Thursday, 25 November 2010

Remembrance Day: A Time of Anglobitch Hypocrisy


In Britain, November 11 is the annual Day of Remembrance for military personnel who died in the two world wars. That date marks the end of World War One, in which Britain lost a million men, the heaviest losses in its long history (though the medieval Wars of the Roses and later English Civil War killed a much higher proportion of its citizens). Poppies are duly worn by all and sundry and wreaths are laid at The Cenotaph and other important public buildings. In Britain and the Commonwealth (Canada, Australia and New Zealand) that conflict has the same impact on the public psyche as America's Civil War - a disastrous 'war to end all wars'.


The warrior's craft is intrinsically respectable and the bravery of Anglo-American troops commendable. Indeed, some military organizations from the Anglosphere have won eternal renown - England's New Model Army and the Confederacy's Army of Northern Virginia, to name but two. However, in the present socio-political context it must be said that no credible MRA should consider military service as a career option, for a number of reasons I will outline.

While First World War German recruitment posters emphasised comradeship and national responsibility, Anglosphere recruiting posters invoked women - appropriately enough, given Anglo-Saxon deference to women and their ubiquitous exaltation on pedestals. Further, women are a fitting symbol of the Anglosphere, since the Anglo-Saxon world is essentially a matriarchy in all respects - women have all the rights, no responsibilities and receive preferential treatment in education, before the law and throughout the media.

Despite the Anglo-Saxon focus on women in recruiting posters and other propaganda, Anglo women are notable for their absolute indifference to returning 'heroes'. Of course, this is a function of their sexual selfishness and unconscious contempt for men. When soldiers return home, where are those cheering, flag-waving maidens? The English World War One poet Wilfred Owen summed them up well:

Disabled

He sat in a wheeled chair, waiting for dark,
And shivered in his ghastly suit of grey,
Legless, sewn short at elbow. Through the park
Voices of boys rang saddening like a hymn,
Voices of play and pleasure after day,
Till gathering sleep had mothered them from him.

About this time Town used to swing so gay
When glow-lamps budded in the light blue trees,
And girls glanced lovelier as the air grew dim, -
In the old times, before he threw away his knees.
Now he will never feel again how slim
Girls' waists are, or how warm their subtle hands.
All of them touch him like some queer disease.

There was an artist silly for his face,
For it was younger than his youth, last year.
Now, he is old; his back will never brace;
He's lost his colour very far from here,
Poured it down shell-holes till the veins ran dry,
And half his lifetime lapsed in the hot race
And leap of purple spurted from his thigh.

One time he liked a blood-smear down his leg,
After the matches, carried shoulder-high.
It was after football, when he'd drunk a peg,
He thought he'd better join. - He wonders why.
Someone had said he'd look a god in kilts,
That's why; and maybe, too, to please his Meg,
Aye, that was it, to please the giddy jilts
He asked to join
. He didn't have to beg;
Smiling they wrote his lie: aged nineteen years.

Germans he scarcely thought of; all their guilt,
And Austria's, did not move him. And no fears
Of Fear came yet. He thought of jewelled hilts
For daggers in plaid socks; of smart salutes;
And care of arms; and leave; and pay arrears;
Esprit de corps; and hints for young recruits.
And soon, he was drafted out with drums and cheers.

Some cheered him home, but not as crowds cheer Goal.
Only a solemn man who brought him fruits
Thanked him; and then enquired about his soul.

Now, he will spend a few sick years in institutes,
And do what things the rules consider wise,
And take whatever pity they may dole.
Tonight he noticed how the women's eyes
Passed from him to the strong men that were whole
.
How cold and late it is! Why don't they come
And put him into bed? Why don't they come?



Let all young fellows consider these lines well. Anglo women won't reward a returning soldier with sex, especially if he is crippled or mentally damaged. Instead, they will handle him like a 'queer disease' (if they stoop to touching him at all). In Germany after World War One (and some experts consider Germany a part of the Anglosphere), young whores were stepping over legless heroes begging on the side-walk, for all their medals. More recently - last week, in fact - we had more evidence of the Anglo-American female's profound gratitude for male military sacrifice:

Wolverhampton cenotaph vandal's mum billed for £780

A mum who shopped her daughter for vandalising a war memorial was landed with a £780 bill to remove the obscene graffiti yesterday. The 14-year-old girl was given a nine-month referral order after admitting she sprayed the memorial with bright pink graffiti - daubing a crudely-drawn penis and the words "I love Luke x".

But after the case Royal British Legion volunteer worker Mike Morris claimed the sentence was too soft. Mike, 69, said: "Really she's not had a punishment, it's her mum that's had to bear it."

Veterans were reduced to tears by the damage to Wolverhampton's cenotaph last month. The girl was caught when her mum found a paint can in her bag. Passing sentence at the city's youth court, JP Sandy Gough told the girl: "I think it's a despicable act that you did at the memorial."

The girl, who cannot be named, said: "I'm disgusted with myself."

SOURCE: The UK Daily Mirror


Of course, that is just how women are. We cannot blame rats for living in a sewer. However, the self-aware Anglo-American male can use his knowledge of their selfish iniquity to negotiate a more constructive lifestyle for himself - one that avoids the tender mercies of the Anglobitch. Instead of wasting his time defending the misandrist Anglosphere, he must withdraw all consent from Anglo-American civilization and turn to new, foreign horizons for life, work and sex.

Increased male singleness across the Anglosphere has opened men's eyes to female insolence and ingratitude. When males were married or in relationships (or at least sought those outcomes) they could hardly afford such clear-eyed objectivity. However, the 'new male realism' has fed a number of post-feminist agendas, including the Men's Rights Movement. The old Anglo propaganda exhorting men to defend 'precious' Anglobitches is certainly wearing very thin - since female approval no longer matters, smart middle-class men across the Anglosphere now consider military 'White Knighting' the height of folly.

Indeed, those Anglo nations with active military commitments are lowering intellectual requirements for new inductees to near-subnormal levels. Not only is the Anglosphere witnessing a Marriage Strike in response to feminism, but quite possibly an Intelligence Strike too (somewhat akin to the elite's 'opt-out' in Ayn Rand's magnificent Atlas Shrugged).

Simply put, smart Anglo-American guys are no longer willing to risk life and limb for ungrateful, misandrist Anglobitches who despise men and deface war memorials. The word is out, as with marriage and chivalry: stay on the outside, never commit. In any case, contemporary wars to defend the Anglosphere are wars to defend matriarchal misandry, a Kulturkampf directed specifically against men. Why should men take part? It's women's agenda, let them fight for it. As ever for the Anglo-American male, progress depends on unlearning everything he has been told about Anglo women.

21 comments:

  1. Though, importantly, it's also clear that modern wars have been less morally defensible, and so ought to be avoided for those reasons too.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Not Thomas Fleming25 November 2010 at 10:04

    A most noble and worthy essay. Succinctly and lucidly sums up what has been stirring inchoately inside me for a while now. My compliments and thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Invictus:

    I disagree about the wars justifiability in isolation: IMO, the Islamists are the modern-day Nazis. Their conduct at Beslan (where they managed to turn a primary school into a concentration camp) bears out how vile they really are. True, the Beslan Islamists did not DIRECTLY oppose the Anglosphere, but they're cut from the same cloth as the Taliban.

    No, it's the political climate and the Anglosphere's social realities that should make a guy rethink fighting within those wars - not much point in defending Anglo feminism, after all. This is coming from somebody, mind you, whose father and grandfather served in the AUS military (and an uncle in the Malaysian military back in the 1960's). I also have a fondness for military gear.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Good, insightful article, Rookh. I have a cousin in Iraq and have heard many stories about how the supposedly hero-worshipping American bitches have been caught busily screwing scumbags when their warrior husbands were abroad.

    Things may have been different in WW1, but the Anglobitches today have nothing but contempt for men who would actually sacrifice for them. Their superiority complexes and narcissicism chafe under needing a man for anything, or feeling any resposibility to reciprocate.

    I always likened their attitude to the scenario of a white knight fighting the dragons while the damsel is back in the castle getting it on with the jester in the knight's bed. A truer picture of 'chivalry' as it exists today could hardly be imagined.

    When the bitches squawk about the decline of chivalry and real men, that is what they really mean: a sucker to do their fighting for them and pay the bills, leaving them free to bed-hop with all the local thugs.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Interesting article, Rookh.

    I have a lot of respect for the men who are serving in the military and I have nothing against people joining the military. Besides, the military is a good stepping stone to becoming a career mercenary/soldier of fortune.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The military life is exciting and can be honourable. However, in the present context the self-aware male should think carefully WHY he is joining.

    Specifically, becoming

    *a white knight fighting the dragons while the damsel is back in the castle getting it on with the jester in the knight's bed*

    is hardly a smart move.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I hope you don't mind Rookh, this is entirely off topic, but he's up to it again:

    "I remind such people of the fate of the wedding guest who came without the right clothing. It starts early, even before the high school dances for which the girls spend days in preparation and their loutish dates are hard pressed to wear clean bluejeans. The louts know, at least dimly, but they don’t care. Now let us hear from the Mens Movement louts about how it is all the girl’s fault for being immoral, how men are really the victims, or how it is manly to grope women and address them with slimy language. Not to beat a dead horse, but most people who join identity movements–female, male, Gay, White, Black–are Jerks with a capital J, because they roam the world seeking the ruin, if not of souls, then at least of parties and conversations and domestic tranquility."

    http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2010/11/29/jerks-i/#comment-205559

    ReplyDelete
  8. I hope you don't mind Rookh, this is entirely off topic, but HE's at it again:

    "It starts early, even before the high school dances for which the girls spend days in preparation and their loutish dates are hard pressed to wear clean bluejeans. The louts know, at least dimly, but they don’t care. Now let us hear from the Mens Movement louts about how it is all the girl’s fault for being immoral, how men are really the victims, or how it is manly to grope women and address them with slimy language. Not to beat a dead horse, but most people who join identity movements–female, male, Gay, White, Black–are Jerks with a capital J, because they roam the world seeking the ruin, if not of souls, then at least of parties and conversations and domestic tranquility."

    http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2010/11/29/jerks-i/#comment-205559

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think we've rattled his cage...

    Also, it isn't men's rights 'louts' who disrupt domestic tranquillity. Aren't 70% of divorces initiated by women? The guy isn't even close to knowing what goes on in the contemporary Anglosphere.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Aren't 70% of divorces initiated by women?"

    In America, 72% of all divorces are initiated by women! Women are the ones who want to get married and then they are the ones who want to get a divorce!

    I try to avoid American women like the plague! When I think about marrying an American women, I don't know whether or not I should laugh..........or vomit!

    ReplyDelete
  11. If it wasn't such a waste of time, I would write a tight little essay for Tommy, explaining, ever so gingerly, that louts and jerks are the preferred consorts of his precious little female angels. And that the rise of the jerk along with the rise of feminism and female power is no mere coincidence. Then I would provide links, photos and statistics that illustrate, and indeed,PROVE it.

    P.S. I have linked to an old and excellent site that should be better known to female-wise men.

    ReplyDelete
  12. James Bond:
    I recently heard another mangina, the author of the 'Men are from Mars' series interviewed, and he admitted that 90% of American divorces are initiated by women. When you couple that with the abortion rate and the out-of-wedlock birth rate, I wonder why how fools like Fleming can say with straight faces that MEN are the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Not Thos. Fleming:

    This brings to mind another 'memorable relation' about these precious little angels we're so blessed with in America.

    A couple of years ago, I was at a fairground, working on a political event. We had booths set up; mine was an iniative to reform public education. Next to me was a guy involved in drug legalization. Before the event started, I heard him complaining that he'd recently been in jail and also that he was having problems with the numerous mothers of his numerous illegitimate children.

    This guy was about 5-4, skinny, missing 5 teeth and had dirty dredlocks down to his waist. He stunk so badly, I could smell him when the wind changed. I found out soon that there were a lot of single women at this fair; not because they were concerned about school reform; but because they were lining up and falling all over themselves at the pushers' booth.

    Twice, this idiot jumped up on the table, waving scraps of paper with phone numbers and screaming "These bitches here sure do like men! I'm getting me a piece o' ass tonight!" Such gallant behavior only increased the army of sluts lining up for a chance to spread their legs for him.

    All White Knights take note: THAT is what you're fighting for.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anon 12:08,

    Was that drug-legalizing advocate by any chance black? (I'm assuming his "groupies" were white.)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Fleming's viewpoint reminds me of the great boxing match between Meldrick Taylor and Julio Cesar Chavez. Going into the final round, Taylor's corner were saying, "It's close! It's close!" when their man was a mile ahead on points. Taylor consequently took more risks than he had to and got knocked out. People ever since have wondered what boxing match Taylor's corner was watching. It was like they were smoking crack cocaine and hallucinating a completely different fight to the one before their eyes.

    Fleming is pretty much the same. Events happen in front of him, but he cannot see them because his vision is clouded by White Knight myopia. While in reality Anglo-American women initiate most divorces and seek out violent thugs as sexual partners, Tommy only sees virtuous Disney princesses carefully weeding out such 'jerks' in favour of noble White Knights like himself. Like Taylor's cornermen, he is watching a completely different fight to the one in front of him - one doubtless culled from his tortured sexual imagination.

    Reading his CV it is notable that he teaches classics. This explains his archaic outlook, but also his lack of regard for empirical proof of his eccentric assertions. Only someone with no scientific background would nurture such wilful disregard for objective evidence.

    I have been reading Theodore Dalrymple recently (Life at the Bottom: The World-view that Makes the Underclass) and, while he is a much better writer than Fleming, he too exclusively blames men for violent underclass relationships. He gives example after example of underclass women preferring thugs to solvent, intelligent males and returning to these louts again and again, without ever once acknowledging that such women are ultimately responsible by wilfully choosing such men as partners in the face of every rational objection...

    Returning to the White Knight military theme, decent males should never worry about anti-female domestic violence (except when it is aimed against themselves) since females plainly seek it out, preferring such abuse to healthy relationships. If that is what they want, let them have it: why should Mr Solvent pick up the pieces of their self-smashed lives?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rookh:

    It occurred to me when debating with a 'white knight' type recently, that men like Fleming share a lot of the same psychological characteristics that compulsive gamblers have. The compulsive gamblers behave as though their destiny to 'hit the jackpot' and keep feeding the slots; regardless of how much evidence they have that the tables are loaded.

    I mention this because I keep hearing from the Anglobitch apologists and the so-called experts in the media how much relationship success with Anglo women depends on 'luck'. Common sense should tell anybody that such an important life-choice should never depend on the fulfillment of an accident.

    What's your opinion on this?

    ReplyDelete
  17. *I mention this because I keep hearing from the Anglobitch apologists and the so-called experts in the media how much relationship success with Anglo women depends on 'luck'*

    The way Russian Roulette depends on 'luck'?

    *It occurred to me when debating with a 'white knight' type recently, that men like Fleming share a lot of the same psychological characteristics that compulsive gamblers have. The compulsive gamblers behave as though their destiny to 'hit the jackpot' and keep feeding the slots; regardless of how much evidence they have that the tables are loaded. *

    I think they may be a certain male type that evolution has programmed to be so strongly geared to White Knight monogamy that they cannot function outside that paradigm - it is their evolutionary 'reason for being', as it were. Consequently, they cannot 'see' contrary evidence to their position, no matter how overwhelming it is.

    Interestingly, there is much evidence that males of high IQ are much more programmed for monogamy than males of low IQ:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7339654/Intelligent-men-less-likely-to-cheat.html

    I would say a monogamous obsession strongly inheres to White Knighting and, this blind spot excepted, most White Knights are middle class and of above average intelligence. In fact, I would say that many of my readers fit this profile, too - smart, educated and with monogamous expectations.

    The big difference is, Anglobitch Theorists are White Knights who 'woke up' to the fact that Anglobitches just view White Knights as 'jerks', 'losers' and cash cows... while Tommy Fleming, David Futrelle and their ilk aren't quite smart enough to challenge their own biological programming. Hence, their deluded, ongoing game of Russian Roulette in the hope of being 'saved' by some Anglobitch...

    Crazy, but there you have it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I agree with your sentiments, Rookh, but I must add this: 'white knights' as we view them are almost exclusively an Anglo phenomenon. You wouldn't catch an intelligent Russian guy blandly whitewashing the faults of Anglo girls in the way that these 'white knights' do.

    Why? Simple: because Anglo-raised males have been conditioned to believe that they are fundamentally inferior to Anglo females. It is almost like Pavlovian conditioning, if you will: we subconsciously associate the word female with a bunch of affectionate terms that generally do not correspond with the stark reality of how they behave. That is why so much Anglo music idealises women (check out Tal Bachman's She's So High for instance - a well-known hit), vis-a-vis music from other cultures (like Rammstein, for instance - also note how many black/death metal bands come from Scandinavia).

    I used to think a bit like a white knight, but I was never stupid enough to unilaterally praise women and never criticise them - past abuse at their hands made me see all too quickly that Anglo females were generally pretty awful role models (my mother is NOT an Anglo female, FWIW). However, I did tend to blame myself for my failures with Anglo women my age.

    So what led me to this blog? Well, the realisation that, if females are poor role models when older and supposedly wiser, then they'll be even POORER in their youth. Secondly, I did realise, on a subconscious level, that the way that I was treated by Anglo females was wrong, screwed-up even - especially when I saw them with self-absorbed clods and guys who look as if they haven't showered for two years - guys that probably didn't care much for them. Thirdly, despite all of this, I was STILL getting blamed my others for these issues, despite my honest attempts to connect with Anglo females, on account of 'poor social skills' - when your typical Anglo female can't even hold a conversation, much less hold two pieces of bread down long enough to cut them with a knife. That all led me here, I think.

    Also, if males of lower intellect tend towards polygamy, then would females of lower intellect tend towards hypergamy? I mean, my mother (a relatively well-educated and intelligent woman, despite her occasional obliviousness to the obvious), is most certainly NOT hypergamous. Or is it just a matter of culture enabling behaviour that would otherwise be seen as idiotic or immoral? Or both?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I agree with your sentiments, Rookh, but I feel that these 'white knights' are an Anglo phenomenon. You would not find a Russian guy expressing these sorts of sentiments - no way.

    Why? Well, because Anglo males live in a culture which raises them to believe that Anglo women are superior - it's sort of like Pavlovian conditioning - women are associated with good things. This is, sadly, in stark reality to how many Anglo women behave. This conditioning can even be seen in our music (compare the Canadian Tal Bachman's hit 'She's So High' to works by Rammstein, for instance).

    As for me, I used to think a bit like a white knight. I was never stupid enough to associate women unilaterally with good things - I'd received too much abuse at their hands when I was young, but I did blame myself for my failures with young Anglo women.

    I think what brought me to this blog (and not only that, realising that its premise was essentially correct, bar semantics) was 1) the realisation that Anglo girls only develop empathic traits as they get older, wiser and less attractive 2) a subconscious realisation that these women seemed to be attracted to clods of various descriptions and 3) continually getting blamed for problems that these Anglo girls shared but were excused for - i.e - being unable to hold/carry a substantial conversation.

    Also Rookh, if less intelligent males tend towards polygamy, do less intelligent females tend towards hypergamy (more intelligent Anglo females are often as awful as less intelligent ones, but more in their attitude than in their physical actions)? Or is just Anglo culture promoting such behaviour on their part? Or both?

    BTW, was my last comment removed? If it was, I didn't mean to offend anybody.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Rick

    Yes, there is a complex interface between cultural and biological factors. The biological tendency for monogamous White Knighting probably exists in all cultures, but in the Anglosphere it is fanned to white heat by the puritan cultural meme. Hence the stereotype of 'the English Gentleman' (i.e. White knight poltroon) is not matched in many other cultures.

    Of course, there also exists the possibility that specific social factors have promoted the White Knight 'gene' among Anglo males (according to professor Richard Lynn, White Knight traits like 'chivalry' have a strong genetic component), leaving White Knights at a huge disadvantage in our post-feminist sexual anarchy where, as we know, the thug is all.

    Fleming's rage against 'blue-jeaned louts' thus becomes the cry of the sexually frustrated male yearning for an older 'genetic era' of civilization, when his kind were assured mates. Unfortunately for his thesis, the 'louts' are just responding to Anglobitch preference, as we all know. In sum, the feminist Anglobitch trashed his White Knight idyll; and the 'louts' are mere followers, not leaders. In short, his White Knight 'gene' prevents him seeing the true cause of his travails: 'emancipated' Anglo women. Which is why his cause is doomed...

    I agree about the music. I find The Beach Boys to be especially guilty of saccharine 'Anglo-woman worship'. Just listen to the gloopy 'Good Vibrations' to hear what I mean. The woman is presented as a mystic goddess, not a woman at all.

    *Also, if males of lower intellect tend towards polygamy, then would females of lower intellect tend towards hypergamy? I mean, my mother (a relatively well-educated and intelligent woman, despite her occasional obliviousness to the obvious), is most certainly NOT hypergamous.*

    The research suggests that smart people transcend brute biological programming in various ways so yes, I would expect high IQ women to be less hypergamous as high IQ males are less polygamous. Of course, it may well be that the high IQ people are just dancing to a different biological programme, as I suggested earlier (perhaps higher parental investment in fewer children serves the high IQ'd better, for various reasons). As ever, where does instinct end and consciousness begin?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I love this passage:

    *I think what brought me to this blog (and not only that, realising that its premise was essentially correct, bar semantics) was

    1) the realisation that Anglo girls only develop empathic traits as they get older, wiser and less attractive
    2) a subconscious realisation that these women seemed to be attracted to clods of various descriptions and
    3) continually getting blamed for problems that these Anglo girls shared but were excused for - i.e - being unable to hold/carry a substantial conversation.*

    At an intuitive level, men all around the Anglosphere are thinking exactly the same. I would generally say Anglo males who come to these realizations are characterized by - how shall I put it - a DISAPPOINTMENT with Anglo women. That is, for these men the toxic reality of the Anglobitch stood in sharp contrast to the princesses celebrated in the Anglo-American media (pop music, romantic films and such).

    ReplyDelete