The age of conflicts

I don’t know what to believe nowadays. In my seventy six years, I have never been so aware of conflict.

When I was young, life was much freeer. Most people smoked. There were no safety belts in cars. Kids got disciplined, a smack was normal. Sex was something you practised in secret until you got married. Marraige was the norm. A family had a ‘family doctor’. Most women stayed at home and influenced the family over the dinner table. Most people went to Church on a Sunday, or belonged to some kind of religion. Ordinary people washed dishes in the sink, clothes in a twin tub or the bath, kept food in a food safe and sat before a fire in the winter. They read books, wrote letters, talked on a phone, or made calls from a call box, watched TV in shop windows and went to the movies on Saturday where Movietone News told them what was happening  in other parts of the world. People sang God Save the Queen at events and after a film.

Bitchiness was called gossip. Homosexual people were called Queers. People talked behind other people’s backs. Some people were very nasty in their own small area.

Certain behaviours were considered bad, whilst other behaviours were good, and thus encouraged.

Masturbation caused insanity. Porn was censored. Abortion was illegal. They were considered harmful.

With all its flaws, life then, was free from over regulation. There were no health and safety laws. Drop side cots painted with lead paint were common. Babies slept on their stomachs and were swaddled. Women were free to bottle feed them. And use pacifiers/dummies. Only rich people sued other people, and you were famous and rich, or a ‘star’, not a celebrity to be envied for most people hardly dreamed of becoming one.

Ordinary people owned less. Consumerism had only just begun. There were less experts, few psychiatrists or psychologists, no life coaches, few scientists, university was for privaledged people. Learning was admired.

On the whole, people were happier we are told.

I can’t remember.

But in my old age, I am conflicted.

Currently, my computers feed me news that alters by the hour. I can watch  conspiracy news, biased news, mainstream news, TV news, Youtube News, Bitchute news, Christian news, Asian news, Falun Gong news, Chinese News. I can read any paper from anywhere on my computer or Smart TV.

Legislations pour in about what we can or cannot do, daily.

Scientists, who are just common folk with a university degree, that are two a penny now, disagree whilst using the same science,  and conflictingly tell me Covid is a hoax, vaccinations kill, and the government lies,  or that Covid is real and we are not doing ‘enough’ to stop it.

My news sources tell me Trump lost, or Trump actually won. That Biden will be President despite the fraud, or that he is ingahoots with the Chinese. He will lockdown on Covid, whilst Trump will not because he got the vaccine for the country instead.

Here in the UK, we have left the EU, but we haven’t. Our children are being taught they can chose their gender. Actually, anyone may. We find Black Lives matter more than White Lives, the climate will kill us so we must not eat meat, use gas, fly, or waste stuff.

And of course, no one may smoke or vape. Or say certain words, or express opinions. Gossiping is called tweeting, but only certain words are allowed otherwise your career is over. Im so grateful I have no career, and am not a ‘celebrity’.

There are many ways that life is more comfortable in this age of plenty.  Most people have everything they need, or even dreamed of. But the discontent is vaster. Everyone is fighting for their rights.

In truth, as simply animals, developed gorillas, the scientists say, we have no rights at all. Not even rights as animals. Rights are proclaimed by humans.

And they can be taken away. In this age of conflicts – opinions, scientific, political, religious, cultural – our thought, even privately, is facing the greatest challenge. Our thought can be taken away by censorship and manipulation. By having to be politically correct. So that we even need to suspect the thoughts of others are tainted with hypocracy. None can be trusted.

Our age of innocence has been destroyed. Everything is allowed, yet nothing except the creed of the new critical thought.

There is no preacher on a Sunday, nor one Movietone news. There is no Sunday Paper to peruse from front page to the back page comics for comforting support, there is simply a Tsunami of information containing logs and debris, doubts and fears, criticisms and slanders, that are altering by the minute with every bias of opinion.

I can see why people must have been happier before, in the old days; when they had time to think their own thoughts in the safety of their own homes, when experts were really experts and universities were places of wisdom and newspapers employed real journalists.

And life was slow.

Thank God for the old days!

Parents nowadays haven’t a clue how great it was being a parent of school going kids – in the old days.

Let me tell you the ways…

  • The were no “World Book Days” with parents having to send their kids to school in costly costume.
  • There was no Paedo Panic.
  • There were no eyewateringly expensive car seats. Kids could be loaded into any vehicle.
  • There were no Atheists demanding the complete demise of Christianity.
  • There were no mobile phones, no social networking.
  • There were no designer drugs – only a furtive cigarette behind the bicycle sheds as a rite of passage.
  • Sex before adulthood was frowned on.
  • There was no sex ed, except in biology class.
  • Kids were taught that animals were either male or female.
  • There were no Drag Queens reading Trans books to school kids of any age.
  • Masturbation was not taught in class, only discovered secretly.
  • Woman who got drunk and slept around were not considered virtuous. Such behaviour was not promoted.
  • Porn was viewed via tatty magazines, nicked from Dad and passed around amongst sniggering school friends.
  • Kids got smacked for naughtiness which made a statement that the parent cared, and would not tolerate the misdemeanour.
  • Parents promoted good behaviour in public.
  • Respect for old people and authority was taught as a virtue.
  • Greed was discouraged.
  • There was no Child Line.
  • Social Services did not remove your children because of what you tweeted, or said at a political meeting.
  • There were fewer human rights.
  • Meat, eggs, butter, and milk were considered good food. An (one) apple a day, kept the doctor away.
  • There were no commercial foods.
  • There were no toys, clothes, shoes or technology geared only for kids.
  • Tops and YoYo’s were fun.
  • TV stopped at ? eleven o’clock at night after which kids could watch the test pattern.
  • The doctor got to know your kids.
  • There were things called accidents. People didn’t sue the gym if the kid fell over the wall defining its entrance, or a restaurant/shop/manufacturer if they found a garden caterpillar in their peas.
  • There were few allergies.
  • Asthma was rare.
  • Psychologists were rare.
  • Psychiatrists rarer. We all knew if a kid was off the rails, his parents were either Psychologists or Psychiatrists!
  • If your kid got bullied, you taught them how to box, retaliate, defend themselves, or reported the bully to the teacher.
  • There was no political correctness.
  • There was no Climate Rebellion.
  • There was optimism, cultural pride and excitement in anticipating the progress of the future.
  • Child suicide was unheard of.
  • School taught the three R’s, History, Geography, Literature, Culture and that kind of stuff. Parents understood homework.
  • There were Mums and Dads and families. Most kids had them. And Mums stayed at home mostly.
  • Divorces were uncommon.
  • The father was breadwinner and leader. Except everyone knew who the boss REALLY was! Especially the kids.

Life for parents was less stressful. With every progress now there is less. With less we had more. What a complex web we have woven around our children. In the name of what?

Smacking, or mental abuse? Strange twist.

Since we climbed out of trees, mothers and fathers have disciplined their unruly children physically.

It’s a habit followed by nearly every mother and father in the animal kingdom.

Strange that, don’t you think?

But humans are far more advanced. We have language!

Smacking a child has progressed in concept from the word “discipline” to “physical abuse”. We must not do it any more. We say two adults that smack each other as using “physical abuse” against each other. They are adults.  Two adult animals “smacking” each other might end up being a group skirmish.

Children are not adults. Cuffs are out, but real abuse has replaced them.

We are bringing up our children nowadays using mental abuse instead.

We must distract little Johnny when he attempts to put his hand in the fire, so that afterwards he has learned nothing about hands, or fire, or acceptable behaviour, or that putting one’s hand in the fire is not something he must do.

In a social situation, where little Johnny is misbehaving, leaping on the sofa, or biting his cousin, he is sent to sit all by himself in the “naughty corner” (like the old dunce) listening to the others in the distance carrying on without him. He sits there, rejected, hurt and confused. His immature internal philosophy does not suddenly well up to explain to him, his failure.

In both situations, a quick smack causes fast learning without using convoluted false and contrived mental manipulation.

Johnny knows putting his hand in the fire is not allowed which gives a secure parameter for future behaviour.

Johnny knows jumping on the sofa and biting his cousin, is not acceptable, but even so, he is NOT expelled from the group. Someone in the group will comfort him. Love returns more quickly.

A smack is instantaneous. It shows someone cares. It needs no manipulative language. It sets the rules for future behaviour. It is the way to train children in what is acceptable or not as they enter the world of grownups.

A smack is not “physical abuse” – it’s a quick, efficient, reprimand.

A smack is not a BEATING.

Making it illegal for a child to be smacked, is an intrusion into a parent’s/carer’s purpose – to transform small children from feral animals into secure, confident creatures.

This new move to make smacking our children a crime is just another action on a political journey to restructuring the family, removing its solidity and making parents/carers frightened. How to abuse and confuse our children through the manipulation of their minds is a big agenda. And we are allowing it!

The West has gone insane.

 

 

Rant on war and Right Think…

Dear James,

I’ve cogitated on your email talking about future war as you see it from your place in Africa.

In the society we are watching developing here in the UK, the war that is coming is already here, and has been for a while. It’s a war on how people think. Our technology has opened up an easy way to infuse people’s brains with right-think to quote Orwell. Every movie, every TV series, every news report dishes up right-think. At last the masses can be sculpted by the elite to believe the correct beliefs. There’s no need to purge Academia like Mao did, nor send them to gulags. Theres no need to even have political parties once you have got the masses all thinking RIGHT-THINK.

The young people of this generation will automatically become good subservient citizens, who will further right thinking to their children and teach and educate others through the education they are receiving now.. I’m talking about the West. We’ll all be green yet multicoloured, multigendered vegans, bicycling around under our flight-free skies, reading loving messages on Twitter and Facebook, whose emotions are never challenged by any ugly ideas, or the sound of clapping, whose lythe bodies are never sullied by smoking, vaping or sugar and who believe the next James Bond should be a black, transgender, vegan, Downs Syndrome actor.

We are just watching a new TV series set in early cold war. So far, two episodes, we have met a gay male couple, the lead role female who is a strong determined, loud, liberated woman, who is also lesbian, some hateful white chauvinistic male politicians who pinch girls’ bottoms, a strong black American chauffeur who is being downtrodden at “home” in the USA; also a disabled wheelchaired person, and, let me think, oh! Yes! NOBODY SMOKES!!! The movie takes place in the late fifties, early sixties.
So the war on the mind of the West is big! Of course the propaganda is watched by the rest of the world because we live in a Global age.
As for all the wars, those are put in place by our politicians. They are losing respect from the masses. Our new green vegan generation do not believe in wars. Bottom pinching is now sexual assault, a weapon used to bring down any white male you wish to destroy. That bodes well for the future. They are repulsed by the bombing in Yemen, the idea of drones, and violence. If it simply takes bottom pinching to completly destroy a person, who needs a war? So I’m relying on them to sort it out.
As for the disgusting habit men have of actually making a testosterone induced war, that’s easily solved. Feminise all men so they stop behaving badly….
Your friend,
Beth.

Leaving Neverland thoughts

I was very moved by watching Leaving Neverland. I don’t know how it affected you. It seemed not so much about Michael Jackson’s guilt or innocence, for I think he was guilty anyway, but rather, about how the grooming of people happens – in fact the grooming of whole families happen. And how ongoing sexual abuse of children, also means the parents and families have, in some way, been groomed too.

I was gripped by the sincerity of the film. I think it will be a watershed film on Michael Jackson himself and how abusers, set the scene.

This film will predictably have interesting outcomes, wait and see.

If you haven’t watched it, please do. There is not a spiteful bone in its body.

Some initial response on Leaving Neverland (UK stream)

Mobilising our children for your propaganda – disgusting!

My grandchildren were off school to “protest” climate change.

FFS!

The BBC puked children spouting words put into their mouths by adults.

This whole event was a propaganda activity coordinated by Youth Strike 4 Climate.

I think its totally and absolutely disgusting and should NEVER have been permitted.

Its obscene.

My grandchildren are not there to further your cause. What they know about Climate Change is what has been put into their heads by their schools. They can decide to join your protest, when they are old enough to think for themselves, and not regurgitate propaganda like small programmed robots.

Shame on you all.

This article on the BBC (God help us) news page says “Since then (began with 15-year-old Swede Greta Thunberg), tens of thousands of children across Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and Australia have been inspired to hold their own demonstrations. Link

Yup.

We know who “inspired” them!

The group, which helped coordinate the protests, has four key demands:

  • The government should declare a “climate emergency”
  • It should also inform the public about the seriousness of the situation
  • The national curriculum should be reformed to include “the ecological crisis”
  • The age of voting should be lowered to 16 so younger people can be involved in decision-making around environmental issues.

Yup.

How low can they go?

The strange situation concerning sex and gender

There are normally two sexes.

Male

Female

We have always taken it to mean that an animal with a penis is male and a female has a vagina. It has been so throughout the animal kingdom. A farmer birthing a calf, knows on sight that a calf with a penis will not produce milk.

It’s been a reliable system of knowing what sex a creature is. It has worked with humans too. We can tell the difference between males and females, boys and girls.

All cultures bring their children up as boys or girls.

But now, in the west, this is considered wrong by a small minority with very loud voices. We should remember they are a MINORITY, yet they have been screaming so loudly, we have given them attention.

The baby that screams the loudest gets the most milk!

So now we are able to choose our gender, no matter what sex we are born. And parents should encourage their children to decide from an early age. As you will pick up from my tone, I think it’s all quite potty!

HOWEVER, there are really strange things concerning sex and gender that show deviations from what we have considered normal.

Here is a good article from Nature showing how biology is recording the anomalies. Its called Sex Redefined.

I don’t think it redefines sex, that is a misleading headline, but it’s an interesting paper nevertheless showing how science is coming in to support the minority .

Sex can be much more complicated than it at first seems. According to the simple scenario, the presence or absence of a Y chromosome is what counts: with it, you are male, and without it, you are female. But doctors have long known that some people straddle the boundary — their sex chromosomes say one thing, but their gonads (ovaries or testes) or sexual anatomy say another. Parents of children with these kinds of conditions — known as intersex conditions, or differences or disorders of sex development (DSDs) — often face difficult decisions about whether to bring up their child as a boy or a girl. Some researchers now say that as many as 1 person in 100 has some form of DSD2.

When genetics is taken into consideration, the boundary between the sexes becomes even blurrier. Scientists have identified many of the genes involved in the main forms of DSD, and have uncovered variations in these genes that have subtle effects on a person’s anatomical or physiological sex. What’s more, new technologies in DNA sequencing and cell biology are revealing that almost everyone is, to varying degrees, a patchwork of genetically distinct cells, some with a sex that might not match that of the rest of their body. Some studies even suggest that the sex of each cell drives its behaviour, through a complicated network of molecular interactions. “I think there’s much greater diversity within male or female, and there is certainly an area of overlap where some people can’t easily define themselves within the binary structure,” says John Achermann, who studies sex development and endocrinology at University College London’s Institute of Child Health.

These discoveries do not sit well in a world in which sex is still defined in binary terms. Few legal systems allow for any ambiguity in biological sex, and a person’s legal rights and social status can be heavily influenced by whether their birth certificate says male or female.

>>>

Biologists may have been building a more nuanced view of sex, but society has yet to catch up. True, more than half a century of activism from members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community has softened social attitudes to sexual orientation and gender. Many societies are now comfortable with men and women crossing conventional societal boundaries in their choice of appearance, career and sexual partner. But when it comes to sex, there is still intense social pressure to conform to the binary model.

The binary model is Male or Female. It’s what most people are – either male or female.

How are we going to name a non binary model? Could we redefine sex in dogs or cows too?

I dunno – it’s a crazy planet. But the article has a solution!

So if the law requires that a person is male or female, should that sex be assigned by anatomy, hormones, cells or chromosomes, and what should be done if they clash? “My feeling is that since there is not one biological parameter that takes over every other parameter, at the end of the day, gender identity seems to be the most reasonable parameter,” says Vilain. In other words, if you want to know whether someone is male or female, it may be best just to ask.

Fairy-tales and Feminism

I rather enjoyed the original fairy-tales. They were pretty gruesome – scary in fact. Imagine the courage of caged, abandoned children waiting to be eaten in the Hansel and Gretel story, sticking a chicken bone through the bars so the witch could feel how skinny and unappetising they would be should she choose to eat them that day.

And, oh, the fear that the hunter would rip out Snow White’s heart for the terrifyingly jealous Wicked Stepmother! And Snow White’s kindness to seven men dwarves, chiding them to be neat, clean and orderly.

And the dreadful conditions of poor Cinderella in grubby clothes sitting amongst the cold ashes and living with cruel sisters – a reflection of the condition of poverty stricken children and young people of that time long ago. And the desire for her situation betterment.

The real fairy tales told of love, hate, jealousy, envy, greed, ingenuity, loss, fear, loneliness, hope, kindness and survival – and history once upon a time, a long time ago. That’s what I thought. Teaching stories, they were. Teaching us through our own emotional responses.

But Feminists are very anti fairy-tails, saying they were written to groom girls into submission by cis males bent on dominance. I don’t think this is true. The old fairy-tales were about lessons in behaviour, not only for girls, but for boys too.

Fairy-tales now days are different. I agree with Feminists about how they are presented to children now.

In fairy-tales, the girl wins the Prince. Well, in Disney fairy-tales, which are slick, superficial re-tellings of the real stories, they do. Girls attract the Prince by looking pretty, feminine and wearing beautiful clothes. And the Prince is captured by their beauty and the two of them fall instantly in love.

Just about every girl, and some boys too, even in remote countries, have ‘Princess Dolls’, manufactured with bodies, hair and faces that capture the Princess ‘look’ that is wildly unachievable by any young person – comic characters really.

Drag queens strive to achieve it, and do, very cleverly.

But despite any protests by feminists, the fairy-tale, is still the most popular situation for women. Women marry ‘up’ – called Hypergamy – quote –

However, even in relatively gender-equal societies it is generally accepted that young women will often partner with powerful older men; while the general rule is that older men have had more time to gather wealth and status than younger men and they are on average wealthier and of higher status.

Studies of heterosexual mate selection in dozens of countries around the world have found men and women report prioritizing different traits when it comes to choosing a mate, with men tending to prefer women who are young and attractive and women tending to prefer men who are rich, well-educated, ambitious, and attractive.

Many women, even Feminists, still long for their own fairy-tale.

More on British schools…child abuse

I wrote a post on the UK Mad Hatters of education here .

There has been an outcome from the many outraged comments on Twitter about making six year olds write a love letter from a King to his (male) servant suggesting marriage.

UK Govt to Give Private Junior Schools LGBT Lessons Opt-Out

I quote

While the government’s response to the consultation is yet to be published, The Timesreported “civil servants are understood to have made it clear” that inspectors should no longer fail private schools on the basis of neglecting to meet sexual diversity requirements, which include making children aware of issues such as “gender reassignment”.

Ofsted, whose leader Amanda Spielman has demanded schools place “liberalism” at the “heart of the curriculum” while insisting that institutions with “cultural conservative or religious values” should be “exposed”, said the standards should remain in place, with a spokesman saying the watchdog believes it “appropriate” that all primary school children are taught to respect LGBT lifestyles.

The Department for Education said: “Independent schools, like all schools, have to promote respect for other people with particular regard to the protected characteristics under the 2010 Equalities Act.”

News of the move, which was deemed as a government U-turn by left-wing opponents, followed what The Times characterised as intensive lobbying by faith groups after reports that schools were being downgraded over teachers’ failure to explicitly highlight LGBT issues during class-time.

This applies to schools that are NOT Government schools, remember.

Failing a private Jewish girls’ school for the third time, Ofsted claimed that pupils at the north London school for children up to the age of eight were being denied “a full understanding of fundamental British values” because they were not given instruction on homosexuality or gender reassignment.

Buckingham University’s Professor Alan Smithers told The Times: “Whether or not young children should be taught about LGBT issues and gay families in schools has been a battleground for ages.

“This looks like a government U-turn. Jewish, Christian and Muslim groups have bitterly resisted the requirement to teach alternative lifestyles, with protests and placards. If this loophole is granted to independent schools, there will be a big push for this in state primary schools too,” he added.

The news came after backlash on social media to a video which shows 6-year-olds at a state primary school in Manchester being tasked with writing homosexual love letters from a fictional ‘Prince Henry’ to his manservant, ‘Thomas’.

A full understanding of fundamental British values, for me, has got nothing to do with a tiny minority of people that many small children have probably never encountered and instruction on homosexuality or gender reassignment in junior schools is ABSOLUTELY not acceptable in any junior school. It is child abuse to my mind.

Bring on the outrage!