web analytics
Exterminationism Metaphysics of race / sex

Boobs revisited

This is a postscript to my previous post ‘Classification of life’ where I wrote: ‘I recently debunked the Netflix series The Queen’s Gambit showing that in the real world women cannot compete with men in chess (here, here and here)’. I failed to add to these links my December 1 entry, ‘A naked ape’ where I quote Desmond Morris’ book, which cover, incidentally, Aron Nelson shows in his series Systematic Classification of Life. Desmond Morris said:

Given this situation, one might very well expect to find some sort of frontal self-mimicry of the type seen in the gelada baboon. Can we, if we look at the frontal regions of the females of our species, see any structures that might possibly be mimics of the ancient genital display of hemispherical buttocks and red labia?

Lips on women’s mouths! Only until I read that book I understood why we want to kiss them! I quoted Morris in the context of what I had written in ‘On Beth’s cute tits’:

Decades ago, the biggest surprise I came across when reading The Naked Ape was discovering why men crave women. If we consider the shape of a baby bottle for milk, that is exactly the shape female teats would have if the objective were purely functional for baby sucking. But women’s breasts are completely different. Morris explains the phenomenon of self-imitation in other species of apes. In these species, natural selection favours females to imitate their buttocks with their coloured breasts, to shift the aggression of the males to a more erotic channelling.

I was shocked to discover that my species is a more aesthetic version of the same phenomenon of self-imitation! But that is exactly what it is when we see the ape we are with a naked eye: the needs of the baby are secondary to the trick that Nature does to us so that we impregnate our females. Nature makes them irresistible to our instincts for the human species to breed.

Except for Antinatalist44, no other commenter told me anything about it. I wonder if, unlike me, most white advocates aren’t interested in science, zoology, and physical anthropology. I find it fascinating, as science supports the thesis of this site that we are animals like any other, although with tremendously developed frontal lobes in the brain. Accepting who we are has a lot to do with saving the white man from extinction.

As I said yesterday, Aron Nelson was very scientific before arriving, in his final episode, at the appearance of the human races. But white nationalists too, like Nelson, resort to a pseudoscientific vision of the human being by continuing to believe in life after death or in a Christian or neochristian morality that prevents us from genociding our enemies.

I came up with the expression ‘the extermination of Neanderthals’ decades before I found out that Cro Magnon had perhaps exterminated the Neanderthals. In Nelson’s series for example, it is mentioned that Neanderthals fled as much as possible before the Cro Magnon advance in Europe until they had nowhere else to flee, thus becoming extinct. This is the attitude that the white man must have, once again, towards the more primitive versions of humans. And if he doesn’t have it, it is because he is still under the spell of the Jew who wrote the New Testament, with those commands of universal love, including our enemies, etcetera.

What I want to get to is that the fact that white nationalists don’t see Beth’s pretty boobs for what they really are, is the other side of the coin of accepting a Semitic code that cannot be more antithetical to the Laws of Manu that the Aryans developed when they conquered India (see page 100 of On Exterminationism). Seeing our women for what they actually are, and Neanderthals for what they are, a species that competes with our habitat that has to be expelled (and eventually exterminated) are, in effect, two sides of the same coin.

But when will white nationalists transvalue their values from Semitic values to Aryan values? The fact that only one commenter told me anything substantial about my article on Beth’s palatable boobs suggests that other commenters have not shaken the Christian vision of man. Or did they just not want to opine?

5 replies on “Boobs revisited”

And by the way Antinatalist44: Change your penname. SS members promoted Aryan reproduction in a maximum way, as we can read in the final pages of my book that I mention above.

I am thankful to you for your appreciation of my thoughts. I chose this nickname out of recognising that having children is inseparable from dominating their will. In view of this, I fail to see how one might harmonise such an emotional view of psychohistory as yours with a cynical, materialistic, ruthless logic of child rearing that is more akin to the hunger of Quetzalcoatl.

For what it’s worth, I play a role of a devil’s advocate by being a sissy extremist. Obviously, in the Reich, children would not be burned alive in the tophets to Moloch like in Carthage, but the logic to me seems technically the same. To me, if you have children, you absolve yourself of responsibility not to betray their trust because you have already done that. We are all born to serve.

It’s just Christianity is servitude criminal, spiteful and unholy, compared to the harsh beauty of the eternal Natural Order. And I would rather not be reduced to a Galilean out of the sorrow inherent in the world.

It is precisely because in Spanish I speak of the 4 words and in English of the 14 words that my philosophy is unclear on this site.

‘Eliminate all unnecessary suffering’ means eliminating things like the torture of animals and the torment of children or adolescents with schizogenic parents. It doesn’t mean ‘eliminate all suffering’.

Regarding the necessary sufferings, we could think of how hard it was, after going through the Hitler Youth, fighting for the homeland: a duty of every Aryan, even if they die virgins in war, as perhaps happened to some young Spartans.

The distinction between necessary and unnecessary suffering is fundamental to understanding my exterminationist eschatology but, again, the focus of my writing in my mother language is different from what I write in a second language.

Yes, the moral duty of the Aryan is to exterminate the non-Aryan (to protect the conscious animals from being skinned alive). No, I don’t see how the 4 Words can give the impetus to survive after the victory. Why not kill all cerebrates and octopods, and die ourselves? Or replace humans and non-humans with non-organic life, if it is possible.

Killing and fucking are natural instincts, merely inhibited by Christianity in one race. But they predate and postdate your 4 Words. To be blunt, Nature sees no duties and no fairness – the dinosaurs did not “deserve” to be wiped out, and the mammals were not “higher”, as the other visitor has insinuated. Everything goes, some halter, others continue. Crazy fat freaks such as AronRa get inspired to die right away when facing the truth. Savage, vigorous niggers do not. And so the wheel turns.

> ‘No, I don’t see how the 4 Words can give the impetus to survive after the victory’…

Such an impetus in fact that only Jung has speculated about the incredible force resulting from contacting the Self but, again, that’s not the focus of this site.

Comments are closed.