ISIS Philippines Shows Beheading Executions Of 3 Men In First Official Release
Home | Index of articles
Men Who Love to Hate
Hey there, haters! Do you hate blacks, Jews, Catholics, Muslims, gays and anyone else who is not white, straight and Protestant? The Ku Klux Klan has a place for you! And ladies, you can wear the outfits too! What if you don’t rock a hood that well and feel claustrophobic wearing one, or feel that burning crosses on lawns is too much work? Try neo-Nazism. They almost have the same hate list as the KKK and the outfits are much more form fitting and Third Reich-ish. And if you’re blonde, well … blondes do have more fun, right?
Still not what you’re looking for? We might have something perfect for you, regardless of your skin color, ethnicity or religious affiliation — except if you’re a woman or gay man. If so, do not even think of joining … wait for it … The Return of Kings. Can you hear the TRUMPet fanfares? Can you see the bowing and scraping and boot kissing? Can you imagine the outfits?
The crowns, the Ermine-trimmed velvet robes, the bling! Oh yes, and the most important part: countless numbers of vicious, scheming women just waiting to be ravished!
The ROK categorically despises women, so you can still hate Catholics, Jews, Muslims, Protestants, agnostics and atheists, plus feminist women of any group! Particular vitriol is reserved for women with brains who relate to themselves as human beings and not merely as f#@k-holes, a charming term for women coined by the late bad-boy poet Charles Bukowski.
No, you are not reading The Onion right now. You’re reading “Consider This,” and I’m sorry to say that Return of Kings is not a parody or a joke or SNL skit. It is the creepy, dangerous, Trump-supporting and insane “neo-masculinity” group, the brainchild of a Hitler-esque man who is undoubtedly still living in his parents’ basement like most of his 13,000 followers. His name — which I’m reluctant to state since it’s helping to legitimize someone who shouldn’t have any visibility at all — is Daryush “Roosh” Valizadeh. And apparently the only thing that makes him superior is that he has a penis. That’s it.
If you’re a liberal or progressive or just an old-fashioned Republican who hasn’t ingested the Tea Party Kool-Aid, you understand that Mr. ROK hasn’t “arisen” in a vacuum. He is a reflection of the same gestalt that has some extremists salivating over Donald Trump and his ideas. The Return of Kings is a backlash against the next global revolution that must happen if we’re going to have a shot at a world that works for everyone, which involves the equality and full citizenship of half the planet, namely, women.
Valizadeh is a bitter nerd who has created a movement because no self-respecting woman wanted to sleep with him. Talk about vagina envy. Now he’s in the news because he called for a “Pro-Rape Meet-up” that was to have convened last week on Feb 6, in more than 40 cities at various locations around the world. The event was eventually canceled over fears stemming from not being able to guarantee the safety and privacy of attendees due to planned protests. I kid you not. Advocating fear is one thing, but experiencing it is quite another. Canceling the event is like a KKK member being afraid to march in case someone will speak out against them, then getting the leadership to call off the march rather than face the consequences of their words and actions.
In the early 1970s, Andrea Dworkin wrote a book called “Woman Hating” that is truly a must-read for any person, woman or man, who wants to get a grip on gender politics. Sadly, “Woman Hating” is still relevant. Many women have the words “man-hater” hurled at them for expressing ideas of justice and equality as they point out misogyny and discrimination. The real problem is rampant woman-hating, not man-hating, either expressed with glee and openness like the ROK idiots or through more subtle means like glass ceilings, double standards and vicious stereotypes that negatively impact both women and men.
It would be easy to ignore or dismiss ROK; doing so is folly. They are not monsters or aliens. They live next door to you. They are in the grocery store or at a coffee shop. They are around at probably the same rate as sociopaths, which by some estimates is about 5 percent of the population. There’s reading that can help shed some light: Gavin de Becker’s “The Gift of Fear,” will have you looking at scary people a lot differently, as will “The Sociopath Next Door” by Martha Stout. Not all sociopaths are serial killers or mass murderers. They simply thrive on making themselves feel superior by joining others in putting down the targets they hate and blame for almost everything.
Haters thrive on secrecy. Before the event was canceled, the ROK issued a secret “password phrase” for attendees, which undoubtedly changed once the word got out. The password created to help participants recognize each other was “Do you know where the nearest pet shop is?”
My password phrase? “Please get help now. The only place you are a king is in your head… and that’s a very bad neighborhood.”
Neomasculinity, as postulated by Serge Kreutz, is a social and political movement that aims to reinstall the patriarchy where it has been eroded, and to preserve it where it still functions. The defining element is anti-feminism. All other positions are negotiable.
American pedophile in Albania
Seven years after our country was shocked by a pedophile scandal at the “Femijet e Tij” Center, (His Children), in the Albanian capital, where three foreigners had abused with homeless minors, another scandal is expected to end up in court soon.
Top Channel has secured the prosecution file against the US citizen, Carl Stephan Kaminski, today 70 years old, who arrived in Albania under the name David Gerard Golderstein. He will be prosecuted in absence for pedophilia with grave consequences against three children during 2003-2006.
One of the abused children, according to the prosecution, is still being cured for serious psychiatric problems, with the diagnosis “refractory schizophrenia” and is unable to communicate.
The minor showed these problems after he was abused. The Prosecution says that Kaminski has entered Albania as a tourist and has mostly lived in Durres. During this time he has abused with children in a house that he had rented.
“He has abused with three minors when he was living in the rented house. The defendant even took naked pictures of the children, promising to delete them”, the Prosecution file says.
The pedophile was discovered recently after a notification that arrived in 2011 by the US authorities.
According to the documents that Top Channel has secured, after abusing with the children he has left during the time when another pedophilia scandal shocked the country, that of the British citizens, David Brown, Dino Kristodulu and Robin Arnold.
But Kaminski was arrested by the German Police near Rosenheim, for traveling with false documents under the name David Gerard Golsderstein, as a Belgian citizen. In this country he was sentenced with one year and four months for falsification of documents.
After finishing the sentence, the 70 year old was handed over to the US justice, where the authorities were looking for him for sexual abuses with minors. When he was 30 years old, he was also sentenced in Massachusetts for pedophilia.
The US prosecutors found pornographic videos of him with the Albanian minors, and have immediately notified the Albanian Prosecution that opened the case.
The Albanian prosecution asked the extradition of Carl Stephan Kamisnki, based on the extradition tractate of 1993.
Why is sex so important? Because sex builds an immortal individual soul.
Khmer Rouge terror in Cambodia
Donald Trump Lowering the Age of Sexual Consent to 13 Is Fake News
March 1, 2017
Reports that President Donald Trump signed a law lowering the age of sexual consent in the United States to 13 years old are false. This story was recycled from a similar fake article published under former President Barack Obama’s tenure.
According to Snopes, the fake claim originated on Now8News website, a fake news website with no disclaimer to help discern the difference between fact and fiction. The article claimed that the new law changed the age of consent in all 50 states. It purported:
An announcement was made on Wednesday by the Trump Administration which states a new law that will take effect April 1, 2017 and Americans are shocked and disappointed. According to the announcement, the law concerning the age of consent will be changed across all 50 states and D.C. Currently the law varies in each state with the age of consent being 16, 17, and 18 years old with age provisions and mistake of age defense clauses. Currently, according to lawyers and court officials across the US, these varying laws cause confusion from state to state. This new law is looking to create a uniformed, understood age of consent factor across the entire country.
This new law will make any and all contact legal as long as the child is 13 years of age or older. Now that they have done away with the age-gap provision, a 19-year-old boy can legally have sex with a 13-year-old girl without suffering any legal consequences as long as they both consent to the act.
In the U.S., there is an age of consent between 16 and 18 years old, depending on the state. The same fake article about lowering the age to 13 was published in 2015 about Obama signing the bill. That, too, was false.
Male feminists are traitors. For women to be feminists is somehow understandable. They want power. Everybody wants power. But male feminists are traitors. Treat them as such. For a list of male feminists, see here.
The History of Vivisection
The use of animals for experimentation began centuries ago, first as a study of the physiology of the animal and its organs, and then as a model for learning about the function of human systems. Human cadavers were used to study the structure of the human body, but using live animals allowed scientists to see how blood flowed and organs worked in a way that would generally not be tolerated in a human, although history has many instances of human vivisection as well. Many early vivisectors were themselves appalled at what they were doing for the sake of their experiments.
A thorough treatment of the history of vivisection was published earlier this year by Nuno Franco, Animal Experiments in Biomedical Research: A Historical Perspective. This article details the earliest known use of animals as experimental subjects through relatively modern times, including the advent of the anti-vivisection movement.
Understanding the history of how animals have been used in the name of science is helpful in understanding how to change attitudes and how to move forward in advancing better, more humane science. If you have an interest in the history of vivisection, this article provides a well-researched and written treatment of the subject matter.
Socrates, clearly recognized as a wise man, stated that women have no place in public life. And right he was.
Female Circumcision as Sexual Therapy: The Past and Future of Plastic Surgery?
In Chicago, a physician with offices on Michigan Avenue offers clitoral unhooding today for $1,000 (plus operating room fees). His intention? To more easily enable a woman to reach orgasm. Clitoral unhooding falls under the larger category of female genital cosmetic surgeries (FGCS), surgeries that are reportedly becoming more popular among women and physicians. Some physicians, even those who don’t perform FGCS, see them as part of the future of plastic surgery.
The assumption is that these surgeries don’t have much of a past. In fact, there is a long history of surgeries on female genitals—especially on the clitoris—as “sexual enhancement” for women, designed to help them achieve their “proper role” as sexual partners. Over a century ago, another Chicago physician also removed clitoral hoods of women, also as therapy to enable them easier orgasms. The use of female circumcision since the late 1800s to treat a woman’s lack of orgasm reveals a medical understanding of the function of the clitoris as sexual—an understanding held decades prior to the physiological evidence supplied by William Masters and Virginia Johnson.
Understanding the sexual nature of the clitoris and its importance to female sexual pleasure, some physicians have, for well over a century, diagnosed a condition of the clitoris as the physiological cause for a woman’s failure to have an orgasm with her husband. These physicians thus treated the lack of an orgasm in the marital bed as a sexual disorder treatable through surgery.
By removing the clitoral foreskin, some physicians (as well as non-physicians) thought the clitoris would be more exposed to the penis during penetrative intercourse, and would thus receive direct stimulation from the penis. Physicians performed—and some women or their spouses sought out—female circumcision in order to maintain (or conform to) the sexual behavior deemed culturally appropriate for white, U.S.-born, middle- to upper-class women: orgasm with their husbands.
In the United States, the first documented use of female circumcision as a sexual enhancement therapy occurred in the late 19th century, appearing at a time when the espousal of female orgasm during marital sex was increasingly seen as an important component for a healthy marriage. Physicians performed female circumcision to help married women who wanted—or whose husbands wanted their wives to have—orgasms during martial sex.
Practitioners who removed clitoral hoods to enable female orgasm included Chicago gynecologist Denslow Lewis, who presented evidence for the benefits of female circumcision at a meeting of the American Medical Association in 1899. In “a large percentage” of women who failed to find marital passion “there is a preputial adhesion, and a judicious circumcision, together with consistent advice, will often be successful,” according to Lewis. Lewis had treated 38 women with circumcision, and had “reasonably satisfactory results in each instance.”
This procedure continued to be used to treat women for their inability to orgasm throughout the 20th century. In 1900, Chicago gynecologist A.S. Waiss wrote about removing the clitoral hood of Mrs. R., a 27-year-old woman who had been married for seven years and who was “absolutely passionless,” something that greatly upset her. Her unresponsiveness troubled her, or her husband, enough for her to seek a medical remedy. The doctor found Mrs. R.’s clitoris “entirely covered” by its hood. He circumcised the clitoris and the patient “became a different woman”—she was, the doctor wrote, “lively, contented,” and “happy,” and sex now brought her satisfaction.
In 1912, Douglas H. Stewart in New York City saw a “fairly robust woman” who, though desirous for sexual intercourse, when the act was attempted found “there ‘was nothing in it.’” Upon examination, Stewart found the clitoris of the patient to be “buried” and preceded to circumcise the woman to reveal the organ.
Charles Lane, a physician in Poughkeepsie, New York, believed the clitoris “a very important organ to the health and happiness of the female,” and performed circumcision on women who were unable to reach orgasm. In a 1940 article concerning his use of circumcision on a patient—Mrs. W., a 22-year-old woman who had recently married but had yet to experience an orgasm—Lane noted “that little trick did it all right.”
And C.F. McDonald, a physician in Milwaukee, noted in a 1958 article that women who complained to him of difficult or painful intercourse often had a clitoris hidden by foreskin. To reveal the organ, he removed the foreskin, with “very thankful patients” as the reward. McDonald operated in the 1950s—during the height of the Freudian vaginal orgasm theory, a theory that held healthy and mature adult women had vaginal, not clitoral, orgasms—suggesting clitoral circumcision as sexual therapy did not stop; indeed, by some accounts, more women underwent circumcision at mid-century to surgically increase the potential for orgasm than at any earlier time.
Physicians, both in print and at medical society meetings, discussed that “little trick” for decades. By the 1970s, information about the usefulness of female circumcision to enable female orgasm during penetrative, heterosexual sex began to appear with more regularity in popular publications as well, with information about the surgery as a sexual enhancement appearing in books such as The Consumer’s Guide to Successful Surgery.
Magazines, too, including Playgirl and Playboy, ran stories about female circumcision. Playgirl carried two stories by Catherine Kellison, who wrote about her circumcision and how orgasms were easier for her to attain after the surgery. The gynecologist who removed her clitoral hood told Kellison that an estimated three-fourths of women did not reach orgasm because of a hooded clitoris, and that circumcision was the surgical solution to this condition. The doctor told Kellison that she would likely benefit from having her clitoral hood removed, and, after undergoing the procedure, Kellison wrote that she did find orgasms easier to attain following the surgery.
While estimating how many American women underwent female circumcision since the late 19th century is not possible—it was a quick procedure, most often performed by physicians in their clinics—evidence of its use can be found indirectly through insurance reimbursement for it.
In May 1977 the insurance company Blue Shield Association recommended that its individual plans stop routine payments for 28 surgical and diagnostic procedures considered outmoded or unnecessary. Of the 28, one was removing the hood of the clitoris. While this information is not translatable into an actual estimate of how many women elected to have their clitorises circumcised, it suggests the procedure was at least popular enough to warrant the discontinuation of paying for it by an insurance company.
In addition to Blue Shield Association, others have labeled the procedure as not medically indicated, with some being even more critical of the assumptions underlying the use of it as therapy to treat a lack of female orgasm. Feminists interested in women’s health began questioning female circumcision as a surgery for purported sexual enhancement in the 1970s as part of their larger critique of the medicalization of the female body and the feminist embrace of the clitoris as an important sexual organ for women.
More recently, women’s health activists with the New View Campaign in the United States protested practitioners of FGCS and launched a website to educate the public about the diversity of female genitals.
Similar to the New View Campaign, both the popular media and academics have weighed in on what the apparent “rise” in these surgeries means about the female body, female sexuality, and the role of medicine. Some academics have further challenged these procedures for the lack of evidence that such surgeries increase female sexual capacity and that women should feel the need to correct their bodies in order to enjoy sex rather than to, for example, change sexual positions or techniques.
In addition to academics and feminist activists questioning the procedures, medical practitioners have also raised concerns about the lack of established medical need for clitoral unhooding and that there is no evidence that female circumcision, along with the other procedures comprising FGCS, are safe. Indeed, in 2007, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology recommended practitioners not perform female circumcision or other FGCS, since the promotion of FGCS as sexually enhancing was not based on empirical evidence, nor were the surgeries medically indicated.
But while feminists and some medical practitioners since the 1970s have been publicly questioning the physiological basis for female circumcision as a sexual enhancement surgery, the surgery today, like a century ago, continues to be performed as an effort to enable women to have a clitoral orgasm during penetrative sex.
There is a new solution coming up for ugly old women. Normally they would just become man-hating feminists. But soon they can have their brains transplanted into a sex doll, and feel beautiful again.
Feminism, by creating artificial scarcity of sexual resources, is responsible for much of the deadly infighting among men, as well as male suicides.
The truth about the way ducks mate is terrifying
ON THE Venn diagram of strange animal mating behaviours — from lobster golden showers to garter-snake orgies — duck sex is on the border between cartoonish and sadistic.
That’s right, our beloved mallards engage in some seriously disturbing mating behaviour.
The “dark side” of duck mating has its own chapter in the new book The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin’s Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World — and Us by Yale ornithology professor Richard O. Prum.
It’s a controversial subject, earning notoriety in 2013 after news leaked that the American government contributed $US400,000 to study the mating habits of ducks — dubbed “duckpenisgate” by Mother Jones.
But Prof Prum, recipient of a MacArthur “genius grant”, believes that understanding duck sex might better help us understand evolution. And it all begins with the duck penis.
Ducks, for one, are outliers within the avian population. Unlike 97 per cent of birds, ducks have penises — super-long ones.
They are among the best endowed (in terms of ratio of body to member) of all vertebrates. For example, the one-pound, foot-long Argentinian lake duck has the longest of all with a member that is four inches longer than its body.
Duck penises regrow every mating season. Once the season ends, the penis begins to shrink and regress until it’s 10 per cent of its full-grown size. They are stored inside the duck’s body, waiting to emerge only during copulation.
“The process generally resembles a cross between using your arm to evert a sweater sleeve that is inside out and unfurling the soft, motorised roof of a convertible sports car with a hydraulic drive,” writes Prof Prum.
And it only gets weirder.
The duck penis is not straight, but spirals counterclockwise (!) from its base to its tip. The Muscovy duck penis completes six to 10 full twists over its 20cm length.
“Like a selection of sex toys from a vending machine in a strange alien bar,” writes Prof Prum, “duck penises come in ribbed, ridged and even toothy varieties” to hook into a female’s reproductive tract, which is as long and convoluted as the penis.
Female reproductive tracts are full of twists and turns or, as Prof Prum puts it, “dead-end side pockets or cul-de-sacs,” and some spiral clockwise in the “opposite direction of the counterclockwise spiralling duck penis.”
Here’s where evolutionary biology and mate selection comes in — and where the story gets dark.
Many duck species skew male, meaning females can be pickier in their choice of mate.
For a male duck to land a female, he must boast colourful plumage plus have an elaborate dance mating ritual and beautiful mating calls. In other words, he needs to be a beauty, plus a great singer and dancer.
Most males don’t measure up. So what’s a mediocre guy to do?
Forced copulations are “pervasively common in many species of ducks,” writes Prof Prum.
These are socially organised “gang rapes” that are “violent, ugly, dangerous and even deadly” and even sometimes end in the death of the female.
This represents a “selfish male evolutionary strategy that is at odds with the evolutionary interests of its female victims and possibly with the evolutionary interests of the entire species,” Prof Prum writes.
To spread their seed, these ducks are upsetting the natural order of selection.
But the females have mounted their own counter-defence with an increasingly elaborate anatomy — including, in some cases, sharp turns in her reproductive canal that act almost as teeth, making it harder for ducks to inseminate during forced copulations.
“Male ducks had evolved penises that would enable them to force their way into an unwilling female’s vagina, and the females in turn had evolved a new way — an anatomical mechanism — to counter the action of the explosive corkscrew erections of male ducks and prevent the males from fertilising their eggs by force,” writes Prof Plum.
This helps explain why duck vaginas are so elaborate and why duck penises have evolved to keep up — a kind of sexual evolution arms race called antagonistic coevolution.
It’s pretty depressing to know how those ducklings are made. But it’s not all bad, Prof Prum adds. Some ducks and most birds have called off the arms race and dispensed with a penis entirely — no more forced copulations, no more elaborate reproductive tracts.
Instead, female and penis-less male birds rub their cloaca (openings that house testes or ovaries) together in what’s called a “cloacal kiss” — an act that shows the power of natural selection. And how both beauty and brutality guide evolution.
Feminism in Europe makes second-generation male Muslim immigrants suicide bombers. Only the patriarchy as a social and political system can achieve justice.
2 women doctors promote female genital mutilation, may face action
MUMBAI: At a time when voices of dissent against khatna or female genital mutilation (FGM) performed on little girls in the Dawoodi Bohra community are getting stronger, a group of six Bohra women, including two doctors, have formed a group called Dawoodi Bohra Women for Religious Freedom (DBWRF) in support of female circumcision.
While the subject is still being debated in legal and medical circles in India, the involvement of two doctors as founders of the group endorsing khatna or khafz - a procedure where a pinch of skin from the clitoral hood of girls between the ages of six and twelve is sliced off on religious grounds, in silence and secrecy - can warrant action if brought to the attention of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), Dr KK Aggarwal, national president of the IMA, told TOI on Thursday.
"DBWRF has been formed to give voice to mainstream Dawoodi Bohra women who have been taken for granted as a community. We are here to say that we have a right under the constitution to practise something that is harmless. We don't need a law that victimises a minority community," claimed Dr Fatema Jetpurwala, a homeopath and specialist in neuro-developmental disabilities at Saifee Hospital who is among the founders alongside Dr Alefiya Bapai, a gynaecologist and laparoscopic surgeon at Saifee Hospital; Nafisa Kagalwala, a teacher; Batul Ratlamwala, a home chef; Rashida Diwan, an educator; and Johra Attarwala, a counsellor.
The involvement of doctors in endorsing the act "goes against medical ethics" Aggarwal said. "IMA is a signatory to the World Medical Association's policy cleared at Taipei in October 2016. We condemn the practice of genital mutilation or cutting of women and girls, regardless of the level of mutilation. It is not scientific and we oppose the participation of physicians in these practices," he said.
Although DBWRF believes religion gives them the freedom to practise the custom and offers reasons for its continuation, "these reasons do not justify the considerable damages to a woman's physical and mental health in the long run", said Dr Duru Shah, scientific director of Gynaecworld in Mumbai. "There is no evidence-based material available that talks about the utility of female circumcision but enough to prove that it harms... No doctor should practise it," added Aggarwal.
Aggarwal said, "If I read a report or someone raises a complaint about a doctor propagating FGM, IMA will take it up. The doctor will have to show institutional permissions and offer scientific explanations since it is not an established procedure. We will also refer the matter to the ethical committee of the Medical Council of India for further probe."
While international organisations such as WHO and countries like the US, UK, Australia and some African nations are using laws to restrict, regulate, or ban the practice considered an extreme form of human rights violation, Jetpurwala insists 'female circumcision' and 'FGM' are different things. "Khafz is harmless and should not be mixed up with FGM. It is a travesty of justice to call khafz, FGM," reasoned Jetpurwala. According to DBWRF, the removal of a speck of superficial skin is a "simple gentle process in which there is negligible if any, pain". She claims that it is done to "satisfy the religious requirement of taharat (religious purity)" and argues that female circumcision is equivalent to male circumcision, which Shah and Aggarwal dismiss.
"Female circumcision has no medical benefit unlike in boys where complications may occur if the foreskin is not removed. In fact, many outside the community are getting circumcised to lower the risk of cancer," said Shah. In contrast, research reveals grave and permanent damage to health, including haemorrhage, infections, urinary retention, injury to adjacent organs, shock and severe pain, pointed out Aggarwal. "Long-term complications include severe scarring, chronic bladder and urinary tract infections, urologic and obstetric complications, apart from psychological and social problems," he added.
DBWRF's theories refute every line of reasoning that has surfaced in the anti-khatna movement in the last two years. "We do not accept that female circumcision is a mutilation. It is a harmless procedure and as such should not be termed FGM," reads DBWRF's explanation on their website.
Masooma Ranalvi, who was one of the first to bring the issue to light with her personal experience of undergoing khatna at seven, says: "It is shocking that educated people especially doctors after taking a Hippocratic Oath are supporting something that is in violation of that code. Not only are they tampering with what is God given but also committing a form of sexual assault."
Feminist rule in Europe makes second-generation male Muslim immigrants suicide bombers. They die for sexual justice. Why do Western politicians call suicide bombers cowards? To sacrifice one's own life is the ultimate in courage.
Home | Index of articles