GO WITH THE GOOSES AND BAN SEXISM FROM EARTH! M. R. Pinheiro www.geocities.com/mrpprofessional
[email protected]
One of the most impressive women to try entering the so blessed, and so infinitely entertaining, doors of the perfect, and fully abstract (for perfection cannot be human), world of Mathematics was a French woman named Sophie Germain1. She could never have access to classes (proper) directly, only to notes, at most. Self-learner, Germain produced extraordinary results, learning in sub-human conditions. In her time and age, universities (could) openly forbid (!) women from attending school. Sophie only got her results considered by Science because she lied about her name (used fake male names and submitted her work via correspondence). Since that century, 18th (!), things have not progressed from an actual perspective. They progressed from a theoretical perspective, where laws and systems exist in abundance, but nothing ever becomes real, especially by the time needed by a female victim of sexism, for instance, so that she is able to progress in her studies, work, life, in a normal way. It is in publications as much as in post graduation, it is in secondary learning as much as in tertiary learning: It is still everywhere! Were it ever of sexual nature (affecting males), the whole World would have to stop and make of it a `big deal’. However, as it is one more `female issue only’, who cares? It is not AIDS, or something, the World does favor only males, and none of them is harmed if women are out. Rather the opposite, on the top of getting paid for leisure (doing Mathematics and Science is pleasant, and makes you important and meaningful, socially and politically, Sophie herself did it for leisure and entertainment), they still get a chance of exploiting all knowledge, information, and even findings, of the `lesser beings’, the `servants’, the women… Reality is that males are far more suitable for home work, and logically 1 See [1], for instance.
1
pushed to take care of kids. Truth is that in the bee society, for instance, only one female is chosen to give birth to the whole species. She remains there, being served by absolutely everyone else, and all she does is procreating and directing that society. Women who generate kids, in a logical society, which is able to be logically organized, therefore, are not all of the female share of the species, but only one, chosen amongst the whole group as `able’ to generate best kids. Maternity, in a logical society, is not seen as `a right’, but as a democratic choice, of both the universal generator (for that small colony) and of the whole colony. Of course, in modern terms, what should be chosen is `what sort of human beings we wish to be generated/we need (Whites? Blacks? Why? Homos? Weak for work? Strong in their bodies? Intelligent? Males? And etc.). All other females are then `pushed’ to have their power of giving birth simply stopped artificially somehow, because it is a `democratic’ choice. Of course, for this to happen, all females in the society must be equally happy, once that is the only way they will wish for the welfare of everyone else in that society. The matter about life must regard natural talents, natural will, welfare of the mind, as well as of the society. Basically, were males and females never externally instructed, the choices would not vary that much these days: Both would do all house work and all external work equally. Apparently, both males have developed the share of the brains which regards old femininity and females have developed the share of the brains which regards old masculinity, what is natural for a World `in progress’. This way, there must be both understanding and acceptance of the male role being that of a `house husband’, with all principles of psycholinguistics 2 applied to the expression (so that people get emotionally used to it and accepting of the situation), and of the female role being that of `genius of Science’, who is too busy to do anything else apart from being served sexually, socially, house-like, and physically, by a male, whose only reason to exist is pleasing his female partner. Without real update in the social actions and allowances, there is no change, there is feeling of discomfort in the `updated’ members of society, and they seem to be `odd’, whilst they are actually pattern. Due to the academic reactionary movement, always stuck in the past, everything else seems to bear clear conflict: Words and theory against practice and people. This way, we live in a fully schizoid3 society, 2 See [4], for instance. 3 See [5], for instance.
2
where theory in general will never include real life individuals, or needed actions to preserve, safeguard, and reward, their efforts in general. That basically means that we will tend to place normal, modern, individuals, in confined environments (mental hospitals, jail, and etc.), and corrupt, distorted, odd, individuals, in full freedom of action, even regarding other people’s rights and allowances, in a full inversion of everything which SHOULD be, and it is CLAIMED to be, by every system in place in the World right now. Basically, the women may be even more talented than the males, extraordinarily talented, but the more talented they are, similar to the law of Physics we wrote about in the previous article of ours (Action and Reaction, third law of Newton – see, for instance, Britannica encyclopedia), the more crimes and atrocities they will suffer. The next few paragraphs are a real person’s set of words to describe her situation, all super-real, and easy to be verified scientifically: `I am currently a victim of the worst breach of human rights ever. Not only I was always a top student for Brazilian standards, but my mind was born brighter, able to see further, and devise alternatives, solutions, things, that nobody had thought of before (of course I mention people I had access/contact with only, so that `nobody’ means my personal universe of people), no matter if male or female. My own brains has been attacked, in the most coward way as possible, when I visited Brazil, a place nobody who is good should ever visit. A researcher, and my best bet is an old male, has endeavored to design, build, and deliver, the most powerful device of human extermination, and slave use, which has ever existed on Earth. Biotechnology is the share of Science involved. So, somewhere, in this World and time, there is a bastard who has actually designed this instrument, which allows the slowest and most painful death of all, longest, keeping the victim under slave use of all her human abilities, and he (my bet) is laughing and fully enjoying the consequences of his absurd breach of ethics, and absurd breach of human law, right now, whilst I am enduring the most painful consequences, ever, to my own organism, as well as life, in which not a single fault, problem, or loss (with which I was unable to deal), were ever found until end of 2001, when I spoke to (apparently) a native Australian who has sold himself and his stolen information (from me) to my mortal enemies: Those waiting, their whole lives, for the right moment to attack me 3
criminally, with full power. I have managed to write an initial proposal of Ethics to the higher sector, hoping it is internationally adopted, what would give me some justice finally, at least (please visit www.geocities.com/msorfiap2 to read it). With its adoption, all results of the fully unethical and criminal assassins, of my entire body and life, would be erased, taken away from them (from journals, from wherever) and, therefore, true justice in those regards would happen (what society seeks is the elimination of the profit/gain of the criminal, as well as a physical punishment compatible with whatever they did against society, nothing else)’. It is actually quite impressive that there is Ethics exam for every organized class of workers of higher level (Medicine, Engineering, Translation, and etc.), but there is no such a thing for those who `teach’ the members of those classes about how to do their jobs (?). How more schizoid can a society be, or how more inconsistent (which some call paraconsistent 4 instead, these days), or even incoherent? The own women, unfortunately, are also a part of this. They are fully unable to accept that other women may have same, or more, talent than themselves, and also be complete (beautiful, attractive, feminine, hot, and etc.). Because of their absence of self-analysis, and persistent absence of search for self-improvement (why would not all of us fight to look best, to be more complete?), they try to kill/exterminate the women who actually challenge their beliefs, in top coward and unethical way as possible (and are very happy with the results, as long as they are tricked as to `belonging’, as it was possible to be heard from at least one female from the higher sector, P.P., directly responsible, in Australia, for the life and body usurpation of the victim whose words we above described. Basically, they cannot see beyond their limited minds: If one of us – women- falls, we all fall, butterfly effect, as written before. Remember males will always act like the gooses (see [3] for reference): One will replace the other in the lead, always with objective being top gain/profit of males in society. All women will lose if not doing the same; 4 See [2], for instance. Paraconsistency is defined as being a logical system (for computers) in which the same assertion is finally `allowed’ (allowed here means that it is possible for the computer, whose system is of that sort of logic, to deal with that conflicting information in a way as to decide, with no mistake, what action to take) to be both true and false at the same time.
4
We are all weaker in every possible social sense, just for starters. Sexuality is the most basic sense of all, and we do not even have a single prostitution place with beautiful, horny males available, at waste, and cheap, for our entertainment…where are we winning, ever, please, doing it all contrary to the gooses way?). It is basic thing that the more `winning’ a society is, the more logical its systems are. The American society has chosen closest to what should be right for many years, and `God’ has gifted them with a `first power in the World’ title. It really does not matter the `why’ one chooses (energy which is positive, God, righteous choices, or others), the results are always the same (allowances and gifts to those doing the rightest things, losses and pain for those making the opposite moves). Easy to see that whenever human kind goes against the Bible teachings (Old Testament coherent set of instructions: By coherent we mean with no conflict, ever, as to other pieces of the Bible), everything becomes painful and absurd for the own human kind as a whole (Aids came either from sexual interactions between monkeys and men, or from spontaneous occurrence of the same sort of virus in human kind of the homosexual type, both explicitly condemned by God in the Old Testament, for instance. God instructs human kind very clearly as to males having to get a female permanently, and socially present, as a partner, as soon as they have erections, not giving any chances for anything else to happen, or be thought of. Human kind avoids that rule, and even diseases never thought before, as it is written in the Old Testament, appear: `plagues appear in abundance, and human kind will suffer for long years, until they repent and stop it‘). The only way to make society `logical’ is putting women in the right spots: They must dominate and master everyone else; they were gifted with the power, and only they were, of either stopping the race forever (power of generation), by simply stopping their procreating allowances, or making it infinite in terms of existence. Women are better teachers, better lecturers, and better educators. Every possible profession starts there: In the classroom. Therefore, the highest salaries, as well as the most charged professions, in terms of righteousness and perfection, must be the teachers’/lecturers‘. This is the only way to go. And, in having a choice, society should always choose women, once they are 5
historically better (top logical choice, owed to a developed society). On the other hand, it is also well known that women in research commit far less mistakes than men (papers with almost 98% wrong information, conclusions, proofs, are easily found amongst males). Females were gifted with better observation, judgment, analysis, and detail. Quick statistical studies would prove that another logical choice would always prefer women in research, both as supervisors and researchers, to males, simply for their gender history. It is also well proven, statistically, that women commit far less evil mistakes whilst driving (usually, if they hold accidents, they kill and impair far less than men, even because they usually drive slower). With this, female drivers should also be hired with preference over male drivers. This is simple logical choice. In a logical World, God will always gift the vast majority of the members of society with happiness about themselves. This should, ultimately, be the aim of any developed society. As for the sexual side of things, once this is always top interest of most of the members of society, women are also well known for betraying their partners less, being more loyal, letting them more content for longer, and being better partners. Therefore, if any prostitution must exist, the male prostitution is more logical: Males for women, once women would not choose that to beset their relationships, they would make more rational use of it than men, who usually use that to escape needed self-improvement as a person, as a social member, as a family member, as a workforce member, and etc. So, if not for the suffering imposed to women in Science, which is inhuman and inhumane, for logical reasons, which lead to immediate rise of society as a whole, women should, indeed, be on top of several things with full, and legal, preference over males.
REFERENCES:
6
[1] B. A. Case, A. M. Leggett. Complexities: Women in Mathematics. 2005. Princeton University Press.
[2] K. Tanaka. Three Schools of Paraconsistency. V. I. 2003. Australasian Journal of Logic.
[3] L. H. Grando, E. P. Galastro, M. A. Amaral et al. Trabalhando em grupo na pós-graduação: conciliando teoria e prática. In Proceedings of the 8. Brazilian Nursing Communication Symposium, 2002, São Paulo (SP, Brazil), [online] 2002 [cited 24 December 2007]. Available from:
. [4] M. Garman. Psycholinguistics. 1990. Cambridge University Press.
[5] N. C. Andreasen, P. Nopoulos, D. S. O’Leary, D. D. Miller, T. Wassink, M. Flaum.
Defining
the
Phenotype
of
Schizophrenia:
Cognitive
Dysmetria and Its Neural Mechanisms. Biological Psychiatry. V. 46, I. 7, 1 October 1999, Pp. 908-920.
7