Trolls, Moderation, Men, and Peace
UPDATE May 11, 2010
During the past couple of days Bob has been doing some research about the “Manhood Academy” web site. The owners call themselves “Prof Plum.” and LaDice.” Plum has written an epistle he calls “Manhood 101.” They are very young men who are part of the generation of men raised by women. Like many city gang members they are turning to each other trying to figure out how to become men. Like a lot of other insecure young men raised by women they think that being manly has something to do with bullying and being offensive. Bob would be surprised if either of them has ever actually had a conversation with a mature manly man. In some ways they act like LaSalle from MND, full of themselves, full of fight, and ready with their “ban” button when real men speak their minds. Its no wonder that those two got into a flame war with LaSalle.
Lesson to learn: When a boy grows up without a father's love and guidance, he does not learn how to talk to men. If he's lucky, and works at it for another 20 years, he may eventually learn some of what he lost as a child. Some of the lost guidance will never be recovered. Some of what has been lost takes 3 generations to recover from.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE May 10, 2010
The manginas who run Mens News Daily (MND) and who spun off Spearhead Forum are continuing their attack on Manhood Academy despite the efforts of Bob and other men to suggest a more moderate tone among men. The Men's Movement will not prosper and succeed as long as faux men attack other men for failing to support feminism. And that is really what it is. Mike LaSalle who owns Mens News Daily is a feminist who trolls the Men's Blogospere siphoning off energy while pushing feminist “equality” dogma.
The plain truth in front of everyone is that men are better than females in every field of human endeavor except being female. Men are better at art and literature, better at hunting and gathering, better at protecting and defending, better at reason and thinking, better at music and dance, better at creating and providing, better at guiding families and raising children to be productive adults, better at relationships and understanding of human nature. Mike LaSalle protects and defends the century old feminist lie of “equality” and lately has shown he will attack other men who insist that the plain truth in front of everyone is still true.
Five years ago LaSalle's MND forum, called “The Colosseum” was run by LaSalle's female moderator. LaSalle sold his manhood and his friends for her pussy. It is immoral and just plain stupid to put a cow (called “Navy blue”) in a power position sitting in judgment over the opinion of men in the Men's Movement. Cows should never be in a position to judge men, nor to silence the voice of men. Bob got banned from MND 5 years ago (2005) for objecting to feminist dogma demanded on The Colosseum. Read about it here. LaSalle's bedmate eventually got tired of the unmanly jerk and left him. The Colosseum collapsed because of bad (female) management.
More recently LaSalle hired Paul Elam to run MND, and a new comments section. They spun off The Spearhead Magazine run by Welmer with its own forum section. Both are still owned by LaSalle who is still short a couple of gonads, and still demands allegiance to “equality” feminism.
Elam produced some fairly good U-Tube videos and began making a better name for the cleaned up MND web site. But LaSalle couldn't leave it alone. LaSalle is not content to keep his own little mangina corner of the blogosphere. He has set out to dominate and CONTROL the voices of other men. He picked a flame war with a relatively obscure Men's Blog called “Manhood Academy.” See the original post on this topic below.
Since that was written, it seemed for a time that some peace would be restored, but LaSalle will have none of it. The little mangina cannot stand real men who reject feminism and its hateful dogma. He continues to attack and spew flames. His go-boy Elam did try to apologize and make peace, but Elam's attempts were thwarted by the WND owner who has final control over what gets published on WND and Spearhead.com. These excerpts below show what has been going on. Pay particular attention to LaSalle's vitriolic attack on Manhood Academy.
First Elam posted on Manhood Academy:
.
Over the past few days Bob continued to suggest peace among men by posting this on MND. LaSalle hit his “ban” button again. He cannot tolerate the voices of real men on MND.
Here is what LaSalle posted on Manhood Academy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Article, May 7, 2010
An open letter to Welmer of The Spearhead
-------------------------------------------------
Trolls, Moderation, Men, and Peace
Sent: Fri May 07, 2010 7:20 am
From: Bob Knows
To: Welmer
Hi Welmer,
Men are concerned about The Spearhead on other men's forums such as MGTOW, my blog comments, and other places. Some say you are "losing it." From reading your recent discussions it seems a lot like you have gotten a little lost, and overwhelmed by it all.
I thought I would try to help you with some experience and suggestions.
First, you are trying too hard, and its overwhelming you. Relax a little. Relax a lot. I suggest that you go over to Chris Key's forum, Mens Rights Online and see how Chris is doing. He uses a VERY LIGHT hand. It takes little of his time. And he has not had the kind of problems you have gotten yourself into lately.
The big thing is NOT to try to own and control the voices of men, even when many men don't share your opinions or perspective. Men don't take well to ownership or control. Yes, its your forum, but trying to control the opinion is way too much work for any man, and all it does is to drive the best men away to other venues. Good men stand their ground and own their own positions.
The next thing, related to the big thing, is not to try to censor out misogyny. Many men have had very bad experiences with mothers, wives, feminists, etc., and are not going to shut up about it. Yes, the feminist will scream, and well they should. In the past two years feminists have created two parody blogs slandering The World According to Bob, but I take it as a compliment that feminists find me offensive. My blog is all about promoting what is good for MEN, not what pleases feminists. A forum can be good for men, or please feminists, but not both.
Bob censors out misandry, not misogyny. You have to decide which is the focus of Spearhead, men or feminism. If you run a men's discussion "with a hard edge" then let the hard ass men have their say, and to heck with the feminists who don't like it.
I really don't know about that "Manhood 101" site. I've just started reading it to see what they are about. I would suggest though, that you tone down your attacks on them, even if you don't agree with their view on many issues such as domination and submission. A war between men's web sites is not good for any men. They will stand their ground too, and I respect that as a manly behavior.
Lastly, about MikeeUSA. Mikee is not a "troll." A "troll" is someone who posts contentious argument for the purpose of disruption or creating argument. (see Urban Dictionary.com for definition) A "troll" often does not believe the post, and the troll changes it to disrupt as needed. That's not Mikee.
Mikee is a man who has a strong opinion, and stands his ground about it. He has posted his belief on many web sites over several years, and argued his position with me and most other men who have been on line for a while. He posts his opinion because he believes his opinion, not because he is trying to disrupt. Mikee stands by his beliefs even if it gets him banned from many web sites, and even when it got the free software community to delete several years of his work. Even though I disagree with his opinions, I respect him for standing his ground in the face of adversity. That's a manly thing to do.
To sum up, here is good advice. 1. Lighten up. Don't work so hard. 2. Allow men, even hurt men, to have a say. The "ban" button should be only used against men out of desperation, not for differing opinion. 3. Everyone who has a different opinion from you or me is not a "troll." 4. Let the MEN speak, but watch out for infiltrating feminist shaming tactics that try to silence men.
Spearhead is a really good idea with a really good beginning. I can see that its overwhelming you. I offered to help moderate but never got a reply, then I got banned after you got into an argument with some other guy. Step back. Calm down. Relax. And don't work so hard. Let the men have their say. You don't need to police them or argue with them. It doesn't need to be that hard.
And most of all Have Fun.
Blessings
Bob
During the past couple of days Bob has been doing some research about the “Manhood Academy” web site. The owners call themselves “Prof Plum.” and LaDice.” Plum has written an epistle he calls “Manhood 101.” They are very young men who are part of the generation of men raised by women. Like many city gang members they are turning to each other trying to figure out how to become men. Like a lot of other insecure young men raised by women they think that being manly has something to do with bullying and being offensive. Bob would be surprised if either of them has ever actually had a conversation with a mature manly man. In some ways they act like LaSalle from MND, full of themselves, full of fight, and ready with their “ban” button when real men speak their minds. Its no wonder that those two got into a flame war with LaSalle.
Lesson to learn: When a boy grows up without a father's love and guidance, he does not learn how to talk to men. If he's lucky, and works at it for another 20 years, he may eventually learn some of what he lost as a child. Some of the lost guidance will never be recovered. Some of what has been lost takes 3 generations to recover from.
---------------------------------------------------------------
UPDATE May 10, 2010
The manginas who run Mens News Daily (MND) and who spun off Spearhead Forum are continuing their attack on Manhood Academy despite the efforts of Bob and other men to suggest a more moderate tone among men. The Men's Movement will not prosper and succeed as long as faux men attack other men for failing to support feminism. And that is really what it is. Mike LaSalle who owns Mens News Daily is a feminist who trolls the Men's Blogospere siphoning off energy while pushing feminist “equality” dogma.
The plain truth in front of everyone is that men are better than females in every field of human endeavor except being female. Men are better at art and literature, better at hunting and gathering, better at protecting and defending, better at reason and thinking, better at music and dance, better at creating and providing, better at guiding families and raising children to be productive adults, better at relationships and understanding of human nature. Mike LaSalle protects and defends the century old feminist lie of “equality” and lately has shown he will attack other men who insist that the plain truth in front of everyone is still true.
Five years ago LaSalle's MND forum, called “The Colosseum” was run by LaSalle's female moderator. LaSalle sold his manhood and his friends for her pussy. It is immoral and just plain stupid to put a cow (called “Navy blue”) in a power position sitting in judgment over the opinion of men in the Men's Movement. Cows should never be in a position to judge men, nor to silence the voice of men. Bob got banned from MND 5 years ago (2005) for objecting to feminist dogma demanded on The Colosseum. Read about it here. LaSalle's bedmate eventually got tired of the unmanly jerk and left him. The Colosseum collapsed because of bad (female) management.
More recently LaSalle hired Paul Elam to run MND, and a new comments section. They spun off The Spearhead Magazine run by Welmer with its own forum section. Both are still owned by LaSalle who is still short a couple of gonads, and still demands allegiance to “equality” feminism.
Elam produced some fairly good U-Tube videos and began making a better name for the cleaned up MND web site. But LaSalle couldn't leave it alone. LaSalle is not content to keep his own little mangina corner of the blogosphere. He has set out to dominate and CONTROL the voices of other men. He picked a flame war with a relatively obscure Men's Blog called “Manhood Academy.” See the original post on this topic below.
Since that was written, it seemed for a time that some peace would be restored, but LaSalle will have none of it. The little mangina cannot stand real men who reject feminism and its hateful dogma. He continues to attack and spew flames. His go-boy Elam did try to apologize and make peace, but Elam's attempts were thwarted by the WND owner who has final control over what gets published on WND and Spearhead.com. These excerpts below show what has been going on. Pay particular attention to LaSalle's vitriolic attack on Manhood Academy.
First Elam posted on Manhood Academy:
.
Paul Elam Sat May 08, 2010 1:52 pm
Re: Emasculated emo fags like "Angry Harry" lead MRAs
Hey guys, wake up. Everybody bends the truth. It's not that I personally hate you. It's just that if someone gets in my way, I do whatever it takes to smear them. It's nothing personal. I'm just trying to make the MRAs look tough on the internet okay? Geez. Cut me some slack will ya.
Over the past few days Bob continued to suggest peace among men by posting this on MND. LaSalle hit his “ban” button again. He cannot tolerate the voices of real men on MND.
Bob (on WND) 2010-05-09 at 1:29 am
Paul, I see you are making an attempt to begin a peaceful dialog with MA. That is good. Flame wars between men’s web sites is counter productive no matter how “right” you and your Spearhead friend Welmer think your positions are. Personally, I find the MA web site convoluted and confusing, and their “101″ publication so long and boring that I haven’t read it. However they do seem to be making converts to MANLY awareness in ways that have been lacking from MND and others.
No, all Men’s Activists are not going to be on the same page, not ever. That is not the nature of men. What is important is that we are all going generally toward the same direction, toward some kind of recapture of the natural and rightful position of men in our society.
Your friend Welmer has reminded me lately of a 2nd grade kid who brought the football and claimed it gave him authority to make the rules. Even in 2nd grade the boys put a stop to that pretty quick. And sure, we could all go get our own football, but we kids knew that getting enough kids together to play a game required us all to get along — even as we competed with each other to be the winner. Often you can only “win” by giving up and getting along with the other men.
There is a place in the Men’s Movement for hard edge advocacy. Maybe its overdue. If you can’t support them, at least get out of the way. Men need to cooperate, not fight each other.
Blessings
Bob
Here is what LaSalle posted on Manhood Academy.
Mike LaSalle Sun May 09, 2010 9:50 am
Small boy from Nigeria
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 9:45 am
Posts: 2
The position you guys apparently advocate — that one sex is intrinsically better than the other — puts you at the extreme edge of social discourse.
And you compel a response.
No right thinking person would assert that men should assume property rights over women and children — as you apparently do. That’s insane. It’s repulsive. It’s the signature of a warped mind and an empty soul.
I condemn you clowns at the “manhood academy” without hesitation.
Anyone who supports you does not belong to the MRAs.
Mike LaSalle Sun May 09, 2010 9:58 am
Small boy from Nigeria
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 9:45 am
Posts: 2
You are my enemies! I will fight you to the very end!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Article, May 7, 2010
An open letter to Welmer of The Spearhead
-------------------------------------------------
Trolls, Moderation, Men, and Peace
Sent: Fri May 07, 2010 7:20 am
From: Bob Knows
To: Welmer
Hi Welmer,
Men are concerned about The Spearhead on other men's forums such as MGTOW, my blog comments, and other places. Some say you are "losing it." From reading your recent discussions it seems a lot like you have gotten a little lost, and overwhelmed by it all.
I thought I would try to help you with some experience and suggestions.
First, you are trying too hard, and its overwhelming you. Relax a little. Relax a lot. I suggest that you go over to Chris Key's forum, Mens Rights Online and see how Chris is doing. He uses a VERY LIGHT hand. It takes little of his time. And he has not had the kind of problems you have gotten yourself into lately.
The big thing is NOT to try to own and control the voices of men, even when many men don't share your opinions or perspective. Men don't take well to ownership or control. Yes, its your forum, but trying to control the opinion is way too much work for any man, and all it does is to drive the best men away to other venues. Good men stand their ground and own their own positions.
The next thing, related to the big thing, is not to try to censor out misogyny. Many men have had very bad experiences with mothers, wives, feminists, etc., and are not going to shut up about it. Yes, the feminist will scream, and well they should. In the past two years feminists have created two parody blogs slandering The World According to Bob, but I take it as a compliment that feminists find me offensive. My blog is all about promoting what is good for MEN, not what pleases feminists. A forum can be good for men, or please feminists, but not both.
Bob censors out misandry, not misogyny. You have to decide which is the focus of Spearhead, men or feminism. If you run a men's discussion "with a hard edge" then let the hard ass men have their say, and to heck with the feminists who don't like it.
I really don't know about that "Manhood 101" site. I've just started reading it to see what they are about. I would suggest though, that you tone down your attacks on them, even if you don't agree with their view on many issues such as domination and submission. A war between men's web sites is not good for any men. They will stand their ground too, and I respect that as a manly behavior.
Lastly, about MikeeUSA. Mikee is not a "troll." A "troll" is someone who posts contentious argument for the purpose of disruption or creating argument. (see Urban Dictionary.com for definition) A "troll" often does not believe the post, and the troll changes it to disrupt as needed. That's not Mikee.
Mikee is a man who has a strong opinion, and stands his ground about it. He has posted his belief on many web sites over several years, and argued his position with me and most other men who have been on line for a while. He posts his opinion because he believes his opinion, not because he is trying to disrupt. Mikee stands by his beliefs even if it gets him banned from many web sites, and even when it got the free software community to delete several years of his work. Even though I disagree with his opinions, I respect him for standing his ground in the face of adversity. That's a manly thing to do.
To sum up, here is good advice. 1. Lighten up. Don't work so hard. 2. Allow men, even hurt men, to have a say. The "ban" button should be only used against men out of desperation, not for differing opinion. 3. Everyone who has a different opinion from you or me is not a "troll." 4. Let the MEN speak, but watch out for infiltrating feminist shaming tactics that try to silence men.
Spearhead is a really good idea with a really good beginning. I can see that its overwhelming you. I offered to help moderate but never got a reply, then I got banned after you got into an argument with some other guy. Step back. Calm down. Relax. And don't work so hard. Let the men have their say. You don't need to police them or argue with them. It doesn't need to be that hard.
And most of all Have Fun.
Blessings
Bob
Labels: Men men's rights, men's activism, men's nation
posted by Bob | Friday, May 07, 2010
233 Comments:
I have a special purpose board. Most MRA boards are filled with "My woman done me wrong." Or, "all women are bad."
I made a board for men who want a refuge, a board which tries to teach men to seek the positive in a variety of manners. Expatting; inpatting; avoiding women; whatever works.
Any man stupid enough to marry in the Anglosphere does not belong on my board. Nor does anyone belong on my board who WANTS to continue to wallow in agony and despair.
I do not have much traffic, and that is fine with me.
It is a special purpose board, period, and is intended for a small number of men who tend to respond to the emotions positive or negative of others, and who want a refuge with a positive attitude.
My point is not to plug my board, because I don't want a lot of members. My point is there is room on the Web for all viewpoints. Go to proboards.com and start a message board exactly as you want it. Anyone who doesn't like it, can go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
Oh for crying out loud. Why doesn't Mikee just start his own forum or blog? I'm not a computer genius by any means, but I could set up a blog in a matter of minutes. A forum would be tougher I'm sure but could be done. Why whine about being censored in other forums when he can just start one of his own to discuss what he wants to discuss? From what I saw on Spearhead his real name is already out there so what's he got to lose?
Exasperated, not angry
Said it like a REAL MAN!
Most men on most boards do attempt to keep anyone from expressing a differing opinion. It can be a nuisance, true, but it is just too easy to start a board.
http://www.proboards.com/ and click on SIGNUP. Free with advertising.
Their rules are rather tight, including rules on advocating crimes (I presume no rape fantasies allowed) no explicit sex, obscenities, English only, and more. Clever men can discuss anything if they are good writers and use a big vocabulary.
If you want to talk about the wonders of rape, or other things that get websites shut down instantly in the Anglosphere, it shouldn't cost much to buy a web site out of country. it takes some cojones, true, but if you don't have them, you don't deserve much attention.
There is freedom of speech, but not on a board belonging to someone else. The True Golden Rule is: Whoever Owns the Gold, Rules. Get your own gold.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Its not hard to buy a dedicated IP and run your own web site/forum on an old used XP server. There isn't anyone who can censor your conversation.
However, the possibility of going off by yourself is not an excuse for those men running the mainstream MEN's web sites to play "My football" crapola. That wasn't "fair" when I was in 2nd grade, and its not fair now.
Good point in dedicated IP. I tend to forget things like that, because where I live Telmex has a total monopoly.
Anonymous age 68
Dedicated Server on one's own dedicated IP means that people on the internet can track you down to where you live and attempt to have you arrested or instigate legal action against you.
We can take the current spearhead debates as a point-in-context:
Welmer has said that if he could find out who the mike and the manhood101 characters actually are he may instigate civil legal proceedings against them.
Here Welmer scowers the internet looking for the true identity of the mike character with whom he disagrees and notes that he'd like to find out where he lives:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/05/06/manhood-academy-magnet-for-rape-supporters/
Welmer May 6, 2010 at 23:47
...
Shouldn’t be too hard to find a guy with a name like that."
Here a thespearhead commentator posts a map to the living quarters of Welmers "mysoginist" adversary:
"
keyster May 7, 2010 at 11:27
MikeeUSA lives with his mother in Ohio.
I have a map to his house if anyone is interested [REDACTED].
"
This has been attempted before by women's rights activists, the spearhead men are attempting it again. There was also a case in canada where a Man was imprisoned because his anti-feminist writings were easily traced to an IP address. Tying one's financial information (credit card) to an IP address makes things all the more easy for both law enforcement and third parties to locate and sue or imprison a man whos opposed to their society and beliefs.
Note to anonymous:
First: You don't actually have to have a dedicated (fixed) IP to operate a web server. There is software that continually checks the IP of your "floating" account and updates your address if it ever changes. You don't have to pay extra for a dedicated IP. I have a friend who runs his own web sites on a floating IP.
Second: The government tyranny can find you and destroy you regardless of your IP or whatever. The man who is currently in prison for non-feminist opinions was running a blog on Blogspot/Google, very similar to The World According to Bob. He didn't even have his own server, and hadn't violated Google's rules. He posted a blog that celebrated Saint Marc's Day and criticized feminist hate. The Canadian Government FemiNazi used the power of their Gestapo to send him to Auschwitz.
It is disappointing that Welmer and his friends accuse Mikee and unspecified others of "rape supporter." We expect that kind of feminist lies from feminist hate sites, not from men's advocate web sites. We expect men's web sites to maintain a certain degree of honesty, unlike feminist haters.
It is most disappointing that Welmer suggests or invites physical violence against Mikee on that Spearhead article. Even if he disagrees with the guy's opinion, there is no reason to suggest violence against other men on a men's discussion forum.
I read the comments on spearhead, or better yet, softspear, and Welmer has fallen into the echo chamber mentality early.
Now, anonymous 68, I've read your responses to Mikee, and the patience and maturity you show is obvious.
Believe me, neither Bob, nor Manhood academy have posted in the way Mikee has. Neither of these guys are advocating wallowing in misery, or promoting hatred of women but they have a hard edge, that Welmer can't handle, and he defamed Manhood Academy.
Personally, I agree with you: it is Welmer's board and he can exercise control as he sees fit. The fuss led me to read Manhood Academy's stuff for myself and form my own (positive) judgement on what they say. I wish Welmer well, and hope that one day spearhead will man up.
The fact that the canadian man didn't use any proxy software made it very cheap to hunt him down: an IT investigator didn't even need to be hired.
Note to Marlon:
Numerous men's web sites have taken that "Its my board so I make the rules" approach. It reminds me a lot of "Its my football so I make the rules." We hated boys like that when we were in 2nd grade, and it hasn't gotten any more fair since.
"Welmer May 7, 2010 at 21:34
fmz wrote:Welmer,
your judgement is starting to look a bit suspect. You post an article on political utility of not being reasonable and now you wounder at the verbiage from the radically unreasonable.
Well, see, that’s what sucks about being a publisher: you’ve got to accommodate a lot of people at once, so your judgment is always suspect.
Ultimately, it’s the readers who matter. They are my flock, and if I didn’t shoot wolves I wouldn’t be doing my job.
"
Flock? Jesus?
Respected Spearhead poster telling us how she is raising her daughter:
""nilk May 7, 2010 at 20:01
Michael, I read the review you linked to, and while I can see where the author is coming from, I prefer to look at the bigger view.
When my girl hits her teens, I want to take her to the shooting range and teach her to use a gun. Even if we do have the most restrictive gun laws in the world here in Oz.
I want her to learn self defence, and be able to kick some arse if it needs kicking.
So many people turn their girls into pampered little princesses, that it makes life for everyone difficult.
With the current multicultural mixing going on in Western societies, then the possibility of her being assaulted goes up exponentially, especially in an area like where we live, with the municipality proudly declaring that we’ve got 93 nationalities in the neighbourhood.
You reckon I’m not going to look at my girl learning weapons and things when she’s a bit older? 8’s a bit young, but with everything else going on, there’s no way she’s not going to learn to look out for herself.
""
I don't see her being of much use to men. A violent or suspicious female is not a good wife.
I see your point, thanks for explaining it.
My attitude is, if someone brings a football and tries to make the rules, tell them to go pound sand and buy my own football. When we were kids, we couldn't buy our own football, things have changed.
However, overall, I have a totally different viewpoint. My view is, the men of this nation are never going to stand up. They are wimps suited only for fighting among themselves. I hate to say that, because I think American men are collectively too good for American women, and Mexican/Thai/PI women well know it.
But, they simply can't stand up to sick, twisted, psychotic women.
So, I bailed, and urge others to consider it. I have had some success in encouraging men to bail. Once men get a taste of relatively sane women in a male friendly society, they seldom go back.
I fought a good fight, at least 10,000 hours of a variety of activities, including public activism, over a ten year period, but another name for One Man Army is cadaver. I have one life to live, and overall it is very good here in Mexico. My b.p. this week was 100/63. I am in great health, have not needed a doctor's treatment in 8 or more years.
Other men who bailed have reported ability to stop all meds, angina gone, etc.
If you can fight, then fight. But, in the end, take care of yourself because no one else is going to do it.
Anonymous age 68
Bob said...
Note to Marlon:
Numerous men's web sites have taken that "Its my board so I make the rules" approach. It reminds me a lot of "Its my football so I make the rules." We hated boys like that when we were in 2nd grade, and it hasn't gotten any more fair since.
that is too damn true i used to hate the little cunts i used to kick their fucking heads in for it
Same day as the spearhead article about trolls look what is edited:
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/index.php?title=MikeeUSA&diff=8716&oldid=8320
"He is regarded as a troll and a sexist within the masculist movement as well."
What's the diffrence between a feminist and a men's rights supporter? They both believe women should control human reproduction and thusly the entire species itself (since men will pay any price for that). What is the diffrence?
""Postby TrollKing » Sat May 08, 2010 6:13 am
I don't for one moment believe that women havn't had the ability to consent to sex or marriage. This is a feminist lie. Women have always had some measure of choice in their sexual pairing. Men used to have to call on women. This meant they went to the females house and met her parents and she and her parents would choose which male she married. Now did some women get forced into marriage for economic reasons. Yeah sure, the wealthy did. The average farmer didn't. I can simply look back into my own family tree and realize that many of these ideas are bullshit. Its like the feminist revionist history that says men traded women as if they were property. Women controlled their own sexuality outside of marriage. Inside of marriage it was the property of the husband. In my own family tree there are several women who had children out of wedlock and they got along just fine. Their children had matrilineal lines, up until they married and then the next set of their children had patrilineal lines. Men never owned women, infact men have always been subserviant to women. Thats why males died in wars, not women. Women have always owned their own sexuality, they simply decided to trade it for male resources, and men gained paternity rights. In other words, female nature is based in whorishness. ""
Trollking is correct.
Why should we support women controling their own sexuality (and therefore controling men?) Why not support men controling sexuality and MEN choosing their mates (aka: marraige by abduction. Rape. Etc)?
It's a woman's world if women control reproduction. It's a man's world if men control it (not fathers: fathers (and brothers) are proxies of daughters and aquiece to whatever the daughters want.)
Note to anonymous, age 68.
I understand what you are saying, but if every kid stays in his own yard with his own football, you never get a game together. That doesn't work. Bully boys need to learn to be more cooperative.
The men's movement such as it is is largely composed of manginas who refuse to allow any of the more edgy men to offend feminists. Its all about their "flock" of feminist members. Its really all about their commercials. An edgy web site generates complaints to the advertising sites. Feminists are a lot better than men at complaining to advertisers.
"Why doesn't Mikee just start his own forum or blog?"
He has done that.
blogspot webblog
wordpress weblog
pressword weblog
etc.
All of them were shut down.
He also used to run his own website and forum for many years which had both his own opensource programs, videogame media, and opinions on it for download. It was attacked and many attempts were made to find out his identity and location for federal prosecution, and to have him fired from his job, etc, by "geekfeminists". He was reported to the FBI atleast 5 times and was complaints were filed against him in many other countries aswell with the stated goal of having him imprisoned if he were to travel to those countries. Some of thespearhead commentators have attempted to discover the same information again, and to have it acted upon.
So, yes, all your suggestions have been attempted. All have failed.
The carrier is not the issue here, it is the message.
I can't argue with a word you say, Bob, not a word. I am well aware how hated kids were when other kids had no choice and the stupid kids abused it. And, it made sense, because most kids couldn't get another football.
When intelligent people have a different viewpoint, there usually is a reason for that difference.
In my case, I started to some extent public activism in the form of op-eds to local newspapers, in 1978, and continued with other activism, including picketing the court house, until 1993.
I stopped because I realized most men are such manginas they will never stand up for their rights no matter what you do. They are fit only for fighting among themselves like little children. Getting most men to do anything beside posting anonymously on secret web pages is like pushing a rope.
So, though I do respect men who do anything at all, I also realize it is a waste of time.
In Spearhead's case, they will accomplish nothing, just as my generation accomplished nothing. Sure, they all tell each other they are changing the world, just as my generation told ourselves we were going to change the world. We didn't and they won't, either.
Thus, my viewpoint is not to waste my time arguing with impotent losers who aren't going to change anything.
That's just me, of course. but, in the end that is why I am in Mexico. I win.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
"If the feminists are against it, then Bob is for it."
While I may argue with Mikee over his beliefs, it troubles me to see that the feminists can have the voices of men shut down at will. We pretend to have "free speech" in the US, but that is not really the case. PC is PC and non-PC is not allowed. That is called "equality" in femiNazi doublespeak.
It occurs to me that a man could form a nonprofit corporation with fictional "illegal alien" directors. A mail drop could be used for the addresses. Then he could register a URL in the name of the corporation.
A server could be set up in a cheap apartment or you could rent a small space in a shared business facility. An alternative might be to get a "RV" satellite account. The RV accounts have a mailing address but no fixed transmitter address. The mail address can be the mail drop belonging to the fictional Chinese/Mexican aliens and the corporation.
The FBI monitors 100% of the web traffic. Their large computers scan all traffic for key phrases. Officially it is supposed to find terrorists before they put bombs in NYC. In effect it terrorizes the people and creates anti-government political movements. The feminists may have "reported" Mikee to the FBI but anybody can report anything and get ignored.
It is more worrisome that feminists have controlled speech on the Internet almost since its beginnings. In the first few years of Internet on AOHell, Bob got banned for objecting to feminist anti-men hate. It seems that anti-men hate did not violate their rule prohibiting "prejudice," but objecting to it did violate that rule -- according to their feminist moderators.
Feminists control Google and their Adsense marketing programs, and similar. Any men's web site that offends feminists gets its ads cut off and loses its income. Financial control used to censor content and silence the voices of angry men is a bigger threat than the FBI.
Note to anonymous, age 68:
You are right about the lack of success we found objecting to feminism back in the 60s and 70s. Men just weren't ready to hear about it. A lot of the problems came with societal guilt over the great wars of our fathers. Men were "bad" and particularly white men were "bad."
That kind of societal guilt takes at least 3 generations to overcome. Young men today are still not ready to speak about feminism, but quietly are making a difference. Young women won't admit to being a feminsit because that is a social disaster. And in elections, men are making some progress.
http://tinyurl.com/wxyzzyxw
"The carrier is not the issue here, it is the message."
Maybe you ought to reexamine your message, which AFAICT is "rape, rape rape." Rape is a hot-button issue. I used to not get it until I started reading accounts of prison rape, man-on-man. The accounts were chilling and very disturbing. Men who have been raped report it being a horrible experience and not just because of physical pain. They suffer serious psychological damage from it as well as physical. Even homosexual prisoners are traumatized by being raped.
When all the shit about pedophile priests started coming out in the early 2000s the men who were victimized were also traumatized by it. Men and women seem to have the same experience and damage. Loss of self-esteem, loss of personal identity, anxiety, phobias more than the average population, trouble with relationships with the opposite sex, nightmares and other sleep disorders,substance abuse, anger-management problems, the list goes on and on. It seems from all I've read that rape is a lot more than forced sex for the victim. Men and women both, boys and girls alike. Maybe you should read a little more too. A few years of research convinced me that rape is a crime, not a social instrument. Didn't make me a feminist, but it did make me rethink my anger on Saturday nights when I had to date Rosy Palm instead of a real girl who didn't want to go out with me.
Reexamine your message and you might change your mind. I doubt it, but do a little research. I can provide you with plenty of links if you want. Otherwise, start up a blog that's all about raping virgins. Anything other than raping virgins is off-topic and you can remove the comments. Perfect solution.
Exasperated, not angry
I don't know, exasperated and highly confused. I may be wrong, But, I don't think Bob has said much about rape himself, except to say the concept of marital rape is an oxymoron, that one cannot rape his wife. And, I agree. Any woman who thinks she can be raped by her husband has obviously committed fraud when she pretended to marry him. Which is common in the USA. Which is why intelligent men do not marry in the USA.
And, I do think he recently said clearly he thought real rape was wrong and a criminal act which should be severely punished. I know I can be wrong, so feel free to show where Bob advocated rape and I will correct myself.
Mikeeusa is the one who has advocated getting wives by raping young virgins, and Bob has explicitly asked him to tone it down, and has asked the rest of us to take it easier on Mike. Mike even admitted not long ago that he knows it can't be done.
So, I think, if you can't correct what I am telling you, that you are simply making up stuff in your own mind and attributing things to Bob that he hasn't said. I wait for you to backup your accusations.
Anonymous age 68
I just ran into the same games on another blog. I reported on DV in Mexico, and the need for Mexican women to adjust to a new reality, which is few women can afford to have their husband tossed in jail even if they want to. Also, Mexican women have learned that it is not a good idea to scream insults at their husbands, especially when they are drunk.
Two people took me to task, accusing me of thinking that was okay.
This was the Ugly American in action. To be PC, when I reported the truth about DV in Mexico, I was supposed to piss and moan and sigh with the horror of it all. Since I did not piss and moan and sigh with the horror of it all in the PC mandated correct manner, I must obviously think it is okay that way.
Bob allows Mikeeusa to post things which Bob has said he does not agree with, and he has said it a number of times. But, since he lets Mike say it, because he has just said in some detail he thinks men's blog should allow differing opinions, you assume Bob is all about rape.
Why do I think Bob is not the one with the problem?
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Bob does not "advocate rape."
Bob recognizes that "rape" is the premier hate program of organized feminism, and is massively over punished. Bob does not support the feminist hate program, and from time to time objects to men and would-be MRA's who pander to feminist dogma by supporting their primer hate program used to hurl at men and send so many men to hell.
Feminists have become so irrational and hateful about the whole topic that no rational discussion can be held. Bob has proposed a moritorium on rape-hate persecution of men until calm and order can be restored.
Of course, feminists and their well trained lackeys scream bloody monthly when any man objects to rape-hate hysteria.
Meanwhile, rape is the #1 theme in female erotic fiction and sells 25 million "bodice ripper" books per month. Getting laid by an aggressive man is clearly not the huge trauma that the hate mongering femiNazi claim.
Personally, I feel actual rape is very bad. But, I also believe there are more false rape charges than real rape charges, and nothing is done to women who file the false charge, even when they admit it was a lie.
Yet, I have had good teachers who taught me that maybe women don't think rape is so bad as others claim.
I learned some years ago that large numbers of men were being raped in prison. When I told women about it, there was pretty much a standard response.
They would think a minute, then start laughing and laughing, until in most cases tears of laughter would run down their cheeks.
I concluded that perhaps women don't think rape is all that bad, unless of course it happens to them personally. So, why should men worry a lot about something women think is funny when it happens to someone else?
I still think true rape should be punished if proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and those who file false charges should receive the exact same punishment they were trying to inflict on someone else if proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
But emotionally I have become somewhat indifferent to rape unless it involves one of my loved ones. I had good teachers.
I also remember something that Doyle used to put on the front of the LIBERATOR. It was a quote from a woman, something like this. She said women get too upset about being raped, rape is getting beat up and men get beat up all the time.
Those of you who criticize Bob for the topic of rape, I suggest instead of picking at Bob, go after the women who preach that all men are rapists.
And, go after those who claim a husband can rape his wife.
Anonymous age 68
The message will not change. It will never change.
" Men and women seem to have the same experience and damage. Loss of self-esteem, loss of personal identity,"
It is bad for a man to lose his self esteem and personal identity: he is cowed, more controlable in that state.
It is _good_ for _MEN_ that women and girls lose their self esteem and personal identity: they are cowed and more controlable, more docile, in that state.
Men are not women. The domination of females (especially previously unconqured females) by men is natural, and more importantly, good for men. The domination of men by females (or their proxy: the police) is bad for Men.
The message will never change.
"And, I do think he recently said clearly he thought real rape was wrong and a criminal act which should be severely punished. I know I can be wrong, so feel free to show where Bob advocated rape and I will correct myself."
You are wrong.
Bob said that rape was not much of a crime and the punishment should be the price one pays for the services of a lady-of-the-night.
Why almost all men rush to defend the total domination females have over their life is beyond me. Those who control sex control men (because what men want the most is to have relations with females). Men themselves should control that: they should beable to abduct a virgin girl, rape her, and marry her. Oh an men should also have advanced weaponry to kill off the mob that forms to "protect" women's right to control the destiny of the world.
Anons and MRAs:
You can either have men control women and society, or you can have women control sex (and men).
You cannot have men controling women or society, but women still controling sex. But MRAs think you can.
To be "pro-rape" (of virgins) is to be anti women controlling men.
To support the prosecution/persecution of men for raping virgin girls (and then forcing them into marraige), or any of the similar prosecutions in that area, is to support women's control of men.
That is it. There are no other options.
Women control men and society through rationing "their" reproductive capabilities. They use the market as a weapon. The only reason they can do that is because police (or mobs of pro-women-power men when there aren't police) protect them from being abducted and forced into marraige by men when they are girls, and from having to submit to their husbands (in modern times) once married.
If you are pro-rape prosecution you support women's greatest weapon against men.
"Mikeeusa is the one who has advocated getting wives by raping young virgins, and Bob has explicitly asked him to tone it down, and has asked the rest of us to take it easier on Mike. Mike even admitted not long ago that he knows it can't be done."
Bob has noted many times that marraige by abduction is no sin except in a scumbag worthless woman's society (though he didn't phrase it that way).
I am not alone.
Hey BOB look at this SHIT!!
Legal protection for bully victims
Sunday, May 09, 2010 » 10:08am
Young victims of cyber and classroom bullying will be given legal protection under new anti-harassment laws to be introduced by the federal government.
Fairfax newspapers say the changes will mean victims under the age of 16 will be able to use sexual harassment laws to pursue their tormentors.
At present a 15-year-old girl whose former boyfriend sends naked cyber images of her to their classmates has no protection under federal sexual harassment legislation.
Students will also be able to take action against teachers from other schools.
The changes are part of the government's attempt to modernise the 25-year-old Sex Discrimination Act.
I told you ITS MUCH MUCH WORSE IN AUSTRALIA DIDN'T I FUCKING BITCHES NOTE WHO IT'S AIMED AT YOUNG MEN "SEXUALLY DISCRIMINATING" AGAINST YOUNG NUBILE FEMALES AGAIN I HATE LIVING IN AUSTRALIA!!! YOU THINK YOU'VE GOT IT BAD THINK AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!
Anonymous age 68 wrote: "I concluded that perhaps women don't think rape is all that bad, unless of course it happens to them personally. So, why should men worry a lot about something women think is funny when it happens to someone else?"
Sometimes rape turns out to be "The best sex I ever had." It has a lot of "bad boy" excitement for the female in additon to sex which has its own natural biological pleasure no matter who decided that sex is going to happen.
Bob learned several years ago that a big part of the job of the "Rape Crisis Center counselor is to convince "rape victims" that they are actually "victims" even when they had a fucking good time getting raped. It turns out that rape is not always "a fate worse than death" like the feminsits want men to believe. Many times real rape is a fucking good time. All the Rape Crisis Center managers and counselors know that dirty secret in their rape-hate advocacy program. They have to teach counselors to deal with "victims" who had a fucking good time.
We also should not confuse natural sex between men and women with an unnatural homosexual assault. One is biologically pleasurable and fills evolutionary drives, and the other is just a vicious assault.
For the record, 68, my comments were directed at MikeeUSA, not Bob. Bob has made a few comments about rape in other columns that I disagree with, but in this case I was responding to Mikee and his constant harping on the subject of rape. I stand by them. He's back, still talking about rape, rape, and rape.
Exasperated, not confused
Note to Mikee:
Bride Capture has been a traditional practice in many societies for thousands of years. It should not be misconstrued with your stupid advocacy of raping virgins. Once again, it is legally and morally impossible for the concept of "rape" to apply to a man's wife except under feminist nonsense. Please drop your feminist nonsense.
What is today? Today is Mother's Day. Let us remind our mothers of all the dirt they did to us.
"Bride Capture has been a traditional practice in many societies for thousands of years. It should not be misconstrued with your stupid advocacy of raping virgins. Once again, it is legally and morally impossible for the concept of "rape" to apply to a man's wife except under feminist nonsense. Please drop your feminist nonsense."
The rape and then marraige of virgins is bride capture. Rape, as we know it today, is sex with a female without her concent.
Men who don't like that definition have been trying for 1/2 a century... perhaps a whole century to define rape as something else.
They have failed. Their arguments have failed. Whey they are confronted with "well what you are advocating is rape" they back down fumbling with words trying to claim it is not.
And that's when everyone stops listening to them.
It's time for another approach. It's time to say that yes, the capture of virgin young females and the man having sex with them at HIS will and forcing of them into marraige... is rape... and since another man's wife wasn't stolen... it's not detrimental to men... so it's just fine.
Bob, I'm not a feminist BUUUUT I don't try to redefine words when others before me have tried and failed to do just that for half a century or more.
A man forcing himself upon a young virgin female and then taking her as a wife is the man being in control and is good.
A man having relations with his wife whenever he decides to, regardless of her objections, is the man being in control and is good.
Sure, most men will never be convinced of this... but somehow that never stoped the ancient Isralies. It never stopped Mr Kahn. Old Muhammed was not stoped by this either. No evil man was ever stopped by the complaints of good men.
We have to acknowlege that to be anti-women's rights, though it is good for MEN, is evil. We have to acknowleg that only evil actions will wipe away good (pro-women's rights supporters). This is a one sided war right now and evil is being locked away and killed throughout the world by good pro-women's rights men... while evil sits down and does nothing.
Note to anonymous:
Yes, today is a good day to remember all the crap that boys get from mothers.
Mothers do twice as much child abuse as father including sexual abuse and murder, and mothers abuse boys twice as much as they abuse girls.
Mothers have been responsible for the sexual mutilation of a hundred million American men.
Mommy murder is the leading cause of death of boys under age 5, and that doesn't even count millions of boys who have been killed by abortions.
Mothers frequently deprive boys of the love and guidance of their fathers, and often subject boys to additional abuse from her parade of other men.
Mothers are self-centered, egotistical, irrational bitches who willingly sacrifice their own sons for their own selfish ends.
Yes, today is a good day to remember the horror show of mothers.
>> 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
He has said this a zillion times over the years.
Anonymous age 68
Age 68, I disagree with your explanation of why many women are ok with prison rape. A couple of years ago we had a high-profile rape case here (our DA likes to see his name in the paper) that ended in a well-publicized conviction. I overheard a couple of women talking about it and making light of whether or not the guy would be raped in prison. One of them snorted and made a comment to the effect "let's see how he likes it for a change." I think women are not concerned with men raping men because they like the idea of it happening to men "for a change" although if I read the statistics correctly, the incidents of prison rape make man-on-man rape more prevalent than man-on-woman so IMO more of a societal concern.
Bob's comments 5/9 8:15am are an example of what I disagree with. Not enough to quit reading here by any means, but I disagree with him. I think that rape of anyone is wrong, but Bob disagrees. It's his blog. I think if I pointed out that women are sometimes also forcibly sodomized in the commission of rape that he'll find a way to make it less serious that sodomizing a man. I disagree, but it's not my blog. I also disagree with you on the subject of DV. Again, if I read the numbers right women instigate about half of DV incidents and I don't have much patience with those who do. Dumbasses should know better than to pick a fight with someone larger and stronger. But I also detest men who like to hit women who are smaller and weaker and didn't hit first. I detest cowards and bullies and don't think that mouthing off is anywhere near sufficient grounds for knocking anyone around. We live in different countries with different standards for that.
As for MikeeUSA, I think he can be found here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/obsession since he's pretty much got a one-track mind when it comes to raping virgins into marriage. I'm a usenet veteran and know it's all too easy to dismiss someone as crazy, off their medication and other empty insults, but in Mikee's case I do think he's disturbed.
Exasperated, not angry
>>don't think that mouthing off is anywhere near sufficient grounds for knocking anyone around.
There we go again putting words in people's mouths. I do not think I ever said mouthing off was "sufficient grounds" for knocking anyone around. That is your silly idea.
The truth is if a woman runs her mouth at a drunk Mexican man she IS going to get knocked around, and probably in most countries as well. Mexican women of even modest intelligence understand this, even if you are incapable of understanding it. Which is why they don't waste time and sympathy on any woman stupid enough to run her mouth at a drunk.
This "sufficient grounds" B.S. for the inevitable, is a feminist concept found in the Anglosphere.
Another common example is: Just because a woman runs around the streets more naked than not, at night does not 'justify' her being raped. No one says it does, but if she runs around the streets half naked at night, she WILL be raped eventually. Only feminists and manginas will fail to grasp that.
I won't rape her. I assume you won't rape her. Most men won't rape her, but it is only a matter of time until she encounters a crazy person who does rape her, and only fools fail to understand that. There is evil in the world and there are precautions that all sane people take to avoid that evil.
If I walked into an inner city ethnic bar, and shouted ethnic insults, that does not justify my body being found in the canal the next morning, but that's where my body will be if I am stupid enough to do it.
This is psychobabble, and involves a failure to grasp reality.
Thanks for showing your true female and feminist nature. You deserve few more responses.
Anonymous age 68
You can't go wrong by treating others (especially strangers) cautiously. Often, the less said the better. But if they are harming you, call authorities. Do whatever to protect yourself... often with a few determined words, and strong action.
"You can't go wrong by treating others (especially strangers) cautiously. Often, the less said the better. But if they are harming you, call authorities. Do whatever to protect yourself... often with a few determined words, and strong action."
The "athorities" is a female concept. Men do not take kindly to strangers ruling over them.
Bob, they have a point, most men ARE our enemies. Only a very few men even want men to hold dominion over women and girls, and even a fewer number want that dominion to be complete and absolute.
Just think about the few men who accept the young marraige of fertile girls (age 12 to 14, just to be clear I'm not talking about the 18+ rule)?
Think about the even fewer men who accept bride capture.
Or even just think about the small amount of men who are opposed to women voting.
Even in the middle east, or asia, the number of men who support such things is low. (Middle east invented chilvary and deferance to women though... those muslims... the high-brow sunnis followed Ashia as a female military leader after Muhammed died, it was the Shittes that refused to follow the woman and instead fought under Ali... and notice that in shitte countries often bride capture is legal (the father just gets paied) but in Sunni countries the men are executed. Sunnis are manginas that are our enemies aswell (because they introduced women's rights to europe). Also note that the Sunnis usually feel themselves superior to the Shiites because they protect women from men so much. They see the Shiites as dogs.)
If there ever is a civil war over women's rights it will be us evil men against those good men. It's not going to be against women, women don't fight: they gain proxies.
ROTFLMO!!
I doubt this will make it to your comments, but what he hell.
The comment attributed to me at MA101 is a complete fabrication. I never posted a word to their site.
You are an absolute moron, Bob, but hey, have fun.
I posted this on the MGTOW board where they are calling me a woman/chick, it went into moderation so likely won't get posted:
"I'm not a woman.
I notice that the men in the Men's Rights Movement call any man who is more infavor of men's liberties and opposed to women's rights a feminist or a woman. Everyone less extreme than them is a feminist, everyone more extreme than them is a feminist-provacatour. Each man in the MRM stands on his own high pedestal, and everyone to either side of him is scum and THE problem with society.
No.
Women's rights, women's equality and acendancy over man is the problem.
The fact that females have choice, the fact that they are not enslaved into marrige when the would make the most suitable brides (when they gain the ability to have children (usually at 12, 13, or 14) when they are the most vunerable to psycological and physical manipulation by the man (the husband), the fact that it is not men and only men who make the choices... that is the problem.
Young females' purpose is to be the brides of men. Not to be the trophy horse of the father, not to be an independent actor in their own right, but to be the obedient domestic servant of a man who chose her as his wife.
Most men will never accept this: they are good men.
Somehow that never stopped the ancient Isralies, Kahn and his crew, and old muhammed.
The ancient Isralies even wrote their anti-women's rights pro-men's liberty and domination over ANY not yet claimed (married/betrothed) female... that's nice.
Good men are the enemies of bad men and the protectors of women and women's rights.
Good men protect women and girls from being used as slaves, wives, subordinates.
Good men raise women up and give us the world we have now.
Good men are the enemies of bad men.
They are the reason we don't have the brides we desire.
They stand in our way."
--MikeeUSA--
Why is it that I kindof hate these people?
Note to Mikee:
Many men are conflicted between their training to protect females and their realization that we men are being destroyed by females and other men who protect them.
The layers of realization and awareness of feminism and its harm are only peeled back one at a time. A good man may wake up one day and discover that his wife is a femiNazi whore who destroyed his marriage and bound him into indentured servitude (slavery) but he still carries a myth that his "little princess" is not exactly like her stupid cunt mother. A man may realize that the "DV" program hurts millions of men and destroys families, but still think that "law and order" is "necissary" for a society.
Most men will turn on their neighbor, call him names, if he has gotten a little farther past the oppression and brainwashing of feminist dogma. Most men still want to protect their oppressor. Look up "Stockholm Syndrome.
Note to LaSalle's go-boy:
"Suppose they had a gender war...and men showed up"
I'm sorry to learn that you didn't try to make peace with other men. I thought you were a better man.
Your 3rd grade name calling does not work to get Bob or other Real Men to shut up. When you can't discuss man to man, you always have your "ban" button, like a pathetic wuss.
You and Pussy-boy Mike do not own and control the Men's Movement, nor write the litmus test for who will be a Men's Rights Advocate. Supporting "equality" feminism is the opposite of showing up for the war aganst men. Supporting "equality" feminism supports the feminist war against men.
Suppose they had a gender war...and men showed up on the side of men for a change? That seems to be where MA is going. I wish I could say the same for MND.
"So, I think, if you can't correct what I am telling you, that you are simply making up stuff in your own mind and attributing things to Bob that he hasn't said. I wait for you to backup your accusations."
Age 68, what is your beef with me? I respond to a post by, I assume, MikeeUSA, quote him at the top and advise him again at the bottom to start his own blog and you accuse me of attacking Bob. I don't need to back up anything since that post wasn't directed at Bob.
Now you're pissed at me for accusing you of supporting wife-beating. I did no such fucking thing. Yeah, mouthing off at a drunk is a good way to get a beating. but there's no good way to deal with a drunk.
Let me tell you about dealing with drunks. It's a subject I know well. Back in Tennessee in the 60s, DV was a private issue. One sheriff and two deputies weren't bothered with it. I don't recall my mother yelling at my father, but she got hit anyway. No meat in the soup? She got hit even though he'd been unemployed for months and too drunk to hunt. It was the 60s. Men hunted. Still do. Not him. Mention a word about getting even a part-time job? She got hit for saying a man couldn't support his family. Offer to trade some excess vegetables for a little meat? She got hit. House not clean? Get hit. House too clean? Get hit for having nothing better to do. Yelling wasn't necessary to piss of a drunk. She died when I was 10. Then me and my brother got it because she wasn't there to get inbetween him and us. Grades aren't good enough? Get a beating for not wanting to make anything of yourself. Grades too good? Get hit for being a sissy faggot little girl who studies all the time. Rip your pants playing baseball? Get hit for not knowing the value of a dollar. Get a job after school? Get hit just like your goddamned mother for saying he can't feed his family. See a girl? Get a beating for neglecting your chores whether you'd done them or not.
I know all about drunks and their beatings. It's not peculiar to Mexico. I've done enough reading to know about men who don't have many avenues for success and their frustrations. Been there done that. But I can walk away from some nagging female or pissy little punk. I don't have patience with those who can't.
YMMV. And what the fuck have you got against me and why do you construe everything I write as an attack against you or Bob?
Forgot to sign the previous post, addressed to Age 68.
Exasperated, not angry
"Suppose they had a gender war...and men showed up on the side of men for a change? That seems to be where MA is going. I wish I could say the same for MND."
Lol, men hate men, always have.
Clarification... good men hate men.
Good men love law and order and helping the womenfolk out and asking nothing in return. They are good servants.
"Been there done that. But I can walk away from some nagging female or pissy little punk. I don't have patience with those who can't."
Because you got hit.
And we should to (by police).
You know, the Italians don't hit. The men of southern Italy just put a knife to the womans throught if she's causing problems... would you rather that? The threat of death?
Hmm reminds me of the arabs.
I was reading Jihad Watch, a pro-american anti-islamic-terrorism website, and came across this lump of prose:
[quote]
"Georganne Chapin, executive director of Intact America, a group defending women from this practice, was "astonished that a group of intelligent people did not see the utter slippery slope" that the AAP had started on by allowing for the "ritual nick." Chapin asked: "How much blood will parents be satisfied with? There are countries in the world that allow wife beating, slavery and child abuse, but we don't allow people to practice those customs in this country. We don't let people have slavery a little bit because they're going to do it anyway, or beat their wives a little bit because they're going to do it anyway."
Chapin is right. What next? Wife-beating seminars and its unintended benefits? Or a strip in Vegas for child marriages, so they won't go overseas for the nuptials? Allowing for this "ritual nick" will not have the effect these nudnik do-gooders imagine. It will have just the opposite effect. Islamic misogyny will be given the seal of approval by the American Academy of Pediatrics...."
[/quote]
Wifebeating, "child marraiges" (anyone under 18). America stands against such practices. Any man who hits his wife goes to jail for three years usually, sometimes longer. Any man who marries a young woman under the age of 18 goes to jail for life, and in some states is executed.
This is what America is. This is what the world is becoming. What will you do, what can you do?
The actual article was on some tribal custom the grandmothers do in africa and the middle east... but I was interested in those two paragraphs. This is a conservative anti-muslim website. American conservative.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/05/geller-american-academy-of-pediatrics-and-the-new-york-times-sanction-fgm.html
"Mali: Imam living in fear after backing women's rights bill"
Ah that's better news, I hope that Imam gets shanked to death.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/05/mali-imam-living-in-fear-after-backing-womens-rights-bill.html
" An imam in Mali is living in fear after backing a new family law which no longer obliges wives to obey their husbands, angering Muslim groups.
He has received threatening phone calls and local Muslim leaders have tried to dismiss him.
The new law is currently being given a second reading in parliament after Mali's president refused to sign it because of the Muslim protests."
" Its most contentious provisions give more rights to women.
For example, under the law husbands and wives owe each other loyalty and protection rather than obedience, women get greater inheritance rights and the minimum age for girls to marry in most circumstances is raised to 18."
I pray the imam and all who support this law die.
Bob: why are these laws cropping up everywhere and how are they to be stopped?
Do the pro-women's rights people have to be tortured to death before they will stop for awhile? What is the solution as you see it?
>>Any man who hits his wife goes to jail for three years usually, sometimes longer. Any man who marries a young woman under the age of 18 goes to jail for life, and in some states is executed.
Hogwash. There is no state in the US which puts men in jail for three years for hitting his wife. If you think I am wrong, tell us which state does that.
Also, there is no state which puts men in prison for life for marrying a woman under 18. Nor does any state execute men for marrying a woman under 18.
Why are you saying such outrageous things.
Note to exasperated: I am going to work hard at not reading your female postings. I started one and realized it was yours, and you were whining about why I took the approach I did to your postings. Considering I said very plainly what I thought of your postings in detail, and why I think that, you are another person it is impossible to communicate with. If your body has male sex organs, you are one totally messed up dude.
And, let me make it clear I am not just using insulting language. Your 'logic' is absolutely 100% female in nature.
Anonymous age 68
"Hogwash. There is no state in the US which puts men in jail for three years for hitting his wife. If you think I am wrong, tell us which state does that."
Go try and marry a 14 year old girl in the US and tell me how you make out.
You'll be in prison for a llloooooonnnggg time.
Note to anonymous:
Language is important to express yourself clearly.
A man does not marry a "girl." Men marry women.
There are many places where men may marry decent young women with permission of their fathers.
The posting did not say a long time, which is correct, It said for life, which is B.S. And, it also said in some cases it means capital punishment, which is more like mental illness talking. Let us not be stupid here, then try to twist out of it.
Dearies can talk nonsense. When you are where men are, you get called down on stupidity.
Differences of opinion, even extreme differences of opinion, are normal on this blog. Saying things like were said in that posting above are totally stupid.
Anonymous age 68
Name one state in the U.S. where you can be executed for marrying a girl under the age of 18.
I was reading the update and came across this that you quoted from LaSalle:
"No right thinking person would assert that men should assume property rights over women and children — as you apparently do. That’s insane. It’s repulsive. It’s the signature of a warped mind and an empty soul."
The area of children's right is convoluted and a legal nightmare, especially on the subjects of discipline and environment. Generally, however, it is agreed that parents have the right to raise their children as they please.
Women's rights are another kettle of fish. Do you think that men should have chattel rights over women? Leaving children out of the discussion completely, at least for purposes of this post. Should women be considered property in the United States? If so, why, and how could it be implemented, given the U.S.'s history with slavery?
Note to anonymous:
The deliberate mischaracterization of father/husband leadership of a family as "chattel rights," "property" or "slavery" is very offensive. That kind of offensive straw man argument is serves to demonstrate the lack of reasoning ability that is typical of feminists. By lying about traditional relationships you create hostile emotions and add nothing to a reasonable discourse.
There has been no culture or historical period that Bob is aware of where any of those were true, and Bob does not know of anyone who advocates anything of the kind today. Your irrational lies do not make for for reasoned discourse.
Successful societies have men as leaders of families. Men are better at making rational decisions instead of based on "PMS" or other irrational nonsense like the stupid emotional lies cited above.
Men tend to consider the needs of everyone in the family, protecting and nurturing everyone. Females consider their own needs and disregard the needs of others. That is why we have so many divorces and destroyed families when females are allowed to make stupid decisions.
bob, i cant find which part of your article is the may 10th update, it's not clearly defined in the article. you need to teach those m101 boys a lesson. use tor and register several accounts to harass them.
Another good one, Bob.
I, too, know of no time in history when women who were not slaves as so many men also were, were ever chattel property.
Men today in the US ARE chattel property. Their lives and their future earnings can be confiscated from them and bought and sold, which is the definition of chattel property.
I will give an easily verifiable example.
When a man is stupid enough to actually marry in the US, or messes up and helps conceive a child, some unknown percentage of his lifetime earnings are ordered to be legally transferred to the woman who just cuckolded him.
And, if she is also lazy, which is very often, and decides to let the tax payers support her, she can (and must) transfer that chattel property to the government, who then owns him.
In the era in which stupid women and manginas believe women were chattel property, the Titanic sunk. The evil slave owners went down with the ship and the poor, poor oppressed slaves sailed away in life boats, some to live for many years.
I have a standing challenge to anyone to write a believable sci-fi tale about a planet on which the slaves are so valuable that the owners will all voluntarily die to save the life of the slaves, in some cases even one slave.
No luck so far, and I am not holding my breath.
I can contemplate a sci-fi tale in which space creatures come to Earth, and when they discover the major mental illness, (the insane belief that the sex of the species which does almost all the useful work and invents almost everything is worthless,) infecting the Anglosphere, fumigate the entire Anglosphere.
Anonymous age 68
Note to Doug. As the old saying goes, "Nobody is so blind as he who will not see." The M101 boys do need some lessons on how to be men, but they are unwilling and unready to learn. A man could make 4 or 5 aliases as you suggest, but its not worth wasting time on them until they grow up a little more and become aware of what they are needing to learn. Right now, they are still young and stupid and think they know everything.
http://expressbuzz.com/opinion/op-ed/a-modern-philosopher%E2%80%99s-stone/172365.html
All about The Pill, until it gets down to a stone-age tribe found living in Dutch New Guinea. Then it gets interesting. Definitely an avenue for further research. I hadn't heard of them before. It'll be interesting to examine the male/female relationships in a culture that's remained unchanged for thousands of years and is untouched by feminism or anything like it. Had you heard of them?
"Do the pro-women's rights people have to be tortured to death before they will stop for awhile? "
Yes, idiot. That's what it's going to take. All of them, worldwide, have to be tortured to death. Now how do you propose to make that happen?
Note to anonymous:
Female fertility is directly related to the female's overall heath, including diet, diseases, exercise, etc. Females in primitive tribes who get a poor diet and do a lot of physical work have a lower fertility rate, on average, than females who get plenty to eat and do little other exercise. Body fat of about 25% is good for fertility. Female athletes commonly stop ovulating because their body fat drops.
Primitive tribes are the losers of human history. They should not be used as a general "truth" about successful human cultures.
For the past half century there has been almost total sexist prohibition against research and development of birth control pills for men. We've heard decades of lies and excuses. One common excuse lied that a pill for men would be "harder" to make. In the first few years of the 21st century a minuscule amount of research funding in Australia and Europe developed a pill for men. It was set to begin commercial distribution a couple years ago but femiNazi politicians stopped it. FemiNazi maintain total control of our families.
When you hear people celebrating 50 years of "the pill" remember that its also celebrating 50 years of total discrimination against men.
I had read somewhere that part of the problem with a male pill is female mistrust that men would actually use it. It goes something like "men never have to take the consequences of pregnancy and will lie about having vasectomies and whatever to avoid using a condom so you couldn't trust them to tell the trust about being on the male pill so why bother developing one since birth control always falls to women anyhow". I'm thinking that mandatory child support, at least in the U.S., would counter that. Can't say whether or not it was true in the past but now I think the prospect of paying big $$$ would be incentive for men to take it faithfully.
Note to anonymous:
That is another of their sexist lies. Men don't trust females to take their pills either. There must be millions of men who believed "I'm on the pill" and ended up bound into indentured servitude (slavery) for 20 years.
Its all about control. FemiNazi don't want men to be able to control when women don't get pregnant.
>>Its all about control. FemiNazi don't want men to be able to control when women don't get pregnant.
Bob is hot today. He nails it again!!!!
Anonymous age 68
In the southern states sexual "child abuse" is a capital offence. Sexual "child abuse" is a man having sex with any female under the age of 18, wife or not (yes, the protections that a man had from such prosecution were all repealed in the 90s and 00s in the south.)
If you are fucking a 14 year old wife of yours you could be executed. There is nothing untruthful about it.
"Women's rights are another kettle of fish. Do you think that men should have chattel rights over women? Leaving children out of the discussion completely, at least for purposes of this post. Should women be considered property in the United States?"
Yes, but not to the extent to which the man is responsible for the woman's crimes. The woman or girl should be bonded to the man but he should not be responsible for whatever criminal actions she might take.
"If so, why"
It's good for men.
" and how could it be implemented, given the U.S.'s history with slavery?"
Civil war. Basically it can't. There are too many good men who stand against women losing rights and also stand against men having young wives and stand against men being happy at all, generally.
The world is going the same way (if it isn't allready: most places have chilvary: ancient feminism). Men lose.
Bob: what is the solution.
We've been talking for 30 years.
We'll be talking for 30 more.
And then well die.
Here is the Texas law, called Jessica's law, and you are full of last week's frijoles. It does not say you can be executed for having sex with anyone under 18. Go pound sand.
>>The Texas bill reserves death for those who twice rape children age under age 6, or younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of a deadly weapon, alcohol or drugs, death threats, bodily injury, kidnapping or gang rape.
>>It also creates a new offense, urged by prosecutors but decried as unfair by defense lawyers, for "continual sexual abuse of a child or children" over a period of 31 days or more.
>>The new offense would include two or more crimes involving aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, indecency, forcing a child into prostitution or pornographic sexual performances and kidnapping or burglary with the intent to sexually abuse a child. Indecency is defined as touching below the waist.
>>The compromise includes a "Romeo and Juliet" clause, making it an affirmative defense against prosecution for "continual sexual abuse" if the defendant is not more than five years older than the victim and the sexual activity is consensual.
>>Forcing a child into prostitution would be a first degree felony carrying a maximum sentence of 99 years. Using a child for pornography would be a second-degree felony with a maximum 20-years sentence.
>>The statute of limitations would be lifted for sex crimes against children under age 17.
Your local community college probably has basic literacy courses. Shouldn't cost much.
Anonymous age 68
Note I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, assuming you simply can't read, as opposed to being an egg-sucking liar.
There is some question if the law will pass the Supreme Court which has ruled the death penalty is to be reserved for those who have taken life.
Where do these people come from, Bob?
"In the southern states sexual 'child abuse' is a capital offence." (sic)
"If you are fucking a 14 year old wife of yours you could be executed. There is nothing untruthful about it."
Name one state. Just one. Come on, idiot. Name one. If there's "nothing untruthful about it" then you can name, just one, juuuuuuuust one "southern state" where it's a capital offense. You don't even have to cite the actual law--I'll look it up for you, if you can juuuuuuust name the state.
Just one, idiot.
Otherwise, just shut up, idiot.
Louisiana
Note to Anonymous:
Louisiana: If either party to the marriage is between the ages of 16 and 18, the presence and signatures of both parents are required. If a parent has legal custody in a divorce, a certified copy of the judgment must be presented. If either party is under the age of 16, a court order is required in order to obtain a license.
>>We've been talking for 30 years.
We'll be talking for 30 more.
And then well die.
What you say is true for many men. A few good men have expatted, and are living the good life.
There are several reasons more men don't bail on a sinking ship. Not in any particular order of importance:
The U.S. is very nationalistic. The general culture says there be dragons outside our borders. It never enters most men's minds to Get The Hell Out, any more than to jump off a cliff.
Wimphood. It takes cojones to pack up and leave your home country and go elsewhere, and most AM simply don't have it. The same cowardice that keeps men from standing up to the fiends who actually propose killing 90% of the men on the planet, keeps men from moving to a male-friendly country. Shiver; tremble; .
In ability to visualize life in a different culture. My little tales of daily life here in Mexico seem to help more than the usual MRA tales of beautiful hookers.
For some without good employment, and without portable skills, money is an issue.
You are right with your implication men aren't able to stand up to evil man-haters camouflaged as female humans. Note how many alleged men on this blog attack anyone who suggests anything significant, imagining they are superior kind of man for helping enslave their fellow men! They are the modern version of male slaves who were given a better house and choice of the females for whipping other slaves to force them to work harder.
But, this was the same in the Roman Empire's last days, and even in Sparta. Sparta had the toughest men in the history of the world, but once they gave women political power, they couldn't get it back again.
Someone once said continuing to do the same thing while expecting different results is mental illness. For 45 years, men have proposed activism of various sorts, and it has never worked, usually stopped by other men which is what will happen to those who try it again.
That's why it is time for the few good men who still exist to stop doing the same thing that doesn't work, and Get The Hell Out.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
South Carolina: If you are under 18, you will need a certified copy of your birth certificate and a notarized statement of parental consent. The minimum age for a female is 14 and it is 16 for a male.
There you go. You can legally marry a 14 year old virgin with her father's permission. The marriage will be recognized in other states.
>>Lousiana
Good try, f'idiot, but no cigar.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
US Supreme Court Strikes Down Louisiana’s “Jessica’s Law”
It was a close decision, 5 to 4, but now Louisiana’s “Jessica’s Law”, a law that demands that child predators, sexual deviants who rape children, be put to death for this offense has been overturned by the United States Supreme Court.
Louisiana's “Jessica’s Law” an extreme form of a family of laws recently passed by some states, named after Jessica Lunsford, a child that was assaulted, raped and then murdered by repeat sexual offender John Couey has been ruled unconstitutional by the Court on the grounds that it violates the “cruel and unusual punishment” provision of the US Constitution.
At issue, essentially, is whether the punishment fits the crime. Louisiana’s law provides that the assault and rape of a child is a capitol offense (where the offender incurs the death penalty). The reasoning of the law is that future offenders would be deterred from raping a child if the punishment was extreme enough. This theory, 5 justices decided, was unconstitutional. Wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy for the majority:
“The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child."
Here is the Lousiana law:
"(2) However, if the victim was under the age of thirteen years, as provided by Paragraph A(4) of this Section:
(a) And if the district attorney seeks a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by death or life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, in accordance with the determination of the jury. The provisions of C.Cr.P. Art. 782 relative to cases in which punishment may be capital shall apply.
(b) And if the district attorney does not seek a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence. The provisions of C.Cr.P. Art. 782 relative to cases in which punishment is necessarily confinement at hard labor shall apply."
Now, maybe you are too stupid to tell the difference between 12 years old, and 18, but we are not.
I want to tell you something. Men have a need to discuss issues affecting us, and try to understand what is happening. Clearly, men do not always agree, and Bob allows considerable disagreement, even when he thinks someone is being stupid, since free discussion is important.
However, when you just make up stuff out of thin air, that does a great dis-service to all men. If you are a little boy, which seems likely, why don't you go do your homework and get to sleep early? Tomorrow is going to be a busy day in the Second Grade. You need to learn enough to get a good job when you grow up, so you can move to a better country.
Anonymous age 68
Bob, there was a case a couple years ago, I think it was in Kansas, where a young man married a young woman, by memory she was maybe 15, legally in his own state.
When they moved to another state where sex with girls under 16 was prohibited, they arrested him and sent him to the pen as a sex offender.
So, do not assume being legally married in one state will be honored by other states.
Anonymous age 68
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/national/30baby.html
the NY Times reporting the case.
I never cease to be amazed that the more totally American female means WHORE, the more laws are passed to protect the whores like virgins.
Anonymous age 68
"There you go. You can legally marry a 14 year old virgin with her father's permission. The marriage will be recognized in other states."
Yes, but you cannot have sex with them. All the states now prosecute men older than 18 that have relations with females younger than 18, married or not. Just because you are married in an american state does not give you the right to have sex with your wife: the two concepts are divorced from eachother because of the tireless work of good men. There was a case a few years back about a tenessee man who married a young woman in kansas, the tenessee prosecutor prosecuted him and I'm pretty sure he got him put in jail for sex with a minor. This happens all over the USA. Unless you are willing to exterminate every prosecutor in the nation, and their help, you cannot have relations with a woman under 18 no matter what. Face it. I'm not lying to you. Infact a man who wrote a book on trying to use legal loopholes like you suggest is wanted by the FBI just for writing the book. In the EARLY 90s, yes you could do what you say, now you CANNOT. I also remeber a case in texas a few years back, where it was atleast legal to try to marry a 17 year old. The man had permission from the mother (the only parent still around), went with her and the daughter to get the state marraige license, and was arrested for trying. Maybe it's "legal" by the letter of the law, but you still go to prison. This is NOT our country, stop trying to pretend it is and that "you just have to do this and that impossible thing to make it happen". And stop leaning to the moderate side and pertending you didn't say the things you did in the past (guess me repeting myself makes you look bad? Or you realise that ALL the men in the MRM are good men and there is no way to get ANYWHERE by supporting complete supremacy of men over women and girls even upto the point of condoning bride abduction and low marraige ages for females?).
Note to anonymous:
It is one thing for a misandrist bigot to indite a man. It is another to get a conviction. The judge in that case probably tossed it, or the jury.
The US Constitution requires that legal acts from one state be recognized in other states:
Article IV
Section 1.
Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.
Ok so the supreme court struck it down last year. That doesn't mean it wasn't the law in louiworld, and it doesn't mean you won't go to PRISON for the rest of your life. (So you get to live in hell untill you commit suicide).
Face it: you cannot practically have a young wife in america.
1) You need a judge order (which you can't get)
2) You are not allowed to screw your new "wife" untill she's 18 anyway.
3) Men have been imprisoned for even trying to get a marraige license.
4) No parent would allow their whore... I mean daugher... to get married before they graduated highschool, and probably wouldn't be happy unless they graduated college too.
It is almost impossible.
This is not a man's country.
Afghanistan is a man's country.
The rural areas of turkey are aswell.
Some parts of russia or its sattilites maybe.
Not america. America is your enemy really.
"That's why it is time for the few good men who still exist to stop doing the same thing that doesn't work, and Get The Hell Out."
America is hellbent or bribing and warring any place that men can run to out of existance. Its goal is to bring freedom to women around the globe.
What do you do in the face of a bombing or a bribing campaign?
"It is one thing for a misandrist bigot to indite a man. It is another to get a conviction. The judge in that case probably tossed it, or the jury."
They often get convictions. Would you risk it. Also you get to stay in prison and denied bail untill they get around to trying your case. Your wife will probably move on, or atleast fuck some people on the side.
No, you can't beat the system, and you cannot run (america is placing women's rights eveyrwhere it can influence, and most places allready have chilvary (ancient feminism) in place allready)
http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2010/05/12/20100512arizona-immigration-law-consul-fallout.html
Bizarre. Looks like Mexico thinks it owns Arizona. Or at least thinks its people have every right to live there illegally and have the right to be pissed about United States laws.
Mikee, or whatever your name is, shut up about "bad men." You're not a "bad man." You're a wannabe. You want to see a bad man? Drop into a state penitentiary and look for a guy with serious muscles from working out all day with his hermanos and has tattoos all over his body and is doing time for armed robbery and assault. THAT is a bad man. Now tell him you want to abduct and rape his hermanita and ask where she lives. See if "bad men" are on your side. Otherwise stop talking about "good" men stopping "bad" men from doing what only you want to do. Bad men are not on your side.
Gasp!!! Don't tell me, Bob. You mean the states are openly violating the Constitution? Please don't tell me it is so. Sarcasm intended.
I know what you are saying, Bob, but nonetheless they are not honoring the other state's marriage laws.
>>you cannot have relations with a woman under 18 no matter what. Face it. I'm not lying to you.
There you go again, you keep repeating the same f'ing lies, but when we look up the laws you quote, YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT THE AGE LEVELS. You ARE lying to us. Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
That man who married the girl in Kansas did do jail time. The first minute he can, he will probably be back with her.
"See if "bad men" are on your side. Otherwise stop talking about "good" men stopping "bad" men from doing what only you want to do. Bad men are not on your side."
That's because they are good men. Good men screw eachother over, rob eachother (legally or illegally), and kill eachother (especially to help a woman). Good men support women's rights. Most of the men in jail are good men who support women's rights. Good men understand that men are dogs/scum and don't have any problem with assaulting or murdering other men. They do have a problem with harming, or opressing, or failing to protect women.
Good man == man who supports women's rights.
Bad man == scum who supports the supremacy of men over females.
You're using some other definition, an archaic one at that. Those "bad men" in the pen, they support and protect women. They aren't so bad, they just made some mistakes. Really they're good men who support and protect women.
Remeber: men who are convicted of having relations with females under the age of 18; men who want to dominate young women... they get murdered in the penitentiary... by good men who will not stand for bad men (men who opress women) existing.
Most of the men alive today are good men, and they don't suffer bad men lightly... not on the streets, not in the jails, not anywhere. Women reign supreme with the help from good men on both side of the law: be they police officers or thugs: both kill bad men who opress females.
You're one of the good men, right?
It shows how much of a fucking retard you are that you thought I was talking about the men who are simply criminals in jail as "bad men"... when I defined what a bad man was probably 10 times before this... and then you accuse me of thinking jailed men would support me? LOL. You don't think I know that they, those in jail, completely support women's rights? You think I assume that they are outside of society? You think I don't know that they were raised by their mothers who taught them to protect women? (And if they were raised by a father: the only fathers that are allowed to exist are good men. Men who are bad are killed quickly.)
"There you go again, you keep repeating the same f'ing lies, but when we look up the laws you quote, YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT THE AGE LEVELS. You ARE lying to us. Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68"
You are delusional.
The United States of America is an anti-man gulag which has the support of the entire united states people (both the men and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, the women (controlers of society)). You cannot fuck a 12 or 13 or 14 year old young women in America, wife or not.
You can fuck an 18+ year old woman, you might be accused of rape, but you might not be.
But you can't fuck a young virgin. This is NOT a lie. It is the TRUTH in the USA. It wasn't the truth in the early 90s, you could still go down south back then, but it IS the truth now in 2010. The laws changed to match the culture. You probably left before then.
"That man who married the girl in Kansas did do jail time. The first minute he can, he will probably be back with her."
Yep, it's too bad he did jail time, he should have murdered the police and the prosecutor... every prosecutor.
Many men who have done "time" say that if ever they were to face time again, they would go out in a blaze of glory rather than be sent to hell.
I think that men who have the courage to fight probably go to heaven, and those that choose not to fight... might not go there. Just read about the Old Testament God... I think he would not look down badly at the men who fought... he doesn't seem like someone who rewards pacifism.
"Bob: what is the solution."
Adults think for themselves and find their own solutions.
Human rights is here to stay. Accept it and be happy. Quit griping.
Anonymous asked, "Bob: what is the solution."
Bob cannot tell you a solution. However maybe you can find wisdom in the words of Thomas Jefferson
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
"One man with courage is a majority."
9:20am, it's not so bizarre if you look at it. America closing it's borders and enforcing it's immigration laws is a nightmare scenario for Mexico. Money sent home from illegals in America is one of Mexico's biggest sources of income. The guy who lives there would know more about it. I don't know if they still do it but for awhile the Mexican goverment published a comic books manual on how to cross into America safely and successfully. If all illegal Mexicans were suddenly sent back overnight it would be a terrible blow to the Mexican economy. It's irritating as hell to Americans to have other countries saying weather or not we can enforce our own laws but to Mexicans enforcement of immigration laws is a bad thing.
Again, ask the guy who lives there for more details. He'd know more than me and probably you too.
"Human rights is here to stay. Accept it and be happy. Quit griping."
That's what the Spartan and Roman women thought too. Their rights eventually dissappeared... but it took awhile for that to happen... and not all their rights dissappeared.
So you're 1/2 right.
But let me tell you this, mother fucker, the men of this woman's civilization do not give a fuck if it survives or not: they have a slave attitude. You'll have to rely on the women to make the new progress: men now are here to be a drag on the society and to tear it down (regardless of weather it hurts them aswell: they'd rather everyone lose, than only them lose)
Thomas Jefferson was a terrorist supporter.
Human rights == women's rights == bad for men.
Note to Anonymous:
Thomas Jefferson was a patriot and very wise man who understood what is necessary to establish freedom, and how fragile it is once established. Men will never have freedom unless we are willing to pay its price.
All your whining and sniveling will avail you not unless the "tree of liberty" is nurtured.
I think men should dominate (opress), but not be responsible for (not be slaves to), women and girls.
Men should opress females. Men should choose aswell.j
""
finsalscollons May 12, 2010 at 18:09
A mythology would have to be along the lines, that women and men are different, that feminists tried to make women into men and have denied women the best things in life: sharing time with their children, being at home in exchange for having to slave themselves in an office job.
""
Why does he care about women? Feminism is bad because it hurts men. Why is he complaining about what women don't like about it. This is not common cause.
"Women have been trained to see heterosexual men as fabulously wealthy oppressors, walking wallets, rapists, paedophiles, and subhuman beasts. "
Why don't we become what we are accused of. Rich opressors, who rape young women, and enslave them to ourselves, and having a habit for the gym.
It sounds like a good thing to be, aslong as the female doesn't get a dime from the wallet and is just a servant and toy.
68, what is it like in the heart of Mexico? Do ordinary Mexicans know/care about the Arizona law, or efforts in the U.S. in general to keep them out? In the U.S. illegals march for their rights to send their kids to school, have health care, jobs, houses, etc. How is it in Mexico? Do they support the illegals who have gone north? What's your take on it?
Mikee, you keep complaining about going to jail. What's the big deal? Back in the 60s the civil rights people went to jail for their cause all the time. When the wimmin in bloomers wanted to vote they went to jail. Surely you've got as much conviction as an ugly housewife in pettycoats. The peaceniks went to jail and they were all died in the wool cowards. I remember a song the wooly-headed hippies sang called "have you gone to jail for justice."
Have you gone to jail for justice, Mikee? Why not? If your cause is just and right, then protest the laws that keep you from your rights, hold press conferences, and be at least the man the ugly feminists were.
>>68, what is it like in the heart of Mexico? Do ordinary Mexicans know/care about the Arizona law, or efforts in the U.S. in general to keep them out? In the U.S. illegals march for their rights to send their kids to school, have health care, jobs, houses, etc. How is it in Mexico? Do they support the illegals who have gone north? What's your take on it?
In general, the Mexican families I know look at their illegals like we would look at family members going into the military. They view them as brave, undertaking great risks in search of a better life, and long for every phone call; every letter just as family of soldiers do.
I beg them not to go, but with no work here, and plenty of work there, they go.
I see houses, simple houses, built with the money, for families who lived in houses made of sticks and palm leaves. I see girls sent to school when they otherwise could not go, with money sent by their brothers. I see small businesses started with money sent by illegals.
In other towns, associations of illegals in the north send money to build potable water systems, to build sewage lines to houses, and improve the whole area.
Illegals come back with new ideas, with the knowledge that they need not live the way their ancestors did, that their children need not die from unclean water, or lack of basic medical care. That they need not tolerate absolute corruption by their government (which is why the 70 year political party no longer automatically elects the president.)
You wanted my view, that's the first part of it. The second part has to do with the usual view of people in power. "What are we going to do to them?"
They never seem to stop and think, "What are they going to do to us?"
The feminists are like that with men.
The people of the US are like that with men. 13 years ago, two people in Iowa who were brought as babies by their parents, not of their own free will, were arrested by Federal Attorney and deported, which meant being separated from their babies.
Um, well, okay, I guess. But, if you try to do it to ten million people, there are going to be bullets flying. Lots of them. And, those who have most to lose ALWAYS WIN. Ten million of them.
I am NOT supporting this. I am just telling you my opinion. I wish they would all come home and let then US economy tank.
Anonymous age 68
A personal comment to Richard Cerebellum. That is the wonderful Anonymous who told us you would be executed for having sex with women under 18. Then, when we pointed out that was false, said, well, in Lousiana.
Then, when that was pointed out to be false, he insists something different, also totally false. Etc; etc; etc.
Now, while repeating more total false hoods, calls ME delusional. Hoho haha heehee.
Anonymous age 68
>>Have you gone to jail for justice, Mikee? Why not?
Hee, hee, good one.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous, age 68:
American MEN have the most to lose.
>>American MEN have the most to lose.
I don't know how we compare to men in UK, for example. I know they are taking lots of crap, too. But, I certainly can't disagree American men are taking significant abuse.
On the other hand, it could be said we don't have much more to lose because most of our legal; civil; human; and constitutional rights are already gone. Yet, most men don't seem to have noticed. As long as they can sleep in their mother's basement, they assume all is well.
That is why I simply don't understand why more men aren't at least looking for an exit plan.
In Germany, some Jews started bailing in the 20's, while others ignored the obvious threats and died. There are serious proposals to eliminate as useless most men in the nation.
The Jews after the war said their biggest mistake was not believing people who said they wanted to kill them.
I am not at all ignoring those who say they want to kill large numbers of men.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
Yes, that is what is so disappointing about men today. Like the German Jews in 1930, they sit an snivel while doing nothing.
What a bunch of complainers, here. You want young 13-year-old to play with in bed? Easy. Get one.
Think you'll be arrested? Think again. You can get away with it if you plan carefully, if you're smart.
Bob et al. always brag how smart they are (larger brains, higher Mensa I.Q. etc). Ok... act smart. Have your fun with that prepubescent beauty and use that brain to NOT get caught.
Either take that chance or quit griping.
Just to clarify, Anonymous Anonymous May 14, 2010 7:14 AM, not everyone here advocates doing anything with 13 year old girls. The number here who advocate that is very small. This is another case where a forum which allows a certain amount of free speech is accused by the uneducated of advocating all the beliefs expressed by participants.
I do not personally advocate it at all. My concern is such things happen, and I think total destruction of more men for stuff that WILL happen, and do nothing to the equally 'guilty' female is wrong.
I, for one, believe it is an act of insanity to have anything to do with any female of any age, not only in the US, but anywhere in the Anglosphere.
Any man who is in the Anglosphere who is not at least thinking about an exit plan is one hurtin' dude.
Anonymous age 68
>>Think you'll be arrested? Think again. You can get away with it if you plan carefully, if you're smart.
I graduated from high school in a prison town. That prison was full off men who believed they would never get caught because they were too smart to get caught.
>>Have your fun with that prepubescent beauty and use that brain to NOT get caught.
Go pound sand. No one here has suggested having sex with prepubescent girls. You made that up.
Even our worst wackos only believe when a girl is sexually mature (you do understand what the word prepubescent means, don't you?) and desires to be sexually active, she should be married to a man old enough to support her and the children.
A high percentage of 13 year old girls are not prepubescent.
Anonymous age 68
Anon 68: why would you want to marry any woman, even a 13 year old woman?
"...when a girl is sexually mature (you do understand what the word prepubescent means, don't you?) and desires to be sexually active, she should be married to a man old enough to support her and the children."
When children, male or female, become sexually mature and desire to become sexually active, they should be well educated in the use of available methods of birth control and told how to obtain and use them effectively. That way their education and future will not be negatively impacted by unwanted pregnancy. The future lies in education. The days of getting a good job at "the plant" or "the mill" or whatever are long over. Every kid should take whatever chances at education they can get, and work hard for more chances. Without education there is no future. College is a must in the developed world. There is plenty of time for adults to have children once they're well established in a career. There is no shortage of people in the world. 13-14-15-year old children are not old enough to vote, drive, sign contracts, etc. for good reason. Marrying off teenagers is primitive and dates from a time when life expectancy was much shorter. It has no place in first-world countries. Education, education, and more education is the key to success in the developed world. Third-world results may vary, but if they become more developed, teen marriage always falls by the wayside.
>>Anon 68: why would you want to marry any woman, even a 13 year old woman?
I think you twisted things around in circles, yes?
Did I say I wanted to marry any woman, even a 13 year old woman? If so, where?
I think we were discussing the need to get girls married off before they get pregnant, no matter the age. (No, it will not happen now, until the Huns come in and clean up this mess. But it is ideal.)
And, suddenly you are talking about ME wanting to get married. Double WTF? Maybe Triple WTF?
It helps so much in important discussions if participants try to understand what is being said, instead of wandering off on their own and making stuff up then attributing it to others.
I don't know if you can follow anything this complex. But, I married my current Mexican wife in 1975, perhaps 20 years before you were born, heh, heh. The laws were still reasonable, and by 1984 when the laws crossed over the divide between sane and feminist (the opposite of sane), and I started telling people it made no sense to get married (yes, I started telling them in 1984), it made no sense to divorce to avoid divorce.
And, here I am, still married after 35 years. And, my marriage is not sexless.
(I realize some of you think a 68 year old woman is no good for sex. That involves the man's skills, heh, heh. And, I avoid all the legal and disease problems the heroes experience with young chicks.)
I live in rural Mexico. They have all the laws here, but because there is no substitute husband in the form of government checks for whores, women seldom file charges, even when the man is guilty, not to mention false charges except for every year or two a false rape charge, which is quickly debunked by the medical examiner in most cases because most such charges are false. "Omigod, my parents found out I was servicing half the town!!!"
There is no reason here to marry by the law. Most people do not.My wife's best friend, a mother in her 50's, told my wife she had to stop and think to remember anyone who was married by the law, except her son.
Here they call it Free Union, and technically historians call it Private Marriage. The difference between that and shacking up is here they really believe they are married, and most shack-ups in the US do not believe they are married.
So, why on earth should I want to get married? Makes no sense.
Please try to follow along a bit better.
Anonymous age 68
Note to anonymous:
That femiNazi crapola has been responsible for the destruction of families and uncounted millions of lives. It is all backward. A young woman can do it all, but she has to follow the time that mother nature gives her.
If a young woman follows your femiNazi crapola, avoids marriage, takes birth control, gets a man's "education" and career, she ends up as a desperate 30 something worn out slut desperately paying fertility clinics and hoping she hasn't waited too long. Many women end up childless because they waited too long. Millions end up as single mothers because no man wants an old worn out whore. It is a social disaster of unprecedented proportions.
On the other hand, if a young woman gets married at the traditional age that her foremothers have for a hundred thousand generations, her children will be grown and married by the time you femiNazi are still trying to find a life. She will have several decades to go to college, get a PhD, become a professor, or participate in her husband's business.
A young woman can have it all, but only if she tells you femiNazi whores to pound sand, and finds a good husband.
>>Education, education, and more education is the key to success in the developed world. Third-world results may vary, but if they become more developed, teen marriage always falls by the wayside.
Yes, teen marriage sure does fall by the wayside in the developed countries. Teen whoredom goes way up, and unwed teen motherhood also goes way up, with all the welfare costs, and all the little convicts being raised by unwed mothers. I suppose you imagine this is progress?
Currently, women need do very little to be 'successful'. Screw their way through college, even if learning nothing our grandparents didn't learn in primary school, then get a nice dumbed up affirmative action job paying $40,000 a year, taking ten of them to do what some years ago 2 highly motivated men could do.
I realize some of you imagine this is the way it will always be. Not so. This nation is nearing the end financially. It's over.
So, which anonymous do we have today? The female Canadian feminist, or the male New Mexican feminist? Not that there is much difference. Dumb is still dumb.
Anonymous age 68
Omigosh, I forgot to say go pound sand, forgive me, Bob. Heh, heh.
>>she ends up as a desperate 30 something worn out slut desperately paying fertility clinics and hoping she hasn't waited too long. Many women end up childless because they waited too long.
The good news is another defect does not reproduce. Yippee!!
Anonymous age 68
Sorry, bob, Anon 68... I know personally many 30s women who marry for the first time. They are healthy, pretty, highly educated professionals. They produce 1-2 kids and balance a high powered career. Their husbands are happy (they don't sit writing sob-blogs all day).
As for young teen marriages... try Afghanistan or other primitive countries.
My Grandfather had sex with a 13 year old girl in 1932. It was a family story.
Anon 68, questions:
Have you ever had sex with a young teenager?
Do you have an indoor toilet?
Note to anonymous:
Your fictional anecdotes notwithstanding, there is a huge Fertility Clinic industry paid for by desperate 30 somethings who can't get pregnant. For an average woman, her fertility starts to decline after age 26 and declines rapidly after 30. In addition to the difficulty getting pregnant and carrying a child to term, many children of 30 something mothers have bad problems being born very premature or with mental problems. Women who bear their children according to Mother Nature, while their bodies are young and strong do not have those problems.
Note also that "1-2 kids" is an extinction birth rate.
>>Anonymous said...
>>Anon 68, questions:
>>Have you ever had sex with a young teenager?
>>Do you have an indoor toilet?
>>
>>May 14, 2010 5:35 PM
Were you born stupid and obnoxious, or have you had serious injuries to your head?
Anonymous age 68
>>Anonymous said...
>> Sorry, bob, Anon 68... I know personally many 30s women who marry for the first time. They are healthy, pretty, highly educated professionals. They produce 1-2 kids and balance a high powered career. Their husbands are happy (they don't sit writing sob-blogs all day).
>> As for young teen marriages... try Afghanistan or other primitive countries.
>> May 14, 2010 5:34 PM
"(they don't sit writing sob-blogs all day)."
Like you are?
>>I know personally many 30s women who marry for the first time.
This is one of those areas where I disagree with Bob, but only a tiny bit.
There are excellent women who marry in their 30's, and do quite well.
But, there aren't very many of them, contrary to your exaggerated claims.
The biggest complaint of women in that age bracket is no one will "make a commitment", which means marry them. I see those sweet, little honeys in the supermarkets. They wait in line, and look around to see if anyone is looking, and I look up or down so they don't realize I am watching, and they slip a copy of BRIDE on the belt.
That has been true for perhaps 20 years. A very long time ago, Oprah did a show on that very topic.
>>They are healthy, pretty, highly educated professionals.
I have seen women described by other women as healthy and pretty. Ho ho ho ha ha ha hee hee hee. (Sings a few bars of The Baby Elephant Waltz.)
As far as this being a sob blog, I haven't had so much fun since my public activism days. It's ever so much fun telling morons; imbeciles; nincompoops; (moving sharply down the intelligence ladder) female feminists like the Canadian feminist; (moving even more sharply down the intelligence ladder to the bottom) male feminists like the New Mexico feminist; to go pound sand.
Also, back to the real world, who besides Mikee has said he wants to marry young teen brides? We have had considerable discussion here in a theoretical sense that when girls are ready to copulate, they should be married to a man old enough to care for them, instead of becoming unwed mothers and filling our prisons with the convicts they produce.
I realize many of the low intelligence people who come on here can't read very well, but we have said enough times that we do not advocate any man marrying any female within the Anglosphere, it is hard understand why you still think we want to marry a teenage fiend.
Anonymous age 68
As I said in a previous posting, I haven't had this much fun since my public activism days. I want to thank Bob for letting me have fun here. This is his blog, which means he can do what he wants. So, he doesn't have to let me post here. But, I certainly enjoy it.
And, the people of low intelligence who come here to call Bob and commenters names, please ask your friends to come, too, so we can tell even more people to go pound sand. :)
I must admit after spending a lot of time in Mexico, I had forgotten just how ignorant feminists in the US really are.
Anonymous age 68
>>Have you ever had sex with a young teenager?
>>Do you have an indoor toilet?
I did not have time last night to explain all the reasons these questions were stupid and obnoxious. If Bob allows, I will expand on that now that I have time.
The first question first.
1. As anyone with enough intelligence to put clothes on without help, and to take a bath without help knows, that sort of thing is simply not your business.
2. Bob has said repeatedly he does not advocate any illegal act. I agree with his policy on that. While 'young teenager' is an ambiguous term such as one expects of uneducated, ignorant people, a wild guess is that would mean a teenager under the mid-point, that is under 16, which is currently illegal in much of the US, and also illegal anywhere in the world for US citizens, no matter where they live or what the local laws say. So, if I have had sex with a younger person, it would be as stupid as some of you are to admit it.
3. I have actually answered this question on Bob's blog, but only intelligent people would recognize it as an answer, which leaves most of Bob's critics uninformed.
4. While my political views cause me to say it's your neck, whatever you want, promiscuous sex not only sucks, it also kills. If you mess around enough, you will get a variety of disgusting, incurable, and harmful diseases, up to and including genital warts; herpes; HIV/AIDS; and lots more I don't even remember.
There will also be jealousies, with sometimes gunfire or knife wounds. Women will steal your genetic materials and clobber you for 22 years of child support. There will eventually be a false rape charge or two. Probably DV charges when the inevitable occurs and you encounter a toxic fiend who physically attacks you then files charges for the damaged knuckles she broke on your nose.
A faithful marriage when it is possible is best for men and women alike.
As I said, it's your neck. Please get it cut off while I watch.
5. We have plainly said, several of us, we do not advocate any illegal acts, which having sex with young virgins currently is. We do think the laws should be changed to allow girls who are determined to be sexually active to be married to men of an age to have assets. This is the way it was when the country was growing into the strongest nation in the history of the world. Almost all kids lived in a family with a father or good step-father, so the prisons weren't full as they are today with all the unwed mothers cranking out little convicts.
The second question. I have no idea what indoor toilet means. Another vague and ambiguous question so typical of Bob's critics.
Does it mean a hole chopped in the floor with a board over it? I have no idea.
Where I come from we have a concept of "bathroom". Toilet is something poor folks have behind the house.
Here, where I live, in our 2,850 square foot house, with 4 bedrooms, easily expandable to six, we have four full bathrooms, including one Jacuzzi.
We also have the only fireplace in town, though there are allegedly two or three Jacuzzis.
Wiring came from Home Depot in the US, with surge protection for the computers rated unlimited.
Also, since you seem to be stupid about Mexico, electricity more reliable than we are used to in Texas. Telephone; high speed Internet. Microwave and refrigerator, blender; crockpot. City water. We will be getting satellite TV soon.
Two water heaters, one with unlimited capacity.
Automatic washing machine. Water recycling system so most water is used more than once before being discarded.
Avocado trees. A system of hoses which brings spring water nearly half a mile from a spring to irrigate.
I am not saying you all could have this. One must be intelligent to do things like this.
Anonymous age 68
"Mikee, you keep complaining about going to jail. What's the big deal? Back in the 60s the civil rights people went to jail for their cause all the time. When the wimmin in bloomers wanted to vote they went to jail. Surely you've got as much conviction as an ugly housewife in pettycoats. The peaceniks went to jail and they were all died in the wool cowards. I remember a song the wooly-headed hippies sang called "have you gone to jail for justice.""
People feel bad for women. That's why they went to jail for a few weeks and were then released rather than being sent to prison for years or a life time. People also felt bad for the peacenicks and didn't want to get rid of them. People do not feel bad for men who wish to opress women and girls: prison is where those who believe in "justice" want such men.
No one would carry a tune on a fiddle over some mysoginist dead or in prison, the same was not the case for pro-justice "victims" such as women and peacenicks.
"
I see houses, simple houses, built with the money, for families who lived in houses made of sticks and palm leaves. I see girls sent to school when they otherwise could not go, with money sent by their brothers. I see small businesses started with money sent by illegals."
So they're busy making women's rights there too with their money (girls in school).
Girls in school serves no purpose that is benificial to evil men.
Girls should not be in school.
"I do not personally advocate it at all. My concern is such things happen, and I think total destruction of more men for stuff that WILL happen, and do nothing to the equally 'guilty' female is wrong."
Why not? Why shouldn't men have young women as wives? You're polluting mexico with your ideas that females should not be married at 12 to 14 years of age.
"Also, back to the real world, who besides Mikee has said he wants to marry young teen brides? We have had considerable discussion here in a theoretical sense that when girls are ready to copulate, they should be married to a man old enough to care for them, instead of becoming unwed mothers and filling our prisons with the convicts they produce."
Most men would prefer a younger female over an older female. This is not theoretical. They won't admit it, however, because it's basically a thought crime.
"No one would carry a tune on a fiddle over some mysoginist dead or in prison, the same was not the case for pro-justice "victims" such as women and peacenicks."
I presume this is Mikee. So, Mikee or whoever. Are you less courageous than black housewives, fugly white sufragetts, scrawny coward hippies? What kind of "man" are you that is so scared of a little jail time if he speaks out for what he thinks is right?
Somebody on Spearhead reported that you still live with your mother. Is that true? If you're over 18 and live with your parents then you're a pathetic joke. Will they cut off your allowance if you speak out? Gut up, Mikee. Speak out and take the consequences. That's what real men do and have always done. Look at history. It's not made by wimps, it's made by MEN. Or middle-aged wimmin with too much time on their hands. But they make history and they _win_ because they're willing to fight for what they think is right whether "society" thinks they're right or not.
Many teen girls suffer or die in childbirth, like any other age group.
As for older women in their 40s... that Christian Dugger family is still going strong. Mother is in her 40s and recently birthed Kid #19 ... or was it #20 ?
>>You're polluting mexico with your ideas that females should not be married at 12 to 14 years of age.
WHY DON'T YOU GUYS STOP LYING???
Do you know how tiresome it gets when so many postings instead of contributing a personal opinion, simply includes total fiction (i.e. - lie) someone made up with absolutely no basis in reality?
Not only is my usual comment when I hear someone married or 'married' at a young age, "CIVILIZED!" And, everyone laughs.
But, Mexican law is very clear that any participation whatsoever in political issues, including any political debate, is grounds for summary deportation.
I do not wish to be sent back to Hell and be forced to live with the wimps, so I work very hard to avoid violating that law.
Yet, you simply make something up and accuse me of it. This contributes nothing to any discussion. Go pound sand.
Anonymous age 68
>>So they're busy making women's rights there too with their money (girls in school).
>>Girls in school serves no purpose that is benificial to evil men.
>>Girls should not be in school.
>>May 15, 2010 2:43 PM
Well, things are looking up. That posting gets some facts straight, then presents an honest opinion, instead of lies as so many do.
You are entitled to your own opinion, of course. It is clear you are the guy who confuses good men with bad men and thinks bad men are superior. I have not yet been able to follow that logic, but no matter.
Wanting women to be illiterate again is much like wanting to be able to rape virgins as wives.
No, I am wrong on that. Three generations of Muslim Fundamentalist law, which is probable in our future, since we have rejected the Mexican option, and all the female literates will be gone. The problem is, so will most of the male literates.
Maybe faster, because even female college graduates in the US are barely literate today.
The problem is not female literacy. The problem is a governmental system which lets whores receive support from taxpayers or from absent men. This pays women to screw over men, and to raise children without fathers.
Here in Mexico, no amount of education will convince most women to have children without fathers to help support them, because welfare is token in nature.
And, if you marry a young chick as so many men wish to do, you will need her to support her when you are old. Women need at least some education to do that.
Of course, you are talking again about the way things should be, instead of how things are. That is fine, of course, if everyone keeps the two straight.
Anonymous age 68
Note to Anonymous: (May 15, 2010 6:00 PM)
You confuse "anecdote" with "data."
A rational being (non-female) understands the difference.
You may want to bet your future family on some anecdote from mass media, but Bob knows too many old females who cry every night because they waited too long and never will be mothers.
The data says that for an average female, fertility begins to decline after age 26, and declines rapidly after age 30.
Older females also suffer far more problems in childbirth, premature births, and defective children than young strong women.
Good one, Bob. I have noticed that few woman can grasp the concept of statistics.
Tell them that 75 or 80% of divorces are filed by women, and they will start telling you about some woman they know whose husband filed, as if that meant something.
A man I knew called this female nonsense, A SAMPLE OF ONE.
I suspect the troubles with young women and childbirth result from them living in poverty, usually young daughters of unwed whores, who do not get proper medical care, because of their mother's ignorance.
If they were married to a successful, 30+ year old man, they'd get the best of care, and have no problems at all. Not that it is going to happen, just saying.
Anonymous age 68.
>>Bob knows too many old females who cry every night because they waited too long and never will be mothers.
Wasn't it some old hag like Germaine Greer who advised women not to marry, not to have kids. But, in her 40's or older, spent a fortune on fertility treatments, and admitted she felt screwed because she had no kids.
I was happy. Another defect did not reproduce.
Anonymous age 68
"You are entitled to your own opinion, of course. It is clear you are the guy who confuses good men with bad men and thinks bad men are superior. I have not yet been able to follow that logic, but no matter."
This is a diffrence of what dictionary we are using. I am using the dictionary of modern parlance, you are using your own dictionary (or perhaps that of mexican culture).
I have not seen the change-the-definition/modern-usage strategy ever work. I instead try to play it straight ... using the terms most people understand. Most people understand men who take young wives, who make them obey them, etc (strong men) as bad men. Rather than fight a war about weather or not they are "bad men" (this is: weather or not their actions help women more or less than the current type of good man), I just say I'm pro-bad man and then I can fight the next war of words instead.
>>This is a diffrence of what dictionary we are using. I am using the dictionary of modern parlance, you are using your own dictionary (or perhaps that of mexican culture).
>>I have not seen the change-the-definition/modern-usage strategy ever work. I instead try to play it straight ... using the terms most people understand.
I said I simply did not understand your usage and you twist this around to my using my own dictionary or a Mexican one.
No wonder men lose; lose; lose to a pack of psychotic man-haters. You gotta' be able to grasp reality to fight a battle.
You toss out the words, good; bad; strong; weak; evil; as if there were a random word generator.
I really don't care how you use the words as long as I can sort them out. Too many men-battles are fought when we should be focusing on male and female feminists who attempt to destroy us, simply because of quarreling over semantics. or the shape of the table I don't give a hoot about semantics, but when I don't understand your usage instead of making sense out of it, you make it into a personal attack.
One issue where I differ from many, not all, men here is the apparent need by many to want to keep women stupid and uneducated, and treat them like dogs. (I am not addressing the same person here now, except as part of the group.)
When you want a virgin, just find one, maybe 12 or 14, and everyone should help you do it and smile with happiness, even her dad, because you forced your dirty tiny penis into her bleeding vagina.
Keep women uneducated, so they can't read or write so you can slap them around to suit yourself.
Nice, huh?
Women were treated well in the Western culture from the first days of this country. All went well and the nation grew in strength and power, until a couple generations after women (and most men not much earlier, though most MRA's don't seem to know that) got the right to vote.
And, if you read about the 19th Century, intelligent women told them not to give women the right to vote, that it would tear society and marriages apart if women got the right to vote. That it was a man's job to take care of his family, including political issues so women could be in the home with their kids without stress and worry. It was stupid men who forced suffrage on women.
There is one thing you guys who have never been married, never raised kids except in your hidden fantasies, seem unable to understand.
Women in any and every society, no matter how much a patriarchy or matriarchy, are the first teachers of their sons.
It you have a society like most Muslim societies where there is a tendency not to educate women, THE MEN ARE STUPID, TOO.
In families, if one can use that word, of unwed mothers, the sons are stupid and worthless.
I see it here in rural Mexico. Older women whose dads pulled them out of school after primary, produce sons who are incapable of work more complex than perhaps pumping gas in the local Pemex, and that is the best, not the average.
When you see an upscale man here, which is rare not just because of the culture but also lack of opportunity, his mother is alert, intelligent, and well read.
Your wishes would put us back in the caves. I don't mind as long as you wait until I am dead, then crawl in there with the bugs and snakes and enjoy your 24 year life expectancy with virgin rape and 12 year old wives. Go for it.
Anonymous age 68
""One issue where I differ from many, not all, men here is the apparent need by many to want to keep women stupid and uneducated, and treat them like dogs. (I am not addressing the same person here now, except as part of the group.)""
Yep, you are a good men. Many men here are not good caring men like yourself. Many men here do not want to have the extra problems that come with "educated women".
"When you want a virgin, just find one, maybe 12 or 14, and everyone should help you do it and smile with happiness, even her dad, because you forced your dirty tiny penis into her bleeding vagina."
Yes, indeed, I would like a girl with an intact hymen, those do tend to bleed when they're penetrated. Your point is sound, however: no man wants his daughter to be fucked by ANYONE (except maybe the rich man in town). This is why men backed feminism and women's rights: they figured that if women had the power to choose maybe they could atleast gain access to the daughters. This is why I support marraige by abduction: because fathers hate all other men on earth who are interested in their daughters: fathers are the gardians of the harem and will gladly prosecute and kill men who wish to have their daughters as wives. Fathers will only "give up" their daughters once the daughters have actually left the house for years and are in their mid-twenties... when the father has no control any more... and he will still grudgingly hate the man who took "his little girl".Commonly the daughter is the only female that has ever been nice to the father... he doesn't want her to leave him, also he never got to have a young bride... and he wanted one... but he didn't get to have one so neither shall you. So as to keep fathers and other married men "in the game" and sharing common cause I support polygamy (plus the excessive cloning of girls so that it may be sustaiable and no man would do without) so that the father /can/ have a young bride if he wishes.
"Keep women uneducated, so they can't read or write so you can slap them around to suit yourself.
Nice, huh?"
Yes, it is nice for me, not nice for the young woman, but nice for me.
"Women were treated well in the Western culture from the first days of this country. All went well and the nation grew in strength and power, until a couple generations after women (and most men not much earlier, though most MRA's don't seem to know that) got the right to vote."
Yes, I know this, if you had read my previous posts I derided America for being pro-woman from the start. In an early book about America a Frenchman noted that the big diffrence between men in America and men in France is that men in America were happy to convict their fellow men of rape and then execute him, they believed in woman's choice, while Frenchmen would NEVER convict a man for rape (at that time) as they supported a man's perrogative as common cause.
You are an American Man through and through.
A good man.
"Your wishes would put us back in the caves. I don't mind as long as you wait until I am dead, then crawl in there with the bugs and snakes and enjoy your 24 year life expectancy with virgin rape and 12 year old wives. Go for it.
Anonymous age 68"
I pray you are granted a life of immortality.
Men invented nearly everything (not quite everything, but nearly so). The rich and successful are such because of their connections, not usually because of their accomplishments (the rich are not engineers). When there are connections women have them too (and then they get their sons the good positions). You are confusing the product with the cause.
"There is one thing you guys who have never been married, never raised kids except in your hidden fantasies, seem unable to understand.
Women in any and every society, no matter how much a patriarchy or matriarchy, are the first teachers of their sons."
Why do you think men instituted the education system in the late 1800s? To get men educated by men rather than by women.
It got coopted and is largely worthless now.
Alot of the mechanisms of evil men to reduce women's hold and power over society failed. They had good intentions for their fellow man, we should not deride them for not being able to see the future... they tried to keep women out of the professorships and teaching positions.
Anonymous (May 16, 2010 9:57 AM) blathered:
"Keep women uneducated, so they can't read or write..."
That straw man argument is just plain stupid, but its not surprising that a whiny feminist bitch would post it. Young women should be educated through basic education, including home economics so that they are effective in all the requirements of maintaining an efficient and well run home. If young women get good guidance, not femiNazi stupidity, she will have several decades to get advanced degrees or whatever she likes while femiNazi are still trying to figure out how to have the babies they now will never be able to produce.
Traditional marriage and families are the best for women and men.
Note to anonymous: (May 16, 2010 10:06 AM)
Putting your feminist nonsense aside, the actual reason that public schools were created in the late 19th century was to dumb down young men, and make them controllable, so that they would become good industrial labor.
For more on the history of education in America read, The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto.
Meanwhile, your lack of intelligence is insulting to almost everyone. It suggests that you are a product of modern American uneducation system, and haven't learned anything since.
"Anonymous (May 16, 2010 9:57 AM) blathered:
"Keep women uneducated, so they can't read or write..."
That straw man argument is just plain stupid, but its not surprising that a whiny feminist bitch would post it. "
Anon aged 68 posted that, he's the man from mexico. He's a feminist bitch?
"Meanwhile, your lack of intelligence is insulting to almost everyone. It suggests that you are a product of modern American uneducation system, and haven't learned anything since."
Why am I unintelligent? Because I support bride abduction? Polygamy? Because I'm opposed both to modern feminism /and/ traditional american feminism (women ruled the roost from the begining of this country.) Because you have become more moderate and now, rather than support things because they are benificial to men, you profess to support them because they are in the best interests of women (that argument has never worked to men's favor in the recent past (100 years) and didn't help much before them either)?
Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.
--MikeeUSA--
>>Young women should be educated through basic education, including home economics so that they are effective in all the requirements of maintaining an efficient and well run home... --Bob
Good, Bob, I agree. This is far different from the 'person' who said girls should not be allowed in schools. Also, once they have passed their children years, if I read you correctly, you agree then is the time for them to get educated if they wish. We agree on that.
##
>>Anon aged 68 posted that, he's the man from mexico. He's a feminist bitch?
Let us look and see what has been posted. Ah, here it is. Do you know how silly people look when they are unable to follow the thread? (I am not necessarily addressing the person who pointed out that it was I who said it.)
>>So they're busy making women's rights there too with their money (girls in school).
>>Girls in school serves no purpose that is benificial to evil men.
>>Girls should not be in school.
>>May 15, 2010 2:43 PM
Since he (?) implied boys should be in school, as opposed to home schooled, and girls should not, in my opinion, he/she is the one who thinks girls should be kept illiterate, not I. I was responding to that comment, and I think the thread made it clear what I was doing. Try re-reading the thread so your comments make sense, please. If you have anything useful to say, it makes more sense if you stay on topic so we can understand you.
##
>>Why am I unintelligent? Because I support bride abduction?
Mikee nails it!!!! There are other explanations better than unintelligent, but Bob has requested I not say the words that are the correct description of your problems, and this is Bob's blog and he is in charge here so I won't.
Polygamy may come again if things get tough. The Huns are coming, and I think they are into polygamy.
Here is the problem. If bride rape/abduction and polygamy come back, the m*r*ns who advocate it aren't going to get any. The rich guys, the Donald Trumps, are going to get the good stuff, same as always.
Allowing polygamy or virgin rapes is not going to make Mikee any more successful than he is now. Men like Mikee are going to be begging on the street if we go to the ancient society he favors; his mommy won't have enough money to supply a basement for him to live in, nor the Internet to explore his fantasies. She would have to cast him into the street when he's five years old, to leave enough food for other children. If he lives past his sixth birthday, he will be a common beggar.
And, to be honest, most of us will be.
In fact, most of us in such societies, and I include myself and Bob, if we so much as look up from the ground when a young, beautiful virgin is carried by, the caliph or sheik who owns her and expects to defoliate her later this week, will snap his fingers and his body guards will drag us off and castrate us behind the market place.
Mikee imagines in his utopia, he will do better than he does in this society. There is no reason to imagine such a thing. That harsh reality is why I link such fantasies with major problems in the mental illness area.
I, at least, have good sex twice a week with my thin 68 year old wife, and if she dies before I do, will have a hot young type I unwed mother with a sweet kid to help raise, while Mikee has his useless and impotent fantasies. Yet, Mikee mocks me as a fool.
Mikee, we have told you a number of times it doesn't take that much work to actually get a concubine (the legal term here) in Mexico. Yet, you sneer at the idea of actually having a warm, sexy, young woman in your bed, because you'd rather scream insults until by magic your raped virgin society appears out of no where.
Anonymous age 68
Brave words, MikeeUSA, for a guy who still lives with his mother.
I understand you used to write gaming code. Why aren't you working in the gaming software industry for big $$$? Then you could easily go to Turkey or Eastern Europe for a young bride.
Age 68, who would even want a raped woman as a wife? I'm married, and I like having a wife who loves me. If you rape a woman into marriage she'd hate you with everything she's got, and probably lay awake at night figuring out ways to kill you. Ground glass in the food, rat poison in the coffee, women are good at stuff like that. Mikee's ideal woman would hate him every waking moment and probably when she's asleep as well. Who needs that? It's much nicer to sleep with a woman who likes being there.
Lots of women choose never to marry with no regrets, ever. They just don't want to be bothered with a husband and/or children.
Note to anonymous: (May 16, 2010 4:22 PM)
The "trauma" that females suffer over rape is the loss of value of her cunt. Her cunt is her only marketable asset, and when it is taken without payment her value is reduced to zero. She is "destroyed" because her market value, what she receives for her cunt, is nothing. She becomes emotionally "destroyed."
A wife is getting goods and services in exchange for her cunt. She is not raped. Her cunt is not reduced to no value. She is being able to earn her living and probably support for her children with her cunt.
The whole concept of rape is not applicable to wives. Legally, morally, and emotionally a wife is not raped, not ever.
Husbands can never be sure that his wife is not going to poison him over some imagined slight. It is a leading cause of death of men. No man should never have so much life insurance that he is worth more dead than alive.
Continued:
>>Legally, morally, and emotionally a wife is not raped, not ever.
If Bob means by her husband, I agree. Women can be raped by violent criminal men who want something they did not pay for. The reason wives cannot be raped by their husbands is because when they married they moved from single woman status, which means a woman who is supposed to maintain as best she can, her chastity as property of the man who someday will marry her, to married status. In exchange for the many benefits she gets from marriage, she grants blanket, unlimited sexual consent to her husband.
Any woman who goes through a marriage ceremony and does not grant that blanket, unlimited sexual consent has committed fraud and perjury.
I would suggest that most women who marry today in the Anglosphere are committing perjury and fraud, and do not recommend men marry any woman in the Anglosphere.
Here in Mexico, in spite of ignorant comments by male and female feminists, they have laws against marital rape, and those laws are not really important. If a man 'marries' rather than marries, when the wife refuses sex, the smart man first tells her family what she has done, and a couple days later, if she has not repented, he kicks her to the curb, and moves in a younger chick who is told the score before she moves in. And, her family is ashamed, because they know she has done wrong and reflects badly on their upbringing.
As May 16, 2010 4:22 PM said, who wants a raped wife? Especially when at little or no cost, you can have a willing wife. Outside the Anglosphere, that is.
Anonymous age 68
>>Age 68, who would even want a raped woman as a wife?
I try not to make a big deal out of semantics, except to clarify them so we understand each other.
I do not think being raped makes a woman soiled and unsuited for marriage. So, I don't think a woman being raped makes a big difference in her suitability for marriage.
If she is still missed up emotionally, that could be a problem, as any emotional problems of any kind are bad for a man seeking a wife. There are people whose training and occupation involve dealing with screwed up women; it's not a husband's job.
However, I agree totally that I would not want a wife who had to be abducted and raped to do something she did not want to do.
Which is what I think you meant in that sentence quoted above. I just wanted to make sure we are on the same page.
Only a truly cruel, sick, twisted man would want a woman to be forced to be his wife, to sleep with him, to have sex with him, to raise his children. With pain and force.
Even that, as long as no one actually violates existing laws except with words, I might not care.
What pisses me off is when someone like that says over and over again we are disgusting, in whatever semantics he chooses to use in a given moment, because we don't agree with his sadistic fantasies.
>>Lots of women choose never to marry with no regrets, ever. They just don't want to be bothered with a husband and/or children.
>>May 16, 2010 4:29 PM
Here we go again with the female sample of one nonsense.
"Lots" is vague and meaningless. In most cases, when women don't marry, it's because they couldn't find a man to meet their sometimes impossible standards. Or, they prefer other females.
It is true a few women, far less than "lots", don't want a husband nor children, but it's not a major issue in the reduction in marriages in the 21st Century.
While you slept, GLORIA STEINEM GOT MARRIED. The woman who said a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, which not only showed how stupid she was, but also proved a fish needs a bicycle. This ugly man-hating hog got married, once her price was met. And, before that, she took a lover who sent his chauffeured
The only reason to post what >>May 16, 2010 4:29 PM posted is to try to convince us, if we are stupid enough to believe it, that any man who has a woman somehow beat reality, because women are so precious and marvelous that it takes direct intervention by God for us vile scumbags to find a woman who will tolerate us even temporarily.
Over the years, I have been present when a woman announces her engagement to other women. So far, I have never heard the other women say, "Run! Run! This is a horrid mistake." Those are most distinctly masculine words said to men who announce an engagement.
The other women say, "Wow! Neat! Congratulations! Luckyyy!"
One of the biggest problems reported today by women is the inability to find someone stupid enough to marry them, though of course they twist it around to make it sound as if the men were defective. "If no man will marry me, there is something wrong with them."
Ho ho ho ha ha ha hee hee hee.
There are a number of articles, every few days, purporting to explain what is wrong with men that they won't "make a commitment", which means turn over their past; present; and future earnings to a narcissistic princess for fourth rate or nonexistent sex and unlimited demands for material goods, coupled with a 40% chance of man-fault divorce. These women simply cannot comprehend that all women who deserve a husband are already married and will most likely stay married.
Continued: Anonymous age 68
(continued)
Videogame programming is an established sector of the economy, no programmer gets rich on it any longer, those times are long over. Only those who own the established companies gain fortunes in the industry... and those are the people who built the industry in the early years (The '90s for 3d computer games). There is not much new to do, programmers in the field get payed about aswell as a janitor and are worked much harder (mandatory overtime).
Besides, my code is shit, not the shit, but shit: absolute crap. I couldn't get a job there, lol.
Anon 68: I know that I will never, today, have a young virgin female for a wife. I know that in the squalid past I would have been dead probably as a young boy. But... I would gladly accept that if it ment that men like you, men who are opposed to men having young wives, men who want females to be educated and thusly gain power over men and also enact women's rights within a few generations, men who think that men who abduct their brides should be punished (Dueteronomy 22 allows bride abduction / rape of virgin females into marraige) (castrated I think you fantasized)) etc etc... I would gladly accept my death as a young boy to allow your world to be destroyed. If that was my choice, and it was the only choice, to take, I would take it. I'd rather have the bridge crumble under me, than let a fast approaching adversary pass.
Oh, and PS: arabian muslim society is not the same as ancient Isralie or current Ethiopian society, or the society of the caucuses. Yes, arab muslims gladly castrated men, they always had a strong prohibition against marraige by abduction (rape), and they invented chilvary itself. On the other hand in Christian Ethiopia today the courts uphold the marraiges of men who abducted their brides, 70 percent of Ethiopian marraiges start this way. All it takes for a man to aquire a bride is eyes to see and the will to have her. Diffrent cultures are diffrent. Ofcourse women's rights activists, helped by "good men" are trying to end that practice. I think that you, anon 68, are a good man.
Bob, what is your opinion? I remeber when we seemingly agreed on everything. I did not change my opinions. What happened? Did you get smarter and realise that my thoughts were that of an idiot?
Bob, if you had to choose, which would you choose:
1) A world where you could get a serial string of maybe 2 marraiges (you know, if you're 'lucky enough' that the first one dies fast enough) to 20 year old "Type A" unwed mothers and never have children of your own with them (Anon does not have children with his mexican wife, we can tell this by the fact that he never mentioned them no matter how many times they were brought up by other), to basically walk yourself into cuckoldhood. Oh and you are _given_ (allowed by the grace of the Type-A mother) sex about twice per week, for your support and services.
2) A world where you could marry a young woman of the ages 12 to 14 years, where you could either (at your choice) negotiate with the father to marry his daughter or you could abduct and rape her into marraige (bride abduction) pay a fixed reasonable bride price and then forgo the right to divorce her, marry multipe females at your pleasure, not have to contend with "educated" wives (because they aren't educated: they are just married off to men, maybe they're even illiterate), and own and dominate that which is your domain.
Which would you choose, of those two choices and no others. His world? The world I wish existed?
Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.
--MikeeUSA--
(The Idiot)
Anon aged 68 is bragging about "getting" sex two nights a week from a 68 year old woman. (Note he doesn't take, he graciously recieves like the servant (not master) that he is: it is his payment for his service to the woman (gave her an estate... fed her bastard children (voluntarily cuckolded himself)). He then tells us how he is going to get another 20 year old unwed mother when this one dies... and not untill then.
He then chides those of us who do not want his life.
He also mocked those of us who wanted young virgin women as wives, making a big deal of the fact that virgins bleed their first time (did you see that Bob: basically he compared a man deflowering a young woman to some sort of vicious assault.)
--MikeeUSA--
"
If Bob means by her husband, I agree. Women can be raped by violent criminal men who want something they did not pay for. The reason wives cannot be raped by their husbands is because when they married they moved from single woman status, which means a woman who is supposed to maintain as best she can, her chastity as property of the man who someday will marry her, to married status. In exchange for the many benefits she gets from marriage, she grants blanket, unlimited sexual consent to her husband."
Bathed in woman-power verbiage.
"The woman grants..."
"She maintains... _as best she can_"
"violent criminal men who want something they did not pay for"
Disgusting. Shows your ancestry.
--MikeeUSA--
Bob: I do not understand what the diffrence between an Anon68 and a feminist/women's-rights supporter is. Sorry, he just seems like the old-timey chilvaristic good-man version.
--MikeeUSA--
>>basically he compared a man deflowering a young woman to some sort of vicious assault.)
I must apologize, Mikee, I assumed your problems were only psychiatric. With that statement you have shown there is also a basic foundation of lacking intelligence.
Yes, in fact, a violent forcible rape of an unwilling virgin, which is what you are talking about, is a vicious assault. That simple concept is what people have been trying to tell you for the many years you have been forcing your insane virgin rape drivel on others by every possible means.
In your mind, apparently that rape of an unwilling 12 or 14 year old virgin is going to be received with smiles and profuse thanks.
I am guessing you have every Gor book ever printed, right?
Anonymous age 68
Mikee, you really, really need to move out of your parents' basement. Seriously. Fresh air will do you a world of good.
Unless:
1) You're under 18. Sorry dude. Under 18 you're like totally not allowed to move out. Blows dogs, dude, but, like, it's the law.
I really should have known. Sod off then. Grown-ups are talking.
2) You're over 18 but seriously disabled. If you're in a wheelchair, bedridden, in need of assisted care, I owe you a HUGE apology. Let me know. If this is the case then I'm an asshole and happily will admit it, with the caveat that I didn't know and reacted to you as though you hadn't a disability and were normal.
3) I'm having a bit of trouble thinking of 3. Angry 14-year-old? Wank early and often. Ask your dad to take you someplace special and pay for the whole package. Over 18, still living at home? See a specialist. Spending more than an hour a day fantasising about abusing women? See a specialist TODAY. No MRA, no matter how ardent, is like you.
>>(Anon does not have children with his mexican wife, we can tell this by the fact that he never mentioned them no matter how many times they were brought up by other)
Is that how you tell such things? Wow, no wonder your video games were "shit".
If someone asked about my children I missed it. But, actually it's not your business how many kids I have by whom, so if I had seen the question in the midst of the hatred and drivel I might well have ignored it as being none of your business.
Actually, Mike, while your online music is not world class, if you worked on things like that, instead of this insane push to try to get something you admit you will never get, you might have a life.
And, likewise if you had concentrated on the video games instead of trying to mix in killing women and stuff. Smart people can only do so many things at the same time, and you are not coming across as really talented and gifted, MIkee.
You sneer at my saying if my wife dies, I will get an unwed 20 year old mother of Type I. But, you as best as we can tell have nothing at all in your life. You are apparently decades younger than I am and apparently can't even get a date with a fat whore, but you mock a 68 year old man who can get a good 20 year old with a good kid.
Deeds, not words.
Anonymous age 68
Note to Mikee:
Grow up!
Note to readers:
Please review Bob's rules for comments in the left column of The World According to Bob
Ad-hominem insults of other men are not allowed.
Comments about Bob are not germane to the topic.
Thank you for your interest and participation.
Sorry, Bob, I know we aren't supposed to trash out Mikee, but he essentially insists on being trashed out. I will try to do better, as hard as it is with his hateful attitude.
Oh, wait a minute, Mikee does more ad hominem attacks than anyone doesn't he? Still, we should avoid sinking to his level. Thanks for reminding me. It's hard to remember with all his hate and anger.
Mikee, part of growing up is using a grown up name. Little boys are called Mikee by their mommies, and we realize you live with your mommy, and she probably can't let go. Try Mike or better yet Michael. Just a thought.
You said your video games are shit. I believe it. Not as shaming language, nor as a put down. But, because I know why your video games are shit.
No, I don't need to be an expert on video games to know why they are shit. I know what it takes to be an expert, I was once upon a time an expert myself and I know why I was, and it is missing from your life, so you can never be an expert.
I worked for over 30 years at a large very high tech electronics factory. Though most people, even local people, didn't understand it, we had some of the top engineers and technicians in the world.
Did we hire the top engineers and technicians in the whole world? No. Our entrance tests probably allowed the top 25 to 50% of any school graduates to work there.
We MADE the top technicians and engineers in the world out of the top 25 to 50% of graduating students. When they came in, they weren't much, just as I wasn't much when I started.
The way it worked was, we taught each other what we learned.
In 1974, I was the technician pioneer on microprocessors. I got started on them, and plugged away. Everything I learned, even the small details, was grabbed at by other techs who came to talk to me almost every day to see what I learned that day. And, I told them, because that was our environment.
I made up a simple training program, using the machine language listing for a module tester, and once a technician finished that training program, he was ready to work on microprocessor embedded systems. We had techs who went to the community college for a three month course, but they still had to take the course, to understand how to deal with microprocessors. The community college treated microprocessors like a hardware device, and did not cover the software aspects.
Over the next five years, I basically brought our techs up to speed, which made us a competitive company in the field. It's not just my conceit saying that. Everyone admitted my passing on everything as I learned it boosted our entire company. In exchange for which they didn't fire me when I burned out, heh, heh.
Over in engineering, men were doing the same thing for the engineers.
That's how it works, Michael.
Famous artists, if you look at their biography, spent time learning from other artists. How to make a shade. How to paint certain effects. How to mix colors.
After they master the basic skills by learning from others, they then develop their own style which is what makes them famous.
You put a lot of time into your video games. What was it you lost, when they purged your files at Source Forge, nearly 700 MB, and you hadn't backed it up? Oh, man!!!
With your ambition and energy, if you had taken time to learn basic video game requisites from others, what makes a shitty video game into a great video game, and the basic skills which produce an exciting video game, you might be one of the top video game programmers in the country. Or, world.
Instead, you waste all your talents with total hatred for everything and everyone, trying to create a society which you admit will never be. No one helped you make good video games because you were so filled with hate, and you wouldn't have listened if they had tried.
Continued
Anonymous age 68
Continued
You mock me because I have good sex with my 68 year old wife twice a week, and because if my wife died, I would happily marry a Type I unwed mother and take her child to be mine. Yet, from your life's story, most people will conclude you have never had sex with anyone, ever. No one who ever had a woman would have your preposterous attitude towards women and sex.
You have no idea just how good a woman's body is. You have no idea just how good it is to have sex with a willing woman who grabs at you with passion, wanting more and more. You are unable to comprehend that having good sex with a 68 year old wife twice a week is a major achievement that few can ever have.
So, you imagine that a vicious assault on a 12 year old virgin in the form of violent rape would be really good sex, and think we are nuts when we try to tell you the truth.
You even imagine, that Gor-like, as soon as you rape her she will be sooo happy and grateful, that she will become your obedient, submissive wife.
And, I tell you, Michael, it is sad to see you waste all your potential on this insane quest which you admit openly you will never obtain.
As vile as your life has been, it would be nice to think you would figure things out and get your shit together, and amount to something someday. Alas, it will never be. You have so totally jumped the shark that if you so much as got a job washing dishes or mopping floors, someone is going to show your boss your Internet history, and he is going to get you out of there before you kill everybody.
Sad to say, but your life is over, Michael.
It's going to be more of the same, until your mom dies someday and there is no one to feed you like a baby, and you die under a bridge. Or, the Home Security folks lob incendiaries into your house to fumigate it.
A true tragedy. Most people do not succeed because they lack ambition and energy, which you have in copious quantities. Yet, going the wrong direction wastes it all.
anonymous age 68
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5joJkR4SmstJ7TROqBbCkSsODRNBQD9FOL7LG0
Note to anonymous:
Some states already have whole prisons for "potential rapists." Once accused, a man has to prove that he is "Not a potential rapist" or he spends the rest of his life in hell. Proving a negative, "Not a potential rapist" is logically impossible, so being accused is effectively a death sentence for men. Now the federal government is joining this part of the very violent war against men.
Its not going to change until real men start taking real action against the manginas in ties and cows in Congress. We MEN will either stand together or die alone.
I spent ten years of my life in militant activism, trying to head off this nonsense.
I finally noted that most of my enemies were other men, including men who took advantage of my free counseling services for divorced men.
That is when I stopped all activism, and started working on my exit plan, which is why I am today in Mexico, which does not jail people because some idiot guesses they might commit sexual offenses.
Here, though I suspect if a man actually raped a small child, he would not go to prison, because he would disappear on the way there. But, what do I know?
I do know here the medical examiners work very hard to protect men from false charges, which is a big difference.
Anonymous age 68
Steinem never said women needed men like fish need a bike. Some other writer said it and it got attributed to Steinem.
Steinem's 2000 "marriage" -- my understanding is her partner needed to be married to a U.S. citizen to remain here.
They had had a good committed relationship for years.
Steinem wasn't keen on the label "married", but they both tolerated the ceremony for convenience.
Anon 68: Not for nothing, anyone can pick up a 20-something single mother. I don't want that. I want a 12 to 14 year old virgin girl of european ancestry for a wife, an obedient one who is pretty.
I do NOT want what you have. Why you insist on me wanting what you have I do not know.
Bob: How is Anon 68 not a women's rights supporter? He shames men for not wanting a female that is abit older who has a kid, he supports female education, he just disses you if you don't "take what you can get" (aka 'doing something')... why would you be on his side? I don't understand what is so compelling about living in mexico, getting a Azteca Mulatto woman and "being given" sex two times a week (_given_). I just do not see what is attractive about that. I'm not attracted to native americans or asians really, sorry. And I'm not going to grow up out of that.
Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.
--MikeeUSA--
(Happy to use the name he has used for over a decade)
(not ashamed to continue doing so)
(infact, not having any sembalance of even an idea of what shame is)
(also desirous of a 12, 13, or 14 year old fertile female for wife)
(will not settle for 20-something single mother from mexico)
(don't know why Anon68 is so angry about that, he must not be happy about his choice)
"You put a lot of time into your video games. What was it you lost, when they purged your files at Source Forge, nearly 700 MB, and you hadn't backed it up? Oh, man!!!"
I specifically stated that the women's rights activists had removed every publically accessable copy of my work: my Nexuiz maps, my Casino Game, my models, and various other things I had made. They also had every weblog of mine shutdown. Other people decided that meant that I had lost every copy of my work, and then made fun of me based on their conclusion. I allowed the women's rights believers to bask in their triumph. One level-headed man explained what I said, but he was ignored. Do you endevor to bask in their triumph aswell?
Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.
--MikeeUSA--
(Has no reliable public outlet on the web,)
(no matter where is used,)
(it is shutdown)
Anon68:
I'm not much of a programmer. Sure, I do some perl code and some python, and the _occasional_ C or derivative. Yes I have a few perl games, but most of my output is content for opensource videogames. 3d maps, models, etc, and 2d maps, sprites, and textures. Sometimes a crappy song. I was never going to be a world class programmer.
I spend alot more time on the content then on posting anti-women's rights beliefs; posting is not subverting my work-time. I find that one needs a break from editing every so often anyway.
Death To women's Rights.
Viva Men's Liberties.
--MikeeUSA--
Listen, Michael. You are not saying anything of importance. Your recent postings are nothing more than, "Nyaaah! Nyaah!" like a little kid. Just tossing out insults with no connection with reality, you just make up a pack of lies and toss them out to piss people off.
Unlike you I have a life; a family life, and a sex life.
I can't tell you what your real problem is, because this is Bob's blog and he has asked us not to do that.
I am going to leave you for now, because you have nothing to say. Maybe Bob's next thread, but one thing for sure you will have nothing to say that connects with reality. Leopards do not change their spots.
anonymous age 68
""You mock me because I have good sex with my 68 year old wife twice a week, and because if my wife died, I would happily marry a Type I unwed mother and take her child to be mine. Yet, from your life's story, most people will conclude you have never had sex with anyone, ever. No one who ever had a woman would have your preposterous attitude towards women and sex.
""
My life's story? I didn't know that had begun.
"
You have no idea just how good a woman's body is. You have no idea just how good it is to have sex with a willing woman who grabs at you with passion, wanting more and more. You are unable to comprehend that having good sex with a 68 year old wife twice a week is a major achievement that few can ever have.""
She's 68 years old.
""
So, you imagine that a vicious assault on a 12 year old virgin in the form of violent rape would be really good sex, and think we are nuts when we try to tell you the truth.""
She's 12 years old.
I just want to point that out to you. You know, all things being equal.
You know, I wouldn't want to have sex with a young-teen mexicana woman though, they aren't that attractive to me. Obviously they aren't to you either.
""
As vile as your life has been, it would be nice to think you would figure things out and get your shit together, and amount to something someday. Alas, it will never be. You have so totally jumped the shark that if you so much as got a job washing dishes or mopping floors, someone is going to show your boss your Internet history, and he is going to get you out of there before you kill everybody.
""
Nope, my life has been just fine. It will likely continue to be so. Why do you think I don't feel the need to settle down with a "20 something type A single mother"? Think for a moment "why is this mother fucker not jumping at the chance to get what countless men before him have jumped to get". Put it through that brain of yours.
""
Sad to say, but your life is over, Michael.
It's going to be more of the same, until your mom dies someday and there is no one to feed you like a baby, and you die under a bridge. Or, the Home Security folks lob incendiaries into your house to fumigate it.
""
That's what you wish to happen. It's Mikee btw, not Michael.
""
A true tragedy. Most people do not succeed because they lack ambition and energy, which you have in copious quantities. Yet, going the wrong direction wastes it all.
""
And Scene?
""
I finally noted that most of my enemies were other men, including men who took advantage of my free counseling services for divorced men.
""
I notice this too. Men don't get along. The only way women's rights will stop existing is if a nuclear war breaks out. I notice that some men, while claiming to be opposed to women's rights, get incensed at other men and just spount pro-women's rights crap from then on... and also fantasize about the death of other men.
I also notice that once a man gets some woman he tones down his rhetoric and becomes meek against women's rights but fierce against his fellow man.
That's why we'll never win.
Que huge diatrabe by '68
"I do know here the medical examiners work very hard to protect men from false charges, which is a big difference."
Get rid of the rape laws and you don't need that expense. Marry raped girls off to their rapist like the old Israelis did. Saves on persecute-man costs.
Anon 68: Leaving isn't "doing something", the problem eventually follows you (note the pro-women laws enacted in mexico, note how your friend down the road was imprisoned by the wife's will for a week, note that in america pro-women laws were not always enforced as vigorously as they are now: it usually takes about 10 years untill a new batch of LEOs (lions that devour your fellow man, and love doing it... and whom you probably support because every OTHER man is the child-molester scumbag, not you!)
Doing something is killing and dying. Have you killed the enemies of man, or is your enemy your fellow man?
None of us has done anything.
Bob: Why are there so few bullets?
In a normal capitalist system if there is great demand for an item more of that item is produced (or imported). Demand for bullets has been high for years now and we still have a huge shortage.
What's going on?
I think Anon68 is angry because he is afraid that the gulag of america is coming to mexico and he allready has invested his life savings in a nice house so he can't move elsewhere again.
I understand.
But we can't run forever.
We just have to one day accept that our destiny is to die, and we must destroy the enemies of our fellow man.
anonymous asked: (May 17, 2010 6:43 PM)
"Why are there so few bullets?"
Aren't there? Bob was aware of an unusual demand 2 years ago that had bought most of the vendor's inventory out of fear of Obammunism. Bob was not aware that the shortage was still ongoing, but then Bob does not buy guns or ammunition on a regular basis.
Bob has previously recommended that wise men would prepare for possible political trouble by stockpiling a 2 year supply of food and ammunition, and some whiskey to use for trade goods when the dollar collapses. I'm sure that Bob is not the only wise man in America.
One further note on bullets;
In the late 1940s, prior to the Israeli war for independence, some of them constructed a secret underground arms and ammunition factory beneath a laundry. It was hidden from the ruling British and anyone else who might snoop around. It was done because the government did not allow large scale private production of military style arms and ammunition.
There are rumors of secession or independence movements in several parts of the US, such as Texas. It takes a lot of arms and ammunition to prepare for a war of independence. Check under your neighborhood laundry.
"It was done because the government did not allow large scale private production of military style arms and ammunition. "
Sounds like America since the '80s
Mikee, as long as you still live with your mother you can never be taken seriously. Learn to stand on your hind legs if you ever want to be anything but a joke.
Anon68's financial advice is brilliant. We should all follow it and ditch our families. We will surely all be both happier and richer for it. After that we should go out and marry some 20 something single mother, it's such a feat of accomplishment, we should make sure she's of some greatly different ancestry to ourselves because _surely_ that is what we would be attracted to.
With our some-other-guy's-kid in toe, standing in front of our shoe-box barrio apartment, we will all be recognized as giants of the world.
Yes, I shall follow your advice right quickly, Anon68, for you are a king amongst men and I wish to acquire for myself a lofty throne like yours.
I will also support the education of girls, and I will oppose the young marriage of females. I will stand proudly against all the rapist men out there and campaign for tough rape laws, I will tacitly support men being imprisoned or killed for having sex with women under the age of 18 or 16 (that is : I will support the status-quo with my silence).
You have changed my life, great wise man. Today is a new dawn, a bit worse than the last as I journey out on the path to SUCCESS that you laid out for me!
You know... what I always wanted was to be .. accepted... taken seriously... by men who oppose nearly my every word. Thank you, Anon68, man who is attracted to old women way past their prime, who doesn't even recognize when their prime actually is, thank you for showing me the path I must take.
http://www.thepoliticalcarnival.net/2010/05/pedophile-island/
Feminist misandrist definition: "Pedophile" --> A man.
Feminist/mangina hate never ends.
Manhood101 is a great resource. Critics of Manhood101 (e.g. Elam) are manginas and pseudo incognito feminists. They will continually prove that over time, obfuscating, fence-sitting and apologizing for feminists as they do.
<< "He is regarded as a troll and a sexist within the masculist movement as well."
What's the diffrence between a feminist and a men's rights supporter? They both believe women should control human reproduction and thusly the entire species itself (since men will pay any price for that). What is the diffrence? >>
I agree 100%.
A crowd of pseudo concealed feminists and fence-sitters are proclaiming themselves to be "the movement".
I don't believe the statement on the Femcunt Wiki page is actually true - I think most pro-men activists coincide with the views of MikeeUSA which are reasonable and logical. But, the situation needs improvement.
Solution:
A critical mass of genuine masculinists should be reached in the movement.
Make it clear that pseudo-feminist fence-sitters are NOT welcome and that they are NOT our friends. Expose them as a third column; a limiting, destructive force.
We will reject their calls for impossible-to-achieve "equality between men and women". (Women aren't interested in "equality" even if it were possible.)
Rest assured, there are many, many masculinists out there who agree with MikeeUSA.
"I'm not a woman.
I notice that the men in the Men's Rights Movement call any man who is more infavor of men's liberties and opposed to women's rights a feminist or a woman. Everyone less extreme than them is a feminist, everyone more extreme than them is a feminist-provacatour. Each man in the MRM stands on his own high pedestal, and everyone to either side of him is scum and THE problem with society."
It's true. The attitudes on many MRAish forums and blogs can be very perverted and wayward.
I guess, it just becomes an ingrained attitude - X is the boundary, we can't say Y. When the moderators and heavy posters hold that view, it can be difficult to dissent. Majority opinion (or artificial would-be majority opinion) rules quite easily. This is political correctness in action.
One thing is for sure though: the mention of MikeeUSA brings the pseudo-feminist fake third columnists out of the woodwork REAL quick. I say it's an acid test. You'll find of those that are virulently opposed to Mikeeusa, they are also very pro-feminist in a round-about way; behind their couched snakey rhetoric.
Any time I hear the notion that we have to silence "extreme" MRAs because feminists will have a supposed "smoking gun", I respond:
Women's activists will hate us no matter what we say, no matter how polite or reasonable we are. Women do not accept ANY form of pro-men thought.
Under such circumstances - women/feminists hating any hue of pro-male opinion - why are we so concerned about female/feminist judgement?
Trying to impress women/feminists or look reasonable to them is so obviously nonsense.
The suggestion that so-called "extreme" masculinists are "women/feminists" is totally absurd. I expect those "MRAs" who suggest this know this too but say it anyway. They are non-committed to masculinism.
They will willingly lie to defend feminism and pro-female society.
>>>>>Rest assured, there are many, many masculinists out there who agree with MikeeUSA.
Talking to yourself is a sign of mental illness, MikeeUSA.
"Human rights == women's rights == bad for men."
Could not have put it better.
In our society "human rights" are merely a euphemism, a synonym for "women's rights".
Feminists say "women's rights are human rights". I say "human rights = ONLY women's rights".
The "human rights" agenda explicitly excludes men.
So fuck so-called "human rights".
It's a cover for anti-man matriarchy.
<< A mythology would have to be along the lines, that women and men are different, that feminists tried to make women into men and have denied women the best things in life: sharing time with their children, being at home in exchange for having to slave themselves in an office job.
""
Why does he care about women? Feminism is bad because it hurts men. >>
Exactly. "Finalscollons" needs to grow up and get real.
"Yes, teen marriage sure does fall by the wayside in the developed countries. Teen whoredom goes way up, and unwed teen motherhood also goes way up, with all the welfare costs, and all the little convicts being raised by unwed mothers."
And feminism (i.e. man-hate) goes way up.
"I suppose you imagine this is progress?"
I suppose he does.
"Yes, that is what is so disappointing about men today. Like the German Jews in 1930, they sit an snivel while doing nothing."
The situation is incomparable. Sexual conflict and racial conflict are totally different. They have different dynamics. Invoking the "Jews in 1930s" as compared to men today is really nonsensical and doesn't serve any purpose.
I voted yesterday. Had to wait in line for awhile and took notes while I did. Lots of women voting. Lots of them. Whatever MikeeUSA is doing to make them stop, it isn't working. Went to the library today. Filled with girls. All colors. Black, white asian, latina, you name it. Reading, doing homework, working on computers, texting, standing outside chatting. None married. Whatever Mikee is doing to change that isn't working.
Sorry to use this as a message board, but I'd like to ask 68 a couple of questions.
I just finished watching NewsHour on PBS, and they had a segment on Calderon's visit to the US. The gist of his comments seemed to be to the effect that Mexico did not wish to respect US immigration laws and that the US should accept illegal immigrants. The report mentioned that the Arizona law had been vigorously protested inside Mexico as well as in the US. Is this what you see? I gather you've lived in Mexico for many years. Do Mexicans think that the US should welcome illegals and allow them citizenship? If so, why? Mexico itself, as I understand it, is not at all friendly to illegals inside its own borders. I'm trying to understand what I saw on the news which seemed to indicate that Calderon, at least, thinks that Mexicans have a certain right to enter the US without censure.
Sorry again to use this in lieu of email, but 68 is the only one I know of who can report directly from Mexico.
Note to anonymous:
Mexico is conducting an invasion of the US with the intention of capturing a large part of SW states that was the northern Mexican territory when Mexico belonged to Spain and then France. Obama supports their invasion and recapture.
Post a Comment
<< Home