Archive for the ‘history’ Category

Addendum to my last post

September 27, 2009

Thought I should clarify a remark I made in my last post, which now that I reread it might seem to imply that the Reformation gave everyone freedom of speech.

It didn’t, of course. For the first couple of centuries that Protestantism existed, it burned heretics and witches and suppressed dissidence if anything more sternly than the Catholic Inquisition ever did.

However, by breaking the enormous political power of the Catholic Church, Protestantism did pave the way for the Enlightenment, which was where the idea of freedom of speech was born. Much as the selfish, lying cunts known as “feminists” want to claim women’s freedom of speech as their own heroic achievement, it was actually a gift from men like Thomas Jefferson, and they gave it to everyone, not just men. Find some historical evidence to the contrary! You can’t, because there isn’t any.

Pretty ironic that feminists are now trying to claim credit for freedom of speech, when they’re working so hard to suppress it in anyone who doubts the Holy Gospel of women’s equality, pacifism, global warming, socialism-by-another-name, and all the rest of the cowshit they’re trying to force on everyone.

Just didn’t want it to sound like I’m anti-Catholic, because I’m not.

P.S. Protestantism was launched by a man named Martin Luther. The Enlightenment was initiated by another man, Rene Descartes. Women didn’t do either, men did.

Advertisements

Women, witchcraft, and the vote

July 12, 2009

Well, it looks like the feminist idiots have gotten bored with trolling me for recommending that women not put themselves in situations where they would be easily rapeable. When I found out that the hysterical male feminist wasn’t just whining about me, he was telling women that it is safe to strip and get into bed with men they have no intention of having sex with, I banned him for aiding and abetting rape by giving dangerous advice. But he kept commenting, even though he knew I was deleting his comments unread. This guy claims that women can take off their clothes and get into bed with him and he’ll “respect” it when they tell him no, but he won’t respect it when a woman tells him, repeatedly, that she’s not interested in wasting her time on conversation with someone as stupid as he is. Maybe he figures that when I told him, “No, I’m not going to have a conversation with you,” and then proceeded to discuss the viewpoints he expressed with smarter people, I was giving him “mixed messages”. I guess I’ve learned a lesson about giving stray morons who comment here even the slightest encouragement.

On to today’s links. First, the Editrix has posted debunking the Margaret Murray feminist crap about witch-burnings.

Burning of witches was almost unknown and strictly rejected by the popes. In the 17th century, when all over the Protestant regions north of the Alps the stakes were burning (there is an estimation of 25,000 victims), not a single witch trial was performed. In Spain, about 300 “witches” were burnt at the stakes, in strongly Catholic Ireland 2.

The frequently traded number of 9 million victims can, interestingly, be traced back to Heinrich Himmler, the second most powerful man in the “Third Reich”, who intended to fuel thus anti-Catholic resentments. In fact, even his “research team” couldn’t fabricate more than 30,000 victims.

This is one of those things liberals try to gloss over these days: one of the many things that Nazis had in common with today’s liberals is that they practiced pseudo-pagan religions. After they had won the war and finished killing off the Jews, their plan was to abolish Christianity, which they saw as a Jewish sect. Today liberals try to demonize Christianity, but neopaganism (Nazis) and secularism (communists) have killed more people in a few decades than Christianity’s worst moments did for centuries.

Thanks to feminism, the history of the European witch hunts of the late 16th and early 17th centuries has become ideologized and bent out of shape to their liking and, interestingly, 9 million is the number incorrectly and widely bandied about. While witch hunts were seen in the early 1900s as outbreaks of religious hysteria for which an ever-sinister and oppressive Catholic church was responsible, in the Seventies, feminist revisionist historians claimed that they had been a systematic campaign by the patriarchal system to do away with the remnants of — Yeah, right! — goddess-worshiping pre-Christian religions.

A Razor for a Goat is a detailed debunking of Margaret Murray’s revisionist history of witchcraft.

Anywhere, more evidence to throw on the pile that women have no business voting: Unmarried Women Deliver…Big Time

Last night unmarried women supported Barack Obama by a stunning 70 to 29 percent margin according to calculations based on the Edison/Mitofsky National Election Pool published by CNN. This margin exceeds the support Obama generated among both younger voters and Hispanic voters. Unmarried women similarly supported Democratic House candidates by a 64 to 29 percent margin, matching their progressive support in the 2006 elections.

In fact looking back at martial status, unmarried women consistently generated large progressive margins, but never as large as we saw last night. In fact, there emerged a 44-point difference in the behavior of married women and unmarried women. If not for the overwhelming support of unmarried women, John McCain would have won the women’s vote and with it, the White House.

Ann Coulter once figured it up and said that if we threw out the female votes, there would only have been one Democrat president since women’s suffrage happened. I rest my case!

Also, Roissy:

Why There Is A Gender Gap

In short, women are voting more Democrat because the Democrat Party is the prime force for turning the government into the world’s biggest provider beta.

Women, witchcraft, and the vote

July 12, 2009

Well, it looks like the feminist idiots have gotten bored with trolling me for recommending that women not put themselves in situations where they would be easily rapeable. When I found out that the hysterical male feminist wasn’t just whining about me, he was telling women that it is safe to strip and get into bed with men they have no intention of having sex with, I banned him for aiding and abetting rape by giving dangerous advice. But he kept commenting, even though he knew I was deleting his comments unread and not reading his blog posts. This guy claims that women can take off their clothes and get into bed with him and he’ll “respect” it when they tell him no, but he won’t respect it when a woman tells him, repeatedly, that she’s not interested in wasting her time on conversation with someone as stupid as he is. Maybe he figures that when I told him, “No, I’m not going to have a conversation with you,” and then proceeded to discuss the viewpoints he expressed with smarter people, I was giving him “mixed messages”. I guess I’ve learned a lesson about giving stray morons who comment here even the slightest encouragement.

On to today’s links. First, the Editrix has posted debunking the Margaret Murray feminist crap about witch-burnings.

Burning of witches was almost unknown and strictly rejected by the popes. In the 17th century, when all over the Protestant regions north of the Alps the stakes were burning (there is an estimation of 25,000 victims), not a single witch trial was performed. In Spain, about 300 “witches” were burnt at the stakes, in strongly Catholic Ireland 2.

The frequently traded number of 9 million victims can, interestingly, be traced back to Heinrich Himmler, the second most powerful man in the “Third Reich”, who intended to fuel thus anti-Catholic resentments. In fact, even his “research team” couldn’t fabricate more than 30,000 victims.

This is one of those things liberals try to gloss over these days: one of the many things that Nazis had in common with today’s liberals is that they practiced pseudo-pagan religions. After they had won the war and finished killing off the Jews, their plan was to abolish Christianity, which they saw as a Jewish sect. Today liberals try to demonize Christianity, but neopaganism (Nazis) and secularism (communists) have killed more people in a few decades than Christianity’s worst moments did for centuries.

Thanks to feminism, the history of the European witch hunts of the late 16th and early 17th centuries has become ideologized and bent out of shape to their liking and, interestingly, 9 million is the number incorrectly and widely bandied about. While witch hunts were seen in the early 1900s as outbreaks of religious hysteria for which an ever-sinister and oppressive Catholic church was responsible, in the Seventies, feminist revisionist historians claimed that they had been a systematic campaign by the patriarchal system to do away with the remnants of — Yeah, right! — goddess-worshiping pre-Christian religions.

A Razor for a Goat is a detailed debunking of Margaret Murray’s revisionist history of witchcraft.

Anywhere, more evidence to throw on the pile that women have no business voting: Unmarried Women Deliver…Big Time

Last night unmarried women supported Barack Obama by a stunning 70 to 29 percent margin according to calculations based on the Edison/Mitofsky National Election Pool published by CNN. This margin exceeds the support Obama generated among both younger voters and Hispanic voters. Unmarried women similarly supported Democratic House candidates by a 64 to 29 percent margin, matching their progressive support in the 2006 elections.

In fact looking back at martial status, unmarried women consistently generated large progressive margins, but never as large as we saw last night. In fact, there emerged a 44-point difference in the behavior of married women and unmarried women. If not for the overwhelming support of unmarried women, John McCain would have won the women’s vote and with it, the White House.

Ann Coulter once figured it up and said that if we threw out the female votes, there would only have been one Democrat president since women’s suffrage happened. I rest my case!

Also, Roissy:

Why There Is A Gender Gap

In short, women are voting more Democrat because the Democrat Party is the prime force for turning the government into the world’s biggest provider beta.

June 11, 2008

Worst Science Article of the Week: Did Women Wield Power in Greece 3,500 Years Ago?

The researchers’ study and their subsequent news release were tempered in their enthusiasm, saying that the find showed that Greek women from that era may have been able to achieve high social status—if they were born into a powerful family. Previously, they said, they thought women could only ascend to any kind of influence my marrying a wealthy man. The Observer, however, wrote that find elevated the status of Mycenaean women from little better than servants to places where they “often played key roles in running affairs of state.”

That’s overstating things by quite a bit, according to MIT ancient historian William Broadhead. “The presence of a brother and sister in this grave instead of a husband and wife actually changes little,” he told DISCOVER. “I would expect all the women in an imperial court to be buried in more or less similar fashion, regardless of any formal or informal power they might have wielded while alive.”