Reverse the Sexual Revolution

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140520115514.htm

If you pointed at a random American man or woman on the street and shouted Whore! you’d probably be right.
Note the contradiction of ‘healthy’ ‘infected’. They know the cancer risk and doubtless others.
This is being pushed as healthy?

Meanwhile, there are probably psychiatric effects from HPV…

and this includes men, who retain STDs in their urethra (the area isn’t sterile), as well the inevitability of male birth control.

19225852_1418153738292010_274071024440347821_n

HIV and the STD jump from apes to humans via bestiality

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2848574/

It goes on about genital ulcer, pushes circumcision and still admits that it doesn’t explain the data.

“Transmission of simian retroviruses to humans is not exceptional.”

But this one is different.

“Simian foamy viruses (SFV) have frequently been transmitted to humans exposed to bushmeat, apparently without further spread [20] and the epidemic human T-cell lymphotropic viruses (HTLV) arose from their simian counterparts (STLV) through contacts over thousands of years. It is generally accepted that SFV, STLV, as well as SIV, entered the human population through bushmeat handling. Although such events are common today [20][22], and therefore assumed to also have been common in the recent and distant past, they seldom result in a virus with epidemic potential. Despite progress in identifying SIVs closely related to HIV groups [1][3], [9], how and why only some of the transmitted SIV strains established epidemics is subject of ardent debate”

That’s as close as an academic gets to I know I’m lying but I need to get this published.

The French Disease, the C of E and modern history

inspired by
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/britains-prince-charles-sees-return-to-dark-days-of-thirties#comment-313855

I decided I need to explain more fully. I’ll be brief and short on proof because you can literally just Google-fu most of it, seriously. It’s literally history. This is about connections. Credit me, biches.

thinking-cap

 

Manwhoring as it’s now known might’ve decided the course of modern history. Fornication is forbidden by the Bible, but nobody asks the punishment for unmarried men?

Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.

First of all, art history. No, really. Seriously, look.

Who is this?

Who is this?

Jesus, right? White Jesus. Regardless of your opinions on the genetics and hue of the region at the time, there is a typical Renaissance image associated with Jesus from this period. It’s oddly youthful and mercurial.

Except that isn’t Jesus. The White Jesus iconography is based on one of the most despicable men in history, the basis for Machiavelli’s Prince. It was based on the bastard son of the Pope, Cesare Borgia.

This Spanish, incestuous piece of shit. Read around about it, he’s worse than Hitler. He deserves to have his name spat on the way people do about Hitler now.
Instead, we continue to depict his likeness as The Christ.

http://macquirelatory.com/False%20Images%20of%20Christ.htm

Who did this portrayal? Leonardo da Vinci. Paid by the Catholic Church, headed by… a Borgia. His father.

…Jesus Christ…

There’s vanity and then there’s demanding someone paint your son as the Son of God, Saviour of Man.

It’s some Alexander-level egotism. Alexander the Great claimed to be a demi-god too.

Before people could read widely, they read paintings, symbolically.

But that which is made with hands is cursed, as well it, as he that made it: he, because he made it; and it, because, being corruptible, it was called god.

I don’t trust Catholic statues for this reason.
They’re creepy. Paintings, fine, but a statue? An idol? No. No, thank you.
I’m pretty sure there was a story about that.

There’s an interesting story that this mystery ‘model’ might be Judas too, twisted by time and sin.
http://www.cjpwisdomandlife.com/davinci-last-supper-judas-jesus/

Ugliness, the wages of sin. They do appear similar, perhaps a reference to Cesare’s public and private face?

http://www.constitution.org/mac/prince17.htm
also http://www.bartleby.com/36/1/17.html

Cesare is mentioned by name preceding its most famous and misquoted passage.

Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with.

The full passage is eye-opening indeed.

fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.

Speaking of the mask of celebrity.

http://ianchadwick.com/machiavelli/chapters-15-21/chapter-15-looking-good-acting-bad/
OT: Machiavelli and Leonardo da Vinci were friends, Assassin’s Creed was truthful.
They tried to collaborate on a river project, what a mash-up.
Why wouldn’t they discuss Cesare, both involved in the constant war of the time?

Machiavelli wrote the Prince to curry Cesare’s favour by praising his decisions.
Medici money had its limits, unlike the Papacy. Gold thrones, y’all.
Truly, it should be known as Cesarism, not Machiavellianism.

Anyway, the rampant sexuality of the Cardinals, up to and including the Borgia Pope himself, have given it a reputation that continues to this day with paedophilia scandals (women were banned from most of the Vatican).
“At present, Vatican City is the only country where men but not women have voting rights.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Alexander_VI

Therefore his Italianized Valencian surname, Borgia, became a byword for libertinism and nepotism, which are traditionally considered as characterizing his pontificate.

I mean, there are books about this stuff. Do I need to keep linking fact or can we crack on?

TLDRBooks: Cesare caught syphilis in 1497. It might’ve made him more evil, a feat supposedly possible.

To avoid going into hiding like possibly, literally Hitler, he wore “a leather mask covering half his face (disfigured possibly by syphilis during his late years).”

If only men weren’t crazy about pussy, eh? Far more evidence they’re the hysterical ones, isn’t there?

Maybe that’s why we call it his-story? It’s the story of STDs, r-selected men being the primary carriers.

Fast forward to Henry VIII. He had the ‘French Disease’, syphilis. Nobody knows quite how, he got around. Is it a hint if I hyperlink?
To escape France and it’s pimp hand, The Pope, Henry formed the Church of England (colloquially C of E), which doesn’t hate women, allowed him to marry a prettier one, allows the book of Common Prayer in a common tongue and doesn’t take all your beer money overseas to keep the sexual deviant who gave you The French Disease in silken socks.

Allegedly.

This would explain why Elizabeth wanted to keep her wits about her and remain a Virgin Queen.

The nobles shared prostitutes and wives, they were pretty much all infected with something.
That’s why their babies kept dying. On top of everything.

Who worked for this French deviant? Why, Leonardo!
Who might Anne Boleyn have met at the French court? Leonardo, again.

Where does syphilis spread fastest? Well, much like HIV, homosexuality in men, again.
We do know a direct descendant was of that persuasion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_III_of_France#Sexuality
And we all know the French court was decadent, almost manic, grandiose and well, a bit loopy.

Symptoms of the French Disease.

Mad King Georgey had some type of ailment but nobody can pinpoint what exactly.
Seemed a little bipolar, mouth watering,, difficulty seeing, bit loopy…
Syphilis is also known as the ‘great imitator’, looking like many diseases to the untrained eye.
It’s a matter of psychiatry in the latter stages. This didn’t exist.

Where did this dread disease come from? Why did it suddenly get through Europe?

Well, the French disease, isn’t French. It was actually brought back by Columbus’ crew from America.

Why can’t men keep it in their pants, seriously? That’s much worse than measles, smallpox and flu.
It’s the Renaissance HIV, it might’ve ended the Renaissance as we know it.

However, it took up permanent root in the French court swiftly (homosexuality marks out the French, free lovers) and might’ve been the hidden cause of the decadence that led the French people to guillotine them.

http://thisisversaillesmadame.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/sickness-of-shame-syphilis.html
Some of those symptoms may be familiar.

The court in which Louis XIV grew up in definitely saw syphilis as a sign of god’s wrath for a misspent life.

By 1736 the problem had become so imminent that Jean Astruc, royal physician to Louis XV, wrote one of his greater works on the disease.

It can be passed onto children if the pregnant mother catches it from the father.

Fast-forward again to the modern day.

It’s returning because middle-aged men can’t keep it in their pants. AGAIN.

It has come back to Europe, like TB, with mass immigration and promiscuity of former debauched eras.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233310/Syphilis-scourge-kings-dictators-old-surging-back.html

We are the age of super-gonorrhea. I’d suggest either of these as candidates for Gay Germ theory.

Thanks, Sexual Revolution!

The feminists lost the plot when they denied the unique female power of maternity. Men kill men, women kill their babies. Men kill their future babies and drive their women hysterical with STDs (see Lincoln’s wife).

The true sexual revolution were the libertines, extreme hedons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertine

They only came about after the introduction and spread of syphilis into Europe.

Wait, does Britain have a Mad King in modernity?

There is a rumour about Charlie’s adultery. A certain infection Camilla might’ve picked up at school that ravished her looks early… God’s wrath indeed.
https://www.occams-razor.info/2005/04/a_salute_to_rea.html
“There was also the obvious concern that the king or queen would not contract sexually transmitted diseases like syphilis, which was quite common through much of human history.”

I’ve written before on the fact STDs were considered evil because they were passed from whores to mothers, and on to babies, who they tend to murder. It’s like the male form of abortion. Lincoln’s children might’ve died because of his disease.

http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/2015/camilla-parker-bowles-openly-mocks-princess-diana-prince-charles-condones-it-prince-william-prince-harry-would-be-mortified/

It’s almost impossible to keep any references to this online for long, but it’s spoken of quite openly in London.

“It wouldn’t surprise me.”

Syphilis produces many of its third-stage neurosyphilitic symptoms with physical degeneration. It is found by autopsy, physically.
One symptom is weakened impulse control e.g. Ivan the Terrible murdering his own son in a manic fit of rage (mixed episode, clinically). This is also called hypofrontality. Porn addiction can cause it too.

http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/garys-research-hypofrontality

Hypofrontality may be a temporary boon to creativity, a side effect of schizophrenia-like bursts of erratic mental energy, explaining the slutty artist who later loses it and tops himself.

https://subtleyoga.com/2015/02/19/neuroscience-hoga-yoga-helps-mental-health-part-6-transient-hypofrontality/

How many lefties love meditation and yoga?

The ‘mindless’ trend? Brainlessness, celebrated by these people?

Transient hypofrontality is an (obviously) technical term meaning large portions of your prefrontal cortex have deactivated and brain activity is now dancing around various circuits.

THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING.

No Noooooo are you kidding me wtf are you testing me satan

Frontal lobe is known to generally code for common sense, self-control, logic and reason.
Hypofrontality is heavily r-type, as a mode of cognition.

They don’t have anxiety, they likely have brain damage, by self-report.

I’ve leave you to these dark thoughts and hidden facts.

Throughout modern history, what if the women weren’t crazy? This idea only really came about during the Renaissance, when men became the lascivious ones.
What if they had an STD thanks to slutty hubby?
What if their own reasoning was twisted by the same?
What if this was passed through the seed?
What would be a great way to punish prideful man, that doesn’t keep monogamy or respect purity?

Drive his wife to madness and kill his babies.

I’m slightly ripping off Carlin here but he thought it was AIDs.
“maybe it could be spread sexually, making them a little reluctant to engage in the act of reproduction” source

We had syphilis originally, then HIV and now Ebola. All deadly STDs.
Who would be empty-headed enough to sleep around, despite these?

http://www.charismamag.com/life/women/27015-6-reasons-this-popular-meditation-trend-is-dangerous-for-christians

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Sins-of-the-Father/

Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear [the guilty]; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth [generation].

What could do that?

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

A microbe? A pathogen, maybe?
Between generations, biologically, that would mean sexually.

drinking tired of this shit michael fassbender

What would be a divine sign, if there were to be a plague on man?

The evolution of the natural world beyond the mastery of man.

Antibiotic resistance.

#mic drop#

Anal sex linked to anal cancer, says Captain Obvious

http://www.medicaldaily.com/does-anal-sex-lead-anal-cancer-3-facts-and-myths-400561

Close to 90 percent of anal cancer cases can be traced back to HPV. But the cancer itself is relatively rare.

Not the point. You shouldn’t have STDs in your arse.
That’s the point.

If only we had a book of some kind, teaching people these basic facts of life.

What to do, sure, but more importantly and practically, what not to do…

Yeah, that’ll do.

Honestly, the worst lie atheists peddle is that the rules of reality are arbitrary.
Things are called bad for a reason – because they ARE bad for you. Personally.
Morality is based on the individual and their dumb-arse choices.

Couldn’t resist.

It’s gay sex. Doesn’t matter if you’re doing it with a woman, if you’re not doing it with the woman parts of the woman. Gay sex habits, gay sexual statistics. Because we know that bell curve ends well.

“And though cases have been slowly increasing in recent decades, only one of every 500 people will develop anal cancer in their lifetime, generally between the ages of 55 to 64 — a stark contrast to the one in every 22 people who will develop colorectal cancer.”

  1. Not correcting for sexual ‘lifestyle’. Not an argument.
  2. As if microbes cannot migrate. Through the same system. With zero boundaries. The area of the tract is vastly larger than the opening. Accounting for physical size.

See note.

“Similarly, the greater number of sexual partners, the greater the risk of cancer.”

I keep seeing the manosphere complain about prostate cancer but deny… this bit.

http://www.livescience.com/45743-sti-std-trichomoniasis-trich-prostate-cancer.html
How did it get there? Magic?

You can only shut out reality for so long. Before it comes knocking on your backdoor.

You notice how so few of these sex-positive people are willing to talk about medical facts, from HBD to STD immunity?

Prostate cancer is under-funded, therefore women are wrong.

Prostate cancer is bad, therefore breast cancer is funny.

Prostate because man. Manly man macho man. Listen to Mr Man. Anal fun.

Note: This pathogenic cancer aetiology is a great score for Gay Germ theory. I wonder if the ‘men’ indulging in the medically, morally wrong type of sex to imitate porn stars (great sexual role models) will show greater effeminacy (and other atypical gender psychological outcomes). So the pussies complaining about cancer in men as sexist are happily spreading germs they know probably cause cancer in women. No sympathy necessary.

“two-thirds of new cases are diagnosed in women.”

Did I mention the best part?
Men can catch and keep STDs in their urethra from not wearing a condom, it makes you less of a man regardless of where you stick it. It doesn’t just protect the woman/receptive party.  Even the testes are not immune, as Ebola shows.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279435042_Immunophysiology_of_the_Male_Reproductive_Tract

I mean, anal sex with a woman can still result in pregnancy so I don’t know what argument they’ve got at this point.

http://www.womenshealthmag.com/mom/pregnancy-from-anal-sex

Almost like it’s evil (as eating bad pork used to be fatal, prior to antibiotics and electric ovens). All the stuff about the sin of men lying as with other men refers to this practice, it isn’t exclusive to gays but it’s the only internal type they can do, they don’t have as much choice. When God got mad at sodomites, they might’ve been doing it to women, also raising questions about spilling seed with the expected pre-marital stuff to boot. I mention that because the guys who get high and mighty about doing it with women, are actually worse according to the Bible than the homosexuals they look down on.

Wherever anal sex is discussed, it should be dismissed, based on literally ALL the evidence.

Never taught to kids as the ‘same’ and OK to emulate based on porn.

Yeah, refusing to disclose STDs is illegal here

I keep seeing the myth that it’s fine if it isn’t HIV.

Erm, nope. Damaging STD, and considering the cancer risk, miscarriage/birth defect odds and lifelong reputation damage, that’s basically all of them.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/h_to_k/intentional_or_reckless_sexual_transmission_of_infection_guidance/#Relevant

And that’s why PUAs hate the UK.

The courts have recognised that person-to-person transmission of a sexual infection that will have serious, perhaps life-threatening, consequences for the infected person’s health can amount to grievous bodily harm under the Offences against the Person Act 1861: R v Dica [2004] 2 Cr. App. R. 28. Therefore, the transmission of that infection can constitute the offence of inflicting or causing grievous bodily harm, which when intentional can attract a sentence of life imprisonment.

The relevant offences for a prosecutor to consider are under sections 18 and 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861.

Malicious, reckless, aforethought are relevant terms here.
Not using a condom extends the sentence, not informing them of sleeping with third parties that also carry it (current risk level is assessed) will also count (so you can’t blame third party for the risk piggie in the middle willingly took on and spread).
More STDs, higher sentence, longer duration spreading it around, higher sentence, bragging about it or apathy, higher sentence.

We’re civilized.

And if they’d still give consent when informed (aka when it counts) then why not inform them?

Eating is natural. Presenting someone with adulterated food is still illegal.

Medieval common sense, disgust and contagion

https://aeon.co/ideas/the-medieval-senses-were-transmitters-as-much-as-receivers

It’s really quite clever.

Think of the damage an imbecile has on your intellect when you have to listen to them.

You have to stop, process it as them/their argument, recall the truth, correct it in your mind and move along.

Prior to germ theory, this set of beliefs would produce much the same behaviours as we would call hygiene e.g. avoiding the objects and physical company of degenerates, probably covered in harmful microbes, and disgust at seeking out sites (even on the human body) associated with filth.

brb downgrading my impression of your IQ

Ostracization wasn’t petty, it was medically prudent.

A term I love that we need to bring back is sexual hygiene.

Immorality, as it was called, was a public health risk.