January 7, 2018
The Jews created feminism. It was their idea, largely, to force women out of the home and into public life. It has been an entire disaster for everyone involved.
So this ideology that they created came to it’s obvious conclusion – women using claims of “sexual harassment” to purge the ruling class of men – and now they’re freaking out because they are the ruling class and all of their people are the ones getting purged.
The NYT has published a shocking admission by the Jewess Daphne Merkin stating very clearly that they do not want to keep purging people, and that they have to do something to stop the metoo movement from overthrowing the Jewish ruling class.
You can be sure that this weekend at the Golden Globes, Hollywood celebrities, not exactly known for their independent thinking, will turn the red carpet into a #MeToo moment replete with designer duds. Many have promised to wear black dresses to protest the stream of allegations against industry moguls and actors. Perhaps Meryl Streep will get grilled — again — about what she knew about Harvey Weinstein. The rest of us will diligently follow along on Twitter, sharing hashtags and suitably pious opprobrium.
Just the start of that – these Jews are shoving the opinions of Hollywood celebrities down our throats nonstop, effectively claiming that we have to agree with them because they are famous. But here a top Jewess, writing for the top Jewish paper, admits they are people who just believe whatever they are told to believe.
Because she is here writing for an “intellectual” audience.
But privately, I suspect, many of us, including many longstanding feminists, will be rolling our eyes, having had it with the reflexive and unnuanced sense of outrage that has accompanied this cause from its inception, turning a bona fide moment of moral accountability into a series of ad hoc and sometimes unproven accusations.
Since when have the claims of women needed “proof,” Jews?
Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported. https://t.co/mkD69RHeBL
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 23, 2015
I thought it was a moral imperative to always believe any accusation ever made by a woman against a man, because false accusations basically never happen ever?
For many weeks now, the conversation that has been going on in private about this reckoning is radically different from the public one. This is not a good sign, suggesting the sort of social intimidation that is the underside of a culture of political correctness, such as we are increasingly living in.
Wow, intimidated by feminism, Jews?
You poor poor poor poor dears.
The women I know — of all ages — have responded by and large with a mixture of slightly horrified excitement (bordering on titillation) as to who will be the next man accused and overt disbelief.
It goes without saying that no one is coming to the defense of heinous sorts, like Kevin Spacey and Matt Lauer. But the trickle-down effect to cases like those of Garrison Keillor, Jonathan Schwartz, Ryan Lizza and Al Franken, in which the accusations are scattered, anonymous or, as far as the public knows, very vague and unspecific, has been troubling.
Perhaps even more troubling is that we seem to be returning to a victimology paradigm for young women, in particular, in which they are perceived to be — and perceive themselves to be — as frail as Victorian housewives.
Returning to that?
As if this wasn’t what everything has been leading up to this entire time?
The only thing we hear more often than how empowered and equal women are is how vulnerable and powerless they are. Of course, it is convenient to pick and choose which narrative to use, and women themselves are so stupid they are incapable of grasping that these two narratives are being simultaneously promoted as if they are compatible with one another (men being afraid to ever question anything related to feminism), but you can’t just pretend that you never promoted this, Jews.
Consider the fact that the campaign last month against the Met to remove a Balthus painting that shows a young girl in a suggestive light was organized by two young Manhattan feminists. Fortunately, they were unsuccessful. This is the kind of censorship practiced by religious zealots.
What happened to women’s agency? That’s what I find myself wondering as I hear story after story of adult women who helplessly acquiesce to sexual demands. I find it especially curious given that a majority of women I know have been in situations in which men have come on to them — at work or otherwise. They have routinely said, “I’m not interested” or “Get your hands off me right now.” And they’ve taken the risk that comes with it.
The fact that such unwelcome advances persist, and often in the office, is, yes, evidence of sexism and the abusive power of the patriarchy. But I don’t believe that scattershot, life-destroying denunciations are the way to upend it. In our current climate, to be accused is to be convicted. Due process is nowhere to be found.
Bitch where were you during Mattress Girl?
If you were concerned about due process in female accusations, you should have spoken up about that in the 70s.
The concept of women being above reproach and unquestionable shouldn’t have sneaked up on you. Men have been having their lives destroyed by lying sluts for a very, very long time.
And what exactly are men being accused of? What is the difference between harassment and assault and “inappropriate conduct”? There is a disturbing lack of clarity about the terms being thrown around and a lack of distinction regarding what the spectrum of objectionable behavior really is. Shouldn’t sexual harassment, for instance, imply a degree of hostility? Is kissing someone in affection, however inappropriately, or showing someone a photo of a nude male torso necessarily predatory behavior?
You tell me, Jew.
You invented this shit to terrorize us.
No one can explain it but you.
I think this confusion reflects a deeper ambivalence about how we want and expect people to behave. Expressing sexual interest is inherently messy and, frankly, nonconsensual — one person, typically the man, bites the bullet by expressing interest in the other, typically the woman — whether it happens at work or at a bar. Some are now suggesting that come-ons need to be constricted to a repressive degree. Asking for oral consent before proceeding with a sexual advance seems both innately clumsy and retrograde, like going back to the childhood game of “Mother, May I?” We are witnessing the re-moralization of sex, not via the Judeo-Christian ethos but via a legalistic, corporate consensus.
Where’s the lie?
Jews complaining about their own agenda being implemented is GOLDEN.
Stripping sex of eros isn’t the solution. Nor is calling out individual offenders, one by one. We need a broader and more thoroughgoing overhaul, one that begins with the way we bring up our sons and daughters.
These are scary times, for women as well as men. There is an inquisitorial whiff in the air, and my particular fear is that in true American fashion, all subtlety and reflection is being lost. Next we’ll be torching people for the content of their fantasies.
Yes, of course we will.
Because nothing ever ends with you people.
Watching you squirm after getting hit with your own deranged system is the greatest thing I’ve ever witnessed.
But go ahead.
Try to stop the metoo train – because you cannot. There are a lot more sluts than there are Jews, and sluts have been taught from birth that all the power in the world is theirs. And they’ve decided to seize that power.