Women Aren’t Responsible For What They Do Because They’re Possessed By Demons?

At the Dalrock blog recently, they were talking about abortion.  Rather than hold women accountable for making the choice to abort their babies, they blame anyone and everyone else starting with a super secret pagan takeover of the culture.  Only one man, Boxer, objects to this delusion.

Dear Oscar:

as a result the culture drifts further from Christ, we drift closer to superstitious pagan practices.

Please. In saying this, you’re displacing the blame from women to men. This is the same motivation that the kooks here are driven by when they blame Jews, illuminati, etc. You (and they) always excuse the behavior of feral wimminz by creating some boogeyman who is actually in charge — the hidden demon always being male.

Pagan societies that were viable never allowed women to kill their children for convenience sake (see Julius Caesar’s Gallic Wars for two clear examples of viable pagan cultures).

Women and their white-knights have seized some social control, and thus they’re pushing society closer to a Christian matriarchy. What religious or cultural customs are extant doesn’t matter. When feral wimminz and their enablers take over a society, this is the result.

Blame the Jews, blame the NWO, blame the Illuminati, blame lizardmen from Planet X, just don’t blame a (white) woman.  At least one man stood up to that.  Boxer continued in another comment.

The abortion trend really has nothing to do with religion, and most of the feral wimminz who get abortions have nothing to do with “pagan practices”. They remain protestant, catholic and jewish wimminz, same as they were before.

By bringing up nonsense about “pagan practices”, you’re opening the door for us to blame some pre-Christian resurgence, rather than the actual christian wimminz, who are (lest we forget) doing the killing of the babies. This is the same tactic as the kooks who blame Jewish conspiracies, illuminati, etc. for wimminz bad behavior. All these other groups open the door to displacing blame from where it really belongs.

Human sacrifice in general – and child sacrifice in particular – are common in pagan cultures. There are exceptions, but they are exceptions. Furthermore, non-ritual infanticide and abortion were common among the Greeks, Romans and most other pagan cultures.

1. You have provided no historical sources for this contention. Can you kick one out to support this nonsense?

2. Neither the Greeks, nor the Romans, nor “most other pagan cultures” murdered babies with the ferocity of the Christian/Jewish society you live in. Stats for the abortion trend are right here. Thus, by your own logic, murdering babies must be a Christian/Jewish sacrament, as Christians and Jewish wimminz do it more than anyone else, by a long mile.

There is no such thing as a Christian matriarchy.

Yes, there is. You’re living in one, right now.

Try blaming the actual Christian and Jewish wimminz who are murdering their own children, rather than blaming “pagans” (that don’t exist) for this shit. It’s less palatable to face the truth, but much more effective.

Then the comments turn into a No True Scotsman argument about why Christian women aborting their babies aren’t really Christian.  The argument continues in the comments until someone says, more or less, that there’s a super secret moloch pagan conspiracy.  It turns out that doesn’t mean what you would think it does.  It means that women are possessed by demons.

@Boxer

[M]ost importantly, it’s all a conspiracy, started by a resurgence of the Moloch cult. These Moloch pagans are all around us. We need to fight the Moloch worshippers!”

There is a cant used among American Protestants/Evangelicals to which you are not privy. It uses the same words as the rest of American English, but there is a shared context about how to think about certain words; for example pagan or Moloch

In this case: You see both the worship of Christ and the (now defunct) worship of Moloch as sociological phenomenon. We don’t. We know there are spirits, and we know that the spirit(s) who animated Moloch worshippers in the past, and that they still exist and move.

Neither you nor we have ever heard anyone say they worship Moloch. Because your worldview is blind to the spiritual, and since you have no evidence of a current sociological phenomenon of Moloch, then the idea of a conspiracy of Moloch strikes you are ridiculous. But we don’t need to witness people praise Moloch to know that they act in service to the spirit(s) of Moloch; who are demons.

There you have it.  Christian men believe that women only have abortions (or commit sin in general) because they are possessed by demons.  Thus, Christian men are think women are completely blameless.  They should have stuck with the super secret moloch pagan conspiracy.  At least that’s physically possible.

It’s amazing the length manginas will go to avoid holding women accountable for their actions.  Even if demons actually exist, the Christian manginas are fighting an imaginary enemy.  It doesn’t matter if demons exist or not.  “Demons made me do it” is not a legitimate defense for anything even if they actually exist.  Women are acting on their own choices but the Christian manginas would rather believe that women have no agency, moral or otherwise.  Thus, they invent stories about demons possessing women because they can’t face the reality that women are acting on their own agency.

Advertisements

70 thoughts on “Women Aren’t Responsible For What They Do Because They’re Possessed By Demons?

  1. Considering that women’s sexual freedom has done me no good at all, I have no incentive to support it. If we recriminalized abortion tomorrow and publicly executed women who had abortions, that wouldn’t bother me.

  2. How very convenient for women! They can take over, rule and destroy the world and face no opposition because the stupid boys are rather praying against demons…

    Personally, I’m not totally opposed to abortion, tho. But the problem is, that even the moderate conservative’s three-exceptions rule (rape, incest, life of the mother) is based on the idea that women don’t lie about rape. So if you would enforce such a law there would probably be even more men ruined by false rape accusations…

  3. Boxer makes some decent comments over on Dalrock’s blog. At this point, I wonder if he does it just for the LULZ.

    The lunacy is so bad over there that I haven’t checked that blog in over a year even to check for evidence of mangina nuttiness. Just can’t bring myself to even give them a click.

    As example of their illogical theories:

    While women have no agency over there, it is suggested that men should marry “red pill” women because they “won’t” initiate a divorce. What is a “red pill” woman? Well, a woman that realizes that women divorce because they don’t “bond” with their husband and only use him a utility. A “red pill” woman realizes how useful her husband’s utility is to her needs, of course! While at the same time, women have no agency, and it is MEN who have to make the women into “red pill” women.

    Just nuts.

  4. “Human sacrifice in general – and child sacrifice in particular – are common in pagan cultures. There are exceptions, but they are exceptions. Furthermore, non-ritual infanticide and abortion were common among the Greeks, Romans and most other pagan cultures.”

    Review Leviticus 27:28-29. Review the story of Jepthatah’s daughter in Judges.

    Jehovah demands the sacrifice of “all that openeth the womb”. All firstborn. Now sure, you could purchase your firstborn back from Jehovah by paying a redemption fee. But the ancient jews kept slaves. How many of them do you suppose got bought back? When Jehovah told Abraham to human-sacrifice Isaac, at no point did Abraham reply “What the fucking fuck???”.

    Christianity is the story of a human sacrifice – Jesus. It’s an explicit and inseperable part of the gospel. It’s the core of the story.

    Find me where in the bible infanticide is forbidden. Oh, you’ll go to hell for having sex with a goat, but there’s not a word forbidding drowning unwanted girl-children in the well.

  5. Blaming women’s waywardness on “demons” shows why Christianity makes no sense in the modern world. Christianity will disappear eventually any way, like plenty of other religions. Apparently a big swath of Europe has turned into a “Jesus who?” zone, organically and without any deliberate effort to persecute Christians or suppress the transmission of their beliefs.

    Harper’s magazine ran an article recently about the twilight of the ancient Zoroastrian religion, a faith older than Christianity that at one time had millions of adherents. Christians should read this article and think about what could lie ahead for their faith during its decline in the coming centuries:

    http://harpers.org/archive/2015/08/house-of-fire/?single=1

  6. Pingback: Gynocentrism Amongst Religious "Red Pill" Men

  7. I would like an article looking into the psychology of women in regards to the universal joy and humour they find in male genital mutilation.
    I tested my own mother by making a comment about Lorena Bobbit’s penis cutting festival,and she laughed like crazy.
    I called her on it,and she said she did not know why it was funny to her, it just was.

    %90 of women,including my doctor, will laugh about ball cutting or penis cutting.

    WHATS UP WITH THAT?

    • My female doctor told me to stop being a baby when she was tugging my foreskin too hard.

      And people wonder why some men hate women! lol

      Popular culture is full of men getting theyirsexual organs harmed for comedic effect. Getting kicked in the balls, things jammed up their anus. I have never seen a comedy about a female getting something jump up her vagina.

    • I like your comment, AA. Surprised it didn’t get taken down, but hey…it’s still there, though the one response to it is rather lacking. As for how one “becomes” an adult? I think it has more to do with reaching self-actualization than anything else, but our society tries desperately to make it about other “standard” markers.
      One isn’t an adult just because they had sex, or bought a house, or own a car, or are over 21, or got a driver’s license. It’s about coming to terms with who you are, not how much you’ve catered to the whims of others.

      • Coming to terms with who you are – well said tarnished. Simple words but so difficult to achieve!

        And yet it is the essence of adulthood, maturity, and confidence.

        PUAS object precisely to the idea of self acceptance. They heap scorn on “just being yourself” yet that is the most difficult thing to achieve. Its also the strongest thing you could do.

        They don’t get it.

        Weak, callow youth.

  8. Well the female nature is what it is but don’t forget to blame those who funded the feminism whoever they are bankers, corruption’s experts, organizations with expertise in influence peddling, mad esoterists.

      • I don’t understand your answer.

        I’m completing you analysis by adding things you forgot to mention, why do you insult me? You should learn to argue. Personal attacks are for feminists and blue pill manginas don’t fall to that level.

        • Not holding women responsible for their actions and blaming men instead is the quintessence of being a mangina. And very convenient for women because they can go on with fucking everything up while men are shadow boxing against other (Jewish/rich/Catholic/black…) men instead of forming an opposition.

        • And another remark: I mentions bad people without any precision about their sex and you made the assumption that evil people are necessarily men which is a fully gynocentrist mindset.

        • Well, in your post you blame female nature and those “who funded feminism whoever they are bankers(…)”. Those two things. Female nature is what it is (ie women aren’t responsible for their actions because it’s just their nature) and those people who funded it. That’s why we called you a mangina who doesn’t hold women responsible for their actions.

          As for the men: every single conspiracy theorist I met always thought about the Jews, the Rothschilds, Bilderberger, Jesuits, Freemasons, etc. as men. Jewish men, Jesuit men, Freemason men…

          Maybe you’re the exception, who knows. But you would be that then: the exception.

        • Maybe there is a misunderstanding.

          Female nature is what it is I just another way to say don’t be surprised if female act like female. I never wrote that female should be considered as slave of their nature and not punished when they did something wrong. You had that interpretation.

          For the conspiracy theories I never mentioned any those, you did it.

          I just acknowledge the fact that there are evil men like there are evil women and that it exists some kind alpha thugs, psychopaths and fanatics that are more or less aware of the problem of gynocentrism and deliberately amplificate it because it fit their agenda.

          Those men are criminals and should be hold accountable for their actions.

          If I mentioned bankers it is because today the real power is in the banks, so I expect that all those power-addict go to work in finance where they will easily satisfy there addiction.

        • If you are unable to make the difference between a simple contradictor and a troll you will not go very far.

          If you don’t want to understand that there are evil in both men and women and that we have to see both side of the problem at the same time if we want find a solution (or at least moderate the problem) I don’t know what to tell you except that you will be very very dangerous on the long run.

        • Other points:

          There is also a female freemasonry, you should check your informations.

          And anger phase is toxic, don’t stay in it too long.

  9. Fatt Horney is now claiming his lezzie, feminist, sex pozzie “gurlfreind”/seXXX worker is a narcissist sociopath….

    Rachel Haywire Scammed Trigger Warning’s Donors

    I bet Forney paid her for “companionship” thinking he would get layyyed…. She probably gave him a lame massage and snapped some picks of his bloated, naked whale belly to extort him with….

    this is why you should be distrustful of womyn and manurespherians….

  10. oh, I ain’t gonna link but Forney is vewwy, vewwy mahd…

    must be a cheezeurger shortage, but go to his twitter, it’s all jews this, cuckservatives that…

    he’s gone full neo nazi, I guess all the gay sex with Don-0-van finally converted him to full on nazi….

  11. anyways, it’s pretty funny…

    anyone here would know that some tramp like Rachel Haywire was hustling for money but not Forney…

    There’s some pic where he is hugging her and she looks grossed out. Oh, dem poor opressessedessed sex workers. It’s obvious she was hustling Fatt Matt somehow. But it’s even funnier that he ranted how evillle tatt’d womyn are.

    She’s all tatt’d…

    and even without the tatt’s, she’s still got that “I hate men” look like Girl Writes what.

    So, there is an old phrase-

    “You can’t hustle an honest man.”

    I almost have to say, good job Rachel. Now go assrape Roosh and Hugo Schwyzer, um I mean enthousiastically consent to pentrate them with a strap on.

    • LOL! WTF? I thought this was a guy at first and that was chest hair, but it’s tattoos. She’s nasty! Didn’t Forney write an article about women with short hair being whores, too? Good to see Forney follows his own advice. It’s toss up between him and Roosh as to who is the biggest loser…..

      • hahaha…

        the tatt’s do look like chest hair…

        as far as biggest manuresphere loser, well there is also Aurini, don’t forget everyone’s favorite transhumanist, HBD genderqueer wannabe Anton LeVay.

    • So long as the male partner is likewise inexperienced and isn’t bringing a ton of STDs or immediate-awesome-sex fantasies to the table, it sounds ok. Though I do wonder if the requirement for duty sex goes both ways…If he gets home from a 12 hour shift at work and is back-breakingly tired, but she’s all done up in lingerie waiting for him, he’d have to have duty sex too, even if all he wants is to sleep.

      • “So long as the male partner is likewise inexperienced”

        That would make sense if women and men looked for the same things in the opposite sex. As this blog and many of the male posters will confirm women in general do NOT prefer sexually inexperienced men. In fact, many will go so far as to consider the man severely flawed because it.

        And to answer your response about women’s vote, its simple. Women got the vote since, what? 1923? Since then, they have implemented nothing but laws that harm men, criminalize men, work to transfer men’s wealth to women and erode men’s rights. Your response to this? Essentially, “Well I don’t do that”. You think none of us have heard this shit before? Its the SAME response every woman makes when they’re collectively called on their shit. Women were given the vote, they have done nothing but use it as a way to enact socialism and selfishly benefit themselves at the expense of others. This is true for both married women, single women, lesbians, whatever. They differ in how they agree to do so but in the end it is the same. And so I conclude they must be kept out the law and decision making progress in any significant capacity for the well-being of society.

        At this point from your posts I cannot tell if your disconnect from reality is willful or not.

        • > As this blog and many of the male posters will confirm women in general do NOT prefer sexually inexperienced men. In fact, many will go so far as to consider the man severely flawed because it.

          Notice that this translates over to women’s comfort with having promiscuous gay male friends. Apparently it doesn’t bother “fag hags” that the gay men they confide in may have sucked or butt-fucked dozens of other gays, often strangers they meet in public restrooms, seedy gay clubs or other venues.

        • Speaking of sexually inexperienced men, I have noticed a lot of propaganda lately about the wonders of sex robots and similar transhumanist fantasies. I post critical responses to these stories, when feasible, because I consider the sex robot a horrible idea. These technologies would just amplify the trend towards men’s eviction from having sexual relationships with women and create an even larger population of men who lack the skills for knowing how to deal with women in general, in a society which allows women to do pretty much whatever they want.

          A responsible kind of futurist thinking about human sexuality, which has the interests of most men in mind, would argue for ways to roll back the sexual revolution, keep women from getting premarital sexual experience (which only damages their ability to form stable relationships) and make it easier for ordinary guys to marry sexually innocent women and form families with them.

        • I have no disconnect from reality, and agree that many women would prefer a sexually experienced male as a lifelong mate, if only because it would mean he is likely to be able to give her more satisfaction and not accidentally hurt her in the process of sharing sex for the first time. However, note what I stated: STDs and unrealistic fantasies of immediately-awesome-sex. It would be a crappy foundation for marriage indeed if a virgin wife got clamydia or herpes from her experienced husband. Likewise, it would also be crappy if he was previously with solely non-virgin women who’s bodies were already were used to sex and did not require any patience or “warming up”. These things should be a consideration regardless of if the virgin/less experienced partner is the male or the female.

          As to the vote issue…yes, I’m very well aware that you and everyone here has heard this shit before. I am not trying to break out the tired, old NAWALT argument precisely because I see that a majority of women *are* like that. And yes, I realize that my sex has done this in general.

          But the thing is, you’re not calling me out on my shit, whatever it is. You’re trying to call me out on shit that other people who happen to share a chromosome arrangement with me perpetuate. I can’t control other women any more than you can control other men. I try to talk about misandry, and get mocked for being “brainwashed”. I signed up for the Draft alongside my male friends to show solidarity against a corrupt system that says they’re disposable because they have a penis and get laughed at by our teachers. I financially support the various groups like the Wounded Warrior Project, the Parasmus foundation, and Just Detention International because I believe that veterans need to be cared for…men should have more birth control options…and prison rape is a horrific thing. Hell, there’s a homeless man in my neighborhood that I buy a coffee and breakfast for whenever I see him.

          I do what *I* can to help men. This isn’t a “oh but I’m not like that” argument. This is a “I can only be held responsible for my own actions” argument. Hence, I try to only be responsible for socially beneficial actions, because I’m an adult who owns my shit, whether good or bad, without being asked.

          For what it’s worth, I don’t think anyone should have the right to vote just for being alive and 18, and I don’t believe men should be required to sign up for selective service to redeem this right. We need to create some kind of test to determine if one is actually intelligent and moral enough to gain said right. If that meant only 15% of women and 40% of men get to vote…so be it.

        • >many women would prefer a sexually experienced male as a lifelong mate, if only because it would mean he is likely to be able to give her more satisfaction and not accidentally hurt her in the process of sharing sex for the first time.

          Uh, hello? Sexual inexperience solves itself when you and the fresh man in your life get naked regularly and you two figure out how to calibrate and coordinate your sexual responses. I don’t know why modern women consider this learning process with an inexperienced man such a hassle.

        • Not sure, AA.
          It’s the only reason I could come up with off the top of my head. Others might say it’s due to women only wanting to be with “alphas” that previous women have “validated” by having sex with him, but this reason is a tad confusing. How would anyone know if a guy’s had 0 partners or 20, unless he tells them or is known in her social circle?

        • …but they can see how popular a guy is with women…

          Hi, BP.
          See, this is the part that’s confusing, though it could be due in part to not understanding the environment such observations are made in.

          If a random guy I’ve never seen before walks into my store, I’ve no way of knowing if he’s popular with women. He could be a virgin, he could have had 2 partners, he could have had 9. There’s literally no way to tell. Even if a bunch of female customers (which would be surprising in itself, lol) all seemed to be acquainted with him…that still doesn’t explicitly determine anything. He might simply attend classes with all of them, or know their boyfriends, or happen to be their college Math tutor. Yes, it’s also possible he banged/dated all of them…but again, it’s impossible to know that.

          Is there something else, like subtle body language, looks/glances, phrases, etc that factor into this that aren’t mentioned online? Or is the hypothetical situation above wrong, and one would only be able to tell in a club/bar environment due to social cues of other female patrons present? In other words, what factors go towards the creation of said proxy?

    • I have noticed your rational commentary on Dalrock and other blogs. It’s refreshing to read someone who isn’t nuts like the rest of the commentors on those blogs. Personally, I don’t know how you can spend so much time dealing with them without ripping your hair out.

  12. Pingback: MGTOW Has No Commander | The Black Pill

  13. Pingback: The Manuresphere’s Demon Obsession | The Black Pill

  14. Pingback: Freud on The Fear of Loneliness | v5k2c2

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