By : I fear Carina Kolodny’s children, and so should you.Why, you may wonder, should you fear them, and for that matter, who on Earth is Carina Kolodny?
According to her byline at the Huffington Post, she’s a writer, media activist, and sex educator. Apparently, she also holds a Masters in Social Media & Social Change. In other words, she’s a professional Social Justice Warrior (SJW). For some readers, that may seem like a positive appellation.
For clarity this is an individual who repeatedly engages in arguments on “social justice,” often in a shallow or poorly reasoned way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A Social Justice Warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily believe anything they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting “on behalf of.” The term also connotes an established tendency to advance arguments based solely on the immediate utility of moral one-upmanship, and completely unattached to reality, truth, or any core moral principals such as non-initiation of violence.
But returning to Kolodny’s children, and why fear is an appropriate response to them: they’re rapists and violent criminals. Does that sound hyperbolic? It’s worse than you think. Kolodny’s children, those children, teenagers, and in time, the adults they will become are not simply her actual offspring. In fact, Carina Kolodny doesn’t have children. Rather, they are all the children and teenagers raised to believe in the same popularized narrative Kolodny perpetuates in her writing, media activism, and sex education.
What narrative? This one; “It is a young woman’s responsibility to safeguard herself from rape, assault, harassment, stalking and abuse because boys will be boys and some of them just can’t help themselves.”
There are two separate and contradictory ideas at play in Kolodny’s quote, so we will examine each one independently. The first is that of self-responsibility. Apparently, when contemplated for women or girls, the Social-Justiciar and sex-educator Carina Kolodny finds it objectionable. Protecting yourself is not girls’ jobs, it is society’s job to protect girls (and apparently no one else).
“It is a young woman’s responsibility to safeguard herself from rape, assault, harassment, stalking…”
Kolodny is being sarcastic, but why? Yes every young woman (and old woman, and every young man, and old man) has a personal responsibility to mitigate risk, to make responsible decisions about attire, displays of wealth, and to generally avoid stupid, unnecessary risk of criminal victimization. This is not to suggest that any individual falling prey to criminal victimization is at greater fault than whatever violent perpetrator may have committed such victimization–but being an adult means taking responsibility for oneself. That this needs to be explicitly stated is one more indictment of the modern ideology of gender flying under the big “F” brand name. Women apparently are not to be treated like adults: that appears to be the sarcastic underlying assumption of Kolodny’s humor.
But now, let’s return to her opinions on the propensities of boys and girls. The reason, unfortunately, that women have to safeguard themselves against rape – you know, as if they are adults — is because “boys will be boys” and they “Just cant help themselves.”
That’s right, if your son, your brother, or yourself happens to be male – he’s not a human being, he’s a rape-inclined animal, and only the careful guidance of a right-thinking feminist will prevent him from his inevitable realization of his “true nature”: a violent sexual predator.
What is more devious about this formulation of hers, however, is that it’s ultimately a lie. Kolodny would undoubtedly object and claim she doesn’t believe men are “that way” by nature, but rather that they are socially conditioned to behave that way, and that the rest of her remarks are ironic or sarcastic. But our culture does not teach men that rape is OK, it has never taught men that. Since boys and men are not taught that rape is OK and never have been in this culture, the only reasonable conclusion she and those of her ideological ilk can therefore reach is that, whether the cause is “natural” or “socially constructed,” boys and men are inherently rapey and have to be taught otherwise.
This whole confusing ideological Gordion Knot of Kolodny’s fucktardery can be cut cleanly with one statement: she’s an ignorant bigot and only an ignorant bigot would say the things she’s saying, even supposedly in jest. Boys aren’t inherently rapey, and neither are they taught to be, you stupid bigoted asshole. All your garbage does is teach them to hate their natural sexuality and believe themselves to be potential rapists when the vast majority of them are not and never will be so inclined. In fact, news flash you stupid bitch: even if you encouraged boys to rape, most of them would recoil and refuse.
Kolodny’s article continues on with her hatemongering bigotry with various admonitions and advice to be imparted to young men by their mothers, and possibly, if they were properly socialized, maybe even their fathers.
I have had quite enough of Carina Kolodny and every other fuck who subscribes to the ideology of gendered hatred she promotes. Fuck Kolodny’s open letter to the mothers of boys, and fuck every other vile, hateful garbage-spewing ideologue singing from the same songbook. My patience for those who heap hate, disdain and contempt on men and boys is exhausted. No, Social Justice Warriors, boys are not innately rapey, nor are they taught by our society to be rapey. Both are hateful disgusting deplorable lies, and fuck you for spreading either one of them.
There is really no point in further criticizing or attempting to converse with such hatred than to just identify it as what it is.
However, we do have a few suggestions to offer the mothers and fathers of boys growing up in what is now a feminist-dominated culture. Here’s a few words of advice on that score:
When you speak to your son, teach him that his identity is his own. It will be his own choice to be the man he wants to be. Not the man other people may demand him become because of his utility to them, or his convenient disposability, or his need to be shamed for things supposedly in his character that aren’t actually there. Teach him to beware of those who will confer an identity on him, especially in such a manner as Kolodny does. Tell him he is not a “good” man, nor a “bad” man, as both of those ideas are traps designed to control him. Those intellectual traps are for the convenience of those who disregard and even deny his fundamental humanity. If some stupid fuck tells you you’ve got a “rape switch” tell him to go to Hell. If some stupid fuck tells you your inconvenient erection means you’re “objectifying women” tell them to go fuck themselves. If someone tells you it’s your job to “stop rape,” tell them it’s their job to stop murder first and otherwise go fuck themselves.
You may also want to teach your son something he will never learn from this culture’s mainstream feminist narrative. Admittedly, he may figure this out himself, but why not give him a heads-up when he’s 10, rather than when he’s in his 30′s and sorts it out for himself? His sexuality, particularly his sexual desire, is his own. Nobody is entitled to it. No, he is not required to fuck just because a girl wants to. No, he is not inferior if he finds a particular girl (or boy) unattractive. No, he is not to be shamed if he has standards in women. No, his penis is not a dancing pony expected to fuck on demand. And his right to say “no” to a sexual encounter is every bit as vital and real as a girl’s right to the same.
This, of course runs against the populist public narrative. In the popular narrative, it is not merely assumed that masculine sexuality is predatory, exploitive, and 95 other negative adjectives. It is also flatly assumed that the sexuality, and the sexual desire of men, is a public resource to be not merely condemned and criticized, but used as a lever of control over, either through direct exploitation or through shame.
Your son’s penis is not simply not a weapon, as it it characterized by mainstream propaganda. It is also an intimate part of a boy’s body to which nobody else has a right. He will be living in a world where women assume ownership of his sexuality and desire. The idea that a man is always on, always eager, that he really doesn’t even have a right of refusal, is common; that he has a right of refusal is something he isn’t even taught to consider. He should be taught to consider it in the face of a culture that endlessly suggests otehrwise.
Your sons should know that he should command his own sexual self-ownership. A few useful phrases for your son to add to his repertoire might include variations of “talk to the hand bitch”, and “look sweety, I’m not actually gay, but for tonight, you should assume I am.”
“My cock is fabulous, but do not ever assume you’re entitled to it, or entitled to my wallet for another of whatever sugary shit your drinking tonight.”
You might also want to convey to your son that nobody has any right to initiate violence against him. We’re all familiar with the common admonition to “never hit a woman.” This carries the implied, but false, implication that women can rightfully initiate violence against him. This includes feminine incitement to other compliant men acting on the behalf of members of the leisure caste. Your son will need to know explicitly that he has a right to his own integrity and freedom from coercion or other violence. Indeed, his explicit moral right to self defence even against members of “the weaker sex.” If a girl slaps him, he probably shouldn’t slap back (in a just world this would be allowed, but we don’t live in a just world), but he should never accept it and should probably forever terminate his relationship with any woman who does that to him.
Your son will also likely be bombarded by public messaging admonishing him to “respect women.”
Not respect people. Not respect other men. No. Just respect women. But of course, this doesn’t actually mean respect women as individuals, because individuals have to earn respect. No, the respect they mean is like the respect that Indian peasants were supposed to have toward white British colonialists: the “respect for women” they want is the respect of an inferior to a superior. Don’t give it to them. Real respect is something earned, not commanded by fiat. The common admonition to young boys to respect women is actually a command to demonstrate obeisance – while also invisibly acknowledging the fraudulent doctrinal conception of female-as-inferior. Why else would respect for individuals of a particular social caste require the common command for respect?
Aside from respecting the fundamental respect for basic rights and courtesy due to all human beings until they demonstrate otherwise, your son should only respect those who earn his respect. You should tell him to do so with or without instruction from public opinion-crafters. If the “respect” publicly propagandized to boys and men of “women” were the respect of humans as individuals with basic human rights, they would say “people,” and not merely the social caste “women.” Teach him to recognize this for what it is: a demand for unearned. And teach him that this hateful “respect for women” canard is all the proof he will ever need that feminists lie when they say “feminism is about equality.”
On the matter of sex between men and women, you might also want to acquaint your son with the increasing, absurd and amoral public ethic of feminine non-accountability.
This idea, increasingly popular, is that women, distinct from men, are held exempt from any concept of responsibility in matters sexual. This is important knowledge of the mine-field that gender ideologues have chosen to create for members of the disposable social caste to negotiate.
If your son makes any decision, or takes any action – whether drunk or sober – he will be held responsible for it. In the legal and popular culture today, this is the reality: a woman is – due to the ideology of her inferiority as a human – explicitly not a responsible actor in her own life. For example, if a man and woman are both intoxicated during a sexual encounter – SHE is a victim, and HE is a victimizer. Yeah, that makes sense, right? If two people are drunk, the one with a penis is automatically the rapist.
It doesn’t end there either. Increasingly, any withdrawl of her consent makes you her rapist, even if it’s days or even weeks later.
Your son, when he is very young, may not understand this. Most young children are actually far more rational than most adults. As young people, they are not yet acculturated to many of the widely accepted stupidities and insanities people like Carina Kolodny buy into and peddle to an unthinking public. So it will be up to you to teach him that BECAUSE of MAGIC, or Fairies, or Wizards, or Aliens from planet X – that women are uniquely incapable of having opinions or making choices – particularly after drinking a grey goose martini.
Or, maybe just tell him that hateful bigoted nutjobs who think like this are in control, and he needs to be aware of it.
Your son, as he matures from a child into a sexually mature and active person, will be well-advised to demand evidence of mature accountability and self-responsibility from the women he allows into his life. We live in a world contorting reality into pretzels to exempt women from personal responsibility. It is rare to find those few women who demand their own realized adulthood, which includes personal responsibility. Your son will need a tool-kit to detect the real adults among a vast majority of female victim-toddlers whose irresponsible whims and moody tantrums are used to justify the suppression of the rights of others, and even justify violence on her behalf.
Such a toolkit is being developed by the various current practitioners of MGTOW – although details of the same are outside the scope of this discussion.
Advise your son to exclude women who fail these tests from his life.
Last but not least, while there may be many other important talks to have with your sons, you will also wish to discuss the various meanings and social values of words like “slut” and related terminology. As a parent taking on the task of describing sexual relationships in the real world of today you must remember that words like “slut,” “whore,” and even “rapist” take on different meanings when used by different people. If you can’t be honest about the real world with your child then you have no business engaging in such conversations. Leave that to others who are more capable.
“Slut” has several different meanings, three of which will be mentioned here:
The most currently popular of these is the use by gender ideologues of slut as a “positive” label. This is the reclamation by feminists of what they assert was once a condemning insult. In this application, it is claimed that slut means a sexually liberated, free-spirited and unashamed woman positively exercising her sexuality. Picture the proud self-identifying sluts of the emergent public parades known as “slut-walks” around the world. In reality, the term “slut” used in this context really means “grifter.” A self-identifying feminist slut is as sex-denying, as condemning, and as hatefully judgemental as a klansman opining on issues of the black community. Just ask a slut-walker if they’d like to go for a quick shag, and see that sluttiness precipitate into a shower of false outrage. “Sexually irresponsible jackass” might be another, more accurately descriptive, way to phrase it.
The term “slut” is also used to condemn a woman of truly open sexuality. But interestingly, this condemnation is often from another female. The sexual openness of one woman is, in this context, treated as de-valuing the woman offering that condemnation. This is also likely why among a certain subset of the feminist mainstream, sex-workers are criminalized and marginalized. Female prostitutes, by providing sexual access for a finite exchange of money, break the sexual trade-union of state feminism. A slut who, within the reasonable limits of hygiene personal capacity, will fuck just “anyone” (or the whole hockey team) is seen by sexually-withholding women as a threat to the control of the market.
The final use of the term “slut” to be mentioned here is the usage of the term by men. In this instance it is a term of admiration for women who place high value on honesty in their own sexual communication, as well as physical affection, openness and sexual disinhibition. This is by far the least-commonly used of the three different meanings of slut. But it is also a genuine term of admiration and affection – even among men who themselves are sexually insecure, or sexually cautious.
Related to the multi-definitioned term “slut” are two other words, namely “whore” and the aforementioned “grifter.” “Whore” of course is a much-misused term. Opportunist lawyers, politicians, attention seekers and other bottom feeding creatures are regularly labeled as whores, in an abuse of the word, and a failure to understand the nature of actual pay-for-sex merchants. Actual whores – of the type practicing their business honestly, are arguably a valuable part of their community. They provide a useful service, often under very difficult conditions. Much of the world still criminalizes the independent practice of sex for money, creating a criminalized environment of escalated harm for sexual service providers as well as their customers.
“Grifter” is of course a term somewhat out of fashion in modern usage. This may be because the practice of grifting so closely resembles what is the populist ethical practice of sex, and manipulation through access control.
A fourth term, “rapist,” is perhaps the most troubling of these terms. Among the gender ideologues presently dominating public narrative – like Carina Kolodny – a rapist is any man who is labeled one based on no more than the whim of a female accuser. The term once meant a sexual criminal, including women sexually abusing minors or anyone else who couldn’t reasonably consent to sex. However, “rape,” while it retains the powerful stigma and condemnation of violent sexual victimization is increasingly coming to mean any sexual activity in which a member of the disposable sex participates.
The disposable sex being you, my son.
But of course, in the practice of parenting – particularly of boys, these are just a few of the talks a responsible and loving parent will have to have. It is boys now being raised with an awareness of this culture’s need to control them through shame and coercion who will grow into men who cannot be controlled, or manipulated to their own self-destructive utility to others.
What the gender ideology of State Feminism always promised, namely a humanitarian, equalist society, is coming. But it is not coming from feminism. Even so, it’s coming with the inevitability of gravity, and it will be boys going their own way – and the men they become who bring it. These men, some of whom exist now as MGTOWs, are not men allowing themselves to be defined by their utility, or by their approval by women. They are not the tamed lap dogs that even radical feminists privately find repulsive just as they publicly demand continued male obedience.
It is not the point of this article to establish the thesis that boys are not naturally any of the evils routinely heaped onto them as if defining masculine identity. For the real parents of boys, this simple reality requires no exposition except for you to explain to them that the popular narrative lies about them and subjects them to unearned hate, to to teach them to be aware of it without accepting the hate. The talks you, the parent of a boy will have, will arm him to defend against the self-hatred they want him to absorb, and arm him to be ready to define himself by his own compass, and to armour himself against a poisonous wind which would warp him into a man of conditional identity rather than sovereign adulthood.
Your son should know that a boy taught to be a “good man” by feminist standards is one whose public personhood depends on consensus of utility and approval by dysfunctional women and their lapdogs. His identity to them is dependent, and referential. A “real man” is based on the (stated or unstated) agreement of his mother’s friends. And boys raised by mothers to be these pleasing slaves, so that they may one day be approved of by their female contemporaries, eventually becoming the cooperative beasts of burden we typically call husbands and fathers. Do your son a favour and teach him not to allow himself to become a compliant servant of men and women who would use him as a disposable utility.
Finally, teach your boy to use his own best judgement, and to seek only the counsel of those who first prove that they believe he is a sovereign adult and that women should be treated as no less and no more than that. Otherwise, teach him to beware those who would confer on him any identity he himself does not gladly accept or, better yet, craft for himself.
Teach him also of the ideologues who hate him based only on an aspect of biology, and to recognize them. And let him learn to fuck their shit up.
Source
________
Calgary Mother Killed 2 Babies In Dumpster 3rd Saved By Dad
By : On Wednesday January 8 2013, Meredith Borowiec 32, of Calgary Alberta plead guilty to aggravated assault for putting her newborn baby in a dumpster.
She was originally charged with attempted murder.
Borowiec has already been found guilty on 2 other counts of infanticide and has spent 18 months in remand so far.
Her method of killing the 2 babies and attempting to murder the third was to place the babies in a garbage bag and toss them into a dumpster.
She admitted to murdering one baby in 2008, murdering one in 2009 and attempting to murder the the third in 2010.
On Oct. 19, 2010, the baby’s father rescued him after another passerby alerted him of a cry in a dumpster. The child was saved despite suffering from hypothermia and being in a plastic bag. According to one source he was the father of all 3 children. A responding officer suspected Borowiec was the mother after he noticed blood on her clothing.
The prosecuting Crown Attorney, Jayme Williams, is asking Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Peter McIntyre for Borowiec to serve another 8 years on top on the 18 months she has already served. 4 years for the 2 murders and 4 years for the “aggravated assault.”
Borowiec was originally charged with second degree murder in the 2 deaths but Justice Peter McIntyre substituted the lesser charge of infanticide in his ruling.
The Crown intends to appeal Justice Peter McIntyre infanticide substitution for the charge of second degree murder.
Borowiec’s lawyer, Andrea Serink, is asking for time served and other alternative punishments such as a 15 year peace bond that would retain her right to future pregnancies.
Justice Peter McIntyre has postponed his sentencing until January 29 2014.
Links: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/meredith-borowiec-pleads-guilty-in-3rd-dumpster-baby-case-1.2489287 http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/01/09/mother_who_threw_babies_into_garbage_feels_horrible.html http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/01/08/calgary-mother-meredith-borowiec-already-convicted-in-deaths-of-two-babies-pleads-guilty-of-dumping-third-live-newborn-in-dumpster http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/05/03/co-worker-testifies-accused-baby-killer-meredith-borowiec-was-happy-when-she-returned-to-work-after-allegedly-murdering-newborn-in-2009 http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Borowiec+could+face+nine+years+leaving+newborns+dumpsters/9364760/story.html http://www.calgarysun.com/news/alberta/2010/10/21/15784856.html
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment