The Epstein-Files

Many non-tRumpians are desperate for the so-called "Epstein-files" to be released. The fact that that hasn't happened yet, and that America has ended up in an unfortunate Shutdown which puts a severe strain on the American people will make even more of them want to see that release as soon as possible: The obvious need to keep the files secret may be the real reason for the Shutdown. In the imagination of the, by now, quite exhausted American people the Epstein-files have been turned into the magic key to how to get rid of The Conman, tRump. They already know a lot about the allegations against him by the girls and women he presumably abused with Epstein, and they expect the files to give some information about even more pedophile or "just" sexual crimes which may get him indicted. However, we know from e.g. Ghislaine Maxwell that there also were videos, and some of these seem to have ended up in Russia. In my opinion videos must be much better evidence than lists in writing, but I may be wrong, as it's obvious that the tRump administration really, really doesn't want the files released for public scrutiny, so after all, they may be DYNAMITE!

I, for one, suspect that The Orange Menace was more than a friend and customer of Epstein. If the allegations of one of the victims, Maria Farmer, is right then his then wife, Ivana, may have been into trafficking herself for a while which also makes her husband a suspect. In my opinion there are details in the tRump-Epstein-relationship that hasn't been seen - or seen for what they are - as Maria Farmer has told of how she, Ivana and her friend, Ghislaine went out scouting for under age girls to the Epstein-trafficking-business. If that's true then it opens up to many new questions about the real nature of the friendship of tRump and Epstein.

As we know tRump definitely was a close friend of Epstein, but why did they (presumably) fall out over one of the Epstein-girls, Virginia Giuffre, when there were so many more to chose from? The way tRump has described the end of the long friendship with Epstein over her indicates that both of these men saw her as some kind of sales object, merchandise, or at least "property". To me that looks like the grandson of a German pimp, namely tRump - and his then wife, Ivana - were into sex trafficking themselves, at least for some time, and maybe just for the "fun" of committing such a crime. 

The files may tell about even more grave crimes, and I for one wonder at the fate of one girl who seems to have "disappeared". What happened to her, and is she even alive today? The only way to find out may be the release of the files - or of some of the videos. However, even as I claim this release I feel that those of us who do that may be duped into focusing on something that is neither magic nor a key to much of what went on in the world of tRump and Epstein. While we focus on that a lot of events tell of an ongoing political coup that should have been stopped long ago, but which wasn't recognized as what it is .... 

https://trumpfile.org/ghislaine-maxwell-says-jeffrey-epstein-recorded-trump-with-his-victims/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/17/trump-human-trafficking-programs-cut 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9270769/Ghislaine-Maxwell-admitted-Jeffrey-Epstein-DID-tapes-Donald-Trump-Clintons-2016.html?ci=79269&si=25716443 

 

https://pagesix.com/2021/02/16/ira-rosens-60-minutes-book-has-stories-galore/ 

 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/former-60-minutes-producer-ira-rosen-airs-dirty-laundry-about-mike-wallace-diane-sawyer-katie-couric/ 

Thinking About the Intricate Pattern of Suppression

 

What nonsense! As if women only need medical attention when they are in the child-bearing age. Nothing could be more wrong - except one thing: The very idea that women always should do with medical attention. As we know that's what the infamous "Project 2025" is implying, at the same time uttering the assumption that women are some kind of "breeding machines" who willingly will give birth without any kind of medical and economic help. 

Up through history women have been "paid off" in ideas, that seemingly eliminate the, more or less, elicit the stigma of being a woman in a Patriarchy. Religion, common superstitions and doctored historical accounts of "how it has always been" have claimed that women are the "inferior sex". Women, wanting to find an acceptable position in such a poisonous social situation, will be easy prey for whatever makes them feel less worthless than they have been portrayed by their suppressors. That's the point of special interest to me as I know that what makes suppression work is what seemingly turns it into something "good" to the one who is suppressed.

Joseph Goebbels should not be someone to admire, but he sure did have an eye for propaganda, and he knew how to use his knowledge. He is not the one who invented the "Kinder-Kuche-Kirche"-ideology which was set to assign women their special role in society as it goes much further back in history. However, he - as well the Nazified German society as such - used this ideology, to suppress women. 

 

The seeming "glorification" of women and their maternal role in society gave the suppressed gender a loophole into a kind of acceptance that in reality was more of a "noose" because they didn't have any other useful options.

These days many women have their tubes tied, not to get pregnant, because they know that in the tRumpian Hellhole of today they shall have to fend for themselves, even with little or no medical and economic attention. Those who fell for the "Kinder-Kuche-Kirche"-scam in former times may have become CEOs, etc. these days. They may still want to have children, but also they may turn their wishes for progeny into a deep love of their "furbabies". Such a family doesn't even take a husband or father ....
 

https://boobytrapec.blogspot.com/2025/02/women-chosing-to-have-no-babies-after.html 

 

https://chariotjournal.wordpress.com/2020/07/13/kinder-kuche-kirche-the-role-of-women-in-nazi-germany/ 

 

Wikipedia

 

Porn as Liberator of Women?

As sex in a patriarchy is most often defined as a power struggle it's difficult to agree to Ovidie's suggestion that porn is a form of female emancipation. After all, words may have been given the power to define sexual interactions, even though the most common definitions don't hold water for a more close scrutiny: For instance, for a long time sex very often was described as "he got his way with her", as if it was all his doing. It's definitely not a definition made in Nature, but in Patriarchal societies: There are many "Mrs. Robinsons" out there, seducing whomever catches their eyes. However, somehow the idea of men as the "aggressor" is still (more or less) valid: Men are the seducers, proving their masculine superiority by getting women to sleep with them - something which they may even brag about.

Ovidie is of another opinion than the general one about the sexual roles, and, by the way, she is a French actress, movie director, writer, journalist as well as a former porn star. When entering the porn industry she was a very active feminist, and before trying out porn for herself she was sure that the female stars were subjected to all manners of suppression and degrading situations. However, she came to see that they themselves felt that they were gaining power from their work - and, after all, it is a job!!! - so she decided to try it out for herself.

 

She saw her porn experience as extremely interesting as a way of understanding something about the female sexuality, femininity as well as bodily expressions. Surprisingly enough in her opinion the female porn stars didn't come out as "victims", which was how they were commonly described, but as strong women made stronger through the performance of sexual acts. 

To me that looks as a very limited "freedom", but I admit that sexual rights are an important part of the picture as such. As it is, I hold that freedom should be the right to do whatever one wants within the legal limits of one's society and the personal limits of each of us. That also pinpoints what's very important in any society: The ability to earn a living, to have a meaningful career and to say "NO!!!" if that's what one wants to do when one is being targeted by that maybe not all that seductive guy.

What Use Are Fans?

 

I bet that the football legends being admired by ardent fans love it at the moment, but will they go on loving - and expecting - it after their career has ended? After all, they have their private lives with partners, kids and whatever they do that has noting to do with ball games. Or put another way, what weighs the most, the fans or the privacy?

I would say that in reality the privacy weighs the most, but that many, who achieve a special popularity or even fame, don't allow it to do just that. They live their career goals, their fame, and the adoration that they have received from their fans. Maybe they even live it that much that they don't have time for anything else, not even the knowledge, talent or ability that brought them all those fans ....

However, like it or not, but fans and fame may not be a forever-thing. You may be famous for e.g. 5 years, 5 months, five weeks or fine minutes, and the rest of your life you're forgotten by those who adored you some time in your past. Or you may end up being a prisoner of your own fame, never being allowed the blessing of being forgotten to live your own, private life ....

 

The Slave Girl Who Became An Author

 

Harriet Jacobs (1813/1815-1897) was born a slave, but luckily enough she was taught to read and write by her female owner when she was a child. However, at 12 years of age she had an abusive male owner who beat and raped her. In 1842 she escaped and hid at her grandmother's. Actually, she stayed in her attic for seven years, until she got the chance to run off to New York. After her escape to New York she lived and worked as a nanny at Idlewild, the home of writer and publisher Nathaniel Parker Willis. In 1861 she published her memoir, "Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Written by Herself" in which she exposed the abuse enslaved women had to endure. One of the worst cruelties is that their children might be sold away even thought they themselves did all they could to protect them. This book, which was written under the pseudonym Linda Brent, is recognized as one of the most noticeable voices against slavery. Even so she had difficulties getting it published. 

 

Harriet Jacobs (1894) 

The brother of Harriet, John S. Jacobs, who also had escaped from slavery was involved with the abolitionists and, for instance, went on anti-slavery lecturing tours. Harriet helped him run "The Anti-Slavery Office and Reading Room" in New York. She learnt about feminist and anti-slavery ideologies, and in her book she describes how she came to a new understanding of the situation of black people: "The more my mind had become enlightened, the more difficult it was for me to consider myself an article of property." Well said and totally understandable!

https://hammondharwoodhouse.org/womens-history-month-harriet-jacobs-the-woman-in-the-attic/

 

https://skinnerfamilypapers.com/?p=3731

 

https://web.english.upenn.edu/~cavitch/pdf-library/Jacobs_Incidents_1861.pdf 

 

https://nbhistoricalsociety.org/portfolio-item/harriet-jacobs-writer/ 

 

Wikipedia

 

A Modern Legend of Demons And Possessions

 

Sarah Musben

Nobody really knows what happened to Sarah Musben, who was born in Sweden in 1913 and died 13 years later. Her life must have been agony, and, according to one's beliefs, one will ask how did this happen or why. To ask "how" one must see her case as belonging to medicine, but to ask "why" one obviously sees it as part of something else, but what? She herself said that a demon took possession of her body, but do we believe in what is known as super-natural demonic possessions? Naaahhh, not really, but on the other hand: Maybe .... 

However, neither way of seeing her fate gives a truly useful answer to her strange condition, which is the reason that many people don't believe it's true whereas others are convinced that it's a genuine case of demonic possession. (Also it scares people that much that they simply don't want to admit that it may be true ....).

https://youtu.be/NVuzH3zKe_c?si=xc85HqSgx_C8rfCi 

As far as I can see the only medical condition which might explain something of what happened to her is Epilepsy, but only up to a point. The possibility of a demonic possession is hard to accept because we are conditioned to see hardships of this magnitude as something deserved or undeserved. In this case it goes far back in the life of a child in Sweden who can't have deserved anything like it: Her parents got so afraid of her that they had her hospitalized when she was 7 because every night at midnight her blue eyes turned black, and her body made involuntary movements. 

The most striking physical change was her eyes which attained an extremely hateful expression while black. People - obviously including her parents - got afraid of her and thus shunned her. As to her death at 13 it must have been a relief to her no matter what happened to her in her short life - or didn't her demon possession not stop when she died? People at her death bed reported that after death her eyes suddenly opened, not blue, but black and sinister. What's more, all those present at her death died soon afterwards, and - lo and behold!!!! - their eyes had gone black ....

 

Attempting To Save The Tudor-Name And Dynasty

It's obvious to me that Anne Boleyn didn't believe that her husband, the king, Henry VIII, was going through with his intentions to have her executed for "adultery", "incest", etc. that she most probably didn't commit. When waiting for the executioner she kept looking for "someone" which most likely would be a messenger that Henry VIII wouldn't go through with the executioner. That means that on that fatal day, May 18, 1536, she was still hoping that she might be saved by a pardon which never came. Hoping against hope is a very special kind of torture, and she endured it in a notable fashion, actually laughing when the time schedule of the execution was botched. Of course, that laughter wasn't out of merriment, but shock at the situation where she, the Queen, was to be slaughtered by the man who had been totally besotted with her, but who now wanted to get rid of her so that he could marry his pregnant mistress, Jane Seymour: All for the male, royal heir he was so desperate for!

The day before the execution she had been told to "prepare her soul for death". Just like Marie Antoinette of France, who was sent to the guillotine on October 16, 1793, she kept her dignity, didn't fight the executioner or try to escape on the scaffold like e.g. the king's cousin, Margaret Pole. The execution of this elderly relative of the King was totally botched up and must have been a nightmare not only to her, but to the executioner. But then she and her son had resisted his changing the religion of England to be able to marry Anne Boleyn "who was going to save the Tudor-dynasty by giving him that much longed for son" so .... 

Margaret Pole

Henry's desperate wish for that male heir who might save the Tudor-dynasty made him cruel and vicious. His two daughters, Mary and Elizabeth, weren't even married off at an early age as was usual with royalty, most probably because they would not save the Tudor-name, only the bloodline. If married they would still belong to the house of Tudor, but they would not keep the name alive, and that meant a lot to a new dynasty which this was. 

Jane Seymour

After the execution of Anne Boleyn the king married Jane Seymour, and - lo and behold - she gave him the son he longed for: Edward who became Edward VI after his death. As to Jane Seymour she died from postnatal complications, a couple of weeks after the birth of her son, but she was the only one of Henry's many wives who received the honor of a queen's funeral, and she was buried alongside him. 

Henry took for granted that he himself would have a splendid burial site, but no, he didn't so there his lies in his badly damaged coffin with a small coffin on top of it which contains one of the many dead princes and princesses of the dynasty to follow his own: The Stuarts. They were of the Tudor bloodline, but didn't represent the dynasty as such, and he would have grieved to see that this was what it all came to in the end. 

 

Wikipedia 

https://www.hrp.org.uk/blog/the-extraordinary-life-and-death-of-lady-margaret-pole-countess-of-salisbury/#:~:text=Margaret%20Pole%27s%20execution%20came%20on,blows%20to%20sever%20her%20head.