It takes balls to draw a dick on the memorial to a murdered feminist

24

It made sense for Andy Nolch to draw a penis on the memorial to Eurydice Dixon, because feminists hate men’s penises and want us to cut them off, and they will deliberately destroy civilisation in order to achieve this.

Okay, let me explain.

Eurydice Dixon was raped and murdered in Princes Park, Melbourne, in June this year. Jaymes Todd was subsequently arrested and charged with her murder. Australia’s Political-Media Complex politicised her murder in the following weeks, the most notable moments being a deplorable rant by Lisa Wilkinson on Channel 10’s The Project and a row on the floor of parliament between Liberal Democrats Senator David Leyonhjelm and Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young in which the latter, after opposing a bill to allow women the right to defend themselves with non-lethal weapons, accused the former of “slut-shaming” her.

The point of the politicisation was to blame all men and so-called “toxic masculinity” for Dixon’s death, rather than the autism of the alleged murderer, or the simple fact that some people are just psychopaths. It was in this context that Andy Nolch defaced a memorial set up to Eurydice Dixon by drawing a penis on it, for which he was charged and fined a considerable sum.

Dia Beltran, who has appeared on several XYZ Livestreams interviewed Nolch on her own channel last Wednesday night, and she was accompanied by Matty’s Modern Life. Dia made it clear that she believes there was no justification for defacing a memorial to someone who has been raped and murdered. Matty sympathised with Nolch’s motives for the vandalism but argued that he should have found another way to express his dissent – drawing a penis simply made it look like a schoolboy prank.

I disagree for two reasons.

Firstly, feminists of all persuasions pretend that feminism is a scholarly pursuit. It is not. The entire field of study is centred on two things, and two things alone:

Penises and vaginas.

Take for example a feminist approach to architecture. On one corner of the intersection of La Trobe Street and Swanston Street in Melbourne’s CBD stands Melbourne Central Tower, a tall, erect structure which is pointed at the top.

Melbourne Central. Photo by mugley

Feminism’s critique of such a building boils down to the fact that it represents a penis. It looks like a penis. It is, for all intents and purposes, a penis. You can argue all you want about how the price of prime real estate and mass immigration means such structures are merely an economic inevitability, but we cannot escape the fact that skyscrapers are a symbol of man’s attempt to dominate nature, to penetrate the heavens. From the Tower of Babel and the Colossus to the current day global race to build the next tallest building in the world, the building of skyscrapers has always been a massive dick measuring contest.

And this is bot a bad thing. It is biological reality. Men compete for the fittest women with which to breed, to give their offspring and their genes the most advantages they can get over the genes of other men.  Building skyscrapers is just another way to do this, and of representing this natural, healthy masculinity.

Feminists hate skyscrapers because they hate penises. No greater proof of this can be found in the structure on the opposite corner to Melbourne Central.

Storey Hall, RMIT, Melbourne. From Wikipedia.

The facade of Storey Hall was made deliberately concave, and was deliberately designed to celebrate the building’s feminist history:

“The street façade is a version of the historic hall next door, its basic shapes of arch below and window above transformed by applying the Penrose pattern. The precast Penrose patterned tiles incorporate the impression of ruffles, keys and suspender belts to represent the Suffragettes, who once occupied used the original hall. The colours of purple and green also reflect those of the women’s liberation movement.”

It was deliberately designed with something in mind.

“Goad describes the building as ‘a tour-de-force of cerebral architecture and formal virtuosity’. Subliminal references abound.”

Looks like a… From armarchitecture.

They built a vagina.

That is the best they could do. After all their supposed subversion of the dominant paradigm, for all their deconstruction of patriarchal tropes, for all their PhD’s and Deconstructivist waffle, the best they could do in response to their criticism of the fact that skyscrapers represent penises was to build a vagina.

Like I said, penises and vaginas.

The result of toxic feminism’s infection of the world of the music world is even more vulgar. In Feminine Endings, Susan McClary spends some time analysing nursery rhymes – Jack and the Beanstalk is the story of a boy who grows a plant so high that it penetrates the clouds, he climbs it and conquers the giant in the world above (she sounds jealous) – before she distinguishes between aspects which make a piece of music either masculine or feminine.

Masculine music is typified by music which rushes predictably toward a climax near or at the end of a piece, after which the music abruptly stops. Feminine music on the other hand is less direct, it meanders and has numerous undulations before avoiding the horribly patriarchal perfect cadence to reach a less obvious conclusion, which she makes the case is a more vibrant and intense art work than its male equivalent.

To get to the point, she argues that masculine music follows the pattern of the male orgasm, while feminine music follows the shape of the female orgasm.

I am not making this up. You can read her book.

Penises and vaginas.

This pattern of an obsession with male and female genitalia is repeated across the all academic fields which feminism has infested with its Cultural Marxism. The fact that the term “phallocentrism” is a thing and does not raise the ire of my computer’s spell checker should tell us this.

The purpose of feminism was never to bring equality, but to replace the masculine with the feminine. Its most lasting legacy is the murder of over a billion unborn babies, because they hate the fact that babies are what penises and vaginas are meant to make.

Instead, feminists want penises for themselves. Butch lesbians would not try so hard to look like men if they did not desperately want a penis themselves.

Thus they hate penises, they hate men, and they hate men for having penises. They would not try so hard to get little boys to cut their penises off if they did not.

This is why Andy Nolch’s drawing of a penis on the memorial to Eurydice Dixon was so utterly devastating: It was the ultimate symbol of resistance to the attempt by the feminist establishment to turn the murder of a young woman by a psychopath into a jihad against all men. It was a literal “fuck you” to the destructive ideology of feminism which has worked tirelessly to emasculate several generations of Western males, and seeks to literally castrate the next.

To the feminist, the penis is the ultimate trigger.

This leads into the second reason why what Andy Nolch did makes sense.

It is indeed a horrible thing to do to desecrate the memorial of a woman who has been raped and murdered. But we are not living in ordinary times. Feminism has moved from its stated aim of destroying marriage and the traditional family:

“The nuclear family must be destroyed… Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process.” Linda Gordon.

To its fetishisation of violence toward men:

“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” Andrea Dworkin.

To the stated desire to #KillAllWhiteMen:

We live in a time when the globalist, feminist powers that be want nothing more than the complete destruction of our entire race. This plan for our genocide is beyond evil. But until recently we have been losing because we have been playing nice, we have been the ones who would always say “I agree with your motivations but you went around it the wrong way”.

White men are increasingly coming to understand that our only hope for survival is to fight dirtier than our Cultural Marxist enemies. If we are to win we must be prepared to do horrible, terrible things. It is why Americans voted for Donald Trump, who called illegal immigrants drug dealers, criminals and rapists and called for a ban on Muslim migration. It is why Italy’s Matteo Salvini, who has stated “We Need A Mass Cleansing, Street By Street, Quarter By Quarter” is loved by his people.

Marxism’s very first strategy was to divide the people of a nation into competing identities against each other. It was first based on class, and when that didn’t work they invented new categories. Thus race is kryptonite to Marxism, because it reasserts the biological factor which unites people against the artifical social constructs Marxism uses to divide us, and along with strong family and religious values, makes us impervious to Marxism’s poison. It is why Marxists have worked to demonise anybody who advocates an identity based on race as a “nazi”.

Likewise, the penis is kryptonite to feminism, (itself merely a branch of Marxism, useful for pitting invented interest groups against each other) and drawing one in response to feminist propaganda is an assertion of everything that feminism hates. It is an assertion of the fact that we are not ashamed of our masculinity, of our nature, of biological reality. We as men embrace who we are and we reject feminism’s so-called “critique” as the deliberate tool of white genocide that it is.

In coming years there will be a million more Andy Nolches. We need to draw penises on the walls of every Gender Studies faculty in every university in the West. We need to draw penises on every grave of every half forgotten feminist “academic” who ever lived, and spam the social media pages of every living feminist with photos of our glorious shlongs. We should invent a dick emoji which we should use in response to anybody who uses any form of “reasoning” tainted with feminist programming, and we should plaster every available public space with the slogan “Dear Feminists, Suck It.”

We should meme the penis.

The feminist empress has no clothes. The penis is the simplest, the most efficient, the most virile way of revealing feminism’s purported academic prowess as the obese, hairy, penis-envying pile of horse turd that it actually is.

We should follow the ultimate example of our Go Emperor:

Grab them by the pussy.

I will be appearing on Dia’s livestream tonight at 7:30 PM ADST, along with Matty’s Modern Life to discuss this further, and also ethnonationalism.

Photo by bobarcpics

  • fimbulwinter

    When you are fat, ugly, have blue hair and are a complete bitch the only thing on your mind is penis. Because you get none.
    Feminism – the incel of women.

  • Ryan

    Hear, hear David! If the Cerne Abbas Giant has taught us anything, a large club and raging hard-on is a good way to piss off pigs in lipstick… https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2eb33840ccbb2ed12cfc1e014a22f386d201038d315d3079b55346b56745c691.jpg

    • Jai_Normosone

      “Pigs in lipstick” – love it! 😀

  • Harry Stottle

    It was Stephen fry who got me thinking about this very same thing when he said that Catholics are utterly obsessed with sex, in the same way an obese person is obsessed with food. The modern left is all about genitals, including the pre-pubescent ones. They’re sick.

  • Dan Flynn

    Congratulations David, the most unhinged article ever written on XYZ. Quite an achievement!
    As an aside, I wonder what Eurydice’s father would think of your logic?

  • Bucky Redux

    Feminists are threatened by the penis and attached ball-sack.

    Some sort of deep Freudian maelstrom involving the female conscious mind and the unconscious mind and how the two interact.

    The penis represents penetration of their retarded and deluded feminist psyche and the ball-sack represents the manifestation of penis envy which they carry as a heavy sub conscious burden.

    The gist of this is that women may envy the features that make a man a man because they associate these with power and status.

    Female creatures are weak in mind and body and should be restricted to domestic and reproductive functions, always subservient to the male of the species.

  • clemilf

    Storey Hall looks like a musrat gurl after the obligatory FGM.

  • Jael

    Not convinced, David. Sure, go and draw cock’n’balls on the walls of the ‘feminist studies’ departments. (Edgy, but nothing new, historically speaking.) But they have no place on memorials. Even if the disrespect is intended for feminism rather than the dead girl, it’s way too easy to get that confused.

    • Repeal fake marriage

      I tend to agree Jael. I utterly love disrespecting the left’s unicorns considering the unhinged way they behave, but the victim was loved by someone I assume.

    • Ryan

      Jael stop acting like a matriarchal mamzer.

    • Brendan Cleary

      It was not a memorial. It was not put there by a public or private body by agreement of the public which makes these decisions. The drawing of the penis was a political statement and should have been dealt with the same way as Andrea Dworkin’s exhortation and the drip who wrote “kill all men”: not at all.

  • abra

    Feminism is just a strategy by rich men to take the women off the poor men. To make men single.

    Because: It is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE to enslave and economically exploit a man who is sexually fulfilled… That is higher psychology! Billionaires NEED single slaves to produce for them to stay in power. If every man was married, billionaires could not possibly exist because nobody would slave for them.

    That is the true reason. Feminism was invented by greedy rich men, NOT by women, they just fell for it.
    Trump is just a liar who claims to stand for the working man, but secretly he supports feminism and he loves single men to slave for himself so he can buy all the sex he likes, while his slaves watch porn and masturbate.

    Why do you think the billionaires gave you free porn??? Think about it…