Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Taliban Rapes Europe

A Taliban leader kidnapped and raped Dutch journalist Joanie de Rijke. She defends her rapist - just as Europeans generally defends the rape of their nations.

Here is the story of a Dutch journalist named Joanie de Rijke who went the Afghanistan to interview the Taliban. The Taliban responded by holding her for ransom and raping her repeatedly. Joanie de Rijke was freed by the Taliban once her magazine paid the ransom.

Many people were surprised when she defended the Taliban. She defended her rape by explaining that the Taliban leader had high testosterone and could not control himself.

As a liberal, I am sure Joanie de Rijke is a proper feminist. If a Dutch male should happen to look at her the wrong way I am sure she would have screamed sexual harassment and demanded immediate action.

So what is it that makes a person such as Joanie de Rijke hate their own people? Many theorize that it is the Stockholm syndrome – the condition in which a kidnapped victim identifies with his attackers. I don’t’ believe that this is the case for Joanie de Rijke. I believe her own words - that she will excuse and rationalize a rape if it is from a man with high testosterone. Meaning, she is naturally more attracted to men that act like men versus the feminized men she finds in her own country.

Unfortunately, many of the men that are in positions of power in the West no longer have the desire to defend the West.


  1. Wow rape with cookies & tea. Probably stockholms. Either that or everyone in the Taliban has an extremely small penis and it wasn't that uncomfortable of an experience. Like dropping a jellybean into a bucket.

    Saw your juggling vid the other day :) the wet hair look suits you.

    1. I think it was more of a case of her finally meeting a dominant man that didn't give a damn what she thought and took what he wanted, when he wanted. Even if what he wanted was her pussy. See, in her country, she's surrounded by nothing but politically correct men. But then she met this manly Taliban leader, who ironically, by raping her, unleashed her feminine instincts of wanting an aggressive, dominant man. It goes to show you how women think, and how illogical they are. And feminist everywhere are angry with her, because she didn't have the politically correct response to being raped for 6 days straight. In fact, she took up for her rapist. It shouldn't surprise anyone that rape fantasiesare common among women.

  2. Thanks. Maybe I should move to Seattle so I get wet more often.

    btw - I love Seattle. Lots of good memories.

  3. Very funny, Paul.

    It's tempting to think of this as an example of Roissy as opposed to Stockholm.

    Oh and the NYT guy is probably the leading candidate for Roissy's Beta Of The Year.

    However, I am reading a book now ("You Still Don't Understand") which argues that male placating behavior has been common for a long, long time, long since before feminism, and also in non-traditional societies. I have neither finished the book, nor combed through some of the sources cited -- both of which will be needed, I think. But its argument is provacative.

    The book argues that women have long dominated relationship conflict, since long before feminism. It also argues that this makes neither men nor women happy, and so the book says that men should stand up more, and women should take the edge off their emotional and conflict dominance more -- for the benefit of both. But he argues that the "default state" is not men controlling women in relationships, but precisely the reverse. And that this leads to relational dysfunction in most relationships (women lose respect), which in the current age due to women's economic independence, leads to massive divorce rates. His theory is not that male "wussiness" to women is new (he says it isn't, and it's common even in traditional societies), but that this wussiness combined with female independence leads to divorce rates surging. So since we are not going to be seeing women become less independent economically, the only solution (in the book's mind) is for men to become less wussy and women less pushy in relationship conflicts.

    That's an interesting theory, and as I say, I am just starting to read the book. But I'm not sure -- if these tendencies (female conflicta aggression and dominance and male appeasement and withdrawal) are as ingrained as the book thinks -- how realistic it is to change them and make relationships work better. I suppose it takes two to tango.

  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. Nova, I know you know this and I'm just preaching to the choir. I think Men would love to be more dominant in relationships but there's such a fine line and everything falls under VAWA. So, in essence, women have used the law to prevent us from being assertive Men in relationships. I'd go so far as to say this even applies to society. Men have a gun pointed at their heads and we walk on egg shells all the time. Sure, you can test the waters, but she can bring the full force of the govt. down on your ass any time she wants. The law is the problem and it's created this very unnatural experience between the sexes.

  6. Great comparison. Like all of history's empires, it looks like we may crumble from within.