Julie Burchill has had it with women. She has had it with girl talk and with whiny expressions of deep emotions. She prefers the company of men. You know, toxic men, the variety we are all supposed to be rejecting, like one Donald Trump or our supposed autocratic enemies.
And so we see, once again, the wisdom of the aphorism, "Be careful what you wish for because you might get it." For decades, women have been demanding to "overthrow the patriarchy," or some variation on that theme. It is so prevalent that we no longer bother to remark upon it; it is simply taken for granted that women should "roar," thereby cowing men into fearful compliance. Those women found allies among the male homosexual crowd, who saw this as an opportunity to find a more compliant field of potential sexual companions by making sure that their brand of simpering, faux feminity became acceptable, if not eventually dominant in the culture. Once the cultural beachhead had been established, then followed wave upon wave of other debauched and degenerate sexual deviants to claim their place in the new hierarchy, and with each sucessive wave, traditional men were consigned to a lower and lower place in the societal hierarchy. Fathers were denigrated. Marriage was decried as being merely a way for "the patriarchy" to be continued. Government benefits were lavished upon our newest heros, the "single mom." But with few exception, these new societal heroes supplanted our old and established heroes, men who gave all for their ideals, sacrificing themselves in war as well as in more mundane pursuits, like "making a living" to support their wives and children. And now we are witnessing the terminal result of this escapade; the wreck of a once great and flourishing polity. Druggies and gangbangers abound. Feral black and brown shooters rain their violent gunfire on the rest of us, but especially on those sharing their own ethnicity, a fact we are prohibited from noticing. Our political class is dominated by these types, who mouth empty shibboleths about "our democracy" while accruing unto themsleves all the levers of power. So this is what we now are expected to accept in place of "the patriarchy." But there are some who see through the fog of propaganda, like Ms. Burchill, much like the callow lad who remarked publicly that the emperor had no clothes, and sadly note that the victory of feminism has been the defeat of civilized society. It is much like that miserable vermin, Richard Dawkins, who has spent the entirety of his adult life decrying, belittling and attempting to overthrow the Biblical underpinnings of Western Civiliation, who of late has been heard to bemoan the passing of the Christian social compact that enabled him to speak his poison without fear of retribution. He still hates Chiristianity (or, in fact, all religious expression, but especially that which is founded on The Bible) but admits he wants to live in a society that still clings to Biblical Christian values. He, like his feminist counterparts, are the passengers in the lifeboat, the hull of which they have been busily poking holes in, suddenly realiing that they are going to sink along with everyone else in the boat and, probably too late, now express second thoughts about the situation. Curse them all.
Minor thing, but women horning in on the ""man cave" drives me nuts. The wives decorates the entire house, relegating their husbands collection to some corner of the basement or the garage. The husband runs with it -- he takes his NFL memorabilia, or baseball stuff, adds a recliner and a TV, and calls it his "Man Cave." Yeah for him! But then the wife has to have a "she shed" or if the "man cave" takes up too much room, she has to weigh in on the decor. To them, I want to screem: LEAVE HIM ALONE! YOU HAVE THE REST OF THE HOUSE! WHY CAN'T YOU LET HIM HAVE HIS OWN SPACE?
It is everywhere -- magazine, DIY shows, fictional shows. Ugh.
And so we see, once again, the wisdom of the aphorism, "Be careful what you wish for because you might get it." For decades, women have been demanding to "overthrow the patriarchy," or some variation on that theme. It is so prevalent that we no longer bother to remark upon it; it is simply taken for granted that women should "roar," thereby cowing men into fearful compliance. Those women found allies among the male homosexual crowd, who saw this as an opportunity to find a more compliant field of potential sexual companions by making sure that their brand of simpering, faux feminity became acceptable, if not eventually dominant in the culture. Once the cultural beachhead had been established, then followed wave upon wave of other debauched and degenerate sexual deviants to claim their place in the new hierarchy, and with each sucessive wave, traditional men were consigned to a lower and lower place in the societal hierarchy. Fathers were denigrated. Marriage was decried as being merely a way for "the patriarchy" to be continued. Government benefits were lavished upon our newest heros, the "single mom." But with few exception, these new societal heroes supplanted our old and established heroes, men who gave all for their ideals, sacrificing themselves in war as well as in more mundane pursuits, like "making a living" to support their wives and children. And now we are witnessing the terminal result of this escapade; the wreck of a once great and flourishing polity. Druggies and gangbangers abound. Feral black and brown shooters rain their violent gunfire on the rest of us, but especially on those sharing their own ethnicity, a fact we are prohibited from noticing. Our political class is dominated by these types, who mouth empty shibboleths about "our democracy" while accruing unto themsleves all the levers of power. So this is what we now are expected to accept in place of "the patriarchy." But there are some who see through the fog of propaganda, like Ms. Burchill, much like the callow lad who remarked publicly that the emperor had no clothes, and sadly note that the victory of feminism has been the defeat of civilized society. It is much like that miserable vermin, Richard Dawkins, who has spent the entirety of his adult life decrying, belittling and attempting to overthrow the Biblical underpinnings of Western Civiliation, who of late has been heard to bemoan the passing of the Christian social compact that enabled him to speak his poison without fear of retribution. He still hates Chiristianity (or, in fact, all religious expression, but especially that which is founded on The Bible) but admits he wants to live in a society that still clings to Biblical Christian values. He, like his feminist counterparts, are the passengers in the lifeboat, the hull of which they have been busily poking holes in, suddenly realiing that they are going to sink along with everyone else in the boat and, probably too late, now express second thoughts about the situation. Curse them all.
Minor thing, but women horning in on the ""man cave" drives me nuts. The wives decorates the entire house, relegating their husbands collection to some corner of the basement or the garage. The husband runs with it -- he takes his NFL memorabilia, or baseball stuff, adds a recliner and a TV, and calls it his "Man Cave." Yeah for him! But then the wife has to have a "she shed" or if the "man cave" takes up too much room, she has to weigh in on the decor. To them, I want to screem: LEAVE HIM ALONE! YOU HAVE THE REST OF THE HOUSE! WHY CAN'T YOU LET HIM HAVE HIS OWN SPACE?
It is everywhere -- magazine, DIY shows, fictional shows. Ugh.
(BTW, I am a woman.)