Translate

Thursday, 9 March 2017

Swedish woman is now Western woman, therefore Swedish man is now Western man

Sweden is dying because it is a matriarchy.
To discover that your society is a matriarchy is to discover it has a terminal illness.





























https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel

The corruption of language is the corruption of thought.

The corruption of thought is the corruption of the law.

The corruption of the law is the corruption of morality.

The moral corruption of a society is the destruction of social cohesion.

Social cohesion is necessary for shared values, national identity and the continued existence of a nation.

Only through respecting the rules of marriage is it possible for a society to keep and maintain what it has so far acquired in the way of possessions and knowledge.

All societies need the protection of social conservatism to protect themselves from their internal and external enemies.

The eternal enemies of society are sluts and socialists. 

Everything about female promiscuity undermines marriage.

Everything about feminism destroys civilisation.

Not a single feminist is prepared to discuss any of this.

What all feminists will conspire to do is ignore, marginalise and smear anyone who asks any of the questions I have asked, proving that they are indeed the totalitarian enemies of free speech and civilisation. 

History first enacts itself as tragedy, then repeats itself as farce.

The ancient Chinese idea of Yin and Yang acknowledges this eternal battle of the sexes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_marriage#Marriages_in_early_societies

In traditional Chinese thinking, people in "primitive" societies did not marry, but had sexual relationships with one another indiscriminately. Such people were thought to live like animals, and they did not have the precise concept of motherhood, fatherhood, sibling, husband and wife, and gender, not to mention match-making and marriage ceremony. Part of the Confucian "civilizing mission" was to define what it meant to be a Father or a Husband, and to teach people to respect the proper relationship between family members and regulate sexual behavior.

God was created by Man to make the laws that protect his civilisation from the Slut, because Man  knows he cannot trust himself to say no to the Slut. This is why a theocracy is both logical and necessary, even to me, an agnostic.

In a matriarchy where there is no alpha male, there is only the weaker sex and the even weaker sex, to be invaded, raped, pillaged, and conquered.

Why don't women care about men's civilisation?

Because they didn't create it and know they will be OK whatever happens, in just the way a lion's harem never come to his assistance when they know if he loses the fight against his potential usurper he has to leave the pride and his cubs will be killed by the usurper. If their cubs are killed, that's just fine with the lionesses, because they will be impregnated again by the victor, who won't have a loser's genes.

Helen was a slut, Paris was an MCSF and Troy fell because it protected them. The West is Troy.
Nothing much happened to Helen. Menelaus just took her back to Sparta as his wife.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahab
Rahab was honoured for letting the invaders into Jericho.

In short, feminism is a shit test to test the fitness of men and their civilisation to survive.

Strangely and surprisingly, Western man prefers merely to complain weakly and weekly about being exploited by Jews and invaded by Muslims and assorted foreigners. He prefers merely to complain than actually having to marry a woman of his own race and bringing up her children, apparently. If he does not think women of his own race are worth marrying because they are all feminists, he does not seem able to get up the courage to denounce feminism and propose the repeal of its laws viz:

  • the law that says it is OK to have premarital sex
  • the Equal Pay Act 1970
  • the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
  • the Sex Discrimination Act 1975
  • the Equality Act 2010
This means that the next generation will be even more slut and bastard and more full of morally compromised slut-fuckers than previous generations, entrenching the idiocracy.



Catch 22:

The only way Western civilisation can be saved is if it became Islamic. But if it became Islamic, then Western civilisation as we know it - sexually promiscuous, hedonist, feminist, consumerist, still fucking around with elections under a multi-party system of indiscriminate universal suffrage falling over themselves to pander to feminine preferences - would have to end.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/case-for-disenfranchsing-women-or-why.html






https://www.thelocal.se/jobs/article/why-these-swedish-trade-union-bosses-wore-pink-pussyhats-for-gender-equality

http://www.returnofkings.com/70400/all-swedes-will-be-forced-to-fund-female-promiscuity

The Muslim Brotherhood is creating a 'parallel social structure' in Sweden, aided by 'political elites' making it impossible to criticise Islam, government report admits

“Mr. Trump did not exaggerate Sweden’s current problems. If anything, he understated them.” - Per Jimmie Akesson and Mattias Karlsson, in Wall Street Journal op-ed

Stereotype of Swedish women as promiscuous

“We have strange drinking habits and we copulate assiduously, before we commit suicide on a large scale, after we have paid a terrible amount of taxes,” is how the actor Erland Josephson ironically summarized the foreigner’s image of Sweden in 1987 (30).

Englishwoman Mary Wollstonecraft, who actually went to Sweden, complained about promiscuity at length. In her famous travel book of 1796, Letters written during a Short Residence in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark (already translated into German in 1800) she wrote of “the total want of chastity in the lower class of women” (Wollstonecraft 1989:258) in Sweden, for whom love is “merely an appetite, to fulfil the main design of nature, never enlivened by either affection or sentiments” (314).

The about-turn in the (West) German perception of Swedish sexuality first becomes apparent in the fifties, as the Swedish film industry achieved great success abroad with, for that period, very permissive films such as Arne Mattsson’s Hon dansade en sommar (1951; English One Summer of Happiness) and Ingmar Bergman’s Sommaren med Monika (1952; English Summer with Monika) and became “the initiator of cinematic aphrodisiacs” (Der Spiegel 1964:96) – to some extent involuntarily. For example a second version of Sommaren med Monika was also shown in the USA; cut from 97 to 65 minutes, dubbed and with new film music as Monika, the Story of a Bad Girl (Stevenson 1995:19–22). “Stockholm produces cultivated films with good photographic technique, with preaching pastors and naked women” is how the cinema researcher Georges Sadoul summarized the “Swedish film” in 1957 (394). Or even shorter: “naked swimming plus social criticism” (Der Spiegel 1964:96). But if one examines the reception of, for example, Hon dansade en sommar in German-speaking countries (see Beindorf 1995 and 1996), it is noticeable that the “immoral” is still not attributed to the country and its inhabitants. The stereotype only arose in the course of the following twenty years. Der Spiegel (1969:132) summarized as follows under the headline “Free from taboos”:

Drugs and pornography, prisons without doors and girls without morals, boredom and short skirts, hot love and cool people – that is the average German’s image of Sweden.

 there is no shortage of arguments to confirm that the heterostereotype really is referential. Historians and ethnologists argue that a specific Scandinavian or Swedish development with regard to sexual practice has existed for centuries. Two historical phenomena are held primarily responsible for the tradition of premarital relationships in Scandinavian countries; “night courtship”, ritualized visiting by young men in unmarried women’s bedrooms, and the specific function of engagement in old Nordic law, which counted as permission to commence a sexual relationship (Hertoft 1970:61–69; Löfgren 1972; Frykman 1977). Wollstonecraft wrote as an eyewitness about the sexual activities of young couples subject to the conflicting forces of secular engagement custom and religious marriage law:

Young people, who are attached to each other, with the consent of their friends, exchange rings, and are permitted to enjoy a degree of liberty together, which I have never noticed in any other country. The days of courtship are therefore prolonged, till it be perfectly convenient to marry: the intimacy often becomes very tender: and if the lover obtains the privilege of a husband, it can only be termed half by stealth, because the family is wilfully blind. (326)

In Stockholm around 1850 almost half of all children were born to single mothers; in general the proportion of extramarital children in Sweden in the nineteenth century was about 10% (Frykman 1977; Frykman 1993:189f.; cf. also Hertoft 1970:68). This is not to mention the marriages entered into after conception but before birth. The assertion was that the nexus between sexuality and religious sexual norms had actually always been undermined – a development which continued with the great morality debate in the Modern Breakthrough and in the cultural debate of the 1930s, which was in many respects a struggle for self-determination in sexuality (Bergström-Walan 1970:11–58; Linnér 1967; above all Lennerhed 1994 and 1991). In the thirties a new functionalist physical consciousness, modernism, and the construction of discursive-collective identities such as national identity were combined to great effect (Frykman 1993:161ff.). In 1938 information on contraception was legalized and the first abortion law was passed (although without permitting social grounds). Sex education was made obligatory in all schools in 1955, an event which attracted worldwide attention; “the Swedish sin” became a catch-phrase (Lennerhed 1991; Frykman 1993:189ff.). The sexual liberalism debate conducted with great enthusiasm between 1962 and 1965, and also the Swedish sense of being the international standard-bearers of modernism influenced foreign opinion. Western conservatives were convinced that the Swedes had sacrificed the secret of sexuality to profane functionalism, functionalizing sexuality as a hedonistic principle. On the other hand, liberals praised Sweden as the model for progressive sexual policy and asked “whether it would be worth creating ‘many Swedens’ of sexual policy” (Giese 1970:9).

a comparative analysis of illegitimate birth rates in Sweden and elsewhere3 shows that premarital sexual intercourse was common in Europe and North America, a consequence of the “European Marriage Pattern” (early sexual maturity, high marriage age) (Mitterauer 1983:23– 30). Scandinavia is one of the regions with traditionally high illegitimacy rates, but the figures for the Eastern Alps region are significantly higher. For example, in Vienna in the second half of the nineteenth century, the proportion of births out of wedlock was over 50% (Mitterauer 1983:25). In Bavaria in the nineteenth century the figure was around 20% (Nipperdey 1991:127). The particular function of engagement existed into modern times, not just in Scandinavia but also in England, North America, France, Portugal, etc. (Mitterauer 1983:14). And night courtship was widespread in Central Europe, the Baltic region, Wales, Western France, etc., under a variety of names (Kiltgang in Switzerland, Fensterln in Austria, Nachtfreien etc.) (Mitterauer 1983:57).

As a central discourse of modernization, sexuality was progressively socialized by it4 and thus inseparably interlinked with the entire social system:

Because important cultural systems (religion/ theology/church; state/law; family/marriage; science; art; economics), lay claim to and realize love, its control, shaping and functionalization, its domestication, classification, or simply representation, alterations in one or more of these systems lead to alterations in the attitude to sexuality. And vice versa; alterations in the attitude to sexuality lead to alterations in one or more cultural systems (Beutin 1993:92).

At the latest since Foucault’s research it has become a platitude that discourses on sexuality always develop where the power in society is located, and are an instrument of power (Foucault 1978). There is an inseparable relationship between supposedly “merely” interpersonal sexual behaviour and the overall organization of society (Giddens 1992:3).

Sexuality is capable of representing the modernization project not only in synecdochic, but also in metaphoric terms. Modernization research, long committed to linear models, has in recent years emphasized that modernization is a paradoxical process which unites apparently contradictory developments (e.g. individualization and pluralization) (van der Loo & van Reijen 1992). At least in Western cultures sexuality has a similar paradoxical character. It is viewed ambivalently, on the one hand with fascination, on the other with fear and caution. My main point is that the promiscuity stereotypically attributed to the Swedes is primarily an expression of the ambivalent stance taken on the best-known project of Swedish modernity, namely, the welfare state.

As late as 1963, in the context of a long Spiegel interview with the Swedish prime minister Tage Erlander, Sweden was presented as the “perfect” welfare state under the headline “Everyone is entitled to a pension”. The journalist’s critical questions were directed solely at the affordability of the welfare state, and its relationship to the private economy, and no reference was made to sexuality either in the journalist’s questions or in the illustrations for the interview (Der Spiegel 1963:60–67). It was not until the end of the sixties, when critical voices were increasingly heard, that the stereotype received prominence in West Germany. Examples are the Spiegel quote already mentioned or Huntford’s book on the Swedish welfare state, published in 1971 and translated into German in 1973. Huntford “crowned” his polemical criticism of the Swedish new totalitarians with a chapter on the promiscuous behaviour of the Swedes, stating that the freedom of copulation has led to an obsession which permeates all of Swedish life (Huntford 1971). Lennerhed, who has investigated “the Swedish sin” above all in Anglo-American regions, summarizes:

In the context, however, it appears important that the negative post-war image of Sweden is so extremely focused on Swedish sexual policy. The rational, pragmatic and reform-oriented sexual policy was seen as typical of the Swedish state and possibly of the welfare state in general (Lennerhed 1994:97).

The German heterostereotype of Swedish promiscuity implies the same connection between sexuality and welfare state, but it interprets it differently. It is more differentiated, because it does not only express criticism of the Swedish welfare state “model”, but articulates ambivalence towards it. This is because Swedish sexual behaviour came into use as a stereotype in the Federal Republic of Germany at precisely the moment when the image of Sweden became ambiguous,5 as criticism and fascination became paradoxically fused in public consciousness. The following question was asked in a representative West German opinion poll in August 1970: “Which country is the best example to us in terms of social matters, or is no country a model to us in terms of social matters?” For 44% of those questioned there was no country which was superior in social matters, but Sweden was in second place with 36%, with Switzerland at 7% and Denmark at 3% far behind. Even amongst CDU/CSU supporters, whose party leaderships presented Sweden as a socialist horror state, one in three thought that Sweden was a good example (Der Spiegel 1970:79f.). The attraction of the “model” was by no means gone (see also Der Spiegel 1972:122–145).

Finally, it is noticeable that the stereotype normally refers to female sexual behaviour. But this is only surprising if the stereotype is understood as referential in relation to the Swedish sex debate, where other subjects such as sex education, the abortion question, equal rights for homosexuals, and censorship played an important role (Lennerhed 1994) – a series of things which are ignored by the stereotype. Because, unlike tempting-threatening female sexuality, they do not offer the (male) groups which dominate public debate the opportunity to articulate ambivalence towards the welfare state project.6 An additional factor is certainly rhetorical identification of the Swedish welfare state as woman, emphasizing “female” characteristics (care, unagressiveness, warmth) (cf. Ehn 1993:279).

In the film The Producers mentioned at the start, the Swedish secretary Ulla, characterized as a “Swedish sexpot” in the secondary literature (Yacowar 1981:76), has long lost all specific “Swedish” qualities. She has become an icon for (heterosexual)7 sexuality itself.

The blonde woman became the sensual dream woman, her hair no longer an indication of shyness and chastity, but an erotic allure.

The Swedish Woman is now the Western Woman.  

The Bhagavad Gita:

"Out of the corruption of women proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil."  

 
at
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

The Founding Fathers: what did they really say by Mat Clark

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Founding-Fathers-Evidence-Christian-Principles/dp/1979939470 Christian principles are not "freedom for everyon...