Despite BBC's anti women's football propaganda (i.e. by giving much more
space to women's cricket etc) these women showed that football is the
perfect sport for girls and women.
When in 1921 women's football became more popular than men's in
England, the supporters were mostly men and the opponents were mostly
women.
According to a female physician "the jerky movements" in football risked
reproduction and therefore ought to be banned. However, almost 100
years later we still lack evidence of this "diagnosis".
Barbara Jacobs: So we are to assume that women's bodies unsuited to jerky movements? That's put paid to sex, hasn't it?
Klevius wrote:
Klevius diagnosis of feminism: Bipolar self goal
In
1921 England had the world's best female football team. However, due to
feminist resistance against females playing football FA banned them
from its grounds. The decision was based on a female feminist
physician's expert statement that "...the game of football is quite
unsuitable for females and ought not to be encouraged."
In Sweden, from the late 1960's for about about a decade feminists (the
communist Grupp 8 - Sweden's main feminist movement) very actively
opposed female football. Later on Swedish feminists still oppose female
football although more under cover and in the form of spitting at penis
equipped football experts dealing with female football as "patriarchal
domination" when in reality it's been the lack of female ones that has
been the problem. And this lack is of course to a large extent to be
connected to the active female dismissal of female football. Which fact
doesn't exclude the "religious" renaissance for sexist men, not the
least via islam. As Klevius has always pointed out: Chauvinism and
feminism are married!
Women's World Cup 2015 starts next Saturday - how many girls know about it,
can follow it, and are made interested in the world's most challenging
and popular sport?
It was extremely close that we could have ended up with a sharia muslim
("prince Ali) leading FIFA. A sharia muslim whose main work for women's
football so far has been to open up for a veil demand on female muslim
players around the world by lifting the ban on the veil (presented as
something positive by BBC).
Klevius is no fan of Blatter's suggestion about improving the interest
in women's football by introducing "hot-pants"* on the pitch, but thinks
it would be even less helpful for girls/women to have a sharia muslim
at the top.
* No offense to "hot-pants" - but they
would just cover up the real problem of sex segregation/apartheid.
Football isn't beach volley.
Acknowledgement to Americans from the US: In the following the word
'football' really means FOOTBALL - not any form of rugby! In football a
player isn't allowed to touch the ball with her/his hands inside the
pitch - in American "football" players use
only their hands during normal play.
In Cannes women are forced to wear high heels - in London they aren't allowed to drive! Sanctioned by feminism and religion.
Chasidic Jews in Stamford Hill, London, ban women drivers due to "modesty" and "dignity".
Rabbi Yissachar Dov Rokeach, has advised them to introduce a policy
of not allowing pupils to come to their schools if their mothers drive.
From August 2015 children would be barred from their schools if their
mothers drove them there.
In an interview with a woman who had been a member of the Belz community
for ten years until she divorced her husband, said that she didn't see
the religious rules as problematic because she was "normalized" into
them.
Klevius comment: Like muslim women. Those rules are based
on Talmud, a 73 volume early medieval haystack full of cherries ready to
pick for almost whatever reason. Talmud is a Jewish "effort" to discuss
and guess what "God" could possibly have meant with cryptic paragraphs
inscribed by early "prophets" in the pre-medieval Torah.
Feminism and religion
Klevius, the world's foremost expert on
sex segregation
(no competition there - sad isn't it), has for more than three decades
fought practically (personal life, educator, coach, etc) and
theoretically (books, articles, academic thesis, TV, radio, media
production, web sites and blogs, etc) for girls'/women's rights.
However, although there are many stunning girls/women out there, they
have almost no power against that power patriarchy that most women have
let themselves lured into defending.
The original meaning of 'feminism' was to keep women segregated from men
via their 'femininity'. That's why early feminists even opposed the
vote.
The first definition of 'feminism' you get when googling it is:
the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
synonyms:
the women's movement, the feminist movement, women's liberation, female
emancipation, women's rights; informal women's lib
"a longtime advocate of feminism"
In other words exactly what Kleviushas worked for - except for the word
'feminis-m/t'. How could Klevius possibly call himself a 'feminist' if
sharia (OIC) supporting muslims call themselves the same?!
Japan is the reigning world champion in women's football. They also took
silver in the last Olympics. How come? Football is a tiny sport in
Japan which was left contaminated not only by the horror and
radioactivity from two US atom bombs but also by the US form of rugby
(aka "American football") and base ball. The answer is that Japan didn't
become contaminated with Western religions which are all based on sex
segregation/apartheid*. In Judaic religions Eve was made out of a bone
(a rib) that Adam could live without. She was made to entertain Adam
(heterosexual attraction) and considered inferior to him so that he
could be her guardian (sex segregation/apartheid).
* When Klevius compared Western and
Japanese women's movements of the late 19th century he made an
interesting observation. Whereas Western sources mostly discussed
"women's sexual liberation" the Japanese sources were more interested in
the opposite, namely how to protect themselves from unwanted sexual
impositions. This could then be connected to Murasaki Shikibu's thousand
years old novel (the world's first) Genji Monogatari which describes a woman trying to make sense of her experience of the heterosexual attraction (read Klevius more than decade old unchanged website
if you don't know what it is - you'll have a hard time find it anywhere
else on the Google web) that her body causes in male brains and how she
should deal with it while not loosing herself in it. It's possibly the
best book ever written (analyzed in Klevius 1992).
However, today when we have 1) Human Rights, and 2) six decades of
seeing revealed female forms everywhere, we (most of us) have learned:
1) Women are fully humans and should therefore have the same Human
Rights as men, and
2) we (most of us) feel no urge whatsoever to sexually assault or rape a
woman no matter how sexy we might think her body looks like. Even the
very thought makes us (most of us) uncomfortable*. Biological
heterosexual attraction is a one way affair but hetero erotics needs not
only the woman's body but also her full will to participate or show up.
Even pornography needs to convince the viewer that the woman wants to
be sexy. Rapography and other erotics without some form of consent is
simply necrophilia.
* Could this be the reason why some rapetivist cultures need to sexually dehumanize girls/women.
Here two responses to the article above that really shows the polarized world of women today:
Tigger 9 days ago
High heels are the western equivalent of
19th century Chinese foot-binding. I've never understood why women
should wish this torture on themselves - even paying astronomical sums
for the dubious 'privilege'.
flag / like / reply
sszorin 9 days ago
@Tigger The fight against high heels is a waste of time and effort
because most women prefer them. The answer is - design and make
comfortable high heel shoes, physical pain should not accompany
elegance. This said, 6in minimum is over the top. 3in is high enough for
official engagements.
flag / like / reply
sszorin 9 days ago
Klevius comment: "Because most women prefer high heels"!? One might
truly question the solidity of this latter statement. It's like saying
"most women in Saudi Arabia prefer to wear a black burqa in 40 degree
Celsius". However, more importantly, by saying so you impose the rule of
"most" on those who might disagree. Just like sharia women want to
impose restrictions on other girls/women.
Klevius wrote:
* The combination of no hands allowed,
extreme individual freedom, 1.5-2 hours play on a 100 m long and 50 m
wide pitch. This is also why the rest of the world can't stop laughing
when Americans call their rugby "football"! Moreover, there's no
difference in rules and gears (except for sport bras of course)
whatsoever between women and men (although islam wants to change that of
course). You can be a good football player no matter of your size or
constitution. The world's best male player, Lionel Messi, is 170 cm (no 2
Christiano Ronaldo is 186 cm) and the world's best female player,
Marta da Silva, is 163 cm (no 2 Birgit Prinz is 179 cm)!
Karima Maruyama's World Cup goal was a real classic when it comes to
football technique. Running at high speed towards the side of t
he
goal and then, at the right microsecond,directing a kick just outside
the opposite goalpost makes the forward inertia in the ball curving it
enough to be out of reach for the goalkeeper while still making its way
to the inside of the post.
Klevius question:
Is this the real reason why football is by far the most controversial
of sports when it comes to female participation? Check out:
Did feminists kill the World's best female football team in 1921?
Sexist BBC
While some of the most exciting matches are played in Women's World Cup
BBC decides to neglect it all together and instead offers EIGHT HOURS OF
F1 RACING added by some golf etc!!! No wonder British girls/women in
general don't have a clue about football and are among the most sex
segregated in the world. This is then reflected in British men's due
attitude towards women. According to many of my Finnish and Swedish
female friends who have experienced Britain British men are the most
sexist they have ever encountered in the West!
Of all sports a girl can use (many girls don't use any sport at all) to sculpture her future physicsfootball is by far the best.
Klevius wrote:
A woman scored the goal of the year - but will it be dismissed because of sex segregation?
Some heroic Saudi women challenging (?) islamic sharia* and
Stephanie Roche who scored the goal of the year
Stephanie Roche began playing football with the boys on the streets of her native
Shankill (compare Pia Sundhage in Klevius PhD thesis). After a brief spell with Valeview FC was curtailed by rules
against mixed–sex football she started playing only with girls/women.
See some other beautiful female goals further down.
Btw, this website is already banned by FIFA!
Wonder why. Is it because it, contrary to sharia, defends ALL people's
Human Rights or is it because it supports female football - or both?
* Some stupid brainwashed (or
deliberately evil) people might try to argue that there are many islams
(just like feminists used to say there are 'many feminisms' before
Klevius intellectually made it an illogical joke back in the 1990s).
However, it all works like this. Saudi initiated, Saudi based and Saudi
steered OIC has (via UN) declared not only that sharia should apply to
all muslims but also that every muslim country can decide by itself what
their particular sharia version means. Moreover, OIC's own global
"reference sharia" (the so called Cairo declaration on "human rights in
islam") openly declares that sharia always tops Human Rights - hence
making the latter a criminal offence against sharia.
Islam is a dictatorship - even in sports
The extreme stupidity of normative* islam
* Saudi Arabia is not only the
Guardian of islam but also the most powerful force behind all the
world's muslims world organization OIC which is not only initiated by
Saudi Arabia but also based in Saudi Arabia/Jeddah and led by an
islamofascist from the Saudi dictator family.
What is the
difference between muslim Ottoman harems and the organized and
widespread child sex abuse among muslims in the West (compare the
Rochdale case and many other similar cases in UK etc). The vulnerable
girls were already taken as Ottoman slaves or as the target for
insensitive and basically purely commercial state interventions not in
the best interest of the child (see the most important sociological
paper from the last century,
Angels of Antichrist - kinship vs social state)
before they were abused. However, just as in the islamic muslim sex
slave harems, the abused Rochdale girls themselves often denied being
abused because of some futile favors they first seemed to get.
So next time you see a wealthy Saudi woman "defending" islam/sharia,
please consider the extremely simple fact that under Human Rights women
can do what they like with their bodies, but under sharia there is
always impositions and limitations! So why choose sharia when it means
imposing your life choice on others, including vulnerable girls?!
There seems to be an almost total lack of sociologist challenging sex
segregation. A possible exception is Pierre Bourdieu's cautious and
defensive Masculine Domination which, by the way, may well be his
thinnest book. Already the title seems to try avoiding a closer look on
feminine domination (of females).
According to Bourdieu. the
effects of social position may in some cases reinforce the effects of
gender, or in other cases attenuate them, without, it seems, ever
eliminating them. By contrast, intensive practice of a sport leads to a
profound transformation of the subjective and objective experience of
the body. It no longer exists only for others or, it is no longer
merely a thing that is made to be looked at or which one has to look at
in order to prepare it to be looked at.
Instead of being a body for others it becomes a body for oneself;
the passive body becomes an active and acting body. In the eyes of men,
however, those women who break the tacit relation of availability and in
a sense re-appropriate their body image, and with it their body, appear
as 'unfeminine', even lesbian (Bourdieu 2001:67-68).
In this
respect Bourdieu seems to echo Tertullian who, in the early years of
Christianity, labeled women's wish to free themselves from the male gaze
(heterosexual attraction) as a 'sport of Nature'. Bourdieu continues:
If the old structures of the sexual division seem still to deter-
mine the very direction and form of these changes, this is
because as well as being objectified in disciplines, careers and
jobs that are more or less strongly characterized sexually, they
act through three practical principles which women, and also
their social circles, apply in their choices. The first is that the
functions appropriate to women are an extension of their
domestic functions - education, care and service. The second
is that a woman cannot have authority over men, and, other
things being equal, therefore has every likelihood of being
passed over in favour of a man for a position of authority and
of being confined to subordinate and ancillary functions. The
third principle gives men the monopoly of the handling of tech-
nical objects and machines (Bourdieu 2001).
However, sex
segregation is much deeper and multi faceted. Heterosexual attraction
need not be a problem neither for women nor men - this has been showed
by the West since the 1960s (yes, many men used the time for abuse but
most didn't) - but it can easily be used in a confusing/self-confusing
manner which opens up for totalitarian sex segregation.
Sex
segregation - could also be defined as unnecessary limitations connected
to physical differences that has nothing to do with these limitations.
However, what is needed in sex segregation studies is the most natural
follow up questions. Who questions 'femininity' and 'sexual orientation'
and why?
When you pull up that net Klevius wouldn't be surprised to see some (most?) women as well.
What klevius said/showed
Do you see the evil cloud on the map? It's sex segregation: OIC consists of 57 racist/sexist
islamic nations which have agreed to violate the
negative human rights, i.e. the basis for freedom & democracy!
WHAT
A MEDIA HYPOCRISY WHEN THE MUSLIM NIGERIAN TERRORIST IS DESCRIBED AS
"EXTREMIST" WHILE HIS TALIBAN LIKE SHARIA ISLAMIC HOME TOWN (stonings,
mutilations, corrupt "Sharia banking" etc) IS DESCRIBED AS "MODERATE"!
North Nigeria is a disgusting reminder of islamic slavery & islam's
devastating effects on Africa through 1400 yrs! AND CONSIDER THAT
KLEVIUS HAS FOR LONG BEEN YOUR ONLY TRUE, INTELLIGENT & WELL
INFORMED NEUTRAL (yes!) VOICE AGAINST EVIL
SEX SEGREGATION ON THE NET (the link is abt women's football as well)!
Did Germany's Birgit Prinz, score the best ever goal (incl. those of men) in 2009?
The video is
here
Klevius motivation:
1
The attack (from an in-throw) was as clean as it gets. Check out the
video & consider how Simone Laudehr's extremely well placed pass
(into an open but crucial area) is taken by Inka Grings who was
initially further from the ball than Prinz, who runs in the opposite
direction.
2 Inka Grings then does just the opposite to what one
would have expected. Instead of running with the ball into the empty
space from where she could have tried a cross to Birgit Prinz, she turns
against & between two defenders and quickly squares the ball across
the penalty area just before Birgit Prinz encounters the defenders.
3
Birgit Prinz accelerates strongly & manages not only to reach the
ball before a defender crashes into her, but also to cheat the
goalkeeper (see how the keeper moves to the wrong direction) while then
perfectly turning her foot in the last fraction of a second to give the
ball ultimate precision, before she is smashed to the ground by the
flying defender.
Who said women's football is boring?
Size doesn't matter in football
However,
although Birgit Prinz is a six footer (179 cm), in footbal you can be
any size & still world class. Lionel Messi, the world's best male
player 2009 is 169 cm/67 kg, while the next best (Xavi) is 170 cm/69 kg!
Third place Ronaldo is 185 cm. Among women Marta da Silva (162 cm/57
kg) is the world's best player for the fourth year in a row, with Birgit
Prinz right behind!
Football is the most emancipating sport in the world
This
goal hasn’t even been mentioned among the best, perhaps because women’s
football is hardly mentioned at all in the media. And the reason for
this is the same as with evil islam, namely that so many women
participate in directing girls into the sex segregation trap of their
own *starting physically with Indonesian muslim women who mutilate every
female child, to Western glamour feminists who push their daughters
into the time consuming trap of empty & pointless artificial
"feminization".
As Otto Weininger put it a century ago: "The main obstacle for women's emancipation is the Woman".
Klevius
doesn't in any sense want to point out how women should behave, quite
the contrary. He couldn't call himself intelligent if he would, could
he! However, what Klevius does want to do is to help minimizing the
number of girls who limit themselves or commit self rape becaudse of
cultural sexism. In this Klevius stands in the deapest oppositition to
islam, while Mr X US "president" says he "respect" islam (and no wonder,
look at his islamofascist pals)!
Origin of islam & its evil parasitic booty/sex/slavery/reproduction formula
Btw,
a professor friend (sociology) thinks I “uber-emphasize” sex
segregation. My question then to him & to all of you is: How can one
ever “uber-emphasize” something that affects negatively & directly
HALF of the world population, & indirectly the WHOLE of the world
population, & which is upheld on no logical grounds at all?! And
which constitutes the cornerstone for the evil interface between islam
& the rest of the world! And which constitutes the main difference
in OIC's Cairo Declaration which (initiated by Saudi islamic theocracy)
aims for the destruction of UN's 1948 Human Rights Declaration, combined
with a global effort (via UN) to criminalize criticism of islam! Read
more from Klevius (e.g.
From Freud to bin Laden or
What is sex segregation?)
to understand why islam & feminism share so much & why the
first feminists didn't support votes for women! And why feminists can't
agree if Mary Wollstonecraft was a feminist or an anti-feminist!
Or perhaps Klevius
Marriage, kinship & friendship
Or even better, the most important sociological paper from the last century:
Angels of Antichrist - kinship vs social state
