Tuesday, 8 September 2015
Due to the new EU data security laws, I've disabled comments for this blog.
After having been banned by Facebook four times (last time for 30 days), I've decided to blog again, though for the time being not here. I've changed focus and design of my style blog "The Evil Style Queen" and there is a new German one "Die böse Stilmutter" (something like "The Evil Stylemother"). Both focus strongly, although not exclusively, on anti-feminist topics.
I'll be taking down my personal Facebook page soon. However, the bilingual Editrix' Facebook "Fanpage", where I've uploaded and still upload the best and still topical entries from all my blogs, will still be online and may be interesting for my Anglophone readers.
Dear friends and readers,
I'm done with blogging. Too old, too tired, too depressed. Those who want to follow my latest more spur-of-the-moment brain waves, please go to my personal Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/editrix.roncesvalles
I've uploaded the best and still topical entries from all my blogs here: https://www.facebook.com/die.editrix
Thanks to all my faithful readers of many years. Some of you have become real friends.
Nora - The Editrix
Tuesday, 11 November 2014
For a whiff of what is going on, go to the webpresence of Professorette Lann Hornscheidt (it has given itself a "gender-neutral first name):
Do you want to contact Profx. Lann Hornscheidt? Please see that you use a form of address like "Sehr geehrtx Profx. Lann Hornscheidt"."Sehr geehrte(r)" is the formal way addressing a person in a German letter.
Please avoid all two-gendered addresses like "Mr. ___", "Mrs. ___", "Dear (male version)___", or "Dear (female version) ___".
This is no joke. I rather think it's damned frightening. There are 233 chairs for "Gender Studies" at German universities.
Monday, 25 July 2011
There is a German Facebook group "I am conservative and I denounce the terror assault in Norway" ("Ich bin konservativ und verurteile den Terroranschlag in Norwegen"). Why does a "conservative" need to distance himself from such a monstrous crime? Are conservatives known for planting bombs in government buildings? Of butchering the children of their political opponents? What will they do next? Distance themselves from breathing because that mass murdering scum breathes -- sad to say -- as well? Those who excuse themselves accuse themselves.
Which leads us to the term "terrorist", which is as falsely as liberally (ha ha) applied here. That man is a mass murderer. Terror is something to establish fear and soften opposition to achieve a political goal within a defined framework. The IRA comes to mind, as does the Basque ETA or -- dare I say it -- Islam, and while multiculturalists and Gutmenschen stumble over their own legs in the attempt to euphemise the countless heinous deeds committed by Muslims in the spirit of Islam as as "isolated cases", conservatives jump the gun in anticipating obedience to declare that they have nothing to do with this mass murderer. Who would have thought so.
There is another aspect, maybe the most irritating one. 800 young people plus attendants, coaches and other carers -- there must have been a three-figure number of able-bodied men in their late teens or twenties on that island. The murderer had to load and re-load that gun again and again during those hellish 90 minutes. However, as far as we know, no attempt was made to overpower him. Different from the people of hero flight 93, the young people would even have had a decent chance to survive. Is that the outcome of more than 40 years of misandry, of denouncing and criminalising the best qualities of the male sex? Have they heard once to often the debased creed that "violence has never taken anybody anywhere"? God help us!
Cross-posted at Roncesvalles.
Thursday, 11 November 2010
There is no peace and consequently, I (I, I, I !) have no peace. Every morning, I (I, I, I !) wake up to news about Muslims blowing each other up ... Yesterday, a friend ... told me (ME, ME, ME !) that Arab Muslims are taking over more and more Jewish Israeli land ... They are not allowing me (ME, ME, ME !) to have peaceful thoughts. Every week, sometimes every few days, I (I, I, I !) am informed that yet another Iranian woman has been ... Daily, the news from Afghanistan chills my (MY, MY, MY !) blood ... Thus, Muslims, among whom I (I, I, I !) once lived and whom I (I, I, I !) once loved, are giving me (ME, ME, ME !) no peace in my (MY, MY, MY !) older years. (The ones I (I, I, I !) knew and loved are either dead or living in exile in the West.) ... please explain to me (ME, ME, ME !) why Gretta Duisenberg ... is now suing my (MY, MY, MY !) friend and colleague the eminent Iranian-Dutch professor of philosophy and jurisprudence, Afshin Ellian, for calling her an “anti-Semite,” when she proudly calls herself an “anti-Semite.”You get the point? The worst about the threat Islam poses to the West is that it causes Professor Chesler to suffer sleepless nights and doesn't allow her to have peaceful thoughts anymore. And now, finally, at last (we are relieved) to the purpose (apart from letting us know that the worst about the threat Islam poses to the West is that it causes Professor Chesler to suffer sleepless nights and doesn't allow her to have peaceful thoughts anymore) of this hyperventilating ego-extravaganza:
Leon de Winter and Abigail Esman are both asking us all to write on their blogs, in our articles, on our Facebook pages that we, too, believe that Gretta Duisenberg is an anti-Semite. In Dutch, de Winter says:For Heaven's Sake! Almost exactly seven years ago, I (I, I, I !) and the Jerusalem Post called Gretta Duisenberg (and others) antisemites. Countless people must have done so as well before and since then. And now she (SHE, SHE, SHE !) needs to recruit "thousands, perhaps millions" to save her (HER, HER, HER !) "friend and colleague" from a fate worse than death? Give me a break!I invite all readers to support journalistic freedom and freedom of expression by writing ‘I, too, think Gretta Duisenberg is an anti-Semite.’How many people can Duisenberg sue? Can she sue only one person if thousands, perhaps millions, are saying the same thing?
In fact, a Google search for "gretta duisenberg antisemite" renders 398,000 results right now and a picture search shows countless pictures poking fun at the evil old Duisen-hag, even including the antisemitism-topic.
For Phyllis Chesler, the world revolves around one thing, Phyllis Chesler's arse. The fact that people take seriously what this lump of hormones blathers, is proof for the fact that feminism has won long ago.
Cross-posted at Roncesvalles.
Tuesday, 2 November 2010
Margot Kässmann (Dr. Rev.), ex-lay-bishopette and as such former head of the Protestant* church in Germany, is culturally enriching Emory University during the fall semester, serving as Distinguished Theologian-in-Residence at the university’s Candler School of Theology, and as a Distinguished Fellow of the Claus M. Halle Institute for Global Learning, which lends a so far unknown meaning to the word "distinguished".Now I was pointed at a recent bout of verbal diarrhoea of that woman, exactly one of those for which she is so widely revered in this country. She explains Americans how they ought to feel about the Ground Zero Mosque, which is, after all, ten whopping walking minutes away from Ground Zero. "Does this building of a mosque really hurts the feelings of Americans? Does it really have anything to do with the terrorist deed of September 11?" In a word: Don't make such a fuss, Amis!
A theologian, pastor, prolific author and able to hold more booze than an entire troop of Russians, Kässmann is an influential leader in the international ecumenical arena and an enormously popular speaker in Europe, often drawing crowds in the thousands, specifically since she was caught in a drunk-driving incident with more than three times over the limit, which proves that we have become an undiscerning, sheepish breed with a knack for the sleazy.
“When I became dean at Candler, I issued her a standing invitation to join us for a semester at our rowdy stagettes whenever she could, and I’m delighted that she has accepted,” says Love, dean of Candler. “Candler faculty and students will be able to interact personally with an extraordinarily creative, charismatic and chadbandian Christian leader. Plus, with our new strategic emphasis on internationalizing the curriculum, whatever that is worth, the fit of having her on campus for a semester could not be better”, says Jan Love. Love is, who would have thought so, female.
Since Kässmann's election in 1983 as one of the youngest members of the board of directors of the WCC, she has broken age and (retch) gender barriers within the leadership of the Protestant church, and it shows. First in 1999 with her election as the first female bishop of the Protestant Church of Hannover — the largest worldwide, then in 2009, when she was elected chair (barf) of the Council of the Protestant Church in Germany (EKD), the governing body of 24 million Protestants. She enjoyed (you bet) a lot of media attention and even granted interviews about intimate matters to the sleaziest of all Caesarean media whores, BILD.
Kässmann’s February 2010 voluntary resignation from her roles as bishop and chair (barf) of the EKD after a drunk-driving conviction when she had always vocally condemned all forms of "excess", has not diminished her popularity, but, as it could be expected in a totally worth- and shameless society, enhanced it: She received several standing ovations at her first major appearance after her resignation, a Bible study for 5,000 people at the Ecumenical “Kirchentag” in Munich this May, which ought to teach Catholics what ecumenism is worth.
“I think the public see her as a leader who models honesty and integrity in the face of difficulty — a model of authentic leadership at a time when too few leaders own up to the consequences of their inappropriate actions,” simpered Love lovingly. Just imagine for a fraction of a moment what the slimy old bag would have said, had a Catholic bishop committed the same "inappropriate action".
Known for her administrative acumen, prophetic witness and pastoral ability to address complex dilemmas of everyday life (burp), Kässmann is the author of more than 40 books on spirituality, the quest for Christian unity, Christian social engagement and Bible study and about all other thinkable footling and fatuous attention whorish things with which a certain ilk of theologians, not all of them female, poisons the hearts and brains of the undiscerning.
During her semester at Candler, Kässmann will deliver lectures, participate in panel discussions, hen parties and preach, addressing such hilariously funny and utterly worthless topics as women’s leadership in the church, post-modern and secular challenges to the church’s mission, and Protestant spirituality, all of which are unbearable below a blood alcohol level of 1.5 o/oo.
Kässmann is the featured speaker at the following events, which are free and open to the public, which is self-explaining because otherwise she wouldn't attend anyway:
Lecture in the Luminaries Series, "The Challenges and Opportunities of Women's Leadership in the Church Worldwide," Sept. 21, 4:30-6:00 p.m., Cannon Chapel, Emory Campus. A reception will follow. Bring your own bottle because Margot will swig the lot. Lecture co-sponsored by Emory’s Office of the Provost, Luminaries Series, Candler School of Theology, la Veuve Clicquot and The Halle Institute.
Preaching, preening and presiding while pissed, Reformation Day Chapel Service, Oct. 19, 11:15 a.m., Cannon Chapel, 510 Kilgo Circle, Emory Campus.
Preaching at Emory University Worship Margot Service on Reformation Sunday, Oct. 31, 11:00 a.m., Cannon Chapel, 510 Kilgo Circle, Emory Campus. Drinks will be served.
Lecture, "Bible, Prayer and Confession: Anticipating the 500th Anniversary of the Reformation," Nov. 16, 4:30-6:00 p.m., Cannon Chapel, 510 Kilgo Circle, Emory Campus. A reception will follow. Bring your own bottle because Margot will swig the lot. Lecture co-sponsored by Candler School of Theology, The Halle Institute and Johnnie Walker.
* I am not using "Evangelical Church", the literal translation of the German term "Evangelische Kirche", of which Americans are so fond. It is misleading, and so "Protestant" will have to do.
How was that about the religion of the natives? It was considered inferior, dismissed, eliminated by forced baptisms, wiped out. Today there are Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, Buddhists here -- and they all define themselves as Americans. [No, NOT ALL do that, Margot.] And yet there is an undercurrent: An American is Christian.If there is a single politically correct issue, however far-fetched, in the vicinity, that woman will grab it and twist it to fit her own shallow, vain, slimy and sleazy devices.
She then goes on to inform us about the evil Pilgrim Fathers and their rigid understanding of religion, and goes on -- as a German SHE CAN NOT HELP IT -- to wax lyrically about the Koran burning of that "fundamentalist" pastor in Florida that never happened and how hurtful this was for, yes, not just Muslims, but specifically for us as Germans -- the entire old schtick of the child molester who thinks he is especially qualified for a job as a kindergarden teacher.
She left out, I guess yet and just, the slavery issue, and I spare you the rest, Americans. Frankly, I've got neither the time nor the stomach to translate the rest of that totally predictable, hackneyed, undignified drivel. Here we have a woman, a woman who holds a doctorate in theology, a woman who used to head one of the largest Protestant churches worldwide, a woman who has supposedly taught for two months now at an American university, a woman who IS BOUND TO HAVE spoken to Americans, a woman who still doesn't know how Americans, her hosts, think, feel and define themselves. Why? Because she doesn't give a damn as long as she looks pretty in her priestly cassock.
In a word: a woman.
She is supposed to come back to Germany later this year. Do me a favour: Keep her!
Cross-posted at Roncesvalles.
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
However, it's the circumstances that are really remarkable. Here we have somebody who converted to Islam, half-sister to somebody for whom the description "has been" would be quite apropos, and all the world is as ecstatic as if the Pope had. And now we have to suffer the ubiquitous pictures of another sickeningly simpering blonde clad in a headrag. The phenomenon that lets women put on a self-congratulatory, smug smirk as soon as they are wearing such a piece of cloth, is something else!
I educated myself about her because I had never heard of her before. At home, she enjoys (You BET!) a modest notability as a TV personality, just exactly the vulgar, obnoxious lower class broad with a horrible accent one would expect, who makes the max out of her faint connection with the pre-previous PM.
There is only one possible explanation. The corrupted media, hell-bent on the Islamisation of the West, are hoping for copycat conversions because they know quite well that women will fall for any (but ANY) little bit of potential attention whoredom, however cheap, however dangerous, however evil.
Sunday, 17 October 2010
The Social Pathologist, who is a doctor, has a matter-of-fact attitude towards the female nature, backs up his points with a lot of data and is lacking the sneering, cynical and contemptuous attitude of Roissy and his ilk, something I find unsavoury and hard to tolerate.
Here is where I come in:
It seems, that every society has got its own aphrodisiac and that women always make the worst of it.
"Some [pissant artist] burns a koran and it's art, some [non-Christian preacher where Christians are a minority] puts a crucifix in urine and that's a hate crime."
Point taken and yes, there are two sides of that matter -- theoretically. However, the fact remains that no embassies burn and no people die if somebody puts a crucifix in urine. Maybe it's a conservative thing to understand that "equality" isn't the answer to everything.
"The whole divorce end point is complicated by a whole host of variables."
IQ (at least occupational status correlated to IQ) does decrease divorce rate........... in America. In other countries it increases it."
I'd wager that is, because American society is in many things lower middle class (or petty bourgeois, if you like that better) in its VALUES. ("What WILL people say!") From my experience -- I am a German who was partly socialised in England -- people above a certain stratum simply don't care what others say about them.
Fascinating discussion. Keep up the good work!
The Social Pathologist said...
The Editrix, thanks for dropping by.
However, the fact remains that no embassies burn and no people die if somebody puts a crucifix in urine.
That's because Christians don't care. If they did the embassy's would burn. The only reason why the towelheads burn embassies if because they love Allah, we give God lip service.
I'd wager that is, because American society is in many things lower middle class (or petty bourgeois, if you like that better) in its VALUES.
It is both American society's strength and weakness. America probably cannot scale the heights of European glory, nor can plumb the depths of European wickedness.
people above a certain stratum simply don't care what others say about them.
So true, but it's a fatal flaw to have when the criticism leveled against one is legitimate. Sometimes its most beneficial to care about public opinion, most times its not.
"It is both American society's strength and weakness."
Indeed! I was trying not to be judgemental, just stating a fact. A lot of American traits we tend to sneer at are really strengths.
I find this blog most interesting because it seems to deal with the facts of female nature, different from the Roissy-ites, in a matter-of-fact and non-contemptuous way. Many of the complaints of American men, of which I have no doubt that they are justified, I find as exotic as I might find the the mating rites of some Australo-Papuan tribe.
To make an attempt at putting the problem, as I see it for the European society in which I live, into words: Women are not able to live their sexuality in a self-reliant and responsible way. They simply don't possess the ethical and moral fibre necessary for that and need the confinements of a TRADITIONAL marriage. The most destructive single cause for the decline of our civilisation is the sexual liberation of women. I see a woman at the root of virtual each and every marital and familial failure I am watching. I see sluttiness, idleness, vanity, lack of backbone, morals and common decency. What I do NOT see is "hypergamy". But then, when I first came across the American wedding cult, five-figure wedding dress, diamond ring, the lot, more than ten years ago in the Internet, it was one of those Australo-Papuan culture shocks as well. I am not saying that we are any better in Europe or Germany, we aren't, and the outcome for marriages and families is just as disastrous here. All I am saying is that the underlying motives are different, and that wouldn't be so if "hypergamy" were really a biological given.
I see this as food for thought and further discussion, not as the ultimate truth.
However, and on a different note: I'd like to strongly contradict your statement about Muslims. I don't think Muslims love their Allah, which is not the God of the Bible, as we love the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. They just hate everything and everybody that doesn't fit into their debased world view. I strongly deny that we can learn anything from them. Any similarity with a traditional Christian view, be it the love of God, women's modesty or whatever, is purely pheno- not genotypical.
Off my soapbox now. ;-)
It seems I ought to have read your entry "The Programmable Sex" first. It goes a long way towards explaining the differences. If one assumes that women's sexuality does indeed reflect societal norms and peer group pressure, it is not so amazing anymore that American woman go for material gain and a diamond ring when looking out for a mate, and German women for (far more frightening) idealistic reasons. Don't take that as a flattering description. Germans are at their most obnoxious, even dangerous, when their sense for idealism is tickled. If I think of the failed marriages within my circle of friends and acquaintances, I'd wager that the adulteresses are very sure that they really "love" that man, "deserve" him and can make him SO much happier than his wife can, in brief, that they are doing actually a good and meritorious, even noble, thing. Few of those I have in mind right now have gained much financially, but, again, that doesn't make them in the least better than any American gold digger and the marriage and family they broke up is just as broken.
The same applies to the wives who leave their husbands because they are bored. They usually don't improve their financial status.
Reversely, you would be amazed for what German men are exchanging attractive, charming and even rich wives. The Roissy-ites with their scale of female attractiveness would be stunned. I am not a man, so I can only say that I haven't a clue what makes them tick. Admiration from the cook or groom they don't get from their wives? Maybe, but why MARRY them?
I have been thinking for a while now rather sketchily in that direction because the differences are so obvious to me when I have no reason to doubt the complaints of the American men. Thank you and this blog for helping me clarifying that.