Does the Real Why Reason Unknown Men Molest Women Have Something Directly to Do with the Male Drive to Control the Human Genome?

I’ll try to keep this brief because I’ve been really busy, but this is on my mind and sometimes it helps to blog about things to get them out of my head. Several weeks ago, I attended a little party with attendees I did not know, except for the hostess, who I do not well, but whom I like. All of the attendees were women, except there was one man.

Although I am the true definition of an introvert, I mostly enjoyed the party while I was there. I haven’t been around people much, except for immediate family for a long time. I especially haven’t been around city people and almost all of the people there were from a larger city an hour or more away from here.

It is often said that there is a cultural divide in this country, but I don’t think it’s  so much a matter of black vs. white or north vs. south. Instead, it’s really a difference between city dwellers and rural dwellers. We might as well be living on two different planets!

Still, these were very nice women, the kind who work in offices and a few had worked in factories. But, at least, two of them spent a lot of the evening staring into iphones. Whenever they were not directly engaged in conversation, they were gazing into the devices and using a finger to scroll up and down. I’d heard about this being a social disease among milennials, but these were women well into their fifties! I found that very odd. What is the point of going to a social function, if you’re just going to stare into a little rectangular, plastic box?! I guess it’s a way to ignore things you don’t want to see or acknowledge. That’s how it seemed to work, anyway.

I sat down next to this friendly woman, who was lots of fun to talk to, when she wasn’t staring into the device, despite complaining she was unable to get a connection  on the thing out here in the boondocks. She had traveled quite a lot and quite recently and I genuinely enjoyed hearing about all of her experiences in a lot of different places. I genuinely liked her. But, when I wasn’t talking to her, I had the only man at the party on the other side of me and he was one of those guys who cannot have a conversation without putting his hands all over women, apparently.

He’s starting to get really personal with his conversation, too. After he critiques my appearance, he interrogates me about my religion (I don’t have one and where I do stand on the subject is something he doesn’t really want to know and I don’t want anyone to know). He’s a Christian and it’s important that the woman he’s molesting is Christian, too, apparently. Then, he asks me my age – another rude question that you’re not supposed to ask, but which I am frequently asked, nonetheless. I’m about the same age as all the other women in the room – over the hill! Once a girl is no longer a teenager and enters adulthood it is exceedingly rude to ask her age, but then apparently no other social rules apply here, either.

As the guy is questioning me and feeling me up, the nice woman is completely enthralled with her iphone. I try to get her attention, to politely turn the conversation to something that doesn’t involve my molestation by this man, who seems to be taking advantage of the fact that no one is paying attention.

Now, I’ve only been at this little gathering for a few minutes. I don’t want to offend my hostess, but I make a “humorous” cry for help a couple of times by saying loudly to the man, “Are you hitting on me?” and “I think you really are hitting one me.” No one seems to hear.

Meanwhile I’m doing this kind of slow-motion karate fight with this guy, who keeps touching me and I keep moving my arm to block him because, you see, out here in the backwoods, women pack heat. And, I’ve got a rod concealed on my person and if he keeps poking around and moves from just assaulting me to sexually assaulting me, then he’s likely going to find it. Maybe I should have let him find it, maybe then he would have backed off, but I don’t appreciate being felt up by men or anyone else, for that matter. So, I continued to block him like I had a black belt in that sort of thing, which – after years of dealing with molesters and rapists – I kind of do.

In another circumstance, I might grab this guy’s fingers and bend them backwards until he found himself on the floor. But, that kind of thing doesn’t work out well in social situations. It only works out in the dark corners of night clubs when you’ve got bouncers and body guards and a safe place to retreat to once you’ve punched or kicked the fucker in the face. This tactic wouldn’t work here. So, I made the excuse that I needed something to drink and found the hostess. At which point he got up and left, insisting on a “hug” from me before he departed. I knew this dudebro all of about 10 minutes!

This skeevy experience combined with the complete lack of any awareness on the part of any of the women around me caused me to remember many such situations I’ve been in. I’ve been followed by strange men and tried to get help from other women to no avail. It’s my fault this prospective killer is following me. I’ve been introduced to men before and said all of, “Hello, It’s nice to meet you,” only to have the dude come to my apartment to find me – and when I wasn’t there, by sheer luck, to be be raped or murdered, I was blamed – by the other women, including the one who introduced me to the criminal. I have so many of these stories, I couldn’t go into them all and I’m sure that if you’re reading this you have similar stories of your own.

The thing I’ve been wondering about for a long time now is why men cannot seem to talk to me without molesting me. This is a really gross problem, which serves to keep me from entering social situations and spending much time in public places, at all. Often the molesters are employees of a place! (Yes, it’s illegal for an employee of a company to put his hands on customers, but they do it, anyway.)  I think it’s a lot like hating dogs (and I do hate dogs) and then having dogs constantly coming up and put their noses in your crotch and lick you and other people think this is normal and just fine. No one bats an eye or looks away from her iphone for a second, even though you are clearly asking for help because it always happens in a situation where you can’t defend yourself the way you ought to be able to because public opinion is on the side of perverts and dog lovers!

Then, the possibility hit me that that all of this molestation has something to do with the subject of this outstanding article series, which was published on May 15, 2016, at https://trustyourperceptions.wordpress.com/, entitled “Semen: Men’s Chemical War Against Women. Appendix: Compounds in Human Semen Which Alter Female Psychology, Behavior, and Physiology.” The reason for the molestation, the masturbation in corners, and men’s insistence on sliming unknown women with their essence may have something to do with their attempts to alter our behavior in some way and maybe not just our behavior, but our reproductive capacity. Maybe all this molesting and sliming has something to do with keeping complete control of the genome.

This thought didn’t really hit me too hard until I saw this article: http://www.dailydisruption.com/years-alone-female-shark-reproduces/3213  It’s about a fish, one of a number species, who when the female is removed from the presence of males are able to continue their lineage by reproducing on their own, the offspring containing only the matrilineal DNA.

Could this be the real reason for all the casual molestation and assault by random men? I leave it to you to ponder as I continue to do.

 

 

Baking with Amy, Part II: Review of Amy Bouzaglo’s Cookbook, “Baking with Amy: Baking Up Some Magic”

I recently purchased a digital (.epub) version of the cookbook, “Baking with Amy: Baking Up Some Magic” by Amy Bouzaglo, published in April, 2015. This reader-friendly book is written by the chef of Amy’s Baking Company in Scottsdale, Arizona, of “Kitchen Nightmares” fame and is sure to be of interest to culinarians and aspirants of all levels of expertise.

A Beautiful Book

unnamed_grandeThis is a beautiful book, well-laid out, and very pleasing to the eye. It is precise and well-written. It is not a typical celebrity chef cookbook or, for that matter, a typical cookbook, at all. The author is a chef first and an only accidental celebrity after the fact. It contains recipes for desserts I love, but have not yet tried making, as well as a few that I already make. This book provides clever additions, special ingredients, and describes expert techniques for making some of my favorite dessert dishes in a better way. It, also, provides unique recipes and flavor combinations for dessert dishes I’ve never seen before.

While I have only purchased the digital version of this book, I would really love to have a hard copy for my personal library because this such a beautiful book it has a collectible appeal for those of us who collect cookbooks. I have a collection, many of which are vintage first editions and I choose them as much for their unique recipes as the beauty of their illustrations.

Remarkably Well-organized

Apart from its beauty, the most immediately outstanding feature of this cookbook, which sets it apart from any others I’ve seen, is its remarkable organization. A certain notorious chef commented that he didn’t see how a single person (or one with very little assistance) in a relatively small kitchen could produce so many different types of food from scratch. When you see how well organized this book is, you will see how it is possible. With the information in this book a person can produce a great variety of desserts from a relatively few basic recipes.

The organization of the book is the primary basis of its creativity. The author shows you how to do big things by doing smaller things first. There is a great deal of emphasis on doing things in a prescribed way, then using the base recipes you’ve mastered to let your own creativity flourish. She provides you with 20 basic recipes, then shows you many ways to put them together to produce a wide variety of desserts, which if combined with your own taste and creativity could be the source of an infinite number of delicious desserts and flavor combinations.

Instructive, Encouraging, and Creatively Inspiring

The author is generous in her encouragement to individuality and creativity. This book, also,  inspires the reader to generate ideas for improving his or her own existing recipes. Whenever a tip or technique is provided, the author explains why it is a good thing to do. I already have ideas from this book of how I’m  going to change some of my current baking practices to make some of my own favorite recipes even better. The book is very creatively inspiring this way.

For instance, I just made a half-batch of my favorite chocolate chip cookie recipe, which I’ve been making for years, using some tips and ideas I got from this book. I used super fine sugar (which I made into super fine by using a food processor) and Kosher salt; normally, I use granulated Morena sugar (using Morena sugar is one of my own personal baking touches) and sea salt. I, also, sifted the flour, which I don’t normally do, and the recipe turned out better than ever! This is a tiny example of the tips offered to beginners and intermediates, however, I can already see that the information in this cookbook is going to make  my current baking practices so much more professional.

Recommended for Beginners, Intermediates, and Experts Alike

This cookbook is good for dessert-makers of all different levels of expertise. There are lots of beginner tips for making desserts that are regarded as tricky or difficult to make. It is, also, unique enough for more accomplished bakers. I am somewhere between a beginner and an intermediate. There are certain things I feel I’m accomplished at making, yet I feel I could improve on, and there a number of dishes I would like to try. This is a very good book for someone at my level of expertise.

My selections from this book, which I plan to make first: The Chocolate Mousse; the Vanilla Bean Cheesecake; and then the cherry pie. I have never made a mousse or a cheesecake before. These are two of the base recipes in the cookbook. Once mastered, you can make other fancy dessert combinations with them. My favorite dessert in the whole world is cherry pie and I think I make a good one, but I see room for improvements as I read this book. I want to try the cherry pie recipe in this book exactly as it is written. I am very excited to try these recipes and I will post an article about my experiences with, at least, one of them in an upcoming article. I think I might start with the Chocolate Mousse!

Where to Buy “Baking with Amy”

Buy the book from Amy’s website: http://amys-baking-company.myshopify.com/collections/all

This is the author’s homepage: http://amys-baking-company.myshopify.com/

You can, also, buy the ebook directly from Lulu for only $3.00: http://www.lulu.com/shop/amy-bouzaglo/baking-with-amy/ebook/product-22130871.html

If you’d like to purchase the digital epub version, but don’t have a reading device, you can read it on your computer by downloading a free epub reader. My two favorites are Calibre (which I prefer for my Windows 7 PC) and Ice cream (which I prefer for Windows 8).

Scroll down under “Additional Material” below to see videos showing some examples of Amy’s baking style.

bw-cats-15

Meow! Translation: The End!

F.T.C. Disclosure Statement: This is an unsolicited, unpaid review by an unbiased purchaser of this book, who has no connection to its author.

Copyright Statement: Copyright © 2016 by Radical Witch. All rights reserved.

Permissions Statement: I, hereby, grant permission to Amy Bouzaglo to use the contents of this review, whether in part or in whole, in any way she sees fit, including for any commercial purposes, freely and without attribution.

Additional material:

The video below is an example of Amy’s baking and instructing style. This is a video with a recipe and tips for making Gingerbread men. This video is excellent, but her book is even better!

The following video demonstrates one of the Base Recipes, Creme Brulee, directly from “Baking with Amy”:

Other reviews:

 http://www.chicagonow.com/intellectual-chicago-suburbs/2016/06/stevens-book-reviews-baking-with-amy-a-cookbook-by-amy-bouzaglo-of-amys-baking-company-fame/

http://www.eater.com/2015/7/31/9060935/best-lines-kitchen-nightmares-amy-bouzaglos-cookbook

This one contains one of her recipes: http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/restaurants/amy-bouzaglo-of-amys-baking-co-has-a-cookbook-recipe-7102164

 

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

 

The Power of Fiction to Rewrite the Patriarchal Narrative: Free College-level Writing Courses

Dosso_Dossi_006

Woman Writing

In several of my recent posts, such as, “Radical Feminist Analysis of Dark Shadows, The Television Series (1966-1971),” and “Men’s Propaganda War on Women: Television Sitcoms Designed to Groom Women and Girls for Male Sexual Depravity,” I’ve discussed the use of fiction, mostly in the media of movies and television, to create narratives about society and the relationships of men and women that support the patriarchal establishment and which is highly detrimental to women and girls. I have discussed the almost complete control that men have over the movie industry and how they channel the energy of the most powerful women to the service of males in films, such as in my blogpost, “A Radical Feminist Perspective on Witchcraft Movies: Movie-makers Throw Witches and Women a Bone.” I’ve discussed the television series, “Roseanne,” and how this is regarded as a feminist television show, although, the feminism of the characters is very limited by their social class. I’ve talked about how little has really changed in the portrayal of women in television, of which the television show, “The King of Queens,” is a good example.

Television shows and movies all rely on scripts. Some are originally written as plays while others are adapted into scripts from other forms of fiction, usually novels, novellas, and short stories.

I find that the power of fiction to influence people is generally underestimated. In particular, I’ve noticed that a lot of feminists (including radical ones) are aware of the power of non-fiction. In fact, most are brilliant at writing it, at telling their own personal stories about matters that are difficult to talk about and would be impossible to talk about without the relative anonymity of the internet. But, many regard non-fiction as being more important and may be quick to dismiss fiction.

In fact, this post is inspired by  an online discussion with someone who is a very powerfully influential and courageous exited-woman (one who was trafficked as a child and survived!) and I found she was quick to dismiss fiction as the construction of some far off ideal or the creation of a feminist utopia that can never be. While there has been some fiction that imagines life without men, such as Herland, published in 1915 by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, there are other ways to approach writing radical feminist literature.

The examples of such writing are very few because, as I’ve shown in previous posts, fictional narratives must serve men or else they will not see the light of day. Historically, women were forbidden to write and those who did were regarded as whores, which is why they were rarely published, had to publish under masculine-sounding names, and when they wrote, they served men in their writing, such as was the case with Jane Austen, who was praised to high heaven in her time by the likes of Sir Walter Scott and the Prince Regent of England.

Writing, publishing and now movie-making and television-script-writing, producing and directing are still areas that men try very hard to keep women out of. Certain genres of fiction, in particular, science fiction, are very difficult for women to break into or to be acknowledged for their achievements. Sci-fi is notoriously male dominated and women who have attended sci-fi conventions, regardless of their level of achievement, have been subject to all kinds of sexual denigration by the men.

There are numerous articles and discussions online devoted just to harassment of women writers by the men, including men writers, at sci-fi writers’ events. Here’s a sampling of what women writers are subjected to, so you can see what I mean:

On Sexual Harassment at Conventions

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Science_Fiction_Fandom

The above link makes reference to these particular events:

The Character of Sexual Harassment at Cons

You get the idea, of course, and if you’re still wondering just do an internet search on “Sexual Harassment at Sci Fi Conventions.” There’s a whole lot more.

Let me tell you the reason for this, if you don’t already know. This reason, also, spills over into the reason for the outrageous degree and number of incidents in which mobs of men attack women who create or critique games. The science fiction genre is very powerful. It is in some ways more powerful than any other genre of fiction because it is the one that can most be used to both illustrate the absurdities of society and to forge new directions – even to provide the foundation for new scientific discoveries and inventions.

The applied creative imagination is an aspect of witchcraft – truly. When we create fictional worlds and fictional characters we are at one with the creative forces of the universe.

Here are two examples of fictional novels, both written by men, as far as anyone knows, which illustrate the strangeness of our world, both of which were adapted into movies and one of them into a television series, as well:

The Man Who Fell to Earth, published in 1963, by Walter Tevis: This gives us a look at earth from the perspective of an alien from a distant planet. The alien is from a technologically advanced planet, which has run out of water. He has come to earth on a mission to save his dying planet, but is eventually caught, imprisoned, and treated about like you would expect men in white coats would treat any living creature they want to “study.” Their scientific study is an excuse for torture.

Logan’s Run, by William F. Nolan, published in 1967: This is one of my favorite science fiction stories of all time. It’s far better than Star Wars because it tells the truth about mind control in a way that could only be done in fiction. It illustrates how mind control, especially when the system has been in place for centuries, operates to imprison people in their own minds through belief – blind belief. In this story, there has been a nuclear event in the past and civilization only survived by living in the domed city. It looks like paradise, but it is a prison in which everyone must die at age 30, believing that they will be “renewed.” They believe that there is no outside and those who are not part of their organized civilization, which is actually a soft tyranny, are savages. Logan’s Run bears some similarities to Aldous Huxley’s A Brave New World, but I actually think Logan’s Run is even better. Ideally, they should probably be read together because the relationship between the two works seems undeniable.

The men fight to keep this powerful genre out of the hands of women because it is through science fiction that their own evils can be most easily illuminated. The stories in which feminist author’s create utopias, in which men and their power over us is either eliminated or greatly diminished, would fall into this category of fiction.

But, there are other genres that could be just as powerful, if used in the service of women instead of males.

An example of this – and, as you know, there are very few in either books or film, especially since both have been entirely in the hands of men and very controlled by them until very, very recently – an example of how fiction is used in the service of women may be found in one of my favorite witchcraft movies, Season of the Witch, (aka. Hungry Wives or Jack’s Wife), which was made in about 1971, and supposedly the script was written by George A. Romero. Although, I have my doubts about how much he wrote of it, since it may well have been primarily the work of his wife at that time.

Season of the Witch, is of the horror genre, which is, also, a very illuminating one, as discussed a little bit in one of my recent posts on the television show, Dark Shadows. Horror probably does the most to tell the truth about the lives of women and about the nature of men. In Season of the Witch, we do not see a feminist utopia, but a terrible reality, which a woman (and her daughter, to a lesser extent) must somehow escape. She does this by renouncing patriarchal religion and patriarchal cultural norms (to the best of her ability) and embracing her true nature (symbolized by the Green Man chasing her through the house in dreams) as a witch. Eventually, she frees herself in a very real and unexpected way and we are left, as the audience, to decide whether it was witchcraft or not. (I think it was!)  This film is very valuable because its protagonist provides a role model to women. It is, also, a cautionary tale about marriage and the nature of men.

Romero, himself, has described it as a commentary on Women’s Liberation, but it is not something on a large scale, but rather something very personal in one woman’s life. It is one small victory for this woman, which if modeled would be a victory for all of womankind.

It, also, a story we can all relate to in some way, as feminists, because we have had to free ourselves one way or another from the mind control programming laid on us from the time we were infants, enforced by psychological and physical abuse. It takes courage to break free from that – and, unfortunately, it’s something most women never do.

The patriarchal programming of little girls and of adult women through fiction is so absolute. We are inculcated with their sick, twisted ideas about us and our nature to the point that we begin to believe it ourselves. There is so little for girls and women to grab onto as examples of how to plot a path to freedom – and this is where radical feminists writing fiction can make a difference.

I believe we can re-write the world, that we can – through the power of imagination – forge a way out of this dark prison and help lead other girls and women out by providing fictional models of women who have overcome male domination.

I’ve had my own ideas about this for a while, but I’ve never tried to actually write the story. Oh, I’ve put some things down on paper, but there is an art – a craft, a skill, and knowledge – that goes into writing fiction well. So, I have these ideas revolving in my mind. Every day I wake up with them and I feel like a caged animal, thinking, planning, every day how to break out and how to rescue my fellow prisoners. I think this is the answer. We are going to have to write our way free!

You can imagine an ideal world for women. That’s good. But, if that’s too unrealistic for your tastes, you can imagine a world in which one little thing has been made better for girls and women. You can take one little thing like that and run with it and see where it takes you. What if women had complete reproductive rights? What if women never needed to fear rape, again? What if women had as much economic power as men do?

You can take a situation, a single person, or a whole community of people, and use that as your creative experiment in freeing women in some way. What if there was a town – just one town – in which rape was taken seriously? What would happen to the women and the men in that town? What would little girls’ lives be like in such a town?

This one is for NoMorePaperTowels: What if the women in a community developed their own language that only they knew and understood?  How would that affect the people in the community, male and female? How would it change their lives? Would it alter the power dynamic?

Try to think about one tiny aspect of the patriarchy that could be chipped away at and make it happen in the life of a character or characters that you own.

I know activism is a big subject among feminists, especially the liberal feminists, but I ask you to to consider how much more change can be effected quietly, in the minds of people, moving them a little bit at a time, than by taking to the streets with megaphones and picket signs. What I am proposing is a very quiet, stealthy form of protest, in which we insist on our own creation and in which we take control of the fictional ideas that men have created to our detriment and have forced and enforced on us. This is where the real power is. This is why men get angry and attack women at sci-fi conferences, why the try to bar women from the writing and production of films and movies. But, they have had trouble controlling women writing books. They are having more trouble than ever now because the major publishing houses have lost control to digital and on-demand publishing.

Writing is an area in which women have always excelled. It’s an area in which radical feminists do phenomenal work although many of them have had limited educational opportunities, but this doesn’t stop them from being amazing, brilliant writers. I have never known a more talented group of people. I suggest that this is an opportunity, something that we should not leave on the table. We should seize it!

Free Fiction-writing Courses for You to Learn and Perfect Your Craft

Present and upcoming (soon) classes through Coursera on Creative Writing, which you can audit absolutely free!: https://www.coursera.org/specializations/creative-writing

The above courses, can be taken for credit toward a degree, but a fee applies. Of course, if you are working toward a degree at another university, you must check with them to make sure they will accept the credit or that it applies in a way that helps you accomplish the attainment of your particular degree.

But, you are free to audit the classes, which means you get to sit in on them, listen to the lectures and get the assignments, which you can complete on your own. The limitations are that you will not be able to participate in peer grading and will not be able to receive a grade.

I’m auditing a couple of these courses right now through Coursera from Wesleyan College (one of the few all-women liberal arts colleges still around) and they are excellent. I’ve previously taken similar courses from another all-women’s liberal arts college, but it has been years ago and it is wonderful to see how fresh the courses have been made. It is very enjoyable and I think it could really help anyone who is trying to write fiction.

Check Coursera often or sign up for email notifications from them (that’s what I’ve been doing for a long time!), so that you are the first to hear about exciting new classes you can audit. Some are taught by famous writers.

Men’s Propaganda War on Women: Television Sitcoms Designed to Groom Women and Girls for Male Sexual Depravity

Happy_Days_Cunningham_family1974As I mentioned in the previous post, much of what we believe about men is the result of male propaganda. Propaganda is a major aspect of any war. It is used to gain compliance from the enemy, to demoralize her and in the case of male propaganda against women and girls to groom her. This post has a lot to do with the power of fiction, which men understand very well – they live their lives in a fantasy world in which they are heroes and sages. Non-fiction is regarded as being more important by many people, but the fact is that fiction is by far more powerful than any non-fiction. I plan to discuss the power of fiction more in a future post. Propaganda through fiction is how men mold our image of them, of ourselves, and of the social order – it shapes what we see as being natural and inherent. But, it is only men’s fiction.

Men’s propaganda war against women and girls is a very broad topic because it is all around us. You’ll find it in literature, music, and art going back for century after century. You’ll see it in most of the supposed non-fiction on television and in film, such as news and documentaries (in which the propaganda war is sometimes far more apparent), as well as in all the fiction, such as movies and television series, whether they are dramas, comedies, reality television or virtually any other format. You’ll see it in the newspapers and now the online news – just take a look at an outlet like the U.K. Daily Mail any day of the week, especially look at the celebrity news and the Femail section – all you will see is anti-woman propaganda. You will see objectification of women and sometimes even little girls. You’ll see who looks good, in some man’s opinion, whether dressed or undressed, who had a “nipple slip,” who has a “baby bump,” and all kinds of reinforcement of the slave institutions of gender and marriage.

The propaganda war is perpetuated by individual men and sometimes women, too. They enforce gender restrictions on their own children and males enforce it on girls and women they don’t even know – all the time. If you go out in public, especially in a high-population concentration area, there will be a man who will remind you that you are nothing but a walking hole to him  in one way or another. He may do it in a “polite” way, even. But, the idea that there are certain roles for men and women is deeply ingrained and enforced, regularly and often, against women and girls.

In order to narrow the scope of this subject of the propaganda war on women, which is ubiquitous, I am going to limit my discussion to television. Since I don’t have television and have seen very little of it aside from clips and probably pirated posts of television shows on Youtube, I will describe the kind of programming I remember in television programs when I was growing up and the few that I have seen recently.

My favorite television series have mostly been sit-coms – in fact, I think comedies are the most insidious forms of propaganda against women and girls because they cause us and others to laugh at our oppression and abuse. I mention some examples of this in my review of the comedy series “The King of Queens.

Almost any comedy series you can think of is an offender: The Andy Griffith Show; I Love Lucy;  Leave It to Beaver; Bewitched; I Dream of Jeannie; All in the Family; Happy Days; Bosom Buddies; Three’s Company; The Roseanne Show; The George Lopez Show.

There are some older series I’ve seen only an episode or two of because they were so perverse and disturbing to me. Some of these are regarded as being very wholesome. For instance, there is an episode of Ozzie and Harriet, in which Ozzie, the ideal American father, is ogling a woman on the golf course.

There is an old television drama program called the Kraft Theater. I once watched an episode written by Rod Serling, featuring an appearance by Elizabeth Montgomery, from 1955, called “Patterns.” You can watch it at the link provided. This old program was very disturbing to me because I used to work in offices back in the 1980s and this is the same kind of mistreatment, dismissiveness, and sexism I frequently experienced. Serling often writes morality plays – many of his Twilight series episodes are modern morality plays, which deal with ethics and fair treatment, especially of oft maligned, oppressed individuals. This is the case unless, of course, the oft maligned, oppressed individuals are women – this is entirely ignored as if it does not exist and you will see that in this particular program. There is a question of a man’s business ethics in relation to other men – but, never in his treatment of women in the office, who are nothing but underpaid servants.

Other old drama series, in particular Alfred Hitchcock Presents, The Alfred Hitchcock Hour, Perry Mason, and some other dramas include anti-woman propaganda. But, it is most insidious, and often more difficult to discern, in comedies that make us laugh – or, at least, make people who aren’t “humorless radical feminists” laugh!

Some of the nastiest comedies are those that are touted as “family” shows, in particular, The Andy Griffith Show and Happy Days, both of which featured a wise father imparting his “morals,” as such, to his sons. As I said two posts back, men are angry with women because what is moral to them is immoral to us – and vice versa. What is moral in a Christian-dominated, male-dominated culture is for men to have unfettered access to  and control over women’s bodies. Our resistance to this is immoral, according to them, because we are not obeying God’s command to submit to males. This makes the men angry; it makes them feel justified in raping, torturing, and killing us.

The Andy Griffith Show is extremely authoritarian. The sheriff is a gentle tyrant, who almost always knows better than everyone else. Usually, the only time he ever gets it wrong is when he over-disciplines his son, Opie. Then, he always makes good and apologizes to the boy. Girls and women are all secondary characters in this show. Aunt Bea takes the place of the boy’s mother and is the sheriff’s live-in cook and housekeeper. She’s a silly old woman, who makes bad pickles and falls for con men, which we see in several episodes.

Even though Andy is an ugly and undesirable old man, he uses his power and authority as sheriff to pick up on women, whether they are residents, have just moved to town, or are just passing through. His hilarious, bug-eyed sidekick. Barney, also, has a little gal of his own and many episodes are devoted to the sheriff and his deputies’ dating escapades.

I recall two particularly disturbing episodes of this show: “Andy and the Woman Speeder” and “The Manicurist.”

In “Andy and the Woman Speeder,” Barney and Andy pull over a woman who is speeding through town in a convertible. They take her to jail and the old trope of the attractive woman trying to use her feminine wiles to get out of a ticket unfolds. There are many sexually suggestive scenes, in particular, there is one in which the prisoner, a “stubborn female,” is shown undressing in silhouette while provocative striptease music plays in the background. The combination of patriarchal police authority and sexual situations involving male authority over an imprisoned woman make for a very perverse episode in the disguise of wholesome, all-American television viewing.

In “The Manicurist,” starring Barbara Eden, we see another testosterone-soaked morality play. The men in town all line up for manicures when a pretty, blonde, single woman, who is presumably hot for every old geezer in town, turns up in what she thinks looks like a nice, friendly town, in search of work. After all the women in town are inflamed by this woman’s existence (remember: men write these things, actresses just mouth the words they are given), due to the male’s undisguised, panting perversions, Andy advises her to go back to her possibly abusive boyfriend since that’s her rightful place – at the side of a man, not causing trouble and upsetting the system by daring to become an entrepreneur and trying to live as an independent person. She thanks Andy for his manly and fatherly wisdom.

The message is that men know best. Women have a certain limited place. Even the best, good, God-fearin’, folksy men cannot help their disgusting behavior toward women, which we see from long camera strokes up and down Barbara Eden’s legs in “The Manicurist.” It is man’s role to ogle women and it is women’s role to be ogled and to either ignore it (a big joke – and the message is that women are stupid and don’t see what men are doing to them) or to enjoy it (women are whores and love being treated as objects by males).

In Happy Days, we see a total reinforcement of “boys will be boys” type of behavior. There is the family patriarch, Mr. C, and his wife, Mrs. C, and both reinforce gender roles on their children and every one else’s. Mr. C  advises his son on how to deal with girls. The female characters including the wife and daughter are secondary to the male characters, as is common in almost every television show ever made. The Fonz is a pick-up-artist, who advises Richie and the other fellows on the show, including Potsie and Ralph Malph on how to pick up women, how to treat women, how to get what they want from these women. The Fonz is irresistible to women, as if he has some hypnotic powers – like Dracula. He snaps his fingers and women cling to him and they walk off together and it is often more than suggested that he is going off to fuck them. We never see this, but the suggestion and the assumption can be found in every show. But, the Fonz, far from being a villain, is the hero of the show who is pitied by the Cunnighams as a overgrown orphan.

One of the most disturbing episodes of this show I remember – and almost every episode is riddled with perverse filth in the name of family entertainment – is one called “Hard Cover,” in which Potsie and Ralph conduct a “panty raid,” at a local college dorm. Yes, felonious sex crimes are funny in TV Land. The two break into women’s bedrooms at night and terrorize them, chasing them around – women screaming in terror at strange men in their bedrooms at night, is humor – to men, anyway. This is a way of making sex crimes seem frivolous and funny. The victims are just humorless, falsely accusing bitches. The perpetrators are just boys having a little fun – boys being boys.

In every episode, we see the reinforcement of gender roles. We see that women long for relationships with men. They are unhappy when they are not in a relationship with a male. The goal of the young girls, all secondary characters, is to pair up with a man and the men – even those presented as the best, most wholesome examples of Americana – are sex predators, oglers, and PUAs.

There is an episode of Happy Days that I think of every time I’ve been harassed by a man in the produce section of a grocery store. In it, the Fonz teaches Richie how to pick up women at the grocery store by ramming his shopping cart into theirs and then starting up a conversation about melons and bananas. How much did this show influence males growing up in the 1970s? I would say quite a lot. I think it influenced girls, too – to look for a heroic male, however abusive, authoritarian, and perverse he is.

If you examine the television shows going back for several decades you will see a pattern of men and their sons as primary characters. The only exceptions are those relative few in which you see men fathering or foster-fathering daughters. Some of these examples are especially disturbing. For instance, if you haven’t taken a close look at some of those old shows that used to run on television featuring Shirley Temple, they are worth a second look to see the pedophilia programming. There is constant reassurance that old men can be trusted with little girls. Shirley sits on old men’s laps and tugs at their beards and the men are always gentle and kind. Statistically, we know that men who have access to little girls, especially those who are not their biological daughters, have a very high instance of rape and sexual assault of the girls. You would never guess it by watching these old programs, though.

Another one that always disturbed me – it’s not a sitcom, but a movie that always runs on television around Christmas time  – is the film, Miracle on 42nd Street, which involves a cute, little girl and a fat, old department store Santa Claus. Something is just not right about the old man in the little girl’s bedroom and his perverse interest in a fatherless little girl whose absentee mother almost makes her an orphan.

Most of the sitcoms I can recall feature men and boys, though. After all, girls aren’t good for much except sewing, cooking and being fucked by men. So we see in Lassie, My Three Sons, and the Courtship of Eddie’s Father. We, also, see that two men are very capable of raising a girl (and a boy) in A Family Affair, a 1970s sitcom. Would you trust Mr. French with your daughter? I wouldn’t. But, the message is that men are safe for girls and women to be around – and, not only safe, but this is a desirable situation. In fact, it is a dangerous situation, but this is something that no one discussed openly until, at least, the late 1970s or maybe the 1980s.

Often when I am watching a television series, I wonder about women characters who open their doors to whoever knocks. Is this something women really did back in the 1940s or ’50s? You’ll even see this in The King of Queens, in which Carrie will open her door – in Queens! in 2004! – to whoever happens to be knocking. She doesn’t even look out the peephole, but just throws the door wide open.

In both comedy and drama series, women who are concerned about men trying to kill them are portrayed as crazy – sometimes it’s even funny that women fear male predators. For instance, there is an episode of Maude, called “Maude’s Desperate Hours,” – a particularly funny one, in fact – in which Maude has hired a Greek painter, who made sexual advances at her, then threatened to kill her. The whole episode makes light and fun of her terror and that of her friend, Vivian, who quite perversely loves to hear tales of sexual abuse by men. This, too, is accompanied by a laugh track and appears in many episodes.

In this episode, Maude is shown being both sexually attracted to and terrified by the painter. The message is, again, that women secretly long to be abused and terrorized by men. Men threatening women is not a serious matter. Women who insist that it is serious, are hysterical, to be ridiculed, are over-reacting, are really wanting it, enjoy the drama, wanting the attention – all the things we hear from males whenever a woman is assaulted can probably be found somewhere in this episode. And, of course, it is all very funny – I can’t help laughing anytime I watch it, although I clearly see the programming and realize that it is at my own expense and at the expense of women and girls and it is all to the benefit of males who wish to harm us.

This the most insidious propaganda because we women buy into it, ourselves, all too often and laugh at it, despite ourselves.

The propaganda serves the purpose of numbing, desensitizing, and trivializing the abuse of women and girls, grooming us, making it easier for men to harm us, abuse us, kill us, and get away with it. It gains our compliance and the compliance of everyone around us.

This is the power of fiction. It is a demonstration of its power because all of this is simply a reflection of the male’s patriarchal system of abuse of females, which is, itself, predicated on a fictional story – a lie.

Men’s fictional propaganda goes back, at least, as far as their silly Garden of Eden story and everything we see on television and everywhere else in pop culture and all around us is a variation on this basic fictional story.

In my next post, I hope to discuss this a little further using a popular old, Gothic soap opera called “Dark Shadows,”as a further example of this propaganda and the power of fiction.

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.

 

 

 

 

Commentary on TrustYourPerceptions’ Latest Series of Blogposts

TrustYourPerceptions is a blog written a radical feminist with a background in biology, in particular, the study of genetics. This blog doesn’t publish often, but when it does, it’s a doozy. The latest post is, “Semen: Men’s Chemical War Against Women.” It is linked below along with two previous postings.

Semen Men’s Chemical War Against Women: https://trustyourperceptions.wordpress.com/2016/05/07/semen-mens-chemical-war-against-women-no-skip-intro/

Dudes are Doomed: https://trustyourperceptions.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/dudesaredoomed1/

Forgiveness + Positive Thinking = Eating Shit: https://trustyourperceptions.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/forgiveness-positive-thinking-eating-shit/

TrustYourPerceptions is a very good name for a radical feminist blog because what we are all dealing with is a great lot of mind control programming, which begins in infancy when we are born to mind controlled mothers, many of whom have already been sexually abused and raped since the time of their own infancy. We are repeatedly told that our own perceptions of ourselves, of males, and of our surroundings are wrong. The gaslighting starts early and persists.

When I think back at the various topics I’ve discussed at this blog, most have to deal with some sort of programming or attempted programming. I’m sure that when people stumble upon some of these articles I’ve written, they are immediately turned off because often what I have to say is at odds with the status quo – or what we are told that is.

It’s normal to be put off when you first run across a really revolutionary idea. It can be upsetting. If you’re not ready to hear what is said, you might resist, be immediately turned off. You might even feel some sort of fear, anger, or other strong emotion, however, it is something to read, to consider – even if you reject it at first – then ruminate on it and see if there is something about it that rings true. That is how deprogramming works – at first we may reject an idea, especially when it is unpleasant, but once we have the chance to think about it, to let it soak into our subconscious, it can go to work breaking down old, erroneous ideas.

There is always an ongoing discussion about what radical feminism is. For instance, I recently saw a list being passed around from a left-leaning feminist blog that was titled “Radical Feminism” and purported to explain what it is in comparison to conservativism. It was a good list except that a few of the items on it were not radical feminist, but Marxist feminist. It is generally considered that there are three types of feminism: Radical, liberal, and Marxist. They are not difficult to tell apart for me since I fall pretty firmly in the “radical” category.

When I see people extolling the virtues of choice, “sex worker’s rights,” the joys of porn, and equality with men, I know I’m looking at liberal feminism.

When I see women who want to take money out of my pocket and give it to a bunch of guys to lay around, look at porn, and impregnate whatever woman is handy, then I’m looking at a Marxist feminist. Marxist feminism uses the work of a Jewish male to analyze feminism and Marxist feminists like to talk about “wealth redistribution” and the legal right of same sex marriage (working with and for the benefit of gay men to reinforce gender and the slave institution of marriage).

Neither of the above are radical feminism. Radical feminism is, as I said in a previous post here somewhere, not so much an ideology or a political position as it is simply a state of being. It’s where you find yourself when you are finally able to get away from men and are able to sort out what has happened to you. A lot of us are older. Many of us have been prostituted, subjected to pornographers, repeatedly raped, etc. A lot among us are smart young women who, taking full advantage of the information age, have access to feminist books and articles (and, also, see first hand how men operate together to abuse, subjugate, and terrorize women since this is primarily what goes on on the internet) and choose to live their lives without men, avoiding men, as much as possible. Among us are quite a few lesbians and probably quite a few women who regard ourselves as asexual – not having any sexual orientation, at all.

We call this “radical” feminism for a couple of reasons. All true feminism is radical in nature. But, since there are these derivative forms, described above, we use the term “radical” to distinguish ourselves from them. We, also, use this term, “radical,” because it describes the aim of feminism, which is to eRADicate the problem of male domination by pulling it up by its roots, casting it aside and destroying it forever, so it can never, again, grow. The term, “radical,” is derived from the Latin word, radix, which means “root.”

Furthermore, in my own radical feminism, I do not believe it is necessary for women to wait for the permission or approval of men to do certain things which are our natural rights. For instance, we don’t need anyone’s permission to menstruate, which is my way of saying that abortion/miscarriage is a natural, innate aspect of our beings and should not  – and really cannot – be subject to legal regulation by males. We do not need the permission or approval of males to do anything else with our uteri, to defend ourselves against them with lethal force, or to, in any other way, act in accordance with our own self-preservation.

We come to radical feminism when we realize that male domination is the underlying cause of every problem we face on this planet, and as individual female humans. We arrive at this place, very often, when there is simply no other place to go – we have no other option.  Males, because of their behavior and, in fact, their very nature, have left us with no other option, no other recourse. We simply want to live, to go on living and to do so without threats, terror, and life-threatening violence.

A common argument we hear – as if it were even possible to argue with people who have no other options – is that it’s “not all men,” (NAMALT: Not all men are like that!) and I admit that this is a theory I once held. I think many of us once held this idea. We hoped, at least, that there was one man who was not a demon in the flesh. We thought there was something wrong with us because we could not locate such a man. But, we have discovered the terrible truth, each of us, in our own way – often in very similar ways, though. I would like to warn any woman who wishes to learn for herself whether or not there is a single man on this planet who is not a rapist, sodomizer, or user and abuser of women, that she undertakes that mission of discovery at the risk of her life and, at the very least, her physical, mental, and emotional health.

In TrustYourPerception’s latest post, she discusses the biological danger that males pose to females, which goes far beyond something they might, theoretically (highly theoretically!) be socialized out of. In fact, this is one of the strongest cases I’ve ever seen for what I already know – males cannot be socialized or retrained to not be a harm, a parasite, and a constant danger to women. She uses biology and genetics to make this case.

If you’ve read my other posts, then you know I’m not a fan of patriarchal science (sometimes called orthodox science) and its offshoot studies, such as allopathic (orthodox) medicine or psychology, both of which are very patriarchal and founded on the abuse of women by perverted men. I have a different, yet rational, perspective, which is grounded in esoteric science.

As I was reading TYP’s latest post, I was struck by how many of her points correspond with my esoteric view of things. The overall theme of this series of posts is that men’s semen contains a chemical cocktail that is damaging and dangerous to women and girls, not just because of the obvious possibilities of causing pregnancy or infectious disease, but because it contains constituents that alter women’s minds, emotions, and physical ability to fight off males.

I don’t think this was mentioned, but I would not be surprised if there are not parasites involved in this insidious male biological warfare agent.

At any rate, this chemical cocktail creates alterations in women’s biological chemistry, which causes us to doubt our own perceptions. It causes us to doubt our own judgement. It, also, bonds females to males, while males continue to remain as machines (borrowing an apt description from Valerie Solanas), who do not experience the same bond with the female.

This explains, too, why women betray our very selves, in relation to men, and why we betray other women. It goes a long way to explain women in relationships with abusers. It, also, explains my own experience with males with whom I had sexual relations – men remain indifferent and the only sign of anything other than that is when they turn overtly abusive and violent. This is a very common female experience, for which other women like to remind us that there are good men out there and we have to have more self-respect, not let men treat us like that, look for a checklist of qualities – all of which is a set up for more abuse, of course – and maybe the next one will kill us.

This betrayal occurs because of the chemical cocktail in the men’s sperm.  Biologically, men are a disease to us. The act of impregnation, itself, is an infection. Pregnancy cannot occur in a body that is 100% healthy, so the male has to break down our health in order to impregnate us. Now, let me tell you how I know that pregnancy is an infection. I didn’t learn it through orthodox science. I learned it by studying alternative medicine. There is an herb that is a natural pesticide that can kill sperm (that is kill the flagellating things in the nasty liquid men emit) and they kill it like it’s a pest, like it’s a bug, like it’s bacteria – because that’s what it is. As it turns out, boys really do have cooties! Men really are a walking disease. This cold pressed oil from the seed of this tree can increase a woman’s immunity if it is taken properly (have to take it for, at least, 30 days) and render her impervious to the male filth. You can do your own research on the subject. The herb is called neem. It will kill the pests in your garden, too, without harming the plants.

When women must be around males, which is an unnatural situation (but, we haven’t gotten that far, yet) we lose the ability to exercise free will. We are, also, unable to be particularly relaxed or calm around males because of the constant threat of violence, which many of us have learned at an early age.  Even now, I find this is true for myself, which is why I cannot be around men, at all. Since I am not around them except rarely, I see how my health and my psychological well-being suffers when I’m in a situation where I have to deal with them. When we are around men, we are unable to be our natural selves, to behave as we normally would.

Now, if you live your entire life in proximity with males, or must deal with males frequently, this is more difficult to notice. In order to really see the difference in your behavior and your overall health when you are away from men, you have to get yourself away from them for a long period of time. This is why a lot of women don’t fully realize how anxiety-inducing the presence of males is to them. Most of us don’t have the luxury of living away from males for an extended period of time.

The cocktail that causes the bonding, the circumstances that cause the fear, and the chemistry behind the male breakdown of female immunity and health is discussed in Part 1: https://trustyourperceptions.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/semen-mens-chemical-war-against-women-part-i-male-chemical-munitions-what-semen-does-to-females/ This particular post in the series, also, discusses the doping, the dopamine, that is in the cocktail, which causes women to become “addicted to love.” Males who put their dicks in women or even put their semen on our skin, are killing us softly; they are using their “sub-lethal” weapons against women. Sexual relations with men, even when it is consenting (which is, as is clear from this biological discussion, impossible) is death to us. Furthermore, this biological war – this invisible war – is the foundation for every other wicked thing males to do females – everything from paying us slave wages (when they pay us, at all) to raping baby girls.

In Part 2, she talks about females have evolved in response to the male disease. In Part 3, she goes into various evolutionary theories, some silly, some sort of reasonable, all centering around early females trying to cope with male aggression.

In Part 4, she discusses concealed estrus as a possible cause for male enslavement of women. The overall point of this and the previous series of TYP’s posts is that males are trying to maintain control over the human genome. The conclusion- and this is my conclusion, too, coming from an occult perspective – is that earth women have been essentially hi-jacked. I differ from TYP in that I do not believe that women are fundamentally animals. I do believe that men are something more animal-like and somewhere along the line our DNA was fiddled with. I, also, think it can be un-fiddled. In fact, I’m quite sure it can be altered using electro-magnetic kind of frequencies. (This is another one of those things that when I first ran up on this idea many years ago, I dismissed it out of hand. Circumstances led to me being forced to look at it (circumstances of my own ill-health, at one point) and this (radionics) is a real thing, although it is dismissed by the allopaths, and last time I heard, by the patriarchal, orthodox scientific community.)

Here I’m going to wax metaphysical for a little bit:

Everything in the physical world has a connection to the metaphysical (in fact, is a result of it) and there are different levels. By altering what we call the etheric field, it is possible to effect changes in the physical. It is very easy to affect very small things – a small thing, like a virus is very easily dealt with by focusing the right out-of-phase wave harmonic at it. (This is not any kind of theory, by the way – this is my life! I have never suffered, cold, flu, or any type of infection since I learned about it nearly 20 years ago.) The same can be accomplished with the DNA. It can be altered by wave harmonics.

demheadI’m going to go out further on a limb (think Shirley McClain) and say that something tampered with our DNA to create a physical form that it could inhabit.(This is in all kinds of esoteric and historical records going back 5,000 years to Sumer.) This something is very hostile to us women. If you have done any research, at all, in the field of demonology, you know right where I’m going. Those things are real. They are walking around with us, often looking like human males. I know because I’ve seen them many times and many other women see them, too. They are not human on the energetic level – or if they are then we are not human. I don’t know what “human” really means. But, whatever we are giving birth to, about half of them, are neither physically nor metaphysically like us. The male is truly something other. He is alien to us. (Maybe you remember that old ABC television series, “V,” (1983) if not, you might want to take a look.)

When I said that all things have a counterpart in the metaphysical, this means that the male sperm does, too. Also, if there are parasites, these, too, have a metaphysical aspect. These things act on us from outside the normally visible realm. The behavior of the sperm, the drugging effects, the mind altering effects, the biologically altering effects on women, all have a counterpart in the metaphysical. They are truly an influence on women that is of a demonic nature. It is not wrong at all to call this black magic. It’s exactly what it is. The good news is that once this is recognized, they can be acted upon on this same level (by means of radionics, for example, which is a kind of machine) or by the directed will. (“Will” is a term that my sister occultists will recognize as the focus of the mental body on an aspect of the metaphysical to cause a desired outcome on the physical level.)

This leads me to what I have said before in previous posts: There is no way to stop the raping (including the sex trafficking, the prostitution of women and girls, the porn, the enslavement in other ways) and other abuses of women and girls except to stop bringing these poisonous things onto the physical plane with us. The only way to stop this train wreck is with our noggins. We have to change the way we think and how we focus our minds and our energy. We must stop complying. We must stop cooperating with our enemy. We must, above all, stop reproducing – especially males.

We have had some success. If you want to experience joy, find a white supremacist discussion online and look at the males freaking out because they cannot find a white woman to put the slow kill on. They are livid. They are afraid. They are going crazy because they are seeing themselves dying out – and it’s happening fast. Since the 1970s or so women in Western nations and especially white women have withdrawn from males. Every opportunity women get, we escape males – more and more. These men and their own perversion (increasingly more sick and depraved in their behavior toward us – and nobody hates white women more than white men do) and their never-ending violence against us is the cause of their own demise  They are going out like the Wicked Witch of the West when Dorothy splashed water on her!

This is what needs to happen the world over and it can, at least, to a large extent, if women re-focus our minds and our energy.

Also, in Part IV, she discusses the disabling effects of the chemical cocktail that men inject into and sometimes onto women. I have touched on the metaphysical aspect of this in a previous post, particularly in relation to rape, but it applies to any sexual relations with men, regardless of the degree of violence involved. The act of copulation is death to women on the metaphysical level. It weakens the lower will, that part of the body associated with the legs and the lower spine. This is why after rape or “consensual” sexual abuse, women cannot walk sometimes. The energy in the woman’s body is depleted – stolen – by the male. The male truly is a vampire who wants more than just your blood. He wants your essence – your life.

Men engage in sexual activity frequently with females in order to boost the bonding chemicals. This is physically and psychologically disabling. If they manage to impregnate the woman, of course, they have a whole other hold over her – especially legally.

In Part 5, she talks about how, across species, females avoid males in order to avoid rape. In fact, it’s the only way I know of to avoid it. Males rape. As far as I know, they all rape and there is no way to prove that they don’t. Therefore, it is only safe – if you value your life, your health, and your sanity – to assume that it is all.

Near the bottom of the left-hand column of this same page, she mentions that males have lost control of the genome in the past. She says it appears to have happened a few times, usually as the result of some catastrophic event. I hope she writes more on this soon.

She notes somewhere on this page that women who give birth to males are making war on other women. This is an idea, which I realize doesn’t sound very nice or very kind on the surface, where other women are concerned – nonetheless, it is an idea that I think we should nurture and grow. We should push it and there should be shame associated with a woman giving birth to a male. Right now, women are shamed in various ways when they have daughters. (In some places, it is not permitted to give birth daughters and they are forcibly aborted or exposed. Not long ago, Hitler gave medals only to women who gave birth to males.) I’ve seen discussions among childed women who say they are treated as lesser-than because they have daughters rather than sons. This has to change and the only way to change it in our favor is to reverse it, even though it seems unkind.

The last thing she urges in this entire series is for more women to become involved in this study.

This, again, is where those who have writing talent can exert some influence. Very often it is through the imagination of writers, usually writers of science fiction, that scientific breakthroughs are first manifest simply as ideas. Everything begins in the mind. It’s here we must make the first changes if we are to change anything, at all.