Post: #276

Thank god for Fearless journalism like this: asking the real questions

Post: #277

Time for some eye bleach...

Post: #278

(01-23-2017 11:53 PM)eskimobobseal Wrote:  @John Michael Kane

I've never thought about it like that before, it really was a failed shit test. We're seeing the aftermath of it today.

These women out marching would be a lot happier at home serving a masculine man. There's a reason so many of them are addicted to anti-depressants, you can only rebel against God and nature for so long before breaking down.

Women DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY WANT, which is why you must find out want THEY NEED AND GIVE IT TO THEM. Benevolent patriarchy is recognizing women's weaknesses and not getting angry with them, but rather realizing that expecting women to have the same rights and responsibilities is setting those women up for failure. Men must lead, women must follow. That is the natural order of things.



Saint Paul writing to the early church in Corinth:

Quote:But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.

Further reading on the ancient wisdom of Saint Paul and non-cucked Catholic Church teaching on the importance of manly leadership:

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/l...ecnum=1409

Post: #279

Here's Munira Ahmed, the Bangladeshi-American model for the American hijab picture.





WYB?

Post: #280

She's a hottie. Desperately craving some masculine submission, like all women. She's the type that would either sleep with a Muslim man that will slap her around, or a Trump bro.

Either way, she craves some masculinity, and you can sure as hell bet she wouldn't sleep with the maginas at the Women's March. Haha, cuck please! (Waves hand dismissively!)

Post: #281

(01-24-2017 01:15 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  Here's Munira Ahmed, the Bangladeshi-American model for the American hijab picture.





WYB?

Of course I'd bang that.... She's clearly attractive.

Post: #282

So that cunt is not only wearing a flag-themed headscarf, but a headscarf actually made out of an American flag?





No, I would not give her the pleasure of experiencing my cock. She can pack her shit and go live in one of the many Shitholistan countries if she doesn't like it here.

Enjoy getting your nose cut off or acid thrown in your face for breaking some moronic islamic law, bitch.

Post: #283

WNB. I won't even speak to a woman who wears one of those things.

Post: #284

WB if she converted to a submissive Christian woman who makes me sandwiches.

Post: #285

'CynicalContrarian'
Ok..., I'm starting to get worried about ol' Crowder.



As much as he went a bit too far at times with his co-host, Steven Crowder actually was able to have a funny dialogue with many of them, go up close to the moderately hot girls without bras and even talk to politicians.

He is built like a linebacker, but trannies can do everything.

Also I would not call him Alt-Right - he is an alternative media host who does plenty of funny and interesting interviews. I wouldn't have kissed my co-host no matter what, but extroverts who are married and quite masculine have no trouble dressing up as a woman. The problem is that if you dress up as Dick-Man with a Trump hat, then you are only going to experience hostility like Alex Jones back then. Though the Dick-Man-Costume should have had plenty of good interactions too.





This entire ideology is utter and complete madness and he did a good job unmasking that.

Post: #286

'Unchained'

(01-24-2017 01:15 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  Here's Munira Ahmed, the Bangladeshi-American model for the American hijab picture.





WYB?

Of course I'd bang that.... She's clearly attractive.

Note how she drops 2 points at least wearing the Hijab. Hair is clearly very important for a woman. Otherwise we would all encourage women to paint their hair purple and cut ot off to a buzzcut. Long luscious hair is attractive to men and women envy other women with beautiful hair.

Only Western feminists could conflate the Hijab with something empowering when hundreds of millions of Muslim women around the world see it as oppressive and stifling.

Post: #287

EDIT: delete

Post: #288

I'd bang the shit out of her. I don't care what she is wearing, cause it don't matter.
She is just wearing and saying what she is told to, like all women. I tell her what to wear and say, then that's what happens.

Post: #289

(01-24-2017 02:38 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  'Unchained'

(01-24-2017 01:15 AM)WalterBlack Wrote:  Here's Munira Ahmed, the Bangladeshi-American model for the American hijab picture.





WYB?

Of course I'd bang that.... She's clearly attractive.

Note how she drops 2 points at least wearing the Hijab. Hair is clearly very important for a woman. Otherwise we would all encourage women to paint their hair purple and cut ot off to a buzzcut. Long luscious hair is attractive to men and women envy other women with beautiful hair.

Only Western feminists could conflate the Hijab with something empowering when hundreds of millions of Muslim women around the world see it as oppressive and stifling.

If the hijab isn't forced I see no issue with it. Many women want to wear the hijab to virtue signal their faith and devoutness and their modesty. Some women wear it because they choose to. In many African nations with high Muslim populations and of course in the west, there's no societal requirement to wear the hijab and women still choose to do so.

Also another poster mentioned he would bang if she converted to Christianity or something. I get being tongue in cheek but I am weary of the vitriol and haste of some of the posters on here who seem to quickly and without thought say closeminded things about the Muslim religion.

For you men that claim to be Christian and denounce the hijab, you should know that the Bible says that women should keep their head covered. In Corinthians, the Bible said a woman who does not keep her head covered is worse than a woman with all her hair cut off. The Virgin Mary herself is NEVER and I mean NEVER in any type of art work or depiction, shown without her head covered. Muslim women who wear the hijab, submit to their men, pray to God, and value their family are far closer to the piety and humility of the Virgin Mary than any western whore could ever be in a million years. In Christianity and Judaism as well as Islam, a woman keeping her head covered is a sign of chastity, humility, and modesty.

I don't understand the blind vitriol toward the hijab. I expected men on this forum to be able to look at things with a bit more nuance than that of someone who only watches Fox News or someone who lacks the intelligence to be able to entertain an idea without actually believing in it.

I see no issues with the hijab as long as it's not under threat of force. And I know for a fact many women wear it as a symbol of religious pride, chastity, and conservatism. We should be commending Muhammad for creating a system where you're woman literally hides her beauty from other men and reserves it only for you. On a forum where many men claim to value tradition, gender roles, conservativism, and virginity, I find it hypocritical to insult the hijab and what it represents while railing against western sluts and praising conservative women.

That's my 2 cents

Post: #290

'Unchained'

For you men that claim to be Christian and denounce the hijab, you should know that the Bible says that women should keep their head covered. In Corinthians, the Bible said a woman who does not keep her head covered is worse than a woman with all her hair cut off. The Virgin Mary herself is NEVER and I mean NEVER in any type of art work or depiction, shown without her head covered. [i]Muslim women who wear the hijab, submit to their men, pray to God, and value their family are far closer to the piety and humility of the Virgin Mary than any western whore could ever be in a million years.

In Christianity and Judaism as well as Islam, a woman keeping her head covered is a sign of chastity, humility, and modesty.

I don't understand the blind vitriol toward the hijab. I expected men on this forum to be able to look at things with a bit more nuance than that of someone who only watches Fox News or someone who lacks the intelligence to be able to entertain an idea without actually believing in it.

I see no issues with the hijab as long as it's not under threat of force. And I know for a fact many women wear it as a symbol of religious pride, chastity, and conservatism. We should be commending Muhammad for creating a system where you're woman literally hides her beauty from other men and reserves it only for you. On a forum where many men claim to value tradition, gender roles, conservativism, and virginity, I find it hypocritical to insult the hijab and what it represents while railing against western sluts and praising conservative women.

That's my 2 cents[/i]


First of all - what is in the Old Testament or even excerpts of some new has no bearing on Christian culture. We have to look upon what Christians did over the centuries (especially the Old Testament is irrelevant). Christianity never had the same moronic values that you extol in Islam.

And the Jews were stoning adulterers back then, so what?

Muslims still do that.

Another Islamic apologist claiming to be so secular, but then suddenly praising Mohammed - Allah Akbar to you!

Yeah - Muslim women donning a Hijab, doing their prayers and submitting to their Jihadi husbands are indeed a million times better than every other woman. You should go and move to ISIS Caliphate territories and tell us from Raqqa how it goes.

Yeah - because we know that the solution to SJW-degeneracy is the wonderful teaching of Islam - the true and only religion of peace.


A million times better women than the Christian sluts.


She is 10 million times better - she is so empowered, that her husband made sure that no one is going to rape her ever again.

Why is it always those blokes who think that traditional Red Pill should automatically mean that you embrace a backwards, idiotic, violent, inbred cult of a medieval warlord? That is like embracing Luciferian human-sacrificing Satanism because some Catholic priests diddle some kids semetimes.

Post: #291

(01-24-2017 01:18 AM)John Michael Kane Wrote:  She's a hottie. Desperately craving some masculine submission, like all women. She's the type that would either sleep with a Muslim man that will slap her around, or a Trump bro.

Either way, she craves some masculinity, and you can sure as hell bet she wouldn't sleep with the maginas at the Women's March. Haha, cuck please! (Waves hand dismissively!)

Agreed. Should take the hijab, turn her around, bend her over, run it around her mouth and use it like reins. Bang her into submission and claim her for Christendom. Tell her to turn it back into a flag or be punished, then place that repaired flag in a prominent place she'll see it frequently, like the ceiling of your bedroom.

Post: #292

to me a feminist at a women's march wearing a hijab, even an american flag one, is similar to another trend - the latent desire to be dominated. you see this same latent desire in womens clothing, where expensive shoes have bondage-inspired styling - these are shoes women wear to the office. its also fashionable now to wear choker collars.

Post: #293

Post: #294

^
Because avocados don't grow well here and they're freaking expensive dipshit!

Post: #295

Jeb Bush should have plenty of spare 'guac' bowls lying around if that helps...?

Post: #296

The normalization of the Hijab begins. In ten years the burka... and all in the name of female empowerment.
Absolutely disgusting. And ridiculous.

Post: #297

(01-24-2017 08:12 AM)Wreckingball Wrote:  The normalization of the Hijab begins. In ten years the burka... and all in the name of female empowerment.
Absolutely disgusting. And ridiculous.

Any underlying desires for male dominance aside.
Rather amusing the degree to which they'll complain about 'white male patriarchy'.
When in reality, if they had even a small taste of 'muslim patriarchy'...

Post: #298

CynicalContrarian'
Wreckingball
The normalization of the Hijab begins. In ten years the burka... and all in the name of female empowerment.
Absolutely disgusting. And ridiculous.


Any underlying desires for male dominance aside.
Rather amusing the degree to which they'll complain about 'white male patriarchy'.
When in reality, if they had even a small taste of 'muslim patriarchy'...





Black Pigeon had a good vid on the issue, that it was mostly the UK and Western civilization that brough slavery to an end globally. Muslim countries had slavery right until the 1960s to 1980s (!!!). Actually their labor laws are still akin to slavery. Blacks are still called Abeds (slaves) by Arabs - even now you will have that which makes it ever more strange that so many American blacks converted to Islam.

Feminists think that White Westerners were the most prolific slave-holders in the world. This is utterly false - slavery was common all throughout history, but Christian White Patriarchal Westerners ended it and forced the end of slavery on Muslim countries and every other place in the world. If a caliphate ever wins in the world, then slavery would be coming roaring back in force.

Post: #299

I should get onto writing that book - '50 Shades Of Sharia'.

If the other 50 Shades book is anything to go by, the book itself doesn't even need to be that well written...

Post: #300

These marches are a lesson in the importance of frame control.

We all know that women need to be led. Over the years the liberal left, mostly via feminism, has worked to reduce the power of male leadership, especially as husbands and fathers - and it has been phenomenally successful in this, not only weakening the respect these roles carry but actually denying millions of the younger generations a father or husband at all. The frame of masculine leadership has been diminished to such an extent that much of Game is simply the discovery / rediscovery of male frame and the understanding of how to create and use it.

The liberal left achieved this level of devastation simply because instead of setting women 'free' from 'patriarchal oppression' (which was how it was sold) they substituted their own frame in the place of men's. Big Daddy Government replaced the father and the 'corporate boyfriend' replaced the husband. The women themselves were never really without a frame to submit to, they simply segued from a patriarchal frame into a liberal left one.

The biggest losers here of course, were men, especially traditional men who, broadly, were forced to assume the beta role to the Liberal Left's alpha. And this has been the status quo for most of the last 50 years. The women, on the other hand, believed themselves to have become independent, empowered and emboldened on their own account - that their new power was the result of their own awesome talents and efforts. In reality these things were and are mostly an illusion, enabled by the frame the liberal left had created around them to keep them safe and corralled.

But then on June 28th 2016, the frame of the liberal left was rattled for the first time in decades. The Brexit vote was the first meaningful indication that perhaps the liberal left frame was not quite as strong as was thought. The liberal left were dismissive of the result of the referendum, mocking and shaming the Brexiters - but no matter; the seed of doubt of liberal left omnipotence had been planted. Maybe the liberal left frame was not quite so alpha after all. Women's social antennae, always way ahead of men's, started twitching.

Nov 8 2016. If Brexit shook the liberal left frame, the US election result destroyed it. Trumps victory was so comprehensive that the liberal left lost control of the narrative. Women's social antennae stopped twitching and started flashing red alert. The alpha had fallen. But unlike the move from the patriarchal to the liberal left frame, there is no new, ready-made frame for women to submit to. And without such a frame, many women, especially single women, are lost, leaderless and scared. And when women are lost, leaderless and scared they instinctively start to herd.

This is why these women attended these rallies in such numbers and why they could not articulate whey they were there. The multitude of contradictory, nonsensical and sometimes outright insane reasons they offered for attending along with the bizarre and inconsistent behaviors they exhibited are perhaps the best example of how women behave when they have no frame to work in. I have heard it reported that many women could not give a reason why they had attended but just that it 'felt better' to come together with other women. Safety in the herd.

And that's about the limit of what they will actually do. I see no sign that they are building a new frame for themselves and nor do I expect to. They will drift until someone creates a frame for them. This is what women look like when they are truly naked - for a lack of frame is far more terrifying to them than a lack of clothes. The frame they will submit to is no longer decided by the liberal left - it is ours to define as we see fit. The alpha is there for the taking.