As Feminism’s Poison Does its Work, Anti-Female Brutality Explodes onto the Scene

by W.F. Price on September 19, 2011

Feminists asked for a gender war, and sadly it is starting to look as though they got what they wanted. Repeated provocations against men, systematic discrimination against men, and state-sanctioned debt slavery are starting to have the inevitable effect. In a triumph for the feminist movement, men are lashing out violently against women, fulfilling the feminist fantasy of a gender war.

For feminism to exist as a valid movement, there must be violent conflict, so many of the efforts of feminists have sought to provoke just that. For example, in teaching that women must “take back the night” from men, women were encouraged to be militant against all males, which can only have unfortunate results, given the hands-down male superiority in combat. Women have further been encouraged to fight men in all areas of society rather than cooperate with them, which is guaranteed to create some violently anti-female men. Unsurprisingly, more mentally unstable and out-of-luck men are lashing out violently against women, just as feminists have always hoped for.

You see, for a feminist to justify her job there must be some degree of brutality against women. Gender war is essential to feminism. So, if you are a feminist, the hapless women murdered or assaulted by the damaged men feminists have created are necessary sacrifices for advancing the feminist agenda. It’s a pretty simple concept. Too bad for the girls who ended up on the wrong end of these men’s rage, but hey, if you’re a female senator or staffer it’s good business for your cause. And we all know that feminism has never been about the typical woman who lives a humble life, but rather the ambitious elite who want to have access to the big boys and big money on Capitol Hill and Wall Street.

Here are a few very recent examples of the results of the feminist gender war campaign:

Trucker murders hookers across South.

Florida man kills wife, shoots two pastors.

Arkansas man attacks courthouse.

Women’s best bet for security is not in denouncing and fighting men, as feminists would have it, but in cooperating with them and taking on their proper role. Feminists would willingly sacrifice women for their own power, but ordinary men will sacrifice themselves for the women in their families.

This is why the arguments one often hears that women are stupid and inferior sometimes seem to carry some weight — what woman would give up this natural protection for an uncertain guarantee of government support? Only a foolish, stupid, shortsighted one. But perhaps that is the point — the most economically secure, educated and privileged women in Western society rarely leave their husbands. It is overwhelmingly the hapless, unintelligent and disadvantaged who believe the lies about “empowerment” and strike out on their own, only to fail in the overwhelming majority of cases.

Disadvantaged women are truly the cannon fodder of feminists. For Machiavellian types, this is a net bonus, but for anyone with a shred of morality, it’s a despicable path to power. The United States will once again be a righteous society only when feminists are jailed for interfering with families, and their academic apologists are removed by security from their jobs in taxpayer-funded educational institutions. This would be the most humane course of action to take. Far more humane, in fact, than provoking men and women to physically attack one another, as feminists would have it today so that they can unleash state agents on confused and demoralized families.

{ 111 comments… read them below or add one }

MWPeak September 19, 2011 at 05:08

Feminists are kind of like those mothers who smother their infants in the crib and then blame it on SIDS so they can get attention.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 67 Thumb down 16
oddsock September 19, 2011 at 05:30

Quite a few years back I was forced into looking at the bigger picture. I started off by looking at this thing called feminism and later womens nature in general. I had know even from around the age of 5 that something just did not add up, something was wrong.

It was my later in life experiences that brought everything to a head. I have always been quite a strong willed person but I must admit, I even started to doubt my own sanity. Thankfully, it was just around this time that I discovered the angryharry website. I had been searching for answers everywhere and realized that I was quite alone. Most men I would chat with or ask questions simply shut off the conversation or had, or at least claimed, to have no idea of what I was talking about.

I see quite a lot of this still happening on here and many other MRA websites. There are some that are clearly at the stage I was at many years ago and there are a few that are just curious or angry but, without doubt there are at least a couple of posters that are here to do nothing more than cause confusion and shit stir. This is no accident or just some cloaked feminist.

Watch the video below but more importantly, watch your reaction to the info. Oh, and the comments on this thread to my post.

Makow. The New World Order

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWC3WTUNsA8&feature=player_embedded

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 34 Thumb down 23
demirogue September 19, 2011 at 06:15

And on the opposite side of the coin, more and more women are killing their own kids. Even media blackouts of the events aren’t preventing the stories from getting out.

So tell me, are they really winning? No, and as the years pass and more women lose it, and the populace at large questions their sentences, what will the feminist excuses be? We can’t have an ever increasing society of women who harm their own children. And we can’t have a justice system that hands down the lightest sentences in many cases so what is to become of it? More dead children I guess.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 6
Rod September 19, 2011 at 06:31

I’m afraid that if it ever came down to a real physical war between the sexes, men would unfortunately lose. There are too many men who can’t stand the sight of men harming women, and would immediately step in to save them. Perhaps nature instilled in us a visceral reaction to women’s suffering, making us want to step in and help, and at one time in the history of our species, that reaction was no doubt a salutary thing. Now it just works against us. Even in situations where the combat is merely verbal–say, a fomral debate between a man and a woman–there are a lot of men out there who will immediately side with the woman no matter what because they can’t stand to see a man verbally picking on a woman. (“Ma’am, is he bothering you?” the white knight says.) Much more so, then, in any physical confrontation. In the court of public opinion, women always seem to win. So, unfortunatly, I think that any real physical war of the sexes would only backfire for men. We have to be more subtle in our maneuvers, but I’m confident that men will eventually learn strategy for slaying the feminist dragon.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 12
Poiuyt September 19, 2011 at 06:45

Pro-femaleist males, white knights and manginas will ultimately bear moral responsibility for plunging all society into the abysimal dark age of totalitarianism and sexist police statism. And with this parlous state of affairs, although females will feel some share of the generally heightened levels of violence in society, … males by a far greater extent, greater degree and greater severity will be the primary subject target against which all violence will be ultimately directed. [Official and unofficial]

Take the following comments from Chris Patten, ex-governor general of British Hong-kong and now chairman of the UKs BBC for illustration, of just how wedded elite males and white knights are to the idea of entrenching genderist femaleism at all costs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14963915
Quote “”BBC Trust chairman Chris Patten has said there are not enough women in on-air roles at the public broadcaster.””We should have more women on radio and television,””

“”In his interview, Lord Patten stated that women should be better represented on the BBC.”””I’m 67, for heaven’s sake, and I’m married to a charming and beautiful 66-year-old, and I would be delighted if she was the face of anything on television,” he said.””

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 3
dragnet September 19, 2011 at 07:19

The next few decades are going to be interesting. While feminism is certainly part of the story, there are larger forces here at work that have been hammering away for a long time. Yes, you have some unstable men targeting specific women or womens’ groups for violent retaliation, but I think most of the violence against women yet to come will be crimes of opportunity—domestic social unrest brought about by the increasing wealth gap, vanishing middle class, and the increasingly desperate circumstances for everyone not a member of our political and financial elite.

Anti-female brutality has been getting a fair amount of coverage lately—but in the short- and medium-term, it’s only going to make it worse for men. The last 20 years have seen the militarization of our police forces, the rollback of constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms, the privatization of prisons and the normalisation of torture, due-process free assassination, two-tiered justice and other loathsome initiatives. It is lower SES men who will bear the brunt of this stuff—they always have.

First, fear of blacks were used to justify this, then fear of Islamic terrorists…but it turns out this was really just a smokescreen. In truth, the past few decades have really just been a dry run for elites to hone their skills at domestic repression and propagandism. The increasingly terrible weapons of state will now be deployed in the service of short-circuting the coming domestic social unrest that is the birthright of the lower classes when they have been too long fucked over by their elites.

The misandric laws they pass and increasingly harsh tactics being used against men aren’t necessarily to benefit women or feminist causes, so much as to ensure the position of the elites and to guarantee that the lower- and working- and middle classes are bled dry without interruption.

In this context, the feminists just happen to be (extremely) useful tools.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 58 Thumb down 2
AntZ September 19, 2011 at 07:21

“Women’s best bet for security is not in denouncing and fighting men, as feminists would have it, but in cooperating with them and taking on their proper role.”

The MRM should focus on ending government-mandated male roles, and not on advocating female roles.

As long as men’s lives depend on what women do, men will not be free.

Men’s lives should depend on the decisions that men make.
Women’s lives should depend on the decisions that women make.

Today, the lives of men are determined by the decisions of women. The answer is not to shackle women (so that the lives of women are also determined by the decisions of men). Mutual dependency is only a small improvement over male slavery.

The answer is to liberate men, so that whatever women do (or do not do) no longer affects men.

Equal protection under the law. Equal protection of government.

You are 100% correct that feminism is a movement to transform random violence by individual men into collective privilege for all women (and collective oppression of all men).

You are also 100% correct that feminists benefit from individual acts of random male violence.

You are also 100% correct that feminists actively encourage random male violence, because they profit from it.

However, I think you are incorrect to assume that the answer is a return to a mutual dependency arrangement between the genders. That world, good or bad, is gone forever. We must act to make our own future, independent of women. We must act to end male oppression. As long as men care what women do (or do not do), we are not free.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 5
Uncle Elmer September 19, 2011 at 07:23

How timely, I almost sent yo a link to this local new item.

A few days ago there was an incident here over a restaurant table involving some woman and a guy who claimed to be a “deputy sheriff” (oh, I’ve heard that line a dozen times in my life). Caught on video where she antagonizes the guy then he gets up and “shoves” her to the ground, wherein she now becomes a helpless “victim”.

“I blacked out. I was in shock” she says. Complete with concrete burns.

Who hasn’t seen this behavior out of today’s modern woman? Rough and tough until someone calls them on their behavior at which time they collapse into a pile of tears and victimhood. Give her a shove and then she “goes flying” to the pavement where she is injured, the poor dear.

The video is a little sketchy and the guy certainly overreacted. But if a male had insulted him and got knocked down there would be no news story. What’s telling is that of the over 300 comments virtually all of them are siding with the female and spewing rage over the big, bad, abusive “deputy sheriff”.

Quite a change between her pre-shove haughtiness and her post-shove victimhood.

Men know full well not to antagonize an opponent unless they are ready to duke it but women feel no restraint as they bellow and rage at someone (usually a man) over nothing and then fall to pieces or call in another male defender at the slightest resistance.

How many men have gotten killed or sent to prison over this behavior? It’s imperative for young men to recognize this threat and avoid getting dragged into it, because when the dust settles she in no way will do anything for you :

Man claims to be sheriff’s deputy; shoves woman at the Frontier

http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S2286397.shtml?cat=504

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 44 Thumb down 3
ruddyturnstone September 19, 2011 at 07:43

I would like to see something more than anecdotal evidence before I agreed that “Repeated provocations against men, systematic discrimination against men, and state-sanctioned debt slavery are starting to have the inevitable effect. In a triumph for the feminist movement, men are lashing out violently against women, fulfilling the feminist fantasy of a gender war. ”

Despite all the hoopla about “violence against women” and the propaganda for VAWA, and the “take back the night” charades, the fact remains that women are much, much less likely to be the victims of a violent crime than men are. In every category of violent crime except, perhaps those involving sexual molestation and rape, men are much more often the victims than women are. And even with rape and sexual violence, I wonder how much the disparity would be if it were not for underreporting of sexual violence against boys by adult women and sexual violence against men in prison. And I have seen nothing to suggest that there has been any kind of surge of violence against women lately.

And, of course, not all violence against women is the result of feminism. So what is the proof that this particular type of violence is on the upswing?

Even the anecdotal evidence prented here doesn’t amount to much. In the first case, a man is accused of violence against a series of prostitutes. The claim is that he is seething with hatred against women, but his reasons for doing so are not at all clear. It might have something to do with feminism, but then again, it might not. In the second case, a man killed his wife and shot two pastors, but no one seems to know why he did it. Again, any connection to feminsim is only speculative. In the third case, the man asked to see the judge, a man, who presided over his divorce case and, presumably, meant to kill him. This is perhaps the most likely case of feminist involvement of the three, as it is not too much of a stretch to suggest that various aspects of his divorce case were decided against him, probably along the lines of the typical pro female decision of family courts. But, even so, the man sought another man, the judge, to take his wrath out on. Not his ex wife, not a prominent female feminist, not a woman at all.

Men have been conditioned socially for generations not to use violence against women. And, in the main, that social conditioning still stands.

And, frankly, I don’t think it will do our movement much good to resort to violence, unless and until all other avenues of change have been exhausted. Furthermore, I think it does our movement no good at all to be claiming that men are becoming more violent against women. That just feeds into the feminist narrative. Men are not, by and large, in the overwhelming majority of cases, violent at all. Of the few that are violent, they are much more likely to be violent against other men than against women. They myth of there being widespread violence by men against women is harmful to men in general, and the MRA/MGTOW movement in particular. I don’t think we should encourage it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 4
greyghost September 19, 2011 at 08:06

Pro-femaleist males, white knights and manginas will ultimately bear moral responsibility for plunging all society into the abysimal dark age of totalitarianism and sexist police statism.

If we handle ourselves right the whiteknights and the manginas supplicating of cunts will be the ones also paying the price for their whiteknighting.
As a big believer of MGTOW and indifference the manginas will be the only ones paying child support and marrying. It doesn’t take all men to live a culture of indifference, just enough to cause panic. With fewer men marrying there will be a doubling down and more men will get the red pill. The whiteknights and manginas will be the target drones for femminism and will be our examples for our education of more young men. Game, the PUA to the man going his own way, to the Clooney style childless love without marriage lifestyle will cause major panic and change of attitude. Involuntary childless spinsterhood.
These guys committing the acts of violence are men living under the blue pill. They have broken and struck out. These men have basically given up the same as the men that have committed suicide. Those men are part of society and are necessary as a part of misandry. As misandry goes these men go. Also has natural beta men learn “game” and indifference pushed and motivated by misandry women will be ready. Activist types like Glenn Sacks will make proposals to change the law and it will pass. At an individual level a woman that whats a man will have to give a reason for a man to be with her other than for her pussy. (very hard to do for a western woman hint: try kindness bitch) Overall once the culture of MGTOW and indifference becomes the norm femminism will feed it. with men being naturally kind and beta as feminism dies taking misandry with it the laws can be returned to the constitution and the culture of indifference will follow the end of misandry.
A direct battle with feminism with men playing the stereo typical role we lose big time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 08:26

It will be hard to prove such a trend but to me, someone who watches the news and links alot it seems there is an increase of violence at least reported.

One of the many many things I have learned being involved in the mrm is that what get’s reported is highly political and only reflects reality when it pleases the ptb or is so sensational that it leaks out.

So, we will not know because the minute they have the data they will hide it.

But it doesn’t really matter. Men are pretty predictable.

When they feel that it’s in their best interest men will attack women. Training will disappear in a heatbeat. Organized violence against women comes whenever a man enters the military.

The nazi’s were not shy about women and neither were the cambodian, tutsi’s etc….men will attack women if ordered to do so.

So, there is nothing inherently deferring about men. Educated men like the men here have many more proscriptions on behavior, and despite women wanting to be able to accuse us everyone knows were safer then most other men.

Disadvantaged women chose feminism to represent them. They get what their paid for and seem very happy with the product. We’re not seeing any women protesting feminism and when the feminists needed the ladies of room service to stump for their framing of DSK the maid Union was happy to oblige.

Let them rot. For me I will go to my grave petitioning for women who don’t work to be removed from the public dole.

MRM to Feminism: GET A JOB

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3
DJ September 19, 2011 at 08:35

Whiteknights and Manginas inevitably get sick and tired of being endlessly burned by women. It just takes longer for some than others to figure it all out. Even the most pathetic manginas figure it out in their 30s. Women just can’t stop themselves from shitting all over these hapless dupes. They’ll do the majority of the work for us, the more entitled and bitchy they get, the more they inevitably shit all over men, the more the pendulum will swing back.

I already see it here in Canada – our strip clubs are overflowing every weekend, prostitution, massage parlours etc are rampant. Our stripclubs are literally mass market brothels in disguise. Believe me, when you pay $100 for a lapdance in the vip area at the back, you are getting much, much more than a mere dance. Dudes invariably walk around with jiz in their pants, at last call, the strippers will go around asking if you’ve been ‘finished off’.

Why would these guys need a hellish relationship to an unbearable, entitled spoiled brat when they can have their needs met so easily?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 2
keyster September 19, 2011 at 08:43

“The United States will once again be a righteous society only when feminists are jailed for interfering with families, and their academic apologists are removed by security from their jobs in taxpayer-funded educational institutions.”

What about getting to the point where there can be an open and honest debate first? As long as feminists own the stage and claim the podium, they don’t have to answer to anyone who questions their dogma. They simply refuse to acknowledge dissent; dismissing any counter-argument as childishly irrelevant or positioning it as either hateful, “sexist”, “traditionalist” or neanderthal.

She who has the power decides whether or not to engage.
Acknowledging dissent might validate it, and start a counter-movement rolling. They cling to the power of disregard with purpose.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1
DJ September 19, 2011 at 08:57

The argument I keep hearing from any vocal feminists whose path I cross always contains the word ‘oppression’. How on earth are white women oppressed? Who is oppressing them? They’re the most privileged group of people on earth ffs. Once I say that, the ad hominem attack comes – ‘do you realise how ignorant you sound?’, or the gem, “I can’t believe I’m hearing such backward thinking in this day and age.” At that point what can you do.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 2
Rebel September 19, 2011 at 09:02

From where I stand, it appears that 99% of all feminist problems are generated by Anglo Saxon women.

In other words, if those women were not allowed to reproduce, the problem would disappear in one generation.

Men clearly have the upperhand in this game: just abandon Anglo women.
Leave them to their own designs, their own existence and wish them well on their way to oblivion/extinction.

Feminists must be allowed to die childless. I don’t believe in violence: it only stirs hatred and makes the problem worse. My solution is peaceful, respectful and considerate.

But for Christ’s sake DO NOT let them reproduce: BREED THEM OUT!

There are 3.5B*.92 women in the world who are not Anglo saxons or Westerners (that’s 3.22 billion women to chose from).

Can anyone come up with a simpler and quicker solution?

Think of this: IF Anglo women are not permitted to reproduce, your SONS will NOT go through hell like we do.

Not enough?
Then think of this: IF Western women are not permitted to reproduce, it might save Western civilization.

Still not enough?
Then think of this: If Western women are not allowed to reproduce, then the population of men in jail will decrease by the millions.

You know I could go on and on and on…
I have said it again and again: Breed them out!!

B-R-E-E-D- T-H-E-M- O-U-T!!!

Push them to extinction.

Isn’t this a peaceful, non-violent way of solving the problem?
Does anyone see anything wrong with that?
Then why not do it?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 27 Thumb down 23
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 09:02

@ Keyster

Then what does one do when the other side refuses to acknowledge your position in a negotiation?

Publicity, publicity, publicity.

We just need to keep it up. The general public is the target not professional feminists, they will never change. They will be removed or neutralized in regime change (elections).

The mrm is in a good position to keep moving forward with unrest among the youth and financial crisis in the economy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Firepower September 19, 2011 at 09:17

W.F. Price

Feminists asked for a gender war, and sadly it is starting to look as though they got what they wanted. Repeated provocations against men, systematic discrimination against men, and state-sanctioned debt slavery are starting to have the inevitable effect. In a triumph for the feminist movement, men are lashing out violently against women, fulfilling the feminist fantasy of a gender war.

If not exaggeration, you can’t expect men to be Ghandhi after decades of provocations against them, systematic discrimination and state-sanctioned debt slavery.

It’s just that some men have chosen to respond the only way ensconced power elites understand. The only way they’ll heel.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 5
Slicer September 19, 2011 at 09:19

Perhaps this article details the first real beginning of feminists gender war against men:

World War I, Women and the White Feather Campaign:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2038997/In-Downton-Abbey-male-servants-taunted-feathers-women-going-war-So-whats-truth-cowards-tormentors-Feather-Girls.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Anti Idiocy September 19, 2011 at 09:26

Maybe I’m the one who doesn’t understand human nature in general and men in particular, but it seems to me that anyone who doesn’t expect a backlash against feminism is the one who doesn’t understand. We hear more and more today, in “respected” venues, proclamations of “The End of Men” and questions such as “Are Men Necessary?” There are millions of young men who have grown up under this, and whose futures are uncertain at best. Anger against feminism has been building for years. As the men’s rights movement has gained momentum, feminists and their lackeys have doubled down and become more virulent in their anti-male hatred and propaganda. Women today are becoming more and more nasty on an interpersonal basis, and they are doing so more frequently. A breakpoint will come. It will probably take a catalyst; another severe economic downturn might do it. But it will come. Feminists and their pet femboys will push things until it does.

This culture is extremely divided, and we are in increasingly bad economic times. We do well to brace ourselves.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 2
demirogue September 19, 2011 at 09:27

Best way to get the general public to see the hypocrisy of the feminist and leftist is to point out the criticism and name calling of women who aren’t in full agreement with them. Mainly those in the limelight and running for office. And the strange silence from many on the left when the misogyny they perpetuate is right out in the open. Especially the name calling and the put downs. Disagreeing on stances well that’s OK and healthy. But the left using shaming tactics galore if others are in disagreement with them concerning women and feminism is totally hypocritical considering they say and do worse things to the women who aren’t in agreement with them.

Calling them out on their own hypocrisy should be the first thing because it’s the easiest.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Anti Idiocy September 19, 2011 at 09:28

@ keyster: “She who has the power decides whether or not to engage.
Acknowledging dissent might validate it, and start a counter-movement rolling. They cling to the power of disregard with purpose.”

Rather like the MSM’s treatment of Ron Paul.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Anti Idiocy September 19, 2011 at 09:32

@DJ: “Once I say that, the ad hominem attack comes – ‘do you realise how ignorant you sound?’, or the gem, “I can’t believe I’m hearing such backward thinking in this day and age.” At that point what can you do.”

Next time you might start out with “Do you realize how ignorant you sound?” or “I can’t believe I’m hearing such backward thinking in this day and age.” Then go to “White women are the most privileged people in the world today.”

The shame game can cut both ways.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
keyster September 19, 2011 at 09:32

“How on earth are white women oppressed? Who is oppressing them?”

They’re oppressed by society’s expectation that they pro-create, and once they succumb to that oppression, they’re oppressed by the “burden” of motherhood. They’re oppressed by their own biology, and resent men for not having the same sort of pressure applied to them. Feminism attempts to “equalize” this “curse”, through social propoganda and political/legal force.

If we didn’t have to rely on them for their unique reproductive capability, they would be accomplishing all sorts of fantastic things, like men always have. What they’re finding out though is that being a man means trying something and then failing miserably at it; that all men aren’t naturally gifted with greatness anymore than all women. This reality is difficult to accept and men must somehow be to blame. We have the keys to the castle, we’ve mastered the secret code to success and we’re not sharing it with them.

This is the oppression; a mysterious and powerful man’s world we won’t allow them to enter.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 2
keyster September 19, 2011 at 09:40

“Rather like the MSM’s treatment of Ron Paul.”

In that case, there can’t be a third side with ideas that seem radically different from the other two. It’s too hard to “brand” or catagorize. And the feeble lowest common denominator that the MSM has to pander to can only comprehend two concepts at a time. Good vs evil, one vs zero, etc. The minute you start introducing sub-plots (Ron Paul) you lose your audience.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Antiphon September 19, 2011 at 09:46

Rebel:

“If Western women are not allowed to reproduce, then the population of men in jail will decrease by the millions.”

What a ridiculous notion. Non-whites (or non-”Anglos” as you seem to prefer) account for 65-70% of the U.S. prison population. It would seem to me that breeding more “Anglos” is the way to go, while kicking non-whites out of the country.

“From where I stand, it appears that 99% of all feminist problems are generated by Anglo Saxon women.”

Andrea Dworkin, Susan Faludi, Betty Friedan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Emma Goldman, Erica Jong, Naomi Klein, Susan Sontag, Gloria Steinem, Naomi Wolf, Elizabeth Wurtzel, and many others (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_feminists)—some good Anglo-Saxon names there!

“IF Western women are not permitted to reproduce, it might save Western civilization.”

So, there is no connection between blood and culture? I’ve known very few half-breeds to be staunch defenders of Western, i.e. European, culture.

In summary: Your arguments are far from persuasive. It’s time to awaken and see that feminism is merely one aspect of Liberalism. The target is white (European), Christian men–and we are targeted for our whiteness, our masculinity, and our religion. Your advice advances the Liberal agenda as much as feminism does.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 12
Antiphon September 19, 2011 at 09:49

Rebel:

“Push them to extinction.”

I hate to point out the obvious, but breeding white women into extinction will also breed white men into extinction. I fail to see how that will improve the world.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 8
MobilePT September 19, 2011 at 09:55

@DJ: “Whiteknights and Manginas inevitably get sick and tired of being endlessly burned by women.”

Some of the most dedicated MRAs I know are recovering feminists. Drank the Kool Aid for years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
oddsock September 19, 2011 at 10:16

Anti Idiocy September 19, 2011 at 09:32
@DJ: “Once I say that, the ad hominem attack comes – ‘do you realise how ignorant you sound?’, or the gem, “I can’t believe I’m hearing such backward thinking in this day and age.” At that point what can you do.”

Next time you might start out with “Do you realize how ignorant you sound?” or “I can’t believe I’m hearing such backward thinking in this day and age.” Then go to “White women are the most privileged people in the world today.”

The shame game can cut both ways.

Excellent advice Anti idiocy.

These days it is not often I debate a feminist or women in general but, when I learned years ago that it is most always best to start with; I am outraged, or I am totally stunned that you still think/say/believe etc etc etc.

Just for the record, I eventually realized that trying to debate a woman/feminist using manners civilty and logic is about as much use as an ash tray on a motorbike. You need to claim the victimhood the wronged high ground right from the start. Oh,and you must keep this up even as they try and knock you off the high ground with their shaming language. Simply state you are even more shocked by their attempts to shame you into silence.

Don’t forget to walk away in disgust .

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 4
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 10:16

@Keyster

I agree. Let the white race rot, I’m Italian, they never thought we were really white anyway.

I was watching a new music video. They really reflect current politics, they’re the leading edge of new culture.

The triumphant is the white woman. And they look like trannies, all of them, not just Gaga.

So, I agree, feminism this is a war of nordic women against their men now generalized to all men. The Swedes know this. They are defining culture, the US is selling the products, songs and movies.

But they are not reproducing.

Memo to feminist central, if you want to show the world that depopulation is the way to go, starting with yourselves might make for an easier life, we know how much you hate children, but if you succeed, you’ve bred your self out of existence.

And the brown skinned women are not your husbands and will not say yes to you like he does, they don’t need sex from you, you have no power over them.

So, I agree Keyster, men should avoid white women like the plague. They’re the worst of the feminists and are the leaders. We should attack the leadership and the body of feminism will collapse.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 12
Rebel September 19, 2011 at 10:17

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 26
Firepower September 19, 2011 at 10:24

Rebel (in your own words)

@Antiphon wrote:

“Andrea Dworkin, Betty Friedan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Emma Goldman, Erica Jong, Naomi Klein, Susan Sontag, Gloria Steinem, Naomi Wolf, Elizabeth Wurtzel, and many others” were all living in America. They might not all have been Anglos,…
============
None was Chinese, nor African, nor Arab, nor Japanese, nor South Americans, nor anything but western: they- were- all-western women.

“NOT Anglos?”

Nor Chinese nor African, nor Arab, nor…

Hmmm…now I just wonder WHAT ethnicity these “white” women have in common.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 7
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 10:33

OT

Talking about Italians, it looks like with DSK removed european countries are abandoning the G8.

Italy is jumping ship and looking to China to bail them out.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/europe/110918/analysis-china-aids-the-sick-man-called-europe

That’s how quickly things can change.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
greyghost September 19, 2011 at 10:50

Antiphon
Take a look at “game” (female psychology in a context of interpersonel relationships) I think Rebel is on track. Involuntary childless spinsterhood. it will only take a large but relatively small group of women to make changes.
Have faith in hypergamy,have faith in the “hamster”, have faith in the beta male. There will be plenty of whiteknights and manginas to keep the population of white people around. Try not to let evil hold you hostage to such things 50, 60 years of this holding the line is enough. The changes needed will come when getting what they want is denied.
As far as men doing violence on women. So what I don’t care and here’s why. (make sure you get this one manboobz) Those men are men of the blue pill. They the enlightened made those men. Trey Pennington committed suicide was on the blue pill and I can say with cofidence if he was aware of the mens blogs and had a chance to get his red pill he would be alive today. If he had a sense of game what could he have done? From Mel gibson to Alec Baldwin those guys and their behavior was from living under the blue pill. As the men here have committed violence is not the way for an MRA but for a man trapped in the delusion of the blue so what. So praise him for being a good boy and manning up and marrying you and giving you your children. Call me names and a misogynist. And I will sit back and watch you apply misandry to the “good” man that married you and not interfere when he cuts your throat. MRA don’t have to encourage violence against women feminist will do that just fine. Sounds bad but that is what MGTOW/ indifference looks like.
I am guessing here that is maybe on track with what Welmer had in mind with this article.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 11
Ryu September 19, 2011 at 11:05

Now we’re getting somewhere. Rebel has pointed out the fundamental contradiction: kill the whites, kill feminism.

And we arrive at the truth, which is that the MRM is essentially anti-white. The elephant in the room for the MRM has always been affirmative action – helping black, mexican, jewish, muslim, gay, transgendered men over straight white men. White men are in effect, asked to help in their own destruction.

Naturally, this has been already anticipated in other movements. White nationalism is essentially a civil war between whites who want to live and those who want to die. The whites who would like to die do not want to go alone. They are trying to drag down the others.

Of course, the death of 800 million whites does not enter the calculation. We can joke about killing the whites. It’s very funny. So funny that Welmer, who is white, with white children permits it. But how many here will scream with indignity if I start poking holes in the holocaust fable? Yet 800 million dead is a joke – that’s the hate for whites, that is true hate.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 29 Thumb down 21
Craig Himself September 19, 2011 at 11:13

Quickie:

In the Misandry Bubble, the author points out that even if the quantity of violent-minded men stays flat, they can have much more effect if the quantity of INDIFFERENT man goes up. Is the violent:indifferent ratio that matters.

The more men who realize that all the gallantry in the world won’t get them noticed/loved/laid/families, the more antics the violent-minded will get away with.

Somewhere I read about some girls getting gang-raped by some frat brothers at a park in Philadelphia, and other men just walking away. “Fuck her.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
greyghost September 19, 2011 at 11:14

Ryu
I’m not white and I have enough sense to know killing whites is not going to end this madness. What I see here is men striking out and trying to find a solution. But once again hanging on to something like not being able to let a white woman enjoy spinsterhood out of preserving the white race is what got you here in the first place. Have faith MRA, white women will be long sense kind and polite before we run out of white women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8
Acksiom September 19, 2011 at 11:17

The argument I keep hearing from any vocal feminists whose path I cross always contains the word ‘oppression’. How on earth are white women oppressed? Who is oppressing them? They’re the most privileged group of people on earth ffs. Once I say that, the ad hominem attack comes – ‘do you realise how ignorant you sound?’, or the gem, “I can’t believe I’m hearing such backward thinking in this day and age.” At that point what can you do.

Before that point, why are you even discussing this with people like that ITFP?

Go find some non-feminists, preferably men, and give them some red pill information in your own best interests, instead of being emotionally exploited by damaged and broken people with empty, meaningless lives.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Rebel September 19, 2011 at 11:17

@Firepower:

Sorry chap, but I don’t follow you. What are you talking about?

O.K., they all all Jews. In other words: Semites, like the Arabs.
But those Jews are, truly, “Europeans”, aren’t they?

And since Jews are venerated and idolized in the U.S., they are also Americans. Am I saying something “verboten” here? (Threading on thin ice???).

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 10
oddsock September 19, 2011 at 11:21

Where is Opus when you need him ?

Opus. I begining to think your quote on another thread is quite true.

“There are two types of people in this world, English people and those that wish they were ”

I wonder what’s the nationality of angry izzy ? I bet it says “made in China” somewhere ?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 12
Rebel September 19, 2011 at 11:30

@ Ryu September 19, 2011 at 11:05
Now we’re getting somewhere. Rebel has pointed out the fundamental contradiction: kill the whites, kill feminism.

Who the fuck said to kill the whites????

Aren’t you getting a little carried away, friend?

I said Breed Them Out! They are excess baggage. They are surplus to requirement. They are irrelevant, just like they pretend that we are.
Just because white women will not reproduce does not mean that the race is done: race is transmitted via the MALE.

Besides, the addition of new genes in our gene pool will be very beneficial for everybody. All in all, it’s a win-win scenario.

Can you really think of a better cleansing technique?
How else are you gonna get the dirt out?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 18
oddsock September 19, 2011 at 11:36

Pfttt! Same old same old.

Pissing contests biggest dick contests labels labels and more labels.

The feminsits and the PTB just laugh there tits off watching all this.

It is MEN that are getting the shaft. M E N. Not a colour or religion or race or culture or nationality.

Wake the feck up for fecks sake!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 11
Jaego Scorzne September 19, 2011 at 11:40

Is the answer the White Women of Eastern Europe, or are they gone too?

Italy is consumed by Feminism – the lowest birth rate of all.

We are between a rock and a hard place. But surely we have to try something different. By not marrying at all, or only Non Anglos in our 40′s, we will become a very wealthy and influential group if we so desire. Some of the previous posters may be right: we will become very attractive and the more sensible Angloettes will jump ship and come crawling.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 11:40

Remember guys, we are all races here at the Spear-Head but we are men first, at least that’s the sub-text here.

Here’s an Italian intellectual who was falsly accused at Dartmouth in 1991 and writes today about how he feels this is the modus opporandi of the American ruling class and why, because of this, he no longer supports the US:

http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-i-learned-at-dartmouth.html

I agree with him, every single word.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 11:50

Btw.

In that article I linked the author makes the connection that the bull that he experienced in college resulting from the Anita Hill escapade directly related to the abuses of power the college graduates of Darmouth used in accusing him, then used to justfy Abu Grhab and Guantanimo.

My point is, and confirmed by this article, that the worst thing about these new laws on college campuses, todays graduates institute even worse laws in 30 years time.

This is a slow motion version of the Chinese cultural revolution.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
DJ September 19, 2011 at 12:03

A girl I dated in my early 20′s is now 37, she is a fat, ugly, childless, radical feminist spinster, and a lesbian. Looks like these fembots are breeding themselves out of existence without any of our interference after all. This used to be a beautiful young woman, femininity was her power. She is repulsive to me now, I’m ashamed that I ever slept with her, she truly is a jabba the hutt these days. Used to be an 8+, now she’s a Zero at 37. Too many dicks and pussies gobbled, must be high in calories.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Anti Idiocy September 19, 2011 at 12:04

@ oddsock: “It is MEN that are getting the shaft. M E N. Not a colour or religion or race or culture or nationality.”

I wish I could give you ten thumbs up for that comment. Members of the MRM and men in general play right into the hands of the PTB, when they turn against each other based on grouping according to race, religion, sexual orientation, age, culture, nationality, whatever. One of the slickest and most effective early moves by second wave feminists was turning all other men against the most powerful — WHAMs. Men should have joined together a half-century ago to advance themselves and each other as M E N.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 5
DJ September 19, 2011 at 12:04

I forgot to mention Aksiom – the above mentioned woman was an old friend. She started her feminist rant and I told her to eff-off. Now when I see her I completely ignore her.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
The Trend September 19, 2011 at 12:10

I have heard that a lot of women “victims” actually initiated the violence- I wonder how/if that factors in. There has been an avalanche lately of the “grrrrrrl power” type movies/TV shows lately (feminist porn)- invariably depicting the young attractive white woman with perfect hair/makeup/nails/clothes/shoes/accessories etc effortlessly kicking the shit out of every white male she meets.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
DJ September 19, 2011 at 12:23

Yeah, let’s not forget that this is a problem perpetuated by white women and manginas, but has spread amongst various ethnicities. Let’s not confuse this with a racial conflict, I, as a white man who grew up predominately in a white neighbourhood feel more kinship with the plight of black men than I can ever have imagined, all at the hands of feminism. We white men are the next target, they destroyed the black man’s family decades ago, now they are in the final stages of destroying the white man’s. Having been through the family court/lawyer b.s. for my daughter, I absolutely do NOT buy into this black man as the deadbeat dad myth/exaggeration. Not anymore.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 9
W.F. Price September 19, 2011 at 12:23

Of course, the death of 800 million whites does not enter the calculation. We can joke about killing the whites. It’s very funny. So funny that Welmer, who is white, with white children permits it. But how many here will scream with indignity if I start poking holes in the holocaust fable? Yet 800 million dead is a joke – that’s the hate for whites, that is true hate.

-Ryu

Show me where people are making jokes about killing whites, and I will ask them to stop doing so. I think you exaggerate some, Ryu — several writers here (including me) have made it pretty clear that leftist anti-white propaganda is nonsense. What I am not going to do is blame all our problems on other races/ethnicities, and a major reason for that is that I personally can’t stand it when other races/ethnicities do it to white people/Europeans. Also, it is a pretty ineffective way to fix problems.

As for white nationalists, I am suspicious of them, because in my personal experience many are unpleasant people, who seem to feel that their ideology excuses them from acting like decent human beings. In short, they are the mirror image of the anti-racist fanatics who would gladly destroy whites to fulfill their goal of a monochrome world.

oddsock September 19, 2011 at 12:36

Anyway, we shouldn’t worry too much about colour. Another few thousand years and with continual inter race breeding all the human race will eventually become some shade of Beige !

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 21
DJ September 19, 2011 at 12:37

Most white nationalists/KKK types etc. are rampant socialists too, not to mention manginas. If you dare, read some of the filth on that disgraceful site called stormfront, and you’ll see many of them are female pedestalizers.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 13
MWPeak September 19, 2011 at 12:37

I originally posted: Feminists are kind of like those mothers who smother their infants in the crib and then blame it on SIDS so they can get attention.

Allow me to revise that:

Feminists are women who keep their male offspring in an infant indentity, smother them in the home they are never allowed to leave, blame society’s problems on men being failures and then claim the greatness of feminism to get sympathy for their self-inflicted plight.

A little less harsh than the SIDS analogy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
keyster September 19, 2011 at 12:44

The secular-progressive (“anti-establishment”) movement that took hold on our college campuses in the 60′s, was the beginning of the end of the “patriarchal” family and “patriarchal” Christian tenets as a moral guide.

When they denounced God and embraced moral relativism in His place they destroyed a system, the framework of a civilization and it’s backbone, the nuclear family.

Once women were left to their own narcissistic “life style choices”, outside the bounds of church and encouraged by the state, they chose themselves above men, children and even other women. Men (and many women) have known for millenia that women need some amount of control. Because without it civilization quickly loses it’s moral compass and slowly declines with each generation, until a new one (that better controls its women) fills the void.

Welcome to the “Age of Woman”, the subserviant emasculated man and the “independent and empowered” woman. Our women rule, while our men have grown soft. Give women unfettered control of your pro-creation and as a species there will be dramatic shifts in world population (power). It’s happening so slowly relative to our life time we can’t see it, but it’s upon us right now. Its no coincidence Pandora was a woman.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4
greyghost September 19, 2011 at 12:44

The western woman birth rate is low anyway. One of the big reason is that women in general think a husband (sap) will always be there. They volunteered to be spinsters based on a feminist lie. Women of liberal western society are slutting around with their HR type jobs thinking they will land a chump when they hit their early thirties. Sometimes they win and at other times (most) they find they can’t attract the man they want. When that choice is not theirs to make (men will decide who gets married and has children) The panic will set in and some women will do what it takes to have a family. (they may have actually bring something to the table) They may try and change the laws to make it more likely a man will chose them. Most likely team woman won’t stop the law being changed. It is not about race. I have full faith in beta men and full knowledge and understanding that there will always be chumps,whiteknights and manginas. Logic doesn’t apply to the female mind and the sexual dynamic.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 8
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 19, 2011 at 13:06

OT…..

A little more sexist hatred from the UK “equalities” minister.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/politics/article-23988643-men-to-blame-for-mess-the-world-is-in-claims-equalities-minister.do

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5
Anti Idiocy September 19, 2011 at 13:22

@ Peter-Ander: Nolan(c): “A little more sexist hatred from the UK “equalities” minister”

People should take a look at the comments that follow that article. So far every one, and I mean 100%, are opposed to the comment by the minister of sexism.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
Ryu September 19, 2011 at 13:27

“And if we must sacrifice “whiteness” in order to eliminate the crap, well that’s a small price to pay: if one of your legs has gangrene, it is worth while to cut it off so you can keep on living. Feminism is gangrene: it has to be surgically removed. The end justifies the means”

Rebel

So….sacrifice all whites. Cut them off like you would cut off a rotten leg. It’s right there. When you talk about race, you can’t seperate the women and the men. That’s a luxury that MRA’s have. They don’t consider race important.

It ought to be very apparent where such a policy would lead. California is full of liberals and feminists. The non-feminist mestizos are having babies, white women are not. What is the result? Budget deficits, from 95% white to 60% mexican in 30 years, crime, environmental destruction. California is going to hell in a hand basket. Much of it can be traced to the racial composition and why it changed.

The problem with that scheme is that an ever shrinking white population cannot make up for an ever increasing NAM population. The critical mass goes away. The culture changes. If you enjoy living in Western civilization, white women must reproduce. If white women are abandoned, the culture is abandoned. The change will be the same as when the Europeans left Africa en masse.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 7
Anonymous September 19, 2011 at 13:40

Is defending a woman conditioned? Or is it something deeper than that, perhaps part of our DNA? After all, they are the weaker ones and they all carry eggs. Our sense of survival and instincts keep most of us from ever doing anything to women, and that’s great and right, although “modern” women are really asking for an old fashion smack like in Airplane the movie. What to hope for is continued change. The current status quo among the sexes and female supremacy is unsustainable, but so is practically everything else in this F*cked up culture and country. america’s pathetic condition speaks to this. There are huge ties between our failing financial system and feminism, and once we re-balance both our individual and national spending habits there will be violence…as in a violent return to normalcy. Indeed there will likely be violence associated with social unrest too. The best thing for all of us men to do is to check out of the system in our own ways and become the best we can possibly be. feminism is doing well for a number of reasons, however, it is NOT because women are superior. Quite the opposite, in fact, feminism must bring men down to give the illusion that they are moving up. All the while claiming some “right” to become their full self, nothing is said about making boys and men their full selves (living up to their absolute potential), why? Answer: because as shown throughout all of history and even to today, men will always do better than women save for the womanly things such as talking and caring for babies. Violence is never the answer; women are helpless creature’s susceptible to persuasion, spineless, easily controlled, emotional and irrational. Like it or not they carry eggs and a failsafe instinct in us that prevents us from doing harm and to protect them. But, this is the natural order that deranged feminist wish to disrupt. And this is the same natural that we need to bring back into being, we just need to break-down the system and bring back a limited government. feminism will die quick death on its own.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 19, 2011 at 13:42

oddsock September 19, 2011 at 05:30

Come on oddsock. You are a conspiracy nutter…surely the Illuminati can not exist! LOL!!

I must admit I too was amazed at first. But once you understand the monetary system you understand the extent of the conspiracy. The money gives it away.

Welmer,
Thanks for the three more cases. I am keeping a sub forum that records violent crimes by men against women and children. (link below)

I have been telling women for three years now that abusing men and supporting criminal acts against men and laughing at them while providing no path to justice is a HUGE provocation. Apparently, as I have had to come to admit. Women are too stupid to realise that provoking men is a REALLY bad idea.

There can be no reason other than abject stupidity that a woman would provoke a man, let alone provoke him beyond his endurance. My ex used to try and needle me and provoke me all the time. I just put up with it. Men used to comment at my clients that I had the patience of Job. I used to laugh it off as “I have raised 4 kids”. But it was as much as the patience and tolerance I had to show my wife that was the result of such patience with clients.

The only thing wrong in ANY of these stories, in my humble opinion, is that the men made sure that they were going to be caught pretty much. If EVER men who are being abused figure out to do “stranger on a train”? The number of dead women will skyrocket.

If EVER men take up the proposal to form small bands of 6 and dispense summary justice given the TOTAL LACK OF JUSTICE today? They will be stacking dead judges and lawyers up like firewood.

All that has to happen is for men to “swap problems” so there is no connection and to do the deed in the dead of night. If THAT ever happens? Its not going to be much fun to be a judge, a lawyer or a criminal woman wielding the criminal family courts.

And…quite frankly? I can see the smarter men wising up soon enough. Its just a matter of time.

http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/123/scope/threads/Default.aspx

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 19, 2011 at 13:53

Today a woman whom was on my facebook from school days wrote a post about how she might not be a mans first choice but she was a good choice but if you did not accept her the way it is then watch her walk out the door.

She is, of course, in her 40s and single. She did have a kid or two I think. So I replied that such arrogance is one reason why I have sworn off western women etc and I linked “Sues” statement and pointed out THIS is what a REAL woman talks like. So then some other stupid woman jumps in and says Well I will defend the women ….presumably pretending that telling the truth is an attack.

So I spent a little time pointing out how women were committing crimes and the OTHER WOMEN supported this etc etc. How the guvment is a criminal organisation etc. And how only ONE WOMAN has spoken out in support of me…..so yes the vast majority of Australian women ARE liars and hypocrites.

How did this “strong and independent” grrrrrrll react?

Well she deleted my post and unfriended me of course.

These women are dumber than rocks. They think that silencing the man who is telling them what is coming is going to stop what is coming.

Bad times are ahead for western women. Very bad times indeed.

That said? Today I bought the domains for the association and am building….

It is no longer going to be called Peter Nolan Associates for I have now committed to changing my name when all this is over. Its just going to be called the Mens Business Association. Keep an eye out for the web sites.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 19, 2011 at 13:58

Anonymous September 19, 2011 at 13:40
” Violence is never the answer;”

The promise of violence is very OFTEN the answer. And if you promise you have to deliver when pushed. I have never been pushed to violence as an adult.

Every man I have said “stop that shit” to has stopped. Every, single, one.

The promise of violence in the answer. And women might want to get that through their stupid thick heads. Ditto their niggerz.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 6
Rocco September 19, 2011 at 13:58

@ Anonymous

I saw Bill Clinton on the news this morning and he’s still talking of “spending our way” out of this recession. To me that means he still believes that feminist elimination of spending limits on women is the only way out of a major disaster and that feminist bullshit is still guiding policy makers.

Interestingly, when asked about unemployment, he was saying it’s likely around 15% and that he was actually more concerned with unemployment outside the US and seemed to think that US spending needs to rise to help these non-US unemployed.

In other words, instead of realizing this is unsustainable and changing feminism, Bill Clinton is still trying to build his one world government financed on the backs of men who aren’t even allowed to see the children they love with all their hearts.

Liberals are cruel cruel people and conservatives are just the same.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
DCM September 19, 2011 at 14:01

“Rebel September 19, 2011 at 11:17

@Firepower:

Sorry chap, but I don’t follow you. What are you talking about?
…………”

He isn’t talking about anything. He’s spewing rhetorical slogans straight from leftist playbooks, in this case trying to get people of different races here pissed off at each other.
There’s a couple of trolls or planted disrupters here. Don’t fall for their crap and unless you’re just amusing yourself don’t engage in discussions with them or give them the tolerance they won’t extend to anyone else while demanding it.
Note that they pretend to take the high moral ground, they use forceful words and ideas, they eventually contradict themselves, they pretend to support one or another contributor and try to get them to turn against others — the ones who see through them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8
oddsock September 19, 2011 at 14:41

Thanks DCM

So it’s not just me that can see through all the bullshite and shit stirring tactics?

PAN

Moi? A conspiracy nut ? Feck ! I am thinking of getting a made to measure tin foil hat. Have you ever heard that saying about trying to un ring a bell?
Once you take the red pill there is no going back.

Tell you what, there has been many a time I have had to turn off me puter and go for a walk. It is just so so so unfeckin believable that so many so called intelligent American men point blankly refuse to see the glaringly feckin obvious.

Here watch this.

For all you Americans. No I do not hate you or envy you. 9/11 was an incredibly obvious inside job. Why on earth do you refuse to see it? The evidence is overwhelming for fecks sake ! Are you really really so feckin naive that you believe your government would never do such a thing ? Perhaps look up the gulf on Tonkin incident, you know, the thing that set off the Vietnam war killing millions of people and hundred of thousands of your own men. A False Flag op, a de classified one at that, previously just a conspiracy…. and you think a few thousand killed on 9/11 would bother these people? Sometimes I feckin despair I really do.

Its like trying to get through to a feminist or a woman with her rationalization hamster in overdrive. !

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 15
Rebel September 19, 2011 at 15:05

@Oddsock:
“The feminsits and the PTB just laugh there tits off watching all this.”

You of all should know how irrelevant that is. Who cares what they do or think? Are you telling me you care about what women think?
Na! I know you don’t.

@Ryu:

Such is your opinion and I respect it.
We are not seeing things from the same point of view. Yours is interesting but does not resonate with me. That’s all.

If you think about it, I haven’t said anything on this thread that hasn’t been said several times before here, using different words.
This time, I have put it a bit more bluntly (I guess the gag I use when I write was not well in place…LOL!!).
I think I should better not venture into some of the more radical ideas I have: I would collect thumbs down like crazy. HAHAHAHA!!!
….
lol

I shall keep them for later..

More light is shed in a heavy discussion than from pats on the back.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7
oddsock September 19, 2011 at 15:16

Rebel

@Oddsock:
“The feminsits and the PTB just laugh there tits off watching all this.”

You of all should know how irrelevant that is. Who cares what they do or think? Are you telling me you care about what women think?
Na! I know you don’t.”

Sorry mate. I was just trying to point out that we are not achieving much by going around in circles arguing among ourselves over petty things like race colour and nationality while the feminists and PTB watch on in amusement.

All this is easily caused by a site destroyer or cloaked feminist troll making a slighly caustic comment on any of the above topics. As you know, a well known tactic that has been used over the years to destroy many a fine MRA website.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11
Venom Froggy September 19, 2011 at 16:42

@Rod:
“We have to be more subtle in our maneuvers, but I’m confident that men will eventually learn strategy for slaying the feminist dragon.”

There’s only one way to end this madness. One is to either convince these humble good girls this article speaks of (where the hell they are) and convince them the feminist poison must be expunged from the system.

Or sit back, crack a cold one, and watch the horror unfurl. I myself don’t want that, but until these white-knighting mangina defenders wake up (they outnumber us about 30-to-one), then, we’re just gonna have to wait until the violence increases even further.

So pucker up your sphincters, kiddies! It’s gonna be a long and bumpy, but thrilling, ride to Hell!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
LoneRanger in NYC September 19, 2011 at 16:45

Secured , educated women rarely leave their husbands? I don’t think so, the way things are going women of all background (rich , poor or educated) are taking their husbands to the cleaners or they cuckold them at their jobs. I work in an Investment bank, and I see these broads leaving at 12 noon to screw one of their coworkers or someone else that they met in another place. Meanwhile hubby thinks that she is working until 5 or 6 o’clock. The educated woman that is attractive will leave her husband since she has options.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Venom Froggy September 19, 2011 at 16:52

@DJ:
“Most white nationalists/KKK types etc. are rampant socialists too, not to mention manginas. If you dare, read some of the filth on that disgraceful site called stormfront, and you’ll see many of them are female pedestalizers.”

Oh yeah. Their beloved Adolf Hitler was a socialist. Most people don’t even know that. In fact, the entire Third Reich was a socialist regime, albeit one based on genocide and Aryan supremacy.

Wanna know something else? I read in a news article that some KKK branches and certain sects of the Neo-Nazis here in the United States voted for Barak Obama. Why? Because, like Hitler, Obama is more socialist than socialism itself.

These bigots were creaming their pants with such orgasmic anticipation of having an honest-to-goodness socialist in office, they were willing to overlook the fact he was a member of the hated “mud race” they so desperately want to eradicate.

How’s THAT for bitter irony?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 15
Laura Grace Robins September 19, 2011 at 17:08

“Women’s best bet for security is not in denouncing and fighting men, as feminists would have it, but in cooperating with them and taking on their proper role.”

Love this. Really gets right down to it. What’s worse—being attacked or submitting? Certainly a catch 22 for the feminists, although they do seem to prefer the former. Better to be attacked by a man than submit to a man, because in their twisted world, if they are attacked at least they can raise that victim flag a bit higher. It gains more sympathy, more attention, more causes/organizations, and in short–more power. Everyone will feel bad for the attacked woman, but not so much for the submitting woman. The submitting woman makes a choice to comply and has an element of free will whereas the attacked woman is merely a poor victim of the patriarchy. Although even with the submitting woman it can be said she is oppressed by the patriarchy, has no choice and is a victim, but it just doesn’t market as well or play to the world’s emotions as an attacked woman does.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2
Lingam September 19, 2011 at 17:13

I have never met a person of J*wish extraction who had anything good to say about OTHER ethnic groups national/ethnic/cultural aspirations – UNLESS they can act as the managers/mediators of the process. If you have had similar experiences- PLEASE – rec this post. Just reality-testing here!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 4
bruno September 19, 2011 at 17:55

Feminism has nothing to do with race.
It’s a culture.
Bring any woman from any country to the West, and after a few years of talking with local women, watching TV, and especially: learning how the laws here work, and understanding her superior legal position, she will become feminist too, it doesn’t matter which race she is.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 0
Jaego Scorzne September 19, 2011 at 18:05

If you see thru gigantic socially engineered scam, it’s easier to see through other such scams. Thus many White Nationalists are MRA’s and vice versa. Truth is a skill and a habbit. Why do WN’s adore their women? Because most women are abject followers and success chasers, a Woman who will stand behind a condemned doctrine and the Men who hold it, is a Gem.

WN’s getting bad press? Are you sure it’s all deserved? Think there might be a campaign to slander us – kind of like that used against Men? Do you really not see any campaign of hatred against Whites? How about Christians? Nothing there either?

Think of it as reverse Affirmative Action. A Woman is higher than a Man but a Black Woman outranks a White Woman. She’s what’s known as a two fer. A Black Lesbian is a three fer – untouchable, sacred, a PC Brahmin. The reverse? A White Christian Man – he’s not untouchable, he IS an untouchable, a pariah, trailer trash.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 4
Peter September 19, 2011 at 18:10

Hey Welmer, I don’t know about you, but I’m getting paranoid about all this. I’ve gotten a bit worried ever since that Norwegian guy did his thing. Apart from his concerns about Islamisation, h quoted liberally from the MRA movement, and that’s gotten me worried about the MRA movement eventually being linked to terrorism.

Another recession will inevitably lead to more men lashing out violently, and inevitably one of them will be found to be a contributor to your website or others like it. And that’s when the s*** goes down; the FBI starts tracking visits, looking into donors and contributors like me, and we’re all on domestic terrorist watch lists.

I’ll say something about your article: apart from the courthouse shooting, there’s little connecting these cases to feminism. Guys go apes*** and kill people all the time, whether under a Victorian patriarchy (like Jack the Ripper) or under our feminist distopia. And it’s wrong no matter what the circumstances. A trucker that murders hookers has nothing to do with men’s rights. A guy who kills his wife and them murders several others in a church has nothing to do with men’s rights. Both of these men were wrong to do what they did. Hell, even the courthouse guy could have very well killed a lot of innocent people.

I think we need to make it clear that violence is not a moral solution or effective solution in a civilized democracy. Think about it; you inadvertently made this point – every violent incident only helps sustain the feminists. You need to moderate the extremist rhetoric that has been allowed to build up in the comment section. Everyone needs to take a step back and chill the f*** out; none of this is worth killing or getting killed over.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 13
Phil September 19, 2011 at 18:12

Lingam- 100% correct.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
CorkyAgain September 19, 2011 at 18:18

At one point during our divorce, my ex and I were having a heated argument. I forget what it was about, but I do remember being frustrated by her refusal to acknowledge a single thing I was saying. I told her that up until that moment I had never understood how a man could be brought to the point where he’d hit a woman.

(I think I had some crazy idea that explaining my emotional state would improve communications. She certainly seemed to think so, since she was always telling me how she felt when she was frustrated with me.)

Her response? She dared me to do it — and in a flash I saw how she was maneuvering for legal advantage.

So I just turned around and walked out the door.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Firepower September 19, 2011 at 18:19

DCM ranted

There’s a couple of trolls or planted disrupters here.

Making slobbering paranoid accusations against writers who’ve been here longer than you invites the observation that you have your head firmly planted up your ass.

Oddsock carked:

I was just trying to point out that we are not achieving much by going around in circles arguing among ourselves over petty things like race colour and nationality while the feminists and PTB watch on in amusement.

That’s pretty darn good – coming from a bloke whose country is 90% white. Let’s all Rock The Casbah in Londonistan.

Tell me again, what do the feminists have to fear from mrmsters? Our organized marches? Our groundbreaking courtroom victories on the Telly? Our massive influence in politics? Our fear-inducing intimidation factor?

YOU are so under the radar, they need SONAR to find you.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7
W.F. Price September 19, 2011 at 18:21

Another recession will inevitably lead to more men lashing out violently, and inevitably one of them will be found to be a contributor to your website or others like it. And that’s when the s*** goes down; the FBI starts tracking visits, looking into donors and contributors like me, and we’re all on domestic terrorist watch lists.

-Peter

I’m not worried in the least about the FBI. As a publisher, I’m protected under the 1st amendment, and I owe them absolutely nothing — not even cooperation. Of course, there’s only the slimmest of chances that I’ll ever have any dealings with them unless I am personally involved in a federal crime, and unless opposing feminism is on the list of federal offenses I’m pretty sure I’m in the clear in that regard.

I’d say the same applies to others on the site. Anyone can say we’re responsible for violence or whatever, and this is a typical BS trick of the left, but even to this day only those who actually committed crimes can be held responsible in criminal court.

Don’t let the fed bogeyman scare you. In most cases, it’s only whining feminists who are trying to associate us with criminals, and this is totally transparent to anyone in the criminal justice system. If the feds start investigating me, I will look them right in the eye and say they are wasting taxpayer dollars, and should do their real job or screw off.

Anonymous September 19, 2011 at 18:25

Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) September 19, 2011 at 13:42

“The only thing wrong in ANY of these stories, in my humble opinion, is that the men made sure that they were going to be caught pretty much. If EVER men who are being abused figure out to do “stranger on a train”? The number of dead women will skyrocket….If EVER men take up the proposal to form small bands of 6 and dispense summary justice given the TOTAL LACK OF JUSTICE today? They will be stacking dead judges and lawyers up like firewood…”

Here goes trolly mctrollster again trying to bring an end to Spearhead. What sort of a dumb bint cunt would give away all his secrets on a public forum?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9
fmz September 19, 2011 at 19:00

l win by not fighting and going this way.

Let them munch on each other, figuratively and literally.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Firepower September 19, 2011 at 19:31

W.F. Price

I’d say the same applies to others on the site. Anyone can say we’re responsible for violence or whatever, and this is a typical BS trick of the left…Don’t let the fed bogeyman scare you.

TS has attracted many Brits, Aussies and Germans – our lookalike brothers from oppressive Socialist countries unused to Freedom of Speech.

So, questioning Big Brother scares them and they need reassurance.

In America, our Feds are too busy supplying guns to Mexican drug cartels and funding SOLYNDRA to care.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4
Aharon September 19, 2011 at 19:47

Lingam wrote: “I have never met a person of J*wish extraction who had anything good to say about OTHER ethnic groups national/ethnic/cultural aspirations…”

Just how many Jews have you met and how many Jews have you had such a conversation with about this subject? Numbers please. I’m Jewish and I’ve said many good and supportive things about the aspirations of people from other groups and so too have many Jews that I know. BTW, I’ve never been involved in managing, leading, or profiting by verbally supporting and wishing others the best in their aspirations.

Its been quite awhile since I visited Spearhead. It really is incredible how terrified and paranoid the anti-Jews are here about all Jews based on the behavior of some spoiled Jewish born self-righteous bitches who have embraced Nazi Feminism.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 14
Firepower September 19, 2011 at 20:01

Aharon

Its been quite awhile since I visited Spearhead. It really is incredible how terrified and paranoid the anti-Jews are here about all Jews based on the behavior of some spoiled Jewish born self-righteous bitches

Perhaps, but NOT as incredible as the cadre of the most destructive feminists being 99% ONE ethnic group.

From your perspective, how do you explain that?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Anonymous September 19, 2011 at 20:19

Dear Laura Grace Robins September 19, 2011 at 17:08:

Amen, sister.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
Anonymous September 19, 2011 at 20:28

Dear Aharon September 19, 2011 at 19:47:

Agreed. Seig Heil Feminazi criminality knows no bounds by way of race, ethnicity, place of birth, etc. It’s the criminal ideology of women being out of place (God had it right. Men should rule: women are to be helpers.) The God of Abraham, Isaach and Jacob, the one and only God is perfectly right in his counsel to his creation as to how to get it right. Genesis, Titus 2, Ephesians 5 & 6, Esther 1, Proverbs 31.

God decided to create a people of his own starting with the Hebrew people he created. His Holy Spirit seals salvation for all who are called by HIM.

In many ways, ethnic Israel is a microcosm of the world. It gets much wrong and yet, within it, there is a sliver of getting it profoundly right. Consider David, the prophets, the messiah, etc. God chose the Israelites first, then Gentiles (and Abrham had among him Gentiles who were believers in God–Gentiles always were in the covenants of God).

The point of reference for getting it right is God himself, the husband, not any part of the bride, his people who need forgiveness and require a righteous God-husband to obey.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 11
gender foreigner September 19, 2011 at 20:37

Dear Aharon September 19, 2011 at 19:47:

Agreed. The criminal ideology of Seig Heil Feminazism knows no boundary, ethnic, racial, linguistic, geographic, etc. It’s a cancer from hell which requires the cure from heaven, God himself.

God chose to create a people for himself, his bride, from the Hebrews (and Gentiles) and then the Gentiles (and Hebrews). Proverbs 31, Esther 1, Titus 2, & Ephesians 5 & 6, pure counsel in getting it right genderly. God made us and gave us the handbook as to how to get it right. We, the creation, need to obey the Creator. Period. Here, lies much of the salvation of the world. And to the extent to which people get things wrong, they need to confess to God and he is quick to forgive the truly repentant. One must believe in his Messiah, also.

Satan’s rule is the problem. The chain of command is supposed to be: God, man, woman, snake. The problem of the snake ruling the woman who is obeyed by the man has been the problem since the beginning. We need to recognize that creation is hard-wired to go as God has ordered.

We are not God: we are creation. We need to be told what to do. Let’s obey the one and only true God, the God of Abraham, Isaach and Jacob. Period.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9
gender foreigner September 19, 2011 at 20:38

Dear Laura Grace Robins September 19, 2011 at 17:08:

Amen, sister.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
gender foreigner September 19, 2011 at 20:49

As God designed things, men and women werre to have complementary roles, the proverbial hand and the glove. But what feminists (most women) have done, is make women the predatory enemy of men, boys and male babies.

As such, the only way a man can get ahead is not by working for or with women, but rather against them. Feminists (most women) have made the essential way for males to make it in society by way of causing injury variously against their predatory gender foe.

Such feminists (most women) asked for it, and, increasingly, they’re getting what they’ve bargained for.

As things stand, I see my hope for scratching something out in the dying days of my life only in the destruction of women, categorically. Such should not be the case but such must be hit home to women that they’ve designed the gender relations that way.

They’re simply getting something of what they justly deserve.

I still recognize that there are civilized women, and again, they tend to contribute to this website (such as Laura Grace Robins–thank you for being who you are–from my heart of hearts).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7
Aharon September 19, 2011 at 21:19

Gender Foreigner,

Wonderful to see you here. I can’t say that I agree (or understand) all that you wrote to me yet your good intentions are known. As much as I condemn those Jewish feminist who have help spread the poison of feminism (well beyond their percentage of total women in society) so too are those responsible for choosing to follow their teachings and spreading the poison yet further.

“I was just following orders” and “I didn’t know better” are not valid excuses for immoral behavior whether coming from a sheeple or a wolf.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 10
AlphA September 20, 2011 at 00:09

Speaking of women antagonizing men, I saw this gem of an episode play out yesterday in the mall:

1. Man is chilling with his buddies.

2. Woman (presumably wife/girlfriend) walks up to him and starts shouting at him. Something about finding out that he lost his job and didn’t tell her.

3. Man turns to her, grabs her arm, and takes her off to the side, where he firmly but QUIETLY tells her to keep it down.

4. Woman shakes off his grip, and continues to holler about how she’s tired of having to worry about money all the time. Man looks around to see how much damage control is needed. Woman says something about how this isn’t what she deserves.

5. Man loses his cool, and, with a deadly stare, says that he’s not “a fucking ATM”. Something about how this isn’t all about her. Tells her to shut her mouth, “no need to spread it around”.

6. Woman slaps him, saying “Don’t you dare tell me what to do, you’re not my father”.

7. Without hesitating, man “bitch-slaps” her right back, adding “Let that be the first and last time you EVER lay a hand on my face again”.

8. Woman stands there like a fish, shocked expression and all. After all, she’s a lady, isn’t she?

9. Heart full of pride, I walk up to him, and offer to buy him a fucking drink.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 1
FFS September 20, 2011 at 00:16

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 33
Andy September 20, 2011 at 03:16

On topic?

Lily Allen on retirement from music: “I’m happiest in the kitchen”

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/showbiz/news/a339743/lily-allen-on-retirement-from-music-im-happiest-in-the-kitchen.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
DCM September 20, 2011 at 03:44

“AlphA September 20, 2011 at 00:09″

Perfect description of female shaming behavior. Staging a public scene to make a man the center of attention for his supposed fuckups. The only real emotion the female experiences is when the man responds appropriately, as in this narrative; otherwise it’s all an act by her.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
Rod September 20, 2011 at 04:44

This is a great article.
Thank you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Rumour September 20, 2011 at 05:56

@oddsock

“Most men I would chat with or ask questions simply shut off the conversation or had, or at least claimed, to have no idea of what I was talking about.”

Man-ness (along with rational thought) has been bred / schooled out of most males. We have become, by and large, bitches with deep voices.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Luke September 20, 2011 at 07:12

“Rebel September 19, 2011 at 09:02

From where I stand, it appears that 99% of all feminist problems are generated by Anglo Saxon women.”

It appears as though Mr. Rebel is seriously behind in the homework department. Feminism is a disease invented by Gloria Steinum, Bella Abzug and Betty Friedan . All three of these women, plus countless others who’s names are not that difficult to find on the Web – are jewesses. Not Anglo-Saxon women, Mr. Rebel. You’re standing in the wrong spot, friend. Take another, deeper look into this feminist disease.

Feminism was created in order to destroy traditional, White European, Anglo-Saxon-Celtic and Germanic families and to pit white women against white men in the sort of unnatural competitive gender warfare that the author of this great article describes. Feminism was also intended to be a devious way to reduce the White birthrate, which assists the jews in speeding along the genocide of the White European race, by brainwashing primarily White females into thinking careers were more important than motherhood, child-rearing and having a successful marriage to a White man – who was the traditional breadwinner.

Granted, there are many high profile, so-called ‘Anglo-Saxon’ women who have been brainwashed so fervently with the mental illness of feminism that they are often mis-recognized by the uninformed as it’s primary promoters – but this is a mistake. These women are merely suffering from the most toxic forms of a disease which they caught from it’s original inventors. The media owners, who we all know are not White, deliberately like to put these White female feminists in the forefront so as to conceal the ethnic role in who is really behind feminism.

By Deception, Thou Shall Make War.

Notice too, that feminism has primarily affected White European females – who were the targeted demographic group from the beginning. Minorities of almost every flavor, except for Asians – already have very weak family structures and suffer from countless forms of dysfunctionality. Hence, it was the White American family who represented the target that the Marxists felt the greatest need to attack, undermine, and destroy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 5
Firepower September 20, 2011 at 08:49

Aharon

I condemn those … those responsible for choosing to follow their teachings and spreading the poison yet further.

Um, instead of condemning the followers, care to explain why 1.5% of the population makes up 100% of radical feminists LEADERS.

From your “unique” perspective…of course.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5
Ryu September 20, 2011 at 09:38

Firepower,

Easy tiger!

You can’t judge an entire race of people by the behavior of a few. After all, if the SPLC, ADL, JDL are all run by jews, how can Aharon help it? And if feminism and communism were started by jews, the same goes. And if Hollywood is run by jews, the same.

You have to go thru, person by person, all 40 million of them, and judge each by his merits. Anything else and you are a anti-Semite and a racist!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 5
Firepower September 20, 2011 at 10:09

Ryu, I humbly apologize
to aharon and
you

For making Aharon avoid answering my question
twice

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
maxsnafu September 20, 2011 at 11:47

@Aharon: You’re quite right. Jews LOVE Blacks. Give a hammer to a White man and he will build civilizations. Give the hammer to the yellows and they will build more hammers. Give the hammer to the browns (Arabs/Latinos) and they will beat their wives with it. Give the hammer the blacks and they will kill white people with it. Give the hammer to the Jews and they will give the hammer to the blacks.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6
Traveller September 20, 2011 at 12:03

“Show me where people are making jokes about killing whites”

Any black rapper on Youtube (and outside).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
universe September 20, 2011 at 12:59

It isn’t particularly gratifying for me to revel in how some men, driven up against a wall inside a feminist imposed ‘legal’ cage, may lash out against ordinary, perhaps, innocent women.
It may be somewhat difficult to evidentially prove that willful statute encroachment and social engineering feminism has also endangered the common woman, especially if no one is actually looking for it, but at first glance this seems probable given the social pogrom against men and boys and the state’s re-inforcement of it all.
The spending billions of more tax dollars on whether feminism does injure the common non-feminist female would just be one more insult to our culture. Publicly investigating and publicizing the claims of feminism would be my starting point of choice and jail time would not be enough. Forcing those fraudsters who made a buck and a pension from the promotion of feminism to hand back their profits would be appropriate.
A common men’s movement wouldn’t be necessary had feminism not been engineered into the consciousness of the citizens of N.America. And men’s issues do need to be articulated, and not only to address the concerns of common men that resulted from feminism but to counter decades of unproven feminist claims about and against men.
Blogs, such as this one, are a starting point for men’s issues.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Reece September 20, 2011 at 13:09

Aharon said:

It really is incredible how terrified and paranoid the anti-Jews are here about all Jews based on the behavior of some spoiled Jewish born self-righteous bitches

I’m glad you used “anti-Jew” rather than “anti-Semite” otherwise I would of had to remind you that Jews are not Arabs. The Arab is a Semite, and nobody said anything about Arabs. Still, I think any white that sounds “anti-Jew” has probably read something like this:

“Keep bashing the dead White males, and the live ones, and the females, too, until the social construct known as the White race is destroyed. Not deconstructed, but destroyed.” — Noel Ignatiev, Jewish MassArt professor and editor of Race Traitor magazine (Washington Times, September 4, 2002)

“The White race is the cancer of human history.” — Susan Sontag (much-celebrated Jewish “intellectual,” whose recent passing was lamented loudly in Jewish circles)

If you replaced the word “White” with “Jew” in either of those quotes above, and the author was white would you consider him to be “Anti-Jew”? If so, do you consider the Jewish authors above to be “anti-White”? Do you consider that it is fair people like this are funded by white taxpayers and avoid widespread and serious condemnation?

You may have read offensive comments by Whites about Jews on the internet but it’s unlikely that those Whites are funded by Jew taxpayers (oxymoron?). It is also unlikely that they would avoid widespread and serious condemnation by both Jews and Whites. It is also unlikely that they are influencing government policy or having any impact on the everyday lives of Jews, worldwide.

You may be wondering if I’m anti-Jew? The answer depends on whether the Jew in question is anti-White. This attitude is often referred to as self-preservation.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4
gender foreigner September 20, 2011 at 17:54

Dear Aharon September 19, 2011 at 21:19:

Amen, brother, especially about the excuse re the wolves and the sheep.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
bspiken September 20, 2011 at 18:20

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 18
gender foreigner September 20, 2011 at 18:31

As far as recognizing that there are quite a few self-identifying Jewish women who are rabid feminists, Aharon recognizes such. We cannot condemn a whole race or range of races (there is wide racial difference among, “Jews” and such differences arise from mixing with Gentiles) because of the awful dispositions of many of its members. Remember, that many Gentile women are rabid feminists (just go to any women’s government school–I’m an expert here–or air force, church, etc.).

Remember, that it was from the Hebrews that arose King David, a man after his very own heart. There are sinners and there are saints. As Gentiles, Hebrews have both and those IDed variously as Jews are really Hebrew/Gentile in their racial makeup. As such, we Gentiles must acknowledge the evil within our own races. I do and such does not exclude recognition among Hebrews as all else.

Aharon is clearly onside as per the feminist issue. Let’s keep that engraved-in-stone face front and centre. We need the Aharons of the world as he needs other MRAs.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10
gender foreigner September 20, 2011 at 18:37

P.S.:

Notice that Aharon has not, “Gentile-baited” in any way even though he recognizes that there are utterly despicable Gentile feminists, both female and male. Notice also that there are Hebrfew MRAs who are onside as per the feminist problem and they admit the sins of Hebrews as well as those of Gentiles (as did the prophets–many Hebres there).

And noticed that God sent his corrective prophets mostly to Hebrews and then mostly to Gentiles.

Enough said. To say more most likely would result in beating a dead horse, so to speak.

I’m with my Hebrew and Gentile MRA brothers (and sisters–let’s keep those in mind, also) as I know many others are, also.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10
Ostrogodo September 20, 2011 at 19:16

I do not accept to be called a “gentile”— this term is wholly generic, without any character, and akin to calling others “the peoples”, or “those people”. To be called a “gentile” is to fall into the Jew-Gentile dynamic which says that only one people deserves a name- and the others are, well “those others”, those that are not distinct or civilized enough to be named by the names they choose for themselves.

.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Vortac September 21, 2011 at 00:35

“Equal protection of government.”

You mean “from government”, right? (we are all really sovereigns originally, capable of governing ourselves – the government was originally meant to be a simple and relatively powerless tool for everyone’s benefit and to assist us, not to control us or do our governing)

Aren’t governments nowadays just corporations with the pretense of taking care of people, when the real agenda is enslave and control them (with their consent, too)?

If this goes on far enough, soon even the ‘freeman on the land’ stuff won’t help, and it doesn’t matter if you consent or contract with the ‘authorities’ to be governed by them – they will just ‘do it’, regardless of law OR the legal system. I think if everyone knew what ‘person’ means, what ‘to apply’ really means, what they actually create when they sign any ‘form’, how no one would really need driver’s license to travel by car, all this could be stopped and the real evildoers could be lawfully brought to justice – not the mock justice we have these days, but real, actual, lawful justice.

Btw, constitution didn’t give anyone any rights, and can’t really guarantee them either – at most, it merely explains them, and it’s purpose is mainly to LIMIT the government’s powers so it cannot do unjust things. Constitutions are not about the people, but about the governments – so the constitutions could benefit the people (and only this way they are about the people).

I mean, the reason, purpose and target of everything that is said in a constitution is to limit the government, not to grant people rights (manifestation of their inalienable rights is a side effect of limiting the government – a desired one).

If people weren’t duped the way they were, we wouldn’t be in this mess.. people got lazy, they didn’t care what was going on as long as they had their ‘personal’ luxuries and comforts – they didn’t care what the ‘evil, powerful people’ were scheming and doing… until it was too late. And many people still don’t know or care about any of this – they simply trust that ‘the system is just’, and so on (until they suffer from the unjust nature of the system ‘personally’).

Alas, I do not think there is a way to inform the majority of the people about all this. Not even the most aware individuals know about all aspects of these things. The ‘freemen’ do not know about men’s rights stuff very well, and vice versa. And this goes on and on to so many different aspects of life and systems and power structures, that it’s almost impossible to find someone who knows the truth about all of them. Even if you think about ‘the spiritual path’, I can tell you that spiritual leaders are as clueless as anyone else. Tolle Eckhart, for example (very respected Zen-experiencer and writer and lecturer) – as calm an as humorous he seems, has said things like that women were treated very badly in the past, and how horrible it all was, how they were sold like cattle etc.. among many other clueless comments he has expressed. So, although he certainly knows what Zen is and has experienced it, written about it a lot etc – he remains absolutely clueless on men’s rights, just to give an example.

It’s going to be a rough ride because of the lack of knowledge and wisdom – no one seems to see or know the ‘big picture’, only one fragment of the whole, no matter who you turn to. Oh, some people might know two fragments.. but usually never all that many.

Still, I suppose we must keep trying .. I just wish that instead of a “MRA Site”, “Freeman site”, etc.. there could be an “All knowledge-site” – would give more clear and full picture, while also clarifying the reasons and underlying causes for each fragment clearly. But I don’t really see that happening, especially with people making so many mistakes, disagreeing so much with each other, endlessly fighting and debating with each other about every little thing until no one knows which side is correct, etc.

So we can only continue this information spreading, fragment by fragment, and hope that some people somewhere are intelligent, wise and experienced enough to put it all together.

Sorry for the long rambling, but I had to say it sooner or later.

- Vortac

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Reece September 21, 2011 at 02:01

Some good points, Vortac.

Tolle Eckhart, for example (very respected Zen-experiencer and writer and lecturer) – as calm an as humorous he seems, has said things like that women were treated very badly in the past, and how horrible it all was, how they were sold like cattle etc..

He’s a bit vague on when and where this actually happened. This sort of thing has been absent from Western civilization for hundreds of years, well before feminism reared its ugly head. Also, what he fails to consider is where did these women come from? Were they plucked from a tree? Or did they come from some village where the men were overwhelmed and probably had their throats cut while their women and children were carried away. Yes, their captors treated the women like cattle, but not the men that loved them and fought to the death to protect them.

Vortac said:
Still, I suppose we must keep trying .. I just wish that instead of a “MRA Site”, “Freeman site”, etc.. there could be an “All knowledge-site” – would give more clear and full picture, while also clarifying the reasons and underlying causes for each fragment clearly.

This is where you’re wrong. The picture could not be clearer. The problem is usury. Without the vast fortunes that usury provides our enemies they would be powerless. They would have to quietly and impotently hate us from distant lands as they look on our great civilization with envious eyes.

Yes, our enemies endlessly implore us to “Love thy neighbour”, whilst conveniently forgetting about, “Thou shalt not hate”, and “Thou shalt not covet”. Of course, “Love thy neighbour”, does not mean love everyone. It means be kind to those that share your values.

PS Do You Know Where Money Comes From?

What Is A Perfect Economy?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: