You get what you ask for…

by W.F. Price on September 12, 2013

Jane Lynch, who has a role on Fox’s gay teen drama “Glee” as a lesbian coach, and who is a lesbian in real life, is going through a divorce with Dr. Lara Embry, her gay-married wife of three years. Since landing the role on Glee, Lynch has been making very good money, on the order of a quarter million a month.

Embry, who has a ten-year-old from a a previous relationship, is now seeking almost 100k per month in alimony:

The Glee star announced in July she was legally ending her three-year-marriage to the clinical psychologist, whom she split from in February and Lara is demanding a whopping $93,809 a month in spousal support, according to TMZ.

In new court documents Lara revealed Jane’s average monthly earnings are $234, 688 and said the pair regularly ran up $40,000 a month on credit cards.

Lara’s expenditure includes $6,500 on clothes, $12,000 on entertainment and $4,500 on eating out and the documents reveal much of the money for these has come from Jane’s earnings.

She said, ‘Her income, investments and assets increased dramatically with her newfound acting success.’

While Lara and her 10-year-old daughter are currently living in the house Jane bought, she is thought to be demanding the house, which the couple spent $3 million on renovating, or 50 per cent of its worth.

The pair first met in 2009, got engaged in 2010 and married on Memorial Day the same year in an intimate ceremony in Sunderland, Massachusetts.

It is believed they don’t have a pre-nuptial agreement and despite their financial issues, Jane recently insisted they have remained civil.

Welcome to family law, Jane Lynch!

I might feel a bit of sympathy if it hadn’t been for the fact that lesbians have been highly overrepresented in family law for decades as part of the plan to smash patriarchy. Not only are many attorneys and heads of social agencies lesbian, but a high number of petty officials who bully husbands into giving up their children and turning over their paychecks are as well. I, and countless other fathers, have had personal experience with these types.

Gay men are not as enthusiastic as lesbians about marriage for obvious reasons (why spoil a good deal when you don’t have to?), so a high number of gay divorces are bound to be lesbian affairs. One might speculate about whether this will prompt changes in family law, as they backpedal from their earlier stance regarding the right of wives to plunder their spouses. It might, but I doubt the effect will be all that strong. The profit motive is now too strongly entrenched in the system for lesbians to have the same influence they did 30 years ago.

At least now, however, lesbians can share in the same joys of matrimony as the hated patriarchy.

{ 55 comments… read them below or add one }

revver September 12, 2013 at 14:35

“At least now, however, lesbians can share in the same joys of matrimony as the hated patriarchy.”
What’s good for the goose is now bad for the…erm…goose?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 47 Thumb down 0
keyster September 12, 2013 at 14:59

Living and working in California Ms. Lynch is paying a combined income tax of 54%, which means her lovely ex-wife is taking almost what’s left per month. You can trust they’ll do whatever they can to keep any squabbling private and the press will oblige – because they don’t want people to start figuring family court bias out through gay divorce…even though we all know it’s inevitable.

And who else but a lesbian couple puts $1.5 million renovation into a $3 million house? As the husband Jane Lynch should have put her foot down.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 6
TFH September 12, 2013 at 15:12

She cannot possibly have been surprised that these are the laws she would come under, in the event of unilateral divorce by her lesser-earning spouse……

So what are the views of lesbians like her now?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0
Anonymous September 12, 2013 at 15:13

I operate a zero-tolerance policy towards lesbians.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 4
TFH September 12, 2013 at 15:14

The profit motive is now too strongly entrenched in the system for lesbians to have the same influence they did 30 years ago.

Perhaps, but they will be vocal about educating other lesbians about it, and the education might reach men too….

Overall, this is the natural conclusion of the lunacy…. good.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0
Brian September 12, 2013 at 15:55

Well, well, well. The chickens have come home to roost (for once). When leftists have no common enemy, in this case no man to blame, they simply turn on each other. They’ll eat each whole without a shred of mercy or compassion. It’s easy to be cruel if you are absolutely convinced that you’re doing right. That’s how people like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao could commit atrocities without a second thought.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 1
Wilson September 12, 2013 at 16:12

Divorce is just different for rich people, since losing half of a shit-ton of cash still leaves you with a half a shit-ton. And feminism has always been obsessed with the lifestyle of the 1%. When lesbians are homeless or committing suicide because of family court decisions I’ll believe they’re being held to an equal standard to men. But it’s just impossible, you’re not going to see a court order that a woman be supported at the expense of bleeding another woman dry.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 1
Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta September 12, 2013 at 16:12

If we were really homophobic, we’d make marriage mandatory for gays.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 66 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader September 12, 2013 at 16:17

TFH
She cannot possibly have been surprised that these are the laws she would come under, in the event of unilateral divorce by her lesser-earning spouse……

Ah, but I’m sure you do recall — women don’t understand cause and effect very well.

So what are the views of lesbians like her now?

I’m sure they’ll find some way to blame it on men in general, and Teh Patriarchy as well.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 1
Thin-Skinned Masta-Beta September 12, 2013 at 16:18

Not a fan of Glee, but I did like “Party Down.”

Why would such a dark misanthropic comedy like that appeal to me?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader September 12, 2013 at 16:18

Oh, and two words for Jane Lynch.

Imputed Income

Perhaps she’ll have it tattooed on some part of her anatomy?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0
Joeb September 12, 2013 at 16:23

I’m sure the “Gay up” crowd will form . Gay Up , Don’t be that gay , The Good gay foundation and Dead beat Gays .

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel September 12, 2013 at 16:27

Imputed Income

Yeah, she could become the lesbian version of Dave Foley. Keep that $3 million a year coming, Jane.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0
ahamkara September 12, 2013 at 16:29

Don’t laugh just yet… they’ll find some justification for making the rules different for homosexual marriages, or there will be some taxpayer funded safety net just for lesbian moms. I can’t even think of what the justification would be but never underestimate their capacity for mental gymnastics.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 0
dannyfrom504 September 12, 2013 at 16:38

no sympathy at all. NONE.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 0
boz September 12, 2013 at 16:42

I don’t use internet acronyms often, but when I do, LOL. LOL.

Nice to see semblance of justice returning to the world. As an earlier poster posited, when lefties have nothing left to righteously combat, they eat their own.

Please, more cases like this. When gay marriage first became an issue, I was rooting for it for this very reason.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Vektor September 12, 2013 at 17:38

I always considered gay/lesbian marriage to be about their quest for legitimacy, not marriage itself. I have nothing against gays/lesbians, but I will always see their lifestyle as ‘alternative’. Of course, their real target audience is future generations who they hope will grow up seeing their lifestyle as ‘normalized’.

Time will tell. By all means, get ‘married’, and enjoy the bitter fruits of ‘normalization’.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
ng85 September 12, 2013 at 17:41

Once a state legalizes gay marriage there’s always an influx of “oppressed” gays who will rush to get married to take a stand and declare their love for their partner. And sure enough the “starter marriages” will begin to peter out a couple years later.

I’ve said it before that gay marriage is as much a “right” as free wi-fi. It’s a privilege at best that some people think they’re entitled to. Once more states legalize gay marriage (And it will happen) and more gay divorces take place I wonder how gays will view marriage. Perhaps gays will become like red pill guys and drop out of marriage, realizing what they’ve been lobbying for has been a sham all along.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
TFH September 12, 2013 at 17:59

AR,

Ah, but I’m sure you do recall — women don’t understand cause and effect very well.

Indeed, that would apply here as well.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
patriarchal landmine September 12, 2013 at 18:27

I wish gays were the only ones who were allowed to legally marry. men don’t give a shit about weddings, and women have destroyed everything else about the institution themselves.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 0
Paradoxotaur September 12, 2013 at 19:40

One thing I hope will happen now that gays are marrying is that all the special benefits (private business and gov’mint) that have been carved out for same-sex, non-married partners over the past several years will be eliminated. Put a ring on it and face divorce court, sucka. As the glow of same-sex marriage loses its allure, the non-married partners will be up the creek without the special benefits they now enjoy.

“never underestimate their capacity for mental gymnastics.”
Especially as more women become the higher-earning spouse and are exposed to alimony and child support payments to their former husband. However, my money will be on the divorce industry parasites (attorneys, mediators, psychological evaluators, family counselors, etc., etc.) since the system pretty much runs on fleecing the higher-earning spouse of any and all financial assets and maximizing child support payments, which in turn drives awarding sole custody to one parent. Even man-hating lesbian trolls will throw heterosexual women into the meat grinder to keep the dollars rolling in. They’ll probably figure out a way to do this while inflicting maximum damage to men, since they seem to be driven by pure, blind hatred.

One wild card in my opinion is that the current family law system relies, absolutely relies, on the love fathers have for their children. If most, or even many, fathers were the callous deadbeats the stinking feminists infesting this system portray men as, the system would largely collapse because a lot of men would just shrug and walk away. They wouldn’t jump through hoops and spend large sums of money trying to satisfy an unending series of bizarre requirements in the hope that it might restore their relationship with their child, no matter how slight the chance is or how confining the allowed contact. No mediators, psychologists, therapists or other parasites would get paid. Deep down these evil women know that if a father’s love were not so great, many of them would be out of a job.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1
Dire Badger September 12, 2013 at 19:45

trust me, lesbian divorces are going to be a thousand times nastier than gay men divorces… the difference? Women have no sense of perspective.

That’s why it’s so easy to convince them that you have a 10″ cock.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 1
andybob September 12, 2013 at 21:13

Dr Lara Embry expects to walk away with nearly $100,000 a month plus a property and investment bonanza, after only three years of marriage. Jane Lynch will become the biggest, plainest lesbian mark since Melissa Etheridge.

Wouldn’t you think that lesbians, high-profile or not, would be a little bit more clued in to the fact that most women are mercenary predators who view their intimate relationships in terms of maximum reward? They are hypergamous leeches. But then, that would require them to express criticism of women – and that, of course, would be blasphemy.

Anyone who thinks that this will make lesbians nervous about marriage doesn’t know lesbians very well – or women for that matter. Dr Embry’s free ride down Easy Street will have lesbians salivating with envy, desperately hoping to emulate her ‘success’. Only wealthy lesbians will view Dr Lara Embry as a cautionary tale. The rest will regard her, privately at least, as a role-model. They’ll want to have what she’s having.

The only other people who may express outrage at Ms Lynch’s dilemma will be die-hard ‘Glee’ fans: a bizarre assortment of morbidly obese teenaged misfits, and the kind of persons who live in trailers they made themselves out of Sprite bottles. The cretins who shelter at Manboobz love ‘Glee’.

I will never get married – it just doesn’t make any sense. My partner is never going to be my ‘wife’ and sure as hell isn’t going to be my ‘husband’ – so, what’s the point? There’s something so fraudulent about it all. Most gay men are less than enthusiastic about marriage. As Mr Price suggests, it would be spoiling a good deal when we don’t have to. Looking at Ms Lynch’s soon-to-be-empty bank account, it would also be a bad business proposition.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 1
oddsock September 12, 2013 at 21:25

TFH

“Ah, but I’m sure you do recall — women don’t understand cause and effect very well.

Indeed, that would apply here as well.”

This might well be true however, I would add, women just don’t give a feck and why should they? There are legions of manginas white knights and pussy beggars willing to bend over backwards to help and offer assistance and excuses just for a hint of female approval, including lesbians. Ok many could cause a police horse to bolt but they are still female, just.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
oddsock September 12, 2013 at 21:38

My apologies Mr Price, Off Topic but perhaps of interest to Keyster Towgunner Charles and yourself.

In a Re Call Vote. Two Colorado Democrats, Angela Giron of Pueblo and John Morse of Colorado Springs have been replaced by pro-gun Republicans in a stunning rebuke of abject progressive liberalism.

http://www.naturalnews.com/042024_Colorado_recall_election_results_democracy.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel September 12, 2013 at 22:17

andybob
Wouldn’t you think that lesbians, high-profile or not, would be a little bit more clued in to the fact that most women are mercenary predators who view their intimate relationships in terms of maximum reward?

Great comment. You put into words what I was thinking in a more unformed way. How’s it possible that one woman can be taken to the cleaners so easily by another? Isn’t it only young men, willfully ignorant of the nature of women, who march so willingly to the family court slaughterhouse?

Also, the demands of Lara Embry are ridiculous. I can’t believe they will be granted by the family court given the fact it was a short term “marriage” and there are no children. Or did Jane Lynch legally adopt Embry’s daughter or do something equally epically stupid?

Finally, I can’t help thinking that never in the field of same sex marriage has one lesbian paid so much to a horse-faced woman for so little. If Jane Lynch were a wealthy man I’d hope he would have at least enjoyed three years of boffing some hot young starlet for his dough.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
Nemo September 12, 2013 at 22:54

From Paradoxotaur:

“One thing I hope will happen now that gays are marrying is that all the special benefits (private business and gov’mint) that have been carved out for same-sex, non-married partners over the past several years will be eliminated. Put a ring on it and face divorce court, sucka. As the glow of same-sex marriage loses its allure, the non-married partners will be up the creek without the special benefits they now enjoy.”

This *should* be the logical, concomitant responsibility that is imposed on homosexuals when they are granted the right to marry. If they want the full benefits of matrimony then it is only fair that they should also be limited to those benefits ONLY if they get married.

In short, we should be scrupulously fair and make certain that homosexuals are treated be exactly as heterosexuals are treated. Shacking up is not sufficient to grant an employer’s medical insurance to the other half of a straight couple. If gay marriage is legalized, then it should not be sufficient for the other half of a gay couple.

I expect that the current administration and the MSM will torture logic to try to suppress and refute this idea, but lots and lots of straights (and a few fair-minded gays) will accept it as correct.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Paradoxotaur September 12, 2013 at 23:16

CM- “How’s it possible that one woman can be taken to the cleaners so easily by another?”

An unshakable belief in NAWALT, which in many women’s heads really means “I’m not like that!” Whether they are or not is secondary to the desire, perhaps even necessity, for them to believe they are not like that. I think it’s similar to the cognative dissonance shown by men who marry, each thinking his special little snowflake is not like all the others and his marriage will not end as so many do. In other words, magical thinking.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Dire Badger September 13, 2013 at 01:12

women are far more capable of denial of their own imperatives than we give them credit for.
OF COURSE they cannot recognize their own mercenary tendencies in another woman… to do so would be to admit that they might have such mercenary tendencies themselves…. anathema.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
andybob September 13, 2013 at 01:24

@ Charles Martel
(Thanks for the compliment)

“I can’t believe they will be granted by the family court given the fact it was a short term “marriage” and there are no children.” Mr Martel

You’d think so, wouldn’t you? Then again, family court rulings have left me gob-smacked in disbelief many times before. When you think they couldn’t violate Lady Justice any more than they already have, they manage to sneak another look up her toga.

I think it is only a matter of time until lesbian gold-diggers like Dr Embry start making false domestic violence allegations to secure leverage in the family court. Never under-estimate how low such parasites will go to secure a lifetime host. This could work. White knights are suckers for damsels in distress – even horse-faced gum-booted damsels with five o’clock shadows.

It will start to get interesting when both damsels burst into floods at the same time because all the manipulation is going to look a wee bit obvious. Will the prettiest lesbian (least misshapen and repellent) win?

Who knows?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
A Nony Mouse September 13, 2013 at 03:13

This obviously didn’t happen in Colorado, but because in that state (and many others), alimony to an able-bodied spouse is almost never awarded. Sometimes temporary alimony to help them get set up in a new household, but long term? Forget about it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Opus September 13, 2013 at 03:15

I don’t like Lesbians either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
crella September 13, 2013 at 03:42

‘a quarter million a month. ‘ For the crap that is Glee? Color me astounded.

The chickens are flocking home to roost lately, are we coming into the End Times? ;P A woman getting socked with alimony, a little girl being threatened with the sex offender’s list (for playing doctor), the implosion of Hugo and the tons of egg on the faces of feminists everywhere, false rape accusations being prosecuted….get ready for the Rapture, guys! ;D

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 4
bruno September 13, 2013 at 06:10

This is what marriage 2.0 is all about: steal money from each other.
Marry somebody with a high “earning potential”, and then just sit back and watch and wait, and let the years tick by.
Until you can’t stand it any longer, and then slap them in the neck with the divorce papers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
bruno September 13, 2013 at 06:13

And in the future, this strategy will also become completely legal after cohabitation, … even just after having a “relationship” with a woman, no marriage or cohabitation required.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
bruno September 13, 2013 at 06:18

Thank you “lawmakers”, for creating, enabling and enforcing this completely disgusting scam.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
RLT September 13, 2013 at 07:24

Time to “man up”….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Anon7 September 13, 2013 at 07:29

A study done in Sweden, where partnerships between gays and lesbians have been allowed for a number of years, show that lesbians seek divorce twice as often as gay men.

And here in the US, heterosexual women seek divorce about 70 percent of the time, which is pretty close to that “twice as often” stat.

Yup, it’s a feature of the female genes…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Opus September 13, 2013 at 09:08

‘Lara’s expenditure includes… $4,500 on eating out’

-and-

‘married … in an intimate ceremony’

Are those both unhappily worded or is there a sub-text in the quoted article which we are supposed to get?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
Brando's Drinking Habit September 13, 2013 at 09:48


I might feel a bit of sympathy if it hadn’t been for the fact that lesbians have been highly overrepresented in family law for decades as part of the plan to smash patriarchy.

Until we know that she had something to do with the propping up of lesbians in the family court system (she might have, but we just don’t know), then I’m going to feel sympathetic for her the same way I feel sympathetic for my dumb relations who get married because “love” and “commitment” and then, when the wife decides it’s time to invite the divorce lawyers over, realize they should have thought a little more about “money” and “incentives” during those halcyon days of yore.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Patr333x September 13, 2013 at 10:11

My guess id that lynch thought she was “special” enough that she wouldn’t have to worry about the risks of marriage. I think women know how predatory other women can be but their own egos lead them to believe they will have different results from other people.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
TFH September 13, 2013 at 11:06

andybob,

Wouldn’t you think that lesbians, high-profile or not, would be a little bit more clued in to the fact that most women are mercenary predators who view their intimate relationships in terms of maximum reward?

This is exactly what I was aiming to say earlier too…

The thing is, women don’t really understand how women think. Hence, women cannot predict that a relationship will go sour (even if by their own hand).

The tactic that women use by saying they ‘found themselves divorce’ or ‘the marriage ended’, in order to avoid any responsibility of their own, is highly correlated with why these lesbians cannot see female gold-digging for what it is.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Thos September 13, 2013 at 13:32

Paradoxotaur September 12, 2013 at 23:16
>CM- “How’s it possible that one woman can be taken to the cleaners so >easily by another?”
>An unshakable belief in NAWALT, which in many women’s heads really >means “I’m not like that!”

It’s called a variety of names but alloplastic defense or alloplastic adaptation is basically the idea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alloplastic_adaptation It’s what bullies use to convince themselves that “you made me do this” and what narcissists use to say “I deserve”. I’m not shrink in real life so someone who knows more about the technical application of this topic than I should feel free to correct me.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
keyster September 13, 2013 at 14:36

I think it should be considered that Ms. Lynch might feel a tinge of validation as a rich white dude being taken to the cleaners by “some bitch”. Butch lesbians are always complaining about their girlfriend’s attitude, games, moods, etc. – as if they’re one of the guys. Welcome to the club Jane!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3
tiredofitall September 13, 2013 at 16:38

Two thoughts about this:

1.) Now we’ll know something I’ve always wondered about, who is the “man” in the gay relationships.

2.) Gays wanted equality, now they’re gonna get it good right in the teeth…enjoy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Samson J. September 13, 2013 at 17:30

her gay-married wife

I notice with very great disappointment that even “conservative” commentators have adopted the language of the Left. Use the word “partner” if you must, but not “wife” where it’s inappropriate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
George September 13, 2013 at 22:57

“her gay-married wife of three years.”
“Three years”. How… exact. 3-4 years is the length of the sexual cycle of a feral human female. That’s the length of time it takes her to be able to get back up on her feet again and support herself after having an offspring. That’s when she kicks her partner to the curb and looks for a new partner for her next offspring. Human females benefit from genetic diversity too. Biologically, women are serially promiscuous. In heterosexual marriages, divorce peaks at 4 years into the marriage.
Monogamy is a cultural construct that was painstakingly put together over the eons to curb the worse parts of male and female human sexual nature.
But anyways, back to the topic of gay divorce.
In Sweden, the only country that had proper same-sex marriage statistics, male gay divorce is 50% higher than hetero divorce rates; and female gay divorce is, get this, 267% higher than straight divorce rates. So that would mean plenty of business.

Now’s a great time to become a divorce lawyer. I’m not joking. If you are reading this, are a red pill and in high school and haven’t yet decided what to do for a living, or have decided but don’t feel strongly about it, then become a divorce lawyer.

We men cannot defeat the behemoth that is (anti-)family law and we can’t be fathers anymore. That has been disincentivized and rendered fraudulent to the point of insanity.
But we can become divorce lawyers. Instead of standing underneath its gargantuan weight and supporting it with our lifeblood, we can feed from its bloated body, hastening its expiration, until eventually, the parasitic body crushes its host beneath it. If you can’t just stand aside and “do your thing”, i.e. raise a family and be left in peace (feminists won’t let you), then, please don’t mope, lament your fate and the cruel hand destiny has dealt you and women’s and gays’ rights activists have forced upon you; by all means, join the vampiric party.

If you can’t beat them, join them.

We can join them without selling out on our principles. You can become a divorce lawyer and only take on gay divorces. You can become a divorce lawyer and prey upon the shrinking base of blue pill men who refuse to open their eyes. If reason won’t wake them, pain will. You can move to California and specialize in divorces with high-earning wives and lower-earning husbands. Incite them to take her for all she’s worth, the same way divorce lawyers incite their female customers, in the rare case she wasn’t going to do that already.

To be honest, the hardest part of that job would be hiding your grin. It’s unorthodox activism.
You can waste your breath and energy doing conventional activism and trying to change men’s minds, and I’m sure you’ve seen how attached they are to their Matrix (which, interestingly, has its etymological origin in Latin ‘mater’, meaning mother), all the while barely making a cent from your activism.
Or you can do this.

I once read that you can’t change the world unless you can make a living changing the world. That’s why feminists have been so successful. In addition to their legal and cultural victories, they get a lot of dough in the form of federal funding. They can do it full-time. And the more they succeed, the easier it gets. Whether in university positions giving mandatory “gender studies” courses, or in government jobs in federally funded organizations, they are getting paid to shift the world to their dystopian view.

You cannot outshout a man that has a metal bucket over his head, who’s banging it with a big metal spoon and screaming at the top of his lungs “LALALALA, I CAN’T HEAR YOU, LALALALA!”. Why risk the inevitable cost of his ostracism of you? Instead, inflict great pain upon him, and see if he can’t shut up and take the bucket off his head. If he opens his eyes, then you have done something good and earned money from your activism. If he insists on remaining blind, then he deserves everything that’s going to happen to him. As for the other effects, which are negative, such as the breaking of families, and the negative effects on children… they’re going to happen whether you hop on the gravy train or not. The quicker we grind down the host, the quicker the nightmare ends. Besides, we should thank gays for taking themselves off the endangered species list. They are now fair game. Let’s return the favor to women and gays and declare open season on them and on their life savings and future income. Thank you, “gay rights” activists.

And once marriage has finally been destroyed by women and gays, the party will be over and as their drunken haze dissipates, they will find before their eyes a state of the world so chaotic and apocalyptic (think third-world failed state with no nuclear family as the norm and a gangster epidemic, a coast-to-coast Detroit) that everyone will be worse off, but the ones who will best be able to navigate it will be men.

It took centuries of cultural, civilizational, even religious, discipline to create the “leave it to beaver” institution, and a masculine identity centered around sticking around and working your ass off. In the space of a century (we’re half-way through the process), they destroyed marriage. Do they really think they can rebuild it from its ashes in the space of a few years once they get to their destination and find out that’s not a place they want to be? I don’t think they can see that far. They can’t see past the “free” money and goodies the government gives them (which disproportionately come from straight, male and white taxpayers, it’s not really free).

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
piercedhead September 14, 2013 at 00:43

“It took centuries of cultural, civilizational, even religious, discipline to create the “leave it to beaver” institution, and a masculine identity centered around sticking around and working your ass off. In the space of a century (we’re half-way through the process), they destroyed marriage.”-George

All true, and one of those rare long comments I was interested to read to the end.

What’s missing though, or rather what’s implied, is the exceptionalism of our time. What makes us so sure that because we cannot see beyond the obvious faults of our own time, that we must eventually succumb to them? What makes us so sure that our forbears hadn’t similar fears for their own inadequacies?

None us need any great talent to look at a painting and see its flaws, if it has any. But few of us can paint a flawless masterpiece. I’m willing to speculate that there is nothing exceptional about us at all – that our forbears had exactly the same fears, because they too could see the end of times, but could not imagine what it would be replaced with.

And yet here we are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
John Savage September 14, 2013 at 05:22

If George Orwell were a comedian, he could not write anything more deservingly ironic and absurd than this story.

Real life is far more entertaining, and chilling, than any fiction.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Grant September 14, 2013 at 08:18

George,

Brilliant. Price should make that his Comment of the Week.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
geographybeefinalisthimself September 14, 2013 at 08:33

“You can move to California and specialize in divorces with high-earning wives and lower-earning husbands. Incite them to take her for all she’s worth, the same way divorce lawyers incite their female customers, in the rare case she wasn’t going to do that already.”

I don’t know if this part of your strategy will work, George. If I remember correctly, being a stay-at-home dad is extremely risky because the wife may still file for divorce and the husband will not receive a penny in alimony or one minute of custody of the children and will not have a recent work history to fall back on. He may still have to pay child support as well, and that would be a clusterfuck. Even a father who works outside the home but who earns less than the mother might not receive alimony or any custody of the children. Again, he might still have to pay child support.

I do not know if the male percentage of alimony recipients is currently increasing or not, but even if it is, I would imagine that any man is being vilified if he receives alimony, often disparagingly called “manimony.”

I do not know if the rest of your strategy will work, but I would still not advise that any man marry anyone or cohabitate with anyone under any circumstance. This applies with other males as well as HIV is not a thing of the past and a marital contract is not a condom.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Nemo September 14, 2013 at 10:04

The marriage rate is falling off of a cliff. Men are slowly realizing that marriage is a game that they can’t win unless they never play it. Eventually, the lack of marriages will bring the divorce industry to a grinding halt.

It may be a good time to be a divorce lawyer right now, but in 10 or 20 years there will be damn few married couples to generate new business for you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
bruno September 14, 2013 at 15:55

” It may be a good time to be a divorce lawyer right now, but in 10 or 20 years there will be damn few married couples to generate new business for you. ”

Don’t worry, our dear “lawmakers” will make new laws so that women get a multitude of ways to legally extort money from a man, even without marriage.
Just having had a relationship with a woman, just having dated her a while, will make it possible for a woman to start legal procedures against him, even many years after the fact.
These laws are coming, the government, the universities and the courts are full or radical feminism, so better be prepared.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
tz September 14, 2013 at 18:12

Time for a remake of “The Gay Divorcee”, though this time I’m not sure if tragedy precedes, follows, or is merged with farce.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Dire Badger September 16, 2013 at 00:15

I have to agree with Bruno. A time is coming when even smiling at a woman will be enough for her charge you as a rapist for ‘failing to meet implied agreements’. And then strip you of any and all of your resources.
The longer the ‘marriage strike’ persists, the more attractive slavery becomes to federal masters and the grievance industry.
It’s only a short step to auctioning men off to whichever woman can pay the most for this slave.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: