Why Liberal Men and Criminals Don’t Like the Idea of Women and Girls Being Able to Defend Ourselves

Liberal men hate women. Like the men on the right, they believe we have only a couple of good uses. To the men on the left, we exist for men’s pleasure in pornography and as “sex workers,” as they so joyfully like to call trafficked women  and girls and, in fact, anyone who has ever had to provide entertainment to men for a living. (I was a career exotic dancer for the span of about 20 years. When I entered that line of work, I did it out of desperation (and I stayed because it was a safer workplace and paid better than most of the offices and other regular jobs I’d had), but at that time we were just thought of as dancers or strippers and only very ignorant people thought we were “hookers.” This belief is now mainstream and pushed, especially, by liberals who say that “sex” – remember I said, “dancing” and not “sex”so this is like trying to talk to a Christian Fundamentalist, who, also, have a one-track mind! – is a good thing.)

So, liberal men are the ones who most insist that our lives revolve around sex and that we exist for the sexual pleasure of men. At least, this is the case, at present, in the U.S. This could change when the Muslims begin to outnumber them because they, not surprisingly, have the exact same beliefs about white (especially blonde) women and Christian women.

Thinking about Germany in my last post called to mind a particular incident. I had a few incidents like this, mostly with German men, who didn’t like Americans  or the U.S. and thought this was an excuse to do violence to me. (I’ve mentioned this before, but I am very small. I have tiny wrists and fingers with bird-like bones, smaller than the average white woman, and I am very diminutive. I was often mistaken for a child by the Germans who are, by contrast, absolute giants. So, the idea of these massive men targeting me because they hate all of the United States is pretty ridiculous, but it happened occasionally. The fact is that men will use any excuse to commit violence against women.)

On this one occasion, I was with a couple of friends who met up with some people they knew at a typical German pub. The next thing I know, I’m in a conversation with this guy who, I was later told, was from a very wealthy family. He had been studying law for years and while I was sitting next to him, he decided to bring up some of the U.S.’s laws, which he didn’t like. In particular, he disliked the 2nd Amendment. Growing increasingly drunk, he expounded on why it was terrible that Americans should have a right to defend themselves. He quickly became tiresome and I remember, after explaining why we have the law (see previous post), just shrugging my shoulders and saying something like, “That’s just how it is.” After all, I didn’t make the law, even though I do support it just a I support the U.S. Constitution, in general. The Germans certainly love their laws, you’d think they would understand.

But, at one point, he drew back his arm and made a fist as if to strike me. I don’t know why he stopped, but he changed his mind, for whatever reason. Maybe it was my matter-of-fact defense of the right to self-defense or maybe it was the look in my eyes because if he had even tried to strike me, I’d have knocked his gigantic, candy ass off that bench he was sitting on and banged his head onto the concrete floor until he was unconscious or dead – whichever came first. (I’ve had to do this kind of thing before.) The legal consequences of doing something like this usually only cross my mind after the fact.

Such hypocrisy! This man, who was arguing against violence and against self-defense was, in the same moment as he was making the argument for the umpteenth time, actually in the motions of taking a swing at me.

I didn’t mention it to anyone, but when we left, one of the circle of friends told me that the man I’d been talking to – a spoiled, leftist brat of an over-grown infant – had actually hit her before. She didn’t say if he was arrested, so I’m guessing not.

Luckily for me, I have not dealt with a lot of liberal men. But, I think they are as dangerous as any and more so than other categories of men. They are very insistent about things and trying to discuss certain  matters is like talking to a brick wall. Maybe they’re really just not too bright, despite the fact that many of them are formally educated – of course, they are “educated” in increasingly wacky, liberal universities, which have pretty much killed real education, destroyed rational thought, and re-written history.  (If you don’t believe me, take a look at Mizzou!)

Most of my encounters with liberal men have been in W. Europe, where I dated a couple of these candy-asses, one of whom had, also, been a law student but never graduated. Apparently, lawyers don’t make much money there – just average salaries, like everyone else. That’s socialism. Everyone makes pretty much the same wage regardless of level of education, talent, ambition, or even if they work at all (Muslims, other dark foreigners and layabouts “earn” almost as much money each month as hard-working Germans).

I, also, met them in New York City, which is a really Europeanized city, in my view. I say this because all the liberal men I knew – and all the perverts and freaks – were either 1st generation or maybe as much as 2nd or 3rd generation from socialist Europe. So, I’ve developed the theory that the U.S. is being poisoned by Western European socialism. It’s a slow, painful death, like a little arsenic here and there. It’s in heavily Europeanized cities and chocolate cities (with lots of Muslims) that we have seen a reduction and an absolute, un-Constitutional and illegal loss of 2nd Amendment rights.

Ah, but deaths by gun shot are down in places where guns have been confiscated or cjwdseverely restricted, says the liberal, white male. Sometimes this is not true, at all, because criminal males always seem to have no trouble accessing guns and ammo even when it is severely legally restricted. Other times, the killers just find more creative ways to kill their victims – like in NYC, where they shove them out of tall windows, set them on fire in elevators, slice and dice them with a machete, or knife them to death.

There is, also, the problem of an increase in rape in these cities. You see, men don’t need a gun and, in fact, usually don’t use a gun in rape crimes against women and girls. On the other hand, women who have guns have a good chance of staving off an attack, of deterring an attack (I know this works because I’ve done it), and sometimes of killing their attackers before they can kill them or their children.

The liberals, including liberal feminists, like to cite how many domestic violence situations are escalated to murder more quickly when there is a gun in the house. But, they never think about the women whose lives could have been saved if they had had un-fettered access to a firearm, especially in cases where they have left the abuser and he keeps coming back to kill them.

In the case linked to in the above paragraph, if the woman had been able to access firearms and ammo, she might have been able to save herself from a criminal attacker who has no trouble getting a gun. Contrary to what this Huffpost article claims (and the link they gave provides no information about the laws in the state), in the State of Arkansas, it is still not that easy to own a gun and it was probably even harder about 10 or more years ago.

What this does is make it difficult for women to get self-defense items they can easily learn to use – even if they’ve never held one before. Guns, too, because of Obama’s wonderful job at causing them to fly off the shelf every time there is another staged shooting event followed by immediate threats against the 2nd Amendment, are now very expensive. You used to be able to get a very nice 12-gauge shot gun for about $100, but now it is $300 to 500. Ammo is scarce, threatened, and expensive, also. Keeping women poor and ignorant of or scared of firearms (and liberal white men and liberal feminists are always running scare stats and scare articles trying stir up more fear in women about guns and to gin up anti-gun, anti-self-defense, anti-Constitutional sentiment, especially in women) is a way of keeping the patriarchal machine of violence against women going.

Remember what they say about doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? It’s insanity. But, in this case it’s more than that – it is a conscious attempt by males and apparently gullible or paid-off females – to keep women and children vulnerable to male perverts and male killers.

bptIf women are afraid of guns (and lots of libfems are), these people – like the libs at HuffPo – are directly to blame! It is they who have been running this fear-mongering, psychological warfare operation against women. It is a way to make women easy to rape and kill, easy for men to get their hands on the children, too. This is why men, especially criminal men and liberal men want gun control and fear-monger about gun ownership. This is why when they talk about women needing self-defense they like to give out cans of pepper spray (absolutely useless and possibly dangerous to the user) and suggest self-defense lessons – they know this is ineffectual against the enemy – and they are the enemy! Also, if women are able to defend ourselves we don’t need so many “charities” and non-profits. Oh, and we don’t need men to “protect” us, either, including the cops, when we have guns and ammo and know how to use it. Getting rid of the problem by arming women, by legally empowering women, would put a lot of liberal assholes out of a job – and it would put women out of reach of abusers, of porno heads, would-be pimps and johns, rapists and killers.

Criminals and liberal men (interesting how they fall into the same class here) do not want women to have the right to defend ourselves and our children (whom they see as sex objects to be used by men to fulfill their sexual perversions) any way we see fit. It’s not because they are anti-violence. No. On the contrary, it is because they most desperately wish to perpetrate violence upon us – just like the rich, liberal, German law-student I described above.

Let me be clear: Anyone who wants to take away your right to defend yourself, anyway you see fit, with whatever type of weapon and however many rounds you need, is an enemy. He has something bad in mind for you, something he wants to do to you –  and your daughters and maybe your sons, if you have any. These men want to feed on your flesh.

At no time do I ever hear a man talk about “reasonable” restrictions on the 2nd Amendment that I don’t see a walking, breathing, erect penis ready to strike at any moment. Anyone who wants to restrict your right to defend yourself or frighten you into not defending yourself is a particularly loathsome enemy.

imcompensating

Advertisements