During wartime, this critter is suddenly more 'valuable' than the average male |
I apologize for my tardiness in writing. At last, the Russian invasion of Ukraine is confirmed and settling into a regular pattern, as is the west’s response to it. Since the invasion was the focus of this post, I now have all the ammunition to make my general case.
So Russia invades Ukraine for whatever reason, Ukrainian women are permitted to flee the country while all men under 60 are expected to remain as a reserve-pool of potential cannon-fodder to resist the invaders. Now, this sounds pretty sexist and traditional to me. Yet nowhere have we seen or heard any opposition to this outrageous ‘sexism’ either from feminists or the ‘progressive’ western media. In fact, all we hear is unstinting and universal applause for these policies. Predictably, the west's tradcuck conservatives haven’t had much to say, either.
Despite the rhetoric espoused by feminists and their various 'progressive' apologists across the Anglosphere, these same apologists never propose that women should take an active role in the military or any other dangerous occupation.
Despite their chatter, the Anglosphere (and indeed, the west in general) accepts the following policies without a moment's thought:
- Only women and children are allowed to leave Ukraine.
- All men under 60 have to remain in Ukraine.
- All men under 60 remaining in Ukraine will be expected to fight.
One trans woman said she is “terrified” of being stopped trying to leave Ukraine, and being forced to join the Ukrainian army “as a man” – especially because authorities are stopping men aged 18 to 60 from leaving. Another Ukrainian trans woman is too scared to leave her accommodation in fear of transphobic attacks. She’s the only person left in her neighbourhood.I do not blame these transsexuals, they are merely responding rationally to the fact that low value men have 'subhuman' status in the world. But hold on - what about all the non-trans men who might be forced to join the Ukrainian army "as men"? If everything is a 'social construct', without any biological or physical foundation whatsoever, why have non-trans males suddenly become legitimate cannon fodder?
So,what lessons can we draw from this fiasco of double-standards?
- Gender equalism and the Anglo-feminist notion that gender is a 'social construct' are instantly forgotten when war or any other dangerous activity comes into view. Then, only men are expected to defend these ideas with their lives. And yet if the Anglosphere authorities truly thought gender was merely a 'social construct', they would put women and their flat heads straight into the front lines.
- In general terms, Anglo-American feminists don’t really believe a word
they say or write. All their cloudy talk about 'gender-equality' and 'gender anti-essentialism' is just that: talk. When it comes
down to it, they are still living in the 1950s on gender issues, male
rights and everything else: exactly as one would expect from the
Anglobitch Thesis.
- Anglo-American liberals still view men as ‘disposable’ even while spouting their ‘gender is a social construct’ rhetoric. One cannot make a leopard change his (or her) spots - not this one, at any rate. In the final analysis, 'progressives' are no friends to Anglo-American men. As a reflexively sex-negative and misandrist cultural bloc, the Anglosphere will always pedestalise women and devalue men; that is its default position, and it can do no other.
In conclusion, don't be fooled by all the hollow rhetoric. An Awakened Man puts himself first, second and last, in every situation. Stay aloof, stay strong and let the Crimson Pill continue to guide you.
Imaginary 'Trafficking' tales are stirring up Blue Knight Anglocucks |