‘Lift The Skirt’, Or: The Last Days Of Feminism

People have had enough. No bearded 'ladies' and no 'boys in skirts' please.

People have had enough. No bearded ‘ladies’ and no ‘boys in skirts’ please.

Thankfully Feminism is recognized as the destructive force that it is by more and more people every day. The myth of ‘equality’ and the ruthless attack on men and children in society are becoming unbearable.

The tide is already turning: in the US, 29% of women now call themselves ‘stay at home moms’, up from about 20% a decade ago. The rape of men in the family courts is getting wider recognition.

The insanity of ‘equality’ is still hard to fathom for the brainwashed masses, but this will change too.

Meanwhile, the aggressive insanity of the politically correct continues to escalate.

Here’s the story of populist resistance in France against schools in Nantes who want ‘to give boys the opportunity’ to come to school in skirts. Presumably to distance themselves from ‘patriarchy’ and show solidarity with the poor little oppressed women who have it so difficult in our society.

‘Boys in skirts’ plan sparks outrage at French school

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “‘Lift The Skirt’, Or: The Last Days Of Feminism

  1. The Origins of Political Correctness

    If we look at it analytically, if we look at it historically, we quickly find out exactly what it is. Political Correctness is cultural Marxism. It is Marxism translated from economic into cultural terms.

    …..

    The cultural Marxism of Political Correctness, like economic Marxism, has a single factor explanation of history. Economic Marxism says that all of history is determined by ownership of means of production. Cultural Marxism, or Political Correctness, says that all history is determined by power, by which groups defined in terms of race, sex, etc., have power over which other groups. Nothing else matters. All literature, indeed, is about that. Everything in the past is about that one thing.

    Third, just as in classical economic Marxism certain groups, i.e. workers and peasants, are a priori good, and other groups, i.e., the bourgeoisie and capital owners, are evil. In the cultural Marxism of Political Correctness certain groups are good – feminist women, (only feminist women, non-feminist women are deemed not to exist) blacks, hispanics, homosexuals. These groups are determined to be “victims,” and therefore automatically good regardless of what any of them do. Similarly, white males are determined automatically to be evil, thereby becoming the equivalent of the bourgeoisie in economic Marxism.

    …..

    Marxist theory said that when the general European war came (as it did come in Europe in 1914), the working class throughout Europe would rise up and overthrow their governments – the bourgeois governments – because the workers had more in common with each other across the national boundaries than they had in common with the bourgeoisie and the ruling class in their own country. Well, 1914 came and it didn’t happen. Throughout Europe, workers rallied to their flag and happily marched off to fight each other. The Kaiser shook hands with the leaders of the Marxist Social Democratic Party in Germany and said there are no parties now, there are only Germans. And this happened in every country in Europe. So something was wrong.

    Marxists knew by definition it couldn’t be the theory. In 1917, they finally got a Marxist coup in Russia and it looked like the theory was working, but it stalled again. It didn’t spread and when attempts were made to spread immediately after the war, with the Spartacist uprising in Berlin, with the Bela Kun government in Hungary, with the Munich Soviet, the workers didn’t support them.

    So the Marxists’ had a problem. And two Marxist theorists went to work on it: Antonio Gramsci in Italy and Georg Lukacs in Hungary. Gramsci said the workers will never see their true class interests, as defined by Marxism, until they are freed from Western culture, and particularly from the Christian religion – that they are blinded by culture and religion to their true class interests. Lukacs, who was considered the most brilliant Marxist theorist since Marx himself, said in 1919, “Who will save us from Western Civilization?” He also theorized that the great obstacle to the creation of a Marxist paradise was the culture: Western civilization itself.

    http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

    Liked by 1 person

  2. We should also take note that we are a species with two complementary and different inborn genders. Females are hardwired to sexually respond to masculine behavior, voice, self-confidence and even posture. All young men should note that a skirt will make them into a girl-friend in the eyes of women. If your goal is to be completely invisible as a man, then please go ahead with it.

    Feminism however will continue its march on. They may not succeed with their entire gender-utopia, because the sexes will rebel against it. However feminism will succeed in feeding the female hypergamy hamster, creating rampant promiscuity and the “empowered” women. The goal is a Brave New World kind of society with constant unattached rutting after all.

    The Gender propaganda will be impossible to push on the majority of the population. Frankly I believe ever more that this total breaking of all social barriers should just open the way for the next step: Acceptance of artificially created clones.

    Liked by 1 person

    • We are seeing a real fracture in society. Those who have enough and want to rebuild their own lives and society on the one hand, and the braindead clinging to the mind control by their masters with ever more aggressive posturing.

      The good guys will win.

      Like

  3. The comment below gives some ‘perspective’ of reality. I also live in DC, so I can identify with.
    By the way, this comment was removed. Here is the original link:
    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/mary-kate-cary/2012/03/10/five-reasons-washington-dc-has-the-happiest-single-women

    By “anonymous”: Well from my perspective of DC living here the women are feminist serial daters who are exploitative of men for their company among other things. Just an observation from someone living here but from elsewhere where it isn’t the same culture. I think this city brings out the worst in women because they can get away with it whereas in a rural area they would have a horrible reputation stepping on people like that. I see the polyamorists, friends with benefits, and no strings attached people around and polyamory originated out of the feminist movement AGAINST marriage as it was viewed as submission to men. So yeah the dating scene is nice and shallow. Wonderful if you are seeking a loveless sex life and share your partners with other men. That is the truth of DC. You think it got such a high HIV rate from anything but promiscuosity? I think men are very replaceable in the DC area and thus disposable. It has changed my views on the reasons why most women love living in cities as opposed to not. More opportunities to serial date in a metro area. In fact, here they call me a serial monogamist. Funny I think personally. In fact, that is what cued me in to this notion of serial dating was being called that. So there you have it folks. The truth of DC.

    Liked by 2 people

Your thoughts are well appreciated!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s