than say a little Latino boy whose sole caregiver is a crack-head mom.

In kyriarchy, power is flexible and situational.

Some illicit channels of communication have more direct access or control over power than other, traditional, accepted forms of communication; think Gloria Steinem licking Henry Kissinger‘s balls in her posh town-home in New York, as she prepares for another CIA-feminism funded blitzkrieg of the airwaves to convince all the young girls that she is some sort of Che Guevara, rather than a CIA operative who has lived a posh life-with Henry Kissinger as a consort.

Matriarchy in bed with patriarchy is not feminism.It is kyriarchy.

Think male drug crime convict, or prisoner has less power to speak out than any white female at a drug addicts shelter who he once ‘dated’, or anyt creature with a vagina having more credibility in a court-room in a domestic violence hearing.

She, and object of pity, and achieved victim status–an addict, an understandable “it.” But the prisonewho once dated her? A double and unspeakable “it.” Worse than an it–in fact, an “other than it.” because ‘we don’t know what he is capable of’. And certainly not a thou.

I personally give the credit to Martin Buber in this dialogue, because he was the first who ever explained to me the importance of object relations.

And I think feminists have selfishly inserted their object reality into the reality of others. They are like big dicks, raping dialogues.

“I and Thou,” he told me.* You’re an “it” they told me.

I–conceivable self-object–product of the nearly inconceivable, but approachable all powerful subject. That, pendant only upon my disbelief, or the needle in my own hand at the ballocks.

But here below are some notes attempting to point out the shifting sands of the heirarchy of kyriarchy, messed up even by Mazlows standards of order, and certainly in the feminist paradigm, it seems they missed a few details, or just skipped to the front of the line when it comes to the rank order of objects.
1)non-objects, yet to be realized.
2)manifestation of object, percieved through abject  (as per Kristeva for instance) into recognition of physical object
3)gendered/classed/racialized/sexualized object
sex object: does ex come before the staus of sex? or for that metter, the violence inherent in sex? Violence, a pendulum from genetic material/entrapment of men to rape of women?
4)status object: status can be from multiple sources, and symbolized in multiple ways
5)ritual object: objects given meaning or ascribed meaning by the hoi polloi, those objects sacred, sometimes above indivdual objects or individual relations.
6) violence object: male bodies and tools used against life
music/art/object; status symbols or internal devices mad external? Or, are these objects
7) object object [first? reverse the order?]

8)?????

=====================================================

FROM WIKIPEDIA:
Buber’s main proposition is that we may address existence in two ways:
that of the “I” towards an “It”
, towards an object that is separate in itself, which we either use or experience;
and that of the “I” towards “Thou”, in which we move into existence in a relationship without bounds.

From 1910 to 1914, Buber studied myths and published editions of mythic texts. In 1916 he moved from Berlin to Heppenheim. During World War I he helped establish the Jewish National Commission in order to improve the condition of Eastern European Jews. During that period he became the editor of Der Jude (German for “The Jew“), a Jewish monthly (until 1924). In 1921 Buber began his close relationship with Franz Rosenzweig. In 1922 Buber and Rosenzweig co-operated in Rosenzweig’s House of Jewish Learning, known in Germany as Lehrhaus.[6]

In 1923 Buber wrote his famous essay on existence, Ich und Du (later translated into English as I and Thou). Though he edited the work later in his life, he refused to make substantial changes. In 1925 he began, in conjunction with Franz Rosenzweig, translating the Hebrew Bible into German. He himself called this translation Verdeutschung (“Germanification”), since it does not always use literary German language but attempts to find new dynamic (often newly invented) equivalent phrasing in order to respect the multivalent Hebrew original. Between 1926 and 1930 Buber co-edited the quarterly Die Kreatur (“The Creature”).[7]

Beyond dildo‘s and rubber duckies: women fucking themselves–with sex robots!

Considering the level of rhetorical and  verbal violence that feminists direct at men, it is always tempting to be as crass and cruel as they are. But I won’t stoop to that–I will go one better: some women are so self involved that they want to fuck themselves, literally.

Woman has sex doll made in her own image: “I was thinking of her as this object upon which to act.” Oh, do tell me what you really think of yourself…

I love it. Now if she could only get a personalized dick made in her size, too. But we know how equity feminism has let women down in that battle! Equity Feminism gave the white middle class entire ‘other’ classes of men to have sex with–and they’re still not happy…

Blue silicone dildo

I don't care if a person is white, black, brown, red,, blue or green...they're still people...!!

The world really is hard for the middle class white American female, isn’t it?