Whiny Man with Misogynistic Blog Declares, to Crickets, He Is Boycotting American Women

reply to post by orangetom1999


Okay, so what you mean when you say ‘feminised’ you mean ‘materialistic’? I can work with that if you are unable to see beyond gender.

Consumerism is a fairly new religion in the UK, we never had true Protestantism, as in the merger of beliefs that came about through the interaction of Roman Catholicism and Judaism, which is the real driving force of modern throw-away consumerism or perhaps more significantly, we didn’t really get influenced by that idolatry because of our defensive reactionism against Rome. The US, in it’s innocence was far less immune and we, as a people, through close contact came to ‘envy’ the US’s wealth and prosperity and there are, if you look precursors to that.

So, firstly, we had in Britain two successive world wars, which effectively wiped out two successive generations of men, and left the women to raise the children. In addition to this, due to the only men that were ‘available’ in the UK at that time were US servicemen (“Young, dumb and full of come” or “Over-sexed, over-paid and over-here”) many women of breeding age saw the US model as aspirational. Our industry at that time was already in decline and in the US the norm was well-paid manual work that enabled a ‘stay-at-home’ wife, it seemed a life of ease in comparison to the UK where a women was expected to contribute to the family economy. Those that returned from the wars to the UK found women who had been spoiled, trading sex for commodities, in some cases enjoying independence for the first time from earning an income outside of the home and not understanding the incredible hardships and terrible experiences that those men had suffered. It created a sexual division. The best women it was considered had gone to the Yanks, and those that were left had probably dropped their drawers for all and sundry. Distrust, lack of understanding, added to which, these men wanted, and had been promised jobs, the women were sent back to the scullery, and understandably were dissatisfied. Additionally, measures were put into place that further limited the opportunities for women to work around the home, a married woman at that time was expected to give up outside work when she married, but it was the norm for those women to ‘take in’ work. The women in my family have always carried seamstress skills, so they would, for example, take in sewing, make frocks for middle-class women, the such like. This became impossible after WW2. So those men of the working classes were expected to work to support the entire family, and most died soon after retirement due to that strain. The women went on well into their eighties on the otherhand. But either way, you have at least two generations, up until mine, where the sole responsibility of child care and raising fell to the women. This is not natural and not particularly healthy for the child, especially when that woman has no other outlet. As I am sure you can imagine, a woman that is talented, or intelligent, or just curious about life, is going to become frustrated within such confines, and put all her hopes and energies into the children. Not necessarily a bad thing, but throw in a little bitterness with that, and well, you end up with the Kray Twins.

Women are not automatically ‘good’ mothers. They have to either be set a good example, or conversely a very bad one that they rebel against, but either way, one single individual should never be the sole influence upon a child, and most certainly that child should not be the vindication of an otherwise wasted life, as is so often the case. In addition to this, children grow up and leave home, and often as not, especially given a pushy mother who wants a clone of herself to prove her worth, will rebel. What has that women then to show for her ‘life’ but her home and possessions? Add to all that children who have observed their mother’s beholden-ness to the father. She is dependent upon him for her ‘value’, if he doesn’t appreciate her work and attentions, she has no other worth in such a social framework. She may use manipulation, sexual or otherwise, to get the things she needs. My mother for example, because my Dad did not think that sanitary wear was a household expense and would not give her money to buy those things that she needed every month, would baby-sit for other mothers in exchange for those products. Other women would perhaps use sex, or general sweetening to meet those needs. Children will emulate this behaviour to get what they want too. I’ll leave the rest to your imagination, but as much, in this instance, depends upon the morality of both parents as to how the children will turn out…but in terms of ‘femininisation’ or ‘materialism’, this is a primary drive, sons and daughters who are taught to ‘ingratiate’ or ‘please’ for reward, rather than earn it, will pursue that through life if it works for them and they are not shown alternative means.

Take that back now to before the great wars, to my great-grandmother, Sarah-Jane Rose. She was indentured at 12 to one of the local estates where she worked in the big house, initially as a scullery maid, but eventually working her way up to Lady’s maid. My great-grandfather, Arthur Haynes, was one of the gardeners, again he was indentured at 12, working his way up to being in charge of the orchard. He and Sarah-Jane married when he was 31, she 29, basically when they had saved up enough to set up home together. Till then, there was no hanky-panky, partly because it was forbidden, but also because they couldn’t afford the consequences. When they decided to marry, they asked their employers permission and they were released from service. Married people were not allowed to work together, or at all,and most even had to notify a senior member of staff if they were even courting, failure to do so would end in dismissal without good references. Before contraception this was how the lower classes were prevented from over breeding, and this was during (relative peace time too).

Arthur and Sarah-Jane had three surviving children, including my grandfather Albert became a gas-fitter, a new and somewhat dangerous trade in those days, and because of his valued, and rare expertise, he travelled throughout the colonies installing all the workings to supply gas to homes. When he married my grandmother, he bought the house. My grandmother, who had never worked, apart from modelling, went from being dependent on her father, to being dependent upon my grand-dad. He was too young for the first war, and a little too old for the second, but also as essential services he was not allowed to volunteer. It was his job to be the first in to a bombed house (this was Birmingham, an industrial centre, mainly munitions production during the war, so heavily hit) in order to switch off the gas. My grandmother on the other hand was enjoying the first real independence of her life, drafted in to work in a munitions factory. Following the war, forced back into the home, subsequently having nothing but two children and four walls to occupy herself soon fell for the charms of the man from the Pru, my eventually to be ‘Uncle’ Frank, who added a little spice to her life, and as is often the case, a bit of conversation. My grand-dad worked himself into an early grave miserable from supporting a whole family, rather than being able to share that burden with his partner, who herself was bored, unchallenged, dependent, and therefore quite understandably self-obsessed, or home obsessed in compensation.

And naturally, in such a situation children, confined as they are within the nuclear family to the care and attention of only one person, usually the mother, emulate that behaviour to gain similar reward. Children from such a dynamic may love their mother, but may struggle to describe a relationship based on respect, and similarly, their father they may respect, but only because he has provided for them, not because of love or even admiration for his ‘sacrifice’. Therefore you have adults who do not understand ‘team work’ and co-operation, but only sub-servience and dominance.

Now, to say the UK is infecting the US with this is naïve, it is a much wider and deeper social issue, primarily driven by whatever it is that is the aspirational model and that aspirational model is always set and directed from somewhere above and the media play an integral part in helping to target the ‘desires’ of the cannon fodder producers. The nuclear family, the isolation of some women and the elevation of others, and most importantly the isolation of the genders from each other, is all very much part of a design and it is important that one understands their role in it, especially if one wishes to ‘wake up’ and break free of the herd, or at the very least, allow their off-spring to do so. You should read some of the research into Albert Kinsey for example, the funding that he received and the way his ‘research’ was promoted to encourage hyper-sexualisation in the US and later spreading that influence into the UK.

In the UK, I am judged on my merits, hard work and accomplishments, these are rights that have been fought for in conflict with the state, not on my reproductive capability, or my ability to be ‘pert’ or ‘cute’, similarly men are adjudged the same. That is equality. I have to earn the respect that I am afforded, nothing has been given to me, or rather I have never taken anything, just because I can or am ‘pretty’. Those tests and pitfalls still exist within my society as they have always done, but I can nolonger be forced into servitude or dependence, because most importantly, I am equal in law. I would be far less concerned about the state of the world if indeed there was even the slightest chance of the ERA being passed in the US, and it coming into line with the UK and Europe. Until then, the US remains cancerous to us all, due to it's failure to progress to recognise all it's citizens as equal combined with it's insistence on telling others hypocritically what to do and how to do it.

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Kilgore Trout,

I recognize an individuals gender just as do most peoples. What I recognize more is whether an individual can define themselves by more than that for which they consume. This is become a rarity today, male and female.

Consumerism is a fairly new religion in the UK, we never had true Protestantism, as in the merger of beliefs that came about through the interaction of Roman Catholicism and Judaism, which is the real driving force of modern throw-away consumerism or perhaps more significantly, we didn’t really get influenced by that idolatry because of our defensive reactionism against Rome.

I don't know that I would agree with this statement as there is alot of defensiveness/reaction ism here against Rome as well.
What I note about England is that on any given Sunday or even during the week there would be more peoples down at the pub than in church. Or even today with rising prices you would still not find that many in Church.
It is happening here as well..but not the Pub thing. People are just doing their drinking more at home than at a Pub.
Also with the train wreck that both World Wars have left to the English economy it took your country longer to get back on the Consumerism path than here. Our infrastructure and cities were not as devastated by our governments and enemies alike during the war.

The US, in it’s innocence was far less immune and we, as a people, through close contact came to ‘envy’ the US’s wealth and prosperity and there are, if you look precursors to that.

It is not just the UK peoples who did this...the peoples from other countries did the same and wanted to come here to the land of more and plenty.
The problems with this kind of thinking I find is that so many Americans tend to think this is normal...the way we live...they have never been to other nations to see how these peoples live their daily lives.
Americans have no idea that the rest of the world does not have big refrigerators into which they can put their foods and left overs foods. That peoples in many nations must shop daily and by this their foods are far more fresh than much of what we here in the states eat.
I remember as a youngster living outside of Paris...seeing the french going with their wine bottles to get refilled at the wine store or same with mineral water. To get their daily french bread or meats....vegatables..et al. People had these little net bags they carried with them.
You see .we take our refrigerators and cheap electricity for granted and think it is the same everywhere in the world. We know so little about our own country much less how others live outside the USA.
This gap in knowledge is going to catch up with Americans big time in 2012/2013 when all these high taxes come into effect on everything we consume. We will then have become just like Europe and the UK. This is by design..not by accident.

As to women doing their work....this is true in many nations and was true here in the States as well. My mother worked very hard raising the four of us as do many men today..and even harder than do many feminized men of today. She was not a shrinking violet so to speak. My mother did not have all the labor saving devices as do so women of today who also do so much complaining about conditions. They are all..."Victims " today. Most of them haven't a clue and so too with most of the men.

I agree ...women are not automatically "Good Mothers" and this is more and more being born out in the news as it cannot be hidden as easily as in times past. I find that women detect this in other women much faster than do the men. It is like a female radar, seeing through the night, and operating on a different frequency than male radar. Men are also more apt to give a woman more slack than would another woman in this arena. And I don't think most men are even aware of this difference. To much sports, cheerleaders,and alcohol blocking their thinking apparatus.

I remember taking a woman to the store and her closely examining the woman and children in front of us at the cashier line and noting quickly how dirty this woman's diaper changing bag was. She quickly passed judgement on this woman for not keeping the children's diaper bag clean and in inspection order. Here statement to me was that there was no excuse for this. The felt that this woman did not have to use an olde washboard but knew how to work a cell phone keyboard astutely. I had to laugh at the abruptness of her judgement. Me ..I never would have noticed such an thing until she demonstrated to me as to for what to observe. LOL LOL..talk about a finely tuned radar. I never would have thought of this kind of thing. She remembered women when she was coming up who were pretty poor but kept their children and their things clean. I now note this kind of thing as well now that she has educated me.

Now this Kilgore Trout....is to me very very ignorant on the part of women and men too.

In addition to this, children grow up and leave home, and often as not, especially given a pushy mother who wants a clone of herself to prove her worth, will rebel.

As a man I don't feel the need to prove my worth to anyone..particularly when I know what RISK is in life. I am very intimately familiar with RISK for my monies. I am not interested in any woman's insecurities in this arena. AT ALL. I am interested in a woman secure enough in herself to bring me Peace..not just Piece.

What the woman's movements have sold to most women is more insecurity ..not more security. And the women/women's movements are trying to foist this template off on the men or males through their substitute wallet.....government.

What has that women then to show for her ‘life’ but her home and possessions?

This is to me a very shallow..shallow demeaning definition of a woman. It is rampant consumerism. A woman to me is a woman internal first ..not external first. This is where to me so many women have gotten it backwards and then using/misusing this phony template try to put this off on the men to make it happen..and failing that ..turn to government as a substitute male or wallet...for votes of course. It will not help them in the long run....because government itself is very feminine..and government itself, as the whore it is, does not brook competition from males or females. They are very selfish in this regard. Government itself will use/misuse women and men both to keep and maintain power and control. This is a definition of whoredom..on the part of government and if the women are following this template they become whores as well.

The other side of the problem to me is that the men have become so dirt stupid they haven't a clue as to what is happening around them. Everyone and anyone is running the homes they take RISKS for but them. And I mean everyone, anyone, and anything but they themselves. But they can do a point spread for their favorite teams. What a bunch of dummies.

Add to all that children who have observed their mother’s beholden-ness to the father. She is dependent upon him for her ‘value’, if he doesn’t appreciate her work and attentions, she has no other worth in such a social framework.

Let us think about this template you are describing in the quote above here. So today's smart, savvy, educated woman is going to reverse this role and take care of the man and children...and have him dependent on him for his value along with all the commitments needed to accomplish this. You know....cars, maintenance, home, maintenance, insurance,vacations, doctors, dentists, schools, vacations...etc etc etc..and all the payments and RISKS which go along with this "Responsibility."

Or is today's , educated, savvy, intelligent woman going to dump the male and live off the system that has been set up for her "options" while the man continues to pay and pay and pay..while getting none of the benefits of a woman?? And I am not talking about sex here.
How is this working out in the UK between males and females?? Man as a wallet to government as a wallet..for votes of course.

She may use manipulation, sexual or otherwise, to get the things she needs. My mother for example, because my Dad did not think that sanitary wear was a household expense and would not give her money to buy those things that she needed every month, would baby-sit for other mothers in exchange for those products. Other women would perhaps use sex, or general sweetening to meet those needs. Children will emulate this behaviour to get what they want too.

You are describing here that women are very much like children to get what they want as long as there is not to much RISK involved. This is not grown up. ...or maturity...nor savvy..nor intelligent. But to me much of it is to avoid certain RISKS in life..not solve problems per se..but to get someone else to take the RISKS and call it grown up, mature, savvy et al.
I dont have alot of use for a woman who's main lifetime skill set is her sex and sexuality. I may take or accept this from her .but not for real goods and services. She is not offereing me something I cannot get somewhere else or something rare or valuable. I also know that I am giving sex as well..it is a two way thing..not just a one way thing. For you see Kilgore Trout....I can do more than just sex....understand now?? My skills and knowledge are worth much more than mere sex. Most men will settle for sex but not reallize they have been verily cheated by their own ignorance...and they are very very ignorant.

I have often asked myself why the toy aisles look in a certain manner very much like the soap detergent aisles in the grocery stores. All the bright colours screaming out at you..."Take me...no take me instead..take me!! Buy me!!" It is the same kind of mental appeal. Childish and emotional. The advertisers know what they are doing when they try to appeal. They know how to seduce and deceive...just like a feminine politician.

but may struggle to describe a relationship based on respect, and similarly, their father they may respect, but only because he has provided for them, not because of love or even admiration for his ‘sacrifice’. Therefore you have adults who do not understand ‘team work’ and co-operation, but only sub-servience and dominance.

Disagree here and particularly today. What many children of today learn is that the father is not necessary. They too can work the system to get what they want and can also take it to the next step ...that they deserve it ...more than others and also deserve it without RISKS. This is not respect..it is entitlement thinking.

This is what we are breeding and producing and what is coming rapidly here from European thinking. Entitlement thinking. Living off the government ..male and female both..by entitlement.
I see many children today thinking they are entitled to their first car and Mom makes sure that someone else RISKS to get it for them without work, and without RISK. Father takes second, third, or further place down the road in priorities while everyone else comes in first.

What government is learning and taking advantage of is that the female in economically affluent economies is the determiner of how the monies are spent..not necessarily that she takes RISKS for the monies but that it is she who determines the bulk of the spending and particularly on big ticket items. Therefore politically and economically it is the woman who must be sold..not the man. The man is only a vestigial organ...not needed except to take the RISKS out of life for the woman and children. The children too learn that the man or male is a vestigial oragn ..not necessary and mostly in the way...until real RISKS need to be taken...just like a woman.
The woman can be sold by appealing to her sex, sexuality and through the children... not through the male.
She can be made to sell the very soul of the male for her vote. Even the soul of the nation.
This is why controlled tabloid journalism appeal is so important in a feminized nation.

The important vote at election time is the women's vote ..not the males or mans vote.
Most males are totally oblivious to this template and are slated and scheduled to remain so.

All of this is part and parcel of Entitlement thinking from the UK and the Continent and which is ruining their economies unto bankruptcy. They want to bring this system here to the USA because we are not quite as bankrupt as are other nations but heading there fast.

There are further and deeper reasons for this but I am watching the time constraints here.
I will continue this later when time allows. Sorry for having to cut this short.

I will catch up with you later Kilgore Trout but must make haste for now.

Thanks for your lengthy post,
Orangetom