Leftism is a religion

Further proof that "Christianity" has been infiltrated, and taken over, by leftists who practice another religion. In order to spread their religion, they must destroy Christianity.

Our Parent Who Art In Heaven

These people need to be excommunicated from any Christian Church.

I am surprised that someone hasn't come out with the demand that Jesus was the "daughter" of God. 

Here's the deal. We can sort of run experiments. My premise is that there was never such a thing as "equity feminism" and that it was a convenient construct to convince males to cede power. And it worked. But I believe that feminism is another of those offshoots of Cultural Marxism that has no off switch.

So note that in a year or two we won't be arguing over the supposed inappropriateness of calling god "Father." The point isn't to get some gender-neutral verbiage installed in its place. The point is that "God the Father" will soon become "God the Mother." As Rush would say: Don't doubt me.

But this is an experiment that we can sort of run and see how things fall out. It could be that feminism has an "off" switch and they won't reach for the Feminism Uber Alles of "God the Mother." But you know where my wager is.

And how long until Jesus (with the supposed long hair) is considered some flavor of transgender? Now, I completely agree with you that the people who are pushing these things don't care squat for religion. They just want to crash the gates. It's another "male patriarchy" thing to tear down. Will they be attending a church where "God the Mother" is preached? It's highly unlikely. But they will get a great dark sense of satisfaction watching the belly-rolling Cardinals and others fall all over themselves to accommodate them.

Right now there's another interesting race. You may or may not accept my formula. And that's fine. It's just us here and it matters not if I convince you. The rest of the world certainly would not accept any premise that I'm forwarding.

But it's an interesting horse race (whore's race?) between Feminism and Weirdo Culture. The front lines of this battle are in the women's locker room, and Weirdo Culture is clearly winning so far. Yes, there are a couple female athletes stepping in to object. And good on them. But they are clearly in the minority.

Now you have a "transgender" Miss Netherlands. Look at the women in the photo who have lost to this man. They are smiling and applauding. Are they really happy about this? If they are, they have (amazingly...ironically) allowed a man – even in the guise of bra-and-panties – to take over their turf.

This is an inherent conflict. Men are supposed to be sidelined. Men's clubs are out. Men are not allowed to have their own spaces anymore (but women, of course, are). You can have black history month, gay pride month. You can celebrate women doing this and that. But nowhere now can you celebrate being either white or being a man.

So this is a really interesting bit of parasitism. And I don't know how this will end. Weirdo Culture infiltrating feminism is fully consistent with the idea of "no off switch" to the various offshoots of Cultural Marxism.

But feminism is built on marginalizing men. It's built on replacing men. Now there are men (although in bra-and-panties) taking over the spaces and places of women. I'm not honestly sure where to place my bets here. But it sure does look as if women will not push back.

Will women soon be in the position that men where fifty years ago? Men, having long told themselves that's it's just fair play (aka "equity feminism"), they easily ceded power. Will then the women (as has happened to men) find the entire idea of feminism indefensible because of having ceded power (and, more importantly, moral authority) to Weirdo Culture? Will the present-day established female matriarchy be threatened to its core?

I guess in one respect I hope so. The down side is being ruled over by Weirdos instead of Karens. The Karens are no fun. But at least they're not Weirdos.

I had a look at this person and, as I suspected, he/she/it actually looks like a female. This reminded me of Bugis Street back in the early 1980s. The transvestites there were often good looking and many tourists could not tell them from females. I think I wrote about visiting Bugis Street with Mdm. Flu and running into British Sailors who had been on the HMS Sheffield in the Falklands War. 

My point is that elsewhere in the world, transvestites, at least those I have noticed, try to actually look  like women and do their best to be attractive. Whereas in America, they are mainly fat, ugly, gross in-your-face pigs whose main interest would seem to be to offend everyone else. There is something in the American character that often takes ideas and beliefs to extreme ends. Mental illness?

Something funny just occurred to me. In the words of George C. Scott as General "Buck" Turgidson: "Mr. President, we must not allow a transvestite gap."

I lived there for about 12 years. From Dec. 1979 to Dec. 1983, and Fall 1991 to end 1999/early 2000. The change has been enormous. When I first lived there, there was still the lingering whiff of the colonial Brits. It wasn't ultra-modern and one could still see the sky as there were not many skyscrapers. But the change had already started. By 1991, a significant amount of change had come, but it was still pleasant. Now I don't think I would live there even if you paid my rent, which would be extremely high. 

The same can be said for K.L. It was more backward than Singapore, but I like a little backward so I didn't mind at all. It has changed and the area has grown like crazy. 

I never visited Subic Bay, and they closed it down sometime in the late 1980s/1990s, along with Clark Airforce Base. I understand, the Americans are going back now, slowly, slowly. 

That's completely 100% true. It is in the name of being "honest," at least on the face of it. I think the real spirit is that vulgarity takes less work than manners.

The truth is, the vulgarization of society (the Slobocracy) is an outgrowth of the 50's or 60's dogma that "repression" was a bad thing. This is why Freudiasm is considered, along with Marxism and atheism, one of the three pillars of cultural destruction. Freudianism helped turn normal and needed self-control to "unhealthy repression."

This took off in a big way, especially in movies and comedy. Good manners were considered "repressed." I laugh at Monty Python as much as the next person. But the very essence of their shtick is that prim-and-proper was something ridiculous and that should be laughed at.

Now, that's not to say that the world isn't full of pompous people who need a bit of air taken out of themselves. But the Lenny Bruce "freedom" generation established that the healthiest and best thing a person can do is to just "let it all hang out." Bob Hope is out. Now some hack who does little but drop f-bombs packs them in.

"Letting it all hang out" is already starting to happen quite literally at the Weirdo Parades and such. And there is the nagging from the nags that if men can go topless, we should thus "free the nipple" for women as well. Where once men actually dressed up a little to go to a baseball game, now the grubbiness of the Slobocracy has established very lowest-common-denominator rules. Hell, pre-distressed or torn jeans is a fashion.

It's still an interesting question as to why there is the Transvestite Gap between us and Europe and other parts of the world. I don't know if Americans are the fattest of the fat (outside of Polynesia), but I'm supposing it is so. There is now likely an uncouthness to Americans that not even some of the European countries match in intensity, as silly and morally bankrupt as many of them are.



I absolutely believe this to be true. And we should acknowledge that there are different levels of mental illness and that no one is really absolutely 100% free from some kind of lunacy, mild or otherwise. It's called "personality" when it's in small doses.

One could say that when they elect a man as "Miss Netherlands" that there's a certain level of mental illness in effect if we define mental illness, in part, as "not being able to distinguish fantasy from reality." And granted, I would admit that it's probable that many, if not most, Dutchmen know that there is a dick-and-balls hiding beneath the transvestite's garb, tucked away somewhere like (insert your simile here) an old man hiding his ill-gotten gains under the mattress. (I know you can do better.)

But I think it's reaching the point where people seriously come to think that men can have babies, can lactate, need tampons, etc. I think we're seeing this movement morph from "make believe" to "really believe." And the latter is unequivocally mental illness. It's that old Marxist means of indoctrination: Rub the lies in their face. Humiliate them.

I believe as Mr. Flu does that it has an effect on the "consumer" (we are no longer citizens, proper) to be inundated by commercial messages that are (if you view them objectively) ridiculous, demeaning, vulgar, dishonest, and just downright stupid. Whether these commercials (and movies) are a reflection of us or are creating us doesn't matter. We are in synchrony with this Marketing Slobocracy.

The astonishing thing is that Bud Light drinkers reacted at all to the transvestite incident because the commercials, over the years, had become more and more insulting to the male. Consistent with Kooky Brad's idea that we are living in a Matriarchy, rare is the commercial that doesn't show the guy as stupid and the woman as the wise fixer.

Maybe this stuff isn't as bad over in Europe. I don't know. It's certainly possible that we Americans have this Slobocracy stuff on steroids and thus are significantly kookier than the rest. Given the Transvestite Gap, this might very well be so.

That is precisely it. Women can only be "free" if they free themselves from the constraints and realities of their biology. Rather than being baby-making slaves to the patriarchy, they can be self-actualizing individuals and have careers. And careers are important not for just for the self-actualization but because it frees one from economic dependency upon a man.

Now, Kooky Brad has often made the distinction between the man-hating True Believers driving this stuff and the rank-and-file women who moderate the more caustic impulses of the upper tier as they live out their lives.

But that upper tier is there. And it doesn't go away just because we high-five each other and amaze ourselves at how enlightened we are by applauding when some woman becomes an accomplished lawyer or even astronaut. If honesty permits (and it usually does not), those heights were reached on the bodies of untold aborted babies, broken families, and stressed and depressed females (as statistics are revealing now).



Don't think about it. Just admit you are right and move on.

Holy wanderlust, Batman. I could never do anything like that. I find that amazing.



I can't speak for your friend. Maybe he was hitting every brothel along the way. But I think I can understand what it's like to just get out and go. That's why, on a much more humble scale, I go out hiking and biking at every chance. The place I go is relatively large and wide-open. You can go a day and never run into another living soul.

I know that it is very common for Europeans to just take off and do that kind of thing. And certainly (as you know from first-hand experience), it is not unknown for Americans to take a trip abroad and just travel around.

I live somewhat inside my own little bubble here. But right now I would think the time is well past where those kinds of trip are at all safe. I can't imagine traveling in or near an Islamic country, for instance. And perhaps most of France (outside of Paris) is safe to bum around in. But, again, the impression I get is that you would be taking your life in your own hands.

I think the only foreign countries I would feel reasonable safe in are Japan and the United Kingdom. I think one can travel all across Ireland as well without much problem. But Mexico? I think today you'd have to be well-armed and quit savvy to bum around there on a bike or motorcycle.

I understand you can hit the rail lines in Europe and be perfectly fine at the major destinations. But I'm talking about just getting out into the country, as your friend did. I'm not so sure that the golden age of such ventures hasn't come and gone, although I was talking to an old friend the other day. I hadn't seen him in 45 years or so. He said his younger sister travels the open seas for fun and is down somewhere near Tahiti right now. Wow. I think that might be fun...for a while. But good on her. Roxanne was always a sweet girl and a pretty good looking one as well. Not that that has anything to do with it but it never hurts.

The list could be much larger than that. One can still travel in the U.K., much of Scandinavia, Germany, Austria, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and part of the Balkans and be safe.

I would also be happy to still visit Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Taiwan, S. Korea, parts of India and China without worrying. Of course, I am familiar with all these countries, to one degree or another, since I have visited all many times. I would even be happy to visit Turkey and to parts of the Middle East. 

I would not travel the same way I did, 30-50 years ago, but if I could be reasonably comfortable, I would have no problem. The fact is that this is not something I have to worry about, as I have neither the money nor time to do so. Perhaps more importantly, my son does not travel well. 

If one does travel overseas, one should always be aware that one is in a foreign country and not be the "Ugly America" who is in fact more often the "Stupid American." I think it advisable to keep one's head on a swivel, not only for security, but more importantly to see and try to understand another country.