• Home
  • Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List
  • Shit Cuckservatives Say
  • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Alpha Assessment Submissions
  • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
  • Dating Market Value Test For Men
  • Dating Market Value Test For Women
  • About

Chateau Heartiste

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« The Wall Is Everywhere
The Denial Of Human Nature As A Barometer Of Societal Illness »

What Is The Goal Of Feminism?

August 5, 2015 by CH

Reader corvinus paraphrases a recent Chateau contribution to our collective understanding of feminism:

Feminism: teaching women to be second-rate men rather than first-rate women.

An earlier Chateau definition of feminism stated the following:

The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

The two CH definitions are related, the first being a subset of the second. To the second, I would only add “sexuality and morality” for completeness, as the sexes in their natural states tend to stress accordance to differing, yet complementary, moralities.

The goal of feminism is thus the destruction of the feminine in women and of the masculine in men. Feminism as an ideology seeks the annulment of sex-based distinctions and dichotomy, to be replaced by an androgynous slop that vulgarizes women and enfeebles men, and is at its heart dehumanizing.

Brief historical aside: The origin of American feminism as an organizing principle goes back to the 19th century, although there were rare, individual (European) women who lived well before then authoring proto-feminist books, and probably not coincidentally, these women were usually ugly and/or forced by circumstance to provide for themselves.

As was the case with Rome, the rise of feminism parallels the accumulating wealth and prestige of nations or empires. Affluence may be a causative factor of feminist idiocy, or it may be a correlative factor. Either way, once a nation has succumbed to materialism, it has succumbed to feminism, and once a nation has allowed feminism a toehold in the body politic, decadence and decline are not far behind.

The roots of feminism are found primarily in the suffrage movement, and secondarily in the effects that growing wealth have on the behaviors of men and on social equality. (It’s not well-known that many of the American first-wave feminists were Evangelical Christians who wanted the government to have a stronger role promoting morality, e.g., the temperance movement. These ur-feminists were in many respects decidedly conservative women.)

As the wealth disparity between the mass of beta male providers and the fat cats grew, women began to feel insecure that marriage to the average joe would save them from a life of penury. It was from this seed that the feminist “careergrrl” movement germinated, and it was this seed that the proto-globalist cosmopolitan fat cats wanted so eagerly to plant, to enlarge their customer base and divide families against themselves.

Whatever righteousness there could be found in the ideology’s original intent, feminism regressed rapidly (in nation-state life-cycle times) to a twisted, brutish, stupid dogma, that today has reached its inevitable nadir in campus rape hoaxes, Title IX, and fat acceptance, among many other bizarro world feminist social incursions that blatantly defy human nature. Inevitable, because as with all leftist missions, satisfaction from earlier victories only encourages more bloodlust, and the course of conquest always ends in desolation when the last enemy of the movement has been picked clean to the bone.

So we have as explanations for the rise of feminism affluence, wealth and income inequality, and decadence. To this we can add out-breeding, the marriage pattern among White Europeans (and, later, Americans) that split cousin-marriage kinship ties and created evolutionary selection pressures leading to a people with a high degree of trust and out-group altruism. Taken to extremes, this characteristic feature of Whites, genetically embedded for maximum staying power, promotes the beliefs and consequent social policies of “gender egalitarianism”, which is nothing less than the total rebuke of the existence of natural, organic, and psychologically healthy sex-based differences in mind and body.

Feminism is lies, ugliness, and malevolence, and that is why it must be opposed by any shiv necessary.

Share this:

  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Feminist Idiocy, Funny/Lolblogs, Ugly Truths | 127 Comments

127 Responses

  1. on August 5, 2015 at 1:55 pm James1

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 2:14 pm Shlomo Shekelberg

      Such beauties, gentile women seem so homely by comparison!

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 4:47 pm The Straw That Stirs the Drink

        One looks like she has a goatee… I don’t dare enlarge the image… just ate.

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 2:18 pm Greg Eliot

      Here a joo, there a joo, everywhere a joo-joo…

      LikeLiked by 1 person


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:20 am Captain Obvious

        Old Lu-Ci-Fer had a farm, e-i-e-i-o…

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 2:34 pm corvinus

      Yeah, I wonder if feminism would have been nearly as much of a problem if the average jewess looked more like Bar Refaeli or Natalie Portman.

      Although, since Izzylanders have much higher birth rates than the Diaspora, that may actually be true in the future. We can hope.

      LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:48 am Captain Obvious

        Hat-Tip to Mr Bigglesworth, from the other day:

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:51 am Captain Obvious

        Of course, “Ryder” is just her nom-de-guerre. Her true Eskimo name is “Winona Laura Horowitz”.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:54 am Captain Obvious

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:56 am Captain Obvious

        And of course “Carrie Fisher” is her nom-de-guerre; her true Eskimo name is “Carrie Tisch”.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:58 am Captain Obvious

        It’s really bizarre how, as they age, their true Eskimo personalities come to dominate their countenances – they just can’t hide it anymore – as though Lucifer bred into them a ticking time bomb of self-destruction.

        LikeLike


      • on August 7, 2015 at 10:26 pm Rum

        If you are saying that they are the best fucks on planet earth until they hit the wall… muh dick agrees with turgid exultation.
        Your point is.?.?

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 3:37 pm Sean Fielding

      That’s almost as good as painting them blue. Thanks.

      LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:08 pm Philomathean

      That’s alotta Jewish she poon.

      LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:40 pm anon

      A pet peeve of mine, every time I see that picture it annoys me. There’s at least 5 new toxic tribe members that should be there who aren’t and Christina Hoff Summers doesn’t really even belong there, she’s proving she’s more shtetl of mettle. I really need to learn this photoshop stuff.

      LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 9:09 am Captain Obvious

        It’s hard work, and time consuming. To a certain extent, you can automate some of it, with e.g. JavaScript going to HTML going to PDF going to JPG – or if you have a big enough monitor, you could take a screen shot of the HTML in a browser window [skipping the PDF layer], and save the JPG of the screen shot – but even then, it’s still very time consuming.

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 6:41 pm TZ

      “The goal of feminism is thus the destruction of the feminine in women and of the masculine in men.” -Heartiste

      In other words an inversion of values.

      5p. Who again has practised that at least from the days of Ancient Egypt to this day?

      4p. Tacitus also wrote of it.

      (coffee spilled)

      1p. They call themselves the chosen ones and the light unto nations.

      Reward yourself with a bonus point if you realised the last two are also inversions.

      LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 9:14 am Captain Obvious

        The goal of feminism is thus the destruction of the feminine in SHKOTZIM women [shiksas] AS A FIRST STEP TOWARDS THE ULTIMATE GOAL WHICH IS the destruction of the masculine in SHKOTZIM men [shegetzen].

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 9:19 am Captain Obvious

        And once the masculine has been destroyed in the Shegetzen, a couple of Eskimo Psychopaths like Page and Brin can waltz in and still hundreds of billions [arguably trillions] of dollars in intellectual property from the loser spineless wimp emasculated Shegetzen at Digital’s AltaVista internet search engine, and Eskimo Psychopaths like Zuckerberg and Summers can do the same to loser spineless wimp emasculated Shegetzen like Winklevoss, Winklevoss, and Narendra at Harvard.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 9:49 am zaqan

        What inversion of values? Last I checked, we gave you blue painted monkeys and tribesmen morality.

        LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 1:39 am ho

      The ADL actually targeted Roosh because he dared to name the Jew in the most mild and resonable way possible. One “offence” was that he posted this picture, (paraphrasing) “where Jewish feminists were listed with a Star of David next to their faces.”

      Wrap your head around this one: a kike complaining that their most significant symbol was used to symbolize their people. Then they turn around and threaten people with long prison sentences because the photoshop the Star of David to contain the swastika on it. LOL.

      LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 9:45 am zaqan

      *points to well domesticated ORTHODOX women*
      *notes that all of the above are communists that have never done a Jewish thing in their life*

      http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/06/why-i-am-not-anti-semite.html

      LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 3:35 pm Hilary Clinton

      Forgive my ignorance, but what does the pastel blue pointy badge in the corner of the photos mean? That he’s won a gurning contest?

      LikeLike


  2. on August 5, 2015 at 2:04 pm Shlomo Shekelberg

    What are you talking about, everyone knows feminism is good for the goyim … *rubs hands together vigorously*

    LikeLike


  3. on August 5, 2015 at 2:07 pm JayMan

    Highly related, see also:

    The Rise of Universalism | JayMan’s Blog

    LikeLike


  4. on August 5, 2015 at 2:10 pm What Is The Goal Of Feminism? | Neoreactive

    […] By CH […]

    LikeLike


  5. on August 5, 2015 at 2:12 pm The Other Jim

    From Eskimo Susan Sontag, writing in her collection of essays, ‘Styles of Radical Will'(1966);

    “Everything that one feels about this country is, or ought to be, conditioned by the awareness of American power: of America as the arch-imperium of the planet, holding man’s biological as well as his historical future in its King Kong paws. […] First of all, then, American power is indecent in its scale. But also, the quality of American life is an insult to the possibilities of human growth[.]

    If America is the culmination of Western white civilization, as everyone from the Left to the Right declares, then there must be something terribly wrong with Western white civilization. […]

    The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world. The white race is the cancer of human history; it is the white race and it alone—its ideologies and inventions—which eradicates autonomous civilizations wherever it spreads, which has upset the ecological balance of the planet, which now threatens the very existence of life itself. What the Mongol hordes threaten is far less frightening than the damage that Western “Faustian” man, with his idealism, his magnificent art, his sense of intellectual adventure, his world-devouring energies for conquest, has already done, and further threatens to do.”

    The ugly truth we all face is this; The Barbarians are not only at the gate, a significant portion of the population have become Barbarians, often enabled by the Eskimos.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 2:29 pm PA

      It’s almost as if the real… passion for destruction came from Eskimosess, rather than from their men.

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 2:34 pm Greg Eliot

        Back in the day, Wilmot Robertson speculated, in his The Dispossessed Majority, that the reason YKW women were at the forefront of these movements is because from the cradle they’re treated as second-class within their own culture… leastwise, the Orthodox, who have separate places for the women in the Temple, and consider them “unclean” during menses, and keeping them separate during those, eh, periods as well.

        It’s not too hard to believe that, if you’re taught you’re of less value, and within your own folk, from the time you’re old enough to comprehend the world about you, well… rebellion and hatefulness would be a natural result.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 7:52 pm The Other Jim

        It must be noted that Sontag’s ahem, “partner” was famed Rock/Rolling Stone photographer Annie Liebowitz(another Eskimo. Go figure…). So there you have it. Sontag was a Feminist, Lesbian, and Eskimo. Talk about ticking three of major victimhood industry boxes off.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 8:39 pm Greg Eliot

        As the saying goes, stereotypes don’t arise in a vacuum.

        LikeLike


      • on August 7, 2015 at 8:56 am Canadian Friend

        “…So there you have it. Sontag was a Feminist, Lesbian, and Eskimo. Talk about ticking three of major victimhood industry boxes off…”

        Lesbian

        Eskimo

        Feminism

        (high)Testosterone ( women)

        or for short : LEFT

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 3:34 pm Marc

      @ Greg, Many years ago in law school I read Ginsberg’s opinion holding that it was an unconstitutional violation of the equal protection clause for an insurer to offer lower rates for women even if justified on neutral grounds, such as statistical life expectancy. I had previously read that her “passion for gender justice” was based on the treatment she had received from her orthodox jewish father, and I remember thinking at the time that because of her own personal “suffering” in this way, she imposed her ridiculous notions of gender equality on the rest of the country, with the result that women everywhere now had to pay higher rates. I wasn’t smart enough at the time to see the deeper eskimo issues at work …

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 3:42 pm Greg Eliot

        It’s rare that we get a meat-world admittance as irrefutable evidence… thanks for the post… well-done.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 5:12 pm Abundance Mentality

        “unconstitutional violation of the equal protection clause for an insurer to offer lower rates for women even if justified on neutral grounds, such as statistical life expectancy.”

        This is such bullshit. Statistical methods were already known when the Constitution was ratified, so you can’t say that the two are incompatible. I can’t stand people who appeal to “principles” when statistics are available. No wonder idiots like Ginsburg supported Obamacare, the mother of all actuarial screw-ups.

        If we cannot use statistics and probability to determine public policy, our society is going to collapse. There’s no other valid neutral methodology available for managing a mass society where decisions need to be made on the basis of large tendencies in populations, not anecdotal evidence. We need some kind of plague that wipes out everyone incapable of thinking probabilistically.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 11:55 pm Dude

        @Marc, huh? Look, mate, I’m all for throwing stones at Ginsburg, but you appear to be way off on this one for numerous reasons.

        First, I have no idea what case you are talking about. However, women often do pay less for auto insurance (if that’s what you’re referring to). See
        https://www.esurance.com/info/car/why-women-pay-less-for-car-insurance
        (Note – insurance is regulated by the states; employer-based pension plans, see below, are regulated by the feds, hence the following.)

        Second, regardless, if it were illegal, it would not be unconstitutional. Rather, it would be a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

        Third, speaking of that Act, receiving women less from an employment-based deferred compensation plan (i.e., pension) based on the mere fact that they live longer (please infer the requisite sarcasm) has been held to be a violation of Title VII. While I would love to blame that on Ginsburg or whomever, Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris came out in 83 and was based on Manhart v. Los Angeles Department of Water & Power, a 1978 a case that held a pension plan couldn’t require women to contribute more than men to obtain the same benefit merely because they lived longer.

        Fourth, while I agree that that is a silly result, that doesn’t mean the Court got it wrong. Rather, it was interpreting a specific law (the 64 Act), and it seems clear that this kind of sex-neutrality, even in the face of obvious “life expectancy biases” is required by the statute. Congress enacts silly laws all the time. A Supreme Court that is playing by the rules (looking your way Roberts and Kennedy) is obligated to interpret the law accordingly.

        Sorry, boys, this particular bit of feminism — the amendments to the 64 Civil Rights Act to make discrimination based on sex illegal — was brought to you by a bunch of White Congressman looking to kill the Act by including sex along with race. They figured that no one would vote for the bill if it required that sex be treated the same. (And, no, not a one of them was a tribesman.)
        Too clever by half, indeed.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 9:52 am zaqan

        Ah, so it was her communist rebellion against her people and her faith that guided her views, not her people and her faith.

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:42 pm Abundance Mentality

      “The truth is that Mozart, Pascal, Boolean algebra, Shakespeare, parliamentary government, baroque churches, Newton, the emancipation of women, Kant, Marx, Balanchine ballets, et al., don’t redeem what this particular civilization has wrought upon the world.”

      On the contrary, one jot or tittle from any of these works is worth more than every other civilization combined. I’ll take one possibly apocryphal sentence attributed to Aristotle over the entire Koran any day.

      “What the Mongol hordes threaten is far less frightening than the damage that Western “Faustian” man, with his idealism, his magnificent art, his sense of intellectual adventure, his world-devouring energies for conquest, has already done, and further threatens to do.”

      In other words, she wants the world to be populated by boring people, living boring lives, breeding boring children, then dying boring deaths.

      I’ll pass.

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 5:50 pm Irish Savant

        Yes, but she also like the comforts of the advanced civilisation and polity provided and developed by the ambitions of those world-devouring white men.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 6:18 pm Greg Eliot

        It’s the comforts of that civilization that dreaded “cancer” race created that gives the yenta the ability to mouth off from the safety of her desk.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 7:50 pm Abundance Mentality

        “It’s the comforts of that civilization that dreaded “cancer” race created that gives the yenta the ability to mouth off from the safety of her desk.”

        I tell people the washing machine did more to advance feminism than all the books about feminism combined.

        I sometimes think deep down the reason feminists are so unhappy is because women evolved to be useful to the household, only to see all that usefulness replaced by simple technology like the washing machine, dryer, dishwasher, blender, etc.. Gotta be kind of an ego-crusher.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 2:16 am ho

        “On the contrary, one jot or tittle from any of these works is worth more than every other civilization combined. I’ll take one possibly apocryphal sentence attributed to Aristotle over the entire Koran any day.”

        You know, sometimes I can see where the kikettes are coming from. Try not being a hubristic little faggot sometimes.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 2:20 am ho

        This faggot actually believes that one sentence of Karl Marx’ asinine writings is worth more than Chinese civilization combined.

        Pride is the worst of all sins for a reason, Daedalus.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 9:19 pm Abundance Mentality

        “This faggot actually believes that one sentence of Karl Marx’ asinine writings is worth more than Chinese civilization combined.

        Pride is the worst of all sins for a reason, Daedalus”

        blah, blah, blah

        LikeLike


  6. on August 5, 2015 at 2:17 pm Greg Eliot

    Reader corvinus paraphrases a recent Chateau contribution to our collective understanding of feminism:

    Feminism: teaching women to be second-rate men rather than first-rate women.

    An earlier Chateau definition of feminism stated the following:

    The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

    Well, the feminists, cuckservatives, fence-sitters, red-pillers… indeed, the entire political spectrum… can argue all day about what the “goals” of feminism are.

    The fact of the matter is, these are the RESULTS.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 2:31 pm James Blonde

      there is a theory that some of what black males mistakenly call racism is really feminist attack rooted in envy of the masculine?

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 3:10 pm Anonymous

        No, it’s rooted in envy of 3-digit IQs and minimal social skills.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 3:36 pm James Blonde

        its the perfect cover because white guys get blamed

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 3:40 pm Greg Eliot

        I’ve often said, here at the chateau, that a goodly factor in anti-male sexuality laws stem from the influx of nonwhites and their behavior… although you won’t notice this based upon what TV and Hollywood shows us as creeps, rapists, stalkers, and general louts.

        LikeLike


  7. on August 5, 2015 at 2:26 pm martin

    There is a bit of marxism in there, about fat cats. I am disinclined to believe anything marxist. I now view all leftist movements as hate groups so feminism is just a gendered form of marxism. Oddly enough, the left has a long tradition of ignoring what conservatives say and replacing conservative thoughts with psychological analysis mumbo jumbo and freudianisms. not sure why it hasn’t been turned on them yet. you will find a group of people with hate as their goal disguised by academic speak.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 6:05 pm Abundance Mentality

      “Oddly enough, the left has a long tradition of ignoring what conservatives say and replacing conservative thoughts with psychological analysis mumbo jumbo and freudianisms. not sure why it hasn’t been turned on them yet.”

      Look at what Nietzsche had to say about master and slave psychology.

      Nietzsche did think that slaves ended up having more “espirit” because they needed to lie to themselves and the masters more often in order to live with themselves and their failure at life.

      LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 8:46 am martin

        interesting, that seems true

        LikeLike


  8. on August 5, 2015 at 2:59 pm Dan in Euroland

    I’m reading Okrent’s Prohibition book. Actually syphilis was a major reason for the early feminist movement. Their fellas would get incredibly drunk (more so than a Brit at a New Year’s party), hammertime a pro catching the bug, and then bring that silent killer to his marital bedroom.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 3:32 pm Greg Eliot

      Baroness Blixen allegedly had this happen, as depicted in Out Of Africa. She returned to Denmark and was luckily cured by the current treatment of the day… others were not so fortunate.

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 4:21 pm Marc

        Greg – I hate to stalk you today – no homo – but she heroically endured the effects of the syphilis that Denys Finch Hatton gave her all her – very long – life. Best storyteller ever, fascinating life fascinatingly told by Judith (sorry!) Thurman.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 4:24 pm Greg Eliot

        Did she get a dose from him too? In the movie, the culprit was her husband.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 6:22 pm Greg Eliot

        I’m too lazy to dig into it, but the movie had her husband as the profligate, and her lover Hatton as the noble alpha. If it turns out in real life that Hatton gave her the dose and schlub hubby was just a bystander, well… that’s a real piece of chutzpah there.

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 8:11 pm Marc

        Yes it was husband Bror. I have slandered the dead. (Hangs head in shame.)

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 11:58 pm Marc

        Bror no schlub, not even eskimo. Big game hunter, wrote a book about it. Karen an alpha widow. From wiki, “Although the couple were divorced in 1925 (with Karen retaining the coffee plantation), she was quoted as saying, shortly before her death, “If I could wish anything back of my life, it would be to go on safari once again with Bror…”
        You slander the dead, you got some makin up to do …
        Her life much more interesting than the movie (Sidney Pollack).

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 5:41 am Greg Eliot

        I was talking about the way the movie depicted him… you know, Klaus Maria Brandauer as schlub hubby, Robert Redford as noble alpha Hatton.

        And yes, I figured there would be some Hollywood liberties with the tale, which is why I was wondering if the true story were Hatton gave her the syph when you mentioned it.

        LikeLike


  9. on August 5, 2015 at 3:03 pm Irish Savant

    IMO the feminist agenda has been the most destructive weapon, bar none, in the War Against Nature and its byproduct the destruction of our civilisation.

    LikeLike


  10. on August 5, 2015 at 3:05 pm anonymous

    Another way to say the point of this post, in my opinion:

    Today’s brand of feminism is an attack on women and femininity. It is the idea that the only measure of success is traditionally male standards — telling women to be scientists, ball-busting lawyers, fortune 500 CEOs, firemen, infantrymen or marines (all of these career paths are simply not something they naturally want, nor does civilization need them to do these things), and to be childless and unmarried, and to give up their most valuable asset to dozens of cads, for free, during their prime childbearing years. To get numerous tribal tattoos and piercings, defiling their bodies. It tells them to actively disrespect men, robbing fathers of any authority or influence under thread of the legal system.

    It actively discourages women who want to be mothers and wives from choosing that wise path, leaving a generation of Gen X 40-year-old spinsters about to experience the next 20 years feeling less happy than they would be if they were mothers and grandmothers. As also noted, it was done to us on purpose, as a tool of communism — by extension it was an attack on children (both born and the hundreds of millions who should have been born but were not), fathers, brothers, sons, and families. To break apart the family, with everyone being a tax payer paying daddy government, with women spending their energies working for the state instead of their husbands and children.

    You will not find one modern woman under 40 who understands these facts. Don’t waste time trying to educate women. Demonstrate, don’t explicate.

    Save your energies getting more as-of-now brainwashed white men to understand that we are a nation that is allowed to feel pride, just as every other race does, including the most racist of all, the Eskimos. We are a nation; the current state (the government) is not us, does not represent us, and, in fact, has been actively attacking us for 60 years.

    LikeLike


  11. on August 5, 2015 at 3:10 pm Elmer Jack

    The election may ultimately be decided by whether women want to attend the Women in STEM luncheon featuring keynote address by distinguished former congresswoman or attending a party on The Billionaire’s yacht.

    LikeLike


  12. on August 5, 2015 at 3:21 pm PA

    The Eskimo angle is one-third of feminism, qualitatively speaking. The other third is lesbian liberation and access to young girls. The last third is high-t, ambitious women’s opportunistic use of feminism to secure financial independence and access to alphas.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 3:34 pm Greg Eliot

      Yeah, but if the Eskimo women make up a percentage of the second two categories, well… the Eskimo factor be greater than one-third, amirite? 😉

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 3:53 pm PA

        Hence “qualitatively “

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 4:21 pm Greg Eliot

        Me no savvy dem big woids. 😡

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:30 pm PA

      The Eskimo element of feminism hates the family for ethnic reasons and attacks it with cultural marxism. The lesbian feminist hates masculine men because they are sexual threats and competition for/guardians of women; they fight masculinity with domestic violence propaganda. The high-t amazon feminists hate the beta male (or more precisely, economic or sexual dependence on betas), whom they fight with sexual harassment and “equal pay” and affirmative action-based advocacy.

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 7:06 pm James Blonde

        do white women use black guys as their big cocks in their grudge matches with white men?

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 8:36 pm Greg Eliot

        Tiresome muh dik gambit yet again?

        Sheesh, your phoney doppelgaenger trolls better than you… and he’s a mere ham n’ egger journeyman.

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:55 pm The Straw That Stirs the Drink

      Your point about high T women hating betas – yes. The “access to alphas”. Not really. Proximity perhaps.

      LikeLike


  13. on August 5, 2015 at 3:27 pm Tam the Bam

    ” Affluence may be a causative factor of feminist idiocy, or it may be a correlative factor.”
    Both, really. In the same way that albinos don’t live long on the Equator unless a technical fix is implemented (what we call “clothes”, for instance), feminists vanish from subsistence-level economies unless constantly supported by tithes and subsidies from the productive castes (including herds of untouchable brown women laborers). Probably because they’d be otherwise gainfully occupied doing the kids-having/water-toting/firewood-fetching/spinning/weaving/turnip-field-hoeing thing. And then dying in gratitude age forty, toothless and broken. Thank god. Time for a new one.

    “It’s almost as if the real… passion for destruction came from Eskimosess, rather than from their men.”
    They’d better get used to being poor then. Real dirt-poor (see above). For ever.
    Whitey’s gone MIA thanks to them, and nobody knows how to fix it all any more. Or has the nuts to stop savages stealing and breaking and burning it all.
    I thought they were supposed to be hi-IQ? Or are they just unendurably gobby and spergy (together, often mistaken for brains)?
    Poor anticipation skills and a deficit in self-preservation urges, to put it mildly, it seems to me. Don’t let them run with scissors. It’ll be all the inbreeding, I expect.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 3:37 pm Greg Eliot

      As Scripture tells us: “You are of your father, the Devil… and the lusts of your father you will do.”

      I’ve said this multiple times, so listen up: the big Tell of evil is that, taken to its logical conclusion, it even destroys itself.

      Even the Devil could repent, if he were of such a mind.

      But he won’t… even though he himself knows full well the end result of his activities.

      LikeLike


  14. on August 5, 2015 at 3:32 pm Steve Johnson

    Feminism’s popularity is an outgrowth of female solipsism.

    The advantages women have just for being women are invisible to them – they just think that’s right and proper and the way the world should be (eggs are expensive and sperm is cheap so every woman is valuable just for being a living woman).

    Men, on the other hand, get basic respect because, since all men are potentially dangerous, a basic level of respect between men is necessary to avoid pushing a slighted man past his breaking point where he’ll snap and lash out.

    Women want to keep the benefits from being valuable – which they don’t even know they get – while also getting the respect for being dangerous – which they aren’t. That’s feminism.

    LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 2:26 am ho

      Underrated comment.

      LikeLike


  15. on August 5, 2015 at 3:36 pm What Is The Goal Of Feminism? | Manosphere.com

    […] What Is The Goal Of Feminism? […]

    LikeLike


  16. on August 5, 2015 at 4:03 pm whorefinder

    Feminism is r-selection gone mad. Like all branches of leftism. But it has a short shelf life in the wake of danger.

    I remember I was in college during 9/11. In the shadow of 9/11, suddenly every ardent “feminist” around me (and I was in college at a very left-wing school) started having moments of openly praising K-selection. Men in uniform became “hot” to them, Bush had acted “well” or “nobly” in the wake of the attacks, etc. We even had an uptick in fire alarms pulled in female dorms (we still had all female dorms)—no doubt due to a combination of women desiring to see the K-selected firemen/protectors come to save them and the ladies’ own r-selected amygdala panicking in the face of small events after being hyper-charged by the terrorist attacks.

    That is to say that the old expression “there are no atheists in foxholes” applies to feminists as well. Feminism, blaming whitey, homosexual “marriage” and the like are all entertained/tolerated when resources are plentiful and all is safe, but when danger arises or resources become scarce, suddenly the most ardent feminist/blame whitey/homo-activist will reverse gears and give up their previously “die-hard” beliefs and fall into line.

    As the anonymous conservative says, with the approach of K-Selection, Apocalypse Cometh.

    R-selection rape!

    LikeLike


  17. on August 5, 2015 at 4:03 pm Philomathean

    Feminism.

    Let’s just call it a luxury of civilization.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:10 pm whorefinder

      Win. I have a comment in moderation that says the same thing, but this is the droll version.

      r-selection rape!

      LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 4:26 pm Greg Eliot

      Luxury? Symptom? Bane?

      LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 6:13 pm theasdgamer

      Feminism: the philosophical sewage of advanced civilization.

      LikeLike


  18. on August 5, 2015 at 4:04 pm Bateful Higot

    “Feminism is lies, ugliness, and malevolence, and that is why it must be opposed by any shiv necessary.”

    The answer to Fat Pride is Shitlord Pride.

    LikeLike


  19. on August 5, 2015 at 4:35 pm BigRed

    Feminism, boiled down to it’s simplest, most basic form, is simply self loathing. Feminists are upset that they aren’t men, so all men have to be punished.

    LikeLike


  20. on August 5, 2015 at 4:45 pm pithom

    The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

    -Male heterosexuality. As saith the Encyclopedia Dramatica:
    “Socialism is the belief that governments can create shit out of thin air. It is closely followed by its child feminism – the unrealistic expectation that all men shall become gay.”

    LikeLike


  21. on August 5, 2015 at 4:51 pm The Straw That Stirs the Drink

    “The roots of feminism are found primarily in the suffrage movement”

    Indeed. what madness overcame all western men leading up to 1920? Did our collective great grandmothers squeeze our great grandfathers nuts (not in a good way) so hard they ALL relented and gave away the key to the kingdom.

    Nearly every western nation gave up the vote by 1920 (butcept the Swiss who waited until 1971 and Liechtenstein in 1984)… WTF?

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 6:33 pm Tam the Bam

      “Nearly every western nation gave up the vote by 1920 (butcept the Swiss who waited until 1971 and Liechtenstein in 1984)”
      Votes to make up the numbers? Our lads didn’t have it until after WWI, by which time a shedload of them were selfishly dead and rotten. The Swissers managed to dodge that one, and the next, as usual. Fuck knows what the liechtensteiners were up to. If you sneezed driving through in your panzer you’d miss it.

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 7:20 pm Jack Rackam

        Federal Reserve established 1913, control of the nation’s money GIVEN to the jew. IMMEDIATELY, WWI, killing off the best of that generation’s men. Then came suffrage, prohibition, and, well, here we are.

        LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 4:50 am Scanman

        Don’t forget establishment of the income tax to pay the bankers who “funded” the senseless war that murdered the best of white European fathers and sons. Rinse and repeat a mere 20 years later and …..wallah! The chosen (.1% of the world’s population) now completely control the world’s creative engine — white European civilization.

        “By deception thou shall make war.” There is no denying that it works….for awhile.

        The following 70 years has been all over reaching (evil can’t help itself). Not many years left until it is all destroyed. Once the dollar loses reserve currency status, I suspect it will all go very quickly (and brutally).

        Then …. China?

        LikeLike


  22. on August 5, 2015 at 5:27 pm Joshua Sinistar

    Following the rhetoric is like following a rabbit down the hole and ending up in Wonderland an ass-backwards and upside down world where good id bad and bad is good. The rhetoric is meaningless babble that should be ignored. People should be judged by deed not words. These jewesses are from the ones who ran slavery and fomented a hundred bankster wars. Sex slavery all over the world is done in their dens and bedrooms. They care nothing for women or their rights, any more than they care for dark skinned retards who have merely donned the artificial skins and furs of their masters. Sham and scam is what it is, destroying their betters to rule a world of morons. Hitler was right. If these scum aren’t destroyed, this planet will be a lifeless orb like Pluto, endlessly orbiting the sun with no one to mark the passing of years or making use of the natural resources.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 8:21 pm CMB

      “Sham and scam is what it is, destroying their betters to rule a world of morons.”
      Their most cherished beliefs summed up in a single sentence. That’s going into the vault. Thanks.

      LikeLike


    • on August 7, 2015 at 10:00 pm Rum

      “Destroying their betters ?”

      First, I must apologize.. since I was recently attacked by 2 of my younger and more athletic stalkers at once, I know that I have some severe limitations now after the neurosurgeon had to slurp out many terminally damaged parts out of my brain just to save the rest… But still. Simply ideas I can still do.

      Okay. If your people are being destroyed by “those who are not their betters” … might you not stop and think about what “better” really means.

      Do your own media. Write your own scrips. Engage ! Neanderthals did NOT lose.

      LikeLike


  23. on August 5, 2015 at 5:47 pm What Is The Goal Of Feminism? | Reaction Times

    […] Source: Heartiste […]

    LikeLike


  24. on August 5, 2015 at 6:16 pm Jacob

    Susan Sontag was almost right. Feminism is obviously the white race’s just dessert. Put another way, it’s the inevitable result of Western spiritual ignorance. When the white pagans eventually discovered the heavenly places and began the spiritual journey that other races began millennia before, rather than present their issue for divine teaching and blessing as they ought, they built monuments to their own existence and worshipped themselves. The self-worship continues today. Feminism is an attempt by Mother Goddess to abort unwanted issue or draw it back inside for further gestation.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 6:27 pm Greg Eliot

      If this is a roundabout way of saying you yids are a light unto the nations, well… y’all got a funny way of showing it.

      Tip fer ya, Schlomo… wanna get back in good odor with God, then corral your sheistering kin… foremost, the yentas.

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 6:52 pm James Blonde

        did God invent eskimos?

        LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 8:34 pm Greg Eliot

        If that’s your attempt at a troll, I’m having nunavit.

        All seriousness aside, God created Man, but that free will thingy alleviates Him from the latter’s mischief.

        LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 6:33 pm James Blonde

      bravo

      LikeLike


      • on August 5, 2015 at 8:32 pm Greg Eliot

        Can’t help siding with mom’s side, eh? lzlzozlzozlozlozlozlozozlozlozl

        LikeLike


  25. on August 5, 2015 at 6:27 pm walawala

    Feminism is a giant shit test for women to weed out men who will stand up to them. But ultimately it’s a self-sabotaging strategy. The minute a girl brings up “equality” to me…I know there’s a time limit on our relationship. She’s lit the fuse and the more of a “jerk” I act, the longer I can postpone the break up.

    But more and more girls i’m meeting aren’t used to a guy standing up to them, teasing them, resisting them and in some cases this means I exclude myself because they’re turned off. But for the ones who DO continue and want to surrender, life is much easier and the time we spend is much better.

    LikeLike


    • on August 5, 2015 at 7:05 pm 88

      “But for the ones who DO continue and want to surrender, life is much easier and the time we spend is much better.”

      great point. all girls will test you but the girls who really embrace your strength, who actually enjoy being compliant and pleasing you, will actually shit test you very little over time. they are much more enjoyable to be around.

      i think it’s because they are just designed to please and they find a lot of comfort and joy in doing that. they are really the only ones who are worth your time because others will test you and test you and no matter what you do, they will never really be happy.

      that’s because their motivation is different. most girls aren’t going to try to make you happy because they find joy and happiness in pleasing you. their only motivation for behaving properly and being compliant is fear of losing you to someone who treats you better.

      sure, you can get and keep women like that but they are nothing compared to the women who actually find happiness and feel complete when they are pleasing their man and making him happy.

      trust me, you can see and feel the difference when you are involved with a woman like that.

      LikeLike


    • on August 8, 2015 at 6:27 am theasdgamer

      If you stand up to them in a steady way, it builds attraction. Their gobs will whine, but their ginas will tingle. If you add humor, it actually muddies a woman’s perception that you are steady, unless your humor stings her a bit. Calibrate carefully.

      If a woman brings up “equality”, then institute your own nuclear 5h1t test, on the principle that he who blinks first loses. Show her that you are more willing to walk away than she is.

      LikeLike


  26. on August 5, 2015 at 6:36 pm Tam the Bam

    Bah! Let them eat blubber.

    LikeLike


    • on August 8, 2015 at 6:28 am theasdgamer

      Only if said blubber is organic. Heh.

      LikeLike


  27. on August 5, 2015 at 7:12 pm bo jangles

    Feminism is a Shit Test.

    LikeLike


  28. on August 5, 2015 at 11:06 pm Anonymous

    deez nutz

    LikeLike


  29. on August 6, 2015 at 12:51 am Mark Slater

    “The roots of feminism are found primarily in the suffrage movement, and secondarily in the effects that growing wealth have on the behaviors of men and on social equality. (It’s not well-known that many of the American first-wave feminists were Evangelical Christians who wanted the government to have a stronger role promoting morality, e.g., the temperance movement. These ur-feminists were in many respects decidedly conservative women.)” — CH

    A humble correction: The suffragettes, as typified by Elizabeth Cady Stanton, were not strictly Evangelical Christians, but rather Yankee Puritans, and as such hated real American Christian civilization (the Old South). The old canard that the Yankee Puritans’ greatest fear is “that someone, somewhere, may be having a good time” is not without truth.

    One can draw a seamless line from the Yankee Puritans of the 19th Century, to the do-gooder liberals of the 20th, to the Social Justice Warriors of the 21st.

    LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 5:44 am Greg Eliot

      Hey, you’re stealing whiskey’s shtick!

      LikeLike


  30. on August 6, 2015 at 3:20 am Daily Linkage – August 6, 2015 | The Dark Enlightenment

    […] What Is The Goal Of Feminism? | Chateau Heartiste […]

    LikeLike


  31. on August 6, 2015 at 4:23 am Natty Bumppo

    “It’s not well-known that many of the American first-wave feminists were Evangelical Christians who wanted the government to have a stronger role promoting morality, e.g., the temperance movement. These ur-feminists were in many respects decidedly conservative women”

    The first-wavers may have been socially conservative but they were still tyrants, just like their modern era counterparts. They chose to leverage the power of government, which is the use of force (guns, prisons, fines, etc.), to do their will. The Temprence Feminizis were able to get their initiative passed while millions of American men were still in France after the end of the war, and the result was a thriving black market full of violence (how many men died?) whose prescription was worse than the disease. It’s no different than the current insanity…feminists rally the herd to have government provide for their safety, in the process trading freedom for oppression.

    LikeLike


  32. on August 6, 2015 at 4:58 am oink

    unions:working men feminism:working women

    Frontrunners are there to make the turd palatable to the goy masses.

    LikeLike


  33. on August 6, 2015 at 6:25 am tspark156

    What is the goal of feminism? Too make ugly unhealthy women feel good, and by extension make everyone else (read normal people) miserable.

    LikeLike


  34. on August 6, 2015 at 7:02 am WonF

    Sorry for the wierd looking link but very well put video on how people embracing feminism are the ones failing in the sexual market

    [video src="http://2static.fjcdn.com/movies/Ugly+feminists+modern+feminists+are+neckbeards_7a76ef_5637170.mp4" /]

    LikeLike


  35. on August 6, 2015 at 7:42 am tteclod

    Vaguely related:

    Am I the only engineer out there that gets angry when little girls shout, “I’m an engineer!” when they’re not even licensed?

    http://www.bpelsg.ca.gov/consumers/lic_lookup.shtml

    LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 11:28 am CANNEO

      I’m not sure about California but in Canada you can report the false usage of the term Engineer to the provincial governing body and have that person censured. They will get a court injection against said person if required. In the past there were industrial exemptions where your employer could choose to call you an Engineer even if you were not a Professional Engineer but to my knowledge these have mostly been eliminated.

      If you have the time/will to complain to the California licensing body you should. I’ve had to request people refer to themselves as Specialists/Technologists on various project’s I’ve worked on as I didn’t want to be associated with titles they didn’t earn. Admittedly the fault usually lies with HR and explaining to them that you can’t just call someone an Engineer because it feels like the right thing to do is not as straightforward as it should be.

      Getting your P.E. or P. Eng is a serious endeavour and one of the few professions I feel still worthy of respect by the general public. I think it deserves not to be diluted by a special snowflake so your anger seems to be righteous.

      [CH: +1]

      LikeLike


      • on August 6, 2015 at 4:01 pm tteclod

        Well, fuck; I am licensed in California. That means I’m fucking obligated to report if it’s a violation. Last time I did that it cost me a client – who was promptly replaced by 3. Hmmm… Free advertising?

        LikeLike


  36. on August 6, 2015 at 8:43 am Big Jim

    “So we have as explanations for the rise of feminism affluence, wealth and income inequality, and decadence. To this we can add out-breeding, the marriage pattern among White Europeans (and, later, Americans) that split cousin-marriage kinship ties”

    So why not take the next logical step to find the real roots of femininism? Affluence, decadence and wealth inequality don’t spring out of nowhere: 1) capitalism produces affluence (which is a necessary precondition for the other two or else wveyone is just about equally poor) and 2) the christianization of Europe broke up intratribal marriage patterns, polygamy, and other traditional European family values. Capitalism and christianity are the fundamental roots of feminism. Or are folks here afraid to face that?

    LikeLike


  37. on August 6, 2015 at 9:14 am Theophilus

    “It was this seed that the proto-globalist cosmopolitan fat cats wanted so eagerly to plant, to enlarge their customer base and divide families against themselves.”

    I would amend to “enlarge their customer base, depress wages, disempower white males, enable more money printing, and divide families against themselves.”

    LikeLike


  38. on August 6, 2015 at 9:56 am zaqan

    Ah same old Jew hatred. Never mind that all feminists are communist. Not a single one embraces any actual aspect of Judaism or Jewish culture. Socialism and feminism is a mental disease. Thats why you have Jews disproportionately so, just like Jews are disproportionately represented in every intellectual task. But you also have the Protestants and Catholics. It was the Irish Catholic Kennedy brothers who brought us immigration and welfarism. It wasnt the Jews. But never mind that, let the simpletons seize on meaningless patterns like the man on the moon or on Mars, or that crab thing blocking the cave. Pareidolia is the term.

    [CH: the problem with this counterattack is that one can’t extricate the behaviors typical of people belonging to an ethnic religion from the ideological manifestations of those behaviors. yes, they were communists, (and feminists), but they were also culturally, AND genetically, eskimos. the communism was a consequence of the eskimo-ness, not the other way around.]

    LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 3:48 pm Greg Eliot

      By your own reasoning, it’s not Judaism or Jewish culture (outside of their meddling in the political realm, I guess) that is hated.

      And it matters little if they’re “disproportionately represented in every intellectual task” (oh, that Cathedral humblebrag!).

      When the individuals who just happen to be Jewish (race, not religion) play such a prominent role in all things deleterious to the host nations in which they reside… while practicing an ethnocentrism themselves that would make a Stomfonter look like a HuffPoer… well… I leave imagining the fallout of such hypocrisy and skullduggery to those of harder heart.

      But thanks for playing, Schlomo… unfortunately we’re still getting a glimpse of the men behind the curtain.

      [CH: a group whose history is punctuated on a regular basis by explosions of hatred aimed at them ought to engage in a little self-reflection of the non-hubristic kind and ask themselves if maybe, just maybe, something about them inspires hate.]

      LikeLike


      • on August 7, 2015 at 9:00 am Greg Eliot

        [CH: a group whose history is punctuated on a regular basis by explosions of hatred aimed at them ought to engage in a little self-reflection of the non-hubristic kind and ask themselves if maybe, just maybe, something about them inspires hate.]

        Alas, the answer they keep coming up with is that we’re all “just jealous”.

        LikeLike


    • on August 8, 2015 at 6:32 am theasdgamer

      When it comes to Nobel prizes, the Eskimos can’t hold a candle to the Scots. And the Scots start out poor and disadvantage, unlike most Eskimos.

      LikeLike


  39. on August 6, 2015 at 2:31 pm Samadhi

    What is the final solution to the Eskimo Question?

    LikeLike


    • on August 6, 2015 at 3:50 pm Greg Eliot

      At times it appears the ONLY solution to Mankind’s ills will be the Second Coming… we’re tried fixing ourselves for well over 6 millennia now, and still don’t seem up to the task.

      LikeLike


  40. on August 6, 2015 at 2:45 pm Chad

    Feminism like most leftist schemes does not aim at a goal; they are far too short-sighted to contemplate the consequences of their policies.

    Feminism is analogous to any other leftist political scheme; they want to reap what they do not sow. Feminism attempts to allow a woman to enjoy all the trappings of being a woman while forcing the burdens associated with being a woman onto the general population. Essentially, feminists want absolute freedom of action while simultaneously being protected from any negative consequences of those actions.

    It’s not hard to contemplate that any population that can fully insulate itself from reality will engage in activities that are naïve if not outright destructive. The resulting mentality of which is solipsism. A feminist woman could only assess a man as a means of fulfilling the female imperative.

    Of course the left can only be a decent ally to this up to a point. Since leftism has devolved to the point where sex and gender are now subjective, the gains of feminism stand to be forfeited along with any notion of sexual identity.

    LikeLike


  41. on August 6, 2015 at 9:41 pm B

    I am sure many here are familiar with this talk, but here’s a little history on what feminism is. (agrees with this blog)

    Don’t be put off by her appearance, it doesn’t match what she says and it’s worth listening to.

    LikeLike


    • on August 7, 2015 at 5:05 pm BrutalB

      In that video the speaker mentions the writings of E. Belfort Bax. This is from 1913:

      “There is a trick with which votaries of Feminism seek to prejudice the public mind against its critics, and that is the “fake” that any man who ventures to criticise the pretensions of Feminism, is actuated by motives of personal rancour against the female sex, owing to real or imaginary wrongs suffered by him at the hands of some member or members of the sex.

      I suppose it may be possible that there are persons, not precisely microcephalous idiots, who could be made to believe such stuff as this in disparagement of him who ventures an independent judgment on these questions; otherwise the conduct of Feminists in adopting this line of argument would be incomprehensible.

      But we would fain believe that the number of these feeble-minded persons, who believe there is any connection between a man having independent judgment enough to refuse to bend the knee to Modern Feminist dogma, and his having quarrelled with any or all of his female friends or relations, cannot be very numerous.

      As a matter of fact there is not one single prominent exponent of views hostile to the pretensions of what is called the “Woman’s Movement” of the present day, respecting whom there is a tittle of evidence of his not having lived all his life on the best of terms with his woman-kind.

      There is only one case known of indirectly by the present writer, and that not of a prominent writer or speaker on the subject, that would afford any plausible excuse whatever for alleging anti-Feminist views to have been influenced by personal motives of this kind.

      I am aware, of course, that Feminists, with their usual mendacity, have made lying statements to this effect respecting well-nigh every prominent writer on the anti-Feminist side, in the hope of influencing the aforesaid feeble-minded members of the public against their opponents. But a very little investigation suffices to show in every case the impudent baselessness of their allegations.

      The contemptible silliness of this method of controversy should render it unworthy of serious remark, and my only excuse for alluding to it is the significant sidelight it casts upon the intellectual calibre of those who resort to it, and of the confidence or want of confidence they have in the inherent justice of their cause and the logical strength of their case.”

      — E. Belfort Bax, in the introductory chapter of “The Fraud of Feminism”, 1913:
      https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Fraud_of_Feminism

      LikeLike


  42. on August 7, 2015 at 4:55 am King James Version

    Think Tank: Prostitution Should Be Legalised Because ‘Feminism Has Starved Men Of Sex’

    https://ca.yahoo.com/news/think-tank-prostitution-legalised-because-115158735.html

    LikeLike



Comments are closed.

  • Copyright © 2018. Chateau Heartiste. All rights reserved. Comments are a lunchroom food fight and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Chateau Heartiste proprietors or contributors.
  • Visit the Goodbye, America photojournal website.

    Then cleanse your visual palate with a visit to the Welcome Back, America photojournal website.

  • Pages

    • About
    • Alpha Assessment Submissions
    • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
    • Dating Market Value Test For Men
    • Dating Market Value Test For Women
    • Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List
    • Shit Cuckservatives Say
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Twitter Updates

    Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

  • Recent Comments

    Ironsides on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Carlos Danger on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Jay in DC on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Agent X on Oy, There It Is
    jOHN MOSBY on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    cortesar on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Lichthof on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Davy Holmes on Sweden, The Cuck Corner Stool…
    Lichthof on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    jOHN MOSBY on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
  • Top Posts

    • Battlebrows As Portent Of Sociopath America
    • Women's Sports Will Be Killed Off By Invasive Trannies
    • Red Tsunami?
    • Oy, There It Is
    • Shitlib Logic Trap!
    • Globohomo's Next Target: "Sexual Racism"
    • How To Get A Girl To Send Nudes Of Herself
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
    • The NPC Song: "Feel"
    • There's Something [Very Special] About That Migrant Caravan Truck
  • Categories

  • Game

    • 60 Years of Challenge
    • Alpha Game
    • Cajun
    • Krauser PUA
    • Rational Male
    • Roosh V
    • Tenmagnet
    • Treatise of Love
  • MAGA MEN

    • Alternative Right
    • AmRen
    • Anonymous Conservative
    • Audacious Epigone
    • Dusk in Autumn
    • Education Realist
    • Evo and Proud
    • Gene Expression
    • Hail To You
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • Lion of the Blogosphere
    • My Posting Career
    • OneSTDV
    • PA World and Times
    • Page For Men
    • Parapundit
    • Rogue Health and Fitness
    • Steve Sailer
    • The Anti-Gnostic
    • The Kakistocracy
    • The Red Pill Review
    • The Spearhead
    • Unqualified Reservations
    • Vox Popoli
    • West Hunter
    • Whiskey's Place
  • Syllogism and Synthesis

    • Alias Clio
    • Arts & Letters Daily
    • Deconstructing Leftism
    • Elysium Revisited
    • Feminine Beauty
    • hbd chick
    • Human Biological Diversity
    • Library of Hate
    • Overcoming Bias
    • Stuff White People Like

WPThemes.


loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
%d bloggers like this: