Thursday, August 28, 2008

On Race


First let me apologize in advance for the insults that will be heaped upon you all. The politically correct method we have been using is not solving the race problem. It is not my intention to denigrate anyone, but no effort will be made to spare anyone’s feelings, including white people.

I will depart from my usual method and write in the first person because it is a highly subjective story of a white man who has journeyed from being optimistic about race relations to an overt racist. This is because I have come to the inescapable conclusion that everyone is a racist and the only ones that seem to be made to feel guilty about this are white people. Well, no more.

Finally, I have concluded that there is no solution for the race problem at this time. We need a separation, a divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences. I shall attempt prove this.

The Basic Dilemma

How do we treat people, as individuals or groups? I believe there is a basic difference between the thinking of white people and the other races on this issue. This will be discussed in detail in the next section.

Since this paper is on race the focus is, by definition, on groups. I will make sweeping generalizations about the various races. You will think up individual exceptions to them. This does not negate them. You need to put forth more correct generalizations.

I maintain that the culture a people create absolutely and totally reflects the content of the character of the people who create it. The differences between the races are far more than skin deep, and those differences are reflected in the cultures they create. I reject all of the politically correct reasons for these differences. It is not a matter of geographical luck, having the right plants, animals or other resources. The ridiculous theories of people like Jared Diamond don’t adequately explain how the cultures became different, and they absolutely don’t explain why so many cultures have remained more or less the same after hundreds of years of globalization.

So what we’re really talking about here is a clash of cultures, but since my theories about culture are race based, I am a racist. I make judgments about people in light of their culture.

White Culture

White men, more than any race, including white women, are highly oriented toward individualism. This is why individual rights and freedoms, and democracies are more prevalent and successful in white cultures. But what makes white cultures work is individual responsibility. Every white man is expected to provide for himself and his family and can expect little help from any other white men. Those who cannot do this have no status in the white community. Oh sure, we work together to build roads and cities and the proverbial barn raisings that are clearly too big for one man to handle. But each white man is expected to create his own wealth.

Almost all other cultures are tribal in nature. By tribal I mean that they are basically extended families, and their economies are based on sharing. All members born into the tribe can expect his or her rightful place in the tribe and fair share of the tribal wealth. In a tribal culture a man gains status by sharing his wealth. The problem is, tribal cultures don’t create wealth. When you are expected to share your wealth you soon lose all incentive to create it.

In a white culture a man gains status by amassing wealth. Because he is expected to create his own wealth he gets to keep it. This provides incentive to create more wealth. This is the reason white cultures are so fabulously wealthy. Yes, Bill Gates got some flak for not doing more for charity but no one expects him to give away his billions. The wealthy people in white culture hold high status.

I submit as proof of this that the poorest white cultures in the world are ex-communist cultures that had a kind of tribalism forced on them by the Bolsheviks. It wasn’t Ronald Regan’s military spending that collapsed the Soviet Union. It collapsed because it was sliding into a third world economy. The new world order was economic power, not military power, and they were losing badly.

The Communists made a fatal error in assuming that if you shared the wealth equitably, everyone would be willing to do their fair share of the work. Not so. Most people, even white people, are lazy useless morons who won’t make an effort if they don’t have to. If they can get their share of the wealth without doing their share of the work, that’s exactly what they’ll do. To be fair, there is another rational reason for this. In any endeavor it is wise to maximize your earnings to effort ratio. It makes no sense to put more of an effort into it than necessary. Since communists could do nothing to increase their earnings, the only thing they could do is decrease their effort. For this reason the Soviet Union stopped creating wealth and some of its satellites are having a hard time restarting.

There is an interesting anecdote about Sitting Bull. He made a bit of money touring with Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show and signing autographs. He gave most of it away to poor white folks because that is what a man of his stature did in his culture. He couldn’t understand how so many poor white people lived in such a rich country. He was quoted as saying “white people know how to make everything; they just don’t know how to distribute it.” He didn’t understand that white people were expected to create their own wealth.

White cultures are grass roots. They do not emanate top down from governments. All the federal government is in this country is one huge sucking parasite on American businesses and workers. Economies begin in the towns and cities where individuals and groups of individuals create the businesses, jobs and tax base. Observe the way this country was settled by white people. White men would venture into the wilderness seeking their fortune. When a certain level of development was reached white women would follow. It wasn’t until a significant economy was developed that the territory was considered for statehood. These economies were developed without the aid of a state or federal government.

Native-Americans paid a heavy price for this every-man-for-himself culture. Most of the conflicts were caused by Native-Americans getting between a desperately poor white man and his fortune, especially during the California gold rush. But to be fair, white men were just as ruthless to each other in the competition for wealth.

A lot more can be said about the negative side of developing this country to what is today. And white people were not the only ones involved. Blacks and Asians were in the mix.

But I will show that it is white people who made this country the richest most desirable place to live on the planet. A place so desirable that it seems everyone in the world wants a piece of the “American Dream”, in fact they think they have a right to it. This is setting us up for the biggest culture clash this country has seen to date.

The most important purpose of this discussion is to answer three of the most burning questions of our time.

1. Should white people feel guilty about their wealth?
2. Must white people share their wealth?
3. Do white people have the responsibility to provide economic parity to the other races?

As harsh as it sounds the answer to all three is NO!!!

It has been demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that communism, or any other form of wealth sharing, is a formula for poverty for all. Mao starved 30 million Chinese to death in the 1960s.

No human being has the right live at the expense of another. This is the definition of a parasite:
2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.

When one race chronically lives and grows its population at the expense of another race that race should be labeled a parasitic race.

Except for rare unforeseen emergency aid, everyone must be held responsible providing for themselves. It’s the only thing that works.

The Civil Rights Movement

The civil rights movement was the beginning of the end of race relations for me, but not for the reasons you might think. I was attending Oakland High in Oakland CA from ’60 to ’63. I did not perceive a race problem then. The racial mix was very close to the country today, majority white, a large black population and well represented with Asians and Latinos.
We liked the same music, went to the same dances and had a good time together. I played on the football team so many of my good friends were black. One of my best friends was black. I was very optimistic about the future, even contemplating us all melding into brown people.

I supported the civil rights movement because I knew there were still pockets of institutionalized racism in the country. I believed we were finally going to make the words of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution ring true for all Americans.

Almost immediately after civil rights were firmly established in this country, I begin to observe black people segregate themselves. The most important thing in the black community began to be perceived of as appropriately black. To this end black people have created their own music, their own dress, even their own language, in short, their own culture. This culture is not only intended to be different from the white culture, it is anti-white. To my mind it has become the most racist culture in this country. The worst insult one member of this culture can pay another is to accuse them of acting white. Within this culture constant charges and counter charges as to whether your skin is too light or too dark. Skin color is everything to this culture.

The worst of all is the concept of affirmative action which sprang from the civil rights movement. This is nothing more than reverse discrimination. Black people threw the concept of a color blind society right out window. They want us to notice their skin color and they demand privileged treatment because of it. This was the first nail in the coffin of race relations for me.

Being Appropriately Black In America

This brings us back to the basic dilemma. Do we treat people as individuals or as a group? Black people’s concept of affirmative action clearly shows that they want to be treated as a group. But this is not the only way.

It is now the 21st century and for the first time in the history of this country a man of color, Barak Obama, has a shot at the presidency. The first thing we heard from the black community is “Is he appropriately black?”

What does it mean to be appropriately black in America? It means promoting the official black agenda. They call it:

“Keeping the pressure up on the white man”:

· Keep the guilt trips coming.
· Never let the slavery wound heal, keep it open and bleeding.
· Never forgive or forget, or let white people forget, a single insult paid to black people.
· Never acknowledge a single thing white people do to for black people.
· Hold black people responsible for nothing.
· Hold white people responsible for everything.
· Blame it all on the “White Devil”.

Any black person who doesn’t do this is labeled a traitor to their race.

To prove this point: Following the civil rights movement the irresponsible reproduction and irresponsible parenting of black people has steadily increased to epidemic proportions.

From CNN's 'Black in America'
Seventy percent of Black children today are born to unwed mothers, while only 25 percent of Black children were born to unwed mothers in the 1960s.

These mothers are apparently getting no help from their children’s fathers. This has reached such an abysmal state that the few responsible black people in the country have felt compelled to speak up about it. For daring to hold black men responsible for providing for their children, Bill Cosby has been vilified as a traitor to his race, and Jesse Jackson said Barak Obama should “have his nuts cut off”.

Whenever white people try to take black people to task for their own failures in this country, out comes the slavery card, out comes the past injustice card or any other guilt trip black people can use to justify why they can’t be held responsible for anything in this country.

White people have stupidly fallen for this con game, especially the liberal white media. This is because most white people genuinely feel guilty about the behavior of a minority of white racists. Black people refuse to acknowledge that the civil rights movement was backed by the majority of white Americans, including the President, the Congress and the Supreme Court who were vastly majority white. And it was white national guardsmen shoving guns in George Wallace’s face that really integrated The University of Alabama. Black people prefer to believe that it was Martin Luther King Jr. and Co. who stood alone and defeated the entire evil white empire.

A lifetime of listening to this; a lifetime of listening to black people try to blame it all on white people; a lifetime of listening to black people hold white people responsible for everything, hold themselves responsible for nothing; and a lifetime of listening to black people try to paint me as a white man to be their own personal white devil has left me with no sympathy for black people, no respect for black people and no desire to live with black people.

Black verses White

Ever since the civil rights movement black people have systematically demonstrated their total incompatibility with white culture. As stated above, white culture requires individual responsibility, not just in creating your own wealth but in all other aspects. Black people’s concept of affirmative action has given them such a sense of entitlement that they are holding white people responsible for providing them economic parity to white people. They actually believe that the economic inequity between our races is proof of white racism and white oppression. This is a totally false premise.

Black people don’t have their fair share of the pie almost entirely because they don’t create their fair share of the pie. All my life I have listened to black people demand that they be given their fair share and precious little about their responsibility to create their fair share. This is the kind of tribal mentality described previously.

Black people hold white people responsible for giving them jobs, but it’s not their responsibility to stay in school and get an education or otherwise develop a marketable skill. The black dropout rate has been upwards of 50% all my life, and it’s not clear how much of an effort the ones who remain in school make.

Oprah has determined that they are not worth her time and money. She would rather educate Africans.

“... I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn't there. ...”

Just who the hell is she holding responsible for educating black children, white people? What can white people do when these children rationalize their behavior by claiming that educating themselves is “acting white” and they are not going to do it?

And yet white people are being held responsible for providing economic parity to black people; and if we don’t give them jobs then we must give them welfare, subsidized housing, food stamps, health care, and so much more that I have come to believe that black people consume far more in social welfare programs than the pay in taxes. There needs to be an accounting and I would like to be proven wrong.

If you think I am exaggerating consider this source:

Gwen Richardson:
Why African-Americans Can't Get Ahead: And How We Can Solve It with Group Economics

“Unemployment rates for African-Americans have historically been twice as high as for white Americans… and the plight of young black males is even worse, especially in the country’s inner cities… An even more telling statistic shows that less than 1 per cent of jobs held by African-Americans are created by African-Americans. In other words, we are literally dependent upon other groups for our very livelihoods.”

Gwen Richardson is a black author and apparently one of the few black people willing to take responsibility for black failures. I haven’t read her book so I can’t comment further. However, I believe the majority of black Americans, especially the black establishment, would justify the fact that black people create jobs for only one percent of their people because of slavery, past injustice, racism, oppression etc. You know the song and dance: Blame it all on the white devil; black people can’t be held responsible for anything in this country. You’ve had to listen to it for 50 years.

Black Americans have a myopic view of race relations, defining themselves almost entirely in relation to white Americans. It is time to step back and look at the big picture. The bottom line is this; there are two highly correlated facts throughout the world:

All white cultures are at the top of the world socio-economic ladder and the most desirable places to live because they absolutely and totally reflect the content of the character of white people.

All black cultures are at the bottom of the world socio-economic ladder and the most undesirable places to live because they absolutely and totally reflect the content of the character of black people.


Black people turn every place they exist into poverty stricken hell-holes. This includes every sub-Saharan country in Africa, Haiti (as well as all other black communities in the Caribbean and Latin America) and the inner cities of the USA.

I will not tolerate any nonsense that this is due to white racism and white oppression because there is yet one more highly correlated fact throughout the world. Black people who live with white people enjoy a much higher quality of life than those who don’t. This is true for Europe, the US and even South Africa during the height of apartheid. This is because they are incredibly overly subsidized by white people. That is why the migration from black to white cultures is increasing. Even Africa is overly subsidized by white people.

As stated previously, every culture in the world absolutely and totally reflects the content of the character of the people who create it. I reject all politically correct arguments as to why black people are doing so poorly in the world. But black people have added two more verses to their “Blame it all on the white devil” song and dance. All of the problems in Africa are because white colonialism has trashed black cultures so badly they’ve never been able to recover. Haitians have been so traumatized by slavery they’ve never been able to recover. If there is a single reason why black people are not doing better in the world than they’re doing, other than an innate inability to do for themselves, it is their systematic refusal to hold themselves responsible for anything. The one thing they have become expert at is to guilt trip white people to provide them a quality of life they cannot provide themselves anywhere in the world.

It should be clear by now that black Americans enjoy a much higher quality of life than they have earned. But they still see themselves as victims because they are not provided with economic parity to white people and they hate us for it. This is irrational because white people don’t do this for each other as explained above. Statistically there are twice as many poor white people than black people, but these poor whites don’t seem to get the same attention.

I will now make the case that black people are the real victimizers in this country. I will use negative racial stereotypes which if not entirely accurate reflect the way black people are perceived in this country.

The first victims of black people are their own children. Blacks have a higher birthrate than whites, 70% of their children are born to unwed mothers and get little help from their fathers. There is a very high infant mortality rate. They know these children are going to grow up in the mean streets of the black communities. They don’t care because I believe too many of them try to use their children to retire on the welfare system. If they want a raise they drop another one. These children are raised to believe they are victims of white oppressors.

There is a film of a black women standing up in a crowded auditorium and shouting at the top of her voice: “We are going to breed ourselves into the majority and white people are going to pay for it.” If anyone can find a copy of it please send it to me. These people know what they are doing. It is you politically correct white morons who are clueless. Let us count all the ways white people are paying for it.

Welfare: We have had to become a welfare state to subsidize the incredible amount of irresponsible reproduction and irresponsible parenting of black people. This is a perversion of the white culture outlined above. For blacks everything emanates top down from government. The costs include welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing etc.

Health Care: In addition to the regular care “poor” people require from Medicare, Medicaid, Emergency rooms etc. add these costs: The high infant mortality rate can cost $500,000 per premature birth. Among these welfare queens there is an obesity epidemic; this is translating into a diabetes epidemic. Blacks account for half of HIV/AIDS cases, and two-thirds of American women recently diagnosed are Black. The emergency rooms costs as black children shoot each other down like dogs in the street.

Education: Every so often someone comes up with yet one more grand plan or costly government program such as magnet schools or “no child left behind” to convince black children to educate themselves. They all fail. According to a 2007 article in
The Washington Post, the Washington D.C. public school district spends $12,979 per student per year. This is the third highest level of funding per student out of the 100 biggest school districts in the U.S. Despite this high level of funding, the school district provides outcomes that are lower than the national average in reading and math. Black children are victimizing the schools, and all of us are stigmatized by the poor performance of American students.

Criminal Justice System: Many of the black dropouts do so because they know their future is in criminal enterprise. The cost to deal with black’s overrepresentation in the courts and prisons is humungous. Although I agree that the drug problem should not be dumped on the Criminal Justice System, I don’t know how much difference this would make.

If you think I am being harsh or unfair, I go to these lengths because I believe that many, if not most, black people actually see these as proof that they are victimized. In fact, they are victimizers. They say this is due to poverty. But they are poor because they have shown little ability to create their own wealth anywhere in the world. They don’t create jobs for themselves or their children and at least half of their children refuse to educate themselves. They cannot justify their irresponsible behavior because of their irresponsible behavior and hold white people responsible for it all. There can be no justification for this irresponsible behavior, ever.

What is the solution for this? I don’t think there is one in this country. Affirmative action, the effort to be appropriately black, the refusal to act white has proven to me that we cannot live in harmony. Being appropriately black means being poor everywhere in the world, be it Africa, Haiti or any black community in the Americas. Acting white means being rich everywhere in the world, be it Europe, North America, Australia, New Zealand or even South Africa. I submit that if black people are tired of being poor they should start acting white.

However, their instincts are correct. They aren’t going to make it in the world by being imitation white people. They don’t think or behave like white people. But what they’ve come up with isn’t working as far as I’m concerned. They are going to have figure it out for themselves, white people can’t do it for them.

The black race must be considered to be a parasitic race as defined above. They are totally dependent upon white people to provide them jobs, welfare, housing, health care, etc. And what have white people received in return for this hospitality? Resentment, hatred and endless complaints about how we are not doing enough to end poverty in America. The people who are not doing enough to end poverty are black people themselves. They are not educating themselves or creating jobs. They are not creating their fair share of the pie.

We need a separation, a divorce on the grounds of irreconcilable differences. All my life I have heard black people complain about how awful it has been for them; how they were dragged out of Africa against their will; enslaved an oppressed by the white devil and how we owe them reparations for this injustice. I agree, we owe them repatriation to Africa. It’s time to take them home, to where we so rudely took them from in the first place.

Martin Luther King Jr. wasn’t the only black man with a dream. There was a black man with an even better dream. Marcus Garvey had a return to Africa dream. He even formed a steamship company called the Black Star Line to make it happen. I think we should all work together to make his dream come true.

One possible solution is that black people in this country trade places with white people in Africa. Africa can rid itself of the last vestiges of colonialism and America can shed itself of the legacy of slavery. It has been reported that the black racists in South Africa are preparing to do to white people what Robert Mugabe has done to whites in Zimbabwe, but are being inhibited out of respect for Nelson Mandela. We can find a way to sort this “Africa is for Africans” out peacefully.

You do not have to remind me that there are plenty of black achievers in this country. My response is that Africa is in desperate need of these people. Who has the greater responsibility? White people to continue to provide them a quality of life they have in this country, or these achievers to help their less fortunate relatives in Africa. All my life white people have been guilt tripped to help poor black people. What have black achievers done for poor black people anywhere in the world?


There is a population explosion going on in the world today. Experts project that by the time the population levels off, the world population will double or even triple to 10 to 15 billion people. The numbers are frightening enough. It is questionable whether there are enough resources, even water, to sustain this population, but definitely not enough for everyone to use them at the rate the United States is using them.

But it is much worse than sheer numbers. It is the people least capable of providing for their children that are having most of the children; and there is no better example than what we call the Hispanic race. For the purposes of this discussion Hispanic means non-white Latin Americans since it is generally accepted that white people throughout the world have reached zero population growth, which is where we should all be at this point in time.

It seems to me that the entire Hispanic race has determined that the only chance they have of attaining any kind of quality of life is to elbow their way into this country, dump themselves on white people and demand that white people provide them a quality of life they cannot provide themselves in their own countries and cultures. This must be case since any U.S. citizen who objects to this illegal migration is called a racist in the shrillest manner possible. There can be no doubt that this accusation is aimed directly at white people.

It is remarkable to me how similarly to black Americans Hispanics behave. Like black people they are non-achievers in their own parts of the world and they are non-achievers in this country. Like black Americans the dropout rate is upwards of 50%, and they are as overly represented in the criminal justice system as black Americans are.

They don’t have the built in excuse that black Americans have been using. They weren’t dragged here against their will and enslaved and oppressed in this country by the white devil. They have come here against the will of most Americans. We can’t beat these people off with a stick. But they are beginning to blame their poor performance in this country on white racism. This is an incredible load of racist crap.

Hispanics claim they have a right to be here because this is a country of immigrants. This is a specious argument because every country in this hemisphere is a country of immigrants. In fact immigrants from Europe begin arriving in Latin America in 1492, 128 year years before the English established the Plymouth colony in 1620. They don’t have a right to come to this country without our permission any more than we have a right to go to their country without their permission, and we don’t.

The real question is why is the “American Dream” north of our borders so much better, so much preferable, than the “American Dream” south of our borders. Don’t forget, America applied to Latin America first. By every politically correct argument Latin America should be 128 years ahead of North America. Mexico City was a thriving colonial city when the University Of Mexico was established in 1551, 69 years before the Plymouth colony.

The answer has already been defined. This is a white culture and is the most desirable place to live because it reflects the content of the character of white people. Every Hispanic culture south of our bolder, without exception, is an unacceptable poverty stricken hell-hole that absolutely and totally reflects the content of the character of Hispanic people. It is not a matter of geographical luck. You have to be a low-grade moron to believe that this country full of Hispanics will be any better than any other country full of Hispanics.

Hispanics and their supporters have argued that this migration is good for the US. They assert that they do the work Americans don’t want to do, they are needed to fund the retirement of the boomers and we need them to grow our population and to grow the economy. At the risk of boring you to tears I will debunk these arguments at length.

There can be no doubt in anyone’s mind that slavery has been a totally unmitigated disaster for this country, but because of the wide open way this country was colonized nothing could be done about it. However, slavery began to die out on its own because it wasn’t economically advantageous. Immigrant labor from Europe became cheaper than the capital costs of purchasing, feeding, clothing and housing slaves. That is until cotton became king. Then you heard this argument: We can’t get Americans to work the cotton fields so we need to import cheap labor in the form of African slaves.


So now you hear the same kinds of morons make the same kinds of arguments. Gee, we can’t get Americans to work the bean fields; therefore we need to import cheap labor in the form of Hispanic immigrants. Thereby creating, expanding and exploiting yet one more lower socio-economic class based on race. You morons just don’t learn. Exploiting lower socio-economic classes based on race is a formula for disaster and this next lower socio-economic class will be the biggest disaster of all.

The founding fathers of this country split from England to escape the class system that had a strangle hold on the old world. We weren’t oppressed or poor. We simply didn’t want King George running our lives for us. We wanted to continue our efforts to build a country based on independence, freedom, self sufficiency and egalitarianism. Slavery has always made the Declaration of Independence ring hollow as does the exploitation of any other race, even when that race is aiding and abetting us in their exploitation.

It is not so much that we can’t get American’s to work the fields, but to work the fields for what the growers want to pay them. And the problem it isn’t just big business. Every one of you white morons who are delighted to have cheap labor to clean your house, do your yard work or raise your children for you are part of the problem. The labor gains that we built up in this country are being eroded away by the flood of cheap labor. In an egalitarian society you should have to pay people what you think you should be paid if you had to spend your life doing that work. The class system you are establishing in this country is spelling your own doom.

There is no evidence that the growing Hispanic population will be a net contributor to the tax base. I believe that whatever economic advantage some people got from exploiting black slaves has been paid a thousand times over by the social welfare costs blacks have required for generations. While the Hispanic immigrant is willing to be a cheap peon for white people, their children aren’t. And since half of these children refuse to educate themselves and are as overly represented in the criminal justice system as blacks, I believe they will be more of a burden than a benefit considering their large families. I see no evidence that Hispanics are creating any more jobs for their people in this country than they are in their own countries.

If white people continue to let this go on they will find themselves a minority in an Hispanic culture. If you want to know what kind of Hispanic culture this will become, take a good hard look at Venezuela. In Venezuela the majority race, the indigenous population, voted one of their own, Hugo Chavez, into power for two reasons. First, because everyone is a racist; and wants their own race in power. Second, because he promised them he would redistribute the wealth. This is exactly what he is doing. Latin American countries have a history of taking sharp turns to the left, especially those with large tribal populations. When the Hispanic race becomes the majority race they will vote themselves into power and will probably want to redistribute the wealth because they have shown little ability to create their own wealth anywhere in the world. That is why they are here in the first place.

Finally, let me make this argument. It is the 21st century and no human being should be required to do what we are hiring Hispanics to do. White men can build machines to do most of this work. Our biggest industries such as wheat and corn are almost fully mechanized. All agriculture and the other monotonous repetitive work can be mechanized. The thing that is delaying this is the population explosion of the non-achieving races. They are not only eager, but desperate to do the work we can build machines to do cheaper than we can build the machines to do it. I am intentionally insulting because this population explosion is not dooming only them, but the whole human race to be cheap human machine labor.

The population explosion of this race cannot be allowed to dictate the future of this country. Hispanics have not been shy about promoting a racist agenda to promote their illegal invasion into this country. Don’t feel guilty about promoting a racist agenda to preserve this country and culture.


The same white racists who hate black people seem to hate Jews even more. This has been somewhat of a mystery to me since most of these whites are Christian; and as far as I’m concerned Christians are Jews, at least culturally. Jesus, their Lord and master, is a Jew. They supplicate themselves to a Jew almost every day. Yes, there is a history of religious animosity between these groups which reaches back to the time when Christians absolutely considered themselves Jews, but what I’m talking about is racism. I assume that these are lower middle class whites who believe Jews are enriching themselves at their expense. Blacks can identify with this since it is well known that they think Jews have too much economic power in their communities.

The point I am trying to make is that no amount of white racism or white oppression has kept Jews from being economically successful, nor is it keeping anyone else from doing so. Down through the millennia Jews have been kicked out of virtually every country in Europe at one time or another chiefly because they have been perceived as being too economically successful. The last case in Germany was a perfect example. Germans suffered more than most during the depression because France did everything they could to punish them for World War One. It was easy for Hitler to scapegoat the Jews.

I don’t have a particular problem with Jews because I don’t perceive them as an immediate threat to my culture. They create their fair share of the jobs and the economy, maybe more than their fair share. They are well represented in the sciences and the professions, maybe overly represented. They have created the only real economy in the Middle East.

Achievement commands respect.

Reject the White Man’s Burden

White people cannot be held responsible to solve the problems of the non-achieving races of the world. It is their responsibility to make their own parts of the world as desirable as we have made ours. It is their responsibility to provide their children with the same quality of life we provide ours. If they cannot do this, what good are they? If they cannot do this, the world does not need these people at all. And if they cannot do this, the world does not need to be over populated by these people, which is exactly what’s happening.

Whatever white people do to help the non-achieving races help themselves, we must not do the following:

1. It is not white people’s responsibility to provide the non-achieving races a quality of life they cannot provide themselves.

2. It is not white people’s responsibility to provide their children a quality of life they cannot provide them.

3. It is not white people’s responsibility to subsidize the population explosion of the non-achieving races,

4. White cultures do not have to fling open their borders and absorb the population explosion of the non-achieving races.

5. White cultures do not have to become multicultural as the non-achieving races desperately seek a better quality of life in them. White cultures are infinitely preferable to their cultures because they are not their cultures. White cultures are infinitely preferable to their cultures because they are white cultures; and in order to remain white cultures they must remain majority white, and I mean vastly majority white.

6. And above all, white people do not have to tolerate becoming minorities our own countries and cultures as the non-achieving races of the world decide that the only chance they have of attaining a better quality of life is to elbow their way into white cultures, dump themselves on white people and demand that white people provide them a quality of life they cannot provide themselves in their own countries and cultures.

Most white people will think I am cold and heartless. They feel guilty that they have so much and so many others have so little. They want to help alleviate the suffering of the poor people of the world. But I warn you, you can only help them help themselves, and if they cannot do it for themselves there is little you can do. If you continue to subsidize the population explosion of these non-achieving races they will turn your culture into their culture and you will watch your children suffer the same low quality of life as theirs.

The most important thing you can do for them now is to stop the population explosion of these “poor” people. The sheer numbers are keeping them poor and “enslaving” them as cheap labor.


In my opinion white people have taken an unfair hit because of colonialism. In a real sense colonialism tried to bring the advantages of white culture to the rest of the world. For a long time many of the successful parts of the non-white world were former British colonies like Hong Kong and Singapore. Kenya was considered the “shining light” of Africa until ethnic violence broke out. This kind of ethnic violence that is sweeping Africa and other parts of the world is nothing less than racism.

But these colonies considered themselves oppressed and sought independence. Their attitude was: our countries are for our people, white people go home. There was an “India is for Indians” movement, an “Africa is for Africans” movement, and in Latin America “Gringo go home”. For the most part white people simply got tired of listening to it and packed up and went home. They weren’t evicted by force although Africans consider Robert Mugabe a hero for the only successful war against white people.

It seems that a lot of these people are following white people home. Well, back at you….. White cultures are for white people, brown people go home.

The Human Population Explosion

At the risk of belaboring this point ad nauseam, the biggest threat to us all is the human population explosion. We are crowding out the rest of the life on the planet to the point that we are causing a mass extinction epoch, the first caused by life itself on this planet. Our consumption of resources is having an increasingly negative impact on this planet from pollution to global warming. There are not enough recourses for the current world’s population to consume them at the rate white people are consuming them, let alone double or triple the population.

The reason white people use so much recourses is because we created the industrial revolution. We created the technology that runs on fossil fuels. We have had the luxury of having it all to ourselves for a very long time. Even after white men invented it and showed the world how it was done, the other races just didn’t get it… except for the Japanese. The reason for white colonialism wasn’t any burning desire for global domination. It became a kind of global arms race between major European powers. If you didn’t get out there and grab the world’s recourses, then your European rivals would. And the reason that white people could grab all these recourses for ourselves is that the native populations weren’t exploiting them for themselves.

White people have been vilified for ravaging the world and raping the environment, and there is a lot of truth in this. But this is what has made white cultures so wealthy and desirable. This is what has made the “American Dream” that everyone else in the world wants a piece of. Everyone in the world wants the quality of life that Americans enjoy. Everyone in the world wants to use recourses at the rate white people are using them. It is not possible.

It has been delightful to watch the economic explosion in China. This generation of Chinese may enjoy the same grand era that Americans enjoyed in the ‘50s and ‘60s; the “Happy Days” that I grew up in; the same degree of technological advancement and upward mobility. I didn’t think the world would see another such era. But they are making exactly the same mistakes we have made. Scavenging the world for resources and buying economic prosperity at the cost of environmental degradation. We just don’t learn. Gone are the days of cheap fuel and maybe even cheap food. Can the rest of the world follow China? I don’t think there are enough resources, even water.

White people cannot continue use resources at the current rate we are using them. And although we are developing alternative fuels, recycling and trying to change our bad habits, it is a horse race as to whether technology can solve the problem as the current population increases their use. Increasing populations severely aggravate this effort.

We must stop the human population explosion. It is the best, and maybe the only hope of raising the quality of life for the rest of the world. Whites and Japanese have reached zero population growth. The Chinese have imposed a draconian one child per family law in their effort to stem the tide. The achieving races are doing the right thing. It is the people least capable of providing for their children who are having all of the children. It must be stopped. The sheer numbers of these people are keeping them poor and their population explosion is devaluing them further.

I have gone so hard over on this issue that under no circumstances will I agree to subsidize the population explosion of the non-achieving races of the world. I am furious that this country has become a welfare state that subsidizes the population explosion of brown people in this country. I am furious that I am paying to pump food and health care into Africa and other parts of the world to alleviate the horrible suffering of these people. I believe this chronic suffering is due to populations growing past their ability to provide for themselves. The only program I am willing to pay for is population control. It is the only real and long lasting solution. And above all I am furious that these populations are allowed to explode into this country as well as all white cultures.

I am so hard over on this issue that if these people refuse to do the right thing and control their populations like the modern nations do, we should control their populations the old fashioned way. They should be forced to stay in their own parts of the world and starve to death. You think I am evil, heartless and cruel, but consider this. When Africans start starving to death they get little help from their fellow Africans even though there is enough food. If Africans can watch their fellows starve to death so can I. This goes for all of the other chronically poor parts or the world. Although I am willing to do something, I will not subsidize their population explosion. You cannot guilt trip me into subsidizing their irresponsible behavior because I’m rich and they’re poor. Population control first. The health of the planet depends upon this.

The Future Of The Human Race

Allow me go down a path that will scare the hell out of even most white people. You have probably surmised by now that I am way out in left field…. You don’t know how far.

I believe the future of the human race is in space. In fact I believe our very survival depends upon this. As long as we are all huddled on this tiny rock, squabbling over what little land there is left on it we are in danger of going the way of the dinosaurs. To continue this analogy, somewhere out there, there is an asteroid with our name on it. It’s not a matter of if it will smack the earth; it’s a matter of when. If it hits before we can deal with it, or before we have colonized space, we’re history. And of course there are many other scenarios that can spell the end of humanity on the planet. I’ll discuss them in more detail in another paper.

The question is: who will venture into space? In 1903, two white men, working out of their bicycle shop and in secret, created the first practical airplane. In 1969 white men were walking on the moon. This is what white men can do in 66 years. But all during this space effort I had to listen to black people assert that white people shouldn’t be allowed to spend their money in space. They should be forced to spend it on the poor. Translation, we should be forced to subsidize the irresponsible reproduction and irresponsible parenting of black people. This was another nail in the coffin of race relations for me. White men, we cannot piss away any more of our time and money subsidizing the population explosion of the non-achieving races. We must move into space as quickly as possible.

The Japanese and Chinese are developing their own space programs thereby demonstrating their intention to be involved and I applaud their efforts. We need to move ahead on all fronts. But what about the other races? Black Americans have contributed little more than negativity.

The glaring unanswered question in this discussion about who should return home is the one asked by Native-Americans. When will white people go home? And believe it or not, I am somewhat sympathetic to this argument. I harbor a romantic vision of sending the other races back to their homelands, moving white people into space and returning stewardship of this beautiful land to Native-Americans. But I have as much chance of convincing most white people to move into space as I have of convincing the other races to return home. And if I could, it will take quite a bit of time. So I ask you, Native-Americans, do you want to return to the Stone Age, or do you want to reach for the stars?

Actually, my ultimate fantasy is to move the whole human race off the planet and leave Gaia (mother Earth) to evolve even more fantastic life forms. There is a lot of room out there. We have Mars and Venus to terraform. We are builders of worlds. We have the technology now and we need to get on with it.

I must conclude this discussion on race by the most outlandish concept of all. I believe that when we move into space that’s exactly what we’ll do move into space. I believe that the next great strides in human evolution will be in zero gravity habitats. There is unlimited room to grow in space and we can once more “be fruitful and multiply in number”. This will create new human races. In zero gravity people can essentially fly, unneeded feet can evolve into hands, and who can say what else. This may cause more race problems, but oh well.

Whatever else happens, space can be the final refuge where white people can build cultures free of the non-achieving parasitic races that hate us for our success and then insist on dumping themselves on us and demand we provide them a quality of life they cannot provide themselves.

The Christian God Is An Evil God

A lifetime of being raised in the Christian tradition, listening to various teachings about Christianity and observing life in this world has resulted in the inescapable conclusion that the Christian God is an evil God. This paper will attempt to demonstrate this. It doesn’t assert that God is evil, only the Christian concept of God, and why it should not be taught in the schools.

The Word Of God

There are a lot of people claiming to speak for God, or otherwise spreading God’s word. The problem is that they are all saying something different. This has resulted in very many conflicting religions in the world, even within Christianity. This is totally unacceptable. The main pillar of the Judeo-Christian religion is the concept of the Covenant. The Covenant is literally an agreement with God, which asserts that if we obey the word and the will of God, we can expect to be treated fairly by a kind and just God. But a covenant works both ways. We have an obligation to obey God’s laws and God has an obligation to make sure we understand, in no uncertain terms, what His laws are. The fate of our eternal souls depends upon this. Clearly, this is not working. Evangelical Christians assert “anyone who doesn’t accept Jesus Christ as their own personal Lord and Savior will suffer eternal damnation in Hell”. This results in over two thirds of the human race being subjected to horrific suffering since only one third are Christian; and probably a whole lot more since some Evangelicals don’t consider all Christians worthy of Heaven. Is this some kind of a cruel joke? How can God stand by and allow this to happen when he can obviously do more to teach us His will. Whispering into the ears of certain prophets and expecting them to spread the word is not working. Only a cruel and evil God can allow such confusion when so much suffering is at stake.

Basic Assumptions

Because of the confusion that plagues Christianity, this paper makes certain assumptions. They are based on a perceived consensus about the nature and word of God. The two fundamental tenets of Christianity are:

1. God is an all powerful being that created the universe and everything in it.
2. Everything in Heaven and on Earth happens by the will of God.

This is what most Christians and even most Moslems believe. This means that any conflict between God and Satan is no contest. God has the power to rid the world of the Devil if He wanted to. Therefore, it has to be concluded that the Devil exists by God’s will. There can be no duplicitous behavior of crediting God for all the blessings of the Earth and blaming the Devil for all of the evil that exists. “Everything in Heaven and on Earth happens by the will of God”. Therefore, all of the evil on the planet is also the work and the will of God.

God’s Curse

Christians insist that Genesis be taught in the schools as valid creation theory. Genesis states that God intended people to live in the Garden of Eden. A paradise described as being free of want and suffering. But God cast us out of Eden as punishment for breaking the rules and placed a curse upon us.

Genesis 3:17 To Adam he said,
"Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,' "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.”

The following two points illustrate the cruelty of this curse.

Hunger And Starvation

God cast us out of Eden knowing we would suffer hunger. God has watched millions starve to death, but does nothing to help. Hunger and starvation have stalked the human race ever since.

This is no kind, loving and just God. This is a vengeful, vindictive, spiteful, cruel and vicious God. But God, in His wrath, is just warming up. His curse upon us gets much worse.

Diseases and Parasites

There are many Christians who claim to being doing God’s work by helping to alleviate the horrible suffering caused by diseases and parasites such as Aids and malaria. But aren’t these organisms God’s creatures, created by God through “intelligent design” according to Christians? Christians have vehemently opposed evolution, asserting that God created all life on the planet and that life is immutable. This evil cannot possibly be blamed on Satan because only God can create life.

Why did God create these organisms? What are their little “purpose-driven lives” all about? Obviously, their purpose is to get inside our bodies and eat us alive, slowing and painfully from the inside out. Once again one has to conclude that God is doing this to us on purpose. Who are these Christians who want to oppose the work and the will of their God?

Other Christians claim that the medicines that exist are “gifts from God”. But are they? All medicines have undesirable side affects and eventually become ineffective against organisms. Since Christians don’t believe in evolution, it cannot be that these organisms are evolving a resistance to these medicines. It must be assumed that every time we invent a medicine to defeat God’s evil bugs, God creates new ones to defeat our medicines. If God really wants to give us a gift He has the power to eliminate the diseases and parasites altogether. Obviously He will not do this. He wants us to suffer slow agonizing deaths. This is conveniently omitted from Christians intelligent design theory.

If a human being created these organisms in a laboratory and unleashed them into the world he would be condemned for engaging in biological warfare. He would be considered the evilest man on the planet.

God’s curse upon us has been to conduct biological warfare against us. This God is not perfect and sinless. This God is flawed and sinful. Any being, even a god, who intentionally inflicts this kind of suffering upon others, is evil.


We are not only condemned to suffer life on a cursed world but God has even greater suffering in store for most of us in Hell. Some Christians believe that before the appearance of Jesus, that was the fate of all people. Do they realize what they are saying? Can they grasp the depth of the horrors and suffering they promote? How can they describe such a God as kind and loving?

Once again Christians cannot agree about what actually goes on in Hell. A newer, more politically correct version is a somewhat benign place where we exist apart from God as He denies us His love. A place of emptiness and despair as we go mad “gnashing our teeth” because God is not smiling upon us.

However, Billy Graham is an acknowledged authority on the Evangelical concept of Hell. The following is an excerpt from one of his sermons:

You say, "Well, what kind of a place is hell?" I'm going to read to you right out of the Bible what kind of place it is. This is where some of you are going to spend billions and billions of years. You'd better listen. This is God's Word.

Revelation 20:15 says it's a lake of fire. Psalm 11:6 says it's a horrible tempest. Psalm 18:5 says it's a place of sorrows. Matthew 13:42 says it's a place of wailing, a furnace of fire. Luke 16:23 says it's a place of torments. Matthew 8:12 says it's a place of outer darkness. Revelation 14:11 says it's a place of unrest. Luke 16:24 says it's a place where people scream for mercy. Matthew 25:46 says it's a place of everlasting punishment.

That is God's description-not mine. And God says that all people outside of Jesus Christ are headed to that place unless they repent of their sins and turn by faith to Jesus Christ.

This is toned down version of the “fire and brimstone” sermons we’ve come to expect from Evangelists. It must be concluded that souls cast into Hell don’t lounge around the lake of fire enjoying the view[i]. Traditional Evangelists describe souls being cast into the lake of fire and suffering the horrors of being burned alive for every second of their existence - for eternity. This must be defined as torture, the most heinous kind of torture imaginable. Hell can only be defined as God’s personal torture chamber. Most of the human race has concluded that torture is unacceptable, even for the worst of us. We describe people who torture others as evil. What is evil in people is evil in a god.

Psychological or “physical” torture is equally unacceptable. And why is God torturing us? Not because we have committed a mortal sin, but because we have not sung Jesus’ praises sufficiently according to Billy Graham.

The Christian God is pure evil.

Free Will

Christians try to excuse their God’s abominable behavior by asserting that we deserve it because we have misused the “free will” God has given us. But how much free will do we really have? God can “will” a universe into existence; that is free will. But God has stuck us on this planet with limited choices we can make. Adam and Eve were condemned for making a choice that disagreed with God’s will. So in the end it is always God’s will, not ours.

If God made us then we are no better or worse than He made us. If He doesn’t like the way we turned out He has only Himself to blame. He should have made us better than what we are. He should have made us smart enough to make better choices than what we have made, or if you insist, use this “free will” better than we have used it. To assert that God’s solution to his own incompetence is to torture us and otherwise make us suffer is so appalling as to be unbelievable. You have to be a low-grade moron to believe this. God should have, and could have made you smarter than this.

If your children did not turn the way you wanted them to, would you cause them to suffer for it, would you torture them? Few parents would. Christians assert that we are all God’s children, but then go on to describe the relentless campaign of suffering He has unleashed upon us. That makes most people better than God especially because we have little control over how our children turn out. However, we are exactly as God made us. He has total control of His creations.

Christians efforts to stigmatize all humans as “original sinners” and therefore basically evil is a classic example of shrewd abusers transferring guilt to the abused. Abusers, especially child abusers, have succeeded in extending their abuse by convincing the abused that they deserve it because they are so unworthy.

Jesus Christ Our Savior

Just what or who is Jesus saving us from. The only possible answer is that Jesus is saving us from God Himself. If God weren’t so eager to cast us into Hell and torture us for eternity, our souls would be in no need of saving. This may be proof in itself that the Christian God is evil because we only need to be saved from evil.

We only have Christian’s word that Jesus dieing on the cross absolved us of our sins, and we are once more in God’s good graces. Jesus did not remove God’s curse upon us; nothing has changed in the world. We have not been allowed to return to Eden. We still live on a cursed world suffering hunger, starvation, predators, parasites, pestilence, fire, earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, hurricanes and much more. These are not just natural disasters; they are part of God’s curse upon this world. They do not exist in Eden according to the Bible. Genesis says God can and did make a paradise here on earth, but we still suffer the wrath of God.

God’s love for us apparently applies only to the afterlife and then only to those who sing Jesus’ praises sufficiently. This is very convenient because it can’t be proven.

There is no logic in asserting that a second God is required to save us from the first God, and that a third God is required to make it all happen. It was not necessary for Jesus to suffer on the cross for our sins, especially in the barbaric way described in the Bible [ii]. All God had to do was love us unconditionally and stop casting us into Hell.

This, of course, was the schism that separated Christians from Jews. It must be remembered that Christians are Jews, at least culturally, because Christianity is a Jewish sect. Christ is a Jew and is the Christian’s Lord and Master.

Christians try to quote scripture to prove that their belief system is true because they assert that it is the word of God. But the Bible cannot prove itself. All it can do is define their beliefs. There is no proof that the bible is the word of God. It was clearly written by the prophets, some who call themselves Jesus’ disciples. The question is whether or not God directed these words. Since their biblical depiction is of a God so evil and perverse, it has to be concluded that they are self-proclaimed prophets who are promoting their own agenda. God cannot be as evil as they depict Him. They use the fear of an evil God to frighten people into believing what they tell them to believe.

Jews, who created this religion, reject the New Testament as heresy. The Christian pantheon of three Gods violates the first Commandment forbidding the worship of other Gods. There is a feeble attempt to meld them into a single Deity, but they are still called the Holy Trinity and there are three names for them. When Jesus was on the cross was He talking to Himself?

Luke 23:34
Jesus said “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing”

The concept of the one true just God is lost.

Faith In An Evil God

Why do Christians put so much faith in an evil God? There are three basic reasons. The first is an overwhelming terror of their own mortality. The second is an attempt to believe that life is ultimately fair and to reconcile the injustices of life as they know it. The third is the fear that God is as evil as the Prophets say He is and will do horrible things to them if they don’t submit.


Down through the millennia, the religions that have become most popular are the ones that tell the faithful that they are really not going to die. And the most popular of all are the ones that promise that they will enjoy an eternal existence in paradise where their Father/God figure is going to take care of them in style. Well, this is exactly what most people want to hear. Who wouldn’t want to believe this? And so the focus of most Christians (and Moslems) is “how do I get my ticket to Heaven?” Actually, it’s what’s the least I have do to get my ticket to Heaven since this allows them to avoid examining their religion so closely as to see the perverseness of their belief system.

What are 70 or so years of suffering on this planet [iii] compared to an eternal existence in paradise? What is the purpose of life anyway? Is it some kind of trial by ordeal by which God determines if you’re worthy of Heaven? Some think so and are readily willing to sacrifice their lives to reach paradise. But most Christians preach that life is sacred and cling to life as if there were no afterlife. This is because the overriding motivation for their belief system is complete terror of their own mortality. Christian’s opposition to abortion, physician assisted suicide, etc. is a kind of enlighten self interest. In order to make their life sacred all life must be sacred.

If Christians really believed what they say they believe in, then death for them should be a good thing. Death is a gateway to a better existence, free of suffering or even worry, an eternal existence with their Father/God figure. Why then do they choose to extend their suffering on this planet? When their life is threatened, say by a “natural” disaster, they pray to God to save their lives. There was a TV report that showed a survivor of a tornado. In the background his neighborhood was rubble, and he was proclaiming a miracle that God spared his life. Why would he tell his God that he did not want to be with Him in Heaven? He would prefer to remain on earth, homeless, jobless and suffering. That’s how much he did not want to be with his God. Is this not an insult to his God?

It is fruitless to claim that asking God to take you to paradise is a violation of the “purpose-driven” existence God has planned for each of us, because it is even more improper to ask God to spare your life when He has decided to call you to your final reward. Rejecting God’s invitation to be by His side in Heaven is risky business. God felt Adam and Eve rejected Him and did not love Him. Look where that got us. The proper response is to put your life in God’s hands and let His will be done.

Why then do so many Christians beg God to save their lives and prolong their suffering on this planet? Why do they persist in insulting Him by professing their reluctance to be with Him? These Christians should not call themselves people of faith because they are not willing to take that leap of faith. They should call themselves people of hope. They hope that when they die they will go to Heaven, but in the mean time they will to cling to life with every fiber of their being, as if there were no afterlife. Such is their terror of their own mortality. They are doing the right thing, but for the wrong reasons.

Is There Justice?

The Christian religion has attempted over the millennia to reconcile a just, kind and loving God with all of the injustice in the world. It appeared that the worst of the human race was prospering while the righteous were suffering. Surely God must set things right, it could not be that God was so cruel and unjust. But God did nothing to right the wrongs on earth so it was proposed that justice would prevail in the afterlife. Evildoers will burn in Hell and the righteous will enjoy an eternal life in paradise. Hell became a tool with which to frighten the sinners into behaving better. The fact that God tortures souls in Hell did not seem repulsive to the medieval mind since it was a common practice at the time and even the Christian church practiced it. Life was hell.

This created what we now call “God-fearing” Christians. Christians became so fearful of their God that they dare not criticize Him for all of the evil in the world, so an attempt has been made to blame all of the evil on the Devil. This feeble attempt to make Satan God’s whipping boy has been unsatisfactory since “Everything in Heaven and on Earth happens by the will of God”.

The medieval mind has created a God in it’s own image. He is likened to a King sitting on a throne. They even call Him “King” and “Lord” and refer to the “Kingdom of Heaven”. Christians treat their God as if He were a petty medieval tyrant. If you sing his praises sufficiently you can enjoy the good life in court. If you displease him, he will cast you into the dungeon and torture you to death.

So what is the least a Christian has to do get his ticket to Heaven. Apparently, it is singing Jesus’ praises sufficiently. This is the meaning of “accepting Jesus Christ as your own personal Lord and savior”. According to Evangelists all who don’t do this are cast into Hell by their God and tortured for eternity. Many hymns sung in Christian churches actually have the words “sing his praises” and “glory to the newborn King” in them.

It does not matter to Christens what kind of life you have lived. Consider this quote from Billy Graham:

“One of the Bible's greatest truths is that God is willing to forgive absolutely anyone who truly repents of their sins and commits their life to Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. “

It appears that the Ten Commandments have no real meaning for Christians. They have discarded the first Commandment by creating a pantheon of three God’s. They assert that a sinner who has broken all commandments can seek God’s forgiveness and be accepted into Heaven, but a person who has broken none of the Commandments will be cast into Hell for failing to sing Jesus’ praises sufficiently.

All of the Commandments can be replaced by one Commandment: “Thou shall sing Jesus’ praises sufficiently”.

How did Christianity become so perverse? Do they really think God is a petty tyrant who needs His praises sung? Is he really into torture? Did the conflict caused by trying to reconcile the evil in the world with the concept of a kind and loving God cause Christianity to go mad? It appears so. It is ludicrous to listen to Christians, especially Evangelists, talk about what a kind and loving God they worship while ignoring all the suffering He causes. The suffering is here now and is a fact. A better existence in Heaven is unproven.

Maybe that is why these God-fearing Christians pray to God to keep them alive on this planet. They can’t “trust” that He will treat them better in the next life than He does now.

The most perverting influence on Christianity has been, of course, money. Down through the millennia Christian con artists have enriched themselves mightily selling tickets to Heaven. It is remarkable how much affinity these “spiritual” leaders have for cold hard cash, beginning with the Catholic Church, which became the richest institution in the world for a very long time. In addition to the collection plate they sold “dispensations”; it is tempting to call them “get out of Hell free cards” but they were hardly free. Only the very rich could afford them.

Evangelicals have found it useful to use a double-edged sword to encourage contributions. If the lure of an immortal life in paradise with your Father/God figure doesn’t convince you, then the threat of the horrors an evil God will heap upon you in Hell will.

Modern Evangelism has been plagued with charismatic leaders who amassed a fortune for themselves, only to be discovered to have feet of clay. You know who they are.


Science is not incompatible with God. Religion is incompatible with God. There are many religions claiming to represent God, but they all say something different. Even Christians can’t agree on God’s true word. If you get any two representatives of these religions together the only thing you can be sure they will agree on is that all of the others are wrong, and then they will begin arguing about which of them is the one true religion. If there are 100 religions in the world each would get 99 votes that they are the wrong religion and only 1 vote they are the one true religion. So by a religious consensus they are all wrong. Faith is simply a matter of believing exactly what you want to believe. Evangelists believe that all Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, some other Christians, and all others will be cast into Hell by their God and tortured for eternity. All of the others believe they are wrong.

The initial attraction of the Jewish religion was the concept of the Covenant. The idea that there is one true just God, and that if you obey His laws you can expect to be treated fairly by Him. This was a major departure from the pagan religions of the time. The Greeks and Romans had a pantheon of many gods who were cruel and capricious. It seemed that whenever the gods were bored their favorite diversion was tormenting the human race. Others blamed all evil on the anger of the gods.

The Covenant is an agreement with God and obliges both parties to honor this pact. This has become one of the major pillars of western civilization. It is called the rule of law. It was initially codified in the Ten Commandments. The rule of law is the basis of all of our relationships. Law governs our relations with God and law also governs our relations with each other. All major civilizations are based on laws that we all agree to abide by.

Science has postulated that if God created the universe then He also commanded the universe to obey His laws. Science is an attempt to discover and understand God’s laws. Indeed the creator of modern science believed he was doing exactly that. Sir Isaac Newton was educated at Trinity College in Cambridge, but he had a problem with the concept of the Holy Trinity.

Most of the early scientists believed they were seeking Gods true laws. These included Newton, Faraday, Mendel, Einstein and many more. It cannot be emphasized enough that the foundation of our universe is the rule of law and if God created the universe then the laws that govern the behavior of the universe are Gods true laws. God is to be found in His creation.

How do we know if we have discovered God’s true laws? We do not take the word of any self-proclaimed prophet. We ask, “Can your laws predict the future”. If your laws can specifically, accurately and reliably predict the future then they must be God’s true laws. If God created the universe then only His true laws can predict the future.

Newton’s Laws of motion can predict where every planet, star or other heavenly body will be at any time in the future. This was the first time we were able to do this and we believed we finally understood the secrets of the universe: a totally predictable clockwork mechanism. Alas, it was not so. Einstein came along and showed the universe to be a very different and strange place. Nonetheless Newton’s laws still accurately predict the future. We still use them to navigate the solar system. Newton’s laws of motion predict where our spacecraft will be at any time in the future. This requires pinpoint accuracy. Einstein’s Laws also accurately predict the future. This is the foundation of modern science.

The scientific method is a mechanism for predicting the future. The most straightforward method is to devise an experiment that demonstrates the accuracy of your laws. If you can specifically, accurately and reliably predict the outcome of an experiment then your laws are considered God’s true laws. The experiment is designed so that skeptics can verify for themselves that your laws are true.

Only science can accurately predict the future. And if God created the universe then they must be God’s laws. However, they exist whether God created them or not. These predictions are not some nebulous biblical prophecy that says something may happen at some nebulous time in the future. They are detailed, specific and reliable.

This is why only science should be taught in the schools. No religion has given us the ability to accurately predict the future. Only God’s true laws can do that. If God exists He hasn’t see fit to divulge them to any organized religion. It doesn’t matter whether God whispered these laws into the ears of these scientists or left us to discover them on our own. Science will accept them if they meet the standards of the scientific method and specifically, accurately and reliably predict the future.

Unfortunately, not all science lends itself to this straightforward method. Some disciplines try to understand the past. There is no way to devise an experiment to unambiguously prove these kinds of theories. Yet scientific methods have been devised to validate these theories as best we can. They do not accept the words of prophets. Unless they can meet certain unbiased standards that demonstrate they are true laws of nature, they will be rejected.

Evolution is such a discipline. Evolution does not prove or disprove the existence of God, but it casts serious doubt on the evil portrait of God painted by Christians.


Christians are compelled to believe in the creation story of the Bible because they believe it is their only claim to immortality. So deep is their terror of their own mortality that they cannot live without this hope. They would like to go to Heaven but they are terrified of dieing, which is what they have to do to get there. This has closed their minds to all other theories.

Christians use a bit of illogic to promote their belief system. They call it “intelligent design”. It is an attempt to define Genesis in scientific terms so it will be accepted in academia. In some ways it acknowledges that only valid scientific principles should be taught in schools. However, academia has concluded they haven’t met the scientific standards described above. Some believe it is a deliberate deception to cloak religious dogma as science.

Intelligent design states that life is too complicated to be made by evolution. The logic progresses something like this. Look at this building you are in. What a miraculous thing it is. What are the odds this building came into existence on it’s own. It requires a more miraculous creator. And of course they are right, man created the building. Well then, since man is so much more miraculous than the building, he requires an even more miraculous creator, God. Okay then, who created God? If man is so miraculous that he requires an intelligent designer, then surely God, who is even more miraculous, requires an even more intelligent designer. So on and on you go into infinity postulating ever more intelligent designers

And here their logic of miraculous things requiring more miraculous creators fail them. They assert that God has always existed, or that God created Himself. If Christians can assert that the most miraculous thing in the universe, a being that created the universe itself, doesn’t require an intelligent designer or created Himself from nothing, then it is just as reasonable for science to say that the universe created itself. In fact science is more reasonable because it asserts that what was created were the simplest things in the universe, the elementary particles that make up the universe. Christians assert that the most miraculous thing in the universe was created first. It is not logical since it violates their theory of intelligent design.

The True Meaning Of Evolution

This brings us to the true meaning of evolution. We are how gods are created. We are the gods we seek. We are our own creators. We are our own creations. Our belief in the gods is simply self-awareness, the realization of who we are and what we will become. We are evolving into creatures far superior to the Gods the Christians now worship. We created these Gods in our image, patterned after medieval kings, petty tyrants who were often cruel. We have evolved past that. We no longer cast souls into dungeons or hells and torture them, or at least we are striving not to.

It is not reasonable to believe that the most miraculous things like Gods appear suddenly from nothing. It is more reasonable to believe the simplest things came first and slowly organized itself into more complicated forms over time. Gods evolve. All the suffering that has been described in this paper make perfect sense from the point of view of evolution. Diseases and parasites evolve to take advantage of any available food source, even if it’s you. They make no sense from the point of view of a kind and loving intelligent designer.

We have a kind of immortality right here on earth. Each of us is over 3 billion years old. Our true souls, our true selves are our genes. These genes have been in continuous existence since the beginning of life on this planet, passing from body to body in an unbroken chain of life. What you see in the mirror is your current body, created by your genes to enhance your survival. The genes have the intelligence to create that body. They are the intelligent designers. You are reincarnate in your children. In that way you will live on into the future. So in some ways the Hindus are correct, you will be reincarnated in this world, but your children will be you in your next life, not some other animal. However, in the past you were a single celled animal, a worm, a fish, an amphibian, a reptile and many, many more. Each of us has passed through all the forms that have come before us and are evolving into ever more miraculous forms into to future until we become the Gods we seek. This is how we spend eternity.

It is unfortunate that most of us cannot appreciate this kind of immortality. Our old bodies need to be cast off to make way for our new and improved bodies. If this didn’t happen we might still be worms. But we tend to think of ourselves as those thoughts, memories and experiences that fill our minds, and it is terrifying to know that one day they will cease to exist. We want to live forever. This is a perfect example of how evolution works. Life is so tough that only those with strongest will to survive did so, the rest perished. So we are at a difficult point in our evolution, knowing that part of us must cease to exist and able to do nothing about it.

Into The Future

What kind of creatures are we evolving into? The actual physical forms we evolve will vary as we move out into the universe. The particular environment will shape them as it has done on earth.

For example, many humans will actually live in space habitats, and zero-G life will evolve very differently from those who live in a gravity well such as a planet. Zero-G people can effectively fly and unneeded feet can evolve into hands. How many times did you wish you had four hands while working on a project?

But the ultimate form should be one of pure energy, free of corporeal limitations. A major tenet of physics states that matter can be converted into energy and energy can be converted into matter, but neither can be created nor destroyed. This tenet has been refined to suggest that matter and energy are really different states of the same thing, a single elementary particle that makes up everything in the universe. This matter to energy conversion dynamic makes life itself possible. We are on our way to becoming energy beings, pure thought, pure intelligence.

Those of you who scoff at this should consider the concept of the soul. If the soul were defined in scientific terms it would have to be defined as an energy being. Since it must be either matter or energy, and it isn’t matter like your body, then it must be energy. The only real difference is that Christians consider this energy being already fully formed and functional, trapped in our bodies ready to be released upon our death. Evolution suggests this being is still evolving within us.

Most Christians will, of course, reject these theories out of hand because they do not offer instant gratification, instant immortality in paradise. They still have to cope will the passing of the person they know and love the most, themselves. Living on in their children in not very satisfying.

But the Christian solution to this problem is totally unacceptable. Their need to believe in the Christian afterlife is closing their minds to the truth. Any new idea that has contradicted Christian religious Dogma has been vehemently opposed because it threatens their concept of immortality.

Despite all this, Christians do concern themselves mostly with the right thing. Life is all that matters. If there is an afterlife you should get there eventually. An intelligent, loving and just God can’t be as evil as Christians say He is.

The only way to resolve the conflict of evil on the planet in light of a loving God is that there is no Devil and God is not micromanaging us. Evolution may be God’s plan, and we have to cope with the suffering evolution causes such as hunger, predators, diseases, parasites and misbehaving people. It is our world.

And if God doesn’t exist, life is still all that matters. We have our own kind of immortality and something important to do for eternity: become the gods we seek.

Matthew 25:41
“Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels”

From Jerry Falwell:
“Doing the best we can or trying to "balance the books" is not sufficient to remove even one of our sins. That is why the payment for sin always involved a blood sacrifice. In the Old Testament, animals were sacrificed for sin. In the New Testament, Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, became the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of mankind.”

Psalm 90:10
10 The length of our days is seventy years — or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away.

The Problem With The Women's Movement

The Woman's Movement is based on two entirely false premises. The first is that "Women have been oppressed and sexually exploited by Men". This is just the opposite of what is really true. Women enjoy a privileged position in this society and have been making a living sexually exploiting Men for the last five million years. The second is that "Women want sexual equality". This is the last thing Women want. It should be clear to even the most casual observer that Women have no intention of giving up a single privilege or prerogative or being Female, nor have they. All traditional Female privileges and prerogatives are intact and Women have no intention of giving them up no matter how much they screech about sexual equality out of the other side of Their face. The Women's Movement has degenerated into a group of spoiled rotten Females demanding to be even more spoiled rotten than they already are.

What do Women want? This can be defined by be phrase coined by the Women's Movement, "Having it all", and can be taken literally. Women want all the privileges and prerogatives of both sexes; and the duties, responsibilities and disadvantages of neither. The first thing the Women's Movement did was disavow all traditional Female responsibilities. Women no longer are required to cook, sew, clean house or be responsible for any of the duties traditionally assigned to Women. Currently there are no obligations that Women feel bound to perform, especially the ones traditionally undertaken by Men. Men, on the other hand, have not shirked any of Their traditional responsibilities; including protecting, defending and providing for Women and Their Children.

It is an obscenity that Women are not signing up for the Draft. The draft is clearly sexual discrimination, but Women have no intention of redressing the inequity. If Women thought the draft was a privilege of being Male, an exclusive fraternity where Men garner power and prestige, they would be chaining themselves to the doors of the Selective Service System and in the courts demanding to be included. But Women see the draft as a disadvantage of being Male and want no part of it no matter how much they screech about sexual equality out of the other side of Their face. Women use the word "Equality" not to achieve true equality but to convince Men that Women's roles need to be changed in ways more attractive to todays Female.

"Equality" is a loaded word to males. Our culture is based on Freedom and Equality and is the mainstay of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Our history is replete with heroes, almost exclusively Men, who sacrificed Their lives so that all of us can enjoy the fruits of this philosophy. In recent times the cream of our young Men have given Their lives in World Wars I and II, Korea, Viet Nam and elsewhere so that everyone in world can benefit from it. Men have long accepted the responsibility of defending the group. When danger threatens the group, it is the duty of Men to get between the group and whatever threatens it and sacrifice Their lives, if necessary, in defence of the group. In this respect Men are true altruists, each Man willing to sacrifice His individual life so that the whole will benefit. And as far as Men are concerned this is still a requirement for first class citizenship. Men who fail to fulfil this requirement lose Their status as first class citizens. Draft dodgers, for example, are convicted of a felony and lose the right to vote. In time of war these Men are shot. . . In typical Female fashion, Women want all of privileges and prerogative of first class citizenship without the duties and responsibilities of first class citizenship. This was acceptable under a sexual dichotomy but is entirely unacceptable given the increasing vocal crescendo of "Equality" on the part of Females.

The contribution of Women in the Gulf War was a welcome sight but Females are still not required to take part in the actual fighting. Women are doing little to change this, preferring instead to focus on the fact that they are not promoted as much as Men. This tendency to concentrate on the advantages rather than the duties and responsibilities is typical of Women and, as we shall see, is the problem with Women in the work place. The most telling roles of Females came at the beginning of the war when Saddam Hussein took western hostages in Iraq and Kuwait. Once again it was cries of "save the Women and Children". Once again Women bestowing upon Themselves the advantages of Children, running away and hiding with the Children and leaving the Men behind to tough it out. These very same Women are all to willing evoke "Equality" in the few cases where they can't take advantage of the privileges afforded to Women and Children. The rare women who elected to stay with their men during the hostage crisis are the only ones who can command respect.

Much can be said about the lunacy of war. Women justify Their attitude by saying that if they were in charge there would be no wars. They suggest that the aggressiveness and bluster of Males is responsible for war and they should not be required to take part. This is not only simplistic and naive, but one of the reasons that Women are not in charge is that they have not been willing to sacrifice Their lives for Their beliefs or for any other reason for that matter. If they had been willing to take an active part in defense the entire scope of conflict may have changed long ago. It is well know that Women have a dramatic effect on Men in the battlefield and is one of the reasons that generals don't want Them there. Why the Human Race came to behave this way will be discussed later in this article.

The reason that the draft is focussed on here is to highlight the dishonesty and duplicity of the Women's Movement. This duplicity is prevalent in all aspects of the Movement as will be demonstrated in this article. The one sided way that "Equality" is applied by Women to benefit themselves is unacceptable. For example, Women suggest that equality means that Men become more like Women by "getting in touch with Their emotions". This is absurd. Equality might just as well mean that Women become more like Men by getting control of Their emotions. This is more realistic since it is Women who want change Their roles. And since They want equal access to traditional Male roles it is They who must change to adapt to these roles, not the other way around.

Further, Women think that they alone are to be the ones that will define the future roles and relationships of Men and Women. It is time Men stopped silently taking the criticism and verbal abuse of Females and begin telling Women what is to be expected of them if they are to achieve equal status in the traditional Male milieu. The work place has been invented by Men to be implemented by Men in order to meet Their age old obligation of protecting, defending and providing for Women and Their Children. Most Male aggression is channelled here and much of the definition of being a Male is defined here. It has never been a place of fairness and equality and it has been a long hard road to civilize the work place to this extent and We still have a long way to go. It will not change just because Women, or most Men for that matter, want it to. The civilization of the work place has long and bloody history and We still have far to go.

The Traditional Female

The assertion by the Women's Movement that Women have been enslaved in the kitchen is, again, the exact opposite of the truth. Women defined the traditional Harriot Nelson housewife role just as aggressively as they are redefining Their roles today. Indeed, about half of todays Women still prefer this lifestyle. This has made the Women's Movement not only duplicitous but downright schizophrenic. Women seem to think they can have it both ways. If it's to Their advantage, They retain the right to pursue the traditional role of letting a Man be responsible for providing for Them. If They must support Themselves or choose to work, then They want full equality in the work place.

There were two basic reasons why Women established the traditional housewife role. The first was the change from an agrarian to an urban culture. Before the industrial revolution most People lived on family farms and all members of the family worked from dawn to dusk in order to make a living. Life in the cities could be even worse as sweat shop conditions prevailed. Men, Women and Children worked in these sweat shops up to sixteen hours a day and six days a week. It took legislative action to get Children out of the sweat shops, using as precedent a law designed to prevent cruelty to animals. Women got out of the sweat shops by making it a requirement that Men provide them with a home with a well stocked kitchen before they would agree to a sexual relationship. At the time being dependant on a Man for income was preferable to working for a living. Better to let the Man work in the sweat shop while the Woman stayed home with the Children.

This leads to the second reason why the role of housewife was established. At that time sex meant Children and the average Women gave birth to thirteen of Them. Motherhood was a time and a half job and it was not unreasonable to judge a Man by His ability to provide for Them. The particular Human sexual dichotomy that had been established over the last five million years was continued with Women and Men enjoying separate but equal roles. Each sex accepting and performing Their particular duties and responsibilities and being equally dependant on each other. The strongest drive in life, procreation, was being exercised. Men wanted sex and Women wanted Children and the two drives should be equated: Women want Children as much as Men want sex and vice versa. These drives vary in individuals of course, but at times it seems like most Women don't like sex at all and only submit occasionally in order to have a Child or to make a living sexually exploiting Men. The issue of who sexually exploits who will be discussed later.

This arrangement, though not perfect, was preferred by both sexes at the time. Motherhood became the most revered institution in our culture and special considerations were bestowed on Women because They bore the burden of Child bearing. But it goes much deeper than that. Fathers were now away from home putting long hours in the work place, and when They were home they were often too tired to contribute to Child rearing. Other pressures and considerations further exacerbated this condition. This meant that the major influence on Children were Their Mothers and it was Women who shaped the thoughts and attitudes of Their Children for generations to come. This was true especially for Their Sons. If you don't believe this, watch a college football game on a Saturday afternoon and notice the response when the camera is turned on the cream of American young Men. It is almost always "Hi Mom!".

Mother's influence on Their Sons reinforced not only the institution of Motherhood, but the attitude that being a Man meant protecting, defending and providing for Women and Their Children. Thus the seeds for opposition to Women in the work place were sewn by Women Themselves. But that's just the beginning of a long list of rules that Mothers taught Their Sons about how to behave toward Women. Like most Men of this generation, Mothers taught Their Sons to open doors for Women, hold Their coats for them, carry Their burdens for them, stand up when They came to the table, stand up when They left the table, and a hundred other things that Women would never do for a Man. Men were being conditioned on how to behave in the presence of royalty.

Indeed, that is how Women began to think of themselves: as Princesses whose problems will be solved when Their Knight in shining armor comes along to whisk them off Their feet with romantic ardor and carry Them off to Their castle where They would live happily ever after in luxury. All a Woman has to do is be beautiful. Literature and Hollywood made a fortune pandering to this unrealistic Female fantasy, but Men have been burdened by trying to live up to these expectations. The entire Dating Game is based this one sided attitude. A Man is expected to pick a Women up at Her door, take Her out, wine Her and dine Her and otherwise entertain Her; win Her heart and earn Her love. The Man does all the giving, the Women all the taking. This is still the way Women expect to be treated and have shown no intention of changing it no matter how much They screech about Sexual Equality out of the other side of Their face. The last thing you can expect from a Female is to make an equal effort to establish or maintain a relationship.

The attitude of Women that They must be won is the basis one of problems between Men and Women: Sexual harassment. This can be demonstrated by the kind of romance novels and movies that Women are so fond of; and the Doris Day movies epitomize the situation. They almost always follow the same scenario: Boy sees Girl and falls in love. Boy approaches Girl will cleaver opening line, but is rebuffed. Boy is open, friendly, witty and charming. Girl is a Bitch. Boy launches a campaign to win Her heart, and after many rejections finally succeeds, earns Her love and They live happily ever after. This is not only a ridiculous way for two grown people to behave but it has given Men the idea that when She says no She really means yes. All He has to do make enough effort and He will eventually win Her. Women love it when they are pursued by someone They want to be pursued by. Everything goes Her way and She will make it just difficult enough so that He will not lose interest. But if She is pursued by someone She doesn't want to be pursued by She will probably engage in hysterical screaming about sexual harassment.

This leads to another typical behavior of the traditional Female, blatant emotionalism. Women not only think they have a right to be emotional but an obligation to be emotional at all the right times. Many conflicts between Men and Women begin because Females take umbrage when they feel Men are not appropriately emotional. The position of the Women's Movement that sexual equality means that Men become more like Women by getting more in touch with Their emotions is, again, the exact opposite of reality. Since it is Females who want to change Their roles and since they want equal access to traditional Male roles it is Women who must change to adapt to these new roles. Women must get control of Their emotions. You can, however, make a pretty good argument that in order control your emotions you must understand them by getting in touch with them, but that doesn't abrogate the responsibility to let reason and logic prevail.

The court system is currently stacked in favor of Women and, again, They have no intention of changing it no matter how much They screech about sexual equality. In exchange for sex, a Women is entitled to half of everything a Man owns just for starters. If Children are involved the price goes up. The marriage licence is, in fact, a licence for Women to steal. The one gain Men have made in the quest for equality is the reduction of alimony payments to Women. Women have compensated for this by using Children as a financial lever. The statement "Women and Their Children" was intentionally used to show that Children belong to Her. The way that it is coming out of the court system today is that She gets the Kids, the house and the car; He gets the bills and visitation rights. In better than eighty percent of court cases She gets sole custody of the Children, He gets sole custody of the bills. Women view Children as Theirs and They want to have it both ways; parental privileges to Females, financial responsibility to Males.

Parental responsibility is one of the most important issues of our time. Children are suffering in larger numbers today due directly to parental irresponsibility. More and more Men are not being responsible for Child support, but why should They if the Children are not Theirs. If Women want sole custody of the Children that should include the financial responsibility as well, especially under the harsh light of sexual equality. If Women want Men to share the financial responsibility, then They must share custody. The fact that Women are trying to have it both ways is the biggest obstacle to resolving this issue. In addition to this Women are all to willing to use Children as a weapon against Their former Spouses. Mothers encourage Children to take sides in Their disputes. Constant brainwashing of "your Father this and you Father that" further exacerbates this problem.

This is just one of the ways in which the traditional Female uses Children to Her own advantage. Women have a history of purposely becoming pregnant by a Man who can be sued for big bucks in court. Hugh Hefner, for example was a constant victim of paternity suits by sexually exploitive Females. It can be said for certain that Playmates make a living exploiting their sexuality.

This most insidious use of Children by Women is occurring in the welfare system. All to often a Girl born in poverty and raised on welfare will drop out of school thereby guaranteeing herself no future. What does She do for an income? Drop a Kid. If She wants a raise She'll drop another one. Welfare was designed to aid Children, but Women are lumping themselves in with the Children, giving Themselves the advantages of Children and abusing the system. This means that the non-achievers are breeding themselves at a higher rate than the achievers and demanding that the achievers subsidize Their irresponsible reproduction. It is these Children that are terrorizing poor neighborhoods and lowering the test scores in schools. Even worse, more and more the welfare money is not being spent on the Children, but is being spent on drug abuse by the mother and the Kids are being born drug addicted. The failure of the Women's Movement to focus on the Females responsibility in Parenting further detracts from Their credibility.

The Liberated Women

The one thing that Women do want to change is Women's status in the work place, and seems to be the only thing that most Women can agree on. But even here the application of "Equality" focuses on only those aspects of the work place that are attractive to Females. Since Women also want to retain the right of assuming the traditional Female role, They are trying to have it both ways. Notice that Women as a class have no responsibilities and this is the true meaning of the liberated Woman. They are not required to support themselves, nor required do housework even if they don't work. They are not required to be full time mothers to Their Children. They are not required to take part in national defence or any of the other dirty, nasty jobs that Men do that to make this country the most desirable place to live in since the birth of the Human Race. What They want is equal, or preferential, access to all of the best things in life. This smorgasbord of privileges and prerogatives for Women is possible because Men still retain the traditional responsibilities of protecting, defending and providing for Women and Their Children as well as for Themselves.

Two major changes in our society have precipitated this change in attitude. The first is the fact that Women now have total control over Their reproduction. The average number of Children has dropped to a little over two per Female and even less for the affluent. Add to that all the labor saving devices that are available and Housewives have found themselves with a lot of unused time and energy on Their hands.

Second, now that the work place has become a lot more civilized and all those nice cushy air conditioned office jobs have become available, Women have decided to expend that energy in the work place. As Their number increased, so did the complaints that They are not equally represented in management. You never hear Them complain that They are not equally represented in the coal mines, or the steel mills, or in heavy construction, or in any of the other dirty, nasty jobs that Men do that make Women's life so comfortable. The more Women have demanded equality, the longer and redder Their fingernails have become. These hands convey they message that they no longer do Women's work, but they don't do Men's work either. In fact, they don't do anything whereby "I might break a naaaail !!!". They want to be Boss though.

People in positions of responsibility and authority are not allowed the luxury of collapsing in an emotion heap in a crisis. People in positions of responsibility and authority are required to use their brains and make calm rational decisions when they are under pressure. People who can't do this have no business being in positions of responsibility and authority. Men are taught to control Their emotions because they are being groomed to attain these positions. Few Men have this ability and the competition to rise to the top is designed to weed out the ones who can't, among other things. Women, as a class, have failed to make a commitment to control Their emotions and engage in logical, rational thinking. The attitude by Females That they can continue to be the emotional basket cases They've always been and still be given equal access to positions of responsibility and authority further demonstrate the dishonesty and duplicity of Women.
It is also unrealistic to think that it is the world that has to adapt to suit Women. A graphic case in point occurred in Russia not long ago. The Gorbechevs found themselves the victims of a coup attempt and thought it probable that they would be killed. After it was all over Raisa collapsed in an emotional heap and ended up in a hospital for several weeks. What would the world have thought if Machael couldn't show himself for weeks afterward? He would have been politically dead immediately. Raisa demonstrated how uncommitted and unsuited she was to hold the position as the Female partner of the Soviet leadership.

Women have also demonstrated that, as a class, they are less committed to the work place than Men. Children will result in lower productivity as Women attempt to "Have it all", or they will leave to take the mommy track. They may also leave the work place if they find a sucker that will sign up to support Them in a style They can become accustomed, thereby wasting the investment made by the employer in training Them. Indeed, too many Women view the work place as the best social environment, the perfect place to find such a Man. In office jobs, Women can sit around in Their fancy in-style cloths and Their in-style hair-dos and Their long painted finger nails, like so much sexual bait on a hook, and troll for that Knight in Shining Armor that will offer them early retirement. Housewives also view the work place as a social environment because most of them are bored at home and work offers them social contact, income of Their own and work that gives them a feeling of accomplishment. This is not a bad thing, but they are not committed and have a history of leaving the job when discontented. To Men, however, work is not just the place were he provides for Himself, his Wife and his Children, it is the yardstick by which he is measured. A Man is his work and although He may also leave a company, He is usually totally dedicated to His work.

The biggest complaint that Women have about the work place is, of course, that they do not receive equal pay for equal work. Some of the reasons for this are stated above, but the main reason is that Men still have the responsibility to support parasitic Females. Women fail to mention that around half Their number still retain the privilege of being supported by Men. The main reason for this is so they can stay home with the Children and so the financial responsibility is even greater as Men must support a Woman and Her Children. While many single Mothers also have Children to support they are seldom supporting parasitic Males at the same time, and not required to do so by social custom. People are not paid because of Their needs, but because of Their contributions and there is no way to make it perfectly fair. Most Men do have Wives and if you total all the money earned by Men and Women, most of the money is spent by or on Women and Their Children. How else can Women spend so much time in Their favorite pastime: shopping. Never has there been a race of people so good at spending money, especially someone else's money. They should not expect to earn equal pay until they make an equal commitment to the work place and stop sexually exploiting Men for a living.

Recently many wives have begun to complain that They have no choice and must work to make ends meet. These women have suddenly found themselves with more "Equality" than they bargained for, and they don't like it. Like Men, They are required to work for a living. Women have only Themselves to blame for this because the rise in the two income family was the engine which drove inflation in the 70's and 80's. Two income families drove up the price of housing and other commodities. One income families are now at a disadvantage for competition for scarce resources. This is often a double whammy since one income families are generally making a commitment to parenting and have more mouths to feed. As usual, Women have admitted no responsibility for this predicament. The decline of the traditional family must be placed on the rise of Women in work place.

The Primitive Female

The problem is that Women are trying to change, in a single generation, feminine roles and attitudes that have evolved over the last five million years. This number has been referenced throughout the article because it is the time scientists have determined that Humans diverged from Their ancestral line. It is during this time that Humans have developed Their unique characteristics and Females have had a major role in shaping this evolution. Women now want to undo what they have worked so hard to establish. Therefore, it is Their own attitudes and behaviors that must change and it is time They took responsibility for this and stop blaming only Men for the predicament they find Themselves in.

Pre-Human culture was very similar to modern Chimpanzee culture. It must be remembered that Humans did not evolve from Monkeys or, more correctly, Chimpanzees. Chimpanzees have evolved along Their own lines for the last five million years. We share common ancestors, but Chimpanzee culture has not changed dramatically from the ancestral one. Jane Goodall studied Chimpanzee culture in order to gain insight into the forces that shaped Human evolution.

Chimpanzee culture is similar to most mammalian social cultures: a male dominated sexual dichotomy. Males and females are in fact equal in strength. Male strength is directed outwardly toward defense while female strength is directed inwardly toward reproduction. Males are locked in eternal conflict among themselves for dominance and breeding rights. Nature has determined that the best formula for reproduction is that all females reproduce but only the most fit males are allowed to reproduce. This will maximize the birthrate and will ensure that the next generation of males can successfully defend the group from predators. This and the conflict between predator and prey is one of the natural selection processes that drive evolution, making the next generation bigger, stronger, faster and smarter. There are, however, two aspects of Human evolution that have baffled anthropologists.

The first is how Human Beings came to walk on two legs. All other mammals are quadrupedal including Chimpanzees. Why was it advantageous for Humans to become bipedal? One theory proposes that as we came down out of the trees to live on the savanna we had to stand on Our hind legs to see over the tall grass. However, baboons are savanna dwellers and are the most quadrupedal of all large primates. For this and other reasons this theory, although widely accepted, is unsatisfactory. Another theory suggests that bipedalism made us better hunters and gave us more endurance. The best hunters, however, are quadrupedal with much more endurance than Humans. The real reason for Human bipedalism will be found elsewhere.

The second aspect of Human evolution that has baffled anthropologists is why Human Females have lost estrus. All other mammalian females go through estrus, or heat as it is called in our pets, and is the period of maximum female sexual receptivity. Once a female is impregnated she stops having estrus cycles and is not sexually available again until she is ready to conceive. A Women's period is a vestige of this estrus cycle. Every month, in concert with ovulation, a Woman will have a period until She becomes pregnant, and will stop having periods until She is ready to become pregnant again. However, unlike other mammalian females, the Human Female is sexually available all of the time. Why????

C. Owen Lovejoy linked these two developments into an evolutionary package in which Women used sex as an inducement to encourage Men to provision Them. The only way Men had to carry food back to the Female was to carry it in Their hands. Men learned to walk on Their hind legs in order to free Their hands for this purpose. Males who did this were rewarded with sex and this could only occur if Females were sexually available all of the time. This is the key evolutionary step that separated Humans from Their relatives and led to all of the hallmark achievements in Human evolution. However, it is clear that it is Women who have been making a living sexually exploiting Men for the last five million years. The effort of the Women's Movement to depict Themselves as the poor little dears who are being sexually exploited is typical of Their dishonesty and duplicity.

None of this happened for the benefit of Males or Females. It occurred because it benefited the Human species as a whole. Male Chimpanzees, as with most other mammalian males, do not provision females. Females are expected to provision themselves. If they are pregnant or are nursing young then they must forage for two, and will not enter estrus and be sexually available until they are ready to support another pregnancy. This may be as much as four years, most likely after the child is weaned. It may vary according to the food supply and the Females body fat content. There have been cases of Human Females who have lowered their body fat content to the point to which They stopped having periods. It seems to be the bodies way of saying that you cannot support a pregnancy. With Males provisioning Females the Human population skyrocketed. Females can now become pregnant every year and can support three Children, one in the womb and two at the breast. Our reproductive rate exceeded Our relative's by as much as a factor of four and thus began the process of Humans overpopulating the earth.

The process of Women sexually exploiting Men for a living was refined over the millennia to the point where the first law of Womenhood is never, ever, give it away, always demand compensation for sex. In Our culture especially, Men always pay Women for sex. The mainstay of the dating game is taking a Women to dinner. The more elegantly, extravagantly and expensively a Man demonstrates to a Woman His ability to provision Her, the more sexually aroused She becomes. Women still judge a Man by what kind of provider He is. The current price for casual sex is at least three dinners and a movie, but this is only for starters. Women sell their sexuality like drug dealers sell drugs. It is relatively cheap at first, but as the user becomes addicted, the price goes up. Eventually She demands "total commitment", which means His signature on a marriage contract which entitles Her to half of everything He owns just for starters. What She wants as payment for sex is lifetime financial security.

A classic example of this was depicted in the movie "Pretty Woman". It has to be assumed that it's extreme popularity was due to the fact that it appealed to today's Women. It was a story of a whore who sold her body to anyone who met her price, but was reformed by love. At least that is the way Women saw it. What really happened is that She sensed that He was falling in love with her and she simply upped her price. She demanded the whole "fairy tale". She wanted to be courted and wooed, but mostly, she wanted to see his signature on a marriage contract. If he didn't meet her price she was going to go away and have nothing to do with him. The last thing she was going to do is make her own living, on her own two feet instead of on her back, and make love to this man openly, honestly and without compensation, simply because she loved him. This is the last thing you can expect from any Woman despite all Their screeching about sexual equality. The reason that the so called proper Female can't abide prostitutes is that they don't charge enough. Why should a Man sign up for a lifetime financial commitment if He can get sex on a pay as you go basis? The heroin's reformation came because she began to charge the excepted price for sex.

It is understandable why things became so extreme. In the beginning, the food requirement for pre-human males and females were the same. Although females had to provide for two, males needed just as much or even more food because they were larger and spent a lot of energy fighting among themselves for breeding status. Since eating was simply a matter of foraging for it, females were not at a disadvantage. Indeed, in some animal cultures, the dominant males spend so much time and energy maintaining their status that they have little time to feed and can not build up enough reserves to survive the winter or other harsh times; they live on, though, in their offspring and this provides the incentive. As the new Human condition became established, and as Human populations exploded, Women who didn't have help in providing for Their Children became more at a disadvantage. Since nature responded to the provisioning of Females by increasing Their reproduction rate, Women became increasingly dependant on Men. Child bearing became more of a burden to the point that a growing number of Women began to fear and loath sex. This fear and loathing of sex exists, to some extent, in most Women and has led to a very bad attitude about sex and has further widened the schism between Men and Women. If not for the fact that nature has endowed Women with a Maternal drive that is equal in strength to Men's sex drive the future of the Human race would be in jeopardy.

This was beautifully depicted in the book "The World According to Garp". Jenny Fields hated sex but wanted a child. She had to be respected, though, because she took responsibility for herself and her son. Most Women who don't like sex take the approach of the mother of the little girl who taught young Garp about sex. She explained to Garp that he was supposed to tear her cloths off even though she always "had a headache". In other words, most of these Women still want to sexually exploit some man into providing for herself and her children, but do all they can to avoid sex. That is one reason why many women want to be virgins before they get married. It is better not to let Men know that They are not going to get what They are paying for.

Speaking of not getting what your paying for brings up the subject of breast implantations. The sole reason for cosmetic breast implantations is to be sexually attractive to Men. This enhances a Women's ability to sexually exploit Men for a living. A Woman who intends to support herself without relying on sex has no reason for having large breasts. Women's attempt to blame Men for the medical problems They are currently facing is another example of the dishonesty and duplicity of Women. Women are exploiting a weakness in Men and reaping the financial gains. While much can be said about the ethics of the medical profession for not making it a safer procedure, nothing is being said the ethics of Women.

The key event that triggered the Women's Movement is the development of birth control. This has given Women total control over Their reproduction and has liberated Women from the ancient dependance upon Men to provision Them. While Women have been quick to take advantage of the freedom and new opportunities this event precipitated, They have been extremely slow in giving up the traditional privileges and prerogatives that were afforded Them because of it. Women still retain a very bad attitude about sex. It is time Women developed an attitude about sex more equal to that of Men.

It is clear that it is Women have been making a living sexually exploiting Men. Men always pay Women for sex, and Women have shown little intention of changing this. While this was acceptable in a sexual dichotomy, the light of sexual equality casts Women as a race of whores and parasites. Men are obliged to pay to just look at a nude Female, and it is the height of Female hypocrisy to charge that magazines and clubs who provide this service are sexually exploiting Women. These Women make a living doing this and get away with it because of the extremely bad attitude most "decent" Women have about sex. If Women had a healthy attitude about sex this business would die and there would be much more loving in the world.

The marriage licence has evolved into a licence for Women to steal, especially in community property states. The amount of money which passes from Men to Women because of it is obscene in the light of sexual equality. It is the price Wives demand for sex as can be demonstrated by the fact the contract is not validated until it is consummated by sex. Take Ivana Trump for example. What was her price? She fancied herself a one billion dollar whore but had to settle for ten million. Poor baby. The justification for this is often Children, who should be raised in proportion to Their Father's income, but the Children are not allowed to take this money when they leave home. It is the Wives money as Her price for sex and She has it both ways. She gets the Children and the Man's money. This is another way in which Women exploit Children for financial gain. It is why They seek out rich Men to marry, and have no intention of changing the system no matter how much they screech about sexual equality out of the other side of Their face. If left to Women this will change only when the money begins to flow from Women to Men.

The Women' Movement has lost credibility because They have failed to address these issues. Men and an increasing number of Women are aware of the dishonesty and duplicity of the Movement. The focus of the Movement upon Men and how Men only must change in order to achieve sexual equality is causing the backlash. Before Women will be accepted as equals by Men, all Women must accept equal responsibility and must give up Their ancient lifestyle of being whores and parasites.


All Male behavior can be ultimately linked to the drive to procreate and to continue the species. While this is true for every living thing on the planet, Males focus on sex, which is the heart of the institution called love. Men view sex as the ultimate achievement of Human interaction and don't understand Women's extremely poor attitude about it, and have little sympathy with that attitude. In order to achieve this interchange Men in this culture have spoiled Women rotten. To a large extent the Women's Movement is a group of pampered bitches who want to be even more spoiled rotten than they already are. The problem with the Movement is that half of the Women in this culture know that they're pampered and that sexual equality will mean giving that up.

Male aggression is due to the fact that We have evolved in a very violent world. Most of the animals born on this planet end up in the bellies of other animals. Males have had the responsibility to defend the group from predators while Females hide with the Children. Females don't understand Male aggression because They have been insulated from most of this hardship. The predator-prey relationship is, in fact, beneficial to both species and is responsible for keeping populations in balance with their environment and speeding the advance of evolution. Predators weed out the unhealthy and unfit and the competition for survival improves each subsequent generation. Human Beings would not exist today if not for this struggle. In fact, it is becoming evident that no system can last without negative feedback loops which work to keep it stable. It is only now becoming evident that life on this planet is responsible for keeping the temperature of the globe within optimum limits for life itself by regulating the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The point is that everything that exists today exists for very real reasons and it is vitally important we understand them.

Males are on the front lines of this struggle and have had to bear the brunt of it. Pre-human populations that were better able to defend themselves prospered better than populations that couldn't. This included the willingness to sacrifice one's own life for the benefit of the group. Some populations evolved methods to improve this defensive capability by ensuring that only the most fit males were allowed to reproduce. That is why most mammalian cultures are male dominated with males locked in a struggle for breeding status. Only the toughest males were allowed to reproduce thereby ensuring the fitness of the next generation. Evolution progressed as each population developed better methods of adapting to their environment. It is the offspring of these populations that survive today.

Humans have evolved from being a prey species to being the top predator species. We are so powerful that there are no other animals that can threaten Us. Our population has exploded to the point that We are posing a serious threat to the world in which We live. It is because of this that nature has made Us our own predators. Because no predator has been able to keep Our population in check, overpopulation pressures have caused us to war among ourselves and reduce our populations that way. Human population has steadily increased not because We are more civilized but because our technology has increased food production and the carrying capacity of the land. If food runs short, rest assured war will break out, and we will prey upon each other once again.
Women's attitude that Men are responsible for all the violence in the world is naive to the point of absurdity. They can maintain this attitude because Men have done Their best to protect from Women from it. Males have born the brunt of a violent world and do so willingly and without complaint. While Women have also been brutalized by Men, it is far less than that received by Men. If Men didn't exist it can be said for certain that Women would fill these roles. If They didn't They wouldn't survive long. There are plenty of Female killers in jail and They would inherit the earth unless all Women take responsibility for defending individual rights. Sexual equality means that Women have to do Their share. They must learn to take a punch as well as give one and sacrifice Their lives if necessary for the benefit of the whole.

Men have led the struggle to liberate Us from the brutality of our heritage. Democracy and the rule of law were established by Men as an alternative to fighting for leadership. Women were not included in the voting because They did not participate in the battle. As Human cultures progressed, survival depended on good leadership and this meant brain became more important than brawn. White Males, more than any other race or sex on this planet, have a strong sense of individuality. Their fight for individual rights and freedom laid the ground work for independence for all, especially white Women. It took white Men killing white Men (and sacrificing Their own lives) to end slavery in this country. It also took white Men killing blacks and Arabs, mostly Moslem, to stamp it out in Africa where it was an institution for thousands of years. Our culture is replete with heroes who sacrificed Their lives for Their beliefs or for the benefit of others, especially Women. The history of the American fighting Man is one of sacrificing His life for People all over the world. The last time the American soldier defended His own country was during the war of 1812. All of the wars since then were fought to liberate others from oppression. The closest we have come since then was during World War II when we were attacked at Pearl Harbor. However, most of the soldiers died liberating others from Japanese or German domination. Women are notably absent from this struggle, but are more than willing to partake of the fruits of this labor.

The tremendous advances in science and technology that have made this era in history so luxurious are due almost entirely to the efforts of Men. Medicine have reduced suffering all over the globe and has triggered a meteoric population growth. Men are creative, constructive and productive in ways that Women don't seem to understand or appreciate. The underlying driving force for this is the need Men have to understand and thereby control Their environment.

Men do all of the heavy lifting and the dirty nasty jobs that make the economy as rich and prosperous as it is. From the coal mines to the steel mills to heavy construction, Men have built this country from the ground up. Men build and repair the houses that keep Their Women protected and comfortable. Women have done little to liberate Men from this burden despite all the screeching about sexual equality, declaring instead that Women are no longer responsible for keeping the house clean. Men must take more responsibility for even that.

For all of Their strength and intelligence and achievements, Men are incredible fools when it comes to Women. Men have let Women convince Them that They are exploiting Women when, in fact, it is They who are being exploited by Women. Men have steadfastly carried out Their age old responsibilities of protecting, defending and providing for Women and Their Children without much complaint. Woman, on the other hand, have been angling for every advantage by moaning, bitching, throwing temper tantrums, but mostly using sex to convince Men to do for Them. The reason that Women are getting away with this is that Men seem to fall under two basic categories.

The first is "Momma's Boys". These Men revere Their Mothers and put all Women on a pedestal. They work hard to be the kind of Man that Their Mother can be proud of, which is usually being subservient dofers for Women. Momma's Boys are responsive to constant demands of "do this for Me; do that for Me; take Me here; take Me there; wine Me and dine Me and otherwise entertain Me; win My heart and earn My love". While Women love Momma's Boys, They are usually frustrated by competition from His Mother for domination of this Boy. These Boys can usually be identified by Their large breast fetish.

Most Men, however, are "Dickheads" because They have a hard time thinking with anything but Their dicks. They will do anything to get a Woman in bed. They will say anything a Woman wants to hear, make any effort and pay any price to achieve this goal, and Women see that they do. When a Women says that She's not a cheap date that's exactly what She means. Women have a love-hate relationship with Dickheads. They love all the attention and all the money Dickheads lavish on them, but eventually Dickhead figure it's time They got what They're paying for, and they have been paying for it, and then it's "Men! They're all alike. They only want one thing." This is the underlying cause of date rape. Women can go a long way in avoiding it if they insist on paying Their own way if They aren't interested in sex.

Men have spoiled Women rotten because there is a Dickhead and Momma's Boy in most Men to one degree or another. If relations between the sexes is to progress to a state agreeable to both sexes, Men must change these attitudes as much as Women have to change Their propensity to sexually exploit Men for a living. Whatever the meaning of life is, it is not being a slave to the emotions of Females, not even for sex. Men should no longer consider having a beautiful Woman on Their arm a status symbol since it has become obvious that They are either paying for it or totally subservient to Her emotions. Real Men are beginning to turn Their backs on Women and refusing to play the game the way Women want to play it.

This dilemma is one of the underlying causes for Men's hostility and violence towards Women. Males try to control Their own emotions and Their environment in order to live ordered rational lives. Men find that Their sexual dependence on Women subject them to an irrational, emotional roller coaster ride that They have absolutely no control over, and it drives Them crazy. This frustration is released as physical violence directed at Women. This is the reason emotions must be controlled. No one succeeds all of the time, but Men at least, have made a commitment to keeping a lid on this kind of inappropriate expression of emotions. Women have not only failed to make such a commitment, They insist on being the same emotional basket cases They've always been. Control of one's emotions doesn't mean being emotionless. It means using your intellect so that these emotions are expressed in appropriate, healthy and socially productive ways.

This dilemma runs much deeper though. Men don't want to admit to Themselves that They are dependant on Women for Their emotional well being. Men will engage in dominance games and other self deluding behavior in order to hide the truth from Themselves. The most important one is Men's willingness to believe the Female hype that it is Women who are being sexually exploited by Men. Women are masters at deception and seem to want to portray Themselves as victims, while encouraging the macho illusion of Men never being victimized. The last thing the Women's Movement is about is sexual equality, the real purpose is liberation from Women's financial dependance on Men. The forces that have kept relations between the sexes in equilibrium is mutual dependance. Men depending on Women for Their physical needs and Women depending on Men for Their financial needs. The mutual dependance that has been refined for five million years and is being undone in Our time. The break-up of the nuclear family is due primarily to this growing imbalance.

Men have no choice but to wean Themselves from Their sexual dependence on Women. Until They do Women will try to have it both ways and continue to behave like spoiled rotten bitches, and Men will find Themselves totally controlled by the emotions of Females. If you can abstain until the moment is right you ave achieved the perfect solution. If you must find sexual release is preferable to use your hand than to find some woman to masturbate on. Do not pay for it, not even a dinner. Do not cater to Female emotions and fantasies. Insist that Women live up to Their screeching about sexual equality and make an equal effort to establish and maintain a relationship. When sex becomes an honest physical expression of the feelings of friends and lovers, Women will become more receptive to it and relations between the sexes will warm.

The Future of Men And Women

This article is not a definitive description of Women and the Women's Movement. It is just as one sided and self serving as the rhetoric of the Women's Movement has been, and is intended to demonstrate the irritating nature of this behavior. Women may have come a long way, but They have a hell of a long way to go before They will be treated by Men on an equal footing. Men and Women are not equal, will never be equal, and don't want to be treated equally. The roles of both sexes need to be redefined to enable Men and Women to work together to achieve Their individual and common goals. The failure of Women and the Women's Movement define the responsibilities of Women in this new regime is the single most impediment to further progress.

Women must sign up for the draft. If Women want to achieve first class status and the respect of Men, They must fulfill Their first class responsibilities. Most Women are not suited to front line duties and will not be put there. Only ten percent of soldiers are on the front line, so there is plenty of other things Women can do. However, there are many Women more capable than some of the Men who have been required to be on the front lines and They should be given every opportunity to be there. If Women refuse to fulfill this responsibility They should lose Their first class status and lose the right to vote, and be treated like the second class citizens They are.

Women must make an equal effort to establish and maintain a relationship. The Women who feel that Their life is full of Dickheads should examine Their own behavior. The only effort most Women make to establish a relationship is array Themselves as sexual bait and wait to see who offers what to get Them into bed. The dating game is played so that They essentially auction Themselves off to the highest bidder. Only Dickheads are fool enough to play this game and these Women deserve them. If Women want to meet different types of Men, They should take more responsibility to open lines of communication. Women don't want to initiate contact because They don't want to subject Themselves to the kind of viscous rejection that They have subjected Men to. The sensitive, caring Men that Women say They want to meet don't like rejection any more than Women do. If Women want to meet these Men They must be willing to make an equal effort to establish the relationship.

Women must pay Their own way through life. Until they do they will never be considered equal to Men and should consider Themselves the whores and parasites They've always been. If a Woman expects a Man to pay for a date, even for the "pleasure of Her company" she is asking material compensation for Her time and is a prostitute and deserves the sexual pressure She may be subjected to. The best way to avoid the date rape dilemma is for Her to pay Her own way.

The community property laws must be abolished. A Women has no right to expect half of what a Man owns in return for a sexual relationship. Each partner should take from the relationship in proportion to which He or She contributed to it. Since single income families are becoming the exception, this particular arrangement should be negotiated. If a Women or a Man wishes to remain home and devote more time to parenting or housekeeping, the compensation of that partner should be agreed on at the beginning of the relationship.

Women must share custody of the Children if they expect financial assistance when a relationship breaks up. Females can no longer have it both ways. One of the most important issues of our time is responsible parenting. Those found guilty of not meeting their parental responsibilities should be dealt with harshly. If Men are to be held financially responsible for Their Children then the court must declare that They have at least half custody, and Women should be expected to contribute half of the financial support. How custody is shared should be negotiated. One arrangement might be that Mothers spend more time with the Children when They are young, and Fathers gradually increasing time as They grow older. This is true especially for Boys, but Fathers and Daughters also have a special relationship. This arrangement needs to be very flexible according to the needs of all concerned, but the rigid bi-weekly visitation rights by Men must be abolished. The opportunity that is open to Children to enter into an extended family relationship should be nurtured. As family size decreases and divorce rates increase Children must be encouraged to think of themselves as members of both families. The propensity for Women to encourage Their Children to take sides should be curtailed.

Women must make a commitment to control Their emotions and use Their intellect if They expect to attain positions of responsibility and authority. No such commitment has yet been demonstrated by Women in general and until They do equal access to those positions should be restricted. Men make a commitment to control Their emotions not only to attain those positions but because emotional outbursts by Men can be violent and even lethal. Women don't really want Men to get in touch these emotions because Females are too often at the receiving end of the eruption. To a lesser degree all emotional outbursts are inappropriate in most social contexts and should be controlled. This doesn't mean that emotions must be suppressed but that they expressed in appropriate ways and at appropriate times. One of the reasons football and other violent sports have become so popular is that they have become a release for these pent up emotions.

The Women's Movement must stop Their duplicitous self serving rhetoric. The one sided and unequal way that Women are using the word "equality" to achieve Their goals has become a major impediment to further gains. Women enjoy every advantage in this culture except when it comes to the work place. Women have only Themselves to blame for it since They fled into the home every chance They got. Now that the work place has become attractive to Women this situation will not change overnight just because They want it to. Women's age old behavior of bitching a Men until Men give it to Them will not solve the problem. In addition, the attitude that Women must be equally represented in traditional Male roles that are attractive to Them, such as management, but not necessarily equally represented in roles that are unattractive to Them has resulted in increasing contempt on the part of Men toward Women. The argument that Women are not as suited to heavy construction as Men can be equally applied to management positions since all were invented by Men to be practiced by Men as They carry out Their traditional Male roles. Women are locked out of these positions because They are dependant on Men to give Them these jobs, and the attitude that They must be given these job by unequally invoking "equality" has resulted in a negative backlash. The best way for Women to have access to Their "fair share" of the jobs is to create Their "fair share" of the jobs, but They have shown little ability to do this.

The real point of the Women's Movement is a continuation of the battle that the Men in this culture have sacrifice Their lives for: Freedom of choice for everyone. It is because Men have died for this cause that Women can carry the battle forward in relative luxury. However, Women don't seem to understand what equality means. It doesn't just mean "equal pay for equal work" or "equal representation in management", it means equality under the law. It also means equal responsibility. Men, especially white Men, have a strong need for independence and individuality. Our form of democracy is intended to give each Individual the freedom to follow His or Her own path through life without being forced into molds because of race, religion or someone else's idea of morality or behavior. This is also true for sex, and the Woman's movement should be intended to open doors for Women rather to decide what equality means for all Women and for Men.

The biggest impediment to the Women's Movement is Women Themselves. First, because most of the Women in this culture want to retain the traditional Female roles and privileges. Second is the duplicitous nature of the Movement itself. Until the movement takes the position that They are fighting for individuality and equal opportunity for all, instead of engaging in a battle of the sexes, a negative backlash will continue to hamper progress. This is amply demonstrated by the hypocritical manner in which Women are addressing sex discrimination issues. The rule, according to Women, is that all sex discrimination that benefits Males over Females is prohibited, but sex discrimination that benefits Females over Males is allowed. The draft is the prime example of this but there are many other cases. Two more examples of this duplicity and hypocrisy should be illuminated.

The first is in sports. Women are allowed to form Their own sports associations in which sex discrimination is used to exclude Men. They do this because They know They cannot compete with Men on an equal footing and will never make money if sexual equality were applied fairly. But Women further demonstrate Their hypocrisy and duplicity by asserting that They are the victims of sex discrimination because They don't earn the same as Men. If equal pay for equal play were applied They shouldn't. But to underline the irrationality of Their position, it should be stated that professional sports is entertainment, and the income for players is proportional to the gate they draw, not their ability to play. If Women's sports were to become so popular that They were making more than Men, you can bet the farm that Women will not redress the issue by applying sexual equality. The final insult came when a law was passed which allowed high school Girls to compete in Boy's sports. However, in the typical duplicitous and hypocritical fashion of Women, Boys are not allowed to compete in Girl's sports.

While Women are demanding access to all traditional Male institutions They think that traditional Female institutions can remain segregated. This was demonstrated by the dears in Mills College who threw what has to be described as a typical Female hysterical temper tantrum when they thought Males would be enrolled. Even though their education is steeped in sexual discrimination, you can bet that they will screech the loudest if they feel they are the victims of sex discrimination. They have not demonstrated that they can work with Men or compete with Men on an equal basis. They have shown that they are, in fact, Man haters, but they will demand equal access to all traditional Male roles and milieus. This is the height of Female duplicity, dishonesty and hypocrisy and has to be changed if Men and Women are to work together in the present and in the future.
All talk of equal or proportional representation by sex (or by race or any other criteria for that matter) must be curtailed. The only requirement for a job is that the applicant is the best one qualified for the job at the time of employment. It should come as no surprise that white Males have an advantage because the best jobs in our culture were invented by white Males to be employed by white Males. However, the traditional white Male good old boy system is fast becoming a thing of the past, not because of the sexual and civil rights movements, but because of economic necessity.

The decline of the American economy is due to the fact that the bloated, effete, good old boy management system has not been able to compete will leaner foreign competition. This system has resulted in a plethora of over paid, incompetent managers who got where they are by knowing how to play the game rather than producing results. This fact was painfully demonstrated by the gaggle of automotive and other CEOs who accompanied George Bush to Japan. American companies can no longer afford this inefficient management system and this is at the heart of the pessimism that most Americans are feeling during the '90s recession. Big changes are coming and no one knows what will happen. The companies that will survive are the ones that employ the best people for the job regardless of race or sex.

Another problem of the traditional management system is that is all too often a power game. The reward, for many, of climbing to top is to lord it over the people below. It has long been observed that boot polishers seem to be promoted more than their contribution to the company should allow. This can result in sexual harassment of Women as some Men exercise this power. It should be noted that Men are also subjected to pressure and harassment, although in a different way, but it is just as humiliating and degrading. Women, however, have engaged in undue whining and crying about this kind of pressure, They want to play with the big boys on an "equal" footing, but They want all of the traditional protection afforded to Women. They can't have it both ways. If They want in, they have to learn to take it like a Man. Men are also subjected to sexual harassment by Female superiors, but you hear a lot less about it. This is not to say that this kind of behavior must be tolerated, but that Women are still engaging in emotional tantrums with regard to pressures in the work place.

It will be a long time before this aspect of Human nature is ejected from the work place. Indeed, Women have had to admit, to Their chagrin, that working for Female superiors is often worse than working for Men. One reason is that traditional Female wiles don't work on Female managers. The battle to civilize the work place still has a long way to go and Women will not help Their cause if They continue to address this issue with traditional Female hysterics.

The basic reason for Women's complaints of sexual harassment is the work place is Their extremely poor attitude about sex. Men are, more often than not, flattered by sexual innuendo, while Women behave like fell bitches. Women must develop a sexual outlook more equal to that of Men if relations between the Sexes is to improve. Women now have total control over Their reproduction so the basic reason for this attitude has been eliminated. While They have been quick to take advantage of the freedoms this technology has precipitated, They have made little progress in improving Their attitude.

The battle of the Sexes is a unilateral War. All Men want to do is make love. It's Women who want to make a fight out of it, or charge a fortune for it.