Presidential Election Suggests Climax of Feminism is at Hand

by W.F. Price on April 12, 2012

Following the Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke controversy, the remarks about Augusta, the debate over free birth control and other appeals to American women from Democrats, prominent feminist and corporate shark Hilary Rosen waded into the debate by saying that Mitt Romney’s wife had no right to talk about the economy because she’d “never worked a day in her life.” Lots of people took offense because, obviously, a mother of five has a lot of work to do, whether or not it results in a corporate paycheck.

What’s interesting is that the debate is between two baby boomer females, both of whom chose different paths in life, and underscores the profound schism that has emerged between one America and the other. Ann Romney, mother of five, has chosen one path, and Hilary Rosen, although she did manage to conceive two children with donor sperm (she’s a lesbian), another.

What we are seeing here is the climax of second wave feminism, which really got going in the 1960s, as its adherents reach the peak of their political and economic power. However, despite the heights attained by people like Hilary Rosen, not all American women jumped on the bandwagon, and now the two versions of American womanhood are squaring off over the presidency. You could say it’s essentially feminists vs. wives, and it’s pretty clear which ones will line up with which candidate.

In the long run, the wives will win, because they have a lot more children in general, but for now the feminists probably have a majority due to the large numbers of single mothers and divorced women, which is why Obama will likely take the women’s vote. But he isn’t going to take all of it.

I’m not sure how much longer feminism will be such a powerful force in national politics, but I suspect this election, and perhaps the next one, will be the peak. After that, there will be a decline that, while not entirely noticeable at first, should really become apparent by some time in the next decade. Younger feminists simply don’t have the passion or cohesion to repeat the successes of the Hilary Rosens and Hillary Clintons of the world. As far as I can tell, to them feminism means little more than getting a free lunch. At least, they don’t articulate much else, and if they can get a free lunch by getting married and having children a lot of them will do so and quickly forget all about the gender studies classes they took in college. Furthermore, as I’ve stressed recently, a lot more young white Americans will be the children of the Mitt and Ann Romneys of the US (not to mention Rick Santorums) than they will of the Hilary Rosens. Feminism is simply going to be alien and weird to an increasing proportion of the population. As for minorities, they never really bought into it anyway; feminism has been pretty much a white woman’s game from the beginning.

So, men, I think we should sit back, grab a bag of popcorn, and watch how it all goes down. We are witnessing the culmination of a very strange era in Western history, and it’s going to be history fairly soon. There’s no telling exactly what will come next, but I’m fairly certain that the feminism that has come to define this election cycle will begin to ebb away as something new emerges.

Some day when I’m old and gray, I expect to see people snicker and joke about the feminism that was such a powerful force in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Our current era will be seen by young adults and children as just as alien as the prewar era is to us today. And no, there will never be a matriarchal regime; that’s against human nature and unprecedented in human history. People simply haven’t changed that much, and due to birth control, abortion and other factors that limit feminist fertility the demographic momentum is pushing in the other direction now, and has been for over a generation.

In the meanwhile, we men should take care of ourselves, our families and our brethren. Just hang in there, weather this storm, and try to keep your mental and physical health. When we get through to the other side, we’ll be able to breathe a lot easier than we have in a long, long time.

{ 201 comments… read them below or add one }

Thucydides April 12, 2012 at 13:37

“In the long run, the wives will win, because they have a lot more children in general”

That made me think of Queen Elizabeth I and Mary, Queen of Scots. Old Liz ruled for a long time and was a virgin her entire life. She produced no heir and was the end of the Tudor dynasty. Her enemy Mary, who Elizabeth had beheaded by the way, wasn’t so frigid. Mary’s son was crown James VI of Scotland. When Elizabeth died in 1603, He was crowned James I of England, founding the Stuart dynasty.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 2
Not so much April 12, 2012 at 13:40

Nice thought, and well-written, but I don’t think this is true at all because female supremacy still enjoys status as the One True Gospel in the west.

Though I am always happy to see conservative women challenge Feminist dogma, the notion that vaginas are infinitely more worthy of protection and privilege than penises remains unchallenged. In fact, many traditionalists are even worse female supremacists than women on the Left.

I have personally written two very prominent conservative female anti-feminists (who shall remain nameless here) and neither of them feel that women will ever be willing to give up status as the preferred sex. Quote “even conservative women have a lot to lose, so men should not count on them.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 1
meistergedanken April 12, 2012 at 13:40

I don’t know if feminism is at a natural peak just yet – it’s fangs are just more bared now because it is vital to the democrat’s election strategy.

Obama’s numbers have been in the doldrums for a while, so they are executing a classic “pincer movement”: they have the “War On Women” on one side (w/ all the contraceptive crap), and the “War On Blacks” (w/ the Trayvon debacle) on the other. Shit, Al Sharpton and Att. Gen Holder were paling around at a fundraiser just yesterday, and Holder has gone on record saying that if Florida didn’t charge Martin Zimmerman with something, then the Dept. of Justice would.

Obama can’t win unless he gets all the women back in his camp (married women don’t support him as much as they used to) and re-energizes the black vote to achieve the same turnout he had in 2008 (some blacks being disappointed that the Messiah hasn’t delivered).

Anyone else notice all the inane Facebook chatter lately? People ARE falling for this stuff; the proles are getting back into their designated queues. I would admire the brilliance of it all, if it wasn’t so nauseating and vile.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 74 Thumb down 1
Ethical April 12, 2012 at 13:43

It takes a calm head and a strong mind to see the positive in the middle of what you described before as your battles with the cruelly anti-men family court system. It takes an even bigger heart to take the time to share that upliftment with others like myself facing the same.
Thanks for such an uplifting post.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 0
Rebel April 12, 2012 at 13:51

I was wondering: could prominent feminist and corporate shark Hilary Rosen do what all prominent feminists do best: talk to and argue with her vagina? Wouldn’t that give rise to a most interesting dialogue?

Wouldn’t that make the news?

Would she win the argument?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Opus April 12, 2012 at 13:58

If there were one thing (as the next American President) I would like to ban, outlaw, and shame, it is single women (especially Lesbian’s) being inseminated with the sperm of unknown males. Call me old fashioned,- anti-children, anti-woman, and illiberal – (You probably will) but I feel an almost visceral revulsion at the idea.

For such a hag as Rosen (Jewish, I suppose) to insult Mrs Romney is (though it is not my fight) beyond contempt.

I once briefly worked with one of those Lesbian mother types – I was polite, but turned my back on her, metaphorically- on all occasions. Another instance of women never really knowing what men really think of them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 88 Thumb down 7
Traveller April 12, 2012 at 14:00

While women are voting, there will be always some politician who tries to get their favor..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 14:04

If there were one thing (as the next American President) I would like to ban, outlaw, and shame, it is single women (especially Lesbian’s) being inseminated with the sperm of unknown males.

The best thing men can do in that case is to support the idea that sperm donors can be hit with retroactive child support judgments, as is already the case in a few jurisdictions…

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004046062_sperm01.html

Forward thinking men who want the semen river to dry up can support the expansion of this general idea.

Boxer

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 6
Anonymous April 12, 2012 at 14:06

This is a post I don’t agree with. It’s one thing to be a stay at home mom after having some job for a while, or having some job after the kids are raised, or being a stay at home mom your entire life but being prepared to take a part time job if your husband ever finds himself out of work.

It’s another to be a stay at home mom your entire life because your husband is a millionaire, and in this case being a mom probably isn’t that hard because you can hire a nanny or a housekeeper or a cook.

The former still has some touch with reality. The latter does not.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 38 Thumb down 42
Just Some Canadian April 12, 2012 at 14:14

Ummm, I think maybe that headline can use a re-think. If there’s anything feminists are good at, writing about, thinking about, and even setting up whole university departments to study and publish papers about….

….it’s their climaxes.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 14:15

Ummm, I think maybe that headline can use a re-think.

You kidding? I laughed audibly. I like this blog for many reasons, not least is the humor in the subtext. Glad someone else got it.

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
W.F. Price April 12, 2012 at 14:25

The best thing men can do in that case is to support the idea that sperm donors can be hit with retroactive child support judgments, as is already the case in a few jurisdictions…

-Boxer

Actually, I don’t think it even needs to go that far. Just make knowing one’s biological parents a legal right. A lot of guys will think twice about donating sperm if they know there’s a good chance their kid will get in touch some time down the line.

Avenger April 12, 2012 at 14:31

I don’t know if feminism is at a natural peak just yet – it’s fangs are just more bared now because it is vital to the democrat’s election strategy.

Feminist insanity peaked in the 90′s and the Gen X kids took most of the brunt of it. It’s all over for them now and what you’re seeing today is just the leftover aftermath. It’s time to do the mopping up now and dismantle laws like VAWA etc.
Theold hags will die off or get too old to have any energy for anything and feminism will go back to a tiny fringe group of angry lesbians as it was in the 60′s until the 90′s.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 6
Epoetker April 12, 2012 at 14:44

Welmer you definitely need a post on the piece of work special prosecutor currently going after George Zimmerman. Her sick-making lack of jurisprudential seriousness and careerist ambition oozes from every word in this speech.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3
will April 12, 2012 at 14:49

Too bad the romney is gonna be the same.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 9
Steve_85 April 12, 2012 at 14:53

Those children wont have time to grow up and shrug at Feminism. The economies of just about all the western nations are turning to shit. If this follows a similar timetable as ancient Rome did, we’ll see complete collapse within 40 years… and that’s being VERY optimistic (or pessimistic, depending on viewpoint)

As history teaches, once a society collapses morally, economic collapse follows very quickly afterwards.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 0
Geography Bee Finalist himself April 12, 2012 at 15:00

“Presidential Election Suggests Climax of Feminism is at Hand”

So when do men not at fault for alleged prior misogyny get to inflict payback on women (who may not be at fault for prior discrimination against men, but who cares)?

I personally can’t wait for woman-bashing to go mainstream again. American men born since c. at least 1970 (I was born in 1981) have been discriminated against for misogyny that wasn’t their fault, so now it’s their turn to be vindictive, even if the target for vindictiveness is not at fault.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 7
D April 12, 2012 at 15:09

In the meanwhile, we men should take care of ourselves, our families and our brethren. Just hang in there, weather this storm, and try to keep your mental and physical health. When we get through to the other side, we’ll be able to breathe a lot easier than we have in a long, long time.

More good advice.

Thank you!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Zorro April 12, 2012 at 15:10

I wish I could share your optimism, but biology trumps common sense.

The principle weakness in the human female is her disposition to believe whatever makes ehr feel good about herself. So long as this is true (get used to it), there will be a plethora of women who will vote according to whatever media-inspired meme or nonsense to which they attach themselves (End of Men, The Richer Sex, Man Down, Women are Just So Frikkin Epic, The Awesomeness of Having A Vagina, Marxism is a Girl’s Best Friend, Free Free Free for MEEEEEEE!).

Ad Nauseum.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 3
Lovekraft April 12, 2012 at 15:16

Feminism tries to have its cake and eat it too: to portray themselves as empowered, as equals, as ‘up to the task’.

While at the same time acting like petulant children who stomp their feet when they don’t get their own way.

And, like children, the adults end up getting tired of their antics.

Obama was an attempt at feminism piggy-backing on the biggest guiltracket their is and the past four years has not resulted in the promised ‘awakening’.

Time for them to get out of the way, for we can’t afford to indulge their progressive fantasies anymore.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 1
Flybynight April 12, 2012 at 15:18

Always voted for the Democrats would never vote Republican..but going 3rd party this time….do not like Obama’s upping the Afghan war and killing innocent people with Drone attacks plus his catering to the fems and so forth. So will waste my vote.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 32 Thumb down 24
Dalrock April 12, 2012 at 15:19

Opus

If there were one thing (as the next American President) I would like to ban, outlaw, and shame, it is single women (especially Lesbian’s) being inseminated with the sperm of unknown males. Call me old fashioned,- anti-children, anti-woman, and illiberal – (You probably will) but I feel an almost visceral revulsion at the idea.

Donated sperm single motherhood won’t ever be an attractive option for anything but a very small and radical minority of women. It is as you point out obnoxious, but it isn’t socially relevant in my opinion. Regardless of what feminists scream, it reeks of failure to the average woman; She couldn’t get a man.

This is precisely the point at which team woman collapses and the long knives of intra-sexual competition come out. Other women who didn’t fail in that way will have a field day grinding in these women’s failures, but of course the average man would witness this and be oblivious as to the true nature of the exchange. Most men would mistake the cruelty for sympathy and concern, but the women in the room would know better. Those women who failed to secure a man to have a child with but didn’t choose to go with artificial insemination wouldn’t side with the synthetic single mother out of jealousy at not being mothers themselves.

Even if the government made up for the loss of the male to female resource transfer it could never make her whole on this front.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 58 Thumb down 2
Zorro April 12, 2012 at 15:30

@Lovekraft April 12, 2012 at 15:16

Very well said!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
crella April 12, 2012 at 15:53

Feminism was never about ‘choice for women’ but the politically correct choice for women. I got a helluva lot of flack for staying home, after our son was born in ’83. Strangers, a flight attendant, everybody had to make some remark. It was really weird…total strangers (all women), while waiting somewhere would suddenly ask , ‘So, do you stay home?’ and the outcome was rarely good..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 65 Thumb down 3
Paradoxotaur April 12, 2012 at 16:04

@Dalrock: “Regardless of what feminists scream, it reeks of failure to the average woman; She couldn’t get a man.”

Reminded me of a story I hope is not too far OT. A couple of decades ago I asked a woman out who was fairly cute at the time. She was the HR director for a large local company. She canceled the afternoon of the date, so I just called a former girlfriend who I was on very good terms with – and who was stunning- to go to the event. We walked through the door and who was standing there but Ms. HR Director with another woman from her company. I’m pretty sure her jaw literally hit the floor.

Anyway, a couple of months ago I see Ms. HR Director sitting outside a coffee shop, no longer cute. In fact, she kinda reminds me of the Emperor in Star Wars. But not wanting to be rude, I walked up and asked “So, how are your children doing? They must be off to college or at least finishing up high school now.”

“What’s that? You don’t have any children. My bad. Bye.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 74 Thumb down 2
Rebel April 12, 2012 at 16:29

@Flybynight April 12, 2012 at 15:18
Always voted for the Democrats would never vote Republican..but going 3rd party this time….do not like Obama’s upping the Afghan war and killing innocent people with Drone attacks plus his catering to the fems and so forth. So will waste my vote.

You have made the decision to refuse the “gift”!

The Dem’s gift is WWIII and the Gop’s gift is WWIII.
A third party cannot afford such.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3
woggy April 12, 2012 at 16:34

If this whole scenario didn’t have what seem to be stark implications, it would be quite entertaining theater.

You’ve got feminist women – and their attendant cooch hound manginas – all “empowered” and “smart” and everything, being used as political chattel.
They’re tools to ensure that the Kenyan Marxist will be empowered to disembowel what remains of the society that empowered them.
Wile E Coyote moment straight ahead.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
keyster April 12, 2012 at 16:57

Feminism will not end until the Identity Politics rhetoric does. Feminism is a multi-billion dollar industry with untold power in Academia and the Media. I agree it wains with each generation, but we won’t see it banished from the discourse in any of our life times. It will merely shape-shift it’s platform, (such as The Good Men Project).

For every Hilary Rosen, there’s a young Sandra Fluke right behind her ready to carry the flag. As long as women consume, corporations will pander (and donate) to them. As long as women vote politicians will pander (and legislate funds) to them.

As long as the NAACP, The National Action Network and the Rainbow Coalition and La Raza exists – – NOW, NWLC, AAUW, et al, will exist.

The Democrat Party will not abandon their Identity Politics narrative, because it works. When leftist women, minorities and gays stop identifying as “special victim classes”, and start identifying as American citizens Feminism will end. I have little faith in this happening before a complete collapse and Balkanization of the USA. The divisions have all but been established politically; geographic is soon to follow.

The biggest affect to Feminism will be the establishment of Hispanics as the majority race by 2040. They’re wholly non-secular and innately patriarchal. The Hispanic Race is the key to America’s future.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 6
keyster April 12, 2012 at 17:06

“Always voted for the Democrats would never vote Republican..but going 3rd party this time….”

This depends on what “color” you live in.
If you live in a predominately red or blue county and state, vote with your conscience, send a message if you think it “empowers” you.

If you live in a swing county within a swing state (purple), not voting for Romney is half a vote for Obama. Remember its an electoral college process, not popular vote. Be pragmatic about it. You’ll never have your ideal candidate in a democracy.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 9
YB April 12, 2012 at 17:23

The topic made me laugh unashamedly.

If I was an anonymous sperm donor and hit up for child-support payments for a lesbian, my first question of the Judge would be along the lines of: “So, which skank who couldn’t even attract a drug-dealer wants a free meal-ticket this time? She wants child support, she can put it out for me as long as she wants the money, just like any other whore.”

Its simply another variation of the self-absorbed and self-entitled single mother by choice (SMBC) dynamic.

Somehow I think it isn’t gonna happen.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 2
DCM April 12, 2012 at 17:35

“Some day when I’m old and gray, I expect to see people snicker and joke about the feminism that was such a powerful force in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. ”

Quite likely.
Alas, many like myself are already old and gray and have put up with this crap since we were young.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 1
Anonymous April 12, 2012 at 17:50

I don’t know what kind of live Rosen has but, didn’t she know state at home conservative wife like Ann Romney are the first one to notice the increase on food taxes? when women like Ann has to ask to her husband more money cause the milk is 75 cent expensive they know pretty mush about basic economy, more than the liberal single mom living from food stamps and welfare who doesn’t care about the economy as long as she get her funding stamps.

The shaming from feminists against state at home wife which was very common during the second wave, you know, due to male invention women were bored, and “you are worthless” feminist mystique from Betty Friedan, is back on the table because feminists thought women like Ann wont have any power in the future, but now we have her next to the big-antifeminist-antileberal-thread and possible first lady, going from Michelle Obama to Ann Romney is a twist.

Feminists like Rosen didn’t use numbers and calculation (men are for that) and predicted that delaying marriage, increase abortion, shaming of fatherhood, cheering for single motherhood and a welfare state will create a minority called LIBERALS, with not enough voters and not motivation to do it.

Daughters of the second wave born after the 80s are not motivated to do it like their mothers because what they were promise was not true, they were more money back in the days, the gov could easily pass any liberal and feminist bill like Title IX and VAWA, but big daddy gov is running out of money and it has to CUT the privilege, if the Obamacare was introduced during the 80s it would have been passed, but now? my friend have you the USA’s debt numbers?
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

……and they want taxpayers to funds their sex live style.

Scumbag feminists

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2
MRA April 12, 2012 at 17:50

I don’t know what kind of live Rosen has but, didn’t she know state at home conservative wife like Ann Romney are the first one to notice the increase on food taxes? when women like Ann has to ask to her husband more money cause the milk is 75 cent expensive they know pretty mush about basic economy, more than the liberal single mom living from food stamps and welfare who doesn’t care about the economy as long as she get her founding stamps.

The shaming from feminists against state at home wife which was very common during the second wave, you know, due to male invention women were bored, and “you are worthless” feminist mystique from Betty Friedan, is back on the table because feminists thought women like Ann wont have any power in the future, but now we have her next to the big-antifeminist-antileberal-thread and possible first lady, going from Michelle Obama to Ann Romney is a twist.

Feminists like Rosen didn’t use numbers and calculation (men are for that) and predicted that delaying marriage, abortion, shaming of fatherhood, single motherhood and a welfare state will create a minority called LIBERALS, with not enough voters and not motivation to do it.

Daughters of the second wave born after the 80s are not motivated to do it like their mothers because what they were promise was not true, they were more money back in the days, the gov could easily pass any liberal and feminist bill like Title IX and VAWA, but big daddy gov is running out of money and the have to CUT the privilege, if the Obamacare was introduced during the 80s it would have been passed, but now? my friend have you the USA’s debt numbers?
http://www.usdebtclock.org/

……and they want taxpayers to funds their sex live style.

Scumbag feminists

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
MKP April 12, 2012 at 17:58

“As for minorities, they never really bought into it anyway; feminism has been pretty much a white woman’s game from the beginning.”

Depends on how you define feminism. Screeching about the patriarchy and the Island of Lesbos and garbage of that nature has certainly been a white woman’s game (much to their discredit).

But being impregnated by a series of low-lifes, and then demanding that hardworking tax-payers foot the bill and genuflect at the alar of heroic single mothers, is a kind of feminism. And that kind is practiced by woman of all colors, and I don’t see any signs it’s dying off.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 48 Thumb down 2
MRA April 12, 2012 at 18:00

In the long run, the wives will win, because they have a lot more children in general, but for now the feminists probably have a majority due to the large numbers of single mothers and divorced women, which is why Obama will likely take the women’s vote. But he isn’t going to take all of it.

Look at the futures voters in that picture
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/12/article-2128872-1291F28B000005DC-296_634x353.jpg

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Eric April 12, 2012 at 18:19

Price:

I’m sort of ambivalent about your overall prognosis. The principle problems I see are these:

1.) Political systems, whatever their form, are headed for an inevitable collapse when the political and the social systems become inextricably linked. Once a government from moves from an objective standard of laws (including those which limit its own powers), competing social interests paralyse it for any constructive purpose; and seek to institute social changes that most of society doesn’t want. Even now, elections and issues, and even so-called journalism, are on no higher plane than a reality TV show. Pursuit of power becomes an end in itself in such a system; and those who are more skilled at manipulating the stupid masses are those who will concentrate power into their own camarillas.

2. I think that you are vastly underestimating the power structure. Government, corporations, academia, the media, even much of organized religion is NOT a collection of out-of-touch ignoramuses who’ve bumbled their way into power. They are fanatics: well-connected, following an organized ideology, well-funded, utterly ruthless and contemptuous of everyone outside their own clique. They are political and social revolutionaries.

3. Feminism is only part of the revolutionary social programme. It’s a vital part, though, and won’t be allowed to fail. It’s true that a good percentage of men will marry traditional women or MGTOW, but the elites don’t care about us. They need us because only such men are productive and they need the tax and work base. Their concern is with the lower classes. They need a dependent, semi-civilized, and amoral underclass to act as a check against the productive classes, and from which to draw levies to fill their armies and secret police forces. They not only need feminism to undermine the lower classes, but also affirmative-action and hiring quotas to salt spies and collaborators among the productive class.

So, I don’t think it’s proper to speak of a feminist ‘peak’. Feminism was largely forcibly imposed on a culture unwilling to accept it in the first place; Anglo-American passivity has made it over time a politically-correct cultural norm. It will continue to be maintained by force and delusion.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2
Eric April 12, 2012 at 18:22

Keyster:
The United States has one of the least transparent and easily manipulated electoral systems in anything except the most totalitarian nations. There’s no way to tell whether votes actually mean anything or not.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Phil April 12, 2012 at 18:43

“feminism has been a white womans game”

In the Soviet Union and the USA, the feminist thinkers, writers, supporters and leaders have been Jewish and European. Most of the European feminist women have been mostly followers of what jewish feminists have written.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 7
piercedhead April 12, 2012 at 18:55

Presidential elections always remind of bull hippos fighting for ownership of the harem.

Of course they’re playing to the females! That’s the whole damn point!

What they do to each other is a promise to all other men what they will do to them, should they dare get uppity enough.

There is a direct connection between these gits, and the laws that deprive you of property rights, equal protection by the police and the open season wives have on their husband’s lives.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Joe April 12, 2012 at 19:01

“2. I think that you are vastly underestimating the power structure. Government, corporations, academia, the media, even much of organized religion is NOT a collection of out-of-touch ignoramuses who’ve bumbled their way into power. They are fanatics: well-connected, following an organized ideology, well-funded, utterly ruthless and contemptuous of everyone outside their own clique. They are political and social revolutionaries.”

Yes, it’s not going to go away because people tire of it.

“Feminism was largely forcibly imposed on a culture unwilling to accept it in the first place”

I don’t agree with that. Feminism has been developing a long time. The 1960s were the metastasis, but it seems clear the feminist cancer was already growing a century before.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
peterike April 12, 2012 at 19:14

It doesn’t matter who is and isn’t having children. Feminists are not born, they are made. They are the products of indoctrination. Perfectly normal little girls enter the education-dome and many of them pop out the other side as confirmed Leftists/Feminists/Radicals (boys too, by the way). There is no sign of this process slowing down. And since the level of indoctrination and social pressure is most intense at the most prestigious universities — the ones that give us our elite class — the power structure will continue to be solidly feminist.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 0
MRA April 12, 2012 at 19:19

@Anonymous April 12, 2012 at 14:06

You are using the same tactic feminist sites are using, avoid the topic and focus on the fact that Mitt has money, yeah, but consider that the average marriage today and specially if the man has money doesn’t last more than 7 years, we are talking about a woman who is 63 and could easily use the family court to get money for herself.

ANN ROMNEY
Age: 62
Education: Brigham Young University; finished degree at Harvard University Extension School
Resume: Stay-at-home mother; former First Lady of Massachusetts; worked in non-paid roles for charities
Marital status: Married for 43 years
Children Five boys, born between 1970 and 1981

Ann is the typical suburban wife, white, many children and into charities, the same thing feministing now is using, “hey the black women don’t have that choice, if women do it is welfare queen”.

this is not about the fact that Ann has money and could choose between which car buy to her just graduated son, is about how feminists specially lesbian attack these women who are not into the “liberated” and “empowered” movement.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 6
MRA April 12, 2012 at 19:25

The Obama administration is trying to keep the distance from this and arguing she has nothing to do with the gov, however according to the White House records, she has been in the White House 35 times, which is more than a average political could be.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Navian April 12, 2012 at 19:39

I do not have the stomach to follow national politics anymore thru the media. A bonus to finding these MRA sites is the steel eyed analysis you guys provide. This includes those who believe and those of you who do not believe that the Republican social conservatives can change this travesty that has happened to our culture. The cynicism I use to feel has turned to a disgusted rage at the charade. Thanks for running interference….

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
codebuster April 12, 2012 at 20:06

There is no reason why we can’t help to kick-start some changes right now. The following song from a privileged, angry white-guy is revolution material. Instead of writing boring letters to bored political constituents, perhaps we are more likely to move them with songs like this. A song like this, played on the mainstream airwaves, would change hearts and minds for sure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
jimbo April 12, 2012 at 20:16

Sorry Price, I usually agree with you, but not about your claim about there never being a matriarchal regime… We presently exist in a matriarchal “regime”. The fact the laws of the matriarchy are enforced by men is inconsequential because those men doing the enforcing have been surreptitiously duped by women of the matriarchy to do their work for them. (A prerequisite for any matriarchy.) Is it an absolute matriarchy? NO. But it is still a matriarchy. I know it is painful, but think of your recent experience in the courtroom… The good news is that it won’t last. The bad news is that it is going to cause a lot of pain as it runs its course.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2
jimbo April 12, 2012 at 20:25

Just an opinion, but I think that anybody that thinks feminism is over is just wrong.Women still win in the courtroom. Women still know it all.. Women are still able and willing to make the lives of too many men living nightmares. Women still control what can and cannot be said about them in the news and on campus. Feminism won’t be over until there is no longer any money to pay the bills for food, law enforcement and the military (same thing) i.e. when the shit hits the fan. That is when feminism will be over. Personally, I hope I live to see the day.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2
jimbo April 12, 2012 at 20:36

@ Joe
I think that when you are able to capably compare feminism to a disease, you are on the path to understanding it. You compared it to cancer, but I think it can also be compared to a disease affecting the central nervous system… or, a disease affecting the mind, or a disease affecting procreative abilities, or a disease affecting a body’s defense system…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
sestamibi April 12, 2012 at 20:37

Welmer: “When we get through to the other side, we’ll be able to breathe a lot easier than we have in a long, long time.”

Jimbo: “The good news is that it won’t last. The bad news is that it is going to cause a lot of pain as it runs its course.”

Jimbo is right. None of us will ever be able to breathe easier in our lifetimes. Even younger men who may live to see the end of feminism, will still have spent their most fruitful, horny, and productive years under its oppression.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 20:37

Dear Eric:

This is really a fascinating (and very well written) take on the status quo.

Political systems, whatever their form, are headed for an inevitable collapse when the political and the social systems become inextricably linked. Once a government from moves from an objective standard of laws (including those which limit its own powers), competing social interests paralyse it for any constructive purpose; and seek to institute social changes that most of society doesn’t want.

When people speak of “feminism” they’re speaking of such a broad constellation of (sometimes conflicting) complexes (for lack of a better term) that one has to narrow down the definition of the word in context. I think you’ve made some excellent points, though I think the majority want *some* of what we (and the people who call the plays in modern society) call feminism.

Many women don’t want to get it on in a lesbian threesome or kill men, but most want the ability to divorce their husbands when a more convenient opportunity arises (whether it’s another dude or just a perception of a glamorous single life).

In the case of the USA, the enforcement of some of the parts of feminism costs dearly, and the Chinese (who have resisted most of the destructive aspects of feminism, while reconstructing a somewhat benign version which pays lip service to wimminz rights) is footing the tab. I don’t think they’re going to have the means or desire to do this much longer. They have their own consumer base now (or they’re close to getting one) and no longer need to outsource the buyers of their factories’ cheap crap.

These are interesting times, no?

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5
jimbo April 12, 2012 at 20:39

@peterike
I think there are a lot of men and young men that are seeing women and young American women for the dangerous things they’ve become. I’m not sure what this will mean in the long run, but I do think it is happening.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
TFH April 12, 2012 at 20:39

Ann Romney is one of very few women who does not devalue men (from what I can tell so far).

I base this on how she said ‘Father’s Day should also be Husband’s Day’. Now, one line is not a lot to go off of, but we don’t see many other women, even Republican women, say this. That she went out of her way to say this, is noteworthy.

Even if Romney vs. Obama is uninspiring. A vote AGAINST Michelle O, and in favor of Anne Romney, is a good enough reason for a red piller to pull the lever.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 6
TFH April 12, 2012 at 20:41

although she did manage to conceive two children with donor sperm (she’s a lesbian), another.

Heh. I wonder if red pill awareness vs. blue-pill blindness is genetic.

That would be interesting, as many sperm donors are red-pill aware (and I am not going just off my own example). A single mother lesbian attempting to suppress this could have volcanic results (i.e. the male grows up to be super-committed to fighting misandry).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
TFH April 12, 2012 at 20:44

but I suspect this election, and perhaps the next one, will be the peak. After that, there will be a decline that, while not entirely noticeable at first,

So it peaks in 2016, but pops by 2020.

Agreed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
TFH April 12, 2012 at 20:47

The best thing men can do in that case is to support the idea that sperm donors can be hit with retroactive child support judgments, as is already the case in a few jurisdictions…

NO. It is not *his* fault.

A lot of sperm bank clientele is still married couples. Maybe the man is a mangina, but single women are still not the majority of users.

Another reason to favor this is that High IQ, successful men are crowding out the thugs/ex-convicts who would be impregnating these women anyway. Opposing sperm donation assumes that these women would be childless if not for the banks. Surely you don’t believe that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8
TFH April 12, 2012 at 20:49

A lot of guys will think twice about donating sperm if they know there’s a good chance their kid will get in touch some time down the line.

The child *can* contact the father after age 18 by law. This is known to the donor at the start.

But most such kids only get curious about that after age 25 or so (a separate point).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
Rob April 12, 2012 at 20:55

Quote: “Feminists are not born, they are made. They are the products of indoctrination.”

***

Feminism has always been around, and it always will be around.

It is more accurate to call it Feminine-ism. (Zed’s term, my explanation, from a conversation we held here in the comments two years ago – when pricks like Boxer weren’t around undermining everything. – Even if Zed isn’t here, I can make him here).

Feminism is merely an attitude – it is an attitude that is part of human nature, as well as the manginas that run along behind them trying to lick their smelly rectums. This has always been around. Ever since Adam and Eve.

Briffault’s Law: “The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.” — Robert Briffault, The Mothers, I, 191

This is not an ideology, this is nature. It exists in every single living thing on earth, including humans.

And this is what I mean by pulling our heads out of Utopia, and keeping our eyes on the Truth!

What’s really changed is how much recently that this has taken over. We are returning to our feral state where the female principle (1=1+3) rules over the male principle (1+1=2).

“…The history of humankind is a history of desperate attempts to escape the unconscious, unrestrained rule of woman, and thus the absolute rule of unconscious, ruthless Nature, by creating social constructs which, whatever their imperfections, at least offer us a life less “nasty, brutish and short” than that of the animal world from which we came–and back into which we may fall at any time. This is the real meaning of “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” (From Philalethes#2)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 6
TFH April 12, 2012 at 20:56

Boxer,

The best thing men can do in that case is to support the idea that sperm donors can be hit with retroactive child support judgments, as is already the case in a few jurisdictions…

No it isn’t. The link you included involves a donor who knew the woman.

Sperm banks (which are where the vast majority of such conceptions go through), maintain donor anonymity.

So your link has abs0lutely no relevance to the legal protections that donors in official banks have – you are just seeing what you want to see, even if it is not there. The fool in your article was naive enough to think a woman would not swindle him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 21:04

Dear TFH:

NO. It is not *his* fault.

I know. It’s rough.

So your link has abs0lutely no relevance to the legal protections that donors in official banks have – you are just seeing what you want to see

No. The fact that the headline read “Sperm donor liable for child support, judge rules” is the relevant point. And you’re wrong about universal privacy rules too.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20101025/sperm-donor-case-101025/

Again, some jurisdictions have begun allowing women to sue previously private donors for support. Agitate for this to spread, and the word will go out accordingly.

Your general premise has some merit, though. We’re pretty close to artificially creating sperm cells without any human donor. Rumour has it they’re perfecting this with livestock, and a UK biotech firm boasted in a press release about creating human sperm cells in a test tube recently. They genie may well be out of the bottle.

Best, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
Rob April 12, 2012 at 21:11

Misogynists are not born, they are made.

All males grow up under female control (in the herd), and thus, by nature try to please the female. It is when they realize they can’t, that misogynists are made.

We all follow Briffault’s Law by nature. Civilization is merely an attempt to escape, or control, this animal tendency.

Love you too, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
dicipres April 12, 2012 at 21:32

A very small correction, her kids were adopted, not from sperm donation

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/who-is-hilary-rosen/2012/04/12/gIQA2zFHDT_blog.html

“She stepped down in 2003, saying she wanted to spend more time with her family, attorney Elizabeth Birch and their two adopted children. (The couple separated in 2006.)”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 21:35

A very small correction, her kids were adopted, not from sperm donation

I didn’t pay too much notice to this wretched woman before this evening. Head of the RIAA during the napster era, a ruiner, and look at that sour, bitter, hateful old mug in her press photo. She looks thoroughly unhappy, and dedicated to spreading her own misery around to others as widely as possible…

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5
TFH April 12, 2012 at 21:38

Boxer,

Again, some jurisdictions have begun allowing women to sue previously private donors for support.

OK, your new link is much more relevant to that point.

But that won’t gain traction (and the US is not Canada), as male donors would drop off immediately if there was a chance of this happening retroactively and clinics would fold entirely overnight.

We’re pretty close to artificially creating sperm cells without any human donor.

Sperm and eggs, both. But that is 15+ years away, IMO.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5
TFH April 12, 2012 at 21:42

Boxer,

Actually, I take back the point that your second link is more relevant, upon reading it.

All it wants is for Canada to make donors known when the child is 19.

The US already has that law. The children are informed who their father is, at 18, and can contact him if they wish. I knew that going in.

So Canada is only seeking to have the same law the US already has.

It is not a step towards getting payments from the donor, as the identity is revealed at 18 only. Again, this has been true in the US for at least 10 years, and probably much longer than that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 21:49

Dear TFH:

It’s my fault actually, I’m not being as clear as I should.

Opus made a good point about shaming single moms, and my original point related to scaring dudes. Whether a fella has to worry about a kid contacting him, or about monetary judgements, sperm donation ought to be emphasized as not a *walk away and forget it* procedure.

Sperm and eggs, both. But that is 15+ years away, IMO.

You’re probably right. And if your general point is that many men won’t care and will donate enough sperm for all the dykes in the world to squeeze out kids on the public dime, I’ll concede that too. Fellas are still getting married, after all. P.T. Barnum, suckers, and all that.

Best, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Boxer April 12, 2012 at 22:02

Incidentally, TFH:

Not only are you correct, but Bill may be too, about the “climax” (LOL!) of the feminists.

A Texas man who had previously been unsealed and handed a huge judgment just got his money back (or at least got told he didn’t have to keep paying). This apparently happened just a few days ago…

appeals court ruled a former Texas police officer need not pay child support for two children born as the result of a sperm donation he made. Ronnie Coleman, 47, had been paying child support since 2008 because the mother, identified as Jo D in court documents, said Coleman wasn’t simply a donor and the two had dated and planned to marry, the Fort Worth (Texas) Star-Telegram reported Monday. Coleman said the two had dated intermittently after they met in 1991, and when the woman moved to California 2001, they remained friends. He said Jo D told him in 2006 she planned to be artificially inseminated so she could have children, but he offered to donate sperm at a bank provided he would not be considered the father.

Much more at:
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/04/10/Court-No-child-support-from-sperm-donor/UPI-46001334101163/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
Jean Valjean April 12, 2012 at 22:29

I have my doubts about the premise of this article.

Will birthrate really matter when the school system is indoctrinating young women into feminism at a young age while simultaneously alienating males from all levels of education?

The 1950′s were full of housewives who had lots of children who became feminists. On what basis do you think those young women won’t become feminists today? And with fewer men able to keep women happy in marriage with their “family wage income” what makes you think they will stay married as well?

At the heart of feminism is the female genetic predisposition to discriminate against males. That won’t change no matter what family they are born in. So long as feminism is not labeled a hate movement, so long as the government fills their coffers with taxpayers money, there will be plenty of feminists.

They aren’t going anywhere until we expose them as a hate movement and refute every theory and “herstory”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 2
Lysander Spooner April 12, 2012 at 23:48

Feminism=Genocide …of Feminists.

It really is simple math.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
fmz April 13, 2012 at 00:34

Way off base Bill.

What you see on the way is eye of the hurricane.

Dont be lulled back out. The part of the storm that can do the most damage is lying in wait. Until as many venture back out as possible.

Heads down, tails up and for crying out loud …GYOW, fellas.

While you still can.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Stacy April 13, 2012 at 05:01

Traditional religious conservatives are working towards homeschooling and are some of the most ardents defenders of the notion that “skipping college is for the best”. They’ve pretty much disregard the entire modern liberal educational system.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Migu April 13, 2012 at 05:34

I wish I could share your optimism, but biology trumps common sense.

And human biology trumps animal instinct. Common sense is the defining trait of human biology. The biggest lie in the last 100 years is that humans=animals.

The defining trait of human biology is the ability to abstain from impulse behavior. Common sense so to speak. So, in the case of humans, biology does hold the trump card, but in our case it trumps instinct.

Animal biology trumps common sense.

Human biology trumps animal instinct.

In both cases biology always wins.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6
AntZ April 13, 2012 at 05:49

I hope men can hang on for that long, especially boys.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Migu April 13, 2012 at 05:51

Will birthrate really matter when the school system is indoctrinating young women into feminism at a young age while simultaneously alienating males from all levels of education?

Is the school system the only place to gain an education? Do we even need a centralized “system” to provide for education?

If you don’t mire them in the “system” they won’t become indoctrinated to it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4
Anonymous Reader April 13, 2012 at 06:30

In the 2008 election, Obama got a majority of the votes from women under 30 and from non-married women. Women who are not married are more prone to vote for Obama’s party. Therefore it is in the interests of that party to see more unmarried women, especially babymommas.

The other party tends to get votes from married women. Therefore more married women are in their interests. Now, which way is the trend? The trend is towards unmarried women (50% of births to women under 30 were to unmarried women in the US it is claimed).

The trend is towards pro-Obama voters, for the longer term. Of course, as others have pointed out, the unmarried women rely on government. They rely on it directly via EBT and other programs, but also indirectly via the divorce industry, affirmative action, etc. So long as women can “marry” the government, the trend will continue.

When government runs out of money to “marry” its bitches, then the tide will have to turn. Women can get sperm for their babies from multiple men, but they need resources – either extracted by force from betas by the government, or provided by a single one.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer April 13, 2012 at 07:07

10 Essentials For Your Work Desk Drawer

elmer, an elder Encorpera statesman, offers his advice :

Never keep more crap in your cube than it takes to throw in a bag and walk out in 30 seconds. Toiletries and snacks are a good idea, but maybe keep them in your car or just forget them when you walk out. Don’t keep anything of personal value in your workspace.

If you wish to festoon your cube with knicknacks and family photos use expendable versions and be prepared to leave them behind. If you are an attractive single gal, put up a photo of a fictional ugly fiance’ to keep the office bovines from getting aggressive. If you are a man, a photo of a fat, ugly “wife” is preferable to one of your hot ForeignBride for the same reason to avoid hostility from men and women alike.

It’s ok to put incriminating items in or on your co-worker’s desk though.

Don’t build a nest.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer April 13, 2012 at 07:14

8 Tips for Using Workplace Humor

elmer watches a lot of TV :

“And another thing about White People : Evertime I go into MAC-Donald’s…”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Jean Valjean April 13, 2012 at 07:25

“Is the school system the only place to gain an education? Do we even need a centralized “system” to provide for education?

If you don’t mire them in the “system” they won’t become indoctrinated to it.”

Can you keep them from watching TV, surfing the Internet, associating with kids who go to public school, and shield them from the media and it’s constant sexualization of women which is the carrot that drives most men and keeps them from ever pondering how fucked up things are?

Feminism is as much about state control as it is about female privilege at male expense. It is the new patriarchy where the women control the home and the state replaces men as the provider and protector of all things. They want to control how your children are raised, what they eat, what they think, and how they reproduce.

The out of wedlock birthrate is what the government wants. It destroys the family before it starts and means that the state becomes the family. Do you think that you have the resources to wrest control of your family from the state? And when you are suddenly so “controlling” do you think you can resist the state apparati like social services, child protective services, police, board of education, etc. who will strip you of your children and do their damndest to imprison you for thinking you have a right to be a father and parent?

Feminism will fail when welfare ends. When schools are managed locally. When the government is no longer trying to be the uber father.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Rob April 13, 2012 at 07:38

And human biology trumps animal instinct. Common sense is the defining trait of human biology. The biggest lie in the last 100 years is that humans=animals.

The defining trait of human biology is the ability to abstain from impulse behavior. Common sense so to speak. So, in the case of humans, biology does hold the trump card, but in our case it trumps instinct.

Animal biology trumps common sense.

Human biology trumps animal instinct.

In both cases biology always wins. — Migu

What you are saying is true, but sort of untrue too – heh, I’m speaking like a woman, eh?

Actually, our hind-brain rules all (Fight or Flight-Instinct), then comes our “middle brain” or mammalian brain (emotional brain) which makes us run on “passion” and finally comes our upper brain (thinking brain). They all rule eachother at different times.

When we are calm, our “thinking brain” rules all. We can control our emotions and our instincts and behave rationally. But as we get “assaulted,” our thinking brain shuts down in favour of the emotional brain (passion – love or anger over-rides thinking in many cases – this is as high as most mammals get, except us. Mammals run mostly on “passion”), and ultimately, in times of danger, both the thinking and emotional brains shut down and run on pure hindbrain instinct.

Women “think” less than men because they are more emotional. Angry Harry discusses part of this in Men Are More Intelligent Than Women. The more you “emote” the less you “think.”

We have the ability to over-ride the lower two, but as we get assaulted, either emotionally or with threat of danger (passsion), one brain shuts down and then the next.

I’ve heard before that Mengele did experiments of this nature in concentration camps – ie. measuring the effects of the brain as it “shut down,” by doing things like harming a person’s family member in front of them, or ultimately killing a family member in front of them. (I’ve only watched this on a documentary once, years ago – about Mengele – and have been unable to find it in writing elsewhere, so take this example as you will).

We are “not animals” but we are of the animal kingdom, and still follow its rules.

Btw, sexual instinct resides in our lower brain. Did you actually choose to be heterosexual or homosexual? Nope. (The blank slate is complete BS.) And then, what happens is our mammalian brains justify our “love” which was caused by our lower brain, and finally, our “thinking brain” often rationalizes to us why we are in love.

So, which part is thinking, and which part is instinct? It works in both directions.

(I’m sure Boxer will now be running to the U of Wikipedia to prove me wrong – and don’t get mad at me, people, I’ve offered the Genius of the World two olive branches so as to not have a fight, one yesterday even, and he flat out refuses them).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 13, 2012 at 07:39

Do you think that you have the resources to wrest control of your family from the state?

That’s the mad genius of it. The man who does have the resources just becomes a more convenient target. Migu says he’s read Gramsci, so he should know better than to assume the schools are the only institution wielding the cultural power of the state.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
keyster April 13, 2012 at 08:09

“Keyster:
The United States has one of the least transparent and easily manipulated electoral systems in anything except the most totalitarian nations. There’s no way to tell whether votes actually mean anything or not.”

Tell that to all the people who spent days looking for hanging chads on paper ballots in Florida in 2000. On the contrary the USA is the most regulated democratic voting systems in the world. And FYI – totalitarian nations don’t have electoral systems by definition, so that’s kind of a stupid comparison.

How exactly is it the US system is “easliy manipulated”?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7
keyster April 13, 2012 at 08:28

“All males grow up under female control (in the herd), and thus, by nature try to please the female. It is when they realize they can’t, that misogynists are made.”

Difference is the Mother’s love is Unconditional. Once he unties himself from the apron strings and ventures out, he discovers he can never please a woman, AND their love IS Conditional. That’s how misogynists are made. That’s a young man’s “WTF?” moment. Mother forgives and is tolerant, wife not so much.

Rich Zubaty digs deep into this in his master work, “What Men Know That Women Don’t”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4
Anonxcf April 13, 2012 at 08:31

I don’t think it’s an accident that the groups that have low replacement rates swarm so hardcore to the schools. From trying to strengthen federal control of all state education departments, to actually serving as teachers and administrators, to being ALL UP IN professorships at college, the feminist plan for producing new feminists is and always has been converting the sons and daughters of non-feminist families.

Techniques such as:

-> Shaming the boys. Imply to a boy that his desire for sex is insulting and puts him in a monstrous position (the culmination of this is the “all piv is rape” bullshit, but even without that there’s the implication that the boy is in a lesser position and brings less value). Then state that MANY men do this. The logical (and planned) exit here, if you accept these principles, is the acceptance of the feminist story: that men are privileged, that he has to work to be a Good Man (or a Good Boy) in order to not be subject to the shaming.

-> Promising fantastic prizes to the girls. Primarily, this takes the form of an emotional low and high- people are definitely subject to being told that things are not their fault, that their position would be so much better if not for some villains. Secondarily, there is the actual physical redistribution of wealth. Most people, men and women, have never even questioned the idea that an older couple where a divorce happens, should involve alimony or some equivalent. So the monetary and emotional prizes of behaving in a self serving, female supremacist manner, are sold to young girls, with a narrative of “the men deserve it”.

-> Dehumanize the men. If everyone woke up tomorrow with no memory of anything except how to produce food, imagine how many generational conflicts would simply never exist. Why look at such a ludicrous, fantastic situation? Because to forment hatred, distrust, or malice towards a group of people, we must feel that they deserve it, feel that they aren’t people in the same way we are. If I tell you a full history of the mideast, you might find yourself favoring one faction or people over the other. If you were BORN into that faction, you would absolutely be sold on that fight. Men are dehumanized through stories of oppression, stories of women as property, stories of women denied education. The times when brothers and sisters in the same family ended with the women educated and men simply thrown into a meat grinder of war (much of Europe) are forgotten, or reframed to imply that the manly men were in charge, by looking only at those who had survived terrible odds to even survive- essentially, a lottery winner, the apex fallacy applied to war survivors. Men are dehumanized through painting the successful males as harmful predators, as if all business were illicit, and the painting of unsuccessful males (which by the female sex drive is well over half of males, no matter how ludicrously safe or wealthy your nation) as being unworthy of your notice.

Feminists don’t need to breed to make more feminists. All they need to do is what they HAVE done, unopposed ideologically. Painting an entire sex with a foul brush needs to be recognized as hateful, not given fucking tenure and an interview in mass media. It needs to be seen as what it is, a call to violence, a call to inequality, a call to the application of force, instead of just being seen as “poor women fighting for equality”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
DCM April 13, 2012 at 09:00

“dicipres April 12, 2012 at 21:32

A very small correction, her kids were adopted, not from sperm donation…”

Then they aren’t hers. Somebody put their kids in this situation even if they didn’t know who got them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Migu April 13, 2012 at 09:10

Actually, our hind-brain rules all (Fight or Flight-Instinct), then comes our “middle brain” or mammalian brain (emotional brain) which makes us run on “passion” and finally comes our upper brain (thinking brain). They all rule eachother at different times.

It seems to be the other way around to me. Our cortex rules all, and it decides where to allocate computing resources. It’s the OS, the root directory.

As we go to lower level animals we see the same thing. The emotional brain of a mammal only yields computing resources to the reptillian brain in response to an input from an outside source. In the case of a base mammal sex, food, and danger.

The reptillian is brain is BIOS or UEFI. Without it nothing works. It boots the higher the level systems and cedes control. It only takes over in the event of a panic.

In the case of a mammal we have a BIOS and a primitive terminal. When we get to humans we have the relatively seamless GUI’s, that enable direct access to all lower level systems. Occasionally the kernal panics and BIOS takes over and crashes the system. That is the solution crash the human. (Think alcoholism) Same thing happens with humans. (This is crude, but my aim isn’t technical accuracy it’s analogy)

So yeah I see what you mean by it’s right and wrong. We always have BIOS, so we can get up and running. It’s a fallback so we can do clean installs.

Now I’m rambling….

I have the FSH inverted when it comes to the reptillian/mammallian/human brain.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 8
Towgunner April 13, 2012 at 09:10

I sense that feminism is peaking out too. It’s becoming outrageous and the inconsistencies of their ideology are starting to become too much to cover up. Take the on-going spat between barry and Ann Romney. To suggest that stay at home mom’s have never worked?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Migu April 13, 2012 at 09:17

Can you keep them from watching TV, surfing the Internet, associating with kids who go to public school, and shield them from the media and it’s constant sexualization of women which is the carrot that drives most men and keeps them from ever pondering how fucked up things are?

No, but you can inform them of the fallacies yourself if you don’t cede their rearing to the school system.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6
Migu April 13, 2012 at 09:29

(I’m sure Boxer will now be running to the U of Wikipedia to prove me wrong – and don’t get mad at me, people, I’ve offered the Genius of the World two olive branches so as to not have a fight, one yesterday even, and he flat out refuses them).

I’ve encountered two other guys like him. In real life and on the internet. (It’s a character flaw I use to possess myself)

In my early twenties I heard “Yeah, yeah, migu you’re always right.” enough times that I figured I must be wrong somewhere.

It was a good lesson. Wish I would’ve learned it the easy way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
Migu April 13, 2012 at 09:33

FHS, that was a typo.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
Towgunner April 13, 2012 at 10:08

“Can you keep them from watching TV, surfing the Internet, associating with kids who go to public school, and shield them from the media and it’s constant sexualization of women which is the carrot that drives most men and keeps them from ever pondering how fucked up things are?”

It’s always darkest before dawn. 50 years of feminism during which “they” literally hand held women into certain positions of “power”, where “they” literally softy said things like “give that award to her, cause we need to appear diverse”…I could go on. At yet still, the engine of true progress, making life easier and better, continues to be overwhelming run by men. When the token woman enters into the fray…well they muddle it up with exacting persistence. Right now, I think we’re seeing the apex of feminism, so, it stands to reason that sometimes we’re (the MRA) positive and other times negative. Surely, the femo-monster is revving-up every issue, but could this be a signal that they see the tide going out too? I think so.

Here are a few reasons:

You say watching tv, media etc:

Definitely an explanation as to why we’re at this femofacist point, but consider that the internet is the key disruptive technology breaking the dominance of controlled content from a few media companies and channels etc. CNBC had an article about abysmal viewership at ABC, I think it was, oddly the main networks, which now dinosaurs, have gone hyper-feminist in the last few years. Surely TV’s one-sided messages are driving people away, but an even greater force is that internet-based solutions have put content control almost entirely in the hands of the consumer. ABC, NBC, CBS even HBO and Showtime etc…are all obsolete by current technological standards and alternatives. Isn’t it odd that these channels are staffed with people that constantly talk about how other people, like MRAs, are backwardian and counter progressive when they’re the ones trying to delay inevitable change?

Public schools and education in general:

Thanks to Exxon/Mobile for pointing out to us during The Masters that we rank very low vs. other countries in education. That means…our education system and all its feminization and PC has failed! Once again, education has failed. Never mind grade schools, colleges and universities are out of date producing students that can’t even find Iraq on a map or complete a sentence but are able to spout off a flurry of PC and multicultural sound bites like a machine. Technology will save the day and although “they” will fight to maintain the status quo remember that the student loan bubble is about to burst. When it does, new solutions will move in.

Sexualization of women?

It will never get old, however, an odd thing is happening with the proliferation of pornography…people are becoming impotent.
Finally the biggest reason why feminism has peaked is because the entire West is now bankrupt many times over. We’ll try to patch it up as much as we can but the “die is cast”.

Thanks WF good article.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
LysanderSpooner April 13, 2012 at 10:16

“Climax of Feminism”

I once dated a feminist and damn she never climaxed, but who gives a sh*t, I didn’t. I don’t think feminists are capable of climaxing, what was that good ‘ol saying about feminsts, they are like dead fish without wheels or something!? :)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
ahamkara April 13, 2012 at 10:21

I love the Hilary Rosen debacle. It is a circular firing squad of politicized women trying to smash each other down with their “who’s the realer woman” credentials. I laughed my ass off. This is the kind of infighting that we need amongst women.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
MRA April 13, 2012 at 10:51

The 1950′s were full of housewives who had lots of children who became feminists. On what basis do you think those young women won’t become feminists today? And with fewer men able to keep women happy in marriage with their “family wage income” what makes you think they will stay married as well?

The money is not flowing like it did in 60s, that is the issue here, feminists are having troubles passing laws in the last 5 years, we are a welfare state, with a population of single motherhood growing like rabbits, this children coming from matriarchy household wont have power in 30 years, when just boys rise by single mothers tend to end up in the thug live more than 60% compared to intact family and women who take jobs BUT not create them, and men avoiding log term relationship with women will put them in the hands of the state more than they are now, you know, “women are unhappy and is the STATE job to make them happy”.

Men are already blamed for not just social troubles but what affect men too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
Crank April 13, 2012 at 10:53

Funny article at Huff Post showing how ridiculously stats are use to paint women as victims, but also showing how the women sucking off the public sector are now feeling the effects of the economy as previously predicted here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/13/womens-jobs-state-austerity_n_1415276.html?show_comment_id=147820155#comment_147820155

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Senior Manchild April 13, 2012 at 12:16

The effects of feminism will be felt long into the future even if feminists are no longer a force to be reckoned with. We seem to forget that this has all had an effect on males that is only starting to show up. And while I find the articles that you have wrote portending the end of feminism interesting W.F. I think the part of the equation that you are leaving out is the Men. Dalrock has written about not receiving ¨the signal¨, and many men have not received the signal and are different than their forebearers. Some of what we are now living through may get a second life, but this time with men behind it and maybe even women against it.

Let´s think in terms of some of the male liberation that we see around us. Even here on the Spearhead, I have heard the opinion expressed that maybe it would be in our interest to push through the agenda of our counterparts to it´s logical conclusion. And as you admit yourself, we will probably see another 4 more years of a leftist administration with it´s policy prerogatives. As the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for. If we are about to enter a socialist dystopia, don´t expect a future of vigorous concern for modern America´s 1st world woman problems or anything else. Of course, probably because of the socialist dream we will have increased apathy( sympathy fatigue) towards many of the concerns of old; not in spite of it. I often find some humor when pondering how so much of what women have complained about and sought to correct is getting worse in the absence of the traditional and not better.

So, what I am saying is that there are still older men cut from a different cloth that would go back to a time before second-wave feminism, but increasingly, younger men may see a better future taking everything to it´s logical conclusion if the scales tip too much in that direction?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Senior Manchild April 13, 2012 at 12:29

I mean:

If you destroy a society, who are the winners? the young, the strong, the nimble, men in general.

And by inference who are the worst losers?, the one´s who have been most dependent on the society.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 13, 2012 at 12:47

If you destroy a society, who are the winners? the young, the strong, the nimble, men in general.

I think a very few men and women, at the top tier, win big. Men will come out ahead of women, but they’ll still lose. Society is a framework which allows for things like free time, pooling resources for infrastructure (libraries, superhighways, schools) and other such stuff. The people at the very top of the heap have access to most of this stuff due to their great wealth. The rest of us will suffer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 4
Senior Manchild April 13, 2012 at 13:08

Those at the top are among the most vulnerable when a society collapses; lots of reshuffling going on. Of course I suppose you mean something short of a real collapse.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Senior Manchild April 13, 2012 at 13:11

How many of our wealthy would even survive something as relatively benign( not complete savagery) of the sort exemplified by the former U.S.S.R.?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Boxer April 13, 2012 at 13:16

How many of our wealthy would even survive something as relatively benign( not complete savagery) of the sort exemplified by the former U.S.S.R.?

The Russian and American revolutions were actually pretty profitable for the extremely wealthy. You can see people leaving the country beforehand and coming back as new “communists” or “patriots” with their wealth.

The French revolution was something more akin to what I think you mean. That was very bloody, with cycles of executions that lasted years. In that case, fewer of those who had exploited the rest of us would be able to return and continue their tomfoolery; but, if you read history, you realize that complete collapses rarely happen. Usually the names of things change. The Waffen SS colonel from a wealthy family simply changes his uniform after WWII and becomes an East German communist, with all the privileges of before (the communist party was really the ruling class anyway). Too often, the system endures some cosmetic changes, and the people stay the same.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
Wilson April 13, 2012 at 13:20

I don’t think there’s actually much of a division, because even the SAHMs dislike Ann Romney out of envy. They don’t take an “outrageous” comment from a lesbian too seriously, and admire her life–getting an easy paycheck from a corporate busywork job and settling into a laid-back partnership with a girlfriend is a lot more attainable than marrying a multimillionaire businessman. Maybe after the divorce they’ve been thinking about…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Senior Manchild April 13, 2012 at 13:38

Wealth in America is largely based on consumption; of either goods or services. What I remember about the former communist bloc and read about present day Cuba, is the absolute dearth of consumption. People in Cuba get an egg a day. It is not just that they don´t have much to choose from but that they themselves are not productive enough to really warrant much more than an egg a day. Castro is wealthy. I think that it is estimated that he has a personal wealth of around $1B(U.S.). But, good god, a man that has such power over what was once one of the most advanced of Latin countries is only able to skim off 1B; I am not impressed.

Surely the wealthy in the U.S. do not want men to get behind some of the Marxist policies that are promulgated and then double down on it.
They just want us to be the good little dogs as always and take whatever shit is dished out. So here we are; to go back or go forward.

The good thing is that we can´t really even go forward to something that resembles the former Soviet Union of the 1920´s. We have already ruined our idealism. America thankfully is too cynical for such silly dreams. We can only head towards the phoenix event or balkanization if we do not recede from the edge.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
JeremiahMRA April 13, 2012 at 14:38

We’re in for an era of strife and slavery.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
JeremiahMRA April 13, 2012 at 14:39

Though if you think about it, most of us already ARE slaves. But it will get worse.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
JeremiahMRA April 13, 2012 at 14:46

@keyster

Not only does the establishment rig the primaries through a variety of tactics, as plainly evidenced by this year’s Republican race, but also the voting machines (e.g. Diebold) are very easily reprogrammed to change votes in the general election.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
JeremiahMRA April 13, 2012 at 14:51

“And FYI – totalitarian nations don’t have electoral systems by definition, so that’s kind of a stupid comparison.”

Heard of Iran?

Also, Totalitarian: “Of or relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.”

Sounds like the US to me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
JeremiahMRA April 13, 2012 at 14:53

Both Iran and the US have the illusion of democracy. Both are totalitarian in fact.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Senior Manchild April 13, 2012 at 15:25

you know,

so much pandering to the females by democrats and maybe even republicans,

wouldn´t it make sense for America´s third party to shamelessly pander to men? Their ideology is way more in line with men anyway.

Let´s hope that the duopoly( republicans, democrats) really gets into it and sacrifice themselves for the little wimmins; if they could give each other a fatal blow, maybe we could get them under control. Split the women with democrats and republicans and men win with libertarians.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Towgunner April 13, 2012 at 17:18

@ Senior Manchild:

Let’s hope something like that can happen, split the wimmen between rep and dems. Personally, I like Ron Paul…someone who supports small government. What do you think about this: women vote as a block they’re naturally very persuadable and all rally around hating men. Meanwhile men have been divided by race etc, women will always have an advantage in voting over men, so whoever gets them gets it all. Of course this is mob rule and we are or were a republic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Attila April 13, 2012 at 18:35

There’s never a better time to embrace Islam — it’s good to know you have at least one billion brothers and sisters who don’t buy any of this stuff. It’s a beautiful day every day under the umbrella of the One.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
Eric April 13, 2012 at 18:39

Keyster:

‘JeremiahMRA’ pretty much made the same points that I would have made. Dictatorships and totalitarian governments often run sham elections. The Soviet Politburo, for example, was technically an elected body.

As for transparency, for example, my state (Washington) doesn’t even have polling places. Ballots are mailed in to the government, whose bureaucrats count them. No exit polls, no way of verifying anything. Also our state runs an open primary election where the top two candidates, regardless of party, are the only two in a November run-off. In most states, exit polling is only conducted for Republican and Democratic voters; independents and third parties aren’t counted. Who knows how many of those are siphoned off?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Eric April 13, 2012 at 18:45

Senior Manchild:

“If you destroy a society, who are the winners?”

That depends greatly upon who destroyed it and why. Sometimes the power-structure intentionally destroys it to reorganize it for their own benefit. Revolutionaries have a committed plan for what replaces it. Sometimes, if a society falls unintentionally, whoever succeeds in harnessing the fear and force of the general population wins. Sometimes foreign powers win.

The best option is to do our best to keep it from disintegrating in the first place. It might be too late for our culture, though.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
freebird April 13, 2012 at 20:29

A serious factor not mentioned by anyone here yet:
The repubs have threatened to cut off Social Security and Medicare payments to the boomers, this puts most elder men into the democon catagory.

My own 80 yr old father and I had this conversation today.
The repubs will kill the working man and give it to the large corporations,the democons will promote the gay/lesbian agenda,but preserve the RETIREMENT BENEFITS.

I was all for Ron Paul,but then he spouted the same republicrat line,less taxes for corporations,less retirement safety net for old folks.

It’s a nasty catch 22.
Also I have to add:the older boomers are solid manginas, they still think women have the lesser side of all equations,and do not even protest Dr.Phil type speech nor Oprah Hate speech,they accept the shaming language as genuine,have INTERNALIZED IT!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
Avenger April 13, 2012 at 22:07

@freebird
Also I have to add:the older boomers are solid manginas, they still think women have the lesser side of all equations,and do not even protest Dr.Phil type speech nor Oprah Hate speech,they accept the shaming language as genuine,have INTERNALIZED IT!

They don’t even know Phil and Oprah are alive or are they effected by current US trash “culture”

‘A serious factor not mentioned by anyone here yet:
The repubs have threatened to cut off Social Security and Medicare payments to the boomers, this puts most elder men into the democon catagory.’

When SS was first established it was like an old age supplement fund. Back then, it was the older and retired people who were the poorest and the SS Pension was just a small amount of money given so that they would not starve or freeze from lack of heat.
Today, the AARP and retired older crowd are the wealthiest group in the country who don’t even need that small pension from the government. The small % who only have SS which is not enough to live on have a very meagre existence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
Attila April 13, 2012 at 22:13

The Washington Post had an opinion piece defending Rosen – by a Linda Hirschman (Oy, oy, oy). One wonders how Jews as a group can survive biologically – when it seems that every other one of their women is either an aspiring executivette or a muff-diving artiste.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price April 13, 2012 at 22:49

Today, the AARP and retired older crowd are the wealthiest group in the country who don’t even need that small pension from the government. The small % who only have SS which is not enough to live on have a very meagre existence.

-Avenger

Did you know that AARP magazine – largest circulation in the US – is run by Andrea Dworkin’s widower, who is a self-proclaimed male feminist? Pretty deep reach there, isn’t it?

Avenger April 14, 2012 at 02:29

Did you know that AARP magazine – largest circulation in the US – is run by Andrea Dworkin’s widower, who is a self-proclaimed male feminist? Pretty deep reach there, isn’t it?

No, but I can’t believe that Dworkin was ever married lol

Pretty deep reach there, isn’t it?
Don’t understand what you mean.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
Avenger April 14, 2012 at 03:28

Migu-you cannot compare the human brain to a simple mechanical machine like a computer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3
Kris W April 14, 2012 at 04:00

@TFH

I wouldn’t worry about artificial sperm. They tried it and it is so genetically unfeasible that it just isn’t an issue.

On the flip side, they can convert sperm cells to stem cells, and from stem cells to 110% healthy egg cells. All that is needed is slightly more advanced gestation technology, and women are totally obsolete.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel April 14, 2012 at 04:46

Avenger
Migu-you cannot compare the human brain to a simple mechanical machine like a computer.

Mechanical computers ? I knew you were old, but….maybe not that old.

And yes you can. What are you but a meat robot with an organic computer for a brain? Free will is an illusion .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9
migu April 14, 2012 at 06:19

I can do what the fuck I want cap’n.

I suppose today you are an AI programmer. Besides I’m sure the crude analogy was enough for someone with a brain to follow the thought train. Get back to your bottle and shutup.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10
freebird April 14, 2012 at 08:43

Well there ya go Price, a new thought for a new article:
How AARP helps to condition older folks to support feminism and democons.

There’s a lot to digest there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 14, 2012 at 12:22

Did you know that AARP magazine – largest circulation in the US – is run by Andrea Dworkin’s widower, who is a self-proclaimed male feminist? Pretty deep reach there, isn’t it?

Wow!! Speechless…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 6
Avenger April 14, 2012 at 13:18

@Martel-Don’t be so dense. I think you know what I meant by machine.It’s a creation of man and cannot think on its own.
And no one is ever going to develope synthetic sperm either anymore than they’ll be able to create gold from lead.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 14, 2012 at 13:30

miguel writes ‘Besides I’m sure the crude analogy was enough for someone with a brain’

Yes, a very crude analogy lol

So Chief, what’s your net worth? Because that’s how I judge a man’s intelligence and it’s correct in 99% of the cases. After eliminating the the extremes at the top and bottom it’s a pretty good way to sort out who’s who.
So Cap’n, you sailing your yacht this weekend?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Abides April 14, 2012 at 14:07

The brain is really run by the lower levels. The upper levels and consciousness are there to train/reprogram the lower levels. Conscious decisions happen around 0.5s after the unconscious ones.

When you speak, do you consciously decide what you are saying? No. That’s why when you have to give an important, meditated speech you think about it, write it down, and practice it beforehand.

Similarly when you play the piano or type on a computer keyboard. You deliberately train yourself to do it (and it is often quite a bit of effort) until it just happens and you no longer think about it.

You behavior is entirely driven by your lower brain levels, but you can train/reprogram them beforehand.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Ahem April 14, 2012 at 16:45

“What do you think about this: women vote as a block they’re naturally very persuadable and all rally around hating men. Meanwhile men have been divided by race etc, women will always have an advantage in voting over men, so whoever gets them gets it all. ”

Last election, women voted 56% Obama, 43 % McCain. I think that pretty much defeats the theory that women will vote in one united block.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Smith April 14, 2012 at 21:08

W.F. Price,

I posted that AARP factoid a year ago on Ferd’s blog:

http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2011/04/16/anti-aarp/#comment-31098

Do you remember seeing it there? I’d like to think you got it elsewhere
as that would indicate a wider circulation of these ideas.

Since then, I’ve started to hear radio spots for a sort of counter-AARP
as people wise up to their agenda. It’ s really insidious how this mindset spreads through every as aspect of the culture.

Dalrock highlighted a comment on his blog which in my opinion ought
to be on the masthead of every MRA site:

“Any person or institution not explicitly anti-feminist will drift towards
tacit support of feminism. Because feminism is in the air we breath and
the water we drink.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 03:14

Last election, women voted 56% Obama, 43 % McCain. I think that pretty much defeats the theory that women will vote in one united block.

That is correct.And let’s remember that McCain was a very weak older candidate and he was stupid enough to run with Palin(I guess everyone else knew he’d lose and wouldn’t run with him). Females won’t vote for other females in general esp. a younger good looking one(btw I don’t think she’s good looking) and she likely lost him the female vote .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
migu April 15, 2012 at 05:52

My net worth is more than yours cap’n. Now I expect due reverence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 06:34

Migu wastes time and bandwidth with…

My net worth is more than yours cap’n. Now I expect due reverence.

Typical dick-size argument which means nothing, which is what you generally do here. Go study some of the material you pretend to lecture on, and come back when you have a clue about what you constantly rant.

To the point: the income of the the homebuilder and mathematician generally hovers around the average income of the society in which the homebuilder and mathematician live. The average income of the stockbroker generally hovers around 2000 percent of the society’s average income. The homebuilder produces something valuable and the mathematician writes interesting and society advancing theories, while the stockbroker buys and sells other people’s produce, producing nothing of his own. Income is not tied to personal worth, any more than it’s tied to the worth of the profession. So much for your latest kookfart. This one wasn’t even entertaining.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8
Huck Finn April 15, 2012 at 10:40

Rob,

Interesting comments about the old and new brain and how it relates to modern women, feminism, and misandry.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 14:38

“Income is not tied to personal worth, any more than it’s tied to the worth of the profession.”

The market decides what you’re worth. Everything else is just one man’spersonal opinion.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Rob April 15, 2012 at 14:56

Typical dick-size argument which means nothing, which is what you generally do here. Go study some of the material you pretend to lecture on, and come back when you have a clue about what you constantly rant. — Boxer

Stuff it Boxer, liar.

Why don’t you go back to U of Wikipedia and figure out how to impress us some more.

The next olive branch offered to you will slap you across the face.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:01

Dear Avenger:

The only people I have ever heard spout inanities like these have been people in abject poverty and late-night infomercial shysters.

The market decides what you’re worth. Everything else is just one man’spersonal opinion.

Oh? And which market would that be?

Most of my money comes in the form of interest and dividends. None of it has anything to do with the quality of person I am. I don’t work for it. I don’t even manage the portfolio.

As far as my day job goes, the salary I get is determined partly by a board of people I’ve never met, and partly by bureaucrats at the state capital. I’ll be the first to cop to the fact that I get paid far more than I “earn”. Were there a truly free market, I and most of my colleagues would be out on our asses doing something productive.

There is no “market” in the USA, nor is there any society that is controlled by a market. Even hypercapitalist nations like China and Singapore have price controls, minimum wage, and both of those places even have social engineering schemes that in some ways resemble affirmative action.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:07

Rob/Jeb/various other sockpuppet names begs for my attention with:

The next olive branch offered to you will slap you across the face.

Your problem is that you have no balls, and that gives you zero credibility. You start shit, retreat into feminine whining about how you’ve been in the hospital, and then reappear to start more shit.

I’ve never given two shits about you, loser. That’s what bugs you most. You’re a shut-in who lives online, has no social or professional life to speak of, and is in and out of hospital for various chronic diseases (no doubt due to poor life choices and impulse control).

I’ll await your excuse about being on medication for these latest outbursts. LOL!

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:11

Boxer was proven a liar here too.

He’s hardly worthy of being called a Canadian

Another shameful academic humiliating Canada’s once impeccably high standards.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:12

Pull your skirt up between your legs and keep running, cockser

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:16

Dear Rob/Jeb/Whatever else:

I think you should dedicate at least fifty more replies on this blog to your master: Boxer.

They need to be longer than these, full of your typical psychotic wordsalad prose, with bold and italic text sprinkled throughout, just to prove how darned cool I am.

I’m waiting, bee-yatch. :p

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:22

Most of my money comes in the form of interest and dividends. None of it has anything to do with the quality of person I am. I don’t work for it. I don’t even manage the portfolio. – Boxer the liar

So… you are worth then around $2,000,000 you are claiming, eh?

At given rates, you would need to have around $2,000,000 to maintain a mere average Canadian income from “buy and hold.” Don’t pull your bullshit lies about dividends either, since 3% yield is about the norm you can get from blue-chips, while most other stocks (which you would have in a properly diversified portfolio) yield between 0% to !% dividends. If you could average 2% overall, you would be doing pretty good – and you’d need $2,000,000 to get $40,000/yr income from it.

Liar liar, pants on fire.

And I never started ANYTHING with you cockser, it is the other way around, and anyone who has been following KNOWS that, liar.

What a fucking clown.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:23

It’s not nice to have an asshole follow you around and pester you, is it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:26

It’s not nice to have an asshole follow you around and pester you, is it?

Actually I think it’s hilarious to have a pet like yourself, obsessed with me. I live in your head, the rent is free, and the accommodations are sweet.

Now you just keep posting, kooky. You owe me 48 more followups, and I want 500 words each.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:32

And furthermore, you lying piece of excrement.

There is not one single person in the MRM who doesn’t know that Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz is the same person.

When I posted as Jeb – my real name – I used the exact same arguments I did as Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz – and in fact, often directly linked to the No Ma’am blog to support my arguments. Only a twit like you couldn’t have figured it out. Nobody ever asked, but I’ll bet 75% of people knew right off the bat. If someone had asked, I wouldn’t have denied it.

Zed is also known as Zenpriest, The Grand Curmudgeon, TGC and John Galt.

You gonna attack him too?

What an asshole you are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:35

Dear Jeb/Rob/etc.

Only a twit like you couldn’t have figured it out.

You mean someone with a job and friends, who doesn’t keep meticulous track of who is posting as what today versus yesterday, on some little known internet blog? LOLOLOLOL!

You reveal yourself a loser with every new kookrant you fart out, boy.

Keep it up. I need 47 more of these. They’d better be good, too.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:42

FOURTEEN Years, and still no Ph D.

My God!

To become a heart surgeon, you spend 4 years undergrad in pre-med, then 4 years in med-school, then 3 years of residency, and then finally another 4 years of training for general surgery and cardiac fellowship, bringing the total to approximately FIFTEEN years.

You don’t even have a simple Ph D yet, yet you’ve been in school for FOURTEEN years. Most people achieve that in 8 to 9 years.

Only dimwits take fourteen years, and STILL don’t have a Ph D.

You own the Canadian Tax-payers some serious refund. Maybe you can take it out of the $2,000,000 investment portfolio you’ve acquired while fucking around in school.

Liar.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rob April 15, 2012 at 15:45

Fourteen years studying Trotsky he claims,

And apparently he still doesn’t know Trotsky is a MARXIST!

Hello quality of education.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:47

Dear Kooky Rob/Jeb/etc.:

You’ve built me quite the castle between your ears.

Incidentally: Why would I lie about this shit? Nearly all of the money that sits around, nominally mine, wasn’t earned by me originally (you’re off, by the way). It’s not like it’s some great achievement to have some money your granddaddy gave you.

For that matter, why would I make myself a teacher? Why not an astronaut, or a novelist, or an NBA basketball player who bangs lingerie models?

Time to take your meds and figure out what I’m doing next. LOL!

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 15:52

“The only people I have ever heard spout inanities like these have been people in abject poverty and late-night infomercial shysters”

I have no idea what an infomercial is.

The market decides what you’re worth. Everything else is just one man’spersonal opinion.

“Oh? And which market would that be?”

The general market that we call life. And I have no idea what you mean by homebuilders, mathematicians or stockbrokers.

You’re using these very meaningless generic terms.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 15:56

Dear Avenger:

The general market that we call life. And I have no idea what you mean by homebuilders, mathematicians or stockbrokers. You’re using these very meaningless generic terms.

There is no market we call life that decides how much money a person makes. Most of the wealth people have (myself included) is stuff that was earned generations ago. I could be Jesus Christ or Charles Manson and the cheques would keep kicking into my account.

For that matter, most of the papershufflers and bureaucrats have been given a job and a paycheck, as near as I can tell, merely as a means to keep them busy, thoughtless and out of trouble.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 16:12

You know,I believe that when I first made the comment I excluded the very tiny group at the top like myself as irrelevant but let me also add that there have been many cases where a person has inherited assets only to end up as a derelict.

“For that matter, most of the papershufflers and bureaucrats have been given a job and a paycheck, as near as I can tell, merely as a means to keep them busy, thoughtless and out of trouble.”

Sure, the IRS is very inefficient lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Rob April 15, 2012 at 16:16

For that matter, why would I make myself a teacher? — Cockser

You yourself CLAIM you are a teacher, when you talk about “your students.”

What it probably means is you are merely a TA, probably to some fat ugly Women’s Studies douche who only keeps you around for your “oral services.”

Are you going to SFU or UBC? Just curious. You say you live in Surrey.

I’ve also seen you claim before you were in the States. Which is it, Surrey or the States? Liar.

Fuck, you should shut up.

Btw, you also claim you are so busy that you can’t always post because of your professional life… yet you do post during business hours. Are you further pilfering my tax dollars by fucking around on the Spearhead while on the tax-payer’s dime? You better watch out the information you expose around me. I fucking hate people wasting my tax-dollars. During the week, get to fucking work and make sure us tax-payers get our money’s worth, slacker.

Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive!

Liar

You can’t even maintain consistent lies in the same thread, let alone multiple ones.

Some village is sure missing its idiot.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 16:18

I could be Jesus Christ or Charles Manson and the cheques would keep kicking into my account.

Wrong. If you were Manson they’d be taking that money for your room and board at prison. You would have also been sued by the families for damages and lost all of it.Even before OJ was imprisoned for his new crime he had a $50,000,000 judgement against him and that was after being acquited of the criminal offence.

And whenever a person describes himself as a “mathematician” you can be sure he’s some flunky working as an instructor at some Uni.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 16:18

there have been many cases where a person has inherited assets only to end up as a derelict.

That’s true, and the road to the gutter takes some surprising turns. I knew a beautiful girl in childhood who came from a much wealthier family than mine… She died of a heroin overdose. One of the kids I was briefly acquainted with in childhood lives in a homeless shelter, doing volunteer work. The idealist social worker type…

All the same: the vast majority of people who have some claim to the word “wealthy” are like the members of my extended family. Attorneys, physicians, pharmacists… people who are largely mediocre and unremarkable, who value style over substance, who eat too much, who think too little, and who live masturbatory, self-centered lives. The people in the gated community are pretty much the same quality as the people who live in ghettos and trailer parks, in other words.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 16:21

Dear Kooky Rob/Jeb/etc.:

That’s better! I need more of these long, conspiracy minded articles, all about me. Try and figure out what my real name is, and I’ll send you 1000 dollars!

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 10
Rob April 15, 2012 at 16:42

Heh, heh.

Why do you keep responding to me if I’m just a kook?

And why do you always run away when I prove you’re a liar with your own words?

You obviously never took any classes that teach basic logic.

Get a haircut, and get a real job.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 16:46

The people in the gated community are pretty much the same quality as the people who live in ghettos and trailer parks, in other words.

Well if you believe that then you are completely deluded.

“I knew a beautiful girl in childhood who came from a much wealthier family than mine… She died of a heroin overdose”

Well at least she’d died young and happy. She didn’t have to suffer the ravages and deterioration of aging or being bored for the next 50 years. The perception of time is relative anyway. Five years on opium may seem like 50k in the life of an ordinary person.

“Attorneys, physicians, pharmacists… people who are largely mediocre blah blah bl;ah…”

These are just ordinary jobs filled by the smarter kids from the middle classes (usually lower middle or even lower)

“One of the kids I was briefly acquainted with in childhood lives in a homeless shelter, doing volunteer work. The idealist social worker type…”

In other words, an idiot. Homeless shelters are all a big racket where the government pays so much per head. For 1/2 the amount they could just as well pay for a place to live, food etc

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 16:50

Dear Avenger:

Well if you believe that then you are completely deluded.

I’m tempted to label you too. From my perspective, people like you (who conflate wealth with innate quality) have never had any money, and don’t know anyone with any.

The nouveau riche and upper middle class sometimes falls into this fallacy as well. I suppose it might feed the ego of a dude who has “worked his way up” into the multimillionaire bracket to think that he managed it because he was somehow “better” than everyone else. The reality is that it’s largely a shell game. Think of monopoly to get the idea. You get lucky with some investment and then somehow you imagine you’re cool. If it works for you, it’s fine, but it’s hardly what I’ve experienced.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 16:52

Dear Jeb/Rob/etc.:

And why do you always run away when I prove you’re a liar with your own words?

Umm, this is the internet, kooky. Nobody can run here. It’s words on a screen.

I thought you were busy figuring out who I am in the real world, so that you could, like, turn me in for posting to the spearhead dot com. LOL! Hurry up and do exactly that. In the mean time, you owe me at least 44 long, psychotic rants. Make the next one an expose of me as the head of the communist party (like you did last week). Bonus points for grandiosity!

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 11
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 17:02

As I said,”deluded” and you’re likely to be some poor unemployed guy or at the very most working a flunky’s job as a teacher.

Only the poor believe in luck and of course I’m not referring to winning the lottery here lol

And as I said before, I’m not talking about that fraction of 1 % at the top but the 99% majority. There’s no such thing as luck.
If you do everything correctly in life from the time you are a child you MAY succeed in life in whatever area you choose.But if you are constantly doing the wrong thing, making errors of judgement, not planning etc. you are guaranteeing failure.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rob April 15, 2012 at 17:06

Myself, Migu, Keyster, Charles Martel and anyone and everyone else are going to speak about Cultural Marxism all we want. If they want to fight you, they are welcome to it, but they need not to anymore. I will be standing there with my clue-bat to smack you up the back of the head, you dissimulative little disinformation twit.

What kind of an idiot declares that Lenin’s own words is a “kooky conspiracy rant”?

Pfft.

What a clown – but at least, you are a displaying typical academic clown-assery. That much is certain. It’s about the only consistent thing about you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 17:12

Dear Avenger:

And as I said before, I’m not talking about that fraction of 1 % at the top but the 99% majority. There’s no such thing as luck.

Luck is your word, and it’s not entirely a bad one. What determines what child gets born to a crackhead on welfare, as opposed to a stable couple with a steady income.

I excluded the very tiny group at the top like myself

You’re not at the top, and don’t know anyone at the top. Know how I know?

Attorneys, physicians, pharmacists…These are just ordinary jobs filled by the smarter kids from the middle classes (usually lower middle or even lower)

No, these are the jobs people take who have the money to choose whatever job they want.

The first generation that enters the upper-middle class, at least in North America, is likely to be a hustler, a salesman, the owner of a hotel chain, something along these lines. His kids and grandkids never, ever risk their wealth. They also don’t sit around doing nothing, either. They get law and finance degrees, and they go to easy jobs which give them the appearance of working, and they screw off the rest of the day.

Same as the truck driver in the trailer park, only they go to drug treatment for their benzodiazepine addiction, rather than jail for alcohol and marijuana.

Good convo. I learned much about you this afternoon.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 13
Boxer April 15, 2012 at 17:15

Dear Rob/Jeb/etc.:

Gee, you’re backpedaling pretty frantically from your earlier boast that you were going to turn me in to the dean for “wasting the taxpayer’s dime” or some such. Now you’re desperately name-dropping… very disappointing. I suppose you took your Paxil and are suitably embarrassed.

I have to go for now, but we’ll play again soon, I promise. :)

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 14
Rob April 15, 2012 at 17:34

Do you even read your own posts?

You just pull shit out of you ass and declare it as fact.

Where’s the backpedal, asshole.

I’ve got lots and lots of time yet to figure out who and what you are affiliated with.

I’ve been at this for years.

The only backpedalling I’ve seen is by guys like you – only insults, zero logic, and one contradiction after another.

Pricks like you don’t intimidate me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Rob April 15, 2012 at 17:36

A smart man would have accepted at least one of the two olive branches I offered you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Avenger April 15, 2012 at 19:28

rather than jail for alcohol and marijuana

I figured you were a dopey pothead.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 15, 2012 at 20:39

Seems to me that Boxer has run away once again. This is the third time he’s run off from me. No tangible argument to hold him to, just bullshittery after more bullshittery.

He’ll be back again. He always is.

Get a Haircut and Get a Real Job

He’s never really won an argument with anyone. His logic resembles a woman’s (change the subject, repeatedly). But he sure does know how to tuck his skirt between his legs and run away like a chicken ass.

I’m not nearly done with you yet, bubba.

Lol!I’m just waiting for him to again claim I might be a feminist plant, and that’s why he wants to run away.

What a chicken dick.

I’m glad Welmer is letting us duke it out.

Cheers, Welmer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 15, 2012 at 21:38

Your problem is that you have no balls, and that gives you zero credibility. You start shit, retreat into feminine whining about how you’ve been in the hospital, and then reappear to start more shit. — Cockser

I’ve written this whole thread while high as a kite on valium.

Wanna rematch without the drugs?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 15, 2012 at 23:13

By the way, Boxer,

I already know you attend SFU, since you claim you live in Surrey. I don’t know it the Surrey campus offers Ph D programs, but I will find out.

I also know you work for a bureaucracy that you don’t answer to directly.

I also know you are a TA, not a prof.

I’m not as stupid as you. I will figure out where you work.

All this, and I am high as the moon too!

You just wait, you tax draining parasite on Canadian culture.

You should be living in a box in an alley, near to a warm grate.

You are a looter.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 06:11

Dear Kooky Rob/Jeb/other socks:

I’ve written this whole thread while high as a kite on valium.

I feel sorry for you, which is why I don’t treat you with the same, shall we say, vigor, as Firepower. At heart, poodles is a hardened troll (probably with a usenet history) who enjoys a good argument. You, in contrast, are simply pathetic.

Do call around at Simon Fraser though, and see if you can figure out who I am that way. LOLOLOL! The offer of the thousand dollar reward is still good if you post my real name and office phone no..

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
D April 16, 2012 at 09:28

@ Boxer

The Communist Revolution wasn’t bloody compared to the Reign of Terror?

I wouldn’t want to be around during the Red Terror or the October and February Revolution, comrade.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 11:43

The offer of the thousand dollar reward is still good if you post my real name and office phone no.. — Boxer

Good, we’ll hold you to it, then use the money to buy Spearhead readers some good quality Canadian beer as payment for having to listen to your bullshit and attempted bullying day after day.

I’m also pretty certain that you don’t actually have a job seperate from SFU, but rather are getting “paid” for doing research that will lead into either your Master’s Thesis (which is where I think you are at) or towards your Ph D Dissertation. The research will then be used as the foundation of your thesis, but will ultimately belong to SFU. The “bureaucracy” you work for is actually the panel which will review your work and give you a pass/fail.

After FOURTEEN years, you better get your ass in gear. My sister was a similar slack-ass in school, and all of a sudden found she had to work nearly around the clock or lose all of her funding, they were so pissed off at her for screwing around forever and ever.

There’s another brilliant Ph D. – My sister. Stupid bimbo claims she doesn’t like talking to my parents because they are immigrants whose English isn’t perfect and discussions with them “dumb her down.” What an arrogant little bitch. My parents are fluent in three languages, and have amassed a considerable fortune. But according to her, they are “too stupid.” They sure didn’t seem stupid when the mighty Ph D. was forced to declare bankruptcy twice in her life and had to come all humbled with her hand out to the Bank of Mom & Dad to survive. She didn’t think they were stupid when she got caught by the Canadian Tax & Revenue agency for trying to screw them over, and needed $15,000 tout de suite to stay out of the hoosegow for tax evasion.

Another arrogant thing the bitch likes to do is – knowing that my parents are dedicated Christians – come around and try to deconstruct God right to their face, in front of the whole family, with her big nonsensical words and theories. This is where kooky Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb would step in and smack the arrogant Ph D around with sheer logic + no degree. It’s why the “dumb old immigrant millionaire dad” would walk up behind me, pat me on the back and say in his thick accent, “me so proud-a of my-a son with-a no-a degree.” (Btw, I am not highly religious either, but I just can’t believe the disrespect for others you academic retards have).

You remind me so much of her.

I haven’t spoken to her in five or six years now, except for briefly when my mom was in the hospital for a suspected heart-attack. And I’d just as soon never see her again.

Fucking Ph D’s.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 13:13

Dear Kooky D:

Knowing that you’re just here to beg for a bit of abuse (probably have “daddy issues”, don’t you), you still raise some interesting points.

The Communist Revolution wasn’t bloody compared to the Reign of Terror? I wouldn’t want to be around during the Red Terror or the October and February Revolution, comrade.

They were both bloody and horrible for the common people. For the well connected, the bolshevik revolution was a way to make money. You don’t really believe all that shite about workers paradise, do you? Or are you yet another Jeb/Rob/etc. sock, who thinks the communist party is still controlling the world, now “behind the scenes”? LOLOLOL!

The super rich in Tsarist Russia largely emigrated, and then returned to become “communist heroes” after the bloodbath was over. They emigrated again around WWII, but the revolution itself was something of a farce.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 13:52

It’s business hours, you deadbeat drain on the taxpayers.

Lunch hour is over so get to fucking work!

If you’re still counting my rants, you can find 806 of them in here.

Maybe I should decipher that for you.

“8″ – is the hundreds digit
“0″ – is the tens digit
“6″ – is the singles digit

I expect full credit given for that in your dissertation, which I’m sure will be titled “How to Use a Fake Degree to be an Asshole.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 14:03

I wonder what SFU’s Women’s Studies Department would do if they knew some asshole was using university time and university computers/ip addresses to troll around on sites which specificially criticize them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 14:17

Boxer’s New Best Friends

Work, work, work. Deadbeat. You better give us our money’s worth.

We all know how easy it is to get a feminist into an uncontrollable rage.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 14:19

Dear Kooky Rob/Jeb/etc.:

I’m really quite disappointed. You earlier claimed to be in the process of calling the dean on me, and posting my real name here, and other such kooky stuff. Is this really the best you can do?

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7
D April 16, 2012 at 14:35

@ Boxer

In some cases there are old guard communist are behind the scenes with large amount of power.

For example, The European Union is partly lead by “former” Maoist Barroso. This is him in his younger days as a red: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAHv3UnXvmM

This is him Speaking about the European Union and what it is today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-I8M1T-GgRU&feature=relmfu

This is Martin “Socialist” Schulz, the new European Union president, admitted drawing upon Eric Hobsbawm, a well known British Marxist:
http://www.thejournal.ie/the-european-parliament-has-a-new-president-but-who-is-he-330517-Jan2012/

Please do research and educate yourself before spewing stuff you know nothing about. By the way, there is a difference between cultural Marxism and classical Marxism by the way (with many similarities).

Also, I can see you have a reading problem, because I never mentioned about Communist running the world. My post just mentioned about massacres that you failed (or perhaps purposely) left out. Massacres? Oh I’m sorry. According to you, they were farces. You must be a twisted little man.

It isn’t that surprising that no one likes you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 14:49

I never threatened to call the dean on you, nor post your real name, liar. I said I’ll figure out where you are, and if the Surrey campus offers Ph D programs. And that you shouldn’t be using the taxpayer’s resources and dimes to fuck around on the web.

Reading comprehension much, Socrates?

Everything out of your mouth is a lie.

Like I pointed out before, you’re too dim to even keep your lies straight on a single thread, let alone multiple ones.

Now get back to work, you fucking deadbeat.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 14:54

Dear kooky Rob/Jeb/etc.:

Nice spinning. I offered you 1000 dollars to post my name here, after you made one of your typical grandiose boasts about exposing me. You have yet to pony up.

Incidentally, I do hope you’re not still abusing your psychiatric medication. While being “high as a kite on Valium” may be a fun diversion for the mentally ill, I don’t think it’s particularly safe. Take care of yourself.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 15:04

Although, you have further confirmed to me that you are indeed working at SFU, since you are referring to “the dean.”

You’ve just ruled out an NGO as your employer.

From the U of Wikipedia

Btw, Angry Harry successfully went after some feminists from Oxford for attacking him from Oxford’s own sites – and futher humiliated Oxford for producing such crappy students that can’t spell or use proper grammar.

Kinda like Ph D wanna-be’s who say “sez.”

It ought to be completely unnatural for a degreed academic to use words like “Boxer sez ur stoopid lmao.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Boxer April 16, 2012 at 15:12

Dear Kooky Rob/Jeb/etc.:

I’m sure that everyone at Simon Fraser will be amused as all the readers of the spearhead when you call up, an unemployed mental patient who abuses his medication, to “out” me.

Have you ever stopped to consider that outside of your paranoid fantasies of a resurgent communist party which is supposedly “controlling everything” (LOL!) there is a whole world to enjoy? Here you sit, on the internet, posting ever more psychotic screeds, when you could be outside enjoying the sunshine, making money, banging broads in the back seat of a Riviera, or pretty much anything else. It’s really quite sad to see the life you’re choosing for yourself, Rob or Jeb or whatever you’re calling yourself.

It ought to be completely unnatural for a degreed academic to use words like “Boxer sez ur stoopid lmao.”

You go back and forth on this. Either I have a degree or I don’t. You don’t seem to know, either way.

In reality, of course, it doesn’t matter. I’ll always be more disciplined than you, more intelligent, a better writer, a man with a longer and thicker penis. These are the facts, and you know it better than anyone else, hence your endless hateful rants, about nothing in particular.

Carry on…

Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 15:15

Simple question to the mighty academic.

Was Trotsky a Marxist?

Yes or No.

Just yes or no, nothing else.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb April 16, 2012 at 17:06

Boxer,

Seriously, for this very simple question I’ve put forth to you, I will accept the U of Wikipedia as a reliable source.

Don’t be afraid.

But, perhaps after you answer, you could relate to the men on this board what it is like to run while wearing a skirt.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rob April 16, 2012 at 20:01

Boxer, the intellectual warrior

Keep running from the Killer Bunny, Cockser

Can’t you even answer a straight forward question which is the basis for your attempts to discredit everyone else?

What a dishonest chicken dick you are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
migu April 17, 2012 at 05:59

Damn.

Rob 4
Boxer 0
Capn 1

Migu -18. I’ll get to zero eventually. Nice work, both Rob and Capn.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Boxer April 17, 2012 at 07:18

Dear Migu:

Back for more abuse, just as I predicted.

Even I have my limits. I enjoy poking the less balanced with a stick and watching the subsequent frenzy, but you’re toying with a self-described mental patient, who is alluding to overdosing on Valium, and who earlier claimed to have just returned from hospital.

You’re a very small person, Migu, and there I’m being generous… Laughable and pathetic.

Regards, Boxer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7
Migu April 17, 2012 at 08:19

but you’re toying with a self-described mental patient, who is alluding to overdosing on Valium, and who earlier claimed to have just returned from hospital.

Gaslighter.

http://www.szasz.com/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Migu April 17, 2012 at 08:27

Presumption of competence. Because being accused of mental illness is similar to being accused of crime, we ought to presume that psychiatric “defendants” are mentally competent, just as we presume that criminal defendants are legally innocent. Individuals charged with criminal, civil, or interpersonal offenses ought never to be treated as incompetent solely on the basis of the opinion of mental health experts. Incompetence ought to be a judicial determination and the “accused” ought to have access to legal representation and a right to trial by jury. — Thomas Szasz

You really are despicable boxer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
Migu April 17, 2012 at 08:30

Abolition of involuntary mental hospitalization. Involuntary mental hospitalization is imprisonment under the guise of treatment; it is a covert form of social control that subverts the rule of law. No one ought to be deprived of liberty except for a criminal offense, after a trial by jury guided by legal rules of evidence. No one ought to be detained against his will in a building called “hospital,” or in any other medical institution, or on the basis of expert opinion. Medicine ought to be clearly distinguished and separated from penology, treatment from punishment, the hospital from the prison. No person ought to be detained involuntarily for a purpose other than punishment or in an institution other than one formally defined as a part of the state’s criminal justice system. — Thomas Szasz M.D.

Despicable I say.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Rob April 17, 2012 at 12:10

My valium prescription is because of heart problems and is possibly neurologically related. I lose consciousness – repeatedly – sometimes 15 times in 10 minutes, and THEN I panic like the dickens, which is what the valium is for. The first time I was convinced I was having a stroke. I get afraid because I think I’m goingto die.

When I feel an attack come on, I get scared – quite logically. The valium is certainly not for any mental illness, Boxer, you asshole.

A bit of booze helps too, but yesterday I didn’t need any valium, and so had a few glasses of wine to keep me relaxed. Yikes, only a few glasses and I collapsed onto the floor. That’s not up to my Canadian beer-drinker status. Back to the valium I guess. I just don’t like how addictive valium can become. It’s also why I refuse sleeping pills.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
piercedhead April 17, 2012 at 17:49

Boxer,

Your line of argument is far from convincing.

If you are not a woman, you certainly talk and act a lot like one.

Few men like to taunt the “unbalanced”, if that is what they really believe.
You appear proud of your academic background, but also seem unable to demonstrate it in any useful way. You seem afraid to answer a simple question in case you cannot defend it.

Your stock in trade is personal insult. You use feminine terms like “yes dear”, “I feel for …” and “You’re a very small person”.

I always feel badly whenever I resort to this kind of exchange. I think most men do – but women seem to love it. They keep coming back for more, saying the same thing over and over – as cutting and personal as they can make it. Just to get the last word.

If you are a man, it is unseemly. Other men are watching.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Rob April 17, 2012 at 21:24

But, it’s good to know that not only has Boxer read everything there ever was written about Marxism, as well as every single philosopher in history, and also understands Capitalism and his neighbouring country’s political system so well that he can determine it must be destroyed, he now also has a MD in Psychiatry and can give us diagnoses over the web.

And, btw, taking valium according to a doctor’s prescription is hardly “abuse” and “overdosing.”

Holy shit, can you write anything that isn’t a lie?

We shure iz lukky ta has a rele geneyus in hour presents. Hyuk, hyuk.

In reality, of course, it doesn’t matter. I’ll always be more disciplined than you, more intelligent, a better writer, a man with a longer and thicker penis. These are the facts, and you know it better than anyone else, hence your endless hateful rants, about nothing in particular. — Genius of Every Subject in the World

I’ll tell you one thing though, most psych professionals would immediately suspect that Boxer has a tiny cockser. Men who are confident about their sexuality never feel the need to boast about their penis.

Why don’t you tell us about your mother, Boxer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rob April 17, 2012 at 22:00

And I’m not sure because I don’t have a degree, but when you change the meaning of a sentence in the middle, I think you’re supposed to use a semi-colon rather than another comma. The topic of your sentence was about your vast intelligence but ended with a desperate attempt to establish you had a large penis. That’s two separate subjects you’ve addressed in a single sentence. I believe proper grammar is to use a semi-colon when you switch the direction of meaning inside of a sentence, rather than add another comma.

Semi-colons are tricky. What they are used for is to join two ideas together in one sentence, while both ideas could also entirely stand as their own sentences.

However, it really doesn’t matter. Someone who is handing in work to university ought to know that you’ve missed the “and” at the ending of your list, which makes it redundant anyway. It should be a better writer and a man with… See? No comma was necessary.

Someone attempting to write in clear, proper English would have said this:

In reality it doesn’t matter. I’ll always be a more disciplined and intelligent writer than you. I am also a man with a longer and thicker penis. These are the facts and you know it better than anyone else, hence your endless hateful rants about nothing in particular.

The “of course” is the addition of unnecessary words which clutter your point rather than delivering a clearer, shorter and more direct meaning. You should have ended your sentence about your intelligence entirely with a period. Then you can move onto the next sentence which is a new subject of describing your long, thick penis. It was also unneccessary to have a comma after the word “facts” since you immediately went on with the conjunction known as “and.” Your comma was rather unprofessional. You also added another unnecessary comma after the word rants. But who cares, eh? Lots of people can’t write simple sentences anymore. Some of them even claim they have university degrees.

But like I said, I have no idea because I don’t have a degree.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Avenger April 18, 2012 at 03:07

@Rob who is now using all of the names he posts under in one name listing them all. Is there some reason you do this and post under multiple names?

@miguel-yes I know Dr. Szasz who is now an old man but apparently you don’t really understand his writings. He doesn’t believe or either do I that someone should be imprisoned merely because they are schizophrenic unless they’ve been convicted of a crime but many of these people have been arrested for crimes and would be convicted and brought to trial and sent to jail. But since we know that they are mentally ill it doesn’t go that far and they are merely sent to a hospital and don’t have the stigma of a crime on their records and are viewed and treated as patients which means that they have a lotof freedom that a convict does not have. But even people who have not committed any crime are sometimes incompetent and really aren’t able to take care of themselves. They may lay on the street in winter and freeze, or not eat, or even be victims themselves of people who may harm them when they start acting insane. With some people it would be inhumane to leave them on their own on the street.

And btw, as far as Rob and his valium, drugs of this type are not used for psychotic patients because it makes them worse and sometimes uncontrollable and they are not psychiatric drugs.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Rob April 18, 2012 at 20:07

@Rob who is now using all of the names he posts under in one name listing them all. Is there some reason you do this and post under multiple names?

Yes, because Boxer thinks he is “outing me” by saying I use all kinds of sock-puppet names, and always refers to me as Rob/Fedrz/Jeb etc. etc.

I’ve told him repeatedly that it was never a secret, but somehow he thinks he’s got me cornered. So, I figured I’d just list them all for him and save him the trouble.

I’ve never hidden who I am. Rob or Rob Fedders or Fedrz has been my name ever since I got involved in the MRM back in 2004 or so. For a while I left the MRM – for over a year and a half. Then I figured, meh, maybe I’ll start using “Jeb” as my name, because its my real name. But then, I figured what the hell, I’ll just go back to Rob like I’ve always been.

Somehow Boxer thinks he’s got me cornered with his great sock-puppet insight.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Rob April 19, 2012 at 00:45

Btw, Avenger, Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz are not different names. They are all the same name.

Usually when I just post as “Rob”, everyone knows who it is. It’s also got a direct link attached to my blog. Pretty easy to figure out who I am. I also always use the same little yellow symbol.

Rob is a name of a room-mate I had while living in the States, and Fedders is a name of a room-mate I had while living in Europe.

“Fedrz” was a name I developed (like a personalized license plate) because I was fed-up with blogger, and decided to try WordPress, thus I needed a name for my blog. I found out wordpress sucked, and went back to my old blog.

Note the direct links to No Ma’am are right at the beginning on the sidebar of “Fedrz’ Blog”. Some sock-puppetry. I figured since most people in the world learn to read by phonics, it wasn’t too hard to figure out – especially since even as “Fedrz”, everyone still calls me “Rob” in the comments.

Jeb is my real name – or a nickname – which my close friends call me.

Welmer is also a nickname for WF Price. Is he sock-puppeting?

And furthermore, Avenger, while I don’t personally have a problem with you, and in fact think you have some good insights, this is the second time you made a silly remark to me like that. It was unnecessary because all you had to do was follow the actual thread you are commenting on and it would have been plainly obvious.

No offence intended, but please pay attention before you criticize me. I read your words. Extend me the same courtesy if you are going to ask me questions like this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Rob April 19, 2012 at 03:42

I yam what I yam.

Anyone who doesn’t like it can suck rocks.

I yam Rob/Rob Fedders/Fedrz/Jeb – and now, apparently, Popeye.

The fringe suits me fine.

Have I ever lied to anyone here?

Have I bullshitted you?

Have I asked you for money?

I rest my case.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Rob April 19, 2012 at 04:31

@ Pierced Head,

Looking for people to Go Their Own Way, and to start talking sense again – like we used to, remember?

Would you be interested? Let’s “build the philosophy.”

There are ways we can do it. I’m certain. I don’t think I’m the only one who “sees the path.”

I’m pretty certain Migu is onboard. Fondue-guy would be a great one too. And well, you Piercedhead, with your hot-head and constant insults, plus short-term insights, would make the icing on the cake. We might have to appoint someone to monitor your vicious temper though. It’s a real detractor! God man, keep it under wraps!

Let’s get ‘er done, and bring MGTOW to level two. Someone else can worry about level three while we are sitting in Cancun, getting brought Coronas by hottie hispanic chics. Not our problem. But level two belongs to us. Are you interested?

Men.

Going.

Their.

Own.

Way.

If it’s not right, go your own way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
piercedhead April 19, 2012 at 18:14

Sure Rob – what do you have in mind?

By the way, Cancun is a bit out of reach this year. If you can find your way to Vava’u in early June though, that I can do (will be there anyway).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
rob April 24, 2012 at 00:16

Yeah, Cancun is out of reach for me too.

But do you remember the guy whose site this concept got created on?

http://no-maam.blogspot.ca/2008/03/love-is-for-suckers-blood-suckers.html

We can keep doing it.

Migu and I are now communicating via PM, rather than fucking with Boxer all the time. At Niceguy’s – PM only for now. We can also build a small proboards site again, and just severely restrict the thing.

It doesn’t always take thousands of men.

Some times it takes just two or three (see above linked article).

Let’s really try and make “a philosophy.”

Everything is already here. It just needs a few of the right people to make it work.

We were smarter in the past than we are today.

You’ve got it in your head. You know you do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
migu April 24, 2012 at 05:26

Wait. I was talking to boxer capn not you.

You actually know Dr. Szasz? I bet those were some great conversation.

And yes I understand what I read. Nice job updating the malaria wiki.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Migu April 24, 2012 at 11:04

@ all

Yeah, I’m on board. I don’t really care for obfuscation either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: