What is "the end game" behind all the "sexual misconduct allegations" going on?

BeyondFedUp

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
4,468
Location
United States
I'd like you guys to weigh in on this.

It seems to me that the real string-pullers, the ruling elites are always up to something to destroy Western Civilization. This whole onslaught of allegations against any male (and most of the accusations are against males on the Left) didn't just come about by accident. Many/most of these were supposed to have happened years or decades ago. These women could have been encouraged or persuaded ($$$) long ago to come out with the "me too" outcries wanting justice, revenge, and vindication.

My query is what is the wanted result of the "expose'" of all these brutish, terrible actions from those calling the shots from high places?

I have disdain for dirtbags like Weinstein and those who were truly guilty of actual sexual misconduct and/or assault and rape. These pukes who are actually guilty of crimes ought to be fired, thrown out, jailed and held in contempt. However, I believe there are gradations and degrees of impropriety. Do the ones who are behind reshaping the Western world and America in particular want males so insecure that we can't even compliment a woman, ("Wow, you look nice in blue") or even shake hands "wrong" without being accused of something?

There has to be a very nefarious plan behind all of this. Agree or disagree? Any thoughts are welcome!

Thanks,
BeyondFedUp
 
Last edited:

Shadowlight

Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,882
I can't give you a comprehensive answer but you are right there are "gradations and degrees of impropriety."

Is it me or are most of the accused bald, old and or plain pug ugly.

One thing to consider. If a movie mogul asks a young lady up to his hotel room at 10:00 at night to "go over some lines" you would like to think some common sense would be applied. The young lady would have two proper responses. She could bring along a companion or politely decline the invitation. These young ladies have to be pretty damn naïve to think the guy is asking them to come up to his hotel room to talk "shop."
 
Last edited:

Shadowlight

Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,882
To follow up on these points there is now a discussion regarding some big wig at the NFL network about his tweets with porn stars and escorts. Granted we are not Germany but this county is still pretty liberal when it comes to sexuality but there has always been a Puritanical streak as well so it has been a push pull type of thing through the years. If anyone thinks today's society has been enveloped in sexuality like never before they were either asleep or not alive during the 1970's. I saw first hand what was going on in Times Square back then. There has to be limits on "public sexuality" things and stuff like child porn should be snuffed out and people involved prosecuted to the full extent of the law. But the government shouldn't have a carte blanche on everything sexual either so it is a balance. The other thing to keep in mind is human nature. Men need women in one way shape or another. The law of nature dictates that so anyone who thinks that men can survive in a world where sex or sexual thoughts are brushed aside are living on Mars.

That said I am not sure what this NFL executive has done to warrant such attention? Sleazy and a bit unseemly OK but private "sexual" stuff like getting his jollies off his porn star tweets doesn't fit into the accosting women theory. So I think perspective is needed. See below Breitbart article on the guy.

http://www.breitbart.com/sports/201...eractions-porn-stars-escorts-deletes-account/
 

BeyondFedUp

Hall of Famer
Joined
Oct 30, 2004
Messages
4,468
Location
United States
Thanks for replying, Shadowlight,

This is a bump of sorts.

I'm hoping more will jump into the conversation. My main point of the thread though, is questioning the end game and the "why" of this media blitz and the narrative.

It can't be merely "men in power behaving badly in a sexual nature". That's been going on since creation. I want to know WHY the (((media))) and their mouth-pieces and cohorts are doing this.

I think it is to destroy Western Civilization norms of male hierarchy, patriarchy, and normal masculinity and what very little there is left of it, and especially White masculinity. Add to that, most people are too stupid to even know that Weinstein, Franken, and many of these guys are Jews. They are seen by the majority of sheeple as "White males". Yes, granted, there are several non-jews who have been accused of sexual misconduct/harassment but they all (collectively) look White to the ignorant masses.

Let's not forget how naive and gullible most Whites and other goy are. Sad, but true nonetheless. Nobody I personally know is as awake as my fellow CFers, so let's be realistic.

It's clear from history that (((they))) don't mind at all to sacrifice a few of their own to justify the end (game). Hence, a few Jewish producers, celebrities and insider big-wigs can fall into disrepute along with those dumb goy. It helps the "cause" in the long run.

My question still is put forth: "What is the goal?". It has to be nefarious. It's all they do...
 

Shadowlight

Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,882
AS the Golden Globe ladies prepare to wear black as a protest who are they aiming the protest at? Men watching on TV of which the overwhelming majority have never done anything sexually untoward or abusive against a woman their entire lives?

The idea of "objectifying women" has been a subject that has gained a lot of traction the past twenty odd years. It is reflected in the mainstream movies ( not porn) now where "gratuitous nudity" or the flaunting of the female form or anything to do with female sexuality has been dialed way back. In conjunction with that trend is the rise of showing off male nudity in movies. You can hear the wheels turning as the industry tries to "balance it all out" to the satisfaction of the women I presume? I like comedies but most of the raunchy comedies of today usually feature more shots of male nudity (usually their asses or their--- it starts with a P) than female nudity. The sexual suggestive nature of women has been toned down in all shapes and ways outside even beyond the mere flashes of nudity.

I don't know who these sample preview audiences are for these movies but who the hell wants to see men running around bare ass naked over and over again in these movies? So there is an effort out there to rearrange the "sexual way of things." Of course you can't have a society that is one big orgy but trying to suppress male desire isn't a constructive answer to anything. Not sure if the movies readjust their thinking once again down the road but it is obvious to me there is a big difference in the way say Marilyn Monroe behaved compared to the actresses we see on the big screen today.

Anyway below is an article on the Golden Globes protest but for amusement you should read the comments section. Can't help myself one guy posted "What's the difference between porn and Hollywood?" "In porn the actress is expected to fill in the blank AFTER she gets the part."

http://www.breitbart.com/social-jus...st-sexual-abuses-wearing-black-golden-globes/
 
Last edited:

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,416
Location
Pennsylvania
AS the Golden Globe ladies prepare to wear black as a protest who are they aiming the protest at? Men watching on TV of which the overwhelming majority have never done anything sexually untoward or abusive against a woman their entire lives?

The idea of "objectifying women" has been a subject that has gained a lot of traction the past twenty odd years. It is reflected in the mainstream movies ( not porn) now where "gratuitous nudity" or the flaunting of the female form or anything to do with female sexuality has been dialed way back. In conjunction with that trend is the rise of showing off male nudity in movies. You can hear the wheels turning as the industry tries to "balance it all out" to the satisfaction of the women I presume? I like comedies but most of the raunchy comedies of today usually feature more shots of male nudity (usually their asses or their--- it starts with a P) than female nudity. The sexual suggestive nature of women has been toned down in all shapes and ways outside even beyond the mere flashes of nudity.

I don't know who these sample preview audiences are for these movies but who the hell wants to see men running around bare ass naked over and over again in these movies? So there is an effort out there to rearrange the "sexual way of things." Of course you can't have a society that is one big orgy but trying to suppress male desire isn't a constructive answer to anything. Not sure if the movies readjust their thinking once again down the road but it is obvious to me there is a big difference in the way say Marilyn Monroe behaved compared to the actresses we see on the big screen today.

Anyway below is an article on the Golden Globes protest but for amusement you should read the comments section. Can't help myself one guy posted "What's the difference between porn and Hollywood?" "In porn the actress is expected to fill in the blank AFTER she gets the part."

http://www.breitbart.com/social-jus...st-sexual-abuses-wearing-black-golden-globes/

R-rated comedies always featured T&A if they had nudity, but you're right that the cultural communists have replaced female nudity with male nudity. Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008) started the trend, and now almost all R-rated comedies feature dicks but little or no female skin. I watch very few movies these days, but automatically rule out any that say "graphic nudity" as part of the descriptive breakdown for the rating it received, which always means close-up shots of dicks and balls. As an aside, I can't recall ever seeing discernible female genitalia in a non-porn Hollywood movie. Breasts and rears are shown, but not the female sex organ, whereas the male sex organ is constantly on display these days. Phallus worship is traditionally a Jewish and homosexual obsession but has now become an Amerikan obsession.

In the Amerikan form of communism, everything is always upside down. Women in movies and TV shows routinely engage in violence against men, sometimes for laughs (the time-honored kick in the crotch, which always causes laugh tracks to be cranked up to full volume), other times beating them up out of spite and hate. It's never criticized by the same elites who have decreed today's miserable "liberated" women to still be delicate snowflakes who are incapable of fending for themselves if a man shows interest in them, and God forbid if a man lays a finger on them, even in self-defense.

The whole outing of sexual assaulters, with no regard to degree of offense -- a leer, quick grope, or unwanted invitation for a date are now grouped in with rape as one and the same -- is part of the "enuich-izing" of men and their replacement in all ways and forms with women, while at the same time the vast majority of Whites themselves are replaced by non-Whites. Castrating men makes replacing Whites far easier than it would otherwise be.

To understand Communist Amerika, you need to understand that the goal has never been equality, but vengeance and replacement (the slow genocide of Whites), which is why everything is turned upside down. Gender warfare is far and away the most powerful weapon communists have ever devised, as it messes up and destroys men at the most basic and fundamental levels. It's also terrible for women, but few comprehend it as they've been indoctrinated to irrationally regard all opposition to feminism as somehow wanting to "oppress" and "enslave" women.
 

white is right

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
10,163
I think the end game is to create an artificial social order that will try and sustain itself but this social experiment in the end will fail because at it's core it's not a natural male female relationships.

Throughout recorded history powerful men have always had unequal relationships with females. This goes back to the most primitive of times in cave dwelling days, a high status male ie a chief or a warrior could basically pick what female he wanted to mate with(within reason). He also might want a woman on the side and he would choose a low status female to be his consort. Many of these woman would willingly acquiesce because any children from this relationship could have a better chance of survival.

The powerful men who are behaving this way one could argue it's in their DNA code, now just because that's in their DNA code that doesn't mean they have to act on this but for many it's hard to resist.

I think this new social order will scare of the Charlie Rose types who will consort with prostitutes more or gray area prostitutes like women who want sugar daddies or maybe ask Julio the landscaper if his sister who is a single mother has a man in her life and carry on their behavior in this way.

As for the workplace more AA promotions will occur and potential land mine instances of incompetence could derail major corporations because of this.

PS we have seen this already with the civil service and blue collar workers to high end bureaucrats.
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,416
Location
Pennsylvania
More end game:

UK to Ban Depictions of Traditional Living in Advertising
How long have we got before displaying traditional gender roles becomes hate speech?
  • MELISSA MESZAROS
    December 15, 2017
    housewife2-620x375.jpg

    The Left are gearing up for quite a fight in 2018.

    From the creeping normalization of pedophilia to a “limitless and permanent migrant quota” being now openly planned by the European Union, the next year is already showing us a preview of the challenges we will have to face in order to secure the sane, stable livelihoods of the next generation.

    One of the more absurd liberal assaults that we can expect in 2018 comes from the United Kingdom, in a motion which seeks to further erode and shame traditional families by literally banning the depiction of conventional gender roles in advertising.

    The UK is no stranger to banning things or people that hurt the feelings of their LGBT lobby or the surging Muslim population (which currently stands at around one millionin the greater London area). Most minorities from the third world who live in Western Europe ignore the media’s overbearing messages to live childfree lives and explore the wonders of gender fluidity. Although migrants do join forces with suicidal whites in condemning conservative values, and participate in all manner of radical leftist/feminist protests for muh rights, they are only biding their time until they grasp control over the weakened native population through achieving a demographic majority. Make no mistake — all the mainstream media and university propagandaurging for the need to dismantle “whiteness” and to expose children to transgenderism are engineered for the destruction of only one particular target — native Europeans.

    1458394927644588-300x200.jpg


    According to The Scotsman:

    A new rule will be introduced in the UK Advertising Codes following a review of gender stereotyping by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which found more needed to be done to tackle advertisements featuring stereotypical gender roles and characteristics. The ASA review published last summer, provided evidence for tougher regulation of advertisements with stereotypical gender roles or characteristics which can be harmful to people.

    The ASA are an independent regulator of all media in the UK who are handed guidelines on what material to crack down on by the Committees of Advertising Practice (CAP). The ASA’s 2017 report on gender stereotyping within advertising allegedly includes evidence which “demonstrates that reinforcing and perpetuating traditional gender roles can lead to suboptimal outcomes for individuals and groups in terms of their professional attainment and personal development.”

    But upon opening the 81-page “qualitative research” document, it is revealed that the report was created by two women who held “mini-group discussions” and “depth interviews” in 2016 with an unstated number of anonymous adults and teens recruited “on-the-spot.” The report is simply a long list of quotes by the attendees who were asked about various adverts and how they may be portraying harmful stereotypes relative to body image and gender. When you create a “study” by presenting random commercials to people off the street and tell them, “here, look for the offensive things,” then of course you are going to get some results. Not to mention, based on the quotes, some of the participants had trouble expressing their thoughts in proper English or seemed indifferent to the questions at hand.

    The study concludes that women “more quickly (compared to men) expressed concern about gender portrayal in adverts” while “female ethnic minority participants were also quick to deconstruct messages” and “also noted the lack of diversity in terms of ethnic representation in adverts.” As for the men, they typically did not find any content offensive. They “expressed similar concerns about gender portrayals … only after some debate and discussion around this issue.”

    Advertisements that the ASA wish to ban include a 2012 Asda commercial depicting a mother struggling to prepare her home for Christmas, a commercial for baby milk that shows baby girls growing up to be ballerinas and baby boys becoming scientists and rock climbers, and a GAP image showing a smiling white boy wearing a shirt with Einstein’s head on it. Oh no! Better not let boys think they can be smart!

    WHITE SUPREMACY

    The ASA will set out their new advertising standards in Spring 2018.

    No matter how much the radical left try to convince people of the harm of traditional gender roles, there is no legitimate proof that “equality” leads to a world of peace and free love, but there is countless evidence (as well as basic common sense) confirming that the promotion of feminine men and masculine women is harming relationships, leading to a decline in birth rates, and contributing to record-level rates in mood disorders. A lack of a traditional family hierarchy also risks children growing up without a clear understanding of their place or role in the world.

    DQL7zlfV4AATg3y.jpg


    As the heavy-handed liberal indoctrination escalates in force in the West, it’s practically guaranteed that the children of the future will either become trannies or the most conservative generation in decades. The best we can do is not despair, but live up to the values we believe in and give our children the best shot they have at a successful life.

  • https://altright.com/2017/12/15/uk-to-ban-depictions-of-traditional-living-in-advertising/
 

Riggins44

Master
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
3,043
Location
Virginia
Many people including Alex Jones and Michael Savage have already said this, but I think the end game is to get rid of Trump. (((They))) are sacrificing some of their own, who they already saw as dead weight, with the objective of then bringing out once again the women who said Trump "sexually assaulted" them by asking them for their phone number or something similar. This already started I believe last week. The whole MeToo campaign being Time magazine's story of the year is part of the NWO scum's attempt to create this false narrative. The strategy is they have gotten rid of a few of their own, and now they go after Roy Moore and ultimately Trump on false accusations. But Trump is a true alpha male and an incredible fighter, and will not roll over like these abhorrent Hollywood and DC swamp criminals who actually are guilty of what they were accused of.

EDIT: I wrote that before reading what the last few posters wrote. After reading those posts, I would say the short term goal is to get rid of Trump, and the long term end game is to destroy traditional gender roles and destroy White masculinity in order to to destroy the vast majority of the White race.
 
Last edited:

Riggins44

Master
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
3,043
Location
Virginia
More end game:

UK to Ban Depictions of Traditional Living in Advertising
How long have we got before displaying traditional gender roles becomes hate speech?
  • MELISSA MESZAROS
    December 15, 2017
    housewife2-620x375.jpg

    The Left are gearing up for quite a fight in 2018.

    From the creeping normalization of pedophilia to a “limitless and permanent migrant quota” being now openly planned by the European Union, the next year is already showing us a preview of the challenges we will have to face in order to secure the sane, stable livelihoods of the next generation.

    One of the more absurd liberal assaults that we can expect in 2018 comes from the United Kingdom, in a motion which seeks to further erode and shame traditional families by literally banning the depiction of conventional gender roles in advertising.

    The UK is no stranger to banning things or people that hurt the feelings of their LGBT lobby or the surging Muslim population (which currently stands at around one millionin the greater London area). Most minorities from the third world who live in Western Europe ignore the media’s overbearing messages to live childfree lives and explore the wonders of gender fluidity. Although migrants do join forces with suicidal whites in condemning conservative values, and participate in all manner of radical leftist/feminist protests for muh rights, they are only biding their time until they grasp control over the weakened native population through achieving a demographic majority. Make no mistake — all the mainstream media and university propagandaurging for the need to dismantle “whiteness” and to expose children to transgenderism are engineered for the destruction of only one particular target — native Europeans.

    1458394927644588-300x200.jpg


    According to The Scotsman:

    A new rule will be introduced in the UK Advertising Codes following a review of gender stereotyping by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which found more needed to be done to tackle advertisements featuring stereotypical gender roles and characteristics. The ASA review published last summer, provided evidence for tougher regulation of advertisements with stereotypical gender roles or characteristics which can be harmful to people.

    The ASA are an independent regulator of all media in the UK who are handed guidelines on what material to crack down on by the Committees of Advertising Practice (CAP). The ASA’s 2017 report on gender stereotyping within advertising allegedly includes evidence which “demonstrates that reinforcing and perpetuating traditional gender roles can lead to suboptimal outcomes for individuals and groups in terms of their professional attainment and personal development.”

    But upon opening the 81-page “qualitative research” document, it is revealed that the report was created by two women who held “mini-group discussions” and “depth interviews” in 2016 with an unstated number of anonymous adults and teens recruited “on-the-spot.” The report is simply a long list of quotes by the attendees who were asked about various adverts and how they may be portraying harmful stereotypes relative to body image and gender. When you create a “study” by presenting random commercials to people off the street and tell them, “here, look for the offensive things,” then of course you are going to get some results. Not to mention, based on the quotes, some of the participants had trouble expressing their thoughts in proper English or seemed indifferent to the questions at hand.

    The study concludes that women “more quickly (compared to men) expressed concern about gender portrayal in adverts” while “female ethnic minority participants were also quick to deconstruct messages” and “also noted the lack of diversity in terms of ethnic representation in adverts.” As for the men, they typically did not find any content offensive. They “expressed similar concerns about gender portrayals … only after some debate and discussion around this issue.”

    Advertisements that the ASA wish to ban include a 2012 Asda commercial depicting a mother struggling to prepare her home for Christmas, a commercial for baby milk that shows baby girls growing up to be ballerinas and baby boys becoming scientists and rock climbers, and a GAP image showing a smiling white boy wearing a shirt with Einstein’s head on it. Oh no! Better not let boys think they can be smart!

    WHITE SUPREMACY

    The ASA will set out their new advertising standards in Spring 2018.

    No matter how much the radical left try to convince people of the harm of traditional gender roles, there is no legitimate proof that “equality” leads to a world of peace and free love, but there is countless evidence (as well as basic common sense) confirming that the promotion of feminine men and masculine women is harming relationships, leading to a decline in birth rates, and contributing to record-level rates in mood disorders. A lack of a traditional family hierarchy also risks children growing up without a clear understanding of their place or role in the world.

    DQL7zlfV4AATg3y.jpg


    As the heavy-handed liberal indoctrination escalates in force in the West, it’s practically guaranteed that the children of the future will either become trannies or the most conservative generation in decades. The best we can do is not despair, but live up to the values we believe in and give our children the best shot they have at a successful life.

  • https://altright.com/2017/12/15/uk-to-ban-depictions-of-traditional-living-in-advertising/

These people are so sick and satanic, they need to be defeated completely.
 

Leonardfan

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
24,363
I have tried to wrap my mind around this whole thing. Honestly, due to the insanity of it all I am unable to grasp any rational reason.

1. As Don has mentioned gender warfare is the most effective tool the cultural communists have in our "free" society. The male patriarchy is viewed as the reason the world is viewed as so terrible. Many women are unable to rationalize and go based on emotion rather than having a thought out, pragmatic response - therefore something like sex warfare makes sense to many of them when they have been slighted, offended, wronged (in their mind) by a male.

2. It is being used to mobilize women and attempt to remove men from positions of authority. The whole #metoo movement is geared to make sure all women can feel free to make accusations without fear of reprisal. Again to cite Don's post above - everything is being lumped into sexual assault - from actual physical sexual assault, groping, crude comments, approaching women for dates - it is all fair game according to the #metoo movement.

3. My personal opinion is that no woman should be sexually assaulted and treated with respect (until they show they do not deserve respect than you can talk to them like you would a man). At the same time we see women having no shame, objectifying themselves, showing off their T&A. So they cannot have it both ways. Also, why are so many accusers coming out now when they should of took action right away when in many cases these incidents happened years or even decades ago. Isn't this why Human Resource departments exist? Why did the women stay silent? Why did women take the payoffs and are now coming out after taking the money?
 

Heretic

Master
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
3,261
Most of what I was going to say has pretty much been mentioned by others above. Funny that just before I read Don's post about "traditional living" I was searching on the Internet for those classical appliances to see if there's anyone selling them these days.

I saw new classical one at a coffee shop a few weeks ago and thought it would be cool to bring them back, like they've done with the "muscle" cars of the past, but with better internal technology. It'd be pretty cool to set up your kitchen and other areas of your abode the way it looked like back then and have a muscle car sitting in the driveway or garage or that newer Ford Thunderbird that came out several years ago. It would just be the pretty, happy, feminine, moral woman in an apron that would be the most difficult part to "remodel" to be like back then.

Anyway, here's how Clint Eastwood's character in the 1973 film "High Plains Drifter" treated women, and it seemed to work. I wonder if it would work today ;):

 
Last edited:

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,416
Location
Pennsylvania
THE #METOO SEXUAL HARASSMENT HYSTERIA IS A PRETEXT FOR WOMEN TO TAKE POWER AND MONEY FROM MEN
a60f9c62faaea2d4f45a745d2864899a
JIMBO JONES DECEMBER 21, 2017
NewsweekCover.jpg


http://www.returnofkings.com/143863...xt-for-women-to-take-power-and-money-from-men
 

DixieDestroyer

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
9,464
Location
Dixieland
This whole contrived ordeal is to (artificially) elevate the feminism agenda...whilst running down men “in power”. As I’ve previously said, I believe that 85-90% of these claims are exaggerated (i.e. - consensual & even initiated by the skirt) or outright lies. Besides, women never have been “equal” to men, just as sub races have never been “equal” to the White master race. That is a pure D fact.
 

Heretic

Master
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
3,261
This whole contrived ordeal is to (artificially) elevate the feminism agenda...whilst running down men “in power”. As I’ve previously said, I believe that 85-90% of these claims are exaggerated (i.e. - consensual & even initiated by the skirt) or outright lies. Besides, women never have been “equal” to men, just as sub races have never been “equal” to the White master race. That is a pure D fact.
Men and women were never "designed", either from a scientific evolutionary perspective or a divine creation perspective to be "equal". There are no "mistakes", either from a scientific evolutionary perspective or from a divine creation perspective; therefore, no "remedies" are necessary, period.

We were meant to completely complement each other for a perfectly balanced system (philosophical Taoism, if you will, or simple Biblical scripture). One can see what happens when the Luciferians try to make women "more equal" to men by trying to make them more masculine or enact laws that benefit them exclusively to "level the playing field"...it all turns to confusion, chaos, and, ultimately, the death of the species.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
163
Shadowlight and Don Wassall both make good points about the replacement in "mainstream" movies of (tasteful) female nudity (which was usually toplessness, and the breasts are not sexual organs anyway - as was mentioned, female genitalia were never shown except in outright porn) with crass, disgusting male nudity (the repeating showings of the "stick and berries.") It's all part of the feminist agenda to attack men - specifically, heterosexual white men - and promote these vulgar and hypocritical feminist fantasies. There's female-marketed porn that features nude men and fully clothed women. Meanwhile, "traditional" male-marketed porn has male nudity along with female. Perhaps the feminists are too homophobic to dare look their precious virgin eyes upon nudity of their own sex? It would be hilarious if those left-wing feminists got hoisted on their own gay rights petard. And of course feminists denounce female strip clubs as the greatest evil on the planet, while gleefully drooling over male strippers. They eat, drink, sleep, and breathe hypocrisy.

If any of y'all are fans of the game show The Price Is Right, add that to the list of things feminists have ruined. Not only do they have a male model now in the name of "equality," but the show has the male model do literally 100% of the swimsuit modeling. None of the female models ever appear in swimsuits anymore. The show has always had a large female fanbase, and normal women never minded seeing the girls in bikinis. It's the ruling cabal of feminists in their ivory towers who have ruined things out of their crippling fear and insecurity about their own sexuality.
 

Heretic

Master
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
3,261
Shadowlight and Don Wassall both make good points about the replacement in "mainstream" movies of (tasteful) female nudity (which was usually toplessness, and the breasts are not sexual organs anyway - as was mentioned, female genitalia were never shown except in outright porn) with crass, disgusting male nudity (the repeating showings of the "stick and berries.") It's all part of the feminist agenda to attack men - specifically, heterosexual white men - and promote these vulgar and hypocritical feminist fantasies. There's female-marketed porn that features nude men and fully clothed women. Meanwhile, "traditional" male-marketed porn has male nudity along with female. Perhaps the feminists are too homophobic to dare look their precious virgin eyes upon nudity of their own sex? It would be hilarious if those left-wing feminists got hoisted on their own gay rights petard. And of course feminists denounce female strip clubs as the greatest evil on the planet, while gleefully drooling over male strippers. They eat, drink, sleep, and breathe hypocrisy.

If any of y'all are fans of the game show The Price Is Right, add that to the list of things feminists have ruined. Not only do they have a male model now in the name of "equality," but the show has the male model do literally 100% of the swimsuit modeling. None of the female models ever appear in swimsuits anymore. The show has always had a large female fanbase, and normal women never minded seeing the girls in bikinis. It's the ruling cabal of feminists in their ivory towers who have ruined things out of their crippling fear and insecurity about their own sexuality.
Thankfully, I rarely watch or stream a contemporary movie or TV show these days, so I've yet to see any male genitalia. However, about 15-20 years ago I did start to wonder why I hardly ever saw female breasts in movies anymore because in the 70's and throughout most of the 80's it was a fairly common occurrence. Female breasts have often been the object of attention, even if indirect, for artists, going back millennia, but now, all-of-a-sudden (last 20-30 years) they are not? Is that not a sign?

Over the past several months I've downloaded many films from the late 50's to the early 80's, and several from the 2000's as well. I'm not a fan of movies made in the mid-80's, so I somewhat reluctantly watched "After Hours" from 1985 after it was on a recommendation list and it briefly showed the breasts of one of the female characters. Technically, the movie was well-made by Scorcese, but the high gloss and bright pastels of that era are not my thing and the subject matter and characters were mostly deviant anyway with few, if any, redeeming values, so ultimately I didn't care for it. I only mention it because it had a glimpse of female breasts in it. The other film I watched recently was Cisco Pike from 1972 and that one briefly showed breasts from the female lead as well, nothing gratuitous, just naturally (and beautiful). I did like that film even though it was almost as nihilistic as "After Hours", but at least it had some level of humanity, male-to-female normalcy and an authenticity to it. Point being, I could probably watch 50 mainstream movies today in a row and not see a single naked female breast, yet the last two random movies I watched from other eras did?

I used to watch The Price is Right when I was a kid when Bob Barker hosted it. It would've been laughable back then for it to have a male model in it. That would've been rejected outright at the time by the upper management anyway. All of those game shows back then were fun to watch. Of course, everything has been flipped on its head today, including all of the game shows...just another example that you mentioned but that I hadn't given much thought to.
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2016
Messages
1,740
Regardless of whether some of the initial accusations were true, this sexual misconduct hysteria has gotten completely out of hand. Starlets and harlots are jumping on the #MeToo bandwagon to further their careers, greedy lawyers are making sure they get their share of the payouts, media talking heads are virtue signaling with their unquestioning support of any and all accusations, and politicians are exploiting this mess and fanning the flames in order to gain votes. The signs of a true witch-hunt - no one being immune to accusations and anyone who questions the accusations becoming the next one to be accused - are already appearing.

If they'd had Twitter in historic times...

OMG just had a spell put on me! know how u feel @AbigailWilliams. #MeToo Salem 1692

Caught some royalist counter-revolutionaries thx 2 @MaxRobespierre's guiding light! #MeToo Paris 1794

Capitalist Trotskyite kulak hiding next door! @LavrentiyBeria plz come and arrest thx. #MeToo Moscow 1938
 

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,416
Location
Pennsylvania
Thankfully, I rarely watch or stream a contemporary movie or TV show these days, so I've yet to see any male genitalia. However, about 15-20 years ago I did start to wonder why I hardly ever saw female breasts in movies anymore because in the 70's and throughout most of the 80's it was a fairly common occurrence. Female breasts have often been the object of attention, even if indirect, for artists, going back millennia, but now, all-of-a-sudden (last 20-30 years) they are not? Is that not a sign?

Over the past several months I've downloaded many films from the late 50's to the early 80's, and several from the 2000's as well. I'm not a fan of movies made in the mid-80's, so I somewhat reluctantly watched "After Hours" from 1985 after it was on a recommendation list and it briefly showed the breasts of one of the female characters. Technically, the movie was well-made by Scorcese, but the high gloss and bright pastels of that era are not my thing and the subject matter and characters were mostly deviant anyway with few, if any, redeeming values, so ultimately I didn't care for it. I only mention it because it had a glimpse of female breasts in it. The other film I watched recently was Cisco Pike from 1972 and that one briefly showed breasts from the female lead as well, nothing gratuitous, just naturally (and beautiful). I did like that film even though it was almost as nihilistic as "After Hours", but at least it had some level of humanity, male-to-female normalcy and an authenticity to it. Point being, I could probably watch 50 mainstream movies today in a row and not see a single naked female breast, yet the last two random movies I watched from other eras did?

I used to watch The Price is Right when I was a kid when Bob Barker hosted it. It would've been laughable back then for it to have a male model in it. That would've been rejected outright at the time by the upper management anyway. All of those game shows back then were fun to watch. Of course, everything has been flipped on its head today, including all of the game shows...just another example that you mentioned but that I hadn't given much thought to.

When the movie ratings system started in the late '60s, mostly because all the previous restraints used to hold back what Hollywood Jews wanted to show in mainstream movies but couldn't finally collapsed, it was common to see breasts in PG movies (or M for Mature as it was originally called). Now breasts have almost become X-rated, even as all other taboos have fallen.

One of the few television shows I've watched is Sons of Anarchy, originally aired by the FX Network. Everything goes on that show -- non-stop horrific violence shown far more explicitly than R-rated movies showed violence until recent decades, constant swearing, and explicit sex scenes. There are only two taboos -- the "f-word" is never uttered, and not a nipple is ever seen. Lots of male butts and the very occasional female butt, but never the body part that visually men most enjoy seeing. And of course T&A is an integral part of the biker milieu.

When Baywatch the movie was released to much free corporate media hoopla a year and a half ago, if one was unaware of how everything has been turned upside down, one would have expected to have seen a "boob festival" as David Spade called it in one of his old routines. But it contains no female nudity at all, while there's a scene that takes place in a morgue when a dead guy's junk is shown and handled.

The now disgraced Louis CK decreed that there was to be no female nudity on his former TV show, while male nudity was fine. Louis' willy was even shown on at least one episode. His excuse was that female nudity is always sexual, while male nudity is "funny." Funny in the sense that people are still supposed to laugh uproariously even after seeing a man kicked in the crotch for the one millionth time.

The other justification often given is that Hollywood long utilized the "male gaze" in movies. So now we're supposedly seeing the "female gaze" all the time, but in reality it's men who get turned on visually far more than women. The "female gaze" is the usual feminist-lesbian man-hating gaze, and also the male homosexual gaze, which gets turned on by naked men. So nudity has become yet one more front in the communists' gender war.

An easy tell is that naked men are overwhelmingly White, just as imbeciles, klutzes and criminals are always White men, the only situations where White men are over-represented any more. It's part humiliation (per the CFNM porn mentioned above by Dwight Mansburden), part feminist hate propaganda, and part male homosexual recruitment/indoctrination.

What's scary is that the cultural communists have pulled back a bit since the election of Trump (the old one-step backward, three steps forward routine), and they are seething about it. If Trump isn't re-elected in 2020 and the communist/corporate coalition gets their candidate in after four years of Trump Derangement Syndrome, part of their celebrating will be an orgy of media perversion far worse than any seen thus far. One of the reasons the Amerikan form of communism is so effective is that our rulers haven't engaged in the wholesale slaughter of their enemies (White Americans), which used to be a routine practice in communist countries, but it's clear that the street scum element is up for it, and a lot of public figures in the entertainment industry seem to be also.

But the biggest issue by far remains The Great Replacement. The haters may have pulled back a bit in some areas, but every day on television White men are the new "token blacks," only presented in a far more demeaning way than blacks ever were. And while the media presents mainly lies, fantasies and fake news, in real life, Whites continue to decrease in numbers. If that doesn't change, the point will come, whether it's 2020 or maybe even four or eight or twelve years down the line, where the anti-White coalition will achieve an irreversible monopoly on national power through sheer numbers and generations of "PC" indoctrination. Trump's tweets are great, but he has yet to even mention this most important of all issues. Nibbling around the edges only delays the inevitable for a while longer.
 
Last edited:

Don Wassall

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 30, 2004
Messages
31,416
Location
Pennsylvania
It's been a subject of debate whether the gynocracy will move to ban sex robots, as female sex robots take away the only thing that causes so many men to become submissive doormats to women. But feminists will likely decide that sex robots help move toward the endgame of eliminating the traditional family and any need for sexual contact between White men and women. It also advances "transhumanism" to eliminate any need for men and women to need and desire each other. As this article shows, put an anti-men slant on it and you can be sure it will eventually be welcomed.

Maybe Sex Robots Will Make Men, Not Women, Obsolete

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-01-04/maybe-sex-robots-will-make-men-not-women-obsolete
 

Shadowlight

Master
Joined
Mar 16, 2013
Messages
3,882
Sex Robots. Beyond the sickening idea of them there are two major negatives surrounding the mere idea.

One--A Sex Robot is nothing but a glorified technologically advanced version of those silly blow up dolls. Having sex with a female prostitute is impersonal enough as it is but they mean to tell us men will prefer having "sex" with a machine? I think not. Sure there will be exceptions but I don't see widespread appeal.

Two-- This subject has not been mentioned if at all on this site but I suspect the greatest danger to the human race is AI ( Artificial Intelligence). This is not the site to go into details on this topic which will only get hotter as the future unfolds but suffice to say I am against it and the enormity of what could go wrong with AI is mind boggling.
 

Flint

Mentor
Joined
Jan 27, 2016
Messages
1,468
Sex Robots. Beyond the sickening idea of them there are two major negatives surrounding the mere idea.

One--A Sex Robot is nothing but a glorified technologically advanced version of those silly blow up dolls. Having sex with a female prostitute is impersonal enough as it is but they mean to tell us men will prefer having "sex" with a machine? I think not. Sure there will be exceptions but I don't see widespread appeal.

Two-- This subject has not been mentioned if at all on this site but I suspect the greatest danger to the human race is AI ( Artificial Intelligence). This is not the site to go into details on this topic which will only get hotter as the future unfolds but suffice to say I am against it and the enormity of what could go wrong with AI is mind boggling.

I don't get the idea of "sex bots" either. Are there that many people that haven't had sex with a real woman? So much of the enjoyment of sex is the primitive earthiness of it. The smells, the tastes, the bumps and freckles, the astonishing complexity of the human body which is really just a self contained eco-system, a living thing made up of living things. How can a plastic machine duplicate that in any way? It's nothing but high tech masturbation, better than nothing perhaps but nowhere near even poor examples of the real thing.

I think the whole 'sexbots will be popular meme' is created by all the beta boys and homos that have spent their pathetic lives spanking it to various 2D images on the internet. To them a pretty mannequin of plastic is a huge upgrade over the little ladies flickering out from their iphones. The fact that it is not even in the same league as a flesh and blood woman is completely lost on them.
 

white is right

Hall of Famer
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Messages
10,163
I don't get the idea of "sex bots" either. Are there that many people that haven't had sex with a real woman? So much of the enjoyment of sex is the primitive earthiness of it. The smells, the tastes, the bumps and freckles, the astonishing complexity of the human body which is really just a self contained eco-system, a living thing made up of living things. How can a plastic machine duplicate that in any way? It's nothing but high tech masturbation, better than nothing perhaps but nowhere near even poor examples of the real thing.

I think the whole 'sexbots will be popular meme' is created by all the beta boys and homos that have spent their pathetic lives spanking it to various 2D images on the internet. To them a pretty mannequin of plastic is a huge upgrade over the little ladies flickering out from their iphones. The fact that it is not even in the same league as a flesh and blood woman is completely lost on them.
Short of this, having sex with the modern robot seems one step short of necrophilia.....
 
Top