There’s no such thing as the female gaze

BUT I WISH THERE FUCKING WAS.

I demand more objectification of men in films to balance it out, it’s only fair.
If we’re going for hypersexualised entertainment, don’t leave straight women out.
If it makes straight men uncomfortable, they’re just gay. (No, really).

It’s sexist that women have to actually watch for the plot.

The plot of comic films is shit. I say that with love.

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Do it for the economy.

Source: “Eleven Little Roosters” by RoosterTeeth
https://roosterteeth.com/series/eleven-little-roosters

RESPOND TO DEMAND, HOLLYWOOD.

p.s. I am actually 100% serious.

Superman would’ve been a huge success as a series based on female viewers alone if he just wore a super codpiece. No heterosexual woman would deny this. You’d go. You’d hate yourself later, but you would.


Even Aquaman’s covering up, I am offended. Geeks wait decades for this zeitgeist.

It would’ve made Batman v Superman somewhat tolerable.

Captain Marvel might as well be Muslim with how much skin she doesn’t show, it’s stupid.

We all remember the kinky BDSM X-men uniforms. Those films were popular.

Disney is piss-easy to analyse

That’s why children love it. And I don’t even have to make you sit through a lecture.

e.g.

This also explains non-Western maligned figures such as Kaali, scary mother who’d go to war for her children.

A coward would’ve seen the dragon, the power of women, and run away. He’d forever think of women as only Lilith – pure evil, because he was trying to trespass where he didn’t belong (as an unworthy suitor).

For a modern example, picture the ghetto scum who shout pornographic things at women and act surprised when they’re told to fuck off. They set the crude tone.

Every man alive knows the difference between saying “nice dress” and “nice tits”. They both mean the same thing, it’s a question of showing respect. If you don’t respect WHOEVER you speak to, why should they show respect to you?

It isn’t actually a compliment, to other men they don’t say ‘sexy’, they say “you look good”, they imply virtue. They give respect.

It reminds me of “give him a chance” …why? You date him if you want, women are not a lottery.

It’s bullshit when women say it about their fat friend and it’s dangerous when men say it about creeps. Men don’t have female creepdar.

I despise fake femininity because it suppresses the wrathful impulse to punish wrongdoing and protect the good. That side always comes out eventually. If it isn’t protective, it can turn abusive much like false masculinity’s aggression, made from buried passivity and resentment.

Misogynists see the wrathful side of every woman because the women sense it and are correctly punishing their misogyny. You are not entitled to kind treatment, it is earned. If you treat women like shit, don’t expect women to act like that’s acceptable. Men set societal standards in morality but women have the task to enforce them.

Feminism just thought it could fuck with evolutionary formula  because men dropped the standards for themselves and men changed the rules to evade paternal responsibilities (now the taxpaying man funds the deadbeat male).

Video: The 9 traits of the borderline personality

Male or female.

The instability (emotional) is the BIG one.

Much like a psychopath, they cannot hold down a (healthy) relationship. Bonds between a couple must be stable.

However, like a codependent, they feel they’re nothing without someone, ANYONE.

Stop and start. Stop and start. Lots of small connections, one night stands.

The typical one night stand (m/f) has a far higher chance of being borderline.

Lashing out at anyone rejecting them, however trivial.

Yep, the angry phone number guys. The occasional woman who gets angry if a random man doesn’t want to fuck her. The entitlement.

Borderlines DO NOT DO rejection. It’s a main trigger.

They have no self to fall back on. Obsessed with self-improvement, no identity though. Constantly trying new things that never seem to work out (think Madonna’s looks). Lots of “bad luck” with the opposite sex. Tendency to idolize others, have idols, especially online. They gain a sense of self via this Other. The stans who can delude themselves into stalking, harassing or raping their idol, dangerous people. A courtship disorder is possible or simple limerence at a distance. Feeling a sense of ownership, viewing other humans as objects or property.

Vengeful, rage tantrums, can attempt to justify abuse with some imagined or minor slight.

You provoked me” or “you made me hurt you” or “why can’t you behave”?

That would be the classic “bunny boiler” or “disturbed young man” type.

It’s common to hear, “I own you” …. they actually think this.

Both are big on gaslighting so can be confused with a narcissist, which actually isn’t (usually) as bad.

It’s the men who ask to an abused woman “what did you do to make him hit you”?

Classic BPD, sick bastards. They never man up, nothing is ever their personal fault, even the actions of their own body don’t feel like they belong to them. When they picture themselves as the man (issues with empathy for the opposite sex), they assume the man was never at fault, even if he threatened murder.

They will FIND an excuse to hurt.

“I’m the real victim here”, as the other party is bleeding and traumatized in the corner.

They can seem glib like the psychopath or narcissist and can be at times grandiose with narc features. However, it’s an act, usually in response to attention. It’s fake. Their come-down is when this reality hits them again, which can look bipolar. They claim to be depressed when they don’t want to do something, a lot of small compulsive lies.

A rollercoaster of emotional bullshit. Like psychopaths, they deny their own condition but ALSO spread outright lies about it (we’re nice really, we’re the real victim, we suffer,  pity us, you can fix us etc).

The logical reply is “wait, if you don’t have it, how do you know so much about it?”

This makes them angry. You wouldn’t like them when they’re angry (they can intimidate by threatening this “loss” of temper, which is a deliberate choice to abuse). Adults don’t lose their temper, toddlers do, because toddlers are still developing the brain areas to control it.

Anger isn’t really an emotion, it’s an impulse. They have issues, emotion is quite healthy but being angry all the time is bad for your body. The Bobo dolls study and others show feeding anger makes it stronger and more frequent. “Let it all out” applies to tears, not physical abuse. Angry people get an endorphin rush, abusers enjoy abusing.

Like the psychopath, they study a lot online of how normal people think. They can quote forum posts to act normal or pass for intelligent, to lure in victims. It’s vapid trivia masquerading as knowledge.

A dichotomous view of life that is too shallow to withstand scrutiny.

e.g. all men are rapists/assholes v. all women are whores/crazy.

The common denominator there….

See, they find it helpful to define themselves in terms of what they’re not.

They deny their Shadow Self and project it, it’s stereotypical they claim they’re incapable of that Evil Terrible Terrible Thing. But the Enemy is FULL of it, to bursting! It’s so obvious!

Race they belong to generally but self-loathing can present if encouraged.

Sexism is far more common because of parental issues.

So it’s the misogynist who says

“I’m not sexist, I just don’t trust or believe or respect women.

OR

For balance, the misandrist who says

“I’m not sexist, I just don’t like or rely on or hang around men.”

It can present in so many ways but they’re blind to it, having projected it far, far away from what they believe is physically possible.

Anyone who thinks it’s impossible to be sexist personally, ever, at any point, is living in a bubble. Prejudices exist in all humans.

Being suspicious of all women is dodgy, being suspicious of a seductive woman, taking a sudden, keen interest in you, as warned in the Bible, is common sense.

Being distrustful of all men is off, being distrustful of a man who is insincere and keeps pushing boundaries is survival instinct.

Sexists are just lazy. Within a race, there are too many personal similarities to claim a broad genetic danger.

The psychotic thing is obvious.

“The world hates women” and “The world hates men”.

Obvious bullshit, there’s moderate but clear evidence on both sides (balance) so neither sweeping statement is true. It’s another excuse. Not to try, to abuse the “enemy” group, to get perceived revenge yada yada.

It’s actually:

The world hates (substitute for Self) so I am morally allowed to (do terrible, evil thing).

Like the #KillAllMen or Elliot murder spree fans.

It’s a selfish Crusaderism. If they clashed with that group, say SJW women to anti-SJW women, they’d hate that supposed group they claim to care about, the most of all. Thatcher gets the most hatred of any dead politician because she was a woman. In a sickening display, they got the radio to play “ding dong the witch is dead” on news of her demise. The working class loved her so the Left despise her. Great men and geniuses are envied most by omegas, they plot to literally kill people, other men are just last. It’s like Marx leeching off of Engels, a man who owned means of production. Marx lived off the blood of the worker happily.

These people are dangerous and abusive.
You love the sinner and punish the saint, you are evil. Defending deviants, rapists (of m/f), whatever it is specifically. This is not First World culture. This is childish and bitter. This is anti-justice.

“We’ll show them” they plot.

The world was right to reject them, really. That’s all they showed.

America’s stop hitting yourself

The logic seems to be: Women can’t oppress me, if I oppress them first. How is that going away? The lampreys on MGTOW have utterly ruined it. Who actually supports rapists and murderers without mental issues themselves?

The characteristic of revenge fantasies is that they never actually work.

Logically, if they did keep all 100% of women under male control, all women would be able to renounce all forms of legal responsibility to the man in charge of them. It used to be that way in some places that if women ran up massive credit debt, her husband would be automatically expected to pay. If a woman broke the law, her husband would be expected to provide her alibi or, sometimes, be blamed for forcing her to do it – and be punished in her place. You really want total responsibilities over all those idiotic messes? REALLY. Even SJWs don’t want to be held accountable for what men do. They also want women controlled for life but believe women have expiry dates… need I mention how impractical that is? You can’t drop a responsibility. This is like the people who take a commitment (e.g. marriage) then complain it’s limiting…. The men against marriage would be forcing themselves into a de facto marriage of statistically older (longer lifespan) women. They also wouldn’t be getting sex either, consent still exists. Plus they’d have a recession economy, since half the workforce is gone and never has to work again (sounds nice).

Many of their economic woes are caused by globalization.

They blame the West instead of the East. That is irrational. The propaganda is about the West because it isn’t the West, we were doing well until the rise of Asia stealing our production and student places (most women in top Western universities are Asian, in on forged transcripts, they never mention this).

Mostly, it’s immigration.

If you showed the happy 50s husband the MGTOW posts online they’d probably tell you it was a mental problem. It does share similarities with borderline personality (assuming all people hate you, insecurity, flashy purchases, assuming all people will take things from you and abandon you eventually, feeling out of place).

Hating women (okay, distrusting is visible) so much they deny their own gender role (and thus, power).

from their own files


Do they cut off their nose to spite their face, or their dick to spite SJWs?

You don’t want to pay income tax but want women to pay it?

You don’t want to pay child support but expect mothers to live off air?

You don’t want to fund schools if you don’t have children (that one is fair).

You don’t want men to protect women but refuse the death penalty for the worst criminals? How else do we get rid of them?

You want socialism (the Pill, abortions, STD shots) without the pricetag, seriously? Why not crawl back into your mother’s womb at this point? You don’t want to be an adult. If disabled people can be responsible and productive, what’s your excuse?

Apparently being our gender role oppressed them first. Somehow. Women oppressed them by needing to be provided for, due to the choice to be the baby-carrying and physically weaker sex. Because we choose those, we choose our sex apparently and fuck Darwin, “man up” is apparently hate speech.

Asking an adult male to act like a responsible man is now “sexism”, according to these guys.

(Why do you think a man cannot be a responsible adult without being married ? HMMM?)

Are your parents pushing you to get married? Diddums, you think that doesn’t happen to women?

Are your parents pushing you to have kids? That one REALLY happens more to women. By an order of magnitude.

Is nobody allowed to criticize baby, for fearing he feel SHAME?

Why can’t we shame men who deserve it? They shame women all the time. Shame is good. It makes people question immorality.

If you’re so immoral that shame works, that’s called a conscience and you should listen to it.

Because funding the mother of your children is evil but foisting them on an expensive nanny is good parenting. Studies be damned.

Can I point out the obvious?

If men don’t want to be men – that might explain why women don’t want them.

If we wanted girly men, we’d be lesbians?

A man is not his car or cologne, that would be sexist and dehumanizing. Replacing dignity and masculinity with material possessions and arrogant bragging just puts women off. The good women. Brands are telling you you need to buy stuff to impress women. Is money all they have to offer as a person? How did that work before credit cards?

Oh yeah, men gave the one thing women couldn’t provide for themselves. Men were manly.

If you want to be a metrosexual man, fine. You can’t change biology to make women get the hots for it. This is like fat acceptance but for pajama boys.

“Why can’t the woman pay me paternity leave?”

Because you didn’t give birth. If you gave birth, one day, we’d support you 100%. However, in reality, men cannot give birth, whatever the BBC says. Maternity leave happens after the birth to medically recover from the worst of it (really it takes about a year biologically).

“Why are women congratulated for conceiving?”

Because it’s a medical phenomena that happens inside their body. 

Are they really this dumb? [yes]

They continue to grow and support life itself, that’s impressive. They’ll also have to give birth, which you won’t.

Most of their complaints can be answered with: well, you don’t have to.

Women who choose not to have children still see pregnancy test adverts. They aren’t bitching about it.

Spinsters see marriage programmes on TV. Where is their forum bitching?

Society doesn’t stop because of Princess.

They sound transgender, with all this talk about the ‘evils’ of gender roles and being fluid in their societal duties.

You’re either a man or you’re not. This isn’t hard.

Don’t they get this? I think many of them just have such a low IQ they think the basics of adult living are a huge accomplishment. Women should scatter rose petals at their feet for… not having a criminal record and other things that are… normal.

They want to be spoiled but they aren’t even gay.

Men do the spoiling. Get a boyfriend, let him spoil you. Why do you think men get a sex change? They want a sugar daddy, they need to look female.

Women do provide for men but not the maternal succour they try to demand. Women are maternal to children, not adults and especially not sexual partners. It’s creepy. To be that needy as an adult, just go get it from your actual mother. You will never find a sexy mother replacement. It’s irreconcilable. Women respect (and are attracted to) adults.

(They also won’t find a new one every decade as they age. They think they don’t age.)

Yeah, demanding things from women they cannot biologically (are not evolved to) provide is a recipe for failure.

You can’t blame that on women, broflake.

I deserve this and this and this…” is bullshit in entitled women and men!

You deserve nothing and respect has to be earned. They don’t even respect themselves.

If I hated American men and wanted their legacy to die out, I’d convince them women are like the Jewish Lilith and never to marry or have kids (both of which extend male lifespan and joy).

Males commit more suicide because most of those suicides are bachelors.

Being single (bachelor) is the biggest suicide risk factor for men.
https://psychcentral.com/news/2013/06/11/mens-suicide-rate-is-3-times-that-of-women/55897.html
Almost like they evolved to have a spouse?

ding ding we have a winning study, they’ll never look into it

admitting their lifestyle is medically bad for them would require self-critique

(single women by contrast live longer, especially nuns or the celibate women)

asking happily married men how they did it would require change

Men are also at risk once they are hit by the reality of aging in the 50s. Men young enough to be their children outcompete them.
I’m sure that’s a coincidence. It can’t be regret, right players? There’s no such thing as player burnout, is there?

Men can have children any time they like, sperm doesn’t accumulate mutations year on year, does it? [does]

 

Don’t get me started on the narcissists who feel entitled to sex with women ….without the women part. Well, if you encounter any human socially, you’re bound to expect problems from that. The original MGTOW was quite brilliant in forsaking women and even dating them altogether. Fucking women causes 99% of women “problems”, you signed up for it. Nobody feels sorry for somebody that stupid.

Jan Matthys, more r than Marx

https://mises.org/library/messianic-communism-protestant-reformation

This is so r-selected it’s staggering.


A guy shows up and says property should be abolished, he should be treated like a King though, and women should be forced into marriage with violent adulterers (bigamists) who wanted a ‘legal’ form of Red Army rape because something something ‘love’.

The cage the monstrous leaders’ corpses were kept in is still up in Munster, good riddance.

“Soon Jan Matthys himself arrived, a tall, gaunt man with a long black beard. Matthys, aided by Bockelson, quickly became the virtual dictator of the town. The coercive Anabaptists had at last seized a city. The Great Communist Experiment could now begin.”

Anti-white mob.

“Matthys called therefore for the execution of all remaining Catholics and Lutherans, but Knipperdollinck’s cooler head prevailed, since he warned Matthys that slaughtering all other Christians than themselves might cause the rest of the world to become edgy, and they might all come and crush the New Jerusalem in its cradle.

Cowards.

It was therefore decided to do the next best thing, and on February 27 the Catholic and Lutherans were driven out of the city, in the midst of a horrendous snowstorm.

Ah! The Russian method.

In a deed prefiguring communist Cambodia, all non-Anabaptists, including old people, invalids, babies and pregnant women were driven into the snowstorm,

Socialists do care – about themselves.
The grasshopper should’ve been left to starve in the story.

and all were forced to leave behind all their money, property, food and clothing. The remaining Lutherans and Catholics were compulsorily rebaptized, and all refusing this ministration were put to death.”

I think we’ll have to bring this back, the cage method.
You can see they deserved it.

“With every person drafted for siege work, Jan Matthys launched his totalitarian communist social revolution.
The first step was to confiscate the property of the expelled. All their worldly goods were placed in central depots, and the poor were encouraged to take “according to their needs,” the “needs” to be interpreted by seven appointed “deacons” chosen by Matthys.”

Bloody Communists.

“When a blacksmith protested at these measures imposed by Dutch foreigners, Matthys arrested the courageous smithy. Summoning the entire population of the town, Matthys personally stabbed, shot, and killed the “godless” blacksmith”

Foreigners with a sense of entitlement.

Thank god we learned our lesson.

Multiculturalism is just a slow invasion.

“A key part of the Anabaptist reign of terror in Münster was now unveiled. Unerringly, just as in the case of the Cambodian communists four-and-a-half centuries later, the new ruling elite realized that the abolition of the private ownership of money would reduce the population to total slavish dependence on the men of power. And so Matthys, Rothmann and others launched a propaganda campaign that it was unchristian to own money privately; that all money should be held in “common,” which in practice meant that all money whatsoever must be handed over to Matthys and his ruling clique.”

Banks, we call them banks.

Strangely, they are run by a religion. Must be a coincidence.

Food was confiscated from private homes, and rationed according to the will of the government deacons. Also, to accommodate the immigrants, all private homes were effectively communized, with everyone permitted to quarter themselves anywhere; it was now illegal to close, let alone lock, doors.

No such thing as burglary.

Communal dining-halls were established, where people ate together to readings from the Old Testament.
This compulsory communism and reign of terror was carried out in the name of community and Christian “love.””

White Sharia has already happened. For similar, low IQ reasons, it also failed.

There’s a reason nobody trusts missionaries.
They’re invaders holding a book, that isn’t better.

As you can see, it’s often much worse.

“All this communization was considered the first giant steps toward total egalitarian communism, where, as Rothmann put it, “all things were to be in common, there was to be no private property and nobody was to do any more work, but simply trust in God.” The workless part, of course, somehow never arrived.”

(((Wow))) imagine my shock. And iPhones would rain from the Heavens!

Even they opposed usury, though. Con artists recognize con artists.

1534:
“everything which offends against love – all such things are abolished amongst us by the power of love and community.”

Anyone who tries to sell you on giving them power over you for weasel words like ‘love’ and ‘community’ is a dictator waiting to happen.
Tolerance is a sin, the Bible never tells you to tolerate evil, quite the opposite.
Outlawing “working for money” is intended to increase dependence.


https://biblehub.com/2_thessalonians/3-10.htm
Like unpaid internships and universal basic income today (and the welfare cliff).
Contrary to the God helps those who help themselves logic of the Bible, which didn’t see money as evil, merely love of it and greed at the expense of rights. Making tax-collectors and bankers Satan?

“For the Anabaptists boasted of their lack of education, and claimed that it was the unlearned and the unwashed who would be the elect of the world.”
“Early in May, Bockelson caught the attention of the town by running naked through the streets in a frenzy, falling then into a silent three-day ecstasy.”

Oh, to see that amygdala. Then the other immigrant friend takes over after Jan.
The first sexual revolution / religious rape / free love fest:

The elders were now given total authority over the life and death, the property and the spirit, of every inhabitant of Münster. A strict system of forced labour was imposed, with all artisans not drafted into the military now public employees, working for the community for no monetary reward. This meant, of course, that the guilds were now abolished.

No work > Forced labour.

The totalitarianism in Münster was now complete. Death was now the punishment for virtually every independent act, good or bad. Capital punishment was decreed for the high crimes of murder, theft, lying, avarice, and quarreling!

Notable exception: rape.

That’s how you spot the rabbit.

Also death was decreed for every conceivable kind of insubordination: the young against their parents, wives against their husbands and, of course, anyone at all against the chosen representatives of God on earth, the totalitarian government of Münster. Bernt Knipperdollinck was appointed high executioner to enforce the decrees.

Interfering with family life? Doesn’t sound like the socialist teachers we know.

The only aspect of life previously left untouched was sex, and this now came under the hammer of Bockelson’s total despotism. The only sexual relation permitted was marriage between two Anabaptists. Sex in any other form, including marriage with one of the “godless,” was a capital crime. But soon Bockelson went beyond this rather old-fashioned credo, and decided to establish compulsory polygamy in Münster.

City-wide Communist immigrant-led gang rape. And it didn’t just happen one New Year’s Eve.
Which the Red Army would also replicate in Germany, centuries later. Except you get creepy guys idolizing Russia to this day and never mentioning that literal rape of Europe.

I’m sure they rationalized polygamy (really rape and adultery) as Christian duty (as if their bodies were property of the state) despite how the Bible expressly tells us not to marry.

Since many of the expellees had left their wives and daughters behind,

For shame!

Münster now had three times as many marriageable women as men, so that polygamy had become technologically feasible.

Rabbits wait until most good men are war-dead (The Sexual Revolution happened after World Wars) or poor and desperate to make ends meet then make their move to take the women. By force. How omega.

R-types are just rapists waiting for an opening, a weakness in the native Ks. First they say “don’t defend your women” then it’s “your women?” They fail as husbands and fathers (they can’t even satisfy one wife and are permissive parents). Don’t trust so-called polygamists, usually they don’t believe in an age of consent – or, when given power, consent itself…

Bockelson converted the other rather startled preachers by citing polygamy among the patriarchs of Israel, as well as by threatening dissenters with death.

Won’t let us rape your daughter? Guess we’ll have to make her an orphan. 

Basic principle of tribal war. All war being tribal.

Compulsory polygamy was a bit too much for many of the Münsterites, who launched a rebellion in protest. The rebellion, however, was quickly crushed and most of the rebels put to death.

Along with their conscience.

Execution was also the fate of any further dissenters. And so by August 1534, polygamy was coercively established in Münster.

He raped the city itself, ironic.

As one might expect, young Bockelson took an instant liking to the new regime, and before long he had a harem of 15 wives, including Divara, the beautiful young widow of Jan Matthys.

Bros before what now?

Typical r loyalty.

Anyone who wants a “harem” is basically announcing to the world they’re a rapist.
If all those women wanted to sleep with them, they already would be, by consent, and they wouldn’t want a harem, that kills their ‘lovers’ for leaving.

Remember, Genghis Khan was a very successful rapist.
So-called “conquerors” are the most anti-male icons going, that was some other man’s daughter, sister, wife, mother. Sex traitors.

The rest of the male population also began to take to the new decree as ducks to water. Many of the women did not take as kindly to the new dispensation, and so the elders passed a law ordering compulsory marriage for every women under (and presumably also over) a certain age, which usually meant being a compulsory third or fourth wife.

Rape gangs writing the law.

Thank god we know better now.

Moreover, since marriage among the godless was not only invalid but also illegal, the wives of the expellees now became fair game, and were forced to “marry” good Anabaptists.

This is why you shoot deserters. If they’d betray their country and flee, what right do they have to come back to this?

Refusal to comply with the new law was punishable, of course, by death, and a number of women were actually executed as a result. Those “old” wives who resented the new wives coming into their household were also suppressed, and their quarreling was made a capital crime. Many women were executed for quarreling.

Anyone trying to shut up women is going to censor men too.

But the long arm of the state could reach only just so far and, in their first internal setback, Bockelson and his men had to relent, and permit divorce.

Polygamists are always for easy divorce and multiple re-marriage.
Actually re-marriage is the way they’re hoping to lube society up for it.

Because it isn’t a meaningful, loving commitment unless you can get out of it. And into it. And out. And shake it all about.

Indeed, the ceremony of marriage was now outlawed totally,

Satanists.

and divorce made very easy. As a result, Münster now fell under a regime of what amounted to compulsory free love. And so, within the space of only a few months, a rigid puritanism had been transmuted into a regime of compulsory promiscuity.”

This is what happens if you leave r-selected men in charge.
Chaos. Degenerate chaos. Learn from this lesson of history.

When the SJWs complain about male rule being violent, unfair and incompetent, they refer to r-men. The narcissism of small differences.

“Jan Bockelson seized this opportunity to carry his “egalitarian” communist revolution one step further: he had himself named king and Messiah of the Last Days.”

The Old and New Testaments were specifically written so we’d know to kill these little-dicked despots.

“It often happens with “egalitarians” that a hole, a special escape hatch from the drab uniformity of life, is created – for themselves.”

Communism for all! Except Party members – luxuries for them.
Rule by rapists.

“As soon as he proclaimed the monarchy, the prophet Dusentschur announced a new divine revelation: all who persisted in disagreeing with or disobeying King Bockelson would be put to death, and their very memory blotted out. They would be extirpated forever. Some of the main victims to be executed were women: women who were killed for denying their husbands their marital rights,

rapists, not husbands

for insulting a preacher, or for daring to practice bigamy – polygamy, of course, being solely a male privilege.”

Ah, the insecure double standards of the r-male. You can tell a polygamist is bad in bed when he won’t let his wife sleep with anyone else. But monogamy cannot exist one-way, morons, it’s a single bond between two. There’s no such thing as half loyal to your military either.

Male privilege, huh? The real thing, finally!

As we can see, some males belong on the bottom of the ladder, with no heirs, they’d destroy civilization otherwise.

We are not like bonobos, trust no one who says we were, more like a biological cross between gorilla and chimp.

“So that the king and his nobles might live in high luxury, rigorous austerity was imposed on everyone else in Münster. The subject population had already been robbed of their houses and much of their food; now all superfluous luxury among the masses was outlawed. Clothing and bedding were severely rationed, and all “surplus” turned over to King Bockelson under pain of death. Every house was searched thoroughly and 83 wagonloads of “surplus” clothing collected.

Sugar tax.

Anytime they tax actual food, you’re entering dystopia.

It is not surprising that the deluded masses of Münster began to grumble at being forced to live in abject poverty while the king and his courtiers lived in extreme luxury on the proceeds of their confiscated belongings. And so Bockelson had to beam them some propaganda to explain the new system. The explanation was this: it was all right for Bockelson to live in pomp and luxury because he was already completely dead to the world and the flesh. Since he was dead to the world, in a deep sense his luxury didn’t count. In the style of every guru who has ever lived in luxury among his credulous followers, he explained that for him material objects had no value. How such “logic” can ever fool anyone passes understanding.

Celebrities claiming they’re just like you but shouldn’t be taxed like you (nor their films).
Claiming diversity is good and making expensive efforts to avoid it.
I can see how the pseudologic would work.

More important, Bockelson assured his subjects that he and his court were only the advance guard of the new order; soon, they too would be living in the same millennial luxury.

All talk, like Elon “I’m gonna move to Mars” Musk.
Who happens to be a socialist, coincidentally.

And promises the journey to his new kingdom will be “fun” (creep code for orgies). Don’t get on the ship, folks, if you value your holes.
Logically, the greatest good for all would be letting his staff form a union…

Under their new order, the people of Münster would forge outward, armed with God’s will, and conquer the entire world, exterminating the unrighteous, after which Jesus would return and they would all live in luxury and perfection. Equal communism with great luxury for all would then be achieved.”

I’m reminded of Richard Spencer.
Anyone else?

Magically prosperous (but anti-merit) ethnostate.

Or Mars. Space Eden. For people too smart to believe in a Savior.

The stars are a nice touch.

“Despite his continual preaching about marching forth to conquer the world, King Bockelson was not crazy enough to attempt that feat, especially since the bishop’s army was again besieging the town.”

Ah, the cowardice! Predictable as a Tottenham match.

“Finally, Bockelson, long fascinated with the theatre, ordered his starving subjects to engage in three days of dancing and athletics. Dramatic performances were held, as well as a Black Mass. Starvation, however, was now becoming all-pervasive.”

The narcissism!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mass#Medieval_Roman_Catholic_parodies_and_additions_to_the_Mass

“To guard against such a threat, Bockelson stepped up his reign of terror still further. In early May, he divided the town into 12 sections, and placed a “duke” over each one with an armed force of 24 men. The dukes were foreigners like himself; as Dutch immigrants they were likely to be loyal to Bockelson.”

This is why your ancestors never trusted foreigners with promises.

Reminds me of EU “member states” and the region planning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regions_of_England
Why do they want a full army?

“Bockelson would undoubtedly have let the entire population starve to death rather than surrender”

Typical r.

Anyone who has to tell you they’re caring, isn’t.

“As for ex-King Bockelson, he was led about on a chain, and the following January, along with Knipperdollinck, was publicly tortured to death, and their bodies suspended in cages from a church tower.”

They’re still there, the cages.
If only they were women, they’d have instantly been clocked as witches. The vices gave them away as Satanic.

This is why men should distrust other men, especially socialists.

Their luxury comes from your labour.

Today it’s called the Labour party.

The guys who complain about make-up

are also the ones who’d complain if a woman smells like anything other than floral body lotion.

Like, they’ll criticize women for being fat but also being “high maintenance” i.e. not fat.

Nah-uh!

By ancient standards, you’re more decadent than a French king.

Think how poofy you’d be.

 

You sleep on fluffy pillows, on stitched mattresses, with plush blankets, having used liquid soap, shampoo, conditioner, toothpaste, deodorant, a comb, an electric razor, central heating/air conditioning, with a glass of cold milk waiting in your refrigerator if you wake up thirsty. You think this is nothing and feel entitled to this and more.

 

Who’s the vain one? When are these guys dispensing with all their vanities?

First up, the smartphone! Ultimate vanity symbol! Don’t need that!

Right….?

Right guys?

No, you won’t give up modern comforts so STFU lecturing everyone else.

Do it yourself first and then you might have something to signal with.

 

Being attractive isn’t a sin! These embittered boys are like SJWs and want everyone else to stop making an effort because they’re too lazy! (Covert narcissism, their ego is triggered because they stand out for not making the effort).
R-types want an equalist playing field, remember? Equal outcomes. They actually believe it’s better we’re all equal in stench and skin ailments (skin cancer exists) than feel insecure some dude next to them on the train is wearing nice jeans and a cool cologne.
Men against make-up, for a third-world society looking and smelling like shit.
It already does, in my opinion, let’s not make it worse. The average person makes less effort with their appearance than at any time period before in all human history.
Fashion history exists, whether you read it or not.
Porn taught you “make-up” (please define make-up, guys who can’t spot eyeliner) is a sexual invite and you’re pissed the fiction is fake. That isn’t the world’s fault. That’s your fault for being dumb. (They also think natural beauty is a sexual invitation because addicts are gullible idiots).
What other people look like and how they groom their body has nothing to do with you. Stop being so shallow and obsessing over it.
Grooming is a basic primate instinct. If you don’t have it, you’re clinically depressed.
They look at a naturally pretty girl and think she’s a bitch for wearing lipstick – who’s sinning here?
Jesus himself went off on one at the person who dared call his oil bath vain. There is a spiritual bond between how we treat ourselves (with respect) and how we act in the world (decently).
How dare any of you Americans (and it’s always Americans) shame people about simple standards of appearance?
I’ve been to your country enough times to know you have Fuck-All to be proud of in the appearance stakes.
Romans 12:1, NKJV. “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service
1 Corinthians 10:31, NKJV. “Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.”
I Corinthians 6:19-20, NKJV. “Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? 20 For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s.”
And there’s nothing sinful about having a woman’s body either, God made that too. To insult a woman’s natural form is to blaspheme God’s design.
Genesis 1:27, NKJV. “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.”
Beautification is not a sin, and never has been (there are plenty of Biblical references about good, moral wives looking good too and being the pride of their husbands) it’s about a First World living standard and a longer lifespan, pride is the sin. Like presuming to judge other’s non-silicon appearance and the body/Temple God gave them…
If you look at the history of cosmetics, it’s always been primarily about health because, guess what? Healthy people are more attractive! Cosmeceuticals are not a new thing! Only in the past couple of centuries have they been separated off. Why? Legal reasons. Lower standards for non-medical products to hit the market or that they couldn’t prove the really subjective claims e.g. radiant smile. What’s that? How do you medically prove that?
These would be the “men” who attack other men for wanting to make the best of their appearance.
Leave them alone and join a pro-ugly group, you losers.
Sorry attractive people enjoying their life make you sad, but this isn’t a company’s fault, it’s evolution. [Explain sexual selection without attractiveness, I fucking dare you.]
Since it’s none of your business unless it’s your wife, join a monastery if attractive things frighten you. Do you balk at flowers and smiling babies too?
If everyone went back to smelling like ass and swamp crotch, you’d still be bottom of the barrel and whine about it. Fitness still exists.
Sports are as decadent as Hollywood but the guys claiming models shouldn’t be paid for what nature gave them never ever apply that logic to the genetic freaks known as athletes.
They’d only be happy in the world of Harrison Bergeron because pretty people couldn’t oppress them by comparison. Dya wanna ban Photoshop too? You do, don’t you?
It’s basic etiquette to look good and act good too.
This isn’t an either/or, don’t try to spin a false dichotomy out of this.
Looking like a slob is a sin as much as being it. It’s literally a sin to apply sloth to your personal care habits.
When are you banning mouthwash for making men seem more attractive than their natural oral bacteria (including the likes of Herpes) might suggest?
Jesus never used mouthwash. QED according to you.

Scared of the word “vagina”

MISOGYNISTS

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/08/healthline-website-says-the-term-vagina-is-not-gender-inclusice-will-start-using-front-hole-instead/

When various politicians avoided the word in a reproductive debate, that’s what they were called.

Men don’t get to define womanhood. “Front hole” is the cake hole, obviously.

They hate women because it’s competition for straight men. Really. They only pretend to be female to rape men. It’s the sneaky fucker strategy.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/07/04/book-the-man-who-would-be-queen-transgender-psychology/

Literally their thought process.

“Will I be more successful getting straight men as a woman than I am at getting gay men as a man?” (The last decision has to be weighted by a particular transsexual’s degree of preference for straight versus gay men. Most vastly prefer straight men.)” Rapists.

Disgusting rapists.

Straight men don’t want them. NO MEANS NO.

Legal recognition as a “woman” is about coercion and rape, so men can’t object. I won’t stand for it.

They do everything they can to oppress women (we can’t say vagina, really eunuch?) and if they had their way, they’d just kill us all as sexual competition, it’s insanity. You’ll see.

The violence is the reason they want to be “women”, actually female-passing, they think, sociopathically, it’ll be easier to get away with legally. They’re testing the woman-bashing theories of MRA’s perverse interpretation of gynocentrism and every time, it fails.

e.g. expect to see more of this, tranny rage. Testing the law.

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2018/08/04/jury-rejects-transgenders-claim-that-transition-medication-caused-him-to-try-to-kill-3-people-with-an-axe-660657

When they aren’t above the law, cue crocodile tears and the incredible sulk.
They aren’t in another state or anything, they’re actually aroused by the thought of violence. They’re more present.
Medically, reducing your testosterone levels would make you less violent (there are studies), so you’re doubly responsible 1. for doing it, nutjob and 2. for blaming women’s hormones (sexist) and lying in court (perjury).

Remember Ed Gein.

Cross-dressing is a trait of serial killers and has been studied as a top fetish in prison populations.
They get angry (and the threats are all translated “you wouldn’t like me when I’m angry”) because when you spot a predator (mask drop), it attacks! [This is what real women put up with, with creepy straights. Exactly this, the intimidation, coercion and “the creeps” survival instinct.] They’ll also target young (underage) men/boys because, like most sexual predators, they take advantage of the benefit of the doubt (trust), how society enables them with myths and social inexperience. Men must discuss how to avoid predators themselves, the time is now. Learn about freeze responses and ways to escape such a situation. There’s widespread grooming of adults and minors to accept the behaviour as “good” and “fun” whatever their personal objection (conscience).

Intimidation – you aren’t allowed to find me sexually repulsive gaslighting (I’ve written before that if you aren’t allowed to be sexually repulsed, you aren’t free).

Coercion – scared you might like it? It doesn’t count as gay…

I mentioned a study I could scrape up before.

You aren’t allowed to study these anymore.

Paraphilias deserve no legal protected status, look at these!