The Worst F-Word: FASHION

I have a bone to pick with the fashion industry.

Not with regard to any particular trend or style; no.

THE. WHOLE. DAMNED. THING.

What is “Fashion” anyway?

I’ll tell you: “Fashion” is when you take a useful item, garment, piece of equipment, etc., and copy it’s stylistic elements over to an “updated” version of the original design – without including any of the practical elements that made the original thing useful – and THEN proceed to manufacture the “updated” product out of literal refuse and industrial runoff.

“Fashion” is about fabricating appearances.

You think you’re buying a dress. Instead you’re buying industrial waste plastics that have been spun into filaments and fashioned into something that looks like a dress.

You think you’re buying a pair of boots. Instead you’re buying industrial waste plastics that have been melted and molded and layered and fashioned into something that looks like a pair of boots.

“Fashion” is the antithesis of usefulness and durability.

It is also the antithesis of actual style and good taste, because it is by design and by deliberate intention always changing. It doesn’t seem to matter if the “new fashion trends” are hideous; they only have to be different.

“Fashion” is also a tool of cultural subversion which is being used to propagate widespread “androgyny”(read: faggotry) among men and women alike.

For decades, the Fashion Industry has been churning out “women’s fashion” that is increasingly masculine, and “men’s fashion” that is increasingly feminine.

The majority of new “women’s clothing” available for retail sale in the U.S. are essentially made to fit men: wide shoulders, very little room for boobs, no waistline, and enough room in the crotch of every pair of pants I’ve tried on in the last ten years to smuggle at least a pound of salami without raising any eyebrows.

The majority of new “men’s clothing” available for retail sale in the U.S. has been trending in the opposite direction: narrower shoulders, “slimmer” fits, shorter rises, higher hip-to-inseam ratios, etc.

Pretty soon, most women will have to shop in the “Men’s” department, and most men with have to shop in the “Women’s” department.

They want us all to be trannies, soy boys, and bull dykes.

Those of us who cling to our respective masculine or feminine aesthetic, and depend on large clothing manufacturers to supply our daily wardrobes, will soon have a critical decision to make: wear the clothes that were made for the opposite gender and be “comfortable” – or try to dress like your actual gender, and put up with the discomfort and inconvenience of poor fit and restricted movement.

Footwear is a big problem, too.

We can start with the fact that most of it is engineered to fall apart within about three months of regular use (even when you’re spending extra on footwear sold on the premise of ruggedness and durability) – this should be criminal.

But there’s another problem: the shift of shoe-makers away from the art of cobbling – and on over into the craft of hobbling.

Most modern footwear is designed to absorb a portion of the energy of every step. This “shock absorption” is touted as something that is better for your joints – but the truth is that this design necessitates greater energy expenditure for every step taken, because the energy is absorbed instead of being transferred. Most shoes make each step “clunkier.” Your feet, ankles, and calves have to work harder to sustain locomotion.

Combine this nonsense with universally poor fit due to all footwear being built on lasts which represent an average of shapes instead of actually being built for any of them…

It’s a problem. It’s a big, huge problem – and a lot of people don’t even see it.

WHY?

Because people don’t really do anything anymore.

I have to chuckle a little under my breath when I hear feminist criticizing the “fashions” of yesteryear as being impractical or restrictive.

These same women have bought into a model of fashion which doesn’t even allow their arms to have full range of motion. Even MORE surprisingly, they’ve bought into a model of fashion that actually makes it harder for them to spread their legs. And which makes it all but impossible to, for example, quickly and easily take a pee in the woods.

In their desire to achieve a sleek, chic, boxy, curve-less, masculine silhouette – they shackle themselves.

Many years ago, I wised up to this – and I bought myself a collection of cute but very practical and well-fitting dresses. They’re all-cotton, they’re fitted (but also gathered and elasticized) through the shoulders and the waistline, and they have big, flared, knee-length skirts. These dresses afford TOTAL freedom of movement unlike anything else I’ve ever worn. I can run, and jump, and climb, and kick, and flail my arms around wildly, and nothing gets stuck or slips down or rides up.

I can do anything, and my clothes stay put. This comes as a surprise to most women.

Half a decade or so ago, I showed up for my first day at my brand new dishwashing job, wearing one such dress. You wouldn’t even believe the looks I got – or maybe you would. Lots of smugness and smirks, like “this girl can’t be for real.”

Turns out all those gals in their tight jeans and button-downs can’t even keep up with me.

It turns out that having your armholes positioned where your arms pivot, and having your waistline lined up with your waist, and not effectively binding your legs together, does quite a lot to improve mobility and efficiency in the workplace.

It turns out that if you actually spend a good portion of your life doing productive things, you eventually realize that you need clothes that move with your body.

“Fashion” is made for people who do nothing but sit, stand, or gently recline – all with their arms pinned down to their sides and their knees held together. If you do anything more than that, you run the risk of busting all the seams on your flimsy plastic frocks.

I don’t see “Big Fashion” ever turning around and reversing this trend of squeezing people into strange, anatomy-defying, movement-restricting clothing. I think “Fashion” was always a tool of social engineering, and always will be.

I suspect the only way forward, for those of us who don’t want to be faggots, is to reclaim, restore, and preserve the model of small-scale, domestic apparel design and manufacture. Functional, sensible garment design. Tailoring. Cobbling.

And I’m not talking about dumb hipster shit from retards who think they’re so special that their product transcends calculations of time and materials.

We need people who are willing to see themselves as micro-factory-workers – not people who peddle the same old garbage wrapped in words like “artisan,” “handcrafted,” and “one-of-a-kind” (which almost never means the design is unique – just that the workmanship is sloppy enough that two of the same thing will always end up looking different).

Otherwise we all gonna catch the gay.

DIE (with a T) – Part I

I’m a big fan of simplicity, and food is no exception.

I can cook nearly anything if I have enough BTU’s, but complicated recipes and gourmet foods are not my preference for everyday fare. People generally expect me to be a “foodie” just because I can – but left to my own devices, if I were only feeding myself, I doubt I’d eat anything requiring more than a knife and FIRE for preparation.

But it’s not just me. I have children to feed, and their nutritional needs are different from mine – as are their tastes. I’m not SO far removed from childhood that I don’t remember exactly how foul a lot of the foods I love today tasted back then. My husband likes most of the foods I like (at least, he likes them the way I prepare them) – but dietary variety is more important to him than it is to me… and he does have a little bit of a foodie streak. 😉

I have a personal philosophy that diverges a bit from what “conventional wisdom” seems to dictate, when it comes to feeding my family. I see no reason – short of dire need, or having no actual choice – to EVER serve a dish to somebody when I know they won’t like it. Kids included.

TBH, while I think eating together is important, I don’t really buy into the idea that the entire family should sit down and eat the exact same things, either. Part of living very frugally, as I prefer to do, is having a steady stream of odds and ends and leftovers and things of that variety. Sometimes these bits and pieces can be combined or transformed into something that will feed the whole family – but sometimes it just makes more sense to feed people different things, so that all of the food that ought to get eaten, gets eaten – while it is still fresh and appealing. Sometimes things get divvied up based on who likes what – and sometimes based on who needs more of what.

So, in spite of my penchant for minimalist eating, I spend quite a lot of time in the kitchen. I cook a whole lot of food that I can’t or won’t eat. And you know, I don’t really mind. Because it also gives ME the freedom to eat what I want to eat. Or, as is the case now… what I need to eat.

I said I was going to put together a bit about my diet, so here goes.

I learned years ago that in order to feel healthy and fully functional as a human being (which I am, btw, just so we’re clear), I have to keep my diet pretty tightly under control. There are a lot of ways to lose weight, which is a biiig (lolol) part of what I aim to do by revising my diet. But I don’t want to do it like a retard.

This means no shortcuts. No gimmicks. No unsustainable eating. And I don’t mean the LEETLE GRAYTAH TUUNBAERG  eco-nazi kind of sustainable. I mean: no subjecting the body to a diet that is not suitable on a permanent basis. There is not “going on a diet.” There is: changing how I eat, period.

I will start counting calories eventually, but my first step is to simply pare down what I eat to a relative few basic foods.

How do I decide which foods make the cut – and what gets cut?

Well, first I keep the foods that make me feel good – and I cut out all of the ones that don’t. A food doesn’t have to make me feel bad to get the boot. For me this means: no grains, no legumes, no uncultured dairy protein.

Then I eliminate all of the foods that contain added sugars or added starches of any kind. I ALSO eliminate all of my favorite, starchiest, sweetest fruits and vegetables (think potatoes and dates). It doesn’t matter that these foods make me feel good in small quantities – because these things tempt me to gluttony, straight-up.

Finally, I eliminate anything that is too exotic or expensive. If I’m not going to make it a staple of my everyday diet, I’m going to pretend it doesn’t exist. You might balk at this, but I’ve found that my “austere” ways have made my life orders of magnitude better when faithfully implemented.

I very nearly crossed a handful of things off the list on account of the fact that they’re always imported – but then I got down to “coffee” and I scrapped that whole silly misguided idea right then and there. It might not be totally “sustainable” if (when?) global supply chains are ever seriously disrupted, but I’m not crossing that bridge a moment sooner than necessary.

This leaves me with a VERY PRACTICAL list of foods that I know I can eat pretty much whenever I please. I’ll add that this time around, I also gave the list a once-over and nixed anything that I know my husband doesn’t like, because he told me he wants to try this diet with me. The only thing that got the axe was beets. Kale barely made it. In most other things, our tastes our blessedly similar.

Once I have my list (I usually do this sort of work in a spreadsheet so that I can easily drag and drop and shuffle things around), I sort it into categories and break it out into what I should be eating more of and what I should be eating less of.

Then I throw it into a format that is easy to digest visually, so I can print it out and subject myself to looking at it regularly.

Here’s what I came up with:

everyday eating small

Note that I also added “fasting hours” down there at the bottom. This is not hardcore “intermittent fasting” – 10 hours between dinner and breakfast is the absolute minimum for me. In reality, if I were not so partial to cream in my coffee, I wouldn’t have any interest in calories until early afternoon most days.

That’s it. That’s all there is.

Kind of.

In order for this diet to be sustainable, it needs a handful of provisions for occasional exception.

Those will be on the other side of the page, along with guidelines for supplements and medicines. Maybe I shouldn’t be so surprised by how much easier it is to remember to actually take these things, when I ought to, when it’s written down like this. And yet, I am.

I’ll be sure to post a picture of what I come up with for the other side, too, as soon as I’m finished nailing it down.

Vaccines

… are dumb and bad.

ALL. OF. THEM.

It’s shitty mimicry of the body’s natural immune response, AT BEST.

If you watch carefully, I promise you’ll see the same thing happen this time around as has happened historically: the vaccine for COVID-19 will be introduced on the very tail end of a MASSIVE decline in morbidity and mortality – but will be given credit for “all but eradicating COVID-19.” This will be propped up by having padded and intensively hyped the number of “confirmed cases” (false positives, misleading/incorrectly interpreted “positives,” presumed cases, double-counting, viral/antibody tests, etc.) right up until the vaccine is ready and enough people are taking it.

At that point, ALL THEY HAVE TO DO is to begin counting cases accurately for the first time ever – whether by reducing testing, or changing the guidelines/criteria for what constitutes a “confirmed case” (or both), and it will APPEAR to the ignorant masses as though vaccination led to a dramatic reduction in disease spread.

And that’s actually the best-case scenario!

There’s also an entirely plausible worst-case scenario wherein a manufacturer or two simply fucks it up big time. And when I say this, people like to point out to me all of the rigorous testing and quality-control protocols vaccines have to go through in order to be deemed safe enough for mass-administration – to which I SAY:

– You mean all those protocols they’ve been EXEMPTED FROM FOLLOWING because “onos COVID-19 so scawwy”??? Yeah, that’s right – a lot of that stuff does not apply.

Perhaps THE most frightening thing to me about this “pandemic” has been witnessing just HOW MANY PEOPLE have a dogmatic sort of faith in the “Scientific Establishment.”

I beg my friends and family – and so I also must beg the tiny handful of people who will end up reading this:

Please do a little research on the historical decline of vaccinable illnesses and how they stack up relative to the decline of non-vaccinable illnesses.

Please compare the massive rates of decline in morbidity and mortality that is common of the period PRIOR TO widespread vaccination, for nearly all illnesses, to the relatively minuscule decline (seemingly representative of the continuation of a natural curve) that is seen in the period AFTER widespread vaccination is achieved.

Please do a little research on the historical incidence/prevalence of vaccine-strain illness.

Please learn about how vaccines have NOTABLY caused widespread injury, sterility, etc. to populations in certain countries.

Please educate yourself, at least fundamentally, on the matter of HOW vaccines are made. Learn which rigors and control processes they are ACTUALLY HELD TO – and distinguish and differentiate those from the ones you imagined they would be held to.

Educate yourself on just how little liability the manufacturers and administrators of these vaccines have in the event of injury or death resulting from adverse reactions to the vaccines or any of their components.

Please do not allow the Scientific Method itself to be sacrificed on the altar of some kinda Infallible-Science-Pope.

Folks might accuse me of being lazy for asking them to do this research themselves instead of providing a long list of citations and references. To THAT, I say:

Not only is “controversial” information on the internet redacted and censored too frequently to feel confident that any of my reference materials would remain available for the foreseeable future (and that’s IF I could even hunt them all down at this point; my stance on vaccination is the product of decades of independent research and study for which I NEVER held myself accountable for taking down notes or citations) – but I also believe that doing the research yourself is a critical part of the process of learning damn nearly anything.

The information is all out there.

This isn’t some “vaccines cause XYZ” theory to be debunked. This is an examination of historical data that is readily available, and it is alarming.

I’m not interested in debating anyone on this issue; that would be (and has always proven to be) a waste of my time and theirs. I merely EXHORT YOU, the reader, to consider these things for yourself.

 

 

 

But if you disagree with me you are probably also dumb and bad.

“Mandatory” Facial Coverings: UNENFORCEABLE

First off: I’ve got nothing against masks. I’m still making masks for friends/family/neighbors/etc. I don’t mind wearing a mask when I go to the doctor’s office, or if I have to be around other people in close quarters (which is SO rare for me) – even though I believe, at this point, that it is more of a courtesy to accommodate their misguided fear than a legitimate protective measure.

But now they’ve rolled out the “mandatory facial coverings” order (I question its legitimacy as an actual “law”) for my entire state beginning tomorrow.

No, I won’t be wearing a mask every time I leave my home. To do so would be patently absurd.

Written into the order is a provision for exemption, for anyone with a condition which contraindicates regular or prolonged mask usage.

There is, as far as I’ve read so far, no provision requiring any individual to disclose the details of their condition to ANYONE for the exemption to apply.

This is as it SHOULD be. Why?

Well, I personally have a small handful of conditions that would certainly qualify.

In terms of easily quantifiable physical effects: I have a genetic condition which causes MANY problems for me, including trouble with body temperature regulation. I’ve spent the last three decades of my life learning how to dress to mitigate this problem while also maintaining my personal and religious standards of modesty. It’s easy when the problem is that I’m too COLD – just put more clothes on, and/or start moving until my body warms up.

It’s not so easy when I’m too HOT. Wearing a mask over my mouth and nose, even while just sitting in a chair in the waiting room at my doctor’s office, causes me to overheat quickly and sweat profusely. No joke – after my last two visits, I left a small puddle of sweat on the exam table and was feeling lightheaded by the time I left. And all I did was sit there. I dressed as lightly as I reasonably could.

Is that the sort of thing I should have to disclose to every random person who demands that I justify my exemption to them?

What about the conditions that are less easy to quantify or prove? What about conditions that require digging into an individual’s intimate history, and digging up past traumas, in order to “prove”?

What about the woman who has a combination of claustrophobia and PTSD from (or exacerbated by??) being held in a closet and then physically assaulted as a child by her mother’s abusive ex-boyfriend?

What about the woman whose narcissistic and abusive ex-husband more or less bartered her body in sexual trade to other men – one of whom pinned her down and held a pillow over her face during the act?

I am both of those women – and you’d better believe that when I start getting too hot, and when I start having a hard time breathing, those events (and more!) are replayed through my neural networks whether I want them to be or not. There’s enough written elsewhere about all of the very real physiological changes that go along with those sorts of flashbacks, I don’t really feel like getting too much into it myself.

And yeah, I’ll talk about all of these things here in my little corner of the internet where I am at least semi-anonymous, where I can talk about it on my own terms, and where my sharing these things might help others gain a better understanding of the nuances of these sorts of “laws” and exemptions.

But should I have to dredge all of that up – to reveal intimate or embarrassing details about my physical condition, or to reveal and re-live past intimate trauma, over and over – in order to justify my exemption to every store clerk and every Karen who is on some kind of personal power trip and thinks they have the ability to personally determine, at a glance, whose exemptions are “legitimate?”

No.

And neither should anyone.

Mass Depopulation Events

This is something I’ve been thinking about for months, and this pandemic is only throwing fuel on the fires of my contemplation.

The thing is this: every so often, throughout known history, a whole bunch of people have to die.

No matter what sorts of technological or social structures we put in place, this seems to be a hard and inescapable rule.

This is why I’ve never bought into the hype about anthropogenic climate change – it’s pretty obvious to me that when humans reproduce and consume beyond the threshold that is sustainable, SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN that kills a bunch of them off.

War. Famine. Pestilence. Disaster. Disease.

In ages past, people understood this phenomenon in the context of “angry gods” who required large-scale human sacrifice (population control) for their appeasement. Human sacrifice was a way of ensuring that harvests and rains would be sufficient – effectively by way of limiting the population to a number that can sustainably live off of the natural resources available in any given area of settlement.

Today, people STILL understand this phenomenon in the context of angry gods, more or less – rebranded as “nature” and “science” – which require large-scale human sacrifice for the implementation of their “scientific” population-control models which are aimed at mitigating, or avoiding entirely, the natural consequences of unchecked population growth and unchecked resource consumption. The key difference being an overwhelming shift in sacrificial demographics – namely, the shift from conscious (if not necessarily voluntary) sacrifice of the already-born, to the unconscious sacrifice of the unborn.

Something I’ve repeated a million times, grumbling under my breath in response to people who usually look at me like I’m crazy, is that humans seem bent on working on the wrong end of every problem.

This is perhaps one of the most fundamental problems which faces humanity today. Even if you don’t believe in God, the idea of limiting the size of a population by killing new growth in lieu of pruning away that which is closest to death can ONLY have the effect of slowly killing the entire population. The rate of decay exceeds the rate of regeneration.

People seem to have it in their heads that by selectively sacrificing new life, they can somehow halt the decay of old age, and at the same time eliminate or reduce the incidence of mass-depopulation events.

This isn’t a new idea – it’s only a new FORMAT. Prenatal Termination of Life (and, to an extent, all contraception technology) is the latest trend in human sacrifice.

And it does. not. work.

It undermines the adaptive mechanisms of human biology. Period.

What does NOT undermine the adaptive mechanisms of human biology is for the old, the frail, the terminally ill, etc. to die and to more or less become fertilizer for future generations.

This is the natural order of things; an order which will continue to dictate the terms of our existence, no matter how hard we try to circumvent the consequences of our own mortality by hastening those of others. It is a losing strategy which leaves us systemically weak, both quantitatively AND qualitatively, in the face of the ultimate consequences of unsustainable behavior and consumption on the society level.

From a “faith” perspective – this sort of pandemic illness is the righteous consequence of the hubris that created the global systems which have allowed it to explode into nearly every population. Big-picture, it’s like a microcosm of the fall of man.

I’m not totally convinced yet that this will be “the big one.” I’m not totally convinced that this virus is not actually ITSELF a deliberately engineered mechanism of population-control-by-involuntary-human-sacrifice. At this point I’m just waiting and watching to see how things shake out.

But at BEST, all I can really say is that “the big one” is still lurking somewhere around the corner.

You can still run… for now. But you can’t hide.

Running My Mouth

I recently became aware of the “#TradWife” movement. I can’t say I like it. It makes me roll my eyes. Activism has that effect on me. There’s a saying I heard one time that goes something like “if you’re talking, you’re not working.” Now, that’s not ALWAYS true, but it often is – especially for us, ladies.

There’s also the allure of attention and validation, which is innate to the sorts of activism that thrust people into the public eye, and which ends up corrupting many young women who start out with otherwise good intentions.

A couple posters over on RVF articulated my own thoughts more succinctly than I could:

“Well if said influencers are serious they will be anonymous and they will not show their faces.

Otherwise the temptation to attention whore will be a problem. And they end up a ethot grifter instead.”

That resonates with me – although personally, I have something of an aversion to being in the spotlight. But I’d say the understanding of the principle rings all the truer for me on account of the fact that I’ve been painstakingly aware of the attention I’ve received my entire life, more or less just for being female – because I don’t like it. It makes my skin crawl.

I’ve become reticent over the years in writing and sharing my thoughts – and especially afraid of having those words associated with my actual face – because it’s so profoundly uncomfortable for me to have people paying attention to me. If I already get so much attention without even really ASKING for it – what would happen if I were actually TRYING? And heaven forbid, what if I actually LIKED it? I’ve thanked God many times for making me shy and socially anxious. 🙂

The next quote really drives it home for me, though:

I agree with everyone who pointed out that a real “trad wife” would not be broadcasting her life choices (or her children’s lives) on social media.”

Broadcasting your young children’s lives (showing their faces and saying their names) on social media before they are old enough to know what’s going on is not “tasteful.”

As far as women broadcasting their own lives in order to “teach other women,” there is a reason why pretty much all major religions forbid women from becoming priests or spiritual teachers/leaders.

Even if the woman’s heart is in the right place (unlikely), all the women she influences are likely to only follow her out of narcissism and the desire to get attention. She would be encouraging narcissism and attention-seeking behavior in other women rather than encouraging virtue.

In any case, if these women are so family-oriented, then why are they prioritizing “teaching other women” over caring for their own family in the best way possible (which means not broadcasting their lives on social media)?

Lastly, although I have no evidence of this, I’d be willing to bet that these “trad wives” on social media are more than willing to show cleavage, wear makeup (which in past traditional times was considered to be for prostitutes) and show off their bodies in general.

Even it they are only showing off their faces and not their bodies, I’d bet that they get a sense of satisfaction, rather than disgust, when they receive messages from their male followers telling them how beautiful they are and “I wish I could find a trad wife like you,” etc.

BOOM. Yes. All of this.

ALL. OF. IT.

So why am I even sitting here writing this blog entry instead of scrubbing toilets or teaching my children how to properly conjugate verbs, or work out long division on paper?

Well, because what the “Trad Wife Movement” doesn’t understand is that this is WAR.

I’ll admit that when I was a little girl, I essentially dreamed of being a “Trad Wife.” I held my traditional religious views (cultivated in spite of an exceedingly liberal upbringing) near and dear to my heart, and I wanted to be a shining example of how even today, women can still choose homemaking and childrearing; that women CAN find joy and fulfillment in traditional, feminine, domestic roles.

I was a cultural reactionary at the tender age of just five years old: stomping my foot and crossing my arms and telling my father that I would NEVER go to college; that I did not NEED to go to college in order to get married and have babies. It felt like the entire world was against me. “You MUST go to college,” they said. “You MUST have a career.” “You won’t find a man who will support you and give you the life that you want.”

I was going to PROVE THEM WRONG.

I see the same naive idealism in the “TradWife” scene. Even the ones who are not straight-up e-thots – there is so much idealizing and romanticizing. These women are broadcasting the idea that the lifestyle they are living is not only readily available to OTHER women – but that it is leisurely enough that they are able to invest considerable amounts of time and energy into broadcasting their lives to the rest of the world. And so can you!

In other words, the “TradWife” movement is not representative of any sort of traditional REALITY. It’s a sugar-coated portrait of something people desperately want to see. It’s not REAL. Add in the monetization factor (or the “thotting around to snag a husband” factor), and most of it amounts to pure self-interested pandering to and in support of consumer desires and behaviors.

It’s another a shiny consumer trap.

I’ve learned the hard way that, while certainly not impossible, achieving a traditional marriage and family structure in this day and age (especially in the Western world) is exceedingly difficult. The entire cultural and economic deck of cards that is modern civilization is stacked against you. In short: you’re not ALLOWED to even DO that – let alone enjoy it. You have to be willing to endure a lot of blows and undertake a lot of hardships.

The “TradWife” movement portrays itself as a matter of CHOICE. It asks: why don’t more women simply make the decision to live this way?

Well, no offense here, sweetheart – but would YOU be able to live that way if you weren’t a monetized/affiliate-marketing/self-promoting/gold-digging ho?

No, you wouldn’t.

And yes, that IS overly-harsh of me.

But it’s also kinda true.

Upholding the cultural traditions that are conducive to the formation of strong marriages, families, and societies is not about posing in pretty dresses in meadows. It’s not about taking selfies around the house. It’s not about fetishizing wifely submission or male leadership.

Unless you are VERY privileged, it’s a tooth-and-nail fight that frankly ought not to leave you with the sort of time on your hands to be flaunting your exploits all over the internet.

I’m here running my mouth because I want more people – and especially more women – to understand this.

THE CAKE IS A LIE.

You can either fight, OR you can whore yourself out on the platforms of your enemies for validation and resources and material success while they salt the earth of your homelands and deliver your sisters and your daughters into bondage and death.

THAT is the simple choice you have to make.

Listen Up, Ladies:

Imagine that the world has gone all to hell (because it has – even if you haven’t noticed yet).

The institutions you have previously relied on to support your existence have crumbled.

It’s every woman for herself out there – and every man for himself.

Conflict is everywhere. Cooperation and community are virtually nowhere to be found.

Our FAMILIES – the most foundational and fundamental building blocks of society – are crumbling, being torn asunder, prevented from forming.

Do you relish this? Do you thrive on this chaos – on this decay of traditional society? Are you a strong, independent woman who rises up and whispers into the void that once was civilization – that it better get ready for the storm she’s about to unleash into it?

If yes, please kindly GTFO. There are plenty of places in the world which cater to that perspective, and this isn’t one of them.

But if you’re like me – if you’re standing here wondering what in the everloving hell just happened and why everything sucks and why everyone is stupid and wrong and delusional; why nothing is sacred, why traditions that might have sustained you are mocked, and why the children you dreamed of having in your youth are either nowhere found or formed in this world – or realizing that they are in grave peril for having found themselves in it…

YOU are my sister.

Whether you believe in any God or not. Whether you would stand with me in the bright-eyed optimism of purity and innocence – or in the anger and the sorrow of the deepest depths of degradation. Whether you have learned in the relative safety of faith and discipline – or in the costly school of experience and “hard knocks.”

If you have recognized the untruths that preside over the modern world – and if you give a damn about the ACTUAL TRUTH, and if you are willing to stand AGAINST the lies of modernity – to not give in to the temptations of their convenience and indulgence – then I would have you stand with me. And I would stand with you.