Yesterday, one of my loyal readers sent me a link to an article that had been published on Daily Nation. I asked him what the article was about and he told me to just read it for myself.
So I read it for myself and …..goddamn…..the writer (a lady) had really gone ham on me. Man, that lady was more furious than Elon Musk after a failed rocket launch. I am sure fumes and steam were coming out of her ears and nostrils while she was typing that article. The keys of her keyboard must have been damaged too because she must have been pressing them with so much anger. Here is the link to her article if you haven’t seen it yet: http://www.nation.co.ke/lifestyle/saturday/Boys-will-be-boys-girls-will-be-sluts/1216-4148336-rt0y7cz/index.html
A few sentences into her rantings, you cant help but notice that she is a spiteful feminist who pretends to not like Etemesi’s locutions but secretly uses them for turn-on and masturbatory purposes. She even used the ending sentence of one of my latest erotic tales as part of her alternative title. And you are telling me a woman has crammed every sentence of my sex tales genuinely hates me? Naah!!
Her name is Rachel Wambui.
Dear Rachel, why so salty? I have a feeling that your anger must have its origins. Do we have history or something? Did I bang you and never called you again? Did I bang your sister? Your pal? Did I ignore your advances? No? Do you secretly love me and didn’t know how to get my attention? Honestly, the hate you have broadcasted is so ridiculous that it looks like love. I think you are kinda obsessed with me.
As a skilled operator of the punani milieu, I have lain with many hedonistas , so I know how their gears turn and when their glib confessionals hide charred morsels or real pain and regret. What I see here is a butt-hurt closet-fan going well out of her way to make an agony-assuaging point lost in the noise of her emotional incontinence.
Rachel has used two of my articles to construct her attacking weaponry. She derived most of the material of her scathing piece from a recent social experiment I did. In the experiment, I sought to find out just how much Kenyan women are into white men. I posted my findings here on my blog and the article went viral.
That social experiment is a month old and the fact that you Rachel have taken that long to respond to it surprises me. Is it that your pace of reading and writing is like that of an 18th century monorail locomotive? If such is the case, I’d recommend a change in career – maybe a zookeeper specifically in charge of tortoises. You cannot be a good writer if it takes you that long to come up with something ‘phenomenal’. Or perhaps, you wanted the best article of your life to be about Etemesi so you took your time to make sure you got everything right. Kudos.
Advocates of politically correct speech like Rachel crave putting unique thinkers “on blast” and announcing their declared victory in war to whomever listener. Her aim was to inspire a chorus of sympathetic females to cheer-lead her writings and chant ‘Fuck Etemesi!!’ but sadly for her, most women actually like what I write.
Let me examine some sections of your feebly piece Rachel,
“A month ago, blogger Phillip Etemesi conducted a dating social experiment. He created a fake profile on the mobile phone dating site Tinder where he pretended to be a white man, “to determine just how much Kenyan women are into white men,” he explained in his article. “I got extremely naughty and composed explicit flirt messages,” he continued. He then posted screenshots of his chats with the women who responded to him and didn’t conceal their names or faces. “Kenyan girls,” concluded the 2017 Kenya Bloggers Awards nominee, “have an insatiable appetite for (white men).
This is what slut-shaming looks like – where women and girls who violate traditional expectations of sexual behaviour are vilified for it. It often presents as attempts to bring a woman’s sexual ‘misconduct’ to light in order to ‘set her on the right path.’’
Slut-shaming? I think you what you have done is in fact genius-shaming. By blatantly refusing to acknowledge that that Tinder piece I did was one of the best works to ever have been composed by a Kenyan writer, you are genius-shaming me. That article was gold plated awesomeness and everyone agreed. It should even be carved in stone and displayed in the walls of The Louvre. As a matter of fact, Rachel, you are even supposed to print it, save it in a vault somewhere and show it to your great grand daughter in future as you tell her, “See this my princess? This was penned by the greatest writer of our time. Read it and don’t be like these girls who are ready to do anything for money and the good life, You don’t have to lick the ass of a white man and let him urinate on you to be successful okay?”
If the article was derogatory, why were there no angry comments from women on it? It’s normal for feminists and women who like playing the victim to label anyone who points out their immoral behaviors as a ‘slut-shamer.’ Women post screenshots of thirsty men all the time and do you see any guy complaining about “man-shaming?”
If I indeed shamed those girls for jumping on a white man without thinking twice, what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with shaming wrong behaviour? Should we condone it instead? Should we clap and say “you go girl’ when a girl claims she has standards but is ready to be pooped on by a white stranger within seconds of chatting with him? Let’s be serious here.
On to the next interesting bit in Rachel’s piece;
“How can someone accuse a girl of being interested only in looks and forget that a few sentences before, he had admitted to ‘swiping right on every hot chick?” asks 27-year-old Christine Aoko while scrolling through Etemesi’s slut-shaming treatise.
“What is so alarming about saying yes to a date? How does he know these girls were only chatting with white men? And, for God’s sake, I should think majority of people on a hook-up site would say yes to sex, no?” Christine, a content creator herself, wonders whether the men of Tinder are considered sluts as well, “ama the term only applies to women?”
That Christine friend of yours has already exposed herself as a veteran cock carouseler who says yes to sex a lot. Is that what feminism is about? It allows ladies to consume cock as freely as they want and demanding that the world accepts them for who they are? It has been said time and time again, a man cannot be considered a slut for sleeping with many partners, only a woman can. The logic is simple. i.e easily available resources versus scarce resources. Sex is an easily available resource to women. A woman can walk up to any guy and ask for sex and he’ll be ready to bang her. A man cannot walk up to any woman and just ask for sex then get it. A man has to work hard to get sex, a woman doesn’t. In that case, sex is a scarce resource for men. When you are able to get a scarce resource on a regular, you end up being respected. That’s why men who bang many women are respected by other men. But women who have sex with many partners are considered sluts because it’s idiotic to consume too much of something yet it’s easily available to you. It’s like storing 500 liters of water in your house yet you live next to a lake. Does that makes sense? No.But it makes sense for a person who lives in a dry area to store 500 liters in his house correct?
Ask yourself this too. Why are women regretful when they sleep with the wrong man whereas a guy just sees it as another conquest? Why hasn’t there ever been polygamy where one woman marries three husbands? Every added cock scours a women’s soul while every added pussy gilds a man’s soul. If feminists reasoned as individuals instead of reasoning under the collective ‘we are badass feminists’ umbrella, they’d stop tabling weak facts that can be easily poked holes at.
Again, If that Chrisitne Aoko friend of yours went to a decent school, she would know that the dynamics of attraction between men and women are different. Men are biologically wired to be attracted to looks while women mostly look at a man’s alphaness. There is a good reason why women are created with features that serve as visual stimuli e.g big boobs and big ass while men aren’t. If you are a lady who uses looks as your major mate-selection criterion while ignoring other issues such as intelligence and ambition, it shows that your brain fluid has been diluted by inanities.
On to the next interesting bit of Rachel’s article….
Writer Philip Etemesi again, on why he doesn’t think the modern day Kenyan woman deserves dowry:
“In the age of our mothers, 95 per cent of women would get married when they were virgins,” he argues, “but nowadays, by the time you marry a woman, her vagina has already snapped past the elastic limit.”
He goes on to say that today’s woman chooses fornication over procreation and values career over building good homes and raising a disciplined family. “Our mothers persevered men who used to say ‘Come here woman!’ A man exchanged his money and physical protection for a female’s chastity and guaranteed paternity for his children. (But) the feminist court of public opinion has conspired to deprive men of all power.”
This sounds like the mewling of a woman who has experienced failure after failure in her dreams of becoming a good writer. In the end, she settled on attacking someone influential, hoping she would become the next Njoki Chege.
Her sentiments above point to an article I wrote last year. See? Rachel loves me so much that she digs into the archives of my blog. She reads it like the bible. I bet she can even tell you the date and time each of my stories was published
Anyway, everything I said there is completely true. Women have changed thanks to those like you Rachel who latch onto the YOLO glorification train in the hopes of tarting up their social media feeds with more colorful show-offs yet still expect to find themselves good men. The fact that you are offended by my words as a woman suggests you might be a serial fornicator who wants to have a cock adventure with different dudes but still get a good man in the end. It doesn’t work like that.
And Rachel,I couldn’t help but notice that your writing is too basic. You lay out your opinions well but you write like a high schooler. Your piece is full of emotions but lacks brilliance. If your article was a composition, I would give it 03 out 40 and write “See me at the staff room” at the top. For a person who works at Nation Media, that’s a shame. To make your grammar more fluid and your structuring more sophisticated, I’d recommend that you read a lot of books. Or you read more of my articles. They are gems. You seem to be obsessed with me already, so that shouldn’t be a problem.