Why we need to stop telling women to settle

by Featured Guest on April 30, 2011

By Dalrock

Received wisdom in the manosphere is that women need to settle. I have to say I enjoy a good hamster carpet bombing as much as the next guy.  But in the end the entertainment value isn’t worth the human cost.  I’ve touched on this before, but after seeing the article Did You Marry the Wrong Guy? from Marie Claire (H/T GudEnuf) I wanted to revisit it.

The problem with telling women they need to settle isn’t that they won’t listen.  The problem is that they will listen, or at least use this message as rationalization for wrecking an honest man’s life.  The problem occurs because women don’t think like men.  If you tell a man he has too high a sense of his own value in the dating/marriage marketplace, he is likely to be humbled by this.  Actually no one needs to tell the typical guy this because they tend to figure it out based on which women are and aren’t attracted to them.

Too many women (especially the kind of women the message is aimed at)  however hear this message and decide this means they should marry the well off guy they aren’t attracted to, ultimately doing him the favor of taking his kids and half his stuff when they figure out they don’t love him anymore.  According to the Marie Claire article this is quite common:

According to recent research conducted by Jennifer Gauvain, a therapist in Denver, 30 percent of now-divorced women say they knew in their gut they were making a mistake as they walked down the aisle — and kept walking anyway. Only a handful backed out.

Being a women’s magazine, the article goes on to explain that the women themselves aren’t to blame for leaving a trail of wreckage in their wakes because society made them do it.  The reality is they feared loosing the option to choose, and wanted the status that came with getting married as well as his money.  He wasn’t likely to give up half of his stuff and pay for her to have children if she didn’t pretend to be in love with him in order to marry him:

Clark had dated a handsome businessman for four years before they got engaged, and although he didn’t make her heart race, she still loved him. “We were best friends, and I thought he’d make a great husband and father, even though I wasn’t ‘in love,’” she says. “I walked down the aisle thinking, What the hell? During my vows, I wasn’t making eye contact with my fiancé.”

Five years and two kids later, their sex life nonexistent, Clark wanted out. “I’d often wish he would cheat,” she says. Finally, her husband, sensing her unhappiness, ended it.

I see this woman as beneath more traditional gold diggers and prostitutes.  She isn’t just harming him, but putting her children through great pain as well.  Aside from stealing his wealth and children, she also stole his opportunity for great happiness.   The truth is another woman would likely have found this same man quite attractive and lovable.  She had no right to rob him of that because she lacked the capacity to reciprocate love but still wanted all of the benefits of marriage.  Some might say that he should have learned game and all would have been well.  Aside from the fact that this isn’t common knowledge in our culture, had he learned game he would have been able to marry a much better woman.  She wanted a man of his appearance wealth and status with game, but none of them wanted her or she would have married one of them.

My guess is the root cause of women who are incapable of experiencing reciprocal love and attraction is a blend of the mismatch feminism has created between men and women, the impact of alpha chasing/promiscuity, and an overall entitlement complex.  Whatever the cause of the issue, it does appear to be real for a significant percentage of women.

Making things worse, older women consistently advise younger women to pass up men they are in love with and attracted to with the assumption that another better man will be along shortly.  We have seen this with Advice Goddess, Amy Dickinson, and the authors of Last one down the aisle wins.  The reality is that experiencing mutual attraction isn’t a given for women, and should therefore not be abandoned lightly.  This also is why the advice to women to postpone marriage and “just have fun” for a decade or more is so detrimental to them.  Finding a man who they can reciprocate love and attraction with is difficult for many women, and only gets harder the older they become.

So stop telling women to settle.  I beg you!  The innocent (but clueless) beta you save may be someone you know.

I think this is the single biggest risk a man looking to marry faces.  This is even bigger in my opinion than a woman’s sexual history, although the two are often connected.

 

{ 179 comments… read them below or add one }

woggy April 30, 2011 at 07:22

Women would get the point on their own if divorce and family law didn’t favor them so heavily.
The emotional wreckage of having married the wrong one? Let the women endure it just like the men have to now.
Equality baby.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 89 Thumb down 3
Uncle Elmer April 30, 2011 at 07:48

Making things worse, older women consistently advise younger women to pass up men they are in love with and attracted to with the assumption that another better man will be along shortly.

This falls under the rubric of “misery loves company”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 71 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer April 30, 2011 at 07:52

Thought you would enjoy this one Dalrock :

How getting divorced revived my sex life

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/26/sex_life_returns_at_38

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Eincrou April 30, 2011 at 07:53

The article has good ideas, but I think they are not suited for this audience.

So stop telling women to settle. I beg you! The innocent (but clueless) beta you save may be someone you know.

The commenters of this site are going to respond to this by saying that every man should not marry; thus completely bypassing this article’s primary issue. To them, the solution is that simple. I don’t disagree with them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 2
Keyster April 30, 2011 at 08:06

I was lucky enough in my youth to perceive the difference between true love and “settling” love, and no love at all. I was never quite good enough for true loves, while the “settling” loves would reveal themselves in due course; wreaking of desperation at first, eventually trying to control you.

If you can manage to be around her for more than a few months, even enjoying her companianship, without f*cking her, she’s your mate. If you engage in sex first off or too soon, the entire dynamic of the relationship changes in her favor, as she becomes the dealer and you the junkie.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 8
demirogue April 30, 2011 at 08:18

I personally know a few women that would settle for just about anything right now.

This message has been brought to you by ACME and it’s biggest customer. Wile E Coyote.

Beep, beep!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 73 Thumb down 1
Curiepoint April 30, 2011 at 08:26

I’m more in favor of not only telling them not to settle, but also to keep away from marriage in the first place. This will save the so-called Alphas, Betas, Zetas, and any other man who falls along the Greek alphabet.

They don’t need us. We don’t need them. It’s simple arithmetic:

0 * marriage = 0 misery

Love used to be the universal language. We live in a world now where love is more akin to Sanskrit; few us it or even understand it anymore, and those that do avail themselves of the knowledge to understand the ways of a bygone time.

It isn’t worth the effort to dig through a septic system with a teaspoon hoping to find a diamond. Marriage is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 6
Rebel April 30, 2011 at 09:18

The best approach is to abolish marriage altogether. If marriage is made unavailable, all the current problems will go away.

Hooking up momentarily is enough. When you think about it, serial mono/polygamy is the best arrangement: you fall in love, you hook up, you fall out of love, you unhook.
Kick the government out of your lives: it has no business there.

No problemo.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 9
Aharon April 30, 2011 at 10:11

Government should be out of the marriage business. Like all complex and potentially long-term business partnerships I think there needs to be a required pre-nuptial drawn up by two separate and competent attorney’s representing both sides.

Thou shall not lie, steal (divorce), commit adultery, bare false witness claiming false DV & child endangerment etc, murder (directly or indirectly ie divorce leading to mostly male suicides) — happens all too frequently in modern American marriage. Things have historically never been near perfect yet now society has really gone towards the extreme. Congrats feminists, you accomplished so many things.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 3
woggy April 30, 2011 at 10:14

Keyster wrote:
“If you engage in sex first off or too soon, the entire dynamic of the relationship changes in her favor, as she becomes the dealer and you the junkie.”

It’s often said ( okay, emphasized) that quick sex is bad for women; I suppose that is somewhat true, but in this day and age, where being a slutty woman hasn’t the stigma it once did, it’s not the disadvantage it was. Who doubts that William has been giving Kate the Royal Reamer for years now?
She got a very long white dress and a $65 million bridefest- so what used to brand a woman a slut pays pretty well. Nuff said.

For the guys- with the temporary insanity that accompanies ejaculation?
I think we’re all quite well aquainted with that minefield, so I won’t beat a dead horse, but every teenage boy ought to have MRA material as REQUIRED READING before he has his first wet dream- so at least he’ll KNOW that women’s immodest dress and easy sex is nothing more than a means of entrapment and control.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 0
Dalrock April 30, 2011 at 10:16

Good link Uncle Elmer. The hamster is strong with that one. Just like with Liz Jones, it will exhaust itself eventually. I especially enjoyed the ending:

For the past three years, I have loved and been loved by the man I assume to be my life partner. As I approach 50, my desire for him has not waned.

Funny choice of words. I would bet her ex husband made a similar assumption, although I have no doubt he is far better off without her. Why is it that women always seem to “find themselves” once they have the kids they want, and in her case he finished putting her through school? Quite strange.

Oh, and they left off the best part of the article. They should have included this picture of the sexy babe. They must have forgotten. Although it might have been taken several years ago, it at least gives us an idea of what her poor husband is missing out on. You go golden girl!

http://talkingwriting.com/wp-content/uploads/66468_444282286695_703911695_6042866_908290_n.jpg

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 2
Herbal Essence April 30, 2011 at 10:22

I think many women, even women nearing Wile E. Coyote, are still filled with the belief that “They Deserve It All!” Regardless of reality, if she believed that she settled, that’s what she’s going to believe. I don’t think it matters so much what men say or don’t say.

Dalrock’s advice to women (which I consider good advice) will be heard by many women as instruction to settle. For example, here-

http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/04/26/advice-to-a-single-woman-in-her-30s-looking-to-marry/

To many women, these reasoned and lucid steps will be perceived as settling for Mr. Decent Enough. This is not Dalrock’s fault. He lays out his case very well. But this is where we’re at in society right now with female arrogance and delusion. They’re simply not attracted to men at their level. She very well may get married to Mr. Decent Enough. But her long-term satisfaction is still going to be determined by her willingness to evolve as a person and find happiness in the committed partnership.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3
Sean April 30, 2011 at 10:29

Why should WE tell THEM anything?

Advising a women is generally part and parcel with solving her problems. How has that worked out for us?

Shouldn’t we be saying something like “You go girl! Go do whatever makes you feel good!” ? Or how about “I don’t care what you do, as long as you do it elsewhere”?

I would only help and advise a female relative or friend, and that’s a pretty short list, I gotta tell ya.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 44 Thumb down 2
Leos Tomicek April 30, 2011 at 10:31

So now game is said to give you the ability to chose a better woman? Then everything we do to test the waters is now under the rubric of game. Let me guess, only 10 or 20% of alphas will ever acquire this wisdom. Game is a joke…

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 16
Aharon April 30, 2011 at 10:35

Before the era of modern rad-fem gender-raunch culture really took over America, there was that popular axiom: a women’s best friend is a diamond and a man’s best friend is his dog. Symbolically true then and true now.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 3
Dalrock April 30, 2011 at 10:59

@Leos Tomicek
So now game is said to give you the ability to chose a better woman? Then everything we do to test the waters is now under the rubric of game. Let me guess, only 10 or 20% of alphas will ever acquire this wisdom. Game is a joke…

My point was that if he had game, he would have been able to attract a better class of women. What she really wanted was a man of his income/looks/status but with game. Those men weren’t interested, so she settled for a man who looked the same on paper but didn’t have the level of game she needed. But I do think that game will also help a man better evaluate women. In order to learn game you have to have a basic understanding of women. Not the Disney version men are fed today, but a realistic view. It comes with the territory. I think we would agree that very few men today have the faintest understanding of women. As for only alphas being able to benefit from game, I disagree on that too. I’ve never claimed to be alpha. I’m beta, hopefully greater beta. It wouldn’t make any sense for alphas to marry.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3
Dalrock April 30, 2011 at 11:03

I found another pic of the divorcée who crowed about her sex life Uncle Elmer: http://www.shewrites.com/profile/LorraineBerry

Even worse than the first one.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Uncle Elmer April 30, 2011 at 11:45

I guess I asked for it Dalrock. Those are deeply disturbing photos.

The comments on the original Salon essay are riotous.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
duke April 30, 2011 at 11:55

I don’t know why any man would get married anymore.Would you jump out of a plane if the parachute only worked half the time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 47 Thumb down 2
Andrew S. April 30, 2011 at 12:45

Women have always told me I should smile more. Not real handsome, not real fit, but I look like a nice guy who will provide for them and their bastard kids when I smile. Well, I have no desire to smile while you fuck me over in divorce court, and I will not smile after you have spent your prime years fucking alpha’s and then expect me to foot the bill.

All you smiling beta’s out there need to understand that smiling leads to misery.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 3
DCM April 30, 2011 at 12:57

“duke April 30, 2011 at 11:55
I don’t know why any man would get married anymore.Would you jump out of a plane if the parachute only worked half the time.”

That sums it up perfectly.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2
Rebel April 30, 2011 at 13:21

“duke April 30, 2011 at 11:55
Would you jump out of a plane if the parachute only worked half the time.”

Yes if I know which half.

-*)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
TerraMercenaryMan April 30, 2011 at 13:30

This article doesn’t even belong on an MRM or MRA site. The issue is not whether or not a woman should settle. Issue is about changing unconstitutional laws in the family court system that encourages women to divorce their husbands, and rewards them with custody of the Fathers children, alimony and unfair child support payments, half of the Father’s assets, along with restrictive visitation rights. THAT IS THE ISSUE! Get a CLUE. No disrespect intended.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 10
ck April 30, 2011 at 13:31

demirogue April 30, 2011 at 08:18

I personally know a few women that would settle for just about anything right now.

This message has been brought to you by ACME and it’s biggest customer. Wile E Coyote.

Beep, beep!

Like or Dislike: 15 0

Halarious!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4
Buh April 30, 2011 at 14:06

What is marriage in this day and age? Women save NOTHING for their husbands. What was intended to be a solemn, lifelong contract between a virgin and the future father of her children has become legally mandated extortion between a whore and her latest meal ticket cuckold.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 1
greyghost April 30, 2011 at 14:56

Uncle Elmer,Dalrock Theters is no ay in hell the story of that prune face going on 50 getting all of that good dick is telling the truth. She was talking 24 to 14 years youger than her. Could you see a female desirable 26 year old man laying up and hittin that every weekend over the years. That lady is a professional writer and works at a college. She see healthy young and attractive men and women every day. She is just fantasizing about a life she wanted to have to excuse her divorce. That face in the photos is not the face of a woman getting fantasy dick. That woman has no capacity to love anything. She is all burden.
Well Dalrock looks like you have a good marriage. You seem to always try to encourage marriage. Just a thought, maybe the rational premise should be having a good wife you are happy with is the basis for NAWALT. We hear stories of the cockolding bitch filing a restraining order so she can move her new boyfriend in the house all of the time. Standard female fair and promarriage statement is NAWALT. If a man is truely happy in his marriage and not just some emasculated survivor that loves his kids, well that is the real NAWALT.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Leos Tomicek April 30, 2011 at 15:18

Having game will I see make you desirable for a better kind of women. I do not believe in game so this is a false promise to me, just like the rest of game. The only thing I find useful at this is that it helps you save your ass from some unpleasant encounters, but that depends on your intuition and experience. Being attractive to women means being attractive to all kinds of them. Believe me, most of them will be garbage you will need to get rid of.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
greyghost April 30, 2011 at 15:39

The real value of game isn’t to attract a better woman to me. The line itself is the same old same old bullshit dressed up. It leaves women in the drivers seat to determine your future and value as a human being. ( screw that) What game is to me and why I believe in game for every man is that it will allow a man to understand how bad and selfish women really are. Game doesn’t attract a better woman there are none to attract (that is the big lie of NAWALT shaming) Knowledge of game gives men the ability to get past his natural desires to be a nice guy. It removes the premise of “women good.” What is seen as attracting a good woman is actually the woman using behavior that she thinks will fulfill her natural selfish desire. The hamster is at work. This is how a woman will stand by a perceived alpha waiting her turning in line behind 1 or 2 other women while the same woman will shit all over a beta helping her through college.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 1
Carnivore April 30, 2011 at 16:00

@Buh
“What was intended to be a solemn, lifelong contract between a virgin and the future father of her children has become legally mandated extortion between a whore and her latest meal ticket cuckold.”

I gave you a thumbs up, but a slight nit to pick – your wording should have been as follows:
…lifelong contract between a man and a virgin, the future mother of his children…

And this isn’t just 19th century wishful thinking. Even in the 1950′s and 1960′s, a wife would be described as “the mother of his children”. Back in the mid-60′s, my mom, along with other moms, were involved in a school function. A few of them, including my mom, were photographed and appeared in our local paper, with their names under the picture. Those names were all in the format of: Mrs. John Doe, NOT Jane Doe, or Mrs. Jane Doe or, heaven forbid, Ms. Jane Doe.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 16:01

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 101
Dalrock April 30, 2011 at 16:34

@Carnivore
And this isn’t just 19th century wishful thinking. Even in the 1950?s and 1960?s, a wife would be described as “the mother of his children”.

Now far too often it is simply “baby mama”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
Dalrock April 30, 2011 at 16:44

@TerraMercenaryMan
This article doesn’t even belong on an MRM or MRA site. The issue is not whether or not a woman should settle. Issue is about changing unconstitutional laws in the family court system that encourages women to divorce their husbands, and rewards them with custody of the Fathers children, alimony and unfair child support payments, half of the Father’s assets, along with restrictive visitation rights. THAT IS THE ISSUE! Get a CLUE. No disrespect intended.

I know I have a different take than the majority of men here on the topic of marriage (although I agree with you on the need for legal reform). However, I think words of warning regarding marrying the wrong kind of woman are still needed. Not all men will choose to go their own way. One thing I think we would both agree on is far too many men are marrying today. I’m guessing you would say this because you don’t believe in marriage; I say it because men are clearly marrying women who don’t deserve the honor. I don’t blame the men themselves, because the information simply isn’t out there for the vast majority of them.

For those who choose to marry (even if you feel it is foolish) we should arm them with as much information as possible. The risk of a woman who pretends to be in love to marry is real, and all but denied by the vast majority of men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
PeterTheGreat April 30, 2011 at 16:44

A real woman is a man’s best friend

A real woman is a man’s best friend.
She will never stand him up and never let him down.
She will reassure him when he feels insecure and comfort him after a bad day.
She will inspire him to do things he never thought he could do; to
live without fear and forget regret.
She will enable him to express his deepest emotions and give in to
his most intimate desires.
She will make sure he always feels as though he’s the most
handsome man in the room and will enable him to be the most confident,
sexy, seductive and invincible…

No wait…Sorry.

I’m thinking of whiskey. It’s whiskey that does all that.

Never mind.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 61 Thumb down 2
Anonymous Reader April 30, 2011 at 16:54

Amanda: shorter, and with more cliches next time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 63 Thumb down 1
Herbal Essence April 30, 2011 at 17:01

Oh my god, I think we have just witnessed a rationalization hamster set off a nuclear meltdown.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 1
TFH April 30, 2011 at 17:02

Off-topic,

I have recently been discussing with some Republican friends how conservative women often are about 90% the same as left-wing women. People often that feminism is only a left-wing ideology, and that conservative women are not substantial practitioners of misandry.

Among points they use are :
1) Right-wing women oppose abortion, and to this I say that abortion is a very secondary issue to the state-backed transfer of wealth from men to women, which most Republican women strongly desire.
2) They hate Sarah Palin, so Sarah Palin must be sympathetic to Men’s Rights.

We over here know better, of course. I have come up with a descripti0n that I wanted to get a vote on.

I think leftist and Republican women can be described as being no different from each other than Shia and Sunni Muslims. Shias and Sunnis fight with each other aggressively, but quickly unite against non-Muslims on the ~90% of matters they agree with each other on. Almost all suicide-bombing terrorism against the West was done by Sunnis, yet most Shias, while not practicing this themselves, quietly rationalize it, and certainly do not condemn it.

So lefty and conservative women are no different from each other as Shia and Sunni Muslims. I think this is an accurate analogy, and while there may be a few minor technicalities about Islam here and there, to fixate on those would be to (deliberately?) miss the point.

So is this a good analogy to describe how ‘the enemy of your enemy is not your friend’ concept that a lot of Republican men have trouble accepting about Republican women?

Vote ‘Up’ if you think the analogy is a good one, down if you disagree.

Thanks for voting.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 63 Thumb down 3
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 17:26

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 92
Herbal Essence April 30, 2011 at 17:46

Alert! The rationalization hamster is reaching Level Four! Wheel going around too fast, core meltdown imminent. Evacuate the area!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 59 Thumb down 2
TFH April 30, 2011 at 17:51

Amanda,

You don’t understand what real equality is. Close to true equality between men and women would be a place like the US in 1920-50. Or perhaps a country like Brazil or India today.

70-80% of all government spending is a transfer from men to women. You probably don’t want to change that, even though that is unequal.

Women earn more than men for the same job.

Women receive lower sentences for the same crime, in the court system.

Women are given custody of the children, and usually file for divorce because of money she will get.

So no, true equality would be a substantial step back from what you enjoy now.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 67 Thumb down 0
Herbal Essence April 30, 2011 at 17:55

I’d like Amanda to let us all know what it feels like to register for the Selective Service when she turned 18.

Wait a minute…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 0
Mark Richardson April 30, 2011 at 17:56

Amanda,

That’s a very dismal set of ideas you’re carrying about with you. Also, why the unprincipled exception? If gender is irrelevant and we’re just people, then why bother to dress feminine? Could it be that at some level you really don’t want to give up on a feminine identity? Maybe gender isn’t so irrelevant to who we are after all?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 1
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 30, 2011 at 17:56

Slightly OT

Feminazis (a synonym for feminists and female supremacists) and their mangina enablers want to treat female biological sex as if it were equivalent to mental retardation, at least when it comes to knowing the difference between right and wrong and females having to pay for their own wrongdoing. Too bad the actually mentally retarded are not offended that feminazis and manginas are trying to steal their thunder.

No wonder the website http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com had absolutely no choice but to cybersquat on http://www.womenarebetterthanmen.com . Men are morally superior to women.

For what it’s worth, I did not know that Amanda “owned” Earth. That must be news to the other estimated 6,999,999,999 (give or take) human beings, as well as all the other animals, the plants and other living organisms. She must be one possessive and stupid bitch if she thinks she owns Earth.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
phil white April 30, 2011 at 17:56

“Making things worse, older women consistently advise younger women to pass up men they are in love with and attracted to with the assumption that another better man will be along shortly.”

I’m a little confused here. Is the above comment contradictory to the one below?

“So stop telling women to settle. I beg you! The innocent (but clueless) beta you save may be someone you know.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
oddsock April 30, 2011 at 18:15

TFH

Quite a good analogy.

I have tried to point out the very same. The so called traditional women is no different than the modern liberated woman. For men it is heads they win tails we lose. The guys that wish for a change to the laws or some sort of return to the “old ways” are basically only arguing for slightly improved prison conditions. What still amazes me is the fact that so many men fool themselves into believing the nonsense about being a protector and provider for a woman is something natural or hard wired into men. And then proceed to get royally shafted as a thank you for being a wage slave pack horse cannon fodder white knight doormat. ( Sexploytation and the slaves happiness ) gives a perfect example of this.

It isn’t easy to break free of this false programming but it can be done. We just need to keep getting the info out into the blogosphere.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 3
Anon April 30, 2011 at 18:15

She must be one possessive and stupid bitch if she thinks she owns Earth.

A lot of religious women are so accustomed to socons whiteknighting and pedestalizing them, that these women think they are ‘godly’…

Hence, they are married to God, and when they divorce God, the Earth is what they get in alimony.

That is how they think.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2
TFH April 30, 2011 at 18:17

oddsock,

Thanks.

And remember to post flyers as per the below! :

http://www.singularity2050.com/2011/01/the-time-has-arrived.html

Blogs only reach a small fraction of the population. Flyers like the above can bring tons of new men here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:22

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 67
oddsock April 30, 2011 at 18:24

Amanda

When we have the same number of women in prison as we do men, we will know we have reached true equality.

So what are you going to campaign for ? An increase in female prisoners or a reduction of male prisoners ?

Pfttt! You are so full of shite I bet even your eyes are deep brown !

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 3
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 30, 2011 at 18:25

You still do not own Earth. (Neither do I.)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:27

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 58
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:28

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 59
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:33

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 60
Jeb April 30, 2011 at 18:34

Equality is a big crock of Marxist bullshit used to remove the freedoms of everyone equally.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 47 Thumb down 3
Herbal Essence April 30, 2011 at 18:34

Amanda- Still wondering how you felt when you registered for the Selective Service at 18.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 3
Jeb April 30, 2011 at 18:36

“I suggest you actually just stop getting angry about it and just enjoy being single and without women in your life.”

I think that’s what everyone was trying to do until some loudmouth woman showed up and tried to shove her moral superiority down everyone’s throats.

Go home, little girl.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 1
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 30, 2011 at 18:36

You typed “get off my bloody planet.” “My” is a possessive. “Bloody” is a British swear. Shouldn’t a British woman have a command of the English language grammar?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1
TFH April 30, 2011 at 18:38

I would also like any of you to call me a stupid bitch to my face and see what you got for that.

Actually, you would be quite turned on if a man did that. You would lust for him.

You need to go read Roissy and other pickup-artist websites.
http://roissy.wordpress.com

They know how women think a lot better than you do since they specialize in seduction and pickup. And no, being a woman does not mean you know how women think – quite the opposite in fact.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 4
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:39

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 58
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:41

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 61
oddsock April 30, 2011 at 18:41

Amanda

I no longer argue with people like yourself. You are already trying to tell me what masculinity is and how right you are and how I just need to admit this.

Trying to explain masculinity to a woman, especially one that thinks she knows better than men what being a man and masculinity is all about, is like trying to teach a pig to sing. A waste of my time and it annoys the pig.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 2
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:42

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 65
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:45

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 62
oddsock April 30, 2011 at 18:48

“I understand why you don’t get that, men like you never do……………..I knew it was pointless coming here as there probably isn’t a brain cell amonst the lot of you clued up to even understand what I am saying, let alone be able to grasp how wrong your attitudes are.”

Amanda

Ok, thanks. Bye.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 3
Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:49

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 67
NWOslave April 30, 2011 at 18:50

This is waaaaay off topic but I thought you might like to see this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110428/ap_on_re_us/us_gunpoint_abortion_clinic_4

It would appear that abortion is murder after all, (well, for a man anyway). This man appears to have driven his girlfriend to an abortion clinic at gunpoint demanding she get an abortion. The deal being “offered” is 20 years in prison and 40k for her suffering.

As always, good luck in the New World Order.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
BeijaFlor April 30, 2011 at 18:51

@ Herbal Essence April 30, 2011 at 17:01
“Oh my god, I think we have just witnessed a rationalization hamster set off a nuclear meltdown.”

Sort of like Fuck-You-Shima Unit “A” for Amanda?

Dear Amanda, do not settle down. Get the best purebred Siamese cats you can find. They’ll be a fitting companion.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 4
Cuchulain April 30, 2011 at 19:01

I was just curious. If you are in an LTR and get a girl pregnant, do you abandon her or try to force her to get an abortion? How do you guys feel about raising children? I’m a woman, btw. Please don’t unload a whole lotta hate on me. I’m just asking a simple question because I really would like to know.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 14
W.F. Price April 30, 2011 at 19:19

I was just curious. If you are in an LTR and get a girl pregnant, do you abandon her or try to force her to get an abortion? How do you guys feel about raising children? I’m a woman, btw. Please don’t unload a whole lotta hate on me. I’m just asking a simple question because I really would like to know.

-Cuchulain

Force a woman to get an abortion? You’ve got to be kidding. Men can’t do that. Nor can they “abandon” their children — the law doesn’t allow it. Only women have that option with adoption and abortion.

Totally stupid, pointless question given the reality.

As for how I personally feel about raising children, I’m actually doing it right now. It’s what fathers do. Those of us who take on that job are often better at it than women, who rarely have to sacrifice for their kids these days and therefore don’t take it all that seriously.

I can’t count how many crappy mothers are out there — they fill up the pages of online personals with demands for sex and a man who will take care of them and some other guy’s kids to boot (often when the “other guy” would have been willing to do it himself). Pure garbage.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 2
Jeb April 30, 2011 at 19:24

The guys that wish for a change to the laws or some sort of return to the “old ways” are basically only arguing for slightly improved prison conditions. What still amazes me is the fact that so many men fool themselves into believing the nonsense about being a protector and provider for a woman is something natural or hard wired into men. And then proceed to get royally shafted as a thank you for being a wage slave pack horse cannon fodder white knight doormat. ( Sexploytation and the slaves happiness ) gives a perfect example of this. — Oddsock

This is something I struggle with quite a bit – the concept of it all. I think that naturally these kinds of things occur, and if the human race goes on, which it will, it will revert back to that “old way” in the same as gravity is a natural law.

Should the economy & subsequent civilization of the West crumble and we lose our wealthy ways of living, would things not revert back to the “old fashioned ways” of living? If there were no state paid blue suited thugs with guns, would not the male again take the role of protector? If we lost our technology, would not men and women revert back to the old roles of the men plowing the fields with the oxen while the woman is inside the log cabin, churning butter, baking, and tending to the children? Isn’t that the natural, and most effecient division of labor?

And if the welfare state were to disappear, and women had the choice of being loyal to a man, in exchange for his providership, or of being a sexually unchaste whore who sleeps under a bridge with her thug spawn… well, would women continue to screw bad-boys that left them after sex? All living organisms are survival oriented, and normally this is what also leads the sex-drive. It has been skewed of late because of State involvement cushioning women’s bad choices. The way women are screwing around now would fast lead to their extinction, and ours too, of course, and so in many regards we have to acknowledge that “game” is only a viable option because the state prevents women who choose to ride the cock-carousel from dying, or from living a very bleak existence at best.

Humans still exhibit pair-bonding – we are not monkeys. And wether we would like it or not, men and women are always going to be having sex. The question comes with how they go about getting it.

In no way do I see “game” as perfectly natural, because it allows for women to take on an anti-survival strategy of mating. Can anyone point out an organism that chooses extinction as its mating strategy?

Also, I see this from time to time – the MRM wanting to “end gender roles.” Isn’t that the same disease that started all of this crap in the first place? Isn’t that what feminists have been shoving down everyone’s throats from the beginning? What makes anyone think that males “ending their gender role” will work any better for men than it did for the feminists? I mean, if someone has a plan for how it can work better, it would certainly be worth while looking at, but I suspect that any plan that would actually work, would still resemble an awful lot of the gender roles that existed in the past.

Isn’t even the study of game, a lot of support for traditional gender roles?

Btw, this is once in a while why I try to point out that the terms “Alpha” and “Beta” are not being properly used, and thus closes off the mind to proper human reproduction, the kind without state interference. It needs to be “Alpha, Beta, Omega & Zeta,” in order to fully acknowledge the survival focus of sexuality.

Alpha: The top male. He does not get laid like a fiend, although he could get many women. He gets the best chick and she beats off all the other chicks with a stick. The Alpha is the “10?, once the chick has the ten, who does she hypergamously “trade up” for? He gets social proofing not by screwing dozens of chicks, but rather from dating the best chick. All women know who the best chick is, and should the Alpha become available, all the other girls will rush to be his new girl because that means she will then rise to the social position of “best chick.”

Beta: Most males. They are not weak-willed losers, but they are merely the men who are not number one. When younger, Beta males usually get more sex than alphas, as they sort themselves out within the socio-sexual hierarchy, and date and break up serially before they settle down with a female of suitable socio-sexual status.

Omega: The criminal and scum class. Evil men, drug dealers, bad-boys, gangsters, scoundrels, sexual deviants, cads, have multiple sex partners, can’t form stable relationships…

Zeta: The weak-willed male. He rarely gets laid and when he does he gets viciously exploited by females.

Female sexual behaviour used to make sense throughout most of human history – otherwise we would not be here. Women exhibited clustering around men with good genes and survival qualities such as resources and the social respect and co-operation of the society around them (Alphas). Sure, while single, the Alpha males got laid like the dickens… until he paired off (usually very young) with an Alpha female, and the Beta Males paired off with their properly matched Beta females. Everyone else just kinda whored it up.

But, humans exhibit pair-bonding, and they mate and have children – all except for the small amounts of deviants. Most of the resources are created, and also go to the most valuable members of society – the Alphas & the more valuable Betas. Cuckolding by the Omegas used to be punished by death.

Today, women are still clustering, but they are clustering around the Omegas – with very low survival quality for the woman and her thug spawn. Women are also resisting pair-bonding, which again, is an evolutionary dead end for her and her offspring.

If the government simply were not involved in any part of family life – the cause of women being able to choose non-survival strategies for mating, what makes anyone think that we would wind up with anything different than what we’ve had since the begining of our history? How could we “end male gender roles” unless we advocated for complete control by the state?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 4
NWOslave April 30, 2011 at 19:29

This is in response to @Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:22.

You want EQUALITY. Well two points, first, men and women aren’t equal, even a child can see we’re different. We think and act differently, we have different abilities, therefore equality between men and women as far as ability is an impossibility. Second, equality of rights is not the same as equal outcome. Right now, all womens equality is artificially enforced by the State and endorsed by the mass media.

You also seem to “feel” men aren’t doing enough “parenting” or a good enough job of it. Well, if we review the stats which cuts across all demographics it would appear children raised by single mothers are 3, 4 and 5 times as likely, as opposed to being raised by a single father, to be imprisoned, commit suicide, drop out of school, ect. In other words, men seem to be doing a bang up job of being parents just the way they are.

You say “Don’t use your own bad attitudes toward feminists to make you think my feminism is sexist toward men” Feminism is a Marxist hate movement designed to destroy the family and transfer all social, economic and political power from men to women with the State being the ultimate authority.

Look at just one little piece of feminist law, divorce court. A mans child is kidnapped, he is forced to pay for a child he is forbidden to see or has supervised/unsupervised “visitation rights,” If he disagrees or fails to pay his own taxes are used to incarcerate him. This one law alone takes a mans social, political and economic power and destroys his faimily. There are thousands of these laws. How can this be anything other than Marxist Hate Movement?

As for the rest of your post and all the following posts, you’re telling men what to think and how to act, while men cannot tell women how to think or act, that would be sexist. Besides men are mere mortal beings, it’s unfair to compare us to the apparent perfection in the way a woman acts or feels. If this isn’t the case than why do men need to support a womans actions and opinions on how it ought to be, yet a woman needn’t accept a mans opinion on how it ougth to be. In fact, it seems to be a womans “duty” to “enlighten” men on their foolish notions and backward thinking.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 3
Cuchulain April 30, 2011 at 19:30

Thanks for responding.

“Nor can they “abandon” their children — the law doesn’t allow it.”

If the law did allow it, do you think men would, generally speaking? Personally, I think after the age of 4, the child, no matter the sex, should go with the father. The father is the socialization. And for boys, even more so. How do you feel about that? If the law required the fathers to raise the kids after the age of 4 and not pay a cent to the mother, would that be a step in the right direction, or no? I’m not trying to manipulate any kind of answer, I would just like an honest answer. Thanks for responding.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 5
DevilDog April 30, 2011 at 19:34

Wow Amanda, you’re one dumb bitch.

I wish it was you I killed today in Kandahar instead of that toothless towelhead, hell I bet that dumb motherfucker was smarter than you. A shame.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 23
Anonymous Reader April 30, 2011 at 19:36

Amanda, thanks for taking my advice.

To be honest, to all the guys who ran to dislike my post……….I don’t think any of you need to worry about a woman wanting you for any reason and I think therein lies your problems.

Code Tan – charge of unattractiveness.

I am fair, asking for what is fair. Some of you guys, like Mr I want a woman who will be known as the mother of my children and Mrs John Doe (honestly, get off my bloody planet)…….will never ever get a woman, or at least one who doesn’t have a severe mental disorder. Who the hell are you to think a woman should submit to you like that?

Code Pink – threat of withheld affection.

I cannot believe anyone who thinks women should keep themselves pure where men arent, any man who thinks women should offer anything they wont give themselves, any man who thinks women should raise the children, home make etc any more than them……..could ever think they are right about that, as it just isn’t fair.

Charge of misogyny – code Black

At least I am fair, asking for absolute equality.

You are asking men to bow down and worship you on your pedestal, and using standard feminist shaming tactics in the process. None of this is new to men on this site. Your shaming tactics are trite, to say the least. All of them, and more, can be found here:

http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/

As I say, anyone who disagrees with that, enjoy no women wanting you other than the stupidest, weakest, most pathetic women on earth.

More boring feminist shaming.

Your loss, missing out on happiness, as there doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of anything but women hating and anger that you can’t get one who will submit to your ridiculous selfish, disrespectful, one sided ideals.

Honeybuns, you are asking men to submit to your ridiculous, selfish, disrespectful, and one sided ideas. Men here know that women like you can marry, and then discard a man like a used condom, in short order. Men here know that women like you can have us put in prison solely on your sayso. But you can only do those things if we are foolish enough to associate with you.

We don’t have to do that. And increasingly, men are going their own way.

Do you like cats?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 2
Anonymous Reader April 30, 2011 at 19:39

Let me make one thing clear. I expect EQUALITY.

No, you don’t. You want your precious princess privileges, and you want men to clean up after you.

The good and the bad that comes from that. What you guys aren’t getting is that includes that stuff that is sexist TOWARD YOU MEN. Such as having your children taken away as women get preference in the legal system, such as women getting your assets and what you have worked for, such as you being treated as second class citizens in the home.

All of that is thanks to feminism, and females like you who peddled it in the name of “equality”.

You have no clue what the righteously angry men here are angry about. No clue at all.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 4
Anonymous Reader April 30, 2011 at 19:44

Welmer, have you been hosting this website in your Delorean? Because Amanda appears to be posting from somewhere around 1980…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 3
Uncle Elmer April 30, 2011 at 20:01

Anyway guys, it was as I expected, like talking to a bunch of maladapts with mummy issues who hate women as women have no interest in them.

“Mummy issues”. So it’s true what our UK brothers have been saying, British women really are the worst.

Women have evolved, guys like you haven’t and are being left behind. As I said, just enjoy being single rather than making yourself all depressed that women just don’t like guys like you, they never actually did but they did rely on you financially and that is the only reason men like you ever got women.

Goodbye and I hope, maybe one of you will give real equality some thought……..you actually may enjoy the warmth and happiness it brings.

——

Please don’t go. I laughed real hard at your posts. We will wait while you go out for another case of boxed wine and kitty litter.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2
Maaldweb April 30, 2011 at 20:01

Good Lord guys, stop feeding the feminist troll. You don’t argue with feminists since they are incapable of thinking, but they excel in shaming language and pseudomarxist terms. As that Amanda-troll clearly demonstrated. The western world is going down the drain because it took seriously all these deranged, sad trolls. We shouldn’t do the same mistake.:)

In other news, I enjoyed the article. Its basic premise is correct, even the most fugly pimple-faced western female thinks she deserves a multimillionaire who looks like Brad Pitt. From an early age they are brainwashed to think they are princesses and they all deserve the knight with the Porsche. Eventually some of them might settle down for a beta but they will never stop believing they deserved better, much better. Don’t kid yourselves, women think Betas are boring so eventually they will divorce them and bed . After all society gives them so many options through divorce which only an extremely unselfish person wouldn’t use, and we all know an unselfish woman is an oxymoron.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1
TomJW April 30, 2011 at 20:10

PeterTheGreat April 30, 2011 at 16:44

“I’m thinking of whiskey. It’s whiskey that does all that.”

Dammit man, tell us the brand!

Marry the right women? How is it possible to know a women will be ‘right’ for the next 40 or 50 years. Not possible. Then you’re stuck with divorce 2.0 and you are screwed.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 3
Poester99 April 30, 2011 at 20:31

Dalrock, great article, lots of food for thought. Some of it actually struck me as really general applicable to both sexes in some situations in relationships.
I went over to your site and read a bunch more, all were very good.
Tried to avoid following all the links, cause I actually had to clean up the house today. 8)

Amanda:
Anyway guys, it was as I expected, like talking to a bunch of maladapts with mummy issues who hate women as women have no interest in them.

Your tantrums were cute … in a childish sort of way, but are starting to get boring.

Some facts appear to be too much for you. You’re unwilling to accept and get upset when discussing any notions that challenge your cherished worldview of (barely disguised) female supremacy, because they are coming from mere males that ought to know their *place*.

You should probably run away before you *GASP* learn something new.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 2
Rebel April 30, 2011 at 20:37

@Amanda,

Equality exists only in the mind.
And nowhere else.

The world just doesn’t work that way.

But it doesn’t matter one bit.

Humans were not designed to live in couples.
Women are made to go their own way, live their own lives and so are men: forming couples goes contrary to nature: we were not meant to live like that, but rather as totally free individuals with no bonds.

In today’s world, particularly, it is very much every man/woman is for him/her self.

The only time a man and a woman have business together is for sexual relief. And when it comes to rubbing glands, nobody cares about who is equal. Or do you?

My point of view is best: casual sex now and then, and live your own life.
Sex is like air and water: ample supply and is (as must be) free.

No strings attached, no commitment, quick and easy sex: nobody gets disappointed. What more can we ask for?

You can’t be against that!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 9
greyghost April 30, 2011 at 20:41

Jeb your comment made on April 30, 2011 at 19:24 was great. i agree completely with what was said. I also think that men taking care of the woman they love is natural and will happen even in a society in anarchy. The “man bad” “woman good’ is just pure lies for political reasons.
That is why I push so hard for MGTOW. MGTOW will not benefit any men here today. It will not and I have no delusions that I will ever be considered a good human being by this society ever. As i said before “Game” is a good way for a man to learn about women. To learn how ruthlessly selfish women are naturally. And with game a man can learn to take advantage of the female selfishness for his own survival. MGTOW I find is just as important as game on an individual bases for sex and reduced drama. MGTOW is as I put it as game on a national or global scale. It removes the reward for bad female behavior. Regardless of the law. MGTOW also weakens the governments ability to cushion the bad behavior of women. There will be no collapse persay but I would buy stock in pet supply companies that manufacture kitty litter. There is no wife at this time to be had. The premise is all western women are bad and are hypergamous sluts. Only a man that is married to a woman can make a judgement that the woman he’s with is a good woman. And any responds should be NAWALT. That is how we beat femminism. That is also why I support any law that further marginalizes men. I’m in state of war and this is my personal strategy. It would be awesome to have a conversation with the fellas here on the merits good or bad on the strategy.
Guys like Dalrock and Elusive Wapiti are needed to give something for the female herd to strive for. Rather than telling men how to get married they would do well to talk to women about why they as men are happy with marriage and their wives. They will most likely be the only men in the male blogosphere to speak to women. I Speak to men knowing women are watching and listening. All of these little tricks and checks to make marriage ok for a man with the laws the way they are is just delusional. A large swath of the female population childless into their fourties either divorced or never married and living lives of male indifference will work wonders at the ballot box 20 years from now. Settle? A women going into her twenties seeing childless old carousel riders as the norm along with (as men see themseves portraited now) a common knowledge that men see females as selfish spoiled bitches as the norm. They will change the law themselves. You see it is not settle for a lesser man,women will settle for a fair society and be happy she got that because it is in her own selfish interest. And besides that all women are like that. (the herd) Hope to here from you fellas on this.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2
Anonymous Reader April 30, 2011 at 20:44

Amanda, stamping her foot:
Anyway guys, it was as I expected, like talking to a bunch of maladapts with mummy issues who hate women as women have no interest in them.

Uncle Elmer:
“Mummy issues”. So it’s true what our UK brothers have been saying, British women really are the worst.

Maybe she’s Egyptian…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
continent April 30, 2011 at 20:53

Dalrock,
Glad you listed the link to a picture of author of article by Uncle Elmer
http://www.shewrites.com/profile/LorraineBerry
Googling the name listed her as Virgin Island’s senator among dearly departed. Obituary
http://virginislandsdailynews.com/news/longtime-v-i-senator-lorraine-berry-dies-at-60-1.897637#axzz1L4IRC7iy

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Mark Richardson April 30, 2011 at 21:07

Jeb,

Fantastic comment.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
phil white April 30, 2011 at 21:24

@Amanda

“women are as violent as men and can do as much damage to a man as a man can to a woman.”

(????) Too lazy to look up the exact stats, but rest assured men commit three times as many murders as women. Male hormones are meant to make us aggressive.

As to fairness issues relating to men and women, “Horus” at whiterabbitradio.net said “Women, unlike men, don’t think in terms of what’s fair or unfair, but what works. Anyone who has been in a divorce court knows that.”

We need to take not just gender but age into account. An older friend of mine once made the accurate observation about women. “When we were young they kicked us around. Now that we are old it’s our turn to kick them around.”

The law needs to start taking into account the abuse of power in divorce by young women and older men.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 20
jimbo April 30, 2011 at 21:39

@amanda
The question isn’t whether or not equality sounds nice Amanda. Equality does sound nice, because it sounds fair and kind etc. But, that doesn’t change the reality. The reality is that when women are treated as equals and given all of the freedoms of men, it changes everything, and not for the better. Does equality make women more virtuous or less? Women kill off a huge percentage of their own offspring. It is hard for me to imagine that being classified as being virtuous. Fifty percent of marriages end in divorce and more and more people will never get married. This is a lot of pain and suffering and unhappiness. You can say the fault is with men, or the fault is 50/50, but, I don’t think it is. Undoubtedly, some men make terrible husbands, even if the woman is a saint, but, I don’t think that is generally the case. Most men want their wives to be happy, and in most cases, it doesn’t take that much to make a man happy, so what is the problem? Mass feminine schizophrenia is what the problem is. And the cause of it is derived from women believing they are equal to men, as opposed to different. Obviously, women have manipulative powers. Looking at society today, one would have to be a fool not to accept that. But, men have allowed women to get out of control. Obviously, if their are a lot of sluts and bitches, it follows that their are going to be a lot of bastards and sons of bitches. Why are there so many sluts and bitches? The absence of patriarchy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Jeb April 30, 2011 at 21:39

Greyghost,

Good reply. Yes, I agree, MGTOW/not marrying, and withdrawing from a society that is out to harm men is the proper response.

Also, I think a lot of guys into game are put off whenever I try to point out that what women are really attracted in this false-market society are Omega traits, not Alpha traits. But, there is no getting around it – number one, humans naturally pair bond and this has natural survival purposes, and number two, getting pumped and dumped by a man who won’t stick around after sex usually meant death for the woman, so it’s a little facetious to claim that women naturally seek out pump & dumpers.

It is only because of state interference that women are able to engage with the Omega class – and they are doing it do satisfy their perversions.

Women are still clustering, but not around Alphas with high survival value for them, but instead they are clustering around Omegas.

And that said, I understand and practice game, and am not promoting marriage/pair-bonding in the current state we live in. I am merely pointing out it is anti-survival, and so can’t be completely natural for women to be more attracted to Omega cads or criminals than socially powerful Alphas with resources to ensure her survival – it is on the same level as a man expending his resources on a prostitute is not a good survival strategy for his genes either. Men might do it in our society to get laid and satisfy an itch, but it would not be a good survival strategy to expend valuable resouces on a whore.

That women are currently attracted to Omega traits in our society, means that men must immitate Omega behavior to get their sexual needs met, and refuse to get trapped legally in any way with the types of low-survival sluts that are attracted to them… but it is not natural.

And here comes the problem with all this stuff too – the pack (males) is hierarchal, and they will start killing eachother over Omega behavior. Look at the ghetto – or for a smaller sample, look at Pitcairn Island and how they all started pole-axing eachother (lol, while the women banded together and tried to kill a couple of the men as herd creatures). Roissy had a post the other day about women sharing an “alpha” male… and if you go through the comments, you will find there are quite a few guys in there who openly promote cuckolding the “stupid betas,” and lol, I even seen some comments that betas are now worthless to society and so no-one should care what happens to them (I know that doesn’t represent the whole gamosphere)… but again, that is NOT alpha behavior, it is Omega behavior. Alphas have the respect and co-operation of Betas. That kind of Omega behavior also leads to violence, and in the past, often death. It is about dominating other men through sex with women (and thus, kinda homo-erotic). Omega behavior is amoral – just like female behavior. There is a reason so many of them were killed. It is again, only through state interference, that such Omega behavior is not punished severely. Normally, “the pack” would take care of that.

The binary “alpha & beta” paradigm is incomplete, and much Omega behavior is being called Alpha, and much Zeta behavior is called Beta.

Also, as for “gender roles,” it seems to me that “game” plays upon gender roles very much. What does “ending gender roles” mean? Does it mean that men can be Kitchen Bitches if they want, and we will try to “evolve” women into finding Kitchen Bitches sexy? That’ll work about as well as feminists trying to “evolve” men into liking ugly fat chicks over thin sexy chicks – ain’t gonna happen. Game seems to me to quite advise to reassert your gender role – but it makes Omega adaptions by refusing to pair bond, by keeping enough women “in reserve” to make sure it doesn’t hurt too much when of your love interests buggers off on you. Also, being as disreputable as possible (Omega behavior) gets attraction – but again, this is anti-survival for females, and a perversion they can only maintain because of the State.

I think there is quite often some confusion about “oppressive” gender roles, as men generally look into the 19th Century for reference. But, keep in mind, the 19th Century was fucked-up central – especially sexually – but also with the rise of women into the political sphere backing it up. If you go older in history, you will find there often was societal acceptance of human sexuality – and the acknowledgement that men needed to be protected from female sexuality, instead of the other way around.

If I were shipwrecked on an island with a woman, I think we would fast revert back to the age old gender roles in order to survive, because our gender roles are the best division of power and labor resources to ensure survival. I suspect it has always been this way, and always will revert back to it, once the state is no longer involved.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Aharon April 30, 2011 at 21:40

“Women, unlike men, don’t think in terms of what’s fair or unfair, but what works. Anyone who has been in a divorce court knows that.”

Women are survivors. It doesn’t matter how much men get hurt as long as they reduce their amount of suffering and opportunistically exploit a situation to thrive. In their minds, I think they believe males are duty bound to sacrifice themselves or suffer for their female superior selves or greater vulnerability to hardships.

I think someone should start an online betting site over the recent royal marriage taking bets when they will get divorced.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 30, 2011 at 21:57

@Aharon

Should we measure the duration of the marriage in days/hours/minutes/seconds? Should there be a bonus payout for guessing who unilaterally dissolves the marriage?

Feminism oxymorons:
“feminist humor”
“feminist speech and debate team”
“feminist fair-mindedness”
“feminist morality”
“feminist ethics”

Anyone want to add more oxymorons? Feminists (especially Amanda) did it to themselves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Migu April 30, 2011 at 21:58

She left???

Amanda said (Get off my fucking planet) I believe my is a possessive pronoun.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Scattered April 30, 2011 at 22:14

Take note at the kinds article these women choose to post on.

“I couldn’t give a monkeys what you think masculinity is, as it is different for each person.”

Then masculinity has no meaning, it simply doesn’t exist. This is absurd.

“However, what it is not and will never be is about men being superior to women”

This a very large part of it. Mens role is to provide and protect, we are better at it than women. Men provided women with technology and civilization. Men protected women with their own lives.

Superiority is a relative term, this superiority is largely determined by how you value womens reproductive function. I as an individual could care less whether women can bear children, so naturally I do think men are superior. You cannot accept this because you are projecting, I have no doubt if women were superior, men would be fucked. The difference being men are psychologically predisposed to care for women, I experience this all the time, I simply cannot help it despite how much I hate what women are.

“Yes, women are in general, stupid and weak, they have been conditioned that way. Women like me, try and change that.”

There is no reason to assume it is conditioned, it is just a theory, if you are intellectually honest your going to have to accept that women might just be that stupid and weak. Social construct theories represent 2 things, human arrogance and an piss poor excuse for female inadequacy. No matter how much I train (“condition”) a dog, its still a dog. The same applies with humans and more specifically men and women, just deal with it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2
Dan April 30, 2011 at 22:17

Arguing with the Amanda is like wrestling with a pig.
You can’t win, you just end up dirty and she enjoys the
attention.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2
evilwhitemalempire April 30, 2011 at 22:17

Sorry to get off topic but I have to get this out.
Some of you may (or may not) recall a comment I made a while back about feminist men basically being nerds trying to get all the jocks arrested so they can get the cheerleaders to themselves.
Well I think I just managed to get under a certain mangina’s skin bad enough for him to make a post about it.

http://manboobz.com/2011/05/01/be-aggressive-be-be-aggressive/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
Dubcik April 30, 2011 at 22:45

Jimbo, what you say here is spot on “Most men want their wives to be happy, and in most cases, it doesn’t take that much to make a man happy, so what is the problem? Mass feminine schizophrenia is what the problem is. And the cause of it is derived from women believing they are equal to men, as opposed to different.”

I know more than a few guys who would be so much better off without their nagging wives/girldfriends, always trying to prove in some way how “equal” and “strong” and “right” they are. They are always trying to PROVE something, instead of just getting on with living and enjoying each other.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1
crella April 30, 2011 at 22:45

“I knew it was pointless coming here as there probably isn’t a brain cell amonst the lot of you clued up to even understand what I am saying”

More of the usual…never refutes anything, just insults whomever she’s speaking to. And the overweening presumption of superiority…..hope the door didn’t hit her arse on the way out.

‘not worthy to be called Bubba’

*chortle*
Amanda once made a giant leap for bigotry when she assumed I was a white male when I said I was married to an Asian-that’s the name she gave me, so you can see that there is NOTHING new in her world….she hasn’t changed her personal interaction patterns in YEARS.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 4
evilwhitemalempire April 30, 2011 at 22:48

Amanda say’s
“To the calls of look at nature arguers. I tell you the following, females sleep with males only when they want to get pregnant, they sleep with many males at that time, all of the best genetic males only, then they leave. Most males die virgins as only the best genetic make ups ever get laid. Many males get killed by females for trying to mate. You get the point, the nature argument of animals cannot be used to control women back into the kitchen.”

What’s being left out here is that in much of nature (particularly with mammals) the females seldom have any mating choice. She doesn’t really select her mates. The males fight and the winner ‘rapes’ (at least by feminist definition) the female.
You think grrrrl power can exist in that kind of environment?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
evilwhitemalempire April 30, 2011 at 22:59

“I cannot stand the raunch culture/over sexualisation in todays society either. It is not empowering, it is a total crock-”

Damn! You caught on.

“-and is numbing men to seeing women as actual real humans-”

You mean numbing men to the limited sex appeal of ‘plain janes’ like yourself?

“-and making men unable to bond on any real level with women-”

You mean making men less willing to commit?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
evilwhitemalempire April 30, 2011 at 23:15

“However, what it is not and will never be is about men being superior to women, about women servicing men in any way, about women raising mens children and staying home to be housewife like a good little weak dumbass.

Not going to happen, times are changing and women are becoming less pathetic by the day.”

She perceives her fellow females as weak.
It’s just like MacCloud said.

“They have classic typical female bench warmer syndrome [penis envy] _mixed with_ wallflower ax to grind anger. They are also the most masculine fems and therefore sense that freeing themselves from the harem of emasculated hermaphrodites [see "fundamentals": cuttle fish] and making a run for it is within reach.”

http://seanmaccloud.blogspot.com/2011/01/sugar-and-spice-what-dames-be.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Maaldweb April 30, 2011 at 23:43

Just for the lols

Amanda is presumably British and at the time she was posting it was Saturday night in Britain.
So…we have a woman who is online at home Saturday night and comes to a MRA to spew hate against men. Anyone want to guess her dating value and/or the number of cats she owns? :-D

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 2
Timothy April 30, 2011 at 23:49

“My point was that if he had game, he would have been able to attract a better class of women. ”

Yea, and during a lapsed moment when he shows his true beta self, being at a higher SMV she will leave him that much faster. The biggest mistake many people here like to make, is assuming that game solves everything.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Geography Bee Finalist himself May 1, 2011 at 01:15

Somewhat OT but intriguing nonetheless

Notice how feminists in the US got their “rights” (other than the right to vote, but even that right was handed to them by mostly male U. S. House Representatives, mostly male U. S. Senators and mostly male state legislators of thirty-six of the then forty-eight states) without winning the ERA and throwing a continuous temper tantrum since 06/30/1982.

They have not had to resort to violence and terrorist activity to achieve any of their “rights”, I mean, entitlement agenda. They have been allowed to steal the 14th amendment’s original intent of covering biological race, and biological race alone, to advance their agenda, with white feminists giving their collective middle fingers to nonwhites, both feminist and antifeminist.

Feminists are dumb enough to think that the 35th and final ratification of the ERA (Indiana’s) was enough and that they could behave as if their work was done. They decided to blow off getting three more ratifications knowing that if a 38th ratification occurred, their de facto right to not have to have anything to do with the military would be in jeopardy.

Contrast the shameful handling by feminists in America of the defeat of their proposed amendment with the handling of the residents of the District of Columbia with the failure of their proposed amendment, the District of Columbia Voting Rights Amendment, which would have given DC two Senators, a voting representative in the House of Representatives, a vote to ratify a subsequent federal constitutional amendment and a vote in the House of Representatives if no presidential candidate received a majority of electoral votes.

The DCVRA had as its ratification window by at least 38 states from 08/22/1978 to 08/22/1985, but only Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, West Virginia, and Wisconsin ratified. (The ERA had received one extension; the same courtesy was not extended to the DCVRA.)

Washington, DC residents have handled the defeat of their amendment with far more class than feminists have handled the defeat of theirs.

I hate to break it to anyone in Washington, DC, but I do not know how Washington, DC residents will get what they want as far as a re-submission of the DCVRA without the nation’s capital’s residents resorting to rendering the capital of the “free” world completely ungovernable, more dangerous than Somalia in 2011, and unlivable, to where any combination of 38 states will be looking forward to ratifying the amendment.

Will men’s rights be like women’s rights in that men will get rights without having to resort to violence or getting a 28th amendment into the constitution, or will men’s rights be like District of Columbia voting rights, where men will not get their rights unless they resort to violence and intimidation?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
buggeroff May 1, 2011 at 01:33

Amanda, omg get help, but on the other hand you are excellent at accelerating the learning curve of new members to this site to just how female supremacists think.
Take a look at your title Femi // nist. If you want so called equality the last thing you would call yourself is anything female, you would be a Humanist or…………wait for it,,,,,, MRA sorry that your face is now so red better go put it under a cold water tap.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 2
migu May 1, 2011 at 01:53

The weekend disappeared with the gaslight. Now it is just “my” weekend. Unless you work in government anyway. Then you have graveyard shift. And swing.

Just saying the whole lonely weekend bit is a tar baby. Don’t get stuck in it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Kyo May 1, 2011 at 02:21

I get you guys, yes I would love even as a woman to come home to a gorgeous man, who looked after my kids,

Our kids, Amanda. Our kids.

See, how it works is that when you get married and have children, you raise the kids together. They “belong” to the two of you.

You wonder why you’re taking all this guff from other commenters – look at the unconscious assumptions that underlie your language.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 1
E May 1, 2011 at 02:28

demirogue says…
“I personally know a few women that would settle for just about anything right now.”

hmmm
Let me guess, 20 years ago one of these ladies (in college at the time) snubbed her nose at that nerdy and insecure petroleum engineering student who asked her out on a date. Fast forward to today, he’s still a nerd but definitely not insecure…not with an annual income of $120,000. When he’s not hard at work pumping for oil at $100 a barrel he spends his off time pumping whores (even harder) for $100 a pop something he can easily afford with his salary.

As for the woman, she has a worthless college degree in the liberal arts or humanities and is now making $35,000 a year as an office drone. Yeah that engineering salary looks really hot and sexy right now. oops but it’s too late. The *Revenge of the Nerd* wouldn’t even look at you now women.

When middle-aged women ask themselves where have all the good men gone? The answer is, “Well do you remember all those nerdy, nice guys back in college who you blew off?” But lets keep this a secret amongst us men here. I agree with the original statement, “Why we need to stop telling women to settle.” These women do not deserve husbands, they deserve….Zero.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 1
DCM May 1, 2011 at 04:23

“Amanda April 30, 2011 at 18:22
……
I have fought a lot for mens rights, as much as womens, as I want EQUALITY…”

Uh-huh.
Do you really think, er, feel that we haven’t heard all this catshit before? Don’t you realize how long this has been going on and how many men have dealt with it?
This is all new to you, isn’t it? You expect men today to act like high school boys 50 years ago, much as liberals and other leftists believe society is exactly as it was 50 years ago, isn’t that true?

Pay attention to what is said here, see men as human, face reality. I doubt it, but you may be one of the 10% of females who are mentally equal to men. Maybe you can chuck the last 50 years of isms and catch up.
But I doubt it.

“Cuchulain April 30, 2011 at 19:01
I was just curious. If you are in an LTR and get a girl pregnant, do you abandon her or try to force her to get an abortion? How do you guys feel about raising children? I’m a woman, btw. Please don’t unload a whole lotta hate on me. I’m just asking a simple question because I really would like to know.”

Before offering the same advice I’d like to show what’s wrong here. You are assuming that being a “liberated” female still means that men carry all the responsibility. Men don’t just “get” women pregnant; as adult, responsible persons females have a responsibility to see to it they don’t get pregnant if they don’t want to. It’s up to females to either take the pill or not fuck.
I know they can regularly, consciously use contraceptives because relatively few prostitutes get pregnant and then usually by their husband or boydfriend.
So quit falling back into the poor helpless victimized girl role when it’s convenient so you can get paid and evade responsibility. Get off your fat butt and act like the adult women claim to be.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
woggy May 1, 2011 at 05:24

Amanda wrote:

“Herbal, I am not in the US, so I didn’t have to. I do believe in true equality Herbal, so would be expected if I did live there, to register (for the draft) the same as everyone else, gender regardless.”

Trouble is, no such compulsion exists for 18 year old women, so you could move to the US without the fear of having “equality” making you lace up your combat boots or having your brothers-in-arms zip you up in your body bag.
Nope, all of the federal favoritism comes WITHOUT any of those strings attached.
TALK.
IS.
CHEAP.

As for the rest of what you said: bald faced shaming language.

If you represent the “bestest”, “most fairest” feminist, without the mental problems you ascribe to the few decent women who exist, then indeed all men (not just Spearhead readers) would be better off without you.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
Rumour May 1, 2011 at 05:31

The first comment, by woggy, hit the nail on the head. Women don’t have to worry about settling because they have little to lose. If it doesn’t work out … no real loss. She gets a divorce, keeps the kids, and has a steady flow of income in the form of child support. The worst is that she suffers a bit of social embarrassment that she can rationalize away.

Eliminate the issues of child custody and support by enacting legislation that mandates presumption of equal physical custody and you completely eliminate incentive for divorce and at the same time institute equality. If feminists really want to be taken seriously when they say they are all about equality … they would be consistent and support such legislation. Instead they are its greatest opponents.

This is the one issue that unmasks their true intent … power.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) May 1, 2011 at 06:00

From the article:

“Five years and two kids later, their sex life nonexistent, Clark wanted out. “I’d often wish he would cheat,” she says. Finally, her husband, sensing her unhappiness, ended it. ”

Yep..she knew on her wedding day this was wrong but she made sure she got the two kids to put him onto the ‘alimony and child support’ hook.

And western women wonder why I find them disgusting? Well? Look at what this woman did? And she is LAUDED for it!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) May 1, 2011 at 06:07

It’s simple Dalrock. I am 3 years down the track of being divorced. Nothing has improved my quality of life more than BEING DIVORCED.

NOTHING.

I tell every young men. DO NOT GET MARRIED. IT IS NOT WORTH IT.

Young men are MUCH better advised to ‘become alpha or high beta, make good money, enjoy your life, compete with the women on an ‘equal before the law’ basis and don’t give an inch over equal before the law’.

Wimminz and their mangina lackeys spew hatred at me for saying this? So what else is new?

I have been getting to know a new woman and she has now graduated to become my fav#5. Funnily enough she knew my fav#1 in passing. She has listened to what I have had to say about ‘western women’ and her comment is ‘you are 100% accurate, sadly so’.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) May 1, 2011 at 06:15

Yep..this is how delusional women are…good find elmer.

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/04/26/sex_life_returns_at_38

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) May 1, 2011 at 06:29

Dalrock April 30, 2011 at 10:59
“I think we would agree that very few men today have the faintest understanding of women.”

Correct. And those of us (like ME) who has a profound and deep understanding of women that was very hard won? We are generally hated on by wimminz and manginas. However, occasionally a young men will write to me to thank me for what I am doing. I included one such email in the book. Sadly. The VAST MAJORITY of men I have worked to benefit either also HATE on me who call me names based on their stupidity and willful ignorance.

Any man who has not lawfully rebutted his guvment presumption that he is a slave? He is a slave. And he DESERVES his slavery. There is now no longer any excuse for any man in the MRA area to not declare their sovereignty.

You have not declared sovereignty? Then you are a slave. And it was YOUR CHOICE. Well done.

I’b been writing to the head of border patrol as well as to the ‘customs’ department in Germany of late. Boy. They are all upset about how I have told them I am a sovereign and that they have no right to interfere with me or my property. I have sent them the documenation I have provided to Angela Merkel and suggested to these people that if Angela Merkel was not willing to provide any evidence of the claim ‘the federal republic of germany’ has any claim over me then it might be because she doesn’t. So I suggested to those I am writing to that they write to Angela and ask her for an affidavit from her under penalty of perjury and full commercial liability along with law (not legislation) that the ‘federal republic of germany’ has any claim over me or my property.

How many other sovereign men here have been challenging the jurisdiction of a national leader this week?

Oh? Wou;d that be NONE?

TerraMercenaryMan April 30, 2011 at 13:30
“THAT IS THE ISSUE! Get a CLUE. No disrespect intended.”
TMM….that is NOT the issue at all. I have already PROVEN that a man can rescind consent to be governed making this legislation irrelevant. Why would you change that which is irrelevant?

The REAL ISSUE is that men are stupid. Dumb as rocks. And they compound that issue with being WILLFULLY IGNORANT. And yes! Any man who feels that is dis-respectful it is FULLY INTENDED.

I FULLY INTEND to PISS MEN OFF by calling them STUPID and WILLFULLY IGNORANT because they need that smack in the mouth so as to start reading. There is barely a man here who does not fit that catergory. I was ‘nice’ for a long time. I can’t be bothered being ‘nice’ any more. Time for men to be MEN or to STFU.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11
Uncle Elmer May 1, 2011 at 07:05

Well it didn’t take dalrock long to write an essay about Lorraine Berry :

http://dalrock.wordpress.com/

But did he have to post her photo?

—-

Amanda harped on “equality”. Reminds me of Dwane Dwyer’s pre-New Age book Your Erroneous Zones and the chapter “The Justice Trap”.

This book sold like 60 million copies. You can probably find it at your library.

A lot of women are caught up in “The Equality Trap”. Sure enough, some feminist wrote a book with that title :

http://www.transactionpub.com/title/The-Equality-Trap-978-0-7658-0740-3.html

But her solution is more pro-fem legislation. Typical feminist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
djc May 1, 2011 at 07:38

“I suggest you actually just stop getting angry about it and just enjoy being single and without women in your life.”

That’s what I’m doing. And I love it. Don’t have one..Don’t want one.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Avenger May 1, 2011 at 07:42

Uncle Elmer May 1, 2011 at 07:05

Well it didn’t take dalrock long to write an essay about Lorraine Berry :

http://dalrock.wordpress.com/

But did he have to post her photo?

>>>>>vomit

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Migu May 1, 2011 at 07:55

Ahh where did she go? That was kind of refreshing.

I think this is actually the first time no one has come up out of a hole to defend one of these things.

You guys are sooooo mean? :smirk:

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Aharon May 1, 2011 at 07:58

Kyo wrote:
“Our kids, Amanda. Our kids.
See, how it works is that when you get married and have children, you raise the kids together. They “belong” to the two of you”.

Earlier, I was reflecting how most (all?) western women take on the attitude that the mother is the real true parent and the disposable father is to be shamed and manipulated into supporting the mother’s ownership rights and domination.

The biological and spiritual reality is that the life-force of the child comes from the male sperm. By contrast, the egg and womb can be generously considered a fertile garden with nutrients. Within twenty years artificial wombs will be available and women will become obsolete when it comes to gestation. Men can then all freeze and store their sperm, and get vasectomies.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 4
Patr333x May 1, 2011 at 09:27

Most women are not settling anyway; in most marriages it is the man who is too good for her, not the other way around. A woman often compares the man she has with a man she fantasizes about, not a man she can actually get.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
Sean May 1, 2011 at 09:41

I’m glad Amanda stopped by. She makes a better argument for avoiding women than any man ever could.

Thanks, babe!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 1
Aharon May 1, 2011 at 09:41

“A woman often compares the man she has with a man she fantasizes about, not a man she can actually get”.

My mother constantly compared my father to my mother’s father and to her brother in law. I can’t believe the man never lost his temper with her. He used to go to worship services primarily to get away from her for a few hours.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
greyghost May 1, 2011 at 09:47

Patr333x Thank you very much. That is what men need to learn and know about themselves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Rebel May 1, 2011 at 10:27

Has anyone thought that Amanda could actually be a man?

P.A.N. uses harsh words to whip men into awakening.

Amanda, if a man, is using a similar technique, from another angle…
Wouldn’t that be genial if “she” was really a male?

On the other hand, even if Amanda is female, she is doing MRA’s a huge favor by triggering men’s wrath.

I hope she/he comes back and triggers some more…

As much as I hope P.A.N. will not alter his style.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer May 1, 2011 at 10:53

Has anyone thought that Amanda could actually be a man?

You mean is it Amanda or A Man Duh?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
SingleDad May 1, 2011 at 11:36

Someone above posted that men are natural protectors due to them having testosterone which makes them aggresive and that pair bonding is natural for humans.

I respectfully deeply question both commonly held assumptions.

When looked at scientifically, and, of course we are all cognizant of the Female Imperialist Army constantly looking to destroy any sceintist that dares provide evidence against there Inquisition to destroy men.

I think this makes science published in these times likely to be skewed toward feminist assumptions like “men are agressive, see they have testosterone”.

Here’s one study that looked at young men getting, not normal “physiological” levels of testosterone but high dose shots of testosterone and comparing to slow release exogenous testosterone.

Quote:

” A single injection of 1000 mg TU im increased plasma T concentrations from 20.7 ± 1.5 to 37.5 ± 2.2 nmol/liter at wk 1 and 31.6 ± 1.5 nmol/liter at wk 2, and estradiol from 74.0 ± 4.9 to 120.4 ± 10.7 pmol/liter at wk 1, and 100.0 ± 6.3 pmol/liter at wk 2.

The T increment was associated with detectable but minor mood changes. Increased circulating T was associated with significant increases in anger-hostility from baseline (mean score = 7.48) to wk 2 (mean score = 10.71) accompanied by an overall reduction in fatigue-inertia (treatment = 6.21 vs. placebo = 7.84). TU treatment did not increase aggressive behavior or induce any changes in nonaggressive or sexual behavior. Changes in estradiol were not associated with any behavioral alterations.”

So even a high dose injection in men who probably have normal teststrone levels, young men, had barely detectable changes in mood.

This study goes along with others I have read saying that in modern studies there is no aggression that results from testosterone, simply a myth.

I think possibly men enjoy this myth as it makes us appear as socially acceptable capable protectors.

I think the military data on the inabilty of draftee’s to even shoot at an armed enemy in like 85% of cases points to the truth that men are not at all inherently violent. Quite the opposite. Men are mainly gentle caring humans

http://jcem.endojournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/89/6/2837

And I do not think humans naturally pair bond. I think the denial that us in the MRM have is being pealed away by our mothers, sisters, dauters and wives.

Even game and hypergamy point to a near complete lack of an urge for pair bonding on the part of women.

And if you don’t believe that, did you believe cupcake would leave you? Then want you dead? Imprisoned?: Stripped of your children???

Well 70-80% of divorces are filed by women. Unilateral divorce was an invention of women. Abortion…..all women.

So, are we staying in denial and still believe we are in the that small 3% of species that pair bond or do we now realize we are in the 97% of species that do not and are more like our nearest evolutionary relatives, chimps, renowned for their promiscuity (ever been to Bangkok?).

When I took Anthropology we learned that the real reason for having big cajones is for promiscuous species to make it more likely the baby is yours.

Put another way, species in which multiple males copulate within the same female, Crystal Magnum, have large testicles as the probablitly of passing you genes along is directly proportional to the amout of semen produced.

All us great apes have very large testicles and 20 years ago scientists admitted that humans where, from a biological perspective clearly not pair bonders.

“Ultimatly, Diamond explains, “Species in which multiple males routinely copulate in rapid sequence (my: gangbangs, girls night out?) with one female woman in rapid sequence need especially big testes (Diamond 1992 p.72). Thus in the spectrum of things we would expect human males to be less promiscuous than chimpanzess but more promiscous than gorrilas (my : polygamous) and orangatans.”

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:aYRfPXN9dXgJ:drleannawolfe.com/PolyLitRev-4.pdf+testicular+size+and+pair+bonding+human+academic&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiTLEOwClVQflMrAzWjfLECaPpoh1YEgwztQ_KaOKBWS6IlljONohQOo5uT-60Yz_Q4qZ6UIH8pf5S2Bu1eIcXhKzbObcS1xAWYdFDT5ryAezGvJ2YWgmZvU2tcvcHBqzYDo8TM&sig=AHIEtbRLwuTdvdIpuSHwVWfloneTJgeyHg

And to prove my point, here is the most prominent US Female Imperialist rag the NYT’s proclaiming that humans pair bond:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/11/science/11kin.html

Using such spectacular science that says, well, we must push pair bonding so let’s just make up some stuff to justify what we see as men are forced to support and raise children that have at best a 60% chance of being theirs.

I believe marriage and pari bonding are a social construct and that now that women en mass have come to believe they can do without half the population, males, they are going their own way, but are pushing propaganda on men so we don’t figure it out. Of course this assumes they think we’re stupid, a safe assumption given the way men throw their lives away each day in marriage.

Jane Goddal published before the fem police took complete control of academia that it was women with high place in chimp society that had better survival of offspring, it had nothing to do with pair bonding. And of course we see women today expecting automatic status such as set asides in corperate boards etc in order to improve their outcomes.

They read the research and act accordingly, will we?

Goodalls original paper:

http://www.unl.edu/rhames/chimprs/chimprs.htm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
RL May 1, 2011 at 11:38

Well, Omega is currently the new ‘Alpha’ because his definition for Alpha is not by resources, power etc. but solely how many attractive women a man can get….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Jeb May 1, 2011 at 11:40

Well, if this thread is any indication, women don’t have to worry all that much about men not caring or paying attention to them. One loud-mouth shrew shows up here, and all of the men who are supposedly turning their backs on women can’t stop talking to her, and when she is gone, they can’t stop talking about her. Women have nothing to worry about at all.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4
andybob May 1, 2011 at 12:44

“You [Amanda] are already trying to tell me what masculinity is and how right you are and how I just need to admit this.” Oddsock

Isn’t this just typical? Always ready to dictate the discourse and appalled when men have minds of our own. Amanda has spouted a garden variety “equalist-not-feminist” pastiche of what passes as identity for Today’s Woman. She supports men, but she hates men. Women are their own worst enemies, but they’re the greatest. She craves Mr Gorgeous, but resents needing a man. And so on… Confused, deranged and soulless.

Just a hodgepodge of predigested slogans and postures designed to make her feel powerful and victimised all at once. She began so confidently, but typical of her ilk, she began drowning in her own bile the moment she was challenged. She doesn’t know what she thinks. She simply unleashes endless stream-of-consciousness feeelings, masquerading as argument. She talks a load of crap. Don’t try to make sense of it.

When Spearheaders ‘failed’ to bow down to her, she seemed to melt in a Wicked Witch cloud of self-pity and frustration. Her parting shots are what she clearly imagined to be the cruel taunt that :
“women just don’t like guys like you, they never actually did.”
She’s talking about herself of course. So, she hated us all along. Makes her initial claims of supporting men’s issues seem a bit feeble, doesn’t it?

And later:
“…you don’t get that, men like you never do………I knew it was pointless coming here as there probably isn’t a brain cell amonst the lot of you…”

In the parameters of a single thread, she went from ‘curious Mandy, here to see what’s up with you guys’, to a shrieking harridan who obviously didn’t understand men’s issues and only cared how they impacted her. And she wonders why our rhetoric can sometimes get a little harsh.

My guess is she’s Australian. Lots of Modern Australian Women talk this kind of drivel. Don’t try to understand what she’s talking about. She doesn’t know either. They’re a lost cause.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
DCM May 1, 2011 at 12:51

“Rumour May 1, 2011 at 05:31
…….
The worst is that she suffers a bit of social embarrassment that she can rationalize away.
…….”

Women don’t suffer any social embarrassment in divorce. Women are embarrassed if they aren’t embarrassed at least twice.
Divorce is something to which they all aspire. It gains them the admiration and envy of other females, raising their status in female society.
The lies they tell about it are a source of tremendous entertainment for other females, sort of like soap operas.
The female gains an enemy — especially the first husband — on whom she can blame all her failings and errors. He “made” her do this or that and the awful things he did/made her do caused her to be upset for years.
The value of divorce to women is incalculable.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
andybob May 1, 2011 at 12:51

“One loud-mouth shrew shows up here, and….when she is gone, they can’t stop talking about her.”

Sometimes, Jeb, the shrew in question exemplifies many points that longtime commenters are trying to make to newcomers. Troll-baiting can be a learning experience. And Amanda was a particularly fat, juicy one.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
greyghost May 1, 2011 at 13:04

As it stands now Legally and socially It is in the selfish woman’s (all Women) interest to divorce. Legally she has nothing to lose and socially she gets to raise her status. She can claim at least one man was not good enough for her. No woman really loves a man unless she thinks it is to her benefit. Also never under estimate social status competion between women. It is infact stronger than a teenage boy’s sex drive on par to drug addiction.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Jeb May 1, 2011 at 13:48

@ Single Dad,

I have read before that low-testosterone men are more prone to outbursts than high-testosterone men, and the thinking behind it is that testosterone helps men remain more clear-headed in an emergency situation. In this way, it is the low testosterone man that, in the face of say a fist fight with another man, would flail about uselessly, letting his emotions inefficiently drive his actions – whereas a high testosterone man, in the face of danger, would be able to think more clearly, enabling him to either defuse the situation before violence, or, even if his emotions do get the better of him, to still enable him to “think” while behaving in a violent manner – like a fighter that can still think clearly enough to land effective and decisive blows. Here is an interesting article on testosterone: Testosterone: Hormone of the Gods?

I don’t know if I agree with your anti-pair bonding thesis, and further, as I said before, humans are not monkeys. All I should have to do to prove this to you is ask you if you personally acknowledge a strong bond with your children? Male primates typically play no real role in parenting their offspring, however, human males definitely form strong bonds with their children.

This article shows that the belief in humans forming a pair-bond between males and females, is what moved us away from being monkeys, and allowed us to recognize our kinship:

The finding corroborates an influential new view of early human origins advanced by Bernard Chapais, a primatologist at the University of Montreal, in his book “Primeval Kinship” (2008). Dr. Chapais showed how a simple development, the emergence of a pair bond between male and female, would have allowed people to recognize their relatives, something chimps can do only to a limited extent. When family members dispersed to other bands, they would be recognized and neighboring bands would cooperate instead of fighting to the death as chimp groups do.
Humans are not monkeys.

Also, keep in mind that human children take a looooong time to develop – especially to develop our most important “tool,” our minds. In fact, this is one of the underlying beneficial factors of “Patriarchy,” in that while females are usually only able to raise children effectively during pre-puberty, it is the role of fatherhood that extends childhood and allows our minds to develop even further. But, even without Patriarchy, a mother would be fairly hard pressed to raise a child alone.

I believe there is something to Rotating Polyandry, where humans mate and pair-bond for short periods of time – around 4 years, based upon female prerogative – in order that she meets a male, pair-bonds with him, gets pregnant and gives birth while relying on his protection, and then during the child’s most vulnerable stages in infancy, the pair-bond stays strong enough that the male sticks around and provides for both mother and infant during their most vulnerable. Once the child is more or less self sufficient at around 2 or 3 years old – when it can walk, talk, and feed itself – the female loses her pair-bond with the male, and wanders off to find new sperm to impregnate her, and she starts the whole pair-bond off again with a new male. In this way she gets genetic diversity for her offspring. The male, however, does not lose his pair-bond to the female, because there is no advantage in nature for this to occur. The most efficient way for nature to operate would be for the male to maintain a strong bond to the female until she is “finished with him.” The same principle works with children and their parents. The parents maintain a strong bond to the children, while the children lose their bond to the parents so that they may “leave the nest.”

Males are not “less emotional” than women. Males have fewer emotions, but their emotions run deeper. Women have more kinds of emotions than men that sway them, but they do not run as deeply. One of the reasons for women to have this many emotions is because infants communicate mostly through emotion alone, and so women are more tuned in emotionally so as to be able to care for children. However, men’s deeper emotions are what solidly pair-bond him to the mother and child, and motivate him to fight to the death to protect them.

Again, it is Patriarchal marriage that pair-bonds humans for probably longer than is natural – so that human children have more of a timeframe for their minds to be developed. Females have a very hard time maintaining control over children once they reach puberty, and this would coincide with how most other species operate as well – as soon as sexual maturity is reached, the mother and child separate. This also accounts for why the teenager is so rebellious to their parents. They are sexually mature by that stage, and patriarchy creates the artificial construct that lengthens childhood and allows our brains to mature even more than naturally.

I would say that serial monogamy is probably more natural for humans than no pair-bonding at all.

By the way, “one-itis” in game is another word for pair-bonding, and all game practitioners would acknowledge it exists, which is why they take measures to ensure that pair-bonding does not occur. I believe that females pair-bond as well, but as with the bond between child and parent where the parents bonds are stronger than the child’s, between men and women it is also the man’s bonds that are stronger than the females, and it is this way for natural, reproductive/survival purposes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c) May 1, 2011 at 14:13

Rebel May 1, 2011 at 10:27
As much as I hope P.A.N. will not alter his style.

Rebel…remember…I started out three years ago MUCH less ‘abrasive’. I asked men to assist. A VERY small number did. Brave men went onto court rooms to face down criminal magistrates and judges armed with ‘blue gun thugs’…many of them were thrown in jail for their troubles only to be released later with ‘all charges dropped’. Some of my mates are still being thrown in jail as they experiment. A small number had things like judges/magistrates flee the courtroom never to be bothered again. It was THESE cases that we studied. We asked men to go into court rooms and try out new ideas. Like the brave men they are they did so and took their chances. This has been going on since 2008 to my knowledge. I discovered these men in May 2009. One guy. McAttack. Who was only 22 at the time was jailed about 6 times for not showing a license before Vincent Byrne was able to figure out the right response….at which time McAttack was simply ‘let go’. We do not expect our enemy to tell us their rules. We have to figure them out for themselves.

Many arrests later we (meaning MANY independent men) were able to figure out exactly how the system worked. Distilling all this information I made my effort to bring it all together in November 2009. It worked. Nothing, and I repeat NOTHING I have presented to a national ‘leader’ has been rebutted in the slightest of ways. That means they have LAWFULLY accepted what I (we) have done. Men choose to ignore this hard won information. Fine.

Now? As far as men go? I was taught as lad how to deal with men by my football coaches and the older men. When I was 14 I had the honour and privilege of seeing Ron Barassi speak at a mens night. (That’s right NO WOMEN PRESENT so Ron could swear like a trooper to make his point and no one would be ‘offended’. It was a highlight of my young life. For you americans? Think an evening with Vince Lombardi…only Lombardi is crap next to Barassi. ;-) )

My dad could get me in because of his position at the club. There was not another boy there. Barassi is the best footballer to have ever lived in our land and is also one of the best coaches to have lived. Think Jordon….only better. One of his points was this. If men in his charge are not performing based on encouragement it might be time to ‘get in their face’ and force them to choose between being a ‘man or a mouth’. He said that this only worked for men who could point to their own track record in a call for men to ‘stand up and be a man’. If it worked for Barassi? It’s good enough for me. A MAN never asks men to do anything they have not done themselves.

If Ron Barassi said “If a man will not give his all just because he’s a man? Then sometimes it works to scream at him and put him on the spot to prove if he is a man or a mouth.” (‘mouth’ being a play on ‘mouse’.)?

That’s good enough for me.

By the way? My uncle was three times winner of the best footballer in our region. He was as tough as nails. A small man in stature but on the football field he was the best in his league. He also raised me to be totally and utterly uncompromising. When I was 15 I was told to stop playing football by my doctor. My mum begged me to stop. My dad, being a man, told me it was my choice. I was told I might spend 12 months with both my hips in plaster due to ‘growing problems’. My hips were damaged from growing 6 inches in one year. I decided to play anyway. After the season my hips were so bad I would collapse in agony just walking along unable to hold my body weight up. This would happen 3-4 time a day. At the start of the next season when I tried to train after the 6 months break? I collapsed on the training track about a dozen times on the first training night. As much as I wanted to play. I couldn’t….

Anyway…in the grand final at 15, my last game of football with my mates? I ducked a heavy clash when we were well and truely beaten bearing in mind I might wind up in plaster for 12 months. My Uncle (the coach) dressed me down in no uncertain terms in front of my team mates at 3/4 time. He knew my medical condition but took the position that if I was on the field then I was ‘fit’ and was expected to give my all even if that meant being in plaster for the next 12 months. If my uncle can do that under those conditions? I can say what I want on this board about men and their unwillingness to act. I have risked a lot to bring men the news of how the criminals in the legal fraternity act and how to beat them….I will not ‘insult’ any man who has done more than me. Those who have done less than me and are not willing to meet my standards? Well? If you feel insulted? Who’s problem is that? Here is a hint. NOT MINE. In my dealings with MEN? I have had great role models over the years. I do as they showed me. If people who like to call themselves men but are really whimps have a problem with that? NOT MY PROBLEM. I have met men these last three years that make me look like a whimp by comparison. Here is one of them. http://www.rightsandwrong.com.au/

Measure yourself against John Wilson or Norman Scarth. I know I come off second best. But by seeing men who are true heros? That gives us men something we may choose to aspire to. Or not. Where are our John Wilsons? Where are our Norman Scarths? I am giving this effort my all. Why am I so alone?

BTW…We have a joke in Australia about God playing australian rules and a new entrant to heaven saying:

New entrant: “Who is the guy wearing #31? I thought Barassi was still alive.”
St. Peter: “Oh, that’s just God. But he likes to think he’s Ron Barassi!”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6
NoDoot May 1, 2011 at 14:42

“The female gains an enemy — especially the first husband — on whom she can blame all her failings and errors. ”

DCM, that’s an interesting perspective. With women it’s like they are never responsible for their life problems. They get divorced, it’s his fault. They never marry, it’s cause men are bums or fools or superficial.

I think in general people don’t want to admit their faults, but with women it’s like they don’t think they have any, and an ex-husband to blame their messed up lives on is the perfect crutch for them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Whatever May 1, 2011 at 15:00

Read more about Peter’s “hero” John Wilson – the “man” he wants us all to aspire to here:

http://peternolanpsychopath.blogspot.com/2011/04/jailhouse-john-court-jester.html

Put simply, John Wilson is a sad and misguided joke!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
Uncle Elmer May 1, 2011 at 15:14

“One loud-mouth shrew shows up here, and all of the men who are supposedly turning their backs on women can’t stop talking to her, and when she is gone, they can’t stop talking about her.”

She is the stuff dreams are made of. A real tease that one; left us panting for more. Were we all in the same room together doubtless a few men would come to fisticuffs over her.

You’re right. Paper tigers, all of us.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
Stonelifter May 1, 2011 at 16:35

I’m not sure why a man would say anything to a women besides “your money is on the table; now get the fuck out”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Rainbows and Lollipops May 1, 2011 at 18:45

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 34
BeijaFlor May 1, 2011 at 19:39

@ Rainbows: “I think we could even go a step further and teach women/girls that they don’t even need to get married to be happy.”

Nice idea. I believe we can do that best by teaching them by example.

As in, “I’m not married and my life is better for it.”

Or like PAN, “I lost 95% of everything in a shitstorm divorce, but now my life is better than it ever was with that bloodsucking leech of a wife.”

I’ll stand up with my own: “I never got married, and I’m getting ready to sail off to the Caribbean. Sorry, ladies, you’re not invited.”

Because I didn’t settle for the likes of … Amanda. (lol)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1
continent May 1, 2011 at 19:47

Dalrock,
Thanks for the article and thanks for Uncle Elmer for linking the Salon article. Thank you both for putting the author’s picture. As they say “A picture is worth a thousand words”.
Since she may be Vagina Monologues fan, I was not familiar with “coochier snorcher” either. so I Googled and got a link;
http://www.sacerdoti.com/jonathan/vaginas/coochie.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
fmz May 1, 2011 at 20:01

They can advise themselves.

Giving them advice = helping them = white knight = not helping da menz. Quite the contrary.

Plus, they don’t need or want our help.

It only fortifies their dependency. Which compounds the /problem’ for all.

As a GYOW guy, that is the last thing l want. Namely, their wanting me to do whatever they’re not doing for and unto themselves.

In any event, being as they are currently programmed, they will take it all back-to-front anyway. Whether or not reverse psych-babble is the true intent of such advice, its not really helpful.

GYOW. Maybe they will see that as useful and start to do it too.

Until they go their own way, they will continue to project that age old dependency upon us and we will continue to foster it. And this is at the basis of it all.

Dependency becomes entitlement.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Common Monster May 1, 2011 at 21:13

Omega is currently the new ‘Alpha’ because his definition for Alpha is not by resources, power etc. but solely how many attractive women a man can get…. (RL)

Yes, “game” is a tautology:

A: Women want alpha males.
Q: What’s an alpha male?
A: An alpha male is what women want.

Outside of that hamster cage you get as many attempts at defining what constitutes an “alpha” as there are definitions of feminism. The word has become a sort of Rohrschach test: by itself it has become meaningless until someone projects something onto it.

> Received wisdom in the manosphere is that women need to settle.

The mating strategies women naturally employ are designed to insure they do only mate down, which is what I think is generally meant by the word “settle”. Women don’t need to settle if that’s what they’re already doing in droves, which is what I see when I look around. In fact they’re spectacularly good at it, which is why they’re dragging everything down into the gutter. Women under strong patriarchies are socialized to do the opposite, and we all know how they hated that. It goes against every impulse they have.

IOW I question the opening statement as being “received wisdom in the Man-O-Sphere”. It isn’t.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Avenger May 1, 2011 at 22:10

Monster, females are not mating down. What looks like down to you may be the best they can do in their class and their looks. So they may be even lower than the dregs they mate with and are still marrying up. It’s all relative. The homeless drunk who manages to get himself 3 bottles of cheap wine a day may look like a good prospect to the homeless female drunk who has nothing and the tramps around her may only have 1 bottle of wine a day which they drink themselves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
The Private Man May 1, 2011 at 22:42

Where are all the good men?

Just where you left them.

Back in your 20s.

[That's an old quote but it bears repeating]

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
Maal dweb May 2, 2011 at 03:14

Rainbows and Lolipops wrote: “I think we could even go a step further and teach women/girls that they don’t even need to get married to be happy.”

Actually, feminism has already brainwashed western women that they could be happy outside marriage and as a result pharmaceutical companies became richer than ever before selling antidepressants to millions of lonely women who refused to get married and had children.
Women find happiness only in children and in a family context. They cannot live alone. If they remain unmarried and childless they become literally insane after a certain age (usually after 32- 33).
No amount of feminist brainwashing can change human nature. Women are born to be mothers. Deny it all you want, it won’t change a bit. :-)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) May 2, 2011 at 04:00

Maal dweb May 2, 2011 at 03:14
“Actually, feminism has already brainwashed western women that they could be happy outside marriage and as a result pharmaceutical companies became richer than ever before selling antidepressants to millions of lonely women who refused to get married and had children.”

Yep….when I did a short stint on match.co.uk one of my criteria was no children or children out of the house. I was looking at the 38-43 range as I was 43. The women with no children? Many of there were SERIOUSLY insane. The two that I actually went to dinner with? They were loony tunes and they were the ones who made it THROUGH my screening!

I am more convinced than ever that my fav#1 was right when she said “women do not know what they want to be happy. They need to be told what they can have by their man and told to be happy about it. THEN a woman will be happy.”

I see a LOT of very unhappy 40+ women every time I walk into a restaurant in Germany or the UK.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 2
Ken May 2, 2011 at 05:29
Carnivore May 2, 2011 at 05:33

@Maal dweb
“If they remain unmarried and childless they become literally insane after a certain age (usually after 32- 33).”

32-33? You should see what happens once an unmarried, childless woman goes through menopause.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Ken May 2, 2011 at 06:38

“32-33? You should see what happens once an unmarried, childless woman goes through menopause”.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes! It results in a crazy, paranoid woman (after 35) who relies on Psyche meds to get her thru the day. Least that is what I have observed in the ones I know. Paranoia seems to be the common denominator in the ones over 35 I’ve met….paranoid about men “stalking” them, bosses getting ready to fire them, and betas “hitting on” them at work. Avoid these hussies!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
Ken May 2, 2011 at 06:48

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/laura.asp
Another example of an “expendable” man at the hands (and later book-deal)
of a young woman who went on to become First Lady. :(

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Speed Racer May 2, 2011 at 06:53

@Dalrock “Oh, and they left off the best part of the article….” Christ, that grandma is ugly. Even for 50. I bet she’s paying for “the man she assumes to be her life partner” to be around.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Rainbows and Lollipops May 2, 2011 at 07:14

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 42
Uncle Elmer May 2, 2011 at 07:27

“Thanks for the article and thanks for Uncle Elmer for linking the Salon article. ”

All I’m doing is spending far too much time on the internet. My son has become aware of Uncle Elmer and threatens to post a comment revealing that I’m totally pussy-whipped.

All right, let’s get going :

Marlo Thomas

You Know It’s Good When the Boys Want in

“Don’t get me wrong, I love men. I even married one….”, she begins.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marlo-thomas/take-our-daughters-to-work-day_b_854611.html#s270320

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Stonelifter May 2, 2011 at 08:40

@ Rainbow &Lollipops;
my mother is a horrible woman. She did two things for her male childern; didn’t kill us in the womb and tought us how to endure pain. If it weren’t for her suing me ( my fathers estate) I’d never see her again

mothers are women; the 1st women who has a shot at ruining your life

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 2
Anonymous Reader May 2, 2011 at 10:03

Rainbows And Lollipops
I think we could even go a step further and teach women/girls that they don’t even need to get married to be happy. That they can live on their own and not even worry about male wants or needs

Except, of course, that women want children. It’s not obvious when they are young, but as the biological clock ticks louder, the truth comes out. Even women who claim at 22 they have “no maternal instinct” will sing a different song 6 or so years later.

So maybe, just maybe, some women could be taught that men are human beings, not just walking sperm banks / ATM’s? Of course, we’ll have to teach them not to pay attention to feministas like you…but as the number of divorced women, living alone, whose children can’t stand to be near them, continues to increase — maybe that won’t be so hard after all.

One thing is certain. The current misandry is not stable, and therefore won’t continue indefinitely. One way or another, it will stop.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader May 2, 2011 at 10:32

Rainbows And Lollipops
Sounds like you guys are unhappy either way. You’re unhappy if women don’t want to marry and your unhappy if women do want to marry.

Project much? Poll after poll shows a decline in women’s happiness for over 20 years…

Women are born to be people first. Just as men are porn to be people first.

It’s a bit late in the day to make that statement, given other things that have been said, such as:

“All men are rapists, and that’s all they are”.

“A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”.

“Men especially love murder”.

Who said these things, eh? Who’s been preaching “men = evil” for nigh on 40 years? Here’s a clue: it wasn’t men

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1
continent May 2, 2011 at 13:07

Uncle Elmer at 7;27
Let’s call your son’t bluff and none would believe it. You’re the King of the Hill and hens scatter when you rule the roost.
Seriously. Even your handle ‘Uncle Elmer” conjures an image of wise man who researchers and comments succinctly and footnotes to prove for further reading. We all rant sometimes, but the information you provide are educational and enlightening.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Katie May 2, 2011 at 14:50

I haven’t read every single comment, because there are a lot of them, but really, what is up with this Amanda chick? Apparently she doesn’t quite understand what the word “equality” means when it comes to relationships.

I agree with Keyster’s early comment about having sex with a woman too soon; any woman who is willing to have sex right off the bat is not wife material, so stay clear.

And men, there *are* women out there (though they are growing fewer and farther between) who are good, wholesome women who would make excellent wives. Hold out for them! And don’t let yourself be led astray by the sluts of this world. Any good marriage has a male leader and a female supporter. Don’t let a woman entrap you or lead you around. Those kinds of women are definitely not worth it in the end.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 19
Maaldweb May 2, 2011 at 16:35

@Lolipops and rainbows

lets see your points one by one (the ones of actual value because most of your post was off topic or typical feminist rantings of no value)

You wrote: “When you fail to acknowledge anyone, male of female, as a human being first, and only a function of their body, you showcase a hate for that particular gender that is shoulder shuddering.”

My point regarding women being mothers doesn’t imply I don’t recognise they are people. Our bodies and our physiology is what define us above all else. In your typical feminist debating tactics you refused to address the points I raised (in this case that what defines female anatomy is its design to give birth, thus women are born to be mothers) and you proceed to reply to things I never claimed or implied. That may work on tv (this is what politicians do, especially the braindead neocommunists/liberals) or maybe you do in your feminist drum cycle or in your Obama fan club, it doesn’t work here.

Another thing is that you feminists suffer from persecution mania of a sort. Everytime someone disagrees with you and points out your fallacies and irresponsible behaviour you end up calling him misogynist (as you always do here). Chill out I bit, I personally don’t hate anyone, when it comes to feminists I feel pity. However, I feel more pity about the lives of millions of young girls the feminists have destroyed.

You wrote: “Pharmaceutical companies became rich by selling more then just antidepressents to women Maal. The whole industry is built on peddling drugs to both men and women. (Hello Viagra..where every old man can pretend he can still get it up). Women are more susceptible toward being diagnosed with depression but men are more likely to commit suicide.”

Again you are off topic. The issue here is the correlation between feminism/ the rise of women in the workplace (which contributed to many women not having children) and the skyrocketing of their consumption of antidepressants. You refuse to recognise the obvious re: that modern women , “liberated” from patriarchy, family, motherhood are more depressed than ever and more sad and unhappy than their “oppressed” grandmothers were ever be. BTW my grandmother never thought she was oppressed because she stayed home and raised healthy children and their grandchildren. She was always smiling. The women of my age think our grandmothers were oppressed. At the same time they think they have liberated themselves from the “evil patriarchy” but they can’t live without their antidepressant pills, their sleeping pills and tons of chocolate, they are more sad than before, but still they think they are better than their grandmothers. See what feminism does to women? Let me tell you, I saw my grandma on her deathbed and she had a smile on her face, she knew that what she had accomplished was worth of praise. What modern women will think a few moments before they die alone in a socialist hospital? That they got a degree in journalism, worked a boring job and spent 40 years of their lives on prozac chasing dick and doing plastic surgeries?

Your points on the sells of viagra and male suicides are irrelevant. Please try to stay focused and don’t derail the dialogue.

You wrote: “What I deny is that you seem to want to reduce women as only being good for having babies. ”

The way you choose your words proves another long suspicion of mine that in reality feminism is not only penis-envy it is irrational hatred for the female nature and form as well. You consider motherhood something inferior whilst in all healthy civilisations motherhood was the most sacred thing of all and mothers (and their children) the most valuable and protected members of the society. What does it say about your true thoughts as an advocate of “women’s right” that you degrade the nature of women to that extent? What does it say about our feminist/communist civilisation that such mother-hating ideas have prevailed? I guess to an observant reader, it says a lot.

You wrote: “Sounds like you guys are unhappy either way. You’re unhappy if women don’t want to marry and your unhappy if women do want to marry.”

That part of your message proves that you come here to confront and not debate. Men are unhappy because women are unhappy, there was a natural balance and feminists have usurped that balance and created havoc. Women mesmerised by feminist rhetoric think that “working” at offices pushing papers and envelops, doing unproductive government jobs and earning “hot air” degrees somehow are more inspiring than motherhood. Eventually they end up crazy in houses full of cats and with empty packets of antidepressants, cursing life, the evil patriarchy and every possible scapegoat because they are alone. Others exploit the feminist divorce laws to ruin the lives of their husbands and their kids through divorce. Now men are waking up, all these gaullible idealistic betas who would have been perfect husbands, lovers and fathers for all the beta females out there are less eager to be sacrificed to Lilith in government’s clothes. They are tired of being spat at, ridiculed, vilified, hated and of course they refuse to marry, they refuse to conform and women don’t understand what is going on. What you see here in its genesis is the beta revolution. Every action has a reaction. Unfortunately for both of us the destruction that feminism brought upon western civilisation is of such magnitude that we will soon be conquered by the invading muslims and third-worlders and one thing about muslims is that they have specific ideas about what women should do and what they should not more importantly, they don’t argue with feminists, they decapitate them. As ye sow so shall ye reap. BTW don’t expect any betas to go and fight for you when that day comes.

You wrote: “Just as men are porn to be people first. ”

a bit of a Freudian slip I presume…. :-D

Grow up and recognise the feminist shithole your ilk has created to the detriment of all of us. You maybe are too old to change your life and feminism has already destroyed it. But you can help younger girls not to do the same mistakes that turned modern women, childless, depressed and insane.That’s what responsible adults and human beings (since you love the term so much) do, not that I have seen any age-crazed penis-hating feminist admit her mistakes yet….

PS Listen my advice always keep one thing in mind: a man can live alone and sleep alone in bed, a woman simply cannot.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2
Maaldweb May 2, 2011 at 17:12

@Lolipops

sorry I forgot a point

You wrote: “make bogus claims that women become “literay insane” after a certain age. Really? hat’s a pretty “insane” statement to make yourself. There is not one bit of medical evidence you could find to prove that because you made it up.”

You continue to misrepresent what I said and then proceed to answer those distorted versions of my points. It is quite annoying but I didn’t expect anything less from a feminist.
What I said was that unmarried, childless women (not all women) after the age of 32-33 lose it pretty much. That’s quite different than what you claimed I said isn’t it?

It is quite funny that you come here bombarding us (and boring us to death) with claims about respect for all “human beings” (sic) and you don’t even respect your interlocutors by not misinterpret them….

I am not a doctor so I cannot provide you with the relevant studies, only with observations which are fairly admitted by most honest people. But I have the solution for you, how about you ask your gynecologist (provided you have one and you don’t consider that an oppressive patriarchal trick to make women believe they are just wombs) about the hormonal changes in the female body after the age of 32-33 and see what he has to say about it. :-D Then combine it with the cataclysmic decline of a woman’s dating value and fertility at that age and the natural inclination of women to depression. Come here when you have done your research.

As for the career women who have perfect lives without families and children, that’s another feminist myth, those women exist somewhere out there, none has seen them but somehow they exist in huge numbers, because feminist say they do. Just like the blacks who didn’t vote for Obama in the last US elections lol.
Anyway, the web is full of articles regarding the issue. There was a particularly interesting article on the subject published in Guardian (a leftist/feminist british newspaper) a few years back which had several interviews with career women in their late 30s and early 40s who said the exact same thing and that they did a fatal mistake with their lives. In fact they went on saying that the men at their age don’t have interest in them because they want younger more fertile women.
But sorry I wont spend my time searching it for you. For your well being and the well being of your “sistas” I suggest you find it and read it.

You may deny reality and nature all you want. You can come here and argue about women being liberated of motherhood or any other madness you feminists argue. Nature won’t change and at the end you pay the price for denying your nature and none else. Good luck ;-)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Uncle Elmer May 2, 2011 at 17:58

“Let’s call your son’t bluff and none would believe it. You’re the King of the Hill and hens scatter when you rule the roost.”

That’s quite a compliment continent. I chose the name Uncle Elmer because I was named after my Uncle Elmer. In some cultures “Uncle” refers to an older, though not necessarily old, wise man.

But now that my son is on to me I have to temper my words a bit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Maaldweb May 2, 2011 at 18:48

oops someone voted down all the anti-feminist comments here. Penis-hater detected! Get ready for Lollipops and Rainbows part 2 : The Return of Grlll Powaahhh. lol

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Chi?n Binh May 2, 2011 at 22:10

Maalweb, most of your comments are simply superb. It is such a pity that people have moved on into the newer topics to really appreciate them (note the lack of ‘likes’). All I want to say is: I salute you SIR!

And I want to add a point on the aspect of modern Western women’s unhappiness. It is precisely this unhappiness that makes feminist ideologists and their consorted media more bloody-minded in their emasculating campaign against men. For now, they have successfully emasculated many men to make the path to CEO and leader positions easier for women. However considering the massive unhappiness among high-flying women, it is ‘logical’ now that they will push viciously to emasculate all men into supporting (i.e. slave) roles as the Final Solution (no need to reduce them into 10% of the population if you can keep them as docile slaves, yes?) The more they see male leaders outnumber, out-do, and ‘out-joy’ their female ones thanks to having a loving, supporting, natural wife and a solid family, the more desperate the feminists will campaign to social-gendering ALL men going against their nature into supporting roles and future home slaves.

How do they do it? All these brutal attack on men’s rights and masculinity, of course, will be facaded in the name of equality and the very men’s rights as they always have been! “Why women can be emotional (in soap-opera style) but men cannot? “Why women can dress like men, but men can’t dress like a women? ”Why women can breast-feed a child but men can’t?” Feminists and maginas have shrieked those questions for years through all media outlets and their success has been enormous (Yes, I point this at you Armanda!) The instant men fall to those ‘equality’ chants, they lose their ‘traditional’ manhood, they lose their power and become feminist slaves.

The greatest farce of our time is how feminists are trying their best to impose ‘traditional patriarchal’ qualities on their daughter while force the ‘traditional femininity’ on their sons and their out-shouted husbands (if they have). “Traditional” (a term so obsessed by feminists) masculine ideals which glorifies mental and physical strength, honour and self-control if allowed to be encouraged ‘liberally’ in both sex will undoubtedly lead women to be second-class citizens again (as in no way they could compete equally with men in all those aspects, may be apart from Honour). That why for the interest of their own, feminists publicly deride and shame the men who uphold masculinity while lavish praise on ‘modern men’ (who are nothing more than a bunch of slavish, sissy girls!) And this process of shaming and disadvantaging will last till all men are totally domesticated and obedient to the very whim of their lordly wife.

In the end, it is all about power and revenge. I still find it unexplicable how Western men let a bunch of useless, hateful, extremely unpleasant females (like the godmother of modern feminism Andrea Drowkin) ravage their culture, their civilization, their personal life and their very power.

Maaldweb wrote: “Unfortunately for both of us the destruction that feminism brought upon western civilisation is of such magnitude that we will soon be conquered by the invading muslims and third-worlders and one thing about muslims is that they have specific ideas about what women should do and what they should not more importantly, they don’t argue with feminists, they decapitate them. As ye sow so shall ye reap.”

This is probably the most defeatist stance I have seen in The Spearhead. The time is dire but not too late, you can still pound the Feminists into submission again. 3000 thousand years of traditions since Homer will NOT be allowed to fucking perish just because those crazy hateful bitches wish it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Maaldweb May 3, 2011 at 14:06

@Chi?n Binh

thank you for your kind words.

Indeed I am very pessimistic and I don’t see a way out of the mess feminists have created for us. Moreover, it is obvious someone cannot reason with them nor with any woman for that matter. They will prefer to be butchered to pieces by the islamists instead of admitting they were gravely wrong about their lifestyles and ideology.
I am European from what I see continental Europe will be islamic within this century. I just don’t see how the tide can be reversed, unless the far right comes to power, kicks out the illegal immigrants and force women back to their traditional place.

You made an excellent point regarding the goal of feminist to sissify men through feminine values imposed on boys and young men. Destroying masculinity was the primary goal of feminism.

Last but not least I believe that feminism was a mere tool in an organised plan to destroy the western civilisation.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Dalrock May 3, 2011 at 17:18

I just wrote a new post taking the Salon story full circle, bringing it back to the point of this article. I would say more but don’t want to ruin the surprise. Lorraine Berry update.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The White Rider May 4, 2011 at 02:17

I don’t understand this article. MEN don’t tell women to settle. Telling a woman she’s a boring, dumpy Ms. Average from the suburbs who is being unrealistic about her prospects is a one-way ticket to shrillsville. You aren’t going to get past that massive built-up ego that tells her she deserves nothing but the best.

It’s only around middle-aged that women themselves decide to settle at when they realize the “Mr. Bigs” they’ve been collectively chasing can’t put a ring on their finger and/or that there just aren’t enough “Mr. Bigs” to put rings on all of their fingers. So they become semi-realistic, on the surface anyway. So it seems.

… but what’s really going on? The oldest animal mating strategy in the book. Sucker the guy with the resources but who is otherwise sexually unattractive to them– or what you might call “undesirable genes.” This is beared out in the dismal non-paternity rates we’re seeing as well.

These delusional middle-aged hags rationalize these things with garbage like articles titled “I’m marrying Mr. Good Enough.” These women then decide to leave these men years down the line and take everything they can, because true to the true animal they’re behaving as, these men are below them; subhuman to their view. They’re leaving because they say they “just don’t feel it anymore” or “need to find themselves.” What this really means is they want another man and have probably found one and had him on the side for some time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
Rainbows and Lollipops May 4, 2011 at 07:19

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 25
Rainbows and Lollipops May 4, 2011 at 07:32

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 25
woggy May 4, 2011 at 15:32

Rainbows and Lollipops:….
“Just as I think it would be wonderful to teach boys not to value women based on looks/baby making abilities. Don’t you think those would be wonderful messages to teach children?”

I’ll be fifty years old this year. I distinctly remember being taught those very things when young, plus a lifetime of reinforcement. I believe, with all my heart, that the ugliest, most infertile woman to ever walk the earth had value as a human being, just as much as any man (not being pretty and not a “baby machine”).
However, I’m not to be compelled to be sexually attracted to either one of them.

“Especially when you make clearly biased talks about women having expirations dates, as if they were completely worthless,”

Women have brought that attitude on themselves, R & L, by using whatever looks or sex appeal they possess to manipulate the situation around them.
So yeah, it’s long awaited, poetic justice to see those women- who put so much stock in their sexuality and then used it to bully and manipulate men- start to lose their horsepower and then become bitter and desperately afraid they’ll die a lonely old hag.
Owing to the fact that most of them have left a trail of lonely, penniless men in their wake, it’s satisfying- very satisfying- to contemplate.

“and talking about how children hate their divorced mothers.”

Hate might be a strong word for most such children, but I’ve known of many who come to realize that Dad wasn’t the bastard Mom made him out to be- and they do deeply resent her for robbing them of really knowing Dad while they were little.
Knowing the tears that those Dads wept, no one giving anything but condescension, blame and a touch of rat’s ass?
Yep, seeing the chickens come home to roost, with the rooster, is long awaited vindication. Maybe the guy won’t have to face old age all alone, in spite of her best efforts.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
woggy May 4, 2011 at 15:47

More from R&L

“All men are rapists, and that’s all they are”.
“A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”.
“Men especially love murder”.

Maybe you weren’t crazy or hateful enough to say those things, but you, after all, are about the “sisterhood”- so you’ll count your blessings that the bitch that just ran past you carrying some guy’s scrotal contents in her hands is on your team.
You’d never even think of doing the honorable thing and publicly chastising such overt hatred; as a matter of fact, you’re content to come here and scold us for, in the main, striving to make other men aware that the movers and shakers of Feminism said these things, and that their literary works are being used to poison young minds, ongoing.
By your silence (except here of course) you allowed yourself to be the political muscle that Andrea Dworkin and her ilk needed to have those attitudes become woven into laws aimed at men; that too is ongoing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
Dan. May 5, 2011 at 02:41

I am as aggressive, competitive and strong as any guy,

I got the hint of butch as soon as I read this bit of your first post, Amanda.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Maaldweb May 5, 2011 at 02:42

Feminists are weird people. :-)
Ms Lolipops demands scientific studies about everything we state (despite the fact what we say here is pretty much common knowledge) but she can make the most outlandish remarks without providing any evidence to support her points.

Now, reasonable people are able to face reality. Just because there are very few studies (basically due to political correctness) that prove that walking alone at night in an area full of african illegal immigrants will result in you being raped, killed or mugged, doesn’t mean that the vast majority of people don’t understand they should avoid such walks. That is what we call common knowledge and reasonable people have it.

Similarly just because the liberal/neocommie media don’t bombard us everyday with the negative effects of feminism (depression among women, failed marriages, spoiled girls, children ending up in gangs due to the absence of male role models etc) and it is a non-go area for most social scientists to study such issues, it doesn’t mean that such negative effects don’t exist.
Reasonable and observant people understand them and see them everywhere. More importantly are able to connect the dots (e.g. lonely childless women–>sad women–> big monies for the pharmaceutical companies who make antidepressants).
But feminists are neither reasonable nor observant and most importantly they base their insane ideology not on reality but on their imaginary world.
So Ms Lolipops demands extended scientific research to get convinced about things everyone knows and understands.

Of course studies that examine the phenomenon of the depression among over 30+ childless women and the general increase in the unhappiness of the female sex do exist and their is an abundance of articles on the internet dealing with the issue. But anything which defies a feminist’s irrational belief and thinking has to be ignored.

lets sum up: feminists deny and ignore reality (in a similar way Ms Lolipops ignores messages here which she is unable to reply to) even to their own detriment. Who cares you ask? Well, I would say none, but you see feminists haven’t enforced their crazy beliefs upon us all and have made the average western woman and man according to their image, re: a very sad, angry and desperate human being.

Ah I almost forgot, hey Lolipops, since we speak about feminist slogans. Do you recall the one with the marriage proposal and the feminist reply “we can do without it”? It turns out YOU CAN’T ! :-D

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
Maaldweb May 5, 2011 at 03:09

feminist have enforced* !

sorry:-)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rainbows and Lollipops May 7, 2011 at 07:41

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 23
Rainbows and Lollipops May 7, 2011 at 07:46

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 23
Rainbows and Lollipops May 7, 2011 at 08:10

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 23
Jose L. May 9, 2011 at 20:10

Well, after reading -ALL(And I do mean all)- of the posts on the page, I can take three ideological views on each.

1). The “Masculine” view; i.e. The Feminist movement is more apparent and invasive than it has ever been, and those paying for it are righteous individuals forced to succumb to a common human flaw: Greed.

2). The “Feminist” view; i.e. Women have been subjected to cruelties, and worse by the concieved notions of those who presumably knew better, and were only interested in a controlled environment to stifle feeling of independance and self-worth.

3). The “Independant” view: i.e. Looking at both parties, arguing back and forth to a wall, while each other stands upon the opposite side. Yelling too loudly to be heard by one another, and getting naught in response.

I’m only twenty-five, but in those short, short years I’ve seen much of life. Been nearly dead at a young age, grew up with no biological father, only my mother to explain things to me( A view that I have never had a chance to ask my bilogical father, he fled after ordered to pay $10/week child support, to the west coast from the midwest). Had major surgeries, been on morphine, vicodin and percocet just to function in grade school to the end of high school, but I highly digress from the original reason to replying for once on this article.

Many men, and women make bad decisions when deciding to marry, and most often it reflects harshly on the man. Most states side with the women even before hearing any details, or relevant information had been submitted in each particular case.

Is it that men are telling women not to get married, or start a family that might lead into a “happy-ending?”

No, not not to settle down, but that essentially a skewed view of society is targeted at them to force them to marry and hope it works out; regardless of the personal and emotional maelstrom if it ends in divorce court. This is undoubtably where the man-bashing is likely to occur, and I welcome varying views on what has so far been deemed a societal norm, of men losing children, their house, car and large sums of money to a woman who essentially gets off scot-free. No shame, or embaressment, or cajoling by her friends. She has a car, house and a form of income even if she doesn’t look for a job.

And the man gets… bupkiss. Forced to try to even get the slightest bit of visitation, that doesn’t have to be enforced, vain efforts to even have custody/visitation re-examined.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
woggy May 10, 2011 at 14:37

R&L wrote a bunch of….zzzzzz….zzzzz
baloney, and ended with this:

“And while the men on Spearhead want to fight the injustices you’ve faced at the hand of extreme feminists and bad women, you use the SAME words and practice these extreme groups of used to attack men, to attack women. You’re never going to solve anything or win anything that way.”

I used to think the same way, I hoped that was the way it would work, but the reality is that three generations of men have been collectively playing the nice guy.
Where has that gotten us?
Fighting like gentlemen hasn’t worked, and it will not; it’s time to abandon all sense of fairness and fight like “ladies”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Omnipitron May 10, 2011 at 15:44

“Not a news flash. Men hit 30 and their sperm count begins to decline. That’s nature.”

Huge difference between being barren, and having a decline. Men churn sperm to the grave, menopause is simply the end. I would assume this is the reason why the men here have concluded you are a feminist. It’s comparisons like these which give away either your affiliation or your indoctrination, either way it’s erroneous.

Your preaching to the choir, I may be wasting my time but I’ll give you this last comment. Most of the men here and in North America would have loved to be in a normal relationship with a woman, and did try to listen, just as Woggy stated. Instead of reciprocation, like us men where told we would receive, we got nothing but negative and hate instead.

There are many diatribes which are hate filled on this site, yeah, your right. Are they conducive to any positive conclusion between the sexes? Hardly, however, compare a man hoping that one woman get’s cancer in her c*nt to deludes of feminist blogs which actively support the culling of men.

Please spare me your ‘both men and women do bad things’ approach. You want to know what means squat to the guys here? Standing up for us. As soon as a man tries, he gets labeled and shamed, attacked for not accepting the obvious inequalities that North American women dole out. If you notice, there are a few females on this site who regularly comment, you will also notice that they don’t wag their fingers at the men here.

One website which may be negative to women, specifically North American Woman compared to a whole hemisphere which is actively negative against men. This time, I think it’s teh dudez who are the ones who have a reason to be angry, maybe you should listen instead of finger wagging, no?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
Roxanne May 18, 2011 at 11:29

Amanda,

While I agree with some of what you said but I have a grievance with your lack of understanding. These men have every right to be angry and to voice that anger in a supportive setting. These are not Neanderthals with no sense that women are people. I’m sure if you looked up some old feminist literature and pamphlets from the previous waves you would have seen the same sort of angry tone and assessments directed toward men, and more times than not, those assessments were unfair and stereotyped ALL men. Sites like these serve as a support system for these men, to show they are not alone in their feelings and I think that is a good thing. Sure I don’t like or agree with every word that is said, but the I can get behind the base ideology and understand why they feel as they do. Try standing in someone elses shoes for a minute, not just on the legal and logistical stuff, but also on a human level. We are all people after all, right?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: