Monday, July 30, 2018

Her Sister

Content removed pursuant to the F.I.S. Project. Contact the Project for further details.

Saturday, July 28, 2018

Seriously Fighting Anti Semitism

Like so much else, the lie is too big for many to process. How ironic, and how illegal, it would be to eliminate anti-Semitism. And, how amazing, but eliminating all vestiges of anti-Semitism that still remain in the world today would actually be one of the most healthful things that we could do. You don't think you believe that, probably, but trust me, you should, and maybe you already do, but just have a few terms mixed up. Because there once were Semites, and the people whom you now think of as Semites practiced a brutal antisemitism that killed them, then put on the skins of the dead and paraded around in a mockery of their victims. Indeed, they've had control of our cultural institutions for so long that the Semites are almost as forgotten as the older peoples of Europe.

Because, believe it or not, humans are organisms on this planet, and they have died before, individually and in groups. And some of the winners are still here, doing what they do. And that scares the hell out of some people, so much that they will not believe it. "No," they cry, "no other organisms on this planet could possibly be trying to advance at my expense!" Because only conspiracy theorists believe that these little flying things want to suck your blood, or that if you reasonably explain to the ants not to eat the bag of sugar you spilled by the picnic table, they'll eat the damned sugar anyway. As another aside, if you've made any level of study on how crypsis works among parasites, consider a crypsis that is essentially the same, but far bigger in scope, where human cultural institutions and memories are themselves fabricated to create an impression not just like changing your name, language, new hat or costume, et cetera, but changing our sociocultural perception of written and verbal history to achieve the same effect. The lie, and the purpose of the lie, is no different, but the effect can be far more profound, just like saying "ni hao!" in China is effective, but not as effective as marrying a local girl daughter of someone suggestible who made a few of the right deals and having some half-kids and getting introduced to Lord Suchan-Suech because you have the friend who can get him that rubber from overseas for a damn good price.

Yet, the deception is essentially the same. Because, when you say "ni hao" to a certain person in a certain context in a certain way, you're not just saying hello: you're saying, "I share your history and your genes and most of the basic assumptions you make about the world, and I would definitely not sacrifice your Grandmother to the strafing planes just to make myself look better later on." It's similar to the way that some of us can, say, put on jeans and an old work-shirt and walk into a bar in Texas and adopt a casual accent and say "Howdy" to the bartender, and we've just communicated so much more than an android would have if it had entered the bar in a science-lab apron and said "I give you my greetings" in a metallic voice. Our communication with each other is not just the words that we say, but an incredibly vast panoply of the way we design ourselves to look, the way our ancestors designed us to look, chance and circumstance, and all these thousands of little bits of comportment and bearing and costuming and talking that, if we're honest, convey a lot of efficient information about our personal history and connections and attitudes and proclivities and so forth. And a great part of that is conflicting with our modern age now, where we're supposed to encode ourselves like cheap mp3s, then mere telegraph blips, so that counting and trading can happen with faster download times. That type of point has been made quite often these days, and this one presumes they're still making it, though not in the context of the masters of the technique and the most dishonorable of liars. But because of a racist, anti-Semitic genocide that happened, honest to goodness a real one that time, we're hopefully strong enough to so consider. And if you're interested in studying crypsis more, think about ni hao again, and how very, very much that greeting someone goes beyond the kind of way the tech support dude says he really cares about your issue.

An oft-missed subject since perhaps the twentieth century is that there once actually were Semites in the world, and although there are still a few left without any coherent or communal identity--probably mostly just paler "Arabs" or "Levantines" or "Druze" to the modern Terran--they are not "Jews," anymore than Jews are "Palestinians," even though the Jews may someday, similarly to what they did with the Semites, adopt that identity and be remembered for it by a Terra that has forgotten there ever was an actual place called Palestine with its own people who lived there for generations. ("Land without a people," lol. They always lay the groundwork while you're busy watching some football tourney.)

Can you feel it in the air? The slow genocide we just couldn't bring ourselves to care about, the lying to the world while Palestinians are gradually exterminated, and the re-drawing of borders so that Palestine becomes Israel, and is eventually forgotten, and TV audiences the world over forget that it ever was anything but Israel. Yes, there may be data out there, still, where some nutjob can find proof that there was a country and a people named variants on "Palestine" whom the Israelis exterminated and took over, but no one will care, and that knowledge will fade away, and if the Jews want to call themselves "Palestinians" in the 23rd century, no one will argue with them. Don't be an anti-Palestinite.

It was a racial identity stolen by the people who killed and consumed most of the Semites, so completely that now most people think of Jews as Semites, but it is a filthy crime and a sad epilogue that this departed people is not only forgotten, but almost all general memory of their existence replaced by Jewish history. Our "racism," if nothing else, is colossal on this subject, worse than walking across the stage at the Oscar's hooting the n-word: we don't realize, sadly, how objectively offensive our behavior is in not only forgetting the Semites, but in giving their name to their murderers, and though we're ignorant pups, the scope of our malfeasance should at least be imagined in part. We ask forgiveness from the ghosts whom we will one day join. The colossal human tragedy that the Jews caused by all but exterminating the last traces of actual Semites is significant as to all humans, most immediately because the Jews are doing it to Palestine right now, and to Arabs in general, taking control of the House of Saud but also marrying into a handful of the more fungible Palestinian clans as part of co-opting their legacy. Someday, a small, exclusive group of purported "Arabs" who are actually Jews may be all that is left of the human group that the Jews murdered so many of, and spent so much effort getting Europeoids to murder for them, since 1945.

The same slow, gradual conquest--quality, not quantity--has been occurring for a long time in, of course, Europe and America, as Jews carefully arrange breeding between extremely successful goys and their own offspring. The fate of the Semites that we see today is macabre in scope: we don't know what Semites are, or were, and generally believe that the Jews are and always were the Semites. The reason "cultural appropriation" stuff got so much play in what we call the Terran west, even when it was abjectly ridiculous to claim that Europeoids were trying to steal yoga from the Indians or ballet from African tribal dances, was due to a Jewish projection of their own traits and intentions on some white people who were just innocently trying stuff out. The Jews, though, knew it was possible to kill a people so thoroughly that their memory, too, could be killed. I recognize the essential components of deistic similarity in their Torah, but the term "Jew" is just a local mask, and given what will happen to others and what has already happened to the Semites, it's quite probable that there actually were a group of people known as "Jews" living nomadically in Arabia around 2,400 years ago, and when a certain hostile, clever group showed up, those Jews were eliminated, and the new clever group became "the Jews," and has been ever since--except when they're "Semites" or get a different upgrade. The otherworldly horror, the audacity unbelievable to most humans, is quite difficult for the sheltered, short-memoried us to contemplate. (So too the lack of any sense of actual Terran identity held by the perpetrators, which would make such a co-option sickening for a human group to change its whole name and identity like that, but that's a separate-separate subject, how the k'arash are really linked more to their mission rather than to any costume used for a few thousand years here or there.)

(If you're already considered an anti-Semite, ask yourself the following question: "If Shlomo tells me he's a Semite from the desert, is he being honest? Or is it like everything else he's ever said, a dirty lie?" I've seen inexplicable references to Semites in a lot of old stuff that they don't tend to put in universities or on computers, but even when they've wrapped in or deleted the last of it, what someone tells you about the necessity of a Neo-Cohen philosophy of attacking Iraq now now now because of "WMD" should give you enough info about whether or not they really were the Semites they claimed to be, oh, he shipped them to Syria how unfortunate you'll have to kill some more Others. We cannot rely on the records they have already purged to tell us about the Semites, but we can rely on the lies they are telling right now that are verifiable right now, such as, "We need you to kill those Arabs because they're disruptive to your society. Also, new condos." Just like we can put ten lions in a room with a steak for a week, observe the results, then draw a reasonable conclusion about what lions do with steaks, and what this one lion did when enclosed with a steak a hundred years ago, we can use the Jews' behavior toward the other people of the Middle East to pretty perfectly reconstruct what the past was like. I personally loved reading the old land records and discussions of this community whining that that community was doing something irrelevant on pointless forgotten holiday #12, but we need to start using current, instantly verifiable data to determine what has, is, and will happen[ed], and every second that goes by they are Faceberging every university library and every corner of the internet and it is so like them to pretend that by not adhering to our standards of documentary research that would still be there if they hadn't destroyed them, we're not even allowed to argue. Oh look, they just shot another carload of Arab unarmed teenagers at a checkpoint, gee I wonder what Palestine's population will look like in a hundred years, and what the preponderance of living witness testimony and extant written records will say about how good or bad were the checkpoints.)

More immediately fitting, for us in the twenty-first century, is to consider Israeli bulldozers crushing some Palestinian toddlers in their beds, and then to imagine a time one hundred years from now, when some smiling, kindly Jews, with a few drops of Palestinian DNA in their blood from a marriage of necessity generations ago, are considered Palestinians. The effrontery would be perhaps more noticeable to today's modern then, but as unknown as the co-option of the Semites' identity is now, to the people born then.

Farther in the future, perhaps, just as how the Semites disappeared and then lost their name to the k'arash, or the Jews, what they will call "white people" or "Europeans" may just be another of the Jewish costumes. Considering the interbreeding at socially prominent levels, and the work results and dropped columella of the U.S. executive, who tries to tilt his head forward in photos to disguise it, the work has already begun. Pass a moment of silence for the forgotten Semites, who would be mortified to discover that their killers took their name, their soul, as well as merely their nation and lives. Big separate subject, and really interesting if you can find some of the pre-racism-movements older scholarship; moving on...

Softly rasps the wrapping of the ghost. The more explicit references to the Semites' lives have been mostly vanished, but here and there, in stuff like agrarian surveys or unimportant local political chronologies, the Semites were spared full excision from history, such that I was able to catch a glimpse of them in someone's text about this tribe or that tribe, this city or that city, at least to give some tiny shape to the shadow in the crumbling book or the forgotten microfiche. No doubt gone now in the interests of modernization, for they microfiche all the newspapers of record but have no space for the rest. These were sources that also referenced the Jews and the Hebrews, as distinct from the Semites, and more modern revisions have long ago begun to meld the two, such that any reference to a people called Semites has become, by definition, a reference to the people calling themselves the Jews. Like our knowledge of Europe before the Rabbi started to centralize things under His prize nobles, our knowledge of the peoples of Arabia is barely even speculative, and much of the western perception that "there were like a bunch of tribes over there then, right?" stems, perhaps, from the removal and co-option of one or more of them. Certainly, this type of occurrence is not wholly confined to the Jews, because killing all the adults and boys in a village and then mating the females is a common human strategy, allowing the rapespawn descendants to, legitimately, claim blood rights from some of the tattered remains of their genome. What makes the Jews' "Semitism" move so particularly noxious is that they didn't just do that, but, like a child molester changing his name and moving to a new town with a new job only to return with a bunch of idiot Brits so they could molest again, they adopted an entirely different cultural nomenclature and avowed persona to go along with it, and, more loathsomely still, they were using the identity of someone they'd had killed to get there. Future mirrors past here, too, for unlike the Arabs, who could actually kick asses on occasion, even approved modern history displays (to go with "victim" whining, though likely to be modified away in the years ahead) the accurate long record of Jews being militarily defeated by people on whom they attempted to prey that, as in fostering the Iran/Iraq war or the America/Iraq war, show that then, as now, they were using foolish intermediaries to supply and die and bleed for them.

It is with a deep sadness that we approach this issue, because, seemingly ironically, any attempt to speak against anti-Semitism is probably doomed from the get go, because the people trained to clap for the Jews will, amazingly, exhibit no human response to a different group of middle eastern people being discriminated against (or just "killed off," but they've been trained to growl the most fiercely at words like "discrimination"), whereas the doings of the Jews under "Semites" hats for the past few millennia has been so terrible for many populations that are still alive that they have an understandable aversion to feeling compassion for something which was called a Semite. We may see the cycle duplicate itself in the centuries ahead, such that people are complaining, "Oh, the bank is full of such Palestinians, they bumped my mortgage to 17%!" or "It just makes me sick how the Palestinians are lecturing me about being nice to the Chinese while they themselves have the Amhara trapped in those farming-prohibited ghettos!" We cry because, in trying to speak out against an actual, unfair, unjustified, vulgar, hateful, violent anti-Semitism, the warmongers would prohibit it, and the Nu Euros would be so offended that someone would dare speaketh its name. It's so crazy that it's funny, and so funny that it's crazy, isn't it, that when you control the present you control the past and the future?

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Climbing on the Backs of Congoids II

Continued from Climbing on the Backs of Congoids.

The World-Historical Significance of Buyer's Remorse

Certainly the great crime of slavery deserves a fitting genetic redemption, but the Europeoid defense of "daaaarr I didn't know it wasn't all right" does not serve him. That's a world-historical crime, from which he has not freed himself. Accordingly, whether or not African life expectancy or literacy went up a little or a lot due to the children of kidnapped tribesmen being on plantations in North America is irrelevant. If the slaver-traders, the people movers, are ever removed as they should be, the Europeoid cannot then claim that his suffering as a direct result of his own crimes of complicity makes everything balance out. Besides, you dummies, if you put them back home and stop paying to breed them, you could send them thousands of tons of food each year for fifty years and you'd still come out way ahead of now. Not only by not paying to breed Congoids and Siberian feather-dancers, but also not mass-murdering Arabs for the Jews, the Nu Euro could become wealthy beyond any of his current dreams.

As regards bad arguments, then, "slavery helped you" is as irrelevant as "it wasn't our fault mostly" and the ridiculous notion that "we should all be Americans but just have segregation." Segregation offered marginal social benefits over integration, but besides being a compact into which Congoids did not enter willingly--being clubbed and tied and sailed across the ocean by some Jew's goons is not even remotely consent--the notion of trying to blend two very dissimilar species (oh, if that offends you, use "societies") with great variance in levels of violence and achievement, under the same governmental rubric, is as expensive as it is absurd. The vile crimes of the misguided dunce cum bloodthirsty tyrant Lincoln cannot retroactively justify the stupidity that was the antebellum American South, where this rotting cocktail had been kept on a slow simmer until harvest came. Saying it was "better" than the war, or than after the war, is to celebrate the initial symptoms for their superiority over the full expression of the disease in which the symptoms must inevitably result. "Oh, if only we could go back before the war, so we could have it all over again!" It is, perhaps, indicative of the short historical memory of the Europeoid that he looks to the past for answers and is only bright enough to find them in the very recent past, "stable slavery" but not just "farming the New World." Even more shortsighted is the idea that "living in segregated communities" is some halcyon aspiration worth having or remotely sensible. It is indicative, troubling, and troublingly indicative that so many of the "whites" since the American Civil War have tried to argue that, either, 1) keeping a bunch of Congoid slaves at home was a good idea, or 2) free Europeoids living alongside free Congoids was a workable solution for a society, and that things were somehow fine with segregation. Neither lesson learned, and it's like they've forgotten what life was like before the Rabbi came to advise them.

Modern discussion on the human species of this planet, which we might more locally and temporally call "discussion on race," has been blended stupidities, with some Congoids and some Europeoids trying to pretend that the groups are not different, or are not mentally different, do not have different average construction of the bodily proportions or the brain, et cetera. This is stupid, and the stubbornly faithful are and will remain stubbornly faithful, but perhaps even stupider is the Europeoid's defensive response over slavery, which is the same as it has been since the embrace of Judaism, which is, "It wasn't our fault." After a year, ten years, a century, a millennium, the Europeoid still claims that restructuring land under his jurisdiction in accordance with ethnic Jewish whims is an acceptable task. How many times are you not only going to buy a busted used car with a smoking engine from Honest Sal's lot, but to buy the same car, over and over, which you've theoretically tried to return more than a hundred times? It is intellectually painful to watch yet another few generations of Europeoids cheer with illusions of their benevolence as they imagine their stellar gifts will uplift another horde of swarthy immigrants to their presumed level, but is it more intellectually painful to watch those who resist them fondly recall the idyllic days when a different brand of swarthy immigrants were merely free citizens born here, segregated citizens, enslaved non-citizens, or something else? Watching it all happen all over again, this one surmises that the jubilant welcomer is a bland sort of stupid, but the pretensively cognizant aspirant to a previous violation is by far the stupider of the pair.

Any reasonably foresighted thinker prior to the invasion and military occupation of the Confederate states, regardless of geographical location--and including, of course, President Lincoln himself--could see that the only hope for peace, let alone any kind of decent society going forward, was repatriation of the Congoids (which had been originally brought to the New Marketplace, excuse me, New World, by those nice white TV-anchor-types captaining the ships because Abram wasn't so stupid as to personally risk the trip when some stupid goy paid agent could do it for him), because a Europeoid society could not survive the effects of hosting a species which must needs become hostile when glittering temporal prizes were compared in close vicinity. Again like Jewish ("Christian") dominance, America was changed fundamentally by this hosting, which confused the issue of immigration to the dunces so much, that, well, the current year: which could not have looked this way, in America or across the pond, if the fiendish trick to which the idiots were gullible hadn't first been, "Picks your cotton!"

The other slavery-type crimes which the Jews committed and inspired on other peoples are certainly terrible, and increase the metaphorical sentence another several degrees beyond the gallows, but do nothing to solve nor mediate the Congoid problem. For example, the use of primarily idiot Anglo-Saxon armies to Judaize and then exterminate the many forgotten peoples of the northern European islands, and then to enslave the resulting unknown mass of what we came to call in the northwest, perhaps partially correctly in some cases--absent intelligent observers using time machines and making painstaking efforts of years to study and document each slaughtered population on the way to the northern oceans, we'll probably never know--"Celts," has no bearing on the problems also caused Africa. Of course the Europeoid descendants of those Celts later became better involved in saving and mortgaging and inventing and building a society with clean streets and fewer muggings and drive-by shootings, but that was because they are Europeoids. If we're hardy enough of mind to get beyond the deception "No species is different from any other species (except one particular species is more equal than everyone, don't talk about the lack of evidence of the holocaust or your career ergo food goes)," then in the more mature thought process, it is but a banally obvious argument that of course slavery didn't matter in that sense, and of course "the Irish," even after centuries of arguably more brutal enslavement than the Americanized Congoid, were able to still build a functioning Nu Euro society, and also, of course the Congoid bears neither responsibility nor even knowledge of what was done to Europe by the soldiers of Yahweh-Christ, and the crimes against each group have to be judged separately.

What was done to Europe as part of its Judaization ("Christianization") is a separate, and much more difficult to assess, crime, given the totality of the destruction of the population (there were African tribes with only a few slaves, or zero slaves, taken, but every single European village had The Rabbi come to call before 1,000 A.D.), probably totally comprehensive nature of joint bloodlines since then, and the mental constitution of so many of the distant partial descendants to now love the story they were given in exchange for two millennia of their society. Given time served by some and the impossibility of sorting out who's really part what without aforementioned time machine, that is one that will probably need to be allowed to resolve itself, as a suitable punishment for the warmasters themselves removes all the conditions that are otherwise preventing a gradual Nu Euro sanitization and the re-creation of good societies. The vulnerability of that rapespawn to gradual replacement by their successor tools is a suitably measured and balanced k'arash method of retribution, in which they, not motivated by justice but merely replacing tools, visit essentially the same fate on what remains of Europe as those bloodlines did on those who came before. Forest becomes cathedral, cathedral becomes mosque, and in a strange, savage, terrible way, a sort of justice finds its home in the k'arash's essential drive to destroy, because material equality is, sadly, achieved by everybody being dead. We need not, and should not, forget those who honorably resisted, and were ground into the soil (but fertile fields have turned to sand, modern madness, ha-sniff), nor those who kept their minds and went to church and wondered "Why's everyone watching Game of Thrones and reading Harry Potter and praising some rabbi now, are they fucking insane?" but kept some of their telehistorical memory, while learning to survive living safely among the cathedrals, then the mosques. That's its own type of learning experience, and is, again, irrelevant as to Africa.

And that's why we need to talk about what they did to Europe in order to really get what they did to Africa and America, because you can't have understood slavery in the Americas without seeing the European context, nor vice versa.

In exercising some fantasy where a type of justice is possible, then, and where there's any way to stop this runaway train, one must remove the slavemasters utterly, but can never completely finish the punishment of their little stooges who so bravely won the scraps of surviving children from murdered heathen village after village for Yahweh-Christ. The potential removal of the Judaized tax and media infrastructure means a lot fewer little kids being pulled into the rabbi's no-longer-state-subsidized house for worship--fewer every year, and an end to the dogmatic preaching of the Book of Genesis et al. in churches old and new, whether admittedly houses of "faith" or lying houses of "academics" or "science"--more impartial science research and education being permitted, more people taking casual flights through the firmament in the family car and finally putting two and two together, and so forth.

The last few despicable secret pedos and irredeemable dunces may live out their lives imagining embracing the child Christ or the suffering Christ in some scantily clad rabbinical Heaven, suitably perceived by their kin, and the future could be free without the excruciating impossibility of making the rabbi-worshiping betrayers acknowledge what was done to produce their disgusting, imaginary paradise. As the elimination of tax-subsidized welfare payments also eliminates the woman with seventeen kids and another on the way, without having to kill nor physically threaten a single human being, the elimination of social freebies eliminates the lazy arm of the parasite's church. Like trying to discuss the respective strategic bombing techniques employed by Germany and Britain during the Israel Foundation War, in which body counts and choice of targets and any imaginable concept of human decency simply will not penetrate the skull of a modern western "liberal," it is a similarly doomed crusade to tell a modern conservative Irishman that his beloved Church of the Risen Rabbi killed every man, woman and child in this village, and that village, and that village, and all up the coast there, and into the hills, and on, and on, and on. Imagine trying to get an American Democrat to discuss the positive merits of bombing hospitals in 1943 Dresden--it's similarly blank to the mind of almost all Nu Euros still extant, how they came to be on a longer, but even more fundamental, timescale. As they say, there are simply not words.

(Don't overlook the state subsidization of Judaism/Christianity since even America. With Europe, it was essentially a thousand years of letting Jesus-Yahweh borrow the car, fixing it every time he wrapped it around the tree, and him running all the governments through the incest-fatties called "nobles," trash successors to the hero-chiefs of the forests, to do what he wanted, including bringing in "converts" and "His chosen" and constantly sending the younger generation off to some backwater to die spreading His name and Europeoid civilization.

[Seriously, the people who consider themselves anti-racist are sick and deadly as fuck. If you've read of the work of pro-missionary women's societies in ye olde England, there is a truly eerie similarity. Congoids going to war over chieftainships with spears and attitude killed probably a few dozen, maybe a few hundred in major wars. But when you fill their heads with abstract democracy and fill their hands with modern rifles, they kill millions of people to please the dudes who keep bringing the toys. The modern concept of "anti racism" has been an incredibly brutal curse for Africans, and if you can tell that human types are different from each other, you should not be in the slightest bit afraid to argue--not professionally, of course; that's just insane--that the people who are "anti racist" are, truly, the most anti-Congoid force on the planet, responsible for the deaths of not just millions, but dozens or hundreds of millions and counting.]

In America, the much more mundane habit was observed of having every other citizen buy Yahweh-Christ police protection, fire service, zoning crap, animal control, public/clean elections contributions, school proportions, et cetera. Seems much milder than what happened to Europe, and it was/is, but if you've ever run the numbers on a commercial plot the size of some modest megachurch, you know how many tens or hundreds of thousands a year the church is bleeding out of the community in order to tell people to turn the other cheek. It's fucking laughable that at all, and even more so with the acceptance of blunt cattle, American Christianity has ever tried to pretend that it was not an aspect of government. Seriously, every time you see a church in America, you need to imagine everyone else in that municipality working hard to kick in an extra $100-$300K a year, per church, to keep each Sunday-swollen parking lot filled, because without that kind of governmental support, the church would go down, baby, down, and then we'd see just how important the rabbi really was to the Nu Euro. It's a slim sign of hope for the Nu Euro that, even after all that the northering Jews did, they still need to arrange a taxation and media symphony to keep those nasty things around, or else the Nu Euro would wander away and do something else. Sadly, it would just be TV, but it's at least good to know the church can't survive without those gun-enforced kickbacks every 15 April.)

Consumerism from Consumerism

Fitting, in a sick mercantile way, is the correlation between two significant aspects of Jewish involvement in the group development and life experience of the Congoid in America: selling people and demanding the right to buy crap. The "right to purchase trinkets" was a vital part of the civil rights movement, directly harmful to Congoids themselves, but perhaps more rudely, an insinuation that the right to buy stuff is of great moral character. American fast food restaurants, and mountains of online kitsch, owe their crappy existences to this massive social implication that the right to purchase is so incredibly vital that the "life, liberty, and the right to buy crap" had a much larger impact on society than the cliche black person permitted to buy a sandwich at a lunch counter. Not only whites and all other races in America and the world, but Congoids themselves, were amazingly harmed by this invisible consumerism, which we take for granted now because of course everyone has the right to be a mindless consumer drone, and the right to buy some takeout food or piece of plastic crap from China is as fundamental as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Modern consumerism, and its incalculable ills, could not have arisen without the civil rights psyop.

The cunning subjugation of the Congoid to consumerism happened through, and because of, the "civil rights" movement. Not as naturally inclined initially to buy worthless crap as a status symbol--perhaps due to his reduced capacity for abstract thought, making him less vulnerable to the sick Europeoid fetishization of gizmos--the Congoid had to be stroked and encouraged more to become crap buyers. All the other groups that have been blended into American society have taken more easily to the notion of buying crap, though the Siberian tribes of North America have a mystique about being more "natural," which tribal leaders are desperately trying to use to motivate young people to stop moving off the rez and getting into debt to buy crap. The tax-deferred nature of tribal lands, and its use to outside venture capitalists setting up resorts and casinos, may yet save the illusion of per-capita-bribed people giving nature tours in costumes, but otherwise, the "right to go into crushing lifelong debt in order to buy crap" idea has been used with much success on all the human species subject to American omnipresence. The old trick that moneylenders and bankers used to get Europeoid farmers to mortgage their farms, then lose them, and start paying property tax for public fire service, had been long successful by the time Jewish civil rights leaders came up with a way to add Congoids to the rolls and make that conscription seem, to the Congoids, like a good thing.

(Anecdotal aside, I know two black couples who are reasonably wealthy, like not quite decimillionaires but seemingly living the dream for trailer-folk, but it's just like watching white lottery winners, with the inducement to go into ridiculous debt and buy some flashy house that's just a big suburban normalcy in twenty years, the turns-eyes supercar and the $30K piano that no one knows how to play and a bunch of $6K pieces of art on the walls that no one likes anymore, and yeah the kid can afford Harvard or whatever but that legacy is whittled way down and oh god please don't pay that financial dude 2% to manage it are you insane? Tragically for the world's merchant-counters, most Congoids haven't pulled this off, but they're great leverage against the producing Europeoids, so it turned a massive profit anyway. Our concern here is not the nighttime worry about Congoid ARMs, since they don't contemplate future time like that, but the actual real effects they'll have later, even if they don't worry about them like Europeoids would. The unenunciated, maybe never understood feeling of loss of reality might produce more disaffected Europeoid poetry and prose, but the pain of a Congoid trapped in a mall, though not as often spoken of nor described in a tenth as much detail, is still real.)

In a similar way, the supposed repression of "lunch counters," so often cited in support of the mass consumerism of the faceless society, was not even technically accurate in its details. The black dude that the sandwich salesman sees walking around out front every day and shining shoes and picking up cans and helping the lady carry her heavy bag is gonna get a sandwich, whereas some communist training camp kids from out of town who march inside and make carryout orders with pompous knowing expressions aren't. The "civil rights" movement was, in small part, a way of combating racism for the one bad businessman who wouldn't sell product to a paying customer because he was black, but far more importantly, it was a strike against knowing your customer and localism and all of that, dressed up in a veneer of racial fairness. All the specifics of who was or wasn't served and when are never publicly reportable, but that idea that shipping people in from out of town and getting them refused service shows a need for change is a different idea than pretending everyone is the nice black dude they see regularly who did get a sandwich--and the idea that black people should be eating mass produced food, rather than homemade food, is responsible for X million heart attacks via McDonald's et cetera, so yet again Congoids have paid, and continue to pay, a terrible price for the movement to indoctrinate them as Europeoid-style consumers.

(Again, so Portlandia, so hilarious how well Jews know and can mock the specific weaknesses of their hosts. Even as college classes and publishing companies help Europeoids see how the food should be local and you should know your neighbors and you should eat homemade from the organic market, how you should abandon the deadly surrealism of modern society that is so evil, and you should wear Indian headdresses and return to the land, the exact same Europeoids worship the civil rights gospel about uppity negroes coming from out of town to order stock food and move into the soulless suburbs and become more urbanized and get more mortgage-counselor jobs and how dare they not get it?)

The civil rights movement was, among other things, a continuation of the slave ship, in that it further severed the Congoids' ties to Africa and emphasized, massively emphasized, how much Congoids belonged in the northwest of the globe and deserved to participate in that culture and had created that culture and were being unfairly excluded from it. For help beginning to think on this topic, visualize the shopping mall, and a bunch of fatass Nu Euros fighting for the right to buy a "small" bucket of grease for $8.99, then rushing down to the jewelry store to spend five weeks' salary on a chip of glass-like material to commemorate some special event and stopping at the baked treat cart along the way to drop $5.99 on a scientifically trans-fatted breaded treat, alone and miserable and trying to throw crap into the bottomless pit to still feel human, contrasted with some fit African tribesmen hunting wildebeest by a watering hole and then having a communal feast and celebration afterward. The civil rights movement, and all its filthy participants, were trying to improve the quality of the cage that had trapped the African in America, and that is so directly an extension of the slave ship, but with a smile and a lot of bought sellout togetherness, that it is disgusting for that alone. Yes, realistically, those healthy tribesmen threw unwanted infants to the lions and had genocidal wars against the tribe supporting the openly-kickback-receiving political opponent of their preferred openly-kickback-receiving leader, but that possibility was created by Nu Euros trying to recreate European democracies where it wasn't appropriate, and the source of all the crimes was not the slaves nor their kin themselves. Maybe struggling to budget for the next year's mortgage payments is better--but the choice in lifestyle was made by the Jews, with Europeoids' often knowing acceptance, whereas the Congoids actually had to be whipped and kidnapped into joining up, ergo the further entrapment of "civil rights" built upon an edifice fundamentally different than the one that took Europe. It is no surprise, ethnically speaking, that so many Jewish communist instructors and valiant marchers helped the Africans obtain consumer rights in America after their progenitors had owned the slave ships.

These and other similar unwilling gifts were extracted from the tax cattle to be given to "blacks." Viewed in that way, the pro-black social agitation for enforced togetherness of various kinds was, indeed, a benefit to blacks on European terms, albeit only in a teensy, tiny marginal way, which could never outweigh the massive drawbacks, whether or not impressing them with cars and phones made them think they'd moved up in the world after all. Calling the civil rights movement good is like calling the increased number of trained cardiologists in America "good" after the blacks have been switched from 100% organic low fat food to the standard American diet, but also provided with cardiovascular surgeons: the surgeons are, technically, a benefit, but the process is incredibly harmful, and not good. The initial crime of the Jewish and Semitic traders, in changing them from an African environment's survival requirements to a Europeoid economy, had not been removed, and the accretion of civil rights made blacks, as a group, less "competitive" than they might have been had they been affected by well wishers rather than ill wishers.

Think of the difference between a trade school curriculum and a high school curriculum. Say you can jam a hundred kids each through the programs, and at the end of it you get 50 people ready to empower themselves with Women's Studies courses at the local college, 50 people ready to enter professions, and 100 people who are skilled electricians or cooks or water-heater repairmen et cetera. Or, you can have 100 people ready for professions, 50 of them unemployed for 50 years each and 50 stressed as they can be fired any second since 50 people would really like their jobs, and 100 ready for Women's Studies courses followed by retail employment. Some kind of genuine good-natured attempt to help Congoids have more consumer crap in the twentieth century would've been more the "trade school"-type approach, and less a bunch of--choose your preferred take--well-meaning idiots, or lying Jews, telling blacks that they deserved to learn advanced calc instead. And we all know how well the Congoids would do with the advanced calc, but even if you think they could learn it, we still need all that trade school stuff you look down upon you snob, so you need to adjudge the paid advanced calc advocates poorly, and not the long succession of failing students.

The--again, choose your preferred version: incredible stupidity, or vile Jewish lies--that created the civil rights crap of the twentieth century could have been done so, soooo differently, and so much better, and saved millions of black lives from the hell of what came between then and now. A moral, responsible steward of the mixed society Jewish slave traders had created could have established training programs for plumbers and carpenters and drywall techs, and savings programs in government banks, that could have saved millions of Congoid lives, resulted in thousands of cleaner and much safer Congoid neighborhoods, and created an environment of self-respect and sensibility and appreciation that would've turned 90s drive-by culture into working hard to show up your peers and mandated nest-eggs and prisons with a much reduced percentage of black prisoners. Wakanda was a lie, but Europeoids in America could have certainly guided Congoids into living nice, clean, safe lives, if the instruction had been there, instead of the "agitate, get revenge" instruction that the Jewish ringleaders provided. To say this isn't to exonerate Congoids for going along with it, but it is to incriminate Europeoids for going along with it, because there were literally millions of their own lives, not just Congoid ones, and a few dozen Detroits and the rest of their country, riding on it.

Aside from the moral qualms and subconsciously realized effects of the enforced togetherness of the "civil rights" movements, and the deleterious effects that had on the world's northwesterned Congoids, the civil rights movement actually had far more damaging and far reaching effects. By reorienting Congoid society and the Congoids' own minds to understand that everything was someone else's fault (it was, but it was not the fault of a bunch of confused landlocked farmers who were "white" in the northern continents of the world; rather, the soulless Jewish and Semitic* slave traders and their European puppet companies who'd shipped the Congoids off to begin with--and, separate subject, that shows how far ahead they plan and how mentally weak Europeoids are by comparison, because if you let them move in, and you let them establish trading houses, they will do things like start land wars in Asia in your name, or conduct a massive and immoral population move in your name, and you will be left paying for it centuries later with everyone thinking it was your fault to begin with. The things Donald Trump and Jared Taylor are effecting might seem mild now, even favorable, but they plan way farther ahead than you do and they've planned this out on levels of play of which you're not even aware. Seriously, coming to Terra and watching you goys try to play the game of survival against the Jews is like watching the Washington Generals lose another game. It's that imbalanced.).

To be continued in Climbing on the Backs of Congoids III.

Monday, July 23, 2018

Climbing on the Backs of Congoids


The American, then vaguely western-wide, "civil rights" movement was one example of a movement that hurt its presumed beneficiaries as described in Climbing on the Backs of Queers, and a far more deadly one, than buttsecks-related movements.

(And it's appropriate to say buttsecks-related because the old European trend of not giving a damn about who screwed whom unless you needed to bog a pedo was largely carried on into the present as to active lesbians, such that it was almost respectable and expected for women to have women-only friends and women-only activities and women-only spaces, and it took a lot of cultural indoctrination to get people to conceptualize and imagine and accuse the sapphic, whereas it was easier to get them to worry about MSM, ergo foundational Judaism beginning its anti-sex work with perverted concern about buggery. Men had men-only spaces also, but the quiet social tacit acceptance of, and greater assumed privacy accorded to, the total-female relationship, like a couple thirtysomething chicks going on their own two-week holiday and maybe sharing a room to save money at the hotel--"to save money" ha-ha, there're a lot of unknown fights with the husbands and make-ups with the husbands hidden there--enjoyed far less social meddling, even under Yahweh-Christ, than male-male relationships, which took a lot more bullshit stories to keep going. The social disapproval of women with money neglecting social responsibilities to raise the next generation can also not be directly conflated with sapphic behavior; though surely correlated, the refusal to contribute to the future was more frowned upon, rather than, with males, the more perverse social interest in what went into what.)

No one "should" be dumb enough to fall for this shit, an affliction similarly requiring of intelligence comparable to the avid TV viewer. Yet, part of what makes the k'arash unique and effective among beings in this universe is the ability to thrive in shit and not mind it nor try to have better, or more clearly put, the compulsion, the need, to dwell among and control forms with a reduced capacity for being a conduit for light, and to stem the growth process itself. This is necessary for digestion, in the same way that the stomach is designed to kill bacteria, or more dramatically put, bugs swallowed whole who somehow make it down there alive, and we recognize that, but as humans we still sort of lament it. (Consider, e.g., helminths or other organisms designed specifically to live inside the human body, even parts of the digestive system, occasionally just annoying or sickening, occasionally symbiotically helpful like the many other microscopic symbiotes these forms need for skin and other organs, particularly breaking down Terran substances for calories, who are nonetheless killed by the stomach.) So if you have a bunch of idiots, and you have the opportunity either of improving their minds in a slight, gradual way over the course of a lifetime, or having them eat fast food while being proud they voted for some asshole murderer-leader and watching pro sports, the k'arash will always choose the latter, so porn and teevee and shopping malls proliferate as, and as part of, our death. This one laments that overall failure of people to do better, even though everything is not initially capable of being better, just because I'm impatient and something of an idealist, and being here is part of learning about necessity and the beauty, or at least the inevitability, of the process. More specifically put, the fast-food-gonzo-porn-reality-teevee world is, like the k'arash themselves, necessary for better things to happen, although again, if you want to resist then by all means do so, and me knowing it's not going to work and my silly seeming-cynicism about prospects for improving one lifetime's worth of justice need not affect you.

Returning to "civil rights" in the Congoid context, first, consider the benefits the American movement may have offered the fodder group: easing of housing restrictions, establishment of punitive measures for those who wouldn't hire group members, access to more forcibly state-subsidized goods out of proportion to taxes paid, and the requirement that cleaner and better-behaved Europeoid students come to crumbling Congoid brown ("black") schools made to cruelly imitate Europeoid ones, and have a poorer educational experience, thereby lowering in some small percentile the total effectiveness of a racial competition for employment and/or economic achievement, in an environment where all boats sunk a foot so there is reduced opportunity for someone clever to interfere in the competition for jobs requiring minimal skills. Only the last two--harming Europeoid job placement and thereby improving, or making possible, Congoid placement, and, giving tax-bought cash and goodies to Congoids just because--are actually benefits, because the others are either the right to purchase more products or the right to break up the family and put the state in control of children. How well that has turned out for millions of Congoid-shot Congoids since has shown the "failure" of the supposed justification for "state schools for Congoids."

Not really the failure, of course, anymore than the slave-merchants intended their fate after the slave ship to be beneficial. The Jewish community leaders who planned the civil rights movements knew full well that access to more consumer products and attempted forced blending into Europeoid neighborhoods, and the resultant hostility on both sides, would not turn out well for their fodder, and the past, say, fifty years have not been a "failure," but the desired result, just like it was such an unavoidable tragedy that the Israel Foundation War killed 50 million Europeans or whatever. Oh, how tragic, the glorious struggle against the control of the means of production left a few dozen million Russians without food or a few winters worth of fuel and they died, what an unexpected tragedy! Took me completely by surprise, how about you? Here's your bill.

Traditional Opposition to Civil Rights Crusades

In ever addressing this subject, we must take caution to disassociate ourselves with many of the partially correct or outright stupid arguments for "civil rights" having been bad. There exists in some Europeoid circles the notion that slavery was good, because it gave Africans a better life and higher survivability rate than they would have had in the bushlands, but though true, this is absurd, comparable to if a dentist kidnaps a girl, chains her in the basement, but has a paid hygienist clean her teeth three times a day and gives her excellent free exams every month and she lives her life as a slave without a single cavity. The extra dental care is not a plus when considering the chained life; it's a morbid insult on the dentist's part to pretend that the lifetime of captivity can even be weighed and measured in any way other than that hauling her to his basement was completely wrong, end of story, free perfect dental care irrelevant.

(Separate subject, but the concept of "measurement" is something the k'arash really like, and sometime, probably lots later, when you encounter them in another realm, one of the big difficulties will be dealing with how insanely they need to "measure" things, so while you're, say, trying to stop a galactic nova, and they're trying to add and subtract and count and trade stars, it's so effing annoying that listening to them cry about Grandpa's holocaust memories even though the paperwork says he never once left Turkey will seem like refreshing, beauteous honesty by comparison. Seriously, the counting thing...trying to tape-measure the height of the doorway to the millimeter while it's shaking from some dudes trying to battering-ram it's bad here, and I feel it too, but they can and will do worse.)

The first time a Jewish ship showed up with a Congoid, and some disgusting merchant tried to say, "Hey, this one here can pick your produce," the proper response from the Europeoid would've been, "Get him the fuck out of here lest the shot in my blunderbuss find your heart. Now." But that response wasn't given a great deal of the time, and the immivasion worked, costing Africa and the New World prodigious resources, providing incalculable benefits to salesmen of different varieties of product (not only the sticker price, of course, but the social modifications that could only be effected by the recipe), and occurring with no lack of consent and complicity on the part of Europeoids. How stupid you'd have to be, as a species ("race"), to socially imbibe however many tens of thousands of Congoids and start breeding them, is a really professional-grade of stupid, but well duplicates the dumb acceptance of everything the Jew has ever brought the Europeoid, from surrender-based Rabbi worship to millions of Congoids living down the street from your wives, and in a moral sense, it was a genuine wrong to the Congoid, who did not ask for it. Had the Congoid been lured onto the slave ship willingly, by Jews promising "free vacations in America," he might have some responsibility for the outcome, but kidnapping and the whip do not grant that responsibility. The Europeoid, though, was complicit for decades, as bright as a baby being fed ice cream that makes him sick yet still not getting it, clapping and asking for more. Indeed, the immivasion in Europe and America now is a direct descendant of the willingness of so many white dumbasses to buy Congoids from the middle eastern scum who had monetized them. All of those plantation owners buying owned Congoid labor should, in your heart, be viewed as having been as intelligent as a bunch of scantily dressed blonde chicks holding "Refugees welcome!" signs.

(Which raises other tricky, unpleasant questions, such as "How bad do you feel for the 23-year-old sign-holder when she gets raped by Arabs at 26, watches women lose the right to vote at 45, and sees her granddaughters become Ahmed's de-tongued, stick-beaten third and fourth wives at 78?" She asked for it, inasmuch as she can be said to have made a decision in this world. So, too, must the horrors of the American Civil War be viewed. Not to exonerate the northern leaders nor soldiers for their foulness in starting the war nor what they called "Reconstruction," but the choice to buy and import and house and breed Congoids had completely predictable effects on the great great grandchildren of those idiot purchasers, just as have the various immivasions since Judaism hit Rome. Side-side note, the reason Jewish movies and textbooks always try so desperately hard to portray the Romans as orgy-crazed perverts near the end is to create the subtle impression that that was why the Empire fell apart. Just like America, it has nothing to do with Jews, they say, but is the natural failing of the Aryan to lazily give up authority to Jews and Afromestizos while retreating to hedonism, it's completely his own informed decision and has nothing to do with the k'arash behind the curtain. And it really was and is--and having history think of you that way is part of what you trade for one lifetime of material ease.)

To be continued in Climbing on the Backs of Congoid II.

Monday, July 16, 2018


Addressing the issue of buttsecks, even starting through an MSM lens as we did in Climbing on the Backs of Queers, can help us think so much deeper and tighter about MSF relations, evolution of the human organism on Terra, and the meaning of life itself. Much as we can draw inferences about the nature and character of people by their overwhelming majority desire to rub genitals and swap fluids and thereby reproduce, which they quite often do without being ignorant of the consequences of said fluid swapping, and which they sometimes but not always do for the express purpose of both the presumed means and the presumed ends, the prevalence of buttsecks is nearly as indicative, or at least 10% as much, as indicative of human traits as standardized mating-sex. Similarly, if buttsecks is gross, so is normal secks, and the fluid swapping and genital rubbing prove a major source of disease and expression of violence in the world, though maybe not running on as high a percentage per encounter as buttsecks, but still of historical note for as long as people have been recording things. Ergo our own consideration of anal sex per se need not be considered, nor be actually, vulgar or inappropriate, nor limited to some type of salacious sex-specific inquiry, but as reflective and insight-laden as the common desire to eat messy calorie-rich food or jump into a public pool on a hot day despite 37 little kids having peed in there and 3 gross adults having gone in there without wiping well and 142 people having been grossly sweaty when they got in. Also, people eat sashimi and we can talk about that, so as they say, "Be mature." Because buttsecks is a fact of lives, even if not of yours.

MSF Buttsecks

One of the most common turn-ons, per the porn industry, which would have all the male actors in dinosaur costumes if that increased viewership, is anal sex. Which means it's a primarily male turn-on, and that's part of the ongoing career cycles of poor pretty white chicks getting into porn, wherein they start with solo dances and playing with themselves, move on to sex with white-appearing male actors, then maybe group or a black dude, and somewhere in that latter phase of development they're doing anal, which hurts at the start but gradually becomes routine, and then it's retirement to teaching jazz dance classes, or desperately trying to book a couple years more doing bukkake or double-penetration or group black.

Human literature on sex speaks often of this anal attraction, and it's maintained its consistency over decades of filmed porn, as well as centuries of salacious literature, both porn and not. Case in point, the Marquis de Sade's Juliette makes extensive use of MSF and MSM anal, Juliette's own career in sex really specifically telegraphing the modern porn actress' career, starting out with masturbation and girl-girl scenes, then the same tame pairings with one male partner of the same ethnicity as the recipient, where one is supposed to be aroused merely by Juliette getting cummed on, then moving on to sex with groups and burly foreigners, where mere coitus isn't interesting any more since we've already seen her do it. Since everyone in the story is bi-curious, and since the author was secretly way more interested in dudes than in chicks, Juliette's orgies often include her getting nailed next to some dude getting nailed, and the combination is hot for some, even if the dudes have been described elsewhere as rather dumpy and pudgy and old. Juliette and a long, similar succession of works aside, though, the modern porn industry evinces a colossal demand for anal sex, with most porn websites including anal as a proliferate category, with supply such as to indicate men more appreciate watching some chick take it in the ass than the pussy--completely straight men, who'd evince zero cerebral or erectile response to being shown dude-only porn, and who'd die before touching someone else's you-know-what, and who are in every way heterosexual and only heterosexual: not just the normal ways, but the really objective scientific ones that could catch some nervous weirdo who had lied.

Ergo, in every way since written history, buttsecks has not been a wholly nor even primarily MSM, which is to say queer, thing. And this causes great trouble with the way we think about homosexuality and heterosexuality, because given the numbers of each predilection on the planet, there are likely far more buttsecks-interested straight people than there are queers.

Evolution comes in here, too: why would straight males, sons of a long and unbroken succession of successful breeders, have buttsecks with girls as a turn-on or an interest of any kind?

Access Theories

One theory about anal sex is that it's interesting to men because it indicates access to the woman, and thereby is related to vaginal access, ergo reproduction. So, the logic goes, if she'll let you do that--or you have the power to get that, you have the luck to take that, et cetera--then it has such a strong correlation with eventual reproductive sexual access that it is itself a turn-on. That theory doesn't work, though, because being a billionaire is way more likely to get you reproductive access than taking her in the butt first, and if you hook men up to penis bloodflow sensors and show them two films, one about a man winning a billion dollars in a game show, and the other about a man doing a gorgeous chick in the butt, the former will produce zero erections, the latter erections at over a 90% rate of test subjects. Similar results would be achieved by many other "access to womb" tests, such as "video of winning Nobel prize versus doing cutie in the ass" and "video of being voted hottest American firefighter of the year versus hot chick in a chastity belt waggling her naked butt at the camera and saying dirty things about what you should do." The billionaire example should be decisive, but any other similar comparison could be made, from 2018 to caveman days, and the instinct for a man to be more turned on by the chick taking it in the butt is erectively decisive in any test you could run. Even weird male moralists who pretended they disapproved of such things would have to rip the wires off and storm out of the testing room if the "hot chick waggling butt" scene came on and threatened to make them think they were bodily hypocrites; they wouldn't be hypocrites, of course, anymore than people who didn't believe in murder would be able to maintain the appearance of their moral principles if they watched a 4 hour film of some dude happily torturing children and small animals. Avid dieters who don't break their diets still salivate, pacifists still feel the primal urge to defend justice even if they don't act on it, and so forth.

So, the "access theory" fails. If you were already doing her in the butt anyway, it is so much more evolutionarily effective to switch holes, rather than to stay in the butt and feel like an evolutionary winner because you've definitely proven you have access. The access theory is, simply put, stupid.

Pleasure Theory

Because the woman's anal opening is tighter than her vaginal opening, and because the friction that either opening can produce on the male penis is pleasurable to him--which pleasure is completely validated by evolution--another theory of the prevalent interest in anal sex is that it feels better. It's kind of a stupid theory, since people watching porn and jacking off receive the same physical stimulation whether or not the video is of anal or vaginal or some dude fucking a silicon toy, but it's not as stupid as access theory because maybe fantasy just works that way.

However, pleasure theory fails because the female anus is not the most frictive hole to fuck. A proper male or female manual grip can exceed the anus in the strength of its friction, as can countless other things. Yet people don't want to watch a video of some dude fucking the tightest ever silicon sphincter, or some lab-grown orifice, or some bodybuilder's squeezing hand, even if accompanied by racy pictures or clips of naked chicks; even if something about the male interest in females being buttsecksed derives from some ancestral memory of friction, friction is clearly not the only, nor the decisive, nor even a marginal, draw to the act, because people wouldn't just watch a video of some dude fucking a silicon orifice and like it a little less than the chick one; they would completely not pay-per-view. So no one would make that video. No one would want it; no one would care. Men might buy a million of those silicon orifices for themselves, but they would use them while watching hot chicks take it in the butt, because they were interested in the hot chick taking it in the butt and not in viewing the presumed friction. They'd similarly prefer to do a hot chick in the butt than to be left alone for an hour with the tighter silicon product, even were the product mounted on a pole or mounted on a machine that provided pushback. Something that transcends the sensual realities of the act is far more important.

Semen Health

One really dumb, but really scientific-sounding, theory that's occasionally been floated about non-vaginal sexual acts is that any form of insertion of semen into the woman's body accustoms her to that semen, and makes it more likely that said semen will survive inside her after it's splooged in during normal vaginal sex, thereby making successful insemination more likely. Viewed this way, anal sex is like "pre fertilization," or improving the odds, and therefore men like anal sex because it's improving their chances at reproduction.

This theory is dumb for many reasons, but the primary one is the most decisive: imagine two men and two women, and they're in a reproduction contest, "survival of the fittest" style. The first couple has anal sex for a month, then switches to vaginal, and when her eggs come down, they achieve pregnancy. The second couple has regular sex during the first month. Repeat times a thousand couples, or times the same two couples trying to have more offspring during the female's reproductive years. Who ends up with more offspring total?

Obviously, the second couple. If the first couple has some kind of reproductive problem, where a subtle reduction in the woman's vagina's natural hostility to foreign fluids permits that one lucky spermatozoon to survive, maybe their month of anal practice betters their work, but across large populations, assuming similar variance in reproductive-capable and reproductive-impaired people, some kind of anal practice is detrimental, not beneficial, to attempts at reproducing. The couples that pump away at the butt are, by definition, going to produce zero percent offspring during those acts, and the slight increase in the small percentage of "can't get pregnant" couples' successes are offset by the delay of months in the healthy couples working on building anal-based sperm tolerance.


Ergo the "semen health" theory fails also. It should be obvious, but for those amazingly desperate to blend their faith in randomized evolution with some kind of rationale for people's extremely powerful and pervasive non-vaginal sexual interests, they can take such audacious steps, much as someone who's sporadically intelligent can think they believe in the Jewish Bible as a series of metaphors which can be interpreted in an immeasurable number of ways rather than the literal way that's already been disproved to their satisfaction. It's a ridiculous argument, and a ridiculous attempt, like the attempt to hold together random mutation with observable worldly phenomena, but "it's a metaphor" at least can put off the acknowledgement that it was some old lies and nothing more. In the face of organisms as we study them today, or human sexual desires, desperate random evolution theories, mostly theoretical or speculative in the manner of Big Bang "research," about acclimating the semen to the partner's rectum have been floated, but moreso, vaguely hypothetically researched ones (on really small samples, and without mixing the male partners across the females because good science is eww gross I'm not doing that!) has reached unsupported conclusions that ejaculating into a woman's mouth, and her swallowing it, achieves not a rectal, but a gastrointestinal, benefit to sperm survivability, making blowjobs equally, or more, effective in producing more successful breeding later.

Like the theories of rectal training, the idea that men like to have their penises mouthed by women because of instinctive desires to produce later reproductive success are, like the endless succession of rationales for why students of a Chinese-American heritage always score better on math tests than students from a Mexican-American heritage with desperate parental over-involvement, from the same zip code, stupidly inane. Who reproduces more? The dude who gets sucked off 1/3 of the available nights, or the dude who fucks pussy 100% of the nights? Amazingly, and similarly for any male interest in handjobs or between-thigh fucking or foot fetishes or "jacking off onto her face" or any other non-vaginal-intercourse sexual behavior, removing the penis from the vagina is a reproductive loss, and the full panoply of human sexual behavior is 99% an evolutionary fail. Like access theory, the theory that such behavior encourages or leads to sex is fundamentally flawed, because the penis fucking the vagina, or at least ejaculating into it, is the only way to produce offspring prior to those weird dudes in California who use tubes and injections, and all they're doing is improving the process of ejaculation anyway. Human sexuality, above and beyond dudes screwing dudes, is a vast and non-reproductive thing, and like so many other aspects of humans, is so colossal in size and complexity that it cannot be accounted for by the desire for reproduction alone. The occurrence of similar fetishes across widely separated population groups--such as, sub-Saharan Africans wanting to screw hot chicks in the butt just like northwestern Europeans do--shows a commonality of development that can't be explained by (locally popular randomized) human evolution, and the anti-reproductive nature, yet almost total dominance, of certain numerous, perhaps completely innundating, traits, tells us more about the inferiority of our guesses at randomized development than perhaps anything else, since we can feel the effects, and we can know that they don't produce offspring.

So many other things are easily explicable to the male human. You want to be rich, you want to be famous, you want to be strong, you want a fast car, you want a harem--all completely understandable within the context of random evolution. But where the hell does wanting to fuck some chick in the ass come in? If you're not male, or if you're broken there, or if you're not turned on by that--like, the bloodflow monitor wouldn't show any activity down there if you watched some hot chick taking it--that doesn't matter, since the bulk of the world's trackable male population has shown their interest. Overpoweringly. The Japanese have porn about it, the pygmy women give their men blowjobs, the Inuit, the Siberian Americans pre-Columbus, the Renaissance Europeans...all of them would be laughing at Dawkins, if they could stop sucking dicks and filling asses long enough to have the time.

Dominance or Submission Shows

Another potential reproductive benefit from anal sex or blowjobs could be the use/display of, or social awareness of, the male's dominance, whereby he is assumed to be really socially prominent, and thus more deserving of mating that does produce offspring, if he takes chicks in the butt or the mouth. Like, "Wow, I heard Zeke buttfucks all these chicks, I so want to bear his child more than I did before!" But, like so many other pitiful attempts at rationalizing non-reproductive sexual interests, it conflicts with the fact that fucking a butt or mouth means not fucking a vagina. Even if it adds more sexual prestige to a male individual to fuck a butt than to father a child, the time and effort spent gaining that prestige subtracts from time and effort spent inseminating fertile females, and the comparative math of both routes is clear.

It's possible that some weird perverted take on patriarchy makes the protracted desire for oral or anal a dominance show in other regards, but patriarchs who only fucked fertile pussies should have exceeded in number, and driven to extinction, patriarchs who fucked butts and/or mouths, but this apparently didn't happen, despite the purported competition for survival of the fittest. Similarly, the argument could be made that chicks who like anal do so out of confusion, because they can feel the penetration through into other passages, or it makes them feel desired or cared for or whatever, but again, those who coupled only vaginally should have gifted themselves, and their partner's offspring, with a success vastly outstripping those who tolerated anal sex or oral sex or you can just jack off on my feet that's so hot or whatever.

There are certainly other aspects of social prestige and dominance that make sense, like being a known ultra killer or mob boss or richie, but all of those things have tangible benefits to a kept woman or to offspring, regarding protection or provisioning thereof, whereas saying, "My dad once fucked ten chicks in the ass!" does not provide to the germ line nearly the same benefits as ten, or one, additional sibling(s). No presumed prowess nor imaginary social status can explain how a desire for buttsecks could have survived, ergo again, the development of traits through random mutations selected for utility does not, and cannot ever, explain human sexual desire nor behavior for non-fertile-vaginal intercourse.

MSM Buttsecks

We've looked at the amazing depth and recurrence of MSF sexual activity, here, and now queers don't seem quite as, well, queer, because the non-reproductive things they do are, if cycle-timing or just birth-repression drugs are taken into account, actually the distant minority of sexual perversions happening regularly on this planet. The amazingly "unnatural" natural habits of normal straight people over the centuries are no more likely to produce offspring than a bunch of sick queers, and yes, there is a huge difference, but what constitutes that difference, really? If a MSF couple has 6 blowjobs and 1 special anal reward night and 8 normal vaginal sexual encounters per month, but she's got an IUD anyway, is it something spiritual or holy that makes them more straight than a couple of queer dudes who have buttsecks with faceless nobodies at the club 4 times a month, and swap handjobs another 20 times a month? Yes, but spirituality, or some form thereof, is the only real difference, as far as being a clump of human cells here and using other cells to get mental titillation of physical pleasure in ways that aren't even remotely performed in contemplation of offspring. God or evolution or whatever apparently designed the human body with a pleasure center, the prostate, up the male butt, which apparently some queers like and say they can cum from, and whether or not you join this one in thinking that's fucking gross no way ever over my dead body you sumbitch, the inexplicable quirk of wasting resources for growth and survival by putting a bunch of touch-sensitive nerve endings down there, of all places, suggests under a "random mutation, evolution by natural selection" rubric that, somehow, MSM buttsecks is a benefit to mankind. And it's clearly not, under our modern evolution religion, but nature doesn't make mistakes and what the fuck man? Just the recurrence of homosexuals in human society should be enough to make all the points this article has already made, because this apparently random mutation keeps coming back no matter what, not being eliminated but apparently tolerated and nurtured and sometimes enthroned by various human societies, but showing its face over and over again. It's almost enough to make you believe that there really is a perverted Sky Man who designed that gross temptation just to see if people would violate his commandments by doing it, good grief what a filthy trick, that is one sick Sky Man, but at least then homosexuality would make sense, since even the bonobos who want to fuck dudes also want to have 40 children with chicks just because they like genital rubbing.

Why Sex?

Sex is easy to understand from an evolutionary perspective. You make a life of suffering, use different degrees of suffering or relief therefrom to motivate things to survive, and provide pleasure for things conducive to survival, like eating or resting or producing offspring. The motivation for individuals to then use pleasure loci for non-survival, non-reproductive functions, is then discovered, because pleasure is of inherent worth and, per evolution faith, people are motivated to seek it out for no reason other than that it's pleasure, so you have people overeating ice cream or jacking off three times a day at home alone, thereby costing themselves years or mates, thereby pleasure is counterproductive, yet...well, our evolutionary faith doesn't explain that, anymore than it does the appearance of lungs suited to Earth air, oh wait it does it's random aren't we lucky.

The confluence of so many acts of incredible, mathematically impossible if you round to the 100th digit, features of life here is explained not by random mutation, but by evolution, or real evolution to contrast with the Random God way it's usually presented in 2018 Terra. Part of what you do as a human is learn about what it means to be a human, of course, and part of that is private existential angst and part of that is interacting with other humans, a component of which is often sexual interaction. And in fostering that process, that desire to expand light not only in your "self" but light in general, you have the desire to reproduce, and also the desire to learn and explore, and part of that often expresses itself sexually, particularly while you're in this body with these functions and these possibilities. People's shifting moods and preferences, in foods and partners and parts, are not always or ever explicable here, but that is why people desire sex with no reproductive purpose, with or without a touch or a dollop of mutuality or togetherness, and so forth. Exploring humans, and gaining knowledge of the relationship of other bodies to your own, is more of a primary function of being here, in the self-ish sense, than even reproducing, which is why the childless are still human, and why some of them don't end up honestly, privately traumatized about it. Ergo humans have this drive to explore one another and try things out, whether or not they're necessarily more pleasurable, whether or not they advance the interests of a competitive species. View the diversity of sexual desire as a demonstration of an (more general, not always specific) essential "human character," or at the very least, view it as a disproving of the local evolution religion's sacred texts and a chance for you to conjecture your own theories about why these hominids on this planet would have any, let alone many, inherent desires to participate in physical acts that are not related to reproductive success, caloric imbibing or accumulating, grooming, strengthening of social bonds, or anything else that would theoretically result in survival or reproduction. Ergo, logically, these bodies were designed for some other function than "surviving and reproducing on Terra," since they have all these recurrent traits among really unrelated individuals.

So, ultimately, something as seemingly garish as buttsecks can join a vast line of human traits in demonstrating greater care in construction than Bangism alleges. Existential despair can be likened to an evolutionary accident, where these increasingly more sophisticated minds evolved accidentally to increase chances of a certain species' survival and reproduction, and the thoughtful minds then began worrying about other things, but like the historical dearth of incomplete organs designed for processing resources found on other places shows that such organs were never "randomly" designed, the instinctive and proliferate drive for buttsecks teaches us, strangely, that there is some greater purpose in existence than our wisest wise men have yet been permitted to speculate. Something loaded stuff into our brains that the Random God cannot explain. Therefore, there is hope beyond the "accumulate pleasure for one life then void forever" of our popular religion.

Sunday, July 15, 2018

Climbing on the Backs of Queers

In Alexander the Twink, this one said:
The Jewish crimes against humanity are many, which is easily known, yet more varied and discriminatory than are commonly known. African American urban violence in the twentieth century, for example, is a "but for" situation, where the civil rights movement changed communal focus from whatever it might have been to a fruitless blaming that spiraled to microaggressions, and there was nothing left but shooting your neighbors. The Jews climbed upon the backs of homosexuals and transsexuals also, directing all community and public attention toward a focus on mostly illusory victimization where the opportunity for self understanding and self improvement was destroyed.
We'll look here more specifically at the ways in which predominantly or wholly Jewish staged rebellions, or civil rights movements, used as their fodder the people they were supposedly trying to help, and how the perpetuation or establishment of problems in those fodder groups both assisted ethnic Jewish causes directly and indirectly.

Fungible Brains

Much of our dissonance throughout these topics will be caused by people's arrogant belief that showing kids things doesn't change them. There's a whole separate sordid history there of Jewish movie-salesmen being recognized as poison peddlers early in the twentieth century, and occupation governments staging several Trump-like deflections of popular anger by pretending to do things that were worthless, ergo "ratings" keep society perfectly safe, because a bunch of stupid Europeoids get so vindicated that a movie with a bare ass or the f-word gets a certain "rating," and thereby all the smarter, subtler things slip into little Billy's mind, and he suddenly hates borders and doesn't understand what it means when X hundred, then X thousand Siberian invaders are driving drunk with no insurance and crashing into mommies and kids.

But the influencing of the young is paramount. People know that kids exposed to a language sufficiently will learn it, but what's left of Europeoids doesn't believe that about children; doesn't understand it like the k'arash do. So many adults nowadays live in this dream-haze of assumptions about who they are, and where they've come from, and what problems the world faces, based upon the things they've watched on movies and television, and to a lesser extent on the propaganda they were exposed to in school. School history is basically, there was a revolutionary war, a bunch of people in wigs and stockings signed some important stuff, then first Abraham Lincoln, who really wasn't racist but was just a man of his time, and Saint MLK liberated the Congoids from a weird oppression whites had created, and then came modernity and we're going to fulfill their mission. Oh, and there were evil Nazis in Europe and the one good thing America did was kill them, but then Civil Rights and we must vigilantly work on that. And TV and movies reinforce this, without which a bunch of pale-skinned dullards would probably forget who was bad. And there's really very little we can do convincing the dullards of this, because the TV tells them they're informed and empowered, and all the infrastructure is in the Enemy's hands, and that battle was, sadly, lost long ago.

The point is, children get massively influenced by things that happen around them when they're children. They trust adults, and they hate Nazis not because they have an understanding of the history of the time period, the history of the world, the history of the species in the world, et cetera, but primarily because all the people they respected and relied upon have indicated that they should. And in large part, that is supported by TV and movies, but that's a separate subject. It's also a subject that's not itself important here, because what we're going to consider here is how the meaning of the world, as told to children, makes various social movements more influential after they happen, and are rubbed into growing brains, than while they happen. When a 25-year-old marches for sandwich service, it affects him much less than a 5-year-old 50 years later hearing about how good the march was and why it had to happen.


A subtle change in the perception of discrimination against (LGBTQ+, let's just say "queer" for purposes of discussion, because at least unlike the media-nurtured crime of linguicide evinced by the use of "gay," the term "queer" is linguistically sensible and embraces diversity and is literally true since everyone is weird in some way anyway, but you know what this one means when this one types "queer") queers has been the Hollywoodian pretense that queers were in some way lynched or persecuted in violent ways before there were twentieth century campaigns to teach everyone to love them. In American Beauty, where Evil Military Man kills a man because he secretly wants him and loathes the idea of queer culture, and Brokeback Mountain, where weird white hillbillies cheat and group-kill a queer just because they don't like queers, carrying on the trend of trying to make young people believe that Europeoid culture has not merely decided not to hire or move in near queers, but to actively hunt them down and kill them for no reason other than an irrational, violent dislike for their sexual behaviors--and it's so irrational, that repressed queers might kill you even if you're straight (American Beauty) so everyone's concerned and you can't sit this one out and you have to let them kiss and groin-grab openly in the military or else you're only just hurting yourself. And queers were always in militaries, and did just fine, and it's such a degrading insult to thousands of years of that to bring the modern western ones into flagellatory celebration as emblematic of anything related to that history, but that's a separate subject. Which is to say, a hundred generations of men who bravely and stoically performed various duties that they and others thought honorable, while not making their bedroom preferences a remote part of the process,

Without a primer on the developing human mind, and on minds of similar complexity found here, it would be difficult to make an argument that should be obvious to anyone who has ever been a child that things about the world form an essential part of the peripheral character of your self on Terra. There exists a substantial literature on this which often but not always avoids touching what is thought of as political, but those who understand how components of their character, or of their underlying worldviews, were shaped by childhood experience, may understand this. And everyone else understands it, too, which is why the Christians are not okay with all children sent to godless liberal indoctrination camps until ten years of age, with the belief that God will redeem them once they're older--a few of them, yes, but playing by the numbers, letting the enemy educate your young--as the Europeoid has conceded to the Jews these many years--produces a predictable aggregate effect.

This is what has happened with cultural perceptions of queers in the latter half of the twentieth century. Whereas Congoids were actually lynched sometimes in U.S. history--with discernible, though modern media-hated, reasons for why dead Nu Euros would've mobbed and actually done something--queers were not. In Jewish controlled Manhattan in the 1960s, their mayor told their police to conduct a series of raids on some queer fuck clubs, and some anti-police riots were staged, all to create a plausible veneer of "physical conflict" that could be at least one citable reference of some petit violence between the queer community and those supposed exemplars of Europeoid society. Further attempts to stoke riots and disagreements failed, so fifty years passed, and they made Brokeback Mountain, but the historical record of "anti-gay lynchings" never filled itself out, even with false flags and ample motivations, because Europeoids had things they would rather do than kill the queers among them.

And yet, the media fostered this "queer lynching" presumption so assiduously that, despite its utter absence from European and American history--and there's a very good, very obvious, very specific reason that the Christian community and faith leaders never did well at fostering anti-MSM stuff despite the supposed wishes of their Jewish god--it became an understood, if erroneous, assumption, and helped foster a lot of "gay rights" legislation to make Europeoids wonder "why even bother?" about having children.

On the Backs of Queers
If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
The great social concern over this imaginary violent battle between queers and repressed mainstream Europeoid society took a terrible toll on actual queers. Conceptualizing what was done, and how it hurt its supposed beneficiaries perhaps the most--besides wounding one of the only human societies to ever tolerate their open, independent existence, and certainly the most powerful--can help in understanding the concept of "pro whatever" movements actually hurting the whatever.

There are lots of existential concerns implicated by being a queer, even if just the boring "has sex with same sex" type. The combination of desire for buttsecks with however many billions of years of sexually reproductive evolution is a tough one, and the social assumption, sometimes but not always correct, that the desire for MSM buttsecks correlates 100% with the negation of the fundamental desire to reproduce and live on through offspring, is a nasty social implication. For an actual individual human being, times however many million, the enforced social turning of a blind eye toward that fundamental aspect of character is a dirty act perhaps worse than a mere occasional lynching by some random asshole who gets the chair but has a handful of internet supporters through the trial. Some churches will, at least, try to pretend they'll heal you of the earlier condition, but there's a complete dearth of social acknowledgement of that desire, whereas there's a massive megacorp-funded set of counselors ready to teach you that buttsecks is great and all your problems are caused by people who are irrationally prejudiced against buttsecks. Since the existential agony, the conflict, is known by the afflicted individual to be personal, the "let's support each other against the evil haters" line just doesn't satisfy--and the pretension of legacy by joining the ranks of the proud butt-screwers doesn't satisfy either, and like not ever eating nor defecating nor doing other natural stuff, the absence of reproduction can hurt in a deep mortal way that, we're taught, just doesn't matter.

The disregarding of transsexual feels is similar, in the sense that it denies the individual's feelings and identity in favor of the Glorious Struggle against prejudice, as though if you're passable or just time things well or stay in a certain part of town when you dress anyone ever even notices, let alone gives a shit. As with MSM and FSF queers, we'll never know the true numbers of people who committed suicide or watered down their lives because of the social hostility toward the concept of their having an internal problem at all, versus blaming everything on some hypothetical haters of the past who conducted imaginary lynchings (and if we think there's some kind of coverup of a shameful history, remember how proud people were to report their involvement in the lynching of Congoids, almost at though, if a wrong act and there wasn't really a rape white wimminz epidemic after the Civil War like there still is today, they didn't have 2018 morals. Ergo if there had been lynchings, people at the time wouldn't have covered it up, ergo the dearth of evidence proves--like the missing gas chamber bodies in empty Europe--that there were no such killings, or that they were so small in occurrence as to be historically negligible).

Acknowledging that someone has some weirdness in their genes, or some other aspect of character, was for years, and may still be, utterly taboo, which is apparently deadly serious to many transsexuals, since they know something is weird inside. And the social mandate to pretend it's all due to the discrimination of magical lynching gremlins, to pretend that everything's all right, and to ignore the reality of the really complicated set of personal issues actual transsexuals have, is damning. Even trackable suicide rates are higher, whereas those caused by people who would express some different identity but don't want to be socially pigeonholed into a victim group with pre-designated non-remedies, no doubt double or triple that number, and the thousand small crimes of "pride" organizations can never be countenanced nor counted. The social denial that there is not anything wrong nor deviant, when it's obvious even to the shemales themselves (whether or not they get off on it, but probably more relevant to us here if it's the ones who don't) that there is, is such a callous, pretentious lie that it's far more hateful and othering and self-denying than some random powerless dude at a bar making explicit rude comments. And since it's supported by government and teevee and movies, it's a pervasive force that cannot be denied.

(The private hells of queers are dark, scary places, particularly if you're Bangist and believe in random mutation and natural selection, but also embrace buttsecks or rugmunching or similar. Hat tip where it's due, I know some queers who have dealt with those issues, and come to terms with themselves in them, sort of similar to a lonely old sixty-year-old in a trailer park who probably could've gotten married and had kids if he'd had different priorities, but who made his bed and accepts that now he's sleeping in it, and his younger brother has kids, and it seemed to mean something to mom and dad years ago, and what's it all about, aw hell, but he still has friends at the bar and he has shows he likes and Davey's in Nebraska and they talk sometimes and life sorta works out okay for him, but there are plenty of people in that type of situation for whom it never quite feels right no matter how many honies you've known, and it's really characteristically callous of our society to not only deny that there can be inner qualms, but to pronounce it definitively wrong that there should be any inner qualms. We all find our own meaning in life, or we don't, and it's a kick when we're down to pretend that certain qualms simply don't exist. Because on the other hand, I also know some queers who haven't weathered the storm well, and suddenly decide at fifty that they actually have to have kids, they're gonna vanish without a trace, not even the trace everybody else gets to have, and it is so fucking callous of modern society that the "cure" for this is some kind of make-believe pride. Woe to us if we come up with a social movement where we celebrate the coming hell for young straight people deciding not to reproduce, or wait, we already have, all those childfree articles, so maybe everyone except Muslim immigrants can share the hell, but they'll get theirs when some half-Jewish sultan is encouraging them to accept pygmy immigration or something hilarious like that. Haha, when it's down to one population they'll just let stagnation kill us, and we'll totally deserve it. Anyway, the point was, there are a lot of queers, and they tend to be the ones who don't answer surveys or participate in pride marches, for whom this permutation of civil rights was really harmful. As with so many other fuck-ups, America did it double, trying to "cure" queers with electric shock therapy, then to "help" queers by denying that anything was actually weird about them. And aside from the required social evolution, or even with that, there are still private dark moments in a supermajority of individuals where it's not funny, it's scary and it's hell, and they know something is a little off about them compared to standard Terran humans, they can feel it, and it's a filthy lie that they can be cured by pain, or that nothing is wrong nor different about them. That doesn't mean "wrong" in the sense of morals, just "wrong" in the sense of weird little changes in the brain that the original template was presumably not designed for. Terra will have to develop some alternate evolutionary theory eventually if it means to engayen more people, but until then, the queers are smart enough to see that the two pieces don't match, and a supermajority of them have the emotional strength to begin considering how or why their own self fits into that. But the ones who don't were and are utterly betrayed by the society that pretends they don't have anything to talk about but "prejudice.")

Maybe those are all the queers' problems and normal people don't have to worry about them, except that it really does cost billions of dollars a year to maintain this cruel facade, and extract millions a year from otherwise-"normal" marks to perpetuate it, and the problems caused socially by all the inner-qualm-denying pro-queer organizations are the annoying facets of life that are now, for many people, assumed to be the inherent problems of people who like buttsecks rather than the inherent problems of people who like getting donations for made-up causes. Ironic, again, in typical Nu Euro fashion, that the existence of anger is correct and healthy, but it's been misdirected again: the Nu Euro "conservative" should not be angry at the queers, but at the sick fucks who are hurting the queers more than they're hurting everyone else. Because the teevee images of how queers are supposed to act and feel are as damaging to actual queers as the innuendo is to impressionable kids. Yeah, maybe 1/10 kids had a little genetic distortion to have MSM buttsecks already, and the movie they show in class helps him embrace his identity, but then it's twenty years later and he kills himself in sorrowful despair, instead of growing up and getting a job and marrying someone and having three kids and a few times in his young life having a racy experience at a gay bar that he never tells anyone about except his doctor when he has those tests and is nervous and won't even kiss his wife until the results come back oh thank God I swear I'll never do that again. Both paths have trackable costs to people who don't want to go near the local gay bar, and one path is much more expensive and the other produces much more benefit to an enduring society. Ergo not for some weird inverted faux-moral reason, but for the most practical and genetically selfish financial one, should a conservative-minded or traditional-minded person be against the gay groups and support a quiet, careless attitude toward whoever someone else wants to fuck. GRIDS and other gross, expensive stuff can handle the nastier particularities, but humanity has always done all right with a few fags, and focusing on it, negatively or positively, only spoils privacy for everyone else and makes everything loads more expensive. Because if those are afflictions and someone has those afflictions, you want them to be a normal productive citizen and not either a marcher in a thong nor a suicide at 16, but just a normal boring productive person who either ignores it like you ignore your desire to kill that lady driving on her cell phone, or occasionally has a gross secret tryst that affects your life zero percent. That's how it was in Europe before Judaism came, and even after, disregarding the church scooping most of them up into male only, child-access environments, that's how it continued to be.

It's a separate irony to watch today's Nu Euro suddenly embrace and scathe queers in such a way, because before Judaism came to Europe, the forest pagans had a much more sensible stance toward homosexuality. Women being sapphic, don't care, but you still gotta get married and have kids at childbearing age, and sometimes there are weird witches who gather or wise women who never get married but have herbs, and that's a socially acceptable role and a known fact and you just don't worry about it, and actual lesbians are okay with that and still have a place in society if they want one. And if someone molests a child, you bog them, and if a couple hunters like hunting together and are sometimes gone for a long time together, well, everyone knows it's not just a hunt but who cares, get your kids your own meat. And things work out well.

Not piddling; not minor. A lot of lives, straight and queer, would've been different if the giant homo crusade of the twentieth century hadn't been carried out. The attempt, which was supported but not even conceived of as plausible by the first "gays" to support it, to shove buttsecks down the cultural throat, created itself a lot of the animosity that would later be claimed to have justified it. Along with stealing or denying any kind of background cultural acceptance that queers had and would have had, and purloining countless billions of dollars in resources contributed by well-meaning people who would have given the same level of support to good causes if they hadn't been crowded to death by weeds, the various forms of "gay rights" crusades also, like so many military bases in Saudi Arabia, inspired an enmity that wouldn't have been there otherwise. The things that spawned these crusades benefited greatly from them, and got to be considered real humanitarians, so they were a benefit to someone, many someones, but not to queers as a class.

The conquests of Caesar, and then of the popes, changed all the traditions of Europe. Suddenly the pedofag priests are everywhere, backed up with military support and the nationalized "aristocrats" installed like mini-EUs, one sphincter to rule them all, and the pedofag priests are initiating the children of the people who surrender-survived the initial invasions, and of course Rome falls, it's served its purpose like many later empires and doesn't need to maintain its form...and society suddenly gets really perversely interested in who's buttsecksing who, and eventually the circle is now complete and there are queer reverends explaining how Judaism really is about embracing love not lust and forgiving child molesters and so forth. Paganism is dead, old Europe is dead, and the Nu Euros develop this aforementioned weirdly perverse interest in sexuality that they are then guided into making a beloved sick interest rather than the previous incriminating one. If you want to see the way Judaism is evolving on this topic, watch one of the gay Christian movies here. There are still some old-fashioned, perversely interested worshipers who resist, but the trend, particularly among young Christians, is clear. As Christianity embraced the incredible human and fiscal costs of immigration and colonialism, it will come to embrace buttsecks.

We've discussed here how the twentieth and twenty-first century "gay" movements have actually been far more harmful to queers than helpful, and along with that harm goes the forestalling of energies being used for actual help, which a Europeoid society would have probably given if not misdirected. We know it's natural to Europeoids to not give a damn, and natural to many other human species or cross-breeds also; the Indians and the American Siberians had castes or designated social roles for their queers, and the Arabs had a social role for their cross-dressing buttsecksers too, and before Yahweh and Allah got them, that was all okay, and still persists in some forms and some places (token Wiki on hijra if you wanna read). It's all safe and healthy, completely trumping full Europeoid methods, because not only does it give all the social support to the queers, it also clearly identifies them so they can be completely avoided by those who want that. Cheap, sustainable, healthy, and massively rewarding to a society. Imagine an America where you could eliminate fifty years of the bullshit, the priests raping kids and the burgeoning trend in discrimination lawsuits, and legislative and executive and judicial debates, and take all the billions of dollars in wasted sinecure salaries and teevee specials and damage awards and invest it instead in, I dunno, space exploration or infrastructure.

Maybe more important, maybe not--you be the judge--is the issue of lives, in the sense of people not being able to perform useful functions well for fifty years, or not at all because they kill themselves for reasons they think no one cares about. Whether or not you care, you can view these wasted lives as a consequence of the Jewish-backed diversity whining, which at the very least--even if you don't think they were smart enough nor malevolent enough to have planned it--changed society in a way that pretended to care about, while also utterly dismissing, queers. Sparking and teevee-covering (and writing in textbooks about) the Stonewall Riots did not create the not-present history of anti-gay violence that just wasn't endemic or even, in most cases, there even one out of a hundred K, and queers knew that from their day-to-day experience, and although movies can help you imagine things and see real things in that imaginary light, you know you can't blame your deepest inner struggles with who you are and what it means to be here on invisible gremlins. Yet you must, says society, and so you're left alone with that struggle. The founders of various anti-discrimination groups thought your pain was worth far less than donations and the social effects of pretending it was only the gremlins. And the millions of well-meaning people who wanted to help were misdirected, and will not help, because they're stupid, and they think giving money to fight gremlins, and to support movies telling you how good your buttsecks is, will automatically resolve the questions and difficulties you feel inside.

(Not every priest was a pedofag by any means, of course, but the pollyannaish stupidity of forgoing family and reproduction inside a society, and instead talking to and about Sky Man every day, is so irresponsible and biologically stupid that the label is appropriate as an insult even for those who didn't rape children and just thought the selfish life all about yourself + Sky Man was worth more than contributing in a real way to one's people and country and world. The modern psychological trauma of "finding yourself," along with innumerable other Plain Stupid or selfish trends we might notice, stem from the notion that a celibate priest disconnected from the world and focusing all on how he can know Jesus better and share his enlightenment with others was a respectable profession and a good idea. Like David Cameron in a no holds barred match with a 2nd century Viking chieftain, the comparison between respected wise men of pre- and post-Christian Europe is a no contest, laughable victory for the pre-Christian role model--and not only in terms of kicking ass in physical combat, but in the enduring quality of their life and quality of assistance and contributions to their people over the course of a lifetime.)

(In a separate but related note, Judaism has always been against sexuality, because appreciating one another, and sharing the joys of mortal youth, is part of developing here, and the k'arash are driven to shut that down like everything else good when they clear a planet. That is why Jews enshrined child genital mutilation, and why they created the first expressly anti-homosexual religion on the planet, and why they spent thousands of years perversely investigating people's private relationships and violently enforcing ridiculous rules about who fucked who and how they fucked, which did indeed sometimes mean killing the two weird dudes who lived in a cabin all alone. Not actually ironic, but superficially so, that the group which, in modern times, has spent so much money stealing and repressing social support for people who drew the perhaps-unfortunate genetic combo to enjoy MSM buttsecks, also spawned the original mendaciously divine commandments to stone queers. The over-hyping of sexual conduct, and the Jewish porn connection, is similar to the murder-by-immigrant/reproduce/murder-by-immigrant mandate in conquest and post-conquest Europe, in which gaining control of some aspect of life was used to lend an appearance of support to the positive aspect of the process that was, earlier and later, destined for doom. Given the massive Jewish porn connection of modern times, it can be difficult to see how they are, and always were, against sex, as a good and intrinsic part of life, but other than modern porn coupled with a better understanding of porn, or just looking at every other historical era, the aversion to and hatred of sex can be seen. And there are a thousand little things you can put together about porn in the modern world, from men jacking off alone to unrealistic expectations about the one in a million cross-bred Jewish actor who's really hung and loaded with stimulants while the six white girls fawn over him in amazement, but that's a separate subject. More important historically speaking is to understand the way anti-sex leagues of some form, including the murdering and outlawing of some pagan communities that used orgies for reproduction and then took very seriously their high quality and meaningful and in-group-bonded communal parenting, are a longstanding technique of the group you call here "Jews." Every LGBTQ+ person who rankles at the presumed hundreds of years of discrimination and meanness, or just at the local assholes at some small church who think you're gross, needs to trace it back to Judaism, the source. And of racism and sexism too, but again that's another subject.)