web analytics

Category: Feminism

Categories
Feminism Michael O'Meara

Lord Snow

‘Lord Snow’ is the third episode of the first season of the HBO medieval fantasy television series Game of Thrones. It first aired on May 1, 2011. The bad message of this episode begins when Ned Stark discovers, already settled in King’s Landing, that his little daughter Arya has a real weapon.

Ned Stark: ‘This is not a toy. Little ladies shouldn’t play with swords’.

Arya: ‘I wasn’t playing. And I don’t want to be a lady’.

Keeping in mind the medieval literature of my mother tongue, there was nothing like it in Spain despite the fact that its literature flourished with stories of medieval warriors. This dialogue in ‘Lord Snow’ is a pure invention of our time. (I have said elsewhere that the film that started this reversal of roles, that a saving warrior could be a woman, was the 1979 Alien.)

Very kindly Ned tries to reason with his daughter in her room, asking Arya if she remembers the House Stark motto, ‘Winter is coming’. He makes Arya see that she was born in the middle of a long summer (in George R.R. Martin’s universe summers can last for years, and dreaded winters too). Ned wants to show his daughter that she hasn’t yet known the harshness of life.

Contemporary Americans are like Arya in the sense that they haven’t suffered those long winters: the thirty to one hundred years that, according to Revilo Oliver, we must endure to bring about a true psychogenic change. This could even be said of all contemporary Westerners who require a long winter to generate the gravitas to form a new nation. Fortunately, what the Europeans have suffered will soon begin to be suffered by the Americans. On page 131 of Toward the White Republic the American Michael O’Meara said:

Qualitatively more persuasive, though, is Orlov’s claim that the Soviet Union was better situated than the United States to endure and recover from a political-economic breakdown. In his view, Americans see their ‘spendthrift debtor nation’ as a ‘land of free ice cream and perpetual sunshine’. Never having experienced invasion, world war, famine, or bloody dictatorship, it’s hard for them to imagine a future unlike their past. More than Russians, Americans have been severed from their past and redesigned as gratification-oriented consumers whose defining character is materialist rather than ethnic, historical, or cultural. They also lack the psychology of resilience ‘bred’ into the long-suffering Russians. Finally, they are more ideologically deluded by the system’s pretences, just as they are more integrated into its increasingly dysfunctional institutions.

In Winterfell the boy Bran has awakened from his coma. In the novel this is due to the telepathic intervention of Bloodraven, a man fused to a weirwood tree (see the weiwrood trees on the sidebar) who had appeared to the comatose Bran in a dream as a three-eyed raven, thanks to ancient magic on the other side of the Wall.

Old Nan, the caretaker of the now crippled Bran, for the first time in the series talks about the legends about what long time ago had been a winter that lasted a whole generation. (The actress who played Old Nan died before ‘Lord Snow’ was released. The episode is dedicated to her memory in the end credits.) Old Nan speaks to Bran about the White Walkers who had been a scourge to mankind during the long winter, so the Wall was built millennia ago in order to keep them at bay.

On the other side of the kingdom King Robert remembers with the members of his Kingsguard their first killings. The masculine dialogue reminds me, once again, of today’s feminised western men. Who among the so-called defenders of the West on the internet has killed someone? If there is something that distinguishes us from women it is our passion to kill, and without manhood there is neither war nor white republic. (This said, I recognise it’s impossible to kill since WW-II as our governments are anti-white and there are no good wars to fight.)

King Robert recounts that during a war he fell from his horse and a young soldier charged at him, receiving him with a hammer blow that broke all of his ribs. Jaime Lannister and another member of the Kingsguard tell the king who their first victims were.

Having won the Allies we can no longer have this kind of dialogue. And together with tolerating that, the System has even taken women away from us through feminism: a sign of the mental state of the white man. Only if Hitler had won would we be telling ourselves who our first victims were.

And speaking of feminism and would-be warriors, the episode closes precisely with the reversal of sexual roles. Upon learning that Arya doesn’t want to become a lady but rather wants to be a swordsman, Ned hires Syrio Forel to teach her the art of handling her Needle. In the first lesson Forel tells the girl Arya:

‘You are late, boy’.

That, and not the last season that angered the toxic fandom so much, should have triggered the rage of viewers. But whites are bananas. When a man accepts these inversions he is accepting masturbation as a substitute for those women who (like Arya) aren’t going to marry. The betrayal doesn’t come from the woman but from the Aryan male (women only follow the strong, and the strong one today is the anti-white System).

Within the cultural revolution that has been unfolding in the West for a few decades, critics of Game of Thrones have praised Maisie Williams for her portrayal of Arya Stark and her sword lesson scenes. The whites among these ‘critics’ represent the worst scum Western history has produced. But the havoc that the long winter ahead will cause will also wipe out all degeneracy of America’s summer (actually, historically it’s already autumn).

The episode ends with Arya training with Forel and Ned Stark watching them. The scene is paradigmatic of the bad messages of Game of Thrones as Ned was the character considered, by the toxic fandom, as the most honourable man of the 2011-2019 series.

Categories
Aryan beauty Blacks Feminism Film Poetry

Winter is coming

‘Winter Is Coming’ is the premiere of the HBO medieval fantasy television series Game of Thrones.

When in years past the comment threads were open on this site I noticed that one of my topics that didn’t attract attention was Game of Thrones (A Game of Thrones, which English-Spanish translation I have near where I write, is the first novel of George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire). But it must be understood that in my childhood, after seeing Kubrick’s best film, I wanted to be a film director (that was a few years before a family tragedy that would destroy several lives).

In my books I say that when I was a child Warner Bros. offered my father a job so he could go to work in the United States. My father declined the offer and sentenced me to live in a country other than my own. But I was left with the desire to have been a director and the only thing I can do now is film criticism. Of course, as a director I would have handled Martin’s novels in a very different way compared to the way the pair of Jews who produced and directed the HBO series did. For example, Martin’s feminism was exacerbated by David Benioff and Daniel B. Weiss, known to fans as D&D. I would have decreased it as much as possible.

In this series of criticising each episode of Game of Thrones that I’m starting with this post we must bear in mind that I am more critical of the toxic fandom made up of whites than the script that D&D developed. The author of the video we recently transcribed for this site on toxic fandom said elsewhere that Arya Stark was the most mishandled character of all Game of Thrones seasons. I would add that this speaks very badly of the fandom of whites who complained a lot about the finale but never about what D&D did with Arya.

Only in the first episode of the HBO series does Arya appear as she must have appeared throughout both Martin’s novels and the television series: a girl being educated in embroidery and weaving and confined to the home of a feudal lord. Not only the normies don’t want this ‘transvaluation of values’ on how to educate women today. Even many white nationalists don’t reject feminism with the vehemence that every Aryan male should (the masculinisation of the white woman is directly proportional to the feminisation of the white man).

In that same opening episode, shortly after showing Arya in her embroidery and knitting classes with other girls, we see her little brother Bran Stark trying to get a good shot at target shooting. Bran does it very badly and, from behind, Arya, who is even younger than him, hits the target with her bow and arrow thus humiliating her little brother.

That is the first bad message of Game of Thrones. As we have already said on this site, Hollywood is portraying female warriors as faster than men. The reality is that women are slower and generally inferior to us in both physical and intellectual sports (see what I said last December about chess).

It is very important to criticise the white fans of the series for not being outraged by such reversals of reality, from the very first episode. White nationalism limits itself to blaming Hollywood Jews as if whites, in this case the toxic fandom, weren’t equally guilty of greedily consuming those products without criticising them.

When the king of the seven kingdoms, Robert Baratheon and his royal court, arrive in Winterfell and the Starks receive them, Arya contemplates them with a helmet (in its place that little girl would have had to wear a hood). When Arya arrives with her reunited family about to receive the king, Ned, her father, immediately removes her helmet. In the historical medieval world, not in these mad films that demoralise the Aryan man, little girls didn’t want to become soldiers throwing away all of their femininity, much less a blue-blooded girl like Arya Stark.

In sharp contrast, the dialogue between King Robert and Ned Stark in the crypts is very realistic and very masculine. Voices like this are no longer heard in the West, not even among its supposed defenders. This is how we men used to speak: as Robert Baratheon spoke in the crypt when paying his respects to Ned’s late sister Lyanna Stark, with whom he had been in love.

Across the narrow sea in Essos the blond prince Viserys Targaryen forces his sister, Daenerys, to marry a Dothraki warlord, the non-white Drogo. Viserys thus fantasises about conquering Westeros and claiming the Iron Throne for the Targaryen House that Robert had destroyed. (In Martin’s universe the Targaryens were known for their incredible hyper-Nordic beauty, and I think the producers of the show should have chosen more beautiful actors to play the roles of Viserys and Daenerys.) Viserys says something horrible to his blonde sister: that in his quest to regain the throne for his house he would even allow the forty thousand horses of the swarthy Dothraki to mount her. It’s a terrible message because, despite medieval barbarism, I don’t think blond princes treated their princesses like that in real history.

Later we see an uninhibited King Robert dancing, kissing and groping a fat commoner during the evening feast in the great hall of Winterfell in front of Cersei Lannister, his wife and queen. But that’s nothing compared to the wedding between the blonde and the swarthy warlord on the other side of the narrow sea. If the white fans of Game of Thrones were good people they would have rebelled from this moment on. But as we know from the recommended readings in the sticky post, they are the worst generation of whites since prehistory.

But the superiority of the white race cannot be hidden visually, not even with Jewish directors. There is, in this premiere, a short scene that puts Daenerys side by side with black and mulatto women before she was deflowered by Drogo. I mean Daenerys’ walk in the direction of her white mare that Drogo gave her as a gift on their wedding day. The seventh art perfectly portrays the infinite superiority of a white woman over dark people.

The brief scene reminded me of a tale by Nicaraguan poet Rubén Darío (1867-1916), who contrasted a white girl eating grapes with the swarthy people who surrounded her here in Latin America: Y sobre aquel fondo de hollín y carbón, sus hombros delicados y tersos que estaban desnudos, hacían resaltar su bello color de lis, con un casi impenetrable tono dorado (‘And against that background of soot and coal, was the beautiful lily colour, with an almost impenetrable golden hue of her naked and delicate smooth shoulders’).

Categories
Chess Feminism Mainstream media

Queen’s gambit

This is a postscript to my previous two posts on the TV series that has been a hit worldwide. Above, D.L. Townes playing Beth Harmon in The Queen’s Gambit. But the position we saw on Netflix is actually an old study composed by a man!

In chess there’s a current World Chess Champion, Magnus Carlsen, and in a parallel universe of players there’s a Women’s World Chess Championship (WWCC). Why are there separate tournaments of chess for men and women, if according to current egalitarian doctrine the latter are supposedly as smart as men?

Because women cannot compete with men in chess.

See the names of the top 101 players in the world according to the list of the International Chess Federation. There’s only one woman, Hou Yifan, ranked #88 in that list, which means that there are 87 players with a higher rating than her. *

In a nutshell, the Netflix series The Queen’s Gambit only advances feminist lies about women.

_________

(*) This FIDE list is updated every first of the month, which means that the ratings for Hou and the top 100 male chess players are subject to change (see my comment below, in the comments section).

Categories
Chess Feminism Infanticide Mainstream media Metaphysics of race / sex

On Beth’s cute tits

Beth dancing to a degenerate piece of music
that was a hit when I was pubescent, with trophies
from all the chess tournaments she had won.

As a teenager I was a big fan of chess, and even in my early twenties I played daily in a park visited by middle-class chess players (I recount my adventures in Spanish: here).

The Queen’s Gambit is an American TV miniseries based on the 1983 novel of the same name by Walter Tevis, starring Anya Taylor-Joy in the role of Beth Harmon. It was directed by the Jew Scott Frank and the script was written by a gentile, Allan Scott. The Queen’s Gambit was released on Netflix last month and has now concluded.

The past few days I watched The Queen’s Gambit. From one of the first episodes, when Beth approaches the camera showing the shape of her beautiful boobs under her clothes, I realised the impossible chimera of this series that is causing a sensation in the world. But first of all I must speak a little about female tits in our species.

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. Zoologist Desmond Morris, the author of The Naked Ape, explains the phenomenon of ‘self-mimicry’ in other species of apes. In these species, natural selection favours females to imitate their buttocks with their coloured breasts, in order to shift the aggression of the males to a more erotic channelling.

I was shocked to discover that my own species is a more aesthetic version of the same phenomenon of self-mimicry! 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 absolutely irresistible to our instincts in order for the human species to breed.

But our species is also governed by the concept of the trade-off, and I will have no choice but to speak scientifically for a few paragraphs.

Why can’t there be a species that is a mix between a super-poisonous bug and a winged, big, beautiful and highly intelligent creature? In a fantastic world just imagine what power such a creature would have. In my science course at the Open University I learned about the concept of a trade-off between one aspect of an organism’s biology and another. A trade-off is a situation where, to gain some advantage, an organism has to pay a price: to compromise. In our species big brains are a good example. Our huge frontal lobes are certainly nice to have but they are costly in terms of the energy they use up, and make childbirth extremely difficult.

As explained in my Day of Wrath (see sidebar), this is the main cause of massive infanticide of babies in past history. Extremely immature babies are bothersome. A unique feature of the human race—prolonged childhood with consequent long dependence on adults—is the basis for the psychodynamics of mental disorders. The long childhood of Homo sapiens lends itself to parents abusing their young. After all, premature birth was Nature’s solution to the trade-off of bipedalism and the limitations of the pelvis of hominid females in our simian ancestors. (If Homo sapiens weren’t born so immature, we would have to stay within our mothers’ bodies for about 20 months.) The ‘long childhood’ lays a solid foundation for understanding the abuses committed by parents in our species and, therefore, the mental disorders suffered by the progeny. But that’s the price we have paid for our big brains!

Body size is another example of trade-offs. In the animal kingdom being big gives you some advantages against predators but it also means you need more food. Being small means that you don’t need much food but it makes it easier for another animal to hunt you. That species can’t gain an advantage without having to pay a price means that there will be many ways to survive and prosper: and explains why there is so rich diversity in the animal kingdom.

In my Open University course I had to answer this question: Why a bird with a complete set of the five potentially very successful traits (a species of bird whose individuals lived a long time, reproduced repeatedly and at high frequency, and with large clutch sizes) doesn’t exist? The answer is because of trade-offs. A bird that produces large clutches cannot reproduce frequently because the production of each clutch requires a lot of resources. Also, large clutches require more looking after because in due course there are more mouths to feed. Large clutches are therefore likely to suffer higher mortality than small clutches while adults are absent from the nest.

The same applies to the surreal example of the impossible chimera I imagined above. Having assimilated the concept of trade-offs, let’s now remember old Schopenhauer:

at the expense of the whole remainder of her life, so that during these years she may so capture the imagination of a man that he is carried away into undertaking to support her honourably in some form or another for the rest of his life, a step he would seem hardly likely to take for purely rational considerations. Thus nature has equipped women, as it has all its creatures, with the tools and weapons she needs for securing her existence, and at just the time she needs them; in doing which nature has acted with its usual economy [my emphasis—a trade-off].

The media lie is equivalent to ‘filming’ those flying and poisonous bugs which, in turn, are smart as humans: impossible chimeras.

In previous years I insisted a lot on how the most popular series of all time, Game of Thrones, made us see several female characters as brave warriors: something that never existed in the Middle Ages or in old-time chivalric novels (Brienne of Tarth, Yara Greyjoy, the wildling Ygritte, the masculinised female warriors at Dorne) or queens without a king to control them (Daenerys Targaryen and Cersei Lannister). Worst of all was that a girl (Arya Stark) killed the bad guy of the series, the Night King, in what I consider to be the climax of the whole series (Theon Greyjoy should have killed the Night King). In real medieval times, and in chivalric novels, all these women would have been similar to Lady Sansa, the only character who played a feminine role in most of the seasons of Game of Thrones (except for the end of seasons 6 and 8).

The goal of Hollywood and TV is to brainwash us by reversing sex roles to exterminate the white race. And it is a disgrace that even the greatest white nationalist novelist of the 21st century, the late Harold Covington, fell for this feminism in his most voluminous novel (see ‘Freedom’s Daughters’ in my Daybreak).

HBO produced Game of Thrones. Netflix has produced The Queen’s Gambit. HBO wanted us to believe that women can compete with men, and even surpass them, in matters of what used to be called the knight-errant. (Remember how Brienne of Tarth beat the very tough Hound in the last episode of the fourth season of Game of Thrones.) Now Netflix wants us to believe that in matters of the intellect a woman, Beth Harmon, can beat the toughest chess players and even the very world champion (Vasily Borgov in the TV series: Beth’s strongest competitor).

Some people in the media are publishing articles with titles such as ‘Is The Queen’s Gambit a true story?’ They claim that the series was inspired by the woman who has reached the highest when competing in chess tournaments: the Hungarian Judit Polgar, now retired from the competition although she continues to comment on professional chess games. But Polgar’s life was quite different from the fictional Beth Harmon whose photo appears at the top of this entry. It is true that in real life Polgar once beat the world champion of chess, Garry Kasparov. But what the Netflix series omit is the score of all their confrontations. In real life, Kasparov beat Judit Polgar 12 to 1, with 4 draws!

It seems important to me to present the scores of the best female chess player in history, Polgar, in her games against the male world champions (to date, no woman has been crowned world champion of chess). The source for the list below is Chess Life:

Kasparov – Polgar: 12-1
Carlsen – Polgar: 10-1
Anand – Polgar: 28-10
Karpov – Polgar: 20-14
Topalov – Pogar: 16-15
Kramnik – Polgar: 23-1

As we can see, Polgar is at a disadvantage against all of her contemporary world champions. The only world champion with whom she maintained an almost even score was Topalov. Her score against Karpov was not bad, and although her disadvantage against Anand is wide, her results are noteworthy. But against Kasparov, Carlsen and especially against Kramnik, Polgar took real beatings.

These are the pure and hard facts of real life that more HBO or Netflix feminist series won’t change. They want us to believe that women are interchangeable with us in matters of physical activity and, now, intellectual sports!

Nature has endowed the woman with feminine charms so that a man may impregnate her thanks to her inviting tits, and support her for the rest of her life. Nature didn’t give her muscles or brain-power equal to the man. We have more cranial capacity than women. Anyone who hasn’t read pages 99-116 of On Beth’s Cute Tits should read them now. It is the best way to understand not only our sexuality but also the sexuality of the fair sex.

Beautiful tits that enchant us cannot go in the body that houses, at the same time, a superior brain of those whom her tits seduce: an elemental trade-off.

Postscript of 2021: Desmond Morris’ exact quote appears in the first indented paragraph: here.

Categories
Civil war Feminism Hate Patriarchy Racial right Roger Devlin

On Roger Devlin

Not long ago, in ‘Andúril: the broken sword’, one of my essays that appear in Daybreak, I complained about a video by Jared Taylor with these words: ‘Finding ourselves on the brink of a civil war or rather an anti-white, exterminationist war that gets closer and closer to Ward Kendall’s novel Hold Back This Day, Taylor gives counsel like getting married, having a good job, and trying to do politics without overtly revealing our true colours’.

Something similar happened yesterday to me while listening to an interview of F. Roger Devlin about Incels (who was annoyed by the Nazi salutes headed by Richard Spencer in that famous 2016 video because, according to Devlin, the alt-right shouldn’t endorse National Socialism). Although the interview was good, especially Devlin’s insights about feminism, he is the typical alt-right intellectual who, as we have seen, more than a ‘white nationalist’ is actually an American nationalist. (The term white nationalism suggests fighting a civil war to create a nation only for Aryan Man, something that the alt-righters don’t recommend openly.)

By the end of the interview, Devlin advises the same that Taylor recently advised: to get a good wife. The advice is quite dishonest because Devlin himself concedes in the interview that the laws of our time make it very hard for the white man to get properly married. For example, the divorce industry hasn’t been challenged, let alone eliminated along with the stupid laws that prevent males to have sex with their wives whenever they want, etcetera. Without the normal state of civilisation, patriarchy, marrying bitches that steal our children in courts and a law that commands you to send them money while she’s living with another guy is insane.

I think in the comments section I’ve already mentioned the case of a very, very Catholic family, friends of my mother since she was in Grammar School. One of their members, married to a traditional Catholic woman, after a severe illness the woman put him in an asylum and she stayed in his house with their daughter. The man is younger than me and is already committed in an asylum! His late parents were so Catholic that the Opus Dei folk were their clients. (Incidentally, they are a white family: the image of the many blond nephews of this guy now come to my mind when they were kids.)

That family proves that what Devlin said by the end of the interview is wrong. Even if you marry the most traditional girl, under the current laws the bitch can betray you to the degree that—as happened to our friend—not letting him attend even his own daughter’s wedding! The poor man stayed in the asylum during the wedding! When not long ago we visited him at the asylum, this very Catholic man came up that, despite everything, he should never hate…

The repulsion I feel for anything related to the American racialist movement can be summed up in one sentence: like this man they don’t want to hate, let alone fight. Just compare Devlin’s stance to Robert Morgan’s recent comments that I’ve collected on this site. It is more than obvious that, like Taylor, Devlin and the rest of the American racialists are held back by Christian morality. If Devlin & Co. didn’t subscribe to Christian ethics but National Socialism, they would know that only a bloody revolution could bring us back our women.

As long as male racialists don’t amalgamate their soul with the spirit of The Turner Diaries their whole movement will remain a women’s club.

Categories
Ancient Greece Feminism Homer Iliad (epic book) Rape of the Sabine Women Real men

The Iliad, book I

As we saw in the essay on Sparta in The Fair Race, around 1200 b.c.e. the Achaeans besieged and conquered Troy in a crusade that united the Hellenes in a common endeavour, so prone to war with each other. In The Iliad Homer describes them as a gang of barbarians with the mentality and appearance of Vikings who sweep the refined and civilised Troy.

The first book of The Iliad begins already after nine years of war between Achaeans and Trojans, when a plague breaks out on the Achaean camp. The soothsayer Calchas, consulted about it, predicts that the plague will not cease until the girl Chryseis, who Agamemnon had kidnapped, was returned to her father Chryses of Troy. Achilles’ wrath stems from the affront inflicted on him by Agamemnon, who, by yielding Chryseis to her father because of the threat of the soothsayer, now snatches from Achilles’ share of the spoils the young priestess Briseis. (In our times of feminised western males that feel no wrath when seeing a Negro with an English rose, how I wish the return of this blond beast of yore…!)

After all this, Achilles retires from the battle and ensures that he will only return when the Trojan fire reaches his own ships. He asks his mother Thetis to convince Zeus to help the Trojans and Zeus accepts.

More than once I have said that what must be studied are the phenomena that has captured, in a massive way, the popular imagination of the white man. In modern times, those who complain only about Jews look to, say, the Frankfurt School. But to understand the soul of the white man they should pay more attention to what whites have read voraciously; for example, the literary phenomena that marked recent centuries. I mean the gigantic bestsellers of the past that portray the suicidal infatuation of English speakers about Jews (for example Walter Scott’s Ivanhoe and Lew Wallace’s Ben-Hur) or about blacks (e.g., Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin).

In our century, white madness is also noted in their delusional empowerment of women. As I have also said on this site, it is alarming that almost no one tore his garments at the most nefarious presentation of the ‘girl power’ ideology in Game of Thrones, exemplified in Arya Stark. Game of Thrones fans are such an alienated and degenerate folk that they disowned the grand finale, which is a masterpiece, and instead liked the empowerment of the girl Arya in previous seasons. Such feminism even reached a now-deceased neonazi novelist who wanted to create an Aryan republic in his state, as we saw in Daybreak’s ‘Freedom’s daughters’.

As a child I enjoyed Ivanhoe and Ben-Hur although never watched Uncle Tom’s Cabin that I saw advertised in the newspaper. I was ten years old then. Nowadays, from the current bestsellers of George Martin I would only rescue how the author portrayed Bran Stark.

But back to The Iliad, the monumental bestseller of the Greco-Roman world, although recited in private rather than read. Going into the details of the first book is important because it takes us back to the gods of the Homeric Greeks, so different from the meek Jesus. The first thing that strikes the attention in The Iliad compared to our meek times is that it represents the most absolute antithesis of the ethno-suicidal feminism that most westerners now accept, represented in Game of Thrones and in a myriad of other television series.

For example, in this first book of The Iliad the abducted girls Chryseis and Briseis have no voice or vote before their abductors: it is the men who fight for them and who complain, either the father of the kidnapped girl or the god Apollo who listened to such complaints; as well as Agamemnon and Achilles, the alpha males who can enjoy the spoils of war: young and pretty girls. Briseis, Achilles’ sex slave that Agamemnon later snatches from him, is called ‘the fair-cheeked one’ and ‘the one with a cute waist’.

Also notable in this first book of The Iliad is that the Homeric Greeks were very white people. Five times Hera is called ‘white-armed Hera’. Also ‘light-eyed Athena’ grabs Achilles ‘by his blond hair.’ Eos is ‘the one with the rosy fingers’, and ‘silver-footed Thetis’ is the mother of the main character of Homer’s tale.

With women like that it really makes you want to abduct one of them and breed…

Categories
Feminism Film Homosexuality

Downton Abbey (film)

All the films of the last decades contain bad messages, sometimes in a subtle way, even films that could be used as Aryan pride. From the second film of the LOTR trilogy filmed by Jackson, for example, the beautiful Éowyn is empowered as if she was simply another warrior. At least by the end it is implied that Éowyn is going to marry (and have children) with Faramir, fulfilling the traditional role of woman in any normal society. But in the novels of George R.R. Martin who respond to LOTR, Arya, the equivalent to Éowyn, is already a runaway feminist who won’t marry.

Both the television series and the Downton Abbey film contain subversive messages for Aryan preservation presented in a subtle, and sometimes not so subtle way. In Jane Austen’s England women could not inherit in order to force them to marry, depend on a man and have children. That began to change since the late 19th century. Even in the television series, Downton Abbey records the beginnings of the social changes resulting from the first feminist wave that hit England. And in last year’s movie, it is understood at the end that Lady Mary, not an Englishman, will inherit Downton Abbey.

A parenthesis: it’s precisely skinny English ladies like Lady Mary, who below appears at the centre, whom I fancy the most.

That’s not all. In the recent movie, which I saw a couple of days ago, the seeds of a future normalisation of homosexuality are sown. No wonder that Trevor Lynch (Greg Johnson) wrote a review of the film. He may have liked it, but what I saw in Downton Abbey is a description of the first mustard seeds that would grow big, like the evangelical parable about the kingdom of the Jewish god on gentile lands.

I have a hard rule when dealing with movies and television. Keep in mind that as a child I didn’t see non-whites playing leading roles, neither on the small screen nor on the big screen. My rule is: if I see a non-white (usually a black) I immediately change the channel. I do that even in the news (although it is harder to know if one of the anchors is Jewish).

If white nationalists were as purist as a priest of the 14 words, they would do the same. And they would write destructive reviews about products of mass consumption, even about comparatively benign movies such as LOTR and Downton Abbey.

Postscript

The parable of mustard seed is the only parable attributed to Jesus that has three independent attestations in the NT. From our POV, the moral of the story is to weed the tiny plant as soon as it appears: the exact opposite of what Johnson said in his movie review.

Categories
Feminism Miscegenation

Arya sucks

Countless times I have asked myself why I am able to hate and others who claim to defend the West not. The answer lies not only in my past but in how the System feminises men while manning women. That is why the movement needs a critique of the weapon of mass destruction known as gender ideology, which includes feminism. I will explain the manning of the girls, once again, with Game of Thrones.

Much of what appears in this HBO series contains terrible messages, especially feminism: a topic that I have already addressed in several entries about this popular series.

The most grotesque feminist arch is that of Arya Stark, Bran’s sister. I only own Martin’s first book, where Arya is just a girl. I don’t know what Martin has written about her later. But it is known that Martin subscribes at least some form of feminism in his other novels: a feminism that is magnified in the television series that the couple of Jews filmed. For example, unlike crowning Bran Stark, which is planned for Martin’s last novel, as far as Martin is known, he has not planned for Arya to kill the Night King: a character that doesn’t even appear in his novels. This killing was completely an invention of the Jews who directed the series.

Regarding the biographical arc of Arya, I don’t want to review all the visual and auditory offenses that I endured over the years while watching the eight seasons. If I had been the author of the novels, or the director of the series, I would have killed the alienated brat either at Braavos or in the Red Wedding.

The Red Wedding is a massacre at the wedding feast of Edmure Tully and Roslin Frey during the War of the Five Kings. The King in the North, Robb Stark, his mother Catelyn, and most of his three thousand five hundred soldiers are slaughtered. The event is orchestrated by its host, Lord Walder Frey, as revenge for Robb’s breaking of a marriage pact he made with House Frey. In the television series (YouTube clip here) the Red Wedding appeared in the penultimate episode of the third season of Game of Thrones, aired on June 2, 2013.

Although that day of 2013 the public became hysterical (watch some of the female hysterics here), I loved the Red Wedding. While Robb Stark could have married the very beautiful Aryan nymph Roslin Frey, he married a mudblood, breaking the aforementioned pact with Lord Walder Frey (pic). Robb was also stabbed with his mudblood wife during the wedding. The only thing that hurt my feelings was that they killed the caged wolves too.

Arya survived the Red Wedding, in which her mother and brother, the ‘King of the North’, lost their lives. In another season Arya embarked to train with a religious mentor in Braavos, where she studied the art to become an assassin. But the plot armour that the Jewish directors provided Arya in Seasons 5, 6 and 8 goes beyond the grotesque. In the climactic scene at Braavos, Arya survives the stabs in her belly like those received by Robb’s mudblood wife! Even after falling into a sewage river Arya’s open entrails were not fatally infected!

Such imbecile nonsense wasn’t enough. Already graduated as a trained assassin, the now-adolescent Arya, still a slim girl, not only kills Lord Walder Frey but all the male members of the Frey House! This too has the credibility of a Road Runner cartoon.

Of the entire series, these ‘girl power’ scenes are the most irritating and toxic for the fourteen words. But the toxic fandom loved them because they felt vindicated of what ol’ Frey had done at the Red Wedding.

I can see the good and the bad messages of the series. Toxic fans don’t see any of this. They didn’t realise the need to settle accounts with those who have married mudbloods. I believe it’s necessary to approach television hits such as Game of Thrones from the point of view of a priest of the sacred words.

Categories
Feminism

Book-burning by feminists

The ethno-suicidal ideology arose in Europe and the United States. Latin America is merely co-dependent on the fashions of the West. For this reason, the news south of the Río Grande rarely have relevance with the fourteen words, as they only imitate the North. But something happened last week at the Guadalajara International Book Fair that is worth mentioning.

Protected by the security agents of the Fair itself, on December 6, a group of vociferous feminists entered the fair, assaulted one of the exhibitors (containing copies of a book out of the pen of a conservative who writes about therapies for those who wish to heal from their homosexuality); they made a pile, and burned them in front of all.

Shocking as it is that the very security forces protected public vandalism, what caught my attention is that the Mexican journalistic notes failed to denounce it. When they finally mentioned it, they did it in such a way that the basic facts, such as the illegal assault on the exhibitors and their bookshelf, the theft of their books, and that the burning was illegal, were omitted to sugarcoat the facts before public opinion.

He who understands spoken Spanish can listen to today’s video of the Argentinian Agustín Laje (drawing) about the event last week. In Latin America and Spain, Laje, who has visited Mexico and Guadalajara many times, is probably the best-known voice in denouncing gender ideology.

I mention this because not long ago a commenter told us that he did not care about women, as an issue, mentioned in an article in an old version of The Fair Race. The comemnter is clueless of course. The target of that text were not women but how we, men, literally go crazy in our interaction with them, as we are hard-wired to protect the fair sex.

Update:

I just spoke with my sister and she told me that at least some in the MSM of the country did criticise what feminists did. She mentioned the names of Joaquín López Dóriga, Ciro Gómez Leyva, Carlos Loret de Mola and a name that I don’t remember from channel 40 of TV.

Categories
Feminism Manosphere Sexual "liberation"

Turd Flinging Monkey

Turd Flinging Monkey (TFM) is a YouTuber who creates content for the community known as Men Going Their Own Way that advocates for the revoking of women’s ‘rights’. His unusual penname has to do with a clip in which a zoo chimpanzee throws a piece of his stool at humans. In one of his videos (or rather audios) TFM explains that his penname is perfect because men are unable to change the anti-male System, and the only thing they can do is complain on social media, like the chimpanzee locked up in the zoo.

A previous version of The Fair Race includes the text that is currently linked on the sidebar, in the words ‘Women understood: here’, where I used TFM’s work to understand the sexuality of women and men.* It is a brilliant essay that makes us understand feminism beyond what, in the forums of white nationalism, we can read in the work of F. Roger Devlin. If I do not include it in the latest version of The Fair Race, it is because TFM is a degenerate who has a sex doll at home as a substitute for a flesh-and-blood woman.

But I understand TFM and the MGTOWs who follow those steps so as not to fall into a rigged system that takes away their property and children in divorce courts: a system that did not exist when I was a child. (One of the things I mention in my autobiographical book is a memory from the mid-1960s when my dad told me and another kid that divorce cases didn’t exist.) The flaw of that group and the Incel community consists in that, like the white nationalists, they are not discussing the racial revolution, as recovering Western nations means recovering white women.

Although the text in which I collect the ideas of TFM does not appear in the latest version of The Fair Race (or in the PDF of the sticky post), it is vital to read it. The welfare state is mentioned several times. According to TFM, feminism was ultimately responsible for the emergence of the welfare state. This is pivotal to understand the runaway feminism of our days. Except for personalities as opposed as Andrew Anglin and Roger Devlin, very few racialists have a profound grasp about the anti-white ravages that feminism causes in the West.

TFM is a professional when it comes to feminism; Devlin and Anglin mere dilettantes. Although TFM’s analyses are deeper than Anglin’s and even Devlin’s, there is another flaw in the worldview of the Incels, MGTOW in general and TFM in particular. None seems to know exactly how feminism originated. Evropa Soberana and Robert Morgan have tried to ponder at the root of the whole issue, blaming civilisation and technology respectively. But a technological civilisation does not need to reject patriarchy with the anti-male vindictiveness of the third feminist wave, unless it is contaminated by another factor.

‘Why Europeans must reject Christianity’, an essay by Ferdinand Bardamu that does appear in the latest edition of The Fair Race, begins with these words:

The disease of Christianity. The classical philologist Revilo P. Oliver once described Christianity as a “spiritual syphilis.” The musician Varg Vikernes said Christianity was a “problem to be solved by medical science.” He described it as an “HIV/AIDS of the spirit and mind.” Only the paradigm of sexually transmitted disease can shed light on the true nature of the Christian religion.

In the case of syphilis, there is a latency period. This is analogous to the growth and spread of Christianity across the Roman empire, until the reign of Constantine in the early 4th century. The symptoms of syphilitic infection increase in severity, leading to a plethora of life-threatening consequences. The neurological and cardiovascular degeneration caused by syphilis weaken the body of the host. If the infection continues without medical intervention, death ensues. In similar fashion, Christianity weakens and then destroys the state through proliferation of its most degenerate Christian-derived ideologies, such as liberalism, socialism and feminism [emphasis added].

It seems to me that Bardamu is closer to the truth than Soberana and Morgan. As we never saw a victorious Hitler, we cannot know if the project of a patriarchal civilisation throughout the Third Reich would have succumbed to feminism. I doubt it very much! Following Bardamu, I believe that current feminism is more a product of the terminal stage of Christianity, which is a secular phase, than of Western civilisation itself.

To those who have read the sidebar text and wish to delve into the matter, I suggest a recent interview of some Frenchmen with TFM. Just as I ‘translated’ the TFM audios into text, these Frenchmen translated TFM’s philosophy in the interview in English (here) into an audio in French (here).

Remember these words that I have quoted more than once: ‘We don’t stand a chance unless our men become killing machines and our women birthing machines’. Reclaiming the West means not only that we become men again (like George Lincoln Rockwell). It also means that women should become women again.

Update of 8:47 pm:

It is not surprising to me how the people who have a good grasp of a field of knowledge are perfectly sane but, in other fields, they go become completely bananas.

I refer not only to racialists who see absolutely nothing wrong with feminism (they are crazy, of course), but to MGTOWs like TFM who see nothing wrong with the ongoing destruction of whites throughout the West.

None notice that the egalitarianism they fight (racial equality / gender equality) is only one facet of a geometric body greater than the single facet they are focusing on.

This day for example I listened to other TFM audios and realised that this guy doesn’t see anything wrong with a third facet of what we may call the trinitarian god of today: sexual orientation. He said he sees nothing wrong even with extreme sexual practices of people who, literally, like that the sexual partner ‘shits on you’. In other words, for TFM the current god of egalitarianism of racial and sexual preferences is okay. He only revolts against one person of today’s Holy Trinity: gender egalitarianism.

In another recent audio TFW talked about an Ethiopian immigrant who murdered his wife. He didn’t specify whether the wife was white, but TFM sided with the Negro because of the simple fact that he is a man! He is unable to digest that, with their spouses, blacks commit more abuse than whites.

It is not even clear that TFM is white. In one of his not-so-recent audios in Bitchute, ‘News: Unite The Clans (TFM 42O)’, he talked about the post-war Nazis as if they were the bad guys. The image he chose for that program is two muscular arms shaking hands: one of a white and one of a black. TFM said:

This is a call to put aside racial prejudices… We need to stop isolating ourselves as men. We need to stop dividing ourselves along racial lines because women got their shit together.

Although I won’t listen to this guy again, I still recommend the PDF on the sidebar.
_________

(*) I used strong colours in the images that appear in the text so that, when printing the PDF at home, the images appear well demarcated.