They’re Calling for Slavery Now

Post image for They’re Calling for Slavery Now

by W.F. Price on October 5, 2009

Women who have children with a man, and then decide to trade him in for a monthly check aren’t happy with the coercive child support system that can take all and more of a man’s pay, put him in jail and revoke his right to leave the country. No: prison, poverty and Soviet-style restrictions on movement aren’t enough. Nor is even good old-fashioned peonage.

In fact, according to one single mother, who had children with a man she describes as a drug addict, slave labor is the only appropriate remedy.

April McCaffery, who writes for Examiner as the LA single parenting correspondent, gives this recommendation on her personal blog:

Deadbeat dads should be forced into slave labor. It’s the only possible solution that might actually lead to results.

Never mind the fact that she chose to have children with this alleged loser of a man — he still owes her a better standard of living, goddammit! I have no idea who left whom, but chances are the woman did the leaving, and rather than being happy about having children and no longer being responsible for the drug addict she willingly had sex and children with, she has decided that she should be able to use the state to force the man to break rocks for her.

This is the ultimate attitude of entitlement, and gives us a view into the hearts of women across America who ditch their husbands. In their twisted little minds, men not only owe them children, but a lifetime of enforced servitude as well. And of course, the fathers have no rights whatsoever to parent their children (who could suggest such a thing?).

As men, our freedom is our most precious asset. If that can be taken away by faithless women, there is something so inherently unjust about the system under which we live that mere acquiescence may not be enough to remedy it.

I am curious as to what men think the proper response should be to the reintroduction of slavery for the benefit of women who choose to leave their husbands. Perhaps our readers have some suggestions. There are lines we cannot allow to be crossed, but dare we articulate a response when they are?

{ 68 comments… read them below or add one }

Paul October 5, 2009 at 03:47

This is a very good article and I think you will get many interesting things said about it. Although the suggestion is grotesque, what I would like to say is that it is no more than an extension of how women instinctively think. Women always see men as being responsible for supporting them. In some ways men have gone along with this. Marriage has always been a form of servitude where by a man works for the benefit of a woman. Essentially he does this for no reward.

Sex is really no more than the bate on the end of the hook. There is nothing beyond. Before marriage a man sees the bate but not usually the line on which he will be strung out to dry. Once hooked the man will discover that the bate was in fact fake and that the line is strong, much stronger than he is and breaking it is going to be much harder than he thinks.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2
piercedhead October 5, 2009 at 04:20

A silent march by thousands through a city’s main thoroughfare is the start. There’s no need for ideological agreement between men, no need for large organizations, no need for funding.

Name a place, a date and a time, and what specific purpose is being marched against. As soon as a thing like this can attract more than a handful of men ready to walk grim-faced before the public gaze, a fuse has been lit and everyone will know it.

All this talk about men never working together is self-defeating. History is full of incidents where men simultaneously lose their fear and answer a call they would have ignored only the day before.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0
Elusive Wapiti October 5, 2009 at 04:58

There have been folks making the case (Roger Knight comes immediately to mind) that CS peonage is the return of modern-day slavery. He’s even tried breaking out the good old anti-peonage act for good measure. Unsurprisingly, his efforts have been rebuffed in court by a government that wants a man’s money more than his time or parentage.

I pay chilimony. A lot of it. Way way more than my share of the care and feeding of my two older boys. And it strikes me that there is one person in the whole equation that allows the circus to go on. Me. I could end the whole thing tomorrow by simply not paying, or by paying only my share. Of course, the bill I (and my boys) would pay for not paying would be quite steep, as I have a lot to lose, especially now that I have a family again. But imagine what would happen if fellows like me would just not do it any more. They couldn’t throw all of us in jail.

As far as “deadbeat dads” are concerned, Glenn Sacks has done some excellent work on this issue that has shown that so-called deadbeat dads are more like deadbroke dads.

I brought this up to an attorney once in conversation. He’s an older fellow. He mentioned all the trials that single mothers go through. I mentioned that whatever sympathy I had for choice moms was greatly moderated by the fact that they chose that fate for their children and for themselves in a divorce of convenience, and chances are they divorced because they were unhappy. After all, they could have simply honored their vows, stayed married, and been happier.

Baskerville has advised men to never marry and never have kids. This is great advice…marriage has absolutely nothing to offer the non-Christian, which encompasses the vast majority of guys out there.

Lastly, I note that McCaffery censors her comments. No challenging of the opinions of the modern-day slaver at her place, no sirree.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
Elusive Wapiti October 5, 2009 at 05:00

I should have said “marriage has absolutely nothing to offer the non-Christian he can’t get else where”.

Now off to work I go.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
zed October 5, 2009 at 05:22

Looking beyond the inflammatory language which reflects rage, hatred, and an obsession with control, we see a remarkable inability to grasp reality. No thought is given to what sort of economic enterprise might be able to generate income in excess of expenses using unskilled slave labor. I am reminded of a very frightening conversation I had with a woman a few years ago who said she had never given any thought to how men made money, she just thought of it as something men did. I suppose she thought that we just sit around and grow it like we do hair.

Like Paul, I have seen a great deal of entitlement thinking among women which does appear to be the mentality of slaveowners. Sadly, a great many men also buy into this thinking and are willing to be the enforcers. No prison system will ever produce more than it costs to operate, so this obsession with vengeance is simply one more way to kill the already declining productivity of the culture.

Baskerville’s advice strangely echoes what my doctor told me over 30 years ago. During a routine physical he asked me if I was married. When I said I wasn’t he said “Every night and every morning get down on your knees and thank God that is the case.” He had just gone through his 2nd bloody divorce, and was driving a 15 y/o VW Beetle and living in a studio apartment. If divorce can reduce a doctor to pauperhood, it can certainly completely destroy an average wage earner.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
abe October 5, 2009 at 06:38

http://www.tmz.com/2009/10/02/david-letterman-extortionist-child-support/2#comments

some info about David Letterman’s extortionist:

“According to the divorce settlement agreement he signed with ex-wife Patty Montet in 2004, the “48 Hours” producer was required to pay $6,800 a month in child and spousal support for three years. That amount was reduced to $5,966.66 in May 2007.

Their house was sold and the proceeds divided during the divorce. And the credit card bills, totaling approximately $13,500, were split down the middle. Halderman agreed to pay for the unreimbursed medical bills for his two children. He was also required to maintain life insurance. “

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
abe October 5, 2009 at 06:41

I should say, “blackmailer” instead of “extortionist.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
McCrack October 5, 2009 at 07:40

Fine – make the dude a slave. But sew the woman’s vagina shut permanently.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Fiercely Independent John Nada October 5, 2009 at 08:37

I imagine that in their minds, this is just the logical extension of the dominant paradigm: Entitlement Materialist Feminism. Indentured servitude and debtors’ prison is not only alive and well, it’s justified legally under the Bradley Amendment. With the economy running at less than optimum performance, where else were they supposed to get their annuities? When it comes to women pinching men for resources, the juice is definitely worth the squeeze.

This is why I advocate that any man living with the Sword of Damocles hanging precariously over his head to act accordingly and in an astute manner. With 54% of the voting electorate, 1st World Females are not disenfranchising themselves, ever.

No need to re-invent the wheel. Simply look to those who’ve gone before us to see what did and did not work effectively. After that it’s a matter of abandoning the apathy and taking action.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Female Misogynist October 5, 2009 at 09:15

Here is one man’s answer to that. Quote:

“Fortunately, the martyrdom of a few brave heroes has made my future wife aware of what good it will do her. I have made it clear to her that if she ever attempts that crap, I will destroy any assets that we have, shoot a gigantic dose of heroin into my veins, and then burn the house down with me in it. I am serious. She knows it.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 09:16

Look at the comments to that article – there is virtually 100% agreement that slavery is necessary!

My god.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Ferdinand Bardamu October 5, 2009 at 09:24

I should be shocked at this. And yet, I’m not. The society that has no problems throwing “deadbeat dads” into modern debtors’ prison is a society that is two steps away from forcing said men into slavery. The sickness is metathesizing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
sestamibi October 5, 2009 at 09:38

Paul–

It’s “bait”, not “bate”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Deansdale October 5, 2009 at 09:50

“I should be shocked at this. And yet, I’m not.”
Exactly. Did anyone not expect this?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Elusive Wapiti October 5, 2009 at 11:10

“The society that has no problems throwing “deadbeat dads” into modern debtors’ prison is a society that is two steps away from forcing said men into slavery. “

What chicks fail to realize is that the society that blithely enslaves men is one that will also have no truck with taking those kids away from women when/if it feels like it.

Mark my words: women will rue the day they exchanged the authority of their husband for the authority of the State.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Elusive Wapiti October 5, 2009 at 11:14

Example of how women will come to regret their busybody/slaver nature:

Glenn Sacks cites how WalMart employee sicced CPS and the cops on parents who took pix of their nude 5 yo child in the bathtub.

Guarantee you that Joe-6 didn’t agitate for this legislation. Buncha busybody hens did.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Doug1 October 5, 2009 at 11:20

zed–

If divorce can reduce a doctor to pauperhood, it can certainly completely destroy an average wage earner.

No zed, it’s not “divorce” that does that. Writing that it’s “divorce” that does really does create the impression in many people’s minds that that’s some sort of law of nature, or inevitable with divorce.

Divorce did not do that to doctors 100 years ago, or 60. Or 50.

It’s post 1980s 2nd and 3rd wave feminist “reformed” and massively unjust to men divorce laws that do that in AMERICA worst of all, but bad elsewhere in the Anglosphere. Way, way less so in many other countries, in addition to their much lower divorce rates.

It’s American feminism, enabled or anyway not much resisted by British/American male blaming excessive chivalry, that’s the problem. Not all divorce everywhere and at all times.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
DT October 5, 2009 at 12:08

And my family wonders why I haven’t settled down with a wife yet.

I get on my knees morning and night and thank God that I never got married. It would have been so easy for a woman to bait and hook me in my 20′s. Looking back on things I’m shocked that I’m still single because it was not due to any conscious decision on my part, and I came close to marrying a couple girls. I only recently took the red pill and started to discover the horrors of marriage in our society. Basically I dodged the bullet by pure luck.

The sad thing is that deep down inside I still believe marriage and family are ideal for both men and women. But only in a proper society, with proper laws, and both men and women filling their proper rolls. I have one friend…one…that I know with a good marriage and family. His wife is loving and supportive and doesn’t possess a shred of entitlement mentality. As hard as it is to raise kids, it must be wonderful to succeed at it, to be surrounded by family members that love you. I envy him. (He has natural game in spades btw.)

But the risks are far too great in this society. I wouldn’t even dream of marriage or children at this point.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
Reinholt October 5, 2009 at 12:09

An obviously unsustainable conclusion.

You cannot enslave people without significant negative consequences; one part of a group cannot be freed to act without consequence while the other suffers without eventually being destroyed or conquered by another group (one that is likely more productive because they are using all of their resources effectively), or inciting a revolution.

Ironically, wasn’t feminism initially to resist women being enslaved to men because slavery was wrong?

( Ignoring that they weren’t, but the point is they are now advocating the very things they railed against. )

Though, for comedy value, I wonder what would happen in light of this turn of events if one took a speech by Adolf Hitler and dropped in the appropriate feminism buzzwords instead…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Ovid October 5, 2009 at 12:24

“I am curious as to what men think the proper response should be to the reintroduction of slavery for the benefit of women who choose to leave their husbands. Perhaps our readers have some suggestions. There are lines we cannot allow to be crossed, but dare we articulate a response when they are?”

Here’s an old article dealing precisely with that question:

http://www.misandryreview.com/?p=773

A bit extreme perhaps,but a good indication of how far female (and “conservative” male) pig-headedness has driven increasing numbers of men towards withdrawl and desperation.

I call it the new monasticism. As with it’s elder brother it’s a prelude to a new Dark Ages.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 12:49

While I am horrified by this (as well as the comments on that article where most women are endorsing slavery), this is a positive in terms of the balance correcting. Why?

Because the great thing about extremists is that they always go too far.

When AQ in Iraq could not kill American GIs easily, they started killing Iraqi troops. When that became too costly, they started killing Iraqi civilians, including in schools and markets. This courted a general backlash, which only happened because the extremists went too far.

This is another step towards the bubble of imbalance bursting. By 2020, it will burst. You’ll see.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 13:20

In the comments there, notice the blame-shifting :

They say that HE chose to abandon his kids by not paying child support! Child support is the law! HE is a bad person…

Never once do they recognize that SHE, the WOMAN, decided to divorce in the first place.

My god. I haven’t been this appalled since 9/11/01.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
Sambonizer October 5, 2009 at 13:36

Wow… I almost threw up when I read this.
Before reading this I felt sorry for white american males but this is just going too far (not that they weren’t going too far in the first place). How deluded must someone be to expect slavery from someone who you have, and I repeat, YOU have abandoned?
Anyway, I whish I could do something but living where I live (Peru) there’s not much for me to do other than supporting you guys.
Sorry if my comments might seem idiotic or un-informed but that’s why I’m here. To learn. (Also my age might be a factor – 18)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 13:52

Sambonizer,

You actually can help.

You can tell people in Peru how ridiculously unfair life in America has become for men, and that America has fallen far from what it once was.

The reason America is in rapid decline, is that the section of society that invents new technologies, keeps the machines running, and keeps women and children safe, MEN, are being given no reason to love their country anymore. How can they love a country that is slowly and incrementally trying to enslave them?

Let people in Peru know WHY America is in decline….and what happens when women get too much power.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Sambonizer October 5, 2009 at 14:25

Actually, I’ve been telling people about the situation (I’m even writing a report about how men are being abused in America and Europe) but most people just don’t listen or they simply don’t care.
Anyway, thanks for the answer and I’ll continue to tell people about this. Hopefully some of them will actually hear me out.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Welmer October 5, 2009 at 14:29

I noticed Ms. McCaffery is chopping away the comments on her blog like a lumberjack on meth, and now claims she wasn’t serious about wanting slavery.

This woman can’t even accept responsibility or accountability for what she writes! Just goes to show that the sob stories we so often get from single moms, etc., are usually extreme distortions of reality.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 14:32

Welmer,

Maybe save a screenshot of what she said, so that she can’t edit it down later if more attention gets drawn to this. Do it quickly!! This is blogging 101.

Sambo,

Frame the idea in terms of “if you were wondering why America, once so powerful and the envy of the world, is declining so quickly, THIS is why”. Then people will be able to connect the dots.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Sambonizer October 5, 2009 at 14:40

@The Fifth Horseman: Thanks, that will help me put thing in perspective for some people. Still, there are some who don’t believe in male abuse but a couple of links here and there should do the trick.
Well, thanks for your help. Now I have to go do some studying and such.
Best of luck.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
JD October 5, 2009 at 16:58

Who are the idiots saying she needs to be raped and murdered?

You don’t win by making threats you win by proving the other side wrong.

Things like death threats are infantile and basically screw any chance of a meaningful dailogue.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Welmer October 5, 2009 at 17:10

Who are the idiots saying she needs to be raped and murdered?

How should I know? It’s her blog, and she can log the IPs if she wants…

You don’t win by making threats you win by proving the other side wrong.

Things like death threats are infantile and basically screw any chance of a meaningful dailogue.

When someone calls for enslaving people, I think the opportunity for “meaningful dialogue” has already left the building.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 17:25

A meaningful dialog was already attempted by the many male commenters there who did not make such threats.

The inability of the women there to answer simple questions or to explain some gaping examples of hypocrisy further proved that they are not fit for ‘meaningful dialog’.

So quit your cowardly ‘blame the man’ boilerplate. Far more attempts at meaningful dialog were made than could ever be deserved by someone advocating slavery.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Reinholt October 5, 2009 at 17:50

Meaningful dialogue is the wrong strategy here.

Shaming and/or so-called “asshole game” would be more appropriate; understand the tools with which one must engage adversaries.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
JD October 5, 2009 at 17:54

Welmer, I brought it up because it might have been someone that found the post form your link (which isn’t completely outside the realm of possibility. And the point of an open dialogue isn’t convincing the feminists and man haters. It’s about convincing everyone else.

And horseman, how about you stop making strawmen and disagree with something I actually said?

Thanks (in part) to the guy that called one of the women a cunt and said she should be killed, now nobody can discuss the post because new comments have been disabled.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 18:04

JD,

Not a single strawman was created. You are taking a very submissive, Beta reaction to a situation where meaningful dialog clearly already was granted to those women. That is a very generous bestowment, given that they were advocating slavery.

Get some perspective, for once.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
JD October 5, 2009 at 18:15

Oh? You didn’t say I was using “blame the men” boilerplate? I’m sorry I must have confused you with some other blithering idiot.

Unless you’re referring specifically to the reason that comments were disabled. In which case I have to ask what the hell you thought was going to happen when some idiot stars making death threats.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Welmer October 5, 2009 at 18:18

Welmer, I brought it up because it might have been someone that found the post form your link (which isn’t completely outside the realm of possibility. And the point of an open dialogue isn’t convincing the feminists and man haters. It’s about convincing everyone else.

[...]

Thanks (in part) to the guy that called one of the women a cunt and said she should be killed, now nobody can discuss the post because new comments have been disabled.

It could have been someone from here, but it could have been some feminist (like the blog owner) trying to make her own point. It’s anonymous, so we really have no idea. A previous commenter on the thread about rape accusations noted the huge amount of disinformation being fed to UC Davis through one lone feminist avenger, so it’s perfectly reasonable to suspect that an “anonymous” death threat may have been manufactured.

Fortunately, we have Ms. McCaffery herself on the record advocating slavery for men whose wives left them, and that’s all that really matters. As for the deleted comments, they were probably pretty reasonable for the most part, but yet she chooses to display death threats and profanity…

That says it right there, doesn’t it? Cheap and transparent tactic on her part.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Welmer October 5, 2009 at 18:26

BTW, JD,

I should add that you make a perfectly reasonable and rational point. However, you have to keep in mind that our adversaries don’t hold themselves to these standards. They are opportunistic and not above deceit to get their way. It is only in rare moments that they speak their mind, and we have to capitalize on that as a mistake on their part rather than an overture.

Don’t let your noble nature get the better of you.
;)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Puma October 5, 2009 at 18:32

If you are reading this, you ARE the resistance.

- John Connor

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
JD October 5, 2009 at 19:14

I’ve used hateful and vitriolic speech before but I would never threaten to kill someone.

If you want to fight fire with fire then the idea is to make the other party look bad, and when you threaten to kill someone you do just the opposite.

And several well reasoned and logical posts are still present. Mine for instance.

I mention some facts about women not only filing the majority of divorces, but committing the majority of child abuse and infantcide.

I could have sandbagged the lot of them but now I can’t because some idiots came in and screwed it up for everybody.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 19:27

JD,

You still don’t grasp what Welmer is saying.

The ‘rape and murder’ comment was an obvious shill, and that is why April McCaffrey is KEEPING that comment, while far more polite, yet logical comments were deleted en masse.

Think, muchacho, think.

I can’t believe you have been tricked so easily. What a tool they have made you into.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 19:43

I won’t touch the “no point in marriage” bit except to say that I’ve been married for three weeks now and don’t regret a thing — and don’t plan to.

I hope you got a properly-done pre-nup. You know, the existence of which itself makes it more likely you will never need to use it.

Three weeks. If you are still happy 5 years in, consider yourself to be in the lucky minority.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Ganttsquarry October 5, 2009 at 20:26

When I read something like this, I can’t help but think of Whiskey’s famous phrase. You know the one.

Women HATE HATE HATE beta males.

DT,

Your story sounds very similar to mine and I share your sentiments about marriage as well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech October 5, 2009 at 20:51

However, you have to keep in mind that our adversaries don’t hold themselves to these standards. They are opportunistic and not above deceit to get their way.

And this is why being nice to our opponents is completely pointless. They will never listen to reason so we should just do what needs to be done. We have to start treating this more like a war and less like a reasonable debate.

Mark my words: women will rue the day they exchanged the authority of their husband for the authority of the State.

That will never happen since all but a handful of women have no interest in freedom whatsoever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Talleyrand October 5, 2009 at 21:28

It shouldn’t be treated “like” a war. It is a war.

Women will rue it, they just won’t understand the why of it because they’re to tied to the present emotional state to reason out cause and effect.

“1. We still have the 14th amendment, so she can call for slavery all she wants — won’t happen.”

They won’t call it slavery, they’ll called child support enforcement, or social re attribution development or some such. The words of the constitution mean what the elites say they mean, and nothing else.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 21:44

It shouldn’t be treated “like” a war. It is a war.

I agree. When they are openly talking about a) taking your livelihood, and b) enslaving you, what more provocation do you need?

I say we use the means at our disposal, including joining up with the smarter, more surgical factions of the Islamic community, to fight misandry.

The time has come. The Four Horsemen of Male Vengeance are in their chrysalis as we speak.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Steezer October 5, 2009 at 22:08

Fifth Horseman, are you serious? What do you want, to bring sharia to the States? The Four Horsemen of Male Vengeance? Exactly what kind of country do you imagine here?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
The Fifth Horseman October 5, 2009 at 22:12

Western Protestant society > Moderate Islamic Society > Feminist Hell.

Given that the first choice is too far gone, British men are choosing the second choice (see links in the GC comments), bu using Islamic courts to settle family law matters. I don’t blame them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Steezer October 5, 2009 at 23:23

Start off using Islamic courts to settle family law matters and you might end up with sharia for far more than that. I guess that’s their look-out. (Couldn’t they use Jewish courts instead, or do those not exist in Britain?)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Fiercely Independent John Nada October 6, 2009 at 06:21

I’ve been asked on numerous occasions what the biggest benefit of going ghost expat style was. For the life of me I couldn’t pin it down until about 9 months ago when it hit me out of the blue.

What do I mean?

Since going expat I have not seen, not spoken to, not interacted with a single 1st World Female…and my life has been all the more enriched and enjoyable because of it.

Exchanges like these with those problematic females are exactly why. I’d rather chew glass than engage 99% of the women in Entitlement Feminized Societies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Puma October 7, 2009 at 08:02

Religion and Government do not, should not, mix. Of course when I say religion, I am including Feminism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Puma October 7, 2009 at 08:15

I am personally against the mixing of religion and government.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Globalman October 7, 2009 at 10:24

Welmer, I have been at work educating MRAs on their rights. Funnily enough, they are not keen on learning what they are. We are having success refusing the Jurisdiction of the Family Court in UK, Canada, USA and we are testing Ireland and Australia. Simply put, the marriage contract is fraudulent. Men are NOT obliged to pay income taxes, alimony, child support, council taxes, car registration, insurances, drivers licenses, speeding fines. etc. In fact anything that is defined in ‘legislation’ can be effectively ignorned.

If you are actually interested in finding out about this google “Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception” by Robert-Arthur: Menard or duck on over to www,thinkfree.ca.

I am about to give all men in Ireland/Australia the opportunity to divorce their wife and state and refuse jurisdiction of the family court. It should be fun!! I think a lot of guys will take that opportunity.

Me? I have paid no ‘interim support’ and no ‘child support’ and I don’t intend to because they are voluntary and I don’t volunteer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Globalman October 7, 2009 at 10:26

John Nada,
I only date women raised behind the iron curtain…they are really lovely…so I know exactly what you are talking about.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Doug1 October 7, 2009 at 11:03

5th Horse–

Have Islamic courts ever been successfully used when the woman doesn’t consent to their jurisdiction. E.g. because she isn’t Muslim. Or even if she is, she doesn’t want to have the matter adjudicated there?

That’s where the rubber meets the road, aside from some outlier interesting cases.

Of course if they marry a woman raised within Islam all her life, particularly the Middle Eastern (and from what I hear non Lebanese) cultural versions of Islam, then something a lot fairer to men really might occur.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman October 7, 2009 at 12:08

Have Islamic courts ever been successfully used when the woman doesn’t consent to their jurisdiction. E.g. because she isn’t Muslim. Or even if she is, she doesn’t want to have the matter adjudicated there?

I don’t know, but I think that if the man *files* in the Islamic court, that court carries the jurisdiction. So it could be a matter of who files first.

But I don’t know for sure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Joseph January 6, 2010 at 14:44

I’m so late to this it isn’t even funny, but I just wanted to include my view because it’s mine!

We have to stop this shit! These women have lost their damn minds! I’m a Christian (I also don’t use harsh language often) and have been beta most of my life, but fuck this. I say we need a culling. Start on one side of the country and walk in a straight line. Any woman who wants to keep this system of marriage and live on a system of entitlement will be shot and we end it on that. Clean slate and easy fix.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5
>.> January 10, 2010 at 21:47

I don’t know, when I read the feminist’s blog you have linked I detect some dark humor and sarcasm… I mean, there are good points here, but it seems a little overreactive. So she vented a little…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
Nutz January 10, 2010 at 23:32

“I am curious as to what men think the proper response should be to the reintroduction of slavery for the benefit of women who choose to leave their husbands. Perhaps our readers have some suggestions. There are lines we cannot allow to be crossed, but dare we articulate a response when they are?”

A bullet in the cunt’s head would be a good start followed by a quick escape to a non-extradition country. If something as extreme as slavery was put into effect then I suspect something equally extreme, similar to what I just suggested, would not be uncommon.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
David K. Meller February 18, 2010 at 09:33

I suppose we owe this contemptible shrike at least credit for being honest. She states explicitly what the majority of lazy, stupid, narcicisstic, self-entitled, and over-educated modern women are thinking, but rarely publicly confess to.

“Liberation” for women means slavery for men!

Way to go, girl! As far as we men (and any remaining women who love us) are concerned–we’ve been warned!! Mightier ideologies (and tyrannies) than feminism have ruled for a while, and then vanished overnight when the victims finally caught on!

KNOWLEDGE IS POWER!!
David K. Meller

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
kurt9 February 19, 2010 at 16:11

It is very simply for any man to avoid this situation completely. Either get a vasectomy or don’t have sex.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
newly divorced February 19, 2010 at 20:02

I would add to the earlier comments that marriage has nothing to offer to the Christian either as marriage under the current system has nothing to do with the marriage practiced by any religion. (other than socialism). A christian should write up his own covenant between him and his “wife” and have it blessed by his pastor rather than submitting to the authority of the (anti-Christian) state.

If his wife then breaks the covenant between them, the Christian man will be protected from the depradations of the state. If he breaks his covenant, he will be constrained by his conscience and the views of his community just as things were in ancient times when marriage was invented.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
mgtow February 19, 2010 at 20:47

@Newly divorced

And where does a church gets its tax breaks from? The pastors know which side of their bread is buttered, and it sure ain’t God.

In many countries, a marriage contract signed in church is as legally binding as a marriage contract signed at the Department of Marriages. The only difference is that in the former, you’ll hear a sermon and singing of hymns as well.

Oh wait, I think that marriage contract is the same in both situations. Where you sign it is a non-issue. Not signing the contract = cohabitation = fornication = ‘living in sin’. Ah, but your newly wedded, equally yoked, born again virgin Christian wife has repented, she’s okay now.

The main reason why Christians are so for the modern institution of marriage is their belief in the Christ-church = Man-bride analogy. This belief is further deepened by the belief in one-man-one-woman monogamy (a.k.a God’s Original Plan in the Garden of Eden, but let’s just forget about the men in OT who had many women). Also, having sex before signing, under witness, on the dotted line is sinful.

Marriage has always been, and always will be, a business transaction. She gives birth and keeps the house, he brings in the food and money. In modern times, many things have screwed up this simple transaction, resulting in it becoming a high risk-low returns venture for men.

Simple solution for men: avoid marriage. But if you sincerely believe in celibacy, go ahead. Masturbate or rechannel your libido, it’s entirely up to you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
newly divorced February 20, 2010 at 18:40

mgtow

I think we’re saying the same thing. I definately would not recommend that anyone do anything which could be construed as “marriage” by the state. I was suggesting that a “Christian” couple (I’m not particularly religious myself) make an agreement among themselves and abide by that agreement. Obviously, the agreement would not be legally enforceable.

If the government were to call this “marriage” (i.e. common law or otherwise), then I would recommend not even doing this and instead making a private agreement and taking whatever steps are needed to avoid being married in legal terms. Under no circumstances should a man ever get legally “married”. Under current laws, that status is tantamount to slavery.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
HiroProX September 1, 2010 at 23:11

And these women are the same kind of venomous harpies who wonder “Why won’t he commit?”

Probably because committing to such a venomous harpy could be considered grounds for commitment of the mental health variety.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
ML December 8, 2010 at 20:15

What could we do with this breed of woman if conditions were favorable?

I shall tell you. It happens to be the same solution to the problem of modern women in general.

Put those who go willingly into cages, and shoot those who will not. If the feminists want to play totalitarian tough guy, they ought to be reminded that we were there first, and best, too. The word tyrannos was not coined for a woman.

I enjoy anecdotes like this, however. I enjoy seeing the parvenus of delegated power testing limits, allowing themselves little orgiastic flights of authoritarian revenge fantasy. This is how power elaborates itself. That they are schooled in a rhetoric that is obsessed with bygone vectors of power, now transferred to they themselves, is one of those rare grand ironies of historical configuration that if compiled in a book would kill one after a single reading from the deep, tragic laughter it would induce.

Meller’s comment above is perfect. Liberation for women means slavery for men!

Raise the stakes. If some pampered bitch scrivener wants to talk slavery, let us talk execution. Failure to rise to this grim decision is what brought us here. Let’s not make the same old mistake of chivalry. “Chivalry” — let that be to us as “flat earth” is to all, a laughing stock and cause for shame. No support groups. No silly silent marches. No more books, conferences, essays or e-mail lists. If it’s war they’re after, give it them with all prejudice, comrades.

TO THE CAGES, OR TO THE BONEYARD.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
ML December 8, 2010 at 20:18

(Couldnt they use Jewish courts instead, or do those not exist in Britain?)

There is one, actually. It’s called the British Government.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Kris W January 31, 2011 at 01:01

What further evidence is needed for us to recognize the fact that most women are inherently sociopathic?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Clay November 27, 2013 at 08:39

I think that women who treat their men well, and actually put out, will always have their man around. While there are some one night stand girls that do get knocked up, most women are alone with their kids by choice. Either they fucked their boss and the dad left, or they treated him so miserably that he shacked up with another girl. History proves that when a man is treated well, he stays, and he works hard because he is appreciative of his wife. His wife, on the other hand, dreams of the day when Mr. Seducer comes to the door step. She longs for that day.
Men don’t pay child support because they can’t, unless they sleep in their car, shave in the creek, and dunk into the deepest trout pool twice a week so they don’t smell like a pig. Some men do attempt this. It doesn’t work for very long, however, as they will grow lonely, suicidal, and long for companionship. Meanwhile she has already moved her new guy in with her, while her x sleeps in the car and works 60 hours a week to pay child support and come back to the cozy back seat of the car. No man is going to do this for an extended period of time. So he’ll flee, to another city, which is why the kids don’t see their dad anymore. He has to flee or he’ll go to prison where he’ll be raped. I would flee.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: