http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

I certainly don't mean this as an attack against the N.S.M., and that's why I posted here, to keep things civil. But I am curious whenever I see photographs like this, which show a gathering of N.S.M. members at one of their meetings. As is obvious, the vast majority of the members are male. Why is that? Are most of these men single, which would then explain the shortage of female members, as they would lack wives to join them?

Or...are most of these men actually married, and that the shortage of female members is due to the fact that these male N.S.M. members are married to women who shun their beliefs, much in the same way that some wives tolerate husbands who "hunt" or "bowl", but have no interest themselves in participating in such pursuits ?

Whatever the case, neither scenario reflects favorably on the N.S.M., since the first one suggests that the majority of these men are incapable of having normal relationships with the opposite sex. On the other hand, if the latter scenario is true, then that implies that most of the wives of these men have overtly rejected their husbands' Nazi pursuits, which then suggests that the N.S.M. itself is not a credible method in gaining adherents to the pro-white cause.

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

Whatever the case, neither scenario reflects favorably on the N.S.M., since the first one suggests that the majority of these men are incapable of having normal relationships with the opposite sex. On the other hand, if the latter scenario is true, then that implies that most of the wives of these men have overtly rejected their husbands' Nazi pursuits, which then suggests that the N.S.M. itself is not a credible method in gaining adherents to the pro-white cause.

You answered your own question as to why there are so few women with that last paragraph.

20th Century rule of thumb was that right wing causes will attract an overwhelming number of males, left wing an overwhelming number of females. The old SDS was practically a girls club till the draft started scaring the fellas in the mid-60s or so.

Another rule of thumb from theological history: Women are attracted to heresies once men create them (check out the number of females reading The Da Vinci Code). But a "new religion" will attract few female adherents, all things being equal. It's got to be the old bottle even if the wine is new.

Suitable racializing of a current trend will attract lots & lots of ladies, I've already seen this close up in the green movement and it's the reason why the Sierra Club leadership is sweating bullets right now. They know environmentalism is a logical launchpad for a racial movement because environmentalism was an extension of the racial survival instinct to begin
with.

In America, nationalist socialism is like the proverbial "new religion". Women will not really trust it much. But eco-friendly race awareness is an excellent heresy. For the moment it's also where the ladies are.

Michael Moore is another good case in point. An old lefty saying things about Bush and Iraq the ladies already wanted to hear was a good idea. Females in the audience outnumbered males about two to one the night I saw it. And all the ladies were white.

I can easily see someone like David Duke doing a documentary like Farenheit White! and finding a mostly-female audience. Show clips from the bloodbath in South Africa and the Carr brother's handiwork right here in the USA.

White women I know are in fact waiting for something like this to kick the (above ground) movement off. Right now it's the point of which heresy to back and try to get it mainstream. We all have our pet projects. Keep working till one creates the heresy that goes into orbit.

White women are waiting. That much I can tell you for certain.

WN is largely a male ideology. Women, as a general rule, do not think racially. Some do, but most don't.



------

Maybe it's the lack of sane men in the N.S.M.

"Nazi Pursuits". Holy Hell. This is 2004, not 1933. Maybe they should shed those togs and get active politically?


Keystone


Maybe it's the presence of KEYSTONE

This has the potential to get uncivil very fast. If anyone wants to say something which violates the Civil Forum's rules PLEASE make a thread in Chutzpah or somewhere, otherwise your post wil probably be deleted.

WN is largely a male ideology. Women, as a general rule, do not think racially. Some do, but most don't.



------

This is very true, Black women flirt with me a lot which proves that it's not just White women but in fact ALL RACES OF WOMEN don't think racially.

It's okay, Demonica.

The presentation of NSM is a hindrance. You have too many overweight guys in brownshirts that look like play-actors. The women should dress in tasteful civilian dresses (while in public demos).

Maybe the men could wear dark suits and if you need the swazi, some small NS pins. They stand out against a good looking suit of clothes.

Lose the '30's hand-me downs. Be sharp. It doesn't change your message.


Keystone

True, it doesn't change the message, but it gets a lot more airplay on the 5:00 PM news. You didn't see any nation-wide coverage of the boring New Orleans gathering, but you did when the NSM had a demo last spring.

Having said that, I myself am personally not much for uniforms, too independent I guess.

This has the potential to get uncivil very fast. If anyone wants to say something which violates the Civil Forum's rules PLEASE make a thread in Chutzpah or somewhere, otherwise your post wil probably be deleted.

Who, us? ;)

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

I certainly don't mean this as an attack against the N.S.M., and that's why I posted here, to keep things civil. But I am curious whenever I see photographs like this, which show a gathering of N.S.M. members at one of their meetings. As is obvious, the vast majority of the members are male. Why is that? Are most of these men single, which would then explain the shortage of female members, as they would lack wives to join them?

Or...are most of these men actually married, and that the shortage of female members is due to the fact that these male N.S.M. members are married to women who shun their beliefs, much in the same way that some wives tolerate husbands who "hunt" or "bowl", but have no interest themselves in participating in such pursuits ?

Whatever the case, neither scenario reflects favorably on the N.S.M., since the first one suggests that the majority of these men are incapable of having normal relationships with the opposite sex. On the other hand, if the latter scenario is true, then that implies that most of the wives of these men have overtly rejected their husbands' Nazi pursuits, which then suggests that the N.S.M. itself is not a credible method in gaining adherents to the pro-white cause.

Well, I count 21 men and 4 women, which is slightly fewer than 20% women, which is probably typical for most WN movements. If anyone thinks other WN orgs have substantially better percentages of women, feel free to let me know. About 20% women seems like about it to me, although the skinhead gatherings seem to have a higher percentage.

To me, the overweight gentlemen in the front row, 2nd and 3rd from left, make us look worse than wearing Swastikas. We should project an image of health and strength, whatever type of attire we choose to employ when de-brainwashing the lemmings.

Married to women who shun their beliefs? Doesn't have to be that way at all. Hasn't it occurred to you that it is dangerous to be an active nationalist, and women want to stay away from danger, leaving it to their men? They don't want to be in a photograph that could be used against them in the future, and they don't want to go to meetings or demonstrations where they could be beaten bloody while the hobby racialists are safe in their homes, cursing at Blacks and WN activists alike.



To me, the overweight gentlemen in the front row, 2nd and 3rd from left, make us look worse than wearing Swastikas. We should project an image of health and strength, whatever type of attire we choose to employ when de-brainwashing the lemmings.

Yes, lemmings look more to the wrapping than the arguments inside. Doing a hundred pushups a day, walking for an hour, eating healthy food and smiling a lot will serve the nationalist propagandist better than a hundred essays.

Married to women who shun their beliefs? Doesn't have to be that way at all. Hasn't it occurred to you that it is dangerous to be an active nationalist, and women want to stay away from danger, leaving it to their men?

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

Then how do you account for the four women who DO participate, as shown in this photo? Are they exceptional in some way? Karate experts, perhaps? Super-women? Maybe they carry Glock 9mm's in their bras when they're out at a rally? And what about the men? Where's this "danger" you speak of? Whenever the N.S.M. stages a rally, they're surrounded by armed police officers who shield them from the rabble, and then escort them out of the area afterwards. So if their wives can't handle THAT, then they're obviously unfit to be the wives of "true white nationalist patriots". But I suspect the real reason is that they don't SUPPORT what their N.S.M. husbands believe in, because if they did they'd be standing right along side those four women in the photo who DO.

They don't (wives of N.S.M. members) want to be in a photograph that could be used against them in the future...
But this doesn't make any sense. If appearing in a photo "could be used against them in the future" then why aren't the four female members of the N.S.M. not concerned about that? Are they somehow immune from that "danger"? Are the men immune as well? Besides, not appearing in an N.S.M. group photo would NOT conceal or protect the wives of N.S.M. members anyway, were law enforcement to go after the entire N.S.M. organization itself. They'd simply be rounded up right along with their N.S.M. husbands at their homes. Furthermore, if the Feds are monitoring the N.S.M. and their members, do you seriously believe that they don't already KNOW the names of these male N.S.M. members, their friends, co-workers, relatives, AND wives?

So no, your reasons for justifying the non-participation of the wives of N.S.M. members simply don't hold up to scrutiny. In truth, the real reason why the wives of N.S.M. members aren't present at N.S.M. meetings is because they simply don't support their husbands' beliefs, beyond mere toleration.

"Oh, you're off to another N.S.M. meeting, honey? Then you're going out for pizza and beer afterward with the gang? Have fun, sweetie!"

THAT would be the extent of their "support" - merely tolerating their husbands' Nazi hobby, much in the same way other wives tolerate their husbands' fishing or hunting hobby. Because if they really believed in what their N.S.M. husbands were doing, then they'd be standing shoulder to shoulder with them at their N.S.M. meetings and rallys, since there is no "danger" and no need to "protect their identities" - since their identities are already known anyway...

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

Then how do you account for the four women who DO participate, as shown in this photo? Are they exceptional in some way? Karate experts, perhaps? Super-women? Maybe they carry Glock 9mm's in their bras when they're out at a rally? And what about the men? Where's this "danger" you speak of?

Are you having trouble following the spirit of the civil forum? Then get out of it. Your sarcasm does not have a place here, so either give a real answer or keep quiet.

Obviously, there are different men and different women. Obviously, those four women are an exception to the rule stated above.

You say what I write doesn't hold up to scrutiny: well, you're shooting yourself in your foot. You pretend to believe that I was talking about one hundred percent of all women; by that same reasoning your own arguments for why few women are active nationalists are also destroyed by the presence of the women in the photograph.

Satty, Franco speaks from experience and from knowing the statistics, which should be obvious. So listen.

Most White males are nationalist when they are not brainwashed by the ZOG apparatus. Statistics all over Europe show that Whites would stop the dark immigration if allowed to, but our politicians ignore our will and beat down nationalist parties through a web of laws and deception, the attacks on the Vlaams Blok being one of the most obvious examples this year.

Even when only a minority of White men in a region are nationalist, the minority of nationalist women will be even smaller, so Franco's statement holds true there as well.

Satty, Franco speaks from experience and from knowing the statistics, which should be obvious. So listen.

Most White males are nationalist when they are not brainwashed by the ZOG apparatus. Statistics all over Europe show that Whites would stop the dark immigration if allowed to, but our politicians ignore our will and beat down nationalist parties through a web of laws and deception, the attacks on the Vlaams Blok being one of the most obvious examples this year.

Even when only a minority of White men in a region are nationalist, the minority of nationalist women will be even smaller, so Franco's statement holds true there as well.


oy vey, see what happens when someone joins just to nitpick?

There is no evidence -- not even a sliver -- that women are any less "racial" than men.

Show me this. All the "racists" I've met among my people are most certainly males. Women are simply more emotional creatures, and this is a fact. In other words, they're more likely to embrace the Boasnian "We Are the World" PBS nonsense.



..

Statements such as Franco's show why WN is a totally marginalized movement marked by perpetual failure.

There is no evidence -- not even a sliver -- that women are any less "racial" than men. In Nazi Germany, women were Hitler's biggest fans. There was no shortage of female National Socialists. Do you remember Margaret Sanger & co? Racist, eugenicist, and with an opposition comprised mainly of men! Women, no less than men, stick to their own racial kind. Women tend to marry members of their own race. White women, not just white men, engage in "white flight."

See, again, this is a big reason WN is so unsuccessful. Can you imagine a Jewish man saying "Jewish women, as a general rule, are not Zionists." Of course not! For one, it's suicide to alienate over half of one's potential supporters. For two, it's false! Some of the fanatical Zionists (Jewish racists) have always been female.

Sadly enough, Jewish men welcome the support of their women! Rather than treating their women as some separate species incapable of racial consciousness...

Without strong female support, WN will get nowhere. Hitler knew this. You should too.

Most women avoid the WN cause for the same reason most men do -- it's associated in the public mind with whiny, crybaby losers. And women, even more than men, go with the winners.


oy vey, see what happens when someone doesn't like the pessimism of fate?

Read the rest of my post. There are many, many female racists -- they just usually don't want to associate with a cause synonymous with low socioeconomic, trashy, losers.

Get a clue. Jews are the most racist people in the world -- and their women are NOT excepted from this rule.


oy vey, see what happens when a woman or a woman's male bitch takes up nationalisme blanc?

As long as WN males are defeatist or cold to this issue, discussing it just goes loop-de-loop.

Fact is, white women are waiting for white men to get some spine and create an opposition they can support. When WN males push the right buttons the gals will come. Uh, something like that.

WN males need to read a bit more of our history and get the point.

When a bunch of Greek roughnecks got together and decided to turn their tribe into a going concern, they got their ladies motivated to support them by chosing a female patroness as their Team Mascot. They picked a good one. Under Athena's banner, the men were victorious and the women happy for a good while. Athens is still famous because they picked her.

That's not rocket science just good community building.

When a bunch of Greek roughnecks got together and decided to turn their tribe into a going concern, they got their ladies motivated to support them by chosing a female patroness as their Team Mascot. They picked a good one. Under Athena's banner, the men were victorious and the women happy for a good while. Athens is still famous because they picked her.

That's not rocket science just good community building.


The goddess thing is too Eastern -- or was back then; and today it is hokey. You may attract "the ladies" with a New Age suckler but only the most complacent sort of male will rally to a female idol. Die Muslime haben es besser.

......We should project an image of health and strength, whatever type of attire we choose to employ when de-brainwashing the lemmings.
True, image speaks for itself and projects success. Hygiene and smart attire help convey a message. Getting close to gardening creates a fit body, too.

There is no evidence -- not even a sliver -- that women are any less "racial" than men.

There is: statistics, all of which show the same trend, no matter what country you look at.

As for NS Germany, the women were orthodox Nazists after the takeover. Like you write yourself, they side with the strongest, with those in power. Those in power in Germany today are anti-White.

Who made up most of the NSDAP cadres? Men.

I come to think of the Middle East: there is much talk of how oppressed women are there, and indeed they are treated like dogs in many places, but nevertheless the Arab women are just as orthodox Muslims, if not more, than the men. Because they side with power. Whereas in the West, Arab women become race-mixing, Marxist sluts -- because they side with power. Now, Arab men in the West also degenerate, but the women do it at a faster rate, which is where all the stories about slutty Arab girls honor-killed by their brothers and fathers come from.

In conclusion: women side with power, because that is what keeps them safe. Nationalists in the West do not hold power, and joining them offers the opposite of safety, which is why less women than men join nationalist parties.

^Good post.


By the way, your "people" are mongrels. Your sort of mongrel exists because some White MEN (soldiers abroad) can't keep themselves from screwing non-Whites. So much for White men being the big, bad racists.

Actually, my people would have existed anyways. Races are not pegged and clear cut. The Eurasian region has alwasy been a gateway between east and west. As long as there was migration and climate throughout the past thousands of years, my type would have always existed. Is a black born to black parents in Sweden any less black?




..

Are you having trouble following the spirit of the civil forum? Then get out of it. Your sarcasm does not have a place here, so either give a real answer or keep quiet.

Obviously, there are different men and different women. Obviously, those four women are an exception to the rule stated above.

You say what I write doesn't hold up to scrutiny: well, you're shooting yourself in your foot. You pretend to believe that I was talking about one hundred percent of all women; by that same reasoning your own arguments for why few women are active nationalists are also destroyed by the presence of the women in the photograph.


Fred, that is at least twice now that you have rudely told 2 of us to "get out of the forum" simply because we have dared to question your stance on a number of issues. Do you have a problem with reasoned argument?

NSDAP cadres were made up by men who wanted to get their balls back from their decadent government and the Versailles Treaty.

Women can't take the initiative. Aggressive nation-building must come from men who want their balls back. Or maybe guys like the Athenian hillbillies who wanted balls in the first place.

But when they assert themselves women will support them in droves. David Icke, the Brit new age guru, has been sued by rabbis and the ADL for years and his followers are overwhelmingly female. The right strategy will get the job done.

Both Satyameva Jayate and Fredrik are right if you look at their posts closely. Fredrik notes that the ladies are attracted to power and won't expose themselves till they can align themselves with it. This is instinct. Women's essential conservatism is what allows any tribe to reproduce itself.

Satyameva makes the same point from a slightly different angle. Women cannot align themselves with losers; it would be dysgenic. So they must keep their instictive feelings to themselves till they see a possible winner emerge from the WN movement.

That they do have these insticts is proved by the popularity of noisemakers like Icke: Even on a hunch, some women will support a heretic against the dominant culture. This is a good sign.

Excellently discerned, FranzJoseph. Most of the above posts hold their own kernel (or rather bushel) of truth.

Yes, I was just about to ask you about whether or not you pack heat. More dunce I.

Think about it this way, males instinctively are more terroritorial, not only over land, but over potential mates.
Males have more of an intuitive sense of blood and soil, on average over females.
Males are by nature designed to carve out society, make the rules. Compete over potential mates.
Females follow, males lead.
It doesn't really matter if some people disagree with this fact, it is reality.
1 + 1 = 2, 2 doesn't care if you BELIEVE this as Alex would note.

Back to this topic. Many of you make some valid points. There is probably more than a few variables as to why males out number females in WN movements.
Power is a key component as many of you have suggested.
Females generally follow where the power is.
WN is powerless at the moment.

Females, on average, are more humanistic naturally than males.
Hence, the overall female acceptance of multiculturalism.

The good news is that most females want their babies to look something like themselves, so most women still prefer white mates.
Women do seek safety and security. WN is currently not really that safe or secure.

Also, I'll agree that females are an intregal component of any future WN resurgence that may occur.
But, they will generally come after you establish some power and security and fight for them over the nonwhite competition, like the large number of NS German women in the 1930s'.

How many females were their at the beginning?
Not many.

And why should there be?
Men have the testicles for a reason.
Stop whining about the lack of females involved in WN groups.
Check your balls and get a few 'regular' women yourself.
If you think a little speech on the jews and niggers and immigrants will all of a sudden make them 'see the light' and ready to put up an SS poster in theiroom, let me save you the trouble and tell you it will not work.

For many males, WN, along with any other ideological persuasion, is a part of male bonding and being part of a specific ideology that helps us make sense of this wicked world we live in. Females are not that philosophical and ideological.
Women come as a prize after the fact.
Like any other natural resource, they are the prize for the victors after you fight it out.

I do think that some sort of hybrid environmental/naturalistic/pro-White message may be able to really work well with women who are not that materialistic presently.
Check out your local yoga studios to score up a few dates and test this hypothesis out.

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

FH said: "You say what I write doesn't hold up to scrutiny..."

And I still say it. Your two major reasons for why these N.S.M. members don't have their wives joining them at their meetings are, and I repeat:

1: Because of physical danger.

2: Because they want to keep their identities "secret".

I contend that there is no appreciable "danger" in being a member of the N.S.M. - no credible evidence whatsoever that their members have been targeted for assassination, their houses firebombed, their members shot, clubbed senseless, or murdered. Show me news evidence that N.S.M. members are living in constant "danger" - enough so that it would become a threat not only to them, but to their wives as well, should they join. I contend that no such media evidence exists, and that the paucity of wives joining the N.S.M. is due - not to "safety factors" - but simply to the fact that they have no interest in their Nazi husbands' hobby - because that is how they certainly must view it - as a strange hobby they participate in during their evening and weekend free time.

In regard to your second reason, it doesn't withstand scrutiny either. Really, if the NA's Kevin Strom had never talked publically about his wife Elisha, do you seriously believe that law enforcement wouldn't STILL know her name, age, and personal background? Of course they would. Likewise, if the wife of the N.S.M.'s Jeff Schoep remains out of the picture, there is no doubt that law enforcement STILL knows her name, age, and personal background - as would be the case with all the other members of the N.S.M.

And that's my point - there is no VALID reason for the wives of N.S.M. members not to be to in uniform and at their husbands' sides. That is, no valid reason except one - they simply DON'T have any interest in dressing up as Nazi stormtroopers.

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg



[B]And I still say it. Your two major reasons for why these N.S.M. members don't have their wives joining them at their meetings are, and I repeat:

1: Because of physical danger.

2: Because they want to keep their identities "secret".

I count twenty one men. How are you sure even one is married?

As for Hitlers charm amongst women, didnt someone edit out his moustache and put him on www.hotornot.com, where he pulled a 9 out of 10 or something?

An ugly, poor musician will not have a female following, but a good looking, poor one would.

Based on Hitler, it could be surmised that a handsome, word-savvy speaker would be more popular with women than anyone else.

I'm going to make a massive generalization and assume few, if any of those men are in a moderate economic bracket, and unless you look like Brad Pitt, women generally dont marry broke men.

In any event, does any of this matter? The NSM isn't going to be conquering nations anytime soon, and thus cannot turn into a watershed for eugenic improvement, so why does the number of women even matter?

As for Hitlers charm amongst women, didnt someone edit out his moustache and put him on www.hotornot.com, where he pulled a 9 out of 10 or something?


Haha, for real? Someone please tell me more.

http://www.space-ninja.com/hitler/

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg

Draco said: "How are you sure even one is married?"

I don't know. But most of those present look between 25 to 45 in age, with a few lying on either side of that age range. So where are their girlfriends and wives? If they have them, why aren't they in uniform standing at their sides? My conjecture is that most of these men have girlfriends and wives, but that those girlfriends and wives aren't interested in dressing up as Nazis - not even behind closed doors at a private meeting. To me, that suggests that these N.S.M. members cannot even get their own spouses and girlfriends to join them, which indicates that the N.S.M. itself is fundamentally flawed as a viable means to gain new adherents from the general public.

Statements such as Franco's show why WN is a totally marginalized movement marked by perpetual failure.

There is no evidence -- not even a sliver -- that women are any less "racial" than men. In Nazi Germany, women were Hitler's biggest fans. There was no shortage of female National Socialists. Do you remember Margaret Sanger & co? Racist, eugenicist, and with an opposition comprised mainly of men! Women, no less than men, stick to their own racial kind. Women tend to marry members of their own race. White women, not just white men, engage in "white flight."

See, again, this is a big reason WN is so unsuccessful. Can you imagine a Jewish man saying "Jewish women, as a general rule, are not Zionists." Of course not! For one, it's suicide to alienate over half of one's potential supporters. For two, it's false! The most fanatical Zionists (Jewish racists) have always been female.

Sadly enough, Jewish men welcome the support of their women! Rather than treating their women as some separate species incapable of racial consciousness...

Without strong female support, WN will get nowhere. Hitler knew this. You should too.

Most women avoid the WN cause for the same reason most men do -- it's associated in the public mind with whiny, crybaby losers. And women, even more than men, go with the winners.

Margaret Sanger was not a racist, so there's no need to appeal to her. She was a feminist that screamed about the need for birth control. Do you support feminism? Do you think that Whites have a good birthrate?

Women supported the National Socialists when they were in power. German women were no longer National Socialists after Germany was defeated. Big deal. That's just a case where women go with the winners.

It's more useful to go back and look at who constituted the core membership of the original NSDAP. Even as they grew, it was filled with men. Only after the National Socialists established a strong presence did women come flocking.

http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg



I don't know. But most of those present look between 25 to 45 in age, with a few lying on either side of that age range. So where are their girlfriends and wives? If they have them, why aren't they in uniform standing at their sides? My conjecture is that most of these men have girlfriends and wives, but that those girlfriends and wives aren't interested in dressing up as Nazis - not even behind closed doors at a private meeting. To me, that suggests that these N.S.M. members cannot even get their own spouses and girlfriends to join them, which indicates that the N.S.M. itself is fundamentally flawed as a viable means to gain new adherents from the general public.

Have you ever been a member of an organization or seen pictures of other groups gatherings? Take a look at Duke's (old) photo from when he was campaigning at the bottom:

http://www.duke.org/album/index.html

Even Duke, who was much more 'mainstream' in Louisiana had overwhelmingly male PUBLIC support. Now here is Duke in Louisiana with the Stormfront crowd:

http://www.vnnforum.com/showthread.php?t=6873

If we are kind and count Elisha as a "woman", you have 4 women and 19 men (not all White). That's barely different than the NSM picture that you used. If you take a look at other pictures from the conference, the ratio looks even worse. If you don't like that, take a look at pictures from the American Renaissance conference. Again, you'll see a huge gender disparity. Both of those events were affairs where people were required to dress nicely, yet you have the exact same disparity as the NSM picture, if not 'worse'.

If we are kind and count Elisha as a "woman", you have 4 women and 19 men (not all White). That's barely different than the NSM picture that you used.

You left out Cammie from that... I think you mean to say 3 women, if you include Elisha...
(Not trying to flame, but gads, she doesn't quite look like anything of our species, and makes me want to dry heave. My poor breakfast doesn't like her. )

I contend that there is no appreciable "danger" in being a member of the N.S.M. - no credible evidence whatsoever that their members have been targeted for assassination, their houses firebombed, their members shot, clubbed senseless, or murdered. Show me news evidence that N.S.M. members are living in constant "danger" - enough so that it would become a threat not only to them, but to their wives as well, should they join. I contend that no such media evidence exists, and that the paucity of wives joining the N.S.M. is due - not to "safety factors" - but simply to the fact that they have no interest in their Nazi husbands' hobby - because that is how they certainly must view it - as a strange hobby they participate in during their evening and weekend free time.

I will be sure to keep this in mind as I'm driving through a very rough neighborhood in order to get home at night. Maybe one of these evenings, late, after a N.S.M. meeting at which uniforms were required I will be able to remind myself that there is no 'appreciable danger' as I am dragged from my car and heartily mistreated.

You know, at one point I thought that I would be a bigger spur to the cause by staying alive (to have lots of white babies, of course). Silly me.

"I will be sure to keep this in mind as I'm driving through a very rough neighborhood in order to get home at night. Maybe one of these evenings, late, after a N.S.M. meeting at which uniforms were required I will be able to remind myself that there is no 'appreciable danger' as I am dragged from my car and heartily mistreated."
http://img73.photobucket.com/albums/v222/ihn4f/NSMGroupPhotoMaleAndFemaleNaziMembersJuly2004.jpg
Anybody - ANYBODY - who would drive through a "rough neighborhood" at night dressed in a Nazi uniform is a (civil forum - censored). Really, if you haven't even got basic common sense to change out of your swastika armband and brown shirt in the bathroom of your Nazi meeting hall before heading home, then any niggers that jump you while driving through that "rough neighborhood" you speak of are just showing you how totally (civil forum - censored) you really are.

if you haven't even got basic common sense to change out of your swastika armband and brown shirt in the bathroom of your Nazi meeting hall before heading home

Ah, yes. Truly, this is a far more honourable option. Pride behind closed doors. Yes, of course. Maybe when we leave we can tell people that we were actually discussing "community improvement" which surely is no lie but not of the most explicit truth, either.

I am telling you that there are women who are behind this movement who you will never see because the men leading it have not made it safe. Whether the threat perceived by these women is real or not is actually of no consequence. If they are made to feel insecure, they will be reluctant.

Most women avoid the WN cause for the same reason most men do -- it's associated in the public mind with whiny, crybaby losers. And women, even more than men, go with the winners.

True, but jewish controlled media puts that spin on the publics perception, plenty of lemmings are Racialist, constantly saying "filthy nigs" or "dirty mexicans", etc.

Men are the traditional Hunter-Gatherers and women are the nurturing ones, taking care of the children. So it is natural that there be more activist men, although if our content of our message was truly known and if it was "socially acceptable" to be a Racialist, I am sure the percentage of women involved would rise dramatically.

So the goal is still the same, break the jewish control.

Fred, that is at least twice now that you have rudely told 2 of us to "get out of the forum" simply because we have dared to question your stance on a number of issues.

You were so upset in the other thread you had to go stalk me in other threads as well? Not very Aryan of you. And, well, you didn't exactly present reasoned arguments in your reply, and I will advise you once more to leave all aggressive behavior outside the civil forum, and respect its rules.

And I still say it. Your two major reasons for why these N.S.M. members don't have their wives joining them at their meetings are, and I repeat:

I don't care how you divide up my argument, but it remains: there is great risk with being an active nationalist: many have lost their jobs, had their cars vandalized and torched, have received death threats, and been beaten. Just a few months ago I read about a Klan girl who was raped and shot in the head by an anti. You wave away the risk? Obviously you've never been active, then. Try taking part in a nationalist demonstration, see if you'll be allowed to stroll down the street no problem.

It seems you want to ignore the risk to make the women sound more decent than the men: that if the men would be as good as the women, the women would join, and there's no other reason they're staying away. Am I right?

Then it should be easy to post links to these "statistics".

Why do you write it in quotation marks? Do you think I am lying when I say that women vote less nationalist than men? Then say it out loud, instead of using insinuations.

However, we don't want to be "led" by insecure, whiny pussies.

oy vey, see what happens when you teach a woman to speak?

Why do you write it in quotation marks? Do you think I am lying when I say that women vote less nationalist than men? Then say it out loud, instead of using insinuations.


Mensch, why do you bother with this? You know women are hardly more reasonable than Jews. Very devious creatures who should be avoided.

The more likely question is why are there only 2 dozen people in the pic? Could it be that playing Nazi dress up isn't that effective in building an org that has some muscle? And why do you assume that these jokesters actually have wives?

The more likely question is why are there only 2 dozen people in the pic? Could it be that playing Nazi dress up isn't that effective in building an org that has some muscle? And why do you assume that these jokesters actually have wives?


Maybe because American society has convinced White people that Nazism is e-e-e-e-e-eeeevil.

In other words, there are few Whites in the WN movement because America has been Jewed.







[edited]


--------------

[QUOTE=Franco]Maybe because American society has convinced White people that Nazism is e-e-e-e-e-eeeevil.

In other words, there are few Whites in the WN movement because America has been Jewed.
QUOTE]


I do not think that "Nazism" and WN are the same thing. If I want America to be a white nation, how does this make me a "Nazi?"

[QUOTE=Franco]Maybe because American society has convinced White people that Nazism is e-e-e-e-e-eeeevil.

In other words, there are few Whites in the WN movement because America has been Jewed.
QUOTE]


I do not think that "Nazism" and WN are the same thing. If I want America to be a white nation, how does this make me a "Nazi?"

oy vey, see what happens when you don't read enough books?

oy vey, see what happens when a woman or a woman's male bitch takes up nationalisme blanc?

Framers of perception win arguments that reality wouldn't otherwise allow.

Ergo:

white / black = not equal
women / men = equal
women = more than equal
equal = meaningful concept

...all this, and more, in Amerikwa.

Framers of perception win arguments that reality wouldn't otherwise allow.

Ergo:

white / black = not equal
women / men = equal
women = more than equal
equal = meaningful concept

...all this, and more, in Amerikwa.

But of course it is not just la Kwa, it is Yoorup and Roosiya and even Iran.

I do not think that "Nazism" and WN are the same thing. If I want America to be a white nation, how does this make me a "Nazi?"

Here's how:

Write letters to your local paper, your state & federal representatives and Abe Foxman that you "want America to be a white nation."

They'll make you a Nazi in about a week.

It's how the mindgame works, pal. It's why George Lincoln Rockwell started the American Nazi Party over forty years ago. Before that he told everyone he just wanted to live in a white country and they always shot back with "You must be a nazi, so Rockwell finally had enough and said, "Okay, right, I AM A NAZI".

The game's been rigged this way about 2 generations now, and if you've come by a way to change the rules, let us know.

It is excellent to see ARYAN WOMEN who stand up for the Beliefs in OUR Cause. N.S. is not a Male dominated we are EQUAL with our sisters.You are right those boys look a little heavy must be that good living.LOL !!!! S.S.

Tyler, Margaret Sanger WAS a racist. Look her up on Google - she wanted to wipe out the black population through abortion and birth control. And damn right, I do support FREE abortion - for non-Whites and White trash.

well it backfired and Whites babies have borne the brunt.

Anyhow one White baby is worth ten or a hundred others.

All Europe needs to do to fix their "demographic collapse" is make abortion illegal except for medical reasons and limit distribution of contraception. Continent-wide. Dont want it to boost the native non-White population? Eject them at the same time.

Not much else will reverse demographic collapse.

Have a strawberry shortcake sale. Maybe that would attract them.

make abortion illegal except for medical reasons and limit distribution of contraception.

What's wrong with condoms?



..

White Nationalism and NS are manifestations of the visions and dreams of White men.

The straw-man argument of "why aren't there any women" is a typical ploy used by the jew to undermine the resolve of the movement and inject it with self-doubt.

When will we ever learn to think for ourselves without the jew defining the parameters?

The question is irrelevant as are the importance of women to the movement at this point in time.

Are we so afraid that the people will call us homosexuals if we do not include a certain acceptable percentage of token White women in a group photo? Boo! White boy........You’re a homo because you don’t have any girls in your club! Nah nah.

Ridicule is a control device. Don’t you get it?

It is incumbent upon us to build a strong organization that has solid goals and a sound structure that will be attractive enough to produce a kind of “perpetual motion of new adherents” that, in turn, will induce others to join.

Until we attain that level of sophistication.............female membership will most likely cause more dissention then cooperation between the builders of the organization. I cite Stormfront as a typical case in point.

The woman will come when we produce something worthy of coming-to......that is their nature.

Tyler, Margaret Sanger WAS a racist. Look her up on Google - she wanted to wipe out the black population through abortion and birth control. And damn right, I do support FREE abortion - for non-Whites and White trash.

Look, I can find quotes from Ben Franklin and George Washington on the Internet where they have an understanding of the Jewish Question. The problem? The sources were fabricated (Franklin) or quotes were altered (Washington). Likewise, Margaret Sanger was NOT a racist. Take a look at the following:

http://www.ppct.org/facts/research/sanger.shtml

Your friends at Planned Parenthood deal with those issues. She was not in favor of eugenics or racism. However, she WAS a feminist.

What's wrong with condoms?



..

His stated goal was to raise the White birthrate. If people lack access to contraception and abortions, that will happen.

well it backfired and Whites babies have borne the brunt.

Anyhow one White baby is worth ten or a hundred others.

All Europe needs to do to fix their "demographic collapse" is make abortion illegal except for medical reasons and limit distribution of contraception. Continent-wide. Dont want it to boost the native non-White population? Eject them at the same time.

Not much else will reverse demographic collapse.

As faem.com hammered home many times: WE FEED, THEY BREED! We absolutely do need to eject all non-Whites but the mental "sickness" here still remains. This is what people fail to realize. Jews could vanish tomorrow, which would be a fantastic event, but the ideals that they've promulgated will remain until we can purge them from our society. This means that we must take proactive efforts and not act like lunatic libertarians that assume everything just works out when no one controls anything.

We must raise the White birthrate and destroy ideas (like feminism, anti-racism, cosmopolitanism, etc) that have us flying faster than the speed of sound towards complete annhilation. If we fail to do that and act like cowards to garner a few "pats on the head" from misguided womyn, we are doomed.

What's wrong with condoms?

..

Decreases the White birthrate, which is way too low as it is.

Plus using them is like taking a shower wearing a raincoat ;)

Why do you write it in quotation marks? Do you think I am lying when I say that women vote less nationalist than men? Then say it out loud, instead of using insinuations.

It's just denial of reality. Men hold 99 percent of all patents. Since someone will scream for sources:

http://www.amren.com/923issue/923issue.html (it's from the book Brain Sex, just in case someone tries to say I can't refer to American Renaissance)

Now I also have statistics that they've been demanding. Bear in mind before reading this: The French FN is more diluted, mainstream and infinitely bigger than any organization in the United States (and other political parties in Europe). The size of the organization and less radical message will naturally attract more females (in this case, simply voters). The fact that women would rabidly vote for the FN if they were in power means little -- it is the struggle before one obtains power where activism and secondarily support (by a longshot) really matters.

If you were to get down to the percentage of FN activists, the percentage would be much more uneven.

http://www.europanet.org/past_newsletters/200209/earthquake.htm

"Given the continued “gender gap” of the FN vote (21% of French males voted for Le Pen and 13% of French women), this makes the FN voter profile very similar to that of the Freedom Party voter in Austria: a blue-collar prime age male."

It is simply in our genes that men are more creative, aggressive, territorial and willing to hold and express demonized opinions. I know that some will continue to deny this reality but each time you do think back to the patents and the 99 percent figure.

Have a strawberry shortcake sale. Maybe that would attract them.

Exactly, exactly. We'll give out Polly Pocket party favors.

In all seriousness, you need to actually place some appeal to females within the litrature also, if you want to increase membership don't hit suburbia, hit the poor white areas with litrature. You'll get nowhere trying to attract a bunch of yo-yos with silver spoons in their mouths with no real idea of what a coon is like beyond what they see on TV.

So? Jews hold patents, earn college admissions, etc. far out of proportion to their percentage of the population. Does that mean all of this was obtained fairly, without any dirty tricks?

So, are you saying White men obtained their patents unfairly and with dirty tricks? This will be interesting.

For one thing, you are quoting this garbage from a Jewish source (from New York University no less!). You seem to be fond of quoting from "anti-racist" sites, which does nothing to boost your (non-existent) credibility.

1. Why are the voting statistics garbage?

2. Do you believe the statistics are falsified just because they come from New York University? It seems so, but I would like to see you state it clearly.


You say that

a) the statistics are false, and

b) if they are true, then they don't matter anyway, because the gap is not big enough.

Is that correct? Why the need for two explanations, I wonder? Seems the second one is there to give you a way out in case the first one would fail.


Btw, what's with the non-White name? Are you an Indian? Should you be in the Opposition Forum?

So? Jews hold patents, earn college admissions, etc. far out of proportion to their percentage of the population. Does that mean all of this was obtained fairly?

Probably. I don't think any reaonsable person thinks Ashkenazi jews are dumb.




...

They cannot be trusted. Then again, given your infatuation with the very Jewish system of Capitalism, it's no surprise that you would have an affinity for New York University.

Ah, I see our resident non-White is a teenager! His language speaks volumes.

The average teenager online: aggressive, little knowledge, never admitting when he is wrong, always interfering in discussions where he doesn't belong, always resorting to name-calling when he can't back his claims. Then disappearing again just as quickly when he realizes he is out of his league, to show up somewhere else or under a new name.

So, if you accuse Tyler D of posting false statistics, then how about showing us the real ones about Front National's members and voters?

The rest of us know the statistics are right. You're just denying their validity because they are obviously prowing you wrong. And you are also severely breaking the letter and the spirit of the rules of the civil forum, but I see the moderators are lenient.

His stated goal was to raise the White birthrate. If people lack access to contraception and abortions, that will happen.
You would have to 1st deny them access to abstinance

As faem.com hammered home many times: WE FEED, THEY BREED! We absolutely do need to eject all non-Whites but the mental "sickness" here still remains.

What happened to FAEM anyway?

The ideas would eventually disappear without the Jewish engine behind them, as they are anti-nature. Even so, you are right, since the process would take too long for our liking. And of course, any effort that gets rid of the Jews is more than likely to be aimed against their Marxist policies at the same time.

As for birth-rates, first of all, I don't think our countries need to be more populated than they already are. Like Dr. Pierce I think we need less people per square kilometer, not more. A Britain with no more than 30 million people would still function well. But if we want higher birthrates, getting rid of condoms is the wrong way to go. What you need is simply a conservative, White lifestyle, where family is celebrated and supported in a multitude of ways.

What happened to FAEM anyway?

The ideas would eventually disappear without the Jewish engine behind them, as they are anti-nature. Even so, you are right, since the process would take too long for our liking. And of course, any effort that gets rid of the Jews is more than likely to be aimed against their Marxist policies at the same time.

As for birth-rates, first of all, I don't think our countries need to be more populated than they already are. Like Dr. Pierce I think we need less people per square kilometer, not more. A Britain with no more than 30 million people would still function well. But if we want higher birthrates, getting rid of condoms is the wrong way to go. What you need is simply a conservative, White lifestyle, where family is celebrated and supported in a multitude of ways.

Scandanavia is losing villages in the hinterlands isnt it? I think Scandanavia could stand to have more people especially the Scandavian kind. That would be a blessing.

A heavily settled area like England might be a different story. England is past "full up."

Only ten percent of the population lives in Norrland, which makes up two thirds of the country, but I don't think they need more people up there. They are losing people, but mainly because people move southward, and I haven't heard of any village being emptied. No, we did well with four million people, we don't need nine. Nine million only means overcrowded cities, it's not like anyone is building any entirely new cities. We are fond of our vast forests in the north, and like to keep them the way they are.

As for urbanization, it also seems it is getting easier to live in smaller towns now, with better communications. So that problem will probably take care of itself.

Ah, I see our resident non-White is a teenager! His language speaks volumes.

The average teenager online: aggressive, little knowledge, never admitting when he is wrong, always interfering in discussions where he doesn't belong, always resorting to name-calling when he can't back his claims. Then disappearing again just as quickly when he realizes he is out of his league, to show up somewhere else or under a new name.

"Satyameva Jayate" posts at The Phora under the moniker "Miss O' Gyny," and before that, I suspect, as "Mary Poppins" at the same forum. She started a thread at The Phora belittling your intelligence.

http://www.thephora.org/showthread.php?t=637

I wonder why this person failed to answer your question.

So, are you saying White men obtained their patents unfairly and with dirty tricks?

I really dont see the point of this thread. Who needs women in politics?

I always liked browsing Phora. Chock full of self-important neo-intellectual know it alls. It is easier to paint people with broad brushes.

People always like to pretend they have the answer to everything.

I think this topic is an important one. Males often go where the women are.
Get more than a few good looking girls at the forefront of Racialism/Nationalism and you will see a dramatic increase in the number of men.
Of course, this is easier said than done.
A few prominent nationalists in Europe happen to be female. I'd say they are of the same pyschological profile as most men who permeate the WN scene.

Most people, men and women, are followers. There will always be a select few who choose the path of most resistance.
Let's not over-analyze it.
Sure, there are more than a few defectives within Racialist circles.
But, there are more than a handful of quality people (men and women) involved as well.

Many out there (often the phora types) who constantly whine about the PR of racialism to the general public.
Obviously, these people have wet dream fantasies of a NSM resurgence as well.
This is unlikely to happen.

It's useless to keep going in circles over the men vs women debate.
Fact: Males tend to be involved in racialist movements.
Thus, Males tend to be more racially conscious than females.
Yes, there are some racially conscious females.
Check the numbers: its is mostly a male ideology.
Females are much less likely to be part of a socially ridiculed movement than men.

Women come after the fact. I will tell you which button you need to push if you want to attract the women en masse: become creible, viable and successful.
Most men don't want to be with losers.
Why would you think women would?

Interesting how you didn't mention that FadetheButcher, founder of The Phora, agreed with me in the same thread: "Freddie thinks National Socialism is some sort of conservatism. As I pointed out before, Freddie believes in all sorts of stupid things." Fade could be sound asleep and still tear Freddy up in a debate.

Seems this little girl is obsessed with me. Pathetic, really. She can't take opposition, so has to go whine and whine and try to find someone who will agree with her. Sattie, sweetie, Fanatic Fade ran away when his lies were ripped apart here at VNN. He hasn't dared return since. And you have to hide behind him as a blanket? You resort to that when you fail in a debate? What's the matter, can't fight your own battles, hm? Seems like it. :)

Hey girl, how about answering the questions you try to avoid?

Are you really saying White men obtained their patents unfairly and with dirty tricks?

And if you accuse Tyler D of lying, then how about showing us the real statistics about Front National's members and voters? Or were you just saying his statistics were false because you didn't know how to reply to them?

I suppose not, given your ignorance regarding National Socialism, and well, just about everything.


I remind all that this is the Civil Forum.



[edited]



---------

Yes she was. Her whole proposed program was based upon eugenics, and sought to improve racial stock by excising the dull, deformed, and racially inferior.

LOL you are going to trust Planned Parenthood? This is nothing but public relations propaganda. PP doesn't want their founder branded a Nazi.

There is no contradiction between eugenics/racism and advocating power for women. White societies in general have always given more power and respect to strong, intelligent women than any of the non-White cesspools that you admire. You have a real problem with White civilization.

Prove that she was a racist. Go find the books, scan the pages and put them online. Do not give quotes out of context.

I don't have to like Planned Parenthood or any "anti" website that points out that quotations are attributed to the wrong person and others are altered. I've already posted about this regarding the George Washington and Ben Franklin "anti-semitic" quotes. I also looked up the book that attributed an anti-Jewish comment to Washington and, sure enough like the website claimed, it was not there.

You can't flip-flop on your position. First it's just that degenerate Whites and muds should have abortions. The "power" that Sanger desired for women included abortions and birth control for everyone, not just a select class of imbeciles. She spent much of her time propagandizing wealthy women about those issues.

Western civilization has always been patriarchal. You might not like it but that's your problem.

So? Jews hold patents, earn college admissions, etc. far out of proportion to their percentage of the population. Does that mean all of this was obtained fairly, without any dirty tricks?

For one thing, you are quoting this garbage from a Jewish source (from New York University no less!). You seem to be fond of quoting from "anti-racist" sites, which does nothing to boost your (non-existent) credibility.

For another thing, "21%" and "13%" is not a huge gender gap. A truly huge gap would be "21%" and "1.3%". Note also that the FN voter profile is first and foremost blue-collar. Does that mean it has to be that way? Does that mean White Nationalists should write off white collar, college-educated folks and restrict their appeals to construction workers? Only by your twisted logic.

Your "strategy" is nothing less than a plan for perpetual self-marginalization. Tell me, what group benefits from that?

That men are supposedly (according to a Jewish source) somewhat more active in FN does absolutely nothing to show that women are less racist than men.

Which is no doubt why millions of men are rushing to join the White Revolution. LOL!!!

I never claimed that Jews were imbeciles, so why should I doubt the patents? As for college admissions, non-Whites (including Jews) are simply favored. That does little (nothing) to counter the 99 percent figure.

Just admit that you never did want statistics. I've argued with far too many fools like you before. They have a certain idea in mind that they refuse to budge on. It doesn't matter how absurd it might be. First, you want to complain that it's a source from NYU. Now, if it was a source from, say, the government, you would still say that "the Jews" were responsible for altering the true statistics. The source was only about voters not a profile about the activists, so don't try to confuse that.

Now, you have an argument to fall back on even if that's not good enough. The statistics aren't "huge" enough. You want men to outVOTE women for a nationalist party by 20 times for it to become significant. That is an absurd standard. The number of men voting for the FN versus women is lopsided. The percentage of activists is even moreso.

Find an organization and you will discover this for yourself. It's easy to claim that it's "just not true!" when your only experience comes from plucking away at your keyboard.

Satyameva Jayate:

You've never bothered answering:

1. Are you a feminist?
2. Are you in favor of legalized abortion for White women?
3. Have you ever been a member of a nationalist party or organization?
4. Have you ever been to a rally?

For 3 and 4, be specific and tell me about the gender ratio.

Hey girl, how about answering the questions you try to avoid?

Are you really saying White men obtained their patents unfairly and with dirty tricks?


She won't answer that because it would force her to concede the absurdity of her counterexample.

I also looked up the book that attributed an anti-Jewish comment to Washington and, sure enough like the website claimed, it was not there..

And that Lincoln quote, "nothing is more sure..." etc., is also taken skewedly. WNs apparently take it to mean that Lincoln was implying that Whites and negroes would not get along, but it's clearly meant as a reply to the objection that they would not, i.e. "nothing is less certain".

Western civilization has always been patriarchal. You might not like it but that's your problem.

And not only Western civ, of course. Compared to the Middle East we've been very liberal. Anyway, discussing anything with that female is pointless, she's only here to have us chase our tails. Women love that, and when we point it out, they say: "REAL men know what I mean!" -- REAL men stay as far from such women as possible.

I never claimed that Jews were imbeciles, so why should I doubt the patents? As for college admissions, non-Whites (including Jews) are simply favored.

Affirmative action for minorities:

Blacks and mexicans win.

Asians lose.



Worth the trade off?



...