You are currently browsing the monthly archive for March 2016.
A few things stood out to me as I read this feature: “Carmen Carrera: Show Girl” (Condé Nast’s W Magazine) about a man with a deformed and sick psychology (euphemistically called transgender).
Let’s start with a couple of points that I’ve made before: there is no such thing as transgender, there is only a more heightened degree of drag. Given that gender is the psychological component of one’s masculine or feminine sex, there is no way a normal (non-intersex) person can transition to the other sex. An intersex person is also not transitioning to another sex, it’s trying to assign itself some definition which it biologically lacked.
Second, and very importantly, liberal ideology dictates that not only must the person claiming to be the opposite sex be encouraged to lie about who they are, society must force everyone else to lie too – or be socially punished. This includes laws enforcing the lie – as in claiming the psychologically diseased “transgenders” should have a right to use the bathroom of the sex they pretend to be – but aren’t. This is the totalitarian and conforming aspect of liberalism. Its lies are imposed and no one can question them without punishment.
Now on to this man pretending to be a woman – self-entitled “Carmen” -, I noticed how much he emphasized how he adored performing.
I went to my first drag show at a Latin club called Escuelita. The finale starred this stunningly beautiful goddess. She was obviously a transwoman, and she took my breath away. At the time I was studying photography in college, so I would take pictures of the shows, and I got to know all the girls. I also started doing makeup professionally, but surprisingly I discovered that what I really wanted to do was perform. I participated in an amateur show, and the audience loved me—I won! After that, I started touring clubs and acquired a fan base.
His entire existence is one performance, a show, a circus act, since he can never be authentic. His diseased mind cannot deal with being a man, which is what would be authentic for him, so he must constantly perform being a woman. Everything about his “womanhood” is false, it’s an illusion, it’s fake plastic surgery and unnatural chemical manipulations of his true body, biology, and self, which will always be masculine. They are now just hidden under layers of fake lies and drag.
Real women don’t put on a performance of being women, because that’s who they are. They don’t need plastic surgery to turn them into women. This man is just a grotesque “gender snake oil” salesman.
Due to his diseased mind, he even said: “Eventually, I didn’t want to act like a woman anymore—I wanted to become one.”
And because he lives in an equally diseased society, people around him told him that becoming a woman is possible, and that it is done by changing your appearance. Now there’s irony! Especially from a feminist point of view, if you get my drift – and the endless battles feminism fought against women being reduced to their looks or sexual object utility, or how feminists fought against women having to be pegged into a dainty, feminine stereotype. It’s plain to see this man continues to act, it’s just that he has now deformed his outside to better match his act.
I also glanced at another interview with this idiot and we can see how he is obsessed with people thinking of him as some kind of Hollywood celebrity. He craves this kind of attention, adulation, adoration, and sexual objectifying – and why not every kind of sleazy sexual interaction that his mind can conjure to fit the lifestyle? He obsesses with all the fake, superficial aspects of a Hollywood star like the glitter, the flashy-sexy clothes, the expensive saloon hair, the professional make-up. It’s all self adoration and this expensive, exaggerated, narcissistic diva look. It’s almost like he has a need to turn himself into his own giant Barbie doll. Notice also that there is no one around him to tell him that it would be a good idea if he went to investigate why he has so many psychological and emotional problems with masculinity.
I am willing to bet that if he had to live as a poor woman in Central America, cleaning and cooking for a family of 12 kids (obviously not his), in an ugly, faded dress, plus catering to an itinerant husband (or a string of irresponsible drop-by men), plus staying up late to sew and wash clothes of other richer folks to add a few more bucks to the family budget, the very last thing he’d want to be in the world is a “woman”. The. Very. Last.
Furthermore, you look at those men in the photos – the real ones – looking at this diseased “transgender” man as if he were a “sexy” woman and you can see that psychological disease is not contained just in the mind of this “Carmen” idiot.
It’s much more widespread. Seriously, people who think homosexuality is normal are just gross.
No matter how diseased their minds, they will stomp their foot down and claim to be “normal”. As a result, for them, anyone else who doesn’t kowtow to their diseased view of sex, gender, and sexuality is the one who is sick.
And there was another interesting clue about how dysfunctional his parents may have been. He says: “My father died of AIDS when I was 2”. AIDS? And the mother didn’t? His father was what – a bisexual or homosexual pig? And he grows up with only women. And he wants desperately to be a woman… hmm. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. That’s not even looking at what’s below the water level…
As my very last reflection, you know what also happened when I was thinking and writing this article? I thought: just how wonderful is it that I am a woman? I simply am one. I don’t have to do anything to be a woman or to look like a woman, I don’t have to act in any way – every fiber of myself and my soul is that of a woman. And that is a beautiful thing.
Nature stands every bit against the diseased ideology of liberals. As it should.
This is what you call HIGH: Aizhai Suspension Bridge
And I’d love to visit this place: “Wall Built-up Highway is dug out on cliffs.
There are a total of six wall built-up highways in our country, mainly distributed in the Taihang Mountain and southeast China’s Shanxi Province. It is considered one of the ten most precipitous roads in the world.”
Very cool – to visit on foot.
And these are amazingly cool: The Lycian Tombs – Lycia, Turkey. And Ai-Petri, in the Ukraine, straight out of Indiana Jones.
I’ve never been there, I’d love to go. Obviously Obama’s trip shone a renewed mega-watt spotlight on the tiny but resilient nation.
“Cuba is incredibly safe, so I wouldn’t say there are specific places to avoid. I think as long as you’re smart and play by the rules and use your head, you’re going to be in good shape, wherever you go. There are virtually no guns in Cuba — even the police officers have to check their weapons at the door when they leave to go home every night. Like any other highly trafficked area, you’re going to get petty theft.”
Compare this with Honduras, Mexico, Brazil, etc. All countries where the United States’ neocons teamed up with the most brutal, vile elites to make life hell for millions and millions of the little people. No safety, no universal health care, people going hungry all over the place, gangs, violence, etc. While the comfortable middle classes look the other way.
Castro won. He won. And what wonderful thing this is. What he achieved is simply extraordinary.
I am afraid for Cuba, now that the United States will attempt to colonize it and destroy it through its habitual Trojan horses of corruption, greed, toxic elite alliances, selfish individualism, perverted sexualities, drugs, etc., not to mention the old but never dismissed means of assassination and barely covert “regime change”.
Incidentally, I just read that the prison population in the US is higher, proportionally, than in Cuba.
And, of course, with the easing of the embargo and whatever else is thawing, the Rolling Stones, icons of some of the worse cultural trash in the West just had to go do a concert in Cuba. The Western MSM hailed this as progress. Progress means having some of England’s crappiest people, four lousy musicians, drug addicts, and sexuality pigs unload their garbage on the Cuban people. They just have to come destroy everything that is good in Cuba. When did the Rolling Stones do anything that is considered good from a social or political perspective?
And this is why one of China’s main newspapers, the Global Times, discreetly warned Cuba: beware, once again, of American intentions. We know what they are.
Cuba will probably face a lot of tests after it opens to the US: It is near the US, much smaller in size, and will have to deal with a great number of Cuban dissidents living in the US.
Although faced with many challenges, Havana has shown extraordinary courage and determination in opening up to the Western world and initiating domestic reform.
The posture Washington assumes to Havana in the future will be essential to Cuba and their bilateral relations. In the US, there are still political cliques trying to overturn the Cuban government. If the White House turns a blind eye to or even submits to them, Obama’s legacy will be abandoned by his successor, and Washington will resume its hawkish attitude toward Havana.
As for Cuba, it has to meet a new challenge to strike a balance between how to improve Cuban-US cooperation and how to prevent Washington’s possible attempt to foment a “color revolution.”
Given its geographic situation, it is a miracle that in the past 50 years, Cuba has survived US sanctions and military threats.
Havana’s wisdom can ensure the country’s political stability amid more interactions with the US.
Cuba should take the initiative and nail down a few norms with the US. Since Havana is no longer a thorn in Washington’s eye, the US should accept a friendly but independent Cuba. If both sides are engaged in conflicts some time, Havana should stick to its principles and defend its legitimate interests based on reason.
The US has wiggle room to compromise, as it used to do when dealing with Latin American leftists like Hugo Chavez.
Economic growth does not necessarily offer solutions to political conundrums. But state issues can only be resolved while the country is improving and embracing the world. There is not a second road. We wish Cuba a safe journey on this road.
Anyhow, the challenges never end.
But he won.
Updated March 28, 2016
I just left this comment here: Leninism and Lennonism aren’t that far apart. Some thoughts on the Rolling Stones in Cuba. – Mail Online – Peter Hitchens blog
Dear Mr. Hitchens,
While I sometimes greatly appreciate reading your views and social criticisms, here is one topic where we are at the very opposites.
As I commented in none other than the “Rolling Stones” magazine (http://www.rollingstone.com/music/live-reviews/rolling-stones-thrill-huge-crowd-at-historic-havana-show-20160326?page=2), of course, with the easing of the embargo and whatever else is thawing, the Rolling Stones, icons of some of the worse cultural trash in the West just had to go do a concert in Cuba.
The Western MSM hailed this as progress. Progress means having some of England’s crappiest people, four lousy musicians, drug addicts, and sexuality pigs unload their garbage on the Cuban people. They just have to come destroy everything that is good in Cuba. Let us take a moment to ask: When did the Rolling Stones do anything that is considered good from a social or political perspective?
Next, you ask, “Could it be that money and logistics played a part? ”
Indeed, when has money not played a part in every evil deed by wily, devoid of ethics Westerners proclaiming to be for “freedom and democracy” in every country they have set foot to ruin and destroy? Take a look at what the US and capitalism have done to Latin American – the profound malaise, the gangs, the drugs, the murders, the poverty, the sexual abuse, the disease epidemics – for millions, it’s hell on earth.
Regarding one of your questions, I came across this tid bit in the media: En su web, la banda reveló: “Este evento está siendo posible gracias a la beneficencia de la Fundación Bon Intenshon…”. Detrás de esa fundación está el empresario Gregory Elias, promotor de un festival de jazz en Curazao y presidente de United Trust, una importante asesoría del paraíso fiscal caribeño.
Apparently it wasn’t the Stones who paid for their unfortunate visit to Cuba.
Could it be, lordie, lordie, that United Trust is a tax evasion/corruption consultancy? Maybe providing money laundering services as well? The Stones are so trashy they can’t even come to Cuba on a clean ticket… I’m surprised they weren’t sponsored by the Hillary Mafia Foundation…
And United Trust – why does that sound familiar? Ah, yes! United Fruit…
The pests are back!
And next time you want to mention torture, why don’t you mention how the CIA monstrously tortured – yes, go into the details – and murdered thousands of innocent Latin Americans in ways that make Castro look like an altar boy?
Lastly, Mr. Hitchens, I’m sure you will allow this to go through moderation, you who love to go off criticizing those awful repressive regimes where no criticism is allowed by those who control public discussion – lest you be cut from the same cloth?
ADDED on March 29, 2016.
As of today, my comment above has remained censored on Peter Hitchens’ blog/Mail on Sunday site.
See, “freedom and democracy” is a system where it’s proponents never allow anyone to debate them in public. Then they point fingers are Putin, Castro, and whoever for repressing criticism…
I just came up with this version of Hilbert’s Grand Hotel – which I thought was cute.
This is what I thought when watching the video:
To make room for the new guest, the manager asks guest #1 (the one in room #1) to move to room 2. So how many guests are there in room 2 now? 2 guests. Then he asks guest #2 to move to room 3. How many guests in room 3 now? Two. Etc., etc. Isn’t it plain to see what this means? You are always going to have a problem with a room having two guests. 🙂
And it’s clear they are all going to complain at the end and demand their original rooms back because you know how hotel guests are!! 😀
So now on to this question: the “new guest” who caused the humongous headache for the manager decides, after being a nuisance to the entire infinity of guests, that he’d rather stay across the street because it’s less crowded. He moves out.
So the manager – exhausted and thinking he’s had it with working in the hospitality industry – thinks: OK, I can make everyone happy again. So he goes to room #2 and tells guest #1 to go back to room #1, and then to room #3 and tells guest #2 to go back to room #2, etc. What happens? He will be condemned to spend the rest of his life telling the guests to move. And no matter how many guests he makes happy because they move back to their original room, there will be a much greater infinite number of unhappy guests in the wrong room! And, if you think about the problem with two guests in one room somewhere in infinity, he will never be able to solve that problem.
See what just one idiotic customer can do to you? 😛 😀
What a distraught and noxious world we live in, when Americans kill and kill other people and basically take no notice of the fact in their daily lives. More distressingly, Americans are never held accountable for any of the deaths or the suffering they inflict on others.
How healthy it is then to see an article like this one:
by Chas Freeman
Sometime between 460 and 450 B.C.E., Herodotus wrote The Persian Wars, his account of the Greeks’ two wars with the Persians, which spanned thirteen years. Even in a time when trends and events unfolded more slowly than they seem to now, that was a famously lengthy conflict. But the ancient Greeks and Persians have nothing on us Americans in that regard.
The United States has now been engaged in a cold war with Iran – Persia – for thirty-seven years. It has conducted various levels of hot war in Iraq for twenty-six years. It has been in combat in Afghanistan for fifteen years. Americans have bombed Somalia for fifteen, Libya for five, and Syria for one and a half years. One war has led to another. None has yielded any positive result and none shows any sign of doing so.
The same might be said for the wars of others we Americans subsidize and supply. Israel’s wars to subdue the Palestinians and deter other Arabs from challenging its ongoing dispossession of them are now sixty-eight-years-old – and counting. U.S. drones have been killing Yemenis for fourteen years, Pakistanis for twelve, and Somalis for nine. Saudi Arabia’s bloody effort to reinstall an ousted government in Yemen is almost a year old. In none of these wars is an end in sight.
It’s hard to put a price tag on these inconclusive misadventures. The unsuccessful Afghan and Iraq pacification campaigns alone have cost the United States an estimated $6 trillion in outlays and obligations. Over 7,000 Americans have died in combat since these wars kicked off in 2001. At least another 50,000 have been maimed. A million have filed claims for war-related disabilities. And well over two million Afghans, Arabs, Persians, and Somalis have perished. This is a great deal of sacrifice and suffering for no apparent gain in the region and continuously escalating risks to our homeland. Perhaps a bit of reflection is in order, followed by a change of course.
It is said in this regard that before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. (That way, when you criticize them, you’re a mile away, and you have their shoes.) In that spirit, let me offer a few thoughts as well as a question or two about America’s Persian and Arabian wars.
What it is that we Americans are trying to accomplish? Is there no better way than warfare to protect and advance our interests? How can we finally end the many wars we have begun? On what terms should they be ended and with whom? At what point is enough enough?
Unraveling the tangle of wars in which the United States is now engaged with or against Arabs, Berbers, Hazaras, Israelis, Kanuris, Kurds, Palestinians, Persians, Pashtuns, Somalis, Syrians, Tajiks, Tuaregs, Turkmen, Turks, and Uzbeks – as well as Alawites, Christians, Druze, Jews, secular Muslims, Salafis, Shiites, Sunnis, and Yazidis – will not be easy. In large measure through our involvement, their conflicts have become interwoven. Ending one or another of them might alter the dynamics of the region but would not by itself produce peace.
The government issued a new set of regulations in December, though they weren’t widely circulated until recently.
The regulations state that “No television drama shall show abnormal sexual relationships and behaviors, such as incest, same-sex relationships, sexual perversion, sexual assault, sexual abuse, sexual violence, and so on.”
The new rules appeared a week after a controversial show called Addicted Heroin, about gay teenagers, was pulled from video streaming sites in China. The show can now only be viewed on YouTube, which is blocked in China. Several other shows featuring gay characters have also been pulled in recent months.
Yay! My kind of country. See, China has leaders that actually care about having a healthy people and a healthy society.
And given that they are the new rulers of the world, all the better.
Just the tip of the iceberg of the Clintons’ bribe and war crimes machine: Hillary Clinton’s long relationship with Saudi Arabia.
On Christmas Eve in 2011, Hillary Clinton and her closest aides celebrated a $29.4 billion sale of over 80 F-15 fighter jets, manufactured by US-based Boeing Corporation, to Saudi Arabia. In a chain of enthusiastic emails, an aide exclaimed that it was “not a bad Christmas present.”
These are the very fighter jets the Saudis have been using to intervene in the internal affairs of Yemen since March 2015. A year later, at least 2,800 Yemeni civilians have been killed, mostly by airstrikes – and there is no end in sight. The indiscriminate Saudi strikes have killed journalists and ambulance drivers. They have hit the Chamber of Commerce, facilities supported by Médecins Sans Frontières (also known as Doctors Without Borders), a wedding hall, and a center for the blind. The attacks have also targeted ancient heritage sites in Yemen. International human rights organizations are saying that the Saudi-led strikes on Yemen may amount to war crimes.
During her tenure as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton made weapons transfers to the Saudi government a “top priority,” according to a new report published in The Intercept. While Clinton’s State Department was deeply invested in getting weapons to Saudi Arabia, the Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the weapons manufacturer Boeing. Christmas presents were being gifted all around.
Despite the brutal attacks on Yemen and egregious domestic human rights violations, Saudi Arabia remains the number one US ally in the Arab world.
So, the question about all these Hillary supporters is: Do they know this about her or don’t they read such news? And if they are unaware of how vile and corrupt she and Bill and their Foundation are, how many would still vote for her if they were well-informed?
Her main demographics are (low-info) blacks, women (who only care about discrimination against women), and corrupt affluent liberals. I think these people would still vote for Hillary if they knew about the extent and the gravity of how criminal she is. This underscores one of the main flaws with the American political system: most candidates who can manage to rise a bit in the only two corrupt political parties available are already such garbage of people – the good ones are not allowed to get anywhere.
Furthermore, look at the kind of world we have: one big mafia (the United States) sells horrendously lethal arms to another mafia (Saudi Arabia) that the latter uses to kill mostly destitute, innocent people who can’t escape the organized murder.
As it’s plain to see, the murder is clearly instrumentalized by the United States. However, the politicians enabling the deal and pocketing the money, and the corporation furnishing the means to murder innocent people remain in the eyes of most in American society as “upstanding”.
The people working in these corporations care about the mass murder committed with their arms as much as the corporations furnishing materials to the Nazis cared about what the latter did with it. These corporations are like a “normalcy wrapper” that envelops this enormous industry of mass murder.
It’s hard to exaggerate the enormity and high-tech nature of Saudi weapons purchases; the sales in the decade of 2010 constitute the most enormous military sales in history. According to a White House press release in 2014, “The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the largest US Foreign Military Sales customer, with active and open cases valued at approximately $97 billion, as Saudi forces build capabilities across the full spectrum of regional challenges.”
What will the Saudis do with all the weapons they buy? Oppress, torture, and kill their own people, especially those who challenge their corrupt and despotic ruling, and murder their neighbors – most notably the poorest of the poor.
Does anyone working at Boeing Corporation care?
But, but, but… I just had to buy my wide-screen TV, my shiny car, my condo at the beach… How could I think about which murders were being done to pay my salary?
Hitler died but his way of organizing society remains dominant.
And… isn’t this Yemeni population being terrorized by the Saudis? Isn’t it being murdered by an organization that is terrorizing them for political gain? In other words, in today’s world, we have little terrorist groups like the Islamic State, and big ones, like the US and Saudi Arabia.
I went to see Spotlight.(Spoilers ahead).
I liked the pace and the rhythm and the way they treated the subject without being lurid. One of the strongest aspects of the film is that it succeeds in putting a simultaneous spotlight on the pain of the victims and on the collective negligence and cover-up by the Church, the police, the lawyers, society – and, most importantly, the press.
Part of the conscience crisis that members of the Spotlight team face is the fact that the team members begin to see and acknowledge they never investigated, printed, or followed up on several denunciations, clips, stories, and reports during a long time, including from members of their very own “star” investigative team that finally broke the story – this was very well done. They had also been part of the cover-up, even if their cover-up had been due to their disinterest and neglect, and due to not being as aware – unlike the Church, who had been outright criminal. As one critic put it, the film doesn’t lionize and idealize its heroes, showing how the media was often in cahoots with the monstrous Catholic Church.
But… since the movie was written by liberals – who else? – it was replete with propaganda about homosexuality. The most god-awful lie is that these priests just abused male victims “because that’s who was available”. These people are doing a film about the most infamous male sexual abuse scandal in modern times and they want to insist that a 15-year-old male adolescent was sexually abused by a homosexual priest because the priest couldn’t get his hands on a young female adolescent?
What a disgrace. They also never mentioned how many homosexuals there were and are far up in the Catholic Church who aided and abetted the pedophilia and ephebophilia crimes because they were threatened with being outed by the homosexual priests and bishops doing abuse. In the movie, it was all explained away as “these priests are emotionally stunted, that’s why they are pedophiles”. No mention of how many of them are perverted homosexuals and that’s why they abuse.
And Father Shanley, described as “a hippie”, not as the homosexual activist that he was! The movie writers denounce one scandal while continuing to engage in the cover-up of another – the homosexual abuse of minors!! Just as the Catholic Church tries to cover up any truth about its priests, liberals try to cover up any truth about how abusive its homosexuals are.
As we can see, any information that presents the truth about how perverted homosexuals involved in the scandal are and were was purposely scrapped.
On the other hand, it’s very good that the movie won the main Oscar, since this gives it visibility, and that means it gives worldwide visibility to the subject. The importance of this film is that it centers its attention on the societal cover-up, while also touching upon the gravity of the damage done to the victims.
And the ending with the bit about the fact that Cardinal Law is now living in high style in the Vatican was well done. Like Nazis who escaped to Argentina after the war and lived a comfortable life until their deaths.
I had written here (“My entire world almost disintegrated during an exchange about infinity and math”):
Does 0.999… = 1 ?
No, it does not. It can never equal 1 because that contradicts the “…” at the end there – that is, the “…” involves infinity, and infinity as we have seen, is something that is often beyond the scope of math. The infinity here means there will always be a 9 at the end, and therefore, that is not sufficient to equal 1. That is the point!
So… this provides us with the beginning of an answer to our dot problem (and how many lines could you trace on a sphere).
A dot exists, but we can never “catch hold of it” because it’s too small, it is truly infinitely small. However it will never be nothing, that is the beauty of it. It is obviously the inverse of the above 0.999… issue. A dot is what exists just before we get to nothing – and we, as humans, can never “catch” that. It is the magic moment when you go from nothing to something, the very beginning, like the conception of light and life, if you will, in mathematics.
And then I had another thought, based on the above:
If we take my definition of a point as the infinitely small dot, what do we have? Take a blank white piece of paper. Now imagine a black thin line on this paper. Now, if you wanted to pinpoint a point in the line, you have a problem. Because as a human, the dot, or your point, just keeps getting smaller and smaller, in such a way that you could almost see gaps appear between the points, because they are so small. They are, as I postulated above, infinitely small.
But, and here is the big “but”, if we had gaps between the points, it wouldn’t be a line, but several line segments, or simply several lines, interrupted by these gaps.
The fact that a line exists therefore means there are no gaps between its points, even though the points composing it are infinitely small. This means the line cannot contain more dots, even though they are the smallest that can be. Now here comes the big conclusion.
Consequently… a line of no matter what length is the embodiment of infinity.
Recall what this math person had posited here https://www.mathsisfun.com/numbers/infinity.html :
Infinity is the idea of something that has no end.
In our world we don’t have anything like it. So we imagine traveling on and on, trying hard to get there, but that is not actually infinity.
So don’t think like that (it just hurts your brain!). Just think “endless”, or “boundless”.
Infinity does not grow
Infinity is not “getting larger”, it is already fully formed.
Sometimes people (including me) say it “goes on and on” which sounds like it is growing somehow. But infinity does not do anything, it just is.
If you have no gaps between infinitely small points in a line, you have infinity.
A line, infinity.
I just thought of something – and it complicates what I just wrote above. What if you just take two infinitely small points, one adjacent to another, which still qualifies as a line?
That doesn’t sound very infinite. Oops.
Anyways, a longer line still does.
And you could say about the two adjacent infinitely small points: here was one point and she was lonely. And next to her was another point, a he-point. Then they got together and said: we’re no longer just infinitely small points, now we’re a line, a little part of infinity.