[Originally posted @ The Obsidian Files.]
As one might suspect, I get quite a bit of letters and emails from people, asking why I even bother taking to task Denise Romano’s ideas and actions; in this post, I’ll answer those questions, as well as laying out Ms. Romano’s worldview, how it fundamentally conflicts with that of Ms. Susan Walsh, & what it means for Women overall.
OK, so let’s get right to it: way do I bother w/the likes of Ms. Romano? Well, aside from the fact that I can, one major reason is because I take charges of Rape very, very seriously-why? Because, as a Black Man, I understand in a very real way, what can happen when such a charge is cheapened and indeed, raped itself-indeed, the historical record of the United States clearly shows, that hundreds if not thousands, of innocent Black Men were lynched, burned, shot, murdered and otherwise mutilated, merely on the trumped up charges of a Woman, *a White Woman* I might add. “Rape” means something very, very important to me. It’s not merely an arid academic discussion, or some emotive, perverted, misguided crusade. It, for me, is the cold, hard realization that Women can twist and pervert the meaning of ANY word or act they choose, in order to justify ANY behavior on their part-and have Men pay for it. Notice how Ms. Romano is quick to use Slavery in her response to me, but completely sidesteps the One Hundred Years of Lynchings-largely predicated on false charges of Rape. MY ANCESTORS WERE HANGED, SHOT, LYNCHED, BURNED AND KILLED, BEHIND THAT SHIT, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT, MS. ROMANO? Pardon my emotive outburst, but I really had to say that.
People like Ms. Romano, who use all kinds of convoluted definitions for the word “Rape” not only abuse the term itself and cheapens it for Women who were truly raped, but it pisses on the graves of Black Men like Emmit Till, who met a grisly and truly barbaric end under such BS circumstances. I object to her ridiculous “definitions” and declarations of what is and is not Rape, and I will use this and any other platform or medium to oppose her every step of the way. Not only is it the right thing to do, but it is also doing right by my ancestors, who didn’t have a voice to say “Hell No!”.
But that’s only one reason.
Another reason why I take the time out of my otherwise regularly scheduled blogging duties to take on Ms. Romano and her ilk, is because I do not appreciate her efforts to shutdown our First Amendment Rights. Earlier this week I wrote in defence of Roissy, and I did so not because of personal interest one way or the other, but because I saw that if he goes down, all of us aren’t far behind. The First Amendment protects all of us, because it defends the speech WE DON’T LIKE, not the speech we do like. Similarly, the idea of Tenure in the Academy operates much in the same way, to protect academics whose ideas may not be popular or likeable. For example, I found the late Boston College professor Mary Daly’s teachings to be abhorrent and reprehensible, but you never saw me trying to have her ousted for her views; what needed to happen, was to have her ideas and views to be shown for the weak and shoddy reasoning that they were, by other academics who had the balls to oppose her. THAT is the Academic Way to deal with ideas that we find abhorrent, NOT the way Ms. Romano and Lady Raine have attempted to deal with the Roissys of the world. As I’ve noted in a previous post, the very fact that he remains online, proves that they have failed in their self-appointed mission. And I surely do hope they will continue to do so.
The third reason why I oppose Ms. Romano’s ideas, is because I see them as an affront to Women themselves. In a previous post dedicated to Ms. Romano, and taking up the Roissy issue in particular, I made careful note of the fact that it is through deep Socratic questioning that we can determine if an idea is indeed valid. Well, this principle has borne itself out to be true in Ms. Romano’s case-for, as a result of my interactions with her, she has revealed a dominant line of thought throughout her arguments. In a word, and simply put:
Women cannot be viewed as Free, Independent, Responsible, Human Beings.
Bear with me now.
As we all know, Ms. Romano wants Game, if not removed from the scene altogether, to be deeply modified, so as to “warn” Women out there so they can make better, “informed” decisions. Sounds good at first glance-but doesn’t that suggest a kind of Nanny State reasoning-that people aren’t saavy enough to figure things out for themselves? Especially in a time where more Women than Men earn college degrees? Earn their own money? Have careers? And huge help in the many forms of the State? To be honest, if I were a Woman on the outside looking in at the debate between myself and Ms. Romano, I would be deeply offended-because what she’s saying basically is that I don’t have the basic wherewithall to know who I’m with or what I’m getting myself into.
But it gets better. Recently on Lady Raine’s blog, Ms. Romano was asked, not just by me, but a number of Male participants there, about her views of the violent actions of Ms. Elin Woods against her cheating husband Tiger. Ms. Romano’s response was, if ever, a vindication of Mystery’s “plausible deniability” maxim about Women: she said that Ein Woods was justified in physically attacking Tiger, on the grounds that he “raped” her by having unprotected sex with multiple Women, putting her and one of their kids at risk for contracting STDs. She completely sidestepped the matter of legality-which is quite clear on this point, by the way-and instead rationalized (or as we Gamesmen would say, “backward rationalized”) Elin’s actions, even when it was crystal clear that not only was she in violation of the law, but if news reports are true, that she’s now also a fugitive from the law-much like Roman Polanski is. When she and Lady Raine were asked, if the shoe were on the other foot, and it was Elin doing all the tomcatting around on Tiger, and he commenced to kicking Elin’s behind up one side of the street and down the other, Ms. Romano and Lady Raine suddenly demurred. Talk about adding insult to injury-not only do they want to justify Elin’s violent acts, but they also want to maintain a clear and present double standard as well. Rich.
But as if a Theatre of the Absurd couldn’t get wierder, Ms. Romano outdoes her own self, by saying that, because she has ever-perky nipples, and because she can’t help it, no one should judge her for this; that it is society’s responsibility to “grow and evolve” to learn that having engorged nipples doesn’t mean anything at all. Nope, nothing to see here, keep it movin’.
Riiiight.
My response to Ms. Romano was that not only did I write a post about this very same subject-that of how and why people can, do and will make value judgments about you based on how you present yourself in the world, and that it was right and NORMAL to do-but that I included the fact that, as a Black Man, I too have to give considerable thought to how I present myself to the world when I step outside my front door. Failure to do so could prove catastrophic for me-and the harsh realities of life don’t care if I think it’s fair or not. I have two choices-either pull my pants up, get a shave, look and act like I got some sense-or-bear the full brunt of the consequences if I choose to do otherwise. That’s. It.
But not for Ms. Romano-she insists that its EVERYONE ELSE-ESPECIALLY MEN who must change, who must “grow”, who must “evolve”-not her. Everyone else must be a grown up. She, on the other hand, has the right to remain a child.
In each instance-her crusade against Roissy, MRAs and Game/PUAs; her defence of the violent actions of Elin Woods; and her “Nipple Defence”-Ms. Romano lays out that Women have no agency, personal responsibility, or even basic reasoning faculties and commonsense, to act in an advanced and free society-one who’s fulcrum is based on these ideals. She claims that we are the ones wo are behind the times, but in truth, by her own hand and reasoning, it is SHE who still regards Women on the whole as incapable of independent thought, actions, rights or duties, as Citizens of the Free World.
Which finally brings me to Ms. Susan Walsh, of the website and blog, Hooking Up Smart.com. Over the past few months that my blog, The Obsidian Files has been in existence, I’ve had the chance to interact extensively with Ms. Walsh, online and off, and have found her to be an exemplary Human Being, to say nothing of a truly Classy Lady. She is not because she agrees with me-indeed, there are some things on which we deeply disagree-but because she refuses to cowtow to the line of Infantile Reasoning that is Ms. Romano’s stock and trade.
Instead of seeking to shut Roissy and Tucker Max down, Ms. Walsh instead uses her spare time and blogging talents to educate young Women about their ilk and how to reign in their innate urges to mate with such Men; instead of seeking to get more and more laws passed to “protect Women” Ms. Walsh instead uses her site to teach young Women to respect themselves, and to use their head; and instead of approaching everything and everyone as if it were one big group therapy session, Ms. Walsh uses her more than a quarter of a century’s experience as a married mother of two grown kids of her own, to counsel young Women in the ways and wherefores of Sex and Relationships, as have many “Big Mamas” before her in a not too distant past. These are but a few of the big differences between Ms. Walsh and Ms. Romano, and I think she would agree with my analysis of the latter’s essential worldview here.
Lastly, let me say this. I have three sisters of my own, and NONE of them have been duped, brainwashed or led astray by some fuzzy hat wearing Player, LOL. They’ve had their ups and downs sure, but for the most part, they all done well for themselves. Part of the reason for that was because they had an older brother who gave em all a no holds barred talking to about the Real Deal out there on the bricks, and I’m happy to say that it sank in. I think, if they were able to read any part of what Ms. Romano wrote, and compared it to what Ms. Walsh writes, that they would regard the former as on some other ish, and the other not that far off from our dearly departed Mama. In any event, I want Ms. Romano to know, that not only am I deeply offended by her assertions as laidout above in her worldview, but I’m even more offended by the notion that, per her line of reasoning, my three sisters cannot discern Life for themselves. I take tremendous umbrage at that notion. I object!
I’m done on this point, but do not get it twisted, I ain’t no ways tired when it comes to opposing Ms. Romano. I will fight her deranged view of things with all the vim and vigor at my command. Count on it.
Now adjourn your Captain Bligh arses…
{ 46 comments… read them below or add one }
Hey Welmer…
Don’t you have any kind of editorial control to keep Obsidian from posting when he’s drunk?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Obsidian, while I understand that the American Legal system is unjust to blacks now(because it’s unjust to everyone), perhaps you are projecting back into the past a little?
In any case, White Guilt has been played to heavily for to long. Your just getting people to turn off by mentioning it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Internetwood,
I disagree entirely.
Black lynchings are often considered to have been perpetrated by racist white men – which they were – but what is omitted is the role that white women played. Feminists, for instance, will point to white men as the bad guys, and the ONLY bad guys, because they felt that their ‘ownership’ of the chaste, pure, white woman was threatened by the corrupting black man. E.g. see Birth of a Nation.
But, as ever, this removes women’s role as active, moral agents.
Women knew what the effect would be of their false allegations, and still they made them; they absolutely cannot be absolved of guilt. To ignore their role is to deny an historically persecuted people their history. It’s not about guilt – it’s something more than that.
It’s the suggestion that false accusations made by women, with the intent of punishing men, goes back a lot further than feminism – the Salem witch trials would be another example. Although men carried out the ‘punishments’ for ‘witches’, women were the accusers.
See here: http://seasonsoftumultanddiscord.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/the-salem-witch-trials/
We find the same thing during black slavery in America – women making the accusations, which subsequently enrages men enough to commit murder.
And we find the same thing today, where any woman can make a false accusation, and the man is subsequently assumed guilty, and punished, whether or not evidence can be provided. Just like in old times, some members of the public (typically men) get so angry over the accusation that they attack, even murder, the falsely accused.
It’s not a race issue any more – but it’s very important to remember that what we face today, regarding false accusations by women, has also been behind some of the worst atrocities of recent history.
It’s not a new thing. Women have pretty much always been empowered to make a false accusation which ruins a man’s life or gets him killed, because they have long been believed beyond any doubts.
What it all points to is a reconceptualisation of power. Although men represent the physical force which metes out unjust punishment or murder, they have no reason to until a woman makes a false accusation.
So who really holds the power; the power to destroy lives.
This is absolutely crucial, in my view, and any historical examples which we can draw on to show that this has been happening for a very long time are more ammunition in the fight against false allegations.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I realised this section is a little confusing.
What I mean is that the women, who specifically made false allegations about black men, cannot be absolved of guilt.
But the overall point, or the trend this points to, is not about guilt, but about power which has long been held over us as men. That is, the power to destroy us completely by the use of false accusation, and it is not a power that feminists will ever relinquish of their own accord.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s too bad that you see it that way, because what Obsidian is pointing out is that what used to happen to black men in the past more than it did white men is now happening to white men in the same way. It is exactly the same principle as seeing what was done to the black family as being the blueprint for what is going to happen to all families. As people have said many times – blacks are the canaries in the coal mine. What’s interesting is that the cultural practices which led to that saying are so far in the past that a lot of people don’t even know what they mean any more.
You’ve heard the old saying that those who do not study history are destined to repeat it? Any white man who cannot see the glaring and obvious parallels between the cases of Emmett Till or the Scottsboro Boys (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/Ftrials/scottsboro/scottsb.htm) and the Duke 3 is not paying attention. The “lynch” mobs were forming and people were calling for their castration based on a lie.
We have another thread going here on the Spearhead right now about how men can protect themselves from False Accusations of (traditional, real) rape with such extreme suggestions as videotaping every sexual encounter. That is how bad things have gotten. It is worth considering how bad things have also been in the past and realizing that there is a lot of commonality between what happened then and what is happening now.
The biggest problem for men with these issues is that the vast majority of men walk around with a “it won’t happen to me” attitude and harbor the belief that the men who it did happen to really were guilty or did something to bring it on themselves. Then, when they are suddenly caught up in the mob hysteria, they suddenly shift gears and cannot understand why everyone else is acting exactly like they did.
Well, dude, this can happen to you. Obsidian is trying to give a wake-up call to men who might be future Duke 3s, or Hofstra boys, or Scottboro Boys, or Emmett Tills.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My point is that “black anger” has basically become a tool of the elite.
Pastor Wright, Obama’s black preacher, is a screaming loon. So why does he get a pass? Because the Elites want it that way. They like their super-racist attack dogs. Just like they like La Raza(The Race, how subtle), just like they like the Indian Racial Supremacist to. Oh yes, they like them all.
Oh, you may have heard of another identity politics they like.
Feminism.
Many black peoples objection to what the white women can do to them is more along the lines of them wanting to be higher in the hierarchy. Just being above non-rich white men isn’t enough.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
You need to check your “historical record” for accuracy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And, my point is that this isn’t about “black anger” at all. It’s about women’s lies and how they can use those lies to whip men into a frenzy and get them to attack other men.
To me it looks like you are doing exactly what feminists and their femnablers do – taking a description of something that a man has a legitimate reason to be angry and concerned about, and dismissing everything he says simply because he is angry and concerned.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It does men no good to divide along the lines of race. The real enemy is the “minority” that is 51% of the population yet demands special treatment and privileges. Obsidian understands this well, I think, and his comment reflects that.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The point that should be seized on most from this article is the bit about women’s agency. Too many women and white knights seem to think that everyone is some perpetual victim, willing but unable to save themselves from a cruel world of nasty, brutish men.
The British government handing out flats to drunk women on new year’s is one such denial of their agency. “Date rape” is another. Title IX is yet another.
It’s worse then treating them as children. It’s pretending they can’t make good choices because they’re “victims” of something or another, so the kind matriarchal overlords must make choices for them through government. It’s pretending that they are still thinking, independent people despite all the coddling.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It is also very useful to remember that a lot of white men were lynched as well. This may be an issue on which black men have more reasons and evidence to fuel their awareness, but it is certainly not specific to them. The Duke 3 were white boys and their accuser was a black woman.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
No disrespect, but…..
Any White Guilt that was “dished out” in this blog was self-induced.
If some of you had taken the time to take off your “White Pride” blinders and read past those two particular paragraphs (which were at the very beginning no less……WOW), you would’ve realized that Obsidian’s article had NOTHING to do with race or making white feel guilty.
The man just made a reference to the past in order to explain why he takes FRA’s seriously. Nothing more, nothing less.
And my question is….
How is that “Black Anger” towards white people, especially when the only anger he displayed was directed at Denise Romano?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The basic thesis if the article is that D. Romano’s worldview is: ‘Women cannot be viewed as Free, Independent, Responsible, Human Beings.’
It ain’t about black guys gettin’ the shaft. The black guys getting the shaft was just a lead in on Ob’s emotional connection to the M. Romano cheapens the definition of rape.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Actually, if the lynchings prove one thing, it’s simply that…
In the end, game will not save you. In fact, it may be counterproductive.
Given the stereotypically greater ability of black men to game successfully, you’d think that this would, other things being equal, protect them from repercussions to some extent. But once you’re KNOWN for being part of a race that can successfully ‘game’ women to sleep with them, all bets are off. The false rape charge may be silly on its face, but getting a posse of pissed-off betas with guns is far easier when you have that specter of sexual deprivation as a motivator for instant mobs.
I can’t remember any Asians or East Indians ever being lynched on false rape charges, FWIW.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree. I’ve been doing some thinking about Christian morality and why Christians succeeded in the Roman Empire. I’m starting to understand that a lot of their practices focused on self preservation rather than purely spiritual matters. The strict prohibition on fornication probably saved a lot of Christian men from being murdered by distrustful neighbors in the early days of the religion.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Especially because proselytizers probably do better than salesmen in meeting many women, and have a ‘devil may care’ attitude about approaching people for an entirely different reason than your standard PUA.
I’ll also bet that a lot of them managed to marry women from poorer or lower middle class communities when rejected by those from richer, and thus leavened Christianity with the views of women who had few to no silly beliefs about women’s superiority.
I wonder if we’re going to see ‘confessions of a Mormon PUA’ anytime soon?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Epo
“I wonder if we’re going to see ‘confessions of a Mormon PUA’ anytime soon?”
About ten years ago, I had a fling with a 25 year old woman who was a Mormon feminist-and a latina. Sounds like an oxymoron in a way, but raised in that belief system and indoctrinated into feminism in college. I ended it when my tolerance for (I would love to go into details, however it is irrelevant) warped colluding mindset was reached.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
First- What type of whiny bitch brings out the “white-race card” on one of our brothers while he is focused on fighting against one of the most vile feminazis around. You make me sick. You’re damn right we expect those blacks amongst us to pull out the race card on feminazi’s. I expect it. This is war. I expect the gays amongst us to pull out the gay-card on feminazi’s. I expect the Jews to pull out the Jew-card. I don’t want to here any shit about it. Be a fucking team player, or go your own fucking way.
Second- Nothing, nothing Obsidian said is historically inaccurate. Period. Yes, modern blacks are often enough their own worst enemy. Obsidian even touched on this for God’s sake, and you racist reactionaries still want to throw a knee jerk hissy fit. And yes, slavery needs to be understood in the context of historical slavery, that it happened to any race of people who ended up on the wrong side of a power dynamic, not just always blacks. And yes, we need not feel white guilt for the crimes of our ancestors, anymore than blacks should feel guilty for their very ancestors being the ones who sold their fellow blacks to us in the first place, but Obsidian’s point, for you fuck twits too stupid to look past the race issue, is that a sociological, a cultural condition existed that allowed white women to finger black men with no proof for the crime of rape, and that now, a similar culture exists that allow any women to finger any man for the crime of rape. His point was, that people believe what they want, what makes them feel good to believe, and that used to be that blacks were bad/inferior and not worthy of fair treatment, but now it is that all men are bad/inferior and not worthy of fair treatment. His point is that what we are going through is real, and he as black man can better argue this point for us, because he has seen the same undeniable reality before in a different historical context. You are damn well right I expect him to play that race card! That shit is pocket aces you dumb fucks who would cut off your own nose to spite your face! Shut the fuck up. Any legitimate concerns about the race issue, which no one has even brought up here, are minor by comparison to the feminist problem, and don’t belong here anyways, as we need to all work together now. If you were at war, and your platoon had black men in it, would you ostracize them as supposed inferiors due to your limited and biased understanding of the subtle genetic differences between black men and white men, nothing near the differences that exist between men and women due to the y chromosome, an entire chromosome, or would you focus on the killing the god damn mother fucking enemy as a team, and keep you fucking mouth shut.
Third- I didn’t even know Obsidian was black until this article, or if I did, I had forgotten. I’m sure I’m not the only one.
I know brilliant black men. I know even more idiotic white-trash males. The male outlier phenominon exists in blacks and whites. Don’t ever fucking forget that. Men of any race can be great. Thats how fucking awesome the y chromosome is. I know fellow black geeks personally. I know brilliant black nerds who would put the average white man to shame on any test of mental aptitude. Is the black culture fucked up some. Yes. Great black men are trying to fix it also. But I believe the black culture has been fucked by feminism and liberalism more than anything else.
Rant over. Back to the important issues.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I had a nasty screed in response, but decided to post a Howard Stern you-tube video instead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_m1WadbFms&feature=related
Is no different from women who support any woman no matter what.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Women cannot be viewed as Free, Independent, Responsible, Human Beings.”
They aren’t. They are children and the Romanos of the world know it.
“Romano lays out that Women have no agency, personal responsibility, or even basic reasoning faculties and commonsense”
Dude. Women have the intellectual capacity of a 7-10 year old boy. Just keep repeating that back to the women. Nothing more is needed. They provide evidence for this assertion every time they open their mouth or type. Expecting women to be any more will only disappoint you like it did me. The so called ‘good women’ are also just lying, in the main, to try and feather their own nests. Women are natures perfect decievers. We can’t catch them are individual deceits so it’s best just to assume they are always lying.
Since I decided I would not believe anything that ever came out of a womans mouth I have been much better off. Occasionally eastern women will say something that really sounds like ‘the truth’. Take this gem of a conversation I had. I was telling my fav#1 why she should marry a younger man and not me. I was simply ‘making up excuses’ to see what she would say.
GM: “I am too old for you. I am 10 years older and men die younger. You might be left alone for many years. I think you should marry a man closer to your own age.”
Fav: “No, No. I’d be perfectly happy to marry you. It’ ok.”
GM: “Really? Why do you say that?”
Fav: “Well, when you die I will get your money and be well off so that’s fine by me.”
Clang!!! I think I just heard a woman be honest. She did not blink when she delivered that line. LOL! For her a husband is purely about paying for her. Most of the eastern women are very clear about this.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Internetwood said:
“I had a nasty screed in response, but decided to post a Howard Stern you-tube video instead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_m1WadbFms&feature=related
Is no different from women who support any woman no matter what.”
LMBAOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
Man, you are really reaching for straws, aren’t you?
What the hell does that have to do with Obsidian’s article?
Face it, Internetwood….
You made yourself look like a jackass, as well as a racist reactionary (good call, Jabberwocky). AND YOU KNOW IT.
Seriously….
There’s nothing with bowing out gracefully. And you might want to do it in order to save yourself further embarrassment.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
No, I’m trying to be polite.
I mean really, Jabberwocky didn’t know Obsidian was black? The only way that’s possible is if he had read almost nothing written by Obsidian, ever.
I’m done with this tar-baby from hell.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is all too true. While Denise Romano is a nut with no real influence, one way or another feminists are going to come up with ways of making it more dangerous to have sex with women. It can be ramping up the false rape industry or any number of other things. All the game in the world will not protect you from any of these things.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
If O wants to battle Denise Romano
good for him
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yeah, I’m starting to come around to that way of thinking. He’s keeping her hands full, that’s for sure.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
From my point of view you’re feeding a troll to get more exposure to your blog. You’re giving her a voice, and you continue to do so here. It’s like those people who crowd around crazy religious people in universities. They’re nothing if you ignore them.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And with all this in mind…
Women are not exactly stupid. They are just about average on the intelligence continuum, and more uniformly average among other women, making them actually a good barometer of ‘common’ feeling. Just easily to emotionally manipulate, hence the being easily targeted by advertisers, PUAs, and anyone with something to sell RIGHT NOW!
An advertising or proselytizing formula that works on one woman is much more likely to work on ten than a formula that works on one man. The dirty little secret about female uniqueness is that it’s heavily dependent on how she responds to the excesses of…men. Even if all she did was stand as an opposite to whatever extreme qualities her man has, she would eventually gain a more unique personhood simply from that. Paradoxically, she would be less likely to be as easily swayed by what sways the ‘average’ (unattached) woman.
(What happens to married women can also happen to the women with a favorite author, but that has ‘statistical clustering’ written all over it.)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
‘Notice how Ms. Romano is quick to use Slavery in her response to me, but completely sidesteps the One Hundred Years of Lynchings-largely predicated on false charges of Rape. MY ANCESTORS WERE HANGED, SHOT, LYNCHED, BURNED AND KILLED, BEHIND THAT SHIT’
And Eldridge Cleaver wrote in Soul on Ice that he intentionally raped white women as a form of collective revenge for white injustice to blacks.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
And white feminists celebrated him, because it isn’t really about rape (they celebrate rape when it serves their purposes), but destroying patriarchy, and in the black community the job had already been accomplished by then.
Eldridge Cleaver, in their eyes, was helping them “liberate” women. He was just a tool, as all men are in their eyes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Good call. Because every time you responded you looked like an idiot. The best way to hurt him is to not give him any more ammunition to make him look smarter than you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“I mean really, Jabberwocky didn’t know Obsidian was black? The only way that’s possible is if he had read almost nothing written by Obsidian, ever.”
I’m sure that might seem true, but I have a horrible verbal recall memory, and find I only remember things I register as important.
“Welmer January 16, 2010 at 13:34
If O wants to battle Denise Romano
good for him
-Firepower
Yeah, I’m starting to come around to that way of thinking. He’s keeping her hands full, that’s for sure.”
I find this desire to not engage trolls logical enough, but self defeating in the end. We’ve gone over this before, and it is simply an honest strategic difference of opinion. I feel the MRA movement needs publicity. We live in a world where fame has it’s own value. For someone like Denise Romano, battling her in an open way that attracts viewers, from both sides of the debate, can only be good from a publicity standpoint, as no publicity is bad publicity. Plus, I have faith that our logic will beat out feminist rhetorical skills and verbal agility. We, as an MRA culture, have been preparing for this.
“And Eldridge Cleaver wrote in Soul on Ice that he intentionally raped white women as a form of collective revenge for white injustice to blacks.”
Yes. And the vast majority of serial killers have been white males. Lets not point to outliers on one side of the bell curve without factoring in outliers on the other side. That is something feminist do. And I’m sure it was all about revenge, and had nothing to do with sex.
Let me state, that I don’t care if you are racist as long as you don’t mind me pointing out the futility of deriding a large populace of people for the self serving purpose of raising one’s own sense of superiority. Reminds me of childhood bullies. I see valid reasons one might be racist, and would be hypocritical to deny mild racist tendencies of my own. Its natural for people to feel kinship and stick up for their own group. We both do it, whites and blacks. But, I judge people as individuals, blacks, gays, women, etc. Because that is what intelligent people do. They factor in exceptions without denying trends. But, to bring up “racial issues” in an article fighting a feminazi, in a place of brotherhood, a place where I would think we do judge each other as individuals, is counter productive. Anyone’s hatred for a group, while that belief is your right and whether it is valid or not, if I feel that hatred is getting in the way of my hatred, my rage driven goal, to destroy feminism (notice not women) then I reserve the right to express my hatred of dividers in this movement.
Whites aren’t the top tier race anyways if we insist on putting them in a hierarchy. Sorry. Why would I as a white man lie about that? White guilt? Pssshh. I might be insecure about things, but guilt, guilt, has never been an emotion I’ve grappled with, in any form. I’m more than willing to debate the race issue in an appropriate thread. No point burying our feelings and thoughts. Fuck political correctness. But team cohesion, in a metaphorical war I actually consider as dire as a real war, that must be maintained, especially in the heat of battle, even at the expense of curtailing freedom of speech in the trenches of combat, something Obsidian is currently in during his battle against Denise Ramano. Sorry to be a party pooper for both sides, but there is a time and a place for everything, and this is not it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It appears a weakness in the MRM is racial differences, work on that, of all the topics I’ve read here I haven’t seen such emotional outburst (from Men anyway) from both sides.
(Yes, Jabberwochie, that includes you, but you kept your message on track, even if some of your language would make it hard to swallow).
As for denise romano, what’s the game plan if she somehow succeeds in getting the legal system to remove a blog or two?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Start 4 more.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Brilliant.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I’m with Jabberwocky.
This shit is counterproductive. If the racists on both sides of the fence want to sling shit at each other AFTER we’ve skullfucked feminism to death, so be it, but this is neither the time nor the place.
Frankly, I don’t think Obsidian pointing out how white women made accusations that got black men lynched had anything to do with the races of the involved parties, other than in a cursory,topical, way.
It was simply a valid historical example of WOMEN fucking things up for “fun” or “variety” or for whatever sick delusional reason they make up shit that gets people killed.
GODDAMN IT.
We are MEN.
WE BUILT THIS WORLD.
Black men, white men, asian men. If anything ever got done, you can bet your ass that it was a man who did it.
Now we, ALL OF US, are being systematically raped by the very same world that WE built.
The motherfuckers who want to take away your rights and mine don’t care what color you are, all that matters to them is that you have a penis. We are ALL the “niggers”. Guilty by reason of penis.
We are being forced to PAY for OUR OWN ENSLAVEMENT.
Think about that shit. They build the prisons they send us to with OUR money.
Nobody here is the enemy (with the exception of a few feminist trolls). We must either ALL fight against our oppressors, or we will ALL be punished together, blacks and whites, asian, hispanic and jew.
If you have a dick, you are subhuman filth in their eyes, there isn’t any kind of hierarchy of shit. They don’t distinguish between males, neither should we, because when it comes down to it, we ALL stand to win or LOSE the exact same thing, freedom to be a man.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The main reason feminists hate men is BECAUSE we built the world, had all the great ideas, invented everything, explored everything. Even feminism was a male idea.
Imagine being a woman, with everything you wear, eat, live in, most of your thoughts, facts, ideas and freedoms invented or won for you by men. Imagine how that must feel to a feminist. Deeply and profoundly humiliating.
That’s why feminists hate men. Because they are nothing without men. All the feminist web sites are using technology created by men. Imagine how humiliating that must be to feminists.
Real women know this, and are happy to live in the world men built, because it provides them with comfort, safety and a place. Feminists hate men because they are humiliated by the historical impotence and dependency of their own sex.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I agree with the passionate anti-racism, but it was really only one person who even went down that route and he’s long since stopped posting.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Wait, I may have posted this on the wrong thread.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
No, I didn’t.
LOL!
Admins, feel free to clear up my clusterfuck …
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thank you! I would now go on this blog every day!
Have a nice day
Doggy
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Counterproductive? Hell no. Taking on sex and race at the same time is absolutely necessary.
If you haven’t read and understood Is Love Colorblind? you need to do so now.
Best to understand these issues before they come back to bite you in the ass.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
How PUA methods teach and encourage men to rape women and irresonsibly and negligently FAIL to teach men what constitutes sexual assualt and rape and what CONSENT is and is NOT:
http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2008/12/11/state_college_man_bound_over_f.aspx
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Has nothing to do with PUA methods Denise.
The silly bitch was plastered and flirted with the guy who was also drunk.
You reap what you sow…
She got what she deserved.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Kathy,
Instead of the two getting drunk together like bar flies, what they both should have done instead was order, and share, a nice, big, tasty sandwich.
http://www.simplysandwiches.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/chicken-top.jpg
You know, these watering holes really should do a better job of hiring better bartenders and beer wenches, so as to not serve the underaged or the irresponsibly inebriated. Geesh.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“Instead of the two getting drunk together like bar flies, what they both should have done instead was order, and share, a nice, big, tasty sandwich”
Ha!
I think , Get Real, that sucking lemons would be more their go
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
…sucking lemons would be more their go…
__
LMAO
Well, I see Kathy that Madame ‘cut-n-paste’ Romano is back with her eloquent creativity.
How unique and original of her, eh?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
{ 2 trackbacks }