Hyperventilating Ego-Extravaganza

The old bag is at it again:

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:

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?

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!

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.

The Answer to a Long-Asked Question

For a long time I am vaguely thinking about the reasons for the obvious gap between what I perceive as justified complaints from American men about the corrupting effect of feminism and women's "sexual liberation", about the disastrous consequences it has for their lifes and society in general, and what I see here, at my end. "Hypergamy" is a concept I always understood only theoretically and which I did not consider part of my culture. Now, at the most interesting Australian blog The Social Pathologist, which I found by chance, as one does, in the Internet, and specifically at the entries The Virgin Bride and The Programmable Sex (including the comments) I found at last an explanation that makes actually sense (plus an interesting sideline about the nature of Islam).

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:

The_Editrix said...

"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."

SO true!

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!

8:09 PM

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.

11:52 PM

The_Editrix said...

"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. ;-)

1:49 AM

The_Editrix said...

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.

4:13 AM

It seems, that every society has got its own aphrodisiac and that women always make the worst of it.

When Oestrogen Meets Mohammed

The blog Islam in Europe reports via Al-Arabia:

Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi gave a lesson on Islam and copies of the Quran to a few hundred young Italian women Sunday as he arrived in Rome for his fourth visit in a year.

It was the second time the Libyan leader - who travels with female bodyguards and fancies himself a self-styled feminist - had staged such an event for Italian women, who were recruited by a modeling agency and paid an undisclosed sum to attend.

Michela, who asked that her last name not be used, told Associated Press Television News that three of the participants converted to Islam on the spot.

"It was a really beautiful meeting and went very well," she said. "He is very easygoing and he gave us a copy of the Quran. Three girls converted themselves to Islam during the ceremony. It was a beautiful event."

Other participants, though, identifying themselves as Roman Catholics in this overwhelmingly Catholic country, said Gaddafi had urged others to convert and had dismissed Christianity as unimportant.

Unfortunately, it is not really amazing that such "modern" woman, shallow, self-centered, silly and sexually and morally corrupt as they are, will fall for the "charm" of that disgusting old pervert. Nothing shows the danger of women let loose on the prowl better than the fact that they are the main enablers of the death cult that goes by the name Islam.

The Ehical Superiority of the Female Sex

While doing the modest research for the previous entry I found this:

It's a one-page website and the above is the sole content. It can be found at the URL:
http://www.howtogetyourexboyfriendbacktips.com. And no, I'll not go there, I or my computer might catch something nasty.

At my German blog I recently discussed an article in the leading German "teen mag" (Gosh, the word alone is nausea-inducing) Bravo (which targets at a readership between 12 and 17), where the young were informed how to deal with their "exes", another just as pukeworthy piece of vocabulary. Notabene that the strategies, all heavily relying on in-depth knowledge of the dirtiest of human sexuality, suggested for girls to apply to their ex-boyfriends are notably more fiendish and swinish than those suggested for the boys to treat their ex-girlfriends with. I wonder why. Not.

(Notabene that they were not castigated for THAT by the a certain faction of the blogosphere, but because they only focused on -- ta-daaa -- heterosexual sex. (I am considering to rename this blog, because I have come to think that not feminism, but the homosexual lobby may be the "most destructive single cause for the decline of our civilisation".)

In case you wonder whether there is a page http://www.howtogetyourexgirlfriendbacktips.com -- there isn't, I tried it. I wonder why. Not.

The Peculiar Way of Women to Deal with Their Problems

F.C. sent me the following comment via email:

Hallo, I found your Blog through this and I wanted to comment that last one ... I was wondering are you a Female or a Male? Your Judgement against ... about Phyllis Chesler is really horrible (and I say that being a Female) - I say, Dr. Phyllis Chesler is just wonderful.

Anyway, I saw your Post about Nagla Al-Imam and her Statements: People recently talk(ed) about her, since she appearently converted to Christianity and got persecuted by the Authorities of her Country. About her, an Article appeared on PajamasMedia.

Thank you for approaching Islam/-ic/-ist Threat ... that's great.

I wish you a nice Day and Life.

First, thank you for your kind words, F.C. As for the points you have addressed:

Yes, I am female. "Editrix" is the female form of the male "Editor". Why are you asking? Would you expect a female to be more lenient in her judgement of women because she is one herself? If that is the case, I don't agree.

As for Phyllis Chesler, I think I made a good job of proving my point that Chesler is a hysterical egomaniac and grotesquely overrated shame to any academic environment, and that she is not criticising Islam as such, but talking about her (HER HER HER) personal problems with it. It's all in my various articles about her in German and English. Not my judgement is horrible, it's the plain truth. Chesler is horrible. You, on the other hand, just said you think she is wonderful. I would be seriously interested to learn why you think that. No provocation or sarcasm intended.

Now Nagla Imam: So evil Islamists gave her a bad name by doctoring (how?) what she said about Israel. I guess they did that because they knew what a worldwide outcry would ensue because the Jews generally and Israel specifically are so well loved everywhere, as proven by the massive protests against what she said.

(But sarcasm aside and let's for argument's sake assume they DID doctor her statements. The question remains WHERE THE OUTCRY WAS because we had to believe that she had really said that. The feminists' reaction, however: *CRICKETS*.)

I will say what I think of all that: No Muslim in a Muslim country will convert to Christianity lightly, so in that she is credible. I think it just proves that hatred of Jews is the spiritual staple of Islam and the West. She may have, as it was discussed at a blog, tried to give herself some notoriety to protect herself, but again, it would be a peculiar, peculiarly ineffective -- and very telling -- way of doing so. She may be simply a crackpot, but I don't think it's quite that simple. One thing I know: That a case like that will typically and enthusiastically be picked up by Pajamas Media, this great melting pot of a couple of liberals who don't like Islamic extremism (but have mostly nothing against Islam as such) and thus consider themselves "conservatives".

And to revert to the topic of this blog: I wonder whether a man would have dealt with his personal problems in a similarly less-than-straightforward way.

Thank you again for your opinion. Great food for thought!

Where are the feminists? Where is the outrage?

Found here at the eyeblast.tv blog.

It may be 2 years old but I think it’s emblematic of the situation. Watch the video again and let it sink in how chilling this is. A crazed anti-semite comes out saying that Muslim men should sexually harass and even rape Israeli women and what does this arab tv network do? They invite her on and interview her as though she were just another political commentator with a provocative position.

And the sad thing is that in a society where the call for mass genocide against the Israelis is a common event this woman’s disgusting insanity really is just provocative. In a region of the world where denials of the holocaust and calls for its renewal are common place perhaps the treatment of the call for the mass rape of Israelis as legitimate by a tv network isn’t surprising.

But, clearly, it is disgustingly reprehensible and yet another reminder of exactly what the Israelis are up against.

Notabene that this woman wears no headscarf, that she has had obviously a Western education and that the anchor wears a Western suit and tie. These are the textbook moderate Muslims the West yearns so much to embrace.

If this is two years old, where have the feminists been in the meantime? Where is the outrage? What else do we need to prove the utter worthlessness and hypocrisy of feminism?

---

Hat tip: The 'gator!
Cross-posted at Roncesvalles.

The Call of the Double-X-Chromosome

This is from my German blog. The header is picking up that of an article in the German newspaper "Tagesspiegel", which is, notabene, considered "conservative". Under the headline "The Call of The Muezzin", Claudia Keller, always out to explain to unappreciative Germans the virtues of Islam, writes something that is (I am trying to translate my native language anger) "so abysmally dumb, shit-for-brain-bottomless stupid, self destructive, undignified and footling that it must have been written by a woman about women." The quote from the Tagesspiegel says:

Convert? To Islam? Unthinkable for many. But every year it is done by thousands in Germany. Most of them are women. Three encounters.

Sonja did it, to be recognized as a mother and homemaker. Franziska, because she was enthusiastic about the romantic, fateful element in it. Ulrike wanted to escape the achievement-oriented society.

To this, I then add: "And they all did it because they are *umb *unts."

One may approve of such vulgarity or not, but true it is. They embrace Islam because they associate the role of a mother and homemaker with the humiliating, undignified and ultimately pornographic status Islam assigns to women, they are good for nothing and rationalize their justified feeling of inadequacy by "wanting to escape the achievement-oriented society" and, at least to me, worst, they consider a medieval death cult with doubtful aesthetics, that cultivates a sick image of masculinity where homosexuality is as strictly taboo-ed as widely practised, "fateful" and "romantic". Well, at least now I know why "romance", this pukeworthy Americanism for "love", disgusts me so much. For heaven's sake! Look at that woman. The word "simpering" must have been INVENTED to describe her!

(She) doesn't feel completely at home in the Wedding [a Berlin suburb] mosque. The Macho ways of many Arab men go on her nerves. She won't concentrate so hard on her work for the mosque in the future.

My guess is that she won't stay for ever a "Muslima" and embrace wicca, satanism or Bach flowers next, which will be a good thing, because otherwise one of those romantic Muslim men will apply a fateful beating to her to wipe that smug smile off her face.

Apropos beating!

... that the husband is allowed to beat his wife if she doesn't obey him and goes astray, applies only to "extreme circumstances", when nothing else helps. She herself wouldn't be in for anything like that anyway [We are relieved!], she as a convert, is much more devout than her husband who doesn't take religion all that seriously anyway and doesn't visit the mosque. "I am very worried because of that, Jasmin [That's the one who wants to escape the achievement-oriented society!] says. She would like to save her husband from hell, but so far all discussions led to nothing.

Maybe that is because he considers her the moron she is. Maybe Islam HAS a point, after all. (That was sarcasm!)

The article says, too (and appreciatively, by the way), that the Muslim organisation "Islamarchiv in Soest" estimates the current number of German converts to be 25,000, two thirds of them women. And now the INcredible part: Previous to 9/11 between 200 and 250 Germans converted to Islam, post-911 1,000, 2,000, once even 4,000, a year. Should those figures be authentic (and I think they are, more or less) the mixture of oestrogen-addled brains, anti-Americanism, self-hatred and anticipatory obedience is stunning!

When Bloggerettes Hit The Internet

Debbie "Photoshop Queen" Schlussel: This is from a blogger, a "conservative" blogger, mind you, who wants to be taken seriously as a pundit and when everything else is said and done ends up just as a -- punditerette.

Why? Because she can't help herself just as she can't help herself about the Photoshopping. I wish John Derbyshire would photoshop his awful haido, but alas he doesn't.

It's hormones, stupid!

Btw, nothing but gushing, sucking-up, "supportive" comments there. Americans deserve what they are getting.

Gosh, that woman is a pain in the proverbial. At least Coulter is entertaining, not whining, and fairly often right on the mark. If she weren't so intellectually dishonest and would get off the idea that her cachectic frame in flimsy little black dresses is something to strut, I'd almost like her.

Only Male Mass Murderers Have Manners

A friend gave me the DVDs for the first season of "Dexter". Writing this, I assume that you all have watched it. In Germany, if I am not mistaken, it was only shown on pay TV and I don't even own a television set anyway. I think it is good entertainment, as long as one doesn't take it too seriously. Starting to think "ethics" will spoil the fun. However, having not watched TV for many years, I was appalled at the underlying feminism and I am afraid that we have a trend here. I hated the fluttering, wispy and washed-out girlfriend and the annoying, horse-faced sister, whose favourite word starts with "F" and ends with "uck". Interestingly, I liked the aggressive lieutenant, maybe because she is, different from the other women, such a feast on the eyes, or maybe because she has, as women ought to and different from all other ones in the entire series, breasts. Or maybe because she is openly and always aggressive and not, like the two other ones, either mousy and nervous, OR bossy and shrill, whatever suits their agenda. It is so annoyingly predictable. It's always Ms. Wishy-Washy who calls the shots when it comes to sex because she is so "traumatized" and what drove me up the wall was that she calls Dexter every time she has one of her earth-shattering problems and the wimpy idiot never tells her to get lost, however deeply involved he might me in the solution of a REAL problem. Yeah! If The Great Earth Mother calls, even mass murderers' black hearts melt! It was a pity (and a sickeningly politically correct solution), too, that Dexter saved her sorry ass when she violated the agreement about visitation rights with her no-good ex-husband. Of course, how could anybody expect her (HER HER!) to know!

I performed a brief Google search and, yes, feminists tend to love it. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Under the header My new favorite female character one informs us that:

Deb is Dexter’s sister and a police officer and I officially want her to be my new best friend. I have just started watching the third season so I do not know what her character development has been through the other two. She won me over with her response to Dexter having a child: “A mother-fucking, rolly-polly chubby-cheeked shit machine” which is pretty much awesome.

Deb is a problematic character in many ways and is far from the feminist icon status that we give characters like Lisa Simpson. She is desperate for respect and lives in the shadow of her father so there are aspects of her achieving to please a man.

You got that? This depraved bit of human DNA thinks it is a drawback if a woman wants to please a man while it is a good thing ("pretty much awesome") to call a baby, a little human, a "mother-fucking, rolly-polly chubby-cheeked shit machine".

This assessment insinuates an underlying homoerotic motive the series clearly doesn't possess, but at least the author refrains from being disgusting. And about horse face:

Deb, too, is a police officer on the squad; she’s just transferred in, and has to prove herself. She’s also the love-deluded woman who ends up in grave distress, a rather pat role that actor Jennifer Carpenter and the generally smart script work against by giving Deb an easily provoked kind of seething rage. Where Dexter’s repressions keep him battened down ..., Deb’s emotions run rampant over murder scenes and her personal life (especially when they overlap). Their contrasting characters—he, all secret depths and evasions, she, all surface and heart—and their insistent commitment to each other based on nurture rather than nature provides the show’s heart.

Does anybody think, like me, that this "easily provoked kind of seething rage" is nothing but female nature unbridled by societal norms and simple good manners? It seems that good manners, as shown by Dexter, can nowadays only be explained as the outward expression of a psychotic, mass-murderous MALE sociopath.

A third one thinks that to understand "a culture that supports violence against women" needs the image of a psychopathic killer who exsanguinates and dismembers women ("We don’t see this enough on tv") , whereas the "Bitch Magazine", which is aptly named save for the missing "silly", states that the potential for misogyny on this show was pretty strong because Dexter mainly kills "nubile young woman" or "hot blonde chicks", which he plainly doesn't.

Why does one, wherever one digs and at the first little shallow cut of the spade, invariably find those undignified, vulgar or simply stupid females who think that they aren't given enough opportunity to spread even more lack of dignity, vulgarity and general sillyness? And who seem to think, too, that actually WATCHING a TV-series isn't necessary. Having an opinion is quite enough as long as one has that ...errrr... foramination between one's legs.

Just one brief and entirely different aspect of political correctness: I wonder whether it would have been possible to make the psychotic mass murderer black and the abusive superior officer white.

Phyllis Chesler's Old Woman Bile Valiant Anti-Jihadism

My favourite feminist academic is having another hot flush power charge at Pajama's Media to the enthustiastic drooling of the run-of-the-mill anti-jihadist one tends to meet in the Internet. My comment may, or may not, pass moderation. Whatever. Here it is:

Goodness, aren't you shooting at a sitting duck? Chesler said pretty much everything that is to say about Wolf's whisked mice droppings, and she wouldn't be Chesler if she wouldn't say a tad too much. And here am I, thinking this is a CONSERVATIVE website. What about the fact that Chesler disses the traditional Western role of women and likens it to the role of Muslim women? For Chesler there is only one alternative to Islam: HER very own brand of feminism.

"In addition, Wolf believes that the marital sex is hotter when women “cover” and reveal their faces and bodies only to their husbands." If you forget about the face bit, what is wrong with that? That is not Islamic, but something that should be held high where conjugal faith and honest women are valued.

Oh by the way, did I ask whether this is a CONSERVATIVE site?

But this is best: "Now that Wolf is no longer the doe-eyed ingenue of yesteryear, she sees the advantage of not being on view at all times." That is first an assumption and second an ad hominem, and to both an academic ought not to stoop, even if she is doing a journalist's job here. It sounds more like the post-climacteric bile of a jealous old crone. However feverishly she may be "anti-Islam", Chesler is STILL the one who said: "mother-women give up whatever ghost of a unique and human self they may have when they 'marry' and raise children" (quotes in the original), and the anti-jihad movement must be pretty desparate if they embrace somebody like her.

Feminists won't save the West, folks! NO feminist will.

Re-reading Chesler's PM-entry, it becomes even more preposterous. Here is the bit I quoted above in its context:

Now that Wolf is no longer the doe-eyed ingenue of yesteryear, she sees the advantage of not being on view at all times. A Westerner, “playing” Muslim-dress up, Wolf claims that hiding in plain view gave her “a novel sense of calm and serenity. I felt, yes, in certain ways, free.” In addition, Wolf believes that the marital sex is hotter when women “cover” and reveal their faces and bodies only to their husbands.

Marabel Morgan lives! In the mid-1970s, Morgan advised wives to greet their husbands at the door wearing sexy clothing and/or transparent saran wrap with only themselves underneath. Her book, Total Woman, sold more than ten million copies. According to Morgan, a Christian, “It’s only when a woman surrenders her life to her husband, reveres and worships him and is willing to serve him, that she becomes really beautiful to him.”

Well, what can I say? [What about: "I am a loud-mouthed jerk-ette who does not know her arse from her elbow and not a traditional Western women from one under sharia"?] Here’s a few things.

Most Muslim girls and women are not given a choice about wearing the chador, burqa, abaya, niqab, jilbab, or hijab (headscarf), and those who resist are beaten, threatened with death, arrested, caned or lashed, jailed, or honor murdered by their own families. Is Wolfe thoroughly unfamiliar with the news coming out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan on these very subjects? Has she forgotten the tragic, fiery deaths of those schoolgirls in Saudi Arabia who, in trying to flee their burning schoolhouse, were improperly veiled and who were beaten back by the all-powerful Saudi Morality Police?

I am not sure what sort of rhetorical transition "Well, what can I say? Here’s a few things" is supposed to be. Is she really comparing a housewife in Saran wrap with women in chador, burqa, abaya, niqab, jilbab, or hijab or improperly veiled and beaten "by the all-powerful Saudi Morality Police"? What is her POINT? Should they allowed to wear Saran wrap but not to please their husbands? Does she have a point at all? Do we really need her, of all people, to show Wolf's whisked mice droppings for what they are? Should she be provided with a stage to vent her old-woman frustration on a woman 22 years her junior and by all standards still a stunner, whatever one thinks of her whisked mice droppings? And all that under the banner of anti-jihad?

She isn't speaking for me.

Linda and Liz Play Academics

Here is a blog entry from Roncesvalles about what happens when women are let loose on scientific work. Alright, we all agree, women are less intelligent than men and, more important, shallow, vain and hardly able to judge an issue objectively. Their world revolves around them and their petty personal problems, unimportant opinions, spite- and jealousy-fuelled feuds and tertiary issues. But isn't at least rape an important, worthwhile feminist issue? A major cross-societal issue? A mirror of the relationship between the sexes? Shouldn't they AT LEAST be able to do something about THAT?

But they aren't.

What makes women, what makes FEMINIST women, inviting and sheltering rapists, while pissing and moaning about the lack of attention given to this phenomenon? Alright, that is a rhetorical question, but I am asking it nevertheless.

And while the Lindas and Lizzes of this world are busy being academics, other women are raped.


Edited to add:
It's only now I notice that one of the authors of the unspeakable study I am thematizing at Roncesvalles shares her first name with the rape victim. How very sad, how very ironic.

The Missing "Y"

Searching for information on "Oglinggate" with the help of the keywords "Obama" and "sexist" renders some remarkable results. One of them is this:

From: K...... K.... (e-mail her)

Has Steve Sailer or anyone else at VDARE.COM considered that Barack Obama is a sexist?

Obama titled his first book Dreams from My Father, even though his father abandoned him when he was an infant.

Then Obama, to use Sailer’s word, was “ruthless” in allowing the release of his wife Michelle’s “semi-literate” Princeton thesis.

Finally, Sailer reveals that Obama smeared his “dear old granny” in the interest of his political agenda.

Based on Sailer’s accounts, it appears that Obama has issues with women.

As a proud and independent woman, I am offended.

K.... is an educator in Northern California.

This is so rock-hard, flinty-tough, impregnably and intransigently dumb that even I am speechless. Well, for a moment. Do that bimbo and the haufwits who are putting up her drivel really force me to defend Obama again? It seems so. I haven't read Dreams from My Father, however, I read Steve Sailer's America's Half-Blood Prince. From that, it doesn't seem that Obama wrote a eulogy of his deadbeat dad, but vented his racial identity problems which focused, somewhat naturally, on the black parent who ... drumroll ... happened to be the male part in his conception. So he threw granny under the bus, but we can safely assume that he would have submitted gramps to the same treatment had he observed gramps behaving in a similar manner. By the way, he threw his nasty pastor unter the bus as well when the latter became an embarrassment. What does that make him now? A white supremacist-misandrist?

And I don't even WANT to know what the same proud and independent educators, lactation consultants and sanitary engineeresses would have said had Obama NOT allowed the release of his wife's thesis.

Based on all that I'd say that Steve Sailer probably HAS considered that Barack Obama is a sexist and came to the conclusion that no, he isn't. Maybe he (Sailer) is a tad more bright than some uppity teachers, midwifes and cleaning women ... oooops ... educators, lactation consultants and parquet aestheticians.

Any member of a collective, that is sex-obsessed and powerful enough to bully millions of American-English speakers into adapting the name of a rapeseed-derived cooking oil brand in lieu of the generic name is dangerous and potentially capable of ANYthing, for example spouting sheer and undiluted feminist garbage at a "conservative" website and get away with it.

Fat Is A Feminist Issue Indeed

This is one of those little essays I wrote after I first hit the Internet and discovered, the proverbial babe in the woods, feminist message boards more than ten years ago. I have edited it a bit to get rid of the worst smell of naivité.

For women, as much they'd like to appear as being above it, there is one central topic: other women's looks and discussing women's looks is, as every man has to learn the hard way, a volatile topic at best, a snake pit at worst. The following is not a verbatim transcript of message board discussions, but an overview of some of the worst clichés with which a bunch of brainwashed whiners bores us stiff on a regular basis. However, there are different approaches to tackle the problem of one's own inadequacies:

The "It's Conveniently All The Men's Fault" Approach

I feel sorry for these girls that have allowed society to manipulate their minds into believing this is desirable and is in their best interests, but gees..... what do you do to wake women up that they don’t have to take this type of dictates from society, and there is no need for them to flip flop the opposite extreme direction when they wake up and want to become equal and human. I have had my share of manipulations, abuses, and dictates as a female and I realize its not easy for a female who sees very little value in their selves to break loose from those feelings especially when there is always going to be SOME men in society that are going to promote women in negative, unhealthy, or demeaning ways like the modeling and fashion industry.

Well, for starters there are certain unwritten customs governing conversation and the regularity with which they recur among otherwise noticeably different people is first truly amazing and second an indicator that something seriously stinks. For example, if somebody says "..and if you'll forgive me for saying so…" it's invariably the opening for something absolutely unforgivable. Likewise, if somebody says "I am no antisemite but…" one can be 100% sure an antisemitic rant will follow and if, in the course of a conversation covering women's looks, somebody (invariably female) says "I feel sorry for … " [insert models, slim women, generally all non-frumps and -slovens] one can wager one's right of primogeniture against a stale bun that she damn well isn't.

Which brings us right on topic!

Now what IS that obscure entity "society", which is to blame for each and every evil, iniquity, injustice and superfluous kilo? WHO, for heaven's sake, IS "society"? People are not brought up by some nondescript "society", or are they? They are not even brought up by parents but, even in those ever-dwindling cases that there IS a father, and one who is allowed to oppen his mouth, present, by women. THEY shape the young woman's mind.

Men, apart from those who are hell-bent on having a clothes rack to impress their fellow social climbers, like their women soft and rounded and more often than not don't even notice clothing in detail. "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world", as the feminists are fond of saying, an insight baffling in its simplicity, accuracy and insight, albeit only taken seriously when it suits the feminist agenda. Women, with the only exception maybe of the truly desperate ones, give a flying fornication about what men think about their looks, it's other women they want to impress.

Now WHO gives Barbie Dolls to little girls? Certainly not the fathers. Men tend to find Barbie Dolls rather silly and I have yet to meet a father who wants his daughter to look like that. That said, it is conveniently overlooked that Mattel, the Barbie-makers, offer quite a lot of exercise options for Barbie, which is certainly a better incentive for girls than teaching them that being fat frees them from male oppression.

Whose idol was the pathologically self-centered, bulimic clothes rack Princess "Di"? Women's or men's? I know only a very few men who were smitten by her, but I know hardly a woman who was not, and from WHOM got poor old Charlie all the flak when he dared to settle for the more homely, but obviously truly devoted, Camilla? Other men? You must be kidding!

But let's assume, for argument's sake, that an anorexic figure IS a male dream and IF it shapes the minds and self-esteem of girls and women, then WHY does obesity outweigh anorexia in real life by far?

It is my firm belief that behind all that shrill obsessing about "dictates from society", "men ... that are going to promote women in negative, unhealthy, or demeaning ways" and the (totally male dominated, of course) "modeling and fashion industry" are two ulterior motives: First, it serves as an instrument of power for Dworkin (ever seen a picture of her?), McKinnon and other vicious hypocrites to reach their ultimate goal, i.e. making women's (and men's, for that) lives miserable. The strategy taps into a potential conflict between men and women. It encourages women to resent men for feeling concerned about their growing weight. And we all know that men never feel real concern or compassion. Hell they hardly feel much at all, or do they? Second, for the majority of women, it serves as an excuse and an ideological underpinning for the simple thing of letting themselves go, namely to go grossly fat. Feminists have a perverse agenda, which glorifies fatness.

Why don't those clay-footed philanthropists "feel sorry" for the poor, pathetic, disorientated female misfits who insult our sense for aesthetics, take two seats in the bus and one and a half in the plane, burden our health system with their cardio-vascular disorders, circulatory disturbances, respiratory and worn-out joint complaints and are just a general pain in the proverbial, and don't even BEGIN telling me they aren't because they damn well ARE. And PARTICULARLY so, because they wouldn't need to be that way. We are not talking about cripples here.

So nobody tells them (or DARES telling them) that it is nothing but their own responsibility to seek therapy and general help and that they might -- just might -- try to eat less and start some exercising. No, they are told they are "victims", a common outlook, which is widely sanctioned by the politically correct psychotherapist mafia and societal mainstream. There is no more viciously malevolent and anti-social sentence than "There there, I can relate to you" because anybody who isn't that fat damn well can't. After Holocaust survivors, cancer survivors, rape survivors, abuse of various sorts survivors, we now have -- obesity survivors! The terminology reveals the agenda: "Something bad has happened to me, it must be someone else’s, preferably the men's, doing". By standing up for fat women, feminism creates a perverted system of female solidarity. Fat women get encouragement, support and even acclaim for an unhealthy lifestyle. Feminists WANT women fat. They want to proselytize women who feel that they are ugly or potentially rejected by men. These are the first and easiest prey for an ideology that fosters men-hating. It's not men who force their views on women; it's a women-shaped society that forces its views on women and it is not beyond feminists to fish even at the very bottom of that foodchain.

But let's change the object. I don't share the condescending attitude of many gestagen-type, naturally slim women towards their less fortunate sisters and their definition of "fat", a definition that quite often starts at wearers of more than a size 8 at a height of 6'10". As somebody who is constantly fighting a, mostly successful, but sometimes grueling, battle against age- and hormone-induced weight gain, I do, however, resent the victimology mentality that is slowly creeping in everywhere and which has taken over the fat-women-community long ago.

Here we have, and I guarantee those quotes are authentic, a different specimen among those brainwashed losers, this one, rather refreshingly, at least without any pretensions at empathy or analysis. This approach is not so much about blaming one's own misery on the men, but to vent one's frustration about one's fat- (although probably not JUST fat-) induced low social status mainly on other women, which shows that sheer and undiluted grudge can sometimes render better results than phony analysis.

The "I'm Absolutely Desperate But Can't Stop Eating" Approach

"sounds to me like you are afraid of the idea that big can be beautiful...why are you afraid?"

"And big men DO LOVE big women because they know that big women, unlike skinny little sluts, will 1) treat them right...ie: not use them for money, not abuse them, not cheat on them and 2) will take care of themselves..ie: not do drugs, etc."

"And, more and more statistics are coming out that say that more men love big women than we know but will not admit it because assholes like you will degrade them for it."

"And statistics today show that big does not equal unhealthy nor unattractive nor lazy nor stupid...in fact, all the stats show just the opposite…"
"…but you, of course, will deny it because you are afraid...you are afraid to open you mind, go against what society and your parents say and to think for yourself."

"…and BBW magazine and Dimensions and Mode would not be selling millions of copies a day and men would not be buying those magazines and would not be writing to the editors of those magazines raving about how they love big women and there would be no men putting ads in those magazines and in newspapers all across the country looking for BIG, BEAUTIFUL WOMEN and the larger size women's fashion industry would not be a multimillion dollar industry.

"BTW, I have seen some really nasty skinny women so I'd shut up if I were you because you do not know what you are talking about. I have seen skinny women who don't shave, don't care about what they wear (they will wear ripped, stained and ill-fitting clothes), will have a cigarette hanging out of their mouth, guzzling beer or vodka, popping pills, throwing up in the streets and passing out."

"At least the so-called "nasty" fat women will shave, shower, be clean and sober and disease-free, will fix their hair nice (as opposed to the rat's nests of the skinny women), will have manicures and pedicures done and be smelling of Georgio instead of stale smoke and alcohol." "Yeah, big women are so nasty, right? So, go ahead. Go after the crab and lice and aids ridden skinny women. If that is what you are into!!!!"

The amount of raw enmity was baffling and left many questions to ask. What does an aesthetic judgment have to do with fear for example, (by the way, it's an old leftist mantra to denounce the conscious, well-founded and reasonable rejection of something as "fear), or what decency and character, cleanliness and grooming have to do with a person's dress size. Or whether the increasing XXL market has less to do with a wishful-thinking-induced sudden preference of men for fat women, instead of an ever growing number of fat women anyway. I asked all this, but to no avail.

Of course, and everybody who has but only one eye to see will have noticed that slovens and frumps are more widespread among the fattie-faction, presumably because they've given up long ago anyway or because they didn't care all that much to begin with, but I was good and refrained from mentioning it.

My take on all that? Simple! Telling women that fat is beautiful is like prescribing tranquilizers to a person who suffers from the squits so that he (or rather she) doesn't mind anymore what she's doing to her pants.

Figments of Oestrogen-Addled Brains

This is derived from A Tale of Two 31-Year Old Mothers, an entry from Roncesvalles. The overall topic there is the silencing of Islam-critics, but -- call me obsessed -- take any silly, destructive, lost or dangerous cause and you'll find women at the core of it.

This is no exception.

Case in point: The recent murder of a Muslim woman from Egypt by a passport-German from Russia in a German courtroom and the ensuing grovelling by the German media, politicians and public. All honour killings and other crimes within the Muslim counter-culture, all killings, mutilations and beatings-up of Germans by our Muslim "culture enrichers" are, as far as they got any attention at all, forgotten. They were "isolated cases" anway, whereas for this -- really isolated -- case all Germans are held responsible, a crime committed by a man who wasn't even socialised within the evil "islamophobic" German culture. Future critics of Islam will have to live now with the possibility, nay, the probability, to be identified as the instigators of potential murder.

What was most frightening, however, was the fact that even the obscene extravaganza of German self-hatred and submission following the murder wasn't enough for the trailblazing whips (or rather: "whippettes") of dhimmitude. Andrea Dernbach, who has proven her ethical depth and moral prowess already by a justification of sex with children to clear Islam of the suspicion of homophobia, asked in all seriousness under the header "Germany's new hatred": "Why does the death of a woman wearing a headscarf – who wasn’t the victim of a so-called “honour killing” – spark so little interest in Germany?"

That is the same Dernbach who carries a torch, or better: an entire conflagration, for Christianity-hating (and thus hugely popular) "Germano-Iranian" author Navid Kermani, lauded in typically German self-hatred ("Hun-Throat-Feet") as somebody close to a new Goethe. The same Dernbach, who isn't ashamed of writing:

...while 14 per cent of German working-class children say they want to gain a school-leaving certificate (Abitur)*, this figure is almost twice as high (27 per cent) among migrants' children in the same social group

...and, of course, doesn't mention that this is, granted the figure is based on facts, because children whose parents have a "migration background" are told that they have the right to everything and that standards are lowered to make sure that they will get it.

So far, so bad, but lately we seem even to export that specific brand of Islam-adoring journalettes, maybe because whatever Germans do, they do thoroughly. And indeed, under the even more incredible header "A murder that Germany ignored" one Anja Seeliger whines (in the Al Guardian, no less!) about what must be, I don't have any other explanation, the figment of an oestrogen-addled brain, and doesn't even shy away from repeating an outlandish, preposterous accusation from the Muslim media:

They [the German media] could have asked – as an Egyptian did – why Marwa's husband, while he was trying to help his wife, was shot and wounded by a policeman in the courtroom. Because he was not blond-haired?

I am not a prolific letter-to-the-editor-writer, but this time I couldn't help myself:

Your name suggests that you can read German. So you either have an agenda or you are out of your mind. The German media is, since that crime happened, in an orgiastic, self-hating frenzy. "Germans! She died for your sins!" And you are SERIOUSLY selling the above drivel to an unsuspecting Guardian readership? The day the countless ethnic Germans who are beaten to a pulp or killed by our Muslim culture enrichers get at least a fifth of the media attention this case got and it still getting, I will stop worrying what makes people like you tick.

A day or so after I wrote that I am still unable to find any other explanation apart from that figment of an oestrogen-addled brain and that is putting it even kindly.

* Sorry dear translator, but that would be a HIGH school leaving certificate, the entrance to university.

Recommended Reading

From Lawrence Auster's VFR:

By the way, have you noticed the predominance of highly placed women in the idiocies being discussed in the below entries? The Episcopal Presiding Bishopette who says that individual salvation is a heresy and wants to replace it with African style village collectivism; the female federal judge who says that as a “wise Latina” she would be a better judge than a white man; and the female soon-to-be ex governor who makes her personal drama the centerpiece of her supposedly conservative politics. I am not attributing the madness of Western self-destruction to women, but it is clear that the more a society has women in leading positions, the more that society goes downhill.

It's worth to read the mentioned entries in detail.

Are you out of your minds, Americans?

You have considerable problems. Massive annual federal budget deficits, an obviously uncontrollable influx of illegal immigrants, the shortfalls of the social security and health care systems, and an ever-dwindling support for the war in Iraq, to name only a few. And what are you worrying about? Whether somebody called "Paris Hilton" went justifiedly to prison or rather not.

I do not watch TV and I do not read glossy magazines since the Tatler has largely given in to trash-culture and -society, so I had to look up "Paris Hilton". She is a very moderately pretty but decisively vulgar young woman in her twenties and best described by three epithets: blonde, blonde and blonde. She has a lot of money which she hasn't earned and doesn't shoulder the responsibility that comes with inherited wealth (hers is from the "Hilton" hotel chain, so I read).

I give an aviating fornication whether what she committed is filed under "felony" or rather "misdemeanour" or whatever, whether she violated her probation or was a first-time offender or whether the judge was an attention-seeker, leftist liberal commie who was out to sock it to an enemy of the people, or a staunch defender of law and order. I do not care what this unspeakable creature did AT ALL. I am just asking you: Are you out of your minds?

While wanting-to-be-taken-seriously "pundits", like that cackling parrot Ann Coulter who would say anything to boost her book-sales figures or viewing rates, denounce the verdict or, like Debbie "Those who like soccer are enemies of America" Schlussel, the woman whose official picture gives a new meaning to the word "PhotoShop job" and who hasn't even Coulters doubtless entertainment value, are all for it (or is it the other way round?), another trial found infinitely less attention.

Banaz Mahmod was just 20 years old and her only crime was getting out of an abusive marriage into which she had been forced at 17, then falling in love with a man her family did not accept. After she was reported missing for three months, Banaz' dead body was found in a buried suitcase in April 2006.


Responsible for this were members of Banaz' family, her father, Mahmod Mahmod, and her uncle Ari Mahmod. Banaz was a daughter of Kurdish immigrants. In the eyes of her father and her uncle, by entering into a relationship without their consent, Banaz had "shamed" the family. Last week, the two men were convicted of murder at Old Bailey court in London.

They call that "hono(u)r killing" in Muslim culture and in large parts of the Western media too and without quotes.

Before she was murdered, Banaz had made several attempts to warn police that her life was in danger, even naming those she thought would kill her. It was revealed in court, too, that her statement was obviously not taken seriously enough by investigating officers.

They were probably too busy watching smutty "pickies" of Paris Hilton.

And for good measure, it's time again for another posting of Fariba Tajiani-Emamqoli's last pictures, and while I usually ask politicians, men of the cloth, writers, feminists and general bleeding heart do-gooders where they had been when Fariba was hanged, this round is for "conservative" American "pundits":

WHERE WERE YOU, WHERE WERE YOUR VOICES, WHEN FARIBA TAJIANI-EMAMQOLI WAS HANGED?










And while they are hanging another Fariba in Iran and another beautiful, brave and innocent young woman is "honour killed" right in our middle, just go on contemplating Paris Hilton's parking tickets.

---

292 Google News hits for Banaz-Mahmod 10,059 for Paris-Hilton.

Earlier postings of Fariba's last pictures here, here, here and here.

The Many Faces of Self-Hatred

This is one of the archived bits I never found the time to translate with so many more topical items around needing to be blogged. Being confined to occasional online access right now, I finally managed to make this "bloggable".

I am not trying to expose the folly of a number of menopausing crones or one attention seeking journalist. That is, so to say, a collateral effect. It isn't even so much about another one of the Evils of Islam. Hell, we have seen much worse! At least the victims I am introducing here don't get their heads chopped off and I suppose that is SOMETHING.

No, this is about a specifically nasty and dangerous kind of political correctness.

I never twigged before that there might be a hierarchy of politically correct values and mantras, but of course there is, and if two of them clash one will be jettisoned and you can bet your right of primogeniture against an old shoe that it's the more contemptible one of the two that will prevail. After all, that's what political correctness is all about, isn't it?

This is, too, about the sad fact that self-hatred may exist at both ends of an argument.

However, earlier this year, I came across what is probably THE dumbest and certainly one of the five most irritating sites in the entire Internet, together with PETA, ISM, Robert Fisk's website and NOW.

What is it about?

It is about, and by, victims of the schemes of "Middle Eastern men". (The victims' choice of words, not mine!)

About 1500 German women approach the German embassy in Tunis every year because they intend to marry a man from Tunisia. The majority of couples wish to live in Germany, but some choose to live together in Tunisia or, as DIE ZEIT puts it:. : "Some couples realise their dream of a life together at the shores of the Mediterranean", which tells us that even newspapers that are read by 99% of all grammar school teachers in Germany aren't immune against slips of taste and particularly not against this pathetic concoction of sun, sand and sex.

Also, the German embassy in Tunisia receives reports of roughly 1600 cases of fraud every year (things in Egypt are not much better). The estimated number of unreported cases is much higher, because not every victim reports the crime, presumably out of shame.

Those victims are almost exclusively women with a few gay men thrown in and the perpetrators local men with whom they had sexual interaction. Sexual interaction that started during holidays in North African countries and ended later with the emotional and financial devastation of the victims.

However, the more brazen ones make their lack of common sense, taste and distinction public and that's where the website 1001Geschichte comes in.

According to this website and the wildly empathetic accounts in the media, those women are neither victims of their own gullibility when they were in too dire a need of a lay and male attention. They are victims of an evil network with almost (some say actually) preternatural powers. This network, if there is one, goes by the name of Bezness. Bezness is the local shibboleth for "business", this particular business being the exploitation and manipulation of sexually frustrated and dim-witted innocent and trusting Western women.

Behind the 1001Geschichte effort is the journalist Evelyne Kern, herself a victim of "Bezness".

The core of the 1001Geschichte ("1001 Tale") website are the stories of those women who have been fleeced in North Africa by local men. Number one of the tales is a summary of Kern's book "Sand in der Seele" (Sand in The Soul), which she wrote following her own experience.

I think an aside is in order here: Mind you, it's not my English that has deteriorated. I translated the German text 1:1 and just tried to avoid potential misinterpretations, which the abysmal German of the original might have evoked. At some points, I sadly HAD to improve it to give the mixed up rot some sense, but don't blame me for the fallacies still rampant there.

If Kern's book is only half as bad as this grotty drivel, there is even more sand in her syntax, grammar and semantics than in her soul.

To convey at least a whiff of the full extent of stupidity, attention-whoring, self-centeredness, paranoia and utter lack of introspection, it was sadly necessary to translate 90% of the text. Don't blame me if you run out of puke-bags.

Sabrina's tale: A marriage crisis and a phase of mental instability [whatever that is…] cause Sabrina to pack her suitcases to let go and relax for a while. She books a last-minute trip to Tunisia and happens to arrive at Zarzis, close to the Libyan border. At the hotel reception she meets the man who changes her whole life. [Yeah! Every woman with class knows that hotel receptions make great pick-up places for husband material!]

As unbelievable as it may sound, this beautiful young man sees her and knows she will become his wife. For two weeks she enjoys his company without him touching her even once. [Obviously a professional!] … Save a single kiss, nothing had happened between them. His unfailing restraint, his perfect manners and his sureness that he wants only her [How does she know?] don't go into her head and still - at the end of this vacation she falls in love with him.

First, Sabrina tries to forget this man but later she happens to [Note the choice of words here: "Sie landet…", she HAPPENS TO ARRIVE, so it's not her conscious decision and not her fault] arrive only two months later again in Zarzis and in his arms. This time she experiences a passion never known before and knows after one week already that he is the man of their dreams.

She now gets finally separated from her husband and drives two months later … to Tunisia in order to live there for a few months. She experiences the heaven on earth and already [sic!] one year later gives up her job as editor-in-chief in the publishing house of her husband [Had the long-suffering cuckold left the job open for her all the time?] and thus her safe haven [Poor old hubby!] and moves with all her belongings to Tunisia to marry the love of her life. She takes almost her entire fortune with her to this country and carries out her dreams of the white house at the sea…

She experiences the Oriental world "pure" [Not on ice or with soda ha ha…], tries to cope with the Islamic culture and feels in no time at home in this strange country.

That she is being kept under observation all the time and can't make a single step without her husband or one of his male relatives, she finds comfortable at first because, at that stage, she feels "protected" in this strange world. Only when she starts to contact other German women she finds massive opposition. Her husband shows his true face now.

He tries to lock her up it, beats her up and disallows any contact with other people, except his family. But Sabrina gets her way [!] and shows her iron will [!], even when he chases her away in the middle of the night from the house, barefoot, although it is riddled with scorpions everywhere there. [So that is "her way" she got and the result of her "iron will"?] She runs downhill the stony mountain to his parents and appeals to the faith of his father. [What "faith" would that be? A faith that invites such treatment of women?]

Once Amor understands that her will is stronger than his, he leaves her. [And not because she has outlived her usefulness.] He goes to Germany to work and leaves her alone in the strange country. The few weeks which he spends in his native country every year, he dedicates almost exclusively to his family.

Because Sabrina denies herself to him [a German coy-ism for the fact that she refuses to have sex with him] he becomes now a tyrant. [You don't say! And that when he was a perfectly pleasant, law-abiding, doting husband before.] He assigns his family to make her life as difficult as possible. Their attacks drive her to the edge of insanity and despair - however, she withstands. [Whatever however and why ever!]

Now she is finally playing with the idea of divorce. [Gosh, ALREADY!?]. She trusts the policy of President Ben Ali and the equal rights for women in this country. [As she should, judging from her previous experience.] A lawyer clarifies that a woman remains the owner of what she brought into the marriage and that, in any case, she will get her due in this country. But another year goes by [Yes, you are reading that right!] until she finally decides to make this step. She takes a flight to Germany [And here am I, thinking she was being kept a prisoner.] to talk to Amor about a separation. He begs and cries not to leave him, but all he is interested in is his residence permit, now in jeopardise.

But Sabrina can't go on any longer. She doesn't want to see and hear anything anymore and makes a quick decision to take a flight to her sister in Texas/USA. [Thanks for the hint. Otherwise we wouldn't have known where Texas is.] There, a call from a German friend from Zarzis reaches her. Amor is in Tunisia and does everything he can to blacken her name in Zarzis [Now THAT's mean when she was so fervent about keeping her status among the Zarzisian upper crust!] Her husband has done a real good job and then immediately vanished back to Germany. He did not only steal all papers [which she had for some reason left there] and told all her female friends that he had thrown her out of "his" house because she was unfaithful and that she would never come back to Tunisia because he would make sure that she loses her residence permit. Also, he filed for divorce at his own accord not to lose his face. [And not because she had outlived her usefulness.]

Now the horror begins. [When up to know everything was real fun!] When her father-in-law and her three brothers-in-law twig that Sabrina is not ready to give up without fight, they first suggests that she should marry Amor's brother so that everything remains in the family. [Now for WHAT are they taking her and I have a hunch for good reasons?] Sabrina is speechless, furious and hurls abuse at them. Then she goes to the police, in order to get her stolen car registration documents [Where did she keep them so that they could be stolen?] back, without success. She goes to the best lawyer in town but has to face the fact that he is already working for the family and against her. A Tunisian friend takes her to a female lawyer, who is apparently not yet bought by the family. That annoys the brothers-in-law so much that they come at night to Sabrina's house, torment and abuse her. [Aren't there locks and bolts in Tunisia?] Out of pure fear she finally leaves the house of her dreams and seeks hiding in a garage-turned-dwelling with German friends.

She can just in time get a few personal things from the house, before the family replaces the locks and puts up a guard. Sabrina is able to hide her car with friends, but can't drive anymore, since the papers are missing and in the meantime tax and insurance have expired. [Now she has to walk. That's REAL cruel!] Her husband reports her because of theft of household items and the car. She is fetched by the police and treated like a criminal. Her father-in-law states that it is his house and that Sabrina has only rented it, although she is able to submit all bank documents. However, she is dragged to court six times until the divorce is final and although she explicitly states that she forfeits support but not her personal belongings, the Arab divorce documents say that she forfeits everything. Afterwards, she has to acknowledge that not only the female lawyer whom she trusted and the certified law court interpreter were paid by the family. Additionally, two more lawyers from a neighbouring city try their luck but cannot help her in the end. But Sabrina does not give up. [Wow!] She writes to the German embassy, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of the Interior and even Ben Ali personally. Nobody helps her. Only the fourth lawyer shows compassion. He is a decent man and submits civil action against Amor and his family at court. After twelve more nerve-racking court-cases, which are all held in Arabic, [How unfair! They ought to make German the official language in Tunisia for this valiant heroine!] … (the last one) in November, the case is closed, her complaint rejected without a reason being given. She breaks down, gets hysterics, hits her lawyer and finds herself 10 minutes later in front of the public prosecutor. Crying, she tells him her whole story again. He promises to help her - however, she doesn't believe a single word he says - she doesn't believe anybody anymore. [What a well-timed and clever thing to do!]

14 days later she leaves the country, totally without means, humiliated and traumatised and starts to deal with her experiences by writing "Sand in The Soul".

Do you know what annoys me most about that undignified, snivelling, wretched, paranoid drivel? What annoys me most is that the writer is in denial about the fact that right from the start each and every single thing that happened to her was nothing but her very own fault, yet she tries to sell herself as a heroine and martyr (whatever is required) and not as the attention-seeking, whingeing blabbermouth she is. She comes across as a "strong woman" or a "helpless victim", whatever it takes, just not having to acknowledge even a tiny part of culpability in the whole matter.

To be fair, a few, very few, of the many other accounts of the Bezness-victims (at least those I have read - hey, even I have a nausea-threshold!) show at least a modicum of contrition, although, judging from the first, Kern's own, story, they have all been rehashed by her as they have her pathetic "And-then-I-fell-hopelessly-in-love" style written all over them. But it is hard to feel pity for, say, a woman, a teacher, a believer in true love, who intends to spend her old age and her pension and her savings in one of those countries with a man 30 (yes!) years her junior.

I posted a message at the online forum there to the same effect I am trying to convey with this blog entry. (Not nice, I know!) It didn't survive even ten minutes. The site may be ethically and intellectually doubtful, but its security is of Stalinist proportions. Congrats!

When all is said and done, it's all very simple. There is no 'Bezness', there are only dumb women.

Interestingly, the voices critical of Kern, her book, her clientele, and her fight against Bezness are almost exclusively from the do-gooder multi-culti "Islam-Is-Peace"- and "Isn't-The-Orient-Exciting" faction and thus barking up the wrong tree. Kern and her followership are not giving Islam a bad name. THAT Islam is very well able to do itself! In fact, Islam is hardly ever mentioned and it is quite revealing how both, "victims" and their critics, are trying to keep it as far as possible out of the Bezness business.

The clash-of-cultures argument of which Kern's critics are so fond doesn't hold much water either. If folks in the Islamic countries don't like scantily clad women at their beaches - toughsky shitsky. They can always close their borders to Western tourists, then they are not forced to take their money. Not to speak of the utter idiocy of an argument that seems to consider marrying and exploiting those women as a suitable Islamic answer to Western degeneration.

Self-hatred has many faces.

Of course, once stripped off the Islam-implication, the entire "Middle Eastern men" matter becomes intensely racist, but who cares. Female non-culpability can by definition not be challenged and beats "racism is evil" hands-down as a politically correct mantra.

And to end it all on a happy note: Evelyne Kern's introspection through writing worked so well that she is in the meantime married again - to a man from Morocco.

German Riddle

(Foto: T.Mughal/dpa)

From the website of the German station n-tv, a subsidiary of the RTL Group/Bertelsmann AG. The caption says:

Frauen demonstrieren am Mittwoch in der pakistanischen Hauptstadt Islamabad gegen die Mohammed-Karikaturen. Was genau sie mit dem Plakat sagen wollen, bleibt unklar.

I'll translate that for you: "Women rally against the Muhammad-cartoons in Pakistan's capital Islamabad on Wednesday. What exactly they intend to say with the poster remains unclear."

Not any longer! I'll tell you! They are saying: "If only our beloved Führer had known about those cartoons..."

(Oh what has become of our Nation of Poets and Philosophers if a lowly blogger has to tell them!)

Hat-tip to Alex, Gudrun and AchGut!