Wednesday, March 29, 2017

The Rape Culture

More Perspectives from the Southern Cross

It is with pleasure that I publish another guest column by Olivia Pierson of New Zealand.  I have retained  the original spellings and syntax  in her column. The illustrations and extra links are my contributions. Please do visit  her blogsite, and Solo.

Rape Culture Carping

Submitted by Olivia on Mon, 2017-03-27 05:38

Emma Sulkowicz toting that bale
in protest of her fictive rape.
Performance "art" at its nadir.
A few years ago, when my 90 year old grandmother was still alive, I told her to make sure she kept her ground floor windows shut to discourage any intruders so that she wouldn’t get raped. “Pfft!” she sniffed, then smiled. “Chance would be a fine thing!”Did she want to be raped?

Of course not, it’s called a sense of humour. Sadly, the peecee social engineers don’t have one, and listening to them try to engineer a public perception of a rape culture defining New Zealand is just tedious – and dangerous.

It’s particularly dangerous to men and boys.

I will say right at the outset of this piece that in my eyes rape is a heinous, brutal crime. If any male raped one of my loved ones, male or female, I’d want to kill them with anything I could get my hands on, and probably would. There are no excuses for that evil deed (though if some little hussy pulled her panties down in front of a horny man and bent over the table saying “comeon” – followed by, “no, just kidding,” I would probably consider it a mitigating circumstance).

In the aftermath of a couple of Wellington boys making the statement on social media: “If you don’t take advantage of a drunk girl, you are not a Wellington College boy,” precipitating a much media-hyped protest, I think those comments can be safely relegated to the world of edgy humour - much like my grandmother’s comment.

No rape was committed, no young girl’s life was ruined and I certainly hope the young lads who have been humiliated also have not had their youth spoiled.

Nicola Gavy: Academic enemy
of embedded reason and normalcy and the Self, 
one of countless foot soldiers prepared
to subvert your child’s mind
Some University of Auckland psychology professor named Nicola Gavey drew some typically ridiculous long bows from this incident. In a recent NZ Herald article, she was quoted as saying this: “The thing with rape culture, is that it is embedded. We are socially training young people by setting up a gender hierarchy where, put simply, men are on top and women are on the bottom. We don't examine this and we don't think about the ways we are creating it right from kindergarten."

Ladies and gentlemen, feminist professors like Nicola Gavey are the reason why your lovely daughter went into a New Zealand university a normal, good-natured girl but came out an angry, complaining little minx with blue hair and a boulder on her shoulder. Gavey believes “our everyday behaviour creates a culture where acts of male aggression and entitlement are normalised to such an extent that it's easier to cross the line.”

Apparently in NZ, from kindergarten, the royal ‘we’ are all training our sons to act entitled, aggressive and superior to women. This is embedding a culture of rape in our children’s future. Ye gods, this is the stinking poop they are teaching at our universities. Is there any difference between these statements and the “all men are rapists” attitudes of Marilyn French styled feminism?

I’ll tell you what aggressive entitlement looks like... girls like Emma Sulkowicz. a.k.a “Mattress Girl” who probably went into Columbia University a normal and good natured girl before Professors like Gavey got a hold of her mind.

Emma accused a young man and fellow student named Paul Nungesser of raping her. Due to believing the feminist invented nonsense of a university rape culture, Columbia University supported Miss. Sukowicz and allowed her to carry a cumbersome mattress around with her every where she went on campus, a performance art display to protest “carrying the weight’ of being raped by a lad who was not automatically expelled. She claimed that Nungesser had anally raped her, violently choked her and smacked her about the head. News media, social media and every other form of media under the sun obsessed about this story.

Nungesser, who always protested his innocence, had to complete his college degree under the intense scrutiny of the university’s investigation into the case – with the whole of America (and the world) watching and judging.

After opening a second rape crisis centre, as well as forcing compulsory “sexual respect” workshops on all Columbia students, Columbia University found that Miss. Sulkowicz made the whole thing up. She was not expelled. After being exonerated, Nungesser brought a law suit against Columbia University for abetting Miss. Sukowicz in her highly dramatic and internationally publicised lie, which frankly ruined his life at college. He did not win.

This case is not isolated, a whole slew of university rape accusations erupted around this time, remember the Rolling Stone article “A Rape on Campus”? It falsely reported a gang rape at the University of Virginia, claiming they were all in the thrall of a burgeoning rape culture. These assertions are the handiwork of gender obsessed feminists, for whom - and I’ll never know why, men represent some insidious, ever present threat.

There is no rape culture in NZ outside of gangland. That is not to say that boys and girls do not get raped, they do (and it makes me utterly sick that some bastards get away with it).

What does exist ubiquitously in the lives of our young people though (and it is not anything new) is a revoltingly cheap “hook up” culture, often accompanied by drugs, booze and oversexed baseness (these are the grandchildren of the Baby Boomer generation after all). The sex at least is mostly consensual, but an accusation of rape can follow from a girl who feels sexually used, or taken for granted, and who seeks to inflict some measure of vengeance (like in the case of Mattress Girl). By the time some of these girls even get to the tender age of twenty they’ve been on a hook up carousel of being screwed and dumped, screwed and dumped more times than the number of years they’ve been alive.

If the adult generation want to get to insightful discussions with young people about sex culture, they would be better off guiding them to develop a strong, authentic, tenacious Self to combat the pervasive pressure of constantly “appearing cool” - or worse - “pleasing,” in the eyes of their peers. Romantic love can be a minefield to navigate even as an adult, let alone a young person. What business ought teenagers to have with sharing themselves physically and intimately with another person when they are yet to develop a defined individual Self to share?

I just got tapped on the shoulder by the ghost of my dear grandmother – she just threw open the ground floor windows of her mansion in heaven before heading off to bed and she’s calling me old fashioned. (Just kidding... there’s no way she would’ve made it to heaven.)

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Ayaan Hirsi Ali

News from the Southern Cross

It is with pleasure that I publish here another guest column by Olivia Pierson.  I have retained  the original spellings and syntax  in her column. The illustrations and extra links are my contributions. Please do visit  her blogsite, and Solo.

By Olivia Pierson

The beautiful Somali born ex Muslim, ex right-wing-Dutch-politician-come-American, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, is coming to speak to Australians and New Zealanders.

Being a much ruder culture than we Kiwis, Ozzies have already started to protest Hirsi Ali’s arrival using Australian Muslim women academics, business owners (and of course Diversity Peddlers) as spokeswomen. They even have a little on-line petition. You can read it here.

The message of this petition is laughable. Its dishonesty and hypocrisy are so palpably “on the page” I almost cringed on their behalf. The powerful Hirsi Ali is just so intellectually superior to these women that I don’t think she has anything much to worry about – except for the usual death threats, but then, as an ex Muslim female with a very persuasive voice, she’s used to those.

The group claim that their disappointment in having Hirsi Ali come to speak in Australia is “reflective of the huge diversity of opinion amongst Australian Muslim women. Although we are not a homogenous group, we are united in our condemnation of Hirsi-Ali's discourse which is grounded in hate-mongering and bigotry.”

The petition has 348 signatories so far - in a country of 23 million people where about half a million identify as Muslim, they can’t even rustle up 0.1% from their “huge diversity of opinion amongst Australian Muslim women.” Not that I'm complaining.

Really Lovees, just go home and be quiet. Hirsi Ali is coming and she is going to blow your backward religion verbally to kingdom-not-coming-for-you. The most enjoyable part is that she will do this as she always does, eloquently, prettily, cleverly, without ever raising her beautiful, sonorous voice. She will crisply slice your 7th Century superstition to pieces – just as her Muslim family members once held her down and sliced off her genitals with scissors and no anaesthetic.

Like all Muslim-flavoured protestors, this group are supremely anti the great Western value of free-speech - unheard of in their own (or their parents') countries of origin. This value is the only reason that these autocratic little Jezebels are allowed to speak. The petition states:

“Hirsi-Ali’s sheer presence in Australia undermines both intra and inter-community efforts toward social cohesion and in providing platforms for Muslim women to champion their own causes.”

Take a note of that (within all the intra, inter, social cohesion, platform weasel wordery) - they view Hirsi Ali's “sheer presence in Australia” as a threat. Never mind that we have to breathe the very same planetary air as the likes of these sneaky vixens, who want the benefits of our cultural gifts, like capitalism & freedom, yet seek to culturally destroy our values as they set about thriving off them.

Not on my watch – nor Hirsi Ali’s obviously. And why do Muslim women need to champion their own causes in Western lands – the lands of freedom and tolerance? In this multicultural day and age, who stops them from doing anything they want to do? Nobody. Only their co-religionists would aggress them enough to warrant this nonsense about “championing their own causes.” They are pointing their irrelevant fingers at fake oppressors. It is either a twisted psychological projection inflicted via Stockholm Syndrome, or it’s a blatant deception.

Either way, they are not telling the truth.

Whenever Muslim activists start this kind of chatter the term 'Islamophobia' will always be bandied about. Frankly, an overwhelming proportion of Muslims are Infidelphobes and it's about time they are called on it. Hirsi Ali is a very high-profile victim of their Infidelphobia. The undersigned women of the petition have put their names to sloppy sentiments like this:

“Hirsi-Ali stated recently, 'Violence is inherent in Islam – it’s a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimates murder.' This is just one example of the vitriol frequently espoused by this individual. Against a backdrop of increasing global Islamophobia, Hirsi-Ali's divisive rhetoric simply serves to increase hostility and hatred towards Muslims.”

How many news items recently have you seen or read where Westerners are slaying Muslims as they innocently go about their daily business? About two in ten years – one in Norway, one in Canada.
How many news items recently have you seen or read where Muslims are slaying Westerners as they innocently go about their daily business? What’s that? .. you’ve lost count? Exactly. Hapless harpies such as these women are trying to flip the facts because they know Hirsi Ali is right. They do lend their heartfelt endorsement to a violent, nihilistic, destructive, murderous cult of death and slavery.

For those who like to buy the ludicrous idea that these evils have nothing to do with Islam, read the Koran and Hadiths (the biographies about Mohammad founding their religion), then read the history of the Ottomon Empire and the fall of Constantinople. Better yet, read the conquest of Hindu/Buddhist India by Islam - 400 years of genocide, rape and slavery - exactly what we have seen been dished out by ISIS & Al Qaeda.

This is not the religion being hijacked by a few bad eggs, it is the religion itself as set forth by its prophet Mo. Behold what a brutal 7th Century religion looks like in the 21st Century when it has failed to undergo a Reformation encouraged by a Renaissance.

Islamic violence and terror in Western Democracies has grown meteorically in the last 20 years precisely because Islamophobia is not in play. Political correctness has demanded that everybody fawn over this Iron Age theocracy pretending it’s “the religion of peace” – oh God! How’s that for trying to pull a fast one?! There’s more deceit going on here than a Hillary Clinton charity event – one asks how do these people get away with such boldface perfidy?

These mendacious women end their petitioning words with “Australia deserves better than this.”

Au contraire! Australia and New Zealand are damn lucky to be hosting a speaker as poignant on the world stage as Ayaan Hirsi Ali happens to be. She has fought tirelessly and bravely for years to expose the creeping evils which Islamic culture is importing into the West, via the multiculturalist zealots. For all the years since the murder of her friend and colleague, who was stabbed to death in a Dutch street, film maker Theo Van Gogh, she has lived under a fatwa - violent fundamentalists count it a duty to Allah to murder her, resulting in a full time security detail. Why don’t the Westernised Muslima shriekers ever address this fact if their religion is so unimpeachably peaceful?

To hear Ayaan Hirsi Ali speak, go here.

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Adventures in the Surveillance State

Auditors of the ongoing conquest of the West by Islam, the nightmarish bogeyman, can’t help but notice that most Western governments, charged with protecting their citizens from Islamic jihad, are cowards too afraid to identify their enemy (other than the citizenry), or are in sympathy with it, but  also are too sensitive to being accused of censorship when they wish to have information suppressed or erased from public knowledge.  That term, censorship, is so fraught with ominous, negative connotations, that governments avoid it like the plague. Instead they work by proxy, and require private communications entities like Google to do the dirty work.

Melissa Cochran (pictured), the wife of US tourist Kurt
who died, was left covered in blood on the pavement of
Westminster Bridge and comforted by a passer-by
after being badly injured.

And if these entities do not or refuse to do the dirty work, and let slip unpalliative facts or ideas or videos, they will be punished instead.

Unlike in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty- Four , in which the government (or the Party), if it detected or accused one of thoughtcrime, would hustle you off to Room 101, where you would be tortured and made to become a lover of and  true believer in the Party’s aims, agenda, and methods, and  then memory of your existence would subsequently be erased by the government’s extensive “fake news” apparatus.  Breitbart London  has this revelation. It’s interesting that Winston Smith, the protagonist in Orwell’s novel, was employed by the Party to create the very thing he was an expert at doing: creating fake news. An urge to discover the truth got him converted and erased.  

Trolled: The  Muslim pedestrian wearing a brown headscarf and
grey coat was seen walking past a victim being treated
 on the pavement while looking at her mobile phone.
“It’s just another dead kaffir, no big deal, Praise be to Allah.”
On the very day of the attack, The Independent again reported Theresa May’s cross-eyed designation of Islam as a “great faith”

The Prime Minister has said the “Islamist” attack on Parliament was not “Islamic” and Islam is a “great faith”.

Adding: “This act of terror was not an act of faith. It was a perversion; a warped ideology, which leads to an act of terrorism like that and it will not prevail.”

Au contraire, Theresa, it was an act of faith. Khalid Masood was certain that Allah would give him extra brownie points for killing infidels and becoming a “martyr.”

Wake-up call for Theresa, per that “great religion.” Is it “great’ to her because it underscores the virtue of self-sacrifice and the sacrifice of others?

Qur'an’2:191-193: “And slay them wherever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous [sic] than slaying. But fight them not by the Holy Mosque until they should fight you there; then, if they fight you, slay them — such is the recompense of unbelievers, but if they give over, surely Allah is All-forgiving, All-compassionate. Fight them, till there is no persecution and the religion is Allah’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers.”

4:89: “They wish that you should disbelieve as they disbelieve, and then you would be equal; therefore take not to yourselves friends of them, until they emigrate in the way of Allah; then, if they turn their backs, take them, and slay them wherever you find them; take not to yourselves any one of them as friend or helper.”

47:4: “When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then, when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds; then set them free, either by grace or ransom, till the war lays down its loads. So it shall be; and if Allah had willed, He would have avenged Himself upon them; but that He may try some of you by means of others. And those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will not send their works astray.”

Qur’an:8:39: “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”

Ishaq: 324: “He said, ‘Fight them so that there is no more rebellion, and religion, all of it, is for Allah only. Allah must have no rivals.'”

Qur’an: 9:14: “Fight them and Allah will punish them by your hands, lay them low, and cover them with shame. He will help you over(come) them.”

Had enough? There are a few dozen more in the same vein. Yes, Theresa, Islam is a “great” religion – for homicidal maniacs.

Rather, Theresa said, the London attack was “Islamist.” Whatever that means. The distinction is lost on me. A chocolate cake can be described as “cakist.” How can a “warped ideology” be warped? The Islamic ideology is already “warpish.” The cross-eyed lady said that the terrorist action was a “perversion.” Whatever that means about, as Islam, which worships death, as do innumerable Satanic cults. Reason, however, is prohibited from entering any discussion of Islam, or from entering May’s mind.

P.M.  Theresa May: “You have no business or right to know
        the identity of who threatens you or killed you. That would be racist
and Islamophobic!”
 Pamela Geller notes:

Islamism is generally defined as a political interpretation of Islam. Some critics argue Islam is intrinsically political – as the Quran mandates a religious state and law – and say the term is irrelevant.

MPs almost unanimously agreed with the Prime Minister, lining up to warn against “demonising” and “stigmatising” Muslims, and to condemn “Islamophobia” and “racial and religious” discrimination.

What was the name of that British sit-com that mocked the government? Oh, yes. “Yes, Minister.” And then it became “Yes, Prime Minister.” And what do we see here? “Yes, Prime Minister.” “Hear, Hear!”

In the meantime, St. Theresa doesn’t want you to know what’s imperiling your life. The London Telegraph, in its March 24th article, “Exclusive: Google and social media companies could be prosecuted if they show extremist videos,” wrote:

Google, Facebook and other internet companies could be prosecuted if they do not stop extremist videos from being seen on their websites by people in Britain, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Ministers are considering a new law which would mean Google – which owns YouTube - and other social media sites like Facebook and Twitter can be prosecuted if they allow such videos to be disseminated.

Theresa May, the Prime Minister, made clear her displeasure at internet companies that publish extremist content on Friday, saying “the ball is in their court” over taking action.
Google publicly apologised this week after the growing scandal over extremist videos on YouTube led to a series of companies pulling their adverts from the internet giant.

Google, which owns the video sharing website YouTube, and other social media sites have an agreement to take down extremist content within 24 hours when they are alerted to it.

Angela Merkel is listening to you, and
doesn’t like what she’s hearing. Expect
a knock on your door.

May is taking a leaf from Germany’s Angela Merkel and her drooling authoritarian colleagues.

Breitbart London reported on March 22nd, in “German Media Watchdog Instructs Press to Censor Ethnicity and Religion in Reports”:


Germany’s media regulator has revised its code of conduct on reporting whether crime suspects belong to an ethnic or religious minority after complaints the previous guidance was unclear.


The German Press Council – a voluntary, industry-run body – says information about a person’s ethnicity shouldn’t be published “unless there is a justified public interest in doing so.”

The wording agreed Wednesday replaces previous guidance that said such details should only be published if there was a link between a person’s ethnicity or religion and the crime.

Numerous German media outlets complained that the old code was hard to interpret during a breaking news situation.

They argued that withholding such information left readers searching for it on questionable social media sites and stirred conspiracy theories of media cover-ups of migrant crimes.

And that’s right up Theresa’s alley. Got to police those social media websites! She’ll probably get Mark Zuckerberg’s help, just as he helped Angela Merkel smother German dissent against her migrant policies. Breitbart reported on February 5th 2016 in “Facebook Censorship and the War on Free Speech”:

Free speech is under assault — not only in repressive dictatorships suddenly able to influence global conversations through the Internet, but across the Western world, and even in the American bastion of free expression.  Absolute protection for speech as an inalienable right has given way to bitter squabbling over how much free expression should be sacrificed for various, ostensibly noble goals, and who the censors will be.

Writing at the Gatestone Institute, British journalist Douglas Murray looked at Facebook as a battleground in the war on free speech Friday, recalling a recent case in which the social media giant was “forced to back down when caught permitting anti-Israel postings, but censoring equivalent anti-Palestinian postings.”

To this, Murray adds the disturbing September incident in which German chancellor Angela Merkel was caught on an open mike, asking Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg if he would help suppress “anti-immigration” postings… and he replied that he was already working on it.

“Oh, Mark! You’re such a disgusting but well-behaved Jew – the Muslims have something there, don’t you think? – but I need your help to keep my people pacified and in line, and, frankly, shut up. I don’t want any backtalk from the hoi polloi. My legacy is on the line here about all the badly-behaved savages I let into Germany. Can you help me regulate German social media?”

You, the average American, are now an NSA cryptoanalytic
cipher instantly retrievable any time an NSA wonk
wishes or detects an irregularity he does not approve of.

And we mustn’t forget the Big Brotherish surveillance of Americans by our own NSA. Fox’s Tucker Carlson’s eyes were opened wide when he interviewed a retired NSA spook who described in detail the extent of domestic spying on Americans.  Orwell’s Oceania all-knowing and all-powerful ruling Party would turn green with envy with the scale and abilities of the NSA. Binny, the retired spook, categorically denied that the “Deep State” was a conspiracy theory, but was a reality.

We are all in the clutches of another “Deep State.”