Domestic Abuse isn’t Always About Hitting

Warning: I’m still very angry this a.m. at “feminists” who think domestic abuse is a joke or think women who have been victims, who recognize victimization, are “idiotic.” There isn’t a hot enough place in hell for these women and they should roast alongside the demon-spawn men they support with their hatred of us.

I said I wasn’t going to explain it to condescending liberal feminists, but there is one important thing that should be said in light of that asinine, hate-filled video by Teri Strange. The most deadly domestic abuse situations involve men who do not hit. Those are the men who are statistically mostly likely to kill you if you step out of line. If feminists like Teri Strange are looking for black eyes on domestic abuse victims, they are completely missing the point.

They may rape, they sexually abuse, they will traffic you (frequently through pornographic images, which you may or may not know exist), they will steal your identity and defraud you every way imaginable, they will destroy your finances so you cannot do anything for years, they will isolate you. But, hit you? No. But, dear blue-haired, up-speaking, guttaral-frying freak, who has obviously never had to deal with any of this in your whole life filled with “choices” you made freely, who has never been pursued by pornographers,  etc., etc., how dare you judge the rest of us!! Some of us didn’t get any choices! So, fuck you!

I think it’s time we kicked these women out of feminism. I thought I had kicked these assholes out of my life. (Then, yesterday I watched a video of Cathy Brennan, who looks a lot like a dude and will never have to be worried about being molested by a pervert in a locker room, say that she didn’t care if men were in the restrooms, locker rooms, etc.!) They cannot be educated, clearly, because this has been said repeatedly by many of us who have been victims of men, already. But, they not only don’t care about us, while masquerading as feminists and “radical feminists” (because apparently this is trendy to call yourself in places like Vancouver!), they hate us. They have made that clear.

If some feminist who isn’t full of hate for other women, who doesn’t look like Quasimodo, is interested in learning, she can look up the term, “coercive control.”

This upsets me so much because women like this are why victims cannot get help.  (It’s exactly why I couldn’t get help on a couple of occasions when I should have been helped by someone who had the authority to do something!) When other people fail to recognize blatant abuse – I have personal stories about this, but I don’t wish to share at this time – then they allow the abuser to do what he does to the victim.

And as far as you being poor, Teri, get off your fat, white, ass, get rid of the blue dye and the facial mangling and maybe somebody would hire you to flip a burger or sweep a floor! Your Marxist laziness and lack of ambition are not the fault of women like me!

Additionally:

I simply must change my YouTube preferences, ’cause I’m still getting her vids on my main page and today, she did another video talking about “like, choices…. you know” and how much deeper she is than the rest of us who just don’t get her and think she’s weird. Again, sometimes it’s a good idea just to go get a job!

The Enemy of My Enemy is My Friend, Apparently: Trump Stops Non-white Rapists from Entering the U.S.!

This is why right-wing women agree to take a certain level of abuse from white men. You see, the alternatives to not taking it can be much worse. This is how we got Trump and although I am yet trepidatious, I really am pleased with the news I am getting so far about his actions in office this first few days. To my amazement, he appears to be keeping some of his promises. This is highly unusual in a president. Usually, they don’t. So, this is a pleasant surprise, so far.

Previously, I have posted about the dangers disarmed white women are facing in countries like Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands and others where the Muslims have invaded. Just because it hasn’t been discussed much lately, doesn’t mean it has gotten any better. The crimes against white women continue and once these savages are allowed into the country, the native men begin joining in on the rape and murder.

The German government has gone so far as to produce public service announcements describing how the invaders should go about fucking white women and girls, complete with illustrations of black men raping white women.

So, I have been concerned about these negroes and Middle-easterners, now euphemistically referred to as  “southerners” in the German press, coming here to do the same. When they surround a woman 30 or 50 at a time and begin tearing her limb from limb like a pack of wild dogs, it’s hard to imagine how we could even shoot our way out of such a situation! We, at least, have something to shoot with. The European women have nothing.

But, now this problem may have been, at least, deferred for a little while as we see the flow of immigrants has slowed since yesterday, as reported by Refugee Resettlement Watch, which has been reporting on this menace for years. There are many reports today that questionable individuals are being banned from entering the U.S., at this time. The liberals – who are apparently not the primary targets of these violent perverts – are howling and the crocodile tears are flowing.

According to this article today at CNN, “We don’t want them here,” Trump said as he signed the order. “We want to ensure that we are not admitting into our country the very threats our soldiers are fighting overseas. We only want to admit those into our country who will support our country and love deeply our people.”

This seems too good to be true. I’m not used to good things happening and justice is something I have never known. So, I’m still hold my breath a little… They may thank their lucky stars that they were not admitted very soon because women are sick of being hunted and raped! We are not Germans and Swedes here. We are Americans and we are a completely different kind of women, from my observation. The enemy is not going to fare nearly as well here as they have among the Europeans, if they were ever to be admitted in such numbers.

I’m very pleased with Trump as president, at this moment. Although, I still hope his alleged victims get their day in court.

 

Stupid Men, Vicious Dogs, and Doxxing: A Post in Which I Vent About Some Things

I apologize ahead of time for this mostly self-serving post in which I vent about some things that happened over the course of the past several weeks. There is a property adjacent to mine and across a gulch, which is owned by a man who doesn’t seem to care about anything. He has a habit of putting very bad tenants in there – strange looking people, at least, for these parts. In the past, the house has been the source of a lot of trouble. It has been occupied by a gang of drug dealers (all white guys – ’cause when I say drug gang, people always think “black,”) and meth cookers and the scene of domestic abuse involving, at least, two different sets of tenants. Not to pick on Californians, but the worst of the tenants I’ve dealt with have all turned out to be from somewhere in southern Cal. Maybe the landlord has some kind of connection to the area. I don’t know. But, they never get along well here, either with their neighbors or with law enforcement.

The latest was a male-female couple, the dudebro of which looked like a standard, toothpick-legged, saggy-assed, bleached out blonde lover of water sports, the kind that might be found lounging on a beach in southern Cal. He just looked like he was right out of central casting and very much out of place here amidst the hills and the rocks.

I have few pleasures. I am a middle-aged recluse. I’m a small, bird-boned woman. I don’t like to step outside much, but I do usually only to do the things I must do, such as maintain my property or get groceries. But, a few months ago, over the summer, a new friend came to stay with me. The first hint I had of this new arrival was that the tops of all my parsley had been mowed down. Then, I spotted him one day, near the gulch. At first, I thought he was a big rabbit, but he had tiny little ears – it was no rabbit. Then, I thought he was a beaver, but then he turned and I saw a long fuzzy tail – it was no beaver, either. No, it was a groundhog, a woodchuck, a cousin to the world-renowned oracle Punxsutawney Phil Sowerby, come to stay under a big rock, a boulder, in fact, near the only window on the back side of the house that I leave open and without heavy shades and curtains.

phils-cousinIt’s a private place for me and my Little Otchok (from the Algonquin language, it is “one who watches”). I had probably been incidentally feeding Little Otchok for a while before I noticed him because I always throw out the tops, peels and rinds and sometimes the poor results of my culinary experiments. When I saw that he had taken up residence under the big rock, I began intentionally feeding him all kinds of things. The groundhog is an omnivore and will eat virtually anything, but he does have certain preferences. I enjoyed putting out different types of food and watching to see what he would eat first. Groundhogs have little black paws that look and function very much like human hands and he would stand on top of the rock, eating first a carrot, then a slice of bread, then a nut. If he sensed a presence, he would take his valuable ear of corn or end of a loaf of bread and move it under the rock and I’d see him still working on it from the shadows.

This went on for some time and we lived in peace and happiness. I fed the groundhog daily and he made me laugh with all his antics, his nosing the air, and digging the ground beneath the rock to make his home just so, sunning himself on the rock after devouring half a head of cabbage. He rubbed his face on the big rock and on the objects along the way I have to travel to get to his rock home to deliver his food and change his drinking water. This marking of territory, I took as a sign of friendship. He often looked up at me in the window while he was eating the food I just brought him. I knew he knew we were friends and there was mutual respect. This groundhog is a gift to me from nature, herself. As long as he is on my property, he is safe, well-fed, cared for and loved.

Then one day, they came – the new tenants with the bleached blond hair and their collection of water sport items. We are far from the ocean, but there are many water enthusiasts here because of all the rivers and lakes. Many people come from all around to enjoy our waters. These people definitely looked like clueless suburbanites to me. I got an especially good look at the man when I was feeding Little Otchok and he just decided to let his dog loose from its leash. Dogs hate groundhogs. Immediately, the dog, a black and rectangular-headed mongrel, came running after Little Otchok, he put his head under the rock and barked and growled at him, and the man came over afterward to take the dog back. He said he was sorry. I warned him that the groundhog is a wild animal with sharp claws and big, long teeth and it probably isn’t a good idea to let his dog run loose around the woods because there are all kinds of animals – none of which have had their rabies shots or anything else.

Apparently, this little warning meant nothing. For days and weeks afterward, whenever I went outside to feed Little Otchok, I was worried about that dog running loose. This dog, which the owner had told me was a year-old female, was pretty good size, maybe 40 to 60 pounds, big enough to hurt or kill Little Otchok and he would come and gobble the bread I baked for him with one big greedy bite. So, I began shoving Little Otchok’s bread under the rock and stopped feeding him from on top of it like I had done before. I never knew when the bleached-hippie was going to let his dog loose. Sometimes he did it after I fed Little Otchok and sometimes the dog would be waiting and would not let me near the rock. It barked, growled, and charged at me – at first running toward me, then running off, just to do it, again. If I retreated, it came with me, barking, growling and showing its teeth.

groundhog_in_grass_270x224This was a big problem. I began having a lot of anxiety about stepping outside and I feared for Little Otchok. I live in a poor, rural county. We don’t have animal control. It’s not like in the big city or the burbs where you can call animal control and the people with the vicious dog get a warning. Often in the cities and suburbs, a dog gets a lot of chances to threaten the neighbors. I’ve read of cases of dogs biting neighbors and nobody can do anything but call animal control and if animal control doesn’t take the animal away, then it continues to go on. I figure City Boy thinks he’s still in the ‘burbs. Or maybe because he sees some trees, he thinks it’s okay to let his dog loose, although there are people all down in this valley, doing normal outdoor activities, like working in their gardens or tending their own pets and livestock.

This guy has a girlfriend/wife who works. She literally ran me off the road (these people don’t seem to realize that you can’t drive on a narrow, winding mountain pass with barely room for one car like it’s the L.A. freeway) on her way to wherever she worked. At least, she had a job. He did not seem to have gainful employment. I don’t normally watch the neighbors this closely – only when they make themselves a danger to me. But, I tried to observe a pattern of when it was safe for me to be outside. There was no pattern. At any time, the dog might be out there.

One day when the dog was barking loudly (this is a very, very quiet place normally – so a dog barking like that anywhere around would echo all over the place and get attention from a long ways off) and wouldn’t let me near the rock, I made something of a show for the new neighbor, hoping he would get off his lazy ass and come and get the dog. “Go home,” I repeatedly shouted at it. But, the dog was not just aggressive – it was stubborn and tenacious. Once it was engaged, it kept on. I moved back toward my house and it moved with me. I heard the man shouting ineffectually something, maybe it was, “Stop that, doggie.” It was something meant to give the illusion that he cared that his dog was terrorizing me. Now the thing was in my drive way. I lobbed a big rock at it with every intention of hitting it, but it moved aside and continued barking. I was backing up and it was coming with me. I raised my self-defense item and was about to put an end to this animal’s reign of terror when finally the woman came out and got the thing. The man could not be bothered. Or, I thought, maybe he enjoyed the fact that I was being terrorized by his dog. This is his civilized white man’s way of harassing me by proxy.  The dog seemed to me a weapon of his systematic oppression of me. Only the woman had the sense to open the door, come outside and call the dog off before I blew its brains out, which I was just a few seconds away from doing on that day.

I didn’t want to kill their dog, but it didn’t look like they were going to leave me much choice. They knew the dog was bothering other animals and things on my property. They knew the dog was harassing me by proxy, terrorizing me. They were witnesses to all this. I was losing sleep worrying that it would kill Little Otchok. I was, also, wondering how I was going to paint and do some things outside with this dog around – a dog who might emerge out of nowhere and try to bite me while I’m working and I’m up to my elbows in paint or my hands are stuck in a glove and I cannot easily defend myself.

Knowing what was going to have to happen, but not knowing what circumstances I might be in when it did, I called the local sheriff to make a report. We have good state laws about dogs and even better county ones as it turns out. I had only heard about the new law which had been passed in the county several years ago when we had vicious, biting, attacking dogs – I personally had a Rottweiler and pitbull, one from properties on either side of me that would jump on me in my driveway. I was bitten on the ankle by the pitbull, but it was only a small nip that didn’t break the skin. The same dog attacked and nearly killed another dog down the road a ways and the owner was fined several hundred dollars. The owner of that dog was the one that told me about the law and according to her, she and her pitbull were the real victims. That’s when I started regularly carrying. I never step outside without something handy. And, it was back then that they passed a law that you could shoot a dog on your property.

But, I wasn’t sure. A sheriff’s deputy came out and tried to knock on their door to advise them not to let the dog run loose, but they didn’t answer, even though I know dudebro was home. So, the deputy spoke to me and advised me of my rights. I was pretty sure that I knew my rights in this instance, but it was good to have verification. I, also, wished that the guy would just get the message so I didn’t have to kill the beast. I didn’t know what I would do with the carcass! It was big dog, at least, relative to my own size. I don’t think I could have carried it or dragged it and I would have bashed it in the head, again, with a shovel before I got near it because I was afraid of being bitten by it. I would want to make sure it was good and dead.

All this went through my mind. It was very stressful. Maybe I should mention that I have been seriously mauled by a dog before as an infant. I was about three-years old when I was attacked by a small dog – a poodle of all things. As it turns out these dogs are among the chief attackers of babies. So, I am not a lover of dogs. In fact, I genuinely hate them. It is difficult to live in this country, especially in towns and suburbs where dogs are elevated to a god-like status, and have this kind of fear of dogs. I, also, will not stay somewhere that dogs have been – and I know where they have been because they leave behind a terrible stink. I swear I can smell dogs when they are in heat anywhere around my house. They reek like male goats – it’s a very similar smell to an old billy goat, but it smells more like wet dog than horny goat. I have other reasons for not liking them, which is simply their dog behaviors, such as trying to kill other animals on my property.

So, I was about to remedy the problem, in fact, on another occasion. I had fed Little Otchok and gone back inside the house to observe him when suddenly the dog appeared, had his nose under the rock and was going after my friend. Its’ a terrible thing to see one of these dogs attack a little groundhog – terrible, terrible! I’ve seen them go after cats the same way. Two of them will literally tear a cat in two and one alone will bite and shake the little defenseless thing until it’s dead. They do the same thing to tiny humans. I immediately went back outside and down by the rock where I confronted the dog, which was now standing in front of another big boulder and a structure I use for storage on my property. This wasn’t a good place to shoot it, but I was face to face with this snarling beast just a few feet away. I had picked up a rock – I had a collection of them handy for driving this dog and the others who had suddenly started coming around away from Little Otchok’s home. I had the remedy in one hand and the rock in the other and I was about to move the dog by tossing the rock, just to get it at a different angle so I could end this thing, once and for all, when the owner of the dog appeared – the lazy bastard who couldn’t be bothered to do anything about the dog when it was all just fun and games of his dog chasing a woman around her property – but, the fun was over now. He came out and got the dog – which, to his credit took more balls than I would ever have guessed he had. “I’m not going to be bitten by your dog,” I told him. He had no control over the thing, though, and it got away from him and started running back toward me. He called it off, grabbed it by its collar and said to me, “Sorry!” I told him sorry wasn’t enough and he’d better keep the dog away from here.

I heard the dog bark once after that, then I think they must have sent it somewhere. For a week or so, I worried it would come back. A couple of days after this event, I was digging out the gulch between our properties and I saw the guy. He shot me a look of absolute fright – I’d swear that every one of his split-ends were standing straight up in the air for just a second. I had my hands full with the shovel, but I gave him that friendly country nod, where the tip of your cap bobs up and down once. But, he just looked at me horrified. A few days later a trailer that looked like it belonged to Clark Griswold’s cousin Eddie showed up. I think they moved into it! They moved their things out shortly afterward.

So, I have concluded that guns are not just peacemakers – because it’s been very peaceful here, once again, since they left and now Little Otchok has eaten the last of this season’s corn, cabbage and nuts and is sleeping safely under his rock – but, they are communication devices.

It is impossible for women to communicate with men without them in many cases. Furthermore, once communication has taken place, the message is very well received and appropriate action is taken by the men, where no action or adverse actions (threats of rape, for instance) had been taking place previously.

I could not communicate with the guy by simply warning him that the forest is a dangerous place for domesticated dogs. The sheriff’s deputy could not communicate with him, either. But, the mere sight of his dog about to become landfill, which he must have been able to miraculously see out of his window for the first time, for some reason, made communication possible where it had failed every time before. In that instant, he seemed to understand for the first time that it is not acceptable to harass and terrorize women by means of a weaponized canine, which is what this dog was. It was an instrument of harassment and terror for me and for all the animals, the groundhog, the birds, the squirrels, the turtles, and all the other little critters who live on my property and under my protection.

This whole ridiculous scenario ended a few weeks ago, but I thought about it, again, when I read this article here:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/bow-hunter-kills-12-year-old-cancer-patients-therapy-dog-with-shot-between-the-eyes/

The good Christian man in the story was out on a customary Saturday walk with his granddaughter and their “therapy” dog, which they, also, refer to as a service dog. The story tells us that the granddaughter is a cancer patient and this is her dog. I would call it a pet. They call it a “therapy” dog. Okay. So, why are they letting it just run wild and cross property lines, which apparently it did.  A man they called a bow hunter said it agressed on him (dogs do this to strangers sometimes, even when they don’t do it to people they know) and he shot it. This happened in Wagoner County, Oklahoma. The man said he feared being bitten and so he shot it, which he would have the right to do in my county (and many others) even if not on his own property and as long as the victim is not trespassing. Since there are no other witnesses, apparently, we have to take the hunter’s word that the dog was acting aggressively. We know from the Christian grandfather’s story that they did, in fact, allow the dog to run loose and apparently out of sight, so they don’t know what the dog did, nor do they know what their dog does at any time when they are not there to control the animal. This good Christian didn’t want to call the cops – probably because he knows he doesn’t have a case, at all! – so instead he went to the media and now the hunter, although unnamed, is being threatened with doxxing by the loving liberals over at Rawstory. These are loving liberals who have been busy all over the place doxxing white women who don’t like being treated abusively by clerks and commenting on all the “racist” white “whores” who may or may not have voted for Trump and how all of us deserve whatever happens to us as a result of this sex predator being in office.

I’m trying to imagine what would have happened if surfer boy’s girlfriend had a camera while I was trying to defend myself and my Little Otchok against their vicious dog because it seems to me that these people really hate white women and really love dogs!

Similar things to the above news story have happened in my county when clueless folks see a tree and say, “Look Margaret, a tree – quick turn the dog loose and let it run around!” This is what I imagine must go through these people’s minds who come to a rural area and then let their valuable pet or well-trained service dog (har! har!) run around loose in the county – where people keep chickens and such! It is not unusual to hear a shotgun blast somewhere down the way as I did when all this nonsense was going on and dogs were running all over the damn place a few weeks ago. (I think they were in heat because, as I said, I can smell them very strongly at such times and this smell accumulates in certain areas on my property like a gas.) I haven’t seen the huge, black beast that I think was the target since then. I can only guess it had been threatening the neighbor’s chickens. If you like your dog, if you have any respect for other people, other animals, other people’s property, then don’t let your dog loose in the country. Certainly, don’t let it out of your sight because you have absolutely no way of knowing what your beloved pet does when you are not around to control it. There is always a first time when a dog bites someone that has never bitten anyone before. For instance, this little 4-year old girl lost her life when a pet dog that had supposedly “never harmed a child before” attacked her only five minutes after its previous owner dropped it off to be the new family pet. “There was no warning,” the article says.

That’s exactly what good Christian Grandpa did, let the dog off its leash and out of his sight, and now he’s blaming the person who had to defend himself from it – not a pleasant thing in any way and I know because I have just gone through something similar, it’s not fun to fear or to worry about the consequences of having to defend yourself – while painting himself as the poor victim who doesn’t want to report the man. (As I said, the man probably did not break any laws. He has a right to defend himself from a dog that’s behaving aggressively.) He’s going to “turn the other cheek” by informing the media and subjecting the would-be dog bite-victim to the new McCarthyism of liberal, anti-gun, anti-human rights mobs on the internet who will hunt down the person who doesn’t like being threatened with dog bite and dox him. They’ll go after him, his wife if he’s got one, his job, whatever he’s got. How Christian of grandpa!

Edited to add this note: There is a very different version of this story here, http://www.tulsaworld.com/communities/wagoner/news/bow-hunter-kills-pet-of-young-girl-with-leukemia/article_0bde1aee-aa20-5358-ae6d-2d4a06808534.html, in which the grandpa and granddaughter were not outside taking a customary Saturday walk, rather the girl was inside the house getting ready to go to school (on a Saturday? No, a Tuesday, according to this version of the story), grandpa was sitting on the front porch all at around 7:30 a.m., and the dog was in the woods  behind their house alone – barking. There’s something not at all right about grandpa’s story. Why would a valuable “therapy dog” be allowed out into the woods alone?

Because similar things go on around here, I thought I’d look up some things about the county where this occurred. It is frequently the case that dogs, either singly or in a pack, will attack women, children, and the elderly. Dogs pick on smaller humans most of the time or someone who is in a wheel chair and trying to roll out to get their mail out of a rural mailbox. Often the targets are women and I really believe dogs are called “man’s best friend” and not “woman’s best friend” for a reason.

According to this article, http://blog.dogsbite.org/2015/07/2015-dog-bite-fatality-pack-of-dogs.html, a woman in this same exact county, Wagoner County, was attacked and killed by dogs just last year. She was 67-years old and the dogs were in a pack, they attacked, ripping off her clothes and eventually rendering her unidentifiable due to their extensive mauling. The article seems to suggest that they were domesticated dogs and not some sort of wild dogs (such as wolves or coyotes). According to this article, http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/wagoner-county-woman-mauled-by-pack-of-dogs-say-authorities, they were three pitbulls and a Rotweiler. The sheriff says they are looking for the dogs’ owners to file charges, if possible.

What if the woman had shot the dogs? What if the owners then claimed they were the victims? Then, they don’t report the “crime” (because self-defense is not a crime in the county), but they go to the media and whine until a mob of dog-loving, white woman-hating liberals then dox the woman. That’s basically, the story about the Christian Grandpa, but with a different ending to the possible dog bite/attack because the person confronted by the dog killed it before it could bite.

The previous article, also, says that loose dogs are a long-standing problem in the county. Their county, like mine, doesn’t have an agency to deal with the problem. Frankly, even if they did have such an agency, it usually is not dealt with. It’s better to skip the animal control agency and simply remedy the problem. Dogs are not gods.

Truly, here is some irony – or maybe stupidity, I don’t know. But, according to the article, the woman had offered to feed the same vicious animals who ended up killing her. As I said, I am not a fan of dogs anymore than I am a fan of men for the same reason: I know their nature. It reminds me of how women so often help or try to help dangerous men who end up killing them. Clearly, this something we should all stop doing for our own sakes!

Since I had problems with the neighbor’s dog and I had the sense of the dog being “weaponized” against me, I looked that up, as well. It is not uncommon for people to use or even to train dogs, especially particular box-headed breeds, to function as weapons. In my case, I really felt harassed, especially since I knew that the guy knew the dog was menacing me and my property, including Little Otchok (and I should point out that while he is a wild animal and my friend, in these parts, he is, also, regarded as food along with the squirrels. So, in a way he’s like livestock, too, and has similar status here like anything else edible that might grow wild on a person’s own property. As I said, this is a poor, rural county. Food has priority over mongrels running wild here!) The problem of weaponized dogs has been especially prevalent in places where firearms are prohibited. For instance, there is this interesting BBC article, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-22031209, about gangs training dogs to be used as weapons in the commission of rape and robbery in England! Here in the U.S., in cities and states where guns are prohibited (despite the Constitution) and in places where there are a lot of restrictions on gun-ownership (dittos), there are more often cases of neighbors using dogs to harass, intimidate and even kill their (almost always female) neighbors. This is what I think surfer boy was doing – I think he was enjoying his harassment of me by proxy. He wasn’t directly harassing me and I’ve been very harassed before by previous male tenants in that house – one tried to burglarize me (actually got inside and I had to run him off! – he never came back after that and I never had anymore trouble with him directly because I effectively communicated) and is up now for burglarizing another home while the couple (a man and a woman) were home and he was bearing a weapon; and in another long series of events I’ve been threatened with rape and death by men in that house. Surfer boy threatened me, too, but he used the dog to do his dirty work. Then people will defend this and say, “It’s not really the dog’s fault.” “It’s just a dog doing what dogs do!” “How can you blame a dumb animal?!”

To wrap it up, I don’t think too much of Christian Grandpa and his legions of doxxing liberals who are just like him. It’s too bad the sick little girl’s dog is dead, but it’s grandpa’s fault for letting this supposedly valuable dog run loose and out of his sight in a poor, rural county with a long-running history of dog attacks, including, at least, one recent fatality. It is quite probable that the dog tried to bite the guy or acted aggressively toward him, but there’s no way to know for sure. Furthermore, under the law, it probably doesn’t matter. This good Christian grandpa is probably going to end up making the guy with the bow’s life a living hell with the help of liberals who have nothing else to do but dox people and, if this guy has a white wife or daughter, that’s who they’ll go after first. People – including white women – have the right to defend themselves by whatever means, which is another reason the Democrats lost the presidential election. Oh, and if we white whores don’t vote for their candidates, we get what we deserve, according to the loving liberals. Such nice people they are calling us all racist whores, bimbos, bitches and cunts! Gee, I just can’t imagine why they can’t get more white women to support them.

Related:

This article discusses what happens to victims, the trauma dog bite/attack victims experience, and the difficulty of getting legal action or compensation. It discusses the uselessness of agencies like animal control: http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-victim-realities.php It’s interesting that much like victims of rape, dog bite victims – even those of us who were babes in arms at the time – are blamed for the attack. The dog owner cries and the victim has to live with the scars, the fear – and the dog! I was attacked by my grandmother’s dog, which should have immediately been put down. For years, she would pretend not to understand why I didn’t like her dog and every other stupid dog she ever had. She was a dog lover who loved dogs more than humans, especially me.

This site discusses how people use dogs to legally harass and terrorize others: http://www.barkingdogs.net/disturbed.shtml

 

 

Men Inciting Violence Against Women: “The Burning Times” are Never Far Behind Us

In the pagan community, there is a popular slogan: “Never, again, the Burning Times.” This is, of course, a reference to the times when men incited violence against women and sometimes males (usually the husband or children of the victims). Most people believe this is behind us.

In the U.S. most people believe the witch persecutions ended with the Salem Witchcraft trials of the 17th century. That’s not true, by any means. They continued and, in fact, still continue on this continent today. North of the Rio Grande, you can lose your job or your business and have your house or place of business vandalized, south of the Rio Grande victims are still occasionally murdered for suspicions of practicing witchcraft. Long after the Salem incident, there were persecutions and rumors whispered against women, especially, in the Ozarks and Appalachia. Marie LaVeau was persecuted by law enforcement in the 19th century in New Orleans. We had the Jesuits in old French Territory building bon fires and burning Indians not that long ago in what is now the State of Iowa and there was the Inquisition in the southwest in what was once Spanish Territory. There are many stories of the torture of women (and sometimes men) at the hands of men – entirely men – that are known by only a few researchers and some that have never been told because they hid their evil deeds from the light.

I ran across a discussion by a bunch of white supremacists, surrounding the white male’s history of violent control over white women in Sweden and elsewhere and how they plan to maintain it. It contains the kind of talk about white women that most people think died with the Malleus Maleficarum and the Spanish Inquisition. But, here it is, alive and well: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/44017-The-growing-trend-of-feminism-within-the-White-Nationalist-movement Whenever I read this kind of thing from men, I am more and more convinced that male fetuses should be destroyed in the womb, that human maleness should be seen for the birth defect that it is. I see no other way to stop this horrific violence and male subjugation by these walking abortions of humanity. What they do to us daily and what they incite  other men to to do us is not without planning, structure, and pre-meditation. These things – these so-called “men” – are undeserving of life. They are using us as vehicles to this plane and we have the power to stop them, if we only had the understanding and the will.

HillaryWThe past few days, I’ve been looking at the violence incited by Gordon Ramsay and his show’s producers against Amy Bouzaglo, which resulted in witch accusations and characterizations (many memes) of her as a witch. According to the radio interviews, she, her husband, and their pets (three beautiful cats) were all threatened with being killed. Amy was subjected to the usual threats of sexual violence we are all familiar with from men online. The obvious irony is that the men threatening to murder her and her family continued to call her “crazy” and “demonic.”

Similarly, men make characterizations of political figures like Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi as practitioners of the Dark Arts, in league with the devil. (The only devil is in these men!) Donald Trump (who looks like depictions of Old Scratch, especially when he’s eating “taco bowls” and “KFC“) has even told his half-cocked, poorly educated (he loves the poorly educated), fanatical followers – some of whom really believe he is the Christian savior in the flesh – that “Hillary is the Devil.

A couple of days ago, Trump was accused of inciting violence against Hillary Clinton: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/10/us/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton.html I don’t know if what he said about “2nd Amendment people” doing something about something they don’t like was really incitement to violence against her or not. This is because nobody knows what the term, “2nd Amendment people,” means. The 2nd Amendment is a fundamental part of the  law of the land, therefore, it should be supported by all Americans. Trump says a lot of things that seem to be just rambling, often repetitive nonsense. People can pull out if it whatever they like, however, he does have a history of inciting members of his audience to violence during his speeches and talking about how good it feels to physically injure people.

In response to Trump’s most recent idiotic communication from the podium, Katy Tur, revealed something that happened to her several months ago: http://www.marieclaire.com/politics/a21997/donald-trump-katy-tur/ According to the article at the previous link, Tur was doing her job (she’s a reporter for a major, mainstream news outlet on television), when Trump pointed a finger at her and incited a mob to violence against her. She had to be escorted out by the Secret Service agents, who were actually assigned to protect Trump – not her.

This incident is similar to the one in which Heidi Cruz (wife of Trump’s Republican competitor, Ted Cruz) had to be escorted out of a Republican National Convention event because she was being threatened with violence when her husband (not her, but her husband!) refused to endorse Donald Trump as Republican nominee: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/heidi-cruz-escorted-rnc-arena-safety-40757031

According to this Marie Claire article about the event involving Kay Tur, “The wave of insults, harassment, and threats, via various social-media feeds, hasn’t stopped since. Many of the attacks are unprintable.” Here’s an example of one of the nicer ones: “MAYBE A FEW JOURNALISTS DO NEED TO BE WHACKED,” tweeted someone with the handle GuyScott33, two weeks after Trump lashed out. “MAYBE THEN THEYD STOP BEI[N]G BIASED HACKS. KILL EM ALL STARTING W/ KATY TUR.”

What Trump did to Tur is, also, a little reminiscent of the time in Canada that a male “comedian”, tried to incite the gang-rape of a woman who expressed her displeasure at a rape “joke” (which she paid money to be treated to, no doubt). He declared to the audience,“Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now? Like right now? What if a bunch of guys just raped her…” The targeted woman was forced to flee the crowd, while the man continued to “joke” about the men in the audience gang-raping her.

Inciting violence is supposed to be a crime, at least, in the U.S. We have very strong speech protections under our 1st Amendment, but it doesn’t cover inciting a crowd of men to commit violence against women, especially when it is very direct. Most of the time, however, the incitement is indirect. This is the day-to-day Hell of many women who try to earn a living anywhere or who try to exist somewhere, whether online or offline.

To understand why they do it, look, again, at the White Supremacists’ discussion on feminism linked to above. Without the subjugation of women – in the case of white males, they must continue to exist by targeting white women, especially blonde-haired, blue-eyed women (we are the biggest targets of their programs to turn us into both livestock and pornography) – in order to ensure their own existence and their own supremacy. Violence against us and the unceasing threats of it are they only way they can maintain their dominance.

If you are a chef of marginal talents who got where you are by virtue of a good ol’ boy’s club (the restaurant business is another industry where women suffer because of men’s hate against us), you attack your betters. Women are, overall, much better cooks and chefs, despite the fact that they are under-represented among award winners. It is my opinion that Ramsay attacked Amy Bouzaglo so hard because she is a much better chef than he is. I’ve compared his cookbooks to hers and his are full of narcissism, measurement errors (according to other reviewers at Amazon), are not very well done and, in my opinion, they present a lot of bland dishes in common, ordinary ways devoid of creativity or any real humanity or compassion for the reader, who is not a chef. He’s a guy who gets by on his reputation and is surrounded by a team of men who protect him and another massive online following of male minions who act like his attack dogs on command. That’s the only way men can beat women at anything – they have to use violence, threats of violence, and they use the power they have, whether from a podium (like Trump, who has a ready-made international fanship of MRAs and white supremacists) or from behind a microphone on a stage (like the Canadian rape-lover) or by the power of his platform on an international T.V. show, over which he and his producers and editors have total control, and by which he has acquired lots of male fans who hate women, too.

Men attack women, they use violence against us, and form lynch mobs to come after us because, alone, they are inferior to us and weak by comparison to us. The only way they can win is by this means. If a man were not inferior to a woman, he wouldn’t have to have an entire mob supporting him to attack her in an equal match.

If you can buy for a minute that there is a genuine competition between the Republican nominee (Trump) and the Democratic nominee (Clinton) –  which is not easy for me because not only are these two parties two sides of the same coin, both are enemies to women, Republicans seeing us as livestock and Democrats seeing us as natural-born whores to be prostituted and pornified – then, the characterizations of Hillary Clinton by Trump and his minions are very disturbing. Furthermore, Trump and his followers have whipped up a frenzy of misogyny, which is absolutely palpable, to any woman who has seen even a few hours of television coverage of the elections. Men are increasingly more open and violent in expressing their hatred of us. It is affecting men we know, in some cases. In my case, I saw how all the Trump coverage on television affected my own father the last time I visited my parents (I made a blogpost about it) and how he reverted back to some of his sexualized attacks (I’m a slut; I’m a whore; I want men’s dicks in me, I am Satan, etc. – actually, I am Satan. I own that, but the rest of it is lies.) that went back to my childhood, when he was under the influence of the Mormon cult. The woman-hating hangs thick around men now – more than ever.

Nor is it confined to men on the right, which we saw from the Bernie Bros and their slogans against Hillary Clinton, which were blatant in their Medieval imagery. You’d think men – and Christians, in particular – would have some shame about the evil deeds of their past, but no. They’re proud of it. They want to do it to us, again. Why else would they have the slogan: “Burn the Witch!” (They made a play on Bernie’s name – “Bern.”) The effect on actual witches and women of the use of this slogan is discussed at this article: http://wildhunt.org/2016/03/bern-the-witch-slogan-angers-voters.html  Even if you were a Communist, how could you vote for a man whose supporters talk about burning women as witches? Clearly they do not have our best interests in mind.

To those of us who who actually are witches, who live completely underground, under the radar, often in disguise, and in fear of discovery in our physical communities, this is a very serious matter. It’s something we fear and for good reasons. I’ve been denied a lease in the past. I’ve been denied services. I’ve been screamed at and witnessed Christians having psychotic meltdowns in front of me (similar to the Wiccan Wife Swap reality show episode – that’s happened to me twice. It’s scary!), pointing at me while going on about the devil and Satan. I know people in my physical community who have had their house vandalized. I know women who fear losing their careers in nursing and teaching. I know one woman who had to remove her articles on Wicca from the web after she was threatened with the loss of her job. There are other things, as well. So, this is a real and present thing to all of us and it’s very frightening to watch it gathering steam the way it has been, especially since the beginning of the present presidential election campaign.

It’s scary to see the online mobs who often don’t stay online. It’s scary to see them going after people who are not politicians and celebrities. It’s especially disturbing to see men like Trump going after female reporters this way. It’s unsettling to see male politicians going after their female opponents, calling them witches and devils, and inciting their minions to violence against them.

If you take away the computers, the cameras, the satellites, the radio signals and all the other technology, this is beginning to look more and more like 1692!

A few years ago, I thought the pagans who were worried about the return of the “burning times” were paranoid. I don’t think so, anymore.

Baking with Amy, Part I: About the Cyberbullying and Deception Surrounding a Woman’s Bakery and Bistro Made Famous on the T.V. Show, “Kitchen Nightmares”

This is the first of what is to be a three-part series of posts on Amy Bouzaglo and her new cookbook, “Baking with Amy.” This first post is a discussion of how she and her bakery, which was located in Scottsdale, Arizona, came to be internationally known. The next two posts will be as follows:

Baking with Amy, Part II: Review of Amy Bouzaglo’s Cookbook, “Baking with Amy.”

Baking with Amy, Part III: My Results with a Favorite Dessert from Amy Bouzaglo’s Cookbook.

I will insert the links for the newest articles once I’ve posted them.

Amy's_Baking_Company_front_door

The front door of Amy’s Baking Company showing the restaurant’s logo Date 16 May 2013, 19:03:33 Source https://www.flickr.com/photos/planetwrite/8745834055/in/set-72157633499219381/ Author John Aho

Ordinarily, when I want to review a book, I simply write a review. But, I’ve now read several other people’s reviews of Amy’s cookbook (all positive) and every one of them is met in the comment section with criticism for not addressing the television show, “Kitchen Nightmares.” I really wanted to address that, anyway, because it pertains to some problems that women – especially beautiful, talented women – face at the hands of cyberbullies (most, but not all of whom, are males) and real-life harassers. Amy’s story, also, touches on the abuses of male chefs, which are commonly reported by women chefs. You would think for all the times that men keep telling us to get back in the kitchen, they’d be happy whenever we are there  – but, no! I, also, wanted to keep the review of the cookbook separate from this whole discussion. My review is very positive. I love the book and I’m going to tell you, in the next post, why I think it’s so good. But, what I have to say here is not so pleasant because it revolves around subjects like bullying and the deceptive fraud that is reality television.

In some of the earliest posts at this blog, I’ve discussed the hoaxes that get passed off as news. I’m sure some people find it hard to believe or just don’t want to believe it. It’s scary to think that almost everything you see on television and a lot of the trends that occur online are based on pre-planned fraud perpetrated by people who are generally trusted television personalities. (This is the nature of PsyOps as written about by the the modern father of propaganda, Lt. Col. Michael Aquino.) Anytime you see something on television or online that is being turned into a major event, you should put on your critical thinking cap.

Once you learn what to look for, it’s easy to spot fraud.

For instance, I’ve discussed previously the Roanke, Virginia shooting hoax involving a reporter and cameraman supposedly being shot on air. But, if you slow down the two videos provided, which were supposed to have been filmed at the same exact time (one by the cameraman, which supposedly was live on air and the other by the alleged shooter), you see that (1) they don’t match up and (2) no cartridges and no wad are ejected by the fake, stage prop Glock. The “news” is fake, at least, a lot of it is and the rest appears to be greatly manipulated as can be shown through endless examples that go back, at least, as far as the late 1960s, in my own investigations. They’ve been faking the news for, at least, that long in order to manipulate public opinion and to get and keep viewership.

Viewers (and now internet and social media denizens in conjunction with mainstream television viewers) are usually manipulated for, at least, one of two reasons: To sway public opinion about a matter and to make money (often by means of ratings).

Not everyone is ready to accept the truth about the news being manufactured. But, everybody knows that Reality T.V. is fake, right?!

Well, wrong – apparently. Nonetheless, it is as scripted and planned out as any fictional television programming. The people making the programs, also, use some dirty tricks to illicit the reactions they want to get from the people in the programs. They spend days filming with multiple cameras from different angles, then edit it all down into one approximately 25 minute (for a half-hour show ) or 45 minute (for an hour-long show) series of clips.

In this article from Independent.co.uk, people discuss how fake and staged so-called reality television shows are: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/reality-tv-contestants-reveal-how-real-the-shows-actually-were-a6834246.html  The article is based on this discussion from Reddit by people who have been on various reality shows: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/420tzp/serious_people_who_have_been_guests_on_reality/

This article, “I Work As a Writer For Reality Shows — Here’s the Deal
And believe me, they’re not glamorous. They’re also not ‘real.’” from XOJane, discusses the truth about the actors, writers, and tactics involved in the production of these programs. Would you be surprised to learn that the “hillbillies” of Duck Dynasty are actually, clean-cut, golf-playing yuppies in absurd costumes? They are caricatures of people who don’t really exist – all made to order for gullible television viewers.

missde

The first time you see this picture, you will see one image, but if you look again, you will see another. Once you see it, you can’t stop seeing it. It’s the same with fake television programming – once you see the fraud, you can’t stop seeing it.

Once you see how fake, how edited shows, such as the two episodes of “Kitchen Nightmares,” that featured Amy’s Baking Company are, you will never be able to stop seeing it. It’s like looking at one of those Magic Eye pictures or those pictorial illusions (see image to the right).

In two radio interviews, which are linked below in the Timeline of Events, you can hear Amy Bouzaglo discussing how Gordon Ramsay got the kind of reactions he wanted for his show out of her and her husband during the filming. She talks about how they planted actors and some members of the local community who had taken a disliking to them in the restaurant in order to create drama for their one-hour (45 minutes) program, which they filmed over the course of a week. (8/11 Correction to the previous statement: They were supposed to film for a week. The contract was cancelled after three days of filming. After he created chaos and psychologically tortured Amy for the camera – which was then heavily edited so you never hear Amy when she talks about the things he did (they cut her off and impose his voice over hers in the final edits) – Ramsay left on the second day he was there. On the show, Ramsay says he chose to walk out. In the radio interviews, Amy says they wanted to end the contract and asked him to leave.) Once you hear her talking about how it was done, those two episodes of “Kitchen Nightmares” and any other episodes of that show will never look the same to you, again.

As you’ll see from the timeline, below, Ramsay quit his show a few months after they revisited Amy’s Baking Company in an episode using mostly clips from their first visit. The second airing was not authorized by Amy and Samy, according to the interviews they have given on Totally Driven Radio (see the Timeline of Events for links). His show was exposed for the fraud it is and you will see the fakery, the editing, the actors planted as “customers” making faces at plates of food and sending it back to the kitchen, flustering the cooks, in practically every episode of his now dead show.

I am basing the information in this article on solely on what I’ve found online from articles, the television episodes themselves, and from interviews with Amy and Samy, which you can find in the links provided in the Timeline of Events, below.

Timeline of Events:

  1. Amy’s Baking Company opened its doors in 2007.
  2. February 6, 2013 (this is the post date at YouTube), Check Please, AZ, PBS, reviews Amy’s Baking Company. You’ll see a stellar review of Amy’s Baking Company starting at about 10 minutes into the video, which is from a local television program in Scottsdale, Arizona.
  3. Amy’s Baking Company, “Kitchen Nightmares” aired May 10, 2013.
  4. Amy and her husband Samy Bouzaglo appeared on the Dr. Phil Show, which aired on April 9, 2014.
  5. Return to Amy’s, “Kitchen Nightmares” aired April 11, 2014.
  6. 1st Interview on Totally Driven Radio on October 31, 2013.
  7. 2nd Interview on Totally Driven Radio on June 5, 2014.
  8. Gordon Ramsay’s reality T.V. show, “Kitchen Nightmares” last aired on September 6, 2014. Amy mentions in the 2nd radio interview, linked above, that Ramsay announced online that he was done with the show in June 2014.
  9. Baking with Amy is published on April 15, 2015.
  10. Amy’s Baking Company is reported closed on December 29, 2015 by AZCentral. According to my calculations, the restaurant was in business for 9 years, which is a pretty good run.

I’ve made no secret of the fact that I hate television and I don’t have it. I haven’t had it for years. Some people think that people like me who “brag” about not having television and say we hate it are being pretentious, but the fact is, I just can’t stand it. I know that, at least, 99% of what is broadcast is fake. Most of it is extremely misogynistic. Fewer and fewer women are watching television these days because it’s just not a pleasure for us to see women being raped and slaughtered for male entertainment purposes. I, also, find that it is difficult to talk to people who do watch a lot of television because even if they do believe on some conscious level that television is partly or all fiction, they still talk and act like they believe what they see and hear on it. It is impossible to reason with them, to present any facts, even those based on events I’ve personally experienced, when I have to compete with the lies propagated by television. It really has turned a lot of people’s brains to mush. It’s scary.

There is a huge, scary mob of people who are easily influenced by what they see on television. They are reminiscent of the peasants with pitchforks and torches from Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. There are mobs of these people who are seem to be looking for someone to hate, someone to direct their hatred at, which is why they are sometimes simply called “haters.” Women online, in particular feminist writers, are well aware of such “haters,” most of whom are men and most of whom have a special kind of sexualized hatred they direct at women. Some of these are basement dwellers sponging off mom. Some are professional – dudebros like RooshV, who make a living teaching men how to hate and rape women or like Paul Elam, who collects donations and puts out bounties on the heads of women, making them fear for their lives, and there are men threatening to rape them, their daughters, even to harm their elderly parents (such as the threats reported recently by Jessica Valentia and the ongoing threats and organized professional man-hate against Anita Sarkeesian).

In a way, Gordon Ramsay is was one of these professional trolls. He had a production company that apparently cooperated with restaurant “reviewers” from the website, Yelp, to locate restaurants to feature on his show. Most of these restaurants were in trouble. He’d go in and try to capitalize on any existing drama, invent some of his own with the help of actors and by means of his own apparent knack for being an abusive bully and upsetting people. He’s notorious for his disgusting foul mouth, which apparently is all part of his charm to people in the British Isles. The British have been exporting some very unpleasant men to this country  in recent years (e.g. Piers Morgan and Simon Cowell) and this is a trend I’d like to see come to an end. We don’t need it. I understand it is being done because they work cheaply and, of course, they are cheap in other ways. Cheapness is, also, the reason why there is a proliferation of these horrible so-called reality shows. Compared to the kind of television programming that used to be done (remember the ABC Movie of the Week?) these show are very inexpensive to produce.

Amy and Samy were never paid for the two episodes. They didn’t get their permission to do the second episode, which included some clips of an interview by someone from “Kitchen Nightmares” named Garcia. Ramsay didn’t have the decency to even present himself for the “Return to Amy’s” episode. You will see and hear him narrating and you’ll see a lot of clips and phony interviews with people who know the Bouzaglos or who claimed to have a bad experience at the restaurant (like 2 people who were reporters, but never identified as such for the episode, who appear to have planted three fruitflies in a drink in order to make a news clip out of it for a local news show), but Ramsay was never actually there.

Furthermore, the “submission video” shown in Return to Amy’s was fictional. Amy says they did not submit a video. Rather, they were approached by a production company, Amy discusses this at about 8 minutes into the 2nd interview on Totally Driven Radio.

Amy and Samy had drawn the wrath of some of the locals in Scottsdale, according to Amy, because they were a very high-end, yet small operation, and sometimes they had to turn away patrons because they did not have the capacity and staff to serve them on some occasions. So, there got to be a kind of local lynch mob, which aired its malice on Yelp.

When they were contacted by “Kitchen Nightmares,” Amy was under the impression that they were going to get some national attention for their restaurant and Ramsay would help spread the world about the excellent food their restaurant offered. At that time, the restaurant was not troubled. The only problem they had was cyberbullies on Yelp and on their Facebook page.

Amy made one very bad mistake: She fed the trolls! 

Never feed the trolls. This is a rule those of us who live online all know. But, Amy spends most of her time in the kitchen. So, it’s possible she and Samy had no idea what the online world of trolls can become. They found out the hard way. It was Yelpers, quite possibly trolls, who suggested “Amy’s Baking Company” for an episode of “Kitchen Nightmares.” When the first show aired back in 2013, it became an internet sensation, the videos of the episode went viral. People like me who had never heard of  Gordon Ramsay or “Kitchen Nightmares” (which was in its 6th season by then) watched the episode – and re-watched it. (I adore Amy!) It’s safe to say that it’s the most watched episode of that perfectly awful reality show – ever. It may, also, have been Ramsay’s undoing in the end. The Bouzaglos were determined that if Ramsay was going to destroy them, they wouldn’t go down with out a fight and they wouldn’t go down alone.

When I titled this blogpost, I used the word, “deception,” to describe what happened to Amy and Samy Bouzaglo at the hands of Ramsay and his minions, paid and unpaid. But, I wanted to use the word, “fraud.” Fraud is a strong word and it has some legal connotations, so I chose the word “deception,” instead. But, I think it is not at all wrong to call what was done here “fraud.” Some victims of similar reality show shenanigans have sued. The most infamous example I can remember off the top of my head was that of the Jenny Jones Show (I’m dating myself and my television viewing, again, here!) back in 1997 when Jenny Jones invited a non-gay man onto the show to meet his crush, who turned out to be another man. The surprised guest was so humiliated that he ended up murdering the other man – a big lawsuit followed.

Here’s some more information about the fraudulent nature of talk-reality shows in an old video clip, involving that episode of the Jenny Jones Show. Here’s another documentary from HBO from 1997 on these old talk shows: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJJVE2gqjOc . Here is a clip from Jenny Jones at trial. I, also, had colleagues who appeared on some of these talk shows in an effort to promote their careers (to get credits, which get you higher paid bookings with agencies and night clubs) who told me they were heavily edited and the show was made to look very different from what actually happened. For instance, Howard Stern edited his show, I was told privately by a former guest, so that the women who appear on it look as sleazy and cheap as possible. There’s no way to get the upper hand in any conversation with the host because they edit the show and make the guest appear however they want her to appear. Another woman I worked with did promotions for a major (MAJOR, but now defunct) night club in NYC back in the 1990s and the talk shows invented a non-existent pop-cultural phenomenon and tried to convince audiences it was a real thing in order to get ratings for themselves and the shows guests (including my colleague) were hired actors (complete with SAG membership cards), paid to promote the club, which is why they appeared on the show and told a pack of lies to an international audience.

Amy and Samy might have had grounds for a lawsuit. But, they said they are not litigious, although they believe (and so do I) they should have been compensated for their participation in the show, instead they wanted to expose Ramsay and “Kitchen Nightmares.” This, despite the fact that they may have been subjected to a “non-disclosure” clause of some type in their contract (reminiscent of the famously litigious Donald Trump and his silencing tactics).

In the beginning, they believed Ramsay and his producers when they said he was going to help them and the only problem their restaurant had, at that time, was an online troll one. Instead, he aggravated their online troll problem, which had previously only been local, and turned it into a nation-wide troll attack. Amy’s Baking Company became, as Amy described it in the second episode of Kitchen Nightmares, “Disneyland for the crazies.”

So much is disturbing about how Amy was treated by Gordon Ramsay that it’s hard to determine where to start in describing it. A lot of the false characterizations he made of her are based on both gendered and sexist stereotypes. He says she is “crazy.” He doesn’t use the exact word “shrew,” but he puts forth the idea that she is a tyrant who is feared by her husband. He badgers her. When she tries to talk to him, he lets her finish half of a sentence before he uses her words to interrupt her, speak over her, and continue to harangue her. She reveals in one of the radio interviews that Ramsay came into the kitchen where she was working with a female employee and sexually harassed Amy to the point of tears by harping on the size and condition of her husband’s balls while making the accusation that her husband feared her.

It’s reminiscent of how Stanley Kubrick nearly drove Shelley Duvall to a nervous breakdown in order to get the reaction he wanted from her on film for “The Shining!” There really ought to be a law against treating women worse than circus animals! But, we all know that’s not going to happen anytime soon.

It, also, reminds me of high school bullies, as exemplified by “Mean Girls,” which is the level at which Ramsay appears to operate. In the original 2013 episode, when Ramsay first comes into the restaurant he is very complimentary and friendly-seeming. Amy’s Baking Company wasn’t like most of the crummy joints featured on his television show. It was a million dollar-plus spread, with beautiful checkerboard tile floors, a gilded decor, an al fresco dining area, and shiny display cases full of Amy’s beautiful desserts and pastries. The kitchen was pristine. The food in the refrigerators was stored and dated in an example of perfect organization.

He tries one of the desserts. He likes it. He compliments the cleanliness and organization of the kitchen. Then, he talks to Amy and Samy, who are now very relaxed and comfortable with him. But, it’s all a Regina George-style set up. He gets them to talk about themselves. He asks them if they have children. (I find the child question appalling, by the way. Lots of people, especially women, have health problems, have hysterectomies due to some disorder or as the result of horrific rapes, have endometriosis, have miscarriages, have lost an unborn child to male violence – there is an endless number of scenarios. There are, also, many moral, ethical and highly personal reasons that women do not use their wombs to make children. It’s not a nice question and it’s a rudely presumptuous one.)  Amy jokes that they have three little boys, but they are trapped in cat bodies.

They obviously treat their cats like children and one of the clips they most like to use to show that Amy is a “crazy cat lady”is where she is talking about how she speaks to the cats and they talk and sing back. They took this lighthearted moment and turned it into something to demean her in a particularly misogynistic way. This characterization gave way to cartoons (memes) depicting her as a witch. Amy has been able to find some humor in this and on the surface, I see it, too. Nonetheless, there is something deeply hateful, Medievally hateful, in fact, about it. There is something terrifying on a primal level about being publicly called a witch – whether you really are one or not. (Amy is “God’s child,” according to one of her social media posts in response to being accused of being a witch. This means she is probably either Christian or Jewish and is not a conjurer or practitioner of the Dark Arts and, therefore, she is not a witch.) Historically, the “witch” label has been the pretext for unspeakable horrors committed by mobs, instigated and encouraged by those in positions of power – a lot like Ramsay and his legions of dudebros.

As he’s setting them up, he gets some other personal information about Samy, which seem to indicate that he once participated in some kind of alternative life-style. He has been called a “playboy,” which is a euphemism for all kinds of things and it is conveyed that he had, at least once, some criminal connections.

In fact, when the spaghetti hit the fan, one result was that people were digging into both of their pasts. Local news outlets and vloggers were milking their popularity for all it was worth. This resulted in some apparently false reports that Samy was in the country illegally (he is a naturalized American citizen, born in Morocco and a citizen of Israel, according to available information) and was on the verge of being deported. It was publicized that Amy was convicted and served time in prison for “banking fraud.” If you listen to the reports, they’d have you believe she was an embezzler. But, she was sentenced to 14-months for putting a social security number that wasn’t hers on an application for a $15,000 loan. I’m not saying that’s a right thing to do. It’s certainly not a smart thing to do. But, it’s not embezzling or theft and it does seem that the penalty was extremely heavy handed for a non-violent offence and her first and only offence, as far as I am aware. Consider that the Steubenville rapists only got one day in Juvie and the child rapist, Jeffrey Epstein, only served three months in a facility where he had the key to his own cell and was able to come and go freely. Something just seems wrong about this.

Any information that could be found about the two of them was being dug up and a lot of it stemmed from this friendly set up in the beginning in which Ramsay appeared trustworthy and conversational. This friendly conversational demeanor would not last, a pattern you will find in many other episodes of his show.

Most of the food that Amy prepares at the restaurant is made from scratch. Amy acknowledges that a few things are frozen, such as the ravioli. Ramsay fixates on this and runs it into the ground during the show. At no time in the show, does he really offer any constructive criticism. “It’s disgusting” and “it’s crap” seem to be the extent of it. I watched the first episode a few times trying to understand what was so bad about frozen raviolis. I still don’t know.

According to Amy in the radio interviews, Ramsay had them, for the purposes of the show, show a waitress. In fact, the restaurant doesn’t have waitresses. Instead, they have what they call “food runners” who are paid an hourly wage to simply pick up food from the kitchen and deliver it to the table. They don’t take orders or use the computer. This was changed for the show. Then, Ramsay made a big deal about how the waitresses (which the restaurant didn’t actually have) were not being tipped, claiming that the owner was stealing tips from the waitresses. This resulted in the restaurant being investigated by some government agency, but no wrong-doing was found. Nonetheless, this became more fodder for their enemies, a now huge body of nasty trolls, bullies and harassers who began threatening them and harassing them at their restaurant.

The night before Ramsay arrived, they filmed the restaurant, which according to Amy in her radio interviews and in the following article, they packed with actors and Yelpers, some of whom had physically threatened her and Samy online and who had been harassing them for about three years. There is sequence after sequence of people making faces and turning up their noses as they are served Amy’s food. This is something you will see in other episodes of “Kitchen Nightmares.” It’s obviously a set up for the show. These are actors and plants. More evidence for the fact that these were actors and paid instigators may be found at this article, in the Phoenix New Times, entitled “Screaming, Expletives, and, Eventually, Police: All in the First Night of Kitchen Nightmares Taping at Amy’s Baking Company,” in which there are descriptions and quotes from Amy (that she might have actually said and which indicate that she knew who some of the instigators were and that some were actors and she knew she was being “set up,” which is exactly what was happening) from that first night. You’ll see only clips of what happened in the show, all edited to make Amy and Samy look “crazy” and “paranoid.” (It’s not “paranoia” when you are really being set up!)  News articles like this one with quotes from the Kitchen Nightmares people allegedly saying “We’ve never seen anything like this,” pour gasoline on the flames and are an attempt to lend credibility to their fictional narrative.

Another “waitress” appearing in the show was fired by Amy for “simply asking a question.” But, if you watch the show carefully, you see the look on the girl’s face and according to Amy, she had been difficult all night (she says this in one of the radio interviews) and this was the last straw. There is a clip of Amy on the show saying, “Why are you acting like this?” After watching the show a few times, it looks like this girl was put up to her behavior for the purposes of the show. She gives a number of interviews in both the first and second episodes disparaging and ridiculing Amy.

There are, also, apparent patrons (which you will learn from the interviews from Amy were Yelpers, there to cause trouble) who caused difficulties over a pizza and were kicked out of the restaurant by Amy.

Upon re-watching, it is easy to see that the whole “show” is one big set up with a lot of editing to make Amy appear crazy and irrational as Ramsay and his plants try to drive her insane – literally. This is what we call “gaslighting.” The absurd number of alleged customers sending the food back, claiming it’s no good, for instance, is gaslighting. It’s often done by men to women to slowly drive us crazy. To make us doubt ourselves. To frustrate us. To cause us to defend ourselves against charges that we’re not crazy (not witches, not shrews), etc., which is just used as more fodder and more “proof” that it’s all true. To prove that Amy was “crazy” lots of online bullies created memes and videos showing still shots of Amy from the show with her eyes wide open. One idiot male vlogger made a video with a still of this claiming that it was proof that she was psychotic and demonically possessed. Near the end of the first episode, Amy calls him out on what he has done and Ramsay says to Amy, “Blaming everyone again” in the exact same tone of voice as Charles Boyer talking to Ingrid Bergman in the movie, Gaslight. He calls her “delusional.” When Amy says, “Can I show you reviews, hundreds of reviews, that we didn’t write that are from real customers?” He says, “Online bullies again,” as if he’s not aware of the problem – as if she is imagining it. The dialogue might have been taken straight from the script of that film because this is exactly how men who gaslight women behave – this is what they say and how they say it.

When the show aired, it got some press, as well, showing up in national news headlines. That’s when people on the internet (like me, who don’t see T.V. usually) got wind of it. Then, the nastiness multiplied exponentially. Samy and Amy got threats over the phone, they had prank callers (lots of loser men have posted videos of themselves harassing Samy and Amy, mostly on the telephone to disrupt their business and inflict psychological harm), people making fake reservations, and people coming from all over out of state to check out the restaurant. Some of those tourists generated by the show and its fallout did some awful things. But, a whole lot of other people actually tried Amy’s cooking and loved it. They couldn’t understand why they were portrayed as the worst restaurant in the country on the television show.

The bottom line is this: Television is fake. Pretty much everything you see on there including the news is fake. The people you see in reality shows and often on talk shows (although that format nearly died after the Jenny Jones Show debacle) are often actors, people who are not actors are manipulated and psychologically tortured in order to get a desired reaction, and the shows are as scripted as any other fictional programming.

Amy says in her radio interviews that she wants people to know that reality shows are fake and she doesn’t want anyone else to fall for this con artistry. They have done their best to expose Gordon Ramsay for what he is. “Kitchen Nightmares” is over.

Meanwhile, Amy has put out her first book, which I will review in the next post. She’s, also, got some very nice videos on fancy baking and pastry-making. She’s had some problems with trolls, though, apparently. I noticed that she’s had to create, at least, three different channels because YT keeps taking them down. There is a real dearth of women making videos and posting them at YT. They have a man problem over there and that is the bulk of Amy’s trolls, which you’ll find if you do a search on her name or restaurant at YT. A lot of what has happened to Amy is simply woman-hating. If she were a man, it probably wouldn’t have happened. What Ramsay and the trolls have done to her has really taken a toll on her health. None of this is surprising to radical feminists, of course, and it’s all happened despite the fact that she is married to a man.

Amy Bouzaglo really has a larger than life personality. I am really hoping to see more of her, but if she becomes a recluse (like me), I can certainly understand why.

Additional material:

In the Kitchen Nightmare show and in the radio interviews, Amy makes reference to problems with Yelp. Ramsay, whose production company appears to have been working with Yelpers, acts like this is a ridiculous idea. Although, there have been many suits and many more allegations against Yelp for extortionist practices. In the video below, restaurant owners discuss a three-part series of events that plays out like this: (1) A restaurant gets legitimate good (4 and 5 star) reviews; (2) The restaurant begins receiving calls from sales reps from Yelp asking them to pay for advertising; (3) if the restaurant doesn’t pay, the good reviews disappear and any bad reviews rise to the top of their site.

Here’s a business-owner talking about his experiences with Yelp:

Billion Dollar Bully – this is a trailer for a documentary about Yelp’s alleged bullying and extortion of business-owners:

Season 9, Episode 14 of South Park, “You’re Not Yelping,” humorously brings to light the nature of Yelp reviewers and their arrogance, bullying and extortion of restaurant owners:

http://southpark.cc.com/full-episodes/s19e04-youre-not-yelping

A video about Yelp and the lawsuits against them involving allegations of extortion and threats of physical harm if they did not pay. This and these other videos are relevant to the story of Amy’s Baking Company because they fully support her allegations:

Chef suicides and restaurant closings are elements in the wake of destruction that seems to have followed Gordon Ramsay and his reality television shows:

BBC News: ‘MasterChef’ runner-up Josh Marks commits suicide
Rachel Brown, contestant on “‘Hell’s Kitchen,’ found dead in Bedford
Most Restaurants on Kitchen Nightmares Are Now Closed
Joseph Cerniglia, ‘Kitchen Nightmares’ Suicide — Second for Chef Gordon Ramsay’s Shows

 

Radical Feminist Analysis of Dark Shadows, the Television Series (1966-1971)

Spoiler Alert: This analysis of Dark Shadows assumes familiarity with the series and does contain all kinds of suspense-wreckers. 

ds2Dark Shadows was a daytime soap opera that aired on ABC from 1966 to 1971. It began as a conventional soap opera with only ina hint of the occult. The writers and producers of this series relied heavily on classical literary themes. Throughout the series, the writers borrow from Oscar Wilde, H.P. Lovecraft, Mary Shelley, Shirley Jackson, Henry James, Edgar Allan Poe and a long list of others, which you can read about at this Wikia article.

The series creator and producer, Dan Curtis, has said that the idea for the series came to him in a dream of a young women riding a train, which is what is seen in the opening scene, in which Victoria Winters has been hired as a governess by the Collins family of mysterious Collinsport, Maine, a fictional town situated not far from Bangor. The train is taking her into an adventure – a young woman’s adventure, which is very much like Jane Eyre’s adventure in the novel of the same name by Charlotte Bronte.

But, there is another theme, a much older fictional story used in this series, which has to do with a curse placed upon a man and his descendants by a woman. It is the theme of the Biblical Garden of Eden story. This is the central theme underlying the best years of this series, which are those in which the character Barnabas Collins, the vampire, was introduced. It is not listed in the Wikia article I linked to above, perhaps because it is such an ancient theme, one that is taken for granted, and one that is not believed (especially by men) to be fiction, but is taken as the god’s honest truth for it was written, it is said by the believers, by the hand of God Himself – woman as temptress, responsible for the downfall of the first man and all his descendants. She is to blame, never the man, who would be good and not a seducing, murdering vampire, except for her going about the world tempting him to do evil all the time. She, not he, is the cause of all misery.

This part of the series does not begin right away. In the beginning, there was a young woman from an orphanage, Victoria Winters, who accepted a job offer from a mysterious family, one heretofore unknown to her. Ever in search of her true heritage, lonely and without any connection to anyone else in the world just like all the other children in the orphanage, she set out on a train in hopes of reconnecting with some sort of family. She came to find the only family she would ever know. Although, the boy she is assigned as governess to is odd and perhaps even dangerous. He leads her down dark, forbidden corridors, locks her in rooms with spiders and ghosts, and is suspected, at one point, of attempting to kill his own father. But, this is her only sense of connection and so it is easy to see why she stays on in this place. Like many women, she stays because she has no where else in the world to go.

I loved the first season of this series, although, by the end of it, its audience of mostly young women – not a highly desirable advertising demographic back in the 1960s, as they are today – was waning and the writers and producer were desperate to save the show. It was their desperation that led to the introduction of the vampire character, Barnabas Collins, played by a Shakespearean theater actor from Ontario named Jonathan Frid.

I have the feeling that the writers never really knew what they were doing right or wrong. They never really understood the appeal of the show, itself, and many times the actors have expressed their own amazement at the extremes of passion the show inspired in its dedicated fan base. They knew the show was unusual and they were part of something very remarkable, but they never really understood why it worked, either. This fact became a problem for the writers by the end of the series because they didn’t just run out of literary themes to borrow, they completely lost their grip on what made this show so appealing. My diagnosis is that this show finally died, in 1971, of testosterone poisoning. They had too many male characters fighting with each other over nothing and major, very popular female characters, playing damsels in distress wondering when their heroes, the newcomer males who became the primary characters, would return home to sweep them off their feet. This is not what their primarily female audience wanted to see and this is why the show finally died a slow death as the audience waned year after year.

But, in the first year, there was a very good balance of characters and a strong focus on the lives of the female characters. The male characters were secondary, especially to the intrepid, highly intelligent, very likable heroine, Victoria Winters. Even now – and, in fact, it is actually worse now – it is difficult to find a television program that centers on a female character and treats her with some respect. In the first season of the show, this series had four such female characters: Victoria Winters (Alexandra Moltke Isles, a blue-blood from Sweden); Maggie Evans (Kathryn Leigh Scott); Carolyn Stoddard (Nancy Barrett); and Mrs. Stoddard (Joan Bennett, a legendary actress of the silver screen).

Dark Shadows Before the Arrival of Barnabas Collins

Even before the series took off, it was very good and quite different from other programs in its class because of its infusion of metaphysical ideas, even though they were only hinted at in a Radcliffian way, at first. There were doors that seemed to open and close by themselves, which might be explained by an old house that has settled. There were strange murmurings in the corridors, which were explained away by the residents as the noises made by old houses with creaking floorboards and loose mortar. There were voices on the wind at Widows Hill, which was the residents joked about to mask their discomfort.

What made the show good throughout most of its life is that it seems clear that someone behind the scenes had a genuine interest in the occult. It’s a feeling I’ve had about only a very few other television shows (or movies, for that matter) I’ve seen. Dark Shadows seems to have laid the groundwork for these other programs during the 1970s, which some people call the Satanic years because there were so many shows with occult themes – many of which were remarkably good and make modern television programming look extremely pathetic and simple-minded by contrast. One of those old series was Kolchak: The Night Stalker (1974-1975). It is my opinion that whoever wrote that series had a serious interest in the occult. Some people have called it the predecessor of the X-files, but it was, in fact, much better and took the occult much more seriously.  (I hated the X-files!) There was a weekly series of made-for-television movies whose themes frequently explored the occult and Satanism, as well. It was called “The ABC Movie of the Week.” One of the films in that series, The Devil’s Daughter (1973), featured Jonathan Frid.

Another fascinating aspect of Dark Shadows, which makes it more interesting than most television programming, is that it was usually filmed in one straight shot, one roll of the camera, without stopping. It cost the studio a large sum every time the cameras had to be stopped and re-started. For this reason, despite any mistakes, mis-speaking of lines, forgotten lines, tripping, flies in the room crawling on the actors’ faces, loud crashing objects, crew members and sometimes actors accidentally walking into a scene, inexplicable shadows created by microphones and lighting equipment, the microphones themselves appearing in some shots, very bad – hilariously bad! – special effects, and so on, the cameras kept on rolling.

Many of the actors came from the live stage. The cast of Dark Shadows was much more like a live theater troupe than a television soap opera cast. As I watch this show, even so many years later and in black and white, I still have the feeling that I am watching a live theatrical production of the kind that is performed off Broadway in New York City. Furthermore, there was very little editing done before the program ran live on air, usually within a few hours, within a day, or at most within a week of the original filming of the episode.

Dark Shadows, also, differs from almost anything else that’s ever run on television because unlike Leave It to Beaver or Happy Days, it showed, as horror often does, a more realistic view of life. The characters are all troubled in some way or another. Most are victims of fate. They are often constrained by the social order and by the limitation of their status within it. Most of all, the characters are aware of a reality that differs from that presented in the world outside of the town of Collinsport. The center of this activity is, of course, Collinwood, the manor house, its other old structures, its grounds and, naturally, the old family cemetery.

Victoria Winters

rogerandcarolynFrom the beginning, Dark Shadows, hints at secrets, at the idea that we are not being told the truth about important matters. There are many mysteries surrounding the characters. The first mystery revolves around Victoria Winters, who presents a sharp contrast to Carolyn Stoddard, not only in her serious, conservative manner of dress but in her personality, which is often somber. Vickie never laughs quite as gaily as Carolyn does. Vickie has always had to earn her way, unlike Carolyn. There is a stark contrast between this lonely girl with no known family and the Collins family, who revel in their legacy and their heritage. Many early episodes involve her trying to discover her parentage, which she feels certain is connected with Collinwood.

Back in the 1960s and 1970s and, in fact, until the popular commercial availability of the video cassette recorder (VCR), whenever something played on television, you had better pay attention because you may never see it, again. Many fans who missed Episode 97, wondered about the true identity of Victoria Winters, so much so that after the series had ended, Joan Bennett made a video telling fans of the show, as Mrs. Stoddard, “Indeed, Victoria Winters was my daughter.”

It was in Episode 97 that we began to piece together that Mrs. Stoddard was impregnated by a butler at the manor named B. Hanscom. This would have happened before she married Mr. Stoddard, who was the father of her daughter Carolynn. She might have been quite young when this happened. We are left to guess about that. Her brother had been away at school during this time and the baby girl was sent off to a foundling home. In the years afterward, Mrs.Stoddard sent her a little money every month before she invited her to come and be the governess to David.

Now, this may seem very cruel and, of course, it is, but it is a reflection of how life really was for women not long ago. In fact, I know people that something very similar to this happened to. If a young girl was impregnated, there was no possibility of abortion, and she was forced to bear the child in secrecy and then it would be sent to an orphanage or put up for adoption.

We  never know what happened to B. Hanscom, only that a relative of his from a painting which looks a lot like Victoria Winters, left town and was not heard from, again. It is possible that the butler, having raped a young member of the household, went on the lamb or perhaps he was dealt with in some other way. We don’t know and this storyline, itself, is so scandalous that it is only hinted at in Episode 97. The scandalousness of it is further enhanced by the elevated social status of the Collins family. The family still derives its income from a fishing and canning business and such a scandal might have proved disastrous for the family business and their reputation.

Many other mysteries surround Mrs. Stoddard. She rarely leaves the house and she has not left the property in 18 years. Her daughter Carolyn is probably a little under 18-years old when the series begins. We learn that her father ran off and left her and her mother when Carolyn was a newborn.

Mrs. Elizabeth Stoddard

Mrs. Stoddard is the most powerful character of all in this first season.  (In the years afterward and especially in its last seasons, the show takes a lot of twists and turns, for instance, exploring less occult and more sci-fi tyes of themes, and introducing many new characters by the end of the series. By that time, the male characters are the most powerful, also, the most cruel and inhuman.)

Mrs. Stoddard is well-respected and has the ability to inspire great loyalty in the men who work for her, especially Bill Malloy, who is the manager of the Collins cannery and fishing fleet and Matthew, the groundskeeper. Both of these men are so loyal to her, in fact, that they would kill just to protect her from mental distress. When an enemy of the family turns up and tries to buy the workers in the Collins’ cannery, the men who work there refuse on the grounds that Mrs. Stoddard has provided them with steady, well-paid work for so long. Their loyalty stems from self-interest surrounding finances, but it is, also, suggested by Carolyn that Mr. Malloy might have a secret crush on her mother.

Mrs. Stoddard is the beneficiary of a fortunate birth in a fortunate time in which she is able to inherit her family’s wealth alongside her brother, Roger (played by Louis Edmonds). She may have inherited the greater part of the family’s fortune along with the responsibilities of running the family business since she seems to be a little older and more responsible than her brother. It is she who owns the house and the grounds and Collinwood. It is she who runs the business and provides her brother, who squandered his fortune, with both a job and a place to live. She wields the most power in the house and has the final say in all business and financial matters concerning the family’s assets.

But there are problems that go along with living in the “house on the hill,” which is coveted by almost every friend or foe of the family. There is a combination of respect and resentment toward Mrs. Stoddard from the townsfolk. Both Mrs. Stoddard and her daughter, Carolyn, are subject to predators and con men. In Mrs. Stoddards’ case, she has been conned by a team of con men involving her husband and his friend, Jason McGuire, who has been blackmailing her for years. When he comes back to town and tries to force her into a marriage against her will, we finally learn the truth along with Mrs. Stoddard, who for 18 years feared leaving the grounds because she had been convinced that she murdered her abusive husband and buried in a room in the cellar. But, there is no body in the cellar and her husband was never dead.

Carolyn Stoddard

Carolyn Stoddard is probably my favorite character in this first year. One of the reasons I like this character so much is because she is truly dynamic. She is young and has to grow up fast because of the goings on at Collinwood, which are both mundane and metaphysical in nature. Carolyn is very isolated. She has no social equal in Collinsport. She and her mother have been the subject of ridicule by Carolyn’s childhood peers, who laughed at the witch who never leaves the creepy, old haunted house on the hill.

Carolyn’s singular social status is a gilded cage. Although, Collinwood is no palace. It’s more like a large, ornate, Gothic-style tomb. It is dark, cold, and foreboding. Young, vivacious, golden-haired Carolyn, the contemporary teen, is a contrast to the stagnant timelessness and decay of Collinwood. When the series begins she is a mirror contrast to her secret half-sister, Victoria Winters, who dresses plainly, much like a librarian, and as suits her station as the governess to Roger’s son, David. Carolyn giggles like a common teenager. Her wardrobe vacillates between conservative classical styles and contemporary teen-aged styles with peg-leg pants, striped shirts, and sneakers.

The only “action” (a popular variety show followed Dark Shadows in 1966, called “Where the Action Is,” which featured acts like Hermans Hermits, Dick Clark, and Paul Revere and the Raiders) in Collinsport for young people is at the Blue Whale, a local watering hole featuring trademark rock ‘n’ roll music and a dance floor.

I don’t know what bars and taverns were like back in the 1960s in New England. In my time and in my part of the country, bars are not frequented by decent folks. (This may be regional. My grandfather was a tavern-owner and I was told that this fact may have been the source of some very nasty and perverse town rumors about me when I was a child. In very religious areas of the country like where I live, bars, taverns and the people who frequent them are looked down upon as sinners.) In the early episodes, we often see Carolyn dancing with men at the Blue Whale, often while her boyfriend, Joe, looks on in exasperation.

From the beginning Carolyn seems a little angry to me. Although, this character can certainly be read all kinds of different ways, which makes her all the more interesting. For instance, Joe and Burke Devlin describe her attitude as being one of “the belle of the ball.” Burke, a man old enough to be her father, seems to take some sort of satisfaction in taking her down a few notches in his quest for revenge against his rival Roger Collins and the entire Collins family.

Joe is frustrated that Carolyn won’t behave the way he thinks she should. Mrs. Stoddard wants Carolyn to marry Joe and he, also, seems to have nuptial intentions. Joe is favored by Mrs. Stoddard because, although he is a have-not, he is a hard worker with ambitions of buying his own fishing boat. It’s interesting that with all the Collins’ money, her mother never once suggests that she go away to study for a career, perhaps to take over the family business, at a nice university. Of course, if Carolyn went away to school, we wouldn’t have this interesting set of story lines surrounding her.

Like other fictional stories, the plot(s) relies on circumstances and actions that most sensible people would find a logical way around, but if we did without these things, all of which are a tutorial in how to complicate your life, then we wouldn’t have an interesting story. Examples of silly plot devices, which are a lesson in how not to live your life if you want to avoid complications, include basic things, such as, not:

  • Answering the door to anyone and everyone who knocks, without even bothering to inquire who it is
  • Answering the telephone every single time it rings
  • Accepting rides from men you barely know, don’t know at all, or whom you know well enough to know that they are hostile to your interests
  • Accepting invitations to the hotel rooms of men who fit any of the above descriptions and/or, also, have a criminal record
  • Visiting crumbling, apparently abandoned structures, especially alone at night
  • Visiting men, known or unknown to you, in a wide variety of other potentially deadly circumstances
  • Talking to the cops – ever

The women of Collinsport rarely, if ever, hesitate to do any of these things. They, also, fail to arm themselves in any way, no matter how frightened they become. Although, on, at least, two occasions Carolyn does threaten a couple of potential rapists with Uncle Roger’s revolver, which is kept in a drawer in the Drawing Room that is easily accessible by anyone.

carolynandjoanIf Carolyn is resistant to an eligible young suitor of her own age, she has very good reasons. After all, she is is young, has experienced nothing of what the world has to offer, and she is the daughter of a mother who was abandoned by her own husband, so she has a good reason to be leery of men. So, does her mother. Despite this, Mrs. Stoddard tries to push Carolyn together with Joe. She tells her that marrying Joe is an opportunity to escape this dark tomb, which is her ancestral home  – but, to what? What would Carolyn’s life have been like had she married poor, but ambitious and very blue-collar Joe?

Carolyn’s status and station in life, not to mention her lifestyle, would probably suffer quite a bit, if she married Joe. It’s easy to picture her living in a modest house with plaid, cotton curtains in the kitchen, standing over a hot stove, looking frumpy and frazzled while Joe is off conquering the world in his fishing boat and taking accolades from his buddies for having landed the rich shrew, the blonde whore in the haunted house on the hill, who is simultaneously coveted, envied, and hated.  There is still a lingering suspicion that Joe is a gold-digger, too. By marrying Carolyn, he would improve his station in life and, eventually, his finances to a very great degree. He would, also, be privy to the privilege and power the Collins family enjoys in the city founded by their own ancestors.

He would gain and she would lose by this union, as is traditionally the case for women in marriage. This must be in her mind, these images and these suspicions, along with all the whisperings from the have-nots in the town, which go on behind her back, but which she is yet acutely, unceasingly aware of. This is why I see Carolyn as angry. She has a good reason to be angry, anyway. Behind the facade of well-learned upper-class, long-suffering smiles and careless, girlish giggles, these things seem to be on her mind.

So, she resists Joe in rebellion against her mother and her mother’s ways. Instead, she embraces an enemy of the family, Burke Devlin, a man old enough to be her father, who spent five years in prison for manslaughter. But, Devlin isn’t a realistic suitor and, therefore, presents no real threat to her future. Devlin is both worldly and wealthy – unlike young, poor, uneducated Joe who knows only his trade.

Carolyn romanticizes Burke Devlin until she realizes that he really is trying to use her to harm her family. This reaches fever pitch when David’s mother, Laura, a witch who has a relationship to the mythical phoenix, returns to take him away. We learn that Burke Devlin may be David’s biological father, rather than Roger. Burke Devlin throws Carolyn over for Laura, but Carolyn doesn’t really begin to change until her mother becomes gravely ill with a condition the allopaths cannot diagnose or treat. At this point, Carolyn is must assume her mother’s responsibilities over the family’s assets.

Even Uncle Roger is forced to acknowledge her supremacy in the house as her mother’s heir. She decides to employ a parapsychologist, who uses a seance in order to learn the truth of her mother’s illness, which is, of course, the result of black magic perpetrated by Laura.

When Laura dies, Mrs. Stoddard recovers, but Carolyn is much different for this experience. She is changed in ways that Burke Devlin and Joe clearly do not understand, only seeing her in the ways the men see women, as objects devoid of individuality or humanity which are to be used as a means to an end. Devlin used Carolyn and Joe tried to – and in the next season when we go back in time, we see what Joe’s character is probably really like beneath the facade. He is, in fact, a gold-digger.

After this experience, Carolyn seems to lose her interest in men. From that point forward, we see that she understands how she is perceived by them and realizes the limitations of any relationship she might have with them, with the exceptions of the males in her immediate family – Uncle Roger and Cousin David. The only time she displays any interest in men is when she is trying to impress a point upon her mother or to obtain information, in which case, she uses her appearance and innuendo to manipulate the men by means of their mental weaknesses. In another instance, she is attacked by the vampire and becomes his unwilling servant.

Carolyn Stoddard may be the closest thing to a radical feminist in this show. Mrs Stoddard is a very powerful woman, but she still trusts men far too much, as evidenced by her faith in Joe. On the other hand, Carolyn sees the writing on the wall after what happened with Burke Devlin, who lied to her and used her, almost to the peril of her mother’s death. She is never the same after this experience. She is a quick learner. It would be good for all of us if we could study men so quickly and come to this conclusion at a young age.

Maggie Evans

beginnMaggie Evans is the first friend Victoria Winters made when she got off the train at Collinsport. Maggie works in the diner at the only (apparently) hotel in town. She serves up coffee, pie and gossip and may be seen as a mirror contrast to Carolyn Stoddard. Maggie, Carolyn and Vickie Winters are all about the same age. But, Maggie and Carolyn are never really friends, mostly because they never really cross paths with each other since they are in two very opposite social classes.

Maggie is a have-not from the town, whose mother is dead and whose father is a guilt-ridden, alcoholic, impoverished artist. Their relationship represents a role reversal in which she is more the parent and he is more like a child. They live in a simple, modest home. When Maggie is done working at the diner, she has to come home and prepare dinner for her Pop.

When Joe can’t land Carolyn, Maggie is his natural source of solace. Although, she has a good-heart, generally, she still assigns some unkind characteristics to Carolyn Stoddard and the entire Collins family. The source of this seems to be envy, since she does not really know Carolyn or her family.

Joe and Maggie are a much more likely match. Maggie can even recite all the different types of ships that sail on the high seas and she seems like a girl who bathes with plain soap and water and wears cotton dresses and sensible shoes. She is pretty, but not glamorous. She’s the kind of girl men marry, whereas Carolyn is the kind of girl men fuck and fuck over. This contrast between the two is very easy to spot.

A similar contrast between Carolyn and Vickie seems to exist, too, and eventually it is solid, practical Vickie that Burke Devlin proposes marriage to.

Overall, what I love about this series, especially this first year, is the focus on the female characters, especially the three younger ones. There is, also, the almost constant dark, moodiness of the show, which is only briefly relieved by the rock ‘n’ roll music at the Blue Whale. Despite all the horrors, there is something reassuring about it. It is some how gratifying to know that other people, perhaps these writers, do not see the world through rose-tinted glasses.

To illustrate why I think this show is so comforting, consider what I said in my previous post about supposedly wholesome family shows treating evil actions by men as comedy. In Happy Days when two men terrorize women in their bedrooms in the middle of the night, it’s humor. In Dark Shadows, when a man enters a woman’s bedroom with ill-intent, it is taken as a serious offence. Other people are concerned. Even men appear concerned and show compassion toward the victim instead of treating the event as a joke. It’s a fact that men enter women’s bedrooms with bad intentions while we are sleeping, but, at least, in Dark Shadows the men are sorry, they feel remorse, or they are punished and it is seen as a horrible act by others, rather than something light-hearted, not to be taken seriously. When the women on this show are terrorized by men and monsters (often the same thing), it is treated as a serious problem.

Barnabas Collins

2barnsDespite how good this show was, it was beginning to lose its audience, and in an effort to save it from cancellation, they decided to introduce a vampire into the story. Originally, this story line was only going to last for about 10 weeks, but the television-viewing public loved Barnabas Collins, and perhaps Jonathan Frid as that character. This not only saved Dark Shadows from oblivion, but it turned the show into a modern pop cultural phenomenon.

To fill in the gaps regarding the story lines of the show, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Shadows_(televised_storylines)

Barnabas, while protecting his own interests, brings to an end many of the problems plaguing Mrs. Stoddard, including the intrusion of Jason McGuire’s sleazy friend, Willy Loomis, and he, also, unwittingly avenges her against her blackmailer, McGuire.

barnandbrideHe becomes fixated on Maggie Evans, who is a dead ringer for his 18th century bride, Josette. He bites her, abducts her, and holds her captive in a prison cell in the basement of the Old House. The episodes depicting Maggie’s imprisonment as Barnabas Collins are metaphoric to domestic abuse commonly experienced by women at the hands of ordinary men. Barnabas insists on her learning her place as his bride. He takes away her identity by dictating her hairstyle and her clothing and tries to convince her that she is someone else, a person with a different name: Josette Collins. (When this is done to prisoners of war, it’s called “brainwashing.”) When she resists, he tortures her. He threatens his servant, Loomis, when he tries to intercede on her behalf to keep him from killing her. When Maggie finally escapes, Barnabas calls her back to him and holds her captive, again, this time insistent that he will kill her if she does not conform to his ideals of how she should look and behave. (This is exactly how men treat women, especially women who look like the women in porn because we are expected to behave in specific ways that men expect from us, but which are not natural to female human beings. When we do not meet these expectations, they become violent and punishing.)

This is all a metaphor to marriage and the domestic abuse that commonly takes place in it in which women lose their identities, forget their former selves, their friends, and even their family as they become imprisoned and isolated by the men who claim, as Barnabas does, to love their victims. Women who fail to conform to the man’s expectations are brutalized until they are dead or lose control of their own minds. Attempts at escape fail because the abuser is never far behind and the victim is mentally and physically weakened, often through repeated rapes (metaphorically, the draining of her blood), which destroy her life force, which is the seat of the lower will (this is the physical aspect of the will as opposed to the mental will), rendering her unable to get power over her legs.This is a literal feeling that is experienced by victims after rape, which render us unable to run from our attackers. We are paralyzed not only by fear of further violence, but by this loss of energy, a condition not recognized by Western medicine, but understood in other systems of medicine (including American Indian and Chinese medicine).

When Loomis, now Barnabas’ unwilling servant, tries to warn Maggie, he is accused of entering her bedroom to harm her. He is arrested and physically and mentally incapacitated for a while. Eventually, Maggie Evans is driven mad by Barnabas and ends up in a sanitarium.

loveA psychiatric doctor, Julia Hoffman, tries to help her, however, she falls under Barnabas Collins’ spell, too. In brief, this story line, in which Barnabas repeatedly strangles Julia and eventually tries to kill her, yet Julia insists that he can be cured of his vampirism, illustrates women’s relentless faith in the possibility of redemption for men, despite the fact that they are attacking, abusing, and trying to kill us (and, in many cases, succeeding at this). Julia sticks by Barnabas, believing in his humanity despite every monstrous thing he does, every murder he commits, and every threat he poses to her own life. Julia might be considered as an example of a liberal feminist because she believes that if only the evil influences were removed from men (e.g. the white man’s racial oppression, the Jewish manipulation, the influence of porn, the influence of violent video games, and so on with excuses ad nauseam), they could be human, they could learn not to rape and kill women and girls. As a scientist and doctor, she is trained to look at the facts – or supposed to be, anyway – yet, she repeatedly ignores the evidence and all the facts where Barnabas is concerned.

The vampire’s thirst for blood is a metaphor for sex, according to Dark Shadows writer, Joseph Caldwell. But, this is only a man’s perspective because for the female victims of this “sex,” who are unwilling, who must be tricked, cornered and trapped, placed in a trance, essentially drugged by the vampire’s bite, and who, if they survive the attack, are rendered weak and unable to act normally, under their own power, this is not “sex,” at all – it is rape. So, the vampire is a metaphor, instead, for the rapist. His blood drinking is a metaphor for his theft of women’s life force by means of rape. This may be why vampire movies, and horror movies, in general are almost therapeutic for victims of rape and other forms of male violence. Watching them is a way of coping with real-life horror, which is far, far worse than anything these writers could dream up in their fictional worlds. But, you can see how this horrific male violence against women is trivialized by men, in the words of one of the writers, himself – it’s sex. It is representative of eroticism rather than unspeakable – literally unspeakable – deadly, every day, as common as oxygen, male violence against women and girls. The vampire, like the rapist, has some control over who he attacks and when he attacks them. He only attacks when he knows he’s likely to get away with it. He seeks out the most vulnerable victims and those with whom he has developed a sick obsession. The vampire is a stalker, a pre-meditated sexual predator. He has the power to drive his victims insane or, at least, to make them appear crazy. The vampire, like the rapist, destroys his victims lives, murdering their spirits without completely killing their bodies. The rapist, like the vampire, appears as a gentleman, sometimes he’s a member of your own family – at the very least he appears normal and you never know he’s a vampire until that moment when he first tries to kill you. Furthermore, if you try to tell anyone that he is, in fact, a vampire (or a rapist), no one will believe you. They never do until maybe after there is a long trail of bloody victims and it’s far too late.

Still liberal feminists, like Dr. Hoffman, believe in redemption for metaphoric vampires. Julia gives up her paid work, her entire career, in fact, to help Barnabas, to serve him at her own expense and at great risk of physical danger (Barnabas is a classic domestic abuser), to redeem him, to gain his love (an illusion, since he’s a demon in the flesh), to cure him, to make him like herself, to mold him in her own image of humanity and compassion. So, she protects him. She lies for him. She covers up his crimes. She works side by side with him, imagining that he is or could be her equal and, all the while, he is only using her for his own secret, evil motivations. Is this not the very picture of a liberal feminist?!

The story of the return of Barnabas Collins from the grave is the subject of, at least, two movies, one of which I recommend and the other I cannot. The movie, House of Dark Shadows (1970), reprised this story line pretty faithfully, although more succinctly and more graphically. Some horror fans say that this was the best vampire movie of the 1970s. I wouldn’t go that far (I have other favorites – one obscure one, but I like it better, is called “The Vampire,” which starred Richard Lynch), but I definitely recommend it. Fairly recently (2012), there was an unfortunate remake by Tim Burton, starring Johnny Depp, called simply “Dark Shadows,” which I cannot recommend, unless you just want an excuse to throw things at your television screen. In the video, below, the vampire movie reviewer, Maven of the Eventide, explains everything that went stupidly wrong with this film. It’s far better than the movie, itself:

Genesis: The Return to the Year 1795

This is the final major story line of the series that I will address in this post. There are many more, but this one explains the mysterious legacy of the Collins family, its ghosts, the family vampire, and other unusual occurrences surrounding them. It is a revelation of the genesis of the vampire.

This story line is initiated by a seance, which is being held in the drawing room of the manor at Collinwood with the aim of contacting the spirit of a little 8-year old girl in period clothing, who first appears to play with David. She is soon seen by other members of the household. They believe that Sarah may be able to provide them with information about the strange things that are going on.

Every time a seance is held at Collinwood – and they hold quite a few, which is absolutely delightful! – it seems that Victoria Winters has some kind of classic trance mediumship experience. In one instance, the spirit of Josette speaks through her in her native French language, even though Vickie does not speak French. On another occasion, she experiences what Josette Collins experienced emotionally and visually the night she went over the edge of the cliff at Widow’s Hill.

On this occasion, something more surprising happens: Vickie goes into a trance and collapses. When she is roused, we see that it is no longer Victoria Winters sitting at the table, but another woman who is from another time, as evidenced by the fact that she is wearing period clothing. In the present time, Victoria Winters is only gone for only a few minutes. But, she has traveled back in time to to Collinwood in the year 1795 and what takes place then encompasses a long series of thrilling episodes – in my opinion, the very best of the entire series.

Victoria Winters has traded places with the 18th century governess for the little girl, Sarah. When she arrives at the door of the Old House, she is dressed in contemporary 1967 clothing and carrying a large book, which contains the modern record of the Collin’s family history. She is greeted by Jeremiah Collins,  who looks just like her recently deceased fiance, Burke Devlin (now played for some time by a different actor, Anthony George).

When she arrives in 1785, we see that all of the actors are playing characters that are either complementary to or in contrast to their 20th century ones. For instance, Louis Edmonds (Uncle Roger) is now playing the role of the stern and powerful old family patriarch, Joshua Collins, whose portrait is hung over the mantle in the drawing room. We see that Joan Bennet (Mrs.Elizabeth Stoddard) is playing the role of Joshua’s demure, powerless wife. Although Barnabas Collins is the original Barnabas, he is their son. He is betrothed to Josette duPres (Cathryn Scott Leigh, who plays Maggie Evans in the 20th century), a titled French noblewoman, whose arrival with her entourage is anxiously awaited.

On this same day, they are, also, expecting the new governess, however, when Victoria Winters arrives at the door, confused and wearing strange clothing, she is quickly accused by Abigail Winters (Clarice Blackburn, who played the Collin’s housemaid, previously), the sister of Joshua and Jeremiah Collins, of being a witch. It is she who calls in the terrifying witch finder, Reverend Trask (played by Jerry Lacy, who previously played a 20th century lawyer), who terrorizes Vickie by tying her to a tree to determine whether or not she is a witch. Afterward, she is imprisoned and put on trial for witchcraft.

In fact, many strange things are happening at Collinwood, which are, indeed, the work of a witch, however, it not Victoria Winters, but Angelique Bouchard (Lara Parker), who is the servant of Josette duPres, a member of her entourage who all arrived on the same day as Vickie. Angelique is the poor daughter of a Voodoo priestess from the island of Martinique.

cd4f1e6006e320c96ff425199d01ddf3Soon after the arrival of the entourage, we see a revelatory scene between Angelique and Barnabas, in which we learn that during the course of his courtship of Josette, which began at Martinique, he toyed with the affections of the servant girl. While Josette is a woman of a class, at least, equal to his own (she is titled, however, and this is controversial, especially to these American revolutionaries), he is tempted, perhaps by the power imbalance, itself, to seduce Angelique. Men tend to do these things when they think they can get away with them and they choose situations in which there is a great power imbalance. The power imbalance seems to be some sort of aphrodisiac!

He wants to keep this indiscretion between the two of them. Above all, he does not want Josette to find out. Naturally, Angelique is upset by being used and cast aside. But, far from being the powerless servant girl Barnabas thought she was, she turns out to be in possession of a very powerful occult knowledge and force.

If Barnabas had chosen to have an illicit affair with a common, powerless servant, then there would be no story here. She would have gone away quietly, without any other options. But, Angelique is resolute and determined to get what Barnabas promised her. She wants to be his wife. So, she begins to manipulate the residents and other guests of Collinswood by means of witchcraft.

In his own mind, his mistake was not so much deceiving a servant girl, but deceiving one who turned out to be a witch! This idea is repeated quite often by him. He blames Angelique for cursing him to become a vampire, so that whoever he loves he must kill. He never once blames himself for his own unethical actions against her. He only blames her and, in fact, everyone in this story who knows the secret of the curse blames Angelique. Furthermore, Angelique only placed this terrible curse on him after he shot and mortally wounded her! Still, he rages at Angelique, never seeing his own role in his downfall.

After Barnabas is bitten by a bat, initiating the vampire curse, he falls ill and doctors suspect it is the plague. His father Joshua insists on keeping his death a secret and he is placed in a coffin in a secret room of the family mausoleum. It is falsely written in the family history that Barnabas went away to England. It turns out that many things written in the history are wrong.

During the course of this story line, a rogue soldier named Nathan Forbes (Joel Crothers, who played Joe) courts Millicent Collins (Nancy Barrett who plays Carolyn Stoddard), who is a wealthy heiress. Millie marries the fortune-hunter, Forbes, but before she does, she signs all her wealth over to her younger brother Daniel (David Henesy, who played Cousin David). When Forbes learns about this he drives her insane and plans to kill Daniel in an effort to gain control of her fortune.

Soon after, Barnabas Collins goes on a rampage, murdering and terrorizing into insanity the members of his own family before his father finally chains him into his coffin in the secret room of the mausoleum. Only Joshua and David survive to become the roots of the modern Collins family tree.

Simultaneously, Victoria Winters is still on trial for witchcraft. Despite the best efforts of her defense team, she is unable to successfully defend herself against Reverend Trask’s charges and is hanged. At the moment of her death, her spirit is transported back to modern day Collinsport and the original governess is hanged in her place.

This story line is a kind of Garden of Eden theme telling the origins of man/vampire, in which Angelique represents a forbidden temptation, woman, who is the cause of all of mankind’s suffering. It is a spin on one of men’s oldest surviving works of fiction, Genesis.

The results of this original work of horror fiction, Genesis, are the centuries of men’s witch hunts against women and women’s culture, women’s science, women’s medicine, women’s ways, and women’s power.

Witchcraft and the women who practice it are a threat to the order of things, to men’s power, to the status quo, to man’s laws, and his conceptions of the world.

Being called a witch, being accused of sexual desires (even as children) and sexual offences, are matters that still hang over all our heads. Men are not sorry for the horrors they perpetrate against women. Furthermore, anytime men choose, they could begin the witch hunts, again. If a repeat of the so-called “Burning Times,” sounded far-fetched 20 years ago (and it did to me), it sounds much more plausible today. You need only look at the words of white supremacists online to see how much they hate white women, how they accuse us the same way they did centuries ago, to see how this happened in the past and how it could happen, again. Even as the white male entertains thoughts of reparations for black men, some of whom he enslaved long ago, he never gives one thought to the horrors he continues, to this very day, to perpetrate against the women who gave him life.

This last story line is not so much metaphorical as it is absolutely straightforward in its revelations of man’s inhumanity to woman and his continuing accusations against us along with his perpetual fear of our power and of what we will do to him once we get the upper hand. There will be Hell to pay – just as Barnabas paid for his crimes against the original woman of this story, Angelique, who set the rest of the family’s strange legacy in motion.

Was Angelique a Feminist?

angeliqueThe character, Angelique, possessed great strength and she was one of the most popular characters on the show. She was loved by many young girls in the mid-sixties, when feminism was experiencing a strong resurgence, who wished they had her power. Angelique had the power to confront and defeat men and, in fact, anyone else who got in her way. But, the character was not a feminist one by a long shot.

What makes Angelique a non-feminist is her obsession with a man, Barnabas. If she had used her power for herself, to better herself, to attain independence from men, then she could be seen as a feminist. But, Angelique was the opposite. She was both the temptress and the scapegoat, neither of which are positions of power.

As I pointed out in a previous post on the subject of witches in movies, it is almost always the case that women with power must use it to help men. Those who do this are the good witches like Samantha Stevens of Bewitched. But, those who use their power for their own ends, even when such use is perfectly justified, are the bad witches. Bad witches must be punished – they must die or they must be sent to an insane asylum. Angelique is an example of a particularly bad witch who is driven, not by a desire for power of self-improvement, but by the sexual desire for a man.

Could it be that Angelique wanted to marry Barnabas, which she did in the 1795 story line, in order to attain a position of social status? But, why does a witch need social status? Furthermore, if she wanted to attain such status, could she not find a way to achieve this without involving an obsession with the male form? I can think of half-a-dozen possibilities for doing so in a matter of seconds, all of which might have made a good storyline, but would not have suited this or any other fictional story written by men, to suit the ends of men, because it involves women doing things that do not revolve around men.

Men simply cannot stand this idea. That is why Angelique is not a feminist. She would never have been written as a feminist because in order for that to happen, she would have had to have a life and ambitions that revolved around something that wasn’t a man.

According to Lara Parker, in the video below, some young women in the 1960s seemed to be confused about what feminism is and mistook Angelique for a feminist role model. It’s safe to say that many – perhaps most – women (and virtually all men) are now more confused than ever about what it means to be a feminist. If Angelique could be considered a feminist, at all, she would have to be a liberal feminist (liberal feminists are far more liberal than they are feminist!) although they are no more feminist than Angelique because, like this character, they concentrate their efforts on changing men, on re-training men not to be rapists/monsters/vampires, on trying to re-socialize men and re-make them in their own image. Liberal feminists are nominative feminists only. It is easy to see how Angelique might be considered one of them, except that she was subject to a male power. She had a male overlord, who gave her the powers she had to do evil. Therefore, Angelique fails the test completely and could not really be considered any kind of feminist because, not only is she obsessed with a man, she is unable to act independently, under any power of her own.

 

Additional material:

Director, Lela Swift, discusses the supernatural themes of the show and the vampire’s mystique:

 

Three favorite cast members, Edmonds, Scott, and Frid, appear on Good Morning American to discuss Dark Shadows in 1987:

 

Television tropes in Dark Shadows: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Series/DarkShadows

 

The White Supremacist Woman’s View of the White Man and the Question: What Would a “Good Man” Look Like?

This question, “What would a ‘good man’ look like?” and this entire post is inspired by another blogger, Orwell’s Daughter, who has been doing a lot of audio posts lately, as opposed to writing her blogs. She posts the topic and a description at WordPress and then double-tasks by doing an audio post while she gets in her cardio workout.

I’ve had a number of subjects that have come up that I want to blog about, but I’ve been very busy both with work and with taking care of some other important things involving dealing with contractors. I’ve only been able to check out the recent posts of my favorite bloggers and this is my first window of opportunity to sit down and write anything in a while. I’ve been keeping up with Orwell’s Daughter while fixing lunch or dinner. Audio (like radio) is a communication medium I’ve always greatly appreciated.

I think I first ran across her blog a while back when I was looking up something to do with why white males and, in particular the American white nationalists or white supremacists, hate white women so much. I’d had an experience at YouTube in which I left a comment at a video about the Muslim invasion that turned out to be some kind of white supremacist channel. That’s when I discovered how much they hate white women, how much they presume women – in particular, white women – are always hot to be fucked by any male with a functioning dick, and how they regard us as both whores and livestock.  I made what I thought was a supportive comment and, in return, received rape fantasies about me being gang-raped by Pakistanis (that’s a different twist since usually I’m told I should be gang-raped by Mexicans or niggers). The internet provides the opportunity to interact with kinds of people you’d never go near in real life! So, I had no idea that white supremacists or white nationalists were so nasty to “their own” women.

Then, I found Orwell’s Daughter’s blog, which provides some humorous and, also, undoubtedly offensive criticism and insights into this behavior. What I have learned since is that there are two main factions of white supremacists that you will find online. The have similar sounding names and I don’t recall which is which, but one of them got a leader (like all dudebros and demons they love hierarchy and look up to a leader) who is some kind of MRA (Men’s Rights Activist), which probably explains the massive crossover we see between the MRAs and their various factions and the White Supremacists.

But, all White Supremacists appear to be, essentially, MRAs and some kind of conservatives who are all about propogating “the race.” It’s just that there is one faction that is even more vicious and hateful toward women than the other group, if you can believe it. They all try to figure out how they can lure white women to impregnate and when they fail at this, they often seek Asian or Eastern European women to impregnate – Asians being a favorite choice for them. And, this is, also, very odd. To me they seem to be more of an openly racist faction of MRAs who have a special hatred for white, American women.

Just as there are a few women who are involved in AVfM or MGTOW and who call themselves FeMRAs (Female Men’s Rights Activists), there are a few (very few) white women involved in white supremacist groups. They are there despite the fact that they are subject to all kinds of abuse by the males of the group, which I have witnessed in their online discussions. I’m not sure why they are there, at all. This part is still baffling to me.

All of the world of white supremacy can apparently be divided into two other groups: Christians and pagans. The pagan ones seem to have their act together slightly better than the Christian ones. At least, they recognize that Christianity is a Jewish religion with origins in Africa, possibly Ethiopia (according to Tacitus), but most certainly Africa because, according to their own books, this is where this group of people, who had been kept as slaves, were led out of by Moses, using the power of their invisible man in the sky. The concept of White Supremacist Christians makes about as much sense as keeping the white, European race pure by impregnating large numbers of Asian women. So, at least the pagans are smart enough to figure out that hating Jews and Africans does not harmonize well with adhering to a Jewish/African religion. Most of the women involved seem to be Norse pagans, although, I’ve seen a few Christians who seem to be the breedin’-for-the-Lord type.

Again, why are these women there? I cannot say for certain, but it I believe it may be that they think the last hope for men is the white man. There are reasons why someone might come to that conclusion – all created by the white man, himself, of course.

According to white supremacists, everything good in the world was created by the white man – they sometimes say “white race” or “white people,” but they always mean the males – because, according to them, women exist only to serve men and to breed more of them, either for males to continue their wars or for males to have pretty blond girls to fuck and suck the life’s blood out of, according to the sex of the offspring. Women’s accomplishments have been erased and as feminists we are well-acquainted with this fact.

Men have always owned women and still do to a large extent. In the days even worse than the present ones, they owned us and in so doing, they owned all our property. They owned our bodies and all that we produced by them (children – which they still own under the law in most cases) and they owned all that we produced with our minds and our hands. All intellectual property, all inventions, all that we wrought – all of it was stolen by men and claimed by them as their own.

They barred us from studying at universities, stole our ideas, claimed them as their own and got prizes and awards for them – never giving credit. Such was the case with the Lise Meitner (a European woman who, also, happened to be Jewish) who first came up with the procedure to split the atom. Men stole her work, took the credit, erased her existence, then used her discovery to murder innocent women and children. This is only one such example. There are many more. For instance, Werner Heisenberg, did not discover quantum mechanics – Annie Besant did. Einstein, a complete Jewish fraud who was a patent clerk, stole every single one of his so-called theories – none of which stand up to the scrutiny of any rational, independently thinking individual. Some of the people he stole from were women – some sources say he stole ideas from his own wife, which is not unusual.

Men, also, have relied on the service of women while they did work in cases where they actually did their own work. Still, a remarkable number of household, automobile, and agricultural inventions were the products of the minds and hands of women. In the U.S., property rights for women were a little better early on, but in some other countries, like England, women could not file for patents, so anything they invented would have some man’s name on it because she was OWNED by a man and could not act independently.

Men have, also, forced women to hide our identities not only in the past – but right this very moment. We have to be very careful to protect ourselves because men want to rape and kill us simply because we exist and when we resist them, when we tell the truth, when we express opinions they don’t like, that makes them want to rape and kill us faster.

Many women in the past and even now must hide their identities to obtain paying work. Thanks to the internet, this has never been easier! But, the circumstances of our needing to keep our anonymity because of male violence has not changed, therefore, even now women and women’s accomplishments are being erased and being presumed to be that of males – because that is the only safe way for us to operate.

It is said that history is written by the victorious and this is very true. When you are looking at recorded history, especially the popularly accepted versions of it, you are looking at a propaganda machine. It is a machine run by men at the expense of women. It is run this way so that men can retain their dominance over women and ensure that they have someone to stick their dick in, beat, rape, and kill at will because this is how men roll. As TrustYourPerceptions says, this is their struggle for the human genome and when you look at history, you see the propaganda of this struggle.

The white man is especially good at, not only erasing women’s contributions to the world – women without whom they would not even exist – but, they like to ignore other people’s history and when that’s not possible, they dismiss it or ridicule it.

Recently, I saw a YouTube comment left by a white supremacist in response to a comment by an American Indian. It listed a bunch of things the white dudebro believed that Indians never accomplished. It was all lies – all white man’s propaganda, which the white man, especially, loves to believe. It was something to the effect that the Indians never developed a written language, or built anything, or did any of a whole long list of things. On the contrary, there is a great deal of evidence for the red race once being the technologically dominant people on the planet. Of course, you won’t find this in the white man’s history books. But, you will have trouble ignoring the evidence if you venture down to Mexico, south of the Rio Grande, where the European males did not destroy every single goddamn thing in their wake like they did north of the Rio. Down there, they just destroyed most of it. Still, you can see that these were sophisticated builders with a sophisticated mathematical system (still not understood by the W. Europeans), and a sophisticated system of language and medicine.

For instance, the Aztec language is written in pictographs, which don’t look like the Roman alphabet, but they are a written language system. In fact, it looks so unlike the Western way of writing that it is likely that a typical white man would see it and not recognize it as a written language, at all. One of the oldest surviving manuscripts of the North American continent is an Aztec herbal translated into Latin in the 16th century, called the Badianus (everything else was destroyed by white male agents of the Vatican) Manuscript, demonstrates the sophistication of both their language and their system of botany. Again, it is very different from how Western patriarchal doctors would organize plants and their characteristics, but there is a reason for the organization they used, which has to do with their sophisticated understanding of medicine. All of it was formally lost, due to the intentional and systematic destruction by the white man – who now claims that the dirty savages never accomplished anything, at all. Having survived the Mexican Inquisition (an extension of the Spanish Inquisition, which was horrible, despite the efforts of some to say it wasn’t so bad since they didn’t kill as many women as the German men did in the same period!) the old medical system is kept alive today by many women and passed from mother to daughter.

The Indians may have been the most remarkable builders on this planet. They built civilization after civilization going back for millennia. They are still the builders – I have to hire Mexicans because white men won’t climb up 3 stories! And, remember who built those skyscrapers in New York City? – it wasn’t Donald Trump or anyone who looks like him – it was Navajos with their long, black hair blowing in the wind 50 stories up walking around on 2′ x 4’s. It was, also, the Navajo language that helped the Americans win the war because the Germans, as intelligent as they are, couldn’t decode it. South of the Rio, the Indians built ancient astronomical observatories that look similar to modern Western ones. They studied the stars. All the indications are that they flew in some kind of airships or rockets. There are and were (many of these were wiped out due to European agriculture production) what appear to be aerial markers (visible only from high up in the sky) and landing strips all over this continent. You won’t find this information in the white man’s history books, though. He wants you to believe that his is the dominant race, the dominant genome.

Again, this is just one example. The white man continually ridicules or ignores the accomplishments of other people. Here’s another for instance: Traditional Chinese Medicine. This is one of the most amazing things I’ve run across. It’s an ingenious system that survived centuries in China. It is highly effective, tried and true, yet it’s hard to find a publication written by a white man who has gone to study this system, which isn’t full of arrogance and ridicule. Yet, the Chinese have remedies for many problems that Western orthodox science and medicine cannot begin to fathom.

By contrast, the white man’s medicine has accomplished very little. They are mostly purveyors of disease and pain. They set up not-for-profit companies and claim to be researching a cure for cancer or Alzheimers, or MS, or CP, or autism (which they probably created), while torturing animals and people and doing absolutely nothing else – except taking donations, of course! – and never finding a cure. When was the last time the American Cancer Society, for instance, found a cure for cancer? When did the Alzheimer’s Foundation or the Parkinson’s Association or on and on in this vein – when did they ever cure any of these diseases? They say they are incurable! Although, most have been cured by ordinary people, by folk doctors, Mexican curanderas and brujas, and Traditional Chinese Medicine, and in many cases by American Indians (American Indians have multiple cures for cancer that give excellent results), who have proven cures that have existed for hundreds and thousands of years and they found these cures without torturing animals or people. But, the white man says – and many white women believe it, too – that the white man’s medicine is the best. The truth is that the white man’s medicine has always been bad in every respect, beginning with it’s foundation – it’s entire philosophy being one of materialism and making war.

Now, if you go to school, whether public or private (and I’ve attended both at various levels of my education), you will learn only about the white man’s science, the white man’s history,  his literature, his accomplishments (his buildings, his bridges, etc.), his philosophy, his medicine (biology), which is all told from his perspective, and those of other people, including white women, are carefully excluded. The accomplishments of women are almost entirely excluded – all I remember is Sacajawea and Betsy Ross! Sacajawea was taken captive, first by other Indian men, then by white men, and held as a “wife” and impregnated by a Frenchman. She had the baby with her while acting as a guide to Lewis and Clark. This must have been a great hardship and you can bet she never saw a dime or her freedom for having rendered this service. Betsy Ross, stitched up a flag, and this memory is truly a slap in the face to the contributions of white women in the early colonies, who were, also, slaves – the first white women being indentured servants and wives to particularly unenlightened Englishmen. White European women gave birth, often in the fields they were tending, and, if it’s anything like today, did the work of ten men while the men drank themselves into a stupor and masturbated. The Betsy Ross story is a cruel joke – a last laugh on white women- by the white, male historians.

At this point, if I were talking to a white supremacist, they would point out to me that a whole lot of what appears to be “white men” doing bad things is actually “Jewish men” masquerading as white and influencing the white men with their movies and Jewish propaganda designed to undermine the white race. Jews are running the government and the schools and causing all the corruption and perversion. White men aren’t really all this bad, they would say. They are made to look this way by Jewish impersonators and are being influenced by Jewish-run institutions. This is how the white man diverts attention away from his own crimes, his own degeneracy and the fact that he must be one of the greatest rapists on this planet – look at the Jews. Look at her, or him, or it. They’re the real culprits, he says. Or, at least, he says, they are just as bad as I am so why are you picking on me?

When Hitler cleaned out the Bauhaus in Berlin, they all went to the Los Angeles area and thus Hollywood was born. The first studios were owned by five Jewish families and many actors, directors, pornographers, and other perverts in Hollywood to this day are Jewish. It’s a fact.

It is very interesting. If you look at who owns any of the major media, whether publications like magazines or books, or news or entertainment outlets on television, or the movies, you will find that they are entirely male and overwhelmingly Jewish! It’s the same with the private Federal Treasury, which illegally prints the U.S.Dollar. Isn’t that interesting?

If you search further, you’ll find that they have done a lot of damage to white Europeans, including the males, but mostly it is women who have suffered, as always. For instance, an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the World Wars will lead any unbiased researcher to the conclusion that the official history is a lie told by Jews in order to extort money from the nations of the West and to form the essentially Communist state of Israel, which is a center of political power – not just in the world, but in the U.S. They are manipulating politicians – all of them, including Trump, as you will surely have noticed if you watched the recent speeches to AIPAC (a lobby belonging to Israel – a whole other country) during the elections. If a politician says and does what the Jews in Israel want, they send him a big, fat check! They are lining the pockets of all kinds of politicians, both Democrat and Republican.

The so-called Jewish Holocaust is a lie – an absolute, in-your-face lie – concocted by these same people to guilt and extort the Germans and anyone who even looks like a German! They even extort Switzerland, which was neutral during the war and didn’t have an opportunity to shove any Jews into any ovens, make-believe or otherwise. This Jewish Holocaust lie is perpetuated by the ADL and by the major Ivy League universities in the U.S., in particular, Yale. They are all Zionists. Not all Zionists are Jews (like Trump, for instance), but most Jews are Zionists. A few Jews over the years have blown the whistle on this thing and the whistle has been blowing for a long time, but nobody much seems to hear it. And, frankly, even knowing the truth about what I just wrote here is a little frightening. It’s another one of those things we’re not allowed to say or talk about in any way. But, if we don’t talk about it, we can’t get at the all important truth which will set us, as women, free.

I studied all of this stuff a long time ago. I read and studied the works of Marx and Hitler and I read the works of other prominent Germans, in the original language when I could obtain it. Still, I have a collection of these books on my shelves – things like The Zionist Connection, the Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion, the Truth About the Treaty (of Versailles), Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin by Dietrich Eckart (one of my favorites, which explains exactly what is going on in Germany and Sweden right now with the Muslim invasion. Eckart was a founding member of NASDAP and it was he who brought Hitler on board.), and multiple collectors copies of Mein Kampf, in English and the German. I, also, have lots of books on the subject of propaganda and the propaganda war because that was the essence of World War II and it is, in fact, the essence of any war.

The white man’s propaganda, which even black women and Hispanic women buy into, is that he is the best. If you are a black woman who can’t find a “good, strong black man,” you might turn your sights on a white man thinking that he is superior to the black man. If you believe the white man’s propaganda (put out by the Jewish media, which is supposedly the enemy and corrupter of the poor widdle, helpless white boys), you might find yourself a genuine Ward Cleaver or, at least, a Gilligan. Maybe he won’t hit you as hard or rape you quite as often. Maybe he can even hold down a high paying job and take you to the idyllic suburbs to live. But, this is a mirage – a false image of hope – for the black woman just as much as it is for many white women because the white man is a man just like any other.He’s just got a really good propaganda machine.

One aspect of his propaganda machine involves scapegoating. He scapegoats everybody and everything in an effort to distract from his own guilt, his own degeneracy. If you want to see some examples, just look at the news – just this past week or so, we’ve had a number of excellent examples of men scapegoating women, other men, a religion, and inanimate objects for their own wicked behavior. We had a white man at Stanford University who raped an intoxicated woman and blamed it on “party culture” and “alcohol.” Although, it doesn’t appear that he was drunk at the time of the crime (according to the two Swedish men on bicycles who caught him trying to kill a woman behind a trash dumpster) and it’s hard to understand what about the word “party” lends itself to rape and attempted murder.

We had another (undoubtedly staged event – one of many since Obama has occupied the White House, which don’t add up – literally, the numbers don’t add up on this one and there is no evidence of any actual killing presented) alleged mass shooting, this time in Orlando, Florida, in which a Muslim man somehow managed to shoot and kill 50 people at a fag bar and injure 50 more (this is where the story doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, at all – but most people don’t bother to investigate). In this obvious ploy to gain public sympathy for male perverts (and disarm victims, especially women), a religion has been blamed, American gun culture has been blamed, the 2nd Amendment has been blamed, the NRA has been blamed, guns (inanimate objects) have been blamed – almost everyone has been blamed except the shooter who is a man and, as we all know, it is men who kill.

The white man, especially the white supremacist types, like to blame the Jews for their own failings. While it is true that Jewish media, including Jewish porn, and Jewish universities have caused a lot of problems for white people, especially white women, who are most often the objects of the sexed up programming, pornification, and turning the white woman into the whore of the world, the white man has not resisted – instead, he has joined his Jewish brethren. Then, he’s like a little 5-year old with his hand caught in the cookie jar who points at his friend and says, “He made me do it!” But, the truth is no one made him do anything; he is simply exercising his own nature. He is a male being a male.

Increasingly white women despise men, especially the white man, and for this he blames not himself, but white women, the Jews, black men, Hispanic men, feminism and especially radical feminism (although they appear clueless about what it is). He never blames the real culprit – himself and his depravity, violence, and hatred toward white women. He is so certain we exist for him to rape and kill that  it never enters his mind, apparently, that he is too dangerous and despicable for any white woman to be in the same room with voluntarily.

Still, there are some women – some white women, in particular – who believe the white man can somehow be redeemed. They believe that we can work it out somehow (I don’t know how!). Perhaps this is the motivation of those Nordic pagan white supremacist women. Perhaps they believe the white man’s very old propaganda about life in the icy north before the arrival of the Christians. They say the women were warriors, too, who fought alongside the men. (They say this like it’s a good thing.) They believe that the white man, the brave Vikings – who, by the way, were terrors as much as they were traders the world over, raping and pillaging where they weren’t transacting business  – were examples of true and good men. (True as in troth – meaning loyal, loyal to the tribe.) There is a whole mythology about the All-father, Odin, and there are many female goddesses that figure into it and when it is placed next to Christianity, it is relatively less horrible for women. It is a way of romanticizing the white man, but it is just that – a romance, a fantasy, something that is not real and has absolutely no foundation in reality.

Some of them believe that the white male of the north was not such an asshole before the arrival of the Jewish religion, Christianity. They believe that without these foreign influences the white male could be somehow palatable to the white woman.

But, this is all a fantasy. It’s propaganda – old propaganda, dug up and resurrected for the purposes of the white nationalist movement.

I am familiar with a lot of it because I am familiar with Norse paganism. I used to wonder why having an interest in this subject would sometimes get me called a “Nazi.” After reading some of the writings of white nationalist women, I see where the confusion comes in. But, the fact is this: The Old Norse and the Vikings are a civilization with some merits to occultists like myself. We can learn from it. But,  like the civilizations that now lay in ruins south of the Rio Grande, they are a thing of the dead past and cannot ever be resurrected.

Romanticizing men is a dangerous thing for women to do. None of them are safe to be around and it’s the same story the world over. White men are not somehow inherently better because of their mythical Nordic ancestry. The truth about the old Norsemen is that they were uncouth. They bathed in their own filth, when they bathed at all, which was rarely. (The American sense of hygiene comes from the American Indians – not the white man, as I discovered personally when I visited Europe, where they have a completely different concept of such things.) The women were slaves within their tribe. When a man could not find a woman within his own tribe, he abducted one from a neighboring one. If the woman was suspected of being unfaithful, they shaved her head and beat her and did who knows what else, but I’m sure we can all guess because men always get around to it one way or another. Her children belonged to him and both she and they were given their owners’ name.

There is no redemption for anything this evil! Plus, I haven’t even started on the white man’s colonization escapades – right now, I’m just focusing on what he has historically done to white women, which is being romanticized – amazingly! – by these white supremacist women.

In one of Orwell’s Daughter’s audio posts, she says that she thinks it might be possible for white women to work things out with white men, if these foreign influences could somehow be extracted from them. If the Jewish perversion could somehow be exorcised, they could be good for women or, at least, something we could live with. I think this is what she was trying to say.

This, of course, caused me to recall many of the things I have written about above. It, also, caused me to wonder: What would a good man look like? What would a man have to be in order for me to be able to tolerate his presence – without keeping my hand on the loaded weapon in my pocket, at all times, that is? This is a little bit like talking about what a good snake  would look like. I once had a pet snake, so it’s all relative, I can tell you.

So, I thought that a good man, one who was tolerable, at least, would have to have the following characteristics:

  • Not be a rapist – meaning he can never have raped anyone, at all. This pretty much means he must never stick his dick in a woman or girl, at all, because we (or I, at least, and there are many women like me) don’t really want this and even if “consent” is obtained, as it frequently is through coercion, lies, false promises and misrepresentations (this used to be recognized as a crime by the law).
  • Not harass women and girls, not be a street harasser or a stalker
  • Not call women and girls cunts, bitches, and whores and otherwise insist that they long to be fucked by men.
  • Not hit, slap, punch, squeeze hard enough to injure and preferably not lay hands on women or girls, at all
  • Must not view porn, participate in porn, or visit strip clubs and similar establishments that rely on the exploitation of women
  • Must not deny economic, career, and other opportunities to women and girls

Now, this is a short and I think pretty fair list. These are some pretty bare requirements for not being a degenerate, a criminal, and a pervert, however, I can’t think of a single man I know who could pass muster, regardless of race, creed, nationality or personal relationship to me or lack thereof.

There is no way to have a really good relationship with a snake, either. They bite – unexpectedly. Even though you feed them and water them and dutifully clean their habitat, they might decide to wrap themselves around your neck and strangle you while you sleep. It’s the nature of the snake. When you take one into your home and try to make friends with it, these things are all in the back of your mind. It’s the same with men.

Based on my own experiences with men, as well as observing and reading about other women’s experiences, there is no way I could trust a man. I’d sooner have another snake in my house – really, I’d much rather sleep with a snake. If we’re taking calculated risks, the snake is a safer bet than the man is!

The question, I guess for these women, is: What level of threat is acceptable to you? For me, the answer is zero. This is why I do not ever advise women or girl to have relations or even friends who are males, if this is at all avoidable. Get away from men! If you value your health and your life, figure out how you are going to do what you want to do in life without them constantly trying to sabotage your work and kill you.

The idea that the white man is superior to anyone is laughable to me. I suspect that this is a romantic fantasy to these women who just cannot let go of men – they cannot stop loving men, even though it is as plain as the nose on your face that they are killing us! They are a grave danger to us. They are a terrible drain on our lives, on our energy, on our personal resources. Men are men and they are the same to women – all are death to us, either slowly or quickly, as they choose.