pop~agenda~culture

“His response was to fight it with the only weapons at hand—passive resistance and open displays of contempt.” ― Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan

Miley Cyrus Nude: the female gaze IS the maternal gaze.

Miley Cyrus for Candy – Miley Cyrus: Her wildest moments – NY Daily News http://m.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/miley-cyrus-attention-seeking-moments-gallery-1.1060696

Miley Cyrus nude is the product of some interesting social engineering. And, she’s the product of the “maternal gaze”.

image

In the last centuries “sex wars” many feminists and other lesbians, pansexuals, and ambisexual persons were influenced by CIA operatives like Gloria Steinem who posited that all images of women and girls were products of “the male gaze.”

This hypothesis gained currency because it was plainly, pruriently and purely profitable- to women, and blaming men, a form of classic Freudian projection.

image

Nancy Chodorow of UC Berkely particularly serves a dripping hot gravy plate of feminism and feminist female objectification of women, starting when they are little girls.

Chodorow, et al have created/birthed generations of children that embody, in Chodorow’s and others words, womens sexual “fantasies about female children,” as if each little girl somehow needs sexual liberation at the all-so- willing hands of gender feminists and Agency backed funding initiatives of political speech and action.

RELATED STORY: Maternal incest is legitimized in the media?

Objectification of girls and the embodiment- the literal creation and manipulation of them as hypersexualized beings by Chodorow and feminists in general, as a means of ‘liberating’ them is quite a profitable narrative, not at all like pimping.

“Ain’t no girl ever hit the street that wasn’t put on the block first by her mother.”- Anonymous old-school pimp phrase

In the words of one reviewer, this grooming, and then pimping for profit, by mothers, of ‘their’ children as posessions, and yours eventually because ” it takes a village” is key to creating these sex-performance-for-feminist-profit narratives.

“In her view, the female functions as object while the male functions as subject. This comes about, according to the author, because female development is more complex than male development due to the female’s prolonged, intensive and unconscious identification with her mother.”

Miley Cyrus in the nude is one such example, but there are many others where children are raised to derive profits for women- children to many of them are implements, and objects to be exploited at the personal and political level for literally billions and billions of dollars.

image

This is what I call the “maternal gaze,” which I theorize is at the root of every feminist discourse: at the base of every disgruntled woman who blames or shames men, is the knowledge that they are in some way beyond innocent narratives of idealized motherhood, and drawn to manipulate, build, enforce, or re-inforce the sexuality of their children, and then, the children of others.

image

The maternal gaze is at once “pure, nurturing, and innocent,” but on the other side, and in the Chodorow influenced dialectic, plainly prurient, and clearly predatory and capitalistic.

image

In fact, CIA influenced FBI narratives, NSA pretexts, and local police forces are in large part funded by this predatory form of female capitalism. Senate initiatives are designed to preclude insight to this collusion, and laws clearly obfuscate insight into this political human capital creation.

Put another way: Cyrus is a multi- billion dollar show that is allied with LGBTTVTS narratives, which are the product of feminist discourse, and her sexual antics are designed to derive profit from that crowd.

She performs, sexually, suggestively, with great accolades and awards for their gaze- that gaze from the aged and withered matriarchs of third wave feminism.

image

I have another theory too: it is quite possible in the modern discourse that “male gaze” is a code word- a euphimism-that signifies a collusion between state and women that birth for the state, and it indicates a willingness to eat children- to use them as collateral and capitalize them as assets, before they even fatten in the pen.

Have a look at the photos and decide for yourself. But clearly, it isn’t “men” – and certainly not fathers* using Cyrus for political or financial gain- it is a performance by and for the pleasure and political profit of the female gaze.

Sure, Miley- it’s “your” pussy- right? But- thanks for sharing anyways.

* Miley’s father is an entirely different essay.

image

KW: female gaze, maternal gaze, predatory feminism, feminist capitalism, prurient female gaze, big pimpin’ feminist style, prurient interest, sex wars, miley cyrus nude, miley cyrus naked, miley cyrus pansexual, miley cyrus bisexual, miley cyrus Candy, Candy Magazine, anti-male gaze

Further reading: Legitimising female pedophilia in the progressive, and feminist discourse.
Another attempt to say it plain, which is, even then not simple.

Advertisements

14 comments on “Miley Cyrus Nude: the female gaze IS the maternal gaze.

  1. Tom Arrow
    December 23, 2015

    A friend of mine said that men and women are emotionally opposites.

    So if a man is dominant, but kind – a woman would be submissive, but predatory.

    Like

    • popagandi
      December 23, 2015

      As much as I am tempted to run with that because itsvone possibility, I am too old to agree. Women come in all shapes and sizes.

      And I especially disagree, because as an equalist, it reinforces that we are inherently different.

      Yes, most men and women have been ‘created’ by society to fit gender roles. Yes, women are engendered to seekbthe upper hand. But I think mature women- mature people- see these things in themselves and learn how to avoid it because its so destructive.

      Women and men also have distinct bioligical differences too which get in the way. Women are indeed designed by nature to trap you- your gametes specifically. And despite themselves, this happens one way or another.

      The problem is this: social engineering.

      I will give you an example: fifty years ago, the feminist social engineers and their international bankster boyfriends, sought power and control. How to get it?

      They did many things, but chief amongst these things they used science to act as an official mechanism through which to distribute lies.

      Their biggestcachievement was that they framed all dialogues as ” women are victims of mens predation.”

      Sounds nice- men just cant wait to get that mystical stinky two inches of flesh, right? Men will do anything to get there, right? Predators , con men, rapists and so on.

      Scientists- many of whom are feminists, socialists or progressives, seeded all discussions with this idea. That men will do anything to ‘get it.’ that male biology is designed this way.

      But here’s the catch: sometime in the last decade, there was this debate- that sperm is essentially an intruder, elbowing clawing and kicking other sperm out of the way to get to a womans egg. Fits the propaganda, right?

      But IN FACT scientists discovered two things: 1) the female emits a chemical attractant- and the egg releases a chemical trail- that essentially draws the spermatozoa into it! Like a venus fly trap.

      The second thing science ‘discovered’/ conceded is that women are designed to handle endless dicks when they are fertile; that the rapeoplogists in their quest to grame every dialogue as ‘men are all dominating rapists’ found instead that women- despite themselves( if you pull what brains and snowflake identities they are right out of their heads) womens bodies are DESIGNED to be gang banged!

      How can this be? Science provides the answer: it ensures the survival of the fittest- that acwoman is guaranteed to conceive using as many parners as possible during peak fertility, because instead of relying on the hit or miss quality of one mans sperm,
      she’s designed to take on all ‘comers,’ at once.

      Amazing- you can see why this is controversial. It’s quite a long discussion as well, but those are the basics.

      So perhaps, in your analogy, both can be true, at once, or not at all, depending on how well you know yourself.

      But next time the phrases ‘what a slut’ or ‘ she’s a sneaky bitch’ cross your mind, remember this above- they literally have bioligical blindspots that they can’t see sometimes.

      There is no dualist paradigm in a healthy relationship, only in the ‘normal’ ones.

      Liked by 2 people

    • popagandi
      December 23, 2015

      Another great example is domestic violence. Historically, wecall know its about 50-50. But scientists did the same fancy math, and privileged the female perpetrators.

      Big pimpin’…..

      Like

    • popagandi
      December 29, 2015

      Tom, I’m not sure I agree with that-not all who are victimize revictimize others. In cases of sex abuse, it is actually the opposite.

      Like

    • popagandi
      January 2, 2016

      Btw: that’s black and white thinking- a bi-product( artifact) of social engineering

      Like

  2. miagataaa
    December 28, 2015

    “Ain’t no girl ever hit the street that wasn’t put on the block first by her mother.”- Anonymous old-school pimp phrase

    From where I sit.. both mother and father, men and women, are to blame and pity.

    You can’t have one without the other to propagate that endless cycle of exploitation. It is virtually and literally impossible.

    My father (a true misogynist) said to me the other day… “Women see a handsome face and see a mark, they see his wallet and see a mark…” —and before he could finish I doubled over laughing so hard tears were welling.

    And then I said, “That’s hilarious. Yes, men… always the “victim” of a pretty face… but not because they walk themselves into the strip clubs, load their serotonin levels with vast amounts of porn and habitually go after what sparkles. Oh no!

    …and tell me, daddy-o, why do you think women try so hard to sparkle as though their survival depends on it? As if the love of their husbands and lovers depends on it?”

    How many men remark constantly on a woman’s appearance in front of their daughters and wives, reaffirming their daughters self-esteems by voting on their appearance, “You’re so pretty!” instead of “You have such a big heart” or remark on their intelligence, bravery, etc…. and yes, mothers do this as well.

    I know the truth. Because I am a daughter and also have been a girlfriend/partner/lover.

    Being called “pretty” or “sexy” by men stopped feeling like a compliment a long long time ago. It does absolutely fucking nothing for me. It’s just a precursor for being treated like a living sex doll or an affirmation of some guys’ status and “success.”

    I’m privy to that game… so it’s ‘game over’ on my end. My cynicism abounds.

    But for women, like Miley, who derive satisfaction, approval or flattery from the exploitive “gaze” they propagate… I feel sad. It’s a failure for women and men alike.

    I can’t wait to be an old lady…. dressing like some weird druid with hangers swinging down around my navel, long silvery braids, living off coconuts, tofurkey and lentils. Maybe when I hit 70 I’ll become a nudist. I just might.

    I can’t wait.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Tom Arrow
      December 29, 2015

      Every cruelty starts with a victim. And every victim hates the victims that made it a victim.

      Like

      • AllixKatz
        December 29, 2015

        Well said@ TomA.
        Yes, victimization is an endless cycle.But on a deeper level, cases like these triangulate a gendered narrative in an exceptional way: we see the possibilty of creating balance, by employing ‘proper names.’

        Currently the dialectic lacks a proper name for this Miley example because of gender. But if we use available words- pimping- and available dalogic ploys ‘exploitation’- we remove gender and create a legal, moral, ethical space with which to adress this very common female to younger female exploitation.

        Using the gendered phrase of ‘madame’s’ and instead of exploitation we used ‘ empowerment’ we see a different story entirely- and equality cannot take place, because the narrators are enmeshed in the illusion of a ‘shared’ body of a universal woman- a myth with great financial rewards, albeit money in womens hands( another myth).

        @miagataaa

        I would tend to agree with you if all things equal. They are not. In America, and other westernized places, fathers are under merciless social pressures and powerful mytholigical exploitation; combined with gender expectations similar to your ‘sexy’ narratives above ( men provide FOR women, malevsexuality is only ‘safe’ if displayed monigamously, in the missionary position, men are to be seen, and silent, etc.).

        And this idea of equality was mercelessly slaughtered by feminists and other Fabians, social progressives, and opportunists in the last 30 years. Un it’s place was put the ‘sungle mother’ home. Some 72% of todays Af/am homes- no fathers. Some 49% others. This is by design.

        And statistically, it is women who are killing, abusing and literally pimping kids. That’s not me saying that- that’s the NIST and many other resources.

        What I feel needs to be pointed out- loudly- is that fathers in that era- and even today- have nothing clise to equal rights with children. Nothing close to equal resources.

        Why? Because as the left and the courts and its cops went after the pocketbooks of the men at the top tier of the ‘right’- every other man was forced into the battle: poor men, discarded men, uneducated men- the mentally ill and the incarcerated. No agencies protected their rights, or informed them that such even existed. And wimen of the same categories were awarded property rights by ststemic default.

        So what we have in effect is now- a time when our constitution is virtually suspended, and kidsvhave no idea that a father is anything BUT a paycheck. Never mind that the sicial struggle precludedvthat men would have one, or the training to get one. Much less equal parental rights, which simply are not possible in an Amerucan family ct, no matter how much a man pays the lawyer, or the vast ‘social services’ picket draining platform.

        Empathy to you for having to hear it frim your dad- but not all men are gifted withbthe right gab ti explain it. Most are emotionally trapped in their own traumas, and unable to find thevright words for themselves, much less for their grown child who has been literally indictrinatedv’against’ his archetype- not necessarily even him.

        So- because the profiteering that went on in your generation was so calculated and grossly destructive of a fathers narrative, the right words for the average guy is ‘ pocketbook.” His personal pocket picker was the woman who played aling with bigger monsters.

        About pretty faces: I don’t fault women for their need for financial security- we all have that.Neither do I fault men for their desire to kuss a beautiful girl.We all have that too.

        The REAL isdue is neither- the real issue is how institutions like academia, government, and the courts- not to mention international finance- exploit our insecurities and petty lusts. It is THIS exploutation I am addressing- religious, and government, and miltarism exploiting our private conversations with each other, our privacy, and our inherent right to use our bodies in any way we damn well please.

        The best analigy I have is how ladt wave feminism coupled up with internatiinal banksters and three things happened almost immediately: the unions went bust, the wirking wage dropped- and divorce rates skyrocketed. Suddenly, one father wasn’t enough, but two, or three!

        I am speaking generally, and to an extreme, but that’s the main idea.

        And- the two main unions if any note left? Teachers- the main prooaganda delivery system for every kid; and police unions which helped banksters wage “domestic violence.”

        Their main weapon? Gendered narratives.Or: ‘big pimpin’ because girls in thatvera ‘ should know their worth-to value$ themselves.’

        Like

    • popagandi
      December 29, 2015

      Your conversation will still be exciting I bet👍Nice visual there with the hangers.I bet most sensible women see it the way you do- whereas others seem trapped in capitalizing on that commodity- the two inch tickle trail between the thighs.

      You have enough imagination- enough wit, that I bet you will be that old lady who still manages to get it every now and again!

      Like

  3. popagandi
    December 29, 2015

    Well said@ TomA.
     Yes, victimization is an endless cycle.But on a deeper level, cases like these triangulate a gendered narrative in an exceptional way: we see the possibilty of creating balance, by employing 'proper names.'

    Currently the dialectic lacks a proper name for this Miley example because of gender. But if we use available words- pimping- and available dalogic ploys 'exploitation'- we remove gender and create a legal, moral, ethical space with which to adress this very common female to younger female exploitation.

    Using the gendered phrase of 'madame's' and instead of exploitation we used ' empowerment' we see a different story entirely- and equality cannot take place, because the narrators are enmeshed in the illusion of a 'shared' body of a universal woman- a myth with great financial rewards, albeit money in womens hands( another myth).

    @miagataaa

    I would tend to agree with you if all things equal. They are not. In America, and other westernized places, fathers are under merciless social pressures and powerful mytholigical exploitation; combined with gender expectations similar to your 'sexy' narratives above ( men provide FOR women, malevsexuality is only 'safe' if displayed monigamously, in the missionary position, men are to be seen, and silent, etc.).

    And this idea of equality was mercelessly slaughtered by feminists and other Fabians, social progressives, and opportunists in the last 30 years. Un it's place was put  the 'sungle mother' home. Some 72% of todays Af/am homes- no fathers. Some 49% others. This is by design.

    And statistically, it is women who are killing, abusing and literally pimping kids. That's not me saying that- that's the NIST and many other resources.

    What I feel needs to be pointed out- loudly- is that fathers in that era- and even today- have nothing clise to equal rights with children. Nothing close to equal resources.

    Why? Because as the left and the courts and its cops went after the pocketbooks of the men at the top tier of the 'right'- every other man was forced into the battle: poor men, discarded men, uneducated men- the mentally ill and the incarcerated. No agencies protected their rights, or informed them that such even existed. And wimen of the same categories were awarded property rights by ststemic default.

    So what we have in effect is now- a time when our constitution is virtually suspended, and kidsvhave no idea that a father is anything BUT a paycheck. Never mind that the sicial struggle precludedvthat men would have one, or the training to get one. Much less equal parental rights, which simply are not possible in an Amerucan family ct, no matter how much a man pays the lawyer, or the vast 'social services' picket draining platform.

    Empathy to you for having to hear it frim your dad- but not all men are gifted withbthe right gab ti explain it. Most are emotionally trapped in their own traumas, and unable to find thevright words for themselves, much less for their grown child who has been literally indictrinatedv'against' his archetype- not necessarily even him.

    So- because the profiteering that went on in your generation was so calculated and grossly destructive of a fathers narrative, the right words for the average guy is ' pocketbook." His personal pocket picker was the woman who played aling with bigger monsters.

    About pretty faces: I don't fault women for their need for financial security- we all have that.Neither do I fault men for their desire to kuss a beautiful girl.We all have that too.

    The REAL isdue is neither- the real issue is how institutions like academia, government, and the courts- not to mention international finance- exploit our insecurities and petty lusts. It is THIS exploutation I am addressing- religious, and government, and miltarism exploiting our private conversations with each other, our privacy, and our inherent right to use our bodies in any way we damn well please.

    The best analigy I have is how last wave feminism coupled up with internatiinal banksters and three things happened almost immediately: the unions went bust, the working wage dropped, and divorce became so prevalent that women just stopped getting married, and went for the kid instead.

    So- sure, once women had no power to change things-but using kids as leverage, they leapfrogged all ethical or moral bounds and landed in the laps of international social engineers.

    Like

  4. miagataaa
    December 30, 2015

    @papagandi

    Hahaha… thanks for the vote of confidence. I truly hope to someday resemble a little female yoda-hobbit, hangers included, of course. It’s possibly having some to do with a lifelong disdain for the typically branded female archetypes –definitely including our 3rd wave Madonna-feminists– that I opted out of childbearing long ago to focus more on sanity and self-preservation.

    Also, I do abhor the soul-sucking work and pressure of having to maintain someone’s “love” based on my appearance, which is what most men are created and trained to do… Love = pretty face/perfect tits + a regular stiffy. And I rather enjoy regularly wearing my fuzzy onesie with polka-dotted rainboots into grocery stores […] and whatnot.

    Romantic “love” will never compare to freedom and peace of mind.

    Anyhow, you make a valid and strong point with— “What I feel needs to be pointed out- loudly- is that fathers in that era- and even today- have nothing clise to equal rights with children. Nothing close to equal resources.”

    I just think it still goes back to your previous point, which I agree with wholeheartedly—

    “The problem is this: social engineering.”

    I was partially raised/influenced by two extremely sexist parents, who loathed/still loathe one another, and I still carry a bit of both dueling perspectives.
    I was fairly misogynistic for many years, and occasionally still am… while resenting men/my father for this fear/hatred of women.

    I realized this at a young age when my father was practically financially raped by the courts and having his parental rights taken away, without just cause… that our judicial system is absolutely perverse, prejudiced, corrupt and broken.

    And if you recall… I have my own beef, having my civil rights taken away for keeping company with known activists. Harassed, placed on the FBI watch list, followed to work and back home, arrested and financially crippled at one point.
    It doesn’t matter what sex or color you are at that point.

    My female cousin had her 2 kids taken permanently last week…. almost entirely because she isn’t affiliated with any local church, as is the backwoods redneck judge and my fundamentalist Christian male cousin who took and subsequently adopted her kids…. because he and the judge are neighbors, attend the same COC church, and are fishing buddies; and he always wanted a son. The little girl was the unfortunate collateral of the exchange.

    Word is she’s a thumbsucker and chronic masturbator, forced to see a Christian church-appointed shrink bi-weekly.

    Oh yes… a perverted ass-ed judicial system, indeed.

    Like

    • popagandi
      December 30, 2015

      They’re all in on it at the highest levels. State sponsored kidnappings, covered by the courts and its associated machinery.

      If I could help you I would. I sort of imagine building a covert network of concerned citizens to sort of do to them what they have done to others- infiltrate them, spy on them, disable their power- give them a little of their own golden rule in return. The great zio-christo ethic of “do unto others AS” has turned into “do unto others first, and then cripple their opposition”.

      It sounds like you are dealing with a cult at the highest level.They hide behind the facade of legitimacy, knowing that they own the ‘democratic’ machinery at the local level, and also the system itself. There is no oversight of it, and n insight into it.

      I have a question: was the girl a thumbsucker/ masturbator before or after this all happened? If before, well…but if after, I have a few ideas.

      You do know that indicates possible abuse, right? Has anyone outside the courts documented it? Outside documentation is crucial, because their narrative runs so quickly and with deadly efficiency through the courts and the social services industrial complex, s you seem well aware.

      What happens in these cases- much as you described- is that the people entrusted to speak for the kid are in on the abuse- again- these are cultists at the highest levels, and the goal is control of that little girls sexuality, and eventual progeny; control of THAT child’s progeny and so on. Mind control if you will, enforced systemically, in the complete disguise of ‘morally righteous Utilitarian efficiency- of the ‘greatest good.’

      The key to these schemes is the creation of a ‘bad guy/gal’ bogeyman narrative to counterbalance the effect of the obvious wrongs to child’s mind.

      The ‘why did momma go away’ is answered by ‘because momma did bad things.’ Then, when the cultist/ system sanctioned ‘good guys’ do bad things, that often confusingly might not feel bad immediately to a child, they answer with ‘momma/daddy did worse things,’ and so on.

      The child is left imagining every and any of what ‘worse’ might be, without counter-narrative, or ability to discern actual harm-from the people who have kidnapped it into their cult. This is how America builds mercenaries- wombs and warriors, that kill for the Fed; that drop depleted uranium onto middle eastern babies with impunity; that have foregone their Constitutional ‘freedoms’ for temporary ‘safety’.

      Also- this conversation might be best offline- these demons literally employ entire Army battalions that root out conversations just like this ( but you knew that already, right?).

      Please contact me offline with the names and the identifying data of these people who have stolen this child, and any info you wish to provide about the authentic parents….

      Like

    • popagandi
      December 30, 2015

      In re: sexism and mysoginy

      I think this idea of mysoginy is the new sexism. Hatred of women? Are there ACTUALLY people who hate all women? How is that possible? Sure- no one hates women more than themselves- second only to the gay community and all that focus on makeup and appearance…

      But I think men- and MRAs as an example- plainly don’t have the intellect to even understand the concept.

      And it is gender that they likely hate. Heaped with doses of misplaced testosterone. It is really hard to put into words- to make it clear to women- that these hormones cause a sort of endless lusting in men- nature.
      Combine that with the pathetic sex and gender in isdues, lack of sexual education or awareness- and you have this completely muddled discussion that men in general aren’t equipped to have.

      So “cunt” becomes shorthand for entire narratives that take a lot of time to have; combine it again with the advantages bestowed upon women, and women’s unwillingness to recognize it, and voila-Old Massa Ginny runs the plantation- again.

      A classic analogy is slavery: one of the slave narratives documented a man who ran away- each time he was caught, his whippings more severe, until one day they chopped off his foot.

      He ran away an got free after that.

      Years later, he wrote to his sister, and she by then was a preferred house slave-the master regularly having his way with her.

      She asked her brother- who had made it to new York or Boston and freedom: ‘ why did you do it? Was risk of death worth it?’

      He replied: to those that wish to be free, then let them find freedom. To those who wish slavery…’

      Of course he was talking about his sisters choice to prostitute herself to the master.

      I always look at this as a classic paradox of what this male female narrative really is. Men- we literally lose body parts and risk life and literal limb, whereas women choose their sexual slavery, bc it feels safe.

      So- I admire your choices to be free- a badge of honor for any person, and twice for a woman.

      We lack female warriors in our society- lots of complicit killers with guns and official titles, or those cloaked in academic laurels and shit loads of meaningless verbiage- but few stand alone fighters like you.

      I bet you have had an interesting life…

      Like

  5. Pingback: On the nature of the male and the female - Man Without Father

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

We’re all so meta that the NSA targets our intellectual detritus.

MISCREANTS WHO DEFY ZIO-CHRISTO-ISLAMO MEDIA CONTROLL NARRATIVES OF ENDLESS WAR

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 14 other followers

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 14 other followers

Archives

Follow pop~agenda~culture on WordPress.com

THE TREASURE TROVE OF OBSCURE RAMBLINGS

Member of The Internet Defense League

%d bloggers like this: