Female Lawmakers Introducing Bills Against Vasectomies, Viagra

by W.F. Price on March 12, 2012

A number of female lawmakers, angered by limits on abortion and opposition to free birth control, are fighting back by introducing bills to curtail men’s access to vasectomies, viagra and other medications and procedures related to men’s sexual function and fertility.

The bills aren’t serious, of course, but the money these women are being paid to be genuine legislators (rather than comedians) is quite real.

So far, a female legislator in Georgia has stated that she intends to introduce a vasectomy-restricting bill in retaliation for Republicans opposing birth control subsidies, nine more lawmaker women in Missouri have done the same, and one female legislator in Ohio has introduced a bill limiting access to viagra. All are Democrats.

The viagra bill strikes me as particularly incongruous. Sexual function and abortion may be tangentially related, but they are pretty clearly different issues. Given that viagra influences whether or not the sex act is possible, and that it is men who must perform sex and women who attract sex, limiting viagra as a form of retaliation might make sense if men had passed laws against cosmetic enhancement procedures and brazilian waxing outfits and the like, but not abortion.

The vasectomy-restricting bills hit a little closer to the mark, but they, too, fail the test. For one thing, I don’t think anyone anywhere pays for men’s vasectomies besides the men who elect to have them themselves, so limiting vasectomies in retaliation for men not giving women free birth control simply exposes the entitlement mentality. Additionally, vasectomies are in fact limited in practice. Many surgeons require notification of the spouse before performing the procedure. I strongly suspect this is because the physician may be liable under tort law in a number of states.

All this amounts to is political showmanship, but it does give us a hint of what’s to come in a more gender-equal political environment: a much, much heavier emphasis on women’s sexual and reproductive issues in legislatures, which is ironic, because women have been chanting slogans about keeping laws off their bodies for decades now. Rather than less focus on legislating sexuality, it appears that we will have substantially more.

As for abortion, its opponents don’t see it as a form of birth control, but rather murder. They are not trying to control women’s sexuality, but instead protect what they see as innocent human beings. Reasonable people may disagree as to whether their interpretation of when human life begins is correct or not, but as far as they see the issue sexual freedom is essentially irrelevant once human life enters the equation. Therefore, equating vasectomies and viagra to abortion is not going to change anyone’s mind, and will simply inflame the debate and waste time and taxpayer money in legislatures.

{ 126 comments… read them below or add one }

tspoon March 12, 2012 at 01:55

wow. I’m gob-smacked by the though of needing someone else’s permission to get a vasectomy. That one thing, encapsulates almost entirely the position of males in society.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 84 Thumb down 3
evilwhitemalempire March 12, 2012 at 01:58

this little gem i like the most

“Fewer unwanted pregnancies result in fewer children living in poverty and a lower prison population and this is job killing in a time when social workers, police officers, and prison guards need the employment to feed their families. . . ”

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2012/03/women_across_the_country_are_s.html

that’s like a cigarette company openly bragging that it’s business is good business for undertakers!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 3
evilwhitemalempire March 12, 2012 at 02:12

I’m gob-smacked by the thought of needing someone else’s permission to get a vasectomy.
**************************

welcome to the pussy cartel

did you think they (the state) would just stand still and let men defeat the honey trap they set for us?

if the mouse knows how to get the cheese off without tripping the spring then eventually they’ll just build a better mouse trap

this move is absolute proof that fems on the left are every bit as aware that their bread and butter depends on the pussy cartel as those on the right

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 77 Thumb down 3
evilwhitemalempire March 12, 2012 at 02:17

and let’s not forget that they are, deliberately and unfairly, comparing vasectomy to abortion when in reality the true counterpart to vasectomy is tube ligation

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 70 Thumb down 3
AfOR March 12, 2012 at 03:03

Asking a wimminz how many abortions she has had is rather like asking them how many cocks they have had…

They like and low-ball it…

For example I had been told that my false rape accusing ex had had two abortions, but when our separation hit the courts and I got to see her medical notes it turned out to be not two (which is bad enough) but NINE.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 70 Thumb down 5
AfOR March 12, 2012 at 03:08
evilwhitemalempire March 12, 2012 at 03:09

heh, also where is the “i am female i make babies, all you men do is make war” schlock i heard all my life growing up?

but (now that it’s convenient) they decide we are no longer just drone bee’s contributing nothing more than DNA to a child? sperm is now a living thing that has value just like an egg?

o.k. then we get paper abortions

also this whole thing is about as satirical as the scum manifesto

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 3
anonxcf March 12, 2012 at 04:07

While of course both are meant to be, uh, satirical, and I find neither funny…

1)- The vasectomy joke-laws are the closest that they can get to abortion. If you set out to try to make a mirror law based on the idea that laws restricting abortion are sexist (I’m pro-choice, and even tend to agree with this core assessment), then vasectomy is about the closest you can get. Still stupid, of course, but there’s no direct mirror as men don’t get pregnant.

2)- The viagra laws are just more penis envy :P

Seriously- listen to feminists sometimes, even “mainstream” ones, as they shit on anything targeted to fix men’s medical issues, or men’s cosmetic issues. The amount of derision aimed at things that fix baldness is ludicrous, with the money always being compared to “curing cancer”- ludicrous for like ten reasons, but the one I’ll point out is that no one calls out the hojillions of cosmetics companies aimed at female beautification. But the raw misandry of these women shows up every time something is aimed at baldness, a male specific beauty treatment.

The supposed logic of attacking the “unnecessary” of baldness doesn’t even apply when you start to hit erection-disfunction treatments, Viagra being the most common target. So many jokes and so much hatred aimed at men who just want to be normal. It would simply never be tolerated if these bastards were mocking the sensitive-skin shaving stuff aimed at black folk, but something aimed at men with ED is totally ok to bash. After, all, those guys are impotent- it’s not like they’re people!

Raw misandry is what anything about Viagra is. Hell, if some liberals, and all feminists, even say the word Viagra, you know that there’s about to be some unrecognized, possibly ageist, and definitely sexist shit spewing- the only questions are, how much, and for how long.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 4
Steve_85 March 12, 2012 at 04:19

@AfOR
Is it possible that they’ve got this backwards? Is i possible that perhaps she watches soaps BECAUSE she is a shrew?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
AfOR March 12, 2012 at 04:31

@ Steve_85

No Arguments here… in my PoF dating I have several “killer” questions / check boxes, if the answers to any are a “yes” then the wimminz in question is rendered unfuckable as far as I am concerned.

e.g. Hoopy earrings? unfuckable

but “Watches soaps?” is another one, so it’s a bit of a chicken and egg to a vegan question, which comes first doesn’t matter, it is a “Danger Will Robinson!”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3
Durga March 12, 2012 at 04:41

This blog is american or british?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 14
djc March 12, 2012 at 04:56

This is why you don’t let women run anything. They’re like children.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 6
Buck Swamp March 12, 2012 at 05:06

There is an important lesson in all this. Women legislators are still women. Most of them do not and cannot fully represent the best interests of their male constituents. It is against their fundamental nature as women.

Male voters should always remember this at election time.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 85 Thumb down 4
criolle johnny March 12, 2012 at 05:45

Would someone publish a list of states which require a spouse to obtain vasectomy?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1
criolle johnny March 12, 2012 at 05:50

The obvious lesson to be learned from this is that the female legislators are not thinking. They are feeling.
Their emotions are dominating their actions.
This is not legislation. This is a tantrum. This is exactly what every “MCP” warned against when the 19th Amendment was proposed.
Amazing how your opponents give you ammunition.
Pardon me while I snicker behind my hand.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 64 Thumb down 2
td9red March 12, 2012 at 06:00

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 67
Eric Wolf March 12, 2012 at 06:15

I never knew that a man required spousal notification to get a vasectomy. That would be a great issue to test the political waters. After all, they are our bodies and should be our choice. Right guys?

As far as state vasectomy subsidizing, I do believe many states will fund vasectomies for chronically delinquent fathers. I used to work with a guy who had three children by three different women by the time he was 25, and he didn’t support any of them. While i can see the ideological objections to funding that sort of thing, it practical in the “ounce of prevention vs pound of cure” sense for the small percentage of guys who can barely hold a job pumping gas or serving fast food but pump out a dozen kids with no regard for who has to pick up the tab for their lifestyle.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2
Art Vandelay March 12, 2012 at 07:00

Well if the US healthcare system wasn’t so broken it should be a matter between the insurer and the insured. If you want something covered, pay a higher premium.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Anonymous age 69 March 12, 2012 at 07:02

>>criolle johnny March 12, 2012 at 05:45

>>Would someone publish a list of states which require a spouse to obtain vasectomy?

I never had the impression it was a state requirement. I think it is individual doctors trying to protect themselves against lawsuits by the man’s owner, that is, his wife, slave-owner. It may vary, of course, based on court rulings in a different state, but no one has ever said the state law requires this permission.

Your body, your choice. Unless you are a man.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 2
scatmaster March 12, 2012 at 07:06

Eric Wolf :

I never knew that a man required spousal notification to get a vasectomy. That would be a great issue to test the political waters. After all, they are our bodies and should be our choice. Right guys?

You must be new here and yes I am been facetious.

Eighteen years ago I needed my wifes permission to get snipped.
The legislation for that was brought in by a….. wait for it……

a socialist regime.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 0
L March 12, 2012 at 07:21

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 113
Duke March 12, 2012 at 07:41

The hypocrisy of feminists is exposed when they use the term pro-choice.What they mean by that is that women should have the right to opt out of parenthood legally through abortion,adoption,or abandonment of a child they don’t.Of course they do not want men having the same right to choose.They find it perfectly acceptable for the government to force men but not women to be parents against their will even though a man did not cause a pregnancy anymore than a woman did.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 61 Thumb down 1
American March 12, 2012 at 07:42

The Southern Poverty law center will soon label vascectomies as “Hate speech”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 63 Thumb down 1
American March 12, 2012 at 07:48

It seems the “Southern Povert Law Center” has been co-opted to the degree it no longer protects all minorities. It seems the “White sexual minority issues” Now easilly trump the issues of a black man being falselly accused of rape.
What does this mean for the future of some of these past worthy organisations, when they get coopted by the “white sexual minorities” and no longer stand for the basic rights of “any other minorities” that these organisations used to stand for 15 -20 years ago??

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 4
American March 12, 2012 at 07:53

I believe if one looked into the past of “The Southern Poverty law center”, they would see one of the main issues want the black man being falselly accused of rape.
Now, any organisation that sticks of for the black man being falselly accused of rape is a “Hate Group”.
I believe the Southern Poverty law Center has “perverted itself”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 5
American March 12, 2012 at 07:54

correction..
Want=was in above sentence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Somehow Somewhat March 12, 2012 at 07:55

WF Price wrote:

The bottom line of whether a fetus is a human being or not, depends on the feelings and choices of the woman. If you kick the woman, and she aborts, you may be charged with murder “of the unborn baby” even if you did no know she was pregnant, nor that the fetus was still in the age allowed for abortion. When she chooses to abort, the fetus is “a mass of cells” that are “trying to use her body without her permission”. The keyword here is choice. HERchoice.. The choices are extended even when the child is born (“post-partum abortion”)
http://fathersforlife.org/fv/infanticide.htm

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) prohibits anyone to disclose health information to a third party, unless provided for in the law. So, a man needs no permission from no-one to get vasectomy. A doctor who forces anyone to get permission from anybody, might be in violation of the federal law.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080128084643AAg5sLo
http://www.ippf.org/en/Resources/Guides-toolkits/Who+can+have+a+vasectomy.htm


This is a germ.
A man in manosphere said he only votes for females… so that he can enjoy the show while the females are bringing down the system fastest!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
American March 12, 2012 at 07:59

Scatmaster, Are you kidding me, a man needs his wifes permission to get a vascectomy…THAT IS PERVERSE!!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 3
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 08:35

Scatmaster, Are you kidding me, a man needs his wifes permission to get a vascectomy…THAT IS PERVERSE!!

That’s not accurate, anywhere in North America.

The medical establishment has guidelines. Men getting a vasectomy and women getting tubal ligations are supposed to be counseled by the physician. These things are often irreversible, even with surgery. Ideally, the counselling includes a frank discussion of the possibility of reversal (good but by no means certain) and complications (rarely are there complications to these procedures, but they do happen sometimes).

There are no laws that mandate the wife’s permission is needed, though permission of the dude or chick going to get the operation is required, for obvious reasons. Moreover, the guidelines for counseling patients are set forth by the Medical Association, not written into legislation.

I like to criticise the man-hatred that is endemic in North America too, but there’s plenty to talk about without making shit up.

Regards, Boxer

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 25 Thumb down 11
James March 12, 2012 at 08:41

More man hatred coming from American women.

BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 2
James March 12, 2012 at 08:43

Quote from L:

“So you’re okay with MALE legislators using taxpayer money to introduce appalling and ridiculous bills against women, but women can’t combat them with their own (not real) bills? Are you fucking serious? The bills these MEN have introduce restrict and steal women’s rights, but no, that’s okay so long as women are being put down, not men.

This whole monolithic attitude you all possess is really pathetic.”

More man hatred from you American women. YOU are pathetic, and YOU need serious help to get over your deep seated hatred for men.

Have fun growing old alone with your 10 cats.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 55 Thumb down 2
keyster March 12, 2012 at 08:44

“The bills these MEN have introduce restrict and steal women’s rights, but no, that’s okay so long as women are being put down, not men.”

Name one bill that MEN have introduced that “restrict and steals women’s rights”.

That’s the leftist-”War on Women” kool-aid talking right there. No facts, just rhetorical sound bites. It’s the hope that maybe if you can repeat “war on women” enough in the media, it will have an affect on people who’re too lazy and apathetic to bother following up things like the Constitution’s stance on seperation of church and state, equality and state’s rights.

It’s the Democrat playbook. Put the issues in simple, easy sound bites and keep them on a perpetual loop. That’s how stupid they think we are.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 1
Mikediver March 12, 2012 at 08:51

At the age of 45 I went to my doctor to get a vasectomy. I had 6 children, and my wife had died. The point of the vasectomy at that point was that after the last child my wife had had a tubal ligation. Our agreement was if the last one was C-section she would have a tubal ligation, if not I would get the snip. Now I was reentering the world of dating and did not want more children. I was raising the last 4 on my own.

The doctor refused unless I got into a committed relationship (note not necessarily married) and the woman gave me permission to get one. His reasoning was that I could get involved with a younger woman that wanted kids. I was pretty pissed off that it was not “my body, my choice.” Men have no reproductive rights in this country. The law this female legislator is sponsoring is really redundent to the defacto statusof medicine today.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 77 Thumb down 2
Uncle Elmer March 12, 2012 at 08:51

I covered this in ForbesBeat earlier this week.

Turning The Table On Birth Control: Sen. Introduces Bill For Erectile Dysfunction Drugs

http://www.forbes.com/sites/meghancasserly/2012/03/05/birth-control-debate-ohio-nina-turner-erectile-dysfunction-drugs/

elmer 5 days ago

The continued War on Men. Feminist humor is so funny. Let’s hope the good senator from Cleveland changes the discourse to funnel more money into her district. It’s only fair after all, because men are assholes, and I’m quoting recent ForbesWoman-Good Men Project essays so please don’t delete my comment for being inappropriate.

For what it’s worth, I get my generic boner pills cheap from overseas.

Some other great reader commentary :

Heidi Noperi 6 days ago

YESS!!!! I have been waiting for this. No birth control for women, no need for Viagra for men. I love it.

Elmer replies :

elmer 5 days ago

“Heidi” has a climax in response to vindictive news regarding men.

Peter J Reilly, Contributor 6 days ago

I’m in favor of the legislation.

Elmer replies :

elmer 5 days ago

“Peter” prefers a limp member to empowerment of men, and is excited to hear of legislation depriving men of the choice to realize their true potential.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 1
Travis March 12, 2012 at 08:59

@Keyster,
I’ve been following the Spearhead for quite a while now, and I really enjoy reading your comments. In fact, I can’t recall reading anything you’ve posted that I didn’t strongly agree with. Do you by any chance have a blog or website you could post a link to? If not, it’s a damn shame, and you should consider it….

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Travis March 12, 2012 at 09:17

@L,
Can you please tell me how it became a woman’s “right” to have her birth control paid for by my insurance company? I seem to recall a right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”, but I must have missed the part about where you have a right to have your sexual choices subsidized by someone else. I don’t think anyone is saying you shouldn’t be able to use birth control (in fact, I have a feeling most of the guys here would strongly prefer it…) What they ARE saying is that they don’t think they should have to pay for it. But just for arguments sake, if you DO happen to find the provision in the Bill of Rights regarding subsidizing contraception for women, please get back to me. I’d hate to think I was misinformed. Otherwise, please knock off the “war on women” and “oppression of women’s rights” rhetoric. It just makes you look stupid…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 1
nate w March 12, 2012 at 09:40

Too late, my vasectomy is best $900 I’ve ever spent. Can’t think of a higher ROI investment. Based on what I’m paying right now in child support each sperm could cost me $325,000. There is also an 85% chance that any kids I have will be taken from me in court due to my gender being the “wrong” one for raising kids.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer March 12, 2012 at 09:42

The real craziness in the last few weeks has been the willingness of white feminist females to join with sisters-of-color to 1) fund birth control for white women, and 2) promote a population explosion among the black lower class.

There has been a lot of similar vitriol spewed at Minnesota’s Glenn Gorthman for having the courage to take a stand against incentivizing multi-child single-motherhood at the expense of responsible citizens who delay childbearing until they are financially capable.

When the empowerment “formula” runs its course there will nothing left of the host to feed the prey, and famine will sweep the land like a scythe.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 5
Rebel March 12, 2012 at 09:43

Remember IMBRA?

It began as a rumor. Then it became law.

Maybe it’s time for those who were thinking about an eventual vasectomy, to proceed with it without delay.

Once the law will be passed, you can kiss good-bye yet another freedom.

If you are seriously thinking about a vasectomy, maybe you should make up your mind and do it soon.

I would take this threat seriously…
My 2 cents…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0
Dubliner March 12, 2012 at 09:52

Mikediver, you could have found another physician willing to snip you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5
LastCrucible March 12, 2012 at 09:52

Getting a vasectomy has been and will be the smartest, most rewarding decision I’ve ever made. I just wish I’d gotten it BEFORE I had two children.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3
AAvictim March 12, 2012 at 09:59

I agree with you Rebel. Even though you may see this as jest, it can serve as an opening for it to be more serious later.

A lot of women are downright selfish that are pro-women’s rights. When I hear that pro-lifers are disgusting because it is my body my right I am appalled. Regardless of the stance that you take, the baby’s life is more important, or the woman’s choice of whether she wants to put that life into the world it is quite clear what the other side thinks and it is not sinister.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
keyster March 12, 2012 at 10:00

@Travis

Thanks.
My bag is Libertarian/Objectivism, men’s rights advocacy and Truth mongering via the uncensored New Media landscape. I don’t have time right now to manage a blog; in the meantime I find expression in short snippets in comments sections fulfilling, especially mainstream news sites…making blue pill culture heads implode.

If I do something it will be along the lines of online video production more than written word. In the New Media everyone is their own TV network…since feminism controls all the other ones.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4
keyster March 12, 2012 at 10:11

“If you are seriously thinking about a vasectomy, maybe you should make up your mind and do it soon.”

If you’re stupid enough in the first place to insert your erect penis in an arbitrary petrie dish, otherwise know as the vaginal canal, without a condom; than yes, you should get a vasectomy pronto.

Let those of us who’ve been infected with some form of VD from engaging a Slut, serve as a warning. Pregnancy (and false rape allegation) is not the only by-product of penile to vaginal contact.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 5
Charles Martel March 12, 2012 at 10:12

Boxer
I like to criticise the man-hatred that is endemic in North America too, but there’s plenty to talk about without making shit up.

Have you had a vasectomy? Legally required or not, it’s routine for the physician to inquire about the man’s marriage status and to require the wife’s approval before proceeding.

The medical profession knows which way the wind is blowing and do what they can to protect themselves against the legal shitstorm that can result from a unilateral vasectomy. Men have (virtually) no reproductive rights.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 44 Thumb down 5
Charles Martel March 12, 2012 at 10:13

Travis
@Keyster,
I’ve been following the Spearhead for quite a while now, and I really enjoy reading your comments.

Welcome back, Travis. Don’t let the few mad dogs around here get to you!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9
td9red March 12, 2012 at 10:39

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 54
djc March 12, 2012 at 10:50

I don’t need a vasectomy as I avoid all women as much as possible. And have no interest in even dating one again. And there’s not a damned thing they, or the law, can do about it. Yet!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 0
Rebel March 12, 2012 at 11:02

@Keyster
“If you’re stupid enough in the first place to insert your erect penis in an arbitrary petrie dish, otherwise know as the vaginal canal, without a condom; than yes, you should get a vasectomy pronto.”

I still gave you a “thumbs up”…
But…
I think you missed the point.

I did not advise all the men here to get a vasectomy: I said IF you have been thinking about it, then maybe you should do it now before it’s too late.
I would give the same advise to a man who HAS BEEN thinking seriously about expatriating: with new and stiffer laws in the making, expatting will become increasingly difficult: therefore, those who keep that idea in the back of their minds should better bring the thoughts forward and think about it real hard.

I understand that a man who puts his naked pecker into a bare vagina is making a bad mistake, but it does not mean that he has to be sentenced for life for making that stupid mistake.
I would like to suggest to you to have a bit more empathy for your fellow men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Tom936 March 12, 2012 at 11:06

A number of female lawmakers, angered by limits on abortion and opposition to free birth control, are fighting back by introducing bills to curtail men s access to vasectomies, viagra and other medications and procedures related to men s sexual function and fertility.

My first response this this got eaten.

“Fighting back”, they call it. As if they were responding to some aggression they never wanted. No matter how many times Feminists strike the first blow, they will always call the third blow “fighting back”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 1
Tom936 March 12, 2012 at 11:23

“Fighting back”, they all it.

And as usual, what Feminists say they are “angered by” and “fighting back” against is largely a figment of their imagination. The few facts that it draws on are wildly irrelevant.

Religious hospitals didn’t want to be forced to offer abortion and contraception? Must be men oppressing women! The religious right is made up of as many women as men, but that fact doesn’t get in Feminists’ way.

Because anybody who doesn’t like Obamacare can only want one thing: to oppress women. (Is this eating links? I linked to AVFM’s Obamacare article and it wouldn’t post)

Women didn’t get all the freebies they wanted, or that Feminists wanted for them? Must be all men oppressing women! Feminists want to “fight back” by targeting literally every man in the state. NAWALT is a byword here, but Feminists never heard of NAMALT.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1
Travis March 12, 2012 at 11:57

Thanks for the welcome back Charles. I really appreciate it. Although I never really left. Just figured it was easier to turn the other cheek and lay low for a bit. It was pretty obvious the guy was just trying to get under my skin for some reason, and I figured the best way to deal with it was to take your advice (pretty sure it was you…) and ignore him. But I’m not gonna’ write the whole site off just because of one bitter old man looking to pick a fight.
And to Keyster, thanks for the reply. Gotta’ admit I’m a little disappointed that there isn’t a place where I can read more of your stuff, but if you ever do decide to start an online video blog or something along those lines, please let us know. I’d definitely subscribe…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Paradoxotaur March 12, 2012 at 11:58

While some men no doubt benefit from Viagra and similar drugs, it’s main purpose is to validate aging, sagging, dessicated, ashen-skinned, pear-shaped wives. As the country-western song says:

“It’s hard, at night, to kiss the lips;
That chew my ass all day.”

Put hot, wanton young women in front of these guys and ask them if they’ll be needing that pill. As been pointed out over and over, it’s not that he can’t get it up, he just can’t get it up for a fat, bitchy old cow.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 2
keyster March 12, 2012 at 12:00

“The bill that the female legislators sought to mock, which adds the requirement that a woman undergo an intra-vaginal ultrasound restricts a woman’s right to abortion. Such requirement will greatly increase the cost of abortions and serve as an impediment to obtaining an abortion for those who were already having difficulty paying for the procedure. An impediment acts as a restriction.”

Intravaginal ultra sounds are beneficial to a woman’s preventive healthcare needs, as they can reveal a plethora of issues a woman might be having with her “lady plumbing”. I recommend you get one, (as long as I don’t have to pay for it).

Call your local PlannedParenthood and tell them you need an abortion, but that you can’t afford it; I’m sure they will accomodate you for a minimal fee, if not free. (Also, don’t forget to tell them you’re African-American, as they’ll move you right to the front of line poste haste, by Margaret Sanger’s original decree.)

Abortion is a State’s Rights issue, in this case Virginia. If you think the state mandated intravaginal ultra sounds are “restrictive”, then go to another state. These Congresswomen are doing nothing but agitating for the Woman Vote nationally, that Democrats MUST have to thrive.

Now is it a parasitic fleshy mass clinging to her uterine wall (as feminists would want an independent and empowered young would-be mother to believe) or is it your precious baby? Perhaps an ultra-sound will clear up the debate, for that individual woman to better decide.

Be aware while all this hysteria over “women’s health” is being stirred up for obfuscative political expediency – – we’re quickly closing in on a $20 Trillion debt and $5 a gallon gas. In other words, our way of life is about to change dramatically over the next 5 to 10 years as the federal government falls into insolvency. Contraceptives, abortions, women’s healthcare, Viagra and vasectomies will be considered a luxury reserved only for the Elites.

Gird your loins, both figuratively and literally.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 12:08

Dear Mikediver,

You wrote (about getting a vasectomy):

The doctor refused unless I got into a committed relationship (note not necessarily married) and the woman gave me permission to get one. His reasoning was that I could get involved with a younger woman that wanted kids.

As is the physician’s right. Many in North America have personal ethical and religious objections to sterilizations, abortions, euthanasia and birth control. That said, the guidelines in most cases encourage the physician to refer you to someone else who will do the procedure, provided it doesn’t break local law (as in the case with euthanasia, which is only legal in a minority of places).

I’d strongly recommend you going to Planned Parenthood if price or availability is an issue. They’ll do your vasectomy on a sliding scale (almost certainly much cheaper than you’ll pay out of pocket if you’re underinsured in America) and won’t give you any lame lectures about later regrets, other than the standard fact-based risks of irreversibility.

Regards, Boxer

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 10
Rebel March 12, 2012 at 12:09

“A number of female lawmakers, angered by limits on abortion and opposition to free birth control”

This is completely false.

I think everyone here will agree with me: when a feminist becomes pregnant, abortion must be forced upon her.
NO feminist must be allowed to reproduce. NONE!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 2
Uncle Elmer March 12, 2012 at 12:28

“Put hot, wanton young women in front of these guys and ask them if they’ll be needing that pill…”

Ow. I look like an actor from an Erectile Dysfunction or Prostate Helper commercial (the guy who has to take a leak every 10 minutes) who looks wistfully at his crop-haired “Centrum Silver” wife.

So I am amazed at my propensity for getting a throbbing erection nightly with my ForeignBride, as profiled in : A Man Wants a Wife, Not a Co-Worker

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/02/20/a-man-wants-a-wife-not-a-co-worker/

As for the cheap boner pills, once in awhile as a party gag.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 12:29

I think everyone here will agree with me: when a feminist becomes pregnant, abortion must be forced upon her. NO feminist must be allowed to reproduce. NONE!

I know you’re being semi-sarcastic, but this is an issue that ought to be addressed sooner than later. Obscene amounts of money are squandered on skanky single mothers who get pregnant merely for the monetary benefits. Many of these skanks (not all, but many) do not do anything much in the way of parenting, nor do they try to find gainful employment, but only milk the system.

It would be much more sensible to offer these women a stipend for abortion and sterilization, with incentive to go to school or get a freakin’ job. If the chick has some religious objection to getting the abortion, she could give the baby up to a normal, decent couple to raise as their own, as skanky single mamas were forced to do in the 1950s in North America.

The “right to life” people can squeal about abortion, but usually they’re the same people who support the death penalty and oppose health care and other such stuff, so their ethics are clearly one-sided. Either we have the right to a decent life, or we don’t have the right to life at all, and we should choose as a society one or the other. Single mothers are often horrible parents whose children grow up to be neglected and whose kids are not cared about after they are born by the people who oppose abortion. Getting rid of single moms will rid us of a lot of social problems which are becoming intolerable (or at least intolerably annoying). The way to do that is through more abortion and more adoption, and less welfare handouts to skanky nobodies.

Regards, Boxer

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 25 Thumb down 13
Sancho Setanza March 12, 2012 at 12:29

These bills are based off of a very female, tit for tat style of argument. They are hamfisted attempts at satire and they show a lack of understanding of the issue at hand. Abortion has nothing to do with medication for treating a bodily dysfunction or sterilization. The Republicans believe that the fetus is a human life and that abortion is murder. Or at least the people those politicians represent do. This isn’t about women’s freedom to them, it’s about preserving valuable human life.

Note, I am neither pro-life or pro-choice but instead a dispassionate observer. I see a complete lack of understanding in liberals of the religious right’s position.

“So you’re okay with MALE legislators using taxpayer money to introduce appalling and ridiculous bills against women, but women can’t combat them with their own (not real) bills? Are you fucking serious? The bills these MEN have introduce restrict and steal women’s rights, but no, that’s okay so long as women are being put down, not men.”

How silly. Do you actually thing it’s just men that want the anti-abortion bills to pass? The Ohio ultrasound bill was co-sponsored by Margaret Ann Ruhl, Margaret Conditt, Nan A. Baker, Anne Gonzales, Cheryl L. Grossman, Barbara R. Sears, Christina Hagan, Kristina Roegner. Janet Folger Porter, president of some lobby organization co-authored one of these bills too. Governer Mary Fallin has supported every anti-abortion bill that has come to her.

It’s not men trying to oppress women because they hate them. It’s the religious right fighting to impose their own values. Surprise, surprise, most of the republican politicians are men because most politicians are men. If you think otherwise you are a fool.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 3
Uncle Elmer March 12, 2012 at 12:31

“Minnesota’s Glenn Gorthman ”

Correction : Wisconsin’s Glenn Grothman

Must have confused it with “Duluth”. It’s hard to keep these issues straight.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
td9red March 12, 2012 at 12:41

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 40
Anonymous age 69 March 12, 2012 at 13:00

<>> Scatmaster, Are you kidding me, a man needs his wifes permission to get a vascectomy…THAT IS PERVERSE!!

>>That’s not accurate, anywhere in North America.

So, all the men who went to get a vasectomy and were told they needed their wife’s permission are lying?

I call Bravo Sierra on you. That is accurate and it is true. When my SIL got his vasectomy, he had to take a permission slip home to his wife to sign. She was p.o.’d too. She said, “You mean I can have my baby killed without my husband’s permission but I have to sign for him to get a vasectomy?”

On to the other topic, I love it when feminists do truly stupid things. This proposed bill was apparently a propaganda stunt. But feminists, in fact most women, are so lacking in empathy for men, they seem incapable of understanding it alienates men to talk that way.

The beginning of the end for feminism was the joking women of all classes did, in regards to Lorena and John. Based on what I saw in my area, I believe millions of men first learned what their “loving wives” truly thought of them, because of the jokes women made about John’s sexual mutilation. This was the fall of the feminist Humpty Dumpty, never to be fully put together again.

It was not long after that terminal mistake when I met my first marriage striker.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 3
Anonymous age 69 March 12, 2012 at 13:05

t9red, when the Muslims conquer this nation, all the rules will change forever.

This same cr*p happened in the last days of the Roman Empire as well. Women got the vote, and started passing all sorts of laws to their own fantasies, without regard to what men might think about those laws. Men who complained were mocked, ridiculed, and banished.

Part of those laws was liberal no-fault divorce and major property settlements for adulterous women. Sound familiar?

Men stopped marrying. So a Caesar passed a law that any man not married by age 35 had all his property confiscated. So, men started marrying foreign women.

They also stopped caring if their civilization was defended since it enslaved them for the benefit of women. And, so the invaders met no resistance.

I tell men on MRA boards to always keep something white in the house to hang out the window when the invaders come. Please carry on with your fantasies that women will always have the same rights they do now. Hee, hee.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 4
Pops March 12, 2012 at 13:12

This is a great failure in comparing apples to apples. Viagra could better be compared to post menopausal hormone therapy. Both aid in genital responsiveness and there are health benefits to the use of Viagra:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-424158/How-Viagra-help-improve-health.html

So when they restrict the use of such hormone therapy for non-health related reasons, women can make the Viagra comparison. But the comparison to abortion is clear apples and oranges.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 13:16

So, all the men who went to get a vasectomy and were told they needed their wife’s permission are lying?

I call Bravo Sierra on you.

Then you need to provide the specific legislation requiring a wife’s permission for a vasectomy to be performed. That’s a basic critical thinking skill that goes back to the old Roman codex, you know, the burden of proof is on him who asserts.

I won’t be holding my breath.

Of course there are individual physicians who choose not to perform sterilizations on people because of religious objections and such. That isn’t the issue.

Regards, Boxer

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 17
keyster March 12, 2012 at 13:26

“Note, I live in the great liberal empire state of New York where abortion will always be legal, safe, and likely paid for by insurance and public programs. I doubt anyone we dare propose a ultrasound requirement here.”

And only a projected $3.5 Billion deficit!
The great liberal golden state on the left coast is still way ahead.
Don’t worry, when you can’t afford to pay your public sector union workers, the Feds will just print more money and raise taxes–saving insurrection for another day.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
tspoon March 12, 2012 at 13:40

Wow, check those critical thinking skills on display for us. The direct quoted personal experience of several contributors is hereby proclaimed BS, because there is no law saying it has to happen. And until someone produces a law saying it had to happen, we have (critical) proof that it didn’t. BAM. you win boxer!, how could we have been so foolish!

Using this awesomely awesome critical thinking as provided for us here, I hereby pronounce that all crime does not exist. Because not only is there no law to say it has to happen, there are apparently laws saying it must not happen. That’s like, it must double-not-exist! Fantastic. Everythings fixed. (everybody) thaaanks boxer!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
Mikediver March 12, 2012 at 13:51

Dubliner March 12, 2012 at 09:52
Mikediver, you could have found another physician willing to snip you.

I did.

The point is, in the opinion of this (male) doctor, a fully grown man had to have the permission of a woman (any woman) to have the snip. It just shows what permiates the very atmosphere in this country. It is all about what women wants, and nothing about what any man wants.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 13:54

Dear “tspoon”

(LOL! I love all the “new names” that appear once a fella begins popping the ego bubble of this blog’s resident kook patrol).

Please see below.

Wow, check those critical thinking skills on display for us. The direct quoted personal experience of several contributors is hereby proclaimed BS, because there is no law saying it has to happen.

Since you’re a bit dull, I will quote one of the many blanket pronouncements here, yet again.

Scatmaster, Are you kidding me, a man needs his wifes permission to get a vascectomy…THAT IS PERVERSE!!

This is simply wrong.

To equate the fact that some doctors choose not to perform vasectomies without counseling the spouse with a prohibition is pretty much the same thing the kooky feminists do. The same doctors will often refuse to perform abortions, tie tubes, or prescribe birth control, so they ( like you and others here) get on a soapbox and whine about the end of health care.

The reality is that you are responsible for your own health, and that includes finding a physician who will perform elective procedures you want done. Bitching that some doctors are Catholics or charge too much doesn’t go over well with libertarian types who expect you (like your feminist sisters) to take care of yourselves, within reason.

The fact that a few guys here “knew a friend of a friend” who had trouble finding a physician to perform an elective operation sterilizing themselves doesn’t imply that it’s difficult to find a willing, competent surgeon to do the same. It’s just a lot of hot air.

If you’re finding sterilization too expensive, you can go to planned parenthood or, you know, maybe save some of that money you’re wasting on going to the nightclub and finding new sluts to fuck for the procedure. If your own personal family doctor won’t sterilize you, then you can ask him to refer you to atheist Dr. Smith, or go to Planned Parenthood.

Hearsay doesn’t imply that there’s some universal anti-male law which is persecuting you by denying you a sterilization procedure. This surgery is done hundreds of times per day, in every city of any size in North America.

Regards, Boxer

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 19
Anon March 12, 2012 at 13:58

Boxer, I too had a permission slip handed to me when I went to get a vasectomy (in West Los Angeles). I don’t think it had anything to do with personal ethics. The impression I had at the time was that he had to ask for it, but I’m inclined to agree with you that there is probably no statutory support for it.

However, my guess is that all the doctors are advised to do this to avoid lawsuits from the spouses. Why they would fear this, I don’t know, but perhaps there is some ridiculous case law on this.

But I have to ask, can you imagine the shit storm that would ensue if doctors were asking for a husband’s consent before performing similar procedures on a woman? They can’t even ask it for an abortion, and this is way beyond that.

So, contrary to what you say, there is anti-male bias here.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0
Mikediver March 12, 2012 at 14:10

To the person asserting that we are all full of Sh*t unless we can quote chapter and verse of the law specifying that a wife’s permission is required to get a vasectomy, remember the second set of books. Thomas Ball accurately stated it was not the law that was screwing him, it was the set of procedures and policies (the second set of books) that was doing the damage. The laws are passed nominally gender neutral, then the policies and procedures make them draconically gender biased. Does the domestic violence requirement to arrest the principle instigator say arrest the man? No, but that is what hapens.

Years ago I got a tax refund check in both my wife’s and my name; since we filed joint. When I tried to deposit the check in our joint account, with both our endorsements on the back, I was told by the female teller that she could not take the check unless my wife was present. I protested that it was going into our joint account. Her reply was that I could deposit it and then take out the proceeds, thereby defrauding my wife of her share of the money. I got pissed and demanded to talk with the manager (male). He reiterated that my wife had to be physically present to deposit any check made out to both of us. The next day my wife went in alone and deposited the check with no problem. The policies are designed to absolutely guarantee that no man can take advantage of any woman. But men are totally at the mercy of women, and no one gives a damn.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 0
Mikediver March 12, 2012 at 14:12

I would also like to state that the doctor had no religious objection to performing the vasectomy. If I had been married and my wife approved, he would have been glad to perform the procedure. Religion had nothing to do with it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel March 12, 2012 at 14:12

tspoon
Wow, check those critical thinking skills on display for us. The direct quoted personal experience of several contributors is hereby proclaimed BS, because there is no law saying it has to happen. And until someone produces a law saying it had to happen, we have (critical) proof that it didn’t. BAM. you win boxer!, how could we have been so foolish!

That’s our Boxer. If he’s right, he’s right….and if he’s wrong, he’s right!

He’s also Canadian, so naturally is an expert on all things American.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 8
Avenger March 12, 2012 at 14:48

The viagra bill strikes me as particularly incongruous

Erm, this has been going on for 10 years. They’ve either eliminated it entirely or restricted the amount of pills dispensed monthly under Medicare, what veterans get, and medical, medicaid etc won’t cover them at all when they did in the past.So these bills won’tmean anything. The causeo of ED is usually unknown but in somecases the cause is known like young men who have diabetes , MS, soldiers with some combat related disorder etc
Also, some Gen Y nerd pua’s who go limp in the presence of a female :)

And why don’t females just fill their prescriptions at Target for $4a month? These stores are selling it a loss to get you in to buy other junk while a regular pharmacy’s business is drugs.

“Many surgeons require notification of the spouse before performing the procedure”

So don’t say you’re married and have it done as an outpatient for $1k or less,it will only have to be done once and will be well worth the small cost compared to 216 child support payments over the next 18 years which may be 1/2 million.Or jail if you don’t have the money.

“As for abortion, its opponents don’t see it as a form of birth control, but rather murder”

It may be killing or homicide but it’s not murder because it’s legal. And besides, abortions using ru486 will become more common and then no one will really know who’s having an abortion since pills are easy to obtain.
When does human life begin? Well, I’d eliminate the 1st month because a woman’s body frequently just rejects the mass of cells growing or it grows into a tumour or something . Even the Catholic church that now says life begins at conception has changed over the years. But even today they seem to have a cut off point as to when life begins (the muslims do too) because if a female has a miscarriage before a certain stage of pregnancy it is forbidden to name the child or baptise it and you supposed to just dispose of it. You can see this with JFK’s wife,a Catholic where she had 2 miscarriages at different stages where one was just disposed of and the later one baptised and buried.
Life beginning at conception is just a church teaching and opinion anyway. The only things that have any weight are those that are ex cathedra and are infallible and which you must follow to be a Catholic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 7
td9red March 12, 2012 at 14:57

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 27
JervisMKII March 12, 2012 at 15:06

@td9red
You said, among other things: “Women go through so much crap b/c we bare children”…
Yes we know you all do… But how or why is that OUR (men) fault?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Rebel March 12, 2012 at 15:32

“we’re quickly closing in on a $20 Trillion debt and $5 a gallon gas. ”

Five dollars for a gallon of gas?

How come you pay so little for gas?

Up here, it’s sits at six bucks and rising.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Opus March 12, 2012 at 15:32

It is never a good idea to feed Trolls, but as it is quite a few hours since L posted her now hidden comment I hope it may be safe to do so.

She could have made what I think would be a rather good though certainly answerable point – which I will set out below – but instead she goes on a shaming/ad hominem attack against men with such phrases as “monolithic attitude” and “really pathetic” as well as an appeal to victimhood supported by profanity.

This is what she could and should have said: That Marriage (whether from a Christain or Evo-Psych point of view) has some purposes and perhaps the most important is the production of children. Thus, to Vasectomize unbeknownst to the Wife, so depriving her of a family or larger family, is a form of fraud.

Given an Open Goal to aim at – to use a Soccer analogy- she shoots way over the bar. One is always being told that – after all – women are the intellectual equals of men, but all I can see from L, is either a Fitness Test or Attention Whoring.

I know nothing of Vasectomies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
tspoon March 12, 2012 at 15:41

@ boxer, your quoted ‘blanket pronouncement’ was in fact nothing of the sort.

“Scatmaster, Are you kidding me, a man needs his wifes permission to get a vascectomy…THAT IS PERVERSE!!”

He says the principle of needing someone elses permission for elective surgery on himself is perverse. That’s quite a long way from claiming such to be the law of the land, which is the strawman you immediately constructed. However, in a pathetic effort to somehow salvage something from your position, you then claimed that he must disprove YOUR strawman. Critical thinking skills indeed.

Lets have a look at an actual blanket statement shall we?

“That’s not accurate, anywhere in North America.”

Also:

“the burden of proof is on him who asserts. ”

Go for it Boxer. We’ll wait here….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
tspoon March 12, 2012 at 15:45

While we’re at your other statements re: counselling in the event of certain surgeries, are at a wierd tangent to the entire issue of a grown male needing permission from their owner to elect to alter their reproductive system. But I’ll throw you a line. If you can show me just one example of a female in the US needing her husbands permission to get any reproductive type of surgery, or indeed any surgery at all, I’ll retract everything I’ve ever said, sell all my stuff, and become your follower.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 15:51

Hey Rebel:

Five dollars for a gallon of gas? How come you pay so little for gas? Up here, it’s sits at six bucks and rising.

Where you at? In the YYJ it’s at 1.40/l … about 5.29 CAD/US Gallon. I have seen it much higher than this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 9
Avenger March 12, 2012 at 16:05

“Ow. I look like an actor from an Erectile Dysfunction or Prostate Helper commercial (the guy who has to take a leak every 10 minutes) who looks wistfully at his crop-haired “Centrum Silver” wife”

I wonder why that don’t put hot 20 yo girls in those advertisements. Why would a guy want to buy the stuff if he has an old crop haired wife? Now, he’ll have to fuck her and won’t have an excuse anymore for not doing it lol

Actually ED was rarely found in the past among men under the 40′s and even then was usually secondary to some other disease.Today it’s common among Gen Y’s and their T levels are almost like a female’s and you’ll notice that behave like females.. Perhaps there was some truth to all of those studies showing too much estrogen in the chickens. Most of these boys were brought up by unwed mothers and what do females eat? Chicken and fish (containing a lot of mercury) Mercury poisoning and excessive estrogen in utero is probably what is causing the brain damage and feminine traits in Gen Y boys.
I’m a beefeater myself :)

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 16:08

Dear Opus:

to Vasectomize unbeknownst to the Wife, so depriving her of a family or larger family, is a form of fraud.

A long time ago, that argument would have been sound, but not today. To hold out what currently passes for “marriage” as a supposed contract that ensures a man contact with his biological or adoptive progeny is a fraud too. The whole concept these days is rife with contradictions, and it is caveat emptor all around, as any of the divorced and alienated fathers reading this will attest.

For all you brothers who want a vasectomy, just do it. Don’t bother telling the wife. It’s not like women tell men when they’re planning to divorce and strip him of all his property, after all.

Regards, Boxer

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 5
Binxton March 12, 2012 at 16:14

There is an important lesson in all this. Women legislators are still women. Most of them do not and cannot fully represent the best interests of their male constituents. It is against their fundamental nature as women.

And that is why a healthy patriarchal society must ban women from holding political office or voting in elections.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0
Anonymous March 12, 2012 at 16:15

@Mikediver: “The next day my wife went in alone and deposited the check with no problem.”

In my case, the bank (Washington Mutual, now Chase) cashed our tax refund checks for my wife, depositing them into her account, without my signature on the back. When I came in the next year with both our endorsements on the back of our tax refund check they refused to cash them to me, although they offered to deposit them into her account.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
keyster March 12, 2012 at 16:26

“As I indicated above a single-payer healthcare system would shift these costs, reduce them with more attention to preventative care, and negotiating costs of services and drugs would also bring down costs.”

Correct.
It would “shift the costs” to those that are not obese, don’t smoke and work for living (and to men who will be paying for hypochondriac women and their bastard children). It would give the government control over what was once “your body/your choice” in medical care.

The corruption and abuse in the Medicare system is EXACTLY why Republicans don’t want the government to take over healthcare; because the government sucks at what the free market does better.

Imagine what a Michael Bloomberg would mandate as President. No trans fats, no sugar, no salt, no cigarettes, mandatory check-ups, etc. Look at the mess Obamacare is creating already as just a states rights issue alone, not to mention telling a church what it can and cannot do and getting the feminazis in a tizzy.

When an auto-plant closes the first business to suffer is the local hospital. Why? Because people no longer have “free” health insurance, that is often abused. What happens to a hospital when another hospital opens nearby? Their prices go UP, to compete for insurance dollars, keep the revenue stream even.

My dentist office called me up and said “Time for your cleaning!
I said, “I just had a cleaning a few months ago.”
She says, “But your insurance will pay for it!”
See what I mean?

If I visit a doctor it’s $150.
If I don’t have insurance I get an “administrative” break.
20%, off just so he doesn’t have to deal with the insurance company.

The remedy for the problem of rising health care costs, is to deal with obesity, chronic diseases, inappropriate utilization of expensive treatment and the free market. The remedy is NOT the Government telling people what they must do. The Supreme Court will agree this June anyway.

“How come you pay so little for gas?”

Volume baby, volume.
Plus we’re doing a lot of drilling in North Dakota and other states that’s easing the pain. (All private land efforts, as Obama won’t allow any new leases on public land) We’ve got more oil here than Saudi Arabia if we can just get the Enviro-Nuts out of it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Paradoxotaur March 12, 2012 at 16:27

@td9red
“Women go through so much crap b/c we bare children”…

Well, you don’t HAVE to. You can keep it in your pants, or get sterilized, or keep your knees together. After all, that’s what we hear from women when men discuss our reproductive rights, such as male birth control choices or opting out of parenthood. By not bearing children, you will achieve equality with men, who don’t bear children, either. Isn’t it amazing how women can paint themselves as being oppressed victims because they have options men do not?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 1
woggy March 12, 2012 at 16:31

These bills, while presumably a gag, will no doubt be used to gauge reaction from legislators and the public. If the support is there and no serious opposition exists, I wouldn’t put it past any of them to push a law that seriously curtails the availability of vasectomies.
Maybe they’ll levy a exorbitant, punitive tax on the procedure, earmarking the proceeds for women’s government programs.
I really don’t want to give the ball busting harpies any more ideas, but just sayin’.

Anyway, why WOULDN’T they want curtailed any contraceptive option for men that isn’t visibly obvious (like a condom) to a woman before intercourse?
They’ve been claiming, for my entire 50 years, that women can and will “have it all”- some guy getting his plugs pulled will limit princess’ options. She at least deserves the option of demanding her sperm donor/ wage slave do his part that she might “have it all”.

I’m aware that there are no state laws demanding a wife’s permission before vasectomy – that the surgeons are the ones making this demand – but there are also no laws FORBIDDING that any notification/consent be required- and that’s not fair, when a woman can have a tiny bit of humanity ripped from her womb, while notifying anyone is forbidden by law.

They want to suggest banning Viagra?
Better look in the mirror honey, with the most unflattering light source employed, before you leap into that one.
The “may cause temporary blindness” phrase woven into the disclaimers for these “woody pills” should let one know that blindness might just be the chief benefit.
We may remember that beer used to be the “temporary blindness” agent of choice. They managed to get that banned for a decade or so.
Maybe Prohibition was repealed because a bunch of ugly gals simply got too horny.
Food for thought…
So sweetheart, if you’re counting on the lights being low? Remember that a sow like you still has a slimy snout- let the guy have the pills. You need them more than he does.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
fmz March 12, 2012 at 16:36

“if the mouse knows how to get the cheese off without tripping the spring then eventually they’ll just build a better mouse trap”

and,

nature will produce better mice.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Somehow Somewhat March 12, 2012 at 16:36

Talking about “the second set of books”,

In Europe, the second set of books require the doctors to refuse to proceed with vasectomy if the man is young, and single. “Consider young patient age and absence of a relationship as relative contraindications for vasectomy.” For the older men, the books require the doctors to “Provide additional written information and allow the patient to study the information and discuss it with his partner.”
pg 161 http://www.uroweb.org/gls/pdf//2012%20EAU%20Guidelines%20on%20Vasectomy%2061%20159.pdf

A clinic in Cleveland: “You and your wife or partner will be required to sign a request for sterilization. It will state that you understand vasectomy, its potential risks, and that it is not guaranteed to result in permanent sterility.” (emphasis added)http://my.clevelandclinic.org/services/vasectomy/urology_pre_op.aspx

There is no need for the new laws: they might even wake men up.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Master V March 12, 2012 at 16:38

I believe there have been studies indicating negative long term health consequences — including cardiological — for some men who have had vasectomies.

Has anyone heard about this?

Also, is it true that the Chinese force them on men?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Avenger March 12, 2012 at 16:56

We’ve got more oil here than Saudi Arabia if we can just get the Enviro-Nuts out of it.

Those nuts are probably just useful idiots who don’t know they’re working for the oil companies to limit supply and keep the price up.

btw, it’s not just the quantity of oil but the type and the ease of getting it to market. You want light sweet crude near a port or a pipeline that’s under your control.
The Russian oil is Ural oil and sells for less because it needs more refining. At $40 a barrel it’s not worth taking out of the ground.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6
3DShooter March 12, 2012 at 17:50

@Welmer

Congrats on the new crop of trolls that seem to have popped up after the SPLC listing. More traffic on TS is a good thing, some fresh straw-women to knock down :)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Atlas is Shrugging March 12, 2012 at 17:54

Long time lurker (and proud financial donor!) but first post here.

Mr Price, I do believe your article has generated a lot of curiosity on vasectomy procedures in general, and may I humbly suggest that you consider an article on this procedure in the future in order to educate readers on the benefits and risks of this procedure. There does seem to be some degree of conflciting reports regarding spousal consent etc, but I’m guessing a little research could help clear this up.

Here’s my vasectomhy story, in case anyone is interested; I hope readers may find it helpful:

One of the most empowering moments of my life came during my vasectomy procedure. I had been divorced (no kids, fortunately) for about one year and I realized how vulnerable I was to being “sperm jacked” into an unintended (and unwanted on my part) pregnancy following a bad experience with a woman I was seeing post divorce. Men simply do not have any reproductive rights once the semen leaves our bodies, so in my case I decided that I would exercise the one right I still had left: to ensure that the semen that does leave my body will not, in all probability, impregnate anybody.

The procedure itself is easy, taking about 15 minutes, and is relatively painless – only some mild discomfort as many vasectomies are now “needle-less and scalpel-less”. There was no mention of any sort of consent required by anybody else (I live in CA), but I did have to sign a federal consent form, with a mandatory 72 hour waiting period, which was reduced to 48 hours in my case. Following the procedure, just follow the directions and take it easy for a few days and use plenty of ice. I had the procedure done on a Friday and was back to work the following Monday.

There is a follow up visit about 6-8 weeks later to ensure that the patient is truly sterile (and it’s my understanding that one CAN impregnate somebody in that interval, so be sure to follow up and get the all clear with your doctor if you undergo this procedure.) Insurance paid for the procedure (they will not pay to re-connect, which is just fine with me!) Based on many of the horror stories I have now read about on MRA forums, I asked my doctor for a note confirming that I had undergone this procedure and followed up with a post-vasectomy sperm count.

There is a small possibility that one’s vas defrens can “re-connect” following the surgery so I check my sperm count every six months. There are over-the-counter FDA-approved kits (check http://www.spermcount.com) that I use for about $30 each. I keep the receipts for the sperm count kits and then take a picture of the results. I also record the dates on which I tested myself. This will all be useful should it ever be required in a legal setting.

One fianl note is that some clinics offer you the option of “freezing” some of your semen for use at a later date. This will help ensure that your semen is used ONLY when you authorize it. In today’s environment, the only reproductive rights men have are the ones that we give ourselves, so I would urge all men – regardless of age – to consider a vasectomy / storage option. A quick consultation with a physician is a lot less painful (and expensive!) than multiple sessions with an attorney!

A very empowering feeling, indeed! “My body, my choice” apparently works both ways.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
Rocco March 12, 2012 at 18:30

I’m another guy who never did anything better than get a vasectomy (thinks about last girlfriend, facepalms).

Here is a very nice article in a major medical journal but it’s about British law, imagine vasectomy laws vary state by state in the US:

“It is not a legal requirement to involve both partners in the decision-making and consent process. There is a widespread misconception that a wife must consent to her husband undergoing vasectomy. If, against a man’s wishes, his wife is informed of and asked to consent to her husband’s vasectomy, this can be regarded as a breach of medical confidentiality and an infringement of an individual’s right to self-determination (i.e. autonomy).

Nevertheless, it is good practice to involve both partners if the male agrees.”

I would recommend all men here read this if you have or have not had a vasectomy because it’s about what the doctor is supposed to tell, it’s an article for doctors on how to avoid law suits…..the most interesting articles from a doctors perspective.

And layperson.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1282203/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
3DShooter March 12, 2012 at 18:49

@Welmer

I just read over on avoiceformen that one of the frequent poster’s both there and here is desperate need at this hour. Both Paul’s site and Dr. T’s site have the latest. I know that Factory has been a frequent poster on TS also – so guys, lend Factory your support in his dark hour.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Avenger March 12, 2012 at 18:54
Boxer March 12, 2012 at 19:19

Thanks, Rocco and Atlas Shrugged, for the good info.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Charles Martel March 12, 2012 at 19:43

All young men should know that once sperm has left your body it’s an irrevocable gift to the recipient. The circumstances and your intentions are irrelevant. The case law, such as it is, completely supports this. Here’s a well-publicized decision of the Illinois Appeals Court in the case of a doctor who became an unwilling father following oral sex: Sperm Was Gift, Says Court .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 6
Golden Scepter March 12, 2012 at 22:34

Super angry, mentally deranged lesbian feminist attacks:

For the Sake of Equality, How About an International Men’s Day?
by Kelly Cogswell

Lesbian activist, independent journalist and award-winning columnist, Gay City

Thursday was International Women’s Day, and like always, there was some guy saying, “Why isn’t there an International Men’s Day? Yuk, yuk.” And while the usual response is, “Every day is a men’s day, you asshole,” maybe it’s time to agree.

After all, if you really believe in equality in everything, why not push for equal salaries for men? The poor things have been suffering for years with all that excess income. Give me a petition. I’d be happy to support a 25-percent reduction in pay across the board.

And as to equal representation in all our governing bodies, or editorial boards, or corporations, I’d be happy to get behind a movement to slash the number of seats they have by 90 percent or so and devote the redundant salaries to researching the implantation of fetuses in men….

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kelly-cogswell/international-mens-day_b_1334720.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6
universe March 12, 2012 at 23:11

Looks like most comments have moved beyond the initial story line – female politician thinking it a travesty that men, by undergoing vasectomies, are depriving children from being born . (Female “politician” from Georgia actually mouthed these words on vid). Then other female “legislators” joined in with similar sentiments of wishing to restrict men from vasectomies and wanting the state to claim authority over the mans choice.

This is just cra-a-zee. Chick politicians want to restrict men from utilizing a harmless-to-others birth control method upon themselves because a few other chicks are allegedly restricted from utilizing murder upon (aborting) the unborn.
Perhaps it’s best to not pay too much heed, as actions like this do point,
to prime examples of “attention” whoring. Give little air time to their totalitarianist ideas and their sense of importance may very well run more rampant. This lame “bill” deserves the same fate as the unborn they have likely chosen to kill.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Rocco March 13, 2012 at 00:14

OT

Could this attack on the mens rights movement coming because of the rocket like success our model has acheived a few short years.

This couldn’t have happened 5 years ago:

“Huggies is sorry. Very very very sorry.

So sorry, that it rushed representatives down to Austin this weekend to apologize, repeatedly, to 200-plus Dad bloggers gathered at their first ever convention, called Dad 2.0.”

For a TV commercial that fathers found offensive.

Well, now their fighting us, but, I think they jumped the shark a while back…..we’re going to win, it’s inevitable, men will be treated as people.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-belkin/huggies-pulls-diaper-ads_b_1339074.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
W.F. Price March 13, 2012 at 02:09

Super angry, mentally deranged lesbian feminist attacks:

-Golden Scepter

Great find, but try to keep it to an excerpt (I edited it for you).

Opus March 13, 2012 at 02:21

@ Boxer

You are quite right and as I indicated there is an answer to the argument I put into the mouth of L. That argument (and I am always happy to speak to any Brief) is simply and briefly, that a marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman and it is not for a third party (the State) to interfere as between them. One might then even – to use an argument so much beloved of Feminists – say: “IT’S MY BODY”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price March 13, 2012 at 03:49

@Opus and Boxer

I think the liability issue surrounding vasectomy has as much to do with the procedure’s possible failure as anything else. We all know women are litigious, and that they always expect others to provide for their children, so a woman who is impregnated by a man who is supposed to be sterile may think it reasonable to sue the surgeon for childrearing costs, hence the common waiver requirement.

Opus March 13, 2012 at 05:28

@W.F.

Good point. Indeed I seem to recall that this (or something very similar) has already happened, though I am not entirely sure how it can be alleged that the surgeon owes the woman a duty of care, seeing that his patient is the man.

I was not previously aware that women, per se, were specifically of a litigous bent. I had always previously understood that this was a specifically American Trait. Rare amongst the Japanese, so I understand.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Kyo March 13, 2012 at 08:26

@Mikediver – I’m reading your story about managing your joint account at the bank, and unless I’m missing something, your bank is treating the account exactly as they treat “in-trust-for” accounts held by parents on behalf of minor children.

The child and the parent can sign an incoming check together, or just the parent can sign it. Same for withdrawals. In effect, the child’s signature has no “vote” without the parent’s along with it.

Go back to your bank and confirm that your account is not, in fact, owned by your wife in trust for you. And when they assure you that it indeed a joint account and that you’re both adults — yet somehow she has all the control — immediately demand your entire holdings in cash, on the spot, and take it to another bank that treats you like the adult you are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Alexandra March 13, 2012 at 11:35

As far as a married man getting a vasectomy…I would hope that he and his wife actually sit down and discuss this kind of thing and come to an agreement.

My husband and I could only afford one child (probably because our tax dollars go to support these SLUTS–you hear me, Ms. Fluke?). I did not wish go to on the pill again as that messes with your hormones. So my husband got a vasectomy, after we sat down and talked about our options.

Sure, I would have liked to have had another child (we just have the one), but like I said, we really can’t afford it.

As far as abortion goes: NO ONE has the fundamental right to kill an innocent human being. As a mother, I can’t imagine doing such a thing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Mickey T March 13, 2012 at 12:01

Off Topic-

Here’s an item for the “reproductive rights” book of horrors, it’s called “post- birth abortion”:

Recently the the so-called, Journal of Medical Ethics, based in London, published a study advocating post-birth abortion. They argue that parents should be given a “trial period” of an unspecified time in which to change their mind and eliminate their baby.

The authors defended their argument by simply applying the Planned Parenthood/NARAL mantra.

They argue that if you accept the abortionists’ claim that what they do is ethical under any circumstances, then nothing really changes after the baby is born.

I quote from the article: “…there is no moral difference between a newborn and a fetus….their capacities are relevantly similar….”. That means the unborn baby has about the same capacity for pain as the new born baby.

They ague: If It’s OK to kill the baby 2 months before he is born, then it’s OK t0 kill him 2 months after he is born. Again, no time frame was mentioned in the articles that I’ve read.

It’s as if you approach a new born baby sleeping in crib (different enviroment), and hold him down while you apply a set of heavy tongs to head then crush his head until he stops moving. Or you hold the torso of the baby with a clamp, to enable you to dismember her with a forcep type instrument. Or, you turn the baby on his stomach and hold him down while slitting the back of his head to allow a powerful suction tube to enter and suck out his brains. These are commonly used methods of abortion in this country for forty years. The third method was banned in 2001 in the US with President Bush’s (R) signature.

The world authorities are finally proclaiming that unborn babies have the same capacity for pain as the newborns described above. There are about 4,300 unborn babies aborted in this country EVERY DAY. And I don’t think I have mention that it doesn’t take much to make a newborn cry when a mild amount of pain is felt. We can’t even begin to imagine what it feels like for the baby who is aborted.

The best argument most pro-abortion people have is that the “fetus” feels little to no pain during an abortion. But, the above is one of the best pro-life arguments I’ve heard in a while. Now we can say the “fetus” DOES feel the pain as a newborn would, and it is stated by the world’s medical authority, The Journal of Medical Ethics, which basically is an ally of the pro-abortion crowd.

Meanwhile, pro-life groups are working hard to pass the “Life at Conception Act” which is intended to reverse Roe vs Wade and ultimately end abortion on demand.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Troll King March 13, 2012 at 12:04

3DShooter March 12, 2012 at 18:49
@Welmer

I just read over on avoiceformen that one of the frequent poster’s both there and here is desperate need at this hour. Both Paul’s site and Dr. T’s site have the latest. I know that Factory has been a frequent poster on TS also – so guys, lend Factory your support in his dark hour.

____________________________________________

Dude, I took a quick gander over there and didn’t see anything about factory? What is up? I am worried?

Can you link to something here? I will check back later.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Wilson March 13, 2012 at 14:10

These false bills are like false rape claims. Retribution for minor offenses like objecting to paying for sluts’ sex supplies or not calling them back. Of course women can’t be blamed since they are always the bigger victims, and of course since they are women they can always say they were “not really serious” when they try to take away men’s medical options or get them jailed for many years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
bol March 13, 2012 at 16:21

“a vasectomy-restricting bill ”
Since the greatest ‘promoter’ of vasectomy are the wife and not their husband I see no problem with that! Very few men are willing to be sterilized vonluntarly, it’s usualy under female pressure…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Boxer March 13, 2012 at 16:37

Dude, I took a quick gander over there and didn’t see anything about factory? What is up? I am worried?

A Voice For Men released Factory’s real name and location, apparently worried that he was going to harm himself. Feminists have since taken that information and run with it, harassing the fellow and posting his real world details online, and encouraging him to kill himself. AVfM took the article down, far too late. His real name should never have been released like that.

The moral of this story is not to trust anyone at AVfM with your personal details. Nothing we’re doing here is illegal, but it will lead to harassment by small-minded kooks and losers who can’t handle disagreement or debate. There are many such in this egocentric world.

A little bird told me Factory is fine. He had a bad day. Hopefully he’ll show up soon and resume giving his critics hell.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
woggy March 13, 2012 at 16:48

@Alexandra
“I would hope that he and his wife actually sit down and discuss this kind of thing and come to an agreement.”

What they ought to do in pursuing an emotionally satisfying relationship ought not be dealt with in law, or even in some urologist’s manner of doing business. In essence, the doctor should be forbidden to require consent/notification before performing a vasectomy on an adult, with full protection of the law should a snooping spouse file suit.

That’s the only fair way to do it, and the fact that it isn’t that way yet is just another example of our misandrist culture.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Doug1 March 14, 2012 at 08:34

If women’s birth control including tubal ligations is going to be mandatoryily covered without co-pay by health insurance, then vasectomies obviously should be as well.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Mickey T March 15, 2012 at 05:53

@ Alexandra-11:35

I have one child as well, she’s always been quite a lot. If I kept track, I’d probably say that she always gave back more than she took.

Remember, it’s quality, not quantity. LOL

Nice comment.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Mickey T March 15, 2012 at 08:08

That last one did NOT turn out the way it should have. Sorry.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Jay March 15, 2012 at 11:29

The bill has no chance of passing -but this editorial bashing it does a terrible job.

Want equality? Then when you have a problem with your sexual organs/reproductive equipment then (gosh!) I guess you don’t have the right to make up your own mind with your doctor. I guess a man is just going to need more ‘time’ and ‘evidence’ to make a ‘proper’ decision.

When conservatives smell a losing election, they hide behind god, attack gays, and then dive right into womens’ uteri. It’s a political and intellectual loser. . .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Masculist Man March 21, 2012 at 21:11

The bills aren’t serious, of course, but the money these women are being paid to be genuine legislators (rather than comedians) is quite real.

If these bills become law,if they go through the process any other bill does and they are approved they become law and like any other law they can be enforced.

Wilmer,I don’t believe they are joking: http://mensrightsboard.blogspot.com/2012/03/women-to-regulate-mens-sex-lives.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man March 22, 2012 at 13:31

A man in manosphere said he only votes for females… so that he can enjoy the show while the females are bringing down the system fastest!

Then when he and/or his sons or other male relatives end up being Bubba’s cellmate/girlfriend he can thank himself or his sons/male relatives can thank him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man March 22, 2012 at 17:55

It’s the Democrat playbook. Put the issues in simple, easy sound bites and keep them on a perpetual loop. That’s how stupid they think we are.

They’ll have a lot of idiots believing it,take our critics for instance they drank a lot of the kool aid and are asking for more.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man March 22, 2012 at 18:03

I would take this threat seriously…

I would too,Rebel. I take it very seriously.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man March 22, 2012 at 19:06

Men stopped marrying. So a Caesar passed a law that any man not married by age 35 had all his property confiscated. So, men started marrying foreign women.

So Caesar was a big time eunuch huh? Sounds like Obama.

They also stopped caring if their civilization was defended since it enslaved them for the benefit of women. And, so the invaders met no resistance.

I guess it’s time to welcome the Chinese soldiers or the Taliban.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Masculist Man March 22, 2012 at 20:42

A Voice For Men released Factory’s real name and location, apparently worried that he was going to harm himself. Feminists have since taken that information and run with it, harassing the fellow and posting his real world details online, and encouraging him to kill himself. AVfM took the article down, far too late. His real name should never have been released like that.

Putting his personal info online like that was the wrong thing to do and it only embolden our enemies. All around a bad thing to do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jon good March 23, 2012 at 22:07

“The bills aren’t serious, of course, but the money these women are being paid to be genuine legislators (rather than comedians) is quite real. ”

So hypocritical. The same can be said for all the Republican legislatives who are wasting tax payer money fighting against birth control and constitutionally protected abortions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jon good March 23, 2012 at 22:11

@Mickey T

There is a difference between a fetus and a newborn. A fetus does not utilize their liver or lungs, but are dependent on the mother’s umbilical cord for oxygen.

On the other hand, a newborn can use their liver and their lungs right when they are born. They can then be raised others beside their mother and their life is not dependent on the mother.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: