new

[From "British Judge Says Sex With Wife is a “Fundamental Human Right” and Everyone Loses Their Minds"]

The Jewish media puts sex everywhere to make people think about it constantly, but the Jews also make heterosexual sex much more difficult to achieve by introducing convoluted ideas about “consent” and about what marriage is supposed to be.

One man is taking a stand against that bullshit. This judge is bringing old ideas and common sense back into the discussion about the role of marriage in our society, and he’s doing all of that by… saying that a husband should be able to have sex with his wife.

RT wrote:

A British judge has invoked the ire of online commentators, activists and politicians after remarking that it was a man’s “fundamental human right” to have sex with his wife during an already controversial court case.
“I cannot think of any more obviously fundamental human right than the right of a man to have sex with his wife… I think he is entitled to have it properly argued,” senior High Court judge Justice Hayden was quoted as saying during a preliminary hearing on a case involving a married couple of 20 years.
The wife has learning difficulties and her condition is deteriorating, prompting social services to raise the alarm about the potential for sexual abuse in the relationship as they felt the woman was no longer able to make decisions about whether she consented to sexual relations. Social services ultimately brought the case to the Court of Protection in London.
The husband has pledged to no longer sleep with his wife but prosecuting lawyers are still pushing for a court order barring sexual relations to prevent the woman from being raped.

Let’s get something out of the way first: all women have learning difficulties. It’s just a matter of how severe those difficulties are.

That said, if she can say yes or no to a question such as “do you want some ice cream?” or “do you feel like watching a movie?” then she can absolutely consent to sex.

This whole “consent” thing is a retarded Jewish invention that overcomplicates basic male-female interaction. If a woman doesn’t want to have sex, she resists, if she wants to stop having sex while having sex, she makes it known. If she for some reason decides to pretend to be okay with having sex while not feeling like having sex, then that’s her problem. Literally something that happens in her mind that can’t be measured or proven.

The insanity of this story is augmented by the fact that even though the poor husband pledged to no longer sleep with his wife, prosecutors still push for a court order to officially make him unable to have sex with his wife.

Do you understand how insane that is?

If a man can’t have sex with his wife, why does he have a wife?

[...]

The idea about marriage that most people have in their subconscious was put there by tales of old, by their grandfathers, and by the Jewish social-engineering media machine.

If marriage doesn’t ask anything from women, and gives them half of your stuff or more whenever they please, it not only does nothing to stop relationships from breaking down but it actually provides incentives for relationships to break down.

These whores will destroy your life if you let them.

The moment they feel they’ve secured you, that you have no alternative front-hole, and that you’re socially and legally prohibited from looking for their replacement… that’s the moment they’ll decide to stop having sex with you. Sex will become less and less frequent. She’ll never be “in the mood,” she’ll always be tired or with headache. She’ll never treat you the same. She’ll look at you with disdain. She’ll resent you. She’ll feel trapped by you even though you’re the one that’s really trapped. She’ll feel you’re abusive even though she’s the one being abusive.

She’ll file for divorce and she’ll take as much from you as she possibly can, and then she’ll tell everyone you know about how terrible you are. She’ll go fuck some loser that can’t compare to you but that will have more than you because she’ll share the stuff she took from you with him, and they’ll laugh at you every time you go get your kids on the weekends.

Your kids won’t understand why daddy looks so poor now while mommy and her new boyfriend seem so well off. You’ll want to explain to them… but you won’t be able to. You wouldn’t even know where to start.

As time passes, you’ll see how your own kids prefer mommy’s boyfriend. They’ll tell you how funny he is, how many great things they do together, and how much time they spend together. Every time you send them back to her house… you’ll feel like a shadow. An empty human husk trapping the echoes of the man that you once were and mixing them with the cries of the man that you wanted to be.

All because you thought marriage meant something other than your doom.

Are Incels the most reviled members of society ever?

(TL:DR below if required)

Inceldom is not something those under its banner can control, any more than a breast cancer patient should be lambasted for letting herself get sick, and yet, only the former is subject to hatred and ridicule of such a kind as deemed, not only permissible, but encouraged.

Throughout history, there have been many examples of oppressed and reviled peoples, so let's take a look at a few and compare them to the plight of the incel.

Women

The normie favourite. Truly women have suffered unfairly throughout history, right? Surely they're still unequal today and in need of the mighty fist of feminism to even come close to man's privilege, right?
Currently, in first world countries, there is no group more privileged than woman: to suggest a biological difference between the sexes means you're a misogynistic pig. Criticism of any kind, if directed at a woman, is rendered not only moot, but considered to be a vitriolic attack of society's special sneauxphlakes.

There is an expectation that women deserve to be treated better than men, which is propogated by both men and women alike: men should always hold the door open for women; men are expected to pay for dinner; men are expected to be the providers for the family (if women want to work, they're encouraged, but men receive no such encouragement, it's merely expected of them); women are viewed as innocent and preferential in legal disputes (97% of alimony payments are made by men, women win exclusive custody 79% of the time, and women who make false rape claims are believed in spite of the notion that the accused should be considered innocent until proven guilty.)

How about the historical treatment of women? Traditionally, women have also been coddled by society. When men were required to hunt and kill to supply for small hunter-gatherer societies, women were spared from this and left safety away from any danger. Up until very recently, women were also spared from the horrors of war (despite Hillary's absurd claims) it has always been the duty of men to defend, en mass, the rights and safety of their women back home. Women have historically been treated well, even in great societies like ancient Greece where men recognized women's inferiority and preferred the company of other men, women were treated well and respected, many members of Greek society worshiping the female gods more than any other.

And in spite of all this; in spite of every advantage afforded to them, women still want more. Now, in front of the wall street bull, a little girl stands defiant. Why? As a symbol of strength against a non-existent wage gap. Society propogates a myth to make women feel better, and then builds upon that myth with symbols of strength to make women feel better still. Clearly, then, women are not so disadvantaged.

The blacks and the Jews

The two Oppression All-stars. There can be no denying that western countries have, historically, treated black people poorly. Colonialism and the ensuing slavery were clear and systematic breaches of the human rights of millions of people.

However, slavery is not exclusive to blacks. In fact, blacks were very often either the sellers, or the buyers of slaves. The word slave refers, originally, to the slavic people who were frequently forced into slavery in the middle ages. Slavery is not and was not exclusive to blacks, and yet, it is blacks who benefit from its having happened.

Affirmative action is hugely prevalent in America. Black students receive black-exclusive scholarships and receiving greater encouragement and support than non-black students.

Of course, racism existed beyond the abolishment of slavery, and still exists today. However, there have always been those who have stood up to racism. Most famous of all was Martin Luther King Jr who is universally praised for his work helping African-Americans, but he is not alone. Many people have dedicated their lives to helping blacks, some have even lost their lives in so doing: but no one has done this for incels. Incels, in spite of the hatred and discrimination they receive, are not beneficiaries of support or affirmative action in anyway. Imagine the response you would receive by going to /r/peopleofcolour and telling them they deserve to be hated or discriminated against. You would be banned sightwide for extreme prejudice, and yet, to do the same on /r/incels is considered amusing and fair. There are clear correlations between height or attractiveness and success, and yet society turns a blind eye to incels' plight. So while it is the case that African-Americans were the object of much discrimination, there has been a significant reversal and now much is done in their favour. Incels, however, are recipients only of hatred: no one wishes to aid their cause.

Likewise, the Jews and their oppression in Nazi Germany might be a favoured counter-argument to the assertion that incels are the most universally reviled societal group, however, this argument falls flat as well. It is of course true that the Jews were systematically despised and considered sub-human. This fact they share with incels.

However, there is a clear difference: When the Nazis considered the Jews sub-human, the world went to war to defend them. When the world considers incels to be subhuman, people just laugh at their plight and go on, encouraging their subhuman treatment. It is clear then which of the two is the more systematically despised.

Other [mental] illnesses

Inceldom, like race or sexuality, is genetic. If it can be resolved by weight loss, or lifting more, it's not inceldom: it's volcedlom. True inceldom is incurable and predetermined.

However, inceldom is not treated the same way as other illnesses at all. Let's take a close look at the subtle distinctions in societal treatment.

Cancer is, in many of its forms, impossible to prevent with the decisions one makes. I'm sorry normies, but that means you can't tell poor Timmy to shower his tumor away. People that suffer from cancer are praised for their bravery; they are the beneficiaries of myriad charities, as well as the objects of ad campaigns and propaganda. Just like inceldom, cancer is a terrible disease, but only one of the diseased individuals will receive love and compassion while he suffers; the other will be taunted as he suffers in solitude.

Furthermore, if we look at how people, reddit especially, treats depressed people, we see an even cleared example of the double standard that derives from pure hatred of incels. Can you imagine the fervent rage that reddit would unleash if someone told a depression sufferer to 'just stop being sad'? And yet, that is the advice incels receive daily. We suffer the same, and yet, while others are supported, we are condemned.

TL:DR - plz read, it's not like you're too busy banging sluts. If you are: Incels might just be the most universally hated and discriminated against members of society. In spite of this, and where other hated sects have been assisted, incels are ridiculed and hurt further for merely existing. There is no help because they are deemed unworthy of it. It is not seen as noble to fight for incels rights as it might to fight for the rights of women or minorities, so we must suffer, because to propagate our suffering is seen not as cruel, but as just.

(Emphasis original)