Female Columnist Applauds Domestic Violence in Tiger Woods Incident

by W.F. Price on December 2, 2009

Tiger Woods’ indiscretions and his wife’s ride on the crazy train are being beaten to death in the pop press, so I know the story may already be a bit tiresome, but the glaring hypocrisy and double standard where domestic violence is concerned simply has to be pointed out by someone.

At this point it’s obvious Tiger cheated. Big deal. Infidelity has become the norm in marriages across America, and that goes for women as well as men. In fact, the only women who appear unlikely to cheat these days are those for whom it would be economically disadvantageous, such as Tiger’s wife, which suggests what measures ought to be taken to reduce infidelity in general. However, the law today affords no excuses for domestic violence, no matter how heinous the behavior of the victimized spouse. Except, apparently, when the perpetrator is a wife. I suppose VAWA was named the “Violence Against Women Act” for a reason.

Whatever one may think of Tiger’s behavior, the fact is that, every year, millions of American men are subjected to the exact same thing his Swedish wife Elin Nordegren faced. Any husband who reacted in the same manner Mrs. Woods did would find himself behind bars in no time. He’d probably do some serious time if he’d picked up a deadly weapon such as a golf club.

Nevertheless, countless comments left by women on articles have been congratulatory in a “you go girl” manner and, sadly, a number of men appear to share the same opinion. Today, I came across an article in which the columnist actually applauds domestic violence. Jessica Ashley, writing for Shine, supports Elin’s golf club attack:

I say that she should do whatever it is she has to do. If that is taking the tool of her husband’s trade to smash the window of his Cadillac Escalade, so be it.

Of course, she leaves out the part about Tiger being in the car at the time, which makes it a plain case of assault. I should know about this. At one point in my life I got into a fistfight with a guy who threatened me over a traffic dispute, and beat him fair and square. Being a sore loser, the fellow snuck up on me while I was stopped at a red light and took out my window with a baseball bat, spraying glass into my face. The surprise and blood in my eyes blinded me temporarily, and if I’d been moving at the time I’m sure I would have crashed.

Fortunately, a witness took note of his license plate number, a detective called me over to the station to pick him out of a photo montage, and the guy was arrested. He ended up doing a couple months in jail for his ill-advised attempt to mimic a wiseguy. Aside from having to endure a doctor picking tiny glass shards out of my face and eyes with tweezers, I was fine, and the remaining scars are tiny. The point is that attacking someone with a baseball bat, even if they happen to be in a car, is a violent crime. Same goes for an attack with a golf club, I’m sure. In fact, here in Seattle a member of the “Critical Mass” bicycle gang was arrested a couple years ago for attacking a man’s car with a bicycle lock, and the driver, who tried to run the cyclist over following the attack, was let off the hook.

So now that it’s been established that Mrs. Woods likely committed a violent crime, we ought to ask why she was never arrested. In cases of suspected domestic violence, police are virtually required to make an arrest, but they chose not to in this incident. Now I’m not sure if it was because of the stature of the family in question, but I’d be willing to bet that there is far more political pressure to arrest men than there is to arrest women. In other words, the double standard comes straight from the top. Politicians and judges (who are also politicians) are directly responsible for this state of affairs. I don’t think the police, who are quite often victims of false accusations themselves, are the ones who are calling the shots on the ground here.

Honestly, I don’t really give a damn about Tiger Woods fooling around, or even about his wife’s insane response, but as a man, I am not at all happy about the fact that women can commit crimes against men with impunity. Think about this: if a woman can get away with going after Tiger Woods and be congratulated for it, how much do you think the authorities would care if an ordinary, anonymous guy gets assaulted by a woman? This simply proves that men are second class citizens in the eyes of the law.

To add insult to injury, it has been reported that Tiger’s wife has used the incident as an opportunity to revise her prenup with him and receive a huge cash transfer into a personal bank account. If this is how it is, men are truly screwed here in America.

{ 97 comments… read them below or add one }

21Guns December 2, 2009 at 22:48

There aren’t very many positive things I can say about living in Los
Angeles, but the fact that our local chapter of Critical Mass has maybe ten members is definitely one of them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
codebuster December 2, 2009 at 22:54

Let’s say that you are at a social gathering after work, everyone’s getting drunk, dancing, and having a good time. Let’s say that a woman asks you to dance with her, and you decline. Let’s say she asks again, and you simply don’t want to. She’s had a bit to drink, and starts getting aggressive. She doesn’t actually hit you, but she does try to drag you up, you refuse, so she pushes and tries to shove you off your chair. She doesn’t actually hit you, but she is as livid as all hell, and you are actually anticipating getting struck. Would you people regard that as an assault?

This scenario happened to me. I tried applying the womanly-friendly regulations (anti-harassment, etc). The bosses tried to frighten me into backing down, with implied threats, etc, but I persisted. There was a ridiculous “investigation”, claims, counter-claims, escalation, one thing leads to another, I persisted, blah blah, and it finished up turning into a marathon, and I finished up having to leave. That’s right. Not the fine lady in question. But me. It’s a good thing I’ve got a sense of humour. Anyway, my issue with the lady in question became irrelevant and ultimately it was the men in the organisation who were my worst enemy.

People don’t realize the extent to which the system is rigged, and the extent to which people will conduct themselves unlawfully to get rid of you if you dare to contemplate exercising your rights in accordance with the same rights that have been granted to women. Try applying the woman-friendly anti-harassment laws to protect yourself, and see where that gets you! But it’s all worth it. What you learn is a treasure that changes your view of things forever. It really is surprising, how for the past few decades we assumed that while things weren’t perfect, they sort of cruised along on this myth of “worker-friendly” workplaces – imperfect people just doing the best they can. How could I have been so blind? What a load of bs. It’s so ridiculous that it’s funny. I had found myself in a Bugs Bunny cartoon, rolling around laughing my arse off, and not caring that Yosemite Sam is pointing a gun at my head, and so I burst out laughing some more… and then losing my job. The whole of society has become a comic-fest, a laughathon. I love it. The entertainment exceeds the harm.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 2, 2009 at 22:59

I actually view such extremism as a positive. Allow me to explain :

When a group is so convinced they are victims, they drift into an ability to conduct great evil against their perceived oppressors. They can rationalize *anything*.

Eventually, they go too far, and either their targets, or even members of their own group, cut them off at the knees.

Remember what happened in Iraq :

First, AQ in Iraq tried killing US troops. This was a costly strategy, with a poor ratio of US troops to jihadis killed.
Then, they tried to kill Iraqi troops. That was not very fruitful either after a while.
Then, in frustration, they targetted the Iraqi civilians, with unspeakable acts such as strapping bombs to Downs children and sending them into schools.

THIS finally crossed the line that jolted the Iraqi public into action, and sure enough, by 2008, AQ was decimated, and Iraq is now at much lower levels of violence.

Feminists are close to making a fatal overreach. It will happen within a decade. The Four Horsemen of Male Emancipation will all converge by 2020. Ironically, the very Muslims we have been fighting in the War on Terror will be indirect allies in the War on Misandry.

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

They are close enough to the precipice that I actually *want* them to advertise increasingly insane extremism, to speed up the eventual backlash.

I know a bubble when I see one……

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
piercedhead December 2, 2009 at 22:59

It’s becoming tiresome in its predictability. Rihanna gets a smack and there is no need at all to relate the reasons. D.V. is D.V. No matter what she did, he shouldn’t have….

Yawn.

Now we have a violent woman on the loose, and the story gets buried so fast in a diversionary scandal about marital infidelity that many would already have forgotten how this story broke.

We’re supposed to get excited about adultery, in this day and age? Which century do these people think we’re living in?

None of this resembles reason. What it most resembles is ‘tell us that joke you always tell Uncle Chester’, or ‘play that song you sing so well Suzie’. There are only so many scripts running in the average mind, and the familiar ones are the safe ones. Anything outside the usual circuit just upsets the feeble ones in the audience. Can’t have that.

I saw some joke of a guy this evening who ran a Woods fan site with a name like ‘TigerWoodsIsGod.com’ or something like that. He said he worshipped Woods as a hero – an example of the perfect human being. But now he didn’t even like him.

I couldn’t help but feel a wave of nausea as I watched him sell out the man he had made a living out of for so many years, and the people who interviewed him. No mention was made of his violent wife. The entire purpose was to bury her misdeed under a storm of emotional hysteria, and the hell with Tiger Woods. This great hero, this finest golfer ever, was only so much fodder to be rubbished and shunned so that no-one would stop for a minute and say “D.V. is D.V. It doesn’t matter what Tiger Woods was doing – you don’t attack people with golf clubs. Would you?”

What a piece of shit is a man. The greatest ever golfer isn’t worth the smallest part of some anonymous wife with a violent nature.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 2, 2009 at 23:04

Welmer – the title has the letter ‘n’ missing in ‘Columnist’.

I am sending this article to Instapundit and a couple others tomorrow – they have been covering the gender double standard on this issue as well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Welmer December 2, 2009 at 23:07

Welmer – the title has the letter ‘n’ missing in ‘Columnist’.

Oops. Too much coffee making me type too fast… Thanks for pointing that out.

I am sending this article to Instapundit and a couple others tomorrow – they have been covering the gender double standard on this issue as well.

Cool. I can’t believe it isn’t more widely discussed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 2, 2009 at 23:20

Let me say the same ‘Four Horseman’ theme another way :

From 1946 to 1973, factory workers in America had an astonishing standard of living relative to men doing similar work in most of the world. A man who merely installed doors on cars earned enough to have a 4-BR home, 2 cars, and money to spare.

This seemed normal. But soon enough, it was revealed for the anomaly it was.

Two market forces came into play :
a) A pool of people much larger than the American pool, who could do the same for less.
b) Technology that partly substituted much of this work (even China today has fewer manufacturing jobs than 10 years ago, even if output is much more).

The same will happen to American women :
a) A much larger pool exists abroad, willing to deliver a better ‘service’ for lower ‘cost’.
b) Partial technological substitution, greatly devaluing all women below 8, including 99.9% of women over 34, in the marketplace.

This is inevitable by 2020. No way around it. Both forces are inexorably moving ahead.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
ray December 2, 2009 at 23:24

good piece, had to be said

your personal experience with such an incident eventually turned into something very positive

agreed, the whole “infidelity” riff was way overblown and obviously is used by american females for political power and purpose — not to mention an excuse for violence, the little dearies

if tiger had just told the cops the truth hed have been ok — you know, the wife and i argued, she went out of control, nobody’s seriously hurt, goodbye

but instead he got drawn into lies, cause the truth wouldnt have looked good on missy

his greed and arrogance over the past decade probly would have been excused, the infidelity waived, but no, he had to “protect” missy from her own pathology, and leave a lot of other men hangin’

the story would have disappeared in a week or two

but now it wont :O)

the article by jessica ashley (surname translation: law of ashes) comes directly from a front-page yahoo feed — their featured articles

so its venom has their approval

the whole article should qualify as a Hate Crime under obie’s new legislation . . . but we know which gender that “law” is aimed at

here’s ash law’s conclusion:

“I think we should stand by Elin instead. And if she needs a friend to go at the rest of the windows, pass the golf clubs, Elin. I’ve got your back.”

isn’t that cute and original! the Sisterhood has each others’ backs! it’s just like the paleolithic, all shiny and new again!

and, in closing: ya hoo fuck you

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Zadok the Priest December 2, 2009 at 23:40

While I would normally sympathize with the man in such a situation. But since they are an interracial couple it warms my heart to see them fighting. Wood’s squeaky clean image is shatter forever.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4
The Fifth Horseman December 2, 2009 at 23:47

Actually, this shows that misandry trumps race.

Where are the screams about white on black assault?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Zeta December 3, 2009 at 01:00

Guys, as I’ve said before, it’s times like these that show us the true nature of women. It shows their true colors. And what is it showing us? Around 90% of them support domestic violence against men who cheat.

This is like a flashback to the Lorena Bobbitt incident. Instead of giving guys like us some reason to think WW might be OK after all, not screwed in the head, and not man-hating, they go out there and applaud an indefensible act. It’s times like these that prove the sagacity of MGTOW and ghosting, the foolishness of getting married, and the absolute doubled-faced, hypocritical nature of the womens’ lobby (AKA feminists) and the law when it comes to female-on-male domestic violence.

News coverage of the above at 10. Wait, it involved a man getting beat up, so shove that one under the carpet. Anyone got a story of a poor female “victim” we can cover instead? Been a while since we’ve had a high-profile rape claim…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Chuck December 3, 2009 at 01:07

in truth, i don’t begrudge her the prenup revision. she’s smarter than she looks. tiger fucked up and is sitting on a mountain of cash. he’s the idiot here for exposing himself like that.

the double standard on the assault is bothersome, but the redone prenup would take the consent of tiger to pull off. obviously he would want to keep the marriage going, so he’s content taking it in the cornhole to appease elin. as i mentioned on your first post about this, tiger was stupid to get married in the first place. unless he was going to marry royalty, having an inkling of an idea that he would be unfaithful, he should have remained an eternal bachelor – a la George Clooney.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Zeta December 3, 2009 at 01:13

By the way, I think the best part about this shaking out of where women really stand (resoundingly in the pro-DV-against-men camp) is that they’re too god damn dense to even realize it. The capability to self-reflect is so poor in the average woman that she doesn’t think twice before spewing her anti-male verbal diarrhea all over the place. She doesn’t even realize what a poor reflection it is on herself and her sex.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
chrisj December 3, 2009 at 01:23

I think there are two separate issues going on here, the law and trial by media. I read that it was fairly certain that Elin would have been charged with DV had there been enough evidence, so this isn’t a case of the laws being biased against men IMO. The lack of talk by a semi-conscious Tiger at the scene, combined with a just plausible enough story, put the cops off charging DV.
On the other side, everyone in the media is judging the situation based on intuition. The resultant range of media judgments includes the controversial statement by J Ashley’s, who is no doubt trying to get some attention.

Tiger and co are just trying to protect their brand image at all costs, hence the hush job that they are running. I think they are misguided and are losing the battle. Assuming the gossip is correct then what chances that the relationship will continue as anything but a marriage of convenience, one is and adulterer and the other has violent rages. At the same time he is doubling down on the relationship by rewriting the pre-nup, not to mention the alleged one off deposit for her. I think they would have been better off taking a harder negotiation stance with Elin under the threat of mutually assured destruction (brand damage for Tiger and DV charges for Elin), then have a quiet separation in a year or so. But then you can only guess what is going on behind closed doors.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Zeta December 3, 2009 at 01:35

chrisj, put the situation in reverse. Do you honestly believe that if the cops showed up at Tiger’s place with an unconscious, bloodied Elin at the scene, in a car with busted out windows, with Tiger holding a golf club – they’d just drive off because there wasn’t a clear suspicion of DV? This is the entire point of the mandatory arrest laws, the VAWAs, etc. Open your eyes, man. This is about as clear a double standard as you get. And by the way, if Tiger wasn’t rich, he would likely be very roughly handled by the cops as he was arrested.

I agree with Novaseeker’s take on this, in that Tiger wants to cover up what happened for his own purposes. And he should probably be allowed to; I don’t like the state taking initiative and interposing itself into relationships. However, again, this is not about an idealized world but a total lack of consistency and a flaunting of double standards. Women do it, they get away with it and are even applauded. Men do it, the law is on them as soon as a woman (or the womens’ lobby) snaps their fingers, and the life of that man is ruined.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
chrisj December 3, 2009 at 01:49

Zeta, I honestly don’t think he would have been arrested if the situations were reversed. Based on what we know the scene presented like a minor car accident.

and to make my position clear: I think that the courts are undeniably biased towards women for all divorce, rape and DV cases . I just don’t think this Tiger case is clear cut enough to use as a good example of that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
The Fifth Horseman December 3, 2009 at 02:17

Today, there is support of violence against men who commit adultery.

Tomorrow, even going to a strip club will warrant being stabbed.

I’m telling ya, as bad as it is for men caught in these traps, the implosion is near. Increasingly absurd demands and histrionics will inevitably lead to a fatal overreach in feminist actions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Krauser December 3, 2009 at 02:23

Women’s extremism will go too far, and have consequences they aren’t ready for. When a man experiences / witnesses first hand a case of vicious misandry it’s like a switch is flipped, never to be flipped back. His eyes are opened and he completely withdraws all of the unthinking support he gave to the matriarchy.

Divorce is the obvious one, but there’s plenty others. The feminists are creating their own executioners, one incident at a time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
crella December 3, 2009 at 02:45

And if she needs a friend to go at the rest of the windows, pass the golf clubs, Elin. I’ve got your back.

Ewwwww, as bad as email glurge. *Puke* I REALLY have little tolerance for this kind of pap. The author has been watching too much Grey’s Anatomy or something…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Zeta December 3, 2009 at 02:46

I don’t think I really agree with you guys, for the simple reason that men tend to be disunited, competing for women, and women unite. In a democracy like ours, this is fatal to the interests of men. It reminds me, in some ways, of how the Republican party will never get more than a token amount of blacks to support them. Similarly, we will never have more than a token amount of women supporting us, and never a majority of men, either. It’s the biological prerogative for men to want women, to protect them, and to compete for them, even if this prerogative is now used against them. And it’s the prerogative for women to unite. You see it in all the primates.

They may indeed go too far, but you seriously expect an equally strong blowback in the other direction? Get real. Take the above biological prerogatives into mind (probably the strongest human prerogatives of all, by the way, or there wouldn’t be any humans) and realize that again, in a democracy, women will tend to get their way. That means that only when women feel something is hurting their own interests will things change. Hence why, up in Mass., many second wives are pissed off about the lifetime alimony situation, enough to get the ball rolling on some potential reform. They didn’t care there, or anywhere else, when it didn’t affect them – as history clearly shows. And it wasn’t MRAs who were responsible for that reform; nor will it ever be, I’m afraid.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Amateur Strategist December 3, 2009 at 04:33

Men have been on a “lag” in reaction to women’s actions. It’s taken quite a few years just to get to where we are, but what DOES happen doesn’t change back. In other words, it’s like steel, it takes a long time to heat, and a long time to cool down. To sell Men short on a stereotype is a bit generalizing, more and more Men are waking up to how terrible things really are.

And the token Women supporters of MRA? Well, I think they are the first ones (of Women, anyway) to see what’s coming.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
globalman December 3, 2009 at 04:34

A woman is violent to a man? No…not possible we all konw they are all princesses all the time…..and after all DV can only be committed by a man….we ALL know this….in our little world of ‘equality’ some pigs are more equal than others….and those would be the female western pigs we would be talking about…..swedish women are total crap by the way…..great to look at but total crap after that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker December 3, 2009 at 04:42

Yep I agree with zeta.

Trying to get the DV laws to apply to female on male violence is a walk in the dark. Why is that? Because women, in the face of male infidelity, line up in lockstep behind female on male violence in that situation. It’s nothing new — look at the Bobbitt situation. I remember all of the female smirks and fist pumps and so on — they LOVE it when women commit violence against men in that specific scenario and support each other fully. There are exceptions among women to that, but these are, as I say, exceptional. There seems to be a visceral instinct that another woman who has been seriously wronged by her man as the right to be violent with him, and most women will back that up 100%. The other reason, of course, is other men — men themselves see the DV laws as existing to protect women, and this plays directly into the broader male instinct to protect women socially. Men are often rather uncomfortable with the idea of using DV laws to protect other men — it seems like it’s outside the intended scope of the law.

So you have these two things collaborating — almost uniform female rage in support of the violence, on the one hand, and male collaboration with that effort because “female on male violence is not that big of a deal”, even when she’s a psycho swinging around a golf club or mutilating her husband’s genitals in a jealous rage.

And if you think this is just bullshit, ask yourself this: if Lorena Bobbitt herself had been caught in adultery and her husband mutilated her genitals in a rage, what do you think the reaction would have been among men and women alike? You know the answer, and it basically proves the antimale bias in this area. It’s almost impossible to overcome, because both men and women collude to enforce it.

In this particular case, the excuse seems pretty implausible to me (hacking with a golf club through a rear window in a long car like an Escalade to reach your husband in the *front* of the car …? So you can safely remove him over all that shattered glass ….Riiiiight ….). If you look at the crash pictures (http://media.al.com/press-register-sports/photo/woodsescaladejpg-95d6d6344714dd4c_large.jpg) you can see how implausible an explanation this is, because the car doors are not blocked. Here is a photo from the other side: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/sports/images/attachement/jpg/site1/20091130/0013729ece6b0c7d78c55f.jpg

Rather an implausible explanation, it seems to me. Rather much more plausible is that the psycho wife chased the car with the golf club, hacking at it as he was pulling away, and smashing the rear window, distracting Woods and causing him to run into the hydrant and tree. Alcohol and drugs were ruled out, and the other explanation that this was a routine traffic accident is very implausible to me, given his general level of coordination (much higher than average) and his familiarity with the roadway right in front of his own house.

So while the explanation offered may have been plausible enough for the state troopers to “sell” not investigating, I honestly doubt that an arrest would not have been forthcoming if the sexes were reversed here. The story appears barely plausible until you actually think about what it claims to be saying, and becomes pretty much implausible entirely once you see the pictures of the crash site.

As I said on the other thread, I can well understand why *Tiger* elected to cover this up. There is no upside at all for him to disclose this. It makes him look bad, draws more attention to the affairs, and that is something that both he and his publicist know will overshadow in the public imagination any violence on the part of Elin here. Just as was the case in Bobbitt’s situation. Society as a whole pretty much wholeheartedly supports female on male violence in the case of adultery, and blames the men for “deserving” it. All the bitching in the world is not going to change that fundamental reality, because both men and women are invested in it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Paul December 3, 2009 at 05:31

Can I theorise a little more. The question I want to address is why was he fleeing from the house? My scenario is this. The image I have is Woods desperately tying to get away from the woman’s screaming abuse. He runs from room to room to escape the onslaught. It does not work. She follows him screeching at the top of her voice. There is no escape. Finally he tries to get away from the torture by fleeing the house. But that does not work either. There is no escape ; even as he tries to drive away she is upon him.

Well in my own mind I am sure that is what happened. You see there is no stopping a woman in here vicious onslaughts. Woods probably was not even arguing himself. He probably had submitted to all her complaints. But none of that is any good. A women must scream and scream at you the same argument over and over again. There is no stopping her. There is no concession, no apology, no pleading that will end the insanity of a woman.

I don’t know if many people here read what I have to say. Those that do might get the impression that I view women as filth. You would not be mistaken.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Days of Broken Arrows December 3, 2009 at 05:37
JFA December 3, 2009 at 05:48

Swedish golfer: Use the driver next time

A Swedish golder by the name Jesper Parnevik condones domestic violence against men:

In danish but maybe you can translate it with google. Hang on to this one, Gentlemen!
http://jp.dk/blitz/kendte/article1907499.ece

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
JFA December 3, 2009 at 05:55
Metz December 3, 2009 at 06:12

Nothing was proven though. Yah, we can suspect that the woman should have had charges laid on her but the reality is nothing was proven nor was their evidence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Novaseeker December 3, 2009 at 06:46

That doesn’t stop men from being arrested under “mandatory arrest” laws — no evidence required other than someone calling the cops.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Fiercely Independent John Nada December 3, 2009 at 07:01

Novaseeker December 3, 2009 at 4:42 am

Yep I agree with zeta.

***
Yep, me too.

There seems to be a visceral instinct that another woman who has been seriously wronged by her man as the right to be violent with him, and most women will back that up 100%. The other reason, of course, is other men — men themselves see the DV laws as existing to protect women, and this plays directly into the broader male instinct to protect women socially. Men are often rather uncomfortable with the idea of using DV laws to protect other men — it seems like it’s outside the intended scope of the law.

***
Team Woman on one side and the mangina she bears protecting her cubs on the other. Is it any wonder why astute men are forced to run the Gauntlet?

So you have these two things collaborating — almost uniform female rage in support of the violence, on the one hand, and male collaboration with that effort because “female on male violence is not that big of a deal”, even when she’s a psycho swinging around a golf club or mutilating her husband’s genitals in a jealous rage.
…It’s almost impossible to overcome, because both men and women collude to enforce it.

***
The sooner Men realize this problem, the sooner we can move forward and solve it. We are battling against Cultural Lag. This is why I’ve mentioned time and time again that this generation of females and the next two are incurably infected with that nasty virus, Entitlement Materialist Feminism. It will take at least 30 years for things to change, and that’s with (an impossible) standing start.

The fact that Cap’n Save a Hos and White Knights are programmed culturally to protect women without critical thought just underscores that fact. And I’m not sure about you, but there’s no way in hell I’d waste 30 years of my most precious, non-renewable resource–my time–on fighting an uphill battle where those who need saving the most DON’T WANT TO BE SAVED.

When a Swedish nanny can scratch up her husband’s face, put a 9 iron through his windshield, skip the Domestic Violence charges AND collect $80MM to boot, I think it’s safe to say that this society has past the tipping point.

U.S. anti-male society is too far gone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Fiercely Independent John Nada December 3, 2009 at 07:09

***
addendum:
The ghost of Gramsci returns. What we are witnessing in our lifetime is the fruition of his “Long March Through The Institutions”. At this junction, the time, resources and momentum necessary to reverse these effects would be as futile as attempting to remove an inoperable brain tumor.

His disciples truly have “captured the culture”.

Best to jettison the baggage and set sail for new horizons. If nothing more, at least you’d be able to buy some time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
djc December 3, 2009 at 07:23

It is all of these reasons, and the fact that STD’s are everywhere now, and I just love my solitude, that I completely avoid any relationship with any woman.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Angry Harry December 3, 2009 at 07:27

I’ve lost count of the number of times women murderers have been applauded, literally, on women’s chat show programmes, for having murdered their partners.

Kiranjit Ahluwalia was actually given a Bravery Award by Tony Blair’s wife for killing her husband while he slept.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
j r December 3, 2009 at 07:47

fifth,

i like your factory worker analogy, and i think it’s very relevant. i do, however, think that your predictions about the future may be overly optimistic.

you’re right that the ability of women to continue down the radical feminist path of ‘have you cake and eat it too’ cannot go on forever, but it may go on long enough to do serious damage. think about the auto industry. in retrospect it’s painfully obvious that auto workers had too sweet a deal to last forever, but through unions and corporate short-sightedness workers were able to guarantee that these arrangements lasted well past what was sustainable. the result: the near-collapse of the big three.

so, even as the market value of women begins to seriously decline, they may be able to maintain their current lifestlyes based soley on legal protections and an enhanced welfare state. once ensrined, those things take much more time and effort to dismantle.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Puma December 3, 2009 at 08:02

So when the husband cheats, the wife is entitled to commit violence, but when the wife cheats, the husband isn’t?

Yes, it all sounds very … ahem …. *Equal* to me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
kaveman December 3, 2009 at 08:53

Christ, the ink is barely dry on the NY Times article detailing men forced to pay child support to cheating, lying, deceitful, unfaithful wives and girlfriends. An article wich generated very little sympathy from women, and absolutely zero from the fembot authors. But give them a taste of their own medicine, and watct the herd go off the rails in unison. As if any western women has ever been on the rails.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Jules December 3, 2009 at 09:10

In a somewhat similar vein a female Toronto Star columnist writing about Tiger doesn’t defend what his wife probably did to him yet uses the column to brag about kneeing a man in the groin at McDonald’s last week. She then states:

It is not culturally expected for females to fight back, either verbally or mano-a-mano, however much provoked. But I grew up in a different culture and, I will also admit, inhabited an orbit drenched in violence. I am hardwired to opt for violence as conflict resolution, at least between individual adults. I deeply understand the primal urge to inflict hurt.

Of course, it is easy for a woman to talk big like that when she knows the culture forbids the man from fighting back.

welmer: So now that it’s been established that Mrs. Woods likely committed a violent crime, we ought to ask why she was never arrested. In cases of suspected domestic violence, police are virtually required to make an arrest, but they chose not to in this incident

According to the Toronto Star column above: Florida is also one of the U.S. states where, like Ontario, cops are compelled to lay charges in domestic assaults whether the victim is a willing complainant or not – – provided they have sufficient evidence to determine which party was the aggressor.

Unless the injuries can be shown to come from the accident and Elin can explain smashing the back window to save her husband in the front seat(!) this seems to be a pretty clear case of DV.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker December 3, 2009 at 09:23

Yep. But his refusal to cooperate, coupled with a semi-plausible story that most people who aren’t thinking more deeply or looking at the pics will buy, gives them cover. No authority on earth wants to charge a woman who looks like she does with DV when a man has been having an affair. That’s like a one way ticket to a personal hell for the cop involved.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
rebel December 3, 2009 at 09:39

“you’re right that the ability of women to continue down the radical feminist path of ‘have you cake and eat it too’ cannot go on forever, but it may go on long enough to do serious damage.”

I disagree witht that statement.
Nothing can stop feminism now. Things will get much, much worse for men in the near future. The yoke is tightening around men’s collective necks.

I would consider John Nada’s recommendation to look elesewhere to live your life.

I am totally convinced that most men (90% at least) will let themselves be taken to the slaughterhouse without even blinking an eye. I have in my mind, a picture of millions of lemmings committing suicide. No future for men anywhere in the Anglosphere (that includes Europe , NZ and Australia).

Most MRA’s can see the increase in misandry in our countries, but we are the only ones. The misandry will reach seismic proportions and men WILL fall on their knees and beg for their lives.

In this gender war, we are severely outnumbered. There is no way to save men from their destiny: they will be happy slaves to the all-mighty vagina. I have been watching the women’s movement since the seventies: the next logical step is the global enslavement of men. I know that this does not meet with generally received ideas. I will feel no joy, though, when I will be proven right.

Remember that this is about revenge (for women) and enslavement (by the government).

Right now, (and ONLY temporarily) men can still avoid much of the harm that is being planned for them by avoiding marriage and children, but there will come a time when that choice will be denied to you. One day, you will be thrown in jail if you refuse to defer to a woman or even refuse to do what they oder you to do.
An entire nation of male slaves is being manufactured right under our very eyes… men will rather die a thousand deaths than foresake pussy. Most men are already slaves to pussy, even when the pussy gives you death through a multitude of STD’s.

If you don’t want to live all your life in this aggravation, then leave.

Live long and prosper. (in your new country).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Gx1080 December 3, 2009 at 10:01

That women is mental, just like Lorena Bobbit. She hit his car with a golf cub and made him crash. Of course, given this society obsession with celebrity affairs, nobody is going to care. And with all the feminist and jelaous males supporting her? No chance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Angry Harry December 3, 2009 at 10:33

It’s great to see Fifth engaging above in some Men’s Rights Activism.

Who knows? Maybe in the not-too-distant future he will actually recognise that, like it or not, he is, IN FACT, an MRA.

Welcome, Fifth.

Good to have you on board!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
arthur December 3, 2009 at 11:22

the “you go grrll” comments surprise me like not at all. One thing I have noticed courtesy of the internet is the level of contempt that all women have for all men. I am not even gonna bother with any exceptions.

WOMEN HATE MEN. ALL OF THEM. PERIOD.

Fuck all of this “game” bullshit. All that is being sold there is false hope.

The sooner you guys accept that fact that all women HATE all men, the better off you will be. If you are stupid enough to get married with all of the information you have at hand, I have one thing to say to you.

YOU VERY STUPID

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Dean Tong December 3, 2009 at 12:34

With all due respect, what caves have some of you folks been hiding under? Men screwed? Women nailing men without impunity?
My URL http://www.abuse-excuse.com has been up on The Net since late 1996 and these issues have been covered by the national media for at least 20 years now.

Dean Tong, MSc.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Zeta December 3, 2009 at 12:47

Hey, mods, Dean’s pearl of wisdom made me check the commenting policy. I don’t see anything in there about an anti-spamming policy. I suppose you guys have the discretion to remove spam comments/solicitations, but maybe it would be a good idea to make that official policy? Of course, links from actually active posters and allies should be acceptable, but unsolicited spam from folks like Dean Tong (who could be a web bot for all we know) shouldn’t be allowed, IMO.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Paul December 3, 2009 at 12:48

@Rebel

I think you are correct. Evil ideologies don’t disappear quietly. Nazism only fell because it overreached itself and destroyed million in the process before finally being contained. I say contained as feminism is just Nazis
with female genitalia. Nazism did not vanish it just underwent metamorphism and became handed down via the female line.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
InternetWood December 3, 2009 at 12:48

The Internet proves it’s superiority again with excellent advise when dealing with agents of the United States Government:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik&feature=related

You can download it using:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/6584

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
piercedhead December 3, 2009 at 12:52

I find it hard to believe that Woods was so distracted by a golf-club wielding woman that he couldn’t leave either a fire-hydrant or tree unmolested, and that he sustained such severe injuries in a low speed collision that he was passing in and out of consciousness as a consequence. It’s about as believable as their original cover story.

Since everyone’s having a go at guessing what happened, the more probable explanation to me is that she landed a swing or two on him inside the house first (probably a surprise attack). Enough to knock him near senseless, but not so senseless that he didn’t know he had to get out of there. So he rushes to the car – already half unconscious – and finds he can’t even steer the thing straight. She chases after him and smashes a window in her rage. He crashes because he’s already in a bad state. When he falls out of the car, he’s drifting in and out of consciousness (as reported).

And he’s hiding from the cops and the public for as long as he can, in order that the injuries he has have time to heal so that they cannot clearly be seen to be inflicted by a blunt instrument, not a car crash.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr.M December 3, 2009 at 12:56

Following up on piercedhead’s comment…

How is it that there were no witnesses to any of it? There MUST have been yelling/screaming/sounds of a golf club hitting shit?? I can’t imagine an enraged wife, whether abusing/chasing/saving a fleeing husband being silent…can you?

Even if its 2am, people must have heard, no?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie December 3, 2009 at 13:00

“these issues have been covered by the national media for at least 20 years now.

Dean Tong, MSc.”

This seems like a huge overstatement. Obviously the massive media-industrial complex will cover just about every topic eventually, and might cover men’s concerns once in a blue moon, but when people notice a pearl buried in a mound of shit, they don’t think of a necklace (These just come to me, I don’t now where from).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
TAllagash December 3, 2009 at 14:17

given the state of things (fair or not) he should have known better than to have gotten married. if he lets her pull this off and rewards her literally with cash, talk about positive feedback in the conditioning sense, the time she cuts his cock off will be his fault entirely……but as it is, he married her and no it’s not fair that she can do this and is not charged.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Welmer December 3, 2009 at 14:28

My guess is that Tiger is avoiding his tournament and public statements in part because of visible wounds. There’s a chance he had to get stitched up.

Remember the photos of Rhianna’s busted lip — the one so prominently displayed as an indictment against DV? Tiger’s probably got the exact same kind of injury, but we’ll never see it. However, if he did get stitches we’ll see the scar eventually.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
slwerner December 3, 2009 at 14:33

piercedhead – “Since everyone’s having a go at guessing what happened, the more probable explanation to me is that she landed a swing or two on him inside the house first (probably a surprise attack). Enough to knock him near senseless, but not so senseless that he didn’t know he had to get out of there. So he rushes to the car – already half unconscious – and finds he can’t even steer the thing straight. She chases after him and smashes a window in her rage. He crashes because he’s already in a bad state. When he falls out of the car, he’s drifting in and out of consciousness (as reported).”

I’ve come to that same conclusion myself.

It would be interesting to know if there were bits of the glass strewn about on the roadway or driveway where he had come from before hitting anything. To me, that would be a rather clear indication that the window was smashed well prior to the accident.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
piercedhead December 3, 2009 at 14:33

Here’s a little something from Warren Farrell about female violence:

http://www.ejfi.org/DV/dv-6.htm

When the first scientific nationwide sample was conducted in 1975 — by Suzanne Steinmetz, Murray Straus and Richard Gelles 11 the researchers could hardly believe their results. The sexes appeared to batter each other about equally. Dozens of questions arose (“Don’t women batter only in self-defense?”; “Aren’t women hurt more?”). Over a hundred researchers during the next quarter century double-checked via their own studies. About half of these researchers were women, and most of the women who were academics were feminists. Most expected to disprove the Steinmetz, Straus, and Gelles findings.

To their credit, despite their assumptions that men were the abusers, every domestic violence survey done of both sexes over the next quarter century in the U.S. Canada, England, New Zealand and Australia — more than 50 of which are annotated in the Appendix — found one of two things: Women and men batter each other about equally, or women batter men more. In addition, almost all studies found women were more likely to initiate violence, and much more likely to inflict the severe violence. Women themselves acknowledged they are more likely to be violent and to be the initiators of violence. Finally, women were more likely to engage in severe violence that was not reciprocated. The larger and better-designed the study, the more likely the finding that women were significantly more violent.

Studies also make it clear that the women were 70% more likely to use weapons against men than men were to use weapons against women. The weapons women use are more varied and creative than men’s, doubtless in compensation for less muscle strength….

Item. “One well-to-do wife I know of turned the tables on her husband. After suffering repeated beatings, she waited until he fell asleep one night, sewed him in the sheets, and broke his bones with a baseball bat.”

— Barbara Spencer-Powell; Overland Park, KS 13

The fact that women were more likely to use severe violence does not necessarily mean the men were injured more. I will explain later why we do not yet have valid information about which sex is injured more.

None of this serves to prove anything about what happened to Tiger Woods.
But it does show that any resistance you may have to believing his wife could be violent is completely unfounded. Women can be violent – provably violent – and especially so with regard to their husbands.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 3, 2009 at 15:42

Harry,

I certainly seek to do my part. Our goals have always been the same,

The killer ap really would be a documentary film about gender double standards, unconstitutional family court, false rape, etc.

MRM needs a ‘rogue filmmaker’.

Kiranjit Ahluwalia was actually given a Bravery Award by Tony Blair’s wife

This should put to rest an assumption that some have that Indian women, due to a culture of strict gender norms and pro-male traditions, are somehow lower risk after being brought to the west.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 3, 2009 at 15:44

j r,

so, even as the market value of women begins to seriously decline, they may be able to maintain their current lifestlyes based soley on legal protections and an enhanced welfare state.

But the US tax base is maxed out, expecially in high-tax states like CA and NV.

Men are losing the incentive to produce. Some are expatriating. And most importantly, new high-income male immigrants are not coming in as much.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 3, 2009 at 16:08

Harry,

Let me also add that any man who practices Game is, in fact, his own sort of MRA, since he is refusing to ‘feed the beast’ (i.e. the diamond, wedding, real estate, and divorce industries). Roissy, Roosh, and Mystery are all doing a lot of starve the beast, even if their goals are entirely self-indulgent.

Game is a large number of men making individual decisions that starve the beast.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Fiercely Independent John Nada December 3, 2009 at 16:10

The Fifth Horseman December 3, 2009 at 3:44 pm

But the US tax base is maxed out, expecially in high-tax states like CA and NV.

***
You mean NY (New York), right?
Nevada (NV) does not tax personal income.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 3, 2009 at 16:17

Yes, New York.

NV, AZ, and TX are far more sustainable tax structures.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
David Brandt December 3, 2009 at 19:03

My disgust and contempt for the situation in the anglosphere is beyond description. I don’t see it getting better, I see it getting worse. Let the manginas and white knights stay and see how long they last. I think John Nada has the best solution, and I’m voting for it. If we are not here to bleed dry and be affected by these laws, their implosion will be far more rapid. Guys, we are literally paying for this BS, for the enactment and enforcement of these bogus laws. I far prefer to be paying for and contributing to a better quality of life. I’m pretty sure I would enjoy sane women if I knew some, and sane laws to live with. Even if I never have another relationship with a woman again, being around a society that isn’t going through this insanity and not contributing to it in any way, shape or form is well worth it. It is non-sustaining, and the more of us who leave, the quicker it will implode. I think that if the happy expats had a message for their brothers here it would be “come with me if you want a life (or ‘to live’, same difference really)”. OK, I borrowed the line from everyone knows where, but damn if it doesn’t apply. Do I think women are different elsewhere? Not a chance. Living under societal mores and laws forces them to adapt their behavior. What we see here is that if they think they can get away with it, either because of temper tantrum or gina tingle they will do anything–literally. I could tell some true stories of incidents I know of, but I won’t bother here, it would only shock some of you–and it’s pointless for the big picture. Fight–but fight wisely.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
David Brandt December 3, 2009 at 19:15

Fifth Horseman
What about NM? Property tax is low except for Santa Fe. When I see a woman who was in an appointed position quit because of a DUI, and she was making $150,000/year–and layers of public service jobs with important sounding titles (but are do-little to nothing beneficial) being filled by women in which not only do they not do anything constructive, but have the opposite effect–and vast amounts of the economy are based on federal money, it doesn’t make me feel very good. There is supposed to be a state public sector hiring freeze, but Governor Richardson is letting it slide, and pissing a whole lot of people off. He’s gone pretty soon anyway, but damn….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
codebuster December 3, 2009 at 19:34

@David Brandt.

I wonder if your disgust and contempt matches mine. EVERY time that I see a woman in a key role, every time I see a female politician, every single “important” role in which I see a woman, I think to myself – “affirmative action”. There is no role in which I see women that is exempt from this assumption. Their whole lives are a freebie from beginning to end, an endless gravy train without accountability. But of course I’ve had rather close exposure to see how blatantly all this operates, which most people don’t get to see. This is an unfortunate situation because there was a time when affirmative action did not exist, and yet women were able to do well on their own merits – these authentic women have now been rendered irrelevant and invisible because of feminism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
slwerner December 3, 2009 at 19:35

A new picture has been released of Tiger & Elin – looks like they’ve patch thing up:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_3QqO8EXd-II/SxdldqlrhSI/AAAAAAAAuFs/3nYK_ZAUHnI/s1600-h/tiger.jpg

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly December 3, 2009 at 20:08

Too funny Slwerner.

What does Tiger Woods have in common with baby seals?
They both get clubbed by Norwegians

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Zeta December 3, 2009 at 22:30

It’s actually not funny, but it is revealing that even the women who come to The Spearhead approve of it. Even to this female demographic, making fun of a man who was the victim of domestic violence is A-OK. Kathy comes along and adds fuel to the fire. Very disappointing.

Once again, incidents like these reveal the true color of women. I’d say even more than 90% support what Elin did to Tiger. And some would call us bitter!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
bmmg39 December 3, 2009 at 22:43

No, I don’t agree with the estimate that 90% or more women approve of female-on-male violence. On the message boards I’ve seen, plenty of women are condemning this woman’s (alleged) actions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Kathy Farrelly December 4, 2009 at 00:28

Oh come on ,where is your sense of humor.. Funnily enough, my brother-in-law (who is happily married) sent that very same pic through to his brother(my hubby) along with the joke that I posted.

Hubby and I both had a laugh.

I always cop the brunt of blonde jokes (yes I am a blonde) people send them to me all the time. Perhaps I am a dumb blonde, but some of those jokes crack me right up.

I do not however ,condone violence of any kind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
jz December 4, 2009 at 00:31

@slwerner,
funny.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 4, 2009 at 00:50

Instapundit DID link to the original article, but not via The Spearhead article :

http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/89449/

So a partial success..

Anyway, the hypocrisy of the issue is getting exposure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
piercedhead December 4, 2009 at 02:37

A local TV show of comedians doing send ups of current affairs ripped right into the Woods story this evening, and not once did they mention marital infidelity – the sole focus was on his wife – the only person who can beat Tiger Woods.

Whether you like this kind of humor or not, it’s an advance at least to see people outside the MM, with main-stream media presence, picking up on the more likely truth and not being side-tracked by the usual ‘man commits adultery’ sideshow.

It’s a rare thing to see people for once reacting to the deed which is actually a serious crime, rather than being totally preoccupied with other acts that are not extraordinary, illegal or serve any other purpose besides changing the subject.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
gwallan December 4, 2009 at 03:16

I think Kathy Farrelly is alluding to the irony that the clubbing of seals evokes much protest whilst the clubbing of Woods evokes mostly mirth.

Isn’t that right Kathy?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly December 4, 2009 at 03:37

No, hadn’t thought of that gwallan,( I’m blonde) but you make a pertinent point, though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Champ December 4, 2009 at 04:56

Just wanted to mention what’s really going on with the pre-nup. Elin Woods told Tiger you give me the money or I’m leaving and TAKING the kids with me back to Sweden. You see the ability to take, or steal, a man’s children is legal in all 50 states and I’m sure in most western countries. Under the law it’s called child “custody” but it’s really child abduction. Women can and do use this lever with impunity to get basically whatever they want out of their man. This happened to me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Welmer December 4, 2009 at 05:01

Just wanted to mention what’s really going on with the pre-nup. Elin Woods told Tiger you give me the money or I’m leaving and TAKING the kids with me back to Sweden.

-Champ

AFAIK, a Swedish court would give him a much better deal in a custody decision. I think it is presumed joint custody there, and child support isn’t nearly as onerous. The danger would be her getting a custody and CS order in Florida, and THEN fleeing to Sweden.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker December 4, 2009 at 06:15

Sweden does have women’s groups that specifically help Swedish women abscond with the children, however. There was a pretty well publicized case last year of an Australian man whose Swedish ex-wife absconded to Sweden with the kids and was in varipous safe houses and so on sponsored by this group.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly December 4, 2009 at 06:30

What was wrong with slwerner’s joke, eh?
Why is everyone ignoring it, apart from jz.
Or like gwallan and zeta focus on a female’s response? (negatively)
A guy like slwerner
(and I have read many of his posts) is much more likely to garner plaudits from a simple gal like me, because he is an honest, smart and down to earth guy who also has a sense of humor.

Plus, he knows how to get a girl going and keep her interested ;)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie December 4, 2009 at 07:05

@ Kathy Farrelly-

A jokes a joke in my book too.

You know why I like to have sex with 15 year old girls in the shower?

With their hair wet and skin glistening, they looks 13.

Har, har, haar! Hardy, fucking har har.

Switch the sexes in the pic, and do you think feminist outrage would be:

A: Ballistic
B: Nuclear
C: Super Nova like

I expect an answer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly December 4, 2009 at 07:18

Ask a feminist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie December 4, 2009 at 07:39

Actually, I’m a bit sorry I’ve been so pissy lately in all my post. I end up using this place as an emotional dump some, which I’m not proud of. I really do think a joke is a joke, and they all should be taken as such. I’m not offended by the picture in anyway, I’m just offended by the double standards of people when they apply political correctness. I take heart in noticing many comedians and even TV shows be able to poke fun a race, sex, and religion, more and more. I think it is somewhat of a comedic backlash against political correctness.

Your answer Kathy, is appropriate and disarming. Well done. Sorry some of my pissiness splashed on your leg. I was aiming for the femi-urinal (look, they’re not all gold, but I try)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kathy Farrelly December 4, 2009 at 07:50

“Sorry some of my pissiness splashed on your leg. I was aiming for the femi-urinal (look, they’re not all gold, but I try)”

Ha hah! Not a problem Jabherwochie.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
slwerner December 4, 2009 at 08:46

Zeta – “It’s actually not funny, but it is revealing that even the women who come to The Spearhead approve of it. Even to this female demographic, making fun of a man who was the victim of domestic violence is A-OK. Kathy comes along and adds fuel to the fire. Very disappointing.”

Zeta,

I certainly did not wish to insult anyone with that picture. And, I apologize if I have offended you.

I took the picture a bit differently that you did, it seems.

From my perspective, a very large part of the problem with this particular incident has been the virtual cover-up of what Elin’s violence actually entailed. Like Piercedhead, I was never convinced that Tiger was found on the ground, passing in and out of consciousness – to the point that he was taken by ambulance to a hospital – from a fender-bender with a fire hydrant and a tree, that did not even cause the airbag to deploy. It seemed more likely to me that he had actually been struck with a golf club (the edge of an iron could easily cause a facial laceration such as was report by ripping open the skin on contact.).

Thus, in my mind, the “value” of the obviously “doctored” was that it demonstrated that the official cover-story is not being universally accepted.

Yes, much of the humor comes at the expense of Tiger himself, and, by proxy, the many other men who are severely injured and even killed by their intimate partners. In that regard, I certainly understand your concern about the use of humor WRT this incident. Still, I though it had some broader value in that it does demonstrate that people aren’t buying into the ridiculous they’re now trying to feed us.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 4, 2009 at 11:31

Cathy Young has written on the gender double standard here :

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/12/03/tiger_woods_gender__domestic_violence_99392.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German December 4, 2009 at 12:14

I don’t condone physical violence except in self-defense (including protecting someone else). Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY,” says the Lord.

If she didn’t like what he was doing, then she could have left. Adultery breaks the covenant and she is free to leave. Isn’t that what WRAs fought for: the right for women to divorce their husbands if they are abusive or break their covenant?

I wouldn’t condone taking the kids, though, unless she thought he was a threat to them. Joint custody should be default.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
ray December 4, 2009 at 12:52

“VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY,” says the Lord.

indeed it is B&G, but this nation doesnt belong to the Lord, but to Goddess Babalon

pretty good piece by Cathy Young linked above, also

bottom line is that if tiger had done this to the swedish meatball, the entire western world would have demanded tiger’s head on baptist john’s “silver platter”

and they’d have gotten it, too

like the endless Rihanna Recapitualtions, we’d still be reading about Terrible Tiger a month from now, with the medea fanning the coals to ensure that every last drop of political and legal fem-advantage is wrung from it

instead, the Abuser gets away with inflicting potentially deadly violence on someone, based on the fact that someone is a male

then she’s portrayed as the Abused, based on the specious misdirection of infidelity

then the Abuser, homeland-secure in the certainly of her matriarchy, further rapes her husband by extorting 55 million MORE dollars from him, on threat of stealing his kids

meanwhile, the amerikan government huddles, planning to enact even more VAWA-type “laws” with which to crush even more amerikan males

this incident is a goldmine for the MRM, it illustrates with crystalline clarity the rage and hate that possesses the amerikan female, her absolute impunity in inflicting violence on boys and/or men, her predatory nature in then twisting her own guilt to further “punish” a male monetarily, and the psychosis of the government and people in empowering her in her evil

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
crella December 5, 2009 at 00:21

Every time now I see one of those ‘you go grrrl’ articles on women cheating on the net I’m going to post ‘She should be beaten’ and then let the fur fly. A woman would never stand for another woman to be treated like they think men should be treated. I feel sick when I hear women talk about men going to prison ‘I hope he gets raped every day’ and when men are mutilated or murdered ‘He probably deserved it’. I’m going to start aggravating the hell out of them whenever the chance presents itself. I don’t really think many will wake up, but why not aggravate as many as I can ? ;-P

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman December 5, 2009 at 00:26

crella,

Actually, go one better. Play the multi-culti angle.

Say that ‘under Islam, women are severely punished, even stoned, for doing the same thing. It is interesting that Islamic courts are starting up in the West. Tiger Wood’s biggest mistake was not converting to Islam beforehand.’

Feminists won’t know how to react. They can’t condemn Islam, but this reverse is presented to them that they WOULD shriek about if it was not about Islam. Plus, the Sharia courts in the UK show that they can’t just assume that it won’t affect their fat asses in the West.

You have to play the right cards here, for maximum effect.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
crella December 5, 2009 at 05:51

Good suggestion !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Zeta December 5, 2009 at 11:17

There’s a lot of wisdom in your suggestion, The Fifth Horseman, and it extends outside the specific scenario crella mentioned. We live in a society (all of the West does, really) that has been torn asunder by cultural Marxism and the various “victim groups” it encourages and creates. This is a conscious divide-and-conquer tactic, of course, and a wise one in its own right; inflame the passions of groups people actually identify with (as opposed to the vague idea of “the working class of the world”) and use them, as useful idiots, to be the boots and lower-level functionaries carrying out this elite agenda. Eventually you ensure loyal voters for your cause and permanent disenfranchisement for the minority (white men) you’re fighting against. Ultimately I think the elites/”NWO” have little use for all of the useful idiots and desire a topsy turvy society, with the very few elites on the top and the now-discarded victim groups/other proles disunited and easily controllable at the bottom. Basically a 1984 society structure (how did that man know so much?).

Anyways, I ranted a little there, but yes, there is an important vulnerability in all of the cultural Marxism-inspired victim politics; we too can also play them off each other and inflame their passions. So, like you say, use Muslims to criticize women and feminism. They are a “victim” group themselves, a protected class, and so feminists do no feel they have free reign to wail on them like they can towards the well-behaved white men. Interesting anecdote on this, by the way… I read about a European country (in Scandinavia I think) where gays were initially pro-Muslim immigration. Stick it to the evil white men, you know the mentality (useful idiot-ism). Well, it turns out that once the Muslims got there, they didn’t like gays too much. Who knew! They even killed some in fact, what do you know! These two “victim groups” (gays and Muslims) were now turned against each other. Not the ideal or nicest situation, but the gays and Muslims, once united against the evil white male, were now split. Proving that previously united victim groups can indeed be split.

The master coordinators of these parties, by the way (at least the ones in view) are the various liberal, leftist parties (Democrats in the US, Labour in the UK, etc.). Since their modern incarnations are basically just umbrella organizations for various grievance groups (minorities, gays, women, Muslims), they too are vulnerable to splintering. I don’t put any faith in reform through democracy at this point, but perhaps the decline could be slowed if the splintering of the master-coordinators could be encouraged.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Ghost of Rihanna December 6, 2009 at 19:46

Hey, you all heraled Chris Brown as “alpha” at some point and said Rihanna probably deserved it, right?

Karma’s a bitch, boys. Karma’s a bitch.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
The Fifth Horseman December 6, 2009 at 21:06

Zeta,

Yes, causing splintering is the answer.

Get younger women to fight older women (who can’t compete in the dating marketplace after age 35, after encouraging younger, hotter girls to be sluts).
Use Muslims as an avenue to fight feminists (UK Sharia courts give better deals in divorce matters than feminist British courts. Converting nominally to Islam on paper is a small price to pay to avoid the brutality of feminist divorce).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Lady Raine December 7, 2009 at 11:42

A woman applauding Domestic Violence is disgusting and shameful.

No adult man or woman has the right to lay their hands on another person. That includes physically intimidating, throwing things at, shoving, or slapping.

A woman who lays her hands on a man in violence is just as bad as a man who does the same. The punishment should always be just as severe if it’s a clear-cut case of violence (and not self-defense).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Lady Raine December 7, 2009 at 11:47

I wouldn’t condone taking the kids, though, unless she thought he was a threat to them. Joint custody should be default.

That point, though is bullshit. If a man is “abusive” to his wife or girlfriend that means he has an abusive personality. It would be totally irresponsible for an abused woman to leave her husband and NOT take the kids.

A person who is violent usually goes for the easy prey. In a case of a male abuser, if he is likely to hurt a woman (because she is smaller and weaker)….he is also likely to hurt a child for the very same reasons.

An abuser does not understand that they are responsible for their own actions. In their minds someone else always PUSHED them to do it (which of course is complete bullshit if your are an adult of sound mind).

A person who abuses a spouse is just as likely to abuse a child and use the same logic “Well if you didn’t make me so damn angry……” or “Well if you didn’t behave so badly, I wouldn’t have had to hit you.”

An abusive man/woman who has EVER been convicted of Domestic Violence should immediately and permanently lose ALL access to their children until the day those kids turn 18.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Eve December 8, 2009 at 13:58

I guess this is what the bible was talking about when god evicted the first couple and said that the woman’s craving would be for her husband and that he would dominate her, or something to that effect. Geez, you piss off the being that created you by being so divine that your husband chooses you over Him, and life itself, and you never hear the end of it! The comments from the males on here are so bitter, resentful, and full of hate you’d think they’d actually walked one step in a woman’s stilletos. You’d think that they were the female babies killed at birth in some cultures, buried alive at their spouses’ funerals, prostituted by their own families for money, barred from education, barred from voting, kept barefoot and pregnant, received less pay for the same jobs, and murdered so frequently it’s almost cliche. Calm down boys! Just because a few women take solace in cheering for the underdog doesn’t mean we’re on the brink of some new world order. Don’t worry. It’s always been, and will always be, a man’s world. The man upstairs has your collective backs, LOL!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Abject Man December 8, 2009 at 14:22

The comments from the males on here are so bitter, resentful, and full of hate…

Boy, if I had a cent every time I heard this.

You’d think that they were the female babies killed at birth in some cultures, buried alive at their spouses’ funerals, prostituted by their own families for money, barred from education, barred from voting, kept barefoot and pregnant, received less pay for the same jobs, and murdered so frequently it’s almost cliche.

You mean as opposed to all the male babies dumped by women, boys sold as slave soldiers in their teens, men of ages 15-35 forced to fight in countless battles waged by their overlords, forced to work in fields, mines, palaces by feudal lords or business owners paying them in crumbs (if that), beaten or murdered on streets or in bars, jailed in numbers umpteen times that of women, barred from education, barred from voting, received less pay for the jobs while women get 75% of the pay for doing 70% of the work ?

It’s always been, and will always be, a man’s world.

You forgot to qualify that “man,” hon. it’s an “alpha man’s” world. And the girls at their disposal. There’s not a thing the two types won’t do to despise the rest and get them out of their faces. So, don’t worry, those alpha men upstairs have your collective asses — to grab, fondle, and fuck.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Lady Raine December 10, 2009 at 14:05

You mean as opposed to all the male babies dumped by women, boys sold as slave soldiers in their teens, men of ages 15-35 forced to fight in countless battles waged by their overlords, forced to work in fields, mines, palaces by feudal lords or business owners paying them in crumbs (if that), beaten or murdered on streets or in bars, jailed in numbers umpteen times that of women, barred from education, barred from voting, received less pay for the jobs while women get 75% of the pay for doing 70% of the work ?

You do realize that all the things you just listed (while they may be true plights of “men”) are in no way the fault of women? All but maybe one of the things you listed were done by a Government, not by a bunch of women. Things like working in mines and fields and being drafted for wars happened during a time period where women certainly did NOT have ANY power in the Government or Legal System at all, so how are women to blame?

Furthermore at what point were “women dumping their male babies”? And at which point were women responsible for the “draft” or slave trade??? Never. All of those things were done by historically male lawmakers and Governments, so why would you even type that paragraph?

This is sort of what I mean when I say some of these posters aren’t even lucid in their reasoning and you call ME a troll?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Lady Raine December 10, 2009 at 14:08

You forgot to qualify that “man,” hon. it’s an “alpha man’s” world. And the girls at their disposal. There’s not a thing the two types won’t do to despise the rest and get them out of their faces. So, don’t worry, those alpha men upstairs have your collective asses — to grab, fondle, and fuck.

Exhibit B:

So you are angry and hateful to women because Alpha Males exist on earth and you aren’t one of them?? Because you cannot compete with them? Again, how does that correlate in any way to something “women” did to you?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Nu December 13, 2009 at 00:11

Your article totally expresses my opinion on the domestic violence issue. Joseph Biden’s Violence Against Women Act is sexist. It’s a violation of the 14th amendment, equal protection clause.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Pete January 23, 2010 at 23:01

So Lady……since a men is considered guilty of domestic violence on a woman’s say so….without any proof at all……that means according to you, that man should lose all access to his children on a woman’s say so. And you also reckon it’s women that are oppressed to I suppose.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 4 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: