And the Loser is........

Updated - to let a lady speak up.
The hoopla is over, for the moment, and the Victor is declared. Many a pint was poured and a few drops spilled, as per Tradition, as a libation to the Gods of old. The Triumphant Trump willtake his place in History.

The Roman Caesar on his triumphant parade through the streets and throng was reminded by a slave in his chariot:

Remember, Caesar, Thou art but Mortal.

I really hope that people do not go overboard on The Donald the way many did with Obama. He is not the Great White Hope. He is not the Saviour. He needs a slave next to him whispering in his ear "You are a mortal man". 

Perhaps the slave can carry a megaphone to make sure we all know that too.

You can be sure that such a message, and far worse, will be shouted from the rooftops and into your living rooms by the real losers of this election. 

The Media.

Over the past decade or so, the clamour of the media has been loud and long with a siren song for socialism and all its attendant stupidities. Barely an hour of TV or a column of newsprint has missed an opportunity to shove 'modernism', socialism, feminism and all the slurs and disparagements they throw at ordinary people. down our throats.

We are, it seems, bigots, homophobes, misogynists, unreconstructed neanderthals, 'god-botherers', intolerant yokels, unfit to present a game-show or front a breakfast TV fest. And did those 'better-than-us' media hacks get their noses put out of joint, bloddied and bruised by the vox populi.

The US election result ought not to be a wholesale gloating by we plebs. We, too, need someone to whisper in our ears:

 Remember, you are to be a Saint:

 You are as yet a sinner.

We need to look to our own behaviour and pray for the wicked folk who would have us slaves to their ideologies. They have suffered a blow  that will take some time to work through, so expect much howling and gnashing of teeth. And blame of course. It is all our fault.

Brendan O'Neill explained. Well, OK, he went to town on them all:

The sneering response to Trump’s victory reveals exactly why he won

If you want to know why Trump won, just look at the response to his winning. The lofty contempt for ‘low information’ Americans. The barely concealed disgust for the rednecks and cretins of ‘flyover’ America who are apparently racist and misogynistic and homophobic. The haughty sneering at the vulgar, moneyed American political system and how it has allowed a wealthy candidate to poison the little people’s mushy, malleable minds. 

 http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/sneering-response-trumps-victory-reveals-exactly-won/

The suggestion that American women, more than 40 per cent of whom are thought to have voted for Trump, suffer from internalised misogyny: that is, they don’t know their own minds, the poor dears. The hysterical, borderline apocalyptic claims that the world is now infernally screwed because ‘our candidate’, the good, pure person, didn’t get in.

It is astonishing that so many still voted for Hillary Clinton. The Media has been busy for months fighting fires from the revelations of her misdeeds, corruptions, sheer wickednesses. Their whitewash words poured out, excusing her and blaming the victims. All typical Gramsi-ites, deliberately deceiving.

This response to Trump’s victory reveals why Trump was victorious. Because those who do politics these days — the political establishment, the media, the academy, the celeb set — are so contemptuous of ordinary people, so hateful of the herd, so convinced that the mass of society cannot be trusted to make political decisions, and now those ordinary people have given their response to such top-down sneering and prejudice.

Oh, the irony of observers denouncing Middle America as a seething hotbed of hatred even as they hatefully libel it a dumb and ugly mob. 

Having turned America’s ‘left behind’ into the butt of every clever East Coast joke, and the target of every handwringing newspaper article about America’s dark heart and its strange, Bible-toting inhabitants, the political and cultural establishment can’t now be surprised that so many of those people have turned around and said… well, it begins with F and ends with U.

The respectable set’s allergy to Trump is fundamentally an allergy to the idea of democracy itself. 

To them, Trump’s rise confirms the folly of asking the ignorant, the everyday, the non-subscribers to the New York Times, to decide on important political matters. They’re explicit about this now. 

In the run-up to election day, big-name commentators wondered out loud if democracy is all it’s cracked up to be. Trump’s ascendancy showed we need better checks and balances on ‘the passions of the mob’, said Andrew Sullivan. We should ‘cool and restrain [these] temporary populist passions’, he said, and refuse to allow ‘feeling, emotion’ to override ‘reasoned deliberation’. The little folks only feel and wail, you see, and it’s down to the grown-ups in the system to think coolly on their behalf.

As if 'feeling' and 'emotion' haven't already become the modus of the Left.

Elsewhere, a writer for the New York Times asked Americans to consider installing a monarchy, which could rise above the ‘toxic partisanship’ of party politics — that is, above open, swirling, demos-stuffed political debate. In a new book called ‘Against Democracy’ — says it all — Georgetown philosopher Jason Brennan argues for an epistocracy, an ‘aristocracy of the wise’, who might decide political matters for those of us who are ‘low information’ (ie. stupid). 

This echoes the anti-democratic turn of liberals in the 2000s, when it was argued that daft, Bush-backing Americans increasingly made decisions, ‘not with their linear, logical left brain, but with their lizard, more emotional right brain’, in Arianna Huffington’s words.

Once again, the era of Feminism with its canards that 'logic is patriarchal', suddenly gets reversed! Because it suits them to denigrate with whetever contradictions there may be completely disregarded.

Such vile contempt for the political, democratic capacities of the ordinary person has been in great evidence following Trump’s win — across Twitter and in apocalypse-tinged instant responses — and it is likely to intensify. 

Anti-Trump will morph more explicitly into anti-democracy.

If this all sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the same kind of pleb-fearing horror that greeted the Brexit result four months ago. ‘Why elections are bad for democracy’, a headline in the Guardian said. The people are deluded and it is the task of those with ‘reason and expertise’ to ‘un-delude’ them, said a writer for Foreign Policy. ‘What if democracy doesn’t work? What if it never has and never will?’, wondered a pained George Monbiot. 

Boom. That’s it. The secret and not-so-secret cry of the elites and the experts and the observers over both Brexit and Trump is precisely that: ‘What if democracy doesn’t work?’ It’s not so much Trump they fear as the system that allowed him to get to the White House: that pesky, ridiculous system where we must ask ordinary people — shudder — what they think should happen in the nation.

The anti-Brexit anti-democrats claimed they were merely opposed to using rough, simplistic referendums to decide on huge matters. That kind of democracy is too direct, they said. Yet now they’re raging over the election of Trump via a far more complicated, tempered democratic system. 

That’s because — and I know this is strong, but I’m sure it’s correct — 

it is democracy itself that they hate. 

Not referendums, not Ukip’s blather, not only direct democracy, but democracy as an idea. Against democracy — so many of them are now. It is the engagement of the throng in political life that they fear. 

It is the people — ordinary, working, non-PhD-holding people — whom they dread and disdain.

Yes, but somehow, they may have a point. Those ordinary people also voted for Hillary and they are already rioting in the streets, crying on You Tube and Facebook and cursing wherever they can. 

The 'ordinary' people are more easily swayed by Media mendacities than even by lunatic Professors in Universities. At least those swayed by feminist professors and the plethora of 'Studies' lecturers are young people with the cradle marks still on their backsides. 

No such caveats can be handed to the media people though. They are all growed up.

It is what got Trump to the White House — the right of all adults, even the dumb ones, to decide about politics — that gives them sleepless nights

This nasty, reactionary turn against democracy by so many of the well-educated both explains the victory of Trump, which neatly doubles up as a slap in the face of the establishment, and confirms why democracy is more important today than it has ever been. 

Because it really would be folly, madness in fact, to let an elite that so little understands ordinary people, and in fact loathes them, to run society unilaterally. 

Now that would be dangerous, more dangerous than Trump.

Food for thought. I must go and inspect the kitchens.

Have a pint of something fine and Good.

Update:

Meanwhile hear what Hannah Bleau, who calls herself 'Red Dawn' had to say. And boy did she have a go ! She was letting loose at the Chicks on the Right table.

She came by late but was welcomed'

Open Letter To All Of The Whiny Safe Space Liberals Crying Over Our ‘Racist’ And ‘Sexist’ Country

The first half of last night was stressful. I could barely eat. Stupid Florida, always keeping us on the edge of our seats. I switched my networks around last night. I mostly relied on Fox News and Twitter. CNN wasn’t calling states as fast, and MSNBC is a last resort kind of thing. I vowed to stay away from that channel, UNLESS things started shaping up for Donald Trump.

 http://www.chicksontheright.com/open-letter-whiny-safe-space-liberals-crying-racist-sexist-country/

Then the results started coming in. Flyover nation. North Carolina. Ohio. Florida? Wisconsin?!!! That’s when the wheels started falling off their wagon. That’s when I started thinking about Hillary Clinton’s defeat. I never really allowed myself to go there before. I didn’t want to get my hopes up, but my country came through. We the People are not stupid.

We the People defeated MSM. We the People defeated the establishment. We the People saved the Supreme Court. We the People rejected the power-hungry, seahag criminal in a pantsuit.

After they announced Wisconsin, commentators started to change their tune. They looked visibly nervous. Eventually, Mockarena told me it was safe to flip to MSNBC, and it was hysterical. I thought Rachel Maddow’s face was going to fall off.  I flipped back to Fox News. Juan Williams practically peed himself. I watched the cheese slide off his crackers in real time. It was something.

I scrolled through social media. Liberals were melting down. They wrote stuff like, “I don’t know how we consistently underestimated the quiet endurance of racism in America.” They whined over “flagrant sexism.” 

I’m sick and tired of it. 

I’m sick and tired of these uninformed jackholes telling me that I’m racist, sexist, Islamophobic and homophobic. They have no basis for those claims. 

They’re consumed by their emotions.  Do they honestly believe Hillary Clinton lost solely because she’s a woman? It couldn’t possibly have anything with her being a pathological liar who’s spent her entire life pursuing political power? It had nothing to do with the fact that America’s not satisfied with her vision for America– an America with open borders, higher taxes and more bureaucratic scumbags in D.C. telling us how to run our lives?

We’re not racist. We’re not sexist. 

We want people to come into this country legally. That’s not racist. Progressive leadership in the big, urban cities hasn’t pulled the black community out of poverty. It’s worsened it. Liberalism has failed them. We acknowledge that. We want them to prosper. That’s not racist. And as for being sexist? 

All issues are women’s issues. I have no idea why liberals continue to separate them. Do they really believe we only care about vaginas, boobs and killing our offspring? Liberals assumed we (women) would vote for Hillary based on those reasons alone. 

THAT’S sexist, if you ask me. 

Women care about the economy. We care about national security. We care about the almost $20 trillion national debt. We care about the erosion of our freedoms. We care about the future of the Supreme Court. The list goes on and on and on.

I also saw some posts on how Trump’s victory signifies that America hates the LGBT community. NEWSFLASH: We elected a man who wants to keep dangerous anti-LGBT ideologues OUT OF OUR COUNTRY. Those people who want to throw them off rooftops? We don’t want them here. We want to protect the LGBT community. 

Oz's Own Foul-Mouthed Misandrist 

The fact that we stand for traditional family values and don’t want men in the women’s bathroom doesn’t take anything away from that. Not for one second.

We’re not racist or sexist. We’re freaking SICK AND TIRED of the political establishment crapping all over the Constitution and treading on our liberty. We’re sick of them refusing to uphold the rule of law. We’re sick of being told that this is as good as it gets. We want economic freedom. We want to keep more of our hard-earned money. We want healthcare premiums that AREN’T AS MUCH AS OUR MORTGAGES. We want people to enter our country LEGALLY. We believe in peace through strength.  Faith. Freedom. Family. 

We’re the most kick a** country that has ever existed. All you liberals whining over our “demise,” GET OVER YOURSELVES. You’re clueless. We were founded on the novel idea that we were endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Rights than cannot be given or taken away by a governing authority. This was about individual liberty. We reject government force and coercion. Votes. Favors. Political power. That’s the cycle of every progressive politician. We’re done. We’re sick of it. 

Another part of Ronald Reagan’s 1964 speech, “A Time For Choosing,” comes to mind.

“Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, “What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power.” But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector.”

“Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do-gooders, we’re denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goals. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help the less fortunate. They tell us we’re always ‘against,’ never ‘for’ anything.”

But we are. We’re for economic prosperity. Individual responsibility. Fiscal responsibility. Less government. More freedom. We’re sick of the liberal do-gooders shoving their BS agenda down our throats and calling us bigots when we reject their horrid ideas. We’re sick of them scoffing at the principles of liberty.

Donald Trump is America’s middle finger to the media, Hollywood elites, progressive ideologues and everyone else in the world who hates our guts.

I’m drinking the tears of our political enemies in a mug today and loving every minute of it. We defeated them. We have one more chance to prove that our ideas work. We’re right. We always have been.

Well said, m'dear. Have a cocktail of your choice. Ot perhaps a pint for a lady of muscle. 

By the way, did anyone notice that The Donald has washed the orange out of his hair ? Grey suits him.

Pax

President Trump: Hope & Change

What a day here in the Tavern. TV on, and all the Australian media presenters and commentators crowing about the demise of 'Trump' with grins of anticipation on their faces, only to be  'progressively' replaced with hardening lips and wails of 'how can this be'? 

How? Because  that's Progress for you. Because the American people sought and saw Hope for some Fundemental Change. Hahaha. Isn't that what the lefty TV presenters wanted some years back? Well, it may be on its way very soon.

How very disappointed they all were. It isn't as if the election was in Oz, for crying out loud.  I think I saw an ABC person on the brink of tears.

Change is an odd thing. It can be for the better or for the worse. Under Obama things have become 'progressively' worse year by year. The Obama years have seen the Constitution - that magnificent political document and product of 800 years of refinement and love of freedom - rubbished, calumnised and corrupted.

Trump is a response to that and to the deliberate fracturing of society by the Alinski-inspired Obama and his crew of what in other days would be called Traitors. He who dared to alter the Law with the 'stroke of a pen.

Hope and Change, he promised. A Fundemental Transformation of America. Well he had eight years and the Spirit of the American People was not extinguished.

To follow him was to be the most evil woman since Lucretia Borgia. Hillary Clinton.  That was the 'Plan'.  What is so distressing is that so many people wanted her in the White House: some simply because she had particular genitals. They cared not that she is corrupt.

Not that those same people were consistent. Many decry gender altogether. Trump could call himself a woman and they would be miffed but hoist on their own petard. She and her husband and daughter were looking forward to lining their pockets with American taxpayer's hard-earned money after a decade of stripping hundreds of millions from foreign Governments and home & abroad Organisations.  Her 'Clinton Foundation' is a running sore.

And of course, she being the Champion of the killing of 1.2 Million American babies in the womb 

every year.

The Princess of Lies and 'worthy' consort of Satan is ever there is to be one.

Pray for that evil woman's Soul.

Now America can see a flawed man but basically sound - hopefully - and a comparatively wholesome family in the White House.

There was much ribald chatter in the US Room. I had to add a note of soberness. Trump is a businessman (The business of America is business) and negotiator; and his statements of intent are simply his opening gambits. Do not expect too much. Be thankful that the evil Hillary has been defeated.

But I was reminded by Maryse:

Trump is much more than a businessman. His policies on the Supreme Court and on defending the unborn child take him way beyond economics. Hillary vowed to extend the killing. Forget everything else. It will fall into place, as long as Trump is not assassinated by a loony leftie or a Muslim.

A drink for that lady.

A Trump Presidency should not an occasion for revenge, and some caution may need to be applied.

As a furriner I am in no position to 'advise' Mr Trump but I can 'hope' for some clear signs of 'Fundemental Change'. After all, the lefties sought that themselves. so...going with some of the comments from the darker corners of the bars, we had suggestions flowing: 

1) Obama, his staff and all senior members of his administration should be immediately arrested and stand trial for treason. Lefty 'guilty until you prove yourself innocent' rules should apply.

2)The Clintons should be arrested and stand trial for treason and corruptionand their Foundation should immediately be frozen.

3) Saudi rules should immediately apply to all muslims .... all mosques must close.... no public expression of Islam should be allowed. That's simply 'fair', shirley ? All muslims should be obliged to convert to Christianity or be deported or pay a 50% tax. (no, no killing).

4) the Mexican border should have a one-way door and all those lefties who want to go to Canada will be assisted in going to Mexico, in solidarity with all the nice folk in Canada who do not want to be sullied.

5) An enornous hose, perhaps powered by several major rivers, should be sent through all Federal Departments. Only decent folk would be issued with life-vests.


6) President Obama has 2 months left in office. Trump should immediately announce that any Law, 'Executive' action, Act or agreement - especially foreign agreements, will be recinded and rejected on January 10th. All criminals who have been given a 'pardon' despite their guilt in the past 12 months shuld be immediately deported.

Not that I could agree with all, mind you.

But Trump could do well to consider them and apply current Law and perhaps some extra ones too.

Australia should also be very cautious about any 'agreements' emanating from the White House in the next few months while Obama continues his last wrecking opportunities.

It will be of great interest to the Tavern's customers just how the next few years will pan out. All I can offer is that America has been pulled back from the brink of losing its Soul.

It has tested my Supplier's Patience.

The stink has not only spread around the world but reached up to Heaven itself.

Perhaps Trump has been sent. Perhaps to save: perhaps to inflict punishment.

Watch that space.

Pax.

Shaking Cassie and Dispiriting Men

Cassie had her eyes opened. At last. One woman at a time is going to take a very long time. And its not just women who need to have their eyes opened, being as most people, men and women walk about with eyes wide shut.

Yes, its the 'Gender' thing again.

Old White Males

I omitted to mention that one of the tasks I had to do during my overseas trip was to record a passage from Dickens for a Film and Audio Studio.  

http://jlffilmaudio.com/

Dickens, of course, is an Old White (and dead) Male, and my own Old White Male voice with its beautiful, sonorous English enunciation was sought after to read out a passage of his. Unfortunately the research and continuity assistant had misplaced it. Ah well. I could have been famous.

But the owner, Director, Musician and Composer fellow in charge, who just happens to be my beloved son (in whom I am well pleased) apologised and treated me to a dinner instead.

Someone he knows came by the Tavern with a tale, too. 

I walked up to the train door, that I was closest to.  No-one was nearby, which is rare for this time in the morning.  As I approached the door, a woman walked around me so she could be right next to me.  I know this game.  She was saying, 'I want to get to a coveted front facing seat, so I want to get in first', without opening her mouth.  I reached up to press the button and the door slid open, I waited to let her go in first.  This is tradition. It's the thing that gentlemen do and that society implicitly expects.  I followed close behind so I could hear... just in case.  Of course, I heard nothing, and received no acknowledgement of the preference I had given her, or that she clearly expected.

What has happened to all the ladies?  One to whom one could open a door for and receive a polite acknowledgement, a nod, a gesture or world of thanks.

Ah, yes. Back in the days of those Old White Males, it was usual. Chivalry. Ladies reciprocated with charm and gratitude. 

There were seats aplenty and both of us were able to take our pick...

My god, again!  Not five minutes later... Here I sit, one seat unoccupied in front of me... two people from opposite doors head for it ... the man capitulates... the lady says nothing.

This is nothing new but today is getting my goat because I have realised I was not outraged enough yesterday...

Yesterday I was in a small presentation within an office building in Melbourne.  Call it a 'get to know you' session.  One lady recalled an interview with a large corporate IT firm where some people of dubious character had interviewed her.  In the short conversation that followed the phrase "old white men" was used, implied to be a derogatory term, to be associated with these people of ill-repute.  This is representative of, of course the establishment... the ones who want to hold us down!

For he first time in years I felt truly grateful to not have children.  In particular to not have a male child, who would surely be white and surely be born into a world that is increasingly hostile to white men.

I, on the other hand, would be a fine Grand-dad ! 

To add to that the crime of being old... seemed oddly out of sorts a few short days off Rememberance Day, when we celebrate the few old white men left, of the millions who died during the first two world wars.

Increasingly there is an accepted vocalisation of the crime of white male priviledge.  But let's think about that this means.  Surely everyone who is living in Australia, a wealthy nation by most standards, is privileged?

No-one is Self Made Privileged. We stand on the shoulders of both giants and masses of dead, to enjoy the things we consider normal in modern society.  Our freedoms and virtually every modern invention we use and take for granted is founded in the life's work and often, the very lives of Europeans - that's those white people.

The roads, the medicine, santitation, machines and freedom, mostly forged by European men.  The first to benefit from this effort was of course, white women and men.  However fast-followers have been almost every other class and race of people on earth.

So when I hear the old white man belittled, contrary to the much deriled section 18c of the racial discrimination act... at first I recognise the freedom to be dimwitted and to express this in speech.  Then (being a bit slow - much later) I realise that if someone had said "old Asian men" or any other race, that this would have drawn some criticism. Now I realise that I AM offended and I wonder if this law has teeth enough to defend white people, as much as is does anyone else?

Wonder no longer. 18C is not meant for the likes of us white fellows, but against us. 

He encountered those small, almost insignificant indignities offered to men, daily. They add up. Eventually they open the most closed eyes, or those eyes that have been focused on 'getting the job done' to earn a wage to feed, clothe and house their families. As if men can avoid them, what with all the women in the workplace these days who were raised to see men as an 'oppressive' mob intent on doing them down.  As if the competetive nature of our society does not offer enough opportunity for indignities that men have to put up with. 

And the encountered women at least did not throw some nasty remark or exhibit bizarre behaviour. He could have encountered this oddity ! At least one is hard pressed to understand, let alone be offended.

Recall the words of that venerable lady author Doris Lessing: At a literary festival in Scotland:

"I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed," she told the audience.

"The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no-one protests.

Men have been are are being 'offended' every day. Most men, that is, and most days.  It is systemic. 

The media is full of 'male-bashing' and it is gratuitous. Failed commedians make lame jokes denigrating men, adverts depict men as dorks and in such a fashion that were they to do the same with women there would be questions raised in Parliament. As questions are: and nasty, vicious comments about men made by 'lady' politicians.

A favourite customer (Just call me Bro: Big Bro) had an observarion about our  National Broadcaster, the ABC. It is bad enough having manginas flooding the commercial stations, but the 'balanced' (Hah ! ) ABC is supposed to be, well, balanced. It ain't. It rubbishes men in tune with official policy. 

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation is a taxpayer funded organisation that has frequently been accused of left-wing bias, to the point where some see it as a leftist propaganda organisation. A brief viewing of its news broadcasts will reveal a shocking lack of male reporters and a disproportional amount of female-interest stories.

 http://www.antimisandry.com/forum/general/general-news/political-correctness-gone-out-of-control/594908-the-abc-s-hatred-of-white-men

In that environment it is no surpise that some reporters feel that they can get away with misandry and racism. This appeared on the ABC website at the weekend. OH LOOK! Another 'gender imbalance'! :

Gender gap: Do men dominate Australia's music scene?

I don't want to go to a music festival where it's a monoculture and you are just hearing five white dudes with guitars all day long. That's a boring festival.

"That's a boring festival"? Surely that depends on the music, not on who happens to be playing it? If this mangina thinks that the Rolling Stones are 'boring' then perhaps he should rethink his choice of career.

 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-05/gender-gap-do-men-dominate-australias-music-scene/7988666

The JLF Film and Audio are very pro 'music' and I know that ladies feature in their work. Collaborations are there aplenty, and much excellence. Indeed, wherever one looks there are 'divas' showing their singing talent - or profound lack of it - along with as much flesh as they can - often with ridiculous impact. 

Never mind the quality of my screetching, look up my skirt!

The 'entertainment industry takes young women, often when still little girls, and turns them into harridans of the most awful order. And it shoves them down the throats of 'audiences' everywhere. 

But this is not a place to knock the afflicted. Let us concentrate on the brain-alert ladies and their investigations. The smart ladies.  Ladies who listen as well as tell the tales. Even when starting with the wrong end of the stick they want to use to beat men with.

Cassie's investigations in fact.  But......

Cassie has been shocked !!

Dr.Marty Nemko dropped by to tell us:

Dispirited Men

A new movie calls attention to a gender double-standard.

 https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-do-life/201611/dispirited-men

Last night, I saw a pre-release screening of the movie, The Red Pill. It was created by self-described fervent feminist filmmaker Cassie Jaye, who planned on it being a hit piece on the men's movement.

Cassie Jaye

Indeed, the movie begins in that vein. For example, she interviews Katherine Spillar, Executive Editor of Ms. magazine and Executive Director of the Feminist Majority Foundation, and raises no questions about Spillar's contentions that "it's still a man's world."

Never mind Cassie Jaye,
or my filty songs.
Look at my lady-bits

But the film then moves to documenting Cassie's painful, conflict-inducing journey toward understanding men's perspectives. 

The movie shows her interviews with men and women in the men's movement juxtaposed against its most credible female and male opponents, including SUNY Stony Brook sociology professor Michael Kimmel.

Periodically through the movie, we see Cassie's growing uncertainty about the validity of the radical feminist narrative versus that of the little-known men's movement. 

Speaking into the camera, we see her struggling to figure out if the men's advocates statements are true when feminists, colleges, and media relentlessly assert "male privilege." 

Also, she expresses fear that if she softened her feminism, she'd lose the support network she felt was so important to her. Indeed, during the movie's filming, as it became clear it wouldn't end up as another male basher, some crew members and potential funders backed out, and Cassie needed to rely on Kickstarter to get the money to finish the film.

Here are some of Cassie's discoveries that created such disequilibrium in her:

• Feminists call the system a sexist patriarchy, pointing to an imbalance among CEOs and in Congress and that women earn less than men because of male sexism. But the activists and media fail to mention the research, for example, by "Factual Feminist" Christina Hoff Sommers and by former National Organization for Women board member Warren Farrell that finds that women's choices are at play. 

For example, fewer women are willing to sacrifice family and personal time for, for example, being reassigned to far-flung places to acquire the needed skills to rise to top levels of employment. Fewer women doctors choose stressful specialties with irregular hours such as surgery, which pay more. They're more likely to be pediatricians and internists. 

Feminist activists, politicians, and the media also don't report the Associated Press analysis that finds that unmarried women in their 20s make more than equal pay for equal work. The media merely reports the broad-brush and misleading characterization, "Women earn 79 cents on the dollar." 

That shook Cassie and dispirits many men.

• When women have a deficit, for example, "under-representation" in science and technology, there's major effort to reverse it, for example, the Million Women Mentors program. But when men have the deficit, for example, a large and increasing difference in college enrollment, there's little effort at remedy. 

Even when men suffer the ultimate deficit—American men die five years younger (among the world's biggest gender gaps)—we see yet more efforts regarding breast cancer, a sea of pink ribbons. And a search on "men's health" and "women"s health" in PubMed, which indexes 3,000 medical journals for the last 60+ years, finds that, contrary to feminist activists' assertions, "women's health" comes up vastly more often. 

That double-standard shook Cassie and dispirits many men.

• Although over 40 percent of severe domestic violence occurs to men, of the thousands of shelters, only one serves men. 

That shook Cassie and dispirits many men.

• When women are victims, they get far more attention. For example, Boko Haram kidnapped and burned hundreds of boys alive. That got virtually no media attention but when Boko Haram kidnapped girls and did not burn them, there was wall-to-wall media coverage and government action. 

The double-standard shook Cassie and dispirits many men.

• 92 percent of workplace deaths occur to men yet that gets little media or government attention, nor much sympathy from the feminist community, even though many men risk their lives in dangerous jobs to support their family. 

Imagine what would happen if 92 percent of workplace deaths occurred to women! 

The double-standard shook Cassie and dispirits many men.

The Red Pill presents many more examples of why men feel dispirited: from unfair treatment in divorce court to rampant false paternity claims to disparate sentencing: Men receive far longer prison terms than women for the same crime, a discrepancy far larger than the much publicized black-white difference.

There's much additional basis for men's dispiritedness. 

For example, a wealth of evidence is offered in the proposal to the White House to create a Council on Men and Boys. (I was one of the proposal's signatories.) The proposal was rejected but a Council on Women and Girls was approved and heavily funded.

Oz has had an 'Office for the Status of Women' for decades. No Office for men, of course. 

You might ask, "Why don't men publicize this more?" My answer: We try. For example, when Warren Farrell was on the board of directors of the National Organization for Women in New York City, his op-eds and articles were routinely published in the New York Times, etc. But once he started to write articles offering a pro-male perspective, his articles and op-eds are rarely published. My own efforts have been similarly rebuffed. 

All the respected people I know who try to obtain fairness for men report pervasive censorship and a gender-based double standard.

At the end of the movie, Cassie again turned the camera onto herself and, struggling for words, said something she never imagined she'd say.

The audience gave the movie a long standing ovation and then, many stayed in the lobby to open up about these issues, some in tears. I heard, again and again, men expressing gratitude that someone finally gave voice to the pain they feel because of the perceived double standard.

Men represent half the population. If only for the men and boys in your life, it's worth seeing The Red Pill, which will be released early next year. Or at least watch the 8-minute preview linked-to here.

In the meantime, consider that all groups can find legitimate grounds for grievance but men's seem to be disproportionately ignored or prematurely dismissed. 

Men are supposed to hold up at least half the sky but their knees are buckling.

Cassie got a good shaking, but woke up. Well done Cassie, for your fine work. 

The film was slated for a private release in Melbourne recently, but the feminists raised a furore and frightened the cinema owners. It was cancelled and had to be rescheduled at a 'secret' location. (Fortunately the furore simply gave a marketing boost and its sold over twice the original ticket numbers).

There are many indignities we encounter in life. But for men it is made far worse with the lack of 'natural' support they used to recieve from the womenfolk. That seems in very short supply these days, such that even young men are disenchanted, dispirited and mostly disappointed in women. No wonder they avoid them

But here in the Tavern we welcome nice ladies. We know many. 

So, drink up. Don't drown your sorrows but rejoice that their is Gold in them thar hills. 

Pax.

Anti-Catholic Fires.

It was Guy Fawkes Night a few days ago. OK. I am a bit late, but I have been busy.  We didn't forget. It is barely mentioned let alone celebrated in Oz, which is odd as we have a large English and Irish origin population. It is not so usual these days to have the traditional bonfire and fireworks. Well, the noise scares the animals, innit. We have our bonfire in the grounds of the Tavern of course.  Our animals are built of sterner stuff and do not need 'safe spaces'. 

The British traditions are falling away under the onslaught of American ones. Halloween, just a few days before, is more popular, but even that is not 'done' in many places. We did do 'All Saints' and 'All Souls' though and prayed and had Masses as per Catholic Tradition. Indeed, many christian religious traditions are in steep decline, and that is under the onslaught of Marxism and Atheism, and, dare I mention it, Protestantism.

And political bastadry.

No-one these days is allowed to 'insult' Islam but Chritianity is fair game. Laws 'prevent' and punish even mild criticism or derision - or even telling the truth - about that middle eastern cult which was a Satanic response to the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ and the Redemption of Sinners.  You can lose your job for 'offending' Mohammeds little paedophiles. But criticism of Christianity is the stuff of talentless TV presenters and comedians who aren't funny. And while Christianity is in decline in the public square, despite its tenets being the bedrock of western civilisation, Islam is being imported, protected and carried into that square.

Muslims may complain about being regarded as terrorists but they are not prohibited from holding 'High Office' in Britain the way Catholics still are.  

Catholics are forbidden by Act of Parliament from being the Monarch, the consort of the Monarch, the Prime Minister, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. 

Catholics, you see, were the 'terrorists' 500 years ago. Or so we are told. I have many Protestant friends, nice people and solidly 'christian', but it wasn't Muslims that set off and persisted with the Anti-Catholicism we still see today. It was Protestants, and they are still protesting. How was it that the real terrorists managed to 'blame the victims' so easily?

So how did this come about, someone in the Tavern asked. Fortunately Dominic Selwood was at hand to explain.

Forget the Guy Fawkes propaganda 

- the English Reformation was a violent catastrophe

The terrorists who sparked Bonfire Night were fighting a regime which imposed the protestant religion with hangings, burnings and bloodshed

At this time of year, it is traditional to burn things. Tonight especially people will gather in gardens, parks and fields to apply a match to anything combustible. Highlights of the evening’s conflagrations will include re-enactments of a good deal of religious killing.

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11976813/Forget-the-Guy-Fawkes-propaganda-the-English-Reformation-was-a-violent-catastrophe.html

There will be Roman Candle fireworks, an allusion to the Emperor Nero dousing Christians in accelerants and burning them alive to light his gardens. The 18-year-old Saint Catherine of Alexandria will make her annual appearance, fizzing around a sparkling wheel in memory of her condemnation to death on a spiked breaking wheel (although, so the story goes, it shattered at her touch so she was beheaded instead). 

And the pièce de résistance will be the immolation of a life-size Jacobean Yorkshireman, or - in some parts of the country - the Pope.

Anyone visiting from abroad might be forgiven for thinking that they have chosen to spend their early winter holiday in a country with more than a hint of unresolved religious tension. 

Indeed. 

They may well twig — even if most of us do not — that the one thing all these historical characters being symbolically executed have in common is that they are Catholics. 

And they would have a point. Historically, Guy Fawkes Night was created as an explicit celebration of the .....

death of Catholic England on the pyre of the Protestant Reformation.

So how did it come to this? Why do we revel in ceremonially burning an Englishman every fifth of November?

Guy Fawkes was born in York in 1570, and is the most famous of the Gunpowder Plotters, a group of English Catholics incensed at King James I’s refusal to offer them the freedom to practice their traditional religion. Although Guy was not their leader, he was the one caught under the Lords’ Chamber with a match and 36 kegs of explosives.

Within two months of his failed terrorist attack, Parliament passed an act making church attendance mandatory each November 5. And over the next three hundred years that day — coincidentally the same day William of Orange landed in Devon to depose a Catholic king, 83 years later — became a magnet for general revelry and anti-Catholic protest.

History is written by the victors. 

The regimes of King Henry VIII, Edward VI, Queen Elizabeth I, and King James I made sure to bludgeoned England’s religious past into the dust, gaining for themselves the ability to define how they wanted it remembered. Guy Fawkes night was part of that process.

Today's politicians seem intent on taking it a step further and driving Christianity in whatever form into the dust. We even have a Satan-worshipper going to the election in the USA tomorrow. Hillary - the Princess of Lies.

Yet the truth is that the Reformation was not a gentle evolution achieved by a few Parliamentary acts and redrafted ecclesiastical canons. 

It was a violent rupture with our country's recent history, achieved at the point of a sword.

Only two generations before Guy's, England had been an integral part of Christendom. The island’s thinkers, writers, musicians, artists, theologians, scientists, engineers, craftsmen, and merchants were permanently plugged into the creative monolith of the Catholic West, as they had been for a millennium and a half. 

By the time Parliament passed the Observance of 5th November Act, the country was adrift from its cultural heritage, charting a course west to the New World.

"The Papists are tunneling again from Oxford, Rome, Hell, to Westminster, and there to blow up, if possible, the better foundations of your houses, their liberties and privileges.

(Sermon from the 1640s)

As the frustration and anger of Englishmen like Guy Fawkes, Robert Catesby, and the other Gunpowder Plotters demonstrates, there were many who did not want to have a new religion imported into the country and imposed upon them. 

Hello ! Islam, anyone?  Forget history and you will accidentally repeat it.

In a strange twist, the Catholic faith that had sustained England for centuries was now labelled “foreign”, while the Protestant writings of Luther, a German, and Jean (not John) Calvin, a Frenchman, were positioned as the bedrock of all that was quintessentially English.

The Tudor story maintains that religious change is what England wanted. Yet it was not as simple as that. Religious reform is rarely demanded wholesale by one hundred percent of its adherents. Instead, change comes from movements coalescing around specific issues.

Plenty did NOT want religious change.

On the eve of the Reformation, there is no doubt there were small groups in England pressing for reforms. Then, as now, such perspectives were nothing new — John Wycliffe, the Oxford theologian, had been a prominent advocate for radical reforms two centuries earlier. Therefore, in the early 1500s reform was in the air in any event, although the vast majority of ordinary people were happy with their vibrant traditional religion.

The biggest movement working for change within the Catholic Church was Renaissance humanism. And one of its centres was at King Henry VIII’s court, where Thomas More — philosopher and Chancellor of England— was a leading figure. He may not have been the unblemished paragon of virtue portrayed in A Man for all Seasons, but he was undoubtedly a forward-looking Renaissance man. He taught his wife literature and music, and gave his daughters full Classical educations, a rarity in an age that did not value women’s learning.

Hmmm. I had to whack young Dominic with a wet towel for that.  Actually that was an age where men's learning was not valued either. 99% were unschooled. But heck, it has to be about the women. innit?  It was a matter of wealth, not gender.

In his humanism, he is best known as a long-term and close correspondent of the greatest living sixteenth-century humanist, the Dutchman Desiderius Erasmus, and their intellectual friendship is credited as one of the jewels of the age. Had King Henry VIII not executed More in his hurry to divorce, who knows what the ancient English Church might have become?

In the past, it has been traditional to present the Reformation as an organic intellectual wave — a fresh current quietly flowing over Europe, bringing change and 'relief' from existing sufferings. And this is one of the most interesting features of our modern perception of the Reformation, because it was anything but a quiet pulpit revolution. 

Change was effected by a brutal battle of attrition fought with hangings, burnings, and bloodshed, in England and on the continent.

Its leaders were not the benign characters we sometimes think they were either. Take Martin Luther, the architect of the Reformation. He famously turned against the peasants of Germany, denouncing them as “lying, thieving, hordes” and recommending that the nobility should “smite, slay and stay them as one would a mad dog”. Over 100,000 German peasants lost their lives in the ensuing bloodbath.

Luther also went out of his way to foment violent unrest against the Jews. In his book On the Jews and Their Lies, he recommended burning Jewish synagogues and schools, razing and destroying Jewish houses, confiscating all their religious books, preventing rabbis from any religious activities on pain of death, and a host of other anti-Semitic measures. 

He was not, it is quite plain, a man of peace filled with the love of the gospels.

The Peasants’ War in Germany was, in fact, only one of the many Wars of Religion that ravaged Europe from 1524 to 1648 in the name of religion, wreaking havoc across Germany, Switzerland, the Holy Roman Empire, the Low Countries, France, and Britain.

Here in England we had our own fanatics — men like Thomas Cromwell, who plundered the Church and universities to line his pockets and those of his henchmen, and who used the power of the State to ruthlessly murder those who got in his way, irrespective of gender or age.

As we have seen from the reactions to the book and television series of Wolf Hall, outright ahistorical inventions like a tender Cromwell and a ghoulish More can still be provocative in a society for which there remain sensitivities to Reformation-related propaganda. Which brings us neatly back to Bonfire Night.

The ins and outs of Britain’s complex religious history are no longer a prominent part of the annual fifth of November celebrations. If anything, the event is blurring into — or being overshadowed by — Halloween, at which Guy Fawkes “Anonymous” masks are becoming ever more popular. There may even be a historic case for letting the two festivals merge, as it is not improbable that, in their different ways, they each tap into aspects of our ancient fire traditions at this time of year, drawing on the medieval triduum of Hallowtide and Celtic Samhain before it.

So the question remains: in the 21st century, what should we make of Guy Fawkes and the festival that annually re-condemns him to the flames (although in reality he was hanged, drawn, and quartered)?

There is no doubt his deep grievances against Tudor and Jacobean religious persecution were real. From the outset of Henry’s self-serving reforms there had been widespread civic unrest and protest — most famously the mass uprising of the Pilgrimage of Grace in 1536–7.

Elizabeth continued the crackdown on English Catholics, and by Fawkes’s day the recusants were well aware of the fate they faced if they drew attention to their plight. They were violent times, and Bonfire Night reminds us of it all too viscerally. Fawkes was guilty of treason, but in the modern day we struggle to understand the state oppression he faced in this country — just as much as we condemn the actions he and his fellow plotters undertook.

For the sake of tradition, I hope we go on roasting effigies of Guy Fawkes. It is part of the nation’s rich identity and ancient culture. But tonight, as we wait for the processions with the Guy, a small piece of me remains optimistic that somewhere, someone might just throw a large effigy of Thomas Cromwell onto the flames. Just for a change. That would, after all, be proper English fair play. Wouldn’t it?

Remember history. Don't simply believe the propaganda. The 'reformation' weakened Christendom. The results are still with us.

As I said, I have many fine, upstanding non-Catholic friends. Customers in the Tavern. Some are - let me be frank - better Christians than many Catholics I know. They may be excused blame for the anti-Catholicism of the past, and their egomaniac sect-starters, just as catholics do not need to be blamed for woeful Popes past and Archbishops present.  Such mini-heretics, carrying on their parent's religious practices with barely any deep thought, may yet swing the battle of Good against Evil, for evil they rarely are.

We drink to Guy who had the guts (for all to see at the end) to fight back against religious oppression and Government attempts to bring in false religions preached by furriners.

Many pints were downed on Guy Fawkes Night.

Pax