A reader sent me this article about the shocking behavior of an Italian TV hostess who decided to have some fun and boost her ratings by grabbing David Beckham’s crotch while he was speaking with reporters. She prepared for the assault by putting on some rubber gloves and practicing the grab. The video of the incident is available in the article.
Imagine the reaction if some paparazzi photographer grabbed a female Hollywood star’s breasts on air to determine whether they were real. The guy would probably get beat up, arrested, and then convicted of sexual assault and have “sex offender” stamped on his record for the rest of his life. Yet a woman in Italy can pull this off with no consequences.
The double standards across the West are beginning to become so blatantly obvious that they can’t realistically be hidden anymore. Additionally, female misbehavior is so widespread that it is starting to become disruptive even to the lives of the rich and famous.
Subscribe to The Spearhead Newsletter for a free copy of the Book of Zed
{ 73 comments… read them below or add one }
I wonder how this incident fits into their kooky “rape culture” and “male entitlement” theories.
“Imagine the reaction if some paparazzi photographer grabbed a female Hollywood star’s breasts on air to determine whether they were real”: he wasn’t a paparazzo, and he’s gay, but http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2006-03-03-johansson-mizrahi_x.htm
As for the Beckham incident, yes — but he could have pressed charges. Isn’t that the real problem: that it probably didn’t occur to him?
Of course, Italian justice seems to be a bit of an oxymoron anyway…
In the UK a few years back there was a female news reporter live on air covering some local flooding. Some guy walking by pinched her ass as a joke. The police saw this on TV, and without complaint from her , tracked the guy down and arrested him.
Links related to previous comment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_2sIarOigk
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-472480/Why-Channel-4s-goosed-reporter-turn-cheek-pinching.html
My genitals were groped by a drunk woman at a party once, who was making a joke about castration to her female friends. I grabbed her wrist and said “Get the fuck off.” Her drunk friends called me an “asshole” and a “faggot.”
That happened ten years ago. I would slap any woman who did that to me now.
Sickening.
I don’t know how anyone can stand to be around women any more. I really don’t.
Not sure the reverse is unheard of in Italy. Italian culture is pretty different to the American one, and the notion of “sexual harassment” is not as prevalent, so that I’m not so sure a male couldn’t get away with it, especially if he’s alpha. Anyone here living in Italy an/or watching italian TV, who could answer the question?
I agree that such things are becoming more commonplace and obvious.
It’s fairly amusing to me, because soon enough there WILL be some sort of backlash against it. There’s no way there can’t be. I’ll leave the explaining of why to people who can explain it better than I, but it’s pretty much a foregone conclusion.
Man in Italy convicted for STARING at women in trains.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKL1836302120080418
Time to start breaking shit.
Beckham should have “holla’d back”.
Man in Italy convicted for STARING at women in trains.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKL1836302120080418
Time to start breaking shit.
Eye rape.
Man in Italy convicted for STARING at women in trains.
In Italy???
Geesh, I thought this was the country that started this whole thing of staring at women?
*This must of been in the north of that country.
I was standing outside a pub once, waiting to hook up with friends. A woman came out with a guy around each arm. She walked straight up to me, grabbed my hand and rubbed it on her snatch. Then threw her head back laughing wildly, then walked away. I was stunned.
True story.
On the other hand, Amanda Knox got what she deserved in Italy. Would the same have happened here?
Dude, you sexually assaulted her.
/feminism
My head is reeling today. Information overload.
I had a woman grope my a$$ while I was in the legal department at my work.
I was signing some patent forms (for something I invented) – as I turned to leave, she grabbed my a$$ and squeezed.
I stopped and thought, “Why do some women do that – it’s not like they are equipped to do anything about their lust for my a$$”
The thought of filing a lawsuit, or even a complaint did not even cross my mind.
WHY – it seems like there is a tremendous shortage of women in this country that exhibit heterosexual behavior anymore (most are filled with rage – kinda seems dike-ish to me). I would not want to discourage any woman from being straight – eventhough the overwhelming majority of women I have met try their hardest to discourage men from being straight.
@Bitchslap – what country are you from? Canada – it seems like Canada and Australia are the two worst matriarchies in existence today.
Also – did you know that kneeing some woman in the crotch can actually knock the wind out of them – women have a huge bundle of nerves down there – just like men (just no testicles to injure).
If any woman grabbed me there and was talking about castration – I’d punch her lights out.
That is sexual assault.
Richard- No I’m in U.S. At the time, I was in a part of the Midwest that is culturally more like the South. I was a smart and confident kid at the time but only just starting to observe the rancid shit called “typical woman.”
Personally, I would not kick anyone in the crotch unless they were choking me or something.
In the incident i described, a HARD slap would have been appropriate but hindsight is…
Funny thing is… I can remember her face. I can however, clearly remember what she was wearing, and how her snatch felt… how soft and warm her thighs were on either side of my hand.
Women sure do the darndest things…
can’t remember her face*
@zel – was she wearing a bag over her face maybe?
:>
@Richard – (shrug)Memories are funny things, those that are inconsequential just slip away. Now had she been fugly, or wearing a bag over her head… I would have remembered that!
Why weren’t any charges pressed?
I was stunned, and she was quickly gone. I was not offended. Had I seen it coming, I would have held a probing finger up. I feel cheated… and kinda used. That Bitch!
I used to get groped all the time bar/club hopping. Usually it’s a fat trollish woman, but every once in a great while it’d be a young hottie. However, fat or hot, they always ran away when I turned around to see who the hell just handled my junk. Now that I think about it it hasn’t happened in about 2 years. Guess I’m starting to lose my appeal.
Did you personally observe this? I’ve never seen anybody do that in a fight, man or woman. Unlike a man, kneeing a woman in the crotch seems to be off limits.
On the other hand, Amanda Knox got what she deserved in Italy. Would the same have happened here?-sestamibi
No, it wouldn’t. Knox would have gotten convicted at first but would immediately be labeled a “victim” and the usual memes about girls not being “that” kind to do the things she did by the fem establishment and media. Any male involved in the incident would then be singled out as the real criminal. Knox would be set free due to a compassionate public. So much for America’s hard stance on crime, eh?
Ah, I see where this is going. First there’s an article extolling the virtues and total non-faggotry of male-on-male sexual harrassment and assault, and now there’s an article complaining about women sexually harrassing men.
Hmm.
null January 22, 2010 at 18:42
Ah, I see where this is going. First there’s an article extolling the virtues and total non-faggotry of male-on-male sexual harrassment and assault, and now there’s an article complaining about women sexually harrassing men.
Hmm.
“First there’s an article extolling the virtues and total non-faggotry of male-on-male sexual harrassment”
Where did you see this in the article?
“Where did you see this in the article?”
Read my comment there.
I noticed the same thing. It betrays the overwhelming sexual preference of most men on this blog.
(no offense meant. i have gay friends and co-workers and have absolutely no problem with their choices in life, but they are open and outed, not closeted or passive-aggressive about it)
So where’s it going null?
A website with multiple posters and multiple readers will have a variety of positions presented and a wide range of differing reactions. Are you expecting consistency? Do you think consistency is possible? Important? Why?
Of course consistency is important, unless you want to use inconsistency as a deliberate strategy for deflecting criticism, like feminists do.
Clearly you think consistency is important – but you don’t say why.
What is the point of this site if there is no consistency? Just run individual sites if you have nothing in common.
What is the point of this site if there is no consistency? Just run individual sites if you have nothing in common.
This coming from a ‘guy’ who is against ‘echo-chambers’.
I know, pretty funny, isn’t it? This is why I think null is a girl, too. Anyone who’s argued with women should recognize it.
How is that in any way related to this?
Welmer “This is why I think null is a girl, too.”
You think so because you’re paranoid, delusional and stupid. I’ve never even heard a good reason for why women would come here and pretend to be men. And even supposing that I was female… so what?
Women like handsome faces. I know, it sucks. But we might as well face it, better sooner than later.
I think this site consistently provides items of interest to men and a non-feminist view of the world – but that’s as far, and as desirable, as I would want consistency to be a feature.
I think the more pertinent question is ‘what is the point of consistency?’.
It’s certainly a desirable attribute of mathematical systems, scientific theories and enforcement of law, because consistency provides predictability – and the value of that is obvious. To my mind, consistency is what we expect from something after all the hard work has been done. It’s a feature of a finished product. A scientific theory is consistent only after years of debate, experimenting and cross-checking with existing theory. Once the point of consistency has been reached, it becomes more practical, but less interesting. It’s time to move on to something else.
I can’t see how consistency would be desirable as a general feature of people – otherwise, how could we change our minds about something? It seems to me to be a pointless expectation of a group of people. As for the development of non-feminist thought and masculine interpretations of existence, we are not yet at the point of developing consistent commonly accepted theory, though progress is being made. We are still struggling to get a large part of the public to recognize what is before their very eyes and call it by its proper name.
Inconsistency will be a common feature of the Men’s Movement in the years ahead as various theorists make their proposals and others tear them down. That’s been the pattern of history in the making of all new knowledge.
We do not need consistency of thought because worthwhile men can contemplate more than one concept at the time. In fact, considering many alternative points of view is how new and better ideas come into being. We are not seeking consistency or consensus, we’re seeking excellence.
Women like handsome faces. I know, it sucks. But we might as well face it, better sooner than later. Vancouver Race Baiter
I like women with million dollar bank accounts who give me the keys to their Porsche 911′s – but it is not primarily what I am looking for in a woman.
null January 22, 2010 at 23:52
“I’ve never even heard a good reason for why women would come here and pretend to be men.”
Null…that you are a woman is obvious…..you are stupid and ignorant and that is pretty much woman territory.
Women come to mens sites pretending to be men because they are attention whores and desire the attention of men so much they pretend to be men to get that attention. They do it all the time.
One the think free forums one woman was ‘gender non-specific’ because she knows that men are taken more seriously in their comments by other men than by women because women talk such shit all the time. I took this woman to be a man and agreed to assist her with her sons court case over a false arrest before I knew she was a woman. When I found out she was a woman I told her I would help her anyway even though she had deliberately misled me just to prove that men are all class and women are all crap. She took the point. I have since also advised her with respect to her other son. I am helping her two sons. Not her. I told her I couldn’t care if she died tomorrow but the boys should be assisted. She was quite taken aback. We since had a long coversation as to what is really happening in the world and she has volunteered to serve on a jury to try women for crimes they commit against men as she see that as her obligation as an adult.
Pretty interesting that some woman I told I didn’t care anything about and would not be concerned to see her dead has now turned around into a supporter of my proposal to have women sit on juries for crimes women commit. Don’t you think? She has even posted support of me in one or two places to point out to the women that I am exactly correct in calling women on their unwillingness to sit on juries.
Null…that you are a woman is obvious…..you are stupid and ignorant and that is pretty much woman territory.
And a passive-aggressive little beeyotch to boot.
From one of the best bloggers on the internet -
http://therawness.com/my-european-trip-part-6-beta-confrontation/
Globalman “Null…that you are a woman is obvious…”
Yeah, if you’re completely unable to tell the difference between men and women and are so paranoid, delusional and stupid that you actually think women would come here and put on an elaborate show of being men.
“you are stupid and ignorant and that is pretty much woman territory.”
Except it isn’t, since stupidity is possibly the most equally distributed resource in existence. You’re just a misogynist.
“Women come to mens sites pretending to be men because they are attention whores and desire the attention of men so much they pretend to be men to get that attention. They do it all the time.”
I’m sure it appears that way to a mentally ill person like you.
Troll Detector “And a passive-aggressive little beeyotch to boot.”
Are you talking about yourself?
Troll Detector “And a passive-aggressive little beeyotch to boot.â€
Are you talking about yourself?
Null-n-void simply cannot stop making these passive-aggressive comments.
It is like the kid in grade school saying “…I know you are, but what am I…”.
Real original comeback there, Dull.
Troll Detector simply cannot stop being a troll, as well as a retard.
If misguided men like Tiger Woods and Beckham would grow a pair and file charges against their attackers it would be a step in the right direction and maybe women would start to realize it’s not okay to fuck with men.
Also null, we’re united by men’s rights! My penis, my choice! My penis, my choice!
Don’t get your panties in a bunch. And no, I don’t know whether you’re a woman. Men can wear panties too.
Jay Hammers “Also null, we’re united by men’s rights!”
No, the banner of men’s rights is just what you use to give yourself the appearance of legitimacy. Much like feminists and women’s rights.
“Don’t get your panties in a bunch. And no, I don’t know whether you’re a woman. Men can wear panties too.”
I’m not wearing panties, so what does this have to do with me?
Troll Detector simply cannot stop being a troll, as well as a retard.
Another original zinger from our resident idiot, Dull.
null is one of the most persistent trolls I have ever come across. He deserves a round of applause simply for his persistence. Don’t you think guys? I actually think it’s something of an accomplishment. He’s no garden variety, insult everyone once then disappear troll. Come on guys … on a one … two … three …
*lonely clap*
*lonely clap*
RMLMFAO
So is groping OK when the groper is a man? I comment on this only after reading through the male on male post that basically says that men who grope other men aren’t guilty of anything untoward. So the only logical connection I can make is that a groping male is vindicated in his actions. If the theory is that inter-sexual contact necessarily creates problems where intra-sexual contact does not, then if someone could make that point clear, I’ll just agree to disagree.
I think null tends to be right in some cases, but for totally the wrong reasons. The support null uses for his/her/its beliefs are usually pretty weak and defenseless, but some of the positions are not. Is it reasonable that men are okay with being groped by other men, but being groped by women is something to get upset about? I think the results are the same. Saying that men groping men is okay, but women groping men is not is quite similar to the idea that one group of people can say a certain word based on their race, and all other people cannot. It doesn’t follow.
I think there is a serious problem when double standards reach the level they have today. Men groping women is considered sexual assault, but the opposite is not true. The real problem with this is not just the imbalance in social standards for either sex, but the fact that people can’t learn to keep their hands to themselves.
Many Spearhead readers seem to believe in double standards when it suits their purposes but get all bent out of shape when the standards are reversed. Rather than seek to create our own imbalanced social standards, maybe more MRA’s should seek to eliminate them altogether. It’s reasonable to propose that women cannot do certain tasks because they are ill-suited to it, but we’re no better than feminists if we say that women cannot take certain actions merely on the basis of them being a woman.
It’s like Republicans overwhelmingly supporting Bush and the wars in the Middle East. They couldn’t get enough packages together to support the troops, or give enough taxes to bomb brown people into the ground. Now that a Democrat is president, they have nothing but complaints. Obama kept the same advisors as Bush, and has devoted even MORE resources to fighting this war. He’s at least as warmongering as Bush, yet Republicans say he’s soft on national defense. It’s a double standard, it’s hypocrisy, and people can smell it from a mile away. Every time we make statements that a woman can’t do something because she’s a woman, we undermine our position in the logical sense of our superiority in certain areas. Let’s stick to the facts.
According to me, no. A lot of inappropriate male behavior toward other men is a test. I don’t laugh at it; I fight, and I don’t care if I lose.
But it seems to me that what Jack is getting at is that some hierarchical posturing is actually natural, and serves some kind of purpose in the grand scheme of things. I think he might be right. So I’d say that overlegislating male on male interaction might be counterproductive. That’s what I get out of it.
Of course, gratuitous brutality such as hazing boys is going too far, but I don’t think that’s what he’s getting at. Taking our primal nature into account and managing it so it doesn’t go too far is very important, and that takes a lot of subtlety. Setting up a civil law regime to deal with it is like using a butterknife when what is called for is a scalpel.
”””It’s reasonable to propose that women cannot do certain tasks because they are ill-suited to it,””””’
No woman can do all tasks they are just not made to. Make it equal and they will be welders and carpenters and electricians and boiler cleaners because they will do it or be put in jail. Forced equality in every area.
Justus said:
‘but we’re no better than feminists if we say that women cannot take certain actions merely on the basis of them being a woman.’
But feminism has done very well in demonizing ALL men for being men, just look at how successful its been, so why should we men not mirror it and be just as successful? I dont give a flying f*ck if it ‘lowers’ me to the feminists level, I just want control back in the hands of men, and women put back in their place.
However thats achieved is fine by me.
Also, most men in this ‘movement’ dont want or need the approval of anyone. We simply do not care what people think of us.
I would certainly agree. However, I do think that sexual assault is a reasonable enough crime, it’s just gotten far too out of hand in its definitions, especially that it’s so one-sided sexually. There’s a line between ass slapping and freezer gangbangs, and I’d draw that line much closer to ass slapping.
Congratulations, you have justified feminism and destroyed the position of MRAs to just as unreasonable and illogical as women. In essence, you’ve made a woman out of men’s rights. Being the master of unwilling slaves doesn’t help our position. We need to make them recognize that it’s in everyone’s best interest to fix the problems with our society, not crush them into subservience with an iron fist.
Welmer,
I also have a suspicion that Null is using another alias on this thread as well.
You probably could tell, er, just who it is.
Justus said:
‘We need to make them recognize that it’s in everyone’s best interest to fix the problems with our society.’
They dont see ‘society’, they only see themselves, and their own selfish wants and desires.
Justus said:
‘you have justified feminism and destroyed the position of MRAs to just as unreasonable and illogical as women.’
What a bullshit statement.
Has it escaped your notice that millions of men are wronged daily by these asshole women? So no, its not unreasonable of me to think that way, Im absolutely right.
If you, the feminists, women, or anybody else want to condemn me or the MRM for it, as I already said, I dont give a f*ck, because the c*nts will find any reason to keep on harming men and boys, so you may aswell speak your mind as a man, because you’ll be condemned anyway.
get a clue buddy.
The boogie man isn’t out to get you Kulak, and there’s no Spearhead conspiracy trying to trick you into thinking we’re multiple people. I don’t know who null is, but I do know Druk, because he’s my brother. So you have at least 3 people here who disagree with using illogical statements to establish your beliefs.
Yeah, I noticed. It’s fucked up. However, my answer to the fact that we’re getting fucked over isn’t to try to fuck them over more. That’s just childish, and it doesn’t solve anything. In the grand scheme of things, if either men OR women lose, we all lose. Men should be in charge because they’re the responsible, reasonable, logical sex. If you abandon reason, then you lose all credibility. Don’t let yourself become the victim, driven to insanity by the opposition. You have to be better than that.
I also have a suspicion that Null is using another alias on this thread as well.
- Kulak
The boogie man isn’t out to get you Kulak, and there’s no Spearhead conspiracy trying to trick you into thinking we’re multiple people. I don’t know who null is, but I do know Druk, because he’s my brother. So you have at least 3 people here who disagree with using illogical statements to establish your beliefs.
__
Oh no, ‘Null-n-void’ is back
ZOMG. Get Real. No, really.
This is important. We need to maintain an indiscriminate moral fortitude, if you don’t have the principles to do so then at least know that any discriminate act you do will be used against you and all men.
Considering feminist strategies and tactics have been so successful, it would be a little negligent to leave women with sole possession of such potent weapons. It would be equivalent to saying ‘since nuclear bombs are so immoral, we will not use them – even if our enemies do’.
I think we should adopt every tactic that feminism employs – emotional plays, twisted statistics, false claim to scholastic support, filtered focus, unequivocal support or silence for actions men take that appear extreme, etc etc.
If nothing else, it forces the question: if MRAs and Feminists are as bad as each other, as duplicitous and as dishonest, then why are Feminists still being taken seriously and MRAs are being ridiculed and sidelined for doing the same?
Justus:
Justus said:
‘my answer to the fact that we’re getting fucked over isn’t to try to fuck them over more. That’s just childish’
I dont care what it seems, I only care that it works. Reason certainly doesnt work.
Any male that understands the problem of women and feminism know that neither can be reasoned with. yes they will nod in agreement with you as you quietly and clamly make your case, but as soon as the opportunity arises they will do what comes naturally to all women, and suit themselves at everyone elses expense. To not know this is naive.
Justus said:
‘If you abandon reason, then you lose all credibility.’
Whos abandoned reason? Not me.
Im telling the truth that women are selfish and destructive, you’ve only got to look at their behaviour everyday. Females are the cause of the problems in the west. thats a fact. Thats why the arabs keep their women under control, because they know what happens if you dont, you get the US and the UK.
Alqaeda terrorism? these islamists are not fighting for Allah, they are actually fighting to stop their lands from being feminised by the (already) feminised west.
Its all about the control of women for the sake of wider society. It always has been.
Was politics the counterweight to overwhelming female influence at society level? probably, as one of its functions, but now even politics has become infected. In my opinion women should never have even been given the vote.
Is this an extreme viewpoint? not to thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands of men that actually understand the true selfish and destructive nature of women.
Justus said:
Don’t let yourself become the victim, driven to insanity by the opposition. You have to be better than that.
They (women and feminism) have made me the victim. It is they that have driven me insane. My reaction is normal and healthy.
So you haven’t abandoned reason, but you also say that it doesn’t work. Interesting.
You have been driven insane, yet your reactions are normal and healthy. More interesting stuff here.
It all comes back to your goals. If your only goal is to reestablish male dominance in society, then sure, fight fire with fire and play the game by feminist rules. We’ll probably win eventually, but the chaos that ensues will probably burn the first world to the ground. In war, even the victor sometimes loses.
What we should really focus on is reestablishing logic and reason as the pinnacle of values. I’ll agree that most women aren’t inclined to cooperate with this, as many of them seem to be utterly incapable of reasonable thought. The real target should be the men who play along with women’s ridiculousness and the government policies and programs that subsidize them. Feminism could not exist without male support, and this is what we should target. Ostracize the men who play along; call them out on every issue; be examples of how a male dominated society is better than the alternatives we see around us.
By sinking to the level of feminism, we become animals given in to our nature, and give no hope or reason to those who would join us. Their lies about fairness and peace are more appealing than your truths about wishing to destroy the foundation of our nations. Instead, show people the true pillars of civilization centered around patriarchy. We need to repair and rebuild. Calling for the destruction of everything we know as the solution to the problems at hand isn’t going to bring anyone to the table.
I’m not seeing how this would work, in practical terms. Chivalry is endemic in our Anglo cultures. Any suggestion, no matter how harmlessly formulated, that women are being ridiculous and the society is slanting too much in one direction will be reflexively rejected by many men — again, regardless of presentation. The impulse to protect the women-folk runs too deep. I do not think there is a political solution to this problem — at least not one that involves the current political institutions in our societies.
Again, I don’t see the buy-in. Almost no-one agrees with our position about feminism and so on. The “progressive” discourse on history has won the hearts and minds, for the most part.
This is why I think the best course is for men to do things or support things that tend to undermine the current system in an effort to bring about its end more quickly. If enough men do this, it will have the impact of picking up the pace of decline. In my view, the current system is beyond being fixed — it needs to be replaced. That replacement need not, in my view, be old school patriarchy, but trying to build an egalitarian model on the current foundations is nearly hopeless, given the way that words like “equality” and “fairness” and so on have been so successfully constructed in our culture to favor women. I think that the current system needs to be scrapped so that we can then rebuild from scratch.
I have to say that it’s refreshing to converse with people when I’m not holding the most utilitarian position in the room. Perhaps you’re right, that the first world is so lost beyond all reclaim that the best path is to drive it into the ground as quickly as possible, so we can start rebuilding. When it comes to replacement, I suppose we could all have another separate discussion on what kind of system we would put in place, but my vote would probably be for old school patriarchy, as you called it. I’m sure plenty of others would disagree with me.
As for what kind of system would be best to replace the mess we have now, consider the kind of society that would arise naturally if an equal number of men and women were ship-wrecked on a new uninhabited land. In other words, if the complexity and divorce from reality introduced by central government were removed.
There’s so shortage of real examples (e.g Mutiny of the Bounty) and fictional speculations (Lord of the Flies) on the matter. The men would engage in power struggles to determine hierarchy, and women’s involvement would be peripheral. Once established and accepted by most men, it would become stable and be the essential power structure. Labor would be split along gender lines, with men doing what the women couldn’t (and vice versa regarding child-birth and nursing). The women would gravitate toward the man at the top of the hierarchy, but he would recognize that his position would be undermined if he didn’t share them around. This is where we differ fundamentally from apes. Although we have the same basic urges to ‘own all the women’ if we can, we also have higher intelligence that can anticipate the perils of following through on that urge and excluding the very men we rely on to survive. The gang-wars going on in inner city ghettos are nothing more than those struggles for power between men that Golding so elegantly described, and they arose because the stable, accepted hierarchy of power between men was removed – and that was done by welfare for mothers, no-fault divorce, and elimination of respect and rights for fathers.
null January 22, 2010 at 23:50
“How is that in any way related to this?”
Its all about you, so clearly never is any this is not about that.
Making a discussion about yourself sounds like something a woman would do. Or a man without much of a masculine-side. Also the propensity to push interpretation through psycho-babbling filters. And then bounce the contents of your echo-chamber back out, in that arse-about ‘you-am-i’ way that women seem to mistake for reality. Not to mention the way you like to shadow-box respondents into your box of shadows.
Complaint? I would pay to have my genitals groped by a woman, even once. Hell, feel free! My genitals will thank you, just be careful of that one little spot, UGH!
{ 3 trackbacks }