On Saturday the 19th of January, I attended the thirteenth birthday party of my friend’s young son. While there I overheard two brothers, one from Ghana who is married to a Jamaican sister and who both exemplified Afurakan marriage and culture (I will explain this later) and another brother, who was single, but determined to be an example of Afurakan entrepreneurship outside of the white pathology system, speaking on land and the power that is in land ownership. Joining the conversation, I shared my views that having land is not necessarily a true testament of power, without the ability to defend it. And that ability would be best served in a larger group or community of like-minded people, who’s goals and aspiration allow for no wavering of purpose. Black Wall Street in 1921, exemplifies what happens when you are ill prepared to kill in defense of land, property and the symbols of those power. We are already dying in great numbers mainly from the lack of this preparation, anyways. Eventually the conversation, as similar conversation tends to, drifted into what constitutes a community, which lead to us sharing our views on what certain responsibilities of the members of a community should look like. I explained that a community is basically a group of families or people coming together in a familial way. I explained that every successful family must have the basic pillar or foundation off culture, in order to thrive as a family. A group of close knit families then can be seen as, and can grow as a community. No community can thrive with strangers among them, that disrupts the continuity of the community, or individuals who do not practice similar ideals as the majority do.
Every family is a culture. For Afurakan culture, there has to be one man and one woman, who then produce a child or children. This is the basis of authentic culture. Because from this union of one man, plus one woman, plus one or more children, we derive, language or communication. We develop music, which is another form of communicating with the children (child). Story telling, which is the sharing of family ourstory. From music comes dance, which Afurakan people have always use as a symbolic form of communication. Then there is the development of values, traditions and philosophy which sets the ground work for what makes the family and the community unique unto itself. When the family extends into a community, a village, a city, a nation, with similar values, tradition and philosophy, we have what is called cultural perspective and authentic culture. Your culture should never leave you if it perpetuates progressiveness and harmony between its members and between the society and the environment it is in. The environment, I speak of is two-fold. One is the social environment, which has always been a foundation of Afurakan traditional ethics and balance. The other is the natural environment, that older cultures swear by, as healing medicine for the sustenance of cultural survival and social health.
Now I write all of this as a lead in to how we in modern western and western influenced society, view culture. While I broke down what I believe is the basic element of culture, I want to also point out that further stripping down that explanation, to an even more elemental state, what we have as a basic explanation of what culture is; “whatever we are doing at the moment”. These two explanation of what culture is are not dissimilar. In fact culture is whatever you are doing at the moment, from a social stand point. What makes doing shit as culture, different from doing something uplifting as culture, is the purpose behind it and the values we place on its foundation, that sustains itself and uplifts all the players or members partaking in it. Thus we have what is deemed “high culture”; encompassing the cultural products of aesthetic value, which a society collectively esteem as exemplary art. It may also include intellectual works considered to be of supreme philosophical, historical, or literary value, as well as the education which cultivates such aesthetic and intellectual pursuits. In popular usage, the term high culture identifies the culture of an upper class or of a status class; and identifies a society’s common repository of broad-range knowledge and tradition that transcends the social-class system of the society. Sociologically, the term high culture is contrasted with the term low culture, the forms of popular culture characteristic of the less-educated social classes, such as the “barbarians, the Philistines, and hoi polloi”.
Yes! There is a low culture, where barbarism and anarchy overlaps and dominates aesthetic and intellectual pursuits of values, ethics and morality. For some reasons, western society has swung on a huge pendulum from barbarism of cave savagery and feudalism, to the renaissance of Greece and Europe after the dark age ( where just bathing was seen as revolutionary) back to barbarism of Socialism and capitalism, where the ideology of excess trumps ethics and civility. Western culture is in the dying throes of low cultural descent into anarchy and destruction, because it fails to heed its own narrative from Greece, Rome and early Europe. If the basic foundation of any culture is the family. And if one of the basic pillars of family resides in the role of the man and woman, father and mother. Patriarch and Matriarch. Then if even one of these two ends up as unsteady pillars, the foundation crumbles and the family crumbles even before it becomes a community. Socialism and Capitalism is at war with the family and thus with the community and the society at large. When this occurs, the culture lacks endurance and sustenance. Capitalism attacks the family through direct enslavement of workers in a feudal like system where the non land owner works for the land lord, who owes allegiance to the land owner and the representatives of the ruling elites, through the ‘leasing” of property on Government land. .
Re-read the last paragraphed again please!
The non land owners are the working class. They are the largest member of western society, who act as wage earners propping up the system, with their basic labour and their tax payback into the corrupt system. The landlords are not true owners of land. They are owners of property that sits on land owned by the elites. property which can also be taxed and even confiscated under something called eminent domain or failure to pay property tax, or any other excuse the government can and will come up with. Eminent domain is government speak for I can do whatever I want with your property, because I have force behind me. This is a formula from back in the monarchy, where land was owned through force and maintained through “laws” and backed up by force. Therefore the culture is based on whatever the ruling elite says it is. Socialism on the other hand purports to give the “working class” a fighting chance against the wealthy elites. Many who embrace the socialist ideology, are hoodwinked into believing that they can be “taken care of” by the government, without any major contribution or responsibilities. This is not how one builds a culture and community of high value or ethics. Capitalism destroys the family via the wage labour class, where climbing the ladder to success is a never-ending hamster wheel of frustration, hoping to do enough to get, build and sustain a family, under a system that devalues your sweat equity, devalues who you are as a contributor to the economy and devalues who you are as a person. But they continue to give the working class false hope under the ideology that if you work hard, you will eventually get it. Such idea is skillfully augmented through the western education system and through entertainment, which acts as a vehicle for subliminal indoctrination. Socialism does the same but strives to cut away individual personalities under the guise of individualism as an evil state. Such an ideology dismisses individuals who are high achievers, who are enthusiastic go getters and rewards the lazy and uninspired, unless they sip on the ideological kool aid and socialist mantra of being just a brick in the wall.
Socialism or what is called cultural Marxism is a highly efficient and effective form of brain washing that has poisoned the spirit of modern western society, without even needing to mention its socialist background. One of the foundation of cultural Marxism is the notion of equality (another brick in the wall). Equality is coached as fighting against oppression and is mainly focused on individuals or group of sheep whose behaviour is anti common sense and anti community. Numerous legislations and laws have been passed that enforce, support and prop up cultural Marxism’s destabilizing tactics. Today in Canada, you can be fined or threaten with jail if you refuse to call a male dressed as a female, a he. If your child comes up to you, after weeks of indoctrination in the public fool shitstym and tells you she wants a penis and you object as any sensible parent will. That child can be kidnapped by the government and placed in a factory farm of kidnapped children, to be parcelled out to perverts, molesters and rapist. Or even someone of a different culture, who will reinforce white pathology onto the child.
Note: a majority of cross cultural adoption or fostering, is given mainly to Europeans, who are documented as being abusive, molesters, perverts and even murderers. The ones who don’t out right destroy the kidnapped child’s body, will destroy his or her mind, by raising them in a culturally inappropriate environment and manner. That bitch Charlize Theron is a classic example of what she is allowed to do to two Afurakan boys, while she allowed to remain alive and arrogantly so.
Feminism was the foundation of cultural Marxism’s encroachment on family values and cultural sensibility. Even old fashion European cultural norms are affected by this. So think about the impact on a culture like Afuraka, that is as far away different from the European culture worldview, as it can be. Remember…man plus woman plus children is the basis of family. So the Cultural Marxists with the assistance of the ruling elite, who see an opportunity to destabilize society in order to maintain their power position, support the destruction of the family unit, by removing the power of masculinity and place it in the hands of harpies, homosexuals, feminists and mentally ill perverted social out casts. In order to strengthen this twilight zone base of confusion, masculinity has to be under constant attack. Whether its European masculinity or Afurakan masculinity. It’s a lot easier to destroy European masculinity because there is very little ethics or value system in that culture, that is diametrically and fervently opposed to homosexuality, pedophilia, rape, female abuse and destruction of nature, like there is in the narrative of Afurakan ourstory. One of the ways feminists and the manginas (weak emasculated males who act like or wish they had a vagina) who support them, is how they attack masculinity. Certain municipalities in Europe and North amurdikkka have made it illegal for a man to sit in an empty subway car with his knees far apart, under the excuse of man-spreading. And such a man can be attacked by strangers. This is out right male oppression. When idiotic feminists can proudly proclaim that a man’s fart can intimidate a female into not wanting to fart, this is the depth of insanity. When feminist can proudly state that men are not needed. Men should be castrated, and men are just women with penis, this world is going to hell in a chamber pot.
The weirdos and perverts, feminists and cultural Marxists like to place labels on things they hate, in order to later annihilate them. They use terms like heteronormative to describe men liking and wanting to be with women. But they say it in a disparaging way as to make it appear abnormal for a man to want to be only with a woman. Heteronormative was coined by a pillow bitter by the way. Then there is the newest term, toxic masculinity or Hegemonic masculinity, which refers to the dominant form of masculinity that exists within a particular culture and is further defined as a practice that legitimizes powerful men’s dominant position in society and justifies the subordination of the common male population and women, and other marginalized ways of being a man. In other words men who are naturally dominant or masculine, by their very nature and presence, “oppresses” weak and subordinate men and intimidates those who have a different definition of what masculinity is. According to these whack jobs, Toxic masculinity is one of the ways in which Patriarchy is harmful to men. It refers to the socially constructed attitudes that describe the masculine gender role as violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive, and so forth. Note that this is their definition of masculinity. As “violent, unemotional, sexually aggressive and so forth”. In 1987, a lesbian and a feminist, which is the same, by the name of Raewyn Connell coined the term hegemonic masculinity in a text, called Gender & Power.
Intelligent people overstand that Masculinity (also called manhood or manliness) is a set of attributes, behaviors, and roles associated with boys and men. Traits traditionally viewed as masculine in any balanced society include strength, courage, independence, the ability or intent to commit violence in defense of that society, and assertiveness. They purposely confuse masculinity with Hypermasculinity, which is a psychological term for the over exaggeration of male stereotypical behavior, such as an over emphasis on physical strength, aggression, and sexuality. Hypermasculine males are usually those raised in an imbalanced home or community and thus seek to show his masculinity in a distorted way, since he never had a proper perspective of what true masculinity is.
Raewyn Connell’s biography stated that she is an Australian sociologist. She gained prominence as an intellectual ( in other words she doesn’t do meaningful work) of the Australian New Left ( socialists). She is currently Professor Emerita at the University of Sydney and known for the concept of hegemonic masculinity from her book, Southern Theory. Raewyn comes from a family linking the Melbourne professional bourgeoisie with rural settlers. In other words she comes from the ruling elites. Her Irish, Scots and Welsh ancestors were part of the nineteenth-century British colonization of Aboriginal lands in south-eastern Australia. Raewyn’s partner, Pam Benton, was an activist in the women’s movement, a psychologist, a social researcher, a writer, and a public servant. Pam was one of the founders of the Older Women’s Network in Australia. They shared in setting up the first women’s health centre in South Australia, and helped develop Equal Opportunity policy machinery in New South Wales. A collection of her writing was published as Kept on Dancing. Pam died in 1997 after a long struggle with cancer. Pam and Raewyn have one “daughter”, Kylie Benton-Connell. Usually when feminists and socialists set up women’s health clinic in poor non white areas, it is to promote abortions or other forms of genocidal behaviours. Whenever I ask females to describe masculinity to me, they always come back with what they believe a man should do for them or how they should be treated by men. Now I am not saying these women are intentionally being obtuse. What I am saying is women can never describe what masculinity is. Especially Afurakan masculinity. And often in modern society when they dream about what a man can do for them, it is from a romanticized and feminine perspective. Not necessarily from a real world masculine one.
This feminist lesbian, claims that masculinities are not equivalent to men, but are based on men’s position in the pecking order of gender in society’s power matrix. They rant that masculinity is only a power based situation and not a state of manliness or manhood. |Therefore them attacking anything masculine, trying to turn men into women with penis, will make women feel safer. This is why I vigorously state that feminism is anti masculinity AND femininity. Because they attack females who embrace masculinity in men. Feminism attacks mothers who have masculine children, by lying that a woman makes a man. How is that possible? A woman can only raise her son to be disciplined and well-behaved, but only a man can teach a boy how to be a man. So their attacks on women who raise boys away from emasculation is attacked as readily as men who do the same.
Feminists, lesbians and those who support their agenda, like Raewyn Connell, spend an inordinate amount of time disparaging boys and men. They study masculinity endlessly and extract ONLY those men who are considered anti social or misbehaving and hold hem up as examples of masculinity. Hegemonic masculinity’ was first used in a 1982 report from this project, and her first essay on men and masculinities was published in the same year. Raewyn Connell claimed that, “I managed to get funding for a study of social theories of gender. The research assistant job was taken as a job-share by John Lee and Tim Carrigan, both knowledgeable about gay theory and politics. We were soon developing a synthesis of ideas about masculinity from psychoanalysis, feminist theory, gay theory, and structural sociology. She further stated that “the most ambitious project came in 2003-04, when I worked with United Nations agencies to survey research and prepare policy ideas on ‘the role of men and boys in achieving gender equality’. This led up to a policy document adopted at a meeting of the UN Commission on the Status of Women, in New York. It was fascinating to see the diplomats in their natural habitat, and to see other bureaucracies in action. It is hard to know how much influence such documents have. But there have been more efforts to create international projects concerned with changing masculinities and improving gender relations. I have given some help to a project in South-east Asia on engaging men in violence reduction. The interview below was done at a meeting of this project.
This is currently how the European influenced, white pathologically ideological and imperialist system, called the United nations insinuates itself into non white countries, like Kenya, where they currently are spending hundreds and thousand of amurdikkklan dollars to find out why Kenyan men are so masculine, and how they can further emasculate or effeminate them. Imagine if they go to Zululand?
What is toxic femininity?
Toxic femininity is a term used by Men’s rights advocacy activists to point out the hypocrisy of feminists and supporters of feminism, who believe sincerely in the lie that no woman is toxic in behaviour or intent. The feminists claim that these men’s right activists construct a “False equivalence between Toxic masculinity (a manifestation of Patriarchy that both harms men, and causes men to be violent and aggressive against women and occasionally other men) and patriarchal limitations on women’s gender”. In other words, only men can be toxic and only those who embrace masculinity, because masculinity is associated with violence and oppression of women. When you control the narrative, you get to make all the rules , define whatever you want with impunity and play the victim, when your position is challenge, using your very own mind-set against you. This is how white pathology works and within white pathology, this is how feminism works. But is there such a thing called toxic femininity though?