Living by the Sword

We are expected to live by the Word, not the sword, and I have been struggling with my past. It is said that those who live by the sword will die by the sword. Hmmmm. We will all die anyway and it is one way to go and perhaps quite quick. Not that I would look forward to it, although most Knights in my day had an expectation that it would not be in their sleep or at the claws of a dragon. To die with a sword in the hand was an honourable way to go. As long as one was, indeed, honourable.

I keep my old sword under the bar top, out of sight but within easy reach. Wisdom, history and experience leaves us in no doubt that we live in difficult times, surrounded by many who would do us harm. From time to time we seem compelled to resist that harm by showing the sword, and even using it.  Whilst I may be a man of peace and clean tables, there are those outside of the Tavern's hedges that would have my head on a fence post in a jiffy, given half a chance.

But we try to minimise 'occasions of sin' by avoiding the wicked rather than inviting them to live in our homes. And if we are to teach the Word to those who have refused to hear, it is best done through a megaphone at a distance. But those inclined to wickedness will nevertheless attempt to infiltrate and invade, and even if we are willing to give our lives for our brother (and sister and mum and dad and the kids) it is best done by doing all we can to protect them with a sword in the first place.

The material world gives substance to an age-old, immaterial, supernatural battle, and I go by the belief that one such expression of Evil - the Main one of this era - is Islam, invented by Satan as a direct response to the Resurrection of Christ. It is the army of wickedness that has tried before to destroy Christianity and those countries that bend a knee in Love not 'submission'. 

The Scimitar is their sword. And the 'Good' must raise the Cross against it, and the sword if needed. But the western world, currently being invaded needs leadership for that and it seems that such leadership is starting to be seen, in Europe, the scene of previous invasions. As we heard from Mike Chapman.

Bavaria Places Christian Crosses in State Buildings to Reflect 'Christian Values'

The government of Bavaria has ordered that Christian crosses be placed in the entrances of all its public buildings, a rule that goes into effect on June 1, reported BBC News. 

 https://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/bavaria-places-christian-crosses-state-buildings-reflect-christian-values

Markus Soder, the minister president of Bavaria and member of the Christian Social Union political party, said the crosses are not to be viewed as state-sanctioned religious symbols but as a 

"clear avowal of our Bavarian identity and Christian values." 

Crosses already are compulsory in Bavaria's public school classrooms and in courtrooms. 

Bavaria is located in the southeast corner of Germany and its largest city is Munich. 

This is good news indeed, especially considering the recent lunacy exhibited by Germany's Chancellor Merkle inviting the islamic hordes into the house. And to think that some people still hold a view that if only women were in charge it would be all sweetness and light. Hmmmm. A Green light to evil and decay in this instance.

"The cross is a fundamental symbol of our Bavarian identity and way of life," said President Soder in a statement, as reported by the BBC. "It stands for elemental values such as charity, human dignity and tolerance."

Jan Korte, the head of a left-wing group in the federal parliament, according to the BBC, said, "Why can the CSU never think of anything that brings people together, instead of trying to divide the country at every level." 

A real Mandy Rice Davies call. For a millenia and some it was Christianity that brought people together. It is the left that divides, and then blames division on the good and the just. Islam simply kills anyone not Islamic, and even some that are.

America in particular has been struck hard with demands by faux-offended snowflakes to take down crosses even from Catholic establishments. They do not want to offend muslims. Or atheists. Heck... I am offended by their demands. 

Many American politicians, Mayors, University Deans and even religious clergy, have shown spines of jellyfish. 

Instead of telling muslims to shove their demands, and that of the left, they have let them ravage the iconography that has sustained the nation.

Islamists destroy; churches, statues, people.

Leftists encourage it.

Bavaria's population is a little more than 12.6 million and about 52% of Bavarians are Catholic. About 20% of Bavarians are Protestant, 4% Muslim, and less than 1% Jewish. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI (Joseph Ratzinger) was born in Bavaria. 

Regional Bavaria cannot by itself, being part of Germany, stop the tide sucked in by Mrs Merkle.  It can only reinforce its Values. Hoist the Cross. 

Another European State, Hungary, is doing its best to keep the hordes outside the hedges, and is demanding that the EU compensates it for the cost. It is a brave state that crosses swords with the unelected Kommisars of the EU, so more power to their elbows I say.

Europe is the main region under threat from Islam and its hordes. The rest of the western world is feeling the heat of lax policies as more and more Muslims enter nations as 'refugees' bringing with them their hatred of infidels and desire / satanic orders to kill and destroy. Western politicians continue to be deliberately blind to what is happening. That is because the invasion is not how we have come to conceive of as to be invasion. But such happened before.

It was repulsed, at enormous cost. Brad Miner reminded us.

Living by the Sword

(Sixteen) years after the attacks of September 11, it’s probably the case that the “excuse” of the Crusades as a motivating factor behind the violence of al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist groups has somewhat diminished in plausibility.

Of course, the Islamofascists may well aver that events of more than 900 years ago still burn in Muslim consciousness, but that doesn’t make it so. 

 https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2017/10/02/living-by-the-sword/

Osama bin Laden made reference to the Crusades as, no doubt, has Abū Bakr al-Baghdadi of ISIS. But the truth is they abhor the West because their understanding of Islam demands hatred of and war against the infidel: then, now, always. This is the only “root cause” that matters.

In any case, most of us will never have occasion to debate a terrorist on the matter. Indeed, we’re much more likely to go toe-to-toe with a jihadi liberal about the Crusades and their impact, which is what makes Thomas F. Madden’s new primer invaluable.

The Crusades Controversy: Setting the Record Straight is a 50-page broadside against the serial stupidities and half-truths of those who believe, in Professor Madden’s words, that the Crusades were “the epitome of self-righteousness and intolerance, a black stain on the history of the Catholic Church in particular and Western civilization in general.”

In fact, they were “a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslim armies had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world.” 

The armies that marched and sailed from Western Europe into the Byzantine Empire and on to the Holy Land came in response to pleas from Christians in the East to ......

save them from the weaponized religion of Mohammed.

Those Christian warriors summoned by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont in 1095 were not a rabble of “lacklands and ne’er-do-wells” spoiling for a fight wherever they could find one. They were a cross-section of European society that included many of the wealthiest, most powerful men in Europe, not a few of whom lost fortunes – and their lives – in the struggle to liberate the original homeland of Christianity, which had been established not by the sword, but through peaceful conversions half a millennium before the birth of Islam.

Pope Innocent III, successor to Urban II, asked the crusaders:

How does a man love according to divine precept his neighbor as himself when, knowing that his Christian brothers in faith and in name are held by the perfidious Muslims in strict confinement and weighed down by the yoke of heaviest servitude, he does not devote himself to the task of freeing them?

Jerusalem had fallen to Islam more than 400 years before the crusaders liberated the holy city in 1099. But as Innocent suggests, the reconquest was only partly about restoring Christians to power in the heartland of the faith. The crusaders’ journey and the battles they fought were also a promised liberation from the burden of sin: an indulgence through which they might reach heaven.

Madden writes:

Crusaders were sinners. They undertook the Crusade not only to defend their world, but to atone for their sins. 

By the nature of their profession, warriors put their souls at risk. 

The Crusade was a means for them to save their souls.

Herein lies the struggle for all those men who take up the profession of arms. I know of many. 

Not all are 'good' in the sense of being lily-white. All mankind is flawed and prone to sin. It takes effort to be a Pure Knight. 

And Prayer. 

In any event, the triumph in Jerusalem, which electrified Europe, was short-lived. By 1291, Acre – the last Christian stronghold in the Middle East – had fallen, and what we call “crusades” in the centuries that followed became defensive, the last battle of which occurred at the Siege of Vienna in 1529.

Few seem to be taught the facts of history anymore. For the moment forget about the menz oppression of the poor ladies, the nasty white folk oppressing poor 'people of colour', the poor LGBTIQzyx's of the dark ages, just look at the battles. 

But the Crusades ended not because a “final battle” against Islam had been won (there would be another Battle of Vienna in 1683), but because the rise of nation-states, corruption in the Church, and the coming of Protestantism had weakened the will to continue crusading.

And what an ongoing effect  that has had. 

Within Europe new ideas were brewing. . . .Born out of a unique blend of faith, reason, individualism, and entrepreneurialism, those ideas produced a rapid increase in scientific experimentation with immediately practical applications. By the seventeenth century European wealth and power was growing exponentially. Europeans were entering a new and unprecedented age.

In the Islamic world, of course, this sort of progress stalled.

Pretty much since the 18th century, the reputation of the Crusades has followed a kind of rollercoaster path, although with more falls than rises. 

Perhaps the lowest point came when Bill Clinton said, in a speech after 9/11, that at that 1099 liberation of Jerusalem Jews were burned alive in a synagogue and Muslim men, women, and children were slaughtered on the Temple Mount – the crusaders knee deep in blood.

All lies.

But then, what do we expect when the Prince of Lies is so active that he even changes sex and expects us to follow suit. Or dress. Bill Clinton is so corrupt it is showing on his face.

What’s more, Muslims were largely not conversant with the reality of the Crusades until after WWI. 

The first Arabic-language history of the Crusades appeared in 1899, making Muslims’ “long memory” of the Crusades about as long as their memory of jazz. 

Everything from 1099 through Saladin and the several Battles of Vienna came to modern Muslims principally through 20th-century European colonial histories.

It is this colonial imperialism that contemporary Muslims have reacted to so violently. To wit: “This became particularly pronounced after the creation of the state of Israel, which Arabs contended was a new crusader kingdom. The fact that Israel was Jewish was irrelevant.”

In the end:

It is not the Crusades that led to the attacks of September 11, but an artificial memory of the Crusades constructed by modern colonial powers and passed down by Arab nationalists and Islamists. 

This new memory strips the medieval expeditions of every aspect of their age, dressing them up instead in the tattered rags of nineteenth-century imperialism.

Another way of saying this is that the Enlightenment, spawning the modern Left, is the source of modern Islamist rage about the Crusades. Al-Qaeda and ISIS are acting out a Western, anti-Christian fantasy that’s not even of their own making.

Of course, there are other spurs to Islamist attacks. 

Bringing the whole world into submission is a pretty big one.

Today we have more 'Good Men' than at any time in History, but only by virtue of population growth. It is a sad fact that little has changed since there were very few - most do nothing.

 And you all know how the old saying goes.

The Bavarian Minister has stood up and done something.

Your turn.

If you are going to be mown down by some Islamic nutter in the street, at least do not be sitting down in a wicker chair like the chap in the photo above. Stand and face the bastard. The Islamist is motivated by sheer Evil. You must be motivated to fight him.

So Fight. Even to what seems to be the end.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1790669/incredible-moment-isis-hostage-awaiting-execution-headbutts-fanatic-before-gunning-down-captors-and-escaping/

Tell him you Forgive him - if neccesary over his corpse. And hope that Christ will do Justice to both of you.

Right now have a drink. It may give you courage.

Then get a sword. 

Sell your coat if you have to.

Pax

Hypocrits Undone

"Show me the man or woman and I'll show you the hypocrite" said someone or other, and by the Lord Harry they were right. Everyone can carry the name, unfortunately, as we are all only human and prone to frailty. But most ordinary people (not me, of course: I am extraordinary) keep their very small hypocricies very small and do not attract the attention of the media or the uniforms. Yeah, even I. No excuse for mine but nothing remorse, repentance and Confession can't put things aright. Not so some more egregious people.

We had a couple of instances brought to the attention of customers today, and frankly there was little excuse and a good measure of mirth. But that's what the Pin & Balloon bar is all about. Sticking a sharp end into some fatuous balloons.

One concerned a secular, media 'saint'. Yes the left in particular not only like to claim the high moral ground but elevate their own smutty and grubby heroes to that august role. 

Another pointed the accusing finger at the BBC - surely a worthy cumuppence: and even a chain coffee-shop felt the scalding. 

Let's start there first. We do a fine line in Tasmanian coffee (not grown here though) in the Tavern and my best lady, on special occasions brings in fine Louisiana brew too. But we are a minor provider compared to Starbucks, which seems to bring all sorts of brown stuff onto their own heads. They are not so kind to staff or customers as we are. They are so up themselves that it wasn't long before they'd be taken to task.... and for a ride.

Will Gensert brought it up:

Was the Starbucks Incident a Setup?

I think what happened at the Starbucks in Philly doesn't pass the sniff test.  Two black men went in, sat down, and apparently went unnoticed for a period of time until one got up and asked to use the restroom.  When told it was only for customers, he declined the opportunity to purchase something and returned to his associate at their table.  

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/04/was_the_starbucks_incident_a_setup.html

After another unspecified period of time elapsed, the manager, a woman named Holly, asked them to either purchase something or leave.  They said they were waiting for someone, did not want to buy anything, and wouldn't leave.  More time passed, the option was again proffered, and the double-refusal was again the response.  

That's when Holly called "the man."

The "screws" arrived and made the same offer as Holly, three times.  And just as many times, it was refused.  

As they were slipping on the cuffs to take them to the "big house," the ever-elusive "friend" magically appeared.  

You get the picture: it was a setup.  

Why wouldn't the "friend" just buy a cup of Joe so they could all sit down and chant, "No justice, no peace"?  How did he already know not to?  How did he know to soldier on for the cause?

It was a win-win for the unprivileged.  Getting arrested was the goal, but if they weren't arrested when the friend came in, it would validate the claim that white people are treated better than blacks.

The only things I would have done differently are, I would have put one in a suit and have the other dressed as a woman – but tastefully, you know, flats with perhaps a below-the-knee summer dress and some nice hoop earrings.  A little intersectionality would have created a bigger payout.

But hey, it worked out great anyway.  

That million dollars each of them will get from the settlement will come in handy.  

I would, however, watch the bank accounts of the friend.  I have a feeling his accounts will see a large deposit once the inevitable lawsuit is settled – and that would be the "smoking gun" the left is always seeking but can never seem to find.  I would wager that the left won't find it here, either.

Yet I can't get out of my mind all the times something like that really happened back when nobody cared.

Yet again, it's stunts like this, perpetrated by an immoral left with the purpose of keeping and widening the racial divide for all time – while getting rich in the process, of course.  They always get rich.

The saddest thing is what their stunt did to poor Holly.  So afraid that the world was going to deck the halls with boughs of Holly, she quit her job.

Those on the left willingly sacrificed one of the little people for their cause.  Remember when people sacrificed themselves for their cause?

Oh, the hypocrisy!

Yep. Hoist on a green-labelled petard. And how do we come to confirm the suspicion that hypocricy rules the day in Starbucks? Well it was not long ago that something of the like happened. But with a twist. Dan Sobieski was next on his feet to tell us while I pulled the pints.

Hardly a Stir When Starbucks Denied a Cop

Kudos for Sheriff David Clarke for reminding us of the double standard practiced by the self-righteous guardians of social justice such as Starbucks, who flagellate themselves in public over the injustice of denying non-paying patrons use of their facilities – patrons who happen to be black:

    "Not too long ago a Philadelphia Starbucks refused to let a police officer use the restroom telling him it was for paying customers.  

Don't remember Starbucks closing 8000 stores for sensitivity training toward police."

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/04/hardly_a_stir_when_starbucks_denied_a_cop.html

In 2015, an unnamed Philadelphia police sergeant entered a downtown Philadelphia Starbucks and asked to use the restroom.  He might have been the one who would have responded if that Starbucks were being robbed or its employees or customers were assaulted.  He was told in no uncertain terms that he could not and should find a restroom down the street.  The unnamed officer's story was posted on Facebook by Joe Leighthardt, another Philadelphia officer: He said.....

    "So I walk into the Starbucks at 13th and Chestnut in full uniform and ask the young blonde liberal behind the counter if I could use their public bathroom for which you need a key code and she states, in a loud voice so all the other customers can hear that the bathroom is for paying customers only. 

I then ask in a very polite manner if I could please use it. 

She then states in the same loud manner and a smirk "Are you a paying customer?" It was at this point that I realized what she was doing. As I walked out with my hand up and while she continued loudly to tell me about the bathroom down the street, I was even more astonished that the many customers and other employees said nothing and seemed indifferent. 

This is the world cops live in anymore. It's hip for this generation to berate and totally disrespect cops in front of the public and praise cop killers as the heroes of they're [sic] time. I never post things but I hope my fellow brothers and sisters in blue see this and know that we have each other… and not to patronize that Starbucks."

Starbucks did somewhat apologize for the incident, but there was no national mea culpa by the executive officers of Starbucks or the shutting down of its 8,000 stores and turning them into temporary re-education camps for employees who for the most part probably don't have a biased bone in their bodies and who depend on police for their safety inside and outside their stores.

Closing 8,000 stores is a big financial hit, money that could have been spent to help inner-city kids get an education, or a meal, or clothes for school or to fight gang crime and drugs. 

The closures cost the company an estimated $6 million, according to Schultz's 2011 book "Onward: How Starbucks Fought for Its Life without Losing Its Soul."  However, Schultz maintained that it was worth the financial cost and the mockery the company endured to put Starbucks back on the road to recovery. 

Self-survival and political correctness are prime motivators for Starbucks, but not the indignity and disrespect shown a Philadelphia officer in 2015.  No grandiose mea culpas, no mass closings, and no employee re-education.  

Starbucks's social conscience did not extend to those who risk their lives for the safety of its employees and customers.

And clearly Starbucks did not learn its lesson. They can hypocritically take the high moral ground by disrespecting the police and then do it again with black, homeless chaps. But this time someone was waiting to call them out and put them through the extortion wringer. 

But hey, it is hard to direct such a widespread workforce to do the right thing. But what about one man, directing himself. You will likely have heard of Dr David Suzuki. He is a big lefty Green wheel in the firmament of  Canadian hypocrites, and he was taken to task by Ezra Levant a while back. 

The two Suzukis: 

There’s Saint Suzuki, the one you see on CBC, and Secret Suzuki, the capitalist millionaire

There are two David Suzukis.

Most of us know one of the Suzukis. Let’s call him Saint Suzuki. That’s the Suzuki whose TV show on the CBC constantly lectures us about our lifestyle. He says we need to.... 

consume less, buy less and use less fossil fuels.

But then there’s another Suzuki. Let’s call him Secret Suzuki, because he’s far less well-known.

 http://torontosun.com/2013/10/11/the-two-suzukis-theres-saint-suzuki-the-one-you-see-on-cbc-and-secret-suzuki-the-capitalist-millionaire/wcm/41e5eca5-3efa-4a1f-91c7-e4445e4dc367

Secret Suzuki is the one who lives on Vancouver’s elite Point Grey Road, on a double lot, overlooking English Bay, right above the exclusive Kitsilano Yacht Club. The City of Vancouver assesses the land value alone at over $8 million. 

And that’s just one of Secret Suzuki’s properties.

He has another million-dollar home in Vancouver. And then there’s another home on Quadra Island. That’s three homes right there, if you count the double lot on Point Grey Road as just one property.

But then there’s his large property holdings on Nelson Island. What’s so fascinating about that one is that he co-owns the property with an oil company, Kootenay Oil Distributors Ltd. They don’t plan to drill for oil together. It’s a beautiful tourist spot — maybe perfect for a nice big condo development.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with co-owning any property along with an oil company. 

But isn’t Saint Suzuki against fossil fuel companies — especially oil companies?

Saint Suzuki tells us that the world is desperately overcrowded, that we’re overpopulated, and that we’re going to run out of things.

But in his own life, Secret Suzuki has five children.

There’s nothing wrong with having five children. It’s a blessing. 

But then why does he think other people should have fewer kids?

Saint Suzuki rails against corporations and profits. He even gave a well-received anti-capitalist speech at the Occupy Vancouver protest.

But Secret Suzuki himself has several corporations. One of them, the David Suzuki Foundation, took in a whopping $9 million last year and has $12 million in assets. More than 10 million of that is invested in stocks and bonds.

Saint Suzuki despises lobbyists, and says they have a disproportionate control of political power in Ottawa. But Secret Suzuki himself has nine paid lobbyists registered in Ottawa’s lobbyist registry. 

Not one. Nine.

Saint Suzuki despises politicians, and says they can’t be trusted. Secret Suzuki starred in a Liberal party TV ad along with former Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty.

Saint Suzuki says corporations have to be less obsessed by profits, and do more for the public good. They need to especially think of the interests of the next generation, our children.

But Secret Suzuki has made a tidy profit off young people. His standard speaking fee at universities in Canada is $30,000 plus expenses. He billed Quebec’s John Abbott College a cool $41,000 to visit them.

Saint Suzuki speaks in the language of tolerance and equality and liberalism — utterly politically correct.

But Secret Suzuki engages in conduct that should cause feminists to raise an eyebrow. When he visited John Abbott College, his assistant called with special requests to go along with his speaking fee. 

Here is an internal e-mail from the college’s Mary Milburn: “We have learned, via Dr. Suzuki’s assistant, that although the Dr. does not like to have bodyguards per se, he does not mind having a couple of ladies (females) that would act as body guards.” 

The college’s Jim Anderson got involved in selecting the coeds, too: “Please be certain that the women are nicely dressed, we don’t want them in evening gowns, but definitely NOT Police Tech uniforms.” All of this bizarre selection of girls, dressed just so, was the result of Secret Suzuki’s special request. 

If he were a conservative, he’d be called a dirty old man. 

But he’s a saint. So the college went along with it.

David Suzuki is not a criminal. 

But he is not a saint. 

He’s a real man — a capitalist millionaire, a politician, a man with a staff of lobbyists, a prolific father, a wealthy landlord. 

If only he’d stop scolding the rest of us for aspiring to do the same.

The Green sorts have done sterling work in the past, not least the environmental arm of the BBC. 

Who can overlook 'the Bro', Sir David. 

His wildlife films created a genre and educated billions. But was everything 'kosher'? One has to wonder about the 'cheats' and even the odd bit of denigration of reputations. 

Like as happened recently to someone who has the smallest of reputations such that you will not have even heard of the chap.  That is no excuse though and neither is the insufferable holier than though attitude that puts whales above humans in the great scheme of things.  

The BBC builds its own tall tales.  Anita Singh spoke about it:

Scandal: 

Tall Tales.

BBC’s Human Planet Series Withdrawn After Faking Scenes

The BBC has withdrawn Human Planet from distribution after admitting that the series faked scenes of an Indonesian hunter harpooning a whale.

The natural history programme is currently available on Netflix but will be withdrawn within 24 hours while the corporation conducts an “editorial review”.

 https://principia-scientific.org/scandal-bbcs-human-planet-series-withdrawn-after-faking-scenes/

It is the second Human Planet fakery story this month. It emerged that film-makers had staged scenes of a rainforest tribe supposedly living in a treehouse 140 feet from the ground.

The opening episode of the 2011 series visited the Indonesian island of Lembata and focused on a young man named Benjamin Blikololong. He was shown jumping into the sea during a sperm whale hunt, and viewers were told he had succeeded in harpooning it.

A voiceover from John Hurt said: “Benjamin’s moment has arrived.” After he leapt into the water brandishing the weapon, Hurt said: “He’s got it.” Viewers are then Blikololong received a larger share of the whale meat because he “struck the decisive blow”

But a journalist writing a book on the whale hunters, who live on the tiny island of Lembata, met Blikololong and heard that he had not harpooned the whale. He then contacted the BBC.

In a statement, the corporation said: “The BBC has been alerted to a further editorial breach in the Human Planet series from 2011.

“In Episode 1, Oceans, a Lamaleran whale hunter named Benjamin Blikololong is shown supposedly harpooning a whale. On review, the BBC does not consider that the portrayal of his role was accurate, although the sequence does reflect how they hunt whales.

“The BBC has decided to withdraw Human Planet from distribution for a full editorial review.” 

In all, there have been four fakery stories surrounding the series.

In 2015, the corporation admitted that it had used a semi-domesticated wolf in one episode because..... 

the crew were unable to find a wild one.

And shots of a tarantula, purporting to be taken in the Venezuelan jungle,..... 

were actually taken in a studio.

At the beginning of this month, it was revealed that a 140-foot high treehouse said to be a home to the Korowai people in Papua New Guinea was built for the benefit of the cameras.

Writer and adventurer Will Millard went to the village to film another BBC series, My Year With The Tribe, and learned the truth.

The BBC said standards had been raised since Human Planet was made. “Since this programme was broadcast in 2011, we have strengthened our training for the BBC’s Natural History Unit in editorial guidelines, standards and values.”

I am happy to say that the Ale in the Tavern is Real Ale and of the very Highest quality. Tasty too.

The customers are all exemplary (apart from some who are not), honest (mostly) and kind (some only to their mothers).

We can forgive those who tresspass against us, but there are consequences that are unavoidable, I'm afraid. 

So, drink up. Think.

Pax.

Rude, Nasty Girls.

Sugar and spice many women are not, despite the modern insistence that it is only menz that are violent, nasty creatures who need the heavy hand. The modern empowered woman who knows her rights is often not a bit different  from her 'oppressed'  forebears in her propensity for violence. The Colonel's Lady and Judy O'Grady are sisters under their skins. An old rhyme but still true since Kipling's day.

We live in an age where the behaviours and abilities of women to be rude, nasty and violent have increased markedly. 

But while men seem to have become less violent toward women, despite the PC cant and vast amounts of public monies spent to say the opposite, we see women's violence to both one another and to men increasing.  

Many fine, decent women come into the Tavern. I do not wish them to be offended when a customer or two points out flaws. Not in them as such. There is good and bad in all of us  under our skins and our task in life includes eradication the bad and enhancing the good. Some of us get a helping hand. Some go the other way. 

Mean girls grow to be mean women. Oh for the sugar and spice little girls of yesteryear who could become nice ladies.

But a professional lady came by to question the past ladylike behaviours. It was not all frothy white petticoats. And another report came in from the Land of the Long White Cloud detailing a horrible and more recent example. We also took a look at girls who just wanna have fun - of a nasty sort.

It is quite rare for the Tavern to see folk thrown or pushed out of the door. We hear the rude and nasty outside the hedges but the bouncer keeps them at bay. But we do sometimes have the odd altercation inside and it is often ladies doing the altercating! One tries to be kind, but firm.

We see nasty violent behaviours all around us. Where 'society' and 'authorities' have always condemned and punished bad male behaviour, we now have that same society and authority actively encouraging bad female behaviour.  It is rewarded. 

Women in power positions - such as that awful Alison Saunders woman in the UK, heading up the Prosecutions bizzo, go after even mild men, inventing crime where they are quite innocent and actually paying women to falsely accuse. The evidence abounds and you can find it yourselves with ease.

Has that propensity for women to accuse and be vicious suddenly arisen? Or has it always been there, waiting for encouragement and reward? 

Ditta Oliker, Ph.D., is a clinical psychologist in Los Angeles, and she has been to the cinema.

Bullying in the Female World

The Hidden Aggression Behind the Innocent Smile

"Kick him where it hurts" - "Punch him harder" - "Pin him down till he yells uncle".  These are some of the sounds associated with male aggression.  In fact, the word aggression was only applied to the males of our species, expressed in physical action and captured in words like hitting, pushing, punching, beating and ganging-up.  Included in any description was anger that seemed to be the force behind the aggressive act.  

 https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-long-reach-childhood/201109/bullying-in-the-female-world

Until fairly recently, there were no sounds associated with female aggression -- as if it didn't exist.

It's only in the last decade or so that aggression by the female -- in the form of social or relational aggression -- has been recognized.

What made me think of this was watching the film The Help based on the novel by Kathryn Stockett, now a popular new movie.  It is the story of life in Mississippi in the early 1960's and how a group of affluent White women relate to the Black maids who care for them and their children and how, in turn, the maids feel about how they are being treated.  It dramatically captures the distance between the two groups and the underlying racial biases of that time.

What struck me as I was watching the film is how it also dramatically and effectively captures the emotional and psychological violence of social aggression, including the sting and cruelty of the verbal "weapons" women use. 

The words now associated with female aggressive behavior include: excluding, ignoring, teasing, gossiping, secrets, backstabbing, rumor spreading and hostile body language (i.e., eye-rolling and smirking).  Most damaging is turning the victim into a social "undesirable".  

The behavior and associated anger is hidden, often wrapped in a package seen as somewhat .....

harmless or just a "girl thing". 

 

The covert nature of the aggression leaves the victim with no forum to refute the accusations and, in fact, attempts to defend oneself leads to an escalation of the aggression.  The film captures a number of these "weapons" as well as a pattern found in the interactions of males; the justification for the use of the same kind of aggression -- physical or social -- by the "good guy" in response to the original aggression by the "bad guy".

OK. The 'black maid' phenomenon may not be familiar outside of America, but the schoolyards across the western world have been breeding it for over a century. 

Comparison between male and female aggression shows strong and obvious similarities.  Motivation for both groups usually includes: a desire for power, for control, for achieving greater social status and popularity, jealousy, fear and derailing competition.  

Aggressive behavior for both male and female children can be found as early as preschool age, is most prevalent in adolescence and can, as the movie so clearly illustrates, continue well into adulthood.  

Both sexes form social structures that lead different members to assume specific roles and characteristics.  For example, in a female group (as seen in the movie) the one with the power is like the "Queen Bee" with a contingent of followers.  Her friends do what she wants, she is charming when she wants to be, she's manipulatively affectionate, she takes no responsibility for hurting another's feelings, and defines right and wrong by the loyalty or disloyalty shown to her. 

She is usually the one who decides who should be the victim.

The film also captures the dilemma of those who feel helpless to help the victim because of their need to not stir the anger of the Queen Bee and become alienated from the group.

What the film doesn't show is that the effects of social aggression can be longer lasting and more damaging than physical aggression. 

And where better to see that but on the street. Young women, barely out of the school training playground are 'empowered' to think they can take on men and exhibit the worst behaviours of the worst men. These are the product of Feminism.

Since the "weapons" have a stealth nature to them, there is less possibility of anticipating the specifics of an attack and fewer actions to defend against an attack.  This negative effect is particularly damaging during adolescence when the importance of acceptance in a peer group is maximized. 

Adding to the pain inflicted on the victim is the lack of support by teachers and other adults who view the bully -- often a popular and charismatic young woman -- as innocent of such negative behavior.  Thus the strong positive reputation of the bully makes it difficult for a victim to get validation of the bullying and causes a victim to suffer the additional pain of not being believed and not getting any support.

Relational aggression negatively impacts "mirroring" - a peer group's reflected reaction to an individual.  Caught in the web of punishing aggression by peers, a young person's internal sense of self becomes diminished and felt as being "a loser" - "a reject" and "not as good".  Self-esteem is low and feelings of insecurity may persist throughout life.  What is also affected is the ability to trust as an adult and to be free to be open to close relationships. 

A recent development in social aggression is cyber bullying, acted out by both sexes.  In this type of aggression, the perpetrator uses social networking tools - email, Facebook, Twitter - to inflict damage, particularly the spreading of socially harmful rumors of others.  

Recent reports of several suicides by young adolescents who were targeted speak to the damaging power of this kind of aggression.

I was also aware, watching this film, of how new technologies have changed our world.  In the 1960's the nature and power of relational aggression was more muted because these new stealth weapons did not yet exist.  

The Help ends on a positive note, in some ways mirroring the positive changes in race relationships since the 1960's and the civil rights movement.  

It may be time, with the power of the internet being used as a powerful weapon of covert aggression, to start a movement to change the nature of human relationships as they relate to both physical and social aggression.

Hmmmm. There IS a movement already but our society is well down the road to perdition rejecting it. It has been around for 2000 years and was getting to the point of 'forming' the backbone of our civilisation. But the decline and deliberate destruction of Christianity, starting in the 1500's and now followed up with 'enlightenment' and 'humanism', and Feminism, is busy opening the door to the sheer evil of Islam.

That our entertainment biz perpetuates and rewards the worst behaviours is often commented upon in the bars. Here is an example (which thankfully has not reached Oz shores - yet ). This is so clearly a put-up job, despite the faux hilarity of the situation, with those involved eager for their 20 seconds of focus upon them. 

And to move on from the riotous girls tackling and attacking men half again their size outside a pub, we were shown the hidden side of Domestic Violence with an astonishingly rare finding against a woman in a Court.

Controlling girlfriend 'first woman convicted' of new UK domestic abuse offence

A university graduate is believed to be the first woman convicted under new domestic abuse laws in the UK after scalding her boyfriend with boiling water, stabbing him and keeping food from him.

 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12033927

Jordan Worth, 22, banned her partner from their bed, decided what clothes he could wear, isolated him from friends and family and even took over his Facebook account.

She was jailed for seven-and-a-half years after pleading guilty to the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate relationship, introduced in 2015, as well as wounding with intent and causing grievous bodily harm with intent.

Worth, came from a loving and supportive family, made her boyfriend's life a misery, exercising control over him deciding what he could wear shortly after they moved in together, Luton Crown Court heard.

Raised in Ridgmont, Herts, she had been a high performer at school and was a trained gymnast.

She gained a 2:1 Honours Degree in Fine Arts from the University of Hertfordshire and had been volunteering for an animal charity but wanted to become a teacher.

She had also raised money for children in Africa.

But Judge Nic Madge heard that there were two sides to Worth, who controlled every aspect of her partner's life at their home in the village of Stewartby in Bedfordshire.

Worth and her partner had met at college in 2012 when they were both 16, Maryam Syed, prosecuting, told the court.

She became violent towards the man, who suffered from hydrocephalus which is caused by a buildup of fluid inside the skull which made him vulnerable, using blunt objects to strike him, wounded him with a knife and didn't help him get to hospital for treatment.

For nine months he couldn't sleep in the same bed as her, the court was told.

The charge of controlling or coercive behaviour covered a period from April of 2016 to June 2017, when police were called to the couple's home.

Neighbours said they often heard them arguing and the sounds of things being thrown in the house, Syed said.

The victim was heard by his neighbours shouting at Worth: "Get off me, you are hurting me."

He was seen on occasions with black eyes and to be limping and with his arm in sling.

Once Worth was seen at window by a neighbour "armed" with a screwdriver or hammer, the court heard.

Another neighbour heard the victim shouting "Get off me. Get off my head. Don't keep doing that to my head."

The court heard it was in June of last year that neighbours called police to the couple's home in the village in the early hours after hearing shouting.

Paramedics noted injuries to his hand, burns to arms and legs which were being self treated with cling film.

There was cling film round his ankles, and a hand wound that was bleeding.

He was taken to Bedford Hospital's acute clinical unit and then to Addenbrookes Hospital.

The prosecutor said he had second and third degree burns which will leave permanent scarring. The court was told Worth had thrown boiling hot water over her partner.

On June 6 he was examined at the Lister Hospital in Stevenage and found to have burns on his legs as well as stab wounds about his body and limbs.

Days later Worth was arrested.

Judge Madge told Worth that as well as the violence she had carried out on her partner she had refused him adequate bedding and food.

He said she would "belittle" her partner and discouraged him from contacting friends and his family.

"She accepts that she has in the past, on a number of occasions, used blunt objects and implements to strike him and that he suffered injuries as a result of her doing so," he said.

"She accepts using boiling or hot water to cause injury to him. She accepts that she has in the past used a knife to cause injury to her partner.

"He suffered from hydrocephalus and had a vulnerable head and he became increasingly isolated."

Worth, who is now in a new relationship, was made the subject of a restraining order which prevents her from contacting her ex for an indefinite period.

I presume her new partner is a complete half-wit and would hope he does not visit this Tavern. She too. 

Is Mz Worth with her education and empowerment an ususual case? Well it is unusual for her to be sentenced to jail for seven years. Just think, had she been a man who put a piece of bacon at the door of a mosque she would have got a 15 year sentence.

The world is mad and getting badder.

Let us peer over the hedge and see the sort of girls we are breeding. Again, the entertainment bizzo takes girls (and boys) and turns them into the sort one tries to avoid.

I prefer the sugar and spice. And the bacon.

Drink up.

Pax.