Saturday, July 25, 2015

“Critical Gender Theory” Comix (a collection of memes)


This is a collection of memes created for the Unknown History of Misandry that use Comix. Below the memes you will find a discussion of the term “critical gender theory.”

***


***


***


***


***


***


***


***

http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2011/02/misandry-word-its-origin.html

***


***

What is “critical gender theory?” It is the dominant philosophy of feminism; the one that is used (in the US) by the American Bar Association to shape laws, by government agencies, and by private foundations and universities to shape policy and protocols (in order to engage in social engineering). It derives from “critical theory” a philosophical position shaped by Frankfurt School philosophers. Adherents of the “critical theory” philosophy often refer to their belief system simply (and quite cryptically)  as “theory,” as in “I’m studying theory.”

Some of these philosophers, such as Frederick Jameson, use the term “Cultural Marxism” to describe a more general political approach that includes both Frankfurt School Marxism and other “post-structuralist” and “post-modernist” ideas and philosophies.

Critics of the top-down agendas of institutions that have shaped themselves after the “critical gender theory” formula sometimes call the agenda and its results “feminist governance.”

***

Here is a an example of the use of the term “critical gender theory” in its professional (philosophical) context:

“So it is that deconstruction and critical gender theory both seek to unveil capitalism’s ‘other’ and disrupt the ‘ontological totality’ which Marx proffers.”

[Chris Lloyd, “Heirs of Marx, Critical Legal Thinking,” Oct. 24, 2011; a discussion of the 1996 book The End of Capitalism (as we knew it): A Feminist Critique of Political Economy by of Katherine Gibson and Julie Graham]

***

The term “critical theory” has become so dominant in academe that it has been allowed to, in essence “colonize” language and usage in some cases.  Notable example is “critical thinking,” a non-political term describing “the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.”

Yet more and more we see the term “critical thinking” used in a radically different sense, one that denotes adherence to a particular a priori political stance. The trend apparently flows from another “critical” term, Critical Literacy ( a term “usually traced to Paolo Freire, the Brazilian lawyer turned educator”).

Today “critical thinking” is often a term used to denote a specifically political approach to pedagogy that is based on Friere-type politicized “critical literacy.”

[Charles Temple, Ph.D, “Critical Thinking and Critical Literacy,” Critical Thinking International, undated]

***

Another instance of the “critical” term as applied to political ideology labelled in such a way that the terms resembles the objective, rational approach of authentic critical thinking is the term “critical pedagogy.”

Example:

“The idea of Critical Pedagogy begins with the neo-Marxian literature on Critical Theory (Stanley 1992). The early Critical Theorists (most of whom were associated with the Frankfurt School) believed that Marxism had underemphasized the importance of cultural and media influences for the persistence of capitalism; that maintaining conditions of ideological hegemony were important for (in fact inseparable from) the legitimacy and smooth working of capitalist economic relations.

[Nicholas C. Burbules and Rupert Berk, Department of Educational Policy Studies, “Critical Thinking and Critical Pedagogy: Relations, Differences, and Limits,” published in Critical Theories in Education, Thomas S. Popkewitz and Lynn Fendler, eds. (NY: Routledge, 1999).]

***

Thursday, July 23, 2015

Dominique Cottrez, French Mother Who Killed 8 Newborns - 2010


VILLIERS-AU-TERRE, FRANCE: On July 2, 2015, Dominique Cottrez, a 51, French former health worker, was, after years of legal delays, convicted of murdering 8 newborns. Despite prosecutors’ request for an 18 year sentence the jury recommended only 9 years of prison for the killer mom.

It was on July 24, 2010 that new buyers of the former home of Dominique’s parents in Villers-au-Tertre in the north of France near the Belgian border, discovered the skeletons of two babies in the garden. Mme. Cottrez was arrested and confessed. She agreed to show police the location of 6 more tiny corpses of babies she had smothered to death. They were stored in a fuel storage tank, in plastic bags, in the garage of her own home in the same village. The killings occurred from 1989 through 2000 in the village with a population of 655. In most of the killings she suffocated the baby in the bathroom.

Daughter Virginie, 21, told reporters at  La Voix du Nord (on July 29, 2010): “It’s incomprehensible.” We never noticed anything. She had moments of fatigue, it's true, but she was working almost 24 hours a day. She would wake up early for her work as a nurse's home aid, and when she would return home, she had her housework.”

~ Blame “The Patriarchy” ~

After her arrest, Dominique confessed and told police she was the victim of rape, by her own father, who died three years earlier in 2007. In her tale she said the first rape occurred when she was only 8 year old and continued into her teens. She claimed that as an adult she the entered a voluntary incestuous with her father that continued after her marriage. She “she was in love with her father more than with her husband.”

Five years later, on June 29, 2015 while in court she admitted that the incest story was a fabrication. DNA evidence confirmed that her husband was the father of each of the deceased children.

~ Blame another woman ~

She was already obese when, in 2000, she gave birth for the first time. Her weight when pregnan was given as around 130 kg (286 lbs). It was a difficult delivery. Lawyers attempted to blame Ms. Cottrez’s murderous proclivities by arguing that the midwife who attended her at that first birth had hurt her feelings by pointing out her unhealthy condition of obesity.

~ Husband: Two Different Stories ~

At first she asserted her husband had no knowledge of the pregnancies. Years later, as the process dragged on she changed her story on this point and claimed her husband had been aware, despite the obesity that succeeded in hiding the pregnancy from the two daughters whom she had allowed to live as well as, neighbors, nurse colleagues and the doctors at a nearby hospital.

Associated Press in Paris reported that a spokesman for prosecutors reported that Mme. Cottrez “did not want any more children and that she did not want to see a doctor about methods of contraception.”

~ Trial, Conviction ~

Trial at the Douai Assize court opened June 25, 2015, closing on July 2. After five hours of deliberation the jury found her guilty of all counts, but recommended a reduced sentence based on the view that the defendant had “impaired judgment.” Prosecutors requested an 18-year sentence but the jury set the sentence at 9 years.

[Robert St. Estephe; Based on facts in multiple sources, including: “French woman accused of killing 8 newborns ‘very distressed,’” CNN.com July 30, 2010; “French woman jailed for nine years for killing eight of her newborn babies,” Guardian, Jul. 2, 2015; Associated Press in Paris, “Trial opens of French woman accused of killing eight of her newborn babies,” The Guardian, Jun. 25, 2015; Agence France-Presse in Douai, “French woman jailed for nine years for killing eight of her newborn babies.” The Guardian, Jul. 2, 2015]

***

Chronology:

1989 – 2000 – 8 babies murdered
Jul. 24, 2010 – 2 bodies found at parents’ home at Villers-au-Tertre, Nord, France pop. 655; discovered by new owners
Jul. 28?, 2010 – arrested (aged 45)
Jul. 29, 2010 – Charged with 8 counts of voluntary homicide
Jun. 1, 2013 – Cottrez freed under supervision
Jun. 25, 2015 – trial begins, Assize Court, Douai
Jul. 2, 2015 – sentenced to 9 years in prison; prosecutors requested 18 years sentence

Husband – Pierre-Marie Cottrez
Surviving Cottrez daughters: Virginie (aged 21 in 2010) and Emeline

***


***



***



For more cases of this type, see Serial Baby-Killer Moms.

***

“Oulu Serial Killer Mother” – Finland, 2014




They died in a bucket. That’s where their mother tossed them soon after they came into the world. Year after year. Five of them. Some would call it murder. Some would call it empowerment.

And some professional medical ethicists would call it “after birth abortion”: Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva).

***

In Oulu, Finland between 2005 and 2013 a 35-year-old woman (whose name is being withheld by the government) was found to have killed five of her own newborn children and hid their corpses in a freezer. The crimes were discovered on June 4, 2014. The mother claimed they had all been stillborn. It was a lie. It was determined, using dental evidence, that some of the victims had lived up to four days before they were dumped into a bucket where they perished from exposure and starvation.

The first two infant victims were fathered by different, unidentified, men. The Oulu mother married a man in 2010, gave birth to another baby and killed it, reporting to the father that their child had miscarried. The couple conceived two more children and, as as is seen in so many cases of maternal filicide, the mother seems to have convinced that father that the signs of pregnancy were the result of ordinary weight gain. The father of the three murdered children filed for divorce immediately after the bodies were discovered. All of the babies were born full-term or nearly full-term, according to the statements of the prosecutor.

On December 16, 2014 the Oulu District Prosecutor Sari Kemppaine demanded that the Oulu District Court reduce the gravity of the charges against the mother, from murder to aggravated assaults and aggravated manslaughter. The prosecutor used the terms “gross negligence” to describe the cause of all five deaths.

On June 15, 2015 at the District Court of Oulu, the mother was convicted of killing the five infants and was sentenced to a nominal “life” sentence, which in Finland means she will likely serve only 12 years for the deaths.

[Based on facts reported in: “Finnish mum gets life for killing five newborns,” Agence France-Presse, Helsinki June 15, 2015; “Viiden lapsen ruumiit löytyivät kellarikomerosta Oulussa,” (“Five bodies were found the child's basement in Oulu”), Ilta-Sanomat, Kotimaa (Finland), Jun. 4, 2014; Heidi Hietala, “Oulun vauvasurmat: Äiti oli raskaana tutkintavankeudessa viime kesänä” (“Oulu babies were killed: The prosecutor is demanding alternative charges”), Ilta-Sanomat, Kotimaa, Dec. 16, 2014]

***


***


For more cases of this type, see Serial Baby-Killer Moms.

***

Tuesday, July 14, 2015

Carolyn Gloria Blanton (AKA Jane Lynn Woodry), Colorado Boyfriend-Eating Cannibal - 1994


In January 1994 pieces of the body of Peter Michael Green, 51, who had been reported missing in late 1993, were found in cookware, in other containers pickled body parts were found, were found in the Alamosa, Colorado, apartment of his 41-year-old girlfriend, Carolyn Gloria Blanton (AKA Jane Lynn Woodry). Other body parts were in other locations: the head was found in “a remote area.” Mr. Green’s torso was discovered in his own home. Outside, a trash bin contained his legs.

Sheriff’s Captain Les Sharff testified later in court that: “The flesh and the meat were off the legs. They had been totally cut away from the bones themselves, from the ankle up.”

Among the the evidence exhibits accepted into evidence during the the trial were a pot, a bowl and a spoon, each which had been found in Ms. Blanton’s home containing bite-size chunks from the boyfriend’s corpse. Plus a .25 caliber pistol. It was determined she had shot him four times before starting in on the carving and cooking.

She was found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed to the Colorado Mental Health Institute in Pueblo, an institute for the criminally insane, where she remained until 2005.

“I want people to know that the community is safe,” Woodry said to a reporter. “I am not a danger to the community.”

Woodry’s attorney, Bill Martinez, quoted Woodry as saying, “I’m deeply ashamed. The person who killed Peter Green is not me.”

At the end of a two-hour hearing which took place at Alamosa on April 9, 2005, Carolyn Gloria Blanton / Jane Lynn Woodry, the court decided to release her on conditional release. Her treating psychiatrist Elissa Ball, who had worked with the patient for ten years, testified that the cannibal killer could now tell right from wrong and was unlikely to do anything violent if she accepts semi-monthly injections of twice-monthly injections of Risperdal Consta.

Other conditions for release included a requirement for employment, attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, and keeping a diary which would be monitored. Any romantic interests would also, by order of the court, be closely watched.

[Robert St. Estephe; based on: Nelda Curtiss, “Cannibal asks judge for more freedoms,” CNN, Jan. 5, 2009; Charlie Brennan, “Court frees woman who cooked her boyfriend,” Rocky Mountain News (Denver, Co.), Apr. 10, 2005; “Woman ‘deeply ashamed’ for crime; Jane Lynn Woodry seeks conditional release after 15 years,” Durango Herald (Co.), Jan. 6, 2009]

***

***


For more cases see: Cannibal Murderesses

***

Laurina Marie Aune, Canadian Child-Killing Cannibal Mom - 2002

 

NANAIMO, B.C., Canada –

“I don’t know. I felt compelled to do it. I didn’t want to forget her ever.”

These are the words said by Laurina Marie Aune, 26, to Justice James Taylor of the British Columbia Supreme Court on July 20, 2003. Ms. Aune was telling the court why, 8 months earlier, on November 1, 2002 in the B. C. town of Nanaimo, she slit two-year-old daughter’s throat, dismembered the child’s corpse and, with other ingredients, made Kyla’s remains, most of them, into a soup – which the mother consumed.

Ms. Aune did not cook Kylas’s head; she kept that in her bedroom. She did cook the heart and ate a portion of it because, as she told police, “because she felt that’s where her child’s spirit was.”

Few news reports on this case are currently available online and the few that are available are scanty.

Laurina was a “single mom.” Since, in recent decades journalists, seldom bother to mention fathers in reports on children involved in crime stories (unless that father is a perpetrator) it is unclear whether the man Sandra McCulloch of CamWest News describes as Laurina Aune’s “former boyfriend, Scott May” was little Kyla’s father.

In any case, it was Mr. May who had reported the girl missing, leading to the investigation which revealed the crime. At some point (news reports are vague) Mr. May told social workers that Ms. Aune was “unstable,” describing the bizarre assertions thew woman made regarding Kyla’s parentage, claiming that the little girl had “three different fathers and they kept changing bodies.”

Six weeks before her death, Scott had taken Kyla out for Halloween. That was the last time he saw her.

In June 2003, the court remanded Ms. Aune to the Forensic Psychiatric Institute in Port Coquitlam. A disposition hearing was scheduled to take place no later than September 2013.

According to journalist Sandra McCulloch Laurine Aune “suffers from schizophrenia,” yet the news article relating this does not indicate what party may have made such an assessment. In Justice James Taylor’s July 20, 2003 ruling he found that Ms. Aune was not “criminally responsible” for her deed and was unaware that the act was “morally wrong” due to mental illness. Testimony revealed she began having delusions (“hearing voices”) beginning at the age of 12.

Family members, in the course of the investigation were asked why they never suspected that Ms. Aune was insane. They responded to such questions by saying: “That’s Laurina.”

[Robert St. Estephe, based on: Sandra McCulloch (CanWest News Service), “Mother Who Cannibalized Daughter Spared From Prison,” The Ottawa Citizen (Canada), July 21, 2003]

***


***


For more cases see: Cannibal Murderesses

***

Sunday, July 12, 2015

An Ear for Men – (Revolt against the Tin Ear Dictatorship of Control-Freakism)


Here are our comments on the important new blog, “An Ear for Men,” launched on July 4, 2015 by veteran battler of totalitarian mind manipulators, Paul Elam.

Ear is a male space – something that the Lords and Ladies of Correct Thought keep telling you is an impermissible thing. Control-freaks will absolutely despise Ear. And that, by itself, is enough to cause us to respect it.

Please read Ear and share it and promote change toward truth and integrity (the good kind of “change” – as opposed to the “change” of decadence, entropy, dysfunction and authoritarianism that is promoted by officious rulers).

And remember the immortal words of the Great Yogi:
“It’s not over ‘till it’s over!”

***

1 ►July 4, 2015 – Paul Elam, "Male space is an inside job" (Paul with some thoughts on male space and personal choice)

• • •

An Ear for Men – Refreshing and wise: Empathy without mollycoddling, without fostering and fueling the pathological “victim mentality.”

The orthodox position of technocratic social engineers (whether they be corporatist in nature or not-for-profit control-freak in nature) assert in their propaganda organs that “male occupied space is inherently dangerous to women.”

It is not.

Male space is however, dangerous – dangerous to technocrats and free-lance control freaks, whose greatest weapon of mass control is the same as the modern military’s greatest weapon (which the Pentagon labels: “mastery of the human domain.”).

We each own our personal honor. This is a place to learn to hone it.

***

2 ►July 7, 2015 Paul Elam, "Why men can’t say no. A historical perspective" (Most men struggle to tell women no. Paul has some ideas on why that happens.)

• • •

“Men are only as mentally and emotionally healthy as their ability to say no to a woman.” -- Some writers go their whole lives without making a single genuinely important quotable statement.

Yet here we have what amounts to an axiom -- a major, crucially important truth summed up in a single crystal-clear sentence. The crafting and publication of just is one sentence -- this universal and necessary-to-know, and -grasp, fact -- is justification for a lifetime of effort. Paul Elam has crafted a pure and sparkling gem for the ages, one that needs to be posted on the wall of every Male Space in every city, town, village and "wide spot in the road" in the free world ("free world" meaning the non-gynocentric, not yet fully Statist, world).

***

3 ►July 11, 2015 Paul Elam, “Male autonomy: Part 1” (Paul starts a three part series on beating gynocentrism in the confines of your own mind.)

• • •


The Matt Taylor diptych presented here is the icon for the age. Unforgettable, compelling, a call to mind and muscle. It is worth 7 billion words.

The propaganda of coerced “progress” puts out a menu full of photos, carefully composed, with vibrant colors, and seductive shapes, depicting a glittering, enticing “nouvelle cuisine.” Yet once you sign on the dotted line of the “progress” contract you are a serf and the dishes shoved your way are diverse in only the species – source of the feces that constitute the means you are presented with. Understanding the fundamentals of nature will prepare one to resist the confidence game run by the flim flam men and women of the “progress” racket. Know your true root nature (biological/psychological) and know that this reality is not a social construction. Latin, French and Germanic (and many other) nouns indeed have “gender.” Yet nouns are just abstractions. Organisms, on the other hand, have existential concrete reality: complex mortal lives, lived in real space and real time – with agency. Submit to coercion, or resist it: it is a choice.

An Ear for Men is a male space, and as such, is an affront to the Brave New World panopticon top-down technocrats and all their minions (petty tyrants of the soulless bureaucracies and commissariats). An Ear for Men is a “crime” against the Hoax Utopia.

It is a male space!

***

Saturday, July 11, 2015

Madame Roger, French Serial Child-Killing Mom – New Caledonia, 1883


FULL TEXT: A crime has been brought to light in New Caledonia which furnishes a ghastly illustration of the class of malefactors sent out to that island by the French Government. The perpetrator of it, we learn from the Neo-Caledonien of the 23rd of January, was what we should call a ticket-of-leave-holder a woman named Roger. She and her husband had received a grant of land on the banks of the Foa, and one day in August last, while the head of the household was out at work, she took her little daughter, who was only two years old, into a neighbouring wood, and, as it is believed, seized the child by one of her legs, and shattered her skull by dashing it either against a stone or the trunk of a tree. Some months elapsed the corpse was discovered; and the skull, from which the flesh had disappeared, was found to be fractured in front and still to exhibit a red stain on the spot where the poor little creature’s life-blood had oozed out. It was ascertained at the trial that this was the third crime of the kind the murderess had committed; the first having been perpetrated in 1869, and the second in 1878. For the latter she was sentenced to imprisonment for life with hard labour, but obtained her liberation on being sent out to New Caledonia. No other motive was assigned for her unnatural atrocities than that she disliked the expense and trouble entailed upon her by having a child to look after.

[“A French Murderess in New Caledonia,” The Singleton Argus (NSW, Australia), Feb. 9, 1884, p. 4]

***


For more cases of this type, see Serial Baby-Killer Moms.

***