I come back from vacation, (Visit Hamburg, it's very beautiful, even St. Pauli deserves it) I read the email, I do my three hours a day of Nordic Walking (Judo is still forbidden), and I read an Italian newspaper. And I discover that Pascale is Paola Turci's new girlfriend. Or viceversa. Whatever.

This in itself does not worry me (to tell the truth I had activated the Esticazzi Intrusion Detector and I had to turn it off so as not to disturb the neighbors), but I began to see that a lot is written about it. And even in the newspaper of the owner of the Italian press one feels the need for an article like this .

And then there's a second subsystem that activated me. Because the Italian press has a characteristic in common with the illusionists. When there is something they don't want to show, they just spew rivers of ink on something related, but not nearly as dangerous.

What (for reasons related to national popular moralism, the Christian version of National Socialism) do they NOT want to talk about? Why are they spewing rivers of ink about Pascale acting in public today like she's a lesbian?

What is REALLY embarrassing to say about Pascale?

Pascale received 20 million euros as Berlusconi's ex-girlfriend, plus the use of a huge mansion, plus an annuity.

In a moment when #metoo dominates, when the "white male" (probably 50% of you who read) in breathing feels only hatred and contempt against himself, when the politically correct comes to at the point that we may never be able to listen to songs like this again because they commit the psycho – crime of toxic masculinity, that is, in a regime of censorship , Silvio arrives and pays the liquidation to his ex girlfriend.

For sure the conspiracy theorists will begin to talk about the "behind the scenes", due to the tendency that Italians have of not being able to talk about the A thing without talking about the B thing. No. Let's talk about this.

The use of extorting unjustifiable amounts of money from ex-husbands is well known, especially in the USA (but also in Europe, no joke), and is justified by an old assumption that the wife, "angel of the hearth", to follow the family he would have sacrificed his brilliant career, and therefore needs compensation. (the implicit assumption is that the woman is incapable of risk management, therefore).

We are all certain that if she hadn't married Berlusconi, Veronica Lario would have become Apple's new CEO, at least, and that being Berlusconi's wife, as well as an angel of the hearth, was a demanding job (if only managing a service of almost 20 people is a tiring job) and therefore deserved what he received. Pure meritocracy.

So, this is not about a prostitute being liquidated for the purpose of not finding her in bed the next morning, but about compensation for the terrible value of the woman's career potential, which notoriously has more potential if her husband is more. rich: if Veronica Lario had married a worker she would have had a collapse in her career potential, and for this reason she would have received less at the divorce. On the contrary, nothing seems to nourish a woman's career potential as much as marrying a rich man, which is why if the same woman marries a richer man, she receives more. Her career potential is higher if her husband is rich.

But Pascale was not married. And there is no law that requires a man to support his ex-girlfriend. Steps for whores who could blackmail him by telling things about parties: any invention of the girls would have been believed .

So what?

And therefore, Berlusconi treated her like a high-class whore. Because the whore is not paid for the sexual performance: if that were the case, married men would not pay for something they have for free.

The whore gets paid because nobody wants to wake up next to her the next day. In short, she is paid to get out of her balls. As such, the money that is given is nothing more than a liquidation .

And that's what Pascale had.

But I don't see anyone who points out this simple fact. In a world where toxic masculinity is found where it is not there, in a world where this is done to satisfy the politically correct, (and lynched if only the ridicule of this technological practice is emphasized) no one is noticing that Silvio's lesbian girlfriend is dismissed as any whore.

I don't want to talk about A when it should be about B. The subject of this post is that Pascale has been dismissed as any maintained whore. A high profile if you want, very well paid if you want, you can call her a "courtesan" if you prefer, but in the end the point is this: paid to get out of the way without bothering, or to wake up the next morning in another bed.

Let's be clear, given the figure and the lifestyle she has had access to, Pascale is definitely not a victim. For years he has led a lifestyle that was unthinkable before. And it will continue.

The problem is not how much victim the pascale is. The problem is that the message should give hives to all those who feel "offended as women" whenever you say you don't like Avocado. But for some reason, it goes quietly.

And you want to know why?

Because modern feminism doesn't have it with males. He is angry with the males who pay little . If you give your ex-girlfriend 200 euros in exchange for the promise to get out of my balls forever and never be seen again, they'll blow your throat: not only have you offended HER, but you have offended ALL women.

If you are a normal employee and saving a life you buy a noisy motorcycle to go and see miss wet t-shirt you are pigs full of "toxic masculinity".

But if you pay a woman well , you can still do what you want. They don't jump at your throat. They prefer to take voyeurs photos of the pelvis given to another woman in order not to understand a simple thing:

that if you are a footballer you can buy a supermodel, and change it like you change a car. If you are a billionaire, you can easily liquidate an ex-girlfriend like you liquidate a whore.

As long as you pay a woman well, you can do whatever the fuck you want.

And the feminists will shut up.

Feminism, after all, is just a question of paying well.

And let's be clear: I didn't say that feminists stop if you are rich . No, that doesn't stop them. I said they stop if you paid the offended woman well . Of course this requires you to be rich, but if you are rich and you don't pay a woman well, you are still in the crosshairs.

You have to pay well. Pay well, and then you can do what you want, and the feminists will turn away. They will not feel "offended as a woman".

Because it's not true that all women are whores. But feminist intellectuals certainly are. Just pay well, and they swallow everything you tell them to swallow.