Teaching Boys That Boys Are Inferior

If it were an adult show for adult audiences, it might be considered dark humor. Most adults would choose to laugh or look at something else. However, the Hub has something coming out (literally) that is aimed at children.

The show is called SheZow. It is a cartoon about a twelve-year-old boy who utters the words, “You go, girl!” to transform into a female superhero called SheZow. Hub is a small network with an intended audience of two to eleven so it’s viewing field is small. This might be considered a move to stir controversy and attract viewers.

The problem is that children will be watching this. They may not understand the transgendered status in the same way as adults, but that is not to say they won’t take away some part of the message presented. In Changing Boyz 2 Girls, I showed how a very young boy watching a children’s show developed the idea that all boys are bad. A boy changing into a female will not be missed by young minds.

What thoughts will they develop from a plain boy transforming into a superhero girl?

The main character is called guy. He is young and the plain alter-ego of SheZow. In super-hero lore, the alter-ego is usually weak and ordinary, easily lost among the masses and usually incapable of doing heroic feats. So, the weak alter-ego is shed for the super hero inside, who is capable of heroic feats. In this story, the boy is the alter-ego, weak and incapable, but when he becomes a girl, it is she that is strong and beyond capable.

Real life boys cannot instantly summon girl moxie and get things done, but they can look at girls and assume that they, being boys, are weak and girls are the super heroes. Boys are weak, girls are strong.

The change from male to female will also give boys the idea that if they stop being boys they can be better. There is the case of Tommy who at the age eight began transitioning his sex into Tammy. To further escape their maleness, boys can get the idea that instead of being boys who have girlfriends, they should be boys who have boyfriends, like girls do. If they are not born that way, they can potentially be raised that way.

Political leaders have also declared the superiority of women as the superheroes of humanity.

Converting young boys into homosexuality (the gay lifestyle) while promoting women as superior to boys, the leftists are engineering a society of mothers and boys, devoid of men and fathers.

O My people! Their oppressors are children, and women rule over them. O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray and confuse the direction of your paths.


The Cowardly Christian Male

On a busy London street in the district of Woolwich, a British soldier was killed by two men wielding knives. They attempted to behead the soldier while crowds watched on in horror. A video of the attack was captured and a clip released to the public showing one of the attackers defending his actions. With hands and knife covered in blood, he declares,

We swear by almighty Allah we will never stop fighting you. The only reason we have done this is because Muslims are dying every day … This British soldier is an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. I apologize that women have had to witness this today, but in our land our women have to see the same.


You people will never be safe. Remove your government, they don’t care about you … So get rid of them. Tell them to bring our troops back so we, so you can all live in peace.

One of the touted facets in this mess is that the attackers were talked down by the British women while the men stood by and did nothing. But where were the men? The Social Pathologist asked that very question.

It appears that the murderers allowed women to tend to the victim and not men. Still, there was a whole bunch of guys standing in the background there that could have rushed them.

So why was there an absence of men who were willing to challenge these guys? It took a woman to step in and talk the maniacs down until law enforcement showed up and shot the two suspects. Now, it might be argued that the two men were armed with knives and had just beheaded a guy and that maybe these guys had families. Yet, Ingrid Loyau-Kennett was a mother. Her son later tweeted that his mother was “motherf—ing badass.”

With churches calling men idiots, feminist mothers calling boys bad and feminist leaders declaring men inferior, men have gotten the message they should be nice, keep quiet, and be good so they can go to heaven and be with baby Jesus.

For what Christian men have become, click here.

[Note: The men did the killing with knives, rendering Britain’s ban on personal firearms useless. Also, it took twenty minutes for law enforcement to arrive and the only people armed were the killers. Food for thought.]

The Feminist Lust To Be God

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) told a gathering at a campaign fundraiser earlier this month,

Our survival as a species is dependent on women taking charge.

Really? Let’s think about this.

The survival of a species depends on demographics. Essentially, there needs to be families having babies and raising responsible adults in order for a society to survive. Society loses people through illness, accident, crime, and old age. People die. There is something called a “replacement rate” that measures just how well the loss of people is being compensated by the birth of new ones. For the United States, replacement rates, even with mass immigration, is troubling.

But are women the saviors of the human race? No. Here’s why.

  • Feminists supports abortion, which is the termination of unwanted children (termed “fetuses” and “pregnancies”). This procedure kills the very children needed to replace the loss of population. A species that kills its own young will not survive.
  • Feminists reject marriage. Lesbian Masha Gessen openly admitted that marriage equality was a lie and that the goal was the complete annulment of marriage as an institution. Marriage is what binds a man to a woman in fidelity and love for the purpose of procreation and stable families.
  • Feminists reject sex. In a recent CNN commentary, biologist Aarathi Prasad argued for the use of technology to promote reproduction without sex and titled the article “… a liberating future.” Catering to single women and homosexuals, both of which cannot reproduce, is asinine since neither has any vested interest in large families.
  • Feminism is ideology of male hatred and female superiority. Without men, there can be no reproduction and yet feminists hate men and especially the male sex drive. Women forming families on feminist terms leaves little room for male sexuality and active procreation save for maybe one baby and that for sentimental reasons.

So why would Schakowsky declare that women are the ones to save the human species when women are being taught to liberate themselves from family, sex, and children? For thousands of years, it was men who married women, fathered sons and daughters, and who built the civilization that allowed the human species to survive.

And feminists hate that.

Skipping Over Atheism And Converting To Islam

The British are discovering that their secular world is starting to crumble. The feminism and mass immigration meant to create a humanist utopia of equality and diversity is proving to be but a temporary dream, of puff of smoke in a windy sky.

According the Telegraph, Christianity is disappearing faster than expected and Islam, not atheism, is right on its heels.

A new analysis of the 2011 census shows that a decade of mass immigration helped mask the scale of decline in Christian affiliation among the British-born population – while driving a dramatic increase in Islam, particularly among the young.

The secular engineers have long hoped for the dissolving and weakening of Christianity so that a world based on natural facts instead of belief in transcendent gods could be established. They felt if they could defeat Christian faith with scientific skepticism, they could reign in peace with all religious-minded men being subjected to their evolutionary philosophies. I stated in a previous article:

In our modern age, Christianity has lost its claim to the truth. Scientific inquiry and ideological diversity have given the irreligious skeptics leverage in laying claim to exclusive knowledge of the truth.

But now it would appear that their shining secular world is being supplanted by Islam, fed by their own engineered efforts to force secular multicultural ideas on Britons. It was declared wrong, almost a crime, for Christians to impose their religion on the irreligious, but it was acceptable for the irreligious to impose their sciences on the Christian. And now the irreligious are going to find Islam being forced on them. Without a strong, institutional, and dominant Christianity to counter the influence, they will not be able to stop the spread of Islam.

At some point in time, they will be forced to either convert or be excluded. The multicultural utopia they dreamed of, which was motivated primary by the desire for sexual liberation from Christian marriage, will be tossed aside.

This reflects a utopian idea held by the gay community. They are looking for a place where there is “no prejudice, no judgment” and “boundless freedom” … The sought after Gaytopia will be a safe haven for people of numerous sexual proclivities not accepted by a Biblical view of sexuality.

Feminism has a large role to play in this conversion to Islam. Ex-blogger Joseph of Jackson was excommunicated from his church for challenging sexual equality within his conservative denomination. He writes,

[I informed him] that our church was seeing a huge lack in the number of men willing to participate and that attendance was often sporatic for those who did come at all (myself included). I also pointed out that there was another religion that taught that men had a place of great importance and that women needed to remember their place. That religion was Islam and the number of young men signing up for its tenants were growing every year. I reminded them that unless we want the church to fade out completely, we need to teach the young men how be actual men and not “guys”.

I argued that the acceptance of sexual liberation manifested in the phenomenon of “gay marriage” is another path that will bypass the secular engineered world and lead to Islam:

Once marriage has been completely reframed from the one man / one woman standard on the grounds of equal rights, there is no good reason to deny equal rights to those seeking marriages of more than two people, especially with secular states and not churches defining marriage … Modern Islam allows for limited polygamy. Given its uniqueness and the staunch seriousness of its practitioners, it may be the very religion to supplant Christianity and fill the empty void left by secularism while retaining the rights of polygamist marriages.

With gay feminists openly wanting to dismantle marriage altogether for open, multi-partner relationships, men and women will find themselves living empty, shallow lives and look toward Islam to fill that void.

If Christianity wants to get its legs backs and stand against Islam it needs to start with rejecting the fundamental conservative / liberal dichotomy and rediscover human inequality. From that point it can argue that a Christian culture should be dominant and that men should be authority over women and children. Some measure of ideological fundamentalism in Christianity may be needed to spark this and give its adherents strength to endure the secular denunciations such as “racism,” “sexism,” and “xenophobia.”

Quick Rundown Of The Institution Of Marriage

Marriage is an institution and it has three basic parts.

History – God ordained marriage as an institution for men and women when He created men and women.

Requirements – Marriage requires the sexual union of one man and one woman.

Boundaries – The union between a man and a woman is not to be broken except by the death of either the husband or wife.

Any other requirement or boundary is not marriage but a pathology of marriage, a deviation from the institution. Multiple sex partners, either through casual sex or marriage, divorce, and remarriage, is not marriage. Two men or two women is not marriage. Casual sex without lifelong fidelity is not marriage. These things violate the institution and its fixed requirements.

The concept of “traditional marriage” is misleading because it assumes the reality of “alternative marriage” where there is only marriage. The King James bible uses the term “fornication” to describe all heterosexual sex that is not within the institution. Sodomy is the term used to describe two men or women attempting to have sex, since biologically they cannot have sex.

Sex and marriage are considered one and the same. A man or woman who has had more than one sex partner has committed adultery and violated the institution of marriage. The only allowance is one spouse being sexually faithless, which grants an exception of mercy.

Talk of marriage equality is merely language meant to mask the desire for liberation from the institution of marriage for a life of casual and free sex, which is not marriage.

The Engineered Fall Of Britain

I have argued that the Western progressive movement is essentially made up of people of Anglo descent who hate their ethnicity, their culture, and their history and who are determined to destroy them. A recent admission by former Cabinet Minister Lord Mandelson confirms this. British governments run by Gordon Brown and Tony Blair deliberately sought mass immigration.

In a stunning confirmation that the Blair and Brown governments deliberately engineered mass immigration, the former Cabinet Minister and spin doctor said New Labour sought out foreign workers … [Former adviser Andrew Neather] said there was ‘a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural’.

The natural consequence of immigrating non-Britons into a Briton society were known and trumped.

We have to just realise… entry to the labour market of many people of non-British origin is hard for people who are finding it very difficult to find jobs, who find it hard to keep jobs.

In other words, mass immigrating non-Britons makes it hard for natural-born Britons to find and keep work.

It is no surprise that mass immigration (which is actually mass-colonization) is hurting the economy for many Anglo Americans. For the progressive thought, this may very well be the idea. The lust for equality and social justice requires a little inequality and injustice directed toward the right group of people.

Lesbian Admits Marriage Equality Is A Lie

Masha Gessen is a lesbian and gay activist who recently made some candid remarks about marriage equality and the subsequent consequences:

In the video she blatantly says:

It’s a no-brainer that we [gays and lesbians] should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. That causes my brain some trouble and part of it why it causes me trouble is because fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there. Because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. [Emphasis mine]

The dismantling of the institution of marriage is a logical step after redefining what marriage is as an institution. Marriage equality requires that instead of viewing marriage as an institute ordained by God, consisting of one man and one woman, and binding until either the man or woman dies, marriage must be viewed as a state-given (human made) institution consisting of two partners and binding only as long as both partners want to be with each other.

However, such sexual liberation renders marriage itself as null and void. What is the point of declaring vows of loyalty while retaining the right to exit the marriage at will? If marriage has no binding requirements reflected in vows of loyalty fulfilled by duty, then it is not an institution. It becomes a phenomenon, a behavior pattern to be studied by anthropologists, zoologists, and historians.

So it is a lie to say that marriage equality is about two men or two women marrying in the same traditional way that one man and one woman marrying. The purpose of marriage equality is the freedom from the binding expectations of traditional marriage, not the freedom to practice traditional marriage. Since marriage as an institution is something to be freed from, then it is no longer needed, especially among  sexually liberated communities.

Masha Gessen is intellectually honest here. As a lesbian, she has no need for marriage as an institution. Removing it from society is the same as throwing away archaic and antiquated laws and practices. Those who honestly believe that marriage equality is merely about traditional marriage being opened up to same-sex partners are either deliberately ignorant of the reality or genuinely naive about the motives of sexual progressives.