The World According To Bob

Bob Allen is a philosopher and cyber libertarian. He advocates for the basic human rights of men. Bob has learned to cut through the political nonsense, the propaganda hate, the surface discourse, and talk about the underlying metamessage that the front is hiding. Bob tells it like it is and lets the chips fall where they may. If you like what you read be sure to bookmark this blog and share it with your friends.

Location: United States

You can't make wrong into right by doing wrong more effectively. It's time for real MEN to stand up and take back our families, our society, and our self respect. It is not a crime to be born a man. It is not a crime to act manly.

Saturday, April 24, 2010

Arizona Plan

The US Sate of Arizona is situated along the southern border of the US, adjacent to Mexico. Much of the distance along the border is ranch country and deserts. Every day thousands of Mexican nationals cross the border illegally. Many of them bring plastic water bottles and food containers for the long walk to roads on the American/Arizona side of the border. Ranches and farms along the border are trashed with discarded water bottles. Livestock is shot, and ranchers are sometimes shot.

The US Congress passed a law during the Bush Administration authorizing and requiring a wall to be constructed, making it easier to control the border, but the new Obama/Fascist regime has canceled construction of the wall. A huge part of the border problem is drug smuggling. The drug smugglers create huge profits and pay off corrupt politicians, fund lieyers, and cause massive criminal activity in every US city. Control of our border is abaolutely necissary for America, but opposed by our corrupt politicans.

Faced with growing problems of public safety, Arizona passed a law directing their own state blue gun thugs to arrest and deport any foreign nationals found within their state. Law enforcement is also now supposed to stop and question anyone who appears to be a foreign national. Yahoo News Article Of course all the illegal aliens are screaming. American fascist politicians now rely on illegal alien votes to get elected, and even run for high public office.

President Barry Soetoro, born in Zanzibar and now a legal citizen of Indonesia said on Friday:
Earlier Friday, President Barack Obama called the Arizona bill "misguided" and instructed the Justice Department to examine it to see if it's legal. He also said the federal government must enact immigration reform at the national level — or leave the door open to "irresponsibility by others."

"That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona, which threaten to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and their communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe," Obama said.

On Yahoo news comments several people wondered if Obama would be arrested and deported if he shows up in Arizona. Tha would be the legal solution, but power corrupts.

All the anti-American traitor groups such as the ACLU and the Mexican Defense Fund are protesting the Arizona plan to enforce American law. And the Senate of Mexico adopted a resolution opposing the law.

The People of America are opposed by our corrupt illegal poltiicans and now massive invasive armies of foreign nationals. Its time to run the bastards out and reclaim our nation. Other states should adopt laws similar to Arozona. If our illegal alien President won't enforce our laws its up to state and local authorities.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most of the radical muslim convert's friends were male. Your thoughts?

""EXCLUSIVE: By all appearances, Zachary Adam Chesser was the boy next door. He played football and was on the crew team at one of the best high schools in the country. He even studied Japanese. He was hardly the sort of boy you'd expect would suggest on a radical Islamic website that the creators of the edgy cartoon series "South Park" will be targeted for death.

But Chesser also had a dark side. He was a "loner," a former classmate said, one who frequently drew pictures of Satanic figures in his notebooks and had just a few friends, most of them male.

"He was definitely sort of weird," the classmate told "He was very into violent industrial music, borderline Satanic bands and stuff like that. He had dark undertones in his interests."

Two years later, Chesser is literally a changed man. He now uses an alias and has a new set of hobbies. He now likes to be called Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, and his primary interest in this world appears to be Islamic radicalism.

Last week, Chesser, 20, posted a warning on the website following the 200th episode of "South Park," which included a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad disguised in a bear suit. The young man, who just two years ago was studying foreign languages at George Mason University, wrote on the site that Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the cartoon's creators, "will probably end up" like Theo van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker who was murdered in 2004 after making a film critical of Islamic society.

"It's not a threat, but it really is a likely outcome," Chesser told from his home in Centreville, Va. "They're going to be basically on a list in the back of the minds of a large number of Muslims. It's just the reality."...""

April 25, 2010 4:56 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
It is offensive and morally wrong for "news" corporations to attack and slander a young man because of his observations of human reality posted on Internet. Similar attacks could be made against Bob or a million other bloggers for observing and speculating about the human condition.

April 25, 2010 5:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most of his friends were male. Obviously he is not a nice guy. Nice guys have male AND woman friends (just friends). Scumbag males have only male friends and use women only as girlfriends and sex toys.

The males will, however, never ever get their world back. It's woman's time, and that time will not end in the life time of any male posting here. You males will all live and die in a woman's paradise.

April 26, 2010 7:30 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Females are not friends. Females are wombs for sex and breeding.

Bigoted females use the word "males" when they are talking about men. Such offensive females are not even useful for breeding.

April 26, 2010 8:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

April 26, 2010 10:36 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Bob would be happy with hotel staff that at least speaks English. Hotels and other corporations should pay high fines for employing illegal aliens.

April 26, 2010 11:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't it a hotel's private business if their people refuse to speak English? Or refuse to serve Black people? Too much govt. interference.

April 26, 2010 12:46 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous: Hotels should serve the needs of their customers. The government should mind its own F'ing business.

A long time ago in a land far, far away, there once were free men.

April 26, 2010 4:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Man arrested for decapitating his Mother:

He attended church after the alleged crime.

April 26, 2010 4:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Man arrested for decapitating his Mother:

He attended church after the alleged crime.

April 26, 2010 4:31 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Mothers do twice as much child abuse as men, and mothers abuse boys twice as much as they abuse girls. This violent cow has a big problem, her "little boy" grew up and wouldn't take it any more. Hooray for the boy who grew up and wouldn't take her abuse any more. Another violent cow gets what she richly deserved.

April 26, 2010 5:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What proof do you have, that the Mother abused her son?

Report those facts to the Jacksonville Sheriff immediately. The accused lawyer will be grateful. PLEASE -- do your duty to help the young man prove his innocence.

April 27, 2010 5:38 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Your pathetic sniveling misandry doesn't fly. Go pound sand.

April 27, 2010 7:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

""And that chastened silence before a privileged class is certainly the goal of Islamic supremacists in the United States. Besides threatening "South Park," they also compelled the Pentagon to withdraw an invitation to evangelist Franklin Graham to participate in its National Day of Prayer event on May 6. Graham's crime? Calling Islam "evil," a comment he explained in this way: "If you look at what the religion does just to women, women alone, it is just horrid. And so yes, I speak out for women."

The plight of women in the Islamic world is real. The Army should have given Franklin Graham's explanation of his remarks thoughtful consideration--just as they should have considered the implications of the fact that the chief group complaining about Graham's appearance at the event was the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas jihad terror funding case. ""

What do you think of that?
Your side cannot win.
Men cannot overcome women's liberty.
Not in your life time.
Not in 100 years.
So such wish is useless.

If I'm wrong, tell me how I am wrong.

April 27, 2010 2:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Author Profile Page lilredbird | April 26, 2010 3:16 PM | Reply

Seconding what Fanusi (and Bosch) said, from the other loudmouth atheist around here.

I_M_F, exactly how does the "women's movement" equate with being an atheist? Want to hear my opinion of Good Christian Men who think their wives should be subservient? It's essentially the same as my opinion of piggy little Muslim dickheads who think the same.

SIOA Columbia SC, I am SIOA here in Massachusetts and have been atheist for nearly 50 years. Now, who was that "cowardly hearts" remark supposed to refer to exactly?

When Spencer says he includes all of us who are opposed to Islam I believe him. Some of the rest of you, I'm not so sure."

You cannot defeat these people.
They /ARE/ your culture.
The entire world supports women's rights to one degree or another.
No country supports men's rights or supremacy.
You have lost.
You lost from the begining of time.

April 27, 2010 2:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Arizona law will be difficult to enforce. Arizona citizens are 30% Hispanic and 10% American Indian, one of the highest percentages of states except Alaska. That makes 40% of the populace likely to "look" like illegals. Racial profiling has already been declared unconstitutional and this law will likely be overturned on these grounds.

What is interesting is that no politicians are telling the truth about why illegal aliens from Mexico are tolerated. It isn't because they fill difficult jobs, but because without their remittances to Mexico the Mexican economy would crater immediately. The stipends the illegals send home is Mexico's second-larges source of income, right behind the oil industry that is controlled by five families. Without the illegals, Mexico swiftly collapses and the border becomes a most enticing destination for a county in chaos. It isn't in US interests to have a failed country on its border, so don't look for any sweeping changes that would remove illegal aliens. It simply isn't realistic.

Where's anon age 68 on this?

And yes, caving to Muslim outrage is not a good thing to do. Let them grow thicker skins, like the rest of the world. And force them to treat women like human beings as well. It will annoy the hell out of them.

April 27, 2010 3:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Searching for documentation that "twice as much child abuse as men". Haven't found the source.

April 27, 2010 5:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Where's anon age 68 on this?

Um, as I usually am, I am right here in Mexico, heh, heh.

To set the record straight, every chance I get I tell these young men, "Don't go to the US. They hate you." They laugh and when there is no work here, they go anyway. A few weeks ago, a young man said he was beat up when he was in the States.

I do sincerely wish they would stop going. My wishes seem to have little effect on anyone.

We have made a decision in the US. In any case, the US is soon enough not going to be European ancestry. Our whores want to have sex all the time, but prefer to kill the babies they make. Our native birth rate is alleged to be 1.6 per woman, with immigrants, legal or illegal, I'm not sure, picking it up to a total of around 2.1 per woman, just enough to keep things going.

I am saying a lot of our babies are not going to speak English from infancy.

In all the discussion of illegals, no one seems to think much of the future of the nation, only what pisses them off.

We had a choice, may still have a choice for all I know, as to whether we will be a Hispanic nation, or a Muslim nation. But, I think the die is cast. Since we are rejecting the Mexican immigrants, we WILL be Muslim down the road.

Muslims allegedly have around 8 babies per woman, which is why Europe is under Sharia law today.

Don't get me wrong. This decision has been made by the people of the US, so I must accept it. That's how it works in the US. We state our opinions, then we vote, and too bad if you side loses.

So, Muslim it is. I am glad I am old. I can live with the Mexicans obviously, because I am. But, I am glad I am old so I never see Sharia law.

Anonymous age 68

April 27, 2010 6:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>No country supports men's rights or supremacy.
You have lost.
You lost from the begining of time.

Stop making things up. Thousands of years ago, they had women's rights, just before the civilization collapsed.

In the final days of the Roman Empire, they had women's rights, which is why it was the final days.

Thanks to selfish, narcissistic princesses, the civilizations which gave women their rights, collapsed, and hundreds of years passed with no rights for women. Then, the Anglosphere gave women rights again.

Soon enough, within the lifetime of our busy whores, it will be gone again. For a very long time.

I assume this is the Canadian man-hater blowing smoke again, with her fantasies. Dream on.

Anonymous age 68

April 27, 2010 6:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

She is also wrong about no nation having right for men. All of Mexico and Central America are male friendly, men take care of men, and women get kicked to the curb when a man tires of her. There are feminist laws on the books, they are seldom enforced by the male judges. I could write a book on this. People who get their information from the feminist dominated press have no idea what it is like down here, and I like it like that.

Anonymous age 68

April 27, 2010 6:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Searching for documentation that "twice as much child abuse as men". Haven't found the source.

We find what we want to find, don't we?

Actually, since the 80's, the figures I have seen, even from the feminists, is that women do 56% of all child abuse, including murder. That isn't twice, but it is a lot considering the claims that women are non-violent.

And, of that 44% men do, most of that is men other than the biological father, most of it with single moms. Most abuse is not done in the two parent family.

Anonymous age 68

April 27, 2010 6:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, I posted this on, they deleted it all, including a post I posted on the "Fight club" no-moderation area. Should I gain access to the-spearhead database and wipe it? Why do they keep deleting what I post, calling me a feminist troll, and banning me? Why shouldn't I do the same to them by gaining access to their server and deleting everything of theirs on it? Please tell me why I should not do that.


Females should be enslaved into marraige to a man once they are able to have children.
12, 13, 14 year old young women should be wives and should be having relations with their husband. This is what has been done throughout nearly all of HIStory. Men like to have young dainty pretty seemingly-innocent females as obedient domestic servants.

Since Western/American/Women's culture, the culture that Welmer and the rest of you live in and support, have rejected enslaving young females (of young but fertile age) you only have whores. Females do not wait forever; their job is to have sex with men and to get pregnant. They do their job.

You still support the jailing (and even murder) of men who act on their near-universal wish for a young pretty fertile girl as a wife or equivelant.

You are white knights. You have forced your beliefs on the world and now it is the law in almost every accessable area of the globe (any civilized area).

Fuck YOU.
I hope you burn.

In a Man's Society:
*Females are pressed into domestic slavery to a man immediatly once they are able to have children (marraige at menarche: 12, 13, 14)
*Females are raped by their husband whenever he wishes to have relations with them.
*Not-yet-married young females who are raped by a man are married off to that man. The father is payed off. (As seen in the Old Testament (Dt. 22)

No, just because someone is more pro-men's liberty and more anti-women's rights than you does not make them a "feminist troll". Ofcourse you continue to assert such things because you really are not for what is most to the benefit of Men. Your are opposed to a society where Men, all Men, reign supreme over girls and women. You oppose "Male Supremacy", as thordude puts it.

Men do not exist to protect women. Men are the default organism (has strength, capability, properties required for independent survival). Females exist to procreate with men and to domestically serve men, or atleast that is the role for women and girls which is in the best interests of Men.

Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.

>Gx1080 April 27, 2010 at 21:50
> Wow, look who's got a Proxy IP. Trollville is calling, don't let the door hit you >on the ass!

I have not said anything wrong. I support men\u2019s liberty and oppose women's rights. I agree with thordude in that Men should strive for and achive Supremacy over women/girls in all realms including the legal realm.



"Lawyers are truly slime that oozes across the Earth."
No, you are wrong. Lawyers are merely technicians of the law.
It is people who believe and support women's rights and women's liberties that are the slime that oozes across the earth. It is people who are opposed to the enslavement of young women (12, 13, 14 years old) into marraiges where a man dominates them and their entire life that are the scum that makes the dreams and wishes of all men fail and die (even their own dreams).

You and good men like you are the slime that oozes across the Earth and there are not enough bad evil men to clean you and your equal or pro-women's rights global society up.

Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberty.

April 27, 2010 7:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

" And force them to treat women like human beings as well. It will annoy the hell out of them."

Fuck you.
Men like good sweet obedient girls.
Treating them like "human beings" doesn't produce that.

April 27, 2010 7:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Feminist law VS Muslim Law.
Both Suck for men.

April 27, 2010 7:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 68: in those countries if a man rapes an unmarried young female the biblical proscription that the man marry that female is not followed (this is also a proscription in other cultures aswell: rural turkey, the caucuses, ethiopia, etc). Instead the rapist is jailed or killed. Females choose their husband, men don't choose their mates. Also in the past the USA had unenforced pro-women laws too, but eventually it enforced them. Having the laws are the first step.

Also will the world ever be out from under the tyranny of US involvment in culture and society.

Also I like white girls. Can't get good ones anywhere.

Also I want to marry a young one, (example 14 yr old virgin maybe).

April 27, 2010 8:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


April 28, 2010 4:53 AM  
Anonymous djc said...

Come on. Where's the love folks? Oh wait, there isn't any these days.

The West will come crashing down, and it will be women who are hurt the most. Men always find a way to survive. Be careful what you wish for ladies.

April 28, 2010 8:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Angry man stabs kindergarten children in their classroom:

April 29, 2010 7:21 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:

The more thumbscrews are used to oppress and destroy men, the more men are going to fight back against the misandrist system. Maybe its time to end the feminazi war on men and families.

"A social environment lacking fairness and justice, in which those who abide by the rules gain nothing, while those who do not can profit, could bring about resistance by the weak against the entire society," Yu was quoted as saying by the Southern Weekly newspaper a few weeks after the attack.

April 29, 2010 7:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Slashing children is a great way to prove your manhood and punish your oppressive society.

April 29, 2010 7:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is anyone old enough to remember when music came on round pieces of plastic, and they had a little needle that rested on the grooves, thus reproducing the music?

And, any defect would cause the same thing to be repeated over and over: "Me and my hound dog.....Me and my hound dog...Me and my hound dog...Me and my hound dog..." Until someone came along and bumped it.

Y'all are going: "I want to rape a virgin wife...I want to rape a virgin wife...I want to rape a virgin wife...I want to rape a virgin wife...."

So, talk is cheap. Go rape a virgin wife. Sure, any place in the world which has that custom today also kills foreigners on sight. If somehow you survive that one, they kill you when you so much as fail to avert your eyes in the presence of one of those virgins you seek.

And, always there was a dad and uncles, ready to kill the man who does try to rape the virgin. Do you imagine the father says, "Shhh! She is asleep, here let me open the door for you. Grab her while she is still groggy. If she fights, I'll help hold her down while you rape her." Hohohohahaha.

But, what the heck! You are a real man, unlike all the rest of us wimps. Go for it. You will at least die like a man. Right? Show us wimpy fools how a real man dies.

A man who chooses not to have a woman in his life in the Anglosphere is in my opinion, a smart man, and no one should shame him for that decision.

In your case, though, you are calling everyone else all kinds of nasty names. You mock me as a fool for advocating Mexico as a male-friendly nation. "No, it's not; you can't rape a virgin wife in Mexico. It's no better than anyone else."

Since you mock everyone else as a fool, and accuse them of being wimps who should burn in Hell, the rules change. If we are all fools who should burn in Hell, tell us how wonderful your life is, with your belief system, as compared to our not-sexless lives where we are.

Also, just how many virgins have you raped in your life-time?

No, let us keep it simple. When was the last time in this wonderful world you have found (somewhere deep down in your own mind) when you actually had sex. With a woman, I mean. Um, a live woman, I mean.

We need to know, because if you get to rape a virgin every day, we need to move to your paradise.

I for one am not holding my breathe.

Anonymous age 68

April 29, 2010 7:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>The more thumbscrews are used to oppress and destroy men, the more men are going to fight back against the misandrist system. Maybe its time to end the feminazi war on men and families.

There are many ways to fight back. In recent years, the marriage strike seems to have done more damage then activism or violence.

And, the current increase in expatting by men to places like Thailand; PI; and Mexico/Central America seems to be having its toll on the whores.

Anonymous age 68

April 29, 2010 11:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mexico is happily turning itself into a feminist hell hole aswell, and an improvrished pro-women's rights hell hole at that.

Yes, the fact that men do NOT want their daughters married off IS and ALWAYS has been a problem for men. They only want their daughters married to the richest man in town: they want their daughter to have everything. Fathers live for their daughters.

A technical solution could be to create a brave new world with reproductive factories that produce girls. Without protective fathers to help them, finally the rest of the worlds men could have the wives they want, rather than the few richer men (like you Anon 68, the rich american ... who could only snag a single mother none-the-less).

Why jump from a submarine, allready underwater, onto a sinking ship?

Oh, and if you had/have a european-decendant daugher or grand daughter who is young but of age (12, 13, 14) and a virgin: I pray some bad man abducts her, rapes her, and forces her to be his wife and that she is obedient to him and is never given the opportunity to commit adultery against that bad man who raped her into marraige (Dt Ch 22). And if she does commit adultery against that bad man I hope stones are thrown at her untill she dies (various places in the Bible where adulterous women are stoned).

I hope your daughter or granddaughter is enslaved. I hope that if you then go and find the bad man who took your virgin, unmarried, female offspring as his wife...and you try to punish or kill him... that he kills you and all men and women who support women's rights and women's choice so that we are only left with _EVIL_ men who _OPPOSE_ women's rights and women's choice.

April 29, 2010 12:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Age 68, the guy who keeps on about raping virgin wives comes across as either a really frustrated adolescent or mentally disturbed. What I'm more interested in is why you think that men's rights and women's rights are mutually incompatible. I've been married for 17 years, 4 kids 2 of whom are girls, and never had a problem with the concept of women as people. And no, I'm not a Canadian feminist. I was born and raised in New Mexico, my wife is from Texas, and we live outside of Taos. Things are fine here, economy notwithstanding. Why is women-friendly equal to man-unfriendly?

April 29, 2010 3:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The men at menarebetterthanwomen are ... discussing you.

What do you think of their discussion.

April 29, 2010 4:55 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Bob has not read MABTW for months. There seems to be some conflict between my computer and their "security" system. It began while Bob was having trouble with HughesNet (see HughesNet Sucks) and used a laptop from a different location to access my log-in at MABTW. I haven't been able to log in again.

My opinion of their web site tech person isn't very high right now.

April 29, 2010 7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob: you were probably banned from MABTW

Zarsoz "Aside from the fact he advocated legalising the rape of any female over the age of 9 who happens to be wandering about unprotected by the men which own her, yeah.. sure.. great guy... Rolling Eyes"

Thundernuts "sounds a bit like MikeeUSA."

Zardoz [Image of peas in a pod]

Sandman (in agreement) "Word. Both were nuts."

Seraph "Who cares which is crazier? bob was a grits eating cousin fucker who made right wing extremists blush. His only defense was calling everyone who disagreed with him a feminist supporter because they weren't into children like he was.

I understand if my post gets edited or deleted in advance but those are my feelings about the guy."

Zardoz "Edited or deleted??
How about quoted for mother fucking truth."

Sandman "Word

Bob was fucking embarassing. So was Reality. No matter how much good things one says he can always fuck it up.

How about quoted for mother fucking truth."

sweetdeviant had good things to say about you, as did Chauvinist Hero and Burnov.

April 29, 2010 8:38 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Bob is not surprised at young "zardoz" or "sandy." They are a pair of youthful feminist infiltrators who's mission is to attack any men who actually object to feminist agendas or recognize that feminism is an actual war against men. "Sandy" also believes all the "conspiracy" theories and didn't like Bob handing him his hat whenever he posted that kind of nonsense. Both of them grew up without fathers and have no clue how to relate to men. Its typical of those two to post lies and nonsense such as you quote.

Those insults are typical of a century of feminist lies, insults, and shaming language typically used to silence manly opposition. Unfortunately it sill works for manginas who pander to their attacks on men.

The others at MABTW are more sane, and generally support men's issues.

It is a shame that many operators of "Men's Rights" web sites demand milquetoast masculinism and allow closet feminists to be moderators. I expected better from Dick. He apparently has turned over moderation of MABTW forum to some closet feminist lackey.

It isn't the first time that feminists have used various strategies to attack Bob. They hate having the voice of a real man that they can't silence.

April 30, 2010 7:08 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to the anonymous feminist:
Comments consisting of links to anti-men hate propaganda pieces are not allowed. Please review Bob's rules for comments.

April 30, 2010 11:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We had a prime minister here in Canada 40 years that was very much like your President Obama. His name was Pierre Trudeau. He passed a law in this country which would not allow make any culture to be dominant. PM Trudeau also allowed more immigration to Canada than it could handle just for votes. It looks like President Obama wants to take the United States down the same path. Unless he is stopped, the United States won't be much different by 2050 from what Canada is now.

April 30, 2010 11:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, some new opinions from menarebetterthanwomen posters and admins:
(use if you cand directly connect)

Site Admin

Joined: 09 Dec 2007
Posts: 3460
Location: Australia

PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2010 5:58 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Seraph "Who cares which is crazier? bob was a grits eating cousin fucker who made right wing extremists blush. His only defense was calling everyone who disagreed with him a feminist supporter because they weren't into children like he was.

Bob is not surprised at young "zardoz" or "sandy." They are a pair of youthful feminist infiltrators who's mission is to attack any men who actually object to feminist agendas

Seraph must be some manner of prophet or something. Laughing

I don't mind being called "youthful" however, considering I'm possibly older than he is. Be that as it may, I would still curb-stomp the fucker if he so much as even looked sideways at one of my nieces.


The Great

Joined: 09 Nov 2008
Posts: 4644

PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2010 6:52 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
As a third party observation, I would say that it seems that men seem to get hung up on extreme youthfulness in women when it's patently obvious that most women grow up corrputed and useless as wives and mothers.

Given my recent personal experiences, there are women in their 20s who are worthwhile, but I will admit that they are extremely few and far between.

As a woman gets older it's necessary for her to retain those qualities young women SHOULD be taught to cultivate in their youth, this is not happening and thus most men are writing off women at an earlier and earlier age.


Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Posts: 113

PostPosted: Fri Apr 30, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Those guys really do all of the work for me when it comes to making them look like asses. There comes a time where you have to step back from what you say and ask yourself in a collected manner "did I really just say something that fucking stupid" that goes double if you are a crazy wanker whose dream is to enslave all women and become a kiddie fiddler while trying to justify it as normal behavior.

Also bob needs to stop talking about bob in third person, it doesn't make you look smarter it actually has the reverse effect of making you look like more of a crazy ass pirating geriatric than you already are.

These guys are the reason that feminists even exist, these were the guys that chained their women to the stove and beat them with sticks all day for amusement.

The silver lining here is that I think most sane men can see these jokers for what they really are. Nothing more than animals who delight in the thought of torturing an entire gender just based on the fact that they are different.

Now I'm no feminist supporter, but I also don't support men taking it to the opposite extreme and encouraging woman hate either. Always remember folks it takes a man and a woman to make a traditional home work, not just a man or just a woman but both working in concert with each other.

For every young tramp in her 20's I can find you an equally worthless joe blow man who will never amount to shit either, it isn't a gender issue people it's a cultural issue we are dealing with.

That is all.

April 30, 2010 9:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How Many fucking times does BOB have to qoute this?

Bob said...
Note to the anonymous feminist:
Comments consisting of links to anti-men hate propaganda pieces are not allowed. Please review Bob's rules for comments.





May 01, 2010 3:03 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Its become obvious that the MABTW forum has become nothing but a sidebar of history without course or direction. Its been abandoned by its creator and left to a few mindless dweebs who are continually being played for fools by a few females. Their foul language and immature "high school" banter are close to what the Brits would call "Ladism."

For a while Bob hoped that he could provide some adult guidance for the "lads," a generation of men raised by women. It was a waste of time.

As a "MEN's" site, MABTW is a failure.

May 01, 2010 7:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Age 68, the guy who keeps on about raping virgin wives comes across as either a really frustrated adolescent or mentally disturbed. What I'm more interested in is why you think that men's rights and women's rights are mutually incompatible. I've been married for 17 years, 4 kids 2 of whom are girls, and never had a problem with the concept of women as people. And no, I'm not a Canadian feminist. I was born and raised in New Mexico, my wife is from Texas, and we live outside of Taos. Things are fine here, economy notwithstanding. Why is women-friendly equal to man-unfriendly?
April 29, 2010 3:47 PM

I think men's and women's rights are not compatible because they are not compatible.

When women get political power, they do not stop until they destroy all motivation for men, which destroys the civilization they are in.

To say it more simply so even a Canadian or New Mexican feminist can understand, which is not easy, they are not compatible because women in power demand they not be compatible. Women today with the support of knuckleheads like yourself demand all the traditional protections women have received, which you morons imagine was suppression and subjugation, while also receiving all the privileges which were given to men so they could fulfill their obligation to support their families, YET NONE OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES MEN HAVE.

Yet, of course, for women everything is about choice. They can choose to work if they wish, and if they do, they receive every protection and opportunity, but no responsibility at all. Name one law passed by feminists such as yourself which gives women mandatory responsibility, enforced by law. You cannot do so.

Women, in 2010, still don't even have to register for Selective Service. Your sons did, or they could be jailed.

The Anglosphere has always been female friendly. It has also been male un-friendly. Part of our most traditional culture: Sugar and spice and everything nice, vs. frogs and snails and puppy-dogs' tails. Sugar and spice kills over a million helpless unborn babies a year.

You had two daughters and two sons. I need not even ask if at times the girls committed acts of violence against the boys. Daughters of a male feminist are always going to be messed up.

So, did you permit the boys to hit back? Don't even try to lie, we know better. If one of those boys dared hit back when he got hit, he'd be lucky to be alive ten seconds later.

To be a feminist, a man or woman has to be basically stupid and/or mentally ill, which is very specifically defined as unable to grasp reality.

I know you male feminists. You believe if a man gets tossed out of his own house by an adulterous wife, he was a loser who deserved it. You know this is true because it has not personally happened to you. Yet.

The tens of thousands of men every year who face false sex abuse charges do so because they are probably guilty, if not, they were losers who did not know who to get along with women. You know this is true because it has not personally happened to you. Yet.

When a man in a movie gets kicked in the nuts, which would be a major prison sentence for any man who did the same thing to a woman, all you psychotic, stupid feminists laugh and laugh.

When your daughters got good jobs, and your sons didn't, you told your sons they just didn't try hard enough. You are so psychotic you have no idea there is open discrimination against men in the work place.

I could write ten thousand, nay, a million words about all the evil things done to men by feminists such as yourself. But, it is pretty much a waste of time to even talk to stupid and mentally ill people.

Go pound sand, and tell your feminist wife (what sort of pathetic woman would marry a psychotic, stupid male feminist?) and your two feminist daughters to go pound sand, too. My sympathy to your sons, who obviously aren't worth their salt.

Anonymous age 68

May 01, 2010 11:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Mexico is happily turning itself into a feminist hell hole aswell, and an improvrished pro-women's rights hell hole at that.

You are either a damned liar or a fool. One questions if you have ever actually been in Mexico. In any case, you have no idea what life is like there for men and women. I assume you have been reading Feminazi propaganda generated by writers for the New York Times, intended to convince stupid, gullible, wimpy men there is nothing to be gained by expatting. er. escaping from Hell.

No matter how many feminist laws are passed in a country, they have no effect as long as women need a husband to support her and her children. In nations without LBJ's Great Society granting blank checks to sluts and whores who can't get and keep a husband, women simply don't press their 'rights'.

My best friend tells me she knows of women who file charges of DV against their husbands, and the cops drag him off to jail, as the feminist law allows. She admits the usual reason for male instituted DV against a woman is she shoots off her nasty, ugly mouth, sort of like AW do every day.

About three days later, her kids say, "Mommy, I am hungry. What are we going to eat?"

She suddenly realizes what she has done, and runs down to the jail, begging them to let her husband out so he can work and buy food for the kids. Then, she runs frantically home and hides under the bed because she knows well what will be his first task after he gets out of jail.

And, I assure you when he finishes his first task, she bleeds silently; she does not run back to the cops to have him arrested again. And, when he comes home from work, the food is on the table and her big mouth is shut.

The next time she sees the feminist fool who advised her to have him arrested, she is probably not real nice about it.

Ignorance is never a virtue. The reason you guys say such stupid things is caused by ignorance. You assume the problems come from the laws, which is nonsense. It is an entire nation structured for female supremacy from birth which causes the problems. In male friendly nations, unwed mother sluts don't get paid to make babies without fathers, nor to break up marriages.

And, before you type in more drivel suggesting that any day now Mexico will have whore welfare, there simply is no money left over.

Anonymous age 68

May 01, 2010 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>For a while Bob hoped that he could provide some adult guidance for the "lads," a generation of men raised by women. It was a waste of time.

it is no secret that Bob and I do not agree on everything. But, this statement proves Bob learned much faster than I did. I spent ten years of my life and ten thousand hours at various tasks attempting to convince men to stand up for their basic human; legal; civil; and constitutional rights.

Like Dr. Manning (a black minister who says blacks are responsible for their own status, not Whitey) said about blacks, I have learned that men in the Anglosphere are slaves because that is what they are suited to be.

Any effort to teach them to be free men results in them fighting those who attempt to liberate them. Like the ignorant clown who said Mexico is becoming a feminist hell hole.

Anonymous age 68

May 01, 2010 11:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, we are losing, everyone is against us, and we are powerless. Why do you never give a solution?

France to imprison _men_ who make women wear veil:

Draft version of French burqa ban calls for fines, jail for forcing a woman to cover

"No-one may wear in public places clothes that are aimed at hiding the face." An update on this story. "French anti-burqa law to jail offenders," from Indian Express, April 30 (thanks to Ed):

France will jail and impose huge fines on anyone who forces a Muslim woman to wear a full-face veil, according to a leaked version of a proposed law revealed on Friday.

While women will face only a 150 euro penalty if they choose to don a burqa or a niqab, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to slap one-year prison terms and USD 20,000 fines on those who make others wear them.

"No-one may wear in public places clothes that are aimed at hiding the face," says the text of a new law that is to be presented to parliament in July, according to a copy seen by the pro-government newspaper Le Figaro.

The law will create a new offence of "incitement to cover the face for reasons of gender," the paper said, and this offence will incur a 15,000 euro fine and a year in prison.

Legislators decided to impose a much smaller fine on women caught wearing the veil in public "because these women are often victims," one of the authors of the law told Le Figaro on condition of anonymity.

Posted by Marisol on April 30, 2010 7:33 PM | 23 Comments
Print this entry | Email this entry | Digg this | |

Start giving us solutions.

May 01, 2010 12:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Author Profile Page gravenimage | May 1, 2010 11:39 AM | Reply

While women will face only a 150 euro penalty if they choose to don a burqa or a niqab, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to slap one-year prison terms and USD 20,000 fines on those who make others wear them.

Excellent—this puts the emphasis *just where it belongs*. I had rather given up on looking to Sarkozy for any sort of move against Islamization in France, but I heartily applaud his actions here.

Now we'll see if the ban in Belgium passes. Hearing this kind of good news out of Europe—at long last—is like a cool drink of water.

And I agree with Awake and Isabella—Marisol, your indefatigable efforts are always much appreciated!

Just where it belongs == on men.

These our our country men and women.
They hate men who are not obedient to women. They hate those muslim men, they also hate dominant men at home.

They hate us.
They took away our brides.
They made enjoyable life _impossible_.
Bob, what is the solution.
You never answer.

Good men are our enemies.

May 01, 2010 12:49 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Bob does not advocate insurrection, sedition, murder, violence, assault, or any other criminal or illegal acts.

May 01, 2010 1:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

22:56 France will jail and impose huge fines on anyone who forces a Muslim woman to wear a full-face veil, according to a leaked version of a
proposed law revealed on Friday.
22:56 While women will face only a 150 euro penalty if they choose to don a burqa or a niqab, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to slap one-year
prison terms and USD 20,000 fines on those who make others wear them.
22:56 punish the man
22:56 I hope the muslims riot
22:56 and kill feminists
22:56 and their supporters
22:56 I want that war
22:56 the one you don't want
22:56 there are good men, who support women's rights and rule the world
22:57 and there are bad men, who want to opress girls, marry them off young, keep them as servants etc, gain happiness from them
22:57 who used to rule the world but no longer do
22:57 the good men need to die
22:57 they need to be deposed
22:57 they support women being the queen
22:58 and imprison and kill bad men who take young wives etc
22:58 right now they're trying to put through a domestic violence law in afganistan
22:58 so women will run the show at home
22:58 rather than the men
22:58 I hope good men and feminist women are killed.
22:58 but it doesn't look like anyone has the will to stope them
22:59 good men also take over all men's forums too
22:59 and eventually ban all the bad men
22:59 (hapens in every men's forum eventually)
22:59 so there's nowhere to even talk

May 01, 2010 1:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My best friend tells me she knows of women who file charges of DV against their husbands, and the cops drag him off to jail, as the feminist law allows. She admits the usual reason for male instituted DV against a woman is she shoots off her nasty, ugly mouth, sort of like AW do every day."

Notice how the man was dragged away when the boss, the women, the controlers of society (which is why rape of virgin girls is a crime, rather than the making of a bride) decided he should be... in mexico. Notice how the police, the government, the good men: the friends of women, obeyed her.

Have you murdered those police yet? Could you complain to the local drug gang and have said police all murdered?

I would have killed her and her friend, and every single woman who believed as they do, as my first act, then the police.

Please have them killed.
I beg you.
I want to see that on the news.

May 01, 2010 1:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Bob does not advocate insurrection, sedition, murder, violence, assault, or any other criminal or illegal acts."

Why not?
Insurrection, Murder, Violence, is the only way for bad men, men who hate women's rights, to win.

Good men, men who love women's rights, use violence, imprisonment, and murder against bad men (men who hate women's rights). Words alone will not end their millenia long war against bad men.

Women have always been protected by good men. Just... in the past... women didn't have phones to call them any time they needed them... some bad men were able to take young females as wives, opress them, put them into bondage etc, gain happiness from them.

We can't get away with that anymore.
Words will not free us from good men.
From women's rights.

Why don't you advocate Murder, Violence, and Insurrection against the societies that are NOT our?

The field we till is not our own.
We must make it ours, but how?

Tell us Bob.
Will it take Murder.
Some lesser or greater forms of Violence.
Insurrection against the governments which are run by good men to the detriment of bad men and to the benifit of all women?

May 01, 2010 2:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is Bob's Blog, and he can do whatever he wants. So, if he wants to describe a problem and not supply a solution to men who won't do anything at all in their own defense, no matter how bad it gets, that is his right.

It's kinda' like, if you know there is a problem, and can't find your own solution, it is a waste of time to suggest one for you, because it is certain you won't to it anyway.

I have proposed solutions. But, they are solutions that deal with the world the way it is, not the way you wish it was. Nor the world the way the feminists want you to think it is. The way it is.

If that isn't good enough for you, that is not my fault and it's not Bob's fault. It's your fault.

And, if the only reason you stay in Hell, is because Mexico or PI or Thailand don't let you rape a virgin wife, you are insane. May you die as painfully and as fast as is possible.

There are two main reasons more men don't Get The Hell Out. First, most men were raised by their mommies and are totally lacking in spine. They lack courage to even consider leaving the Holy Land that is the USA.

Second the very few that have courage are unable to visualize what it is like to live elsewhere. So, it seems like too big a task, and they don't even think seriously about it.

On message boards where I participate, I write about life here in Mexico, as it is, daily events, and people I know. That helps people visualize what it might be like to live in another foreign country, the first step to expatting.

On one main message board, where I did that for several years, the admin sent me an e-mail not long ago, telling me that not only is he living happily in another nation, but also every moderator is also gone. They read; they thought; they left.

Anonymous age 68

May 01, 2010 3:07 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
You may be right about what it takes to win, however, advocating what it will take to win against the femiNazi will get a man sent to Auschwitz, Dachau, Leavenworth, or a similar hellhole concentration camps. The US Constitutional protection of speech and the press was abrogated by the corrupt government many decades ago. Criminal government agents (FBI) seek constantly to provoke illegally prohibited speech and then destroy good men. For an example of men recently sent to hell by criminal government spies who provoked discussion of possible action to assemble and petition the government, Google "Hutaree." Therefore Bob does not advocate insurrection, sedition, murder, violence, assault, or any other criminal or illegal acts.

May 01, 2010 3:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Malawi: Muslims angered by move to ban polygamy

Particularly noteworthy in this story is the claim that banning polygamy will force women into prostitution because they can't find husbands. There are no other options for women to be considered, apparently. "Malawi move to ban polygamy angers Muslims," from BBC News, April 30:

Muslims in Malawi have been angered by government plans to ban polygamy.

A spokesman for the Muslim Association of Malawi told the BBC the proposed law would discriminate against the country's Muslim minority.

He said with about 6% more women than men in Malawi, if polygamy were banned, many women would be left without a husband and become prostitutes.

The gender minister said the ban was necessary to prevent women from being abused in polygamous relationships.

She said problems occurred because men could not give their full attention to more than one woman.

"When a man has two, three, four wives, they are not co-operative - one will be the loved one," said Gender Minister Patricia Kaliati.

It had not been a hasty decision and there had been wide consultation about the matter, she said."

Cloning factories + polygamy + young marraige of females + opression of females + execution of pro-women's rights activists/officials/etc == paradise for men.

Make it happen.

Should the ban come into affect [sic], those already in polygamous marriages would not be affected, but those who flout it could face imprisonment, the minister said.

May 01, 2010 3:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the last day or two I read the Federal judge in that supposedly militant case told the government he wanted to see evidence they did anything more than talk. What a revolting development! A judge who says freedom of speech is freedom of speech. I suppose they are busy inventing evidence as we speak, because that is what governments have always done.

Anonymous age 68

May 02, 2010 7:58 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
A canadian blogger who had a link to The World According to Bob on his blog is still in prison for writing a blog that the Canadian FemiNazi government didn't like. For more details read, Canadian Gestapo Destroys Mens Blogger

May 02, 2010 8:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We can't win, can we?
We will never have good obedient young wives. The USA/Anglosphere/West's expantion of women's rights over the world will never be reversed in our lifetimes, and no one would dare suggest the only solution (violent overthrow of those who support women's rights, civil war between men who support women's rights and those who don't (it's a one sided war right now)). And no one could ever enact it.

We are powerless and always have been. Society has always been in the hands of women and their allies (otherwise there wouldn't be the rape laws there are now: there would be no statutory rape laws and virgin female who were raped would simply be given over to the man who had relations with them). Is the only option, for women to not continue to reign, the end of society?

May 02, 2010 9:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, thoughts on this article?

May 02, 2010 12:13 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous: (May 02, 2010 12:13 PM)

From that article, the delusional author wrote, "I know, not all feminists are like this."

Not much point in reading the rest of what a delusional feminist sympathizer has to say. But if you read down, he continues to support feminist agendas in the comments. The Men's Movement will get nowhere as long as feminist sympathizers are in charge.

May 02, 2010 3:19 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous: (May 02, 2010 12:13 PM)

P.S. The biggest problem with the "Manhood Academy" is that their web page is poorly laid out, confusing, difficult to navigate, and practically impossible to read.

May 02, 2010 3:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the guy who keeps obsessing over raping virgins: get over it. If you stay in the US you will never have what you want. No first-world country will let you rape women into marriage. If you don't want to give up the comforts of first-world countries then STFU. Bob can't wave a magic wand and fix things for you. If you have your heart set on a white virgin 12-year-old then keep an eye on the Balkans and wait for another war. Otherwise, pack up and move to an impoverished country where you have something to offer a girl's family to convince them to give you their daughter. In poor countries that wouldn't take much. If you're not willing to do that then quit sobbing "I want to rape virgins" over and over. The US will never be what you want. Never. Get over it.

Stop crying for Bob or anyone else to suggest a "solution" for you. There isn't one in the US or most of Europe. Move. Go south, go overseas, go to the former Eastern Bloc or Africa. But if you're not willing to give up your creature comforts then just shut up. You might want to see somebody about your obsession. And if you keep going into Men's Rights forums and nobody else wants to talk about raping virgins, then maybe you should think about whether the problem is theirs or yours.

If you insist on staying in the US and want a young white girl with a registering IQ, then you'd better have a lot more to offer than what you're showing here. No sane girl will accept what you want out of marriage, not in the US where they have a choice. So put up or shut up. Assuming you've reached 18, pack up and go somewhere you have a chance at an "obedient young wife" which isn't in the US. But whatever you do, quit crying for Bob to fix things for you. He can't. I can't. Anonymous Age 68 can't. Nobody but you can do anything for you.

If you want to be an activist in the US I can make a few suggestions that I don't think you'd follow because they wouldn't involve raping virgins. If you can get your mind off of that then say so. Otherwise, get used to the idea that the US will never offer you what you want. Not in your lifetime.

May 02, 2010 5:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>get used to the idea that the US will never offer you what you want. Not in your lifetime.

Absolutely correct.

I call him mentally ill, not to be calling him names, but because he clearly cannot grasp reality, which is the definition of mental illness.

If he simply advocated raping virgins, that would be one thing, but he goes into a rage at anyone who suggests anything that does not involve raping virgins. And, he goes into a rage at the thought that a father would attempt to protect his daughter from being raped, which is what fathers do.

I don't know anywhere south of the US where he can rape a virgin to be a wife. I know Mexico very well, and know enough people from Central and South America that I believe it is not possible there. I have heard of it in Italy.

Any place where men still rape virgin wives also kills insane foreigners on sight. Boom!

As you point out, it is not going to happen.

Anonymous age 68

May 02, 2010 7:30 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to you guys who write comments;
Recent comments have degraded into a name calling session which is not allowed under Bob's rules for comments.

Mikee: Bob is generally tolerant of your inane rants despite your refusal to heed good advice about toning down your vitriol. However, it really needs to be toned down. No good man wants to rape a wife, which is a contradiction in terms. If you can't tone it down your comments will not be published.

You other men, the subject of Mikee's inane comments should be dropped too.

Thank you all for your manly thoughts and participation.

May 03, 2010 6:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I posted this on the spearhead article here:

Men find young nubile females of childbearing age attractive.

Men should have females that are of the age Twelve, Thirteen, or Fourteen as brides.

Females gain the ability to have children (menarche) at about 12, 13, and 14 years of age usually. Throughout all of human history men have married girls of that age and had alot of fun with them. The men taught the young women to obey and be nice, aswell as make them happy. The young females, who were married to men often decades older than them, were enjoyable domestic servants to men. Life was pretty good for men when a war wasn't happening.

All of human history agrees that 12-14 is the time for a female to begin making babies for men. America does not agree and has decided to conqure the world and force it to change (for the good of womankind). American Men agree with America and fight to achive this victory over the wishes and desires of the men of the world.

Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberty.

An Indian bloke responded:

Bhetti said
Bhetti May 3, 2010 at 17:28

cypriot: Nope. Menarche used to occur later. Which is consistent with the fact that non-pedos are attracted to girls/women around 15/16 and over, depending on the individual woman. With attraction to her peaking in her 20s, which also is when she\u2019s most likely to have a healthy pregnancy and birth. Around these ages is when ideal waist-hip ratio among other proven measures of men\u2019s attractiveness is also fully developed.

My post was, ofcourse, deleted.

I then responded with the full first post plus a response to bhetti:

Bhetti: you are incorrect. What happens earlier today is the _onset_ of puberty, not menarche. What you heard in the media was that "girls start to mature earlier today than they did in the past" what you assumed was that this ment menarche happens in girls earlier today than in the past. When the actual studies show is that the _onset_ of puberty happens earlier today, but that menarche, as always, happens in young teenaged females: 12, 13, 14.

Go FUCK yourself bhetti. I hope that a taliban-like people come to meet you.

Men are attracted to fertile decent looking females. Waist-hip crap is stuff that beta's that don't know spew. Normal men don't have time for obsessing over that, aslong as the girl is not fat, has a decent face, is of a not too dissimilar genetic makeup as them, and can have children there is attraction.


Please Bob, don't delete my post here, every other men's site deletes my posts and the posts of anyone who agrees with what I believe.

Don't join their ranks. What has their style of "men's rights" ever gotten anyone? Why go back to the 60s? Why fight hard for just that scrap of nothing?

May 03, 2010 4:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, welmer of the spearhead argued against marrying girls off once they are able to have children by stating this:

"Welmer May 3, 2010 at 17:11

Mikee, this isn’t 7th century Arabia. It would never, ever work in our culture. In fact, if you want to see how that kind of setup actually works in real life, check out Afghanistan, where powerful men generally take boys as lovers. The kind of society that exercises that kind of control over women must also necessarily warp male sexuality.

It’s as unrealistic to expect that society can be rearranged in that manner as it was to expect the Communist Revolution would be an eternal global triumph. It just ain’t gonna work. However, what would work, in my opinion, would be to simply remove all of the infrastructure of oppression that has been imposed since the 1960s.

Go back to school and study history. Hopefully, you’ll figure it out.

In the meanwhile, I’m going to go back to being a comment kommisar.

Is he correct.

I would think that those warlords are gay (who else would want to dominate their fellow man militarially anyway?), and don't see how that has any relevance to normal men.

... but... your opinions are changing aren't they, they are becoming more moderate, perhaps you agree with welmer now?

May 03, 2010 4:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob: why do you want me to tone down?

I know that I will never get what I want. I know that I will never have a young virgin bride, a pretty obedient wife, a submissive unpaied domestic servant.

I will never have that.
I can not go anywhere to get that (note: I'm attracted to europeans, not other types of people).
Women rule the world with good men.

The only thing I can do is scream hatread against people that support women's rights and do not want men to be the choosers (RAYP!) the deciders, the owners of society. That is ALMOST ALL MEN, and certaily _ALL_ men in any government (weather it be western, christian, islamic, eastern, asian).

That's the only thing I can do: hate with impotent rage.

That's the truth.
I'll never have what I want.

At least let me hate my enemies publically.


May 03, 2010 5:05 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to Mikee:
1. Never, ever, advocate raping wives. Its stupid and wrong. Wives have vowed sex with their husbands and consent makes rape impossible. Get a clue.

2. The history of marriage in western nations is that Canon Law prohibited marriage before age 7 throughout most of Europe after the fall of Rome until only a couple centuries ago.

3. Warlords and conquerers were not gay wimps. Genghis Khan, for example, selected a new wife in each city he conquered. Attila the Hun had many wives. Muslim rulers invented the Harems.

May 03, 2010 6:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Welmer was refrencing afghan warlords who supposidly screw boys as the reason why girls should not be married off to men. He said a society that allows men to marry young women becomes gay. I suggested that those warlords were screwing boys because they were gay and this had nothing to do with anything else. Welmer has deleted all my posts, as usual. I don't like him. Pretty much all men's forums are like that.. almost like honey traps.

May 03, 2010 8:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why is it that in democracies men cannot have young wives but in dictatorships they can? Is democracy our enemy?

The women at the spearhead oppose men having young wives. They shame the men that want them by saying said men are nuts and that a young female wouldn't want them anyway.

Since when does what females want matter? Oh yes, since democracy. Democracy is the strongest form of government, how do we defeat it and re-instate a men-only form of government where women have no influence, no power, and the opposite of whatever they want is done?

"Kathy May 4, 2010 at 09:28

“Here’s a basic lesson in psychology. A girl who is not well raised will be pretty much the same bitch she is at 6 that she will be at 60. Whether this will possibly change at some point in her lifetime will require a man who can handle her: a man who can handle a girl can handle an adult woman the same way. ”

Well said Bhetti!

“Plus another advantage of marrying a girl as young as possible is that she’ll have FAR less Sex Partners than some used up disease ridden skank in her 20’s.” Not so Reg.

A good upbringing makes all the differnce. This nonsense about marrying a pristine virgin in her early teens means diddly squat if the girl has not been brought up the right way by caring and moral parents.

Promiscuous girls as young as twelve (who know no better) may well have had sex with many men.

Girls with good moral values who have been nutured by loving caring and religious parents will..(more often than not) stay true to those values.

Here in lies the rub for those dirty old men who wish to get it off with nubile young girls, on the pretence of fertility and babies yadda yadda yadda..

These young girls are not interested in you..

Not one bit.

Not a jot.

Nor should they be, either.

It’s unnatural.

A mature girl of sixteen who loves and wants to marry her twenty year old boyfriend I can understand..

A man in his mid twenties or older who lusts after a 12-16 year old girl is a sick unit.

From reading the comments here most men would like an attractive intelligent caring woman who would love them for the men that they are. A companion who would not nag or cramp their style . Not a teenage girl.

Had a conversation with my nearly fourteen year old daughter last week about the new phys ed teacher. Had a laugh to myself when she said..” Yeah he’s okay Mum but he’s real old” … His age 28..

This is what girls my daughters age like..(well that”s what she tells me)

May 04, 2010 7:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>That's the only thing I can do: hate with impotent rage.

There, Mike, is why your stuff gets deleted. Why should anyone accept your hatred towards everything and everyone over a desire that everyone well knows is not possible?

What you have failed to do in your life is common to many people. We want something in life, which we eventually realize is simply not going to happen.
We can destroy our own lives out of frustration, which is what you are doing.

Or, we can sit down, think hard, and find goals which are achievable, and work towards them.

The result of your inability to have a raped virgin wife and your inability to move on, is you don't have any wife at all, nor really any Life as well. Nothing but anger and impotent rage.

If you shifted gears, and accepted reality, you could someday have a wife 30 or 40 years younger than yourself, and darling kids sitting on your lap. You prefer calling us names for trying to point this out to you.

You raged at me for pointing out male-friendly Mexico, but I have a thousand times better life than you do. You could do it to, if you chose to.

By the way, that posting was the most rational thing you have ever posted.

Anonymous age 68

May 04, 2010 8:00 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to Mikee:
It is normal psychology for "rebels" who gather courage break a cultural taboo to wrap the rest of the culture even more tightly around themselves for security. Breaking more than one is very scary. Its psychologically difficult to be so exposed.

The men on Spearhead and many other "men's" web sites all have stepped out and broken one of the feminist culture's paradigms that their mothers fed them as little boys. But having done so they hang on all the more tightly to all the other feminist dogma.

Many of them, like Welmer, advocate "equality" and allow the cows to use typical feminine manipulation, shaming, etc., to dominate their web sites. Any man who violates Wilmer's feminist training gets banned, and the cows end up running the site. Its the same on MND, AM, and several other failed attempts.

Ms. Kathy recites old tired feminist misandry, and gets applauded by Welmer and his friends becasue she helps them maintain their security blankets while they each attempt to break ONE and only ONE of the feminist dictates. She is "special." She is "wise." She is female. She is untouchable by the young men at Spearhead -- under penalty of banishment.

Bob can sympathize with your anger. But try not to also be stupid. A husband NEVER can rape a wife, for example. Its not "rape" except in the worst kind of feminazi dogma. Drop the feminazi dogma. I'm sure you don't want to be pushing feminist dogma that turnes the sacred sexual union of husband and wife into "rape."

Its a shame that Welmer is unable to really confront feminism and feminists. He has an opportunity, but like so many men is unable to break out past his mother's indoctrination and security. I'm sure that is a big part of the feminist goal of raising boys without fathers, it prevents boys from becoming men.

May 04, 2010 8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>A husband NEVER can rape a wife, for example. Its not "rape" except in the worst kind of feminazi dogma.

Amen! Bob is right on.

Traditionally, rape meant having sex with a woman without her consent. It has been in almost every society in the world considered a very grave offense to have sex with a woman without her consent.

Also, through all history, marriage meant a ceremony of some sort in which a woman gave her husband permanent, blanket consent to sex. In exchange, he agreed to support her and all children created by that sex.

By agreeing to be his wife, she agreed, "Drill me whenever you want. I am yours and you are mine. We are in a sexual union, two in one flesh."

With that sexual bond, you can no more rape your own wife than auto-eroticism can be construed as rape.

The feminists view marriage as a transfer of property rights. No sexual union. No sacred bond of two in one flesh. Woman as owner of a man to her own benefit, period, for life, even if she divorces him, even if he never gets sex from her.

I try to teach men how to distinguish women who might be suitable marriage material. I call it, "Test; test; test."

Any woman who believes in marital rape fails all tests, to the same degree a woman who killed her last three husbands fails all tests.

I just remembered something a Christian woman once said on her blog. She tells other women, "Don't tell your husband, no. Even if you are not in the mood, tell him, yes. You are not a good judge on whether you need it or not. Many times my husband wants it, and I am tired or don't feel like it, but I tell him, go ahead. And, by the time he has filled his needs, I am also glad he did. If I make him wait until I feel like I want it, he won't be getting it much, nor will I."

Anonymous age 68.

May 04, 2010 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>and the cows end up running the site. Its the same on MND, AM, and several other failed attempts.

This is also generally true.

In the early 80's, a local Father's Rights group asked me for assistance, since I was the only person in the community who had the cojones to practice public activism against the feminists. In three months, two out of 35 members had committed suicide, one by gasoline immolation.

I quickly learned that meetings were dominated by the second wives. Subtly, not openly. They came in with cookies and kool-aid, and smelled good.

And, made sure no one actually did any serious counseling of those most likely to kill themselves. At any attempt to counsel them, the dearies would object, and the other men would rush to their aid, like obedient serfs. One vile, but sweet-smelling, honey told me. "They need to act like men."

They were acting like men. When totally depressed, and all your lifes work is gone, pour gasoline on yourself, and light a match.

We got rid of the dearies and monthly meetings became counseling sessions, and suicides ceased. If men wanted cookies, they had to stop at 7-11 after the meeting.

When their is man-work to be done, the dearies get tossed out. Women know this very well, which is why there are 90 women only colleges, and zero men only colleges. Women are well aware they cannot compete with a group of intelligent, motivated men, so they outlaw groups of intelligent, motivated men, just as antebellum slave owners outlawed learning to read for slaves.

Anonymous age 68

May 04, 2010 12:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a non-hypothetical for Bob, Age 68, the angry guy 5/20 5:53, et al.

I've recently come back into contact with someone I knew in college. Even back then they knew what they wanted out of life: to be a professional photographer. Turns out that's just what they did. A modest but comfortable living with enough left over to put aside for retirement, making payments on a home in their mid-30s. This person decided early on that marriage and family wasn't for them, although they enjoy the company of the opposite sex, and sexual relations. So, they had a surgical procedure to prevent unwanted progeny and associated legal difficulties. Selling some photos every year allows reasonable travel and free time, working on becoming a better photographer, etc.

All in all, they have the life they want, and are enjoying it.

Here's my question. The photographer is a real person who sells landscape photos to a few magazines a year. Does it make a difference whether they are male or female, and why? Either way there are no unwanted children, the person is content with their life and the choices made to achieve their goals. If it is a man, or if it is a woman, what are your thoughts on their life and decisions?

Anonymous age 37.

May 04, 2010 2:54 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to age 37:
First, the photography will be different from a man than from a woman. My guess is that you describe a man because a. its a more common profession for men, b. its unusual for young females to get surgery when they can get a few BC pills, implants, IUDs, etc., c. females don't admit that they "enjoy sexual relations, and d. the person has invested in a home, retirement, savings, etc., instead of a shoe collection.

In these troubled times a man faces severe legal problems if he decides to make children. MGTOW is now a common decision for young men. It earns him a Darwin Award for taking himself out of the gene pool, but his life is a lot more comfortable.

Even if I'm wrong above, and its a female, by the time she gets around to a career decision she would be too old to be a decent wife and mother anyway. The would would be better off without her contribution.

May 04, 2010 3:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look what welmer just posted:

"Welmer May 4, 2010 at 11:02

PrairieLark wrote:I don’t know what all these women are doing commenting here. Don’t you read the comments? A lot of the guys here hate women. They want to fuck you at 13 and keep you chained in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant. I get the men fighting for their rights, but you women here are a strange breed.

Welmer wrote:
A lot of guys? I can think of three off the top of my head, all banned.

Bob: can you do something about this welmer guy; he's not on our side. Maybe use proxies to evade his bans, or hack his computer/website or something.

Isn't it men who physically enforce women's rights? If we were ever to have true physical enemies we had to fight wouldn't it be men who support women's rights?

May 04, 2010 3:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob: he (welmer) keeps banning me. Should I look into taking down his website? Defacing it? Something?

May 04, 2010 4:30 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
There is very little MEN can do about pussy whipped "MRA" web sites that ban MEN while catering to feminists. Welmer likes to think he's "Gender Reality with a Hard Edge" but in practice he's kneeling at the feet of the gender feminists.

Yes, it is manginas who always stand up for women's rights and attack other men who are the big problem for any real Men's Action to reclaim our proper place as the head of our families and our society. As long as men would rather kneel and kiss their feet, and attack other men to keep that place, we have a long way to go.

Bob has noticed that there are more men today who post comments on mainstream news sites, giving the feminists competition. Instead of wasting time on faux men's sites like Spearhead, perhaps you would be more effective writing comments on mainstream sites. Be sure to tone down your rhetoric and work the audience rather than giving them both barrels.

May 04, 2010 5:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Age 37 I comment your old friend whether male or female. Good to see anybody bucking the system and not selling their souls for money in place of a real life. A modest good life is better than a slave life with big bucks.

Who cares if its a man or a woman? Either way they did the responsible thing so nobody swells up and makes hysterical emotional and/or financial claims? Your friend, if you're telling the truth, decided s/he didn't wand kids or a spouse and took steps. Good for him, no money-grubbing bitch can sikk a lawyer on him and scream for child support from his chosen lifestyle. Good for her if she chose never to have to deal with a potential abortion or 18-years-later kid on the doorstep.

Good for anybody who opts out of the rat race and is happy with doing what they want. No foul at all I can see.

May 04, 2010 10:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not angry. I'm exasperated. Big difference, Anon age 37. I'm just sick of people thinking they have business sticking their noses into other people's lives.

From the pussyfooting around I'm guessing that the photographer is female. Big fucking deal. So she wants to live an independent life. Great. Go for it. Why is it anyone's business except hers? I get so damned sick of people thinking they have a right to run other people's lives. Feminists, anti-feminists, anti-abortionists, religious lunatics--butt out. All of you. Just get fucking lost. You have no business butting into anyone's life except your own. I'd probably like to date the photographer if she is a woman. If she's making a living at it and went to college then she's probably interesting to talk to and if she's had her tubes tied I'll bet she puts out by the second date. Sounds like fun to me. Doesn't want a spouse and kids? Neither do I. Sounds like my kind of woman.

What business is it of anyone else's, age 37? Why bring it up? You think someone else should run her life, or his life if it's a man? It's not your business and it's sure as hell not mine or anyone else's. They did what they wanted and more power to them, man or woman.

Christ, what is it with people? I hate wife-beaters because I think they're cowards. If she starts hitting first fine then it's self-defense and she should have known better than to pick a fight with someone bigger. If not, then he's a coward and bully. I don't have much use for cowards. The "take back the night" crap? Get over it. Some men are rapists. Their sorry asses belong in jail and I wish that's where they all were, but it's not going to happen. Take precautions and accept facts, feminists. Some men can't control it. There's no excuse for taking what the girls are giving away free in every bar, but some men will. Accept it and quit whining and tarring all men with the same brush. Just shut the fuck up about what you can't change.

Man-friendly countries? Women-friendly countries? Everybody just get over it. Live your own life and keep out of everyone else's. Religious fanatics trying to turn the US into a theocracy? Go to hell and don't stop along the way. Really. Be religious in your homes and churches and leave sane people alone. Keep your damned religion to yourself and out of public life. Quit trying to make other people live the way you think they ought to. People can decide for themselves what is "moral" and can figure out how to obey the law. Nobody needs your guidance.

Just everybody quit whining about what other people do that doesn't hurt anybody else. Shut up with generalizations and trying to remake the world in your own fucked up image. Men, women, the freaks inbetween, just STFU and go live your life and let everyone else live theirs.

Exasperated, not angry, anonymous

May 05, 2010 10:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Feminists, anti-feminists, anti-abortionists, religious lunatics--butt out. All of you. Just get fucking lost."

Keep the police and your laws out of our lives and we will butt out. Keep your attack dogs away when we take 12, 13, 14 year old fertile young women as wives and we'll leave you alone. Keep your pigs in their pen when one of the wives gets a phone and calls out to get her husband arrested and destroyed... and we'll leave you alone.

Let us live the way we want, let us have the girls that we want, and your wish is granted.

May 05, 2010 1:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Live your own life and keep out of everyone else's."

That would work if we were asexuals who didn't desire pretty girls. But we are not asexuals. We need to butt into atleast one other person's life.

Your laws, your police, your good-person society stops us.

We have to destroy it.
No matter the cost to ourselves.
There used to be outlets: we could go to the south to get a nice young virgin wife, overseas, many places.

That all ended in the mid 90s and 2000s.

There is no outlet anylonger.
No hope.
We have to fight you.
We must destroy you and break free.

You took away the alternatives.

May 05, 2010 1:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

>>Just everybody quit whining about what other people do that doesn't hurt anybody else.


>>Exasperated, not angry, anonymous

You lost me there, Exasperated. I certainly agree with you that we and everyone else should leave alone others that don't hurt anyone. Good posting.

But, I read through this entire page of comments, and the only reference to telling anyone what to do when they are not harming anyone, was the issue of Muslim women in Europe being told not to cover their faces. And, that seemed to be reported as a news item.

The photographer as described was a man, because women have no legal issues involved in pregnancy. If they don't want the kid, they get an abortion and that's the end of that. Only a man can be forced to be a parent against his will, so no issue for a woman who doesn't want problems.

Not that it matters except as a matter of accuracy.

So, I am curious why such anger over something that wasn't here? As a general rule Bob and his commenters are commenting on those people who do want to do things which harm others.

Of course, if it was just an off-topic comment, that is fine, too, but I want to understand you.

Anonymous age 68

May 05, 2010 2:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Headline says it all. Another hypocrite "christian".

May 06, 2010 8:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob, not related to this post but I Found this clip. very disturbing. police raid a home, kill thier dogs in front of thier kids.

thanks for sharing

May 06, 2010 1:59 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
It is violent CRIMINALS like that gang of gangbanger thugs that make war against the people. They are evil criminals who must be exterminated by whatever means necessary. No man's life, children, or even his dog is safe while these violent criminals are loose on our streets.

May 06, 2010 2:56 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
A legal search presents a valid warrant in compliant with Amendment IV of the Constitution must be presented to the owner of the premises, and he must be allowed to read the warrant, including review by legal counsel. The government is also illegally using a military force to invade the private home of a citizen.

They did NOT have an arrest warrant, only a search warrant. Their attack against his person was a criminal assault. Note too that only the man was thrown to the ground and abused by the criminal gang. The female was allowed to wander around as she pleased with his children.

The lot of these criminals should be hanged at dawn by the good people to recapture our government and our sovereignty of the people.

May 06, 2010 5:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thoughts on this:

Welmer wants to sue me apparently.

"This form of trolling is likely a civil offense, and if I could find the guys I could probably sue them"

Posting things they don't like == illegal. Probably true.


by Welmer on May 6, 2010

I have to address the perception that I was “tolerating” some of the pro-rape commenters on The Spearhead, because that is totally false. In fact, these guys have been using a Tor proxy service to create users and spam the board with pro-rape comments. All I know is one of them goes by MikeeUSA, and another appears to be connected with the Manhood 101 site, given the hysterical reaction to Paul Elam’s post.

These guys have been wreaking havoc on the forum for the last several weeks, and it’s come to the point where I’m almost ready to shut the forum down, which is probably what they want. This form of trolling is likely a civil offense, and if I could find the guys I could probably sue them, but that would, in all likelihood, be a waste of time.

So what I’ve done is changed the settings on the board so all new registrants have to be personally approved by the administrator. This is a pain, but unfortunately necessary. People who register will have to wait for me to approve them before they can post, which might discourage a few people, but probably not too many.

It’s too bad that there are people out there who seem to think vandalism is fun. For me and readers of The Spearhead, it is a frustrating problem that does nothing but degrade the online experience. "

And the spearhead commentators believe that posting things they don't like is cyber terrorism:

"tsurupettan May 6, 2010 at 18:59

Shame, shame.

Any Internet service whose sole purpose is identity laundering ought to be banned; at very least, providers of such services should have secondary liability. No more safe harbors for cyber-terrorists, I say.

(That said, protecting 3rd parties from leaking sensitive data is important; but untraceability beyond lawful interception is a recipe for anarchy.)"

May 06, 2010 7:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Welmer said:
Well, they successfully made an enemy out of me. I try to maintain objectivity and to be an even-tempered guy, but MikeeUSA and his buddies at Manhood 101 have actually succeeded in pissing me off pretty badly.

Wulf May 6, 2010 at 21:01


Thanks Wulf for the accolades

May 06, 2010 7:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Notice how they imagine things: the expression of anything more extreme then their views == false flag ATTACK. (On a men's forum, pro-men speech is /Attack/)

"zzz May 6, 2010 at 21:09

We are living in an age of personal and political false flag attacks.

This cyber attempt at slander is meant to deter more readers from reading The Spearhead’s articles, by making its other readers seem like true extremists. It goes to show you how low the defenders of the currently out-of-kilter family law processes, and biased media and academic cultures, will go to defend the unequal misandrist status quo. They reveal much about their character through their devious methods to the fair-thinking."

May 06, 2010 7:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why does welmer and friends believe that any suggestion that women should not control reproduction is terrorism?

May 06, 2010 7:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


May 06, 2010 8:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

[BLOG]: Trolls

Postby Charles Martel » Fri May 07, 2010 12:17 am

Simply go here, pick out the six you trust the most, and ask them if they would be willing to act as moderators of the magazine forum. Then appoint those who are willing.

Seconded. Novaseeker, JD and a couple more. With a broad mandate to delete any and all ad hominems, foul language, misogynistic hate speech. Makes no difference whether these are false flags or genuine, they are hurting The Spearhead. Run this place like a patriarchy - keep the vandals in line.


May 06, 2010 9:50 PM  
Blogger Bob said...

Welmer posted on Spearhead:

"With a broad mandate to delete any and all ad hominems, foul language, misogynistic hate speech."

"I have to address the perception that I was “tolerating” some of the pro-rape commenters on The Spearhead, because that is totally false."

Welmer continues to kiss feminist butts while slandering and prohibiting men who criticize feminism, feminist anti-men hate programs, and feminists. Welmer only allows men to speak as long as they don't criticize females, feminists or feminist anti-men hate programs such as their rape-hate program used to destroy so many men. Could a mangina kneel and genuflect more deeply before the feminist cows?

There are some serious problems at Spearhead. Its become another feminist web site diverting men's opinions and preventing real men from speaking. Welmer pushes the feminist agenda, the reverse of a men's agenda.

A real MEN's web site would banish misandrist hate speech and anyone who promotes the feminist "rape-hate" war on men.

May 07, 2010 6:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Could you confront them about that on their posts?

May 07, 2010 7:22 AM  
Blogger Bob said...

Note to anonymous:
Bob got banned from Spearhead when Welmer got into an argument with some other man and Bob suggested he lighten up.

Bob has sent Welmer a letter suggesting that he relax and lighten up his attempt to own and control men's opinions, stop calling names, and have more fun with his forum. See the Trolls, Moderation, Men, and Peace

May 07, 2010 8:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would be somewhat accepting of females controlling their own reproduction issues.

However, they have made a terminal error. They have also chosen to control the reproduction issues of men, even ordering male victims of statutory rape to pay child support to the criminal.

All I ask is women lose total control of their reproductive issues after consensual sex, EXACTLY AS THEY HAVE DONE TO MEN.

I had good teachers.

Anonymous age 68

May 07, 2010 11:56 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home