Iceland copying western folly

Sigh:

According to the poll, a young woman, Þóra Arnórsdóttir (37), will win the election. The reason for voters favoring her is not that the current president is unpopular or has done a bad job. The reason lies in the character of the Icelanders; we want change. The four highest offices of the republic would be held by women: that of the president, prime minister, bishop and the speaker of the parliament, Alþingi.

Change for the sake of change.

During the not unpopular, not incompetent President’s term, “Overall, crime has been on a steady decline since 2007“; when 2011 is compared to 2007, the number of registered offenses has dropped by almost 30 percent” and there has been a significant Increase in Tourists to Iceland.

However, Iceland has also been falling prey to the western cancer:

Landsbanki introduces New Gender Equality Policy

Women’s Rights in Spotlight at Reykjavík Shorts & Docs

Women to Serve All Important Positions in Iceland?

And of course, just as with polls and studies in the west:

Icelanders No Longest Happiest in the World

So it’s even wormed its way into paradise, has it? There’s not the least surprise in it. Women have excellent biological traits and destructive ones too, ditto with men. One of women’s worst traits is never being satisfied, no matter how good it becomes, no matter how much they’re given. When this is exploited for political ends, as with the feminazis, then there is an open-ended dissatisfaction vortex – it can never, ever find resolution.

As one lady put it:

The subject of dissatisfaction concerns every aspect of a woman’s life, and love is a major one. Women have been rightly and wrongly dissatisfied in love; and Aesthetic Realism, thankfully, explains the difference. Women complain, weep into pillows, find themselves furious with a man they hoped they would care for forever. And women have asked, as I did, “Why am I so dissatisfied?”

You see, there used to be checks and balances – woman would curb man’s worst excesses and man would curb woman’s worst excesses. The One who rabbited on, 2000 years ago, about the right way to live obviously knew that the natural order was the best way these checks and balances could be maintained.

Now, thanks to the feminazis, a subset of the global socialists trying to reorder society into a 1984 dystopia, women’s natural dissatisfaction is being played like a violin and of course, they no longer work with their men, they run parallel and have to compete, compete, compete. Where there was once a nice division of labour, now there is a determined, shrill, rabid mania on the one hand and deep, grumpy resentment on the other, with yours truly one of the few putting pen to paper over it and incurring the wrath of women and metro-men who’ve been sucked in by all this and of the State which would see this as counter to “social policy”.

It shows in overall rates of satisfaction and happiness:

Stevenson and Wolfers released a new study, “The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness,” that is bound to generate a great deal of controversy. By almost any economic or social indicator, the last 35 years have been great for women. Birth control has given them the ability to control reproduction. They are obtaining far more education and making inroads in many professions that were traditionally male-dominated. The gender wage gap has declined substantially. Women are living longer then ever. Studies even suggest that men are starting to take on more housework and child-raising responsibilities.

Given all these changes, the evidence presented by Stevenson and Wolfers is striking: women report being less happy today than they were 35 years ago, especially relative to the corresponding happiness rates for men. This is true of working women and stay-at-home moms, married women and those that are single, the highly educated and the less educated. It is worse for older women; those aged 18-29 don’t seem to be doing too badly. Women with kids have fared worse than women without kids.

As you’d expect, this is reprised at the Mail. And of course, there are therapy groups for it. And there is this PDF:

“For example, it has been shown that 80% of American women are dissatisfied with their appearance (Smolak, 1996)”

There is something really wrong, really sick when someone pushing for the natural order to return is seen as a throwback, a malcontent, on top of all the PCist adjectives which are flung at heads above the parapet, e.g. misogyny*. Mark my words, Iceland is buying itself enormous heartache bringing in its western style quotas because as we’ve seen, that’s the surefire way of promoting inexperienced and incompetent parachutees – just how many examples do we need?

Unfortunately, this is just one example of the mass of problems besetting us at this time, of which the democratic deficit, loss of personal freedoms, State intrusion in our lives, rampant sexualization and drugging of our children, greed, lowering of moral compasses, especially in “the rulers” and so on on occupy our attention. Few would zero in on the issue of women in office above all the other issues.

If society survives, there’ll be studies, as sure as night follows day, concerning the effects on the economy, on family life, on overall well-being of the citizenry and how far that was affected by the wrong kind of women being put in positions they should never have been in. In 2012, it’s way too early, just as in 2006, it was way too early for me to go on about Them, the globalists but now it’s apparent to anyone with half a brain what They’re up to.

It’s not unlike the Blair experiment. I said in 1997 to my Russian friends that this would all end in tears, that Blair was a hollow man making meaningless noises and sure enough, what happens? 13 years of blight to the UK. In 2001 I said that the U.S. had no intention whatever of departing Iraq by its stated target of 2003. These things don’t make me any more perspicacious than the average bear – it’s so bleedin’ obvious and so I say once more that this whole women’s mania is going to bring down society, not least because it creeps in under the radar.

Men won’t rebel – they’ll just become sullen and dispirited. They’ll combine with women to bring down the total incompetents at Westminster, they’ll vehemently attack the attacks on the freedom to smoke and drink and I’m with them there but they simply won’t turn around to their women en masse and quietly say: “Look – enough’s enough.” And if the ladies think the State is their friend, then you see the extent of the problem.

* There is a not insignificant percentage of women who themselves agree with all this and have said so, in comments and in articles. That reaffirms my faith in women and suggests it’s not women themselves who are the problem but those manipulating them. For example, on that Chas and Dave number [linked above], in came the metro-men faux-defending women’s right to be outraged – often worse than the feminazis themselves – and so a comment by one Karen Hopgood about the song: “Are you the idiot abroad??? I love this and Ive got a secret crush on Dave. I am 42 years of age and bloody alright looking so not a saddo as such….. I will sing along … and dream…” is far closer to real women’s attitudes than this faux-defence by the metros, who have fallen for an aberration of men’s naturally chivalric instincts.

6 comments for “Iceland copying western folly

  1. May 2, 2012 at 11:42 am

    But Icelandic men presumably agree with this candidate’s platform?

    • May 2, 2012 at 11:53 am

      Two thirds do because, as the writer said, they want change for change’s sake, plus it’s fashionable now to have women leaders – Iceland doesn’t want to be left behind. Zero to do with competence or experience. This is the metro thing I was referring to at the end. People can’t see a couple of decades ahead to the damage.

      Interestingly, if women did now, at say 18, go into roles on the bottom rung, as boys have to and they learn and rise that way, then in two decades, they’ll be qualified to run things – providing, of course, that the university courses can be overcome by sheer on-job experience.

      When the women are simply parachuted in over the top into plum “management” roles, [the current situation], without any dues having been paid, then society pays for those dues down the track.

      • May 2, 2012 at 12:25 pm

        Yes, I understand, but these men are enablers.

  2. Voice of Reason
    May 2, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    When have women not been upset with their appearance?

    I was talking some years ago with the father of an urban archaeologist, whose specialty was to examine the contents of privies in houses of the late 1800’s. The men’s were full of liquor bottles, the women’s were full of laudenam (opium in alcohol), which the women used for weight control.

    • May 2, 2012 at 11:22 pm

      LOL – that’s right. Have to love the ladies.

      • May 3, 2012 at 6:29 am

        Or was it just a way for ladies to get out of their tree without smelling of alcohol?

Comments are closed.