http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100100485/the-riots-remind-us-that-polygamous-societies-are-naturally-violent/
Ed West's egregiously confused blog post is probably testament to the fact that he is so afraid of the feminazis getting him that he has confused the matriarchy with polygamy in his nervousness. To be polygamous, one has to take be able to legally take more than one wife, not impregnate more than one woman. That should ahve been quite obvious to an educated man like him, but, strangely and sadly, Ed West affects not to notice this or really cannot understand the difference himself. Possibly, Telegraph readers these days are now to feminised and dumbed-down themselves to notice any errors of reasoning.
In a matriarchy, it pays women to be promiscuous. In a matriarchy, extra-marital sex is condoned and even rewarding for the woman. The man who has sex with a woman to whom he is not marred is deemed to want to pay for any bastard he sires even if it is quite clear that he wished no such thing. A man who has sex with a woman not his wife who indicates that she is prepared to have no-strings sex with him simply wants to have sex, not make a baby with her and pay for it until it is 16 or until it has finished full-time education.
A woman who has sex with a man thinking he wants to pay for any offspring sired as a result of that union is arguably an imbecile, and imbeciles should be spayed for the greater good so that the national gene pool is not contaminated by imbecility, one would have thought.
But liberals are hardly known for the rationality of their thinking processes these days. Most of the time cannot even explain their bizarre behaviour to themselves, much less to their critics and challengers. Indeed, it is all they can do to repeat their mindless mantra of indiscriminate compassion and endless tolerance of everything that is harmful to society.
It is therefore no surprise that the women who go forth and multiply and bring forth illegitimate offspring - the bastard spawn of stupid sluts (a pleonasm like tuna fish) - turn out to be depraved, degraded and criminal who enjoy a spot of looting, arson, assault and murder whenever the opportunity allows.
What is surprising is really the effeminate and neurotic cowardice of the educated white middle class British male, who fear to criticise the slut single mum - apart from the noble exception of Kevin Myers based in Belfast at http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/how-our-race-taboo-makes-us-colourblind-to-the-truth-16035253.html. This is probably because he fears his female friends and relations who are also single mums and perhaps his male friends and family who were singly-parented.
Strangely and sadly, Norman Wells of the charity Family Education Trust http://www.famyouth.org.uk/ that was set up for the purpose of promoting family values supported by marriage declared to me on 16 August 2011 that his organisation does not exist to "bash single mums". What on earth is it for then, when so many commentators like Ed West are so deeply fearful of offending the slut single mum who spawns bastards at taxpayers' expense?
It is possible that Ed West fears to denounce them because he has not married the mother of his illegitimate children because he sees no need to do so, rather like Ed Miliband, never found the time and inclination to do so until he became leader of the Labour Party.
Ed West may fear his 'common law wife' or a feminazi superior at the Telegraph, but what excuse has Norman Wells got for not doing his job properly? What excuse has he got for fearing the slut single mum who is encouraged to breed by successive governments at taxpayers' expense? There are after all plenty of organisations that say they promote family values supported by marriage, but dare not go the whole hog of condemning feminism and Never Married Single Mothers ("NMSMs"). They skirt around the issues and beat about the bush, talking in their mealy-mouthed way about 'absent fathers' and such abstract ideas as 'parenting', 'discipline' that are beyond the wit of dumbed-down inhabitants of Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland to grasp unless demonstrated in parenting classes at the further expense of the taxpayer, content that they they have written the requisite number of words even if none of them criticise the slut single mum who breeds bastards at taxpayers' expense.
Perhaps the sheer numbers of sluts and bastards in Britain is alone enough to emasculate and feminise men like Norman Wells and Ed West. If so, the prognosis is very bleak indeed. It means that the cancer has spread to all the major organs - the balls and the guts - and has now reached the brain.
The patient is therefore terminal and funerary arrangements ought to be made now, for the stinking rotten body of liberal feminism that will soon be consigned to oblivion and his illegitimate offspring pauperised, disgraced, taken to the orphanage, later to be sexually exploited and enslaved by an uncaring 'carer'.
Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland with its cowardly new race of feral and feminised men, skint, scared and stupid, should therefore prepare themselves for the new New Age in which Tomorrow most certainly does NOT belong to them.
Ed West's egregiously confused blog post is probably testament to the fact that he is so afraid of the feminazis getting him that he has confused the matriarchy with polygamy in his nervousness. To be polygamous, one has to take be able to legally take more than one wife, not impregnate more than one woman. That should ahve been quite obvious to an educated man like him, but, strangely and sadly, Ed West affects not to notice this or really cannot understand the difference himself. Possibly, Telegraph readers these days are now to feminised and dumbed-down themselves to notice any errors of reasoning.
In a matriarchy, it pays women to be promiscuous. In a matriarchy, extra-marital sex is condoned and even rewarding for the woman. The man who has sex with a woman to whom he is not marred is deemed to want to pay for any bastard he sires even if it is quite clear that he wished no such thing. A man who has sex with a woman not his wife who indicates that she is prepared to have no-strings sex with him simply wants to have sex, not make a baby with her and pay for it until it is 16 or until it has finished full-time education.
A woman who has sex with a man thinking he wants to pay for any offspring sired as a result of that union is arguably an imbecile, and imbeciles should be spayed for the greater good so that the national gene pool is not contaminated by imbecility, one would have thought.
But liberals are hardly known for the rationality of their thinking processes these days. Most of the time cannot even explain their bizarre behaviour to themselves, much less to their critics and challengers. Indeed, it is all they can do to repeat their mindless mantra of indiscriminate compassion and endless tolerance of everything that is harmful to society.
It is therefore no surprise that the women who go forth and multiply and bring forth illegitimate offspring - the bastard spawn of stupid sluts (a pleonasm like tuna fish) - turn out to be depraved, degraded and criminal who enjoy a spot of looting, arson, assault and murder whenever the opportunity allows.
What is surprising is really the effeminate and neurotic cowardice of the educated white middle class British male, who fear to criticise the slut single mum - apart from the noble exception of Kevin Myers based in Belfast at http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/kevin-myers/how-our-race-taboo-makes-us-colourblind-to-the-truth-16035253.html. This is probably because he fears his female friends and relations who are also single mums and perhaps his male friends and family who were singly-parented.
Strangely and sadly, Norman Wells of the charity Family Education Trust http://www.famyouth.org.uk/ that was set up for the purpose of promoting family values supported by marriage declared to me on 16 August 2011 that his organisation does not exist to "bash single mums". What on earth is it for then, when so many commentators like Ed West are so deeply fearful of offending the slut single mum who spawns bastards at taxpayers' expense?
It is possible that Ed West fears to denounce them because he has not married the mother of his illegitimate children because he sees no need to do so, rather like Ed Miliband, never found the time and inclination to do so until he became leader of the Labour Party.
Ed West may fear his 'common law wife' or a feminazi superior at the Telegraph, but what excuse has Norman Wells got for not doing his job properly? What excuse has he got for fearing the slut single mum who is encouraged to breed by successive governments at taxpayers' expense? There are after all plenty of organisations that say they promote family values supported by marriage, but dare not go the whole hog of condemning feminism and Never Married Single Mothers ("NMSMs"). They skirt around the issues and beat about the bush, talking in their mealy-mouthed way about 'absent fathers' and such abstract ideas as 'parenting', 'discipline' that are beyond the wit of dumbed-down inhabitants of Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland to grasp unless demonstrated in parenting classes at the further expense of the taxpayer, content that they they have written the requisite number of words even if none of them criticise the slut single mum who breeds bastards at taxpayers' expense.
Perhaps the sheer numbers of sluts and bastards in Britain is alone enough to emasculate and feminise men like Norman Wells and Ed West. If so, the prognosis is very bleak indeed. It means that the cancer has spread to all the major organs - the balls and the guts - and has now reached the brain.
The patient is therefore terminal and funerary arrangements ought to be made now, for the stinking rotten body of liberal feminism that will soon be consigned to oblivion and his illegitimate offspring pauperised, disgraced, taken to the orphanage, later to be sexually exploited and enslaved by an uncaring 'carer'.
Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland with its cowardly new race of feral and feminised men, skint, scared and stupid, should therefore prepare themselves for the new New Age in which Tomorrow most certainly does NOT belong to them.
1 comment:
Always food for thought. Thanks Klair.
Post a Comment