the r in Refugees Welcome signs + funnies

Look at the facial expression in the Bible quote. That’s an atheist going to Hell for blasphemy.

Spliced with photo of actual ‘refugees’. A picture is worth a thousand words.

Hopefully the Manchester attack, nail-bombing little girls has redpilled these feminists.
Somehow I doubt it. This is the one that started it all.

This one in particular triggers me, the way to kill it is with apathy: So?

So was Jack the Ripper, so was Hitler, so is Trump. Tired of whataboutism.

“they are us, we are them”

true

Meanwhile, actual refugees

Yeah, let’s not save these people waving round the white flag of Christendom.

Are they welcome in YOUR home? Why not?

JK Rowling has yet to take in any ‘refugees’ that someone offered to pay to fly to her homes!

She is irrelevant. Like…

Emma Watson hasn’t spent a night in the Calais camp alone, without security.

Locks are racist! No borders? No walls! Let’s all live in pagodas! 

Now a series of triggering memes and funnies.

It’s been a while. 120 funnies. Some repeats. A few serious.

about as real as her hair

Going by her Coco the Clown makeup, I think they do.

The People do not consent to open borders. The native people.

Everyone into Lord of the Rings.

All harassment is bad but sexual harassment is the worst.
It’s the First World, fucking act like it.
Recently, a German woman was beaten by a ‘migrant’, because she told him not to call her a bitch.

Tesla’s expression, my fucking sides.

He never said that but yes. Fitness is in adaptation.

Just like consciousness. You can’t touch it or test it. It’s unfalsifiable. It’s the scientific concept of spirit.
It isn’t scientific though.

Sexual orientation theory is BS. There’s only behaviour – which hole is your goal?

SJW’s playbook.

The alt-lite treats the J-word as their N.

And strange brown men on the street.

The temporary alliance of SJWs and Muslims is simple: the sexually entitled support the sexually entitled.
Also take down White Man but obviously, SJWs aren’t white or men, typically.

Video: Muslim in Canada defends pedophilia

http://www.facebook.com/AnsweringChristHaters/videos/1210222092433197/

They’re getting so bold, aren’t they?

I think the only sensible reply to this is Deus Vult.

“Silence is consent.”

The feminists say nothing.

This completely contradicts the notion of consent, which is a positive construct that must be actively given, in all law, so I would question the translation of that word. It must mean something else, Islam knows no such thing as consent. There is only its meaning, ‘submission’. Submission is never consensual, it is coerced. Coercion is like blackmail in another signed (non-marital) contract, it vitiates consent, it becomes invalid. One must be free to consent.

Lying about the conjoined medical phenomena of menstruation and puberty is another strike against reason.

This entire sham of a religion is merely an excuse for war. No other religion is warmongering. It is totally incompatible with the West and its culture and people.

What is sexual coercion? (hint: not consensual)

It’s a positive sign when the sluts and manwhores kvetch over this information getting out.

It’s a great way of outing rapists, like the vegan test. Just discuss rape by fraud and out pop the rapists.

Oddly they’ll talk about male rape as a red herring, when men are probably coerced as much as women based on porn myths i.e. men always want it.

These are your rights. Your right to personal sovereignty, physical power over your own body. They don’t want potential victims to know their rights.

Like, there’s nothing wrong with being a consumer, but purchasing stolen goods is still illegal. Fraud is always possible.

http://www.consented.ca/consent/coercion/
“It’s not that they did not say “no,” but that they could not say “no.””
People will happily admit duress is wrong, but make it something physical, than written… suddenly they argue it’s ‘complicated’ – no.

http://www.loveisrespect.org/content/what-sexual-coercion/

Or you could stop blaming the victim and simply bring back seduction law, which prevented some of the lesser-known forms of rape. (Because consent needs to be fully, truthfully informed).

Seduction is a form of abusive manipulation. It’s sick that society uses the term to mean something admirable.

Seduction is illegal under English common law. Simply enforce it.
Most of the American system is based on it too. Sinatra was charged with it.

Consent is religious, not individual

reposting a thing I explained elsewhere

smug

sexual consent does have a standard – the marriage signature, so the feminist permission slip is trying to replace the marital one
and arguably that’s why premarital sex is rape, or at least not actually sex – because there’s no such thing as consensus morality, people think they can make up their own rules
two people can agree to kill and cannibalize one of them, it’s consensual by modern legal standard but it isn’t moral in the spiritual sense
but consent isn’t verbal, it’s always been witnessed like the marriage contract, by the church
so consent to fornication is a nonsense
because consent is granted legitimacy by god via the church ceremony, specifically
you don’t have permission to give away your body, except in marriage

“You do not belong to yourself.” 1 Cor 6:19

consent without religious jurisdiction is given in bad faith, they promise to take one another without taking responsibility, rendering it legally null and void aka rape

another reason church and state cannot be separated
it’s a myth
such a place does not exist
every state has an official religion
atheists want to live in a Christian state surrounded by Christian people
the state’s law depends on the moral absolutes (good, evil, guilty, innocent) of religion

what’s the use of swearing to tell the truth in court, in an atheist state?
a vow of what? an oath to what?

5 types of sexual coercion

A lot of men don’t realize that rapists often get a Yes on something else (foot in the door technique) then act like it means something else after the fact.

Just look at prison rape. You accept a free muffin at lunch, you’re later told you agreed to be their bed buddy.
That’s a male example of sexual coercion and men are rightfully terrified of it.

Coercion vitiates consent. It’s in the law, on the legal books.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/67926-is-it-rape-if-you-say-yes-5-types-of-sexual-coercion-explained

“You’re my wife/girlfriend, you are supposed to be having sex with me.”

A girlfriend owes you nothing.
A wife owes you something, but not constantly like a servant.

Many cultures teach us that sex is an inherent part of marriage. Many people take that a step further, and believe that being in a romantic relationship with someone makes you entitled to have sex with them.

They don’t believe that. Believing something doesn’t make it so. They’re lying to blackmail that person.

“You owe me” isn’t a belief.

The problem with that skewed thinking is that it leads some people to act as if taking on the label of “wife,” “girlfriend,” or “partner” suddenly makes your body their property.

I guess this relates to the idea of owning one another, which is true in a spiritual sense with spouses but doesn’t extend to constant entitlement, it relates to the idea that men always have to be up for it like robots and projects it onto the woman as her fault if he isn’t.

Unless you’re Catholic and never use contraception, it has nothing to do with Go forth and multiply, and has nothing to do with Christian duty. Prior to any duty, you should know what you’re agreeing to.

“If you don’t have sex with me, I’m breaking up with you.”

“If you don’t sleep with me, I’m going to sleep with someone else.”

“If you don’t sleep with me, I’m going to tell everyone you are a prude.”

In those cases it’s more obvious that nobody should be sleeping with them because they’re immature.

If Mommy won’t let me have the toy, I’m gonna smash it.

Attractive.

If they don’t respect your No, they don’t respect you or your body. Leave immediately. Run, don’t walk.

Logically, they shouldn’t respect a Yes either, if they doubt your ability to consent. Think about it.

What’s the subtextual thought process here?

You’re not allowed to say No to me.

ding ding crazy

run

whatsjwsimagine

Blackmail doesn’t apply to any agreement, including written contracts.

“If you really loved me, you would have sex with me.”

That isn’t love, that’s prostitution. A prostitute pays for things with sex.

“I wouldn’t have taken you out to dinner if I knew you were just leading me on. If you didn’t want to sleep with me, you shouldn’t have been flirting with me either.”

Again, (tends to be) male entitlement. Neither sex is owed sex.
That’s a non sequitur. If they didn’t want a date, they shouldn’t have asked for a date. That’s the real logic.

Don’t then complain that you thought (lie) it meant ‘something else’, like a ONS assuming it’s now a relationship. But that’s female entitlement, so they’d probably agree if the example isn’t close to home.

It is very easy for someone to try to ply you with alcohol as foreplay to a sexual encounter — because they know that if they can “relax” you enough, you may drop your resistance due to your impaired judgment, and agree to have sex. If your partner knows that you don’t want to have sex, and you find them repeatedly topping off your glass

that would be the point to tell them to go fuck themselves

If you find yourself saying yes to sex as a means to avoid harm, then there is no excuse for your partner’s behavior; please consider talking to someone and getting help.

The police, because sex is not a form of appeasement.

No seriously, many date rapists use these tactics because it gives them more plausible deniability in court later.
I once heard of a serial rapist who’d lure women to alleys threatening to hurt them while a friend played lookout then he forced them to say they wanted him before raping them. Eventually he got caught. Eventually.

The ‘game’ of getting the woman to agree is part of the sexual thrill, because they can take that choice away from her too.

A No doesn’t change into a Yes. That’s called nagging. The coercion thing isn’t widely known although rape by fraud is old as the hills, so the rapist also assumes they’re covered as long as she says the ‘Magic Word’ (until they’re in front of a judge).

There isn’t a magic word that makes rape OK. That’s kinda the point of rape, taking, as in taking away.

Date rapists are harder to catch because the women involved believe it was their fault and he isn’t like that with others (he is). So yes, report it. Others might not get away and you can do everything right and still get raped if they drug you (that’s why date rape is yes, actually, very real, and anyone who tries to argue otherwise is flagging as one of them).

Rapists fear healthy personal boundaries.

Update: I’ll throw this here.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/how-men-are-trained-to-think-sexual-assault-no-big-deal/

Stalking isn’t romantic.
Harassment isn’t brave.
People don’t owe other people anything.
There are no excuses for shitty behaviour.

I cba to go into this one.

Short version – women are not men and don’t have male libido, even porn stars aren’t really into it/you.

It’s stupid to assume all women are coy like some 19th century Austen novel and further, coyness is lying. Coy women don’t sleep with you. It is exclusive from sluttiness. Sluttiness is anti-coy. But I guess that wouldn’t make porn as fun to watch.

There’s no such thing as playing hard to get. You’re either hard to get or easy.

Imagine if we flipped it and said everything men do, they do for female attention and approval. Good career? Wants to attract a good woman. Nice car? He can’t appreciate cars for themselves, it must be to get women. Nice body? He doesn’t care for his health, it’s all about us. It’s incredibly narcissistic and spoiled to assume the choices of others have ANYTHING to do with you.

It’s also sexist to assume that clothing choices based on temperature e.g. male shirtlessness, female mini-skirts, or other practicality, have anything to do with their moral character.

Adult men have no excuse to think as stupidly as teenage boys.
They want an excuse for their actions, they want someone else to blame.

comment

I don’t have anything much to add to this except to say that I do really appreciate the article. It is frustrating to deal with guys who simply refuse to accept ‘no’ as an answer, because there is no way to ‘really’ refuse once ‘no’ is off the table. Short of fleeing the scene, what the f**k can you say?

That’s the point. It’s a trap.
They think if they can rationalize it, it isn’t rape and you’re the ‘crazy’ one.

Ahh, gaslighting again. Notice how this often crops up with the shit of the species? Because obviously, it can never be sociopath/borderline/plain jerk’s fault. You know, the consequences of his actions. Like a man. You push him away, kick him, bite, scream or punch him? You’re a crazy bitch! But him initiating physical action goes unmentioned. It ‘doesn’t count’ as assault, in his mind, because his consent to your body over-rides your human rights. They never mention what they did just before and claim not to see anything wrong – but they don’t mention it unless forced. This is why they rarely harass women in the company of other men – they know it’s wrong and fear punishment for the crime. This is why they usually stop hassling a girl if she says ‘I have a boyfriend’ (women have to lie to be left alone, minding their own business alone, in public. In the West). They’re cowards trying to exert control over others, women are simply the sex less physically equipped to defend ourselves.

They think No means Yes and Get Lost means Take Me I’m Yours – a Disney cartoon figured this out.

They don’t really think that, they’re pushing their luck and the boundaries of the law.

No means No because that’s literally the line. That’s the legal line we shouldn’t have to reach when there are other forms of rejection men are willfully blind to. It’s been proven men assume sexual interest where there is none. It’s a defect in their programming. However, ignoring many indicators to the contrary (emotional intelligence) isn’t an excuse. Women are people, first and foremost, and respect should be given when asking anyone for anything, since you are in the position of desire and need them to oblige you.

The whole tone of that article is a theme I call Poor Men, via Women.

Wtf.

How enlightened, feminist guy.

You’ve gone from acting like a black guy (where all this ‘sexual culture’ comes from) to just a plain misogynist, who can’t understand that women aren’t billboards for male attention. via People is terribly dehumanizing as a message.

It isn’t about you.
It isn’t about you.
It isn’t about you.

Assumptions make a what?

The feminists do the opposite, like Emma Watson signalling Poor Women, via Men. Still wrong, still sexism. You don’t self-actualize or seek attention/sympathy via the opposite sex. Or any other people, really. Your business is yours, not every stranger who piques your fancy.

OT

We seem to have a form of sexual politics like consensus reality. There’s no such thing as consensus morality. Let’s assume coercion doesn’t apply for a moment. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Two people can agree to something, doesn’t make it less wrong. Evil can be mutually agreed. So no, getting a Yes doesn’t get you off the hook for what you choose to do with your own body.

Update: Rape gangs are illegal because it’s organised sexual coercion of women (not just minors).  It’s organised crime, it just happens to be rape than common theft.

Which brings me onto a valid point.

Playing the Eve Teasing line “it’s her fault for being too attractive”, I don’t get to rob a bank and go “but, your Honour, it’s their fault for having too much money!”
You’re responsible for your own impulse control, you monsters. Impulse control is heavily tied to IQ, Westerners have no excuse. Rapists are the sexual Marxists of the world, willing to steal what they can’t earn. You are not allowed to reject a Marxist’s claim to your income, the fruit of your body.
Do regular white women have to be like children in Sweden and wear wristbands saying “please don’t rape me”? You’d ignore those too. Almost like you don’t consider the target group as people, like the rape gangs.
Erotic capital is not a choice, men have it too, expression of sensuality is cultural, social, not necessarily sexual (the culture says we need to look somewhat sexy to conform! and too many things are labelled sexy when they aren’t) and what one person does e.g. tight clothing, is not a super-secret, erotomanic code for burning desire to random observer. It isn’t about you. If a woman wants a man, in this culture, she can ask him out. He doesn’t need to “chase” her, he isn’t a lion about to eat a gazelle. To compare their fun to murder really shows their character, dunnit?

Arguments for circumcision

In light of Germany realizing how barbaric it looks.

Because it is.

argumentscircumcision

Genital mutilation is evil.

I repeat: Genital mutilation is evil.

On a baby, an unconsenting little baby? Unspeakable evil.

Have you looked how much skin is removed? The ‘prepuce’ exists for evolutionary reasons, it’s like removing the eyelids but with far more nerves. Essentially, this punishes men for having sexual pleasure, it’s sick.

Comparing it to FGM is totally legitimate, and there is plenty of evidence for the damage, from what little has been collected. To say we can keep it because there’s insufficient evidence? That’s an appeal to ignorance, science and medicine work with the opposite logic of that.

We don’t conduct studies on why rape is evil, for ethical reasons. Doesn’t make it an acceptable violation of human rights, does it? There is no acceptable violation!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/denmark-considering-banning-circumcision-for-children-under-18s-a7459291.html

Boys should not be circumcised until they are old enough to choose for themselves, doctors in Denmark have said.

The Danish Medical Association said it had considered suggesting a legal ban on the procedure for children under the age of 18, because it believed circumcision should be “an informed, personal choice” that young men make for themselves.

If babies are considered consenting to anything an adult wants to do to them, there’d be no legal backing to imprison child rapists. Mull over that.

“We came to the conclusion that it is difficult to predict the consequences of a ban”

weaklings, putting politics and their career over doing what’s right

According to a major 2007 study by the World Health Organization, roughly 30 per cent of the global male population is circumcised.

Past polls have shown that upwards of 87 per cent of Danes support banning the practice on boys under the age of 18

JUST DO IT.

https://www.rt.com/news/341025-afd-germany-circumcision-ban/

While the majority backed bans on both Islamic and Jewish traditions including burkas, minarets, calls to prayer, and how animals are slaughtered, they cut out the proposal from Bavarian representatives to block the practice of snipping the tip of a baby boy’s penis.

A non-human animal is more important than baby boys? Seriously?

shock horror wtf omg no denial signs

Burn the world, Baby Jesus, just burn it all down pls

Leader Frauke Petry has said police should shoot at those who don’t have a “legal” right to be in the EU country.

Those are called invaders, hostile forces.

The persuasive case against Eurasians

The psychiatric issues cannot be denied.

OT but I’ll put it here

He wasn’t even handsome.
Seriously, all the ‘straight men’ calling him attractive need a good, long look in the mirror but that involves coming out of the closet on the other side.

He looked like a puffy sex doll, with the middle distance porn star stare. Definite creeper vibe, probable anime fetish. It’s mostly in the lips. We call that a trout pout but it’s a pretty good indicator of whorishness since it’s usually a result of Botox. He looked like a strange ambiguous anime character on a balloon or bobblehead. At least very femme for a man. He looked about 13. This case disproves a lot of supposedly redpill truisms e.g. rich guys always win, women will sleep with anything if it’s cocky enough, hypergamy is a female thing instead of a projection of male ambition, women are superficial but also don’t care about looks, you need a car and the alpha mindset (WTF NLP BS is that, alpha males IRL have children and ONE mate) and finally, mixed race is the future. I guess that’s why they have high rejection rates both on dating websites and organ donation. Evil, bigoted biology, amirite?

I still see ‘redpill men’ going on about the injustice of it.
The world doesn’t owe you sex. That’s entitlement. No IFs or BUTs. That’s entitlement. Put down the porn. They’re the male Sandra Flukes expecting the rest of us to give them orgasms…. because they exist, therefore they deserve it.

If you’re basing your lifestyle on a rapper, you’re doing Life wrong.
If your ‘bang’ (shudder) is on birth control, you shouldn’t feel proud. They aren’t ‘selecting’ you for anything. Darwin doesn’t apply to sterile sex and even IF she got pregnant, you’d be the first lot to 180 your ‘principles’ (really signals) and demand an abortion OR an exemption from child support (so Alpha, to abandon your children, so strong, not to mention cuckolding some other guy you call Beta, such brotherly love). You aren’t proving your masculinity, your Alpha-ness or anything other than your ability to be a throbbing dildo or otherwise vaginal plug while she’s between ‘boyfriends’. Where’s the victory here.

If you think hypersexuality is a positive force for society, you’re a feminist.

They would agree with that sentiment, I think. I have no illusions where these supposedly right-wing males stand. The lays never lie. Your politics is proven by your personal life.

The rest of the world won’t fetishize your child the way you fetishized their mother with some Oriental BDSM BS. Don’t expect everyone to agree with your vision or, as the feminists themselves call it, fuck your beauty standards.

If you think about it, he’s trying to emulate his parents’ relationship with his Daddy’s money, like a male Paris Hilton. I don’t know what to comment about that, let’s leave it.

If you actually read his manifesto, it doesn’t go on about women per se.

It goes on about white, blonde women.

How dare they not let him buy them? Like, we’re people? He knows what they need, like he’s their surrogate Sugar Daddy father figure. [Protip for women: if any man hints at trying to roleplay your father or a Daddy-like figure, run, he’s an r-type. Ks want an equal force in the home, they don’t actually control contrary to r-type belief, because they don’t need to, they know their woman is good.] He cares about women so much he thought we are disposable objects, not future wives and mothers capable of making our own decisions, including knowing when to reject someone who’s clearly missing a couple of screws. Consent requires a basic level of intelligence to know when and what to reject. [Also why if women can’t vote, fucking them would be pedophilia, legally. Either we have agency and can make such weighty decisions like reproduction or not. Pick ONE.]

That’s right, your mystery meat White Saviour was anti-white. Why do you want this supposed beta uprising if you’re doing so well IRL and also not beta or lower yourself? Is this not some delta revenge fantasy?

And being nice gets you nothing. That’s called the First World standard. It’s the minimum. You aren’t special for being polite to women because women are people, the same way women aren’t entitled to a drink because they smiled at a guy.

A puppy is nice.

Nobody wants to fuck a puppy.

Have the standards for husband slipped so low?

The self-aware r-types try to win women from both sides by signalling K. Run away. They’re crazy. Leave them to the cokeheads and sluts. Let the genetic suicides get on with it and burn out their pleasure circuits. Yes, that’s what burnout is.

Old sexist adverts again – this time re men

HAPPY NOW.

A picture is worth a thousand strawmans. I’ve included ‘problematic’ implications.

ambitionpills
>Implying men are worthless without a fat wallet. Come on, we know what ambition means.
hemanvoice
>Implying bravado is the only true masculinity.
appeartaller
>Implying malnourishment (look it up) makes you less human.
artinstruction
>Implying men are useless if they do not take up an effete hobby.
marriedman
>Implying married men do no work around the house and are all lazy bums.
catchman
>Implying men are some strange hog-like creature which can be lured and trapped with fatty food.
improveface
>Implying ugly men are silly, socially clownish and don’t deserve respect.
drunkard
>Implying men are addicted, useless layabouts who need to be poisoned for the good of the family.
sexspoon
>Implying male sexuality is shameful, in your own marriage, like a schoolboy.

Pick-up scams are also old hat. There are much older ads that gave advice on how to talk, a coded phrase.
pickup1
>Implying the only thing a man cares about is women.
>Implying (all) men are desperate.
>Implying men value themselves based on how they please random people.
>Implying without sex, men are nothing.
trainyourwife
>Implying you married a dog. Who sides with an advert over their wife?
sexharmony
>Implying you’re doing sex wrong, whatever you’re doing, according to the male equivalents of spinsters, the bachelor. A random, single man knows your genitals and how to please your wife better than you do.
hypnotism
>Implying no conscious woman would willingly go out with you.
erectol
>Implying men must be ready and willing to have sex with anything at all times, like a pogo stick you can just hop on anytime the wife wants. Fuck consent, apparently.
avoidmarriage
>Implying love is a weakness, loneliness is a virtue, creepiness is male and men are users, sexual exploiters who don’t need women for anything like companionship.
gayboy
>Implying any man who takes pride in his appearance must be vain and well, gay.
millionlook
>Implying men are only valuable in marriage for their money.
magictie
>Implying a tie will keep your woman in line for when you inevitably fail to. A tie is more persuasive than you.
notopros
>Implying men are weak-willed and deviant.
learnyez
>Implying the only way to teach men anything is to beat it into them.
beatwife
>Implying domestic abuse is discipline, because a real man needs to strike a woman to lead her.
headachecap
>Implying a hat is brain food and men will buy this to be smarter. No, it literally uses the term brain-food.
manlybath
>Implying cleanliness is for sissies.
nervouspills
>Implying emotions are terrible. Feel shame.
malesedation
>Implying men need to be sedated.
husbandyouth
>Implying men are superficial and cannot appreciate personality and other invisible assets. Also, rather simple and visual, like a dog. About as much loyalty.
alonetime
>Implying a man who wants alone time is deficient in something, probably sex.
mustachetrainer
>Implying sagging mustaches are the male equivalent of sagging breasts.
meatjuice
>Implying … something about cavemen. I’m amazed that Juice Bro guy hasn’t tried to bring it back.

The push to accept pedophilia

Predators all operate in the same way.

It starts like a certain religion, with children.

Step One of Infiltration: “We’re harmless!”

Like the Big Bad Wolf in nana’s dress. The Trojan (sorry) Horse. They say they want to live in peace, while constantly stirring up trouble. Peace is code for ‘Leave me alone whatever I do’.

Then comes the request.

Step Two: “Pity me.”

Rhetorical, appeal to emotion. “Real” victim, by existing. And probably money. They get you to trust them, make their deviance socially acceptable. This way, they can get close to authorities e.g. the classic single mother, the social workers whoring off helpless orphans as having ‘boyfriends’, prevent teachers from reporting them or just freely search for victims to target.

Then finally, what they’ve been working up to…..

“Let me in.”

They say ‘You can’t choose who you’re attracted to.’ As if you can rape anyone you’re attracted to in the street a la Roosh’s ‘satire’. As if people don’t have rights, and private bodies, and physical attraction cannot be ignored.

Actually, sexual tastes are mutable/fluid/changeable/trendy/fashionable, as porn users have proven in various studies. You seek what you feed. A man seeks out anal porn, they’ve turned themselves homosexual. They’re conditioning themselves, training their body’s sexual response cycle. A man seeks out goat porn, child porn, etc. They choose to orgasm to these deplorable things, out of personal weakness. You may hear them say they are shocked by those things, not sexually aroused. Okay, then why touch your junk while viewing it? Nowadays, it is common for men to consider that masturbation requires porn… a view pushed by degenerates, wishing for new recruits, knowing about the desensitization cycle because slippery slope does apply to physical stimulation. Like going to the gym and building muscle. You load on more until you buckle. The body is one big input and output machine. Sex is the biggest carrot (sorry) of incentive in behaviourism. It builds Empires and destroys them.

If you take up babysitting jobs while fantasizing about little girls, you don’t get to blame other people for being ‘bigoted’. Projection of guilt doesn’t work. He already lied to himself, to other people, stalked around his chosen demo, scoped a target, and engineered a situation where he could commit a crime. That is 100% him.

Hold adults responsible for their actions, victim culture is based on infantilization, babying people and holding them to lesser standards. Standards are not ‘unfair’, they are necessary if you want respect. Sometimes I get accusations of being sexist toward men. It isn’t my fault men commit the majority of sexual crimes. That is my exact point. They are 100% responsible for their actions, including the oven-worthy ones. As are women when they rarely make those evil choices  e.g. https://www.icetrend.com/morgue-worker-arrested-after-giving-birth-to-a-dead-mans-baby/

Evil isn’t a male/female/Christian/Muslim/Hindu/atheist/whatever thing. That is my exact point, exactly. It is a choice, which everyone has. If you cannot accept the responsibility of adult choices, you do not get the rights associated with adulthood either e.g. the ability to consent to sex, a choice. Such people are correct, they should be treated like children – but with no half measures. Hence, the asylum was made, to give these people the peace they needed.

Briefly, on stigma.

Every time I see a BS argument about ‘ending stigma’ like a mean rumour on the playground, in practice trying to blame other people for being the victim and reacting as such to unacceptable behaviour from the sick who inconsiderately refuse to get help or take their meds, I know I’m seeing a person that has never witnessed true mental disease. Psychiatry follows the Medical Model. Mental illness, is also mental disease. They are the same thing in synonym and in theoretical backing. Like client and patient refer to the same person. It’s like someone with Black Death who visits family, not caring if someone else gets hurt. At best, they’re terrible sociopaths lacking remorse and empathy in spreading it by choice (cough HIV cough). They should seek solitude and treatment until they are safe for society.
Depression isn’t someone posting crying emoji on social media. Psychosis isn’t limited to thinking you shit unicorn sprinkles. Mania isn’t painting pretty swirly pictures with cutesy hashtags. Depression is a mother drowning her baby because the father refused to co-parent and there aren’t enough hours in the day alone*. Psychosis is murdering your parents because they refused to make you Mac n Cheese so they were obviously demons. Mania is jumping off a building because they thought they were could fly on the power of good intentions. Enabling those sick people for your own ego is also sick. Sick people require treatment, this is common sense. If they don’t require treatment, they are not sick, and therefore, require no sympathy, as they are perfectly well and simply bad at coping with everyday stressors. As many people are without bellyaching about it and promptly seek mechanisms to forever fix their own issue, responsibly. Stigma is the sane reaction to the insane. Diseased people are dangerous, whether the illness is mental or physical. You cannot guilt people into placing themselves in harm’s way. That is wrong.

Abnormality isn’t any excuse for criminality. The law is not a guide on what is psychologically healthy.

Back to pedophiles.

Acceptance, it starts. Everybody accepts that degenerates exist. We have the internet. We know you’re there. What they mean is Accept me in your life.

Against freedom of association and its less-discussed flipside, the Right to Ostracize. 

Eventually they move onto celebration, but all the parades in the world won’t quiet that little voice inside called a Conscience. They don’t like the idea of God because God sees all, even the things that person is in denial of while it is convenient.

But if it’s something you can’t help, there’s nothing to celebrate. If it’s a medical condition, it needs to be kept private for treatment. Otherwise social pressure comes in. That’s why therapists must be confidential, because even their balanced account will bias the recovery. These people slander themselves, happily. They are quite stupid. Reputation has repercussions. You want to write about rape in a lascivious tone? People will think you’re a rapist. You want to write about abusing little girls? People will think you’re a pedophile. Nobody forced you dudes.

It’s like how the self-styled ‘pansexuals’ love orientation theory, although an All option is an impossible orientation (it’s like a sphere as a degree) but then they begin listing all the things they aren’t into. When Pan means all. So no, the meaning of the word implies you are a necrophile, and a pedophile, and into bestiality. That is the meaning of the word. If you use that choice of word, you are going to be considered among that lot. Personal definitions don’t apply to the public. You don’t get to play thought police.

Educate yourself = Brainwash yourself with my opinions for me.

FYI This is Pan.

At the very least, pansexuals are goat-fuckers. If you are not a would-be goat-fucker, don’t call yourself a pansexual, dipshits. Otherwise, when you use that term thinking you’re cool on tumblr, you’ll find yourself swiftly unemployed as the creepy guy. It is creepy. Creepy is the new edgy. If you get a face tattoo or stupid hair, you’ll be fired for that too. Welcome to social consequences for social ineptitude, brought to you by maths.

*Anyone who disputes that very common story, ask yourself ‘Where was the father?’ At literally any point beforehand.

Birth control – for whom?

A minor point on this.

Birth control takes away control from women. The feminists lie.
Men invented birth control, men prescribe birth control, men tell women they need to be on birth control. (So they can use us like whores, only whores used to require birth control/chemical abortions, if a man tells you that you need to be on it, he’s calling you a whore and that any child he conceives with you must be destroyed in shame because while you’re valuable for sex, he doesn’t want to provide in return, still want to fuck him?)

How, exactly, is all this the woman’s choice?

And for the feminists saying they’re pro-choice, well, which industries do they profit from? Sex-positive (slut) and abortion (anti-natal) taking the option of motherhood away from other women and wiping their wallets while doing it. The competition (pretty women, usually) have less children and see no rush to get married in their physical prime, a great incentive to r-types promoting it to the enemy, who also want to keep the number of nuclear families down.

Controlling the life or death inside another woman, or even whether that woman has a life growing inside her in the first place. Doesn’t sound like personal empowerment, but social, medical control.

The fewer mothers, the fewer conservative women, this is a known connection.
The more unhappy sluts, the more self-help bullshit they read blaming the Other (men).
Gee, sound like any belief system you know?

They say: You need this.

They mean: You need us.

It’s drug addiction. What do addicts do? They take the drug longer than maximum (the Pill is only ‘safe’ a few years, tops), they self-medicate with reckless behaviours (sex) and self-destruct emotionally because a core part of their feminine identity (the Mother) has been stolen from them. Result? They feel stuck. Perma-childhood.

Finger the villain.

They say it was a Sexual Revolution.

It was, in fact, a Maternal Destruction.

Listen between their lies.

Motherhood is bad and you’re bad for wanting it. You want to be a housewife? Why? Oh, you’re a mother, what a waste. Mothers are wasting their lives, it isn’t an ambition or a valid one to want a family, like a man who wants a legacy. Those father figures are losers, how dare they love you enough to want to provide for you until they die. You have all the time in the world but don’t do it now, put it off forever. Parents are uncool, you want to be hip, I can tell. You think you want kids, but you don’t really want those ugly, smelly ungrateful things you’d have made, do you? Children are always terrible and the fact they don’t like me proves it. You should be ashamed to side with your family instead of strange women who seem very unhinged and want you to take up their unhealthy habits. If you want a cuddle, buy a dog. Human purpose isn’t genetic, that’s so Darwinian. Parents aren’t superior or I would be one. Nobody wants to marry me so you shouldn’t settle down either because I’d be all alone. There are so many exciting men who’ll be happy to use you until your looks go, why are you depriving them their fun? (R-types stick together, as you can see with the manwhore pick-up artists and slut-positive feminists who both align only to protect Promiscuity Culture).

If this sounds backwards, because it’s a media Big Lie to blame the victim, think of it like this.

Why are there mothers and boyfriends grinding up birth control into an adult woman’s food?

Where is your ‘control’ there?

Why does the father (and they are a father if there is conception) get to order an abortion in someone else’s body, of the child he consented to create in consenting to the act of sex aka procreation?

(The two can never be divided, sex is making babies and making babies is having sex, biology 101; the drugs give us an illusion, or one method would work 100%).

Why were men on board for giving it to women they would never, ever marry?

It allows men to control a woman’s body and her most feminine aspect – her fertility, to use her for his pleasure until he can discard her with no consequences or investment (the masculine side of the sexual bargain).

Is that in any woman’s best interest?

well leaves nope no go leaving

For balance? This is also bad for men in general. Aside from the chemical sterile angle.
As the men opt out of the duties of an adult male, hard-won as a rite of passage, birth control is also anti-Patriarchy. On a fundamental level, it ruins their daughters for their odds of a happy marriage, allows their wife to cheat without being found out, allows their son to waste his time chasing tail instead of building the family business and getting serious, and they probably wouldn’t become Patriarchs in the first place, revoking their masculine power to found a family too and hard-won possibility of a legacy denied to many men who can’t find or earn a good spouse (but usually, modern men are dumb enough from anti-family propaganda to encourage their women to go on the stuff too, only to complain their woman has lost interest in starting a family, because he’s drugging her to think she already has one).