Lines to a Decadent Shrew, by Anonymous [*POEM*]

DECADENT SHREW…RADICAL FEMINIST
Pastiche of a poem by Hilaire Belloc

Blind, perverse, corrupted Shrew,
Resembling the devil in all you do!
Shrew, destroyer of all that’s good,
From youth you’ve poisoned all you could;
Promoter of porn, abortion, gays—
You serve your Father in so many ways;
Shrew dirty in bed and worse with mammon,
Shrew, cause of wars and tears and famine;
Shrew arrogant, Shrew of bile and lies,
Shrew reckless, Shrew with roving eyes.

Shrew twisted, Shrew obsessed, Shrew scary,
Shrew self-absorbed and solitary;
Shrew blustering and epileptic,
Shrew puffed and empty, Shrew dyspeptic;
Shrew hypocritical, Shrew bad,
Shrew furtive; Shrew, like Hitler, mad!
Shrew (since a man must make an end)
Shrew that shall never be my friend—
That is, until fall from your eyes
The scales of Satan, and you arise.

You’re just a shrew like Shrews of old,
With necks of bronze and sacks of gold;
Imbibing—as they thieved men’s homes—
Hell’s poison from satanic tomes!
Like them you curse, blaspheme, and bawl;
Like them one day in hell you’ll fall;
Thou turncoat Shrew, to sin devoted,
Shrew to thine own damnation quoted,
Perplexed to find thy trivial name
Reared in my verse to lasting shame.

Shrew dreadful, swinish Shrew and swearing,
Repulsive Shrew, Shrew past all bearing!
Shrew of the cold and sinister breath,
Shrew despicable, Shrew of death!
Shrew sly, Shrew nasty in night revel,
Shrew snotty, Shrew so like the devil!
Shrew, symbol of dark hate and horror—
Shrew whose mind is in Gomorrah.
Begone, O parasitic Shrew—
Who serve the devil in all you do!

Based on Hilaire Belloc’s Lines to a Don
Like this? Share it now.
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someonePrint this page

23 thoughts on “Lines to a Decadent Shrew, by Anonymous [*POEM*]

  1. this is one of lucius knightsword’s best poems so far. also the pic is just right for the poem. but what are all those snakes doing in the woman’s hair? lucius, why do you hate women so much? this poem is deeply offensive to women. a misogynist’s poem. still, it’s very well written. i sent the editor of this site 6 of my poems a month ago and he rejected them all. yeah, i know why now. none of them were hate poems saying that women were “sly” and “nasty” and “snotty”. i guess i’ll have to send in a few hate poems saying how horrid men are! especially poetry editors! 🙂

  2. Brenda,

    I don’t think Lucius is a woman hater. Apparently the poem has a deeper, hidden meaning. The clue as to its real meaning, I am told, lies in the use of the word “parasitic”. Go figure.

  3. By the way, we enjoyed reading your 6 poems. Unfortunately they were unsuitable for this website. They would have appealed only to a small minority of readers with an interest in Lady Gaga.

  4. imho, anyone who doesnt like lady gaga is an idiot. anyway, my boyfriend said my poems were brilliant. he said, brenda honey, ur’re a f***ing genius! so i know theres something wrong with u montecristo cuz you cant tell the diffrence between quality and crap! yeah, ur’re probly a woman hater too, like this guy lucius. on second thoughts, i dont think u should of published his poem at all. its anti-woman and anti-life and its sure 2 chase all the female sex away from this site. that’ll teach u.

  5. So if “shrew” has a different meaning, if it represents something wicked, why use a female word in the first place? You could just as soon have said “snake”. Snakes are both male & female and are universally feared.

    “Shrew” in common parlance is a female woman, as opposed to a male or female animal. When someone hears the word “shrew” he or she does NOT automatically think of a little furry animal. They think of a bitchy woman.

  6. @ Wyandotte

    So if “shrew” has a different meaning, if it represents something wicked, why use a female word in the first place? You could just as soon have said “snake”. Snakes are both male & female and are universally feared.

    Good thinking, Wyandotte. Your logic is irrefutable. Lucius Knightsword reveals himself as an incorrigible misogynist, even if his poem does have a “hidden” meaning. But do we necessarily want misogynists banned from this site? I don’t think so.

    Women-haters have a role to play in our society just as radical feminists do who spend all their time raging against the male sex. If misandry (= “man-hatred”) is promoted by the mass media by these masculinized females who hate men so much that they want to secede to their own state in which only women will be permitted to live, why shouldn’t misogyny be permitted too?

    I’m told that these radical feminists, invariably lesbian, were abused sexually as children. Which is what makes them hate men and turn for comfort to their own sex. If you’re wondering how they propose to “increase and multiply” in Amazonia, their brave new state, it is by inviting the occasional man in to act as a stud. Or else they will make use of artificial insemination. They will have children in Amazonia, both boys and girls. The boys will not be regarded as a threat to the stability of their society until puberty. They will then be kicked out, age 12, to fend for themselves in the wicked heterosexual world beyond Amazonia’s shining gates.

    What a sick world!

    BTW, we must judge the above poem on its degree of literary skill. Not on the misogyny, presumed or imaginary, of the poet who is obviousy a bit off his rocker. Let’s face it, the guy who wrote this poem has the word NUTTER written all over him. That he is stark raving bonkers can be seen from his other poems which reveal a religious maniac masquerading as a misogynist masquerading as a sane individual.

    I think the editor of this site is a bit of a screwball too, if you want my honest opinion, given that he makes no attempt to monitor these comments and is quite prepared to publish the most inflammatory material on his site. And here I’m not referring to Mr Knightsword’s rather tame poem—I’m referring to this article:

    http://www.darkmoon.me/2011/crimes-of-the-bolsheviks-edited-by-isabella-fanfani/

    The person who wrote this article has taken a sadistic delight in relating a series of the most gruesome tortures in minute and horrific detail, even giving a picture of a man being gnawed to death by a rat. (See Section 7)

    Why does the editor publish this sadistic material unless he himself has a taste for sadistic tortures?

  7. Dr Sardonicus,

    I think you’ve lost it. Neither Lucius Knightsword nor editor Montecristo are crazy or in any way abnormal. Their behavior on this site has at all times been impeccable. If you continue to misbehave, as you have in the past, I shall take steps to have the plug pulled on you.

    Kindly apologize if you wish to remain my friend.

  8. why should he apologize? he’s only speaking his mind miss bossyboots. who do u thing u r?

  9. Dr. Sardonicus – thanks for your response to my post. To tell the truth, I like Lucius’ poem for its skilfulness, ie, its rhythm, speed and all-around cuteness. But use of the word “shrew” kind of rubs me the wrong way; he could just as soon have used the word “viper”, which has stronger connotations than even “snake”.

    And I certainly don’t want misogynists banned from here. As you point out, this is a world of balance. I fully understand why some men & women would hate the opposite sex.

    As to the crimes of the bolsheviks article, I stopped reading when it got a little too gruesome for me. I wonder if these events did occur exactly as “Dr. Gregor” writes. Just as there’s serious exaggeration about the events during the nazi reign (soap & lampshades, etc.), so it is not outside the realm of possibility that Dr. Gregor got carried away. Truly, how can we know?

  10. (With the following, I am not commenting on the skill with which the above poem was written. I am responding to its content, and to a few of the comments written in response to it.)

    We have read and seen this before, haven’t we? It is old and putrid, and we should recognize it for what it is. Poison.

    The bulk of believing Christians would do well to recognize that much of what they believe in and hold dear is filth carried over from The Torah. Extreme group chauvinism, romanticized genocidal hatred, pathological fear, sexual perversion and cruelty, hatred for sexual pleasure, misogyny, general misanthropy, a reverence for the patently irrational and ridiculous… Our Holy Bible, including The New Testament, reeks with these sicknesses.

    Why is it that so many Gentiles were and are moved by what we attribute to the figure of Jesus? It is because many of those teachings (The Golden Rule, The Parable of the Good Samaritan, his explicit contempt for the hypocrisy and dogma of the Pharisees, The Sermon on the Mount, etc.) contradict so much of what fills that disgusting book.
    They are like beautiful lights in a massive sewer.

    When we think of those figures, like the late Mother Theresa, encouraging masses of poor, starving and diseased people to avoid family planning, and to see it as a sin, if we have a real concern for the welfare, dignity and happiness of our fellow human beings, we should recoil in horror and disgust.

    When we think of a Zionist-Christian lunatic fighting to make emergency contraception unavailable to victims of rape (because he believes that a collection of cells, that has no way of being aware, takes precedence over the health and welfare of a sentient human being), we should be filled with horror and rage.

    When we think of a retrograde/misanthropic Catholic encouraging us to view women as incarnations of Satan, and to view female sexuality as dangerous and abhorrent, we should feel like vomiting.

    All of this sickness comes from the same well. We, who proclaim our love for Jesus, should remember that so many of us were and are touched and moved by his teachings because many of those words lead us away from that poison.

    Post Script:

    If we conclude that Hitler was mad, then, surely, we must conclude that Churchill, FDR, Truman and Stalin were far madder because their crimes were much worse. On top that, most of the crimes attributed to those four scum-f*cks actually happened.

    1. Mark: Well said, sir. I could not agree with you more. I am pleased to see that this website has so many intelligent posters.

      Wyandotte: I really enjoy reading your posts. Tho I am not whether you are male or female. The name provides no clue…

      1. Hello, Berenice. Tks for the compliment! I’m a middleaged woman. (Wyandotte is a breed of chicken named after an Indian tribe.)

        Anybody know the work by Belloc that L.K. based his shrew worked on?

  11. @ Lucy Skipping

    “Kindly apologize if you wish to remain my friend.”

    Lucy, I apologize unreservedly if I have offended your feelings. I also apologize to Lucius and Montecristo for my intemperate language. I was wrong to let myself be carried away by my anger. I have no doubt at all that I am a far worse person than the two individuals I have so needlessly castigated and to whom I have attributed so many imaginary vices. My sorrow is all the more sincere in that I recognize in myself all the faults I have been so quick to see in others. I am myself, I confess, a repository of the most heinous iniquities.

  12. @ Wyandotte (July 3, 2011 at 12:34 am)

    “As to the crimes of the bolsheviks article, I stopped reading when it got a little too gruesome for me. I wonder if these events did occur exactly as “Dr. Gregor” writes. Just as there’s serious exaggeration about the events during the nazi reign (soap & lampshades, etc.), so it is not outside the realm of possibility that Dr. Gregor got carried away. Truly, how can we know?”

    Wyandotte,

    Your skepticism and caution are commendable, but I assure you “Dr Gregor” wasn’t making things up. He got his information from the same voluminous sources from which the much respected and meticulous researcher Eustace Mullins got his facts.

    This is what Mullins has to say. Read and tremble!—it’s every bit as “gruesome” as Dr Gregor:

    There are too many well documented massacres in history in which the Jews tortured and murdered their victims with the greatest glee, gloating in such barbaric practices as tearing out the hearts of women and children and smearing the blood on their faces.

    The orgy of murder, torture and pillage which followed the Jewish triumph in Russia [after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917] has never been equaled in the history of the world….The Jews were free to indulge their most fervent fantasies of mass murder of helpless victims.

    Christians were dragged from their beds, tortured and killed. Some were actually sliced to pieces, bit by bit, while others were branded with hot irons, their eyes poked out to induce unbearable pain. Others were placed in boxes…then hungry rats placed in the boxes to gnaw upon their bodies. Some were nailed to the ceiling by their fingers or by their feet, and left hanging until they died of exhaustion….Others were chained to the floor and hot lead poured into their mouths. Many were tied to horses and dragged through the streets of the city, while the mob attacked them with rocks and kicked them to death….Mothers were taken to the public square and their babies snatched from their arms….the baby [was] tossed into the air while another member of the mob rushed to catch it on the tip of his bayonet. Pregnant Christian women were chained to trees and their babies cut out of their bodies.

    See this classic article—it is quite long and deserves printing out and reading carefully:

    EUSTACE MULLINS, THE SECRET HOLOCAUST
    http://www.rense.com/general86/realholo.htm

  13. @ Wyandotte
    @ Mark Hess

    Here are some of my notes copied and pasted verbatim. They offer some corroboration that neither Mullins nor Dr Gregor was writing fiction. No smoke without fire!

    ~ The Atlantic, Sept. 1991, p. 14. In 1919, three-quarters of the Cheka staff in Kiev were Jews, who were careful to spare fellow Jews. By order, the Cheka took few Jewish hostages. R. Pipes, The Russian Revolution (1990), p. 824.; Israeli historian Louis Rapoport also confirms the dominant role played by Jews in the Soviet secret police throughout the 1920s and 1930s. L. Rapoport, Stalin’s War Against the Jews (New York: 1990), pp. 30-31, 43-45, 49-50.

    ~ An article in a 1907 issue of the National Geographical Magazine reported on the revolutionary situation brewing in Russia in the years before the First World War: “The revolutionary leaders nearly all belong to the Jewish race, and the most effective revolutionary agency is the Jewish Bund ” W. E. Curtis, “The Revolution in Russia,” The National Geographic Magazine, May 1907, pp. 313-314.

    Mark Weber: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v14/v14n1p-4_Weber.html

    ~ According to the internationally-syndicated RNS wire service (reprinted in “The Christian News,” Jan. 8, 1996, p. 2), “Some 200,000 (Christian) clergy, MANY CRUCIFIED, SCALPED AND OTHERWISE TORTURED, were killed during the approximately 60 years of communist rule in the former Soviet Union, a Russian commission reported Monday (Nov. 27, 1995)…40,000 churches (were) destroyed in the period from 1922 to 1980…”

    We read elsewhere of Catholic bishops and priests being BOILED ALIVE IN HUGE POTS—and NUNS HAVING THEIR BREASTS CUT OFF AND BEING MASS RAPED.

    ~ The Communists slaughtered 6,549 Spanish priests, 283 helpless nuns and 13 bishops. “In Ciudad Real in the center of Spain, the bishop and every single priest of the diocese were murdered; not one escaped.” –Dr. Warren H. Carroll, 70 Years of the Communist Revolution, pp. 184-185, 188-189. (Also cf. Justo Perez de Urbel, Catholic Martyrs of the Spanish Civil War [Kansas City, Missouri: The Angelus Press, 1993).

    ~ In the Bolshevik era, 52 percent of the membership of the Soviet communist party was Jewish, though Jews comprised only 1.8 percent of the total population (Stuart Kahan, The Wolf of the Kremlin, p. 81)

    ~ At least one hundred Soviet generals were Jewish (cf. Canadian Jewish News, April 19, 1989). Generals who were not themselves Jewish often had Jewish wives. Among these were Marshal Voroshilov, Marshal Bulganin, Marshal Peresypkin and General Pavel Sudoplatov (Sudoplatov assassinated hundreds of Christian leaders including Ukranian Catholic Archbishop Teodor Romzha). This Jewish wife “insurance policy” extended to Politburo members such as Andrei Andreyev and Leonoid Brezhnev.

    ~ Solomon Morel, Jewish war criminal (1919-2007): commandant of a post-war Communist concentration camp for Germans in Poland. Stalin deliberately put Jews in charge of such camps. Morel tortured and murdered thousands of Germans, sometimes WITH HIS BARE HANDS (cf. “The Wrath of Solomon,” Village Voice, March 30, 1993 and John Sack, An Eye for an Eye).

    Morel was indicted for war crimes by Ukraine in 1998, but he had already fled to Israel in 1992. The Israeli government refused to extradite him to Ukraine. He lived and prospered in Tel Aviv and died happily in bed in, age 87, in 2007 — a bloodthirsty Jewish war criminal who managed to escape international justice.

    Exactly in the same way that Israel, with the help of its foolish backer the United States, manages to escape international justice today.

    Beyond the reach of the wrath of God.

Comments are closed.