Negative Human Rights for a Positive Human Future

Definition of Negative Human Rights - i.e. the very foundation of the freedom part of the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948.

Support Klevius' Atheist anti-fascism against islamofascism

This is what BBC's muslim sharia presenter Mishal Husain "forgot" to report. Mishal grew up in the very same theocratic medieval dictatorship which now harbors and rules all muslims world organization OIC and its Human Rights violating sharia. While also spreading islamic hatred over the world through a variety of channels.

Klevius to dumb (or just evil) alt-left "antifa" people who support the worst of Human Rights violating evil:

True anti-fascism in its purest form is laid down in the Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948. Islam (OIC) has in UN decided to abandon the most basic of these rights (the so called negative Human Rights).

Fascism is, according to Google's top hit, "a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation*, and forcible suppression of opposition." 23 Aug 2017

So let's face islam with this definition.

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (islam) that exalts nation (Umma) and often race (muslims) above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government (Koran text/Mohammad's example) headed by a dictatorial leader (the caliph - e.g. the Saudi based OIC's Saudi leader), severe economic and social regimentation* (sharia), and forcible suppression of opposition (apostasy ban against muslims wanting to leave islam, and demonizing defenders of Human Rights by calling them "islamophobes").

And islamofascism gets away with it by calling itself a religion and thereby being protected by those very Human Rights it opposes.

* According to Cambridge dictionary, "extreme organization and control of people".

Klevius to Mueller (who opposed investigation of Saudi 9/11): Check Saudi connections/influence!

Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?
Is the islamofascist Saudi dictator "prince" Mohammad bin Salman the world's most dangerous man?

Is Mrs Theresa May digging a miserable "British" sharia "empire" under the Brexit cliff?

Mrs May plays sharia with the islamofascist Saudi dictator family - skipping Human Rights. Right?

Saudi islamofascism attacks Buddhists - again and again - backed by Mrs May.

When will the world finally turn on the hateful Saudi dictator family - rather than on its victims?

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd

The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses while FEEding Lnd
The islamofascist Saudi dictator family spreading its islamist hate and losses over you

How an organization of islamic crimes (OIC) violates Human Rights

The Viking phenomenon started with bilingual Finns raiding/trading sex slaves to Abbasid (ca 750)

Human Rights is diversity - sharia is the opposite

The evil of Sharia islam is what makes it incompatible with Negative Human Rights (i.e. why islamic OIC violates Human Rights by replacing them with Sharia, hence excluding women and non-muslims from equality). The evil of islam and its origin may be easier to grasp with historical examples, e.g. the Origin of Vikings.

It's racism and sexism even if proposed by a "god"! Klevius altruistic virtual volunteering for the world community in defense of Universal Human Rights . Yes, I know, it's unfair. Klevius vs islam, i.e. Universal Human Rights vs Sharia (OIC) racism/sexism! Of course Klevius will win. The question is just how long we should allow the dying beast to make people suffer. (Negative) Human Rights is not a ”Western” invention! It’s where you end up when you abandon racism and sexism, idiot! After you have abandoned islam! Your confused islamophilia and ignorance about Human Rights make YOU an accomplice to islam's crimes! Whereas Human Rights work as egalitarian and universal traffic rules (no matter who you are or what you drive you have the same rights as everyone else) islam/Sharia differs between muslim men and the rest (women and "infidels")!

Ask yourself, why can't racist islam (OIC) accept Human Rights? The answer reveals the difference between totalitarianism and freedom. And even if everyone converted to islam we'd still have Sharia sexism.
Have you noticed that when the history of slavery is (PC) debated islam is always excluded/excused? Atlantic slave trade and Roman slaves are eagerly mentioned while the world's by far worst, longest and most extensive one is blinked, as is the fact that islam not only sanctions slavery but is itself built on slavery and sex slavery (rapetivism)! The core idea of islam is the most thoroughly elaborated parasitism ever, i.e. what in 1400 yrs has made it the by far worst crime ever. But thanks to islamic teachings muslims are kept extremely ignorant about the evil origin of islam (institutionalized parasitism based on slave finance, rapetivism and pillage). Ohlig: The first two "islamic" centuries lie in the shadows of history. Klevius: There was no islam or islamic Mohammad (that's why the Saudis have levelled Mohammad's "grave" etc), only the evil murdering, pillaging and raping Aramaic-Arabic Jewish("Christian") led illiterate Arab thugs chasing for booty and sex. The "success" of this formula became later institutionalized and codified as a one way (Koran/Sharia) moral excuse (Allah) for further racist/sexist genocides. The bedrock and currency of this system was racist slavery. However, with Enlightenment the new idea of individual (negative) Human Rights emerged (incl. abolishing of slavery) and were, much later (1948), written down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights according to which everyone is equal no matter of sex, beliefs etc. Just like in traffic! But unlike traffic rules no one really seems to care about guarding our most precious asset as human beings. Instead racist sexist islamofascism (OIC and the Cairo Sharia declaration) is protected by Human Rights while they strive to undermine and eventually destroy these Human Rights! And most people don't seem to get it. Always remember, there is no islam without Human Rights violating racist/sexist Sharia. So a "vote" for Sharia-islam is AGAINST democracy and the freedom part of Human Rights!

Sayeeda Warsi (UK's non-elected OIC/Sharia politician) in essence doesn't differ from those muslim Saudi women who approve of sex slavery etc, other than that she is either ignorant or a traitor (against democracy and Human Rights) of the worst kind.

We're all born unequal - that's why we need Human Rights, not islam!

Audi then built by Jewish slaves - today dangerous quality problems

Myth vs Truth

Japan's Hayabusa landed and returned to Earth many years before Europe's Rosetta failed to do so.

Sunday, October 22, 2017

Who, except Klevius, is defending Human Rights? Not Theresa May and Amber Rudd, that's for sure, cause they* praise Human Rights violating sharia.


 * Klevius hasn't heard Amber Rudd's view on sharia but assumes she shares her boss' extremist view. In Klevius world openly encouraging deliberate violations of the most basic of Human Rights ought to be classified as extremism.

Sex segregation drawing (1979) and photo by P. Klevius.

Klevius question: Is the English government the most extremist in the West when it comes to counteracting Human Rights via its association with the world's most intolerant regime which has exchanged (and still does) petrodollars to islamist hate, violence, racism and sexism at home and around the world, leading to endless suffering? 



The origins of England's dangerous and immoral relations with the islamofascist hate and intolerance spreading Saudi dictator family date back to the time of the First World War, when Ibn Saud signed the 1915 Treaty of Darin, thereby accepting the status of an English "protectorate".

The treaty made the lands (sic) of the "House of Saud" an English protectorate/colony and attempted (sic) to define its boundaries. The English aim of the treaty was to guarantee the sovereignty of Kuwait, Qatar and the Trucial States. Abdul-Aziz agreed not to attack British protectorates, but gave no undertaking that he would not attack the Sharif of Mecca, i.e. the "custodian of islam". The Sharif of Mecca was the title of the leader of the Sharifate of Mecca, traditional steward of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina and the surrounding (sic) Hejaz (i.e. the whole western part of what is now the so called Saudi Arabia). In 1925 the Ibn Saud (supported by England) attacked the Hejaz and expelled the Hashemites.

There are now more than 200 joint ventures between UK and the islamofascist Saudi dictator family's companies, worth $17.5 billion, and some 30,000 UK nationals are living and working in this land of evil on Earth.





Islamic sharia "justic" is injustice.


"Justice" in islam means following sharia. And when a muslim says islamic "justice" is "equal" to everyone, it simply means that sharia affects muslims and non-muslims equally in the sense e.g. that you are equally penalized for not being a proper - muslim. In other words, "justice" means totalitarian islamofascism - no matter that there could never be a real totalitarian islam because of islam's inbuilt contradictions and dependency on "interpretations", only quarrels about which muslim "totalitarianism" is the "best".  And the "best" is the one that fits the leaders interpretation.

The only form of justice for all non-muslims is one where they are all condemned to jahannam due to their failure to follow Muhammad as a prophet of Allah. This interpretation is based on the Koran which states that islam is the only true religion. Consequently all other beliefs (or Atheism) are evil in islamic theology.

In the West some idiots try to cling to the "people of the book" argument that some "monotheists" might be excluded from being labeled evil. However, this would be a contradiction in the islamic teaching, and what about non-"monotheists" and Atheists? Just ask a Saudi cleric and you'd know.

Do you really think the 'freedom of religion' clause in Human Rights and the US Constitution means that this is ok?!

Human Rights equality, on the other hand, doesn't give any room for quarreling or "interpretations".

And Klevius does understand that there are many ignorant ranters out there who really don't understand Human Rights equality. Nor do they understand why Saudi based and steered muslim world sharia organization OIC decided to abandon UN's Human Rights declaration.

So here's a simplified picture tutorial for you. Try hard - it will pay off.





Basic Human Rights freedom and equality is not affected by sex, ethnicity or any other characteristics. It's the space that protects the individual from impositions not necessary in a free democratic society. It's like in traffic where everyone has the right to move - within rules necessary to keep the traffic working for all. In this respect Human Rights is the very opposite to islamic sharia which imposes restrictions and "obligations/duties" depending on your sex and belief. And the ultimate proof for sharia islam's incompatibility with the most basic of Human Rights is the undeniable fact that Saudi based and steered muslim world organization OIC decided to openly violate UN's Human Rights and replace them with sharia. So today there are two parallel systems working inside UN: Human Rights and islamic "human rights". And even calling Human Rights violating sharia "human rights" is not only an offense against non-muslims, it's a deliberate effort to obscure the fact that Human Rights are  violated under the flag of religion.
 

Why is England supporting theocracies instead of Human Rights?



The European Court of Human Rights agreed with Klevius already 2002 when it declared sharia nor compatible with Human Rights. 

This is why David Cameron and Theresa May so eagerly have tried to dismiss and smear Human Rights so to keep the gate open to the islamofascist Saudi dictator family. It was never really about prisoners right to vote or about sending back muslim extremists to their muslim homelands where they could face torture, it was all about the relations with the Saudis and their associates.

The islamofascist Brexit disaster. Do note the combined Empire/Commonwealth sign. Klevius takes all credit for it.

 The only time the English government and BBC emphasize Human Rights is when they want to smear them or defend muslim extremism and demonize China or Buddhists - or a very few (compared to muslim extremists) neo-nationalsocialists who usually belong to the lowest of classes in society and many of them mentally ill.

Brexit has become the ultimate full gate opening for an already existing stream of paving in for religious extremism so common in the Commonwealth and other previous English colonies/"protectorates" such as e.g. Saudi Arabia.

But the price paid for the islamofascist oil money is totally unacceptaböe from a Human Rights perspective.

Friday, October 13, 2017

In Klevius series about rapetivism/sex extortion: "Suck me off first, otherwise..."

Acknowledgement: For a background it's suggested that you read Klevius sex and gender tutorial.


Sharia restricts Human Rights and promotes supremacism (drawing 1979 and photo 2012 by P. Klevius).

An average* Swedish woman today in Scandinavia's biggest newspaper: "Women, you blink and dig your own grave."


"How can you not see the problem with the norms of today?"

* A mother of four who studies to become a teacher.



Sofia Ivemalm a Swedish woman writing today in Aftonbladet (translated by Klevius from Swedish to the weird Old Nordic dialect now called English):

I know how it feels to be wrestled down with two hands around one's neck, how it feels to be locked out on the balcony in the middle of the night in cold winter, and how it feels to hear "suck me off first, otherwise your pals won't be let in here", said by a person who says he loves you.

I know all of this but still don't hate men. On the contrary, I have a father, a husband and sons whom I love more than anything else. I don't feel myself oppressed in my daily life.

What frightens me are all those women who don't see the problems of today's norms.

Consensual sex - or extortion?

Here's what Harvey Weinstein has been accused of, based on recent reports.

Thursday, October 5

An Oct. 5 expose from The New York Times detailed Weinstein's alleged misconduct -- and said that the Hollywood titan has made eight settlements with women.

“Scream” actress Rose McGowan was paid a $100,000 settlement from Weinstein in 1997 following a hotel room incident, The Times reported. The settlement wasn't an admission of guilt, the paper described a legal document as saying.

The Times report also detailed how Weinstein, while in a bathrobe in his hotel room, had asked if he could give actress Ashley Judd a massage or if the star could watch him take a shower.

"How do I get out of the room as fast as possible without alienating Harvey Weinstein?" Judd told the newspaper she recalled thinking.

Former employees told The Times that an unnamed Miramax employee left the company not long after an alleged incident involving the producer. The employees said that the woman received a settlement.

In 1998, Zelda Perkins, a former production assistant with Miramax, allegedly confronted Weinstein, and told him to stop his “inappropriate requests or comments in hotel rooms,” The New York Times reported.

Perkins, now working as a theater producer in London, was reportedly concerned for other women working in the office, and threatened Weinstein’s behavior with legal action, according to former coworkers.
FILE - In this March 18, 2014, file photo, Ashley Judd arrives at the world premiere of "Divergent" at the Westwood Regency Village Theater in Los Angeles. Harvey Weinstein has been fired from The Weinstein Co., effective immediately, following new information revealed regarding his conduct, the company's board of directors announced Sunday, Oct. 8, 2017. The New York Times article chronicled allegations against Weinstein from film star Ashley Judd and former employees at both The Weinstein Co. and Weinstein's former company, Miramax. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP, File)

Actress Ashley Judd is one of the multiple women who came forward and detailed the alleged sexual harassment she experienced from movie mogul Harvey Weinstein.  (AP Photo/Jordan Strauss)

The Times reported that Miramax negotiated a settlement with Perkins and her lawyer, and Perkins declined to discuss what happened with the newspaper.

Emily Nestor, a temporary employee of Weinstein’s, said he’d made sexual advances to her as well, promising he’d help with her career, according to the report.

Additionally, The Times reported an incident with Weinstein and an unnamed assistant, who he reportedly tried to convince to give him a massage while he stood naked in front of her at a hotel, which left her “crying and very distraught,” according to a memo by Lauren O’Connor.

In O’Connor’s 2015 memo, in which she penned several accounts of women in the company and the atmosphere Weinstein’s advances created, she recalled how Weinstein would ask her to meet with aspiring actresses after they’d have meetings with him in his hotel room.

She wrote how she felt that she was being used to build relationships with “vulnerable women who hope he will get them work.” O'Connor reportedly settled with Weinstein.

Laura Madden detailed to The Times how Weinstein had asked her more than once for massages at hotels and how he would constantly make her re-evaluate herself after rejecting him.

“It was so manipulative,” Madden said. “You constantly question yourself – am I the one who is the problem?”

Ambra Battilana Gutierrez, an Italian model and actress, met with Weinstein at his office in New York’s SoHo neighborhood in 2015, The Times reported. But Gutierrez reportedly called the police hours later saying Weinstein had grabbed her breasts, while asking if they were real, and put his hand up her skirt.

Charges were ultimately not filed against Weinstein, and he and Gutierrez reportedly agreed to a settlement, according to anonymous sources who spoke with The Times.

Overall, eight women detailed their alleged inappropriate interactions with Weinstein to The New York Times. The report alleges that various employees were asked to perform "turndown duty" for Weinstein, which included getting him ready for bed at night and also waking him up in the morning.

“I appreciate the way I’ve behaved with colleagues in the past has caused a lot of pain, and I sincerely apologize for it," Weinstein told The Times in a statement. "Though I’m trying to do better, I know I have a long way to go."

Rebecca Traister, a reporter for The Cut, discussed in an essay about how she encountered Weinstein while covering one of his book parties in early 2000. She claimed he screamed at her for a question she asked, calling her an obscene name.

    I cannot believe I'm actually reading the story I've been expecting to read for 17 years: https://t.co/bH7b9o3mdE
    — Rebecca Traister (@rtraister) October 5, 2017

When her boyfriend and colleague intervened and tried to get Weinstein to apologize to her, she said “Weinstein went nuclear.” He reportedly pushed her boyfriend down a set of stairs and dragged him out to the street in a headlock.

Traister said the altercation was later described as “a case of an aggressive reporter barging into a party she wasn’t invited to and asking impertinent questions.”
Friday, October 6

Fox 11’s Lauren Sivan detailed an alleged 2007 encounter with Weinstein in a HuffPost report. Sivan said that while working for local station News 12 Long Island, Weinstein cornered her in the hallway of a Manhattan restaurant closed to the public and masturbated in front of her.

Sivan said she had rejected an attempt by Weinstein to kiss her and told him she had a boyfriend. “Well, can you just stand there and shut up,” she claims he responded prior to allegedly masturbating.

“Luckily I didn't need a job or favor from him + didn't have to be polite,” Sivan tweeted Friday. “Others did. Keep that in mind.”

    Yeah. This happened👇🏽luckily I didn't need a job or favor from him + didn't have to be polite. Others did. Keep that in mind. https://t.co/mXs2RIU5kU
    — Lauren Sivan (@LaurenSivan) October 7, 2017

In another tweet, she said, “For those asking why I waited? YOU try telling that story 10yrs ago. Only possible now because of women with bigger names far braver than me.”

    For those asking why I waited?
    YOU try telling that story 10yrs ago. Only possible now because of women with bigger names far braver than me
    — Lauren Sivan (@LaurenSivan) October 7, 2017

She later spoke about the alleged incident on Megyn Kelly’s NBC show Monday.

In a tweet which has since been deleted, “Shaun of the Dead” actress Jessica Hynes recounted an alleged incident involving Weinstein, People reported.

“I was offered a film role at 19,” the 44-year-old reportedly wrote on Twitter. She alleged that Weinstein “came on board and wanted me to screen test in a bikini. I refused & lost the job.”

    My @HarveyWeinstein was Harvey Weinstein! Tricked back to his hotel room where he appeared naked and asked for a massage. https://t.co/v3NIWZlxAP
    — zoe brock (@missbandit) October 6, 2017

Saturday, October 7

Former model Zoe Brock wrote in a blog post for Medium that in 1997, when she was 23, she was "Harveyed." Brock said she "had no intention of leading" Weinstein on, and "felt safe in his company to be" herself.

Weinstein allegedly tricked her into going to his hotel room, where she found herself with no phone and no cash. He appeared naked and asked her for a massage, she said, adding that she felt "uncomfortable."

Brock eventually, according to her blog post, got Weinstein to let her leave.
Sunday, October 8
The Wrap Editor in Chief Sharon Waxman arrives at The Wrap Pre-Oscar party in Los Angeles, California February 22, 2012. REUTERS/Gus Ruelas (UNITED STATES - Tags: ENTERTAINMENT) - GM1E82N140W01

The Wrap founder Sharon Waxman said she was working on a story about allegations of sexual misconduct by Harvey Weinstein but the article was eventually "gutted" after "intense pressure" from the movie mogul.  (Reuters/Gus Ruelas)

The Wrap founder Sharon Waxman claimed in an article that while working for The New York Times in 2004, she “got the green light to look into oft-repeated allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein.”

Waxman said she was able to find the man in charge of Miramax Italy. Citing “multiple accounts,” she alleged that “his real job was to take care of Weinstein’s women needs, among other things.”

Waxman claimed she was able to find “a woman in London who had been paid off after an unwanted sexual encounter with Weinstein,” she recalled in her piece.

    .@sharonwaxman on Weinstein: Might any [recent incidents] have been avoided had @nytimes published what I had in my notebooks 13 years ago? pic.twitter.com/CLRrtHWsNq
    — Fox News (@FoxNews) October 10, 2017

However, Waxman alleged that there had been “intense pressure from Weinstein,” with the article “gutted.”

“The story was stripped of any reference to sexual favors or coercion and buried on the inside of the Culture section, an obscure story about Miramax firing an Italian executive,” she wrote.

“Our former colleague Sharon Waxman wrote about a story that was published in The Times in 2004,” a Times spokesperson told Fox News. “No one currently at The Times has knowledge of editorial decisions made on that story. But in general the only reason a story or specific information would be held is if it did not meet our standards for publication.”

British writer Liza Campbell alleged in an essay published in The Sunday Times of London that Weinstein suggested she take a bath with him at a hotel. Weinstein had earlier "offered me freelance script-reading for Miramax," she wrote.

"Soon I was sent the script of Shakespeare in Love to summarise and critique, followed by The Usual Suspects," she wrote. "And then the scripts stopped coming. I rang the Miramax offices, but nothing happened."

She says that in a phone call with Weinstein, she told the producer that "everything had stuttered to a halt. He said: "You better come to my hotel and we’ll sort this out.""

When she met him at his suite, there were initially several assistants present, but "suddenly all the assistants vanished," Campbell claimed. She said they talked for several minutes before Weinstein left the room, and that she thought he'd gone to the restroom.

"I could hear him moving around and suddenly the sound of bath taps running. 'What do you say we both jump in the bath?' he hollered," she wrote.

Weinstein also allegedly told her, “Come on, it’ll be fun. We can drink champagne. You can soap me — whaddaya say?”

Campbell claimed to tell the producer loudly, “If you come back into this room with no clothes on I’m going to f****** lose my temper.”

She says she got out using one door, after she found that two others were locked.

A Weinstein representative told the newspaper that the producer "will not respond to allegations about private matters in a public forum."
Monday, October 9

Louise Godbold alleged in an essay published online Monday that "in the early ‘90s, I too was one of the young women he preyed upon." Godbold is an executive director for a Los Angeles nonprofit, Variety reports.

"The details of what I have learned was not unique to me are out there now – the office tour that became an occasion to trap me in an empty meeting room, the begging for a massage, his hands on my shoulders as I attempted to beat a retreat… all while not wanting to alienate the most powerful man in Hollywood," she wrote.

Godbold recalled "the girlfriend who had introduced me to Harvey and was angry with me after he called her wanting to make sure I wasn’t going to make a complaint about his behavior."
Tuesday, October 10

    From aggressive overtures to sexual assault: Harvey Weinstein’s accusers end their silence: https://t.co/zSQbK5NV0c pic.twitter.com/e7vS28hckt
    — The New Yorker (@NewYorker) October 10, 2017

Ronan Farrow published a piece in The New Yorker which reported that 13 women alleged they were sexually harassed or assaulted by Weinstein.

Former aspiring actress Lucia Evans went on the record to allege Weinstein forced her to perform oral sex during a meeting.

"I tried to get away, but maybe I didn’t try hard enough," she told The New Yorker. "I didn’t want to kick him or fight him."

Actress-director Asia Argento, the daughter of famed horror filmmaker Dario Argento, claimed that when she was 21 in 1997, she was invited to what she believed was a Miramax party, but ended up in a hotel room with just Weinstein in it, the report said.

Weinstein left the room, but came back in a bathrobe and asked her for a massage, the report claimed. She "reluctantly" said she would before Weinstein went on to forcibly perform oral sex, the report alleged.

Argento claimed that Weinstein would contact her after the alleged assault, and that she would later have consensual relations with the movie mogul.

“I felt I had to,” Argento explained to The New Yorker regarding the initial such time. “Because I had the movie coming out and I didn’t want to anger him.”

An unnamed woman claimed to The New Yorker that Weinstein brought her to a hotel room before he changed into a bathrobe and “forced himself” on her. She reportedly thought about going to authorities, but decided not to.

She later maintained professional relations with the producer, the report said. “I was in a vulnerable position and I needed my job,” she explained.

Actress Mira Sorvino described an alleged 1995 hotel room incident with Weinstein to the publication.

"He started massaging my shoulders, which made me very uncomfortable, and then tried to get more physical, sort of chasing me around," Sorvino said. She reportedly left after saying it went against her faith to date married men.

An unnamed actress locked herself in a bathroom at a hotel so as to avoid the producer, she told The New Yorker. The actress also reportedly alleged that Weinstein masturbated in front of her.

The article also cited a 2015 audio recording made by the New York Police Department wherein Weinstein admits to groping Battilana Gutierrez, mentioned earlier in the Times piece.

The New Yorker article also described a meeting at a Beverly Hills hotel between Weinstein and Weinstein Company temp Emily Nestor, who was also mentioned in the Times report. Nestor, it said, refused his offer to be placed in his London office and be his girlfriend, and she also refused to hold his hand.

Weinstein, she alleged, told her, "Oh, the girls always say ‘no.’ You know, ‘No, no.’ And then they have a beer or two and then they’re throwing themselves at me."

The producer, she claimed, also allegedly said "that he’d never had to do anything like Bill Cosby."

"Nestor had a conversation with company officials about the matter but didn’t pursue it further: the officials said that Weinstein would be informed of anything she told them, a practice not uncommon in smaller businesses," Farrow wrote.

The report also described how French actress Emma de Caunes had a lunch meeting with Weinstein at a Paris hotel, and that he mentioned he had a movie adaptation of a book in the works.

Weinstein, according to the report, allegedly asked her to go with him to his room to get the book, and de Caunes answered her phone while Weinstein went into the bathroom. de Caunes recalled Weinstein later allegedly emerging from the bathroom nude with an erection.

The producer, she claims, told her to lay down on the bed. de Caunes ultimately fled the room.

Actress Rosanna Arquette and the producer were to have a dinner meeting during which she'd get a script at a hotel in Beverly Hills, and Arquette was told to go to his room, The New Yorker report said. Weinstein allegedly was wearing a bathrobe when he opened the door and claimed to need a massage.

Arquette, according to the report, said that she could give him a masseuse recommendation. During the encounter, she alleges that Weinstein tried to lead her hand to his erect penis. She turned him down.

Both Arquette and Sorvino allege that refusing Weinstein impacted their careers.

"There may have been other factors, but I definitely felt iced out and that my rejection of Harvey had something to do with it," Sorvino told The New Yorker.

The New Yorker article recounted an alleged incident between Weinstein and actress Jessica Barth at a Beverly Hills hotel. At his hotel room, the report described how Weinstein allegedly "alternated between offering to cast her in a film and demanding a naked massage in bed."

Barth refused to give him a massage and while she was leaving Weinstein offered a meeting with a female executive, according to the article.

“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein," Weinstein spokeswoman Sallie Hofmeister told The New Yorker. "Mr. Weinstein has further confirmed that there were never any acts of retaliation against any women for refusing his advances. Mr. Weinstein obviously can’t speak to anonymous allegations, but with respect to any women who have made allegations on the record, Mr. Weinstein believes that all of these relationships were consensual. Mr. Weinstein has begun counseling, has listened to the community and is pursuing a better path. Mr. Weinstein is hoping that, if he makes enough progress, he will be given a second chance.”

Actresses Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie were among the women in a follow-up New York Times piece published Tuesday who allege Weinstein harassed them. Arquette also spoke to the newspaper.

Paltrow described Weinstein's attempt to lure her, as a then-22-year-old aspiring actress, into giving him a massage in a hotel room. The incident prompted her then-boyfriend Brad Pitt to confront Weinstein at a film premiere. The producer, according to the report, allegedly ordered Paltrow not to tell people about what happened.
Actor Gwyneth Paltrow poses at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) Art+Film Gala in Los Angeles, October 29, 2016. REUTERS/Danny Moloshok - S1BEUJWQOSAC

Gwyneth Paltrow was allegedly sexually harassed by Weinstein, according to a New York Times report.  (REUTERS/Danny Moloshok)

Jolie also turned down Weinstein, who allegedly hit on her in a hotel room in the 1990s, the report said.

"I had a bad experience with Harvey Weinstein in my youth, and as a result, chose never to work with him again and warn others when they did,” Jolie, now 42, told the Times in email. “This behavior towards women in any field, any country is unacceptable.”

The Times report also recounted a meeting between Tomi-Ann Roberts and Weinstein. Weinstein was naked in a bathrobe when she showed up, Roberts alleges. He also allegedly said her audition would be better if she got naked.  She turned him down and left, according to the Times report. 

Actress Katherine Kendall told the Times that she was at Weinstein's apartment when he came back from the bathroom in a bathrobe and requested a massage. Weinstein exited the room and came back naked after she said no, Kendall alleged.

Kendall claims that Weinstein chased her around the room and that he also asked her to show him her breasts, which she declined.

While in a hotel suite with Weinstein in 1996, French actress Judith Godrèche turned down his alleged request for a massage, the Times reported. She claimed Weinstein later tried "pressing against me and pulling off my sweater." She left the room.

Actress Dawn Dunning claims that Weinstein offered her contracts for his next three movies as long as she would have three-way sex with him, according to the Times report. She took off.

“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr. Weinstein," Hofmeister told the Times in a statement. "Mr. Weinstein has further confirmed that there were never any acts of retaliation against any women for refusing his advances. He will not be available for further comments, as he is taking the time to focus on his family, on getting counseling and rebuilding his life.”

A report published early Tuesday by The Guardian described how Weinstein allegedly wore just a robe during a hotel room meeting with British actress Romola Garai.

“Like every other woman in the industry, I’ve had an ‘audition’ with Harvey Weinstein, where I’d actually already had the audition but you had to be personally approved by him,” Garai told the publication. “So I had to go to his hotel room in the Savoy, and he answered the door in his bathrobe. I was only 18. I felt violated by it, it has stayed very clearly in my memory.”

“The point was that he could get a young woman to do that, that I didn’t have a choice, that it was humiliating for me and that he had the power,” the 35-year-old "Atonement" actress said.

Also Tuesday, former actress and screenwriter Louisette Geiss alleged that Weinstein appeared in an open bathrobe with no clothes on during a meeting at the 2008 Sundance Film Festival. She claims that Weinstein asked several times that she watch him masturbate during the 2008 encounter.

Geiss made the allegations during a news conference with attorney Gloria Allred, who invited Weinstein to meet with his alleged victims in a mediation or arbitration process.

Geiss said in a statement that she is coming forward to help give voice to other alleged victims of sexual harassment. She said her experience with Weinstein led to her departure from the entertainment industry. She now works in real estate.

Actress Heather Graham said Weinstein implied she would have to sleep with him for a role in a Tuesday column for Variety.

She described a meeting with Weinstein in the early 2000s "in which he mentioned that he had an agreement with his wife. He could sleep with whomever he wanted when he was out of town."

"There was no explicit mention that to star in one of those films I had to sleep with him, but the subtext was there," she alleged.

Graham says she later skipped a meeting with Weinstein at a hotel because her actress friend who was supposed to come along said she was unable to attend.

"That was the end of that encounter — I was never hired for one of his films, and I didn’t speak up about my experience," she wrote. "It wasn’t until Ashley Judd heroically shared her story a few days ago that I felt ashamed."
Wednesday, October 11

Actress and supermodel Cara Delevingne took to Instagram to describe her encounters with Weinstein.

"When I first started to work as an actress, I was working on a film and I received a call from Harvey Weinstein asking if I had slept with any of the women I was seen out in the middle with," the statement said. The model said she didn't answer his questions and "hurried off the phone."

She also described a later incident where Weinstein asked her to come his hotel room.

"I quickly declined and asked his assistant if my car was outside," the statement said. "She said it wasn't and wouldn't be for a bit and I should go to his room."

The model said she felt "powerless" and that in the room, there was a second woman.

"He asked us to kiss and she began some sort of advances upon his direction," she alleged. "I swiftly got up and asked him if he knew that I could sing. And I began to sing....i thought it would make the situation better....more professional....like an audition....i was so nervous. After singing I said again that I had to leave. He walked me to the door and stood in front of it and tried to kiss me on the lips. I stopped him and managed to get out of the room."

Actress Léa Seydoux told The Guardian that at the beginning of her career, during a conversation with Weinstein, he jumped toward her and attempted to kiss her.

“We were talking on the sofa when he suddenly jumped on me and tried to kiss me,” Seydoux said. “I had to defend myself. He’s big and fat, so I had to be forceful to resist him."

The "Spectre" actress added: “He tried more than once,” and described Weinstein as “very domineering” and “losing control.” Seydoux told the news outlet that she "pushed him physically. I think he respected me because I resisted him.”

Actress Sarah Ann Masse described to Variety how Weinstein allegedly was in just his undergarments during her 2008 interview for a nanny position at his house in Connecticut.

“Harvey Weinstein opened the door in his boxer shorts and an undershirt. My first thought was, ‘Oh, this is weird. Maybe he forgot this interview is happening. Maybe he thought I was the mailman. I’m sure he’ll be embarrassed and excuse himself and get changed.’ But he didn’t,” she told the publication.

She claims he asked in the job interview, “You would never flirt with my friends or anyone to get ahead?” and that she told him no.

Masse claimed at the end he "gave me this really tight, close hug that lasted for quite a long period of time. He was still in his underwear. Then he told me he loved me. I left right after that."
Thursday, October 12

Actress Kate Beckinsale said in an Instagram post that when she was 17 years old, she was invited to meet Weinstein at a hotel.

She says she thought the meeting would happen in a conference room, but she was directed to Weinstein's room instead.

“He opened the door in his bathrobe. I was incredibly naive and young and it did not cross my mind that this older, unattractive man would expect me to have any sexual interest in him," she alleged. "After declining alcohol and announcing that I had school in the morning I left, uneasy but unscathed.”

Weinstein, she claims, asked her a few years down the line "if he had tried anything with me in that first meeting."

The actress said she "realized he couldn't remember if he had assaulted me or not."

"I said no to him professionally many times over the years-some of which ended up with him screaming at me calling me a c*** and making threats, some of which made him laughingly tell people oh "Kate lives to say no to me," she wrote.

British actress Claire Forlani also posted a statement on Twitter in which she claimed that she “escaped 5 times.”

She said there had been two night meetings at a hotel with Weinstein “and all I remember was I ducked , dived and ultimately got out of there without getting slobbered over, well just a bit. Yes massage was suggested.”

    #HarveyWeinstein #ClaireForlani #MyStory pic.twitter.com/gEVDkbP5ec
    — Claire Forlani (@ClaireAForlani) October 12, 2017

Forlani alleged there were three dinners and she recalled him listing “all the actresses who had slept with him and what he had done for them.”

Earlier in her statement, Forlani revealed Ronan Farrow had contacted her, but that she didn’t take part in The New Yorker expose.

“Today I sit here feeling some shame,” she confided.

French actress Florence Darel alleged to Le Parisien in a French-language interview that Weinstein hit on her in a hotel room in 1995 -- with his wife in the next room.

“He started to tell me that he found me very attractive and wanted to have relations with me,” Darel, now 49, said. “I told him I was very in love with my companion. He replied that didn’t bother him at all and offered to have me be his mistress a few days a year. That way we could continue to work together. Basically, it was ‘If you want to continue in America, you have to go through me.’”

Darel says she left.

English actor Sophie Dix, who was 22 in the 1990s when she met Weinstein, said her possible career path was "massively cut down" after an experience with the producer, according to The Guardian.

Dix said she found herself in a hotel room with Weinstein, and "all the alarm bells starting ringing." She was in bed with Weinstein "tugging at her clothes," before she hid in the bathroom. Once she opened the door, she saw him "standing there masturbating."

It was then she decided not to pursue acting. "I decided if this is what being an actress is like, I don't want it," Dix said.
Friday, October 13

Actress and former model Angie Everhart claimed Weinstein masturbated in front of her on a yacht more than 10 years ago, according to an interview she did with TMZ.

The incident allegedly occurred after Everhart had arrived in France for the Cannes Film Festival, she said. Feeling jetlagged, she reportedly fell asleep in one of the cabins. She later woke up to the sight of Weinstein in her room, blocking the door and masturbating, she said.

Despite him telling her not to, Everhart said she "told everyone" about what happened, including producers and other actors. But everyone reportedly shrugged off the situation saying, "oh that's just Harvey."

She said everybody knew what he was doing to women but no one said anything about it until the Times article was published on Oct. 5.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.



Harvey Weinstein, BBC's Jimmy Savile and Bill Cosby - but what about younger sex abusers?


Klevius question: What's the difference between the thinking in this Rolling Stones lyrics from 1965 and BBC's sex predator Jimmy Saville?

The Last Time by The Rolling Stones 1965

Klevius comment: A wonderful hit - except for the appalling words which Klevius has never understood. Jimmy Savile used his power as a gatekeeper for young girls eager to participate in BBC's pop programs etc. How many male pop artists did the same to girls eager to show their pals they had been noticed by famous guys?


The Last Time (1965).

Well I told you once and I told you twice
But ya never listen to my advice
You don't try very hard to please me
With what you know it should be easy
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no

Well, I'm sorry girl but I can't stay
Feelin' like I do today
It's too much pain and too much sorrow
Guess I'll feel the same tomorrow
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no

Well I told you once and I told you twice
That someone will have to pay the price
But here's a chance to change your mind
'Cause I'll…
Well this could be the last time
This could be the last time
Maybe the last time
I don't know, oh no, oh no
Last time baby
To say no more
Baby I don't know
Well I don't know
Well, I don't know
I don't know
Well, I don't know...

Songwriters: Keith Richards / Mick Jagger


Klevius wrote:

Saturday, November 28, 2015


Klevius recipe against Human Rights violating sharia (OIC/Salafi/Wahhabi etc) islam: First Focus on the Saudi dictator family! It's not our "ally" but our worst enemy!

 Acknowledgement: You who call yourself a muslim but don't support sharia but instead Human Rights equality, you are not the target of Klevius writings - although Klevius likes to remind you of the possible support to anti-.Human Rights muslims your naming of yourself may imply.

All sharia* muslims ought to be classified as criminals (as Human Rights defenders are classified in islam's "homeland" Saudi Arabia) because of their membership of a terrorist organization, the so called** islam. Adhering to Saudi based and steered OIC's Human Rights violating sharia declaration means accepting Wahhabism/Salafism (i.e. the origin of islam) 

* Sharia is here defined in accordance with Saudi based and steered OIC's sharia declaration in UN and how this clashes with the most basic rights of equality in UN's 1948 Human Rights Declaration.

** Islam was in its very beginning a Jewish/Christian sect using Jewish-Christian texts for what later became the so called Koran. This is why earlier parts of the so called Koran are less violent than later parts which were added to fit the "conquest" of the "infidels" because a parasitic robber ideology can only survive by sponging on others.

Ben Weingarten: Invariably you will hear the argument that while parts of the Koran are violent, others are peaceful. Such a view evinces further ignorance however, as it fails to address two essential Islamic concepts: (a) Abrogation and (b) taqiyya.

Abrogation refers to the fact that as the Koran reflects Allah’s divine revealed word, where there are textual contradictions, those passages revealed later must supplant those that preceded it. These later passages are frequently more violent than the earlier peaceful ones.

Taqiyya refers to strategic lying and deception – covering up one’s true intentions so as to defeat one’s enemies. This manifests itself in acts of sabotage, subversion and the propagation of strategic disinformation, not unlike what the Communists did during and after the Cold War.

Others will argue that just as the Koran has violent verses, so too do the Old and New Testaments. But Jews and Christians do not go out and slaughter in the name of their G-d in a modern-day global Crusade like the jihadists are waging. Moreover, the values and principles that flow from these two religious systems have led to the miracle that is Western civilization. The Muslim world on the other hand, especially where Islamic doctrine is followed in its purest form, resembles the seventh century one that preceded it.

Lest you think those who have studied Islam in schools are better off, in America’s universities taqiyya has become an art form. Many of the Middle Eastern departments at our country’s most prestigious academic institutions have been found to put on a “moderate” public face while serving as Trojan horses for anti-Semitism, anti-Zionism and anti-Westernism — all consistent with Islamic doctrine.

This should come as no surprise, as these departments – and even K-12 schools — are often funded by Islamic nations who are the primary backers of Islamic supremacism themselves.

For those able to see past multiculturalism, moral relativism, materialism and actually study Islam in theory and practice, recognizing that the religion at the very least as understood by millions of Muslims is not only incompatible with, but hostile to our very existence, this is a staggering realization. It offends our pluralistic, tolerant sensitivities to think that such a massive, religiously-justified threat could exist. For while similarly savage enemies marched throughout the 20th century, none were tinged with theology, and Communism for its part was explicitly anti-religious.

Moreover, there are uncomfortable practical questions that such a threat raises. Who exactly are we fighting if there are millions of jihadists, aiders, abettors and enablers all over the world? How are we to fight them? What measures can we take to secure the homeland that are both sufficient and consonant with a free society?

Today, the West is clearly not even at the point of asking these questions, which reflects a lack of education on behalf of some, and denial on the part of others. That it is considered a bold act to utter phrases like “Radical Islam,” or “Islamic extremism” or “Islamism,” in the face of now over 25,000 jihadist attacks since Sept. 11, 2001 indicates as much. Imagine what kind of stones it would take to repeat after Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdoğan, that in effect there is no such thing as “moderate Islam” or “Islamism,” and such “descriptions are very ugly…offensive and an insult to our religion…Islam is Islam and that’s it.”

Rather than deal with reality, we figuratively bury our heads in the sand. Meanwhile, savage jihadists lop off and literally bury infidel heads in the sand.

If we are going to turn the tide in a war that we are currently not fighting, it is imperative that a sizable number of Americans wake up. It behooves all men and women of good conscience to educate their fellow citizens, and spark this awakening.


Klevius question: Who made these tragic girls so ignorant about islam?

Klevus answer: Everyone who uses the oxymoron "islamophobia" to cover up the evil of islam. However, sex segregation/apartheid* is the real issue behind all of islam. If you can't accept Human Rights equality for girls/women then you're an accomplice to evil islam - or a victim.

* Islam reproduces itself through its evil one way pillar, rapetivism, i.e. the biological and ideologicalreproduction of muslim men.


Did black (or why not Khoisan) South-Africans think their biological constitution made it ok to not have the same rights as others? Klevius thinks they didn't. However, Klevius knows for sure that many (possibly even most) women still think their biological constitution is a fair excuse for sex-apartheid. This self-imposed entrapment is not only limiting but also a crucial key to the "understanding" of general muslim/islamic/Koranic/sharia (call it what you like) sex apartheid (sex segregation).

Is the most basic Human Rights violating muslim sharia supremacism really "conducive to the public good" in Britain?






.

Thursday, October 12, 2017

Rapetivism* is a consequence of sexist sex segregation/sex apartheis

* 'Rapetivism' is a concept introduced by Klevius in the early 2000.

Girls and women are today worse off when it comes to rapetivism and sex segregation/apartheid than they've ever been in modern Sweden. This downward development has been going on since the last Millennium.

It was the Day of the Girl yesterday - did anyone except Klevius really bother?

Heterosexual attraction paired with sex segregation/sex apartheid feeds unnecessary sexism. Men can easily handle their sexual urges when meeting women - no matter how sexy or naked. However, if culture/ideology/religion "justifies" sexism, then many menwill turn sexist. Moreover, if many women approve of it, then no wonder many a boy/man thinks it's quite alright.

Here are some Swedish voices. And for those pitiful ones who don't master original English, i.e. Swedish, Klevius translate it to the strange Old Nordic dialect now called "modern English" (read English is a Scandinavian language):

I now understand - you really raped me. Rapes aren't always silent - some are silent.

Gazing and nagging about sex -  a daily experience during semester trips.
It's 2017 and I and my female pals can't move around freely.

What's most difficult in being a woman? To live.
We don't have time to wait - stop limiting us.


However, the really tragic bit in this is the sad fact that so many women (the "female patriarchy") participate in upholding this rapetivist culture.


Klevius wrote:

Thursday, December 18, 2014

Rapetivism, the female patriarchy and Human Rights violating islam


What's the difference between Sir Jimmy Savile and Bill Cosby?


And what's going on right now?









However, the worst rapetivism ideology is islam - is this why Human Rights violating islam (the by far worst ideological crime history knows about) is so popular among certain people? Not to mention the female muslim patriarchy.

Samantha Lewthwaite, Mishal Husain (BBC's sharia presenter) and Michael Adebolajo all have islam and its Human Rights violating sharia in common


Klevius wrote


Tuesday, October 23, 2012

In Klevius series Sex Tutorials: The "culture and praxis" of pedophilia/sexual abuse in BBC and islam



Aeneas (ICLA – International Civil Liberties Alliance): "The BBC interviewer made excuse after excuse for Islam in response to Hirsi Ali’s cogent an analysis.  It seems that the agents of the BBC simply believe the taqiyya that they are fed by the Muslim establishment and take it at face value.  Perhaps the BBC needs to encourage its journalists to read up on the subject from all sides and stop accepting dogmatic nonsense.  The sort of naiveté that we witness at the BBC is the same sort that allowed the rise of Hitler and was the principle cause of World War II and the destruction and despair that ensued."

Klevius comment: No, it's not "naiveté " but deliberate misinformation to protect OIC! UK's leading islamofascist (i.e. supporter of Human Rights violating Sharia) Sayeeda Warsi is the "minister of faith (i.e. islam)" who represents UK before the Saudi based islamofascist muslim world organization OIC and its Fuhrer Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu which want to criminalize scrutiny/criticism or whatever that isn't in accordance with Sharia. And you, don't let anyone confuse you with talk about so called positive Human Rights (the Stalin "rights") that can be abandoned. What is at stake is the basis of all Human Rights i.e. what is called the "negative" (i.e. lack of imposition, or call it freedom if you like) true Human Rights!

Patriarchal pedophilia/sexual abuse and sex apartheid


As you dear reader know by now Klevius has for a decade boosted being the net's foremost expert on sex segregation/apartheid and that he consequently also is the only one seriously addressing the root cause of continuing islamofascism against Human Rights. Yes, it's sad but still. Although the holy Human Rights declaration (unlike Sharia) clearly states that a person's sex should not inflict on her freedom and equality, many still continue living in the sex apartheid past hence offering a dangerous cultural interface welcoming islamofascism.


BBC's Jimmy Savile was only a tiny part of the tip of an enormous embarrassing melting iceberg - actually the same as islam rests its foundation on!

Thousands of Brits honored Jimmy Savile, "the friend of all" on his posh funeral in a golden coffin.

Text on the headstone (now removed from Savile's grave and used as landfill):

 
"The first guy who presented back in 1964 the very first TOTP (Top of the Pop's) and went on to do much more.

There was nothing he didn't do.

as he crossed the country each person was his friend.

Knighted by our Queen he was and knighted by the Pope."

"It Was Good While It Lasted"

Paul Harris (DailyMail):



  • In the homily it was said Sir Jimmy can face eternal life with confidence
  • Thousands of mourners line the streets as 700 people pack the cathedral
  • Sharia supporting New York Times gets Sharia supporting pedophile-BBC's former leader


    Mark Thompson, BBC, is set to become the New York Times new president and chief executive. How much did he and others know? And why has BBC been so silent about muslim jihadist pedophiles committing hate crimes against white children while boosting islamofascism (e.g. Saudi based OIC and its Human Rights violating world-Sharia) to an extent that brakes all limits.




    Compare the above to this report from California, US 


    A "Fantasy Slut League" has been uncovered at Piedmont High School in California. According to Principal Rich Kitchens, the league was created by varsity student athletes. Female students are "drafted" and male students earn points for "documented engagement in sexual activities" with female students. Many students participated because they felt pressured to: "Participation often involved pressure/manipulation by older students that included alcohol to impair judgment/control and social demands to be popular, feel included and attractive to upperclassmen," Kitchens wrote. Students also recognized misconduct, admitting fear of disciplinary action against them if discovered, affecting college applications.


    Klevius comment: The disastrous combination of heterosexual attraction and sex segregation/apartheid leads to perverted social interaction (read What's sex segregation to get rid of your sexual ignorance).

    here's what Klevius wrote

    Saturday, September 27, 2008


    Heterosexual attraction and sex segregation in islam

    Quote of the day (Edmondo de Amicis visiting islamic Morocco some 100 yrs ago): "She appeared sad. Perhaps the reason was that her husband's fourth wife, a recently arrived young 14 yr old girl in his harem, had triumphed over her in a way that was clearly reflected in her husband's indifference." Klevius comment: Heterosexual attraction (HSA) combined with sex segregation is often disastrous for human relations! Only with full access to respective social spheres, as well as full awareness of the HSA discrepancy between the sexes (i.e. what möst feminists deny) an open de-sex segregated interaction is possible' HSA per se doesn't presupposes/determines sex of any kind - neither does women "need a normal penis several times" (S. Freud) nor does a male need to rape. What could the older wife possibly offer her husband behind an impenetrable wall of sex segregation when her physical attraction didn't work anymore? Only islam was satisfied because she had to continue her inescapable (Sharia & apostasy ban) fate of fostering new islamists!


    Klevius question: Was News of the World about to reveal BBC's pedophilia history and culture, or how can we explain BBC's overkill in their efforts to drown the world with negative Murdoch "news" and unfounded allegations about Milly Dowler's phone being erased, hour after hour, day after day, month after month (while leaving muslim pedophile rings attacking vulnerable children in "care homes" etc unreported)? And how much did the bSKYb bid affect it? Or were they intertwined?








    .

    Wednesday, October 11, 2017

    Klevius to all the world's girls on the International Girl's Day: Learn more about heterosexual attraction and Human Rights - and about the problem with sex segregation/apartheid and islamic sharia.





    Acknowledgement: Please, don't confuse private religion with mob religion. Although Klevius himself has no understanding of this "private religion", he doesn't bother about it either as long as it's kept private. Klevius' "islamophobia" is only concerned with islam's (e.g. via OIC) violations of the most basic of Human Rights in the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948.


    When we get rid of religious rapetivism* then other forms of rapetivism will be much easier to challenge - because as it stands now, religious rapetivism can hide behind "freedom of religion".

    * 'Rapetivism' is a concept introduced by Klevius in the early 2000.

    Klevius sex education for girls. And why aren't girls  (and boys) offered proper sex educationb at school?


    Islamic Sharia restricts Human Rights and promotes supremacism (drawing 1979 and photo 2012 by P. Klevius).


    Normal heterosexual attraction* (female bodies as possible and potential eroticizers for males) is comparable with being extremely beautiful or ugly. It causes attention. And although it might feel like an extra power, do realize that heterosexual attraction is only in the male eye. 

    However, according to the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration - agreed on 1948 after WW2 had ended national-socialist fascism -  sex should not in any sense infringe on your Human Rights equality.

    Moreover, due to a break in religious brain-washing in the "West", the "developed world" managed to modernize its view on women to an extent that made it possible for women to show off their bodies in public. Moreover, and most importantly, this development also revealed that the absolute majority of healthy men had no problem whatsoever with it. Men can - if you just stop trying to eat the cake while still having it!

    However, even the progressive West has been too slow to adapt to full equality between the sexes. And a main tool for this has been religion. And of all religions it is now sharia islam that is the worst threat when it comes to full Human Rights for girls/women.

    Interestingly, now a mainly Atheist country, China, asks for more sex segregation to "cure effeminacy" in the form of encouraging more "masculinity" among Chinese boys to better compete with Silicon Valley and Wall Street. Klevius wonders whether that would imply that lack of religion made Chinese men more "effeminate" than their religious counterparts in the "West"?


    Bigoted and deeply hypocritical (or just racist and Human Righsphobic) muslim sharia women enjoy the West's Human Rights freedom while islam ravages their sisters in muslim countries and muslim sharia ghettos in the West.

    When women say they "enjoy sex"* they don't mean the same as men - because of sex segregation

    * Either as pure "rub sex" or "romantic sex" which isn't really about sex at all.

    Klevius remembers how he as a teenager got aware of the depth of segregation between the sexes when he managed to get the interest of the "beauty queen" at a club and much later that same night heard her saying that it had been such a good time for her to be with someone who didn't try to push her in bed.

    * Male dogs don't bother about "romantic relations", fore play etc. - that's why we call it "dog sex". However, due to sex segregation, i.e. that girls and boys are alienated from each other, heterosexual attraction has become a main means for girls/women to get attention from boys/men - and for boys/men to excuse (and be excused about) promisquous sexism. This alienation occurs despite boys and girls intermingle.


    Six bio/logical facts about sex

    1  Heterosexual attraction isn't sex per se.
    2  Heterosexual men can have sex without heterosexual attraction.
    3  Homosexual men can have both homosex and heterosex.
    4  There are no heterosexual women.
    5  "Rub sex" is "dog sex" for both males and females.
    6  The only reason for "changing sex" is sex segregation.

    Klevius will explain these crucial points more in detail later.


    Men can actually treat women as human beings - but can all women handle that?


    Klevius knows because he's a man with at the least average amount of male hormones and with a history that lacks 1) rapetivist behavior and 2) lacks any occasion of "failure" when being invited by women into sexual acting (not even his wives/girlfriends can complain about that)*. Moreover, for Klevius the problem has rather been the very opposite, namely that women seem to expect being treated as "women", while Klevius insists on treating them as equal human beings.

    * These strange remarks by Klevius are made just to avoid readers who don't know Klevius to dismiss him as someone living in celibacy (or something else) and therefore being less informed in these issues.

    In the early 1990s Klevius wrote an academic thesis called Gender Apartheid at the Socialanthropology department of Stockholm University. It was however dismissed (and Klevius refused to change it) with the following words: "You are very intelligent, logical and coherent in your writing and in your use of citations. However, the thesis is not written in a way that is expected on this institution" (an approximate translation from Swedish).


    Klevius wrote:

    Friday, April 18, 2014

    Gender schizophrenia


    Covering up the world's biggest problem (sex segregation/apartheid) in gender babble - but when will the bubble burst?

     Oxford Dictionaries definition of 'gender': The state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

    However this kind of non sense use of 'gender' is more and more common:


    Of course there are no 'gender-bending' insects. If a female insect possesses an organ that can pick up semen from a cavity in a male insect, that has nothing to do with gender at all.



    Klevius clarification for his dear but sometimes mildly confused readers:

    John Money introduced the distinction between biological sex and gender in 1955. Before his work, it was uncommon to use the word gender to refer to anything but grammatical categories. However. In the 1970s feminists embraced the concept as a distinction between biological sex and the social construct of gender. Today, the distinction is strictly followed in some contexts, especially the social sciences and documents written by the WHO. In many other contexts, however, even in some areas of social sciences, the meaning of gender has undergone a usage shift to include sex or even to replace it. This gradual change in the meaning of gender can be traced to the 1980s. The APA's psychoanalytically contaminated Diagnostic and Statistical Manual first described the condition in the third publication ("DSM-III") in 1980 and this was then followec by the so called 'glamour feminism' which has ever since trapped girls/women in a continuing web of cultural 'femininity' that functions as a barrier against those ("tomboys") who dare to try to escape it - leaving no other options than either to conform or to become a so called "transsexual". Why do people have to alter their biology when we have Human Rights that should give everyone the right to live as s/he wishes without restrictions imposed because of one's sex?

    It's also noteworthy that the pathological pathologizing of a girl's wish to be free from sex related constrains (a freedom guaranteed adult women in the Human Rights declaration) is a violation of Human Rights but is made possible because minors (and their parents/custodians other than the state) have no legal say (compare what is said in Klevius' thesis Pathological Symbiosis).

    It's still an open question how much this disastrous and monstrous sex apartheid has helped islam (the worst crime ever against humanity) to exist among civilized people (compare what Klevius wrote in Rapetivism from Freud to bin Laden more than a decade ago). Evil and Human Rights violating islamic tenets that would have been completely unthinkable two decades ago are now defended!


     Thanks to a scholarship in 1885, Freud visited his main idol, Jean Charcot, "the Napoleon of Neuroses" and known as "the greatest neurologist of his time" (H. Ellenberger 1970:89), here giving a fake lecture on "hysteria in women" at his institute.(a former poor house for women) in Paris where he attempted to establish a medical monopoly over hypnosis based on contemporary ideas on sex segregation. When Freud returned to Vienna he made his living by "treating" wealthy "hysteric" women. (see Klevius' Psycho Timeline). It is an irony that most of the women performing "hysteria" at Charcot's institute were from the lower classes, in sharp contrast to those women who then became treated by his former students. Who are the great fakes of our time?Psychotimeline revealing Freud's misogyny

     

    This is the Saudi islamofascist Iyad Madani who is now the Fuhrer over all the world's muslims' world organization, Saudi based OIC and its Human Rights violating Sharia. 



    and his disciples

     
     Klevius feels really privileged to be the only one (so far) truly addressing the world's biggest question. However, Klevius is also disturbingly aware of the fact that his time as the world's foremost expert on sex segregation (due to no competition) may be over in no time at all when the global female prison finally opens its gates.


    Friday, October 06, 2017

    Klevius to Amber Rudd: Why do you hide Saudi extremist material? And why don't you defend Human Rights against Saudi sharia islamofascism?


    Amber Rudd wants to criminalize visits on "far-right propaganda sites" without giving any definition. Does it include "Saudiphobic" sites critical of Human Rights violating sharia islamofascism?

    In a climate where disgusting National-socialism now is called "far-right" everything  seems possible.

    Britisharia = aligning with Saudisharia against the most basic of anti-fascist Human Rights in the1948 Declaration.



    Saudi constitution and legal code considers the defense of Human Rights and leaving or criticizing islam acts of "terrorism".

    Nicholas Wilson (at an election hustings over the weekend, independent candidate): "Am I being censored? Amber Rudd shuts down my speech about arms sales to Saudi Arabia".


    J.D McGregor (Evolve Politics): There was nothing in May's speech about tax evasion that costs the country’s coffers billions every year, and there certainly wasn’t anything about cutting deeply immoral Tory ties to Saudi Arabia’s brutal dictatorship who are currently being investigated by the UN for alleged war crimes in Yemen.



    Emily Thornberry (Labour): Michael Fallon (UK Minister of Defense) was in Jeddah, signing a deal to increase our cooperation with the military in Saudi Arabia wantonly ignoring their actions in Yemen. It is rank hypocrisy. But it also illustrates a basic fact that the world we want to see – a world governed by ethics and values, a world based on rules and laws will never truly exist as long as governments and world leaders get to decide for themselves when it suits them to play by the rules and when the rules can be safely ignored.

    The world we want will never exist when governments like Theresa May’s think it’s perfectly OK to loudly condemn those they regard as enemies but then fall utterly silent when it is their friends in Bahrain rounding up, torturing and executing civilian protestors or their friends in Saudi Arabia dropping cluster bombs on innocent children in Yemen.

    In fact, if they were just silent that would be an improvement. Instead, we have to listen to Michael Fallon saying that the thousands of children killed and injured by air strikes in Yemen are just a consequence of Saudi Arabia “defending itself”…