Cowardice is a trait of the inferior, a congenital personality defect that one would rightly expect to see prevalent among the extreme Left.
Great article about the hypocrisy and state media bias surrounding the death of French Antifa youth. This anti-fascist group are known for openly calling for and instigating violence against non-liberals, with violent imagery and abusive protests: “[but] when there is a violent confrontation with the “fascists” the response is a weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth because it was an “Antifa” who got the worst of it in a confrontation that seems to have been reasonably equitable.”
"Sweden is not a place where one expects to see several nights of non-indigenous rioting, nor where one expects rappers to rhapsodize about raping the Princess. Nor did it used to be a place where Islamic interlopers allegedly commit the majority of the country’s sexual assaults and joke about how Swedish girls "get fucked to pieces".
As illustrated in the Battle of Tours and the Siege of Vienna, there was a time long ago when indigenous Europeans had a spine and would repel Islamic invaders. But as evidenced by recent events, continental Europe and the British Isles have regressed into an invertebrate life form, a pathetic jellyfish that apologizes to its captors as they squash it to death.”
As expected, a white European man getting in trouble for speaking about immigration candidly (with his own country’s welfare in mind). How many countries must suffer the same fate as England, France, or Sweden? Why is it that only white countries are supposed to assimilate, intermarry, destroy and neglect tradition and openly adopt a global community - while other racial communities (Japan, for example) continue to flourish proudly.
Anti-racist is anti-white.
"But don’t forget guys, Muslims are the victims in all of this. Muslims are the ones feeling scared."
Cultural warfare continues, and is deeply misrepresented and misunderstood by mainstream media circuits and the general population. White people are, despite what your liberals say, being attacked and disparaged around the world - in their own home lands.
Well this is a pile of hilarious steaming bullshit.
Fun fact: I was a daycare kid. All my siblings were. After all, both of my parents needed to work to support us. Teachers done get paid a lot.
Amazingly, I don’t feel damaged from my time in day care any more than I feel damaged from my time in public school. 8 or 9 hours a day I would go hang out with friends, play games, do arts and crafts, play on the playground, watch movies, eat snacks. I made some of my best friends at daycare. In no way did I feel as though my parents…didn’t love me because I got to go hang out with my friends during the day while they worked their asses off.
This post amounts to a single thing: classist sexism. It demonizes parents who aren’t rich enough to have a stay at home parent. It demonizes single parent homes. It forces WOMEN into archaic gender roles surrounding child care.
This is bigoted ignorant bullshit.
A great example of somebody taking the opportunity to brand a situation with condemning labels (i.e. bigoted, classist, sexist) without giving any indication that they even read what was written.
Do you honestly believe that children should spend large amounts of time in daycare or with nannies and babysitters, rather than with their own family? Quite frankly, the issue at hand is the enormously inflated cost of living in the Western world that forces two parents to work (instead of either staying home, or even an alternating situation).
A post about the dangers of putting distance between parents and children does not amount to any sort of class or sex argument. But I shouldn’t be surprised that a (self-proclaimed) “liberal” will shift an argument to something more inflammatory, right? There was no condemnation of single parents who require daycare, was there? No, it was referring to an article that supposed (all) families should make use of daycare to have double-income households. Did my commentary suppose that women should be shackled to a wall to breastfeed and cook? No, it said that traditionally (logically) there was a reason to why the woman stayed at home (and why men would be the breadwinner). Notice the past tense, as things have certainly changed in the past forty years.
Take the time to carefully assess things before you get out your branding iron. Things aren’t necessarily bigoted or vile because they’re not exactly how you see things, right? The same way I’ve refrained from using any derogatory language towards you. Well, except for jabs at liberals and their blame game.
"The feminist dream: more public day care so that women can spend their days self-actualizing in an office while their children are raised by paid professionals. […] Should children spend fifty hours per week with someone who does not love them? Only a very sick society would choose this, but Mrs. Slaughter is fully on board with it.”
An interesting article outlining the problems with the present-day feminist’s plea for more child care to leave women with more freedom - essentially a mass-orphaning of children to nannies and babysitters so that women can enjoy some sort of professional goal.
If two parents (regardless of their politico-societal leanings) decide to bring a child into this world, one of them is going to have to put their professional goals on hold - the mother, traditionally, would be the one to do this so that she could recover from the nine months of pregnancy and also form a connection with her children while the father (unaffected physically by the pregnancy) could continue to be the breadwinner.
To hand your children off to professional “caregivers” means you replace love with care, devotion with mere attention, and a proper childhood with perpetual daycare. Your children will grow up without the warmth that so many children cherished (and others yearned for) for thousands upon thousands of years.
Edit: If you’d bother to read the article, or my commentary, you’d see that the description of what “traditionally” happened was that the mother would rear the children and the father would work - of course, this can be reversed in today’s time. Of course both parents can seek employment, and often do (as mine did) but that doesn’t equate to handing your children off to perpetual daycaring (as Slaughter suggests). Daycare for an hour or two after school is different than having professionals raise your children. Don’t bother re-blogging and screaming bloody murder if you can’t be bothered to read any of it in the first place. Also try to refrain from your juvenile “hot words” (i.e. bigot, misogynist).