The Bhagavad Gita on feminism

The Western world is convulsed by toxic gender relations that its religious leaders are too afraid to discuss because they fear being accused of something or other.

Don't let feminists divide your society by destroying your civilisation through destroying marriages and families. The matriarchy is a danger to itself. After it has destroyed the patriarchy (which it has equated with domestic violence), it will proceed to destroy itself through the chaos and criminality of degeneracy.

As the hero Arjuna tells the God Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita:

‘In overwhelming chaos, Krishna

Women of the family are corrupted,

And when women are corrupted,

Disorder is born in society’

Men of other races, religions and nations will know that men who submit to the censorship of feminism will be unable to defend a principle, let alone their country. Men who submit to feminists are men who submit to immoral and irresponsible women who bribe men with extramarital sex to keep them quiescent in their matriarchy, desperate for sexual access to women if they are unattached, or afraid of losing sexual access if they are attached.

Men and women who want to become and remain married parents to properly rear the next generation must say no to feminism now.

Blame feminism, not Jews

The Jews being a superior race and group (ie more socially cohesive and genetically more intelligent because they understand the necessity of going forth and multiplying albeit within wedlock which is how they keep their traditions, their sense of identity as a people with a purpose and destiny) will be in more of a position to exploit and bully the corrupt gentile, slower on the uptake, crippled by his now established practice of fornication and a culture that celebrates it. That is why the gentile male Westerner is now helpless against the matriarchy he has helped to create, because he accepted the bribe of feminism: fornication and wants to continue to accept it.

Rabbi Sacks, Melanie Phillips, Maurice Glasman and the late Keith Joseph are trying and did try to warn the gentile, but the gentile is more interested in continuing to hate Jews than refusing the bribe of fornication which feminism continues to offer him and which he is too weak, short-termist and cowardly to refuse being the risk-averse materialistic atheist that he usually is.

Right-thinking members of society are social conservatives, which libtards now call the Far Right or Nazi or Fascist or racist or sexist. Libtards are not right-thinking members of society and libtards can be both Jew and gentile. Good Jews are the ones who take the trouble to be social conservative and to warn the gentile of no longer practising social conservatism, bad Jews are libtard and egg the gentile on in his folly and to his doom.

What is social conservatism? It just means supporting marriage - but not "gay marriage" - and practising family values.

Because the gentile Western male no longer has traditions, he only knows emotion, and that emotion is hatred. It is always easier to hate and complain about the symptoms than to cure the disease, and most people take the path of least resistance.

All political ideologies become national religions when they are adopted by the government.

Our religion is PC Liberalism, our culture is sexual liberation, our cultural product is racial degeneracy, national decline and impending chaos.

Good Jews promote bourgeois values, bad liberal assimilated Jews promote degenerate policies resulting in degeneracy.

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.

The irresistible appeal of nationalism to those who reject consumerism and hedonism

Man cannot live on bread alone. His soul is hungry for the recognition of his unique qualities, even if he does not in fact possess them. He does not want to be a fungible commodity, which is what globalism turns us into. To escape from this state of being fungible, we want to belong to a tribe or a nation, and through this group elevate ourselves as individuals.

Our spiritual hunger for this recognition of our unrealised distinctiveness and uniqueness is of course the essential appeal of nationalism. If we lack the ability to be special and distinctive as individuals, we want our nation at least to be unique and special or be allowed to think so, free from the straitjacket of political correctness. This is the purpose of the Noble Lie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_lie

The creation myth of a nation is akin to knowing one's parents, is it not?

Those of us who know our parents, grandparents and lineage are immeasuralby spiritually and socially more secure than the abandoned orphan who never even knew his own mother. The tragedy of Oedipus is based entirely on the necessity of knowing who we are, where we came from and how we came to be where we now are.

Much of nationalism is tied up in ideas of family and tribe, but most of all the idea family and our parents. Our father and mother may be just like any other man or woman but they are special because they are our parents. Our child may be just like any other child but is special because it is the fruit of our loins, bone of our bone, blood of our blood, flesh of our flesh. And that must be why people used to call their country the Motherland or the Fatherland, before the days of Political Correctness.

Feminism in the West has orphaned the white man from his roots and traditions.

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.

In a patriarchy, there is the male sex and the weaker sex. In a matriarchy, there is the weaker sex and the even weaker sex.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) July 11, 2017

The British Thought Police widens its definition of thoughtcrime

Mere vulgar abuse is an insult that is not necessarily defamatory because it is not intended to be taken literally or believed, or likely to cause real damage to a reputation. Vituperative statements made in anger, such as calling someone "an arse" during a drunken argument, would likely be considered mere vulgar abuse and not defamatory.

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

What is not even a civil wrong has now become a crime in matriarchal Britain.

In the days of the patriarchy, there was free speech, but no longer in our demented matriarchy.

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."

"Out of the corruption of SLUTS 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."

"Out of the corruption of TOLERATING SLUTS AND BASTARDS 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."

Female vote will decide the outcome of the EU Referendum and more of them will vote to stay

0810

The president of the European Council Donald Tusk will today put forward a draft text to renegotiate the UK’s membership of the EU. Katya Adler is the BBC’s Europe Editor, Laura Kuenssberg is the BBC’s Political Editor and Dr Gyorgy Schopflin is MEP from the Hungarian governing party Fidesz.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b070drln

From 2:15

Laura Kuennsberg:

... The crucial people will be those in the middle. By Number Ten's calculation there is a chunk of people on one side maybe as many as 40% who are always going to vote to leave the EU and maybe between 30 or 40% on the other side of people who will always vote to stay. What will make the difference when it comes to the referendum is the 20 or 30% of the people - said to be the mushy middle - who will have to be convinced, and those will be the votes who will actually make the difference.

Apparently, 1/3 has already decided YES, 1/3 has already decided NO, and 1/3 are undecided. I bet it is the women who are undecided ending up voting for the UK to stay in because women are risk-averse, can't be bothered to understand how the EU operates or the principle of national sovereignty. Even if they did they are basically as unprincipled as unprincipled men who are easily frightened. People who stand firm against scare stories are people who believe in the principle of national sovereignty. The only way to frighten the undecided into voting to leave is to use migrant swarms to scare them, but it seems many European women want migrant swarms to come so they can work in refugee centres to be with them and can get their mangina running dogs to support them doing so.

Mangina running dogs of feminazis who will perform any act of masculine self-abnegation if called upon to do so. Europe's invaders will know what to do to them when they arrive. 

Nigel Farage and the effeminate and emasculated leave campaigners will be too afraid of alienating the female vote to call feminism out, so we will probably end up having to stay in. Sad, innit?

Europe’s Tragedy: Most Of Its Men Are Feminized Wimps

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/feminism-causes-immigration.html

Female judge grants asylum to Sudanenese migrant Abdul Rahman Haroun, 3 women greet him at prison gates

Simon Sheppard's Sex and Power and migrant swarms

Female BBC journalists' pro-migrant coverage

Ten Reasons Why Females Prefer Alien Males
Why women mind immigration much much less than men

http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/6876/how-should-i-understand-the-word-corruption-in-this-passage-of-the-bhagavad-gita

It may be argued, of course, that all the major religions are fundamentally patriarchal since they came into being at historical periods distant from our own when human survival was predicated on a strict division of male and female realms. As the hero Arjuna tells the God Krishna in the Baghavad Gita,

‘In overwhelming chaos, Krishna

Women of the family are corrupted,

And when women are corrupted,

Disorder is born in society’

What is more despicable and contemptible than men who are corrupted by and weaker than their corrupted and weak women?

White feminists REPULSED by anti-immigration white proletariat and DON'T CARE what happens to them

I believe I have been banned from posting or even contacting Platitude of the Day

http://www.platitudes.org.uk/platblog/comments.php?y=14&m=05&entry=entry140501-074740

This was what I would have posted on Hinduism:

The best little book on Hinduism is by K M Sen.  

It is the most ancient of religions and is rather clever in its way, claiming to be philosophical, monotheist and polytheist at the same time.  http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/my-interpretation-of-atman.html

It should be noted that Hinduism is very ruthless about  foreigners and women which Akhandadhi Das necessarily has to sanitise for Western liberal sensibilities.  

It deals with foreigners of other races by having a caste system and deals with women through suttee (widow-burning) and by imposing a requirement that the bride's family pay the groom's family to marry her. The reasoning is very simple: the man can afford to wait, while the woman cannot. Think of the dowry that the bride has to pay the groom as the fee you pay someone to tow your broken-down car away.  

Hinduism also has this rather interesting idea about the corruption of women. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-bhagavad-gita-indicates-position-we.html

The Bhagavad Gita indicates the position we should take on SSMs if we are to save our civilisation

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." 

"Out of the corruption of SLUTS 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." 

"Out of the corruption of TOLERATING SLUTS AND BASTARDS 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." 

http://vedabase.net/bg/1/41/

sańkaro narakāyaiva
kula-ghnānāḿ kulasya ca
patanti pitaro hy eṣāḿ
lupta-piṇḍodaka-kriyāḥ

sańkaraḥ — such unwanted children [bastards]

TRANSLATION

An increase of unwanted population [bastards] certainly causes hellish life both for the family and for those who destroy the family tradition.

Legalising gay marriage is the ultimate act of desecrating marriage

That the West has prospered since feminism is an illusion since it was fueled by consumerism and reckless borrowing and lending by individuals and governments. People only appear to be prosperous if they practise conspicuous consumption and spend extravagantly and ostentatiously.

In fact, what the Liberal West did was to dissipate and consume the wealth that was acquired by the by its ancestor, the Imperial West, without replacing it, whom it now affects to despise for being sexist, racist, homophobic, nationalistic, militaristic and imperialistic.

They are like the idle rich children of wealthy parents, who have no idea how  their ancestors acquired their wealth and who could not care less, as long as they had money to spend.  Indeed, most of them even affect to despise their parents and their ancestry.

It goes without saying that they do not respect the institution of marriage.  Indeed, they do not even now know its original purpose nor what they have to do to respect it.  These days, it is practically compulsory to be a fornicatress if you are a woman in the West.   Most Western men insist on “trying before buying” and a woman who insists on being a virgin bride is looked upon with pity and contempt, for the West is now the land of compulsory fornication, and Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland describes it perfectly.

Such is its corruption that even senior Catholic priests cannot bring themselves to say that a fornicatress is a slut, and that even one act of fornication makes a woman a fornicatress and therefore a slut.

Just one act fornication makes you a slut?  That is so harsh, non-judgmental liberals will cry, quite forgetting all that they have learnt in human reproduction, for a woman who has sex just once could be impregnated, and therefore ruined if she is not already married.  

Why would any rational man want the responsibility of providing for another man's child, especially if he is an ill-bred brat whose mother is a stupid slut?  

But most women in the West are sluts and most women have the baggage of another man's offspring so Western man must take their women as they are, or find foreign women whom they believe are not as promiscuous as their own.  

The best they can do now is to grade their women according to degrees of sluttery.  http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/degrees-of-sluttery.html

Soon, most of the West will have legalised gay marriage.  If you wanted to desecrate marriage and make a mockery of it, there is no better way of doing that than by legalising gay marriage.

When the man who proposes this is in fact the leader of the Conservative Party, then you must accept that social conservatism is now considered odd, if not actually “extremist”, for anything that deviates from the extremist liberal norm must by definition be labelled extremist.

It is actually not much fun being a social conservative saying no to everything that might give people pleasure, which is why Man created God to keep himself on the straight and narrow.  Without a general belief in God, a society would have to rely on dictators like Hitler, Franco and Mussolini to keep most people on the straight and narrow, for the exercise of moral restraint is necessary to prolong the life of your race, nation and ultimately your civilisation and perhaps the human race.

Liberal atheists in practice worship like a deity the idea of tolerating sex between consenting adults.  This means that they tolerate extramarital sex, under the impression that sexual morality has no bearing on general moral standards.  When it is pointed out to them that there is a clear link between illegitimacy and crime, they get very angry.  Their tactic is to deny that there is a link or deny that it affects them or anyone that they know, until they themselves become a victim of crime.  

Extramarital sex of course includes premarital sex ie sex with anyone you are not married to, which includes homo sex.   To get round this problem, liberals are now proposing same-sex marriage in rather the same way a murderer who wishes to escape the penalty for murder would legalise murder, quite ignoring the fact that if murder were legalised then murderers would in turn be murdered by the supporters of anyone they murder and bring about the breakdown of their society in an orgy of homicidal licence.

It has been said that the Conservative Prime Minister who proposes to legalise gay marriage is doing so at the behest of his wife and his gay Downing Street advisers.  So entirely without moral conviction is he that he cannot see anything wrong about this, even though he is supposed to come from the best family as well as going to the best school and university in the land.  Such alarmingly low moral and educational standards should be cause for alarm by all who live in this country and are subject to its laws, but most are complacent or indifferent to the fact that they are being led by a man without convictions who is either a fool, a knave, or both, and is not ashamed of being told what to do by his wife.

“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.”

The Bhagavad Gita

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/what-to-say-against-gay-marriage.html explains the long-term degenerative consequences of gay marriage.

UKIP too cowardly to defend free speech: that is why they will never amount to anything

It has come to my notice that Steve Moxon, who wrote The Woman Racket was to have stood as a candidate for UKIP but was removed because

"On his blog he said Norwegian killer Anders Breivik's thesis on Islam and political correctness was accurate."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-17911131

What did Moxon say that was so contentious?

UKIP said that he

"made a number of remarks on subjects such as the Breivik manifesto and Islam that are at odds with UKIP policy and perspective."

What was it that Moxon actually said?

It is clear that the mass of ordinary people are considered with utter contempt by the government-media-education uber-class across the Western world; this as the result of 'cultural Marxism'. So we are, in effect, 'at war' within our societies over PC, as Breivik claims.



And Islam seems not to be a benign religion that is toxic only to the extent that some have adopted a veneer of Western revolutionary thinking after Marx to produce a fundamentalism. Breivik makes an exhaustively detailed convincing case that the problem is inherent in the core of the religion itself and how it is interpreted generally; contrary to what I have previously understood (until recent reading of scholars had already set me along these lines).

http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/anders-breivik-and-his-manifesto-great.html#links

I fail to read anything in it that is anything to do with UKIP policy.  Anyway, the long and short of it was that UKIP preferred to play it safe rather than allow themselves to be embroiled in a discussion about Muslims and Islamophobia, and suspended Moxon pronto.  

Moxon took it in good part, probably because he already knows, being a white man in an effeminate culture,  that the default position of the white man is that of expedient and repellent cowardice.   

At http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/on-happily-being-suspended-as-ukip.html#links you can read him taking it all so terribly well.

Sean Gabb the libertarian would also have been a feather in the cap of UKIP because he is something of an intellectual who appears in the media fairly regularly, but apparently, these days you are not allowed to suggest that people in possession of child porn should not necessarily be treated as criminals without being dropped as a UKIP candidate.

http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2008/03/12/sean-gabb-banned-by-ukip/

How sad then that all those who have said nothing that is morally or intellectually indefensible and who could have defended themselves perfectly well against any hysterical accusations of racism, Islamophobia or whatever are always hung out to dry and then dropped like a hot potato by their party. 

If I were leader of a party and one of my members said something that he or she wished to defend publicly, I would make a point of letting them do so, to see how they acquit themselves.  It would be trial by media of course, but that is always so much fun to witness a baptism of fire even if it turns out later to be self-immolation.  

Something similar happened to me too when I thought I might have been the BNP London Mayoral Candidate in 2011 when I said or tried to say on Five Live that 

(a) I would not wish to bring up a severely disabled baby 

(b) no one should have to pay for another person's children whether able-bodied or disabled

(c) before the NHS came into existence, home births were the rule rather than the exception and any unviable disabled unwanted baby would be disposed of by the miswife

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/transcript-of-what-i-said-on-victoria.html

For just saying this, it was suggested to me that I might like to resign, but I refused, since what I said I felt was morally and intellectually defensible, though undeniably offensive to the easily offended people of this morbidly feminised country.  

How sad it is that no one in our liberal democracy seems to understand what a principle is, let alone show any willingness at all to defend the  principle of free speech.   

A principle is perhaps rather too abstract for dumbed-down degenerate emasculated effeminate white men who have no sense of honour to grasp, let alone practise, I suppose.   This is because most Britons these days are illegitimate and singly parented in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html and you cannot expect much from people like that who have been marinating in their Culture of Entitlement and Excuses for generations now..   

What Voltaire said about free speech is now but completely forgotten in the matriarchal dementia the West is now collectively suffering.  In case you have forgotten what he was supposed to have said, here is it:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

This leads me inexorably to one of my favourite quotes:

"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."  The Bhagavad Gita

Feminism, Sluts and Immigration

I was disabled from commenting on Facebook for saying:

“All women are prostitutes, and all men are punters. This is no tragedy, for it was always ever thus. The tragedy for a woman is to sell herself too cheaply or to price herself right out of the market. The tragedy for a man is to not get value for his money or do the equivalent of buying a car he cannot afford to run.”

Do you just get the feeling it was a woman who reported me?  I wonder if it is still allowed to say that, on the whole, it seems that women are more censorious than men.

This is considered a worthy subject for discussion after all at

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110311020217AAYSFwV

and at

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201103/are-all-women-essentially-prostitutes

but you wouldn't expect a woman, especially if she is a slut, to agree, would you?

Perhaps I should have just asked the question:

“Are women prostitutes?”

This would no doubt have been considered offensive and attracted another Facebook punishment, so perhaps I should have asked the converse, which would have been:

“Are men punters?”

Then no one would have offended at all, because no one cares if men are insulted, only when women are.

What do men ever want from women but sex?

If it is the case that men are only ever after The One Thing, ie sex, then does that not make women prepared to give them sex if certain conditions are satisfied prostitutes?

If a woman has an official life-long exclusive contract then she is a wife, who has rather more onerous duties than a mere prostitute, since her side of the bargain will also involve housekeeping and childcare.

If she has a one-off contract then she is a prostitute if money changes hands after the act.

The woman who gives sex and does not ask for payment is a slut.

A prostitute should be considered a degree above a slut because the essence of a slut is that she is a fornicatress and stupid, while a prostitute at least had the sense to ask for money in return for the provision of sexual services.

If you allow stupid women to breed then their offspring will be half full of stupid slut genes and your society will be saddled with the stupid, learning-disabled and also the depraved.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/shock-horror-britons-getting-5-more.html

This means the next generation will be degenerate and the one after that even more degenerate exponentially http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_growth if you allow this practice to go unchecked, or, if you promote this practice through the aegis of the welfare state.

What is the other reason why is it a Bad Thing for women to give sex to men for free?

Because it corrupts their nature which in turn corrupts society.

When their society is corrupted they will desecrate marriage.

When they desecrate marriage they will lose their traditions.

When they lose their traditions they will lose their memory.

When they lose their memory they will suffer dementia.

When they suffer dementia their society, race, nations will be held in contempt by other societies, races and nations, and that will be the end of their civilisation.

So, this is the reason why sluts are a Bad Thing.

Did you know that feminism says it is OK for women to be sluts?

Did you know that some feminists would even deny the concept of a “slut” claiming that a woman has an absolute right to do anything with her body without being criticised for it?

Of course, these feminists do not think they owe society a duty, much less men, or children or the elderly, or anyone at all.   These women are after all ambitious and selfish women who want to compete unfairly with men with the sledgehammer of totalitarian anti-discrimination legislation.

A slut is a fornicatress.

What is a fornicatress?  A fornicatress is a woman who has sex with men not her husband.

Why is this a Bad Thing?

Because if we say it is OK for women to be fornicatresses then we will be swept away in a tsunami of sluttery and bastardy, even with the availability of modern contraception.

When you are overwhelmed by a tsunami of sluttery and bastardy it will no longer be socially acceptable to criticise sluts.

This is when your society loses its memory and forgets the meaning of fornication.

Remember: all fornicatresses are sluts, and sluts are stupid.

If sex were a drug, then a slut would be a drug-dealer who consumes her own stock and becomes a drug addict rather than finding an exclusive and regular customer who will pay her the highest price.

If you wonder why there is more crime and more learning-disabled people around now, look at the sluts around you who make bad reproductive choices by fucking maniacs and losers who are not their husbands and then neglect to bring up their illegitimate offspring properly because they are single mums.


Nor will they have enough children because they will be too busy being working mothers who will become divorced mothers who will become single mothers.

Many clever women will end up not having children at all, while the stupid ones breed in large numbers.


They are the cause of our Culture of Entitlement and Excuses.

They are also the cause of immigration because the indigenous working classes are no longer fit for purpose.

Why else do successive governments conspire to promote immigration even as they know their voters dislike it?

Because most of their voters are sluts and bastards or the sex partners, friends and family of sluts and bastards.

The leaders of political parties don’t want to offend these voters when all they want is a referendum on the EU, or a smaller state, or to repatriate other races, or whatever it is that they want.

After all, most men secretly or not so secretly like sluts because they lower the price of sex, which is what most men want from women most of the time, if they are not homosexual.  Sluts, already having low standards of sexual morality will be indifferent to homosexual men having sex with each other, because they are too stupid to see that sexual liberation is bad for their society.

This rather explains why, in The Land of Compulsory Fornication that is Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland, most people do not find the very idea of “gay marriage” at all offensive.

“The lower the morals of women, the lower the morals of men.”

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.”