Napoleon's complex

It shows you how utterly irrelevant feminism has become when short-arsed misogynist Frenchman Nicolas Sarkozy is doing more for women's dignity than that entire movement.

Paralysed as always on the crux of multiculturalist relativism, feminists have said nothing and done nothing for the plight of women across the majority of the planet who remain in illiterate, uneducated, abused, indentured poverty.

Instead, dazzled by their own petty concerns, they have adapted what was supposed to be a liberation movement into a shopping list of entitlements they want the state to pay for, like child care, or their endless quangos.

Meanwhile, the man with the Napoleon complex, the model Mrs and the platform shoes has decided correctly that there is no room for the Muslim full face veil in France.

There is no room for it because it erodes female dignity, despite what some token female Muslims might spout about it giving them freedom from sexualisation and so on. There will always be the house niggers who are happy to support their own slavery. They must be ignored, and Sarkozy has rightly done so.

Let's remember that there is no provision in Islam demanding that this shameful item of clothing be worn by women. Only in despotic Medieval regimes like Saudi or Somalia is it the norm, and even there only because of the existence of drug-crazed militias or morality police to enforce the law.

People are knocking on the doors of Europe all the time. They seem desperate to come here and sample European living. Well, it's long time past that everyone was reminded that living in Europe is not compatible with living in the Seventh century.

Well done, Nicolas. Let's hope the rest of Europe follows suit.

Happy (Saint) Paddy's bingefest 09

Well, it seems the annual bingefest is upon us.

Soon, deluded Americans will stand, shivering, on O'Connell Street in Dublin, perplexed at a series of crap floats trundling by in the drizzle.

Later, locals decked out like leprechauns will commence binge drinking in earnest, while their teenage children pass out mid-afternoon from too many Smirnoff WKDs, or have sex in public.

Later again, very drunk people will urinate on each other, vomit on each other, punch each other until blood flows from each other.

Eventually, everyone will pass out, get up late for work the following day and limp in ruefully clutching a handful of paracetemol.

When did celebrating a Christian feast day become this horror show?


You'd think, well, the one positive element of this tawdry annual bacchanalia is that at least it can't get any worse. I've news for you. Sure, it can.

I heard the head of the 'St Patrick's Festival' on the radio yesterday morning. He's reportedly a very nice chap, Donal Sheils by name. He's only the front man for the event, so in a sense cannot be personally blamed for everything.

A priest rang in to complain, legitimately in my opinion and I'm an avowed atheist, that it was ridiculous that Christian themes were barred from the St Patrick's parade.

This festival bod Shiels then wittered on about how the 'festival' wasn't anything to do with a Christian saint - it was a 'celebration of the people and the country' and therefore couldn't have any narrow religious elements whatsoever.

Then he added - to my growing incredulity - that "there will be a float entitled 'City Fusion' in the parade, celebrating 20 different nationalities and 14 different religions will be represented on that."

So, in short: St Patrick's day is neither a day (it's a festival) nor is it anything to do with a Christian saint.

Instead, it's a secular inclusivist 'celebration' of Ireland and the Irish. Hmmm. But let's run with even that debased and state-enforced definition. If it's a celebration of Ireland and the Irish people, then what are they doing with a float with 20 nationalities on board from 14 different religions?

I couldn't care less for the annual bingefest. At it's best it was self-regarding kitsch, and at its very best it was self-regarding kitsch enacted by diaspora descendants in other places. After all, the first parades were in New York.

But as if the annual bingeathon wasn't bad enough, this multi-culti state-funded gobshitery that St Patrick's Day has been turned into is a classic of that odious genre - the public celebration designed by committee.

It represents neither me nor my nation, and consciously denies the feast's origins in Christianity. It is, in short, a state-enforced propaganda spectacle, aimed at proselytising a specific political ideology while seeking to destroy existing ones.

St Patrick's Day, in the hands of Donal Shiels and his paymasters, has become Ireland's Arirang - a thought-police spectacle:


The thought police ideology is, like all such ideologies, utterly simplistic:

Catholic Ireland - bad. Christian Ireland - bad. Irish Ireland - still bad.
But secular Ireland - good. Multicultural Ireland - very good.

Mention of celebrating Patrick's Christianising of Ireland is officially verboten. Instead, we're permitted only state-vetted Paddywhackery with an obligatory side dish of multiculturalism.

The irony is that when the Orla Barry radio show went onto the streets to ask people what the festival meant to them, not one of the foreign born respondents said it meant anything to them other than a reason to drink Guinness, perhaps.

I'm proud to be Irish - not all of the time, but most of the time. I'm proud of Ireland, again not all of the time, but most of the time. One of the times I'm ashamed to be both is on a day when we're told to ignore the origins of our culture and debase it into kitsch and alcohol.

Count me out.

Feminism V Multiculturalism

In a deathmatch, which would win?

Only kidding.

Here's a question that's concerned me for some time, though.

Given that 65-70% of rape on white women in Scandinavia are committed by Muslim men, who make up around 5% of the population ...

And given that a majority of all rape of white women in America is by ethnic minorities, who in total make up only 32% of the population ...

(especially black men, who commit one third of the rapes, despite making up only 12% of the population) ...

... is feminism, or at least the privileged white Western feminism that's primarily concerned with white Western womens' interests, on a collision course with multiculturalism?

Obviously not. But why not?

Feminism in the West generally shows precious little concern for the really important issues globally. Women go without the vote, go without being allowed out of the family home, go without being allowed to drive a car, go without all sorts of basic rights in all sorts of countries around the globe.

But these things affect black and brown women, not white Western women.

You wouldn't know they affected anyone if you listened to most Western feminists. Once you get past the 'all men are rapists' nonsense, you're generally left with handwringing about being fat, or shrill demands for more taxpayer funded childcare. White western women's interests.

But the colour factor in rape is one issue that they don't ever acknowledge. Because there is a simple, though unpalatable fact at the heart of it.

If white Western women could take one simple precaution to protect themselves from rape, it would be to avoid the company of ethnic minority men, especially Muslims and Black men.

If feminism really cared about the needs of white Western women, maybe this should be on the agenda somewhere.

The multicultural experiment is predicated on the assumption that when cultures mingle, everyone benefits. These concerning statistics indicate, that at least in terms of sexual predation, white women are not benefiting from multiculturalism.

When liberalisms clash, it's never pretty. That's why it never happens. That's why it gets brushed under the carpet.

I bet you never heard a feminist refer to the colour or ethnicity of rapists. And I bet you never heard a multicultural theorist acknowledge the problem of rape by ethnic minorities either.

Now, I don't know why ethnic minorities are raping white women so much. It may be that, as disenfranchised people, some seek a semblance of power through sexual predation. But that's just a theory I heard. I simply don't know why it happens.

However, it's not because ethnic minorities are more sexually violent by nature, because they're not. Perhaps some feminist could examine this and come up with a better theory? Perhaps some multicultural theorist could research it and find some conclusions that could help reverse this appalling trend?

I won't hold my breath.