What is the Marriage Strike?

File it under WTF

2011-02-02T09:02:00.000-08:00

A women basically murders a small dog in a slow cruel way but watch the charges against her be dropped.

Have any of you noticed, that when this shit happens, and a man does it, they get the book thrown at them - as they should. If a child does it they try to psychoanalyze the child and find out why they'd do something so monstrously stupid. Yet if a woman does this, people just shrug. It has become a learned reflex to not question the behavior of woman, partly for fear of the lynchmob of cunts who would descend on the man foolish enough to do this. However I think there is another reason, I think that men have long ago accepted on a subconscious level the irresponsible behavior of women. The same way a parent accepts their grown retarded child's behavior, men have learned to not question why women will do the most insane things that even a moment's critical thinking would write off.

Woman wants to marry a corporation....

2011-01-31T12:34:00.000-08:00

So this woman wants to marry a corporation.

I'm curious, just how loony do women have to behave before we get to repeal the suffrage laws?

Because as we are forced to indulge this stupidity, it is not going to abate, they will simply raise the stakes to the point where they will demand the right to scream incoherently while shooting at random strangers.

You can't expect women to reign in their own behavior. Women by their very nature lack the powers of judgement that virtually all men have as a birthright. A topic I plan to expand on soon enough.

Woman commits post-natal abortion, public not outraged

2011-01-30T12:28:00.000-08:00

Yet another woman has slaughtered her nearly grown children because it suited her to do so.

I am no longer shocked that nobody demands the death penalty for a woman, no matter how loathsome the crime. I am however increasingly disgusted by the eagerness of women to rise in sympathy - FOR HER!

It should not surprise anybody that no woman will ever demand the death penalty for a woman who murders her own children. There are many reasons for this, first and foremost is the deep-seated belief by women, that their children are their property. The child came from them, so they are theirs to nurture or slaughter at their discretion no matter if the child is a fetus or nearly an adult. Pay attention to how women stress 'my child' as though she was saying 'my car' or 'my jewelry' because the child is just a talking pet.

Almost as potent is the inability for women to accept that their actions merit guilt. For a woman to admit to the guilt of a action, no matter how despicable would shatter the belief that she is the center of the universe. God can not err.

However the biggest reason why no woman will ever come out for this, one of the endless reasons why women are inferior to men. A man who commits acts of savagery will prompt other men to deal with him quickly and sometimes brutally. The act of an evil man will stand alone, even the most pedestrian of men will be sickened by a man who murders children regardless of excuse or relation. Many men will line up for the privilege to end the villains life. A woman on the other hand will defend the worst of other women, because they know that the behavior of women is uniform. One woman's violent reaction is merely the desires of other women made manifest. When she looks into the face of Julie Schenecker, she sees her own reflection.

The Mythical Female Orgasm

2008-04-08T03:08:00.000-07:00

The Myth of the Female Orgasm

Someday, a long time from now, historians and sociologists will look back on the 20th century and scratch their heads over the “sexual revolution” that began. Of course, assuming the collapse of society doesn’t breed a new era of book burning, they will have ample material to analyze though it may not ultimately explain how feminists were able to convince themselves that their libidos were at least the equal of men. Of course, as with all of their deranged claims, when the proof fails to manifest, they blame men.

The claim is laughable and can easily be machine gunned down by the following bullet points culled from the best source of truth - reality:

* Men view sex as an end, women view sex as a means
* Men need little or no prompting for sex, you would have an easier time talking a woman into buying a new car.
* When men orgasm, there is demonstrable proof. With a woman, you must take her word for it.
* When men fail to be aroused it is invariably physical in nature. When women are incapable of faking arousal, it is usually in her head (where it would have ample leg room).
* Prostitutes are women who sell themselves for sex and can be found around the world. Gigalos are men who sell themselves for sex and are slightly less common than Bigfoot.
* For a man to get off, all he needs is a tissue, his hand and a few minutes. Women however require a vast array of machines with more RPM’s than a lawnmower and most of an hour - if she’s in a hurry.

Needless to say, any woman who mentions her legendary sex drive should be laughed at. This kind of claim is on par with a third world communist nation calling itself great when it’s not even discovered the concept of paved roads. The vestigial response to sexual stimulation that women experience is the equivalent of the nipples on men. They are an genetic holdover from men and women sharing the same racial gene pool. I imagine some of you will insist that there are indeed some women who genuinely do enjoy and crave sex. So what? Apparently some men can lactate too.

Customer Service - A Case Study

2008-04-07T17:51:00.000-07:00

There was a time, long ago, when companies were large enough to be staffed by customer service departments decided they would staff their positions with women. This was based on the misleading research that showed that women tended to elicit more positive responses from those who had were having problems or needed assistance. This is one of those situations where the kunts took a grain of data and ran rough shod over reality. The greater experience, that women have never failed to ruin any industry they have graced, was ignored because as we all know, feelings will always trump reality in a kunt’s mind.

This is the origin of the much deserved bad reputation of “Customer Service”. You might ask how this conclusion is reached? If you are a woman, don’t bother, logic is an elusive concept so no degree of explanation will suffice. If you are a man however I only need one elegant reason: When a man is faced with a problem, it is his gut reaction to correct the problem. It is this innate quality of man that leads to things like science, capitalism and technology. When a woman is faced with a problem, her gut reaction is to figure out how best to avoid it or put it off to somebody else.

This is bad enough when the women are merely occupying the phones and front desks, but women ever leave well enough alone and once they infiltrated the successive levels of their departments, you wind up with a hierarchy of useless staff who’s only talent is in blowing off customers. This of course suits the corporations just fine, because if customers leave without having to be satisfied that’s money the company didn’t have to spend to rectify the problem.

You think it's bad now?

2008-04-03T23:25:00.000-07:00

Just like the global warming pundits, I feel compelled to paint the picture of what the future will be like “if things don’t change”, as just like them I do not expect anything to change. So imagine a good decade or more down the road, figure that no other major catastrophes to give society the electro shock therapy that it desperately needs.

Marriage of course will be dead in the eyes of any man under thirty. It will be relegated to that thing that only old people and creepy women participate in, kinda like what the Catholic church is now. There might be some public notice given to it, however I am not inclined to think so as the media has done everything short of closing it’s eyes and putting its fingers in its ears to ignore it so far that it’s not likely it’s total demise will alter this policy.

Another trend, that has already begun and is already being noted by feminists and men alike, is that of the fear women seem to have about ‘dying alone surrounded by cats’. If my observation of women has shown me anything, it’s that they can barely tolerate each other in their relative youth and in old age they all but completely ignore each other in old age. The ones already locked into this trajectory I suspect will make overtures to their fucked up children in the hopes that somebody will be around to notice the dead body.

While this future isn’t much better for men, the young men are going to envy their fathers as the girls who are being raised now will make our generation look like saints by comparison. What will now be a third generation of girls who are treated better than the historical princesses whose title they have taken, they will not only expect to be pandered to, they will begin seeking ways to enforce this attitude on an increasingly resentful male populace. To compound this problem, younger men will find a tidal backwash of thirty-something men who will make an already grossly overvalued dating market reach levels that could only be rivaled by the dotcom bubble.

One element though that I find amusing is that given this toxic environment for men, I predict at some point in the next decade, when the advancements in computer technologies and virtual interfaces reach a degree, that somebody will craft a truly palatable form of virtual sex. When that happens, though it may take more than a decade, dating as we know it will come to a crashing halt. The phenomenon caused by World of Warcraft, where literally millions of people have all but disappeared from the lives of their friends should give a good idea of what women will have in store for them.

They're still feminists.

2008-04-01T21:05:00.000-07:00

There are is a ongoing bit of chatter in the hive, mostly dealing with how so many women are put off by the idea of feminism and that they are leaving “the movement” in droves. It’s amusing to watch the capital F feminists bemoaning this situation but while I am not sure if they are sincere in their worry, fear not, there is absolutely no truth in it.

Women have not rejected feminism and all it’s fascist self absorbed mantras, they have however rejected Feminism, NOW, and any other official organization representing it. It’s like when I was young, and in the vile redneck shithole I grew up in there was a stir over how the local KKK chapter was disbanding. I was pleased by this and told my teacher (an elderly black man) how great it was. He responded that it was meaningless, that just because the official organization shut down it didn’t mean racism was over. He was right of course and the same is true with feminism.

Women are not rejecting Feminism because they are bothered by what it stands for, they just don’t want to suffer for it by openly claiming to be feminists. They are quite happy to go on being materialistic self absorbed monsters, they are just uncomfortable with advertising the fact.

Feminism is another form of bigotry pure and simple. Just like the KKK, it had a moment in history when it was chic to be openly hateful but just because it’s no longer popular to do it in public doesn’t mean they have stopped doing it. Women will continue to hate men and tarring the word feminist has made them less open about it.

It is a shame though, when the women were open about their misandry they had a brief flirtation with something else, something they don’t experience too often - honesty.

The Great Sperm Drain

2008-03-31T21:56:00.000-07:00

Well it has been going on in England for some time. Sperm donors had their anonymity stripped away from them and instantly became the targets for paternity suits. Of course, now that the number of donors for the whole country has dropped into the double digits they hypocritically bemoan the dearth of donors. You would think the kunts on our side of the pond would for once show a spec of foresight and not fuck themselves over with the sharpened end of their broomstick.

Clearly, if you suffer from that delusion, this will strip it away. No? Maybe this then.

The kunts here are going to do exactly the same thing and the men here who feeling even less forgiving than their British counterparts. It is a pity that some train wrecks take so long to unfold but sometimes the best revenge only comes in slow motion. Once this registry gets started there will be the first uses of it, some claim that the child is somehow defective, suffering from some imaginary problem like bushy eyebrows or her fingernails grow too fast. Then they will insist they need to know who the father is and before you can say “opportunistic bitch” there will be a paternity suit slapped on the clueless idiot.

This isn’t a matter of if, this is a matter of how soon. The irony is that this will leave open grounds for countersuit from the men, to demand that their own samples be removed from the banks and destroyed. Of course the next question to ask is when there is such a severe shortage of Instant-Paternity-Seed, what will the kunts do? This is where the question prompts some potentially scary answers. One could easily envision some crackpot stabs at coercing men to become donors but thankfully the kunts don’t quite have the pull that they need. Yet.

Of course one amusing technological note is that some research into bioengineering has shown that female eggs can be potentially converted into sperm (and vice versa). Now this raises a truly hilarious notion, women suing each other for paternity. I can see how women would insist that would never happen, that women are all one happy homogenous hive mind and would never fuck each other over given the first opportunity.

Of Vegans and Vixens

2008-03-30T20:53:00.000-07:00

Sometimes I wonder if these things fly into my inbox just to bait me.

Wow what a shocking revelation, kunts are naturally given to side with animal rights extremists. Somebody stop the presses, next you’ll be telling me that women support leftist causes and are pushing for a total Marxist transformation of the free world. Oh wait...they are.

One must wonder though why kunts are instantly on the side of every delusional left wing cult. It can’t just be because women are naturally drawn to sociopaths, there’s plenty of fascist right wing lunatics they could clamp their cooch around. Clearly there is more to it than that.

One of the underlying principles of all these leftist organizations is the denial of the individual. Men, being the wild free spirits that we are, enjoy working together but do not feel the hive mind compulsion to only exist as a group. We can and often do operate alone for long stretches, some of us even preferring the solitude for most of our lives. Women on the other hand are like individual ants, mindless and directionless without the rest of the collective to give her direction. Hell, they can’t even go to the bathroom by themselves, even this must become a joint effort.

So knowing this, it is easy to understand why women don’t just prefer left wing causes, but openly cheer for them. Anything to dilute and devalue human life and bring it down to their level of misery and mediocrity.

WhoreMart

2008-03-30T08:49:00.000-07:00

You may not have picked up on it, but when women refer to ‘whores and sluts’ they invariably lump the two together, never referring to them individually as though the two were just synonyms for the same thing. The odd part is that the two groups are really nothing alike at all when you think about it. Whores are women who sell sex for money, with a set rate of hourly exchange for various forms of service. A slut on the other hand is a woman who for whatever reason loves to sleep around with various men and may genuinely be enjoying herself. This would be like comparing WalMart to the Salvation Army, one does this to turn a profit, the other does it for shits and giggles.

Now you might wonder, why do the kunts like to lump these two groups of women together? Might it be because these two groups DO have one thing in common - they disrupt the kunts monopoly on sex. With either of these two groups you have a serious revaluation of the male orgasm. Imagine if you live in a town and the only had this grossly overpriced department store which for the purposes of this analogy I shall call Neiman Kuntus. The store having had a total monopoly has gotten incredibly snooty over the years and most of the men can’t even afford to shop there. The few that try have had their credit record ruined.

Now suddenly next door opens up a plain cinder block establishment where there are no frills, a minimum of bullshit and instead of exorbitant payment rituals there’s just a simple cashier who will happily give you a price check on anything you ask. We will call this place WhoreMart. WhoreMart was started on the simple policy that men like to have sex and shouldn’t have to fill out a credit check just to get their nuts off.

As though this wasn’t bad enough, in various locations around town women are ‘volunteering’ to give sex with seemingly no obligation at all. This service which I have not been able to aptly name (“Tits for Tots” was the best I could come up with but it just doesn’t work) and they are offering it as a service to some men regardless of their ability to compensate.

Prostitution has been hated since it’s inception, not by men, but by women. Not because it degrades women. Women will gleefully prostitute themselves out for goodies, they just despise the idea of having to compete for it. Competition lowers costs, it improves the quality of the product. This would be great for sex, wonderful men, and the ruin of the kunts. Kunts loathe having to compete for anything and the thought of having the one thing they can offer men commoditized scares the living shit out of them. They will fight to keep it illegal and would sooner have abortion made illegal than have prostitution decriminalized.

Female Cop = Predatory Bully

2008-03-27T09:51:00.000-07:00

Yet another article about a female cop going above and beyond the call of kuntdom. I find it amazing how many seemingly intelligent men can read through report after report of how a woman bravely beats a quadriplegic man or just recently how a wily cop, dressed as a prostitute, busts open a ring of eager 90 year old johns. However one thing I have to ask, how does a prostitute dress to stand out from other women these days?

As an aside, I have to ask, why is it always in Florida? No, this isn’t rhetorical as I grew up in that shithole and it seemed like every deranged law, sociopathic murderer, freakish miscarriage of justice and lowlife to hit the national pages was doing it in Florida. The only place on earth I think that can match the level of societal insanity in that state is the middle east.

You will never read about women in law enforcement doing anything brave or heroic because she might break a nail. I assure you, were there some woman who did this, it would be grounds for a epic TV mini series before you could say “There’s an exception to every rule.”

Where Nature Went Wrong

2008-03-27T07:18:00.000-07:00

There are those who would blame Feminism for the behavior of women. I am not one of them. There are those who believe that women behave as they due because of bad socialization or gender stereotyping. I am not one of them. The reasons for why women are what they are, is not the fault of men (or even Feminists, though they do make it worse).

Nature has given women something of a shitty genetic hand to play. The brain of a woman is at best slightly below average that of a man and quite often is seriously lacking. Women have by genetic predisposition bad social skills which are only made worse by poor social skills. Compound these external problems with internal ones like a hormone imbalance that makes peace of mind a stranger and something as simple as an orgasm is often heard about but never personally experienced.

Now put this group around another, this other group, though wildly varied (in contrast) of intellect and talents will on average achieve things they never will. Boys will discover orgasms long before girls will get their first period. As they grow into men, they will find their passions either in art, in science. They will become poets, painters, philosophers, thinkers, scientists, or leaders. Women will go shopping. Yes, some women have the capacity to rise above the crippling flaws of their genetics but they are the rare exception to a disturbingly pathetic rule and even they are tainted as they walk through life gritting their teeth at the men who so seem to do effortlessly what is a major struggle for themselves.

So what of the rule then? What do you do when you are so obviously outclassed and outgunned in this modern market place? Well, any good tactician would you that the answer is simple - you wage a guerrilla war. When you lack strength, impugn strength. When you lack intelligence, speak derisively of intellect. When your neighbor has a nice house, you sabotage it. This is why women will instinctively create misery and suffering where there was no need for it. They are jealous of men, not for their achievements but because they are men. This is the heart of misandry, women feel collectively cheated by nature and they are taking it out on men like a hateful petty sibling.

The Connecting Flight Between Airlines and Leadership

2008-03-23T12:10:00.000-07:00

You learn lessons in the funniest places. The best and most obvious ones are picked up on when I am in a place where my mind is desperately looking for something to gnaw on before it starves from boredom. The airlines are brilliant for this because if you are an observer of human behavior like myself this is like being dropped into the human interaction equivalent of the Amazon rain forest.

One thing that occurred to me was the children, much the way an air raid siren occurs to a person sitting next to it. I realize children probably enjoy flying even less than I do but while I was ready to inform this particular child how she could just shut the fuck up about it, I had a revelation. Looking about, I made several observations based on this revelation:

While observing the unruly children running about (no shortage of them on flight 856) when they were finally chastised, if it was the father it took very little. An ugly glance or a polite reminder of what would happen if they didn’t behave themselves at most.

If it was the mother, there would be a short frustrated demand that the children behave AND immediately followed by the child being slapped, smacked, and in one case spanked. This isn’t to say that I’m against spanking children who are clearly in need of it, but really it amazed me at the disparity in how parents approached the use of it.

(One third thing I’d have pointed out too, the male children were usually the far better behaved ones, but maybe that’s because the screaming child next to me was a twat in training)

This actually conforms rather well to when I was a child, my father could easily command his boys to behave themselves with a word at most, usually a displeased glare was all he needed. It wasn’t from fear of some brutal beating either, we feared his disappointment far more than his anger.

Is it that children just possess an innate wisdom about this? They know when a strong respectable father figure is around they will behave themselves and the only way a mother can enforce her rule is through the immediate and habitual use of corporal punishment? The differences in these two is much like the difference between a charismatic leader who inspires people to follow and the unlovable vile dictator who gets people to obey because they are afraid of them.

This is yet another reason why women should never be allowed into positions of power and authority. Women do not know how to inspire others to follow, all they can do is intimidate people into giving in to their demands.

When a girl says “No” she means whatever the hell she feels like.

2008-03-22T10:52:00.001-07:00

In Muslim dominated countries, a woman’s testimony is only half that of a man. Now apart from the legal strangeness of giving a numerical valuation to a legal claim, I think that for once the religious nuts have a great idea at least in concept. The root of this I surmise is that the testimony of a woman can’t be trusted. This of course is a bit of male wisdom that transcends every culture and nation. It can be found in the oldest scriptures and this wisdom though disputed by every woman has never once been refuted.

Of course the questions arise, are women incapable of telling the truth? No that would mean that women are simply pathological liars which isn’t the case. Others claim that women would prefer to tell a lie because it’s more comfortable than the truth. This is closer but the reality, as it is so often, is more complicated.

The basic problem is that in the mind of a woman, the truth or a lie has equal merit. She will use the truth if it would gain her benefit (or inflict more harm) and she will tell a lie if it will reach those ends better. For a woman, there is no more moral conflict in telling a lie over the truth than there would be in choosing between orange soda and grape soda.

The ramification of this flaw in the behavior of women becomes obvious when one considers how unreliable the opinion of a woman can be. When they stand for nothing (which is impossible when you do not value the truth over deceit) their beliefs become as difficult to nail down as a mayfly. Think about all the times when women simply can’t make up their minds, regardless of the obviousness of a choice, be it a choice of great magnitude or something as simple as what to wear to work. All choices are made on a foundation of valuations which on some level have the labels of “right” and “wrong.”

So it’s not surprising that Muslims would treat the testimony of a woman with suspicion, though their reasoning is almost certainly not as sound, like the idiot who gets the answer to a question correctly by a blind guess, the answer though is still correct - women are dishonest by nature.

I Endorse this Divorce!

2008-03-21T19:15:00.000-07:00

In some other election, where Hillary wasn’t running, Obama would be the darling of Feminists everywhere. Of course like all kunts, when it comes between the best man in the race, sorry but that torture supporting hypocrite McCain can eat shit and die, and the worst woman to ever run for office, they will ALWAYS side with the woman. Hillary is of course the closest the feminists have ever come to their holy grail of having a woman in charge of the country. Because as we all know, once women are in charge, the skys will shower money onto us, the evils of the world will shrivel away and die, and we will all live happily ever after.

Of course, those who aren’t humorless kunts can appreciate how the ‘best’ woman the Feminists can put forth, a humorless vindictive power hungry bitch, who using the most stacked deck a politician could ask for is still managing to lose to the new guy. Rather than acknowledge their bad choice and accepting that the better candidate is winning, they do what all women will do, they are having temper tantrums. The typical manhating shame speeches have already begun. The tirades by Geraldine Ferarro and patron saint of batshit kunts Gloria Steinum were just the start. Now there’s an article in Mother Jones which amounts to little more than a shame-speech and the only shocking part of the article was that the author didn’t ask him to bow out of the race.

If nobody believes me when I tell them that the marriage of Feminism kunts and the Religious fucktards in this country is inevitable allow me to make a prediction and that is when Hillary loses to Obama it will be the proverbial separation of the Feminist establishment from the Democratic party and their inevitable divorce. Of course like the metaphorical sociopathic bitch she will fuck that party over for everything she can before jumping into the arms of the next clueless moron she can woo over. In this case it will be the Religious wing of the now aged bachelor known as the Republican party.

One might say that this would be the death knell for the Democrats when this happens but I am not so sure. Feminists are only in it for themselves, those without ovaries are at best cannon fodder in their eyes (women LOVE wars), so they will gladly support the occupation of Iraq until the nation goes bankrupt and takes the Republicans with them. Also a Democratic party without the albatross of kunt ass kissing will win back large numbers of blue collar men - especially the single father variety if they opt to support father’s rights. What’s great is that the union of these two fundamentalist whackjob groups is that when they cause the Republicans to self destruct they will do more damage to each other as they go down than anybody could do to either of them alone!

Political Marriage

2008-01-19T17:13:00.000-08:00

No I'm not talking about Clinton. I'm referring to a phenomenon that ten years ago I would never have imagined. The religious nuts and the feminists are joining forces. However upon contemplation I realized that this is actually a inevitable joining of two groups who's differences are just as irrelevant as the differences between the religious right and wall street.

Think about it. The feminists hate sex. The church hates sex. The feminists have swaddled themselves in the illusion that they are all for "the family" (which means them, their child and the alimony check). The church has also made claims of an equally hypocritical nature. Also remember this, by far the majority of church goers are women.

This shouldn't surprise anybody when you consider the two groups. Both have as a central principle the negation of common sense, reality and trumpet intellectual dishonesty as theirs by right. If women had not been so gung ho on abortion back in the 60's this would probably have happened already.

2007-12-03T14:52:00.000-08:00

You might have read in the news lately about Linda Calbi who murdered her own son and apparently gets to retain her alimony payments while in jail. If you had I'd like to know what newspaper you read it in as a search through Google News has revealed only a couple blog sites and ONE news outlet reporting it. I'm not going to pontificate on how yet another woman has used the courts to escape justice. I will however point out that the real villains are those in the judicial system who are the willing accomplices of these kunts. Those who sit on the bench are the ones who truly need to feel the brunt of our rage. The judges who stand on the most flimsy of technicalities in the all consuming goal to make sure no woman is ever made to suffer for her sins are those who need to be held accountable. While in a just world, such people would be made to share the same cell as those they would eagerly release, I will settle for seeing them disbarred.

More Feminist Hypocrasy

2007-11-27T17:03:00.000-08:00

I thought I'd check Google and see if my blog was showing up yet and low and behold I find this!

Now quick, before she realizes men are looking at her blathering and takes it down! According to her we men who refuse to bleed our lives into her wallet are "More than likely they are 40 year old virgins" which shouldn't surprise anybody. The typical hate speech that women resort to any time reality chafes against their delusions.

I would love to remind this kunt that feminists for years swore that marriage was enslavement and no woman in her right mind should want it. However as these little cretins grew up and found they loved shopping but were growing to detest the idea of work, it was inevitable they would turn to marriage to finance their spending sprees. Of course as no-fault divorce became the law of the land, the kunts realized that they could have your cake and as well as their own. So now we have come full circle, but one thing has never changed - it's all about them.

Men Are The Better Communicators

2007-11-27T01:41:00.000-08:00

One of many popular myths feminists and psuedo-scientists love to toss around is that women are better at communication than men. Amazing how the gender notorious for the phrase "I don't want to talk about it" can get away with claiming to be our betters in what man clearly is a master at.

Let's gleefully tear apart this moronic bit of propaganda:

TEST SCORES: Boys routinely outscore girls in the SAT verbal. Despite the increasingly hostile environment boys must suffer in school this has yet. The solution? That's obvious, when you are incompetent a level playing field isn't good enough, it must be slanted in your favor!

LITERATURE: Just for the sake of argument, let's ignore everything written up until 1950 when typewriters were available in the western world and quite affordable. Despite that, the overwhelming majority of authors are men. The majority of journalists are men. What few female writers that have appeared over the years have usually tackled the same subjects such as shopping, how to make themselves pretty and how much they loathe and despise men. For the record, there have been a few exceptions. Ayn Rand and Marie Shelley come to mind, but of course such women are snubbed by their own gender. Notice how often you see "author" and "feminist author" used interchangably among them.

ART: This is even worse than literature, though pop-culture has definately allowed for a small group of semi-talanted women to flourish largely on the coattails of their gender. However just with literature they will never produce a great master with anywhere near the regularity of men even if they somehow overcame the poor communication problem. Why? Because women can't bear being criticized and any artist will tell you that it goes with the trade. However I have found one perverse form of art where women have found a niche - the graphic arts. You know the people who tweak photos and throw together the ads that now paper every surface now. However this isn't because women have become marginally better at getting ideas across, it's because this field of 'art' is by comparison very regimented and formulaic.

ARCHITECTURE: Coming from three generations of architects and designers, I have no hesitation in including this. So without resorting to google or wikipedia - can you even name a female architect?

So why are women so miserably bad at getting an idea across? I would put forth the basic problem is that language in particular is built on conceptual foundations. Words have meanings and meanings are intended to be rigid concepts which is in direct opposition to the innate psyche of women. Women want the vague and amorphous, they want things to mean what they want them to mean and the result is they denude themselves of the very tools to get their point across.

They love to say there are "other ways" to communicate, body language being one of their favorites. However, this claim is at best bullshit, because unless you are proficient in sign language, odds are you are not going to do much communicating with your body. Though it does appear women are more capable of discerning cues from body language, this is more along the lines of how blind people have more acute hearing. By disdaining language they had to learn something else. However I would also point this out: lower animals are also more perceptive of body language, but how many books have they written?

How Feminism Liberated Men

2007-11-23T08:44:00.000-08:00

One of the most simple yet profound lessons we consistently fail to learn is that our actions have consequences beyond what we anticipate. Sometimes the consequences turn out to be completely counter to those of the original. Feminism is one such case though I am amazed how men have not caught on to this fact.

Feminists claimed their goals were to 'liberate' women from the 'oppressive regime' of being kept in homes and forced to be the unpaid slaves and breeders of men. They painted the working man as living in some paradise where he lounged in the office and then went home to his slaving wife. While men were not at all interested in indulging a movement based on this deranged fantasy, they did not put up anything like the resistance feminists would have their daughters think they were forced to struggle against. The prime motive in this social change was economics, which actually pushed us away from this momentary bubble of idealism and back to the historic norm. Yes guys read your history, women quite often worked hard labor jobs outside the home. However when women got out into the workplace, much to their dismay they learned it wasn't all gumdrops and unicorns! It was hard! Now, in hypocritical arrogance they are trying to push this shellacked 50's fantasy on us, only now they want us to foot the bill AND absolve them of any 'wifely duties' as well. The immigrant labor we are expected to hire will presumably take care of that.

Guys on the other hand are jumping ship in record numbers, abandoning the concept of even metaphorical unions (live in lovers, cohabitation, etc) as they have realized that a woman's true daydream is to be a size 18 leech. In giving up the illusion of control, they have gained the reality of being free. Women are now living in the nightmare of getting everything they ever asked for. They have their careers, they have their own place, and with each year that goes by it's likely they will never be burdened with children.

The supreme irony is Feminists did what women would have otherwise never done individually. They gave voice to what all women felt and believed, that had neither the desire for men, and that being with men was merely a means to an end. They spoke as openly and honestly as any woman could, that they hated men, and that the only sex they would bear was with each other. They made it clear that children were a burden, and their only purpose was to be a hostage to the men they would cheerfully divorce for no reason at all. Everything men ever suspected women were guilty of Feminists cheerfully admitted to and insisted that they do it with pride.

Is it any wonder that so many women now are intent on distancing themselves from Feminism? Much like how modern politicians who were once members of hate groups are desperate to insist we should read nothing into it. The taint is on them and it's not coming off. We're free and no amount of sweet talking is going to make us put our shackles back on.

We have a long road ahead.

2007-11-21T23:57:00.000-08:00

The marriage strike is just the beginning. Like globalization or climate change, the marriage strike is not an easily tracked phenomena and the decline of marriage is merely the first symptoms of the conflict to come. Within the next few years, as the decline of marriages becomes too obvious for the media to continue ignoring it, there will be the usual spin doctors in the media who will eagerly depict this negatively as possible. Men will be portrayed as selfish, antisocial or even traitorous to browbeat them back into the slavery that is the marriage/divorce cycle.

This will not be resolved in a scant few years. This is a crusade which will take a generation and likely longer to truly bring to a proper conclusion. An entire generation of men have been beaten spiritually and emotionally. They have been condemned as criminals for the 'crime' of not being women. An entire generation of women have been raised to think of themselves as princesses. If history has shown us anything, once people assume a throne, it takes a revolution to remove them.

This is not a strike. This is a revolution.