A little more on motherhood

Study: Women more likely than men to reject unattractive babies
Research questions existence of unconditional maternal love

Questions? There is no such thing. There’s propaganda about how parents automatically love their children because the ruling powers need people to actually take care of and raise their children, and if people have been told that they love their children, some of them will believe it and try to behave accordingly. And not kill the future laborers and taxpayers. With legal abortion, we’re seeing just how “natural” maternal love is; women don’t hesitate to murder children they don’t feel like looking after. Now that baby-murder before birth is firmly entrenched, people are proposing that it be extended for some period after birth. If one of these proposals is approved and mothers are allowed to kill children who are under ten days or two years or whatever they decide, people will promptly campaign to have the deadline extended. If present trends continue – which they won’t, as societal collapse will come long before that stage – then mothers will be able to put their children to death until the kids are old enough to vote. And will.

For more on this, see Marvin Harris’s work on female infanticide.


5 Responses to “A little more on motherhood”

  1. Grim Says:

    Something I have never understood about abortion: Why have the abortion in the first place? Why just give birth and let someone adopt it? Seems to be plenty of couples who want to adopt.

    It's the ownership aspect of motherhood? It's my child and no else can have it but I'll still kill it if I want to?

  2. Female Misogynist Says:

    I know, it's heartbreaking. I think you're right, it's the ownership. Also, being pregnant and giving birth is an inconvenience, and feminists believe that they should never, ever experience inconvenience. Even if someone had to be murdered for their convenience.

  3. Carl Says:

    You can tell something is amiss with abortion when so many people have no problems killing a baby but shriek at assisted suicide. Logically, both biologically and civilization-ally(?), an old or sick person wanting to die should be a lot more acceptable.

    Are they really trying to allow post birth "abortions"? I thought that was just a joke about women that kill their young children.

  4. Female Misogynist Says:


    Alas, it is not a joke. Here's Peter Singer explaining why, in certain circumstances, it ought to be legal to kill babies. And here's Steven Pinker saying the same.

  5. globalman100 Says:

    abortion is part of the Illuminati plan of depopulation of the planet.

    If you read Kissingers Strategic Security Directive 200 from December 1975 you can see that the US insisted that any country that would recieve 'US AID' HAD to sign up to 'Planned Parenthood' which is another name for 'abortions galore'. You just need to know how to read what Kissinger wrote.

    If you scratch 'Planned Parenthood' you find Eugenics fanactics gallore like Margart Sanger as the 'front woman' and the Rockefellers as her benefactors. And oh, the Rockefellers were a benefactor to another Eugenicist in the 20s and 30s. His name was Adolph Hitler. At the Nuremberg Trials they totally squashed the notion that it was the US and the Rockefellers that inspired the Nazis into 'Eugenics Ferver'. The Nazis sterilised and killed a lot of people in the name of Eugenics.

    By the way. The current use of Eugenics by the Illuiminati is not to create 'better' people…it is to create 'dumber people'. If you know what to look for, you can see this everywhere.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: