Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old May 13th, 2019 #21
SouthernNS
Literally Kitler
 
SouthernNS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 909
SouthernNS
Default

All White women who fuck muds should be killed -- slowly.
__________________
One must either affirm or reject anti-Semitism. He who defends the Jews harms his own people. One can only be a Jewish lackey or a Jewish opponent. Opposing the Jews is a matter of personal hygiene.
-Joseph Goebbels
 
Old May 15th, 2019 #22
Breanna
Eternal Glory
 
Breanna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,601
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; May 15th, 2019 at 11:09 AM.
 
Old May 15th, 2019 #23
Nikola Bijeliti
Sex: Male
 
Nikola Bijeliti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 481
Blog Entries: 16
Nikola Bijeliti
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Breanna View Post
. . . women who don't use their wombs or breasts for making and nursing babies go nuts, more and more crazy over time.
Yes, I have observed that, and it is so true. Yet I have heard women at work who are adamant about not having babies and, more especially, about not breastfeeding babies. There is one woman who is adamant about not breastfeeding, another who refused to do so because it took too much time, another who said it was extremely painful so she stopped. (I'm not a woman, but I'm guessing that, if it was painful, she was probably doing it wrong.) And they are the nuttiest women at work. The calmest ones are the older ones who have already had several children who have all moved out.

Quote:
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!
Yes, I have observed that, too. And seeing White women pregnant or breastfeeding makes me feel calm, too.
__________________
Flipper Generation: We killed the evil Nazis.
Boomer Generation: We refuse to fight Jew wars.
Millennial Generation: It's the Boomers' fault!
Zyklon Generation: WE take responsibility.
 
Old May 15th, 2019 #24
Ray Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 8,499
Ray Allan
Default

Quote:
men that can't use their parts to have intercourse go totally bonkers as evidenced by the incels
Not having sex or children and families also affects men in a negative way when a man encounters women who don't want children or is rejected by a woman. Be happy you have a husband, children and a good marriage, Breanna.

By the way, what are "incels?"
__________________
"Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy."

--Henry A. Kissinger, jewish politician and advisor
 
Old May 15th, 2019 #25
Breanna
Eternal Glory
 
Breanna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,601
Breanna
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikola Bijeliti View Post
Yes, I have observed that, and it is so true. Yet I have heard women at work who are adamant about not having babies and, more especially, about not breastfeeding babies. There is one woman who is adamant about not breastfeeding, another who refused to do so because it took too much time, another who said it was extremely painful so she stopped. (I'm not a woman, but I'm guessing that, if it was painful, she was probably doing it wrong.) And they are the nuttiest women at work. The calmest ones are the older ones who have already had several children who have all moved out.
I believe that the child free groups should be considered hate groups and the child free sites should be considered hate sites surely if this lovely place VNN forum is considered a hate site the child free sites should be considered hate sites also? I'm sure children would be offended by them and pregnant women as well. Child free women call children parasites surely that's offensive to children and counts as hate speech? Sure white children give back more to society than they take and the same cannot be said for other groups of special people occupying our nations. Why is it ok to say you hate children but not ok to say you hate nonwhites or hate women or whatever? Sure children are an identifiable group too.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Allan View Post
Not having sex or children and families also affects men in a negative way when a man encounters women who don't want children or is rejected by a woman. Be happy you have a husband, children and a good marriage, Breanna.

By the way, what are "incels?"
I am happy Ray the negatives of our society that I vent about besides and I hope all proud white men will find love and have families nothing in the world would make me happier! The incels are men that have never found a woman to be with and adopt this as their identity. A few of them are after going on killing sprees in their rage.
__________________
Make your short life immortal.
 
Old May 15th, 2019 #26
Adolf Goldbergstein
Senior Member
 
Adolf Goldbergstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 514
Adolf Goldbergstein
Default

Many upper class women in the past would hire a wet nurse as breastfeeding fucked up their tits. Many women today before they divorce their husbands get breast implants for their next boyfriends in part because their breasts deflated after breastfeeding.
 
Old May 16th, 2019 #27
T.Garrett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lawnguyland, NY
Posts: 4,929
T.Garrett
Thumbs down women and their issues

I don't deal with damaged females no matter how 'attractive' they are, so I avoid most of the problems. As soon as a woman begins to display the telltale signs of being headfucked it's get lost, good luck!

There's always someone else. There's a huge surplus of single women in the NYC area thanks to all the degenerates that would rather fuck each other than a female so there's more available for me.

I don't understand the problem, if its broke throw it away and get another one.

To put it plainly, lifes too short to waste any of it on a screwed up bitch and her 'issues'.

Cheers
__________________


Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres; unam partem incolunt Belgae ...

Last edited by T.Garrett; May 16th, 2019 at 04:35 AM.
 
Old May 16th, 2019 #28
T.Garrett
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lawnguyland, NY
Posts: 4,929
T.Garrett
Talking lack of introspection itz

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray Allan View Post
Not having sex or children and families also affects men in a negative way when a man encounters women who don't want children or is rejected by a woman. Be happy you have a husband, children and a good marriage, Breanna.

By the way, what are "incels?"
'Incel' means 'involuntarily celibate' ...someone who speaks and acts so repulsively toward the opposite sex that they never get laid.

Like the dude that's always raving about what duplicitous bitches all women are, claims that all he need do is snap his fingers and any pig will spread her legs for him, calls his mother a cunt couple dozen times a day, he just generally treats women disrespectfully all the time for no apparent reason and is deservedly disliked and shunned by most women for his behavior.

Or it could be the female that yakks all the time about how inadequate all men are generally, how no man can satisfy her (), what losers, fuck ups and liars men are basically, how her father abandoned her, how her ex husband was sleeping in their marriage bed with his secretary, starts most of her conversations with how the most recent ex boyfriend dumped her for some other twat ...

Funny thing is neither this male or female can seem to figure out that their attitude is the reason the opposite sex has no interest in them. So their behavior creates a self defeating cycle that usually ends with them crashing and burning. And these people aren't necessarily repulsive looking, most times they are not its how they behave that turns everyone off.

Its one thing to vent about what douchebags the opposite sex can be on occasion but spewing the bull-shit 24/7 toward anyone within earshot turns you into a social pariah and you end up eventually only being able to relate to other people who feel the same as you and cluster with them to commiserate.

VNN forum member Susan has called the members of this forum 'the woman haters club' and Ive heard the word incel used to describe some members of this forum who always complain that they never get laid.

Ah, the trials and tribulations of life.
__________________


Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres; unam partem incolunt Belgae ...

Last edited by T.Garrett; May 16th, 2019 at 05:51 AM. Reason: laffing so hard I cant write
 
Old May 16th, 2019 #29
Stronza
Senior Member
 
Stronza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,323
Stronza
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adolf Goldbergstein View Post
Many upper class women in the past would hire a wet nurse as breastfeeding fucked up their tits. Many women today before they divorce their husbands get breast implants for their next boyfriends in part because their breasts deflated after breastfeeding.
No, breastfeeding does not "fuck up" our tits. Whatever our tits looks like after nursing our children - deflated, normal or any other shape - is just fine. Any woman who gets breast implants has shit for brains irrespective of her motivation and is someone a mentally healthy man will avoid. Such women have "insecure" and "desperate" written all over them.
__________________
“Need' now means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means wanting to keep your own. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges the transfer.”
― Joseph Sobran
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 PM.
Page generated in 0.10816 seconds.