Presence of Rape III.


           In the last two articles I have tried to explain in more details what causes and processes led to the fact that nowadays rape has become completely customary, natural, accepted for people, How can it become a practice, a part of (sexual) life, and why most people deal the rape with loosely, neglected, or just understandably. The terrible conclusion is that, according to our male-chauvinist society, sex is the property of men, women are its and men's assets – ergo men/owners can do anything with an asset, and sexual violence is just one form of sex. Women are, in the best case, only ornaments, accessories of the apartment/flat/house. All the rituals in the tribes are still for men (truncations, horrors), their purpose either the preservation of women's loyalty, or the condition of belonging to the community or the beauty idea. This includes a series of horrible plastic surgeries volunteered by women today in the civilized, developed countries.
        The punishment of rape in the judiciary – where the rape is punished at all and not the punishment itself, or it is precisely the victim's judgment – is mostly about not being treated roughly with a device or pet. There is no word that women have the same human rights in this case as men have, it does not matter that women are also from human race, so they should also be taken as humans.

       Sex can be sold all because sex is for men and the money and power which needed for purchasing every other are in the hands of men. According to credible statistics, only 1% of all wealth in the world is in women's hands. The wealthiest woman in the world has only half the wealth of the richest man in the world, and not these women have earned it, but inherited it. Of course, this is a direct consequence of the devaluation of women's work, the unfair underpayment of women and deliberately keeping the earnings of women below the value of men's income.

       This system can stay up to date and bloom more and more because there will have more and more people every year, so there will be more and more women as well and the more and more women unfortunately agree with this system, agree to this system and not want to break it out, rather on the contrary. Adopting their fate that they are only for men's delight in the world and that it is unchangeable, everlasting, they act as sexual objects themselves and try to "enforce" their desires, aims through sex, blackmailed sex, or selling their own body. More and more women want to slice a slice from the cake of the ever-growing sex- and beauty industry as a prostitute, a "model bitch" or a "girlfriend" of rich men.
     Even worse, the majority of "rebellious" women imagine "equality" so that women would both be women and become men at the same time.
In other words, they stick the "career", the money earn on besides the female functions (housework, childbirth, child-raising, and day-to-day service of men and families) as a plus task, which adds more burdens to their own, meanwhile remove/take more and more burdens off men's shoulder, then they go back to the kitchen with disillusion, because they cannot bear it, even more to prove to themselves and to the world that they are not born to redeem the world, but only to serve the redeems of the world. So instead of becoming equal to men who almost do not have to do anything but they even more will become the males's servants. I would be surprised if one person would have 100% chance of life in two roles at  working 12 hours at workplace and 24 hours at home at the same time. 
      But equality does not mean that we sit on two horses with one buttock, but on the contrary! It means that it is necessary to delete the "female" or "male" status of the work, remove burdens from women's shoulders, and equalize burdens between women and men. That is, equal to 50-50% of home work, child rearing and earning money between men and women. Work is for everyone, whatever it is. Mainly, equality does NOT mean that women should become "supernatural" and have to work three times much as men at work and home to be equal one time with men!!!

      Since most women do not want and / or can not fight to get the same remuneration for their work as men (and even many of them still consider   as natural the half amount of salary or are only half-time workers against boredom), therefore, if women who are underpaid want to live well, raise children and not spare, for them there is almost a straightforward road to men who have money and power. It seems plausible, evident, practical and easier to satisfy the needs of men in return for money, for prosperity, as a prostitute or dependent housekeeper than to fight for rights, freedom, independence, equality, equal pay, opportunities. For good money, many women even agree to rape or are inclined to pervert, sadistic things in bed - not to mention hundreds of thousands of female players in dirty porn movies. It is also a cliché, banality - and the easiest way - that some part of the poor unlucky strippers and prostitutes keep, support "their children, family" on sex, as a sex object, as if there were no other way to do that. No one asks these women why they had children at the age of 15, why they did not finished the school first, why they did not get a job that would allow them to live fairly with or without children. There is no reason for it, because it is quite natural in the whole world for men to look at children-teenagers as grown-ups (as new, fresh sex toys) and make children give birth children instead of childhood or going to school. The sad truth is that 15-year-old girls like men look them 30-year-old, as well as women living on men love the huge amount of money they are earning with prostitution, and they are scattered immediately, unable to put it away. There is no way out of prostitution, of men for them, unless they become too old for the "profession". Although the eldest prostitute is 75 years old and how coincidental it is, she runs the industry in the Netherlands. There is a need for her.

      Of course, I do not want to suggest that people even more women in the sex industry even more and sans all conscience can be raped without punishment. Rather, the existence of so many sex workers – whether they are forced or not – make rape more natural, accepted and self-evident;  they affirm men that rape and harsh sex are only a form of sexual intercourse and women do not care about sex in whatever forms if they are paid for it. They also strengthens men to ALWAYS claim and make the right to coarse, violent sex with anybody if they pay it in some way. And if the millions of prostitutes do not interfere with violence, why would the other women be disturbed because a lot of "decent women" are just getting married for money and they are just women who are for men! For example, a joke about this: a woman wants to exchange a hundred dollar bill in the bank, and the officer tells her that the banknote is fake. The woman cried out: "Good heavens! Then I was raped!" - Tragic, but unfortunately true.

      It seems to be much simpler, therefore, to “prosper” with the imposed, forced “female role” in life than to do what we want. It's a lot easier to walk through a paved road where we can get well-predictable "successes" than, to break through the jungle with machete where God knows what's on us!  Many women do not even think of living differently, which is not a coincidence. It's a lot of hard work for women to get out of the kitchen and from the "harem" and if so, success often misses. A successful woman is surrounded by hundreds of jealous, hateful men-women who say with a distorted face: "what are you doing here, go home to the kitchen, there's your place!". But if they stay in the kitchen and their role, they will be praised and rewarded – and everyone likes to receive positive feedback about self. Once a successful company manager woman "boasted" that her doctor husband tells her what a pity she does not spend her talent for treating their three sons rather than for her carrier! He would not have been able to drop a bigger insult to his wife's head (I would have divorced him right away), the talented, yet stupid woman not noticed the insult, swam in happiness, but translating into human language meant that, what a pity that you redeem the world instead of sitting at home all day and raise your sons to change the world! Nobody cares about your "female" change of world, why not do what you were born for! Sad.

      The "abduction of women" is a living old practice when men have not simply raped women, but also abandoned their lives to their own service, forced to reproduce with them, to be slave of them, as well as free, self-contained specimens captured in the forest to lock them in the cage.
         Prostitution cannot be agreed and accepted if we say it would bail rape out fully, but there is no chance, because because rape is largely not about sex. Part of it is really about, for example in a party or night bars   where men are just for having sex. The other part is about violence, physical superiority, power, the third part is about both (pleasant to the benefactor - powerlessness + sexual satisfaction). To prove that men are supreme, rule over women and can play them like a cat with a mouse. There are many worthless, rubbish men who have nothing (neither work, nor good pay,  successes, good position), while the world proclaims the superiority and absolute power of men, rape is the only chance of proof for them. There are also lot of men who are successful, rich, so they think they can do anything unpunished! Be a man! - is roared everywhere, every time, every day. That is to say, be violent, strong, dominant, beat, strike, do not grace, get what you want, even by violence, do not retaliate, defend yourself at all if someone hurts you because you're a man! If you do not, you're not a man! What a shame! Na yes, but there is another problem now, namely that too many hunters are and too little seals and there is less and less. It is not really possible to rise above the others, maximum the media and the entertainment industry make it possible, but it is more fortunate than talent. The big and the strong men are meeting more and more times - compared to the values that are close to 0 in the previous centuries - with women who are more successful, earn more, are in a higher position than men, many have a female boss, and many men perform humiliating "female" jobs like clean up in a restaurant, swim in windows and so on. Society, however, increasingly force them to prove being "someones" - many women, lots of money - though they have no chance - unless with violence or crime. It is obvious, therefore, to opt for "the only truly masculine" act, the rape, because every male can act on sexual act, and this time it does not matter if he is tiny and is bad in bed. Such men record the full implementation of rape as “success”, and they are confirmed by it (finally they have done something once in life) since if they did not cause joy but they caused pain, fear and terror. All this is interpreted as a kind of superiority, "authority": you see, in vain you earn more money, in vain you are my boss, yet I do with you what I want to do! Men still decide what the fate of women should be. This includes regular bouts of women, often associated with regular sexual violence, which makes an unsuccessful man feel even greater. The same is the basis for extremist religious radicalization, and not by chance Islam is leading this list.

      There is an interesting controversy surrounding the perception of women's clothing in different societies, even in civilized, "free" countries. I have already mentioned that tribal peoples also cover the delicate parts of their bodies, so visible free surfaces can not be considered as self-seeking or sex appeal. This view could only appear after the men and women first dressed completely, and later removed their long, ground-wear garments, or the nations who still wear long, all-out dresses. The sexy, transparent dress of the prostitutes should not be confused with the smooth, summer dress.  It is interesting that no one is surprised at the women in the bikini running on the beach, no one thinks bathing women to be a bitch, but a miniskirted, deep-seated woman is that. Because does it "fit" there? Why bikini is accepted, normal and "decent" when it's the most displaying piece of clothing. The prostitutes are often "overdressed" in this respect. So the nature of the dress and the location of the dress is what is immoral primarily, not the size of the exposed skin. So, I am a whore in bikini in a restaurant but descent on the beach! Weird.  “Decent” women also tend to wear transparent, all-seeing "bumpy" dresses, in the name of misunderstood “freedom” and “free sexuality”. Yes, freedom would mean that I can wear what I want, whether I can walk naked on the street, but in our male-chauvinist world, where sex is for men, and women as sex toys are for men, it's a stupid thing to show ourselves in sexy clothes, half-naked, because that is only to confirm that women are really for men, women's sexuality is not an autonomous one, it only exists as a dope for men. Actually for free choice of clothes should be gender equality. Many men sit on the beach or in the park to stare half-naked women as a showcase on the stage, with the full conviction that they are dressed up for men, and so the woman who is dressing like this wants sex. What else would the subject  of sex want if not sex?!

         Women who are not aware of their gender role defined by men only know that they want to dress free and openly accept their sexuality, but they go in the opposite direction. Although they know they have sexuality, but they are still considered as the part of male sexuality (as men think), subordinate to male sexuality, so they dress up as a bitch. They also think that whoever loves sex can only be a whore, only whores can have sexuality, that women are aids for male sex, just such aids which "enjoy" sex. So if I love sex and I do it, I take it, I'll assume that I'm a bitch! But that should not be the case! It is a distorted form of the view of the independent sexuality that we are not surprised at since female sexuality never existed, except in prehistoric times, in the age of natural equality. Who remembers it? After that it had been deprived with fire-iron and denied it. There is no example to follow, a pattern of free, independent women, only the "half-freedom" of coquettes living without the bond of marriage is the only thing that is not a good example, since they were just prostitutes in gold coins, whose "freedom" was that much that they could choose their keepers.
            Drug, booze, cigarettes and women – enjoyable items only. Are we then surprised when men see everybody whore and keep rape-able? Unfortunately, there is currently no form of education in which men and women will be informed of the truth.

           In some Islamic religious states having beach resorts, some of Islamic women begin to re-embrace the symbol of slavery, some form of shawl in protest. What do they protest against? Against the "immorality", to wit, the immoral European women who are not ashamed by wearing bikini, being in a mini dress, and make sex with men outside marriage. With this action, they only reinvigorate men, society, and the whole world that there are only two types of women exist: the naked, immoral bitch and the well-packed property of men who never gets into sex. So, every bikini-clad, bathing woman is a whore. Back to the Middle Ages, the men-dominated world!

          Sex was also a crime for a woman, because the result of the sexual act and the evidence of her doing only women could take home in the form of pregnancy, which, besides shame, was also a financial burden, as women did not work (for money), their families had to support them and their children when they gave birth as a maid.
         The raped girls became often prostitutes because in the eyes of the society "it was just the same", since they were no longer virgins they were  guilty, immoral, and there was no difference between “having sex” with one man or one hundred ones. Even then, she can live on as a prostitute.

         It is also very important that for the brainwashed, over-prohibited, unenlightened girls the wedding night was nothing more than a pure rape itself for thousands of years and in many places today. The majority of girls, especially those who were married at the age of 10-14, knew nothing of sexual act or of their own sexuality. For centuries they could not even bathe until their wedding night to know nothing about their own body to preserve virginity, honour and "supreme value" at all costs. Anyone who does not know about sex will not want it! For thousands of years, marriage started with rape for girls, which was completely normal, accepted, belonged to the "female fate" and was often referred to as a lifetime. Nobody protested,  in fact, this was regarded as honest, descent and moral. Then why are we surprised about the existence of rape and legally existence of domestic violence even nowadays?

        Neither does it help In judging the objectifying of women, even in civilized, enlightened, democratic countries, that women emphasize that they "want to look up to a man and do respect him". Whether why a smart, intelligent woman would want that? Why do they feel "valuable" if they are less than men in every field? Unfortunately, only discrimination education can answer that, according to it a woman can only exist by a man. Unfortunately, even rich, talented and famous women in their own right are talking about it in the media continuously, misleading average women and showing them absolute wrong examples. Because of this, even a nobody, street-swing man feels above all women, even the English Queen is underneath, in vain reigns, only a woman. Women follow this trend without reason. There are not many examples for successful women today, because women of the previous generations were all housewives depending on their husbands, did not work, were not independent, successful and rich women.
          At the dawn of filming, there were plenty of movies on the Wild West, in which big and powerful, strong men were equipped with guns, and fired at all and all that moved. This symbolized the masculinity, the manhood, the power, the strength, and all the attributes associated with the male role. In these films, female characters were almost always dirty prostitutes (possibly weak, unprotected widows), in the settlements there were more brothels than the dwelling houses or food shops. These prostitutes flirted and screamingly enjoyed sex with the smelly, dirty, unwashed, alcoholic, unkempt men who came to the brothel. The "legendary hardcore" Clint Eastwood is raping a woman in almost every early film, for example in one of his films dragging a protesting screaming woman into the stable roughly by her hair and then   raping her. Unfortunately, these films and “actors” depict rape as a normal version of sex, depict the protesting of women as "foreplay", who desire more than all to be raped to seem "descent" and / or turn men on. At the end of the rape, the raped woman is "happily" leaving, and in the rest of the story, she will be a constant lover and admirer to her raper and begs for the newer and more coarse sex. So, Clint Eastwood and the other men raping women are samples to be followed by average men!

        Objectifying of women and making them sexual aids are still in high spirits today. Recently, a law has been passed in Germany for the state to pay prostitutes for retired, sick men, if they prove that sex improves their state of health, but they do not get women because of their age, financial status. So the list of what a sick, retired man can claim is the following: medicine, injection, nursing, women. Not familiar? Money, drugs, alcohol, rock & roll and women. Women are at the very end of the list. It's a must-have, list for fun to buy. Naturally, retired women do not have the same option!!! It could not be said more clearly that sex is for men, sexuality is NOT an integral part of women's lives, especially over a certain age; women are just the supplies of men's sex life. The sick old men can cure with the sexual act by the state's money, women do not, in fact, in regard to women it could be shameful if they come up with such demands. And it is probably that women would protest against it with indignation the most loudly if they were to be subject to this law referring to being "descent", they do not need such sinner things. A retired man can use young female bodies as a sexual aid with the state's money! Another very important message of this law: the modern society SUPPORTS female prostitution! Modern society officially and legally acknowledges the role of women as sexual aids and inequality in justice!

       The dancing is also about inequality, both classical and Latin. Man "leads" the woman because she needs to be led, the woman surrenders herself to the man, subordinates to his will, she is the red post that the matador waved at the bull, she is that with whom man does what he wants. In short, classical dances, the ballet are controlled by the man, and the woman is only the "supply" of the man dancer.

        It is also for rape that many women pretend orgasm because of "love"! They spend a lot of energy to moan as if they were enjoying it instead of really trying to enjoy it. Women can live for years or decades without good sex because of “love”, to give up on it for not hurting, not offending the 'big and the strong' men, since sex is for men! Men cannot be bad in having sex, otherwise why would they be men? They have to enjoy sex and be content with their own performance, not women, the tools. If the sexual act fails, that is woman's fault, to wit, the “sexual aids” did not work well. Women are well without orgasm for decades, the marriage, children are more important for them, man is in the centre of sex.

        Paradoxically, and despite all its irrationality, people have the most stupid view and belief that although both parties must have sex for reproduction but somehow women want lots of offspring without sex, but men do want lots of sex without offspring!!! It was inferred from women's hypocrisy that they did not even realize that society forced women to be a hypocrite.

        If that were the case, we would have been extinct. Evolution seems stupid and it does not know what    doing. Or is it rather that this concept favours men who can thus master and monopolize sexuality??? And women also have an explanation for having sex by saving honour: for the sake of having children?!

           A lot of women believe the secret of a good marriage to make a wife a good cook in the kitchen and a whore in the bed! And then you will have  a super-living, your master-commander will never leave you! So the emphasis is on the full service of a man, not on a partnership, so that every man's wishes and needs are fully fulfilled by a woman / wife! And if that wish is just a rape, then it has to be fulfilled! 
          It is also interesting to see that being a "whore" is only a woman capable. Has anyone ever wondered why is someone a "whore" in bed? Because she does all the dirty, perverted things men want. But! How is it that if a dirty, perverted thing is done by two, then one party (man) stays a clear, honest, descent gentleman, who has to be still respected and only the other party (woman) will be a filthy whore who just exactly fulfills his filthy wishes? How can a man with a dirty, perverted sexual desire be normal, natural, true gentleman, to be a role model to be followed while a woman who runs his dirty desires gets dirty? It is only possible that sex is for men with all its perverted, dirty, violent forms, so he is always clean, women are just supplies to it. A decent woman does not have any perverted desires, but with no sexual pleasure at all, she only satisfies needs of men with her body, but if she satisfies that she will be dirty. In the event that a woman only makes dirty things in the bed to men because of the survival of the marriage and the financial gain she gains while she is disgusted then there is really no difference between her and a prostitute / whore. Do we then wonder about the blame the victims of rape for raping? 

         In today's rural elderly men, women are still thinking that a woman has to marry as virgin because a man wants her if another man did not  “dirty into her" yet. Like when somebody ejaculates into a chamber-pot, a toilet bowl when he finds the need. An old peasant man replied when he was asked whether to marry a non-virgin woman. So, would a child's life begin with “dirtying into”?? Did his life also begin with her dad dirtying into her mother? Does his mother count as a bitch and chamber-pot with excreta, because she is no longer a virgin, and a man did dirty into her? And his wife and children? And so on... In Muslims, women who are raped are considered to be exactly such "dirtied-into" and are excommunicated if there is no violent punishment for them.

          Unfortunately, the beauty industry also places emphasis on sexuality in order to increase the sales of profitable buyers, emphasizing beauty and external features to make women the sexiest, the more provoking in order for men to buy them into bed, into a Cabrio to boast with them, because  besides a wealthy man an auspicious life waiting for the lucky (and beautiful) woman - so you have to make sure you call some attention to excel from the other pussy-covered bitches.

          Let's say a few words about the concept of prostitution and "whore" so that we can see clearly why do men think that rape is not violence? It is said that prostitution is of the same age of humanity. Not true! Prostitution is NOT of the same age of humanity! Prostitution is the same age of gender discrimination and patriarchal society. Men have created it to meet their own needs after discriminated women and forced virginity on them. Prior to this, a matriarchal society was characteristic. Someones still live in such a small communities today. But let's continue with 'prostitution', which is totally confused with female sexuality in people's minds. Initially, approx. 5-10 thousand years ago, in some prehistoric-ancient societies, after the objectification of women, there were lot of men-owners who could not afford to buy a wife without sufficient wealth or not being enough woman to be wife. But there were (are and will) people who were able to sex with anybody without indiscriminately, be it any old, ugly, repulsive because they could separate the look and the sexual act. The majority of men are still such to this day and also some of the women, but these people are not equal to prostitutes! These women and men were called “whores” and respected, especially female whores, because they eased the lack of free women and satisfied the sexual needs came from the sexual discrimination and the lack of free choice of partners, sexual barriers without any kind of reciprocation for their own pleasure that the society at the time was very grateful and began to respect these people, especially women, because they were fewer and most of the needs met.  They were proclaimed priests, built churches where they could continue their activities in the public interest. However, since they had to live and eat, so the men who used their services gave them in return food and drink ("paid in kind"). At that time, it was not considered a payment yet but a natural process, because whoever is having sex in the church all day, is not having time to work, to cultivate land for a living, so it has to be compensated for that! It was the "being whore" that was not for remuneration, but as a "noble" act. Later, as in any other "valuable" thing, it was diluted, transformed and devalued, lost its original function, and the real prostitutes appeared who were no longer whores because they did not enjoy sex with their customers but could separate sex from pleasure. These women have been committed to having sex for living, for money and material and natural resources just as women now stand out to the corner because they realized that the affluent men in need willing to pay any amount of money for sex. Most of them lived a lot better than staying at home as a farmer's wife. Later, the in-kind benefit was also replaced by money. In Ancient Rome prostitutes dyed their hair blond, so men could see from afar what “job” they had.  It is no coincidence that nowadays the majority of women dye their hair blond because it is considered "sexy" because blonde hair is related to high estrogen levels.

          Since then, the real whores have been forgotten, and the prostitutes have taken their place, who have been sex for money and for livelihood with men without a moment's enjoyment of the sexual act. And since then  these two concepts have inseparably confused in the brain of people, and even since it has been evolving to include the natural female sexuality in prostitution. This is how the "whore = prostitute = sex-enjoying-woman" nightmare theory came into being, and everyone has been sticking to this with teeth and nails ever since.

         Of course, the male whores were soon forgotten and transformed into "real men" who are having sex every day because they were born for that, and even straightforward they had invented sex. World believe in that sex is only for men and women just the tools of it because of them. All men want  to become sexually-styled sex machine because of them to say they are "real men." They are the “real man's” role models! The 'real man' signs are 'big, strong, sex-hungry'. Existing male prostitutes are immediately associated with homosexuality by everyone, verifying that sex is for men because if a man becomes a prostitute, he only makes it for another male, not for a woman. If there are only one or two gigolo, then only for the rich, old and ugly women, but in this case also women are disapproved not the having-sex-for-money men.  They are still the "lucky ones" who, besides the "free sex", also get a lot of money. No one has ever thought about having sex with ugly women why "free" and why are men “lucky”? Because if that were the case then it would also be clear that women are not the original and only whores who can have sex with anyone for just the sake of sex, but the genre of men is whoring and prostitution. Not to mention the institution of dowry, which is about parents buying a husband for their daughters. What if it is not legal prostitution? Unfortunately, no one has ever raised it or thought about it, so there remains the conviction that only women can be bought! The man, if he "sells himself", does it only in business or politics, not in sex.

        The "sex for men" theory also has a biophysical and anatomical background, and the misinterpretation of it reinforces this view, although it is NOT true that evolution has created sexual pleasure and all its forms for men, and intended women only to be as aids for that. What many people cannot, do not know or do not want to realize is that the male genitalia develops from the female genitalia. Every embryo starts as a female. The genetic – biological – developmental background of this would not be detailed here because of the long, but the point here is that the sexual organs of the girls are the same as the male sexual organs, that is, rather vice versa! The male genital organs are given the same conjunctivism and sexual bioaccumulation processes as women. It is therefore impossible for female sexuality to be "different" than men, just as every other sexually reprehensible species is the same. Anyone who proclaims the "different" and other “differences”, only proclaims his/her ignorance. Anyone who is "different" makes a difference, but only ignores his ignorance. In fact, female estrogen is produced from male testosterone, so everyone has both, only the proportions are others.

         Independent female sexuality and the total independence of female sexuality from prostitution and whoring are denied to this day. A whole series of cultures deny the existence and sovereignty of female sexuality in their world-famous, eternal works. Onegin, Anna Karerina, Madam Bovary proudly proclaims in the world that women are not for love, not for physical love, because that make them unhappy, unlucky, ruinous, often leading to suicide. Women do not know what to do with love and sexuality, and women are for an emotionless marriage (business contract) that ensures their well-being, their existence, in return for the full service of the male and family. If they still want some happiness in life, there is the birth of children from the joyful sexual intercourse, that's enough for them too. No matter how beautiful these stories are written, it does not change the proclaiming of suppression of women, male-chauvinism, the superiority of men in every field, and try to convince women and society that this is the order of the world. If they yet glorify a woman, she can only be a  courtesan. If they still glorify a woman, she can only be a courtesan. The masterpieces of world literature are full of novels in which courtesans are depicted as goddesses for whom (or for their bottom) men are fully with joy for and the courtesans are portrayed as free, independent, self-made women who do what they want which clearly shows that even the most educated ones cannot get rid of the unity of 'whore= prostitute = female-sexuality'. Being accepted it as a dogma they are repeating like a parrot its unalterable way, and with some perverted joy they are lured by the lie about female subordination. Nana, The Camelion Lady, Madame Pompadour, Madame Dubarry and others. Yes, they're free until there is a man who funds their whims, their freedom. These “free” women are the same way the men's toys, are gifted by their wealthy lovers, are depended on rich lovers as well as their cheap counterparts on the street corners, And often die lonely, poorly, and ill when nobody needs them as old, nasty, sick. According to Moliére “to awaken love in man, this is the purpose of every woman”. Yes, but the other part of the thought was missed. That says: because women can only be successful by men (being in love).

           In bars and parties, women do not have to pay for entry, only for men, and they also pay for women's admission, drink because men want to have sex, not women. Women and men can feel right after men pay for everything they belong to men.
           Sex bars, night bars, peep shows, erotic shows, stripper dancers, brothels, massage saloons, sports, bullfightings, dogfightings, cockfightings,  Pamplona bull run, Scottish stupmwood throwing, Sul, Highland Games, French Woodcutting championship and so on are all for men to have fun and to prove their manhood. For women there are the beauty contests wher they can „prove” the only one „valuable” property which is needed for  men.

          There is polygamy, and a harem that is for men to have “multiple tools”, depending on for what function they want to use. The more living sex objects and children you have, the richer, the more valuable you are!
           Jealousy is not about fear of loosing love, it's more about fear of loosing property. Many times more men abuse, chase, kills their wives, their girlfriends from "jealousy," which has a simply explanation. Women are objects, belonging to men like cars, house, furniture, clothing, and people generally want to protect what theirs are. Women are simply the accessories and decorations of a man's apartment. When a female property  chooses another owner, the previous owner cannot tolerate this. An object, a property cannot choose a new owner – only the owner can drop away the object, the property, only the owner may decide that he no longer needs it. If the object does it, it will humiliate and put the male owner to shame as when a dog escapes from his owner after feeding, cared for. A “real man” cannot tolerate this ungratefulness and shame,  he has to take revenge and has to punish the disobedient dog, slave, property.

           In the advertising industry (naked) women can sell anything to men because it is a feeling for men like that beautiful woman automatically added as a premium for the purchased item, or it can be much easier to pick them up by the item.
          And women obey, submit themselves to the rules of men without thinking; they take off clothes, seduce, fashioning, wear make-up like admitting, agreeing that the world is for men, not for women. They will do their utmost to fulfill their destiny and be pleasing to men, to satisfy men's sexual desires and other needs. Later they will be astonished when they become victims of men in all areas of life.

         The male-chauvinist society tells us that sex is for men, because sex is a necessity for life for men like eating and drinking, but for women not because they are "others." They are able to live without sex, in fact, they also have to live without sex. And if sex is a necessity for life for men, they have a right to acquire it any time in any way, even if with violence, because their survival depends on this!!! And is a man guilty of killing not to die of hunger or thirst?


Do we believe them?