Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Feminism and Defeated Tribes

Fjordman included the following note with his latest essay:

Because so many people have been so generous, I have been a little bit slow responding to those who donated via my PayPal button at Gates of Vienna. I will speed up my replies this week, and plan to send a personal thank-you email to all donors by the end of this week or shortly thereafter.

At least one donor failed to receive an email last year, and for that I apologize. There may be a handful of others that I inadvertently missed. In some cases, the email address provided by PayPal did not seem to be working.

Anyone whose gift was not acknowledged may email GoV [gatesofvienna (at) chromatism (dot) net], and I will contact them.


Feminism and Defeated Tribes
by Fjordman

Marte MicheletIn 2008, the regular columnist Marte Michelet in the left-wing Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet wrote that “Islamophobia is the most dangerous ideology of our time.” Michelet was earlier the leader of the Red Youth, the country’s “revolutionary youth league,” and is the daughter of Jon Michelet, a notable Communist author.

None of this has prevented her from becoming a leading columnist in one of the country’s three largest newspapers. There is little stigma attached to being a Communist, in contrast with being a neo-Nazi. Communism is merely a misunderstood ideology that just happens to have killed an estimated 100 million people.

The funny or absurd aspect of this is that in 2012 Marte Michelet warned against dangerous totalitarian movements, specifically singling out anti-Islamists as being one of them. Hearing Communists warning against totalitarian movements is like hearing actor Charlie Sheen warning that it’s stupid to use drugs.

Marte Michelet was personally mentioned by mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik as a potential terror target. Although I consider her to be a political opponent, there are some things you don’t wish even for your opponents, so I sympathize with her in this case. That, however, does not place her above criticism for her public statements as a high-profile writer.

Ali EsbatiMichelet’s partner is Ali Esbati, an Iranian-born writer who has been active in the Left Party, a reformed Communist party in Sweden, but currently lives in Norway. He was personally at Utøya to speak when Breivik started shooting, but survived by hiding from the gunman. He wants the attack to be seen as a political act.

Ali Esbati blames what he calls the rhetoric of Islamophobia for creating the basis for Breivik’s terror attacks. He recalls that he came to a safe and friendly Sweden from Iran in 1986, and laments that the country and Europe as a whole is now less safe and less friendly. That could be true, but perhaps the mass immigration of people from distant parts of the world contributed to this negative transformation? With his revolutionary Socialist background, Esbati concludes that “real safety” can only come from changing the entire society.

PFLP flag

Ali Esbati has previously voiced sympathy for terror organizations such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). During the late 1960s and 1970s, the PFLP and other Palestinian Jihadists pioneered aircraft hijackings and other forms of terrorism as a means of drawing media attention to their cause. The PFLP fostered links with militant groups across the world, including the Red Army Faction (RAF) or Baader-Meinhof Gang, a left-wing terror group in Germany for which Anders Behring Breivik has expressed his great admiration. These revolutionary Socialists murdered dozens of human beings, but also received a lot of media attention.

PFLP-RAFThe RAF trained in bomb-making at Palestinian terror camps during the days when Yasser Arafat had emerged as the senior Palestinian leader. Some years later, the terrorist Arafat received the Nobel Peace Prize from Norway due to the (failed) Oslo peace process, partly brokered by members of the Norwegian labor movement.

What is most interesting about Marte Michelet and her newspaper is that they are at they are very much in favor of Muslim mass immigration and oppose “Islamophobia,” but at the same time have a strong Feminist profile.

On the one hand, Dagbladet can at times resemble a soft-porn magazine that just happens to be published every day, with very detailed and graphic descriptions of how to perform better oral or anal sex. They have run positive articles about nudists as well as testing of dildos, vibrators and other sex toys.

Now I can understand that. What I find harder to understand is how they can at the same time support continued Muslim mass immigration and even say modestly positive things about the Muslim Brotherhood. How many Hamas-run dildo stores are there in the Gaza Strip, anyway?

I’ve been struggling for years to come up with an appropriate term for this policy of supporting Islamization, including veils, at the same time as supporting nudity and sex toys. I finally came up with a suggestion for the ideology: Dildo Sharia. To radical Feminists of the political Left, freedom seems to be a vibrator with a burka.

Marie SimonsenMarie Simonsen is the political editor of Dagbladet and one of Norway’s most high-profile newspaper commentators. She expressed surprise when I stepped forward from anonymity as Fjordman in 2011 and turned out to be a young man still in my thirties. Simonsen thought I was older, partly due to a few critical comments I had made about radical Feminism. According to her, my texts are brimming with an idea of “biology.”

As a sure-fire sign of my alleged extremism, Simonsen highlighted that I was “on the biology track” in my writings before this became fashionable, after the Norwegian comedian Harald Eia along with Ole Martin Ihle miraculously managed to get the state broadcaster NRK TV to air a TV series called Hjernevask (“Brainwash”) about the realities of human biology vs. the fake reality constructed by academic Political Correctness.

Well, I have some news for radical Feminists and Multicultural anti-racists: You may not believe in biology, but biology believes in you.

Besides, what else is considered backward extremism? Believing in gravity?

One of the hallmarks of Dagbladet and left-wing Multiculturalists throughout the Western world who think like them is biophobia, the irrational fear of biology and the belief that mentioning genes and genetic differences makes you a “Nazi.” Anti-scientific biophobia now constitutes a much bigger problem than Islamophobia does.

Simonsen also mocked the idea that some Western men think they have lost out during the past fifty years, including when it comes to their own children. As a matter of fact, it is entirely possible to claim that Anders Behring Breivik is partly the product of the policies of state Feminism found in Scandinavia and elsewhere.

One of the first to mention this possibility was the writer Steen, who is behind the independent website Snaphanen in Denmark. He is old enough to have gone to an all-boy school, which sometimes entailed fistfights. Boys, being young male mammals, will sometimes fight in order to establish a hierarchy among themselves. This can be brutal, but it is a part of nature. What they did learn by doing this was a controlled and civilized use of violence, that is, to (usually) stop fighting before somebody got killed or seriously injured.

Breivik emphaticIn contrast, Breivik has never learned this. He grew up largely without his father, and his stepfather was not up to the job, either. He also did not do any military service. The only form of masculinity he has picked up is a deformed, hyper-violent one shaped by computer games, violent TV series and al-Qaida videos of beheadings.

ABB’s father Jens Breivik has received much criticism. I have to agree that he does not appear to have been a terrific father, but in his defense, he also had the cards stacked against him. The young Breivik’s mother has later been alleged to suffer from serious mental defects and accused of abusing, possibly even sexually, the boy Anders when he was of preschool age. Yet even when psychologists from Norway’s center for child and youth psychiatry reported that she was hurting her child, the father was still not able to obtain custody, although the mother was obviously unfit to take care of the boy and had divorced the father for no particular reason.

Inga Marte ThorkildsenSince the 1980s, it has sometimes become easier for fathers to have more contact with their children after a divorce, but not always so. As a matter of fact, in the autumn of 2012, the avowed Feminist Inga Marte Thorkildsen from Norway’s Socialist Left Party (SV) who is Minister of Children, Equality and Social Inclusion (yes, that is the official title) in the Stoltenberg government, sent out a bill for a suggested law giving one parent the right to stop the child’s interaction with the other parent without asking a court for permission.

In plain words, if a newly divorced mother claims that her ex-partner will be abusive when he meets their common child, she can unilaterally deny him any access whatsoever to their mutual child. Perhaps this could be for the best of the child in cases where one parent is extremely abusive, but this system could easily be misused.

Now, this is merely a proposal; such a law hasn’t been passed yet, but the fact that it can even be proposed it opens up some dangerous perspectives. In the 1980s and 90s there were a number of documented cases, partly backed by Feminist newspapers such as Dagbladet, where fathers were wrongfully convicted of sexual abusive of their children because the mother wanted to harm them after the divorce. The female journalist Ingrid Carlqvist was accused of being a “friend of pedophiles” when she wrote truthfully about such cases in Sweden.

To what extent does the breakdown of the nuclear family contribute to instability in society? A few female authors such as Melanie Phillips have dared raise this question and have often been attacked for this by the Left.

The traditional nuclear family has been presented as a source of oppression and abuse ever since Karl Marx. Can it be? Sometimes, yes. But this does not mean that so-called alternative family forms involve less chance of abuse. Some men and women do abuse their children in various ways. In the most extreme cases, it is probably beneficial for the children to grow up with somebody else. However, in majority of cases it is safest to stay with your biological parents, who usually don’t want to harm their own offspring and thus the continuation of their genetic line.

Statistics indicate a heightened risk of abuse and social problems in families involving non-biological parents. Yet this pattern is often ignored by those who refuse to take a biological basis of human behavior into account.

‘Les Proies: Dans le harem de Kadhafi’ by Annick CojeanA French reporter has published a book entitled Les Proies: Dans le harem de Kadhafi (“Prey: In Gaddafi’s Harem”), containing testimonies from young women who were kidnapped, beaten, humiliated and raped by former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. According to Annick Cojean, “Gaddafi had a harem of women kept in the basement of his residence, in little rooms or apartments. These women, obligated to appear before him in their underwear, could be called at any time of day or night. They were raped, beaten, subjected to the worst kinds of sexual humiliation. For Gaddafi, rape was a weapon … a way of dominating others — women, obviously, because it was easy, but also men, by possessing their wives and daughters. Similarly, he forced some of his ministers to have sex with him. He did the same with certain tribal chiefs, diplomats and military officials over whom he wanted to get the upper hand.”

Yes, Gaddafi was a sadistic dictator, but there could also be a wider cultural pattern in this behavior of using rape and sexual dominance as a weapon, not just against the women, but at least as much against their men.

By raping or sexually abusing their young women, one not only hurts the women, but also humiliates all of their men and relatives by showing them that one is dominant and that they are weak and pathetic and unable to protect their daughters and sisters. It’s psychological warfare at least as much as physical warfare.

The gang rapes that we are witnessing today — especially targeting white women in Dutch, Swedish and German streets, in English cities and French suburbs or for that matter in South Africa and certain cities in North America — constitute warfare. That’s how they should be interpreted. It’s not just the raping of the women, either; it’s a wider pattern of looting, robberies, muggings and violent attacks targeting the men as well as the women.

Do you think this claim is an exaggeration? Well, it was directly confirmed in a study made in Sweden in 2006, one of the rare cases where this was openly mentioned in the otherwise heavily censored mass media there.

In March 2006, Dagens Nyheter in Sweden, one of the largest newspapers in the Nordic countries, published an article about certain immigrants groups waging a war against the natives in the streets, and bragging about this.

In a sociological survey entitled Vi krigar mot svenskarna (“We’re waging a war against the Swedes”), young immigrants in the troubled southern city of Malmö have been interviewed about why they are involved in crime. About a thousand years ago, Malmö was one of the first cities in what is now Sweden to become Christian, and currently looks set to become the first majority Muslim city in the Nordic countries a few years from now.

The escalating wave of robberies the city of Malmö has witnessed is part of a “war against the Swedes.” This was the explanation given openly by young robbers from immigrant backgrounds when questioned about why they only rob native Swedes, in interviews with Petra Åkesson for her thesis in sociology. She interviewed boys between 15 and 17 years old, both individually and in groups. Almost 90% of all robberies reported to the police were committed by gangs, not individuals.

“When we are in the city and robbing we are waging a war, waging a war against the Swedes.” This argument was repeated several times to Petra Åkesson. “Power for me means that the Swedes shall look at me, lie down on the ground and kiss my feet.” The boys explained, laughingly, that “there is a thrilling sensation in your body when you’re robbing, you feel satisfied and happy, it feels as if you’ve succeeded, it simply feels good.” They added with barely concealed glee that “We rob every single day, as often as we want to, whenever we want to.”

In our Marxist-immersed culture, crime is usually explained as a result of poverty and oppression, or “racism, discrimination and social exclusion” as it’s called in Multicultural Newspeak. In practice, this means that if Muslim or African immigrants gang-rape native European girls, the natives should respond by giving more money to their “socially deprived neighborhoods.” And if criminal Gypsy gangs rob and abuse old ladies in the streets, this can only happen because we’re mean to Gypsies.

It’s always our fault. And the worse and more violent other ethnic groups behave towards us, the more we should apologize. Such is the logic of Marxism.

Yet these fine young gentlemen interviewed in Malmö probably all enjoy a higher standard of living in Western Europe than they would ever have had back home. That doesn’t make them more positive towards their adopted homeland, though. They just despise the native population more for being weak prey and giving them money.

The New Swedes: Somalis in Sweden

As they freely admit, the young criminals don’t use violence because they are poor; they do this as a display of aggression and power, in order to humiliate other ethnic groups and thereby show that they are dominant. It’s all about power and humiliation, our humiliation.

Dissident writers who dare to suggest that this not merely random “street crime” but a campaign of ethnic warfare against Europeans are frequently dismissed as cranks promoting “conspiracy theories.” Yet when the people doing this themselves freely admit that this is what they are doing, is it still a conspiracy theory?

European jails are being filled up with Muslims imprisoned for robberies and all kinds of violent crime. A few of them plan bombing attacks. One can see the mainstream media are struggling to make sense of this. That is because they cannot, or will not, see the obvious: This is exactly how an invading army would behave: rape, pillage and bomb. If many of the newcomers see themselves as conquerors in a war, it all makes perfect sense.

Sweden’s allegedly conservative Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has stated that the original Swedish culture was merely barbarism; everything good was imported from abroad. He said this in 2006 following a visit to the town of Södertälje, close to Stockholm. A police station there had been hit by shots from an automatic weapon following a big confrontation between immigrant youths and police. The trouble started after a Swedish girl had been called a “whore” and she reacted to this. Many of the natives are now moving away from this and other urban regions that are becoming flooded with non-European immigrants, not all of them Muslims.

RinkebyEthnologist Maria Bäckman in her study “Whiteness and gender” followed a group of Swedish girls in the suburb of Rinkeby near Stockholm, where the natives have been turned into a minority due to rapid mass immigration. Some girls stated that they had dyed their hair to avoid unwanted attention and sexual harassment. Being called “whore” is now so common for white girls in certain schools that teachers no longer react to this.

Another report tells of how being a young Swedish girl increasingly means feeling unsafe in the streets of your own country. They are scared of being raped, a possibility that appears very real. Many have to plan how to go home at night, how to keep their keys in their hand to defend themselves or to simply run all the way home. The heavily censored Swedish mass media nearly always refuse to link this trend to immigration, but there is a link.

Swedish rape victimIt is not as wrong raping a Swedish girl as raping an Arab girl,” says Hamid, a young Muslim man in an interview about one of many gang rapes in Sweden involving immigrant perps and a native white girl. “The Swedish girl gets a lot of help afterwards, and she had probably f***ed before, anyway. But the Arab girl will get problems with her family. For her, being raped is a source of shame.” He claims that it is “far too easy to get a Swedish whore…… girl, I mean;” says Hamid, and laughs over his own choice of words. “I don’t have too much respect for Swedish girls. I guess you can say they get f***ed to pieces.”

Notice the total lack of any distinction between voluntary sex and rape in the statements by this Muslim man.

A new trend in forced prostitution in the Netherlands involves the cultivation of young, vulnerable girls by men who befriend them and then coerce them into prostitution. In Amsterdam, Dutch-born women rank first among the victims. Some anti-trafficking NGOs believe that there are as many as 10,000 Dutch victims of this, which often involves second- and third-generation immigrants. Police and social workers largely point the finger of blame at Muslim Dutch-Moroccans who use promises of romance and even marriage to win the trust of young girls who they then trick into working as prostitutes. The police refer to this process as “brainwashing.” Moroccans are more than twice as likely as their native Dutch counterparts to drop out of school and remain unemployed and are over-represented in the prison figures, as are Muslims and certain other groups in all Western countries.

England has been sparked by a wave of extremely brutal sexual torture of young white girls committed by Pakistanis or other Muslims, which had been downplayed by the police due to fear of being called “racists.” Many of them, not just in England or Britain but in other European countries as well, see white girls as “easy meat.”

Taj El-Din Hamid Hilaly, a mufti and prominent imam based in Australia, during a Ramadan sermon to 500 worshippers in Sydney in 2006 blamed women who don’t wear hijab (Islamic headscarf) for sexual attacks. “If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat,” he said. “The uncovered meat is the problem.” “If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred.” Along similar lines, in 2004 Shahid Mehdi, an Islamic Mufti in Copenhagen, Denmark, sparked a political outcry after publicly declaring that women who refuse to wear headscarves are “asking for rape.”

In October 2012, 14 immigrant men accused of repeatedly gang-raping two teenage girls in a run-down Paris suburb dominated by Muslims received light sentences or acquittals. The court decision sparked widespread outrage in France. Women’s organizations called the verdicts “catastrophic” and decried a culture of “impunity.” The two victims said they had seen a “judicial disaster” after the verdict in the attacks. They said they had been repeatedly raped in sordid places — in basement cellars, stairwells and car parks.

10,000 Year ExplosionWith the rapid advances in the genetic sciences we are now witnessing, a new branch of biohistory is emerging. This includes pioneering books as The 10,000 Year Explosion by Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending, who show that genetic differences between different groups of humans have practical consequences and that human evolution is accelerating, and Understanding Human History by Michael H. Hart, who focuses especially on ethnic differences in genetic intelligence measured in IQ as a driving factor in human history.

We have almost arrived at what might be termed “genetic archaeology”. Instead of digging in the earth, we can now study our own genes to see the imprints of past changes and population movements. Among other things we can discover patterns where known cultural expansions are followed by the expansion of genes, especially male genes.

Among the mixed populations of Latin America today, there tends to be a higher percentage of native female DNA combined with European male DNA. This is the genetic imprint of an encounter in which Europeans, primarily some European men, conquered large territories and took control over the local women.

This pattern is quite common in many different parts of the world, from the Vikings in the North Atlantic to the first Neolithic farmers entering southeastern Europe: A successful (or aggressive) group of men expand, move into a new territory and take control over the fertility of the local land as well as the fertility of the local women.

Human history can be quite brutal. During armed encounters, it is not unheard of for the entire defeated nation to be slaughtered, men, women and children. Yet a very common pattern is for the women of the defeated nation to end up as sexual playthings and concubines for the men of the conquering nation, whereas the men are enslaved or worse. It may be unpleasant to speak about this, but honesty requires that we note is in many cases the rule, not the exception, for the local women to have sexual encounters with the soldiers of the victorious nation, be that voluntarily or involuntarily. That was the case in prehistoric times as much as it was in Berlin in 1945.

Rape as a part of warfare probably exists in most part of the world, but it is particularly prominent within certain cultures. The slavery aspect of Islamic culture, for instance, has always had an unusually strong emphasis on the sexual side of this, as historian Murray Gordon explains in Slavery in the Arab World. Slavery remains perfectly legal according to Islamic law to this day and is practiced in certain places, barely concealed.

If we notice this pattern then it is very easy to see that it is present in many Western cities today, with immigrant men from certain communities, Muslims and Africans being among the most aggressive, preying on local white women. They instinctively see this as conquering a new territory, which entails looting the locals for their property and imposing their own cultural symbols as well as sexually dominating the native women. And that is precisely what they are doing now. When they can sexually harass and abuse the local women virtually unopposed, they think they are dealing with a defeated tribe — and they are probably correct in that assessment.

What I will say next will cause great offense to some Feminists, but it’s nevertheless a fact which we can discover from human history. While women are immensely important for the social fabric of any society, a civilization is first and foremost created, maintained and defended by men. In all societies, even ones such as ancient Egypt, or the Germanic cultures of Europe where women enjoyed much freedom and respect, most of the political and military power was in the hands of men. A society is primarily protected by men who have masculine pride in their culture. If they lose their masculinity, their cultural pride or both, men from other tribes may not even have to fight much in order to invade and conquer; they can simply walk in and take over the territory and the local women. If we look around us, is this not what is happening in some Western cities today?

Ultimately, this situation has only two possible outcomes:

1. The invading men win and establish their lasting dominance over the conquered and colonized territory.
2. There is a resurgence of masculine cultural pride among European men, who reestablish control over their countries.

Option 3, “Girl power kicks ass,” only exists in certain myths promoted by modern popular culture. Women can take some measure of responsibility for their own protection, for instance by carrying a gun, and some women can contribute meaningfully to the defenses in various ways. Yet in the end, the basic responsibility for protecting society and keeping predators off the streets will always fall to the men. I say this as a quiet man more at home with books than with fistfights, but this is what studying human history and biology shows us.

Cultural and political feminization for a society seems to correlate rather strongly with perceived weakness by outsiders. For instance, is it a coincidence that Sweden by the late 1960s was a relatively safe society, whereas hyper-Feminist Sweden today has one of the highest reported rape rates in the world? This trend happens to coincide and overlap with a wave of non-European mass immigration over the past 40 years, which has widely been cheered on by the very same groups and organizations that supported radical Feminism.

Left-wing Multiculturalists and Feminists champion a number of policies that in combination are toxic:

1. They support the mass immigration of culturally distant groups, especially Muslims but also others.
2. They disarm the local men culturally and ideologically.
3. They teach the local women not to expect or ask for protection from their own men, but not do they teach them to protect themselves properly, either.
4. They teach the local women to think that men from other cultures are just like the men from their own culture and that it’s very, very racist and evil to think of or behave differently towards them, at least in any negative way. As a matter of fact, they, too, are oppressed and discriminated-against victims of the incomparably evil white man.

The combined function of these policies is to create young Western women who look, act and dress in a sexually liberated manner in front of hyper-masculine men from other cultures where white women are seen as sluts. The native men have been actively discouraged from displaying any sign of traditional masculinity or cultural pride. The women are not asking for this, and at the same time they have been taught to be naïve and trusting in front of aggressive groups of young men who view them as booty to be conquered. In short, Multicultural Feminist have turned young Western women into prey, and have contributed with their policies to the gang rapes and sexual torture we can now see from Swedish towns via English cities to the suburbs of Paris or Marseilles in France.

We’ve currently experienced several generations of Marxist-inspired radical Feminism in the Western world — and Western women and their children have arguably never been less safe in the streets than now. At some point we have to point out a possible correlation here.

This does not mean that Feminism alone caused this, nor that women are necessarily to blame. One could equally blame the men for abandoning their responsibilities. It is also possible to argue that radical Feminism is at least as much an effect and a symptom of a decaying society as its cause. Perhaps it is a little bit of both, but the correlation is nevertheless too powerful to ignore.

In the city of Trondheim in Norway, the white native girl Eva Helgetun took her own life on 28 May 2011, shortly after having been gang raped by a group of young immigrant men. She was only 14 years old.

There are numerous stories like hers in other parts of Western Europe. I also read about an Egyptian Muslim man who had raped at least half a dozen Norwegian women, at least one of whom killed herself, and those are only the ones who reported the crime. Even the Oslo police that among assault rapes, certain immigrant groups, particularly Muslims or Africans, are grossly disproportionately represented.

Although hearing this will no doubt anger them, I am of the opinion that Multicultural Feminists such as Marie Simonsen and Marte Michelet from the newspaper Dagbladet have for years supported policies that led directly to the destroyed life of young women such as Eva Helgetun. As long as they continue to support the mass importation of people from aggressive cultures, they will contribute to scores of future young women having their lives destroyed in a similar manner.

For a complete archive of Fjordman’s writings, see the multi-index listing in the Fjordman Files.


Anonymous said...

i comment briefly
in agreement
just so you know
your superb
(as usual)
is not
or un-appreciated.
thank you.

Anonymous said...

"As long as they continue to support the mass importation of people from aggressive cultures, they will contribute to scores of future young women having their lives destroyed in a similar manner."

People? Neigh, men! It is the importation of MEN from aggressive cultures that destroys women from indigenous cultures.

Women from aggressive cultures are only aggressive because their male gangs back them up locally. Take away the aggressive men, take away the violence to both indigenous and immigrant women.

Perhaps the best plan is to limit immigration to single Muslim women of child bearing age, and leave the Muslim men to stew alone in their violent juices?

Even better, let's ask the single Muslim women of marriageable age (six years and up according to model Muslim man Mohammed) if they would like to marry ONE Chinese man.

This plan would simultaneously improve the standard and quality of living of 'poor' Muslim women, pacify the many Chinese men who now lack the ability to marry due to a surplus of men, and lower the birth rate of Muslim women. Win, win, win.

Perhaps a few years without any girls or women would teach Muslim men to appreciate girls and women more and to treat girls and women better.


Anonymous said...

Great post.

Feminism is a poison, perpetrated by the elites.

Here in the U.S. it is pushed by a wealthy clique of Manhattanites. Most are childless, manless, who were born into wealth and power and never had to work a day in their lives.

And they don't care about women. They got a agenda to push and they use young college women as tools to promote a cause that will make these girls lives miserable.

They use their allies in the MSM and Hollywood to promote feminism. You see it with lead roles that used to go to men now go to some 110 lb gal. With children's shows(watch Disney channel live shows sometime) they glorify pretty young white girls hanging with minority boys and having a great time.

Anonymous said...


What about cases in which white women willingly take non-white men as partners? Are white men also 'humiliated' in this situation?

As far as the animal world is concerned, female mammals will generally mate with the most socially dominant males, who will have multiple partners, and not the least socially dominant males, who are not chosen by the females. The same phenomenon appears to apply to humans, however crude that might appear.

A feminist-Marxist multicultural mass media and political system has the effect of raising the status of non-white men, making them more attractive to women, and diminishing the status of white men, making them less attractive to women.

White girls are "easy meat"? In the UK at least, it's common to see many vunerable, drunk young white women roaming around town and city centres every single weekend, with an array of white legs on display as they walk by in their short skirts and high heels, in the cold night. For non-white men to take advantage of this situation is a piece of cake indeed. I don't know whether this scenario is also played out in Scandinavia and elsewhere in Europe, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it was.

Your observation about Latin America and the fact that the mixed-race population was formed from European male blood and Amerindian female blood is quite correct. Human history can be quite brutal indeed.

Excellent article. But do the points I raise here make sense? You talk about the rape and abuse of white women, but you also say "men from other tribes may not even have to fight much in order to invade and conquer; they can simply walk in and take over the territory and the local women". Does this mean you take issue even with consensual relationships between white women and non-white men?

Nemesis said...

His best article to date! I am in agreement with every word of it and so is my wife!

1389 said...

@Anonymous #4,

It isn't primarily about race, but about culture and heritage.

What seems to the casual observer to be a "consensual" relationship between white women and Muslim men may be anything but consensual. Even relationships that start out being consensual all too often don't end up that way.

Here is just one disgusting example.

Anonymous said...

I am a feminist. That means I appreciate equal rights and opportunities, not that I want to deny biological facts. Having equal opportunities will never mean the same number of men and women in each type of job, including defence. Most women in the west today take all the gifts that feminism, and western men's sense of fairness, gave us, such as votes, education, careers. So in that regard most of us are 'feminists'. Most of us also appreciate men who use their additional strength for the good of society. I think the 'radical feminism' era where men were told off for opening a door or helping lift a box are over.

Anonymous said...

Feminism is just one of the ideas progressives have launched in western bourgeois society in order to destroy it. Multiculturalism is another one, and all of their methods have indeed resulted in undermining our cultural pride and confidence.
I´m still not clear about whether the agents actively working towards this end realize that they have been duped, while they were duping the rest of us.
I can´t shake the outrageous feeling that the ´elite´ - our intellectuals, politicians, educators and whatever other idiots who are instrumental in our demise - have no idea of what they are doing, and that somebody is using them..
Quite intelligent people seem to actually believe in the progressive delusion, even while it is not working. Not working in the way they say it is supposed to work, that is..Otherwise it is working perfectly.

Anonymous said...

Feminism is just one of the weapons progressives have launched against the fabric of western bourgeois society in order to destroy it. Multiculturalism is another one, and together they have indeed succeeded in undermining our cultural pride and confidence.
Only thing I´m still not clear about is whether the agents actively working towards this end realize that they have been duped, while they were duping the rest of us.
I can´t shake the outrageous feeling that the ´elite´ - our intellectuals, politicians, educators and whatever other idiots who are instrumental in our demise - have no idea of what they are doing, or that they are being used..
Quite intelligent people seem to actually believe in the progressive delusion, even while it clearly is not working. Not working in the way they say it is supposed to work, that is..Otherwise it is working perfectly.

Anonymous said...

I am a woman and a feminist, and I have read this site almost daily for the last two years. While many feminists seem to think they should go along with the left and mass immigration, some don't. It is, for the most part, simply not feminism's area of focus or expertise- but instead an area where many are blinded by the false left/right dichotomy- "If I'm on the left, and this is on the left, then I must ALSO go with..." Most humans really can't get past politics, and the left/feminists are not the only ones drawn into that. I would suggest that when many right wing men go about attacking their straw feminists (not necessarily the author as much as some of the commenters here, although I don't see that the author fully understands feminism) women's lives and interests are not always THEIR areas of expertise. I am not always convinced that these are even of genuine concern. It seems spurious to make the mass immigration issue, or it's solutions, primarily or even substantially about feminism. How about not letting these people in anymore??

While I do see ideas about gender becoming increasingly avant garde (the extremes of academia) that women must first give up most or all of what they have gained over the last 100 years before we can do something about Islamization, or that Islamization and mass migration is primarily caused by feminism, does not ring true. I understand that Fjordman is not presenting it in exactly those terms, and also appreciate the historic and biological perspectives in the piece.
But I wonder to what extent non-western men get away with the assaults at issue because ALL men tend to get away with assaults. No doubt these agressors see it as attacking other men's territiory, but the lack of charges in the British grooming and pimping scandal (for instance) seem directly political. There is only about a 10% chance charges will be filed, and about a 2% conviction rate for rape (in the U.S.) If one were going to look aside for political reasons, what better time than when that happens, anyway?

I also see that people sometimes think that feminists "don't believe in biology" but that is really oversimplified. Most feminists actually understand what the biological (vs. social) aspects of gender are, and most feminists understand the need for something beyond literal "equalism." "Equality" as a term seems to have caught on in a rhetorical way. Sometimes women need things that men don't (prenatal care in health plans, etc.) but men also sometimes need things that women don't, and women and men both need to live. Figuring out how all of this falls takes actual work- negotiation and honesty.

Combatting feminism is not the issue here. It is also not a reason why this website has ever gained my attention.

Columnist said...

Egghead has the right idea. It is the Muslim women we want.
Judeo-Christian monogamy isn't alpha. Judeo-Christians don't get laid. Whining about feminism isn't sexy.
Alpha Male Other Guy the Islamic world by declaring: Four wives is not enough!!!
(After all, ABB is getting love letters, hundreds of them)
I have been predicting Islam would destroy itself in Syria, and it seems my prophecies come true. This means eternal hell for those with the wrong religion.

Anonymous said...

Muslim women marrying One Chinese man
- What a great idea, Egghead!


PM Jens Stoltenberg's mother, Karin Stoltenberg, died last night.

"She created the Norwegian equality politics", thinks VG. Her husband is a former foreign minister, and so was her late brother in law, Johan Jørgen Holst (Oslo Accords)

Anonymous said...

How many ethnical Norwegians are on the national fotball team?

From the newspapers you'd think at least 50%, or more are muslims, or Africans. Then, counting from the latest match you will find just two who seem muslim, but they are the ones who are talked about, and photographed the most. The most promoted.

It shone through that there was a fight between John Arne Riise and Tarik Elyounoussi for the crucial shootout in Larnaca, Cyprus, where Riise had to give way.

Anonymous said...

"Karin Stoltenberg was a woman of her time" (VG)

For a period, the family lived in San Fransisco, and were influenced by the flower power.

In 1976 Karin and Thorvald were interviewed by Dagbladet in a series about cohabitation. The subject was the rising number of divorces, and equal rights was blamed for this. The journalist asked

- Both of you are traveling a lot(...) have you agreed on a deal when it comes to escapades?

Karin's answer

- The sexual part is important for the marriage, and faithfulness is fine, but that would be a miserable marriage which first and foremost were funded on a compulsory sexual faithfulness. There are other things more important in a marriage.

Karin Stoltenberg, although not naming herself one, was a feminist, thinks VG's political commentator Elisabeth Skarsbø Moen in today's VG.

The Stoltenberg family have been open about the daughter Nini's severe drug problems.

This VG-comment is, actually, all the more interesting to read now, post 22 July, pin-pointing many critical subjects, leading up to that terrible day.

Anonymous said...

Four "Norwegian football players" indicted in the ongoing scandal of fixing match results before the match

This un-culture within the top level football is coming to the surface at the same time as the new norm within football in general in Norway, has become severe raw violence, both physical and with threats as the rule of the day.

Unknown said...

Is it not typical of human condition to blame the world instead of seeing the error of ones ways?

the mind, instead of admitting its flaws, it conceive entire fabrications to sustain it's damaged views.

unable or unwilling to change it corrodes the humanity

the Pan islamism conspiracy is a deranged theory, that is as believable as the Nazi sionism conspiracy, or the Ufology, or the Scientology.

There will never be One Islamic house, as the Muslims are as divided as most people are.

This is called the human condition, wherever a group of people meet and talk there will always be disagreements, and fractions will form....

Not wanting to see the apparent flaws in their reasoning are by per definition a FUNDAMENTALISM, in that respect Sir, you have more in common with Islamist's than you think...

I hope you seek professional counselling one day, as you clearly need it.

wishes you the best.

Unknown said...

s it not typical of human condition to blame the world instead of seeing the error of ones ways?

the mind, instead of admitting its flaws, it conceive entire fabrications to sustain it's damaged views.

unable or unwilling to change it corrodes the humanity

the Pan islamism conspiracy is a deranged theory, that is as believable as the Nazi sionism conspiracy, or the Ufology, or the Scientology.

There will never be One Islamic house, as the Muslims are as divided as most people are.

This is called the human condition, wherever a group of people meet and talk there will always be disagreements, and fractions will form....

Not wanting to see the apparent flaws in their reasoning are by per definition a FUNDAMENTALISM, in that respect Sir, you have more in common with Islamist's than you think...

I hope you seek professional counselling one day, as you clearly need it.

wishes you the best.

Anonymous said...

Fjordman on top form.

The big dumb question, how do we deprogram those Western young men and women?

The big dumb answer, condition the young men as a warrior class and presumably the young women will follow.

Jolie Rouge

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous Woman and Feminist,

You seem to believe that there is no necessary connection between feminism and mass immigration. This is false. Feminism is a corollary of individualism. Individualism is a death sentence for a tribe. If all that matters is the individual, why not allow mass immigration of racially anc culturally alien peoples? Of course, if it is true that there are genetic differences between groups of people, an individualist might oppose mass immigration on those grounds, but then that person has effectively ceased to be an idividualist and rediscovered tribal loyalty. A tribalist/nationalist woman cannot be a feminist. A tribalist woman sees loyalty to her man as her first duty. Now that Islam has a foothold in Norway, your tribe's only hope of survival is militant fecundity. Extinction looms for your people and Scandinavian women will have to make a decision.

To me, the choice seems so painfully obvious that I cannot believe anyone finds it difficult. I mean suppose you have a utopian secular liberal democracy where the individual reigns supreme. What are you going to do? Buy widgets, have "protected" (i.e. barren and childless) sex, go to fancy restaurants? This is a meaningless, corrupt, decadent existence. Nature will not forgive decadent worship of self, pleasure, and money.

A society based on individualism and feminism cannot survive in the face of competition from a patriarchal tribe. Individualism and feminism have clearly failed your people. Your destiny depends on whether you can muster the will to once again participate in the struggle for life on this planet.

Hal K said...

The left is an alliance of identity groups that feel alienated from the main power base of a country, which in the West is white males, as Fjordman pointed out. It may seem strange that feminists are allied with Muslims, but it makes sense when you realize that to the left it is white males who are viewed as the bad guys, since the leftist alliance is defined in terms of its opposition to the main power base.

Now the question is what to do about this situation. Will it help to reach out to the non-Muslim portion of the left, or is it actually the political right wing that needs to be woken up? In the U.S. our political system forces people into a left vs. right mindset, but the right does not stand up for white males specifically. The mainstream of the political right never talks about the adverse effects of affirmative action on whites (and white males in particular). It never expresses concern about how whites are becoming a minority.

If the right won't stand up for whites (and white males in particular) no one will. This means that it is the right that is mixed up, not the left. It is the right that needs to be woken up. It would be interesting to hear whether the same applies in Europe.

Anonymous said...

Anon of 12:59 has it dead to rights, the only way back for Western nations is to rejoin the tribe. That's easy to see if you already possess that mindset as I and 12:59 do, but if you've lost it or never even had it, it can't be easy to achieve. The rot has set in too much and time is not on our side. It's too much to expect.It really looks like
we are all booked for the Halal abattoir.The final resort is of course violence, but there again you need the numbers, not 'well, I've got a family you know....'.

Anonymous said...

"...there again you need the numbers, not 'well, I've got a family you know....'."

Polygamy provides a simple math problem. Where a roughly equal number of men and women exist in nature: If one man marries four women, then another three men are missing the women that would have been their wives.

Polygamy provides richer old men multiple wives at the direct expense of poorer young men. And, polygamy moves the age of marriage downward as men marry younger and younger girls because the women are already taken.


Anonymous said...

Niqab-wearing kindergarten employeee
crossing the Karl Johan in Oslo

Anonymous said...

While Western Tribes negotiate with their rebellious women, their whole society and it's institutions (like the nuclear family) a shambles, Rome burns with Saracens inside the gate.

Sorry feminist, you arent helping.


Anonymous said...

Let me spell it out to you Feminist.

Anything you negotiate will be for naught. Oh you might live out your days in relative freedom and comfort, but your daughters and grandaughters will either be in black bin bags with the rights and freedom of women in current MENA countries, if they marry the conquerors and adopt Islam, or they will be treated as a dhimmi infidel woman, even worse than 3rd class male dhimmis.

You aborted the last couple of generations of offspring and instead of giving up your comfy welfare state, you imported Third World Mohammadeans to provide the tax base to continue on in your life of comfort and irresponsibility.

Buck up sister. The law of unintended consequences is rapidly approaching. It was fun while it lasted, heh?

I suggest you use that educated mind of yours and change your ways for all our sakes.


Anonymous said...

I live in Texas, and just renewed my Concealed Handgun License.

Some people believe that the right to bear arms is a defense against a tyrannical government. This is a mistaken notion. The right to bear arms is a mechanism to give the law-abiding citizen an advantage against criminal gangsters, in combination with a strong and effective police presence that effectively helps to disarm people with criminal backgrounds.

The hysteria of anti-gun advocates stems not from the fact that they think a thoroughly-vetted license owner would take his legal gun and shoot someone in a drive-by. The legal possession of a handgun is an indication that a person takes personal responsibility for defending himself and his family. Such people are least likely to subscribe to the notions of helpless submission favored by political elites, for reasons really known only to themselves.

The first principle of self-defense is to maintain strong borders and defenses. A society that has given up its cultural identity will naturally weaken its own borders. It takes a strong sense of identity to declare "No more Muslims or Africans of non-European extraction will be allowed in."

I agree with Fjordman. Once the sense of cultural and social identity is lost, hostile invaders will waltz in unopposed. The last gasp of the enablers will be to focus the dwindling strength of the government on disarming any citizens contrary enough to resist their physical violation.

Anonymous said...

To pull back a bit to a broader discussion of Democracy...

In the US our Constitutional Republic was formed with voting rights for property owning males only....in most states. The reasons for this were publicly debated and discussed. The Founding Fathers foresaw the collapse of the Republic with universal suffrage...."voting themselves the largesse of the public purse."

The expansion to universal suffrage has dovetailed with the decline of European Christendom.

Women's suffrage has it's own unique qualities that added to the decline. We can see the women's liberation movement as a checking out of the customs of European Christian civilization. Marriage, motherhood, the family and so on and so forth.

But also at the level of archtypical female characteristics flowing through the newfound voting power. The nuturing welfare state being at one level, but also the replacement of colonialism/imperialism, ie force projection or in sexual terms extending the phallus, male archtypical behavior, you now have a feminized nation, which is recieving the phallus, reverse colonization or rather acceptance and welcoming of colonization by other patriarchal cultured peoples, ie the Third World.


Anonymous said...

for the feminists out there:

No successful matriarchal society has ever survived to this day. There are many reasons for that (vide above essay) but in the end it comes down to the biological limitations of females when it comes to childbearing.

Your ideas, like all marxist ideas, are an abject failure and will never work when put into practice. The sooner you admit that, the more lives and Cultures will be spared the death of the 1000 euphemisms.

I hope you feel offended.


Hal K said...

Instead of railing against feminists, let's ask conservatives why they haven't done anything about immigration and affirmative action. The right never specifically stands up for whites or white males. When they do take a position against immigration or affirmative action, they are careful not to imply that they are actually looking out for whites or white males. For instance, they claim that affirmative action harms nonwhites, or they say that it is only illegal immigration that they are opposed to.

Get the picture? The left is the alliance of all identity groups that don't include generic white males. The right doesn't stand up for whites or white males, even as whites are heading towards becoming an oppressed minority in Western nations via immigration and affirmative action.

It is the right that is clueless, not the left, or feminists more specifically. Feminists know they are part of the leftist alliance, while the right doesn't realize whom it is supposed to be defending. Let's save our outrage for the right, which is failing so miserably in opposing the leftist alliance.

Anonymous said...


"Instead of railing against feminists, let's ask conservatives why they haven't done anything about immigration and affirmative action."

Look at the 2005-06 US House Immigration Bill.

Also, AA is about to be struke down by Conservatives appointed to the US Supreme Court.

It took a while for liberal RINO squishes to be either attritioned out of office, or now primary challenged out of office. And it took time for them to realize the necessity of appointing staunch conservatives to the court, instead of middle of the roader in the interest of bipartisanship. In a word, it took them awhile to adjust to the hard Left taking over the Democrat Party and major institutions of US society and government. The Left isnt interested in principles and fair play, they are interested in gaining power in order to destroy European Christendom.

If we can put at least one more staunch conservative on the Supreme Court, (Ruth Bader Ginsberg is on her last leg), and Romney has a good shot at taking the Presidency along with the GOP taking back the Senate (with freshly booted old timer Establishment RINOs run out of town (Richard Lugar) to boot.

We can roll back much of the Leftwing jurisprudence of the later half of the 20th century. That will free up private individuals and businesses to reassert themselves in the schools and institutions.

We are skating on thin ice, but it is always darkest before the dawn. The pendulum is finally starting to swing back.


As regards to overt white European identity politics, they are no doubt coming mainstream and sooner rather than later to the US. This will happen outside the political parties, and then penetrate. The mainstreaming of European Nationalism and Nationalist parties and the ideas that come with it, as well as the confrontation with the most offensive minrotiy identity political group of them all, Mohammadeans. Movement is soon coming on all fronts.

Columnist said...


The power of rich, old males can be broken by euthanasia.

Lilyen said...

I just don´t know what to say, it´s hardly to believe feminists have so much power... there are many other things who play a greater role in supporting mass emigration, tell you your country is nothing worth, make you feel ashamed about where you come from or make you believe you have to tolerate anything and anyone without conditions. I can hardly believe this is all about feminism...

Beside of that, why are young man suffering the lack of masculinity in our culture?! You can go to military, you can become a chef, you can do as a man anything you want and still be better in anything you touch just because you are a man and despite all the independence women have achieved now days, there are still so many women who would rather have someone to protect her and take care of her... This is a so unfair and immoral reason to excuse Breivik for what he's done!

...and always those stupid gens! Geez, what's the hell with our gens?

Anonymous said...

I must point out that the reason for native mothers in the New World is well known: in the early days, there were few European women available for marriage. Most marriages could ONLY have been between European males and native women. Furthermore, Vikings had no time on their raids for dalliances. It was a matter of snatch and run before the local militia organized a counterattack. By that time, the Vikings were rowing downstream as fast as possible. There are large amounts of Irish DNA in Norway which got there during the time Ireland was a Norwegian colony. Norwegian are generally a handsome race and have no trouble attracting voluntary companions from the opposite sex.