Donnadogsoth

More microsubmissions, often exploitative: Accepting a seat on a bus from a man (accepting a display of gentlemanly courtesy) Accepting dinner from a man Receiving alimony from a man Accepting a door held open by a man Taking advantage of ladies' nights Playing with children unselfconsciously Accepting gifts for being women, from men Accepting male protection Accepting a women-only scholarship Staying at home to raise children Opting out of parenthood after the fact Gaining custody of children Partaking of women-only spaces Perceiving women-only tv programs Blaming inappropriate behaviour on hormones Accusing men of having privileges without allowing a retort Evading the label “creepy” for being attracted to a man who doesn't reciprocate Not complaining of negative male representation on tv Being selected to fill a quota Not complaining of disproportionate male homelessness Not complaining of disproportionate male soldier casualties Not complaining of disproportionate male presence in dangerous/dirty jobs Not complaining most suicides are men Accepting lowered standards to become firefighters, soldiers, police, etc. Entering a lifeboat in lieu of a man Accepting an assumption of innocence in a sexual assault allegation Accepting any assertion that women cannot rape men Accepting no responsibility for intoxicated sex Engaging proxy violence Not questioning the lack of shelters for battered men Not defying male attempts to protect women Accepting less jail time than a man for the same crime Helping a man Agreeing with a man Hugging herself Looking behind herself Flicking her hair Allowing a man to give her an injection, draw blood, stitch a wound, etc. Lighting a man's cigarette Asking for a man to light her cigarette Asking for directions Fishing for compliments Having a male teacher Having a male boss Triggering / being shocked Standing on a chair to elude a mouse (much credit: Sargon of Akkad)

What are female microsubmissions? They're ambiguous displays of female sexuality and female traits designed to tease or confuse heterosexual men. In so doing they make being a hetero man easier in terms of navigating the sexual waters, because they are defining women as distinct from men and thus making it easier to locate the universals. Things like, Cleavage Revealing clothing Skintight or form fitting clothing High heels Hose Accessorising Exotic fabrics Jewellery Feminist insignia and slogans Coiffed hair Long hair Brightly coloured hair Body piercings Dresses and skirts Corsets Visible brassieres/panties Bare chestedness (nipple tape optional) Dressed solely in lingerie Disrobed entirely Minor cross-dressing (combat boots, masculine hat, etc.) Veils Niqabs Hijabs Burkas Tattoos (feminine versions) Makeup Depilation Polished / long fingernails Maintaining a figure Allowing a man to complete a sentence Transforming appearance

Do I believe this is the cusp of the new dark age? No, but it's definitely after tea time. This kind of shit will be batted aside by the knowing liberal elite and those with "horse-sense," tv-addicts and other false-positives. If there were going to be another Holocaust, who would it be for? It would be for the people most denigrated by society, that's who. And name a large group of people more denigrated than men. Criminals and political enemies might get thrown in the mix. The original Holocaust was multipurpose, after all. But it would be predominantly for the control and, in a sense, erasure, of men. Women saying this kind of stuff can hide behind Jonathan Swift and say it's all satire, but I don't believe them. Why should I? They're parodying satire, they're getting a nasty swipe in and then saying, "No tap backs, I didn't really mean it!" I think they do mean it, and are modulating their voices to the wavelength needed to snake their message through without setting off feminazi alarm bells. Top Feminist Says Put Men in Concentration Camps "We have to get rid of [gender]. There is no point looking at reforming it. It would be like saying we could reform the Tory party. We just need to abolish and obliterate it." "I hope heterosexuality doesn’t survive, actually. I would like to see a truce on heterosexuality. I would like an amnesty on heterosexuality until we have sorted ourselves out. Because under patriarchy it’s shit." "And I am sick of hearing from individual women that their men are all right. Those men have been shored up by the advantages of patriarchy and they are complacent, they are not stopping other men from being shit." --Julie Bindel Of course no post of this kind would be complete without a link to this seminal work by Adam Kostakis: Gynocentrism Theory http://gynotheory.blogspot.ca/

Such is the difference between a temporal observer and an eternal one.

I agree with you that it seems to take painful crises to rally a population. Right now we are enjoying very sweet fruit so the bitterness of politics is hard to stomach. On the femiblob: Find some way to freeze their money supply and the oligarchy would become inert. In the process they would lash out as violently as possible, so any freezing effort (e.g. BRICS) would have to realise that wars might result. But the principle is sound: They worship Mammon, and Mammon is worshipped through the accumulation of money. Freeze the money and their god becomes false. Granted, money is a substitute or symbol of power, and in the presence of power no money is needed. If one has a gun and the nerves for it one can rob the quickie-mart of anything it has, no money needed. So, in that sense, the oligarch seeks power. It just so happens that the easiest route to absolute power is through the accumulation of money. My suggestion about "leukocyte" is that, while it's a bit difficult to type easily, that fact itself forms a little barrier to admission, to so speak. Anyone who can't be bothered to learn a new word--especially an evocative, apposite one--might not really be down with the program. If it "caught on" I imagine no matter what word it was it would be parodied.

(1) Your objection to prescience is presuming humans have infinitely chaotic natures. I may know my friend is going to castle in Chess as soon as possible, and indeed he does every time, but he still has choice, except that his nature rules him. In a sense, he made his choice regarding his nature earlier on in life and is thus a puppet of himself that I can read and predict the actions of. God views us as similar puppets, our choice to act made in eternity and applied in temporal infinity (i.e. the everyday world). Thus he knows what we will do even though we freely did it. (2) God does not make choices in temporal terms, he makes a single Choice in eternity that echoes throughout our temporal infinity. IE God does not change.

That's a good insight, AccuTron. But we need a name for people who are against the femiblob, similar to how "Crusaders" defined the defenders of Christendom. Another name for the West is "globally extended European civilisation," which is responsible for the degree of international trade, technology (including agricultural and medical technology), democracy, and human rights the world enjoys. "Leukocyte" is no respecter of national origin, it's anyone who opposes what is eating what is good as represented by the West. On the McQueen Blob, they freeze it. It's vulnerable to cold. Not fire, bullets, impact weapons or blades, but just cold. Presuming the femiblob and McQueen's blob are of the same genus (?!), how can we dial down the heat on the femiblob?

No, God knows what we will freely choose. We might think of it in terms of knowing a person's character. You might get to know someone so well you know exactly what they're going to do at a particular juncture. Your knowledge doesn't make their choice any less free. God knows you so well he knows everything you're going to do, even as he doesn't interfere with your choices. Evil would be creating someone who has no choice but to go to hell. Without choice, you're right, God is evil. But since humans do have choice, sending them to hell for their sins is not evil.

No, I'm saying eternal omniscience can know everything about a person's choices whilst still allowing those choices to be free. It's only time-bounded thinking that presumes omniscience and free will are incompatible.

We must distinguish between temporal omniscience and eternal omniscience. Temporal omniscience would negate free will as you describe. Eternal omniscience would not, because it is looking at events "sideways" to time. God created beings capable of free will, discovered what they would do in what situations, and then created those situations. He selected the freely choosing beings he wishes to exist, to exist. Only if the child has no choice of whether to misbehave or not. We can choose not to go to hell.

Men need power for the hunt/war, women need the knowledge their fate is in good hands. Each selects for the other in that regard. E.g. women select for strong men, men select for pretty women, etc..

Men are defined by mechanical advantage, and this is enhanced when they perceive their identity clearly. Women help clarify this identity and thus enhance male power. Females are defined by flowiness, which is enriched by male love. I have not found a woman who gives me power. If I do, I'll love her and likely marry her. My interactions with women have been playful, but not intellectually or psychologically potent. My parents exampled what I would term a lesbian relationship. My father got no power from my mother and my mother got no love from my father, but they pretended to be a "team" anyway.

He knew many would choose hell from the options on offer, yes.

The classic heterosexual exchange is female power for male love. These men are alienated from females (except perhaps in a carnal sense or a I'll-feed-your-cats-while-you're-away sense) and therefore lack the power of the masculine role that females would help define.

Yes.

I found this among Stef's best at simply laughing the crazy away. Female Laziness: The Story of Male Exploitation

This is an intriguing video about the need to clarify what feminism is in order to target efforts to combat it. Fidelbogen also emphasises how any activated non-feminist presence should emphatically state a commitment to non-violence. To Move Against Feminism, we need Target Consensus Also, be sure to check out the colourful abstract map of the structure of the feminist and non-feminist sectors, and the process of feminism's disintegration as a political-cultural potency. The Feminist/Non-Feminist Co-operation Spiral http://postimg.org/image/n28v32tjt/

Definitions: leukocyte, n., anyone who (i) nonviolently opposes the femiblob, (ii) while discussing reality fearlessly, non-hysterically, and honourably, and (iii) recognising that anyone can become a leukocyte, and that everyone should. femiblob, n., the multifarious process of infiltration, critique, subversion, and erasure of Western civilisation, especially of the culture and manifestations associated with whites, heterosexuals, cisgenders, Christians, and men. EDIT: Opposition to the femiblob must be nonviolent in nature.

We can distinguish between the core and the fringe. The core members of these movements are essentially insane and quite likely protected by invincible ignorance--or invincible defiance--of the truth, of the method of reason and evidence, of no contempt before investigation, and the like. the fringe or moderate or hangers-on are not standing up screaming, they're sitting on the fence. I propose a powerful enough understanding of the target will help bring about target consensus and draw off fence-sitters into the counterfeminist-friendly camp. And a name is needed for that camp. "Counterfeminist" is useful, but not broad enough unless we deem feminism the central baddie. I think the femiblob goes further than that which is why I suffix it "blob" and not merely call it feminazism. There are too many other angles of attack by other elements to reduce the situation purely to feminism. Feminism is a huge problem, but it's not the whole problem. Wikkum (WHCCM) is useful shorthand for the feminist target: white, hetero, cisgender, Christian males, but we don't refer to our side as wikkum. Pro-wikkum, maybe, but it's not wikkum itself that is exclusively on the march. Westerners or patriots of the West is too diffuse, even old fashioned. We're defending the orchard, but we are not all orcharders. We defend wikkum, but we are not all wikkums. Our identity consensus is needed before we can successfully achieve target consensus against the femiblob by looking at its intricate internal structural relations. Identity proposal: Occidental doctors, or OD. The femiblob is an illness created by the injection of scores of different psychological and political poisons that creates an anti-wikkum fever. Our mission is to treat the illness, expunge the poisons, and ameliorate the fever. Western civ needs to detox.

Cause and effect are based on Leibniz's principle of sufficient reason. If we accept that principle, that things have to have a sufficient reason to be the way they are and not another way, then cause and effect follows. Why accept the PSR? Because not accepting it is coterminous with madness. Thus the primary reality we have to face here is choice. Do we choose to be mad or do we choose to be sane?

Well, what are we dealing with when we face the femiblob, this alcahestic wonder? Pondering it recently, I've come up with a list of what comprises it. Thus, at least, the femiblob contains the following elements eating away at Western civilisation and the security of the entire world: anti-Christianity, anti-familyism, anti-humanism, anti-industrialism, anti-nationalism, anti-traditionalism, apathy, Buddhism, cisphobia, communism, corporatism, critical theory, ecology, egalitarianism, envy, existentialism, cybernetics, fascism, feminism, gnosticism, hedonism, heterophobia, illiteracy, innumeracy, irrationalism, irredentism, impatience, Islamism, Marxism, mindlessness, misandry, moderatism, multiculturalism, New Age, nihilism, oligarchism, pessimism, philistinism, positivism, psychopathy, reverse colonialism, Satanism, spectacularism, supremacism, synarchism, totalitarianism, unprincipledness, witchcraft, year zero thinking Some of these are not absolute bad things. A measure of ecology or egalitarianism is tolerable and good for example, and critical theory as mere criticism divorced from anti-Western political agenda is likewise. But the essential push all these elements represent are anti-Western and therefore intolerable philosophically. The ultimate hiding in the woodwork is oligarchism, tyranny over the many by the unaccountable few. Oligarchism is what the femiblob's powers bend the will of the world towards obeying, even as the masters hide in amidst the multiplex shards of apparently competing philosophies, tendencies, and doctrines. The people enrobed and directed by the elements are agents of oligarchism, whether wittingly or unwittingly.

Regarding the situation mentioned, I mean it's the feminine taking interest in the accoutrements of the masculine. She's being flowy, she's a little bit melting over the interests and actions and objects of the male. For many men that's part of the appeal of the feminine. Again as noted by others and self sexy girls working in masculine demesnes can be sexier than otherwise, to many men, for the novelty but also the flowiness. "Ooh Ziggy tell me more about amortisation..."

http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5146/117/1600/db060521.gif To find the magic shield, simply replace in the cartoon the White House with "Caligular sex culture" and references to 9/11 with the letters "H-O-M-O-P-H-O-B-I-A".

Not to be too coarse about it, but, strictly speaking, she's handling your accessories with care and interest.

It'll take more than a badly translated and short German article for any revelation of this kind to make a dent in the femiblob narrative.