Saint Obama Slaps Females and Business
Our new mangina President, Saint Obama, has slapped employers who hire women for paying women the reduced wages they earn, but slapping employers who hire women is bad for women who want jobs.
Females are already overpaid when they make $.73 cents for every dollar that men make. See $.73 is way overpaid. This new law will cut their value by another $.10 per hour because of the cost of risk that the employer has to pay.
A typical cunt wastes half her “work” day texting her girlfriends, gossiping about boyfriends, pregnancies, and “relationships.” She surfs the Internet to chat and gossip sites. She uses all her sick leave as if it were vacation days. The “full time” cunt put in only abut 2/3 of the time on her job every week that an average man does, even counting her gossip and Internet hours. And all the while she grouses that she is not paid as much as the men who are doing twice as much work as she does.
Lilly Ledbetter knew she was being paid less than the male supervisors at her factory. She claimed that the difference was because of her sex, not because she was doing less work or less effective work. She sat on this information until after she had retired and then tried to sue. The law said that she should have filed a claim when she was made aware of the alleged discrimination. She did not, and for years continued to work there.
When she brought suit, her lieyers argued that she should have been paid the same as the male counterparts, and that the statute of limitations should be set aside. The trial court agreed. However, the appeals court set aside that verdict because it ignored the law: statute of limitations cannot be set aside. The Supreme court upheld the appeals court and affirmed the decision for the rule of law -- statute of limitations was in effect, period. But that has now changed. Females at work can now wait till they retire, and then get a scumbag lieyer to slap their former employer with a massive “Ledbetter” suit demanding half the total value of a small business. The rule of law has become the rule of “women are dangerous.”
Under the new Leadbottom law, the statue of limitations is no longer applies to manipulative scheming cunts. Why should any company employ a female? Across the country today a million employers are looking at their female “workers” and wondering which ones will sue after they retire. A million other employers are looking over resumes and wondering which person to interview and hire. Some of them will wonder if they hire the female, will she sue them out of business in a few years. Many of them will choose to hire the man because he can’t sue.
This is a classic example of "you can't do one thing."
Or, "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."
This law greatly increases the risk that employers bear when they hire a female. It greatly increases the hidden cost of risk that employers have to bear to hire a female. The cost of risk has to come right out of the woman's take home pay to keep employers from hiring non-risk men instead. Many employers, especially small business that hires the majority of women, will avoid risk by avoiding women employees. It will make it harder for women to get jobs and good jobs.
Saint Obama and Leadbottom
I hope all you working cunts who are cheering about the special protections you enjoy are doing so while considering all the negative results of paying large sums to trial lieyers and a few showcase women. Saint Obama just made it a lot harder, more risky, and more expensive for employers to hire you.
Anyone who took economics at college instead of “women’s studies” will understand that there is additional cost and risk to employers when (some) women sue for alleged equal pay. The new law allows women/lieyers to sue decades later after the employer no longer has records or evidence for his defense.
You can ask any bean counter about "real wages." Ask about accounting for the total cost to the company of hiring and employee. Ask about the cost of risk and how risk is allocated to compare with other direct costs. Some insurance companies may be wiling to provide risk insurance against such suits, but it will be so expensive that most companies wouldn't be able to afford insurance and still hire any female.
The law may appears to be sex neutral, but the long history of such laws has always only allowed females to sue, and only cost employers for settlements to females. Everyone knows that too.
Every state, every corporation, and every small business will have to have a large budget item for settling claims. State governments will have to double their already expensive “harassment” budgets, already costing millions of dollars per year. And state governments can just rob taxpayers to pay the greedy bitches and their scumbag lieyers. The “hire a cunt” tax gets bigger and bigger. Private businesses who create wealth can’t do that. They have to make a profit of they fold. Private business has to cover the government’s tax and their own cost of risk, or they vanish along with the jobs they once provided.
The Leadbottom law crates a large new risk for employers who employ females. Risk is cost, and it is added to the employers total cost to employ females. Any economist can tell you about real wages vs. take home wages, and how the total cost to employ someone affects the employment decision.
Hiring someone, anyone, is no different from buying a new TV, a shirt, or a car. You look at the price and compare that to the next model over. How much I really want the product. Is this purchase worth the cost? You look at the reliability. How long will this purchase last? Will it cost another bunch for repairs next year? When hiring a female you have to look at the price, and the price now includes the cost/risk of lawsuits 20 years later. When hiring a female a sane employer will look at the price of the man who also applied for the job. Does the man's cost less? Will the man sue him out of business in 20 years? Does the employer avoid a significant risk if he hires the man? The Leadbottom law shifts the balance toward hiring men, and will make it more difficult for females to get work.
Any female might decide to sue 20 years later. The man cannot. It will cause some employers to buy the less expensive product, to hire the less expensive employee. So you say that all the employer has to do is to pay the female as much a man. WRONG. A shyster lieyer can sue even if she has been paid more than men doing the same work. Most employers end up settling to keep out of courts. Even when the employer fights it in court the shyster only has to present a crying cunt to a stupid jury and she wins. Even if the employer wins in court, he has to pay for thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of dollars in lieyer fees and costs. Even when an employer pays females as much or more than men doing the same level of work the employer is still at risk.
For those who want females to gain better jobs and higher pay, you buddy Saint Obama just slapped you across the face. The Leadbottom law can and will make it harder for females to find a job, harder to keep your job, and worth significantly less to the employer who has to offset the risk cost of her employment.
Regardless of the “good intentions” of this stupid law, the actual economic results will include the following:
Leadbottom will add risk and cost to every employer who hires a female. The cost of risk will have to be offset by lower take home pay or the employer will hire a man instead.
The Leadbottom law will encourage employers to hire men at the expense of females.
The Leadbottom law will push many employers into moving their production to foreign nations where labor laws are not so onerous.
The Leadbottom law will cause many businesses to avoid hiring entirely. A lawsuit hanging over their head is to be avoided by not hiring.
Some employers will find a reason to “lay off “ or fire female employees who seem to be bitchy or otherwise likely to sue. Her file will be documented with real or imagined poor performance and violations of company work rules.
The Leadbottom law will bankrupt thousands of small business who are sued out of business by shyster lieyers and greedy cunts. The nation will lose millions of jobs.
Make no mistake. This law is not about “equal pay for equal work despite all the political rhetoric. Women won’t do equal work, never have, never will. This law is about equal pay for less work, easier work, fewer hours of work, and more time wasted gossiping while at work. When females are forced to compete fairly in the workplace they get paid a lot less than men because they do a lot less work than men. When a rare female does equal work she gets paid as much or more than men, but that has never been satisfactory to feminazi and manginas like Saint Obama. They don’t want to force cunts into actually having to do equal work to earn equal pay. They believe that money magically appears in the hands of “rich men.” They want cunts to be paid as if they are working when they are not.
Is the Leadbottom law good for females? No, it is not. Females would be better off, get hired easier, and get paid more take home pay if the law was not passed. That is the basic economics of raising the cost/risk to employers who hire women. You can’t outlaw basic economic any more than you can make Pi equal exactly 3 by passing a law. The Leadbottom law is, in fact, the most misogynist law to be passed in several decades. It makes life harder for hard working females. We will see many more unemployed females.
There is one more problem with this law. Our economy is badly hurting as millions of workers are being laid off. Saint Obama is pushing the most massive pork bill ever to hit the Congress under the guise of economic stimulation to avoid another great depression. He has chosen this time to slap employers with huge lawsuits and prevent hiring. One is tempted to think he is either secretly trying to sabotage the economy or he’s really completely ignorant of even the most basic economics. You can’t stimulate the American economy by slapping employers and driving production to other nations.
LA Times video
"Declaring that ending pay disparity is not just a women's issue, President Barack Obama signed legislation Thursday that gives workers more time to take their pay discrimination cases to court.
"Lilly Ledbetter, the Alabama woman whose story was the impetus behind the new law, stood alongside Obama as he signed the first bill of his presidency. Also in the East Room of the White House were labor, women's, civil rights advocates and members of Congress for whom the bill was a priority." Seattle Times
Females are already overpaid when they make $.73 cents for every dollar that men make. See $.73 is way overpaid. This new law will cut their value by another $.10 per hour because of the cost of risk that the employer has to pay.
A typical cunt wastes half her “work” day texting her girlfriends, gossiping about boyfriends, pregnancies, and “relationships.” She surfs the Internet to chat and gossip sites. She uses all her sick leave as if it were vacation days. The “full time” cunt put in only abut 2/3 of the time on her job every week that an average man does, even counting her gossip and Internet hours. And all the while she grouses that she is not paid as much as the men who are doing twice as much work as she does.
Lilly Ledbetter knew she was being paid less than the male supervisors at her factory. She claimed that the difference was because of her sex, not because she was doing less work or less effective work. She sat on this information until after she had retired and then tried to sue. The law said that she should have filed a claim when she was made aware of the alleged discrimination. She did not, and for years continued to work there.
When she brought suit, her lieyers argued that she should have been paid the same as the male counterparts, and that the statute of limitations should be set aside. The trial court agreed. However, the appeals court set aside that verdict because it ignored the law: statute of limitations cannot be set aside. The Supreme court upheld the appeals court and affirmed the decision for the rule of law -- statute of limitations was in effect, period. But that has now changed. Females at work can now wait till they retire, and then get a scumbag lieyer to slap their former employer with a massive “Ledbetter” suit demanding half the total value of a small business. The rule of law has become the rule of “women are dangerous.”
Under the new Leadbottom law, the statue of limitations is no longer applies to manipulative scheming cunts. Why should any company employ a female? Across the country today a million employers are looking at their female “workers” and wondering which ones will sue after they retire. A million other employers are looking over resumes and wondering which person to interview and hire. Some of them will wonder if they hire the female, will she sue them out of business in a few years. Many of them will choose to hire the man because he can’t sue.
This is a classic example of "you can't do one thing."
Or, "Every action has an equal and opposite reaction."
This law greatly increases the risk that employers bear when they hire a female. It greatly increases the hidden cost of risk that employers have to bear to hire a female. The cost of risk has to come right out of the woman's take home pay to keep employers from hiring non-risk men instead. Many employers, especially small business that hires the majority of women, will avoid risk by avoiding women employees. It will make it harder for women to get jobs and good jobs.
Saint Obama and Leadbottom
I hope all you working cunts who are cheering about the special protections you enjoy are doing so while considering all the negative results of paying large sums to trial lieyers and a few showcase women. Saint Obama just made it a lot harder, more risky, and more expensive for employers to hire you.
Anyone who took economics at college instead of “women’s studies” will understand that there is additional cost and risk to employers when (some) women sue for alleged equal pay. The new law allows women/lieyers to sue decades later after the employer no longer has records or evidence for his defense.
You can ask any bean counter about "real wages." Ask about accounting for the total cost to the company of hiring and employee. Ask about the cost of risk and how risk is allocated to compare with other direct costs. Some insurance companies may be wiling to provide risk insurance against such suits, but it will be so expensive that most companies wouldn't be able to afford insurance and still hire any female.
The law may appears to be sex neutral, but the long history of such laws has always only allowed females to sue, and only cost employers for settlements to females. Everyone knows that too.
Every state, every corporation, and every small business will have to have a large budget item for settling claims. State governments will have to double their already expensive “harassment” budgets, already costing millions of dollars per year. And state governments can just rob taxpayers to pay the greedy bitches and their scumbag lieyers. The “hire a cunt” tax gets bigger and bigger. Private businesses who create wealth can’t do that. They have to make a profit of they fold. Private business has to cover the government’s tax and their own cost of risk, or they vanish along with the jobs they once provided.
The Leadbottom law crates a large new risk for employers who employ females. Risk is cost, and it is added to the employers total cost to employ females. Any economist can tell you about real wages vs. take home wages, and how the total cost to employ someone affects the employment decision.
Hiring someone, anyone, is no different from buying a new TV, a shirt, or a car. You look at the price and compare that to the next model over. How much I really want the product. Is this purchase worth the cost? You look at the reliability. How long will this purchase last? Will it cost another bunch for repairs next year? When hiring a female you have to look at the price, and the price now includes the cost/risk of lawsuits 20 years later. When hiring a female a sane employer will look at the price of the man who also applied for the job. Does the man's cost less? Will the man sue him out of business in 20 years? Does the employer avoid a significant risk if he hires the man? The Leadbottom law shifts the balance toward hiring men, and will make it more difficult for females to get work.
Any female might decide to sue 20 years later. The man cannot. It will cause some employers to buy the less expensive product, to hire the less expensive employee. So you say that all the employer has to do is to pay the female as much a man. WRONG. A shyster lieyer can sue even if she has been paid more than men doing the same work. Most employers end up settling to keep out of courts. Even when the employer fights it in court the shyster only has to present a crying cunt to a stupid jury and she wins. Even if the employer wins in court, he has to pay for thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of dollars in lieyer fees and costs. Even when an employer pays females as much or more than men doing the same level of work the employer is still at risk.
For those who want females to gain better jobs and higher pay, you buddy Saint Obama just slapped you across the face. The Leadbottom law can and will make it harder for females to find a job, harder to keep your job, and worth significantly less to the employer who has to offset the risk cost of her employment.
Regardless of the “good intentions” of this stupid law, the actual economic results will include the following:
Leadbottom will add risk and cost to every employer who hires a female. The cost of risk will have to be offset by lower take home pay or the employer will hire a man instead.
The Leadbottom law will encourage employers to hire men at the expense of females.
The Leadbottom law will push many employers into moving their production to foreign nations where labor laws are not so onerous.
The Leadbottom law will cause many businesses to avoid hiring entirely. A lawsuit hanging over their head is to be avoided by not hiring.
Some employers will find a reason to “lay off “ or fire female employees who seem to be bitchy or otherwise likely to sue. Her file will be documented with real or imagined poor performance and violations of company work rules.
The Leadbottom law will bankrupt thousands of small business who are sued out of business by shyster lieyers and greedy cunts. The nation will lose millions of jobs.
Make no mistake. This law is not about “equal pay for equal work despite all the political rhetoric. Women won’t do equal work, never have, never will. This law is about equal pay for less work, easier work, fewer hours of work, and more time wasted gossiping while at work. When females are forced to compete fairly in the workplace they get paid a lot less than men because they do a lot less work than men. When a rare female does equal work she gets paid as much or more than men, but that has never been satisfactory to feminazi and manginas like Saint Obama. They don’t want to force cunts into actually having to do equal work to earn equal pay. They believe that money magically appears in the hands of “rich men.” They want cunts to be paid as if they are working when they are not.
Is the Leadbottom law good for females? No, it is not. Females would be better off, get hired easier, and get paid more take home pay if the law was not passed. That is the basic economics of raising the cost/risk to employers who hire women. You can’t outlaw basic economic any more than you can make Pi equal exactly 3 by passing a law. The Leadbottom law is, in fact, the most misogynist law to be passed in several decades. It makes life harder for hard working females. We will see many more unemployed females.
There is one more problem with this law. Our economy is badly hurting as millions of workers are being laid off. Saint Obama is pushing the most massive pork bill ever to hit the Congress under the guise of economic stimulation to avoid another great depression. He has chosen this time to slap employers with huge lawsuits and prevent hiring. One is tempted to think he is either secretly trying to sabotage the economy or he’s really completely ignorant of even the most basic economics. You can’t stimulate the American economy by slapping employers and driving production to other nations.
LA Times video
Labels: economics, Feminism, government, government tyranny, liberals, Obama, Obamanation
posted by Bob | Friday, January 30, 2009
82 Comments:
Obama clearly want's me to have easier access to jobs in these tough economic times. They always said he was a smart man :P
Thank's Obama!
--A Man who will have to compete less with females now.
Note to readers. Please review Bob's rules for comments in the left margin of The World According To Bob before wasting your time writing a comment that will be deleted.
very little of what bob says here is actually true
Note to anonymous:
1. Please review Bob's rules for comments in the left margin of The World According To Bob before wasting your time writing a comment that will be deleted.
2. If women weren't going to sue their employers, then there would be no reason for Obama and the Congresscunts to pass this law. Its only purpose is to create many more lawsuits as many more women sue employers.
Looks like Obama is a great friend of humanity. Discrimination is wrong, whether against women, African-Americans, immigrants or anyone else. Legislation that makes discrimination too expensive to contemplate, both in hiring and wages, is a boon to the human race. Good for Obama!
What did Bob say that isn't true? I wouldn't hire a woman if I was an employer. All women do is raise tension for fear of law suits.
Sexual harassment, unequal pay law suits, what employer needs that?
If cunts can't hack it in the work place, they need to fuck off really. Men created almost all jobs, and then cunts come along and want men to change their ways to accomodate them. If they don't, they sue.
What a pathetic mess.
Genders are not equal nor will they ever be, no matter how much women scream and stop their feet. Men should be paid more than women because men contribute more than women in certain jobs where muscle, strength and common sense are required.
Look at all of the jobs that *had* to be opened up to women such as police and fire jobs. I guarantee that a woman could not **effectively** do either of these two jobs and is as clear as the colors black and white. I speak from experience; I have seen it with my own two eyes while I was a cop.
I have worked for three different police departments and have worked along side many women that were considered to be far more of a liability than a help. Without going into a diatribe about specific incidents, I will simply say that in all of my years of service with regard to all of the women I have worked with, I can truthfully and unequivocally say that there was not a single woman that I felt that could effectively do the work of a police officer or a fire (man). I will be happy to provide an incident by incident accounting if anyone feels like they want to debate this issue.
I remember when I was in the academy how woman were given preferential treatment and how the drill instructors would **physically turn their heads** in a different direction, looking away when all of the women had to be helped to scale an 8 foot wall that they obviously could not climb or when these same women recruits had to prove their hand-to-hand combat techniques that of course they could not effectively perform. Police and fire departments are under pressure to fill federal “quotas” where “minorities” such as women are given “job preference” whether or not they can actually perform the job or not.
There are certain jobs that a woman has no right participating in. Front-line military, Police, Fire and construction jobs are just a few that come to mind.
Like it or not, the feminist movements are continuing to ruin the very fabric of America and will continue to do so until there is nothing left. It is man’s fault though. We should have never allowed them to get to the point that they are at today. I have always had a great deal of respect for some of the Middle Eastern countries where the government still allows a man to stone his wife to death for disrespecting her family. If America employed some of these same beliefs you would see this country go back to a semi-normal state fairly quickly.
Despite Bob's disdain for police, this is addressed to the cop who posted, praising Islamic culture.
He said:
"I have always had a great deal of respect for some of the Middle Eastern countries where the government still allows a man to stone his wife to death for disrespecting her family".
This man obviously respects what such a culture REALLY represents: legalized violence; slavery of women; poverty; lack of education and health care, etc. Worst of all, that entire culture is built around the primitive emotions of raging-bull men who put themselves first. Even if it means committing the vilest acts of Terrorism including blowing up their own children.
Arab children are not cared for. They are the property of fathers and are often injured or killed at his whim.
A typical example is the Islamic schoolmaster who battered to death an 11-year old pupil:
http://www.nospank.net/n-s12.htm
The Arab culture is worthy of the highest respect .... if you respect caveman violence and revenge as the only way to solve your problems.
Why should men change their ways if they are already behaving and cooperating as mature adults? There is nothing to change.
"I have always had a great deal of respect for some of the Middle Eastern countries where the government still allows a man to stone his wife to death for disrespecting her family"
If we had that kind of respect for family, we wouldn't have Obama as president now. His father disrespected his family when Obama was aged 2. He grew up trying to be different from his father. I've worked with three different men, all from families where "dad" hit the road. All three were dedicated to being different from their fathers, having families, and being good fathers.
Note to anonymous: (6:05 PM)
Your link to a tragic death of a child is disingenuous. It is clearly not an acceptable act in Islamic culture. The teacher has been severely punished for doing so. Female teachers also sometimes injure students. I read another link from the UK last week where a female teacher had severely injured a student.
Your opinion is not supported, and is in fact contradicted by your own example so we must conclude that your opinion is unsupportable.
Note to anonymous (6:40 PM)
Obama's ill placed disdain for his father should have been directed toward his hippie whore mother who went whoring with black college students and got herself knocked up without making sure to have a committed husband first. She traveled to Barack Obama Sr's home in Kenya where Barack Jr. was born, but refused to become Barack Sr's second wife according to the customs of his culture and family. She then left Barack Sr. and returned to Hawaii where she resumed screwing other black men. Her parents, and especially his grandfather, supported little Barack Jr. through his growing up years.
Obama Jr's disdain should be given to his hippie whore mother who failed him in many, many ways.
"Despite Bob's disdain for police, this is addressed to the cop who posted, praising Islamic culture."
Most cops enforce feminist culture. It is nice to know of a retired police officer that is against it.
The distain for police stems from the majorities' treason against their fellow man. If police would just make sure no one was breaking into our houses while we were at work there would be no problem...
Instead police are used for: helping wives, protecting whores, _stopping_ property owners from protecting their belongings, breaking up men's families.
Police don't protect men's property when men are at work ... today they just protect women... that is why there is dislike : most police have userped the position of the man and husband.
Note to anonymous: (6:05 PM)
I am the original poster to your response.
I'm sorry that you don't agree with me but quite simply put... If you don't control the women in society and monitor their movements very closely, you will wind up with what we now have to deal with here in America. Women must be controlled and kept in line. Yes, I truly believe this and also believe that women are, for the most part, responsible for the demise of this country. We are now reaping what we have sown by allowing women to have such a loud voice.
Note to anonymous: (6:40 PM)
And I suppose a "good father" in your book would be a mangina? Let me tell you something about Hussein Obama.. He is a non-American socialist mangina who's right hand man (Biden) is yet a bigger mangina. Biden is responsible for authoring the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act).
Because of VAWA, as a cop I no longer had the ability to go into a house where domestic violence was suspected and "size up" the situation for what it was and not “trumped up” to be.
The VAWA stated that any injury however slight were grounds to make an arrest and that an arrest “shall be made”. Once the fem movements got a hold of the VAWA verbiage, many women used this against the man to get vengeance on them. I consistently saw women that bruised themselves on purpose in order to have their spouses arrested. Unfortunately, cops in general are not the brightest creatures on earth and would never investigate beyond the surface. I am proud to say that I actually made several arrests of women that I had successfully proven in a court of law that had purposefully lied to have the man arrested. Guess what? The charges stuck.
We now have two manginas in office that I am certain will add to the fem movements across America for the next two years.
To all those that disagree with me about Middle Eastern law, I have this to say. The Middle East is smarter than America in that they understand what can happen to their society when women are allowed to speak out. It isn’t brain surgery people. In the Christian faith, the Bible speaks of a woman not being permitted to teach (1 Timothy 2:12). There is a REASON for this.
The verse states: “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.”
The verse translated says: “Here is a charge, that women who profess the Christian religion should be modest, sober, silent, and submissive, as becomes their place.”
World gets its first gay head of state
independent.co.uk — The first government collapse of the global economic crisis is about to yield the world's first openly-gay leader. Johanna Sigurdardottir, a former air hostess, is expected to be sworn in as Iceland's Prime Minister by the end of the week.
http://digg.com/world_news/World_gets_its_first_gay_head_of_state?FC=PRCT0
The fact that a human being would even consider stoning to death another person, is what's disgraceful.
"Your link to a tragic death of a child is disingenuous. It is clearly not an acceptable act in Islamic culture"
...
Hardly "disingenuous" to provide yet another example of the brutality of Islamic society. Nothing new. Whippings, child abuse, terrorism, gender-slavery, stonings, decapitations, war ... all occur in nearly every fundamentlist Islamic society.
For chrissakes these are the men that strap explosives to the chest of 10 year old boys or mentally disabled adults. Hardly people worthy of respect.
If that Egyptian schoolmaster was punished for battering it doesn't mean that, overall, Islamic society protects its people from violence. Violence has been a way of life for centuries; it almost seems a genetic trait.
Note(s) to Bob and friends:
The current president was born in Hawaii, and no matter how many times you claim otherwise, your claim about him being born in Kenya is not true. Face facts.
And also, stop blaming women for every single fucking thing that goes wrong in your lives. If you want something silent and passive to fuck, get a blow-up doll.
Finally: though you claim to admire countries like Iran, I don't see you moving there. I wonder why.
I notice a fundamental disconnect in your reasoning, Bob.
You say most women can't work as hard as men. At the same time, you say the only career a woman should have is wife/mother. Any parent will tell you that raising children is difficult, and, for some period of time, requires full-time care. Yet apparently women, most of whom, according to you, are too immature to hold a 9-to-5 job , should be entrusted with the full-time care of children.
I'm not even going to try to underwtand your so-called logic here.
Note to anonymous:
Your lack of understanding begins with your need for remedial reading classes. You twisted "won't" into "can't."
Many females could work, but they won't.
And, yes, Bob knows how hard it is to raise good children today. Been there, done that, got the T shirt.
“And also, stop blaming women for
every single fucking thing that
goes wrong in your lives”.
Interesting statement considering that all along it has been feminists who have been blaming men for everything wrong
in their lives?
To Anonymous at (February 03, 2009 7:48 AM)
You said:
"And also, stop blaming women for every single fucking thing that goes wrong in your lives. If you want something silent and passive to fuck, get a blow-up doll."
I place the blame squarely on American women for the demise of this society. For the laws that have been enacted that harm, not help.
You seem very bitter to me.. I'd venture to say you are a single woman that has been kicked to the curb by many different men. Let me give you a hint sweetheart... It’s your attitude and is the very reason that most American women are single mothers with bastard children. Nobody wants a woman like you. You made your bed now lie in it.
As for wanting something passive and quiet... I am happily married to a "non" American woman who understands her place in society; no need for a blow-up doll.
"I place the blame squarely on American women for the demise of this society"
What blame? What "demise"?
That's childish. What a miserable little boy you seem to be.
Our Amer. society is strong and fundamentally good --- despite having men like you residing in it and doing nothing but howling.
I predict you will die an unhappy man, never having seen our modern egalitarian society pushed backwards to resemble the 1700s. It just won't happen.... unless Islamic Fundies become the majority and take over by 2030. And while you might assume that would usher in a brighter, happier day for you, it really wouldn't. Your life would deteriorate tremendously.
Be careful what you wish for.
Note to anonymous:
Your comments are being deleted because you are ignoring Bob's rules for comments posted on the left column of The World According To Bob Please review the comment policy and submit thoughtful and germane comments that further discussion without criticizing other men who write comments.
Question for Anon (February 03, 2009 12:17 PM):
Where can i get a foreign woman like your wife? Any luck using the Internet? email:
gw_sampson@yahoo.com
In response to Anon (February 03, 2009 04:05 PM):
I was going to email you but then decided that I would post this info on Bob's blog for others to read as well.
I met my wife one day while I was at work. It's true when people say that you find love when you least expect it, because I found her when I really wasn't looking. She just appeared. We dated for about 8 months before we were married and have been happily married for 8 years now.
I never used one of those mail order bride services but had been tempted in the past. I have dated all kinds of women and found that the best race for me was Asian. The Asian culture is very conservative for the most part and the family values closely match what I used to see here in America before the feminists poisoned our society.
I dated many American women before I met my wife but always found myself arguing or fighting over moral and value issues which for the most part, American women lack. It dawned on me that I needed someone that had a different upbringing. I dated Asian, Hispanic, Middle Eastern and American women. For me personally, I found that the Asian culture was exactly where I needed to be.
I also read a study a while back where American women are being passed up for other races and that there are more white American men marrying women from abroad. I wonder why?
To anonymous (February 03, 2009 4:05 PM)
Try these links,
mexicancupid.com
Loveme.com ( Mostly Russian and Ukrainian women but also Asian and Hispanic)
I have seen some very beautiful women on both sites!
Mexicancupid.com has some of the most beautiful Mexican women I have ever seen! Mexico is cheap and close, I would lean toward that option if it were me.
To Anonymous (February 03, 2009 3:24 PM)
"Fundamentally good"?? What is so good about this society? How do you see it as being strong? Please do share….. If anything, feminazis and manginas have made it worst and weakened it.
Yes, men like me reside here and we will continue for centuries to come. We enjoy howling, that’s what we do.
Your "modern egalitarian society" is akin to a dog having sex with a cat or mixing water and oil together. It just doesn’t work.
"And also, stop blaming women for every single fucking thing that goes wrong in your lives. If you want something silent and passive to fuck, get a blow-up doll."
Not useful for reproduction.
A typical stereotype of the Black race was: they can work, but won't. They are all lazy. (often uttered by Whites lounging on their verandas)
Mr. Anon describes his girlfriend as a foreigner "who understands her place in society "
February 03, 2009 12:17 PM
Who exactly determines what someone's "place" in society is?
Mr. Anon alone decides? His church? His parents and family background? The govt.?
The word "place" can be problematic -- it harkens back to racist beliefs that did great harm to Blacks for 3 centuries.
We all have different places, different circumstances but the basic rule for place(s) is: nobody should be imprisoned in a "place" where they get hurt.
"Yes, men like me reside here and we will continue for centuries to come. We enjoy howling, that’s what we do."
February 03, 2009 9:30 PM
HUH? You enjoy just whining? Some manhood.
uh.. real men, real women aren't whining into Bob's blog. They are WORKING real jobs. Enjoying REAL families, not fantasizing about some medieval submissive doll.
What's so wrong with this society that you must cry all day?
Heck you got a great society to live in. Slaves have been free for nearly 1.5 century. Both men and women can achieve full potential.
No more chain gangs. No more whipping post, pillory, branding irons, slave pens and auction houses. No more signs "white only", 'colored toilet'. No more denying minorities or females their Civil Rights, jobs, education, etc.
No more privies, contaminated well water. No more toothache without dentistry. Not nearly the suffering from disease, poverty, want.
Better building codes, safer, better transportation.... better everything.
but jeezus, Anon can't go buy a slave and yeah it's really devastating to have everybody guaranteed their civil rights along with the highest living standards the world has ever enjoyed.
An anonymous sow squealed, "No more signs "white only", 'colored toilet'. No more denying minorities or females their Civil Rights, jobs, education, etc."
First, it is a feminazi lie to lump women into civil rights. Women were not denied rights by Jim Crow laws. That misandrist cowshit doesn't fly here.
Our society has changed. To replace the old laws restricting minorities in some regions, we now we have a long list of nation wide Jane Crow laws that say "women only" and bind men into slavery or send men to hellhole prisons.
To Anon (February 04, 2009 4:24 PM)
My God are you one stupid individual. Ready for a short edumakation? I’ll try and dumb this down for you so that you can understand what I am trying to convey.
You said: “Both men and women can achieve full potential.”
Not true. Not true AT ALL actually. Thanks to the fem movement and misandry.
What about child support and how over 95% of the non-custodial parents are men? How about slavery… Let’s just take a look at what misandry and your fem movement have done to enslave men.
What about men that are ostracized from their child’s life and made to be nothing more than a paycheck? What about men that have to pay child support to some whore that got knocked up by John Doe and she pegs the first Tom Dick or Harry that fucked her as the father because she is such a slut and fucks everyone in town that she has no idea who the REAL father is? What about Parent Alienation Syndrome the children suffer as a result of the mother poisoning the child’s mind and turning the child away from the father? The REAL criminal in this case is the woman. Any woman that turns a child away from the father SHOULD BE STONED TO DEATH.
There are thousands upon thousands of cases where the real father is not identified and some other poor guy has to pay support or risk being locked up EVEN WHEN DNA EXCLUDES HIM AS THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER. Got news for you… That is indentured servitude. Slavery is very much alive in this country and with your manginas in office your next two years should be smooth. Your meal tickets should keep coming in and your lifestyle will probably only get better.
What about child support cases where the whore claims that the man never paid her anything and he is ordered by one of the corrupt family court judges to pay the money anyway? It’s a reality that is happening all over this country. Wake the fuck up and shut your pie hole until you have something useful to contribute. You have no idea what you are even talking about.
I say that any man that has been wronged by the family court system needs to STOP PAYING CHILD SUPPORT NOW until the scales of justice swing back in the other direction. If all men participated in a nationwide strike against this injustice we would all see an immediate reform.
This is only ONE example of how the fem movement has ruined this country, there are many other examples.
Don’t you dare even try and make me believe for one second that the society we live in as men is better overall. You’re misinformed and ignorant.
You said: ” but jeezus, Anon can't go buy a slave and yeah it's really devastating to have everybody guaranteed their civil rights along with the highest living standards the world has ever enjoyed.”
Civil rights? Now I am certain that you are out of touch with reality because men with child support no longer have this thing you call “Civil Rights”. Civil rights are the first thing to be taken away from a man with child support.
By the way, I work a full time job as well. I also consider myself very lucky to be doing a job that I absolutely love and enjoy.
Fact: Without men this fem society, women would all perish because women do not have what it takes to survive on their own. Women would still need men around to steal their paychecks.
"Who exactly determines what someone's "place" in society is?"
Biology.
Notice how these feminists always have to play the race card to bolster their arguments? I guess it's a liberals ace in the hole?
""Who exactly determines what someone's "place" in society is?"
Biology.
Notice how these feminists always have to play the race card to bolster their arguments? I guess it's a liberals ace in the hole?"
Are you dense? The reason the "race card" is used is because the arguments are so similar. Like your post, for instance. For years people claimed that there was 'scientific proof' that caucasians/whites were the most intellectually developed segment of the human species, and that blacks had less developed brains. They said biology supported their assertions. The same goes for the whole Social Darwinist and eugenics movements. You can easily twist a third-rate version of science to support opinions and ideologies. Just ask the Nazis. They amassed mountains of supposedly 'scientific' data concerning different ethnic groups. And you know what? In the end, it was all rubbish. They were only interested in data that supported the conclusions they had already made. Let me demonstrate how it's done:
Bob and you think: "Women aren't as smart as men and should just stay home with their children. They should know their place."
Biology says: "A human female (woman) has mammary glands (breasts) and a uterus."
You say: "Women have mammary glands and uteri, so they should know their place is just to have children and stay home."
Many people used to say: "Black people aren't as smart as white people. They should know their place."
Sound familiar?
Note to anonymous:
Men have brains about 25% larger than females, and the additional brain capacity is mostly gray matter, the thinking part.
Men excel mentally, physically, and morally compared to females. You would be far better served if you learned to live with your female level of abilities rather than pretending to be like men.
Amen Bob. Very well put.
“Are you dense? The reason the "race card" is used is because the arguments are so similar.”
The reason the “race card” is used is because it’s a cheap and effective tactic used by liberals and feminists such as yourself to play on “white Guilt,” and to further your agenda and it has worked well for you and your kind, but it won’t work here! Actually, as a feminist and a liberal, you should be ashamed of yourself for using the plight of poor oppressed blacks to further your argument.
“For years people claimed that there was 'scientific proof' that caucasians/whites were the most intellectually developed segment of the human species, and that blacks had less developed brains.”
“They said biology supported their assertions.”
Women are not equal to men, the same way not all races\cultures are equal! You yourself have acknowledged that even you don’t believe this to be true with your previously disparaging remarks regarding the Middle East! Clearly you believe that they are not equal to feminist Western culture, you even made a remark about it possibly being due to genetics! But of course, you will now deny that it was you who posted any of these comments?
Attn,Anon (February 03, 2009 6:42 PM),
Thanks for the info. I would like to share an experience I had, good and bad, with dating an Asian. And see if you went through anything similar. It was not handled well, went somewhat like yours. We met in Grad School. But the problems were more with Immigration details and the sticky situation since we were in a large academic dept. near Washington DC.
Would appreciate a private dialogue, thanks.
gw_sampson@yahoo.com
"Note to anonymous:
Men have brains about 25% larger than females, and the additional brain capacity is mostly gray matter, the thinking part."
That is just pure, Grade-A bullshit.
Show me one present-day, mainstream scientific publication that has reported those results. Show me one set of UNALTERATED brain scans that demonstrates that an average man has a brain one-quarter larger than that of the average woman. It would be a very dramatic difference.
"Men excel mentally, physically, and morally compared to females. You would be far better served if you learned to live with your female level of abilities rather than pretending to be like men."
Obviously this is a PRIME example of what you're claiming, although you keep falling back on the assertion that women are inferior merely because of their gender. And why are women inferior? Because they're not men. And why are men superior? Because they aren't women, and women are inferior. And on and on.
Nice use of circular logic. Why don't you get off the internet until you have some REAL arguments, instead of recycled crap they were using 100 years ago.
Note to anonymous:
You fail to understand the concept of circular logic. The point was made that men are more intelligent, stronger physically, and morally superior to females. Your lack of understanding of basic logic, circular or otherwise, continues to demonstrate how men are more intelligent than females. The more demonstrations you post, the more obvious that fact becomes.
Instead of constantly failing in your effort to be like men, your life would be better if you accepted that you are female and learned to enjoy being feminine.
To Anonymous (February 06, 2009 10:37 AM)
Without going into a long drawn out argument, are you trying to say that females are superior to men? Is this *really* what you believe to be true?
I see it like this: With the exception of child birth, a man can do everything a woman can do but a woman cannot do everything a man can do. This does make us superior toots. Women have learned through the ages how to use deception to their advantage so as to advance their agenda and like a cancer, it has infected our society. There are still smart men in the world like us who know what the truth is and cannot be swayed into believing the feminist lies.
I believe that the feminists know in their hearts that they screwed up but of course they will never admit that because part of the fem movement teaches them to show no weakness.
You and others have just bought into the feminist propaganda for way too long and you have been brainwashed. I would be willing to bet money that if you could talk to a woman that is around 80 or 90 years old, they would tell you that “today’s women” have overstepped their bounds in this society.
My grandmother used to tell me before she passed that “the women of today’s age are absolutely crazy” and that how “women just want to be men”. She offered me her condolences in trying to find a “good woman” to marry and suggested that I *not* marry an American woman. I did heed her advice and I am glad I did.
I think there is something to be said for the older generation because they just understood a lot better how God wanted this world to be. After all, it was Eve that deceived Adam, was it not? How can any real intelligent man or woman refute this? I mean, from the beginning of time we have on record, the very first woman deceiving man. It isn’t brain surgery, really.
You just continue on believing the BS fem propaganda that you are being fed and the next time I see you or one like you in public that is single with a bastard kid on your hip, you’ll see me off to one side smiling. Heck, I might even say hello.
You can keep saying how mentally superior men are until you're blue in the face, Bob, and it won't mean anything until you show us some legitimate scientific evidence that supports your assertion. It's very convenient that you dismiss any statistics and/or studies people post to debunk you as being "misandrist" or "feminist hate". The only reason you say that, it seems, is because those observations don't support your opinions. And they are opinions, not facts.
"Instead of constantly failing in your effort to be like men, your life would be better if you accepted that you are female and learned to enjoy being feminine."
I do enjoy being female, thank you very much, and I'm not trying to act like a man.
Although considering how you constantly belittle other men for being 'manginas'--not being 'manly' enough--it's not that surprising that you make this accusation. You seem to have an unhealthy obssession with the idea that the vast majority of people are turning into androgynous beings.
Anonymous said "You seem to have an unhealthy obssession with the idea that the vast majority of people are turning into androgynous beings."
I don't know what planet you are on or what kind of medical marijuana you smoke but not one of my male friends would ever agree to being classified as an "androgynous being" and would further denounce such a premise.
Maybe in your pretend world "androgynous beings" exist but not in the real world.
The anonymous sow (2:31 PM)squealed:
"Some of my best friends are men."
and
"Its not me. Its those feminists over there."
Its amazing how many ways the feminists find to say the same old tired crapola.
"Without going into a long drawn out argument, are you trying to say that females are superior to men? Is this *really* what you believe to be true?"
No. I don't believe that any one human being, or group, is inherently superior to any other.
"I see it like this: With the exception of child birth, a man can do everything a woman can do but a woman cannot do everything a man can do. This does make us superior toots."
Of course there are biological differences between the genders. That doesn't make one superior to the other.
Following that argument, you can declare yourself superior to any number of groups. You could say you're superior to someone who is blind and/or deaf, or someone who was born without the full number of limbs. But does that make it true? No.
Don't call me toots, either. You don't even know me.
"You and others have just bought into the feminist propaganda for way too long and you have been brainwashed. I would be willing to bet money that if you could talk to a woman that is around 80 or 90 years old, they would tell you that “today’s women” have overstepped their bounds in this society."
That's funny, my 82-year-old grandmother says no such thing. In fact, like she did for my father when he was a child, she encourages my brothers and I to work hard, study hard, and to set high standards for ourselves.
"I think there is something to be said for the older generation because they just understood a lot better how God wanted this world to be. After all, it was Eve that deceived Adam, was it not? How can any real intelligent man or woman refute this? I mean, from the beginning of time we have on record, the very first woman deceiving man. It isn’t brain surgery, really."
You have the story wrong. Eve was deceived by the serpent. She then gave the fruit to Adam. Nowhere does it say that she deceived Adam.
However, that isn't relevant, because those events never happened. If you really think that Adam and Eve were real people, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
Never Trust Anything that bleeds 3 to 5 days and doesn't die. Period.
Who literally believes the fairytale of Adam and Eve?
“No. I don't believe that any one human being, or group, is inherently superior to any other.”
You should. Men are superior to women in many ways. I can say that women are superior to a man, only in child birth.
"Of course there are biological differences between the genders. That doesn't make one superior to the other. Following that argument, you can declare yourself superior to any number of groups. You could say you're superior to someone who is blind and/or deaf, or someone who was born without the full number of limbs. But does that make it true? No.”
Yes, it absolutely does. A person that is not blind is superior to a blind person with regard to vision. A hearing person is superior to a deaf person with regard to hearing. You see, this is one of the fundamental problems in this country. Everyone wants to sugarcoat everything instead of calling it for what it really is.
Just like a woman that is a cop or a fireman, is inferior to a man doing the same job. I said it before and I will say it again. Women cannot do many jobs that they have forced their way into with lawsuits and foot stomping. The end result to having women public safety jobs is a higher liability. The last department I worked for did a survey where they looked into how many females were injured as a result of a confrontation in the field. The department realized that it was paying an exorbitant amount of worker’s compensation claims. At that time, there were 19 females working for the department and all 19 females had claimed IOD (Injured on Duty) at some point in their career whereas only 2 percent of the remaining 221 men of the department had claimed IOD.
What that study showed was that women could not handle themselves in the field because they did not have the strength or the mental capacity to do the job effectively.
There was a second study done that showed that women “overreacted” in stressful field situations. I remember that we had a victim shot by a female officer because she overreacted thinking that the person was the suspect. Forget about inferior and superior here. Let’s talk equality. You want to sit there and tell me that women are equal to men? I know better.
“That's funny, my 82-year-old grandmother says no such thing. In fact, like she did for my father when he was a child, she encourages my brothers and I to work hard, study hard, and to set high standards for ourselves.”
I am talking about what my grandmother told me with regard to the feminist movement and about how they demonstrated back in the 60s by burning their bras for equal rights. Both of my grandmothers also told me to study hard, and to set high standards for ourselves.
“You have the story wrong. Eve was deceived by the serpent. She then gave the fruit to Adam. Nowhere does it say that she deceived Adam.”
God said not to eat from the tree of knowledge. The serpent tempted the woman to eat from the tree of knowledge and then gave the fruit to Adam. Why do you suppose that Eve was tempted and not Adam? I believe that it was because she was the weaker of the two?
Note to readers:
While theology of various religions is interesting to some readers, religion is not the topic of The World According to Bob. These comments have strayed far into theological debate which, though interesting to some, has not been resolved for thousands of years. Please keep your comments germane to the topic. Thank you.
I came across this link and thought it appropriate for this discussion:
Some races just understand how to keep their wives in line.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88088
Note to anonymous:
Indeed, sometimes a good hard OTK spanking is the only language a disrespectful wife can understand. Mohammad was not wrong on many things.
Anonymous (February 04, 2009 8:10 PM) writes an impassioned message:
(1) "What about child support and how over 95% of the non-custodial parents are men?"
Answer: Judges and social workers carefully investigate circumstances regarding placement.
Often the male parent is too angry, too selfish, to have custody. He probably has other women, works long hours, travels. He may drink.
It is usually best for Mother to assume custodial care, as in most cases she is the calmer, more dedicated parent. Children naturally gravitate towards female caretakers anyhow.
Respect the judge's decision.
As for child support, if you father a child you must support them until the age of majority. Why would you want to dump your responsibility? That is immoral.
(2) "What about men that are ostracized from their child’s life and made to be nothing more than a paycheck?"
Answer: Again, there are usually good reasons for limiting a man's visitation rights. Often his emotions are so anger-driven (he refuses therapy) that placing a child in his care would be dangerous.
Is having your wages garnished for child support necessarily unfair?
No. Men get higher salaries and have good networking buddy systems. They will not starve if forced to support the innocent child they had fun fathering. It is only right.
(3) " What about men that have to pay child support to some whore that got knocked up by John Doe"
Answer: Nowadays that injustice rarely occurs because a man need only take a paternity test.
Note to anonymous:
How many times do you have to recite those old tired lies before they become true?
{hint: a lot more times than you got, toots.}
They just keep repeating the old tired lies over and over and over and over. None of it was worth a damn when their grandmother spewed the same tired hate, and it still isn't, but they are too stupid even to think up a new one.
Family courts are a business and anyone that has even a little bit of experience with the family court system will agree. Anyway, there you have it; another female that has been brainwashed that will not listen to reason. The feminists just refute everything because they are so scared that they may lose some of the progress (evil) that they have attained throughout the decades.
I will say this about the child support system in general though. The courts hide behind the cliché that "it’s in the best interest of the child" when in fact it’s all about their wallets. It is this very cliché that the courts hide behind while robbing the man of his paycheck. It really makes for a good cover because the uninformed general public thinks or is under the impression that the courts are doing something in the name of the child and allows for this corruption to spread within the family court circle undetected.
Anyone interested in understanding the core of child support corruption needs to Google “federal Incentive Dollars” under title IV-D of the social security act.
State corruption starts when the federal government matches a dollar (and sometimes as much as $3.90) for each arrears dollar collected by the child support enforcement agency.
Do a little investigative research and I am certain that you will see why the states are pushing child support so hard and why there are so many people labeled as “deadbeats” when in fact these people really aren’t deadbeats at all and why even when a person dies, the child support enforcement agencies continue to keep the dead person’s name in the child support computer.
The bottom line is that the higher the case load and the more arrears owed, the higher the incentive dollars that are paid out to states by the feds.
States push for any name at all to open a child support case. The feminists know this and use it to their advantage. The courts are fully aware that the women lie in court but yet are not chastised or punished for their actions.
The county of los angeles child support department was caught paying each county judge, in addition to their 100k+ salary, the sum of $46,000.00 per annum in "perks". There is no way that a non-custodial parent can get a fair shake in that court. The list of corruption goes on and on.
Paternity results are now listened to more and more by courts because of all the paternity fraud news being aired. However, there is a statute of limitations for obtaining a court ordered and sanctioned test. My advice is for any man, whether single or married, to have a paternity test done immediately after the child is born so that you can be 99.999% certain that the child is yours. What seems like a good marriage or civil union today will go south sooner or later and you will want to make certain that you have your ass covered with regard to paternity. Don’t fall prey to a woman’s feelings when she can’t believe that you are insisting on having this test done. You must do this to protect yourself, period, because when the divorce or breakup does occur, the same woman that you thought you knew so well will turn against you faster than you can say “child support”.
Note to anonymous:
Men's brains are about 25% larger than female brains, here
Brain size does matter, here here
Most authors conform to the PC dictates to couch their words by reciting some version of "but women are just as smart" while providing data that proves otherwise. Females are not "just as smart." Few females qualify for MENSA, for example. Intelligence is "bell curve" and the center for females' smaller brains is less intelligence than for men.
Bottom line. Men excel physically, mentally, and morally compared to females.
Bob, what is MENSA?
Note to anonymous:
MENSA is an organization of highly intelligent people (top 2% IQ). The function of MENSA is to promote stimulating intellectual and social opportunities for its members. See the MENSA web site
Bob, do you know anybody in MENSA? I don't know any members but do know bright men and women from work. They never mentioned MENSA activities.
Note to anonymous:
Bob has been a member of MENSA for quite some time. There are around 50,000 members in the US.
As for child support, if you father a child you must support them until the age of majority. Why would you want to dump your responsibility? That is immoral.
What about women who abandon their children at so-called "safe havens" such as hospitals,police and fire stations and get out of the responsibility of motherhood. Aren't these women abandoning their children as well? Yes they are. Wasn't it feminists who pushed this law through? Yes it was.
Answer: Again, there are usually good reasons for limiting a man's visitation rights. Often his emotions are so anger-driven (he refuses therapy) that placing a child in his care would be dangerous.
Women commit more child abuse than men do. A child is more likely to get hurt with its mother than father. Women lie in family court and get away with it. What about women who refuse counseling to save the marriage? Sounds like they are sick selfish bitches.
No. Men get higher salaries and have good networking buddy systems. They will not starve if forced to support the innocent child they had fun fathering. It is only right.
What "buddy networks"? Women have more support networks than men. The court orders are draconian and have been known to reduce men to homelessness.
Its doubtful Masc Man is homeless. Is probably well nourished and happy.
I am very surprised that the anonymous poster at (February 07, 2009 4:27 PM) didn't play up the “domestic violence” card in addition to "his emotions are so anger-driven".
The domestic violence card is usually the first one played. The feminists have been lying about and fabricating the domestic violence figures for decades.
Thank God, California recently recognized that women also batter their husbands / domestic partners and have passed a law where battered shelters need to take men in as well. It seems that the playing field is now leveling out a bit with regard to violence. It seems that the feminists will have to look for more lies and another stronghold.
I am just grateful for sites like this one that help to get the word out there. We, as men can learn a thing or two from the feminists. They got together, formulated a plan and started ranting which is what I now see the men’s movement doing and that makes me happy.
Anonymous February 11, 2009 5:16 PM,
That answers none of my points.
I am just grateful for sites like this one that help to get the word out there. We, as men can learn a thing or two from the feminists. They got together, formulated a plan and started ranting which is what I now see the men’s movement doing and that makes me happy.
We need everybody on board to make this work including you.
@Masculist Man
Worry about yourself dude, I'm already onboard.
I started a child support reform site two years ago and consider myself an expert on family law corruption and tactics used by fems against men with regard to child support / custody.
I put out a weekly mailing of over 620 readers.
I created and manage a site for another MRA that produces weekly men's rights television shows in the Los Angeles area.
I'm extreamly active with men's rights and do oodles more than most.
Anonymous February 15, 2009 5:40 AM,
Good. I run a blog and have written letters in promoting men's rights to politicians and journalists and have been an acivist the last 16 years.
What projects have you done?
To Masculist Man and others:
To shift to a positive side, what things could women do to stop making you angry and bring you a peaceful life?
Serious question. Don't just say "good F---sex, get me my beer". Really -- can anything be done by women and/or society to bring you the peace that so painfully eludes you? (as evidenced by these angry blog entries that never end)
To shift to a positive side, what things could women do to stop making you angry and bring you a peaceful life?
1. Restoration of our rights as men to be treated as human beings.
2. Turn misandric criminals over to us for trial i.e. Lorena Bobbitt and those of her ilk.
3. Persuing criminals charges of fraud against NOW,feminist majority and other feminist groups receiving govt. money,directly or indirectly.
4. Establishing govt. offices for men at health and legal matters such as those that exist for women.
5. If female-only universities are able to exist then male only ones should too.
6. Establish domestic violence shelters for men to get away from an abusive spouse.
7. Last but not least repealing all feminist laws against men.
These are just some that come to mind.
Masculist Man's List of Seven Demands are essentially legal/social in nature. No "gender" can meet such demands. Rather, they would be met by some legislative body charged with changing our laws.
Contact your local, state and national representatives, plus jurists and other powers that be.
Anonymous February 21, 2009 6:04 PM,
Your ducking the issue. Feminist caused damage to men and men's rights so don't dismiss it.
Masc-Man,
"Feminists" don't have the legal power to change laws. That is done through Congress.
Feminists don't have influence in Congress? Cowshit and no one here is buying it.
Masc Man, that is precisely why YOU must approach your leaders in Congress. Persuade them to reject Feminist lobbyists, and adopt your policies. Ultimately it is Congress that has power to change laws. Influence their decision -- and it starts by speaking with your Congressman and Senator.
Note to anonymous:
Elected representative ALWAYS represent the majority of voters -- females where female suffrage is allowed. Your suggestion for men to lobby Congress demonstrates a complete lack of comprehension of how a democracy works.
Not always. Just sitting back doing nothing but angry blogging, will get you nowhere. Are you scared to voice your opinions in person to your Senator, the way you do here?
Note to anonymous:
Your naiveté is showing again. Senators resound to money and majority. Half a century of experience has demonstrated that expressing opinions to Senators gets exactly nowhere. They listen only to those with big checking accounts and large groups of voters.
On the other side, published writing raises public awareness and creates potential majority or at least an active minority of voters. It aggregate, blogs have become a voice that elected representatives do listen to.
Masc Man, that is precisely why YOU must approach your leaders in Congress. Persuade them to reject Feminist lobbyists, and adopt your policies. Ultimately it is Congress that has power to change laws. Influence their decision -- and it starts by speaking with your Congressman and Senator.
I've done that. The last letter I wrote to my congressman and senators is still unanswered. I wrote them to protest VAWA and other matters of misandry.
Masculist Man,
Reprint your letter about VAWA here.
Call your representatives' offices, demand a response. It may be they are overloaded. You should still get an answer.
"Females are already overpaid when they make $.73 cents for every dollar that men make"
Actually, not even true at all. That's known as feminist propaganda - where if you repeat a lie enough times it becomes a factoid. Fact is, in the youngest generation, women actually get paid more now for the same jobs.
If women are less intelligent than men why do they score higher statistically in schools?
just so you know im a man and i spar with my girlfriend iv been training in martial arts for a few years now and iv seen my girlfriend fight people that are massive compared to her she may not be as physically strong as them but this doesn't make her inferior to them she has more agility and speed.
men are stronger why is that better i mean cheaters are not stronger than stags but they hunt them.
you know how YOU feel when your treated nice that's how you should make OTHERS feel others INCLUDING women... I realise some of the feminist sides are wrong and im not fighting for that im just fighting against how much you put women down as its completely wrong, treat others as you would like to be treated. what right do you have to be able to say who is better.
and don't quote the bible to me because i don't believe it so it wont have any meaning to me.
Post a Comment
<< Home