One of Britain's most ancient cathedrals will put an end to more than a thousand years of all-male tradition today, when a girls' choir is due to make its debut. Canterbury Cathedral has had various forms of sung worship since it was founded towards the end of the Dark Ages, back in the sixth century.I wouldn't care if there was a convent with a thousand-year tradition of only permitting female singers, I would strongly support continuing that tradition instead of making it like every other American Legion hall and elementary school. But women, with their instinctive desire to ruin absolutely everything, aren't content until they have reduced everything that is uniquely male to the lowest common sexual denominator.
But the singers have always been male.
All that will change when the voices of 16 schoolgirls will soar towards the cathedral's vaulted ceiling on Saturday.
Traditions are valuable and worthy of respect in their own right. Hence the term "time-honored" traditions. But the Female Imperative honors nothing except itself and knows no respect for anything, least of all tradition. That's why it must be ruthlessly stamped out by anyone attempting to build anything capable of lasting.
What is the good that was accomplished by ruining the male-only tradition of Canterbury Cathedral? Did it send a Very Important Message that girls are capable of singing? They may as well have held a Britney Spears concert there and closed up shop. It wasn't "another sign of change in an institution", it was a sign of the collapse of an institution.
20 comments:
1000 years would put it before the reformation.
The "crystal cathedral" was eventually taken over by the Catholic church.
Perhaps B16's idea for an Anglican ordinate and rite was merely good perparation for when Henry VIII's branch finally has withered into dust. The Episcopalians here are already gone, female lesbishop and all.
As tz said, it won't be long, now, before the Church gets it cathedral back
Without men to enforce this crap, where would be? Imagine if women were the only ones in law enFORCEment? Who would submit?
The other day I realized that I've never needed a cop in my entire life. I realized it could have been nearly infinitely better without than with and all contact with them has been either bad or potentially ruinous for me. Even the time I caught burglars in the act, I was restrained in a dangerous way due to fear of prosecution by men more interested in convictions than civilization. So, to the "what would we do without LE?" people, I say, "mah roads!"
Back on topic, this civilizational destruction will not stop as long as men white knight and support it. Why can't they just ruin themselves and not drag us all down with them?
This is nothing compared to what these bitches tried to do to a Cathedral in Argentina:
http://youtu.be/fOCD_T9Qqpc
Same with Augusta National. Shame, really.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/11/the-strange-and-mysterious-death-of-mrs-jerry-lee-lewis.html
Want to know what women are really like? One need only read the fascinating story at the above link.
When asked why she was marrying a man she didn't even like, the wife-to-be answered "He's got a big dick and a lot of money". She ended up dead. Hope the big dick and the pile of money was worth it...
Maybe it is only our assumption that women would miss the modern world of conveniences that will go away when the beta males finally stop producing.
As long as no one else has an iphone, maybe these women would be incapable of noticing that they do not have one.
Maybe women are incapable of nothing other than their relative social rank, and whatever it is that "men" are doing to them.
It is baffling to me that women think invading every male space is *inherently* valuable even if they have nothing to contribute, and sometimes they will even do it against their own interests just out of spite. Like convincing and bullying us to allow them in the armed forces. But it does make sense when you take into account the totalitarian instinct:
"You want everything?"
"EVERYTHING!"
The Church of England has already surrendered to every group they can find, so this is hardly surprising. Sigh.
Why are there no women with prostate cancer? The male oppression continues. Free the epidydimis! This would make a vas deferens in women's lives!!!
I love them, certainly, and can't get enough of them, but I'm not convinced they're entirely human.
I'm not convinced they're entirely human.
I've noticed that men in old books and movies sometimes refer to women as the "female species." They had the right idea.
Even the Mormons are being infiltrated:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/10/05/us-usa-mormons-women-idUSBRE99404V20131005
I wonder if they'll petition to do the same all-male 2 years of missionary work at 18 riding bicycles in ill-fitting 'Blues Brothers suits and trying to convince the unchurched about golden tablets buried in the forest, before they're allowed to marry a Mormon man? Something tells me no.
Once the Mormons fall feminist infiltration, there will only be one bastion of faith left – so when the Amish allow female spiritual leaders into their midst, then you'll know it's a sign of the apocalypse.
I wonder if they'll petition to do the same all-male 2 years of missionary work at 18 riding bicycles in ill-fitting 'Blues Brothers suits and trying to convince the unchurched about golden tablets buried in the forest, before they're allowed to marry a Mormon man? Something tells me no.
Sure they will. Because the women who champion these causes hate other women more than they hate men. Some older woman will convince some younger woman that this is the most important cause ever for women everywhere. They'll collect a following, mostly of other shrill harpies and their gynuflecting worshippers, and the old biddies will yell and scream at the men folk until they send the younger competition off to be raped and murdered or assimilated into all the somewhere-elses of the world. Just like combat.
You're right about the Mormons, Therationalmale.
They are picking up the pace with the feminization. Used to the leadership had to ask permission from the Husband about giving a wife a calling in the church. That has completely been eliminated.
Used to, during Sacrament meeting, there are 3 speakers, and one of them HAD to be a male. No longer true.
Recently, they had the first female give a prayer during General Conference.
During Priesthood meetings, it is not uncommon to hear how much more spiritual the sisters are than the men. Or how the husbands should have an equal partnership with the wives. (co-heads, rather than the husband being The head) I've even heard in priesthood meetings the opinion, that the wives should be told they're always right, even if they're not, to keep the peace.
The temple sealing ceremony (temple marriage) has changed to de-emphasize the man being the Head.
And the general attitude of giving females the priesthood and accepting gays has changed RADICALLY in the past 5 years.
Vox nailed this, when he said that the mormon church was very similiar to the prostestants, just some years behind due to the late start.
Women cannot ruin anything male-dominated. If a male-exclusive or male-dominated institution is "taken over" by women, it is because that institution has come under attack by another male-dominated institution. All public status hierarchies are dominated by men. Women comport themselves to whatever status hierarchy they identify with. The takeover of a status hierarchy by women is simply the end of that hierarchy and its absorption by whatever other hierarchy has attacked and conquered it. In the case of the Cathedral, the Anglican Church has long since surrendered to the dominant hierarchies of the age: government, media, the usual grimoire. Those hierarchies are all male-dominated. This is a victory for them. Women are incapable of "taking over" anything. When they seem to do so, that's the sign that what they've taken over is already dead.
I'm not convinced they're entirely human.
I've noticed that men in old books and movies sometimes refer to women as the "female species." They had the right idea.
The problem with this idea is that a creature which is not Man is Animal, and vice-versa. There is no in-between, despite the desires of the furry-fetishists.
Which means that if women are not human, then they are animal, and if they are animal then all sexual interest in them is bestiality, which makes homosexuality the only way for guys to get their rocks off with another human being.
... That said, the point about women interfering in men-only spaces, simply for the sake of interfering, is a good one. Men should have spaces in which women are not allowed to intrude. And women should stop trying to intrude into those spaces.
"And women should stop trying to intrude into those spaces."
Given the sinful nature of woman. Its inevitable that this will happen.
Given that the question should be: how do we exclude women from male spaces effectively.
Women are excluded from male spaces by males who defend their spaces from attacks by other males.
That's it! It's a shit-test in macrocosm: women pushing the boundaries to see what the men will let them get away with, half the men giving in, just so they don't have to hear the women whine, and the other half of the men standing by, too flabbergasted at the men's spinelessness to object.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.