View Single Post
Old 4 Weeks Ago #22
Breanna
Eternal Glory
 
Breanna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,594
Breanna
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by T.Garrett View Post

Our women already kill white infants in the womb
This bolded part of what you're after writing here is the most disturbing thing of all to me. My husband's theory's always been that all parts of the body are meant to be used for their intended purpose and if they can't be the person goes bonkers. If you are after being restricted such that you can't use your legs or arms you will go crazy, men that can't use their parts to have intercourse go totally bonkers as evidenced by the incels, likewise women who don't use their wombs or breasts for making and nursing babies go nuts, more and more crazy over time. The media lie that women have hormonal issues during pregnancy that make them act crazy is not true and its the opposite that women go crazy when they have not had a child in the womb for a long time. The hormonal changes of women's monthly cycles make us emotionally unstable and when a pregnancy makes those monthly cycles cease we become calm and peaceful. ESPECIALLY with a baby on the breast we are overcome by a wave of peace and tranquility because calming hormones are released! My husband believes its part why women slut around as one man isn't getting them pregnant so subconsciously she thinks he is sterile and needs to try someone new. Also a cause of divorce if the woman has gone too long without a pregnancy she begins to go crazy and seek someone new. It is just obvious when you encounter women in your life that generally they are not happy.

This book: https://www.anthonymludovici.com/nh_pre.htm
The Night Hoers by Anthony Ludovici is after being very enlightening for us and when I was young my husband had me read it to understand the great cruelty that is after being done against women by manipulating them to accept and even ask for the misuse of their bodies. Frequent pregnancies is really the norm for the female body throughout all of history until very recently and it is how we were meant to function and we go crazy if we are not fulfilled in this way. Since it is incredibly rare for a woman to live this lifestyle, the norm for women since the dawn of time, you see pretty well every woman in the western world being completely insane and nonsensical. The large family is the normal expression of sexuality, especially of women's sexuality, as the woman has a physiological need to see sex through to its end: pregnancy, childbirth, and breastfeeding. And then without children to look after we have nothing productive to occupy our time, even without all these other factors idleness alone will cause people to become destructive. It is not the patriarchal men that are misogynists. It is the patriarchal men who want what's best for us. They want to protect us from getting hurt and they want to guide us into what's best for us. It is the leftists that want women to restrict our family size that are the misogynists.

But why do women murder babies in the womb? Does the primal subconscious need for a filled womb get thwarted by the conscious desire for more hedonistic pleasure and status? I mean they don't even go through the pregnancy to give away the baby after, when white babies are in hot demand on the adoption market, so it isn't just that they don't want to have a baby it's that they WANT to KILL their baby. I reckon it is because they want to keep having casual sex and a pregnancy would make their bodies less arousing so they wouldn't be able to snag attractive men anymore or get attention posting their photos online. It can't be about not wanting to spend the money raising a child if that were the case they would give the baby up for adoption as I mentioned above. Is there anything so heartbreaking as a baby to die because of its mothers selfishness? Is there anything so satanic and evil?

It was the first clue to awakening me to the evil state of the world because when my husband (then boyfriend) first started telling me about all the stuff we talk about on here I thought it was all conspiracy theories and I only realized it could be true when it was pointed out to me that we live in a society that condones and encourages women to kill babies in the womb, and how could such a society be just? How could those in power be anything but malevolent? Is it such a stretch to think they could do more evil things too? That's the door that opened my mind so I think that pro-life but otherwise unaware white women can perhaps be brought to our side like that.

https://www.anthonymludovici.com/violence.htm
Violence Sacrifice and War is the other book of Ludovici that is after enlightening me to the truth. The truth is that there can be no peaceful world, ever! It's impossible! The only way for the world to be peaceful is to take part in the hidden murder of our own children through abortion and the silent destruction of the bodies of the nation's women through birth control. Is this not more evil than going to war against a foreign nation?

Quote:
The violence may be arrested by what is known as Birth Control; that is to say, the restriction of the reproductive function of the female — for that is all it amounts to.
This method is now recommended by Pacificists, Internationalists, Feminists, and defeatists of every description. But what makes it unique in the history of the world is, that in the case of this method of neutralizing the violence of the reproductive function, it is the class solely selected for sacrifice — the women — who are deluded enough to be themselves clamouring for this form of sacrifice.
It is they who are the victims, it is their function that is being sacrificed, it is their womanhood which is being barbarously immolated; and yet, such is the corruption of the world of both men and women to-day, and such is the bewilderment which morbid modern values and modern pseudo-science have brought over mankind, that neither the men nor the women connected with the Birth Control movement have the faintest idea that in this latest attempt at neutralizing the violence generated by the reproductive function, one sex, instead of one class, has been deliberately and cheerfully selected for the sacrifice. Moreover, to the breathless astonishment of all those who have even but a nodding acquaintance with history, in this instance the section of the community to be sacrificed has for the first time within human memory come forward enthusiastically to offer itself for the sacrifice, thinking that it is profiting and gaining some advantage thereby.
I need not enter here into the other deplorable aspects of Birth Control in England — the fact that it invites a proud people henceforward to pour its seed down the drains instead of multiplying and spreading over the earth, the fact that it calls upon a proud conquering and imperial race henceforward to limit its multiplication in order to keep pace with (or rather to keep within the bounds imposed by) such inferior races as negroes, eskimoes, mongoloids of all kinds and Negritos, and such mongrel populations as the Levantines, the South Americans and the hybrids of South Africa, etc. Nor need I refer to the fact that it asks a manly people henceforward to allow other peoples to unload the violence of their reproductive function upon it.
These facts are not our concern now. What is our concern is that here, in Birth Control, there is certainly a means of neutralizing the violence of man's reproductive function, but that it is a means which everyone but a defeatist should indignantly reject — in the first place because it sacrifices only one sex in a way that nothing can justify, secondly because it is based on an ignorant and pathetically unsuspecting acquiescence of that sex in their own sacrifice (after we have allowed them to be corrupted and deluded by false doctrine and pseudo-science); thirdly because, quite apart from the uni-sexual sacrifice it involves, it is a doctrine of national suicide; and fourthly because, as far as the suppressed births are concerned, it amounts just as much to a policy of unselective sacrifice as the deaths from the internal-combustion engine.
Quote:
If, however, the English are not to be allowed to multiply and expand any more than the Russians, the Levantines, the hybrids of South Africa and South America, or the Eskimos and the Lapps — in fact, if the English are to be made to limit their energies., their breeding capacity, and their aspirations, to suit the likewise limited energies, breeding capacity and aspirations of the peoples enumerated — it means that the English are no more important or desirable than these other peoples.
The Pacificist does not, as a rule, argue that they are less important or less desirable. He would simply say that they are not more important or more desirable,
But if the English are neither less nor more important and desirable than these other peoples, then they are to all intents and purposes equal to them. This, I think, the Pacificist would grant.
The Pacificist is, therefore, an Egalitarian. He believes in the equality of human races and peoples. That is the second implication of his position.
Healthy human life, however, presupposes multiplication. A healthy race necessarily increases and expands. Human beings were not given thirty years at least of sexual vigour in order to function as neuters. If, therefore, they are to be healthy in body and mind they must function as sexual adults capable of reproduction.
The Pacificist protests that he wishes them to do so.
But how can they function as sexual adults, if they are to be reproductive only for three or four out of the thirty years given them?
The Pacificist says he has no wish to restrict their sexual life as adults to three or four years out of the thirty. On the contrary, he wishes to give their sexual life free play, while restricting only their families.
But here he betrays his second confusion of thought. To whose sexual function is he giving free play — the man's or the woman's?
All too hastily he replies, "Both."
Is it then the woman's sexual function to be sterile for almost twenty-five out of the thirty years of her sexual life?
He is obliged to admit that it is not. If he is too ill-informed to know that mere sexual intercourse is not the normal satisfaction of the adult female; in other words, if he is so ill-informed that he thinks the sexes are identical; he will not admit it. In this case he is hopeless.
When once he has admitted that it is not the woman's function to be sterile, however, he is a self-confessed misogynist, and since it is his own native women whom he is condemning to an unsatisfying adult life, he is a misogynist, that is to say, hostile, towards his own sisters, cousins, and the rest of his nation's womenfolk. This is the third implication of his position.
But we have seen that a healthy nation is an expanding nation. It is a nation composed of adults who are all expressing their sexual vigour normally, and of children who are being brought up not with one or even two, but with several brothers and sisters.
To wish to limit this expansion is, therefore, to wish for an unhealthy nation. It is, in fact, tantamount to being a Dysgenist. And this is the fourth implicaton of the Pacificist's position.
The restriction imposed on the female's sexual function, however, amounts to a destruction of the nation's seed, both male and female. It is,
in effect, a destruction of the nation's potential offspring. The Pacificist is, therefore, a destroyer of his own nation's potential offspring.
And, if there is no such thing as race equality, if there is a heirarchy of races, and if one race is more valuable than another, the Pacificist who belongs to a superior race is, in addition to other things, a Vandal.
This is the fifth implication of his position.
Thus we have seen that the position of the Pacificist has five main implications. It commits him to loose or confused thinking, to Egalitarianism, to Misogyny, to Dysgenics, and to Vandalism.
The fact that the majority of Pacificists have no notion of these five implications of their position does not improve their case. It merely adds unconsciousness to the number of their disabilities, and reveals how dangerous it is to leave complex problems to be settled by people who are not in the habit of thinking out to the end the implications of the position they hold.
__________________
Make your short life immortal.

Last edited by Breanna; 4 Weeks Ago at 11:09 AM.