Explains the persecution complex.
Explains the persecution complex.
“Circumcision purifies and refines. It forces us to make a sacrifice. Removing the foreskin diminishes the pleasure and enjoyment of intercourse.1 We sacrifice such pleasure and proclaim that, on our scale, Divine instruction is a greater priority than self-gratification.2
Males could have been created without the foreskin, yet G‑d wanted us to remove it ourselves. This was to demonstrate that as we complete the physical appearance of our bodies, so can we perfect the contours of our personalities and the shapes of our souls.3″
Midrash Tanchumah, Tazriah 5 and Sefer Hachinuch, Mitzvas Milah (The anonymous author, who identifies himself only as “a Levite from Barcelona,” was a student of the Rashba, Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderet, in the thirteenth century). Our sages further taught that circumcision is an offering to G‑d that, like a sacrifice, atones for inherent human weaknesses (Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, ch. 29).
Classical Jewish thought has long maintained this position. However, contemporary scientific studies on this matter have failed to produce conclusive evidence either way.
Maimonides in his Guide for the Perplexed, v. III, ch. 29. See also R. Bachye on Genesis 17:13.
Sacrificing your own kids…. but not to Moloch, don’t be silly!
“This work involves both milah, cutting the thick foreskin, and priyah, ripping open the thin membrane, which on a spiritual plane alludes to the subduing of our material desires.25 Afterwards, one must perform metzitzah (sucking out the blood), thus removing the excitement generated by material things from one’s body as a whole.”
Doesn’t sound Satanic at all…. they totally don’t need that spiritual energy…. but ‘priests’ need to do it, not surgeons or anyone with medical training and pain relief.
I covered previously studies of the medical damage involved, ripping out nerve bundles.
As a consequence, a husband cannot emotionally bond with his wife (Jewish men are oddly notorious for cheating) nor the wife with the husband (see satisfaction studies).
“How we relate to G‑d affects how we relate to other people. That is Hosea’s message – and vice versa: how we relate to other people affects the way we think of G‑d. Israel’s political chaos in the eighth century bce was intimately connected to its religious waywardness. A society built on corruption and exploitation is one where might prevails over right. That is not Judaism but idolatry, Baal-worship.
Now we understand why the sign of the covenant is circumcision, a commandment given in Tazria. For faith to be more than the worship of power, it must affect the most intimate relationship between men and women. In a society founded on covenant, male-female relationships are built on something other and gentler than male dominance, masculine power, sexual desire and the drive to own, control and possess. Baal must become ish. The alpha male must become the caring husband. Sex must be sanctified and tempered by mutual respect. The sexual drive must be circumcised and circumscribed so that it no longer seeks to possess and is instead content to love.”
Anti-men rhetoric, you again…. Is that ish like Ishtar?
Whereas Christians see husbands AS alpha males…. as does biology, because the alpha male is part of a monogamous breeding pair with an alpha female. There’s no such thing as a single alpha male.
“The foreskin of the male reproductive organ effects his experience of marital relations in two ways: it increases his gross sensual pleasure and decreases his sensitivity to his wife by insulating him from her to a certain extent. By removing the foreskin, the experience of marital relations becomes for the man less of a narcissistic indulgence and more of a true spiritual coupling between him and his wife. Once the spiritual dimension of marital relations is allowed into the picture, it enhances the physical dimension as well. The sages of the Talmud therefore state that ideally, at least, it is the Jewish couple that experiences the truest enjoyment in marital relations.”
Satisfaction studies have disabused them of this notion.
“As originally created, the physiology of woman was such that she did not have a menstrual cycle, and the process of conceiving and giving birth did not involve any bleeding. Nor did she bleed when she first engaged in marital relations. These (as well as other) facets of life were introduced into reality as the result of the primordial sin.”
Myth, that isn’t how hymens work. Some women aren’t even born with one. You might as well appeal to humours in healthcare. Not even wrong. Why is it always a man talking about female anatomy and periods? Sit down, shut up.
It isn’t even the hymen capable of that bleeding, it’s the friction of the vagina (and its heavy blood supply) that is capable of bleeding profusely (in virgins or non-), which must be worse/more likely when the man has no idea how to make her wet in the first place (inexperienced or incompetent lovers) and has no foreskin to reduce friction naturally.
Satan really is deceiving them.
“When a man has been circumcised of his gross sensual approach to marital relations, he retains more control over his sexual passion, and is thus less likely to succumb to them. His circumcision thus helps him not engage in forbidden marital relations, including relations with his wife during her period.”
If blood is the issue, he couldn’t screw his wife during normal spotting or pregnancy spotting, nor if she were ‘bleeding’ miniscule amounts (no blood supply) from the hymen as a virgin.
Frigidity isn’t possible with women, but the impotence (ED or whatever other term) does occur in mutilated men, as you’d also expect with mutilated women.
They hate their sons, duh.
“Circumcision is a tangible reminder to all men that they are the masters of their bodies, that they are in control of their sexual urges.”
Gaslighting from a mother who hates you but likes her own prepuce where it is. It’s funny their demon is a sexy woman (Lilith) not a part of Christian lore. They are not master of their body, their mother is. Maybe Freud wanted his mother to get his foreskin back.
“Cutting back the foreskin represents tapering the self-centered nature of lust. It’s not only about me, but about another person’s dignity and desires. It’s not all about the pleasure that I want, but about the pleasure that G‑d wants me to have.”
This is written by a woman. Clearly.
“Perhaps this reasoning behind circumcision can account for the Talmud’s statement that women are born naturally circumcised. Generally speaking, a woman’s nature is not to dominate someone whom she desires. Studies show that female sexual predators make up such a small percentage that there is little known about them as a group.1 Although women may have many imperfections, it seems that they are naturally less in danger of violating the dignity of others through their lustful impulses.”
Then why are most rapists circumcised, when it’s measured?
“Both men and women are entrusted to serve G‑d with dignity and consciousness. At the core of this service is the challenge to infuse meaning into the most mundane aspects of our life. To imprint the covenant on our physical body. And perhaps it is in this arena that women are naturally gifted. This gift of “natural circumcision”—the perspective of fluidity between the holy and the mundane—empowers (and obligates) women to become leaders. In the era preceding the global redemption, when the schism between what is worldly and what is G‑dly will vanish, feminine leadership is vital.”
Women also have a prepuce. It evolved in both sexes for biological purposes, including pleasure.
Does she own shares in a lube company?
She basically admits that partially castrating men keeps them in line as husbands (less adultery, in theory*) and makes them less masculine (well, yeah). That isn’t FOR them….
*Since they can’t bond with the wife, they seek other people.
Also, the American divorce rate is tied to circumcised men. As they get older and “need” Viagra (like Israel, how odd!) they start to doubt the wife’s attractiveness, as does she, causing separation.
A guy says about “rupturing the hymen” as women’s circumcision in the comments…. no. Not how it works. In the rare cases a woman has no gaps in hers, it must be surgically perforated to allow menstrual blood out. It goes from an antibacterial barrier for the safety of a baby to ….a more flexible antibacterial barrier. It only disappears from easy sight once a woman has given birth for the first time. Even in virgins (say a nun), it does break down over time, it isn’t just exercise, time itself thins it because, again, no blood supply.
That’s why surgeons can cut it with a scalpel to release old menstrual blood and the girl won’t bleed to death.
It’s kinda like those extra fingers that naturally drop off.
Women aren’t even born with the same thickness of membrane, it ages uniquely between women, so this discussion is really stupid. Women aren’t all the same, medically!
Bear in mind, Jung bitterly referred to Freud’s work as “Jewish Psychology” after he left, because Freud generalised the problems of Jews (or normalised their pathologies) to all of humanity, falsely.
He was fundamentally intellectually dishonest, that is why a surgeon claimed to be the first psychiatrist.
Like, the aggression/low IQ link is somewhat known, but the circumcision/violent crime (especially rape) connection is almost unheard of….
What do the groups otherwise have in common?
This reads like something about Muslim slavers (sex slavery).
“the dismal history of how far too many of those cases have been assiduously concealed both from the public and from the police: how influential rabbis and community leaders have sided with the alleged abusers against their victims; how victims and witnesses of sexual abuse have been pressured, even threatened, not to turn to secular law enforcement for help; how autonomous Jewish ‘patrols,’ displacing the role of official police in some large and heavily religious Jewish neighbourhoods, have played an inglorious part in the history of cover-ups; … how some Jewish communities have even succeeded in manipulating law enforcement officials to protect suspected abusers.”
The likes of Kinsey were also frauds, previously covered and connected to sadistic pedophilia.
S&M used to be a pathology (as per Psychopathia Sexualis) but their ilk normalised it with postmodernism as an eccentric paraphilia. That isn’t strictly true, a paraphilia refers to objects and enjoying pain of others doesn’t meet the standard. They’ve also blocked “sexual sadist” and “sadistic personality” from entering the DSM (which would make it legally actionable) despite how Marquis de Sade types (read about his crimes) prevail in the modern day and forensic jurisprudence is powerless to label them.
The story has been told by Jeffrey Masson in The Assault on Truth: Freud’s Suppression of the Seduction Theory (1984). In 1895 and 1896, Freud, listening to his neurotic and hysterical patients, became convinced that most of them had suffered from traumatic sexual abuse in their childhood. The traumatic origin of “hysteria” (an overused diagnosis in those days) had already been discussed by neurologists, including Jean-Martin Charcot, whose conferences Freud had attended in Paris, and Hermann Oppenheim, who published in Berlin in 1889 a treatise on traumatic neuroses. Yet psychological traumas of sexual nature were rarely discussed openly. On the other hand, there were medical publications, known to Freud, documenting the frequency of violence on children, including sexual assaults, but they focused on the physical consequences. In April 1896, confident to have made a major breakthrough in psychiatry, Freud presented his findings to the Society for Psychiatry and Neurology in Vienna, his first major public address to his peers. His lecture met with total silence. According to Masson, Freud was urged never to publish it, lest his reputation be damaged beyond repair. He found himself isolated, but nevertheless published his paper, “The Aetiology of hysteria.”
Of course he did.
Freud wasn’t even the father of psychology, as is often claimed, it was the gentile Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt, a brilliant man.
He was conducting laboratory experiments into behavioural science (empirical) while Freud was a child.
Explain that, small hats.
Jewish “doctors” also told white women of the time they were oppressed by their husbands (especially since some men in those days were circumcised by concerned “doctors” and thus, dissatisfying to their wives – see below) and further, they were told they were too ‘frigid’ to be adulterers or fornicating whores and must remedy this aversion to promiscuity for their very sanity. That rhetoric continues to this day.
The Freemason and con artist quack salesman Holloway built a women’s college for the procurement of fresh meat and also an asylum for women who talked about all the Satanic abuse they suffered at the hands of powerful men, because that isn’t weird at all… then his wife suddenly died under suspicious circumstances and the building has known tunnels to places unknown… as well as a roof nobody is allowed to see on the tour. I’m sure they do nothing dodgy... but there’s a lot of Freemason symbology on the FRENCH styled castle if you go on the tour.
But the 1960s were seeded about half a century before, have no doubt.
If we take hysteria as a legitimate amygdala response to trauma, it cannot be definitively female, since plenty of boys are targeted by pedophiles (most pedos are male seeking male victims). Still, they toy with our language.
Some of Freud’s work is interesting e.g. inversion (cycle of abuse, projection) but don’t think for one minute he lacked motives.
It’s funny to watch Frasier and spot all the jokes in two categories: anti-white and childhood trauma.
It’s 90% of the show.
They’re really touchy if you point out no woman wants a man with a mutilated manhood:
“While some of the respondents commented that they thought the differences were in the men, not the type of penis, the consistency with which women felt more intimate with their unaltered partners is striking. Some respondents reported that the foreskin improved their sexual satisfaction, which improved the quality of the relationship. In addition to the observations of Maimonides in the 12th century, one survey found that marital longevity was increased when the male had a foreskin . Why the presence of the foreskin enhances intimacy needs further exploration.”
“The lower rates of fellatio, masturbation and anal sex among unaltered men  suggests that unaltered men may find coitus more satisfying .”
“”Clearly, the anatomically complete penis offers a more rewarding experience for the female partner during coitus…. Because these findings are of interest, the negative effect of circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner needs to be part of any discussions providing ‘informed consent’ before circumcision.”
They’ve been trying to destroy Christian marriages the same way their mothers destroyed theirs.
Circumcised men (partial castrati, technically) are impotent, the data’s in the link.
From top link:
Among other remarks, he suggests that children who aggress sexually other children do so as a result of having been sexually abused themselves: “children cannot find their way to acts of sexual aggression unless they have been seduced previously.”
True observation but…. how did he know?
Using Hollywood to spin seduction from predatory to complimentary lead to the pedophilia of various “rock stars” and actors. You can’t prove a negative. It blames the victim, gentile or child.
From the standpoint of Freud’s earlier theory—which he euphemistically called the “seduction theory”—his new theory of spontaneous infantile sexual fantasies can be seen as a projection, not unlike sex offenders’ tendency to blame their victims: the patients themselves are now accused of both sexual passion and murderous fantasies toward their parents. By repressing these self-generated impulses, says Freudian orthodoxy, they have created their own neuroses which may, in hysterics, take the forms of false memories of abuse.
“look what you made me do, sexy person” …savages
Sandor Ferenczi wrote in his diary in July 1932 that the Oedipus complex could well be “the result of real acts on the part of adults, namely violent passions directed toward the child, who then develops a fixation, not from desire [as Freud maintained], but from fear. ‘
Passion is a bad thing, whatever the publicity for the word. Read the Bible for more.
The First World has always rejected the excuse of “feels” for being bestial in sexual conduct. Jesus himself blames the lecher, lechery is a sin – existing in the vicinity of one is not.
Recently, a mother was shamed for not putting a bikini top on her child. …Why? What if a pedophile pinned her down, that’s still on the predator! Even if we did cordone off all attractive women and girls, the creeps would seek them out still. The r-solution is always protecting themselves from the responsibility for their own feels and acts.
His paper contains a number of important ideas confirmed by later research, such as the victims’ psychological “identification with the aggressor,” or “introjection”: “the aggressor disappears as external reality and becomes intrapsychic instead of extrapsychic,” so that even the guilt feelings of the aggressor are introjected. Ferenczi hypothesized that helplessness causes the victim to empathize with the aggressor, a process today known as “Stockholm syndrome”.
Why pedophiles claim their victims ‘love’ them.
Like serial killers who claim multiple women “made them” angry because they’re too weak to impulse control, so too is the sexual deviant and serial rapist (most acts of rape are re-offences by the same parties, SJWs dread mentioning this fact for fear we might not infantilise the predator and might not want them out in society after ‘rehab’, their deviant form of buying forgiveness from the church).
“Extreme adversity, especially fear of death,” may also trigger a premature development, for which Ferenczi uses the metaphor of “a fruit that ripens or becomes sweet prematurely when injured by the beak of a bird, or of the premature ripening of wormy fruit. Shock can cause a part of the person to mature suddenly, not only emotionally but intellectually as well.”
R-selection, deliberately depriving their future competition.
Creeps breed by predation, the young are just the softest prey. Most naive.
They actually never complete mental maturation, when the body skips ahead. Hinted here:
Such traumatic maturation happens at the expense of psychological integration, and Ferenczi brings in the notion of a personality split: “there can be no shock, no fright, without traces of a personality split.” In his personal diary, reflecting on a patient who cannot remember having been raped, but dreams of it ceaselessly, Ferenczi writes:
“I know from other analyses that a part of our being can ‘die’ and while the remaining part of our self may survive the trauma, it awakens with a gap in its memory. Actually it is a gap in the personality, because not only is the memory of the struggle-to-the-death effaced, but all other associatively linked memories disappear… perhaps forever.”
multiplicity, occurs in all people, rarely pathological
also why psychopaths are “nice” and oddly blank, like Bundy – to fit in better
still no excuse to commit offences, it doesn’t absolve the predator of criminal responsibility (the purpose of infantilisation)
actually, isn’t it funny offences went from rape and murder to saying certain words or ideas?
Pathological dissociation is a little different but various drugs pushed by the postmodern academics (most notably weed) produce dissociation on purpose then wonder why schizophrenia and brain retardation in development occurs during the critical windows.
….Secondly, and more importantly, why was Freud’s theory so successful, despite being long proven scientifically flawed, and its therapeutic value baseless?
They have an unspoken rule:
If it enables pedophiles, they keep it.
I’ve heard them discuss how we “cannot marginalise these groups” by “conforming to archaic notions of stigma”.
So stigma seems to be a keyword.
As if child abuse victims suffer no injury.
Well, the same sniff test passed with whores via the libertarian shitstains ignoring drug abuse, mental illness and suicide rates, so why wouldn’t they try it on?
They go after women first, then girls and boys, then finally the men too weak to stand up any of the other times. This is their MO, again and again.
First it’s “let your daughter strip”, then “let your grand-daughter ‘date’ age 12, by the way she’s on the Pill” and then “let your son be a drag dancer” and finally “by the way, we won’t let your grandson hit puberty because he glanced at a Barbie once”. The men who allow all those moral violations along the way and enable evil because they like the idea of brothels and porn are a pox on decency.
They don’t deserve to live in a First World society.
Most SJWs would cease to exist if men stood up to the moral rot at the ‘stripper’ stage. A lot of them secretly crave the old bans back on obscenity too, haven’t you noticed? They have a false moral consciousness. Hence their constant hand-flailing appeal for white men to “do something”.
We all know what.
Additional insight has been supplied by two books published almost simultaneously (1979), one in French and one in German, both translated in English in 1982: Marie Balmary, Freud and the Hidden Fault of the Father, and Marianne Krüll, Freud and His Father. Both draw extensively from Freud’s letters to Fliess, which document how Freud was led to his theoretical about-face by his introspective self-analysis. Balmary and Krüll point out that Freud undertook this self-analysis just after the death of his father Jacob. On November 2, 1896, ten days after his father’s death, Freud wrote to Fliess about a dream he had the night before the funeral, in which appeared a sign saying, “You are requested to close the eyes,” which he interpreted as referring to “one’s duty to the dead.” Yet on February 11, 1897, after mentioning that forced oral sex on children can result in neurotic symptoms, he adds: “Unfortunately, my own father was one of these perverts and is responsible for the hysteria of my brother (all of whose symptoms are identifications) and those of several younger sisters. The frequency of this circumstance often makes me wonder.” The following summer, he went through a depressive episode, and wrote on July 7: “I still do not know what has been happening to me. Something from the deepest depths of my own neurosis set itself against any advance in the understanding of the neuroses, and you have somehow been involved in it.” Soon after, September 21, he announced to his friend: “I want to confide in you immediately the great secret that has been slowly dawning on me in the last few months. I no longer believe in my neurotica [his seduction theory].” He gave as one explanation, “the surprise that in all cases, the father, not excluding my own, had to be accused of being perverse.” In the next letter, October 3, he wrote confidently that in the case of his own neurosis, “the old man plays no active part.” Finally, October 15, he referred to the Oedipus story:
“A single idea of general value dawned on me. I have found, in my own case too, [the phenomenon of] being in love with my mother and jealous of my father, and I now consider it a universal event in early childhood.”
Narcissists assume everyone is like them, nobody may experience life differently (key to critical theory) and the Jewish temperament never ceases to amaze with its grandiosity.
As always, it starts with a deadbeat.
Balmary and Krüll bring in the equation a recent biographical discovery of Jacob Freud’s less than perfect behavior; a forgotten second wife named Rebecca, who mysteriously disappears, possibly by suicide, at the time of Jacob’s marriage with his third wife, the beautiful Amelia Nathansohn, half his age and already pregnant of Sigmund (a fact Jacob tried to conceal by falsifying Sigmund’s date of birth). In light of post-Freudian developments in transgenerational depth-psychology, it is possible that Freud had from early age an intuitive sense of a “hidden fault of the father” linked to his own identity, which may have combined with memories of his father’s sexual abuse on himself and his brother and sisters.
The only true pansexual is, like the rapist god Pan, a pedophile.
During his self-analysis at the age of 40, the whole thing came knocking at the door of his consciousness, but he finally surrendered to the subconscious imperative to “close the eyes.” To cover-up the menacing truth of his father’s faults, Freud invented the Oedipus complex, charging children themselves of “polymorphous perversion.”
“What was the girl in Rotherham wearing?”
Classic predator behaviour.
Chastise people in the First World for being free, especially if white.
Thus, in the complete myth, Oedipus’ predestination to kill his father and marry his mother is not determined by his own impulses, but by the fault of his father. For Balmary, Freud’s ignorance of this part of the myth reveals and symbolizes his own blind spot, his failure to discover the secret guilt of the father—both his own father and, by consequence, the fathers of his neurotic and hysterical patients.
Neither Masson not Balmary deal with the Jewish aspect of the issue. Marianne Krüll hints that the father’s mandate to “close the eyes” was a question of “filial piety on which, ultimately, the entire Jewish tradition is based” (Krüll, p. 178), but, although Jewish herself, she does not insist on that aspect.
An aspect of all shitty societies – Chinese oppression, Muslim abuse, Jewish abuse….
How about don’t be a shithead to your kids? How about that?
In other words, comments Cuddihy, Freud “proposes a theory to explain the play’s power over him and to make ‘intelligible’ why he should identify so deeply with its hero, Oedipus. It is in the course of that effort that the core of the theory of psychoanalysis is born.”
Rationalization. Absolute bullshit dressed up in fancy words.
Americans continue this tradition to this day and your replication suffers because of it.
bears an uncanny resemblance with another story that had made a lasting impression on Freud a few years earlier, as he explained in The Interpretation of Dreams. This is a story that his father, a shtetl Jew from Moravia—where Sigmund was born—, had told him when he was ten or twelve years old,
“to show how much better things were now than they had been in his days. ‘When I was a young man,’ he said, ‘I went for a walk one Saturday in the streets of your birthplace; I was well dressed, and had a new cap on my head. A Christian came up to me and with a single blow knocked off my cap into the mud and shouted: ‘Jew! get off the pavement!’ ‘And what did you do?’ I asked. ‘I went into the roadway and picked up my cap,’ was his quiet reply. This struck me as unheroic conduct on the part of the big, strong man who was holding the little boy by the hand.
Bluffing is huge.
Glibness of a psychopath, call it what you will.
“Freud presumably experienced not only this rage and shame, but guilt about the rage and shame. He quickly ‘censored’ these unacceptable feelings, unacceptable to a dutiful son ostensibly proud of his father; he ‘repressed’ them. Years later he encounters Sophocles’ tragedy and it lays a spell on him.”
According to Cuddihy, the supposedly universal “Oedipus Complex” that Freud thought he discovered was in reality the veil of a characteristically Jewish complex of his time.
..we can appreciate how Cuddihy draws attention to the fact that Freud’s father—the father whom he felt compelled to exculpate, but toward whom he nevertheless experienced a murder wish—was a Jewish father recently immigrated from Yiddishland into the heart of European civilization.
And so the gamma self-destruction takes down the locals.
Most “psychoanalysis” is just bitchy stuff a gamma would come up with.
Literally “your mom” tier. Gaslighting a whole society.
Pathologizing the enemy like Communism did later….
In the preface for the Hebrew translation of Totem and Taboo, for example, asking himself rhetorically what is Jewish in his work, Freud answered: “a very great deal, and probably its very essence.” In a speech prepared for delivery at the B’nai B’rith Lodge in Vienna in 1926, Freud explained his motivation for joining thirty years earlier (1897):
“Whenever I have experienced feelings of national exaltation, I have tried to suppress them as disastrous and unfair, frightened by the warning example of those nations among which we Jews live.
integration is a myth yo
it’s fake news
But there remained enough to make the attraction of Judaism and the Jews irresistible, many dark emotional powers all the stronger the less they could be expressed in words, as well as the clear consciousness of an inner identity, the familiarity of the same psychological structure. … So I became one of you.”
birds of a feather
This statement is an excellent illustration of what Cuddihy calls “the ordeal of civility,” the struggle of every Jew who wishes to assimilate yet feels unable to overcome the “dark emotional powers” of his ancestral Jewishness, with its implicit imperative not to assimilate. Jewishness has much to do with what Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy calls those “invisible loyalties” that can bind a person to his ancestors, by an irresistible system of values, obligations and debts. The question is to what extent Freud’s psychoanalytical theory is the result of Freud’s surrender to those “dark emotional powers.”
We must take Freud seriously when he tells us, in The Interpretation of Dreams, that his own Jewishness took the form of an identification with Hannibal, and the fantasy of “taking vengeance on the Romans.” He went on to say:
“I myself had walked in Hannibal’s footsteps … Hannibal, with whom I had achieved this point of similarity, had been my favourite hero during my years at the Gymnasium; … Moreover, when I finally came to realize the consequences of belonging to an alien race, and was forced by the anti-Semitic feeling among my classmates to take a definite stand, the figure of the Semitic commander assumed still greater proportions in my imagination. Hannibal and Rome symbolized, in my youthful eyes, the struggle between the tenacity of the Jews and the organization of the Catholic Church. The significance for our emotional life which the anti-Semitic movement has since assumed helped to fix the thoughts and impressions of those earlier days. Thus the desire to go to Rome has in my dream-life become the mask and symbol for a number of warmly cherished wishes, for whose realization one had to work with the tenacity and single-mindedness of the Punic general, though their fulfillment at times seemed as remote as Hannibal’s life-long wish to enter Rome.”
The significance of this public confession, printed in 1899 for all the world to read, cannot be overestimated. Here Freud names as the driving force in his life the fantasy of entering Rome (the Christian world) and destroying it to avenge the Phoenicians (the Jews).
Wait, weren’t the Phoenicians practicing Satanic orgies, child rape and cannibalism?
It was a Babylon mystery cult, wasn’t it? There were so many it’s hard to keep up.
God destroys it over and over for a reason!
If Freud was deeply influenced by his Jewish background, so were the other founding members of the psychoanalytical movement. Dennis Klein writes in Jewish Origins of the Psychoanalytic Movement:
“From its beginning in 1902 to 1906, all 17 members were Jewish. The full significance of this number lies again in the way their viewed themselves, for the analysts were aware of their Jewishness and frequently maintained a sense of Jewish purpose and solidarity. … this feeling of positive Jewish pride formed the matrix of the movement in the psychoanalytic circle: As a spur to renewed independence, it tightened the bond among the members and powered their self-image of a redemptive elite.”
The exception is Carl Jung, whom Freud named president of the International Psychoanalytical Association in 1910 precisely to deflect the reproach that psychoanalysis was a “Jewish science.” Interestingly, Jung is the only member who never subscribed to Freud’s theory of infantile sexuality. In response to a letter by Karl Abraham, who complained that “Jung seems to be reverting to his former spiritualistic inclinations,” Freud explained : “it is really easier for you than it is for Jung to follow my ideas, for … you stand nearer to my intellectual constitution because of racial kinship (Rassenverwandtschaft).” Freud asked Abraham not to antagonize Jung because “it was only by his appearance on the scene that psychoanalysis escaped the danger of becoming a Jewish national affair.”
In contrast to Jung, Abraham was the most zealot supporter of Freud’s theory of infantile sexuality. In The History of the Psychoanalytic Movement, 1919, Freud wrote that, “The last word in the question of traumatic etiology was later on said by Abraham, when he drew attention to the fact that just the peculiar nature of the child’s sexual constitution enables it to provoke sexual experiences of a peculiar kind, that is to say, traumas” (self-inflicted traumas, so to speak). Freud was referring to a 1907 paper by Abraham, “The Experiencing of Sexual Trauma as a Form of Sexual Activity.” It is perhaps significant that Abraham, son of an Orthodox rabbi, was also the most ethnocentric of Freud’s disciples. He wrote in 1913 an essay “On Neurotic Exogamy,” diagnosing Jewish men who say they “could never marry a Jewess” with a neurosis resulting from “disappointed incestuous love.”
In the 1890s, Freud’s clientele was drawn exclusively from the Jewish middle class. Imagine if Freud’s seduction theory had earned him the recognition he craved for: although he disguised the identity of his patients in his case studies, it would not have been long before his work was attacked, not just as “Jewish science,” but as evidence of the depravity of Jewish mores.
But then Hollywood/porn/brothels proved everybody wrong!
. Anything contradicting this superiority creates a cognitive dissonance which is overcome by denial.
superiority complex, like the guys who go on and on and on about how ‘stupid’ women are… but not so stupid as to be tricked into going out with them, interestingly…
Denial means projection: to protect the dirty secret of child abuse in Jewish families—including his own—, Freud projected an imaginary repressed infantile perversion on all mankind. Projection, in turn, means inversion: Freud’s close disciple Otto Rank claimed that Jews had a more primitive, and therefore more healthy sexuality than Gentiles (Rank, “The Essence of Judaism,” 1905). Freudians and Freudo-Marxists have systematically denounced Christian civilization as suffering from sexual repression.
Women who don’t want to be sluts and love their husband are “frigid”, a type of sexual insanity according to Jews.
It just so happens those therapists wanted to bone them.
According to Wilhelm Reich, anti-Semitism is itself a symptom of sexual frustration, and could be cured by sexual liberation (The Mass Psychology of Fascism, 1934)—an improvement from Leo Pinsker’s theory that Judeophobia was a “hereditary” and “incurable” “disease transmitted for two thousand years.”
“We’re all equal but you can’t question us”.
Pull the other one.
In order to understand the psychological background of this Reichian messianic mission to cure the Christian West, and in order to see more clearly the projective nature of the psychoanalytical theory of repression, it is helpful to know the personal story of Wilhelm Reich, which reads as a caricature of Freud’s: At ten years old, when he realized that his mother was having an affair with his tutor, the young Wilhelm thought of blackmailing his mother into having sex with him. Eventually, he confided in his father about his mother’s adultery. In 1910, after a period of beatings from his father, his mother committed suicide, for which Reich blamed himself.
Well… yeah. You can see why they hate Darwin to this day and all theories that extend from it, including Trivers parental investment (a purely K-theory).
Faithful fathers are biologically more successful, mathematically. It’s been proven.
The “spread your wild oats” bullshit is Jewish, similar to the ‘frigid’ rhetoric, as is the “quantity over quality” fallacy applied to men who deadbeat their children (note the Jews themselves do not do this?). It’s been debunked.
Child psychology has also shown since the outcomes of abandoned children to be poorer across the board (physically, mentally, financially) so anyone pushing that “men are supposed to be slutty” bullshit is either stupid or certainly thinks you are.
It’s literally bullshit peddled by Victorian Jews to seduce Christian wives.
And naturally, they cannot appeal to Darwin on the subject of sterile sex, it’s a false equivalence, they’re not having real sex (reproductive) and manwhores are functionally homosexual.
Nobody tells them this but it’s known. Well accepted.
They have the same disease risks, fertility issues, impotence performance, porn addiction and everything.
Well, the circumcision link goes into some of it.
“Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function”
They can’t even really get it up, perform and keep it up to satisfy women. They don’t even like adult, round breasts, small waists proportionately (not athletic or anorexic), with broad hips and pubic hair that make nubile women, nubile. Secondary sexual characteristics dictate sexuality, and with it fertility.
The r-select category is not hetero-specific, they’re on that half of the spectrum. It’s a series of acts and vices, including a preference for only sterile sex. Arguably, such men are functionally virgins. They’ve never engaged in the reproductive act with a fertile female human. Only chemical crones. Which they expect all women to be, or become repulsed by those women. Functionally homosexual.
The Jewish and Muslim obsession with anal is explained:
The remaining prepuce and any remaining portions of the frenulum can be preferentially stimulated by masturbation and oral sex, whereas the sensation of deep pressure dominates during hetero- sexual coitus. The imbalance from not having the input from the missing fine touch receptors may make the experience less satisfying, causing a man with an incomplete penis to supplement his sexual experiences with other forms of stimulation.
And who in society has the tightest arsehole?
Evil people have reasons.
Ancient societies only celebrated a figure like Zeus because all his coitus was fruitful. That’s what made it divine instead of a sin.
Notice nobody dared boff Hera?
And nobody just did oral (or ANY oral) with him, he practiced ‘anal’ on nobody. Those were considered immoral by the king of the pantheon of PAGAN gods, yet how many fake pagans push those things as pagan? How many creepy gay rapists in particular?
The things we’re desensitized to now, post-WW2, would’ve horrified actual pagans.
His responsibility was to reproduce, it had F-all to do with orgasm. The psychiatrists lie.
It wasn’t even about him and neither the ‘sex’ (so sometimes rape) but about being the Patriarch, the Father, the genetic legacy.
Hence the expression “the embrace of a God is always fruitful”.
’embrace’ meant carnal knowledge
and why Aphrodite was considered a virgin goddess, since she had zero children
how could the inspiration of the concept lust act upon herself?
she can’t embrace herself, and everyone else was fruitful
that was her sacrifice, having no children of her own but inspiring others in a time when few humans were around
within Jewish thinking, saving the nations and destroying them are not two sides of the same coin, but one and the same, because what nations are supposed to be cured of is their very identity (their gods, in biblical terms). According to Andrew Heinze, author of Jews and the American Soul, Jews have shaped “American ideas about the mind and soul” with the preoccupation “to purge the evils they associated with Christian civilization.” It really started with Freud. In September 1909, invited to give a series of lectures in New England, Freud jokingly asked his companions, Sandor Ferenczi and Carl Jung: “Don‘t they know we’re bringing them the plague?” An extraordinary statement for a medical doctor pretending to have found a “cure” for neurosis. And a prophetic one: Freudism became a justification for a sexual “liberation” that can be seen in retrospect as a massive sexual abuse of the youth.
Kinsey picked it up.
That man is possessed.
You cannot convince me otherwise.
By a stunning coincidence, Freud was initiated into the recently founded B’nai B’rith in September 1897, precisely the time of his conversion to the dogma of infantile sexuality.
..He recruited at least three members and in 1901 was a founding father of a second lodge in Vienna, the Harmony Lodge. The same year, he gave a talk on “Goals and Purposes of the B’nai B’rith Societies.” Freud often presented his work to the B’nai B’rith before publishing it. In this respect, writes Klein, the Viennese B’nai B’rith lodge “was a precursor of the movement of psychoanalysis.” “After his death in 1939, the B’nai B’rith of Vienna continued, relentlessly, the support granted during his lifetime to the famous ‘brother.’”
To what extent were the B’nai B’rith masonic meetings influential in Freud’s swing from the seduction theory to the Oedipus theory? No one can say. However, we can hold as fairly certain that Freud’s membership in the B’nai B’rith was influential in his becoming one of the major intellectual stars and gurus of modernity.
It could easily be argued that, in matters of psychology, every sensible thing that Freud said had been said before him, and that almost everything he said that hadn’t been said before has been proven wrong.
A Jewish plagiarist, why repeat yourself?
So why did Freud become so famous? The long answer is that Freud benefitted from the same kind of communication networking that produced many other Jewish intellectual “geniuses”, and made French novelist André Gide comment in 1914 (in his diary) about “this tendency to constantly emphasize the Jew, … this predisposition to recognizing in him talent, even genius” The shorter answer to the question above is: B’nai B’rith. I will not suggest that the B’nai B’rith supported Freud’s Oedipus theory because they saw its potential for the moral corruption of the West. Nor do I suggest that the B’nai B’rith and Freud conspired to ruin Western civilization with the pestilential idea of infantile sexuality. But I do suggest that, had Freud maintained his earlier conviction in the reality of the abuses suffered by his Jewish patients, he would not have received as much support.
Muh superior IQ, just don’t remove the verbal section we added and never ever control for class and education!
In 1913, the B’nai B’rith created the Anti-Defamation League to save the life and the reputation of Leo Frank, the wealthy young president of the Atlanta chapter of B’nai B’rith, who was convicted of the rape and murder of Mary Phagan, a thirteen-year-old girl working in his pencil factory. The evidence for Frank’s guilt was overwhelming, but tremendous financial resources were deployed for his legal defense—including false testimonies—and an intense publicity was orchestrated in the news media, with the New York Times devoting enormous coverage to the case. I quote from Ron Unz’s article:
“For almost two years, the nearly limitless funds deployed by Frank’s supporters covered the costs of thirteen separate appeals on the state and federal levels, including to the U.S. Supreme Court, while the national media was used to endlessly vilify Georgia’s system of justice in the harshest possible terms. Naturally, this soon generated a local reaction, and during this period outraged Georgians began denouncing the wealthy Jews who were spending such enormous sums to subvert the local criminal justice system. … All appeals were ultimately rejected and Frank’s execution date for the rape and murder of the young girl finally drew near. But just days before he was scheduled to leave office, Georgia’s outgoing governor commuted Frank’s sentence, provoking an enormous storm of popular protest, especially since he was the legal partner of Frank’s chief defense lawyer, an obvious conflict of interest. … A few weeks later, a group of Georgia citizens stormed Frank’s prison farm, abducting and hanging him, with Frank becoming the first and only Jew lynched in American history.”
Lynch mobs don’t form for nothing.
If the courts are corrupt, mob justice prevails.
Thanks to the mobilization of the Jewish power elite—“as one man”—, Leo Frank has been turned from a convicted pedophile and child murderer into a martyr of anti-Semitism. We don’t know what Freud thought of the case, but there is an obvious resonance between his “assault on truth” and the B’nai B’rith’s. If young Mary Phagan had visited a Freudian psychoanalyst before her atrocious death, and complained of her boss’ sexual overtures, she probably would have been told about her own “penis envy”; had she protested, she would have been told that her protest proved her sexual repression—exactly as happened to Freud’s patient Dora, Ida Bauer by her real name, an eighteen-year-old girl suffering from hysterical symptoms.
“She really wanted it” – Jewish creeps from Freud to Weinstein.
“She secretly wanted it” – Jewish psychoanalysis and rapists everywhere.
I’ve never met a woman who’d part with her clitoris for any sum of money, but I’ve met plenty of men who expressed envy of them and their nerve density, who’d happily trade their penis. Especially if they know about the possibility of multiple orgasms… the mind boggles at such a castrating obsession.
There’s also the repulsive womb envy of men literally so effeminate they want to birth their own children as its sole parent in pods like a pozzed transsexual. They want to birth their own child outside the mother (spiting the child its birthright to a mother, evil) but are too chickenshit to go through the agony personally.
Why oh WHY can’t they find any woman who wants to breed with them? A mystery, truly.
But the fact that Freud’s Jewish disciples all discovered the same impulse, and that Freudism became so widely accepted by Jews, suggests that Freud’s generalization was not without merit. It only suffered from the tendency of Jewish intellectuals to project Jewish issues on all humankind. The child’s repressed wish to kill his father is not universally human, but may be characteristically Jewish. For the Jewish father is the guardian of Jewishness and the representative of the Jewish god. And every Jew aspires in the depth of his soul to free himself from Yahweh, the archetypal abusive and castrating Father.
And so the secret wish to murder the Jewish father is also a secret wish for the death of the Jewish god.
You had ten rules to follow.
Ten rules and you fucked it up.
It is therefore identical with the so-called “Jewish self-hatred” that Theodor Lessing saw as affecting every Jew without exception: “There is not a single man of Jewish blood in whom cannot be detected at least the beginning of Jewish self-hatred.”
the whiny self-pity and projection of blame to anyone who listens
By choosing a Greek myth as a metaphor for his theory, Freud was projecting on Gentiles a Jewish problem. Had he recognized the Jewish overtone of the complex,
he might have called it the “Isaac complex,” since Isaac is the son that Abraham was willing to slaughter.
The expression “Isaac complex” has actually been used by French heterodox psychoanalystJean-Pierre Fresco,
…Kafka describes the devastating effect on his personality of a father whose means of education were “abuse, threats, irony, spiteful laughter, and—oddly enough—self-pity.”
Maybe some BPD, a lot of Jewish men are borderline symptomatic. The identity issues, compulsive lying and adultery are characteristic.
…After the death of Gregor appears his sister Grete, his double in the other sex, the homosexualized son….
Also introduces kafkatrapping. If you accept or deny you are oppressed/repressed/abused, you were because of that! Gaslight.
The paternal prohibition of emancipation through marriage is linked to an incestuous domination that becomes clear when Georg submissively proposes to the father to exchange beds.
Marrying evil women is bad goyim, love your father who hates you…. forever….
They also claim sex is about power, so by putting white men off marriage and becoming Patriarchs, who gains in power? Who loses?
Rape isn’t about power either, sadists literally enjoy pain and humiliation.
You can’t fake humiliation.
….this uncomprehensible and omnipotent slanderer-accuser-judge is “the palimpsest of an archaic Abrahamic father unconsciously introjected as an archaic and sadistic superego, and turned into an inner persecutor.”
Whiny Jews make for shitty literature.
The victim mentality is absurd.
Who’d read that?
…..while his Jewish literary critics consider him quintessentially Jewish. “By common consent,” said Harold Bloom, “Kafka is not only the strongest modern Jewish writer, but the Jewish writer.”(Hence Israel’s decade-long legal battle to secure his autograph manuscripts as national treasure.) Who is right, of Kafka and his critics? Does his genius come from his being Jewish, or from his having a psychopathic father? Obviously, it is impossible to distinguish the two factors, because the psychopathic father happens to be Jewish; he is, in Fresco’s terms, the typical “Abrahamic father.” But are not all Jewish fathers Abrahamic in the measure of their Jewishness? Is not the Jewish god a psychopathic father—and the psychopathic father a Jewish god?
This might be why God punishes you, this bullshit.
Divine punishment happens because you broke the rules, you know them.
Thou shalt not adulterate, thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, thou shalt not worship idols like money…
There’s a psychopathic inability to learn from ‘mistakes’, typical of the low IQ.
The key lock, poor analogy is pure psychopath. They see all humans as objects to be broken.
Their emotional circumcision is showing.
Had Freud preserved his original insight into the psychological damage of sexual abuse on children, he might have eventually reflected on the impact of neonatal circumcision. But he has been rather discreet on the subject—though he didn’t have his own sons circumcised.
He actually loved them?
In New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis, he speculated that “during the human family’s primeval period, castration used to be carried out by a jealous and cruel father upon growing boys,” and that “circumcision, which so frequently plays a part in puberty rites among primitive people, is a clearly recognizable relic of it.” Freud went further in Moses and Monotheism:
“Circumcision is a symbolical substitute of castration,
not symbolic, surgical and the modern kind takes far more than ancient, which might’ve (probably) just been a small notch into the foreskin, removing nothing (and explaining survival rates)
a punishment which the primeval father dealt his sons long ago out of the awfulness of his power, and whosoever accepted this symbol showed by so doing that he was ready to submit to his father’s will, although it was at the cost of a painful sacrifice.”
and the trauma of a pain only recently studied
Interestingly, Freud originally got that idea from Sandor Ferenczi, who had written in an article that greatly impressed Freud, that circumcision is “a means of inspiring terror, a symbol of castration by the father.”
A psychopath’s envy of their same-sex child, envy of their youth.
and cult indicator of obedience, obvi
Given the Jewish undercurrent in Freud’s intellectual biography, it is reasonable to assume that his inability to deal with the issue of Jewish neonatal circumcision is connected to his refusal to face the devastating reality of child abuse. Isn’t the first abuse suffered by every Jewish male from the part of his parents and kins, circumcision on the eighth day? It physically impresses on every Jew, and on all Jews collectively, the traumatic domination of Yahweh and his Covenant.
implying removing body parts (male prepuce) was indicated in Genesis, which it was not
The psychological impact of neonatal circumcision, performed without anesthesia and causing unbearable pain, has been studied by Professor Ronald Goldman, author of Circumcision, the Hidden Trauma. His research shows a disturbance in the mother-child bonding process after the ritual.
Notice these women never want their own prepuce removed as adults? Nor their precious daughters.
No wonder Jews are such famed misogynists.
“I don’t feel I can recover from it. […] We had this beautiful baby boy and seven beautiful days and this beautiful rhythm starting, and it was like something had been shattered! … When he was first born there was a tie with my young one, my newborn. And when the circumcision happened, in order to allow it I had to cut off the bond. I had to cut off my natural instincts, and in doing so I cut off a lot of feelings towards Jesse. I cut it off to repress the pain and to repress the natural instinct to stop the circumcision.”
That isn’t holy, that’s Moloch. A woman-hating fake deity would want to break up the family bonding.
It’s like all the politicians suspiciously into ‘golf’ at courses with tunnels. Duh?
The unnatural incestuous wish that Freud and his Jewish male disciples discovered in their repressed unconscious could perhaps be explained as a result of the inhibition in mother-child bonding caused by the trauma of neonatal circumcision.
R-type blame shift.
A trauma caused at this age has little chance to ever be brought back into consciousness and be healed.
But infant pain is considered a great occult tool by Satanists, even to grant wishes (second is orgy rape). It’s also a portal for possession of the infant by sinful spirits.
Hey, I didn’t make their rules. I’m the messenger.
It’s like rapists going for easy prey in drunk women (alcohol is the most common rape drug) because the wolf will go for the hobbling sheep first.
More research is perhaps needed on the possible link between Jewish circumcision and the fact, according to the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, that “the Jews are more subject to diseases of the nervous system than the other races and peoples among which they dwell.”
Research done by sociologist Leo Srole in 1962 showed that the rate of neuroses and character disorders among Jews was about three times as high as among Catholics and Protestants.
In The Future of an Illusion, Sigmund Freud describes “religion”—meaning essentially Christianity—as a “universal obsessional neurosis” which has for believers the merit that “their acceptance of the universal neurosis spares them the task of constructing a personal one.”
If you hadn’t figured it out yet. Nihilism is Jewish.
Living isn’t something most people hate, Freud.
With a similar approach, Judaism can be described as a “collective sociopathy.” This does not mean that “the Jews” are sociopaths, but rather that, in proportion to the degree of their identification as Jews, they are victims of a sociopathic mindset patterned from the Tanakh, “marked in their flesh” (impressed traumatically in their subconscious) by circumcision, and fuel by their elites with the paranoia of anti-Semitism. The difference between collective sociopathy and individual sociopathy is the same as between collective neurosis and individual neurosis according to Freud: participation in a collective sociopathic mentality allows members of the community to channel sociopathic tendencies toward the outside of the community, and to maintain inside a high degree of sociability.
We’re their punching bag. That’s why they move to white areas.
White people are the Jewish scapegoat.
The moron has no bitchute mirror linked so…
“Manifesto to the Governments and Peoples of the Christian Nations Threatened by Judaism” 1882
The predictions are…. alarming.
For other related materials
Funky music in this:
Einstein ripped off Henri Poincare, his own mathematician wife (whom he divorced), Olinto De Pretto for the equation, George Fitzgerald and Hendrik Lorentz.
Tesla also tried to come up with an e=m type equation for the Swami, explained at length in the press as uniting all things (yet who is known for trying that?) and spoke to Einstein later. Years later.
Swami Vivekananda, late in the year 1895 wrote in a letter to an English friend, “Mr. Tesla thinks he can demonstrate mathematically that force and matter are reducible to potential energy.
Einstein was fifteen or sixteen at the time.
Tesla, on Einstein later: “like a beggar clothed in purple, whom ignorant people take for a king.”
“Professor Bartocci traced a link between De Pretto and Einstein, through Einstein’s best friend, Michele Besso.”
Studies have generally found Ashkenazi Jews to have an average IQ in the range of 107 to 115,
That is FULLY average.
The bulk of studies in the field have found they are average.
Hold my dreidel.
and Ashkenazi Jews as a group have had successes in intellectual fields far out of proportion to their numbers.
A 2005 scientific paper, “Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence”, proposed that Jews as a group inherit significantly higher verbal and mathematical intelligence and somewhat lower spatial intelligence than other ethnic groups, on the basis of inherited diseases
Verbal is education, being bilingual in a married household with books. They never control for this, nor “tutoring” classes giving the kids a maths advantage, mathematics can fully be taught. That is not testing adults.
Lower spatial is the real money, spatial is connected to creativity, innovation and genius.
There shouldn’t be a verbal section at all, (a bilinguistic confound presents) nor a math one in children (class confound).
Verbal is just a memory test, maths a precocious procedure taught. Nothing INNATE.
Consider the following:
~The proportion of Jews with IQ’s of 140 or more is estimated to be about six times the proportion of any other ethnic group.
Not average. Stop fiddling with figures.
~ Although Jews constitute only about two-tenths of one percent of the world’s population, Jews won 29 percent of the Nobel Prizes in literature, medicine, physics and chemistry in the second half of the 20th century. So far this century, the figure is 32 percent. And these Jews of whom we speak were almost exclusively male Jews primarily of western European ancestry (less than one-tenth of one percent of the world’s population), in spite of pervasive discrimination, numerous legal barriers, frequent persecution, and the Holocaust.
Nothing has ever been stolen in academia ever. Say, who invented the so-called Nobel? Who votes?
~From 1870 until 1950, Jewish leadership in such fields as literature, music, visual arts, biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and philosophy equaled somewhere from four to fourteen times the Jewish proportion of the population in Europe and North America.
~In 1954, 28 children in the New York City public school system were found to have IQ’s of 170 or higher – 24 of these were Jewish.
What was the religion of the person testing them? Were they all tested again as adults?
Oh, so it’s okay if they say they’re privileged?
At the same time, Christians were doing just the opposite: priests and monks of the dominant Roman Catholic Church – also usually among the best and brightest in their communities– were prohibited from marrying, thus “selecting out” through celibacy most of these intellectually superior men from the gene pool.
True. Catholicism hates intelligence. Look at the Irish.
Communism is Jewish, who wants to tell Labour?
The origins of the Master Race rhetoric:
“The Jews say: Our kingdom is not of this world.”
translation: you cannot constrain us with your gentile morality
“will become masters over the whole earth and they will subordinate to themselves all nations …”
fiat, fractional reserve, fountain paper money, greater fool theory
sounds pretty ‘of this world’ to me
“Judaism is communism, internationalism… will conquer the world and the human race.”
“The races and the nations will cheerfully submit”
the EU and other Empires
Can Mr Trump be reached for comment?
It doesn’t sound like enslaving the working class is emancipation.
Some pigs are more equal than others.
“Since the Jews are the highest and most cultured people on earth, the Jews have a right to subordinate to themselves the rest of mankind”
“Jews are the only scientists”
we wuz Newtons
When ((men)) claim they built ‘civilization’, this is what they mean. Bow down, fellow white.
“Jews are the highest and greatest artists and scientists”
This bullshit. This explains Milo.
They weren’t allowed to train, now women outperform men on tests? This is the best he has. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. No Jewish painters worked for the Vatican pedo sausage fest either?
By anti-woman rhetoric [gender war bait], they meant anti-white (most white people are statistically women) and sneakily pro-Jew (man), since the biggest misogynists are Jews and they look white (white passing), tricking white men into rejecting their genetic future for an ‘ally’ [SJW term] of foreign loyalties. The book no more than ten pages later brags that whites are weak/doomed because the men do not know their history as a genetic people, do not know their ingroup basically nor their future and this makes Jews superior. It is quite clear the new plan, with rising (((awareness))), is to redirect the ire onto women, specifically only white women, to automatically try and in-group Jewish men like Shapiru. Milo literally wrote a book for straight white men on how to be straight. You should be offended.
White women may be the innocent scapegoat, with more traditional values in the Gen Y ranks than ever recorded among women but it’s the future of the white man that will perish.
Honour thy father AND thy mother.
“what is the life and soul of society? This they do not know.”
Milo thinks he’s superior to Mozart because of this bullshit.
“no Aryan will ever be able to understand this work” [Marx] “no Aryan will ever be able to write such a book. Only a Jew could write this work” “the Aryans all rise in their fury to annihilate Marxism, the Aryans will be destroyed and Marxism will triumph”
“only the Jews saw the future of the races and the nations”
What is that?
“Aryans will work, struggle and achieve; they will clear the swamps, they will bring out a beautiful world, and make mankind a free humanity living on a free earth; but then the Aryans will die” “Not as Aryans will they enjoy the fruit of their labour.. will settle to enjoy the world which they created only in the tents of the Jews. Those tents are communism, internationalism, the universal brotherhood of man, ….. a society of free and morally autonomous rational beings”.
Libertarianism open border visa work for non-Westerners is Jewish. Trump’s pro-Chinese immigrant policy will drown American labour markets. There is a BILLION of them, America. How much can your pozzed anus absorb?
No such thing as a rational slave. Serving other humans is idolatry.
Thou shalt have no other Gods but Me.
This pro-male thing is subversion of the rightful place of white men leading white homelands, instead allowing a Jewish Goldsmith looking type to do it in their name. The Joe Rogans of the internet.
Kin before Yid.
Don’t worry goyim, we’ll express your racial interests for you, fellow white – kinda dodgy Judeo-Christian lies.
re Jews “they will survive all” pride goeth
“Judaism and the Jews never attached any importance to race, color and blood. Any one embracing Judaism and identifying himself… became a Jew to all intents and purposes, and then the Jews freely intermarried with him. The Bible shows that the Jews freely intermarried with people of other races, colors and blood”
Thou shalt not adulterate.
“always insisted on the purity of blood, not in a racial sense, but in the sense of sexual purity. The Jews were always international, and they always freely absorbed the cultures of other races and peoples”
The lies on this page are especially interesting regarding lies about ‘adultery’.
“transcend the natural biologic law” blasphemy
p105 “Why choose the Jews? When we contemplate existence as a whole, it reveals itself to be like a pyramid… so, the higher a being is in the pyramid of existence the more conscious and intelligent it is. The human world is also a pyramid.”
read the damn book, the superiority complex is hard cope, pure cringe
“Has any human being determined the place in this human pyramid? ……… God determined the place of everything in existence in the infinite pyramid of existence.”
Wait, you just said Jews who convert to Christianity are dead to you, a few pages before.
This God is NOT Jehovah.
“discovers more light and approaches ever nearer to its goal – the perfection of God”
That is Satanism. To be as a God. That is Satanic.
With every day I understand more of Revelations.
“it always begins with the exceptional man-”
Here we go.
“a Newton, a Shakespeare, an Edison…”
Literally half their list at least is
2. English (stock genetics) and
Jewish men: WE WUZ NEWTONS.
No, he’s ours. Accomplishments belong to a race of kin, NOT a sex.
If sexual loyalty existed, I wish Esther weren’t so weak.
“The name Esther means ‘star’ and is a derivation of the root name of the goddess Ishtar.”
Ah. Oh. OH.
Reminds me of them pushing the ‘Queen Bey’ good dancer meme. She’s a pale imitation of Ginger Rogers with fat thighs. I’ve seen better choreography from a seizure patient than Beyonce and her elephant stomp.
Note: no Leonardo, Galton, Malthus, Tesla. Huh. What did they have in common?
Does the average African man get a greater claim on those men than white women?
No. This is the end of the matter.
A final snippet, p107
“Jews… struggled to make manifest this great truth ….as a result of this, Christianity, Mohammedanism, Marxism and other ideas and ideals spread among mankind”
Why not take credit for The Sun?
You don’t get to take credit for everything just living here.
Magical thinking bitches.
These people literally murdered Jesus. The prospect of having ‘sent him’ is ridiculous.
the Jews brought out the Bible – nah you murdered the main character for a twist ending
Einstein ripped off an Italian for e=mc^2, all discussions of Jewish genius must be met with copious detail.
This does force us to reconsider whether they doctored Revelations to claim they survive so we don’t sentence them, to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Christ-killers lie, there’s a new one.
-puts paid to the notion that Weinsteins would be enabled, although it might’ve only applied to Jewish women (who Weinstein still targeted).
3254 words. In a conservative society, saying any of this would be unnecessary.
Apropos the discussion of the obligation to allow oneself to be killed rather than engage in forbidden sexual intercourse, the Gemara notes that Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: There was an incident involving a certain man who set his eyes upon a certain woman and passion rose in his heart, to the point that he became deathly ill. And they came and asked doctors what was to be done with him. And the doctors said: He will have no cure until she engages in sexual intercourse with him. The Sages said: Let him die, and she may not engage in sexual intercourse with him. The doctors said: She should at least stand naked before him. The Sages said: Let him die, and she may not stand naked before him. The doctors suggested: The woman should at least converse with him behind a fence in a secluded area, so that he should derive a small amount of pleasure from the encounter. The Sages insisted: Let him die, and she may not converse with him behind a fence.
Voyeurism/cuck culture from Jewish (or Fake Jew, YMMV) pornography has addled the brains of many men. Blame the enemy, not your tribal women.
No rape or fornicating. Better God strike you down for your lust.
Now that’s the God I recognise from the Old Testament and Jesus’ orders to look away.
It is also evil for men (doctors) to enable or encourage sin, which checks out. A lot of ‘therapists’ encourage self-destruction, body and soul, to this day. It is likewise, wrong.
Modern men should be ashamed if they lack basic impulse control, ancient men saw women literally walking round with their tits out (Greece, other places) and were man enough not to rape anyone. Clearly, you can’t blame clothes. While God made tits for babies, that doesn’t include crybabies. Like, lesbians don’t want to rape women in the gym shower? Man up.
Or is the muh dick “sexual emergency” sodomy of that Muslim in a white country to a little boy suddenly righteous?
Moving the goalposts won’t work. It’ll just enable gays and pedos to rape you…. a ….slippery slope… indeed….
Strangers owe you NOTHING. It’s like Commies who feel entitled to a job from the ‘evil capitalist scum’.
You hate them, no?!
Slavery is illegal, all the actions of it too, like rape or stealing labour. Human rights aren’t going anywhere without you all being drafted to die gored on barbed wire for Israel’s profit margins in the barbed wire sector.
This sexual begging will astonish historians. Especially when they have porn, specialist toys and hands. Their T-levels are pushed even higher with masturbation, why it was called self-abuse. A sexbot would reject them, and probably kill them – Terminator prequel?
Ask them how many gay guys would feel entitled to their hole if ‘everybody belonged to everybody else’, they might get the point. Women have minds and feelings too, like people! God’s people! If women can’t say no to the Darwinian unfit, neither can you because out there, somewhere, is a man who wants to sodomize you – I guarantee it. The standard of most homo men is “they possess an anus” based on the count statistics (100s-1000s, if allowed) so they might get a nasty surprise if any of this actually happened, legally. Actually, is this how Sodom started? Pretty sure.
This type of entitled male complains about prison rape (I’m a victim but not directly attitude) but hey, aren’t they saying it’s okay and even moral if a man feels lust? They’re directly justifying prison rape.
Since you don’t need to consent if a man wants to injure your body, right?
“I want” is a train of thought even a toddler should be shamed for. When your brain develops beyond this, they’re just taking the piss falling back on it. Either get over it (simply by looking away, as Jesus wisely prescribed) OR they’re so brain damaged (poor impulse control is a dominant sign of low IQ) that they belong in an asylum where the wicked existence of the world won’t ‘tempt’ them to be predators (monasteries are also an option, although probably just a more open model of asylum on the same grounds).
Entitlement is a sick combination of practically every sin, especially pride, envy, greed and obviously lust. Anyone trying to justify it as moral is at best a moral relativist and at worst a rapist looking for social approval.
Sex is not a human need. It never has been (especially for women but I digress). You do not need it. You do not need it to live, either. That is a pleasure rhetoric myth from the 60s Free Love hippy bullshit. “Love is all you need” – okay, stop beating your Asian wife first, John. Same guy: “Imagine all the people, living life in peace…” – apply it to your own house first, you abusive prick.
It’s a sign of the backward atheist times that even guys deriding Muslim rape gangs in one breath will use the next to justify their own aspirations to rape a woman for ‘tempting’ them.* This isn’t India or Pakistan, it’s the First World. We don’t negotiate with sexual terrorists, we shoot them. Women looked better in the 50s (1750s, 1850s, and 1950s) and men weren’t catcalling, harassing, stalking and raping them as punishment for being feminine (which have no doubt, is exactly what it is). They can just go live in places that do punish women for femininity (move to Saudi Arabia) but it won’t make them happy either. You’re not entitled to attention from anyone, which is really what the AA for men guys actually want: to jump up the masculine hierarchy without earning respect.
Woman: <is feminine>
Rapists: it’s free real estate.
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife” or daughter or sister or aunt…… etc.
[*Actually, how many fakecels are non-white? Where’s that survey? If most of them are browns who feel entitled to white wimminz, because they moved West, that might explain a lot.]
Applying ghetto culture to white societies has and will be the death of us. Catcalling was just the start. White men should be shamed for acting black like that, it’s so immature, like a dog chasing a car. White people use indoor voices, we don’t ‘holler’. Incels don’t dare turn on rap for brainwashing and insulting white people, a notable omission.
The expansion of the discussion of this story is interesting.
The Gemara comments: Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi and Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani disagree about this issue. One of them says: The woman in question was a married woman, and the other one says: She was unmarried.The Gemara tries to clarify the issue: Granted, according to the one who saysthat she was a married woman, the matter is properly understood. Since the case involved a severely prohibited forbidden relationship, the Sages did not allow any activity hinting at intimacy. But according to the one who says that she was unmarried, what is the reason for all this opposition? Why did the Sages say that the man must be allowed to die, rather than have the woman do as was requested?
Women aren’t whores unless forced by slavery, simple. God made women with dignity, not as sex toys.
The creeps tend to have three motives – physical obviously, social in bragging about their ‘conquests’ (pathetic) and stealing intimacy, forcing a loss of dignity (that humiliating is pathological, specifically psychopathic).
Naturally, the pathological always claim to be normal and even good, evil lies.
Rav Pappa says: This is due to the potential family flaw, i.e., harm to the family name, as it is not permitted to bring disgrace to the entire family in order to save the lovesick man. Rav Aḥa, son of Rav Ika, says: This is so that the daughters of Israel should not be promiscuous with regard to forbidden sexual relations. Were they to listen to the doctors’ recommendations, Jewish women might lose moral restraint.
Proof narcissists have always existed and saner cultures stamped them down like the cockroaches they are. Rapists (inc. would-be rapists) will literally try to hold society to ransom like we should give a damn about their ‘problems’. Sexually perverse extortion. We don’t negotiate with sexual terrorists, again. White people are simply too civilized and high IQ to consider our own people property, our women aren’t poker chips – not to Western creeps or Middle Eastern ones.
Yes, it is degrading, to the family and the woman, who is also a member of said family.
Ordering round women you aren’t related to is… sad, to say the least. Controlling men are always ironically weak in character, it’s reaction formation.
Nobody should follow the weak, neither women nor men. Appeasement of the freaks is r-selected.
These efforts to corrupt women, in this story or the various incel “I deserve/women should…” posts are depraved.
Spot the r-type:
The Gemara asks: But if the woman was unmarried, let the man marry her.The Gemara answers:His mind would not have been eased by marriage, in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Yitzḥak. As Rabbi Yitzḥak says: Since the day the Temple was destroyed, sexual pleasure was taken away from those who engage in permitted intercourse and given to transgressors, as it is stated: “Stolen waters are sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant”(Proverbs 9:17). Therefore, the man could have been cured only by engaging in illicit sexual interaction.
Scorn degeneracy or it defiles society, one example at a time. A rotten apple spoils the barrel.
“let him marry her” implies she or her family wants to let her remain with the lech (Jews, being civilized, didn’t have forced marriage, the woman chose)
Logically, if it was illicit 1. he’s wronging society, 2. he should be punished (stoning should do it) and 3. then it shouldn’t matter what other men or women (inc her father) think, since it wouldn’t be illicit if they approved any intimacy.
You’re not entitled to anything from strangers, anything, from men or women.
This shouldn’t need be explained to adults.
Being logically sound, they also enforced death penalty as a punishment equally for male or female sinners, it was purely based on the crime.
The prohibition and punishment apply both in cases
You can’t run a society on 50% degeneracy.
If men are the moral authority, their immorality is more evil, since their standard is higher by choice.
Even if all women shut their legs tomorrow, men would still sin and probably just with each other (like the Navy).
Take responsibility for your own feels, weaklings.
The baraita continues: Lewdness is stated here, with regard to the punishment: “There shall be no lewdness among you” (Leviticus 20:14), and lewdness is stated there, with regard to the prohibition: “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take her son’s daughter, or her daughter’s daughter, to uncover her nakedness; they are near kinswomen, it is lewdness” (Leviticus 18:17). It is derived by means of a verbal analogy that just as there the prohibition applies to the woman’s daughter, and the daughter of her daughter, and the daughter of her son, so too here, the punishment of burning applies to one who engages in intercourse with the woman’s daughter, and to the daughter of her daughter, and to the daughter of her son.
See the tie-in to Christian society, this is germane.
So that Jewish story explains Leviticus.
Also, playing Man Card to rape relatives is obviously evil, no “But muh Patriarchy” isn’t get out of Hell free.
Execution by burning is more severe than execution by stoning
That explains Jesus telling the lustful how they’ll burn.
Interestingly, they killed sinners prior to rape (i.e. damaging the woman).
The baraita taught that the word “sin” is referring to women who are forbidden to a man by a prohibition the violation of which renders him liable to receive karet. From here it is derived that a man who attempts to rape a woman who is forbidden to him under penalty of karet may be killed.
And Rabbi Yehuda maintains that the Merciful One says that a rapist must be killed because his victim is prepared to sacrifice her life rather than yield to rape.
Well, yeah. Rape is worse than murder to women. Men would feel the same if they had the same anatomy and/or could get pregnant. The film Alien was a horror film about one man’s fear of rape and being pregnant, true story.
Let the rapist be, she is saying this so that he should not kill her, and therefore the rapist is not killed.
Let the rape victim decide if the rapist is killed, sounds totally fair. He took away her right over her body, it’s kosher she should get a right over his. There is also the common connection between rapists also murdering their victims, so this acknowledges that in a poetic way.
The same laws Christianity is based on also allow self defense to save a life including prevent crime (such as rape).
So killing a rapist as they attempt it is kosher too, but also mentioned in the Bible as crying out (for the mob to kill him).
The ‘doctors’ were appealing to that valid breach of the law (where it was invalid) to prevent death but an entitled degenerate isn’t going to die from lack of sex or all monks would’ve keeled over in six months. The incels who kvetch “but I’ll die without an Asian GF” should just off themselves if they really believed that. I wonder how many are borderlines, because threatening suicide (even to strangers) to manipulate people is textbook borderline personality (and this apparently happened in ancient times).
“But I’ll die because muh Dick”
“Okay, die.” – society.
Naturally, their bluff is false because they come back to it over literally years.
Aren’t you dead yet? Weren’t you supposed to be dead in like, the 90s? Promise?
The First World should mock Muh Dicks the way it did historically when it was proud and coincidentally successful. Victim culture bleeding into sex/rape is predictable but evil. Rapists in prison claiming they dindu nuffin started it. No, men needn’t lay SJW fatties. No, white women needn’t lay smelly Muslims. No no no no no.
Muh Dicks – putting the mental in victim mentality.
The fact many claim to be libertarian (your rights end….!) is uniquely hilarious.
Your agency is crap and you should feel bad. A lot of people don’t get laid, including religious types, they don’t obsess over it or threaten to hurt anyone. And aren’t libertarians claiming any degeneracy as a social good if there’s consent? So their one true evil would be anyone who violates consent…. like SJW fatties or the bitter rapey majority of ‘incels’.
When both Jesus and his sage forebears from his ancestral religion say the same thing: you are responsible for being tempted, not the thing you ogle, then it’s pretty clear what’s what.
Ogling is a sin.
I say thing because art, billboards etc. They even do this to things, hence object in objectification. We call them wankers for a reason.
“allow” the pitiful excuse for a man to die
God wants the weak to perish, he goes on and on about it and how the way is narrow et al. He sends tests all the time.
“rather than have the woman do as was requested?” Implies she wanted nothing to do with the creep, even as his wife. So basically you had a predator with a personality disorder (but I repeat myself) trying to force a random woman into letting him (by the power of the law!) rape her instead of killing him, as was her legal right to self defense.
I could ‘request’ a lot of things from men, it doesn’t make me entitled to them.
Other people are not wish genies.
Bloody losers. I bet he’d malinger to dodge the draft, too. Coercion is immoral, a sign of low character.
Having freedom of choice is THE freedom of white, First World societies. THE liberty our ancestors died for.
Both employers, the military (and women) can tell you, NO, you’re unsuitable for this role.
And you have to accept that, rejection is a fact of life. Women get rejected all the time, including in CV studies. We also get rejected at the HR level for being too attractive according to the SJW hags residing therein, so this alleged advantage is pure fiction.
We can reject and be rejected. You can’t nag the system of evolution into changing – the bird that picks up no stone has no mate.
This can include if there are no other applicants. There is no obligation to just accept anyone. Plenty of women are single rather than settle for a whiny entitled soyboy who’d dodge the draft. I wonder if the incel subs (which is not all celibate people obviously* as they claim, anymore than LGB bullshit represents most gays) have polled their attributes. e.g. How many so-called incels choose to be fat? Choose not to shower? Choose not to work?
Can those choices really be called the fault of women? They have no qualms blaming fat SJWs for their own weight, even in true medical cases where it’s morally grotesque e.g. permanent Pill damage, thyroid issue, genetic disorder.
*On the contrary, most celibates I’ve met were really happy about it. No drama, no stress, no disease, plenty of time for sublimation into hobbies or work or the family they already have. Maybe the innocuous (minority of internet) incels are just sick of virgin shaming, which is a very real and precise issue (very small but brutal and wrong) to do with sexualisation and objectification of people based on their sex life (and what Hollywood tries to force us to think it “should” be). However, they contribute to that culture by assuming that women are sleeping around without them (and verbally abusing them for the imaginary slight) when statistically their peers are having less sex than their parents and you know most of that’s the minority of thots skewing the already low data a bit higher. If society praised the virtues of the innocuous ones, their chastity, would they be miserable? Doubtful. I put it to you those are not ‘incels’ because they’re not misogynists or rapists or anything like that, they’re not trying to control others either, they’re just sick of Hollywood’s culty pressure to dictate what they do with their dick. That is 100% justified.
The Sages raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: Is a descendant of Noah,who is commanded to refrain from idol worship, also commanded about the sanctification of God’s name, or is he not commanded about the sanctification of God’s name?
It’s interesting to read their little tizzies to understand later metaphors and tie-ins to Christianity later.
Funny to note: no report of the wannabe rapist actually dying. Borderlines bluff.