Shameless Pandering

by W.F. Price on July 14, 2012

President Obama has staked his election hopes on women – single women in particular – and has been bashing men relentlessly in the process. It seems he and the democrats think their advantage with single women can negate his weak showing with men, both married and single. What this strategy hinges on, as far as I can tell, is also getting enough of the married female vote to carry him through. So the Democrats have begun a full-court press with feminism, hoping that they have enough support among women in general to help him prevail.

It could go either way. I suspect there’s some diminishing return already creeping in. 2008 was probably the money year for feminism, but even then Hillary Clinton couldn’t pull off a win, because men and minorities voted overwhelmingly for Obama in primaries. Actually, I’m fairly certain that if he were a white man, Obama would lose this election handily, but he has such rock-solid support from minorities that he can afford some leeway, and it looks as though his team thinks he can afford to drop the white male vote due to minority support.

There’s been some outrage in the androsphere lately regarding his recent op-ed on Title IX, which celebrates the decline of men in college enrollment. Although I don’t personally see that as such a tragedy (I think too many people are in college as it is), his support for using Title IX to manipulate enrollment in STEM programs is a pretty clear threat to a number of young men and parents, as that’s often the only hope they have for getting sons into college and giving them a shot at a decent career. If implemented, it will have a real, detrimental effect on hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of young men in the US. In all likelihood, it will also disproportionately affect Asians as well, as they are overrepresented in STEM.

Here’s the part of the op-ed that ought to give us pause:

Today, thanks in no small part to the confidence and determination they developed through competitive sports and the work ethic they learned with their teammates, girls who play sports are more likely to excel in school. In fact, more women as a whole now graduate from college than men. This is a great accomplishment—not just for one sport or one college or even just for women but for America. And this is what Title IX is all about.

What he’s doing here is sadly common in the United States today. Corporate CEOs and politicians alike have rejected any sense of long-term responsibility and are willing to wreck a good thing for short-term gain. When politicians do it, we can fairly call it “pandering,” which is sort of an overused word, but appropriate in this circumstance.

Here’s the definition from the Oxford English Dictionary:

Pronunciation: /ˈpandər/

Definition of pander
verb
[no object] (pander to)
gratify or indulge (an immoral or distasteful desire, need, or habit or a person with such a desire, etc.):
newspapers are pandering to people’s baser instincts

noun
dated

a pimp.
archaic a person who assists the baser urges or evil designs of others:
the lowest panders of a venal press

Origin:
late Middle English (as a noun): from Pandare, the name of a character in Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde (see Pandarus). The verb dates from the early 17th century

What’s immoral about feminists’ desire to handicap men in STEM? It’s pretty clear: we’ll all pay for it in lower standards and productivity, and there’s nothing “fair” about giving women an advantage in the one remaining field they do not dominate.

It’s all about supremacy, and Obama is pandering to female supremacist tendencies — just for a few more years in office. When his presidency is over and he’s touring the world giving lectures, the rest of us will be paying the price for the policies he put in place.

{ 128 comments… read them below or add one }

AfOR July 14, 2012 at 03:34

I warned all who would listen, BEFORE obama got voted in, that he was nothing more or less than a black Tony Blair.

You reap what you sow, and the damage Blair / Obama et al have done to society, both directly and by their political and legal appointments made while in office, is incalculable.

Still, not long now to the stocks / currency crash..

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 9
anonymous July 14, 2012 at 04:16

President Obama has staked his election hopes on women – single women in particular – and has been bashing men relentlessly in the process. It seems he and the democrats think their advantage with single women can negate his weak showing with men, both married and single.

Still, I do not get it, why Republicans do not go full-throttle ahead with support of men and families? Why is it OK to openly pander for women, ‘minorities’ and not for men?

If implemented, it will have a real, detrimental effect on hundreds of thousands – if not millions – of young men in the US. In all likelihood, it will also disproportionately affect Asians as well, as they are overrepresented in STEM.

Asians men also have some “diversity points” so they will be let in. They also bring money in to the economy, which some say the economy with huge higher-education bubble. So guess who is the target? The usual suspect. White, hetero, christian man. After all he is the one the Left thinks he is “privileged”. This is to shoot him down a peg or two.

To make it really simple; why don’t Romney pick Ron Paul for his VP? Then he will scoop a lot of votes. This will be one-sided victory to Republicans never seen in history.

Recent rumor has it that Romney wants to pick Condi… I am not sure how that is going to work.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 5
Art Vandelay July 14, 2012 at 04:34

Yeah the question is if Romney will do any pandering to single men or married couples. If the debate is around feminism the conservatives usually only want to talk about abortion or contraception which I believe a lot of young single men are in favor of.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
Jim July 14, 2012 at 05:18

He’s pandering to women because on a whole, they are still poorer than their male counterparts. The single ones especially. Hence dangling the carrot of big government in front of them. Remember Julia and the cradle to the grave subsidizing? Yet money is not the answer to what ails this nation.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 10
The Geezer July 14, 2012 at 05:29

Yuppers, the “panderer in chief” is out in full force.

The concept that women, particularly single women, NEED the gub’mint to get them through is extremely offensive to thinking women, but then again, wimmin’ t’aint the most analytical folks out there. If they were, there would be fewer of them driving impractical, upside down cars.

The Geezer has spaketh.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1
Days of Broken Arrows July 14, 2012 at 05:41

In fact, more women as a whole now graduate from college than men. This is a great accomplishment—not just for one sport or one college or even just for women but for America.

Why has no one called him on the fact that this disproportionately affects black men, who go to college in far fewer numbers than black women? Frame it like that, and this no longer looks like an “accomplishment” but something to be deeply ashamed of. What country celebrates the academic decline of men and the HUGE academic decline of minority men?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 69 Thumb down 1
Beltain July 14, 2012 at 05:47

Of course he is pandering to women because the entire progressive liberal ideology that he represents is completely based on feminism and throwing bones to the various minority groups to keep them as allies. The female/feminist crowd is the democrat party today.

The real problem is that they have went far beyond the reach of anything Constitutional or legal and have entered the sphere of outright oppression against men using the activist courts to declare these biased laws as legal and justifiable.

They won’t stop. They are women with no rules who are allowed to party as much as they want and use the credit card with no limit because they do not care about the relationship anymore. Until we put our foot down and physically stop it there is no boundary to the excess and damage they will do.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 1
Opus July 14, 2012 at 05:51

At about this time of the year in 2008 I made two preictions as to the outcome of the American Presidential Election for that year: That the next President would be:

1. A Christian
2. An American

Boy!!! How wrong was I?

I am not making any Prediction for 2012 – except I don’t think Kony is going to be elected.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 9
Alex F July 14, 2012 at 06:11

The stupidest part of all this is that every single piece of data collected since 1950 shows a clear and concise deterioration in women’s happiness and fulfillment since their “liberation”. There is a direct, causal link between increased educational, political and employment opportunities for women, and decreased happiness and fulfillment with their lives. This decrease is both objective and relative to men’s:

http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/pol.1.2.190

This link is becoming more and more pronounced in all developed countries (and particularly the US and UK), and has been confirmed by studies again and again – and we all know the mental health statistics: for every 100 U.S. women, 37 prescriptions for anti-depressants are written. All common mental disorders predominate in women over men, and far more women than men are diagnosed as mentally ill – when prior to 1950, the exact opposite was true (then, it was 2 women for every 7 men; now it is 22 women for every 2 men).

It is impossible for anyone to argue – including feminists – that feminism has made women happy. Feminists themselves publish studies regarding the dramatic decline in women’s happiness and mental stability, and conclude that this is further evidence of oppression; that even though more girls than boys are in school and doing better; women in their 20s are out-earning male contemporaries; and 70%+ of divorces are instigated by women, the explanation for their plummeting happiness and mental stability is clearly evil male oppression.

So, they conclude, there must be more legislation, more positive discrimination, more “liberation”, etc etc. Well, as has been said many times before, no-one said logic was feminists’ strong point.

However, you’d hope it would be in better supply amongst our political leaders, and that they might have noticed this preposterous social experiment is an irredeemable failure that has already ruined the lives of millions of men and children – and women. Society simply doesn’t work under feminism, it doesn’t work for any of these groups – as unfashionable and unpopular as it is to say, everyone, specifically women, were happier – and certainly more functional and productive – under the patriarchy.

There’s not a single shred of evidence supporting that the “liberating” of women is good for them as individuals or for the society as a whole. It’s not as if feminism detriments men / children in the name of some “greater good” – it’s just absolutely destructive to everyone and everything it touches.

Every single bit of feminist legislation Obama or Cameron passes is simply another nail in the coffin of Western civilisation.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 59 Thumb down 5
Jim July 14, 2012 at 06:13

Shit, there are some skanks running around here topless protesting their right to go topless even though it’s legal to do so in this city. What kills me about this is the stupidity of women themselves and how they don’t see the impact of it. To me it’s a compete turn off. Nor the gist of abusing their sexual power and how inane they sound when complaining about how men aren’t settling down. Well why should they? On one side they’ve fucked half the men in the nation and turned the other half completely off by being sluts.

Dalrock has a post about the rise of unmarried women. Those women will be lifetime democratic voters because they will NEED the protection and subsidizing of government. Never mind the lives they lead coupled with the way they vote is why they will end up alone in large droves. What a clusterfuck women have become.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 69 Thumb down 4
zimmy July 14, 2012 at 06:15

I’ve heard various Democrats state that Republicans are anti-woman; anti-Black-anti-Hispanic and even anti-clean air.

Democrats show themselves to be shamelessly simplistic in their pandering. Perhaps they’ve discovered how to appeal to the average American?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 2
The Trend July 14, 2012 at 06:21

Take a good look at Chicago lately and behold the results of Obama and other like minded “community organizers” efforts. The people who are shooting each other are the ones who grew up in single mother homes. These single mother homes are facilitated by the policies of “men bad” that create government dependency and strip away your value and dignity. Sadly “community organizer” is just a euphemism for networking to extract even more government handouts directed overwhelmingly at poor uneducated single mothers who get pregnant to get on the dole in the 1st place- so the downward spiral of civilization continues.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 1
Gamerp4 July 14, 2012 at 06:26

I think obama likes it when Womyn are in control, but he wont let Hillary be a president NEVER! well why the double standard then, because he likes to see other men beaten to bloody pulp than him being beaten by a fat cow (Hitlary Rodham Clinton).

But I say let them do that to STEM also, let them push Title IX so far that when Men are needed (You see Men are only needed when the water level rises above the head, feminism kiss my ass) there will be no Men with an ounce of brain cell left to help them because lets face it Men’s Right has evolved into something huge in past couple of years and it will continue to grow in coming ages and from this MANY MEN have started to see the light, and with that said and done TITLE IX will be the hammer that will struck feminism out of power for good.

Last I say MEN QUIT SCIENCE, QUIT MILITARY, QUIT MARRIAGE, QUIT TAX PAYING, WORK PART TIME, TAKE PART IN ADVENTURES AND TRAVELING, LIVE YOUR LIFE AS YOU LIKE IT, PAY NO ATTENTION TO MISANDRY FROM THE MEDIA, AND JUST SMIRK AT “MAN UP” COMMENTS.

Get your popcorn and Budweiser guys it will be hell of a show, when the STEM classes will be filled with 3 or 4 young men but No women will be seen learning them and then Obama can shove TITLE IX up his & feminists asses.

End.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 3
The Trend July 14, 2012 at 06:27

Oh and 1 more thing as Columbo used to say- as elucidated in an earlier article women are running away from the “having it all” mentality- probably because they see the end result and realize that decent people are starting to connect the dots. All these unsustainable government handouts have made things worse in America- not better.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
greyghost July 14, 2012 at 06:58

These quotas on college courses in science and engineering are not so we can have more female engineers. It is just to creditiontial a large pool of women to be in charge of engineering companies. The males will still be actually bending rebar and pouring concrete to support the Mars rocket ship launch. Only a woman will be speaking to congress on the scientific acheivement of her company. Trust in knowing when women speak of being in science and engineering that is what they are talking about. The whole silicon valley gender suite is about just that. No one is telling any bitch they can’t design and develope a new curcuit board or any other technology. It is about placing a women on top of an organization that does. With the pay and benefits and status.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 59 Thumb down 2
Hisoj July 14, 2012 at 07:21

another election where I won’t be voting for anybody.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 6
Senior Manchild July 14, 2012 at 07:36

¨It’s all about supremacy, and Obama is pandering to female supremacist tendencies…¨

Well, I kinda agree with GAMERP4,

¨But I say let them do that to STEM also, let them push Title IX so far that when Men are needed (You see Men are only needed when the water level rises above the head, feminism kiss my ass) there will be no Men with an ounce of brain cell left to help them because lets face it Men’s Right has evolved into something huge in past couple of years and it will continue to grow in coming ages and from this MANY MEN have started to see the light, and with that said and done TITLE IX will be the hammer that will struck feminism out of power for good.

Last I say MEN QUIT SCIENCE, QUIT MILITARY, QUIT MARRIAGE, QUIT TAX PAYING, WORK PART TIME, TAKE PART IN ADVENTURES AND TRAVELING, LIVE YOUR LIFE AS YOU LIKE IT, PAY NO ATTENTION TO MISANDRY FROM THE MEDIA, AND JUST SMIRK AT “MAN UP” COMMENTS.¨

The disincentives have been piling up for years and the pool of men making an extraordinary effort in this current environment is shrinking. So what will women be supreme over?

Yes indeed,

watch the show accompanied by your favorite snack and beverage.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Russ July 14, 2012 at 07:46

The 2008 election was the first time, in more than a generation, in which the majority of White females voted in favor of the Republican candidate in a presidential election. McCain got 53% of the White female vote in the last election. But that was mostly due to their anger at Obama displacing Hillary as the candidate. It will be interesting to see how they vote this time.

Because a super-super majority of White men will be pulling the lever for Mitt this time around, if he can’t win the White female vote, Obama’s toast. Unfortunately, for men, it doesn’t matter which candidate wins, both of them will continue the status quo, vis-a-vis feminist entitlement, because that is the wish of our overlords.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 13
Zorro July 14, 2012 at 07:48

“When his presidency is over and he’s touring the world giving lectures, the rest of us will be paying the price for the policies he put in place.”

Bingo. Joe Biden and Obama have become–shamelessly–the two greatest enemies of the American male since Sharon Osborne and Lorena Bobbitt.

While nobody can really claim the GOP is any particular friend of men, it is high time that the Democrats just came out and openly declared that, for merely the sake of the women’s vote, they will gleefully sell us off as barnyard stock. What Obama intends for Title IX is the very antithesis of a meritocracy; this is nothing less than a manipulation of the education system to create a worthless outcome. Nobody cares if a scientist or engineer has a weiner or cavern between their legs. What we need is scientists and engineers who are the best we can possibly get, and you don’t get that by giving a head start and less to carry during the educational race.

Obama and Biden are two of the lowet, most purulent assclowns in federal government.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 52 Thumb down 1
Uncle Elmer July 14, 2012 at 07:51

You are correct greyghost, nobody is telling women they can’t invent or create, in fact, there is usually a lot of fanfare for women who perform tasks that are ordinary for men.

It’s common practice in my industry for a man to install his wife as company owner-president to milk money out of the government as a “female-owned small business”, which further inflates the statistics often crowed about in ForbesWoman about women creating millions of jobs.

Perpetrating Title IX on technical education will lead to inevitable collapse of our innovation and entrepreneurship. It is men, not women, who take risks and start new industries. Women as a whole seek comfort and security and will bend the activities of any organization they infest to ensure that.

I shamelessly repeat a comment I made last month in response to a ForbesWoman essay that states exactly what you just said : the reason for inflicting Title IX is to create more women tech “leaders” :

Here’s the Real Reason There Are Not More Women in Technology

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markfidelman/2012/06/05/heres-the-real-reason-there-are-not-more-women-in-technology/

elmer :

The whining over women in tech never ends, yet the three main reasons you cite provide all one needs to know about the subject. 1) Women are not inherently interested in technology 2) They “feel” they would not be good at it 3) They are not enthused about their co-workers.

Nobody encourages men to pursue tech, they just go after it with relentless passion and focus. Boys build telescopes and catapults out of cardboard tubes and whatever else they can scrounge up. Nobody holds their hands and “encourages” them about how exciting science is.

Men watch paint dry because they are fascinated by the physics. Women watch paint dry because someone tole them it was a good career move.

Women are not drawn to tech because they enjoy social interaction above all else. They want jobs where they can sit around and gab about their feelings and personal soap operas, and that activity is not generally available in the realm of machines and chemicals.

Peter Drucker, in his famous essay “Managing Oneself”, advised strongly the need to understand your strengths and weaknesses, and observed that you can never win by improving your weaknesses, only by improving your strengths. That is a fascinating thought.

In broader socio-economic terms, we have given women the opportunity to build on their weaknesses (ability to compete against men) and discouraged them from capitalizing on their strengths (youth and fertility). They compete through artifices of fairness and inclusion that are borne on the backs of an ever-dwindling pool of male supporters.

We have weakened society as a whole by building on women’s weaknesses in attempts to make them the equal of men, rather than encouraging them in their natural strengths. And while this charade is going on, men are encouraged to adopt feminine attitudes and lifestyles at the expense of their own natural strengths, now deemed unnecessary in the new gender-neutral economy.

It’s time to stop pandering to women’s feelings about “tech” and put our resources back into the men who will produce the technologies we need to prosper in the 21st century, rather than squander our time and money providing phony make-work tech careers for females.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 61 Thumb down 2
Senior Manchild July 14, 2012 at 07:52

¨Because a super-super majority of White men will be pulling the lever for Mitt this time around, if he can’t win the White female vote, Obama’s toast. Unfortunately, for men, it doesn’t matter which candidate wins, both of them will continue the status quo, vis-a-vis feminist entitlement, because that is the wish of our overlords.¨

So, I guess they will just have to vote like this,

¨QUIT SCIENCE, QUIT MILITARY, QUIT MARRIAGE, QUIT TAX PAYING, WORK PART TIME, TAKE PART IN ADVENTURES AND TRAVELING, LIVE YOUR LIFE AS YOU LIKE IT, PAY NO ATTENTION TO MISANDRY FROM THE MEDIA, AND JUST SMIRK AT “MAN UP” COMMENTS.¨

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2
El Bastardo July 14, 2012 at 08:01

I have talked about this numerous times. I don’t think we are goign to win in this election no matter who wins. This is because we are not a solidified consitituency yet as a male block that transcends our demographics! If we can get more organized, using the slap in the faces these bastards have routinely been giving to men to recruit most, if not all, men to our cause; we could promote the male birth control option, and annihilate several federal level poiliticians careers soo badly that no one will dare mess with us! The election in 2016 would very likely be ours to lose.

What I mean by “us” is the Men’s movement. They slap us around because we have no power, we have no power because we are not tightly organized! We have no power, because we take no reponsibility, power only comes with responsibility. If we did, and destroyed one or more of their careers, they would be catering/pandering to all of us. Like we do to a bad girl we are just using, we should consistently shame them accordingly! I would strongly encourage the complete reversal of all feminist policies! Damn what any detractor thinks!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
Uncle Elmer July 14, 2012 at 08:08

Obama : “The more confident, empowered women who enter our boardrooms and courtrooms, legislatures, and hospitals, the stronger we become as a country.”

Wrong, Mister President. The more you enforce inclusion of women over men the more those institutions and our society will decline, because women seek comfort and security above all else and will not take the risks that are vital to sustaining a dynamic organization.

Here, once again, is Elmer’s Law :

Women are competing for jobs but are not creating them. Other than providing a mass market for their vanity products, they are not forging new industries or technologies. They are marginalizing that small percentage of men who passionately innovate, destroy, and create ideas and take the risks to drive them to actualization

Though men shank me and insult me, only men provide me with opportunity. Women can only insult me and deprive me of opportunity. Only men, and only a small fraction of them, take the risks that create industry and opportunity. Women can only serve as mere functionaries in man-created structures. When an organization becomes feminized, priority shifts from efficient and profitable production of goods and services to development of labyrinthine rules for the comfort and security of women. Ossification and organizational death are inevitable.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 3
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 08:19

Quotas limiting the number of male students in science may be imposed by the Education Department in 2013. The White House has promised that “new guidelines will also be issued to grant-receiving universities and colleges” spelling out “Title IX rules in the science, technology, engineering and math fields.” These guidelines will likely echo existing Title IX guidelines that restrict men’s percentage of intercollegiate athletes to their percentage in overall student bodies, thus reducing the overall number of intercollegiate athletes.

http://www.openmarket.org/2012/07/10/quotas-limiting-male-science-enrollment-the-new-liberal-war-on-science/

He’s applying Title IX guidelines to ACADEMICS!
…because there are TOO MANY males in STEM!
…disproportionate to the number of males attending college!
Astounding!

Honestly, how can anyone be a left-leaning MRA?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 2
Senior Manchild July 14, 2012 at 08:25

¨Honestly, how can anyone be a left-leaning MRA?¨

If the left is given enough rope, they will eventually hang themselves

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
migu July 14, 2012 at 08:34

There is no right and left.

Would you like the right half of this turd, or the left half?

How about you keep the shit to yourself? Just a thought voters.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 23
Zorro July 14, 2012 at 08:36

…yeah, eventually. But they’re hanging us first.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Lyn87 July 14, 2012 at 08:38

Lots of great discussion in this thread. The quality of discourse is going up around here, despite the occasional whack-a-doodle.

We have truly fallen through the looking glass. Title IX for STEM? Holy crap! I suppose it won’t matter much in the long run: as AfOR correctly noted, the bottom is going to fall out from under the financial system. The party is nearly over regarding this madness. I’m afraid that it’s not going to be a matter of, “Pop a top and watch the crash.” It’s more likely to devolve into “Pop a cap and watch your stuff.” Like it or not, we’re all riding this roller-coaster together, and even the most strident harpies are likely to get REALLY sweet when they find that there is no Title IX in a burning city after the checks stop arriving.

Like obesity is to the body, feminism is a disease of excess in the body politic. When society no longer has the excess capacity to enforce counterproductive policies that increase the privileges women already enjoy and hinder productive activity by men, it will stop.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 3
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 08:45

Yeah the question is if Romney will do any pandering to single men or married couples.

Many of you should know by now that’s not how it works, because “if you’re for men as a group, you must be against women.” That’s how Political Correctness works, how it was set up by the Marxist Academics years ago. (If you criticize Obama you must be a Racist.)

This is how they position Republicans as “the party of NO”, because the Democrats want to keep spending money on useless social engineering programs that pander to identifiable victim groups for votes.

Thinking Rebublicans, or any other entity with power and influence is going to do anything specifically for men and boys is an MRA fantasy. On the contrary, what they’re trying to do is STOP Democrats by trying to limit feminist governance. And for this Republicans are called “the party that hates women”.

How can I be any clearer than I already have on this for you left-leaning MRA’s?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 8
Jim July 14, 2012 at 08:56

No political entity is going to do anything for regular men except set them up for more 2nd class citizenship. Mind you that those men at the top are exempt and regularly engage in blow jobs in the Oval Office, sex in the backrooms of the Capitol with interns, and various other affairs while married or giving speeches about the decay of the nation. They though lack mirrors because they do nothing to point fingers at themselves for such matters. And continually are re-elected on either the women or the family values platforms of which they live their lives totally the opposite of which they promote.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 3
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 08:57

Easy. The majority of Jewish, non-White, and bottom-homo “MRAs” lean left, because they understand that the left, just as it favors women, will continue to privilege them.

No, they want “privilage” spread around so everyone is perfectly equal socially and economically. The left-leaning MRA is appealing to the Liberal sense of fairness and justice for all of humanity by exclaiming, “What about men and boys?” – – as yet another identifiable victim group of traditionalism, capitalism, wage slavery and war.

Try starting a Men’s Rights wing of the Democrat Party, where they supposedly welcome “inclusion and diversity”. LOL!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3
TLM July 14, 2012 at 09:09

For the commenters that believe Mitt will throw any rhetoric to the man vote, you are sadly mistaken. Where Obama’s pussiness is overt and open for all to see (He would make an excellent model for those “I Am A Feminist” t-shirts), Mitt tries, but fails to hide his inner beta-bitch. Just last week Drudge ran 2 different pics of Mitt & his wife. In both his body language screams “I’m a wuss”. The jet ski pic where he’s riding bitch and the pic of them holding the mic together at a campaign event. That’s why he’s been unable to pull past Obama. He can’t deny the inner-mangina. And it really doesn’t matter anyway as both candidates are essentially the same when it comes down to ideology. There is no “choice” in this election.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 5
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 09:14

When society no longer has the excess capacity to enforce counterproductive policies that increase the privileges women already enjoy and hinder productive activity by men, it will stop.

I’d say judging by the current debt to GDP ratio of the US and the world (except for China), we’re already there. It’s unsustainable and unrecoverable. We’re merely delaying inevitable collapse. And when it happens, the Chino-Russian alliance will move in on the Pacific-Rim against weakened US military influence.

The question is who do you want in the position of power in the US to manage the Great Insolvency? Harvard theorists or corporate businessmen? Marxists or Social Darwinists?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 6
pb July 14, 2012 at 09:24

“Still, I do not get it, why Republicans do not go full-throttle ahead with support of men and families? Why is it OK to openly pander for women, ‘minorities’ and not for men?”

The Republicans have neither the principles or the smarts to do so; the party isn’t a conservative party but one that supports the oligarchy.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
dhanu July 14, 2012 at 09:25

OT: Female police officer shoots and kills unarmed man; confiscates video recording of the event.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
dhanu July 14, 2012 at 09:40
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
migu July 14, 2012 at 09:53

Maybe this will be clearer.

Both parties are left. The Republicans use M-16 the Democrats use ak-47.

The US is the leftist system that worked. The Maxis failed, the commies failed. George Bush advanced leftism. (Medicare, school vouchers)

Whoever you vote for you get the same. The only difference is whether they use salt or pepper to flavor your carcass.

The solution is to have your alternative (network) running when they finish the cannibals’ feast.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 9
migu July 14, 2012 at 10:01

It really is a four year kool aide dose.

Remember where the debt started? The continental Congress. There was one day when the US was solvent. January 8th 1835.

History truly has been forgotten.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 7
Rebel July 14, 2012 at 10:03

Men are being squeezed out everywhere.

Soon, the only place for them to go will be…the military.
They will be needed there because of the coming war with Iran.

As some have said, Iran is not Irak. It is to be foreseen that the dying there will be plentiful. If aircraft carriers are sunk, the straight of Hormuz will become a new Red sea.

Cannon fodder will acquire a new meaning and, just like in the glorious days of Sparta, the most honorable thing a man can do is to die.

That has always been the way of matriarchies.

And since America has now become a full fledged matriarchy, you know what’s coming next..

If not, then re-read the scum manifesto: it’s more up-to-date than ever.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 2
greyghost July 14, 2012 at 10:04

One of the things Republicans can do for “women” is to fast track a male birth control pill for the benefit of women. Reduce cost of birth control for women and their insurers. Make men more responsible. Overall just have more “fairness” in marriages for birth control responsibility sowoman won’t have to risk the health problems from female birth control methods.
Next they can pander to the needs of the feminised dried up pussy career cunts that didn’t have children but had rewarding careers and years of experience on the cock carousel. The developement of the artificial womb would help these women to enjoy her “right” to motherhood on her terms instead of when that sexist gods terms.
Now some men will see this as panderin (fuck you you pigs) and some women will see this as another need women have been denied by the patriarchy (and you are right honey)
And poor ole greyghost will see this as him being further marginalized. “Please show mercy on us beta guys don’t do this us.having to take birth control pills will be so humiliating I don’t think I could function as a man” “And please don’t make an artificial womb I want to feel needed.”
What do you think of that as a campaign strategy Keyster.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 10:13

Maybe this will be clearer.
Both parties are left. The Republicans use M-16 the Democrats use ak-47.

One is Diet Pepsi the other Diet Coke, I agree not much discernable difference, especially since the Bush’s ushered in “compassionate conservatism”. What this demonstrates is that Democrats; the populist class warfare rhetoric, promises of never-ending entitlements, taught in schools and blaring out through a biased mass media – – are winning the population’s favor.

Critical Theory and the institutionalization of Political Correctness, were brilliantly conceived mechanisms to dismantle the American Experiment and allow for the rebuilding of a Socialist Utopia. When this happens you’ll want to find yourself on the side of The Party.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 10:23

“Please show mercy on us beta guys don’t do this us.having to take birth control pills will be so humiliating I don’t think I could function as a man” “And please don’t make an artificial womb I want to feel needed.”
What do you think of that as a campaign strategy Keyster.

Republicans won’t “fast track” any such things.
They’ll allow the Free Market to dictate the demand.
If men will take a birth control pill a big Pharma will develop one, and sell it and their value will increase in the investment arena.

Democrats want to control/regulate corporations for social and economic justice campaigns. If it benefits the female, even at the expense of the male, Democrats will push for it. See article above.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5
Huck Finn July 14, 2012 at 10:43

Obama’s team isn’t just pandering to women. They are also pandering to Hispanics. While blacks are still in the Obama camp (most will never go over to Romney), many are disillusioned with Obama and may not got out to vote. Many gays will vote for Obama yet not all gays really care about gay marriage as it affects their personal life. Some gays are business owners and upper income wage earners. Therefore, some gays are probably more focused on the economy.

Surprisingly, this time around, many university and post university students are increasingly leaning conservative. Their concerns are jobs, the economy, paying back student loans, the knowledge that big government is behind the huge government debts incurred during previous decades that they will be painfully held to pay off, etc. The Ron Paul message is making inroads among the young adults.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 6
Senior Manchild July 14, 2012 at 10:44

¨Or we could do something constructive, like identifying who our overlords are and replacing them better qualified men.¨

or we could do both.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Brian July 14, 2012 at 10:46

Americans have already been paying the price of bad policies for decades, policies which do all sorts of economic and political harm, including growing the size and power of government over people’s lives and business.

Don’t think that socialism or communism can’t happen in the U.S. We’re still moving down that road and Obama is on the loudspeaker telling everyone to go faster.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Mr. J July 14, 2012 at 10:47

Those with no stake in the game can “vote”.

The “game’ is nearing the end.

Its exactly the same thing as me getting a vote on the board of general motors even though I own no stock and have nothing to do with them.

This foolish game is about overwith.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Huck Finn July 14, 2012 at 10:53

‘Woman crashes while fleeing Colorado wildfire, starts Idaho blaze’

“This is a chance to start completely over,” McCann told KTVB. “I have nothing. So I’ll start with a new wardrobe and a new car, and a new state of mind. And I’ll just move forward.”

2,000 acreas burn in Idaho because of the woman’s driving, over-packed car, and mechanical problems and that is all she is concerned about? I hope she is held accountable as a man would be for the fire damages and emergency response efforts.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/14/12741030-woman-crashes-while-fleeing-colorado-wildfire-starts-idaho-blaze?lite

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 5
Huck Finn July 14, 2012 at 10:59

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

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 42
greyghost July 14, 2012 at 10:59

Keyster
The republicans damn sure won’t fast track a pill for men.Not FOR men. But i know they will fast track a drug company marketing a male pill for WOMENS health. Use the politics you have let them be who they are and we will take care of the rest.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel July 14, 2012 at 11:27

Opus
At about this time of the year in 2008 I made two preictions as to the outcome of the American Presidential Election for that year: That the next President would be:
1. A Christian
2. An American

You missed this too, that the next President (Barack Obama) would be alleged to be a felony perjurer. Barack voluntarily surrendered his Illinois law license in 2008 after the Illinois Bar Association allegedly determined he had lied on his Bar application. Of course, this could just be internet rumor-mongering as lawyers voluntarily surrender their law licenses all the time for no particular reason, right?

Of course, Michelle far outdid him having voluntarily surrendered her law license in 1993, having held it for less than five years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 11:51

Don’t think that socialism or communism can’t happen in the U.S. We’re still moving down that road and Obama is on the loudspeaker telling everyone to go faster.

When the government controls access to health care, it controls your life, your being, your existence. Can food not be far behind?

Have you heard the news? MiniProd is not going to reduce chocolate rations in next year. Oh the contentment of “little joys”!

There are over two hundred references to “…left to the discretion of the HHS Secretary” in ObamaCare. This is only the beginning. Our unwashed masses have no idea what’s coming. Half our population thinks Obama is giving them free health care.

Not voting is a half a vote for Obama and the march of feminism under his administration.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2
Attila July 14, 2012 at 12:16

Just because you’re not aware doesn’t mean other people are “paranoid”.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4
TFH July 14, 2012 at 14:09

Recent rumor has it that Romney wants to pick Condi…

That is just the media attempting to create confusion.

Condi is not a politician (having never stood in elections). She is a cabinet official in Repub administrations. That is not the same thing as being a politician who has stood in (and won) elections.

Similarly, Colin Powell and Gen. Petraeus are not politicians either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7
American July 14, 2012 at 14:57

Keyster…a socialist health care system would mean tens of thousands of fat new bureaucratic “politically correct” pork bloating jobs for the white gender-raunch community.
just like all other fat state and federal white Gender-raunch pork bloated bureaucracies, the “Make work policies” would make health care a hazardous phenomena.
Look at what VAWA pork bloating has done to American law enforcement, where lies are routine, statistics are manufactured to gender-raunch specifications, and truth has become an inconvenience.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 11
Rocco July 14, 2012 at 16:25

The people who decide who to pander too are marketers and psychologists. For Obama it was that woman who insulted Romney’s wife.

The female Herd is half the population but divorced men are a quarter of the population and that’s a large number. A charasmatic Rebulican like Reagan could split the female vote.

We need to keep reminding the PTB that men vote mens rights issues;

Men love their kids and men are tired of being demonized.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
some dude July 14, 2012 at 17:04

Gotcha. Obama is no good.

So what are you saying here? I should vote for Romney?

I quit voting on any level higher than city. I don’t even vote at Parish (county to the rest of you) level anymore. I don’t know these people, they don’t know me. And then there is the factor of me voting is playing their game. If I vote I’m saying the current system is legitimate. I don’t believe it is.

I don’t want what the current system has to offer. And don’t think I’m alone either. I’m solid blue collar/working class. I’m a boilermaker/welder by trade. Increasingly my fellow working class brothers have little use for this system. I’m not saying all of them but more each day.

That left/right Repub/Dem crap is starting to lose its hold. You got anything else to offer me?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 5
Keyster July 14, 2012 at 17:05

Women find Mitt Romney to be extremely handsome. This will bode very well for him. Democrat/Feminist women will vote Democrat regardless, but there is a huge swath of Independent women that will vote on ‘gina tingles alone.

Obama’s multi-culti chic, cool swagger, baritone voice and soaring oratory of policy unicorns and pixie dust is so yesterday’s hottie. He’s an empty suit, he has no substance. Women hate that.

To be fair there were also Republican men that had their jock straps in a twirl over Sarah Palin. Michelle Bachmann for the same reason.

For the fast majority of the American Electorate, who they vote for depends largely on who they’d most like to f*ck. It’s very sad but true – – ever since TV and the Kennedy-Nixon debates…looks matter.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
The Geezer July 14, 2012 at 19:14

Yeah, I think Palin is HOT! Moreso now on Fox than when she was running. What did Letterman call it? The slutty stewardess look?

Yeah, Todd-boy is one lucky sumbeyotch.

The Geezer

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7
Rob July 14, 2012 at 20:42

I say, let them Title IX the hell out of Academia. Hopefully, men with brains will run like the wind. Academia is highly over-rated. Even within the MRM, everyone with a Ph D can only recommend larger and more intrusive government… and how bloody smart is that?

The Wright Brothers were high-school drop-outs, and yet challenged and obviously defeated all of the academics of the day’s “lift equations.”

Einstein would have been on Ritalin in primary school.

Beethoven would have been placed in a special interest group that would have affirmative action-ed his ass into obscurity. He’d probably have ended up composing “Mary Had a Little Lamb” for The School for the Mentally Challenged.

And so on.

If men deem to learn something, wait for it… they will learn it themselves!

Who taught Leonardo da Vinci all of those things… except for himself?

Has no-one noticed that society is stagnating? We have more people living on earth than ever before… logic would dictate that statistically there would be MORE da Vincis, more Einsteins, and more Wright Brothers alive today than ever before… and yet there are not. What could explain this except for the same reason that Tolstoy and Tchaikovsky existed before the Russian Revolution, yet afterwards… nothing. The Russians killed their intellectual spirit in the same manner we are killing ours.

If men want to learn, they will. Nothing will stop them… except Title IX and oppressive government… and even then, we see things like Spaceship One getting launched into outer space for a fraction of what the government can do it for. Let the government kill themselves. The Free Market creates a miracle a minute. High-school drop-outs can create new fangled flying machines, without the aid academia. History has well proven this.

Screw ‘em.

If men want to learn the STEM subjects, they will of their own volition. There is nothing stopping men from learning. Only becoming accredited for a government sponsored job is becoming harder. Good. The government is broke anyway! Who would want a bankruptcy claimant for an employer? Academia is WAY over-rated and hardly can be deemed as providing an “education.”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 5
pb July 14, 2012 at 21:27

How can any rational man not think: “Recognize your enemy and avoid supporting the system as much as possible.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1
evilwhitemalempire July 14, 2012 at 21:40

Still, I do not get it, why Republicans do not go full-throttle ahead with support of men and families?
——————
maybe because they don’t feel that they can trust the white male vote ’cause too many mras have issues with republican politicians

for some reason too many mras think that teaming up with say, 50 white knights and 10 manginas in order to stop 100 white knights and a 1000 manginas on the other side of the fence is an unacceptable ratio

it’s not just splc and etc. that watch things said on this site and others

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
evilwhitemalempire July 14, 2012 at 21:55

Hisoj July 14, 2012 at 07:21
another election where I won’t be voting for anybody.

—————–
a vote for romney cancels a vote for obama

therefore not voting is the same as voting for obama

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0
evilwhitemalempire July 14, 2012 at 22:19

migu July 14, 2012 at 08:34
There is no right and left.

Would you like the right half of this turd, or the left half?

How about you keep the shit to yourself? Just a thought voters.

————————
the right half

because it’s the side not coated with your hemorrhoidal blood

or is that menstrual blood?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
Masculist Man July 14, 2012 at 22:22

Recent rumor has it that Romney wants to pick Condi… I am not sure how that is going to work.

I don’t see how that could work. No one is going to let a woman near the white house unless she’s the first lady. Mondale found that out,McCain found that out and if Romney picks Condi that will be four more years of Obama/Biden.

Romney is better off picking Rubio.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3
Masculist Man July 14, 2012 at 22:42

Unfortunately, for men, it doesn’t matter which candidate wins, both of them will continue the status quo, vis-a-vis feminist entitlement, because that is the wish of our overlords.

That’s a defeatist attitude. Have you tried activism? Have you tried making noise?

To that other guy who says he is not going to vote: why is that? If you don’t participate then nothing happens. If you stay silent you hand power to your enemies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6
evilwhitemalempire July 14, 2012 at 22:53

Obama’s multi-culti chic, cool swagger, baritone voice and soaring oratory of policy unicorns and pixie dust is so yesterday’s hottie. He’s an empty suit, he has no substance. Women hate that.

——————-

has anyone noticed……

…………….

……that obama’s speeches……

……………..

……when he’s up at the podium…..

……………….

…….are always like this?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
greyghost July 14, 2012 at 23:05

I’m fucking voting. Anybody but Obama. We also some how need to get a meme started that a male pill is needed for womens health.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Attila July 14, 2012 at 23:16

Both Robomney and Obamba are part of the Estabishment – but at least you won’t get the social liberalism garbage menu with Robomney. The Zionist Omniscient Government and other cliques will be supporting both sides anyway. But at least Robomney will not show up in drag and sporting tattoos/piercings at his Inauguration.

By the way- thanks for the “bottom homo-MRA” concept … very accurate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Ray July 14, 2012 at 23:18

The Obama administration has been having a field day witch-hunting males as shown in “Witch-Hunting Males” at Youtube. http://tinyurl.com/65dpzwu After a four year witch-hunt of males it’s hard to believe he could get worse, but his recent pandering to feminists shows he’s trying even harder to spread hatred for and persecution of all things male.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
freebird July 14, 2012 at 23:22

A recent search on “girls selling eggs to fertility clinics” yielded many results.Just began to read,apparently women get $3000 to $8000 PER EGG.
Varying reports of how dangerous this may be.But one thing seems clear:the exploitation of younger women by older women.May write another post if I find something noteworthy.
This concept is just begging for a pro writer to flesh it out,also-could be a selling point to repubs-protect the young women!
I like the idea of selling the male pill to the repubs as protecting wimmins too.
In fact,just about anything can and has been sold in the interests of wimmin and chilluns.
Spin that hamster!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
Ray July 14, 2012 at 23:26

Title IX is a club used to promote feminist misandry and discrimination against males. The left wing of politics has a firm grip on academia. Special programs for women are abundant, while male bashing goes unchallenged and unchecked. Domestic violence and rape witch-hunting are favorite on-campus pastimes of feminist academic bullies. Race, class, and gender baiting by Marxist thugs at professor’s podiums is the norm as shown in Marxist Valley College at Youtube. http://tinyurl.com/44btbq8

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
freebird July 14, 2012 at 23:40

“you may be required to take hormones to promote healthy egg production. Both of these can be both stressful and uncomfortable.

Finally, although the procedure is generally safe, the extraction process can also result in physical complication. ”

“shocking is high school students are also joining the bandwagon oblivious to the risks they are exposed to. The fact that the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Bill 2010 governing the procedure is yet to be passed allows the trade to continue untouched.”

““Egg donation has picked up like never before and there is no dearth of young women willing to donate,” fertility specialist Dr Rita said. School- going children have been reported to donate eggs not only once but several times. ”

“The demand is higher for fairskinned donors”

“Oocyte donation is an intrusive procedure. A fertility hormone is injected into the donor to increase the production of eggs. “This triggers nausea, giddiness and headaches which last a couple of days after the procedure,” said a senior gynaecologist. “Regular oocyte donation puts the donor at risk. Since the ovaries are overstimulated with drugs, there is a danger of developing hyper- ovarian syndrome. This can lead to complications,””

““The guidelines issued by the ICMR are blatantly violated. There is a pressing need for the Assisted Reproductive Technology Regulation Bill 2010 to be passed,” he said. The Bill says the donor should be between 21 and 35 years of age and should not donate more than six times in her lifetime.”

“It bears noting that the United States also has no laws regulating egg donation. While the American Society of Reproductive Medicine has guidelines, they are voluntary and there is little real consequence for agencies or medical providers that disregard these rules.”

“you can make a lot of money selling your eggs….I worked for an IVF clinic they pay between 10,000 and 20,000 for eggs which is pretty nice compared to what men get for donating their sperm ”

“Using Craigslist.com, flyers posted in coffee shops and fitness centers, and ads in university newspapers, egg “recruiters” find young women to meet the exploding demand for human eggs. Roughly one in seven couples now suffers from infertility. Delayed childbearing and rampant sexually transmitted infections mean that many would-be moms have eggs too old or organs too damaged to support conception. So donor eggs are a hot commodity.”

“Eggsploitation, a powerful, disturbing documentary, tells the heart-wrenching stories of egg donors who suffered devastating consequences, including lost fertility, serious disability, and near death. This award-winning film sends a critical warning to young women thinking about donating their eggs: Don’t.”
http://www.eggsploitation.com/index.htm

“No one really knows how egg donation affects a young woman’s future health and fertility. Small studies and scattered donor reports suggest links between fertility drugs and cancer, infertility, and other health problems. In the U.S, no one tracks complications or long-term health risks for egg donors. Most egg donors are anonymous (no registry) and receive no follow-up care once the donation cycle ends.”

“One of the few studies of past donors found that 20% did not recall being informed of any risks. Although 12.5% of past donors reported experiencing ovarian hyper-stimulation (a serious, potentially fatal, complication), donor agencies and fertility centers downplay the risk as “rare,” or present in “1-2% of patients,” or as a “5% chance in any cycle.” And prospective donors who wonder whether egg donation might affect their future fertility are flatly misled: “Donating eggs will not harm your future fertility.”


Some of the lives created from donor eggs are deliberately thrown away after fertilization–graded and disposed of as subpar.
Implanted safely, an embryo may be “selectively reduced” (aborted) to avoid multiple births;
Implanted, an embryo may die in utero (up to 20% of successful clinical pregnancies eventually miscarry);
Frozen, extra embryos may languish for years in steel receptacles, labeled by number and expiration date;
Frozen, then finally invited to join the family, embryos may perish in the thawing process;
Frozen, forgotten, or rejected by the intended recipients, remaining embryos are destroyed;
Finally, years later, the resulting children may long desperately but hopelessly to know their biological mom, the egg donor;
And, the CDC warns, IVF children are two to four times more likely to suffer birth defects.”

“a new study reported in the New York Times found that IVF increased the risk of ovarian cancer–an stealthy and often deadly cancer. (link below) The risks of hyper-stimulating the ovaries (common for IVF) are too often minimized or glossed over when the donor gives consent. The hyper-stimulation process produces not one or two eggs, like a normal cycle, but anywhere from 15 to 35–a huge difference. The problem is not that the eggs are wasted but that the hyper-stimulation process itself is harmful and, I would argue, the whole process of IVF demeans human life. And when embryos have been created and then frozen indefinitely or disposed of like trash, human life is demeaned even more. I do agree with your observation, however, that we need more research on the risks to the donor’s health from the IVF process. It’s unconscionable to entice women–by payment and praise–into a process that may seriously harm their own fertility and health.
New Study on link between ovarian cancer and IVF treatments: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/health/research/ivf-brings-slightly-higher-risk-for-ovarian-cancer.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6
migu July 14, 2012 at 23:44

Voting is not the only way to participate.

Voting is in fact conceding defeat. Imagine only 10% vote. The government that oppresses your left and right side has just lost legitimacy.

Now you can install whomever you wish locally and safely ignore the center. Other localities will do the same. Vote for a sheriff who will imprison federal authorities that violate sovereignty. Vote for a city council that refuses to collect for the IRS. Vote for a governor who will annex federal land back to his state.

Don’t vote for national candidates, they represent Washington not you or your community. You want it to stop, you have to make them illegitimate, prove they are the bastards we all know they are.

If you keep sending people to Washington, they will keep looting you.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 10
freebird July 14, 2012 at 23:50

“Since then, it’s estimated that IVF has led to more than 60,000 babies in Massachusetts. In another first, Massachusetts was, in 1987, the first state to mandate insurance coverage for fertility treatments, including IVF. And this isn’t just for those with private insurance. In 2005, Massachusetts expanded its public MassHealth insurance program to cover infertility treatments for those with incomes up to twice poverty level. This means that, at least from a financial standpoint, IVF is more accessible in Massachusetts than almost anywhere else in the United States”

“Some countries, like Israel, prohibit egg harvesting on their own territory yet still reimburse citizens for IVF, even if it’s done with donor eggs, as long as they’re acquired elsewhere. U.S. law says nothing about egg donation”

“”It is twice as difficult to adopt a cat as it is to procure a human egg,” says Glenn Edwards McGee, editor of The American Journal of Bioethics. According to a 2010 study by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, nearly 25,000 egg donations are performed in Europe for fertility tourists every year. More than 50% of those surveyed traveled abroad in order to circumvent legal regulations at home.”

“The vast majority of women don’t care where the eggs actually come from. They are so down the line with unsuccessful fertility treatment at that point that they will go anywhere and do anything.”

“The technology is at a point now,” says David Sher, founder and CEO of the Switzerland-based fertility-services company Elite IVF, “where if you provide the sperm, we can basically FedEx you a baby.”

“models with high SAT scores and prestigious degrees who would be paid $100,000 for their eggs. Those babies could sell for $1 million each”

“If no Y chromosomes are detected, the fetus is presumed to be a girl.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
freebird July 15, 2012 at 00:08

“Want To Conceive A Girl? (sire redacted)
Gender Selection By PGD Sorting & Insemination, Available Nationwide.”

“How do you find Asian egg donors? By offering more money,” said Vorzimer, who also owns Egg Donation Inc. in Encino. “I have seen contracts where donors are getting $50,000 or $100,000.”

“Demand is also high among Jewish couples, many of whom put off having kids to pursue higher education or careers, clinic operators say. According to a report from the United Jewish Communities, half of Jewish American women have college degrees and 21 percent have graduate degrees. They tend to marry later, the survey says, and have lower fertility rates.”

“Surrogate Alternatives in San Diego has about 400 potential donors on its roster, but only two are ethnically Asian. To bring up its Asian numbers, the agency plans to start flying in women from China and Japan, Chief Executive Diana Van De Voort-Perez said.”

“Heart to Heart Egg Donations in Beverly Hills is an agency that specializes in African American donors. It has a roster of about 125 women willing to be paid donors. But the agency had only 22 black or mixed-race couples last year seeking black donors.”

“Some other agencies won’t even bother putting these (black) donors in their database,” Williams said, “because they’ll just sit there for years.”

“We are endangering our young women’s lives,” said Rep. Rebecca Hamilton, the bill’s author. “These girls are being injured they are dying.”

“30 Israelis Arrested Over Human Eggs Traficking in Romania Some 30 Israelis were arrested in a fertility clinic in the Romanian capital ….. Parents may sell children to traffickers ”

“Romania has stepped up the legal measures against the suspects in the ova trafficking scandal, which involves Bucharest-based Israeli fertility doctors.

The State Prosecution announced on Wednesday that 22 suspects – including Harry Mironescu (Miron) and his son Yair, who are the directors of the Sabyc fertility clinic – would be indicted.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/images/0.gifAdvertisementThe head of the Romanian Medical Association on Tuesday compared the activities of the Bucharest fertility clinic, whose Israeli directors have been arrested on charges of trading in ova (http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1101512.html), to Nazi practices.

Professor Vasili Esterestua told Romanian TV that the Israeli-owned clinic “carried out medical experiments similar to those the Nazis did in Auschwitz,” and was characterized by “severe ethical deficiency.”

Accusing the Sabyc clinic of extracting ova from women as young as 15-year-old, Esterestua said the doctors “breached the very basic moral standards.” He also said they were not licensed to practice medicine in Romania.”
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-161893.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
migu July 15, 2012 at 00:20

You know who I am masculist man, and you know exactly why I wont vote.

Voting is defeatist. You concede defeat the moment you tick the box.

Activism is also a failure. I believe the results of activism are with us today. The century of activism brought fourth over 200 million murders not including those murdered by the US dictatorships.

Anyone but Obama? Suppose the grand wizard of the kkk was the “anyone but”

Activism the real kind is pushing the fringe, not legitimizing the status quo. Not a single one of you, nor all of you together will ever force the establishment to do anything period.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 16
freebird July 15, 2012 at 00:26

Ran across some info the Girl Scouts of the USA are in coalition with Planned Parenthood.
They have literature that is disseminated to the girls selected by age level,most of it is written by the well know rad-fem celebrities.
http://speaknowgirlscouts.com/index.php?p=1_4_The-latest-Journeys-more

“Did you know… GSUSA CEO Kathy Cloninger proudly admitted on national television that Girl Scouts “partners with Planned Parenthood”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
freebird July 15, 2012 at 00:32

Seriously,go to the speaknowgirlscouts link above.
The reading list is extensive and horrific.
Worst thing I’ve read in a very long time.
To think it’s been thrust upon innocent girls is sickening.
Yes, the man-hating parts are in there too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
freebird July 15, 2012 at 00:43

In related news,a 2007 hit piece on the GOP in general focused upon Former South Dakota State Rep. Ted Klaudt:
“Like so many tightly wound repressed and mentally ill Republicans, Klaudt was preaching the moral superiority of the far right while he was abusing molesting children– his own foster daughters and 2 state legislative pages! He “faces a long list of charges: eight counts of rape, two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor, two counts of witness tampering, sexual contact with a person under 16, and stalking.”

“In the most disturbing accusation, the girls say Klaudt had them convinced they could earn up to $20,000 by donating their eggs to a fertility clinic. And even though he has no medical training, the girls say Klaudt did all the supposed “exams” and “procedures” himself….”

“Five different girls now say Klaudt did things ranging from manual “breast exams” to the painful procedure of actually going inside of them with a speculum and collecting body fluids. The girls say when they cried, Klaudt gave them a beer and told them to toughen up. ”

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/05/19/336421/-Another-GOP-lawmaker-arrested-for-child-rape-molesting-of-pages

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
The Whammer July 15, 2012 at 01:09
freebird July 15, 2012 at 01:14

“The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.”
Pat Robertson

“One night late last year, Jason Melbourne walked into a CVS pharmacy in Mesquite, hoping against hope to walk out with an emergency contraceptive, or “the morning-after pill.” It wasn’t the morning after. He and his wife had their “accident” a few days before, and the 72-hour window in which EC is most effective was closing fast…

He was finally referred to (redacted) They told him they had just one box left. But when he finally got there, the overnight pharmacist… told Melbourne she wasn’t going to sell it to him.

In order for him to buy the meds, the pharmacist said, she’d need to talk to and see the ID of his wife, who was at home with their two young children..
“Why don’t you show me the law that says you can’t sell this to a man?” Melbourne replied…

A pharmacy technician.. jumped in. He let Melbourne know that they don’t sell emergency contraception to men because they might be giving it to “rape victims.”
…Lisa Graybill, the legal director at ACLU of Texas, says that while denying emergency contraception to a man isn’t technically illegal, “it’s my understanding it’s contrary to the FDA guidelines. They say the medication is available to people over the ages of 17.”
Graybill says that refusing to sell EC to men on the grounds they may give it to minors is “misguided,” as she put it after a polite, diplomatic pause. “I’m not aware of a single case of a man reportedly buying it to push on his underage pedophile victim,” she says. She’s also not aware of men buying EC to force on people they’ve just raped.

stores in Texas, Mississippi and Oklahoma were refusing to sell EC to men. The ACLU called … out publicly, which seemed to solve the problem.

.. it’s “store policy” not to sell EC to men, “because we have to prove that whoever we sell it to is not any minor person.”

We pointed out that Melbourne was over 17. “Well, that’s the issue,” she replied. “We don’t know who he’s going to give it to.” She said she had also heard that “other stores” won’t sell EC to men on the grounds they may give it to women they’ve just raped.

“I’m outraged,” Melbourne says. “I chased this thing all over town, then I get accused of using this for rape, even after they’ve talked to my wife on the phone. It makes me feel like a piece of crap.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
Rocco July 15, 2012 at 02:47

@ freebird

Excellent research on the true problem of egg trafficking, a world wide problem.

I wonder, does the new law limit men from using surrogates?

Stimulating the uterus and uvaries with hormones causes many problems including increased risk of cancer and so a male pill is required ( we will have to make sure it doesn’t cause increase in prostate cancer).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
dhanu July 15, 2012 at 04:38

OT: “If only I had meowed when I was born – How cats are protected more than boys in Australia” (circumcision): http://intactivistsofaustralasia.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/if-only-i-had-meowed-when-i-was-born-how-cats-are-protected-more-than-boys-in-australia/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
walking in hell2 July 15, 2012 at 05:09

More on the subject of pandering, feminism, and the corrupt American criminal justice system. This excellent article by Paul Craig Roberts shows what happens when false spousal rape charges converge with a corrupt plea-bargaining process and feminist- pandering judge.

All young men take note: this scenario of 60 years to life in prison, simply because a vindictive and rotten woman pointed her finger at you, could happen to anyone.

Also noteworthy is that this story shows how men have no friends among do-gooder liberals or law and order conservatives. Read this story and weep about what is in store for you or your male children.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts187.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
The Whammer July 15, 2012 at 06:13

@AlexF-there are a millions blogs on the Net and people setup websites, give them some official looking name and then write articles trying to prove something with rather specious sources.

“There is a direct, causal link between increased educational, political and employment opportunities for women, and decreased happiness and fulfillment with their lives”

That’s not true.Many females have always had a dissatisfaction with life and it’s just their Nature.It doesn’t matter if they’re educated or ignorant and real studies have shown that the more money you have the happier you are relatively speaking which is contrary to what the average person likes to believe.

“This link is becoming more and more pronounced in all developed countries (and particularly the US and UK), and has been confirmed by studies again and again – and we all know the mental health statistics: for every 100 U.S. women, 37 prescriptions for anti-depressants are written. All common mental disorders predominate in women over men, and far more women than men are diagnosed as mentally ill – when prior to 1950, the exact opposite was true (then, it was 2 women for every 7 men; now it is 22 women for every 2 men).”

That’s also not true. Mental illness and what used to be called hysteria was always higher with females. Drug use? It was always higher amongst females than men and in the 1800′s about 80% of the opiate addicts were female. And that statistic was taken from pharmacies when these drugs was legal. Females also took these patent medicines sold as “tonics” which were mostly alcohol and opium tinctures used for “female complaints” (PMS etc.) and later had cocaine added to them, or coca tonics became popular. They likely even drank more than we think especially when alcohol began to be sold in grocery stores and you didn’t have to go into a pub to buy it and it was easy to pick up a bottle when food shopping without drawing attention.

“Feminists themselves publish studies regarding the dramatic decline in women’s happiness and mental stability, and conclude that this is further evidence of oppression”

That’s just female bullshit and a way of keeping men on the defensive and feeling guilty and is nothing new. Females have always lived off men in one way or another even if they worked on a farm or something because their work was just a supplement and besides they had to care for kids. So using men is just part of their nature and hardwired in them. It’s subconscious and they have no insight into why they behave as they do anymore than an animal has to think about what it does to survive.

“women in their 20s are out-earning male contemporaries”

I’m not sure if that’s true because even if a female has a Uni degree they still like to take the easier jobs that pay less. Even the females who do earn the same or more as men their age never seem to save any money and are always spending more than they earn. and that’s also taking into consideration that the man is always paying for everything whether it’s dates, gifts or holidays. Few females have any assets if they marry and the sucker (husband) ends up paying her loans and credit card bills. Females benefit from marriage but to a man it’s just a financiial and emotional drain(maybe there are a few exceptions). If she divorces him because she’s bored she’ll get 1/2 his assets, maybe alimony and maybe even State benefits in some form. But it’s funny because even after getting screwed most men recover and eventually have a better lifestyle than the woman, which should tell you who is the more competent sex.

“Well, as has been said many times before, no-one said logic was feminists’ (or females)strong point.”

Females don’t operate on logic, it’s all animal instinct which is why they must be subordinate to the more logical male in order to maintain any sort of order or civilisation, even a bad civilisation. There may be some advantages in the female operating under some subconscious instinct but the disadvantages outweigh them in anything but the most primitive society.
Most females initiate divorce for no real reason just a sense of boredom or other trivial reason. This is just a feeling that nature has hardwired into them to make them feel discontented so they look for a differnt sex partner.No matter what reason they think they want to leave a man that is the real one.Now perhaps in a very primitive society which is how humans lived for 99% of history leaving one man and going to another had some sort of biological benefit. For example, having 3 kids by 3 different men would insure some diversity and be better for passing her genes on than having 3 kids by the same man in the event where they both may be carrying a copy of a gene for something like sickle cell anemia where all the kids would then have 2 copies and not survive.
But while some things may be an advantage on an individual level, for a civilisation on the whole they will be a disaster. It may be better that some people don’t reproduce or that their children all die (and not pass on or carry certain genes) than to live in a primitve chaotic society where you never rise above a hand to mouth existence and live in a grass hut forever. I’m convinced that the female due to her primitve mating strategy must never be permitted to run society and must be subordinate to the man’s judgement. Sure, men may only be marginally better on average but their power of observation and deduction is better. Over thousands of years they likely figured out certain things even without any knowledge of science or genetics and established rules on reproduction eg. marriage and even though these rules were imperfect and hard to enforce they were still better than what preceeded them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2
AntZ July 15, 2012 at 06:23

Obama is the most vile living thing that ever defiled God’s creation. Sadly, I voted for him 4 years ago. I had no idea he would be a man hating feminist bigot.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
greyghost July 15, 2012 at 07:23

Suppose the grand wizard of the kkk was the “anyone but” I’ll take it. That asshole is at least a white pussy worshipping patriot. The guy will at a minimun give a damn about the US as a country.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Tree July 15, 2012 at 07:29

All of you can see our downward fall, I have a warning for you.

Morally and Spiritually, OUR civilization has collapsed, it is over, we lost it. The physical aspect will take longer, such as when a person dies, it takes a while for the body to decompose. The heart has stopped but various organs still try to carry on in futility.

By various estimates, especially by those of MIT, we have less than 18 years before there is a world wide fall into the dark ages. The disaster will be threefold. An Economic collapse of Consumerism, a Population collapse caused by the Feminist birthrate being less than replacement rate (2.1), and Governmental collapses world wide as the starving masses turn on each other. Respectively, Distribution of food and energy will halt, Health Care will be overrun with geriatrics, and the power vacuum left by governments will lead to intense warfare world wide.

Those who still believe in REAL Culture, truly functioning communities, must seek the lifeboats now before we hit the iceberg and everyone is running for them. WE must seek to create the means of production on an INDIVIDUAL basis.
1) That means having a meaningful trade that produces something that everyone needs.
2) Personally owning the tools to continue this trade for several decades without replacement tools.
3) Not relying on a publicly held corporation for employment.

Feminists LOVE cities, we need to flee from them.
Feminists Love luxury, we need to do without and produce ordinary goods.
Feminists HATE male head of households, marry a poor foreign Virgin from the countryside (NOT the Cities, they act just like American Prostitutes) and you will not be disappointed (this requires loyalty in return).

Japanese Proverb- The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago.

We must begin acting NOW.
Own Land outright
Begin retrofitting your house to function without publicly funded utilities. And all those little things that are put off on fixing, fix them permanently
Have at least a Hobby that produces some basic good (or service if you must)
And yes, be a father and have a family. I am not saying “Man Up,” but I am saying that you owe it to your genes to pass them on. I have found a nice Filipino girl, and she makes every American girl I have ever met seem like a nasty _____.

Good luck to all. Work now in the Day, because when Night falls, there will be no pay, no peace, and no place for feminists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
migu July 15, 2012 at 07:54

Fair enough.

Might want to check Mormon views on “dark people”

And please remember old Adolph was “anything but weimar”

I think we are all better served ignoring the nation. It will continue to ignore you. Neighbors are a different story.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 8
Alex F July 15, 2012 at 08:07

@TheWhammer – thanks for your response, and I take many of your points. However, the study I cited was published in the American Economic Journal, not some random blog trying to look official. There are many other such studies, which have found the exact same thing. Several of them are quoted in this article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/26/women-wellbeing-unhappiness

You said: “That’s not true. Many females have always had a dissatisfaction with life and it’s just their Nature.It doesn’t matter if they’re educated or ignorant and real studies have shown that the more money you have the happier you are relatively speaking which is contrary to what the average person likes to believe.”

This isn’t true; in fact, the exact opposite is. Past a certain point, the richer a country and its individual people become, the unhappier they get. A Gallup poll has shown that Britain (where I live) is less happy than in the 1950s – despite the fact we are three times richer. The amount of people claiming to be “very happy” has fallen from 52% in 1957, to just 36% by 2005.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/happiness_formula/4771908.stm

To quote the BBC here, “the story of extra wealth failing to translate into extra happiness is the story of the Western world.”

As for women always being dissatisfied and it being part of their “nature”, I doubt that this is true. I can, however, agree that they may well be less well adapted than men to live in civilisation. Nevertheless, in a “natural” human environment, I’m sure they did fine. No female of any other species demonstrates a consistent inability to live an adaptive, successful life in their natural environment – you don’t see female lionesses wandering about the savannah consumed with hysteria or sinking into depression or whatever – so it seems highly unlikely the human female would be designed this way.

“That’s also not true. Mental illness and what used to be called hysteria was always higher with females. Drug use? It was always higher amongst females than men and in the 1800′s about 80% of the opiate addicts were female. And that statistic was taken from pharmacies when these drugs was legal. Females also took these patent medicines sold as “tonics” which were mostly alcohol and opium tinctures used for “female complaints” (PMS etc.) and later had cocaine added to them, or coca tonics became popular. They likely even drank more than we think especially when alcohol began to be sold in grocery stores and you didn’t have to go into a pub to buy it and it was easy to pick up a bottle when food shopping without drawing attention.”

I see what you’re saying and these points are valid. But there has certainly been a huge upsurge in mental illnesses and substance abuse amongst females since their “liberation” – such behaviour wasn’t the norm in a traditional society, although it happened; it certainly is the norm now. Most women functioned well enough and were not medicated – I know neither of my grandmothers were (born 1920s) and I’m sure most people here would confirm any older female relatives they have are much more functional and stable than any born in the last 40-50 years.

My statistics about mental health and the sexes came from a report by BP Dohrenwend published in the American Journal of Sociology that shows, prior to 1950, more men than women were diagnosed as mentally ill. This isn’t especially hard to believe when you consider that in 1950, we had just come through two world wars.

“That’s just female bullshit and a way of keeping men on the defensive and feeling guilty and is nothing new. Females have always lived off men in one way or another even if they worked on a farm or something because their work was just a supplement and besides they had to care for kids. So using men is just part of their nature and hardwired in them. It’s subconscious and they have no insight into why they behave as they do anymore than an animal has to think about what it does to survive.”

Again, see what you’re saying, but I think that’s the wrong way to look at it. Women may objectively need to lean on men more than the reverse (smaller, weaker, need more protection etc), but the two sexes are designed to have a symbiotic, mutually dependent relationship. There’s no shame in carrying out a supplemental role; after all, most of us do (e.g. most people work for businesses, and don’t run them). Supplemental, assisting roles are every bit as vital to society as determining, dominant ones. One of the cornerstones of feminism is the denigration of supplemental roles (homemaker, wife, etc); feminists have labelled these roles inferior, sneering they make women “dependent” on men, so I think it’s a mistake to conspire with them on this. We are all “dependent” on others – on our boss, or customers, or whoever – and it’s about a hierarchy and contract of dependence. The original marriage contract had women financially dependent on men in exchange for cooking, cleaning, sex and childcare. That’s no more shameful than a man’s contract of dependence with a boss – he depends financially on the boss, in exchange for volunteering his time, skill, and productivity.

Furthermore, when women were feminine and men were masculine, the sexes complemented each other very well, as they were designed to. Of course there were some bitchy, entitled princesses, as ever there have been, but there was a time when the sexes liked and appreciated each other. Men wanted to protect and provide for women and children, as providing this service is a part of heterosexual male identity. The fact that most men don’t want to do it now is because women have lost their heterosexual female identity and behave like men. Men don’t want to provide for another man.

“I’m not sure if that’s true because even if a female has a Uni degree they still like to take the easier jobs that pay less. Even the females who do earn the same or more as men their age never seem to save any money and are always spending more than they earn. and that’s also taking into consideration that the man is always paying for everything whether it’s dates, gifts or holidays. Few females have any assets if they marry and the sucker (husband) ends up paying her loans and credit card bills. Females benefit from marriage but to a man it’s just a financiial and emotional drain(maybe there are a few exceptions). If she divorces him because she’s bored she’ll get 1/2 his assets, maybe alimony and maybe even State benefits in some form. But it’s funny because even after getting screwed most men recover and eventually have a better lifestyle than the woman, which should tell you who is the more competent sex.”

What you say here is true, however, I mentioned the wage gap among 20-somethings to illustrate the “success” of feminism; how many times have they dragged out the tired old mantra that “for every $1 a man earns…”. Well, in the youngest segment of earning adults, it is now women who are earning more, and this trend is predicted to continue and the gap to widen:

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

My point is that feminism has achieved everything it claimed it needed to to make women happy and fulfilled – more education (more than boys), more money (more than men), more divorce and custody rights (at men’s literal and figurative expense), and now they have got all of those things. The result? Plummeting happiness and mental health in women. Sure, women were never ecstatically happy with every aspect of their existence, but the colossal drop in happiness and mental health since the ’50s is the direct consequence of one thing and one thing alone – feminism.

Re: divorce and men needing to be in control – yeah, we’re on the same page here, and this is really the ultimate point I was trying to make. That the patriarchy was better for everyone, as men are able to make a society work. Not work perfectly, but a hell of a lot better. Monogamous lifelong marriage may well go against a female’s “instincts” – it goes against a man’s in a lot of ways – but there is powerful evidence to demonstrate that the institution of marriage has been the cornerstone of Western civilisation and what enabled it to flourish and dominate.

Joseph Heinrich at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver published a paper a few years ago that concluded that monogamous relationships could well be the foundations of European ideas of democracy and human rights. He stated:

“The anthropologically peculiar institutions of imposed monogamous marriage may be one of the foundations of Western civilisation, and may explain why democratic ideals and notions of human rights first emerged as a Western phenomenon.

“Monogamy may have spread, and continue to spread, because monogamous societies are more competitive: monogamy seems to redirect male motivations in ways that generate lower crime rates, greater GDP per capita, and better outcomes for children”

So, by women making themselves unmarriageable and / or filing for divorce at the drop of a hat, and most men these days uninterested in marriage anyway, Western society is slowly – quite quickly, actually – committing suicide.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3
Anon July 15, 2012 at 08:15

“In fact, more women as a whole now graduate from college than men. This is a great accomplishment—not just for one sport or one college or even just for women but for America.”

I’m wondering if the norm for companies will be that women dominate the white collar ranks, just because so many more women are college graduates. And these companies will just try eke out an existence by maintaining the market share gained by the previous (male-dominated) generation.

And everyone will think that the lack of innovation, and the aversion to dirty, unpleasant, dangerous jobs making things (factory work is tough on your nails), is normal.

I’m not looking forward to this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Art Vandelay July 15, 2012 at 08:26

How can I be any clearer than I already have on this for you left-leaning MRA’s?

Are you calling me left leaning? Why?

Anyways, what do you guys think of the Libertarian Party?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
greyghost July 15, 2012 at 08:35

freebird
The old woman consumption of the young women needs to be encouraged. One thing I have learned over the last couple years is that white knighting and holding the line and keeping civilization viable is a sucker deal for men. The concept of MGTOW is the most brilliant thing I have ever come across.
Look at the post you sent up and read between the lines and see what you wrote. You gave all men here a tell on the painful and desperate nature the effects of femminism has on the females. The brilliance of MGTOW is the effects of those choices are theirs and not taken by men in the form of misandry.
At this time the madness you have described is self induced because men are paying for it. When the inertia of the feminist backlash occurs it will be a written script handed tothem by beta males GTOW. Look the other way freebird and don’t worry about womens health (because they sure the hell aren’t) Concern yourself with male survival. Learn and teach techniques of MGTOW. Game for the young man to get past his horniness without being taken,activism for a male pill, support gay marriage,support open and flaming homosexuality in the military, support women in the military, etc etc ,i am one man with one set of eyes we are a lot of men with a lot of eyes and we know where to go to find our niche to encourage. At the same time teach young men about how to survive (MGTOW, Game, self employment, etc.). Never lie to a boy about the delusion of marriage family children and commitment tell men the truth at all times. (most ,hell,all of the madness is going on because good solid beta men have been duped into using their extreme industriousness and good heartedness to support it with lies)
Don’t believe me freebird or anybody else look at your comment on egg donations. I would introduce you to my daughter . I hope this point doesn’t get past you in a negative way. The world of yours and my, our beta hearts is not the world we live in. We don’t get that world and we have been drafted into a war we didn’t start and don’t want to fight.
No man here today will know a world that he can give his heart to god, country, and commitment to one woman and raise children proudly. Even through our beta asses know it is the strength and back bone of civilization. Our place in history is not to live it and maintain it but to make it reality.This society we have today does not deserve it and I would never bless a society we have today with such civility. Shrugg it off with indifference and survive with the truth. MGTOW has merit so much merit a rich bitch will spend 100k dollars on an egg that will most likely die or be a birth defect.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
greyghost July 15, 2012 at 08:45

Migu
Make sure Obama and as many demo congressmen that parrot that assholes policies are voted out of power. Don’t worry about the details of arguement. You could really help our cause here with an open discussion on shifting the attitude of political parties to be more masculine.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Masculist Man July 15, 2012 at 08:56

You know who I am masculist man, and you know exactly why I wont vote.

You may also be firepower. If you go by other screen names what are they?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
meistergedanken July 15, 2012 at 09:04

“And please remember old Adolph was “anything but weimar” ”

Comparing Romney now to Hitler? Epic History Fail.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Rocco July 15, 2012 at 09:12

OT

How they will justify their “man tax”:

Two Classes, Divided by ‘I Do’

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/us/two-classes-in-america-divided-by-i-do.html?hp

For the women and chillin.

On a positive note, the marriage stike appears to be working.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Elusive Wapiti July 15, 2012 at 09:12

So much for equality. Yet again we see women’s ‘success’ defined as a loss for men.

However, I take some solace in the knowledge that one cannot defy the laws of economics for long…the market always finds a way. In this case, I think we’ll see the economic come-uppance in the form of decreased value of the American STEM degree, and a shift in the STEM center of gravity overseas to countries that are less concerned with fashion in their academic admissions policies.

In other words, I think this so-called ‘victory’ will prove Phyrric in the long run.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Tom936 July 15, 2012 at 10:13

If I vote I m saying the current system is legitimate. I don t believe it is.

So vote a protest vote. Write in your own name, or Tom Ball’s name, or just “None of the above”.

Not voting sends them a signal that you don’t even care enough to go across town.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Keyster July 15, 2012 at 10:18

In this case, I think we’ll see the economic come-uppance in the form of decreased value of the American STEM degree, and a shift in the STEM center of gravity overseas to countries that are less concerned with fashion in their academic admissions policies.

That ship has already sailed.
American tech companies are out-sourcing engineering work to Asia and India, where students are “tracked” on STEM as young as 10 years old. Not only is out-sourcing cheaper (5 engineers for the price of 1 in Silicon Valley), but they’re actually much better, more efficient and work much harder.

I speak from personal experience as a program manager working with both. The Asian/Indian guys didn’t play politics and snow management on schedules and other games American engineers became so adept at. There were no excuses, they just got sh*t done.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
freebird July 15, 2012 at 10:18

@Greyghost:
Thanks for the reply.I hear where you’re coming from.Myself I have no genuine interest in women nor their reproductive manipulations,but the next generation of men may be invested.

MGTOW succeeds by powerful acts of omission,I want to see more of these non-acts,such as: Men not donating sperm under any conditions,young women
not donating eggs under any conditions.

This will leave no avenue of recourse to the professional man-hater to have HER precious,precious children.

Much like men have no avenue of recourse to their precious children.

Packaging the concept as “women being exploited in a manner dangerous to their health” help the blue pillers to swallow it wholesale.

After all-who could be against women NOT having uterine or cervical cancer?

Who could be against 3rd world child-girls NOT being exploited sexually in a medical nightmare?

You must see:this thing has “legs” because it’s in the interest of women and children,secretly it supports the MGTOW concept nicely.

Lack of recourse will bring them to the table of concessions,just as lack of recourse has birthed the men’s rights movement.

It just has to be written into the all powerful LAW.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Art Vandelay July 15, 2012 at 10:29

Freebird you are of course also closing an avenue for men who want children without also committing to a woman for the next 20 years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
E July 15, 2012 at 10:50

Here’s the Real Reason There Are Not More Women in Technology

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markfidelman/2012/06/05/heres-the-real-reason-there-are-not-more-women-in-technology/

Here is my I submitted on the thread. Don’t know if they’ll post it.

But, in today’s world, those views are officially over. Technology careers are interesting, women are great at it, and they get to work alongside extraordinary men and women. Being technology illiterate just doesn’t cut it anymore. It can’t when so many more job functions require so much more technical know-how.

Women are great at it? The TOP women in STEM may be just as good as the as the TOP men in STEM, but the % of women capable of making it in STEM fields simply isn’t the same as men. To non multiculturalist, non PC, non Marxist, “sexist” it’s a given.

That’s my point. It’s not just that we have to encourage more women into technology related jobs

Why? I can’t think of any practical reason beyond girrrrl power feelgoodism.

We can do better than a frustratingly low number (9 percent) of CIOs that are female.

An injustice if there ever was one.

At a time when girls in general comprise about 46% of the advanced placement calculus test takers but that approximately 80% of them don’t end up taking a computer science class, clearly something is not working.

Stupid question, but is it out of the realm of possibility that women aren’t interested in STEM because of a genetic inclination?

The Real Reason we have Fewer Women in Tech…

Your kind is not the least bit interested in the “real reason”, if you were you would at least consider the possibility that genetic differences play a role in the life choices men and women make, but no, any difference in outcomes(that you disapprove of, you have no problem with the fact most janitors are men,) must be because of some omnipresent, goldsteinish male plot to to keep women down.

I had assumed, rather clumsily, that women were not interested in technology because – well – there were not many women in technology. Yet, I saw how women excelled at technology related tasks.

Excelling at a “technology related tasks” is not the same thing as excelling at technology, your first assumption may have been clumsy, but less so then the second.

Why then were perfectly capable women, not in tech related positions? It turns out there are multiple reasons

Two actually, lack of interest and lack a capability.

but it boils down to a quantity problem. We simply do not have enough women choosing tech careers.

Tell us what would be enough.

According to research by Penn Schoen and Berland (PSB), nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of teens have never considered a career in engineering. In another research study by Girl Scouts of America, only 13% of female teens say a STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) related career would be their first choice. Why? It turns out Klawe was on to something. From the research results, PSB found that 74% of teens that considered engineering did so only after being explained the economic benefits and impact they can have on the world.

Telling teens of the benefits of STEM to the world might raise interest, but not STEM potential.

So if women are not even considering a career in technology due in part to a perception problem, what then can we do?

Tell them that a career in technology will make them lose weight, increase, breast size, tighten their buttocks, and land them a 6”6 foot Braid Pitt look alike millionaire who, unlike the vast majority of men throughout history,is attracted to sassy, independent, high status women who can’t shut up about how smart they are.

Or

Give young girls a test to see it they have the aptitude(this is kind of important) for a tech career, if they have what it takes, then inform them that a tech career will make them lose weight, increase, breast size, tighten their buttocks, and land them a 6”6 foot Braid Pitt look alike millionaire.

Because in a world where technology increasingly permeates everything we do, in nearly every profession – there is nothing more important than having both men and women pursue technology careers to ensure our competitiveness.

So long as we focus on those with the potential and interest, it will work out fine.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
greyghost July 15, 2012 at 10:55

young women
not donating eggs under any conditions.

No let it happen. Have faith in male logic and power. The reason women have children is that it is a source of entitlement (income) and status for them. With out a legal attatchment of a man it dies on it’s own. Do not restict women on any of this, just talk to men and make it futile for women to disreguard men.( at the same time encourage women as a way to have a child without men and to pay for college without men) Your concern for what women are doing is being used as a weapon against you and all men. Trust in masculinity the world will love us for this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
freebird July 15, 2012 at 11:47

“With out a legal attatchment of a man it dies on it’s own.”
*ahem*
I see the state of Taxachussetts not only pays for the bottom %20 of women to have artificial insemination,they also have it mandatory via state coverage,meaning that men always pay the whole cost of both the eggs,sperm,and insertion techniques.

That in now way is removing men from the equation,it is requiring them to pay for it.
Also men will have to pay for the welfare handouts to raise these children after the fact.
In short,men are paying for their own demise,by LAW.

As far as eliminating a man’s way to having a child by surrogate, it is clear that most artificial inseminations are done legally in the US,whilst surrogate motherhood has to be offshore in India to have legal standing.
Banning egg donation in the US would have no effect on the surrogate mother business in India,but would make a valid point here in the States.Namely,taking away the large amounts of money for egg donations,and also to make it harder for single lesbian stateside would be mothers to get the resources.
No eggs? No payments by men to the state to cover those hundreds of thousands of inseminations to poor unwed mothers.
Supply and demand,men are already forced over to India,let the women compete equally with that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
freebird July 15, 2012 at 11:52

Not to mention all the outsourcing of eggs.
Those international eggs become US citizens once birthed here.
I do not know what the law is on a child birthed in India,but am guessing it’s not a citizen by default.
Another lengthy legal process and cost born by men to make his child a US citizen after-the-fact.
Make the women compete equally with that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
freebird July 15, 2012 at 12:24

Mark Fidelman said one month ago (In the linked forbes STEM article comments:
“Elmer, if that is your real name – the internet can be so distrustworthy.

I am going to surprise everyone by saying I agree and disagree with your comments. But, you’d win more people over to your ideas if you adopted a different tone and chose not to generalize women.

Let’s start where we agree. First, Boys are being left behind and not enough is being done about it. I plan to address who is responsible and why in the next few weeks.”

Well Mr. Fidelman has NOT addressed why boys are left behind “in a few weeks”
No, Not at all.
Yes,the ‘internet is SO Distrustworthy!’

I searched high and low for Mr. Fidelman’s expose’ on how and why boys are left behind,he simply never wrote it, I believe he intended or intends to write such an article.

In any event: He’s missed his self imposed deadline:A sorry move for a professional writer.
Certainly appears Mr.Fidelman is only interested in spouting the feminist party line.(The Narrative)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
freebird July 15, 2012 at 12:26

Opps!
Correction:
“I believe he *never* intended or intends to write such an article.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
The Whammer July 15, 2012 at 17:16

@Alex-As I said, anyone can set up a website , make it look legitimate,and use various “studies” to prove anything they like.Feminists and anyone else who has an axe to grind do this all of the time.
It is impossible to study happiness from one age to another. For one thing, people in the 50′s were not eager to admit they were unhappy implying them were failures in life or to reveal personal things and feelings about themselves.
It’s a common delusion for people to believe that the past was better. Even people who have lived through a few eras many times believe it was better in the past and it’s probably because the mind tends to remember things better than they were. A lot of memories are just childhood impressions.

“To quote the BBC here, “the story of extra wealth failing to translate into extra happiness is the story of the Western world.”

I never quote the BBC or any other “newspaper”. They all cater to their reader’s prejudices and beliefs. Most people want to believe the money can’t buy you happiness so these papers cater to that by printing stories about unhappy rich people or someone who had OD’ed on drugs or drank themselves to death but these things happen all of the timein the slums and lower class areas it’s just that no one is interested or cares about those people.
Real studies have always shown that the more money people have the happier they are (or at least less unhappy). Most of the problems you read here have to do with a lack of money. Do you think that if any of these guys who appeared in Family court had the money to hire a top lawyer that they’d be abused or taken advantage of by some low ranking family court judge(it’s a lower court and some of these judges also handle small claims). These judges would be intimadated by the reputation and wealth of your lawyer and he’s going to be very careful so he’s not made to look like a moron by your top lawyer.
It doesn’t take any “study” to tell you that the more assets you have the happier(or less unhappy) you will be because you simply have more freedom and control over things when you have more money.

“I mentioned the wage gap among 20-somethings to illustrate the “success” of feminism; how many times have they dragged out the tired old mantra that “for every $1 a man earns…”. ”

Well we all know that’s bullshit so I won’t argue with you but it still appears to me that men will do better despite having to operate under a handicap and being drained of his resources in one way or another. A man is simply more resouceful. A female on her own and without some support system is like a lost child.

“My point is that feminism has achieved everything it claimed it needed to to make women happy and fulfilled – more education (more than boys), more money (more than men), more divorce and custody rights (at men’s literal and figurative expense), and now they have got all of those things. The result? Plummeting happiness and mental health in women. Sure, women were never ecstatically happy with every aspect of their existence, but the colossal drop in happiness and mental health since the ’50s is the direct consequence of one thing and one thing alone – feminism. ”

In the 50′s females almost always had custody and it’s only now that you’re seeing men with custody even though it’s still a tiny %.
Mental health? I guess that this perverted new thing called feminism had something to do with female unhappiness but if you look at any of the drug co. advertisements from the 50′sand 60′s sent to doctors they’re pratically all aimed at females when it was a drug that had something to do with mental health.

“Most women functioned well enough and were not medicated – I know neither of my grandmothers were (born 1920s) and I’m sure most people here would confirm any older female relatives they have are much more functional and stable than any born in the last 40-50 years.”

I’m not so sure about that. There were plenty of deaths from accidental overdoes from barbituates in that era until the safer drugs like Valium came on the market. And drugs like amphetemines which are controlled today were easy to get and a lot of females took them (to lose weight, for energy etc.) A lot of people back then thought of drug addiction as something like injecting heroin and not the drugs they bought at the pharmacy.
And yes, a lot of men back then were casualities from WWII. Another thing they may effect the statistics on mental health is that alcoholism was considered a mental disorder (it’s not today) and some of these men would end up in a mental hospital rather than some treatment centre or AA etc
It’s also hard to say how many females were mentally ill because females have always been protected and taken care of by their family. Those crazy old spinster aunts that almost everyone had were just watched by the family while a man with the same symptoms might end up in a lunatic asylum. He may even get himself killed when acting crazy in public where a female would not.

“One of the cornerstones of feminism is the denigration of supplemental roles (homemaker, wife, etc); feminists have labelled these roles inferior, sneering they make women “dependent” on men, ”

Back in the 60′s we know that NOW membership consisted of 50% dykes (and it may have been even higher than that) so these “feminist” ideas are really lesbian ideas. These are not normal females because they have no use for a man.
But the problem with the average normal female is that females are just naturally susceptible to suggestion and the popular herd thinking that they are constantly being exposed to in the media. We’re going to have to deprogram them like some brainwashed cult member. This may not be as difficlt as you think because once a good portion of females begin to think in a more normal way the other herd members will follow along. Females don’t like to hold any unpopular ideas or be outsiders so the only ‘girls’ left believing this feminist nonsense will be lesbians who nobody gives a damn about. This doesn’t mean that females can’t be educated or work but that they’ll have a more normal idea about what constitutes normal male/female behaviour. At the moment we’re living in a bizarre era.Females are naturally neurotic and afraid of everything on their own and without a man around for protection. Remember that film Home Alone where the boy was left by himself and just sort of enjoyed the whole thing? If that was a female she’d be crying and fearful and would run to the cops just like they do if they’re alone in a house and hear the floor creak or a branch rub against the roof or the wind blowing. Help! there’s a rapist trying to break in! lol

“Furthermore, when women were feminine and men were masculine, the sexes complemented each other very well, as they were designed to”

Oh I don’t know if they complimented themselves so well since men and women are as different as cats and dogs but perhaps they understood what was normal better. If a female was drinking with a man and went home with him she understood it was for sex and was not going to be screaming rape the next day. I can tell you that even in the 80′s the biggest mangina or even a feminst for that matter would never consider any of these things rape as they do today. So the world has got even crazier then even the craziest feminst from a generation ago.

“Western society is slowly – quite quickly, actually – committing suicide.”

When it gets bad enough people will wake up because they will be forced to.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
jg July 15, 2012 at 17:56

I guess this is only give even more fodder for the title IX crowd…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2173808/Women-overtake-men-IQ-tests-time-100-years-multitasking.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
The Whammer July 15, 2012 at 19:03

Not to mention all the outsourcing of eggs.
Those international eggs become US citizens once birthed here

You don’t have to be born in the US to be a Natural Born citizen. If an egg from an Indian female was fertilised by an American man’s sperm the offspring would be a US citizen regardless of where the child was born. It does complicate matters when the fertilised egg is implanted in another female to grow but since the father was a US citizen it doesn’t matter. And today we have DNA tests to prove paternity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Ted July 15, 2012 at 19:18

@jg July 15, 2012 at 17:56
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2173808/Women-overtake-men-IQ-tests-time-100-years-multitasking.html

Thanks for the link, jg. What a classic picture! I want to frame it. I can imagine just what she’s about to say.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Whammer July 15, 2012 at 19:22

Let me also add that if an Indian female’s egg was fertilised by let’ssay a Frenchman and then implanted into an American female who gave birth in the US that that baby should legally be classified as an adopted child since the “mother” was only an incubator and the procedure for adopted children and citizenship should be followed.

Another thing, all of these births in the US by illegal Mexican females should have never been given US birth certificates and that the births should have been registered as a foreign national born abroad at the Mexican embassy in the US where they would issue a Mexican birth certificate.
The only reason that the US has this insane born on US soil nonsense is because after the slaves were freed there was some question of whether that were US citizens.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Ted July 15, 2012 at 19:34

“Furthermore, when women were feminine and men were masculine, the sexes complemented each other very well, as they were designed to”

The big societal change is mostly down to economics and market forces. It’s not worth a woman’s time these days to stay home and make babies – she gets a better return by going out to work. Even if she wanted to stay home and be supported by her partner, his wages would be insufficient because he’s competing in a job marketplace that now has all those extra workers – women like her – in it.

Her unique trade – birthing ability – is not worth as much now either, because we don’t need eight or ten kids per family to keep the population stable. If she does want kids, she’s in a bit of a fix. I’m not surprised women are unhappy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Ted July 15, 2012 at 19:38

“Not only is out-sourcing cheaper (5 engineers for the price of 1 in Silicon Valley), but they’re actually much better, more efficient and work much harder.”

So speaks the quintessential manager.

“I don’t need brains. I can buy brains” (Paraphrasing from a manager I once knew).

There’s a fallacy there somewhere.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
jg July 15, 2012 at 20:50

@Ted:
Isnt this a coincidence and femnisit coup in away by the following summarization:
(1). Women joining the infantry
(2). Extending title IX to STEM
(3). Females smarter than the males

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Ted July 15, 2012 at 22:31

There’s some sort of link, but it’s not straightforward and I don’t have a clear view of it. Flynn found a similar result with IQ for everyone over time – ever since the standardized tests were developed, the results for the whole population have increased steadily. If you work backwards, the average IQ in the 1800′s would have been around 80. I just don’t believe it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
migu July 15, 2012 at 23:51

I only go by migu. Thought you were yohan. My apologies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
migu July 16, 2012 at 00:00

No I didn’t compare him to Hitler. I can’t help if you can’t read.

I compared the situation. “Anything but” is not a very sound decision making process. In fact that attitude has left us where we are today. That was the point.

Obama and Romney are the same. They will both continue to steal from you. They will both deny your liberty, and they will both pull the trigger if you don’t comply.

At least I can sit in good conscience knowing I did not participate in legitimizing the tyranny of either party.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
jg July 16, 2012 at 00:22

Has feminism peacked? It as if feminists are working overtime to break down the last of male spaces and they want it done quick. I am just wondering why they want all this done quickly? The high IQ finding will give them a big ego boost and they will make it a point to show how stupid we men are. They will also rub it in and say “we told you so”!! In addition to this they will say that since women are smarter than men and that we men should let them run the show because the world will be a better place. In view of this study, I am wondering if MENSA will get sued because of the under representation of female geniuses and they might argue that this study clearly shows that there are more female geniuses and than male genuises!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Firepower July 16, 2012 at 08:23

Lordy lordy…

Obama pandering to women. Who’d a thunk it.
He’d never pander to OTHER LIBERAL groups, like coloreds, queers, Muzz or Illegal Mexicans.

And the gems from unka elmer keep pouring in:
“Women don’t produce anything – just trinkets.”

With Wisdoms like these, the MRM is sure to keep REPEATING its past Honor Roll of political, legal and media successes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
freebird July 16, 2012 at 08:33

Regarding the insemination/nationality debate:

I would be inclined to agree and American male using his own sperm would be able to establish citizenship for his child via DNA testing,at a cost.

The flip side is American mothers who get offshore DNA would also have the same ability.

The question becomes:how can we deny man-hating spinsters from obtaining the children they crave w/o penalizing men in the same situation.

Something to brain storm upon.
I would say just in sheer numbers the vast majority of inseminations occur in country with in country sperm.

Since men have to travel to India anyhow,banning in country sperm and eggs is a win-win for men.

Just trump up the medical dangers and frame it as “protection for young women” and the repubs should buy into it hook line and sinker.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
freebird July 16, 2012 at 08:38

I would say the number of men going to India to have sovereign children numbers in the dozens,whilst the number of Ameriskanks poaching eggs and having children in country number in the hundreds of thousands.
It’s a weak spot, one we need to close.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
freebird July 16, 2012 at 08:44

It’s certainly inequitable for a man to have to travel to India,line up two women-one for eggs donor and one for incubation,find a clinic,pay all the costs associated with the above+travel funds and housing,whilst the lesbians
can get the State to pay for the entire process whilst sitting at home “easier than calling Fedx.”

If you guys cannot see the injustice in the process,I’m gonna just shut my yap about it,and hope it sinks in over time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Firepower July 16, 2012 at 09:10

Masculips Man:

[migu] You may also be firepower. If you go by other screen names what are they?

Let Slip The Dogs…
of conspiracy theory!

Those are always the sign
of a healthy movement
- like corn kernels

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
bob July 16, 2012 at 11:51

“What country celebrates the academic decline of men and the HUGE academic decline of minority men?”
A dying one… The western civilisation as a whole is dying thanks to feminism and it’s circular thinking. When you destroy the very foundation of civilization she collapse usually. Who can beleaved it!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
ode July 16, 2012 at 17:22

Gamerp4

Last I say MEN QUIT SCIENCE, QUIT MILITARY, QUIT MARRIAGE, QUIT TAX PAYING, WORK PART TIME, TAKE PART IN ADVENTURES AND TRAVELING, LIVE YOUR LIFE AS YOU LIKE IT, PAY NO ATTENTION TO MISANDRY FROM THE MEDIA, AND JUST SMIRK AT “MAN UP” COMMENTS.

There’s a part of me that wants to save up money to buy a camper van equipped with a shower, toilet, and kitchen everything a man needs to live comfortably.
http://www.pleasureway.com/index.php

And then I can relax having the satisfaction of knowing I don’t own a house so I’m not paying property taxes. I don’t have a home mortgage so the bank is not collecting interest off me. I have already completely pulled all my money out of the stock market or at least any company that makes it’s money by investing in America. The most powerful way to “vote” is with your wallet. If you don’t like the system then pull as much of your money out of it and let it starve.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
DirkJohanson July 16, 2012 at 20:42

IQ tests are given to young people.

If 45 year-old women were given IQ tests, there’s be a law saying they’d have to wear those retard helmets around so they don’ t constantly bang their head against something.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: