Welmer over at The Spearhead put up a short post with accompanying video illustrating in very graphic terms (the best kind of terms) what happens when you couple the feminism-abetted cultural perception of women as vulnerable creatures with women’s opportunistic leveraging of that favorable perception, and reinforce the resulting bitches’ brew with the sledgehammer of the state. The video Welmer helpfully embedded is one of the better metaphors of the informal alliance between runaway state power and the victimization industrial complex that gives the benefit of the doubt in nearly all cases to designated aggrieved groups. What could more aptly clarify this female-PC apparatchik-state alliance than a video of cops planting evidence on a bungling loser as they hogtie him while the appreciative ex-wife oversees the proceedings nearby?
Now no doubt whenever you hear of domestic-related arrests of shady characters like Carlos Ferrel (wanted on a domestic assault warrant unrelated to the action in the video), nine times out of ten the dude is a hellraiser guilty of something. But that doesn’t give the cops the right to abuse the public’s partiality toward them by planting evidence on an unsavory suspect. It starts with a wink and a nod, (almost literally in this video, as the cop doing the planting looks like he smiles at the camera before stuffing Ferrel’s pocket with pot), and ends with a boot and a smashed face. Possibly one day yours.
Nor should our partiality toward the law influence our sympathies so that we always kneejerk align with the supposedly victimized woman. Remember, ten times out of ten in a domestic fracas, the ex-wife or ex-girlfriend chose the asshole perp to be her lover. These women know what they’re getting into. And when they no longer find their badboys useful, they’ll scream victimization, true or not. And the fuzzy-brained white knighters will stampede on cue, their sad, floppy dicks held betwixt index finger and thumb, smooshed into mini-mouthed frowns, pleading for crumbs of pussy gratitude.
You think the ex-wife, when she discovers after watching this video that her ex-husband was railroaded by the cops, will rise up of her own will in his defense? Maybe if he slapped her around a little…
When the state teams up with women, it is game over for the common man. There’s only one way to win at this rigged game…
Don’t play it.
Earthdate: 04.18.2010
Sex life: euphoric
Love life: transcendent
Mood: self-satisfied
Status: still unmarried
PS Isn’t it long overdue that pot should be legal? Just make it illegal for under 21s to buy it like we do with alcohol, throw in a few government sponsored ad campaigns warning against the dangers of toking and driving, and let the adults have some fucking kick back time with a relatively harmless drug. I’ll bet any present or future drug czar good money that ten years after pot is legalized there will continue to be the same proportion of alcohol and cigarette related deaths to pot related deaths as there are today. Personally, I’d legalize crack and meth, too, then eradicate the welfare safety net and let the hardcore addicts and their drug addled spawn die mutated in the streets. In a couple of generations you’d have a healthier, stronger society. Sure, the interim would be a ghastly horror, but it’s not like you really give a shit now. Why aren’t you giving a shit now?
Rhetorical.
PPS Television and its visual communications offshoots have been the greatest anti-eugenic force in human history. Discuss.
“Social Darwinism” is a fighting phrase these days.
But the ire is missing many essential points.
One of the bigger ones is that ANY government
policy even remotely affecting people’s family
and sexual habits will affect the probabilities,
and favor some outcomes over others, maybe
in subtle and hard-to-predict ways. Welfare is
only the most obvious. The government-approved
and encourages hypergamy in general is another.
Thor
LikeLike
The video camera in the cop car is a great invention of our age (what genius thought of it I wonder?) for capturing these kinds of malefactors.
But in future I’d like to see all cops having to carry a camera on their hat or shoulder too.
LikeLike
america was built on tobacco.
LikeLike
Ha ha the floppy dick description is a classic.
LikeLike
The wisdom of the ancients has been hidden from the American male. I hear statements like men shouldn’t ever marry. No men should marry, but only when the laws are changed to bring more balance to the situation or – gasp – even favor the male.
What was the wisdom of the ancients? That a woman and her resulting children are a burden to a man. That is why the ancients required a dowry – a man needed to be “bribed” to marry a “worthless” daughter who even in the best of circumstances represented a substantial burden to a man. Since it was perceived that the bride’s family benefited more in marrying off a “worthless” daughter the burden of the dowry fell on her family. In contrast to the ancients who offered a young man a bribe and a virginal bride prepared for domestic duty what does an american male get – see greatbooksformen’s colorful description of what he gets. Not only does he not get a bribe to take on the responsibility many american men willingly sign up for mortgage and debt servitude see e.g.,
Nothing will change until men realize how the system has gamed them with a “reverse dowry” – alimony and child support.
LikeLike
omg lozzllllzzllllz
the central bankers created feminism and fund it with fiat dollars as fiat dollars are worthless and feminism tranfers wealth from men to women while destorying teh traditions of freedom and exaltinmg charlotte allens to repeat tucker max’s lies about his height in the pages of the weekly standard instaed of celebrating true american heros dying on foreign shores in the neocons foreign wars lzozlzlozlzllzozzlz zozlzlzozlzozlzozzoz zzozloozzl and mamas boy neocon jonah goldberg redfeines conservatism in his piggyt piggy image oink oink zlozlzlzlz
think about it
every single feminsst class is centred around wealth transfer
women are owed money from men lozlzlzlzl
and ben bernanke and his fiat friends getr a cut as houses are repossessed (because opeopel can’t pay back teh loans created from thin air in the first palce loslozlozlzozo the bankers convert fiat debt into physical prpoperty and fund women to grow the government lolzzolzlz0) and homes are destoryed and the feminazis deconstruct the conmstitution and freeedom’s principles contain in our great books heritage and the weekly stanard yells at us taht charlotte allen and tucker max now reign supreme because tucker mas films secretive tapings of anal sex withoutthe girl’s consent and thus he is worthy of space in teh pages of the weekly standard while marines bleeding to death on foreign shores tonight in silly neocon wars are never mentioned in the pages iof the weekly standard as mams boy jonah goldberg must never be shown by triue heroes but only secretive butthexers like tucker max who charlotte allen lauds laozlzlzozzlzozzlzllzllzlzozlzlzo
basically ben bernanke is the ulotimate pimp and modern women are fiat desouled biatches all workig for him first and foremost wearing tehir short skirts lozlzlz to tempt men into adjustable rate mortages which goldman sachs both encourages while also creating ahedge fund to bet against it to fuck over the honest manananananannanan alaolaoalaoalaoalllaoalaososlsososl lozzllz!
but the funny thing?
the hjoke is on teh womenzz!!!!
as after their anus has been viloated they lose tehir appeal to real men and buy cats and watch sex and the city reruns which are over ten years onld and lured them down the wrong path. lzozlllzlozll
no family for you!
no kidz for you now!!
you’re a corproate whore lawyer working for bernanke et al!!! lzollzoollozzllzozzozozlozlzozoz
the funny thing is that it would be fun to expalin the matrix to a chick but teh poor girls do not understand how they were desouled and had tehir soulo rep-alced by much cockagge and stds anr lzozozozl so sad today’s women so often make me sad but hey they made their choices and they wante dto run things and now you see what happens when women reign…..
governmengt grows lzozozzol
freedom shrikns….
families break up….
more kids are abused in single parent houselholds with random dudes coming over to give mom the cocka she was trianed to crave…
fatherhood is killed and the force that kept fdouchcock from teh daughter’s anus is killed and tucker max now has free reign of secretive tapings of anal sex which is why charlotte allen writes about him in the pages of the weekly standard and dutifully repeats his fiat lies abouit his height ebing 6 foot when he stands on cushions to take pictures to make him look taller for his book cover lzozlzlzozlzozozlzoz see i feel sorry for charlotte allen as she got tricked too.lzozlzlzllzlz
LikeLike
Dave, in Africa there’s a thing called lobolla. Men pay a dowry or bride price to the family of the bride, but if she wants to leave for any reason, even if he kicks her out (which most guys won’t except in extreme cases after he’s had to go through so much to get her) she and/or her family has to pay him back.
It’s a tradition that has been working very well for thousands of years, which is why it persists. The man gets to do his provider and social cohesion thing, and the woman gets to do her nurturing thing. Then if the relationship breaks down, it goes back to being a contractual obligation for which the payer has to be compensated.
It’s crude, but it works.
The only problem is that if a woman is really desperate to get out of a marriage, and can’t afford to pay the guy back, she’ll run away. It means exile from her family, but sometimes it is worth it. So marriage is taken very seriously by people who adhere to such traditions.
By the way, in a case where another guy wants to take someone else’s wife, it can be done amicably sometimes if the new guy is willing to pay the husband the lobolla. Kids belong to their father usually, so there’s no “raising/paying for another man’s kids”.
LikeLike
lozzllzl omg the spearhead wants me to regsiter before commenting there lozlzlzllz
so i’ll just say it here
i can’t beleieve all those losers are even taliig about marriage when women give not only their vaginal region waay fro free but their anuses and oral orifices too and probably their ears fro all the tiny-cocked men @ the spearhead. just kidding bros! i am sure you are all hung like betas with pencil dicks lzozlzlllzzozlzll
can’t you guys figure it out that only a loyal virgin with a soul and reverence is worth marrying??????
and only if you don’t let cable tv into your home where the pervs can coomand her to go forth and find cok and divorce ayou as 80
% of divorce are initaited by women who hear oproah and are moya loyal to network tv than their husbands who tehy wer taught to hate andd ifnacialy rape in all tehir feminsit classes lozllzo0zlzlzlzlzozl
wakepup my bros
all you beed to know is that when you go to a clubm, women are dancing to teh ruahciest of all raunchy lyrics lick my crack lisck my this lick my that.
morality was a male invention alongside justice and fairness and honor…
zozozozzlzllzzzoozzo haven’t u read hamelt or teh odyssey or aeneid with all the temptresses and butthexers surroudning teh hero who must resist them?
LikeLike
Nicole writes, “Dave, in Africa there’s a thing called lobolla.”
In Ameirca we call it a lzolzzozlzlozlzlzlzlzlzlzllzlllllollllaa.
I should know because I have had two of them and so did my gf lozlzlzlzlzl.
hey nicloe you posting here cracks me up i don’t even know why lzozllzzollzl it makes me go lzozozolzlzllllzll like i can’t get your point lozlzllzlz
LikeLike
Nicole- what’s your point?
LikeLike
Uh oh, the title of this post would guarantee tons of fiat lozolzlzol fun. Barbabbs, go ahead, lozllzo0zlzlzlzlzozl away:)
LikeLike
Young Woman mod 2.0 as redesigned by the fiat bankers:
LikeLike
That video was horrible. But let’s be clear that it’s men who are the perpetrators in that video, not women. Way to take a mishandled situation by power-hungry male police officers and turn it against a woman who may truly have been abused by this man. And no one deserves to be abused. Often times people gravitate toward abusers because they have no self worth.
Also, if we should feel no empathy for her because she chose to be with him, then we should equally feel no empathy for him–she was a choice he made.
LikeLike
fiat bankers need to be legalizin roids too
LikeLike
study shows blind men prefer .7 waist-hip ratio: scientists cite “evolutionary factors”, fiat banking author refutes with counterexample from r-selecting tribe of spearchuckers, feminists blame oral traditions of the patriarchy
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/magazine/18fob-Bergner-t.html
LikeLike
cops planting evidence on a bungling loser as they hogtie him while the appreciative ex-wife oversees the proceedings nearby?
Planting evidence on anyone, no matter how unsavory, is disgusting, and inexcusable. Any cop who does this should go straight to prison themselves, I will refrain from making any comment on what I think should happen to them when they get there.
I’d legalize crack and meth, too, then eradicate the welfare safety net and let the hardcore addicts and their drug addled spawn die mutated in the streets. In a couple of generations you’d have a healthier, stronger society
Assuming all the rest of us weren’t murdered by the hardcore addicts and their drug addled spawn in the meantime, yes. I appreciate you have gun control in the States, we don’t here. Also, personally, I like my city too much to hand it over to these guys even for a couple of generations.
Now no doubt whenever you hear of domestic-related arrests of shady characters like Carlos Ferrel (wanted on a domestic assault warrant unrelated to the action in the video), nine times out of ten the dude is a hellraiser guilty of something. But that doesn’t give the cops the right to abuse the public’s partiality toward them by planting evidence on an unsavory suspect.
LikeLike
Last anonymous was me, sorry.
Also, the last paragraph got cut and pasted by mistake, apologies again, it is clearly not my day *sigh*
LikeLike
PS Although your unmarried bliss is heartwarming (it must be so good, to have something to feel blissful about on a Monday morning) I doubt if domestic violence vigilante cops confine their evidence planting activities to married men, unmarried men accused of d.v. would be just as vunerable, it would seem to me that the key thing to avoid here is not marriage, but domesticity.
Unless you are suggesting that the whole shebang is motivated with an eye to increased alimony, that is not clear from your post however.
PPS What is the cops’ motivation? Are they white-knighter who fancy themselves as Bud White in LA Confidential or is there a financial or other kickback?
LikeLike
Earlier examples of young woman mod 1.0 thought obsolescent by the fiat bankers:
Penelope:
Judith:
Virgin Mary:
LikeLike
Nicole, never look to Africa for examples of good cultural traditions. I don’t care if they’e been around for thousands of years, they’re obviously not working too well. The west should strive to be the opposite of Africa. This stupid lobolla crap has no stronger condemnation than the fact that it persists in Africa.
LikeLike
@Karen: “no one deserves to be abused. Often times people gravitate toward abusers because they have no self worth.”
Boo-fucking-hoo. If you’re not smart enough to figure out that getting beat up on a regular basis isn’t a good idea, then tough luck. You can’t save the self-destructive from themselves. The law should help those who want to help themselves and let the self-destructive do just that.
“if we should feel no empathy for her because she chose to be with him, then we should equally feel no empathy for him–she was a choice he made.”
I feel no empathy for either one of them on the abuse charges since I don’t know enough of what was going on.
I do feel empathy for him as a victim of the kind of obvious police abuse. And all you folks in the US better be getting ready for lots more of the same.
@Thursday: “On a related note, Rihanna has apparently learned nothing”
You expected her to? I’ll laugh and laugh and laugh the next time she gets beat up.
On the other hand, all entertainers are basically whores* at heart and she might have learned her lesson privately while realizing that selling the ‘thugs are cool’ message will make her more money than ‘getting beat up by some thug is overrated’ will.
*I mean that in the most sex-and-whore-positive way possible.
LikeLike
Kaikou, my point was the same as Dave’s. If women have to buy their way into or out of a marriage, they take it more seriously. Same with men. Nothing like a little money to get the ol’ justification engines going.
Hippos, yeah and western marriage traditions are holding up so well by comparison.
I forgot the everything White people do is better even when it isn’t rule.
LikeLike
à propos weed
LikeLike
GBFM, the feeling would be mutual were I worried enough about a kid to want a catfight.
Maybe you’re misunderstanding my presence here because you’re cougar traumatized or something. So I’ll break it down for you.
Marriage went platonic because hubby went 100% fetish at 50. Freaked out. Calmed down, and needed other options. Was advised by hubby to get a young stud. Big fucking mistake. Wandered aimlessly looking for answers. Found Roissy. Saw into the abyss. Discovered Weston A. Price along the way. Lost some weight. Got older bitch. Order has been restored to the universe.
lollzzzamen.
Got it?
LikeLike
I’ve had a theory for some years now that there is an “arms race” between behaviour depicted in television (particularly the soaps and dramas loved by women) that has cause behavioural standards to drop.
For example, teen pregnancy=bad; TV Soap/Drama shows teenage girl getting pregnant with little consequences;people in real life copy said behaviour. The next year the TV show has to up the ante to match real life and they spiral continues.
Art is the mirror of life and life has become the mirror of reality in an infinite loop of decreasing standards.
LikeLike
legalize it all … then well remember what a doctor recommendation is worth something
LikeLike
I really should proof read before I post…
Art is the mirror of life and life has become the mirror of art in an infinite loop of decreasing standards.
LikeLike
Thanks Renegade for continuing to link PUA studies and the need to know about men’s rights issues.
Nicole is right. The African tradition sounds better than the western one. But you couldn’t pay me enough to get into a marriage. If the dowry was $1 million, maybe we could talk.
White Knighters have a long tradition, but mostly from the right, starting when the Christians took over Rome but maybe even before that when there was a Bachelor Tax in Rome. The left was, for the longest time, the preserve of men like Hugh Hefner that wanted sexual freedom. Now the left is Marxist and extremely anti-male.
Southern Democrats before 1968 were murderous. The KKK was subservient to the Women’s KKK (WKKK) and they liked to kill black men for having tried to flirt with white women.
Much of the anti-male attitude you see today from feminists is a carry-over from the WKKK days (the Southern Dems became GOP after 1968) except it isn’t just black men but all non-tamed men who are the target now.
What you see in the video may also be a bastardization of an old chivalric code that worked pretty well when men were men and gave each other the benefit of the doubt (since alimony is a long-standing western tradition, it can be argued that western men have never really been men since the Christians took over 1700 years ago).
The Mafia, for instance, subscribed to Roissy’s harem POV but told men not to embarrass the wife. I remember growing up that, if a young woman was really raped and had Italian connections, a local mafia guy might get the alleged perpetrator drunk and talk him out like a sympathetic pro-rape type of guy to see if it was likely that the alleged rapist would rape a woman or did so in that case. If it was clear the alleged rapist probably did do the crime, he would be beaten severely or worse.
This Mafia justice helped get the Mafia more loyalty than the state got. It was alternative justice done by guys who otherwise weren’t White Knighters (pro-feminist or religious). From what I understand, it was seldom based just on the woman’s word.
Regarding the police planting evidence: I know of a case when that was necessary. I knew a young woman who was raped and the guy called to threaten the family afterward with death in case they chose to press charges. He also said he could come back and partake of some more if he felt like it.
The next day, the police “found” a stash of cocaine at this loser’s home. The day after that, a fellow prisoner got into an argument with him and killed him.
The police, who were friends with the father, had saved the woman’s father and brother from having to do the killing themselves.
I believe justice was served in that instance. But that wasn’t DV that was likely to have been instigated by the woman. It was also the case that the family had been threatened and it wasn’t just the woman’s word anymore.
And while speaking about the Mafia – the Sicilian Mafia interfered with the justice process in Italy making it so the only way to deal with them properly to avenge the murder of judges and prosecutors would have been for paramilitaries to murder Mafiosi outside the justice system.
LikeLike
Good to see others cluing in on this…BTW the state doesn’t care if you’re Beta, Alpha, or whatever, only that you’re male.
It’s “911: HELP!” CLICK. Watch your head as you enter the car. Then it’s “FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS! (SLAM) NEXT CASE! FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS! NEXT!”
It seems logical that the State will keep this up–and/or make even worse laws–when they’re making $500 a minute.
Canada has an even worse bill about to be made law where not only does a Domestic violence charge have men jailed and then given a restraining order, but 50% of his income is transferred to the woman. It’s called “A pimp’s dream” because the woman only has to claim to be in a relationship with the man, and even prostitutes can argue they ‘were’ in a relationship with a john.
In the Forum area of STANDYOURGROUND.COM I have posted “Caveat Amator: Strategies For Men Before, During and After False Allegations”. Learn them before you need them…
LikeLike
Karen is right. The video is disturbing, but the bad guys here are the rogue cops, not this woman. Even if she’s angry, how is she really going to benefit from her ex getting a false drug charge? Many times the police are called to restore order and calm people down, they don’t always need to make an arrest. A high percentage of police men have their own marital problems so I would think they would be sympathetic to the husbands in these situations.
LikeLike
let the adults have some fucking kick back time with a relatively harmless drug.
Pot is probably the most harmful of all drugs because its effects fly under the radar of a normal person’s sense of caution. A normal intelligent adult will know not to fsck around with heroin or crystal meth. But they’ll have less hesitation to smoke pot. And keep smoking it.
A habitual pot smoker is the most pathetic creature on the planet. Worse than a crackhead. “Duuuuude…. like….maaaan…. it’s coooool…. yeah……”
*BANG! ya fckin loser.*
the central bankers created feminism and fund it with fiat dollars
I don’t know about fiat bankers though Lollzlzzlz man makes compelling arguments. (damn he’s awesome!)
But I’ve frequently floated the idea that feminism is really unchecked capitalism’s handiwork. At some point big corporations took a fringe lesbian movement — 19th centruy America was a toxic witch’s brew of bizarro fringe movements — and appropriated it toward decoupling women from their husbands i norder to cheapen the value of labor.
LikeLike
Gotta revisit my theme of Nicole being the most underappreciated commenter here. Whether you agree with her or not, whether you think her posts are vacuous or wise, she’s worth reading. At least you always feel like you’re reading a traight-shooting adult. As a bonus, she makes some cool comebacks to assorted harassers.
LikeLike
laura, you are wrong–in lots of jurisdictions they have removed all discretion from the police and they are required to make an arrest upon allegations of domestic violence. women, particularly lower class women who know how to game the system, are well aware of this and call the police on men at the drop of a hat. the VAWA encouraged this
once a young man is in the system he can be ensnared for years or even life.
my husband was 19 years old when he went over to his ex girlfriends house to get some stuff back from her. she freely let him in. they argued. the upshot was he ended up pushing her backwards and she sat/fell down hard on her butt. he got his stuff and left.
the next day the cops came and took him away from the very first room he rented on his own.
he only got 30 days in “workrelease” minimum security because they pressed him to plea bargain (this was right after the VAWA). you would think, oh, 30 days big deal. here’s the part you never hear. he lost his rented room, all his stuff and the job he had BEFORE being arrested. when he was released he had no where to go and couldn’t keep his work release job. they conditioned his release on probation ($25 a month) AND court ordered leftist feminist brainwashing class ($65 for the first session, $37 a week @additional for 6 months) AND he owed court costs.
so, recap. homeless now, no job, criminal record in hock to gov. for court costs and required to come up with money to pay for his own “rehabilitation” and penal supervision.
19 yrs old
how do you think this played out laura?
now multiply it by a million and welcome to the world of blue collar young men. 1 in 3 men in the US is under supervision of the penal system due largely to drugs and child support/dv.
LikeLike
@PA
Generalise much? I smoked habitually for years (only really stopped when my kid was on the way and getting supplies was hard work but I still have the occasional toke) and was able to earn a very nice living and swoop fly chicks. I never used the word “Dude” except with deep irony.
Remember – correlation != causation. Perhaps lazy pathetic creatures are just more prone to smoking the herb.
LikeLike
Generalise much?
All the time. As does any non-retarded adult.
Remember – correlation != causation.
You may be a special one. But other habitual pot smokers I’ve known turned from normal, energetic teenagers to unambitious, lazy, sad sack of shit slow-motion vegetables.
LikeLike
Fertility drops as television coverage spread.
http://ipl.econ.duke.edu/bread/papers/working/172.pdf
We exploit differences in the timing of entry into different markets of Rede Globo, the network that has an effective monopoly on novelas production in this country. Using Census data for the period 1970-1991, we find that women living in areas covered by the Globo signal have significantly lower fertility. The effect is strongest for women of lower socioeconomic status and for women in the central and late phases of their fertility cycle, consistent with stopping behavior. The result is robust to placebo treatments and does not appear to be driven by selection in Globo entry
LikeLike
Good point.
I sometimes wonder if I would have been better off as a slow motion vegetable.
LikeLike
By the way, it’s simply impossible to have a normal conversation with a habitual pot smoker. Even when not under the influence, it’s like there is grill-grease clogging their brains. They ambulate in a semiconscious state, and thier flatline eyes fail to recognize your words.
They only snap out of their perma-lethargic state when the subject of pot legalization comes up, at which point they sound like Oliver Wendell Holmes expoundng on legal theory. Then they sink back to their fume-soaked walking hibernation.
LikeLike
Me? I’ve not inhaled a handful of times in my life. Not inhaling is fun, I’ll grant it. Giffy, fun, slo-mo goodtimes fluffy fun. (from what I hear). But I’m also glad that in my nearly-four decades of life, it’s only been literally a handful of times.
LikeLike
Dana,
I understand. That sounds really unfair. I just don’t see why sometimes the police can’t just settle everyone down and then leave. They were called to a dispute in my neighborhood once and that’s what they did. Anyway, I had a male family member who was in trouble with the law years ago (not a domestic issue). I helped him through his court hearing and sentencing and it was a humiliating experience to say the least, as well as very expensive. He has since straightened out, but it took years to dig himself out of that hole. I never want to see any man I care about be charged with a crime or go to prison.
That’s the thing, the woman in this video may have been angry at the time. but her ex-husband is going to be hit with tons of fines and if he has a job he might lose it.
My neighbor is an ex-police officer and he looks down on the women who call the cops on husbands/boyfriends as much as he does on the abusing husbands/boyfriends.
LikeLike
Karen–
Abuse smush.
What feminists and now most younger women (and a lot of older ones) call abuse these days is utter horseshit and utterly one sided. Statistics and what I see suggests to me that women are a lot more “abuse” overall in relationships than men. Relationships for some duration often/usually involve conflict. Particularly with the kind of stridant, entitled to be in your face and you can’t do anything about it while I can slap or even punch you shite that women are taught and modeled these days by feminists.
Repeal VAWA now.
Nothing should be actionable that wouldn’t amount to assault between acquaintence men. If anything a bit less because living together can cause friction esp. w/ feminist women.
The whole domestic abuse female hysterial like the date rape hysterai they’ve also generated and maintain, is very largely fraud and hugely exaggerated, lies and unfounded claims such as “what starts small always gets worse” or ” if he did it to you once he’ll do it again”. Never mind as well that she’s felt entitled to and in fact slapped him much harder many more times.
It’s all about emasculating men’s physical dominance over women they’re in realationships / live with. Power shift and power grab by getting mangina men to back their hysteria about how brutish most men are w/women if not tightly leashed and state threatened on no evidence.
So pisssh on your notion of common male abuse in relationships, relative to female abuse.
LikeLike
Just when I start feeling sorry for the plight of the beta, I remember that betas are in large part responsible for the massive transfer of power to feminists. Betas were all too happy to lay down their testicles so women could walk without getting their feet dirty. Let them get stomped.
LikeLike
laura,
because any place any authority has discretion is open to the only “sin” liberals/women recognize, “discrimination”.
LikeLike
If pot were legalized, would that make the best pickup line in the world (see G Manifesto) less effective?
But seriously, I don’t partake myself, but I’m all for legalizing it, i.e. removing the criminal ramifications of its use and possession. However, I don’t advocate wider use. Like PA, I’ve seen too many intelligent young men trade their drive and ambitions to live in a cloud of smoke. Also I believe it augments the feminine energy and the last thing we need is more feminized men.
LikeLike
Karen, Laura–
The real point is she shouldn’t have this power under VAWA by just dialing 911.
Repeal VAWA.
LikeLike
lozllzllzzzl
anyone notice that women are now independnent?
“to propose to a owman is to give someone a diamond who so many others had when she was younger hotter tighter tighter hotter younger FOR FREE!!!!” lzozlz
lzozlzl !
lozzlzl!
shouitout to my main man r!! http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/03/31/the-number-one-dead-giveaway-that-your-wife-is-about-to-cheat/#comment-163499
i can’t believe that you lzoozozlzlzoeersss still have women living in your homes or that you ever spend a moment counting their menstaral cycle dayss.s.s.. lzozlzllzlllz!!
have you heard about the fmeinist movement?
like now women have a right to their own bodies and they get their own fiat cash from ben bernanke so let them get their own apratments! lolzlzlzlz!!
and there ar elike dna tests now….
1) do not get married
2) do not date
3) pump n dump lzozllz
asking a women on a date is a sign of betaness. asking a women to get married is a sign of gammaness, unless she is a loyal virgn.
think about it lzolzlzlzllers!!
to propose to a owman is to give someone a diamond who so many others had when she was younger hotter tighter tighter hotter younger FOR FREE!!!!
you are about to pay $10,000 and risk millions more for something I had for free when it was in far better condition lzozlzl
the best cure of ed is yp.
the best cure for erectile dysfunction is young pussy lozzllzlzlzl!!!
why are all u guys worried about women?
to spend a second worrying about how many cocks are in her vagina when you’re not there is kinda silly and you can be thrown in prison for worrying about this under the fed’s and neocon’s laws. lozlzlz! then you’ll have to worry about coks in your own anus as opposed to cocks in her pussususysysysys lolazz
the federal resevre’s takeover of women as intruments of welath transfer has ruined them for men. the soulless beasts are of no use to us naymor lzolzlz!!
i mean i feel bad for all the 30 year olds with sore anuses who wasteed their best years with roissy’s cock in their poop chute instead of building a family story via fiath and loyalty to a man lzozlz. but hey–that’s what women choose, as they have no foresight nor moral imagination lzozlozlzlz
haven’t you guys figured it out yet?
women were transformed from the goddess archetype into the temptress archetype to serve ben bernanke & teh federal reserve.
fifty short years a go a woman would have had one partner–you.
now you are expected to shell out $$$$$$ after she has taken numerous massive cocks in all her orfices lzozlzlzllzl
some of us were yet raised in families wherein two parents got along and dad laid down the law like a man. today he (the real alpha) would be thrown in prison as ben bernanke (the beta males) and his feminist police state are backing women.
a fiat currency inverts debt and welath, as well as alphaness and betaness.
alpha manhood comes from character, honor, and integrity.
beta manhood, which charlotte allen tries to pass off as alpha manhood in the weekly standard, is more akin to tucker max who performs secretive tapings of anal sex with girls without the girl’s consent, and thus is held up by neocon charlotte allen as the paragon of alphahood lzolzlz
all you guys thinking you’re betas you’re not. you’re real men.
all teh alphas like mystery are frauds in tehir furry hats and makeup and eye liner lzozlzllzl! wake up and smell teh coffeee!!!!
the federal reserve wants access to your home and bank acocunt, and feminist studies teach women how to transfer your wealth to the fed lzozlz. and then tehy end up single and alone, as the fed pumps and dumps them.
sweety i am sorry ben bernake and the banking cartel pumped and dumped you and programmed you to act on your baser butthex instincts as opposed to your exalted soul lozlzlzl maybe ben benranke can wire you some fiat dollars to feed your cats lzoz
LikeLike
dana–
The example you give in detail is EXACTLY what I was talking about w/Karen.
the fact is that and similar is what the overwhelming majority of VAWA arrests of men amount to. That or his return slap. Or grabbing her wrists to keep her from punching him in the stomach feeling immune from retaliation under the utterly one sided complete draconian — and that’s not remotely an exaggeration — domestic violence laws feminists have gotten through state by state and nationally under VAWA.
Further that ex could have lied about what happened. Completely fabricated it. ANd the exact same thing would have happened to your now husband.
Obviously his pushing her somewhat in a safe area with no intent to injur her and without having done so, just because she fell/sat down rather than sort of nimbling catching herself by jumping backwards, in the middle of a heated argument where she was no doubt all up in his face feeling entitled under domestic violence draconian enforcement forced under VAWA in a working “street knowledge” kind of way, shouldn’t remotely be a criminal misdemeanor nor actionable by the cops in any way.
They should have heard her complain and then said that since he didn’t appear to have intended her injury, nor was she significantly injured in any way, that it wasn’t illegal, but part of normal domestic discord, and to have a nice day.
Same thing with a no injury slap. Or even one that leaves a very slight mark for a couple of days. Girls do it all the time.
It’s draconian, outrageous, and amounts to a female sword of Damocles over the head of any male in a domestic relationships for trivial things never before criminalized in our or any other civilization.
LikeLike
Laura–
Because Laura VAWA tells police departments nationwide to NOT handle domestic disputes between men and women in that way, as they always used to if there wasn’t evident signficant injury or a woman the judged to be truly fearful for her life or serious injury, not just enraged and using that. I’m not sure exactly what the mechanism is, and partly it is feminist lobbying on DAs and through them police, and training films done up under VAWA they attend and so on, and bigger departments like in NY seminars etc. But also I believe federal money to police departments under earlier get tough on crime initiative funding some additional police around the country, then became tied in continuing for the department in question, with cooperating w/VAWA objectives.
As well do you understand Laura that the great majority of arrests under VAWA, certainly of men in the middle and higher classes, are for just this kind of thing. This or his return slap, not very hard, etc. Oh they’re yelling at each other lots most often, though I think typically she way more nuts than him. She feels enraged, wronged in some way, and if she’s leaned that merely a false but hard to prove false (not the shift in the burden of proof).
No one’s against arresting men for domestic violence that leaves a woman seriously burned, something broken, severely beaten up, or genuinely had her life credibly threatened and not just the bs “I’m gonna kill you for that” kind of statement people do make when mad but in a way that’s intended to be understood that it simply really pissed him off, etc. But you don’t remotely need VAWA for that, long existing assault and battery laws applicable with the same standards regardless of the relationship between the parties have been on the books everywhere in the US forever, and though the feminists pretended otherwise, that isn’t why they wanted VAWA and earlier state domestic violence laws passed.
Feminists wanted VAWA passed to literally emasculated any sense by the man or woman of male physical dominance in domestic relationships. Oh they don’t use the word emasculate, but that’s what they wanted and still do. A complete neutralization of very natural and forever existing male power, which of course isn’t to be misused and all societies have regulated that or most have, to one degree or another. Ours did to quite a tight degree, a usually fair but female tilted degree (depended where) in this British upper classes chivalry aping country.
Dana didn’t even talk about an order of protection. One was probably issued but since she was an ex he was through with and wasn’t living in his home, that wasn’t as bad as other things, though not great on one’s record. (E.g. now under that prohibition on sponsoring visas for prospective foreign wives one’s met overseas, before background checks are made on the man for such things as any run in w/the draconian VAWA.
The smart thing about VAWA is the feminists got wise to the idea that severe jail time (though 30 days for what Dana’s now husband “did” seems absurdly high, he was ill advised) for marginal at best and newly created as criminal “abuse” might not let the law get passed or anyway stand up under eventual outrage of how it works in practice, instead VAWA does things that SEEM pretty light until you realize the full impact of them for upper half men especially. Like having to move out of the house you are entirely paying for for the entire pendancy of the action against you, pressuring you to settle for feminist reeducation courses etc. even when it was an entirely made up slap she dialed 911 about when enraged because he said he was going to leave her, etc. Paying thousands for a lawyer. Having a record. Etc. In divorces it’s even more impactful, over made up or trivial things.
That’s the everyday of what VAWA “adds” to existing assault and battery laws.
Repeal VAWA now!
LikeLike
Bingo. Fuck them and if I ever act like one, fuck me too because I will have deserved it.
My only real desire is to take as much of their money as possible, preferably while watching them beg for mercy or cry at the injustice of it all. I enjoy a little emotional relish with my sadism.
Sheep get sheared.
LikeLike
PA–
I agree. Same way I feel about habitual pot smokers and why I never did much of the stuff at all and haven’t for a long time done any.
However for those that are determined to pickle themselves one way or another, pot would seem to be one the safest for them and society. It seem quite non addictive esp. as other potent mind altering drugs go, except behaviorally, in lifestyle they get into and so on, and relatively safe. It’s something people seem to be able to stop if they get a mind to doing so, more easily than with most drugs.
LikeLike
Vincent: I hear you, but unfortunately we have to look out for the rights of even the gamma + omega men because the feminists and White Knighters in the GOP are quick to decide for themselves who the betas are.
Example, alpha males who live overseas or just travel now and then can be labeled betas by some Republican men for not wanting to be macho/patriotic all the time and put up 52 weeks per year with what the feminist culture in the US dishes out.
They basically say anyone they perceive, rightly or wrongly, as weak is a beta who deserves what he gets.
White Knighters often believe they are Alphas. Sam Brownback, the GOP Senator who made a backroom deal with Maria Cantwell to get the whole GOP to back VAWA in exchange for her not filibustering Alito, has a beautiful wife and daughters.
Brownback considers himself the strong male head of a household of women in need of protection and then projects his magnanimity and “strength” to all women.
He would say, for instance, that men who view porn or agree to go to a room with a prostitute are “weak betas, gammas or omegas” whose rights to view porn don’t exist and who should be set up in sting operations and arrested for agreeing to go to a room with a gorgeous female cop, even though there is no proof the presumed beta or gamma would have gone through with intercourse.
GOP White Knighters embrace the Alpha concept in terms of wanting to punish whom they want to think are Betas.
Democrat White Knighters embrace their own Betatude.
The GOP White Knighters are in need of extinction (removal from the GOP) because they are more dangerous to men. That is doable now that so many socon voters are dying off from old age (greatest generation my ass).
LikeLike
Science + Women = End Of The Human Race
Ok so this is off topic but it’s extremely funny, and certainly of interest to Roissy and some posters here. It concerns THE DECLINING QUALITY OF SPERM. (Male genital shrinkage will surely be noted, studied, confirmed, and quantified very soon.)
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1084574.html
“Study: Quality of Israeli sperm down 40% in past decade”
Entire article is below but I want to spotlight the line that made me laugh out loud: “A study published in Israel two years ago revealed that the high level of female hormones in a stream near Beit She’an, apparently originating from women swimmers who were taking birth-control pills, caused fish to develop female characteristics.”
*****************
The quality of Israeli sperm has declined alarmingly in the last decade, according to recent research conducted at Jerusalem’s Hadassah University Hospital, Mount Scopus.
The cause for the decline is not known, but it’s believed by some researchers to be connected to the exposure of children and pregnant women to hormones and other contaminants in food and water.
Conducted by Dr. Ronit Haimov-Kokhman, the study showed a 40-percent decline in the concentration of sperm cells among the country’s sperm donors from 2004 to 2008, compared to those of donors from 1995 to 1999. Hadassah’s sperm bank is now turning away two-thirds of potential donors because of low-quality sperm, as opposed to one-third in the past. Advertisement
Haimov-Kokhman’s research is to be presented today at a conference of the Israeli Society of Fertility Investigation in Tel Aviv.
Kokhman said the study was carried out to test the theory of the director of Hadassah Hospital’s sperm bank, Ruth Har-Nir, that sperm quality was in decline.
The research confirmed that in 10 years, the average concentration of sperm among donors declined from 106 million cells per cubic centimeter to 67 million per cubic centimeter. The rate of sperm motility has also declined: from 79 to 67 percent, although the profile of donors did not change over that period; they are still young, healthy and do not smoke.
According to Haimov-Kokhman, the quality of sperm has declined in most Western countries, but in Israel it has been particularly rapid.
“If we keep going at this rate, a decline of 3 million cubic centimeters of sperm cells per year, we’ll reach an average of 20 million in 2030. The World Heath Organization defines this as fertility impairment.”
Studies showing a decline in sperm quality began to be published worldwide more than a decade ago, along with research indicating a rise in the rate of defects in the male reproductive system.
In Israel, too, a study was published about a year ago, showing an increase of about 30 percent in defects in the male reproductive system. In addition, in the past decade, the number of cases of testicular cancer has doubled.
A number of chemicals in the ground and in drinking water have been identified as impacting hormone levels and secondary sexual characteristics. These chemicals include plasticizers called phthalates, used in food wrappings, cosmetics and a various insecticides. Studies published in Britain have highlighted a clear connection between continual decline in sperm counts and chemicals in the environment.
“I would suggest that a concentration of estrogen in the water is a cause of change, Haimov-Kokhman says, noting that hormones in the ground come from both human and animal waste that reach the aquifer via sewage. “The ground is full of estrogen that produces estrogen-saturated fruits, vegetables and plants.”
A study published in Israel two years ago revealed that the high level of female hormones in a stream near Beit She’an, apparently originating from women swimmers who were taking birth-control pills, caused fish to develop female characteristics. However, the researchers say that the level of hormones in the country’s main waterways is negligible, and cannot be the source of impairment of the male reproductive system.
“While it’s true that the evidence is only circumstantial, even the connection between smoking and lung cancer took a generation to prove,” Haimov-Kokhman notes.
***************
By the way, have you seen my new blog? My current post posits a solution to the riddle of why almost 100% of victims of Pedo Priests remained safely silent until very recent times; previously, I discussed why chicks like Jane Goodall can’t be counted on to save loser species like the chimpanzee.. It’s all at ostranova.wordpress.com
LikeLike
GOP White Knighters, for instance, will say that men who do not want to get married are weak.
LikeLike
omg if you don’t marry women instead of having the police state come into your house and incarcerate you for talking back to them, instead they have to vote for obama to grow the police state which will take a bit longer.
lzozlzlzlzlzlzl. figure it out peopleeees!!
LikeLike
greatbooksformen for lozozl-o-dent
LikeLike
@greatbooksformen:
We need your expert commentary on this. Maybe the fiat bankers are losing their grip:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/04/19/college.anti.hookup.culture/index.html?hpt=C2
It seems in explicable to the young woman that she “snapped out of it” before she ended up 35 years old watching reruns of sex and the city with her cat etc., but my grandmother would attribute it to older women in her family that were reciting countless rosaries knowing what she was up against in the hook-up culture. Anyways, how should a young man approach such a woman, knowing that she’s been had but is still young and hot but doesn’t want to be pumped-n-dumped?
LikeLike
This is as much about race as about anything. Carlos’ ex-wife is white. Stupid Caucasian Knights are just getting even with a black for messing with one of their women. It’s an old story, particularly in the South.
On the other hand if Carlos had been white virtually nobody would care or bother to even notice.
White women have got the nation wrapped around their little fingers. It’s as much the fault of anachronistic patriarchal (and racialist) chivalry as of modern gynocratic anti-white male sentiment.
One thing is certain in my mind. This state of affairs is unsustainable. (Like so much else in our culture.) I look forward to it’s collapse.
LikeLike
Seems my server has crashed.
LikeLike
omg the girl Boyle says,
“”I saw it [hooking up] as a way to be recognized and get satisfaction,” said Boyle, shaking her blond ponytail. “I felt so empty then.”” –http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/04/19/college.anti.hookup.culture/index.html?hpt=C2
lozlzlzlzlzlllzlzlzlzl!!
you get to ask yourself one question.
do you want to be the man ramming your cock in and out and in and out or do you want to be the beta getting ice cream sundaes with her as she cries into them saying “I FEEL SO EMPTY! WAHAHAH AHAHAAHHAH WHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHA! HE CAME IN MY ANAL CAVITY WANANNANANAN! WHY ARE THERE NO GOOD GUSY LEFT??? WAHAHAHAHA”
omg i get this idea for a cartoon where a chick is getting ganged banged voluntarily and enjoying cocks from two biker dudes while three drummers cum on her face nd she is liking it and as teh cum squirts onto her eye she is saying, “Why are there no good men left?”
lozzlzlzl
LikeLike
“A habitual pot smoker is the most pathetic creature on the planet. Worse than a crackhead. “Duuuuude…. like….maaaan…. it’s coooool…. yeah……”
*BANG! ya fckin loser.*
Moderation in everything, even moderation.
I smoke pot 2 or 3 times a week, and take adderall 2 or 3 times a week. I never drink, except at special event type things, weddings, New Year’s, etc. Drugs are a tool, and they can be used to build or to destroy. If I’m stressed, I smoke, if I need to concentrate, I pill. I exercise 2 or 3 times a week also. I’d say I’m brilliant, but thats self agrandizing ego stroking, so I’ll just say that most people I meet are idiots compared to me.
LikeLike
omg i betya that that girl boyle will be back at the alpha cock in under a week as she wants attention and teh article gets her attention and she gets to cry and cry about her emptiness and then hop back on teh alpha cock… lozlzlzlzl
frannie boyle
lzoozzlzl
blow a load on frannie
blow a load on frannie
blow a load for me
blow a load on frannie
and
and
and
now she feels empty (tee hee but i enjoyed it while it happened and my vagina got wet lzozlzl)
lzollzlzlz
sang to the tune of “The weight by the band”
LikeLike
Hard to feel compassion or sympathy for human suffering or get angry about injustice when you can’t see or hear it. Ignorance is bliss, no?
[editor: you’re on the right track. though i’d phrase it like this: sympathy gets in the way of getting things done.]
LikeLike
I don’t know greatbooks, she describes how her situation at Vandy in the spring encourages fornic sorry i meant hooking up and I’m sure she’s had a big backlash among her peer bff’s and her dating is probably way down since she won’t agree to pump-n-dumps anymore. Shouldn’t she be given credit for making an effort and helped in this regard?
BTW, do you have gynecologist lined up to do a virgin examination for when you meet that reverent young woman your apparently ready to marry?
LikeLike
the proper thing to do would be to abstain but not to gloat about it and boast that you used to hook up and enjoy sex but that it left you feeling empty, implying that you were above it all, which of course belittles the other partner who is a man.
actions do have consequences.
yes–it is good to truly repent.
and why should it be news that a girl wishes to abstain?
as teh vast majority of weddings take place in churches and religious insititutions, every girl ought abstain until marriage.
or what’s the point?
do you relaize that part of the 100% vow is 100% physical and spiritual committment?
lzozlzlzlzlzl
it doesn’t start with a girl telling you she now feels empty after baninging ten drummers and giving herself up when she was younger hotter tighter and getting stds now and tehn.
it starts with a girl having the moral character to not bang random cock.
not to bang random cock and then compalin that she has had too much random cockage and now feels empty. as if she didn’t know. as if women have no moral foresight.
which is it? do they want equal rights and equal consequences? or justa bunch of alphas to bang in their hot young tight years and betas to cry to in their empty years?
lzozlzlzllzlzlzl
LikeLike
I smoke pot 2 or 3 times a week
Pothead!!
I guy I know who smokes pot 2-3 times a week says it a little differently. He says:
Hang all drug dealers.
LikeLike
“Generalise much? I smoked habitually for years (only really stopped when my kid was on the way and getting supplies was hard work but I still have the occasional toke) and was able to earn a very nice living and swoop fly chicks. I never used the word “Dude” except with deep irony.
Remember – correlation != causation. Perhaps lazy pathetic creatures are just more prone to smoking the herb.”
I agree with you there bro, but i do get PAs point. I would go one step further than him and say that actually it’s nicotine and alcohol that play the role he claims weed plays.
I smoked weed pretty much everyday for 2 years and have smoked casually for far longer straight through college/high school. I achieved 3 As in the hardest subjects(maths, physics, further mathematics) in my A levels(im british) and a first class electrical engineering degree all the while toking(and inhaling) to completion.
it has it’s good points:
If you can handle your weed you will never need viagra.
Weed can help you shed pounds if you don’t give in to the munchies.(nicole take note and spark a blunt A S A P).
Arthritis, cancer patients, certain mental disorders etc all of them aided by medicinal cannabis.
Weed can help you quit smoking, high people don’t usually get ciggarette cravings.
Can pretty much half your tolerance to alcohol, this is a good thing for me because getting drunk when completely sobre is a hard task for me requiring large volumes of alcohol that are not good for my liver, bladder or stomach. going to a bar and picking up fly chicks is best done either high, or with a view to us both getting high(even more high) back at my place.
Also it can increases powers of concentration, weed DOES make you lazy but it doesn’t render you incapable, far from it, It just increases tendancy to shy away from certain tasks. I tend to peform above my usual standard in the gym, running, computer games, reading and studying when high. It’s hard to do something you don’t want to do or don’t enjoy when you are high but if you find motivation you can drill through pretty much any task efficiently. Example: I can only watch TV or play computer games when im extremely stoned.
Downside: smoking in joint form, even through a bong is the fastrack to mouth, throat,lung cancer. Many times more dangerous than a filtered ciggarette.
Only side effects i found were
A: tendency to crave weed.
B: If you smoke daily for a while(months/years). Theres a period of about 3 days to a week, where you feel slightly agitated/anxious after giving up. Sort of an exxagerated cigarette craving. Nothing major really.
C: If you smoke weed with tobacco and then give up the weed, its easy to confuse tobacco withdrawal with weed withdrawal. Tobacco withdrawal is 5x worse.
one thing i find hilarious is that they are planting marijuana on this guy. You americans and your drug war….
LikeLike
“Repeal VAWA.”
And guess which congressman was responsible for drafting VAWA.
Joe Biden.
Bush 43 was unfortunately enough of a dipshit to sign it into law.
LikeLike
realistically here in uk, they’d have to plant a hell of a lot of weed on you for it be an arrestable offence.
LikeLike
In the UK you are left alone when you grow pot for presumed distribution to school kids but go to prison when you defend your home from an armed burglar.
LikeLike
Roissy,
I propose in addition to an Alpha/Beta of the month to also include a “Creation of Modern Feminism” of the month….
I will submit the first candidate….
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1266298/Woman-person-banned-EVERY-pub-club-country.html
I like to call her Turbo Skank 2000
LikeLike
@greatbooks – should we go back to folk customs regarding non-virgin brides? See, for example:
http://books.google.com/books?id=gh4IE6toGJMC&pg=PA129&lpg=PA129&dq=old+customs+regarding+non-virgin+brides&source=bl&ots=HXEaxdv3xQ&sig=XCG_YjgEfYlscqTjc79UHF7isPo&hl=en&ei=74PMS9GdGoG88gbUr-mJBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CCIQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false
See discussion starting middle of page 128.
LikeLike
Anarchotyranny PA.
The state knows who its enemies are.
the realist,
As a (very) occasional (3x in the last 24 months) pot smoker I notice exactly what pot does to me. Mental slowness / fogginess stays with you for at least a day afterward and I’ve got 0 residual THC in my system when I start. If you toke more than once per month or so, I’d guess that you don’t notice the slowness because it’s with you all the time.
LikeLike
Not sure if these points have already been covered but just in case….
There are several issues here:
1) Police planting evidence. Wrong. End of story. There are a lot of scum bags with badges. Believe me. I tried to be a cop and went through the academy. I can tell you stories of the types of people who are in law enforcement. Why wasn’t I hired? I’m too clean and too highly educated. The question to me was, “Why do you want to be here? What is wrong with you?”
2) Using the powers of the state to screw men over in the name of domestic violence. Hey, if you did it, you screwed yourself but if you didn’t touch her and didn’t act in a threatening manner the it’s wrong but this is where we as men have to think strategy and tactics. If you break up with a woman and go to her place to get your stuff, why are you going there alone? Take a witness in case she tries to start a fight. Why would any man put himself in such a vulnerable position just to get some “stuff.” You need to thing a few steps ahead of your opponent. This is where men fail themselves. Women live for argument and drama and they know how to push buttons so why let her do this? Do you lack that much self control?? A man going to a domestic violence shelter? As a man, I argue that you should have already set aside an emergency stash of cash that you can access. Forget “rights” and “rule of law” we are talking survival and avoiding jail. Save the mewling for little kittens.
3) Legalization of drugs. Give me a break. If you hope to have any credibility then I suggest you not even touch the subject. This battle is won one step at a time.
Sorry but this just irks me. When I left my wife, I planned my escape and knew to avoid her to avoid being another statistic of false accusations. She already played that card so I knew what I was going to have to deal with. I didn’t mewl over my “rights” and “what’s fair.” I focused on the end result of what I wanted and in the end, she failed and I succeeded. Why? Because I out maneuvered and out thought her.
LikeLike
hey dave i’m not sure what we should do but right now this is how it goes:
men propose that men and women remain virgins until marriage (all great religions, made by men, do this)
feminists teach that men are oppressive
feminists men are evil
feminists teach women to fllow their vagina tingles and act on them
girls do this and they feel empty and the feminists wring tehir hands and blame men for not caring
so men propose that men and women remain virgins until marriage (all great religions, made by men, do this)
feminists teach that men are oppressive
feminists men are evil
feminists teach women to follow their vagina tingles and act on them
girls do this and they feel empty and the feminists wring tehir hands and blame men for not caring
so men propose that men and women remain virgins until marriage (all great religions, made by men, do this)
feminists teach that men are oppressive
feminists men are evil
feminists teach women to fllow their vagina tingles and act on them
girls do this and they feel empty and the feminists wring tehir hands and blame men for not caring
lozlzlzlzlzlozlzozlzlzl lzozlzlzl
the fiat bankers profit of of consnatnt war on foreign shores, within our homes, and between the sexes lzozlzllzlzll. that is why they get rid of traidtion and ideals so that their fiat lawyers might reign supreme and profit. lozlzlzl
LikeLike
Roissy said:
It’s funny that Roissy somehow imagines drug laws are there to “protect” addicts.
I look at our drug PUNISHMENT system, that jails more people than any other system on the face of the earth, and I find it funny that anyone thinks the purpose is to help addicts.
It’s even more funny that people think no one can handle drugs without destroying their lives.
You know, like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. They both used opium. Yet I think they were successful people.
Would anyone care to prove me wrong?
That’s what I thought.
LikeLike
To avoid moderation, here is the real world, concentrated:
Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson both used opium. Yet I think they were successful people.
Would anyone care to prove me wrong?
That’s what I thought.
You knows what you knows. And that is NOTHING.
LikeLike
Realist,
Thanks for all the info. I have been told I should start smoking pot occasionally to help me relax and think about things more clearly. I have a little in my underwear drawer, I just am having trouble getting into it.
GT,
Lots of good points. My neighbor is a former police officer and I have to say from stories he tells me a lot of those guys aren’t very bright and are jerks. I do think a certain type of person is attracted to the profession. Also, being smart and thinking ahead probably can help most men prevent these bad situations they get into. Still the VAWA law sounds unfair.
LikeLike
GT–
yes VAWA routinely and very, very frequently, every day is country now gets men arrested w/order of protection slapped on them forcing them to move out of their homes, and hire lawyers for thousands of dollars, for made up physical acts, that she tries to recant the next day or two, after calming down and often sobering up.
But NO, trivial acts of “putting your hands on” a woman you’re living with which VAWA now criminalizes, such as what Dana describes above without question, and also no injury return slapping her after she had and is getting maximally up in the face of a guy, are NOT acts of male moral lepers, nor are they always or even usually wrong, and much less should they be in any way criminalized. They weren’t before VAWA and somewhat similar domestic violence laws in a few states. The existing assault and battery laws which are what apply to everyone EXCEPT American men living with women, were plenty, and would be plenty to return to after:
REPEALING VAWA (and similar if almost always less draconian preceding domestic violence laws in some states).
LikeLike
Doug,
Do the VAWA laws just apply to the woman a man is living with or do they apply to every woman?
LikeLike
Don’t forget it’s even more evil cousin, sanity.
Fortunately, American’s possess neither sympathy or sanity!
You actually believe that stopping America’s extremely PUNITIVE drug laws would HURT addicts!
America imprisons more people per capita than any other nation in the world. Then in typical fashion start talking about your MERCY.
Where would that be, exactly?
When we jail an addict…. even if for only one year…
He loses his job. He loses his house. Wifey divorces him, so he loses his family. Then, he has to deal with the divorce court MERCY to.
Then, when he gets out, the Big Bosses all black-ball him from getting a good job. That’s a MERCY to, no doubt.
Yeah, that’s merciful. At least he isn’t beaten or whipped like you know, they did in the old days. That’s a MERCY, right?
Of course, he IS beaten and raped by the other prisoners in jail, but that super-duper doesn’t count cause you say it doesn’t! So there you go, your Mercy consists entirely of peacocking for not doing actual physical punishment… even though physical punishment is, in fact, done.
Yeah, SYMPATHY and MERCY.
LikeLike
Jerry Ertans
Your analysis of the Brownback kind of sanctimonious social conservative is spot on in what I quote and the rest of your comment.
However any implication that alphas can’t and don’t have VAWA unfairly used on them is just wrong. Sure they’re less likely to have it unfairly unleashed for the same minor behavior, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen a lot for minor stuff to alphas too.
As well people often talk as though any in retrospect less than ideal behavior or arguably that in mangina’s minds (and often without any real idea of what she’s actually doing to provoke his minor acts to check her) should be illegal and make him subject to arrest, being held overnight, and having an order of protection on him automatically cause she called 911 and didn’t say much, even though she didn’t ask for one and doesn’t want one on him.
That’s ridiculous.
LikeLike
Laura–
I believe they only apply to men and women living together. I know that that’s how they overwhelmingly applied.
LikeLike
TG–
Maybe, whatever. The Mail doesn’t indicate what asbo offenses she had previously committed or anyway been charged with which seems to be about enough. Asbo’s a kind of newish British low proof needed minor public nuisance type offenses law which I don’t know about in detail.
But anyway this barred from any drinking establishment in the land for two years, or otherwise purchasing alcohol, seems draconian on low proof. It’s one think to ban alcoholics from driving for a period, due to the danger they’ll kill or maim others. And it’s one thing to punish her illegal drunk behavior. But banning her from drinking when they haven’t even established she’s an alcoholic rather than sometimes drinks too much and feels entitled (no doubt in part because she is fairly hot in a tarty kind of way) seems wrong.
LikeLike
I agree.
Although Marijuana should be legalized, i can’t help but feel that thats lowering the standard as to what we should legalize. Salvia is way better, yet it’s illegal in some states.
Also DMT (imo, the best psychedelic ever) is a drug so powerfull it can actually stop you from doing bad drugs like cocaine and heroin(same as salvia), yet under the CSA its just as illegal as heroin (go figure).
Also as cheesy as it sounds it helped me believe in God again. (you have to try it, or else you won’t understand.)
Joe Rogan shared his experience about it in length: (its worth a look.)
LikeLike
As to the drop in sperm count.
One of the major culprits is broiler chicken.
They stuff them full of stilbensol and/or
other female hormones, it makes them
grow faster.
Unlike the much maligned Bovine Growth Hormone
(BGH, digestible, non-absorbable by the GI system,
and even if injected not effective in humans,
BGH is different from Human GH), the stilbensol
absorbs readily, and screws up the male
reproductive system.
LikeLike
Doug1 wrote: “But NO, trivial acts of “putting your hands on” a woman you’re living with which VAWA now criminalizes, such as what Dana describes above without question, and also no injury return slapping her after she had and is getting maximally up in the face of a guy, are NOT acts of male moral lepers, nor are they always or even usually wrong, and much less should they be in any way criminalized. ”
In some states touching or striking a person without their permission is battery; it’s already criminalized. I don’t see how putting your hands on anyone or striking someone in the face is ‘trivial.’ Many deadly fights have broken out over even smaller matters.
Here is my point….If the woman is getting in your face; she is looking to push buttons to get you to do something stupid to screw yourself. I don’t see why retreat isn’t the better part of valor until such time you can return to clear your stuff out and file for a divorce. As soon as it heats up, grab your keys and leave. Come back when she calms down or isn’t there so you can clear your stuff out and get a divorce filed. The key is to not let her know you intend to dump her when you return.
Seems to me some guys would rather try to win an argument with a woman than do what is in their best long term interest. I mean, if things have degenerated to that level you need to plan your escape and not try to win some argument. And if you are with a woman who acts that deranged you need to ask yourself what in the world are you doing with her??
LikeLike
OstroNova, one would think that the likliest culrpit would be shagging women who are on the pill or the ring. That’s a pretty good way to get direct exposure to estrogen and progesterone to the genital area.
It could be hormones in the chicken too, as Thor mentioned, or a combination.
LikeLike
Its generally older, clueless men who push the line no marriage = weak. Older guys who got married before 1965 have no clue, literally, as to what reality is.
They just have no clue whatsoever. They live in a media bubble, and their post-menopausal wives are not about to dump them for Mr. Alpha hottie.
LikeLike
Jerry,
“GOP White Knighters, for instance, will say that men who do not want to get married are weak.”
That’s crazy if they are saying that. It’s absolutely none of their business. I wonder why they even care.
LikeLike
“GOP White Knighters, for instance, will say that men who do not want to get married are weak.”
Well they have to to get the vote from the religious right.
Also, those white knighters are probably miserably married and jealous of their single friends so they try to justify being in a crappy marriage by fooling themselves into thinking they are strong for staying married.
I would say they are strong….strongly in denial that is.
LikeLike
While the deck may be stacked against men at times, any guy with half a brain can figure out how to not get into a situation like the one in the video. 1) Realize what an accusation by her to a cop WHILE YOU ARE THERE will mean. 2) Don’t be there when the cops show up. 3) Document things 4) Dont be there when the cops show up. 5) The minute she brings up false accusations, head for the hills 6) Dont be there when the cops show up 7) Dont leave a mark 8) Dont be there when the cops show up.
Get the pattern? Most cops are far too lazy to track you down on the mere accusation of abuse. She would have to jump through some mighty high hoops to get things serious enough where they will seek you out/track you down. If you are there when they show up, on the other hand, it is a different story.
LikeLike
RULE #1: Get a prenup with an arbitration clause.
Arbitration avoids the prison gang rape that is the divorce process. Judges are psychotic pro-feminists outside of Florida. So are all gov’t agencies. If your wife is clever and cunning, expect to spend time in jail. She’ll leverage the criminal system for her strategic advantage and “fun” to torture her ex.
Getting your case in arbitration 1) make divorce somewhat painless and 2) deters divorce and makes wifey less psycho. Manytimes wifey harbors fantasies of making you homeless and broke. If she has access to the psychotic legal system, she’ll always be tempted to destroy you and run off with your assets. For women this is tempting like working with a bunch of 18 year old college girls. Women can’t resist a legal system stacked in their favor.
failing to get a prenup could destroy your marriage and subject you to years of hell. don’t be a punch drunk fool and skip it prior to marriage.
LikeLike
“Now no doubt whenever you hear of domestic-related arrests of shady characters like Carlos Ferrel (wanted on a domestic assault warrant unrelated to the action in the video), nine times out of ten the dude is a hellraiser guilty of something”
Glad you put this…in reality the number is probably more like 99/100.
I’m all for STRONG checks on the government and cops and this video angers me as much as anyone, but people also need to realize that most of the time it is “bad doods” so to speak who are running into the cops like this. It doesn’t make it right, but to say that this will likely be you someday….just isn’t true.
Saying “this will likely be you someday” reminds me of this onion article: http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-has-complete-prisonsurvival-strategy-mapp,112/
LikeLike
Madras wrote: “…Don’t be there when the cops show up….Most cops are far too lazy to track you down on the mere accusation of abuse….”
ABSOLUTELY.
I was on a ride along. Call comes in. Woman is crying, “my boyfriend hit me.” But the boyfriend was no where to be found (he had split the scene). While the officers were taking the report Mr. Boyfriend calls. Officer whispers, “try to get him to come over.” She fails to get him to come over and basically, nothing happened to him. We didn’t go out looking for him or anything.
LikeLike
Madras said:
Simply wrong.
dana said:
Someone should have told him to NEVER TALK TO THE POLICE. Then the police would have been left with the word of an ex-girlfriend that he had “pushed her”. No injuries right?
So they would have exactly one witness who had every reason to lie. That would be the entire case. Now, this is America, everyone knows that the police have like super-powers and would never even take to trial a crime with no evidence whatsover. So you have the problem of the jury already knowing your guilty before the case goes to trial.
BUT. The evidence if pathetic. The alleged crime is pathetic, and you have a reasonable chance of the prosecutor not wanting to risk his conviction record on this nonsense.
LikeLike
Madras & Comment Whatever,
Good advice. People, myself included, try to be nice and cooperative with the police and it can backfire. I was in a vacation house where a couple teenagers there were caught drinking underage. For some reason this small town police officer on a bicycle wanted to search their bags. A lawyer staying with us told them to go and get a search warrant first. Of course they didn’t bother and nothing ever came of it.
LikeLike
I love how no one seems to be entertaining that raving lunatic Comment_Whatever, and it doesn’t even seem to faze him. He just keeps raving away incoherently anyway. What’s his deal anyway? He seems on the road to going postal a la Soldini.
LikeLike
Cliff Arroyo,
Obviously he isn’t too smart either or he wouldn’t be hanging around women –or men– who get him involved with the police by association. It’s a double-standard to feel empathy for one victim and not the other.
The idea that the police are totally out of control is a different issue and one I agree with completely. The police really don’t make me feel any safer, honestly. But it’s a bit interesting that the officers doing the abusing in the video or also men, yet it seems most people here only feel bad for the male victim and continue to only blame the woman in the scenario.
LikeLike
From: http://health.discovery.com/centers/loverelationships/articles/divorce.html
“Divorce Myth 5: Following divorce, the woman’s standard of living plummets by 73 percent while that of the man’s improves by 42 percent.
Fact: This dramatic inequity, one of the most widely publicized statistics from the social sciences, was later found to be based on a faulty calculation. A reanalysis of the data determined that the woman’s loss was 27 percent while the man’s gain was 10 percent. Irrespective of the magnitude of the differences, the gender gap is real and seems not to have narrowed much in recent decades.”
It would be interesting to see how much a man’s standard of living DROPS when he gets married, particularly to the house-whoring shrew in the video above.
LikeLike
here’s the definitive read on the anti-male police state:
http://www.argumentations.com/Argumentations/StoryDetail_7732.aspx
lolzzolzzozl, you are getting better and better. Your crazy is wise, what can I say.
LikeLike
GT–
Which is wrong. Those kinds of way overbroad laws should be revised. The real truth is that those kinds of provisions are about never enforced. They only are very selectively when the DA feels this or that way usually due to public pressure at the moment. Which kind of wide open discretion reaching down to stuff that shouldn’t in the vast majority of cases be criminalized just “in case” in some case it maybe should be, is exactly what the laws shouldn’t allow. If there’s to be any kind of equally applied justice.
As opposed to equalizing heavily made up victim groups, which is the cultural Marxist agenda.
LikeLike
The dull army green stuff (and I do mean ARMY green) just makes you stupid, but the bright green with the purple fringes is a totally different drug.
The bright (almost neon) green is much more expensive, but that’s only because it’s illegal (and the CIA likes it that way!).
I suggest combining the kind bud (which relaxes you) with some lsd (which speeds you up); then compare and contrast what makes sense to you after with what made sense to you during. Too frequently done, however, just trades the non-drug trance for a drug trance, and what’s the point?
P.S.
Alcohol is poison; that’s the type of substance it is. Alcohol is not a drug.
P.P.S.
Conservatives see anything that gets you high as “drug abuse”.
LikeLike
GT–
The point is that what constitutes “striking” in that state’s battery law needs to be made much clearer and more limited. Oh sure a roundhouse punch qualifies. (Though even there in a closely mutually escalating battle beforehand, not so much. More when one person does that sucker punching, or does it while he and perhaps his compatriots prevent a retreat by the other, etc. )
Note that the true reality of most of the middle class and up “domestic abuse” arrests and orders of protection for men that aren’t entirely lied about but do involve some male “laying hands on her”, it is a closely mutual escalation where no the man usually DOESN’T get way more escalated then the female, and often way less, but still VAWA arrested.
Sure he COULD beat her up w/his much greater strength, but he doesn’t. He’s controlled. He just slaps her back, no injury. That used to be a clear ho hum in all domestic disputes about everywhere in this country, before 2nd wave feminism started focusing on this as the next area.
Typically in the middle and up classes, she slaps him. Once. Twice. In the midst of a heated highly emotional argument, where she’s doing her best to push his buttons and provoke him enormously, because she knows however vaguely that he’s hamstrung by domestic “violence” feminist laws , or if lower SES often has real street knowledge of what she can do by dialing 911 over any trivial non injurious thing, or even lied about thing. Girls further from the street often supposed that “those domestic violence laws” only really kick in for serious stuff, but she knows the do for that or anything marginally that for sure, so she feel perfectly entitled to maximally provoke, which is what women do with men to shit test them, or sometimes as Roissy likes to emphasise to get a sexually thrilling reaction from an alpha or alphaish man. She also does it way more often to shit test/denigate a beta or suspected one, who becomes that or more that by the very fact of being so hamstrung. though that’s now how she’s thinking about it. She’s thinking he’s to scared and pussy by what I can do to check me. Well she’s got ultimately swat teams under VAWA backing her up on his return slap, one his for three hers, no injury and really trivial.
Though NOT trivial under VAWA.
That’s not intentional feminist emasculation of men,or a damn strong and often effective effort????
LikeLike
schmoe writes: “From: http://health.discovery.com/centers/loverelationships/articles/divorce.html
“Divorce Myth 5: Following divorce, the woman’s standard of living plummets by 73 percent while that of the man’s improves by 42 percent.
Fact: This dramatic inequity, one of the most widely publicized statistics from the social sciences, was later found to be based on a faulty calculation. A reanalysis of the data determined that the woman’s loss was 27 percent while the man’s gain was 10 percent. Irrespective of the magnitude of the differences, the gender gap is real and seems not to have narrowed much in recent decades.”
It would be interesting to see how much a man’s standard of living DROPS when he gets married, particularly to the house-whoring shrew in the video above.”
lzozllzlzlzozllzzll!!!
what the article forgets to point out is taht even after divorce women are still funded to watch oprah all day and sit oin alpha cock whenever their vaginas tingle and dempen lzozlzlzllzozlzlzozlzlozzozllzzozlzllzlzlzzozozllzlzl
basically divorce is like prostitution where you pay for past use of the pussy which you no longer get to see to feel nor touch but whcih you now have to pay for it to bang other cocks.
are there prositutes out there who take one man’s money and use it to fund the banging of other men while not banging the man putting up the money?
yeah–you can find them in church on your wedding day when the minister says “you may now kiss the bride.”
lzoozlzzllzozlzozzlozozlzzz
LikeLike
There are other examples of how violence works,
especially in cultural clashes. In most Western
industrial countries, a teacher may not hit a
student.
The freshly immigrated-from-third-world student
will shit-test the teacher, where (in the kid’s mind)
the only appropriate response is for the teacher
to hit him. But of course, the teacher rarely does,
that way lies prosecution and/or career end.
So the kid concludes that the teacher failed
the shit test, and will thenceforth act up anyway
he wants, since the teacher is to weak to stand
up for himself/herself.
LikeLike
This would be more interesting if crime were 1) a mostly male on female phenomenon or 2) even a small percentage of crooked cops were women. Neither are true. Ergo this is just faux victimhood. Can you imagine how much bigger an asshole Roissy would be if he were an actual minority?
LikeLike
Karen:
But it’s a bit interesting that the officers doing the abusing in the video or also men, yet it seems most people here only feel bad for the male victim and continue to only blame the woman in the scenario.
No, there’s been plenty of criticism of the white knight police officers and Big Chief White Knight, the State. Biden and VAWA as well as the GOP white knights have also come up. Smart guys realize our big enemy is white knights, not just feminists.
LikeLike
Someone said:
So, did Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson do opium or not?
Are they “losers” or not?
Yeah, yeah, you don’t have any answers to real arguments. Go and be a true American! Watch TV! Where both sides agree with you and play argue with each other!
LikeLike
YOU’RE A FUCKING FOAMING AT THE MOUTH BASKETCASE.
Shut up already Comment_Whatever. No one knows (or cares) what you’re talking about.
LikeLike
Careful what you wish for Chateau regarding the legalization of pot. Aren’t there enough fat women without having to factor in the munchies.
LikeLike
PGG-Roissy is a minority, he’s Jewish…
[editor: so certain are you?]
LikeLike
Well, while we are on this topic of men getting screwed by their wives:
I remember a while ago on this blog some people were commenting that black men don’t treat their women well. A black guy replied that may be true,but asked the question:
“What have you white guys gotten from treating your women well?”
There was a deafening silence. I don’t believe a single man replied. Some woman said “Civilization!”, showing complete ignorance of the history of civilization. Likely a woman’s studies major.
So, guys, any answers this time?
I really don’t see any reason to cut women any slack. They are players and takers and certainly are not to be trusted.
Old guys who got married decades ago may have escaped the worse. The current crop of young men have NO reason to support a woman, married or not. The better you treat your woman or spouse the worse it is for you when you split. The law will see to that. Happily, many young men I know are not going to fall into that trap.
LikeLike
FWIW I treated my ex very well when we were married and thus the divorce was much less expensive than it could have been. We didn’t even use lawyers.
Divorce myth #5 most definitely applies in my case. I make about four times the money now that I ever made when I was married, and she makes about a quarter of what she made (though she lives in a developing country now, so the cost of living is much lower).
LikeLike
Anyone who thinks a natural substance should be outlawed does not deserve liberty.
PS so I’m not the only one to suspect that roissy is gifilte?lol.
LikeLike
the realist
“Generalise much? I smoked habitually for years (only really stopped when my kid was on the way and getting supplies was hard work but I still have the occasional toke) and was able to earn a very nice living and swoop fly chicks. I never used the word “Dude” except with deep irony.
Remember – correlation != causation. Perhaps lazy pathetic creatures are just more prone to smoking the herb.”
I agree with you there bro, but i do get PAs point. I would go one step further than him and say that actually it’s nicotine and alcohol that play the role he claims weed plays.
I smoked weed pretty much everyday for 2 years and have smoked casually for far longer straight through college/high school. I achieved 3 As in the hardest subjects(maths, physics, further mathematics) in my A levels(im british) and a first class electrical engineering degree all the while toking(and inhaling) to completion.
it has it’s good points:
If you can handle your weed you will never need viagra.
Weed can help you shed pounds if you don’t give in to the munchies.(nicole take note and spark a blunt A S A P).
Arthritis, cancer patients, certain mental disorders etc all of them aided by medicinal cannabis.
Weed can help you quit smoking, high people don’t usually get ciggarette cravings.
Can pretty much half your tolerance to alcohol, this is a good thing for me because getting drunk when completely sobre is a hard task for me requiring large volumes of alcohol that are not good for my liver, bladder or stomach. going to a bar and picking up fly chicks is best done either high, or with a view to us both getting high(even more high) back at my place.
Also it can increases powers of concentration, weed DOES make you lazy but it doesn’t render you incapable, far from it, It just increases tendancy to shy away from certain tasks. I tend to peform above my usual standard in the gym, running, computer games, reading and studying when high. It’s hard to do something you don’t want to do or don’t enjoy when you are high but if you find motivation you can drill through pretty much any task efficiently. Example: I can only watch TV or play computer games when im extremely stoned.
Downside: smoking in joint form, even through a bong is the fastrack to mouth, throat,lung cancer. Many times more dangerous than a filtered ciggarette.
Only side effects i found were
A: tendency to crave weed.
B: If you smoke daily for a while(months/years). Theres a period of about 3 days to a week, where you feel slightly agitated/anxious after giving up. Sort of an exxagerated cigarette craving. Nothing major really.
C: If you smoke weed with tobacco and then give up the weed, its easy to confuse tobacco withdrawal with weed withdrawal. Tobacco withdrawal is 5x worse.
one thing i find hilarious is that they are planting marijuana on this guy. You americans and your drug war….
Good post. People need to pull their heads out of their asses about reefer. It is way less harmful than any of the other drugs available, especially booze. I agree with Roissy 110% on this issue.
LikeLike
Nicole,
What an interesting idea, synthetic female hormones being passed from female to male through the skin of the penis. I did some Googling about it, but found only a few cautions and unsourced assertions — nothing really academically serious. For example, one “Dr. Nosanchuk,” whose only qualifications beyond “certified family physician” are as follows:
“He is a founding member of the North American Menopause Society and has been awarded with a Certificate of Added Qualification as a Menopause Clinician by that organization.” (Not bad of course, but not what I’d consider the last word on this matter.)
One of his pages states, “Well folks, the skin of the penis absorbs estrogen pretty well too. Not as efficiently as the vagina, but well enough to result in feminizing changes and impotence in the partners of these women.” He gives no sources to support this major assertion, and in any case he is referring to vaginally-applied hormone-replacement creams for women. So, too, are several other pages I visited.
So this quick and dirty research suggests the only real-world concern is that men having intercourse with women who have just applied a dose of hormone-replacement cream are at ANY risk for absorbing hormones in this manner, and I could find no relevant studies named.
Thor,
Pity about the female hormones in the chickens — I’d google some more but I need a cocktail now.
What would life be without chicken to eat? Oh well, I guess us males are all doomed to be turned slowly into chubby, chicken-addicted Wee-Men (I just made that up).
LikeLike
@Realist:
Downside: smoking in joint form, even through a bong is the fastrack to mouth, throat,lung cancer. Many times more dangerous than a filtered ciggarette.
This part is untrue. There was a major long term study done in the US a few years back (2005?) that showed that people who smoked reefer had a significantly lower tendency to contract cancer than the general population and showed this even with those who smoked tobacco as well as cannabis. The inference was that cannabis use actually lowered the risk of getting cancer. Chalk this fairy tale up with the erectile dysfunction and the manboobs myths.
LikeLike
@PA
In the UK you are left alone when you grow pot for presumed distribution to school kids but go to prison when you defend your home from an armed burglar.
Well how about legalizing reefer and letting people shoot burglars? Seems like a fair compromise.
LikeLike
@Tyrone
It’s not a myth. comparing someone who smokes 2 spliffs every couple of days with someone who smokes 40 cigarettes a day really isn’t a very good comparison.
None of the biggest smokers i know smoke weed regularly, stoned people just don’t really smoke that much tobacco. If anything cannabis use prevents nicotine cravings like i said so theres a good chance those stoners don’t smoke as much anyway. Yes i am also aware that weed may have anti cancer properties but i thought that was with regard to PROSTATE and few other cancers.
Have you ever smoked unfiltered spliffs or roll ups? there is literally so much tar and smoke getting through that you can even see and taste the black tar on your lips and toungue. This simply does not happen with a filtered ciggarette. My point wasn’t that weed as a substance is more dangerous than tobacco rather that smoking either(or a combination of both) of these substances without a filter is more dangerous than smoking a filtered cigarette.
Anytime you inhale something that is NOT a gas at body temperature you are damaging your lungs, even inhaling excessive water vapour can cause severe lung damage. Don’t kid yourself weed ain’t dangerous in THAT way.
LikeLike
My dad retires in a year or 2 and has a nice little property, i might convince him to start growing with me on a big scale. Iv’e done it before small scale(10 odd plants) while i was living in a houseshare at uni. But he’s old enough that he would be pretty much untouchable by the law here in britain, a criminal record would be no threat to his livelihood like it would mine.
Its all about farming and distributing.
LikeLike
and i can rig an electricty meter and insulate a room pretty damn easily
LikeLike
@realist:
The study I refered to is the largest, long term study ever. It covered several hundred people over a period of about 30 years. They specifically addressed the risk of lung cancer and said it was virtually non-existent and even went so far as to say that cannabis may have positive effects on treating cancer. Given that this was a US study and that most US studies are biased against cannabis due to government funding, I’d say this is probably a solid piece of research. No one has yet died of cannabis use to my knowledge.
However, You are correct in stating that there is more tar in cannabis than in tobacco, but people who smoke cannabis, smoke far less cannabis in terms of volume than tobacco in most cases for one and heavy smokers tend to use water pipes. I believe the figure is about 5 times the tar in cannabis versus tobacco. Smoking a gram a day is heavy use for most people and that is a negligible amount of tar compared to 40 cigarettes a day.
LikeLike
Schmoe
True about that massive fraud which was crucial in the first round of 2nd wave feminists jacking up the extractions from men in divorce law. It was claimed to be an “error” by the feminist at Harvard who perpetrated it, but the nature of the errors required make that wholly non credible. Yet she’s gotten away with it when she obviously should have been fired in a scandle despite tenure, and the whole edifice of changed divorce laws that her lies supported extensively revised. Neither happened.
As well I believe even that second figure is pre child support and spousal transfers to the ex wife, or ignores child support ones, pretending they’re not her income, which is absurd. Much of the feminist massively jacked up statutory formula child support for young children and for all children by better off men is tax free alimony to her, just stealth alimony. More feminist lying. Men regularly live in small one bedroom or studio apartments, or trailers, or even in their cars in some cases, while their wives live in their former marital house, paying the bills with the massive wealth and ongoing child and spousal support extractions from him.
LikeLike
Further there’s this FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT that men need to own complete:
Why on earth should it be that a woman’s post divorce income have to be made equal to his or better, when she’s in the overwhelming majority of cases the one who walked away from the marriage for no truly compelling reason? In all cases she’s no longer sexing him or providing him any other wifely services after the divorce. So why should he have to equalize her income?
What promise or obligation does a woman who makes less than her husband, which is overwhelmingly the case mostly because women want to marry up in income but men don’t, that’s in any way enforced or considered enforceable in our feminist society today? The answer is absolutely none. She can refuse to sex him and if he tries to take what was traditionally his right, that’s now marital rape. She can leave the marriage at any time for any reason – so much for the traditional “for so long as we both shall live”. We all know she doesn’t enforceably promise any housework or cooking even during the marriage, much less that if he wants she’ll do it for so long as they both shall live. What does she enforceably promise? Absolutely nada.
So why should a man have to give his ex wife ANY of his money, either his wealth or any ongoing support, after a divorce? Even if we think the state should be able to mandate fixed percentages of his pretax earnings no matter how large for child support under all circumstances to a woman who can virtually always take the children from him if she wants and from he can’t withhold if she withholds court established visitation or he’ll go to jail but she won’t, which I don’t at all agree with, why should the amount be so high for decent earners that it includes a substantial stealth alimony component for her? Upper middle class men in high income tax states generally have to pay what amounts to about 50% of their after tax income in so called child support to their ex wife, no matter how much she makes at the time of divorce or afterwards in a bit, or how well off the guy she then decides to live with or remarry is. Remember it includes a v large alimony component. About 1/3 at lower ex husband income levels and more than that at higher ones.
Stop thinking that if the wife’s total post divorce income is significantly lower giving the work she can or more often decides to do, that that’s not right, and the man should have to equalize it. (While of course if his is lower, that’s tough. And anyway he didn’t get the kids, she did, so he doesn’t matter, never mind she 70% of the time filed for the divorce almost always w/out truly compelling reason, and another large percentage of the time forced him to divorce by not only e.g. not stopping sexing a man she’s fallen in love with, but also her complete cessation of sexing her husband, feeling in love love for him or even trying to, or truly working on the marriage.)
Women enforceably promise nothing to men in marriage; it’s all their option and if they’re feeling like it currently these feminist days. Men should cease enforceably promising things in marriage as well, such as any their money post divorce and post her giving him anything in return.
LikeLike
Roissy – John 8:41-44
LikeLike
oops forgot – pls read John 8:39 first.
LikeLike
Since the current situation is so ridiculous and unfair (and actually aids and abets shameful behavior on the part of women) the mrm should have a zany, outlandish but still vigorously pursued component to their proposed reforms that in its insanity highlights the ridiculous nature of the current situation. My proposal: A woman divorcing a man should still have to provide a certain amount of sex and domestic services to her husband. If she does not do so enthusiastically (both in the arrangement and performance of such activities) the man can get a temporary reprieve from alimony and child support. The man will also be authorized to tape said performances so they can substantiate less-than-enthusiastic compliance. This also has the desirable effect of shaming the shameless. Although the proposal is ridiculous, it can be rationally defended. When you start arguing about the proposal in its details, it highlights the opportunity for a shameless woman to game the current system and to treat marriage as a two-step lottery ticket to personal independence.
LikeLike
Since so much of public policy is based on some quack science – and the availability of junk science is often used to support bad public policy – the mrm would have some great ammo with this information when seeking reform to divorce laws. See Rotating Polyandry and Its Enforcers:
http://www.argumentations.com/Argumentations/StoryDetail_7731.aspx
If the reality of many female-initiated divorces is that some women are just giving in to the identified 4 – year cycle of female attraction shouldn’t public policy reflect this in some way? If women are merely divorcing after they no longer find their husband sexually interesting why should they be rewarded? In the Roman Catholic Church similar behavior would indicate that the woman had no intention of actually fulfilling the duties of the marriage covenant and might result in an annulment – meaning there was no valid marriage in the first place. At the very least, shouldn’t this information be shouted in the public square so that young men are made aware that in some way women are biologically programmed to seek a new spouse after a few years?
LikeLike
Dave, that is a very good point. In some “primitive” cultures, people aren’t considered married until they’ve been together for more than five years. In some others, it’s common for a guy to wait until about that time to publically claim a woman as his wife.
I thought that was such a good idea when my grandmother told me about it as a youngster, that I went old-old school and decided that this was going to be one of my personal policies. I give a guy the benefit of the doubt, but don’t think of him as really with me until after the fifth year. I’m always ready to disengage until then, and don’t use the word “love” with reference to their feelings.
When they tell me that they love me, I answer, “I love you,” instead of, “I love you too,” because until the time has passed, I don’t know that we have the same definition for the word. When I say it, I mean that I would take a bullet for them, or happily remove their catheter as foreplay. I don’t know what they mean when they say it until we’ve been through enough things together.
Some guys think it’s because I don’t trust them, but it’s because I trust nature. People say all kinds of things in the first year or two that change.
It doesn’t have to be about women’s tendency to rotate…just people’s tendency to bite off more than they can chew. A realistic government wouldn’t recognize anyone as married until they’d been together for more than 5 years. Until then, if they split, it should be a clean break.
LikeLike
One more comment. The feminists and left/progressives who don’t care about gay rights (gays are a minority even on the left) must secretly laugh at the social conservatives defending “marriage” against attacks by gays. The social conservatives and gays are in this instance both “useful idiots” because they are helping to obscure the fact that what they they think they are defending or seeking (traditional marriage (as others have called it marriage 1.0)) doesn’t exist any more. Marriage 2.0 (a scam perpetrated on unsuspecting males to fleece them of their money by libertine feminists) has been substituted in its place. The social conservatives should be fighting a two front war but instead have unsuspectedly been recruited by feminists to defend their monolith (the divorce and family court plantation) and to give young unmarried males the mistaken impression that traditional marriage continues to exist and can be granted by taking out a marriage license from the state.
Marriage 1.0 does exist but has nothing to do with what is granted by the state and can only be achieved if you are lucky enough to marry a traditional woman who has the fortitude and commitment to honor her marriage vows.
LikeLike
Just to clarify I said marriage 1.0 doesn’t exist anymore in the first paragraph and then contradicted this statement in the last paragraph. What I should have said is the state is a willing participant in the scamming of traditional males – it used to be in the business of granting marriage 1.0 licenses but it is now in the business of scamming traditional males with marriage 2.0 licenses.
LikeLike
Dave–
I love it. Brilliant!
That’s a great way of viscerally getting across just how much of an entirely one way feminist state imposed and enforced contract marriage 2.0 has become.
My long explanations for just how that’s so are one thing. But you’ve got a way of conveying the core idea with a lot more emotional zing.
LikeLike
Dave–
Don’t just make it about support post marriage though.
Also the man shouldn’t have to give any part of his wealth to the ex wife who divorced him, when she can do so at will and is giving him nothing ongoing in return, like enthusiastic sex after marriage.
LikeLike
With all due respect Nicole I think that my fellow americans in the black community did better under western european – style customs, which they did in fact practice until the advent of the welfare state (the tsar bomba of the black family):
With friends like LBJ, who needs enemies?
LikeLike
I think there’s a movie script in my proposal – maybe I should option it to Kelsey Grammer.
LikeLike
Dave, the “primitive” cultures I was speaking of are Native American and some Pacific Islanders.
Even so, where the ideas came from is irrelevant. They’d solve many of the problems westerners are having with relationships, with or without legal recognition.
There is a Christian custom that would work: betrothal.
During betrothal, people can have sex, and officially marry if they like, if there are any babies made during that time. In the case that a couple splits, nobody loses anything except an illusion. If the relationship lasts more than 5 years, then the couple can marry.
It would be nice if legally, couples were considered betrothed/engaged until after the fifth year. It’d be even nicer if cohabitation wasn’t even recognized until then.
LikeLike
@nicole
(about betrothal)
This used to be the norm in certain socio-economic
strata.
There were some additional conditions.
The engagement started with an expensive
ring, given to the woman by the man.
If the woman got pregnant, marriage was
essentially mandatory.
If the woman changed her mind and boggied,
she was expected to return the ring.
If the man changed his mind and boggied,
she kept the ring.
Essentially, the price of the ring was the
going price for a hymen.
LikeLike
Marriage 1.0 – A solemn covenant which, depending on the context (whether religious or state-sanctioned) is either between a man, a woman and god or between a man, a woman and the state. Regardless of the sanctioning agent, it seeks to strike the best balance between the interests of the various agents at the time of its creation and even those not present at its creation – children which may result from the union. Since it has as one its objects the generation of children, and since children have such a long maturation period, it is difficult to break.
Marriage 2.0 – A scam perpetrated by the state on the unwary when viewed in combination with liberal divorce laws. It can be gamed by members of either sex, but since the concern of this blog is with men, marriage 2.0 is a scam that allows women married to traditional men to define in its entirety the content of the marital arrangement. Honorable women can use it to facilitate marriage 1.0, but dishonorable women can treat marriage under a “marriage 2.0” regime as a short-term employment contract from which she can retire at will with (if she’s lucky to find a guy who doesn’t do a pre-nup) retirement benefits defined AFTER her service is rendered. The system is so tilted in favor of women that the actual quality of the service rendered by a woman during marriage is often irrelevant to the reward of “retirement benefits”. As another example of its bias, behavior (adultery) which in other analogous contexts involving men are viewed as capital offenses (for example when serving as a soldier for your country switching sides and serving an enemy) may also not be a defense against a straying wife’s seeking of “retirement benefits”. There is no built-in safety mechanism under a “marriage 2.0” regime preventing a woman you thought was traditional and seeking a marriage 1.0 with you from changing her mind and treating your “marriage” as a short-term employment contract with state-coerced retirement benefits.
Keep these things in mind or else you might be sitting in a double-wide someday while your wife, after having “retired” from your marriage, is having sex with the new master of the domicile you financed – your former pool-boy.
LikeLike
Dave,
My experience with my children’s generation (late 20’s, early 30’s), is that none of the men are marrying women they will have to support, that is, the women have their own substantial income. This is a financial disaster for many young women I know from my children’s circle of friends with low personal incomes (they came from affluent families), like girls working for NGO’s, adjunct professors of music, aspiring actresses, art teachers, and “frivolous types.” The latter types are shacking up, but not getting marriage offers. Poorer girls who don’t have a father to pay off their college debts are especially hurting.
Hell, a guy married to one of my daughter’s best friends won’t work at all. Can’t find a job he likes. College degree, drug free, and healthy.
I hear complaints occasionally about the lack of cash flowing from him to her in some of these relationships, but, these guys have no intention of going down that road.
Going down the economic ladder, some younger women I know are getting knocked up but have no husband.
Anyway, I think the word is out. Young men I know have gotten smart. We are entering a new era of marriage, one where men will be a lot less likely to get fleeced. Call it marriage 3.0.
And, you can thank the Feminists.
And me? I am still supporting women, but, I am from the old school.
LikeLike
Paul McCartney
LikeLike
This is my new blog post but it’s relevant to this discussion:
Tax males for having sex
The feminized state already criminalizes men who insist that their wives fulfil their marital duties (marital ‘rape’); it forces divorced men, or even men from broken common-law partnerships, to give up various amounts of their wealth to women merely for having lived with them in a sexual relationship. What’s next? I think a case could be made for imposing a surtax of some kind on all men who have ever been sexually active, and the revenues thus generated would be naturally used for the exclusive benefit of women. The message sent by this would accord well with today’s governmental and political worldview: Men who have sex with women thereby owe something to society, and the most just and evolved way to make this good is to compensate society at large through tax contributions.
To determine these tax rates, which would of course differ for men in various situations (married, divorced and already paying alimony, lifelong virgin, etc.), a large and powerful new arm of the Internal Revenue Service would need to be created. (That in itself is of course a huge incentive for Our Overlords to bring my idea into being.)
(Some of you who actually believe in Saving The World From Destruction may be somewhat disappointed at my approach — neatly captured in my blog subtitle “Hastening the Apocalypse for Fun and Profit” — so you may wish to use me as a sort of worst-case-scenario resource, rather than as a guide to moral improvement.)
LikeLike
@Grampa:
“Hell, a guy married to one of my daughter’s best friends won’t work at all. Can’t find a job he likes. College degree, drug free, and healthy.”
If his wife doesn’t mind, then why the hell SHOULD he work? Sounds like he’s in an enviable situation, and if the wife divorces him, he’ll have no money to steal.
You should contact this young man and tell him to start reading this blog (and mine of course).
LikeLike
“Shirley (greatbooksformen)
lozzllzl omg the spearhead wants me to regsiter before commenting there lozlzlzllz
so i’ll just say it here
i can’t beleieve all those losers are even taliig about marriage when women give not only their vaginal region waay fro free but their anuses and oral orifices too and probably their ears fro all the tiny-cocked men @ the spearhead. just kidding bros! i am sure you are all hung like betas with pencil dicks lzozlzlllzzozlzll”
Perhaps the spearhead would prefer not to have someone lolzzing in every thread multiple times, especially if they’re going to be afraid of committing to an identity by registering. Not that I know what Welmer & the other guys who author on the spearhead are thinking because I’m not a mind-reader, but they do have a specific identity for themselves instead of hiding behind “anonymous”, so if they expect people to register if they want to comment they’re not hypocritical about things.
And for a guy I’ve already named shirley, or mary ellen, or betty lou (I like them all, it’s so hard to pick just one to call you), who has this…lolz problem…you’re one to talk about beta pencil dick.
LikeLike
Dave
My understanding is that this is true for both men and women. Which is why I’m puzzled at the common reaction amongst many social conservatives here who bemoan the state of marital deterioration. Men want fresh meat as much as women do, right?
Wrong – and here is how it works. Listen closely. Some proportion of both males and females are what Bob Altmeyer would term “authoritarians”. Couple his work with the recent discoveries of a genetic basis for two different sets of morality, one which includes the autoritarians respect for authority plus their innate feeling for purity, and what you get is not a social conservative class, but a genetically conservative class.
If you feel a preference for virgins and think that people should respect the law, regardless of if the law is just, then you likely have genes that give you these predispositions, and you would do better seeking out a girl whose natural inclination was to postpone sex later than average.
If, on the other hand, you are of a more libertine bohemian bent, don’t bother. And you’ll more likely feel, as I do, that the current age is just grand. Who wants to marry anyway?!
LikeLike
Your response is a non-sequitur. Read my post again. The only point I was making is that the dominant culture tries to convince men that women are monogamous – Devlin’s piece makes the point that many women are serially monogamous, which isn’t really being monogamous at all. Men, when made aware of this fact, are better prepared to deal with women whatever their stripe. It only was in keeping with “dispelling pretty little lies”. I even had a woman say to me once “I haven’t been in love in four years”, almost immediately after I read the Devlin piece, which was kind of eery.
Regarding genetic predisposition, author Walker Percy made the point (I’ll put it in coarse terms he didn’t use) that men and women together can be grouped into two categories – on the one hand, “natural” mothers and “natural” fathers, and on the other hand swordsmen and skanks. He believed in a communal setting where children had a choice, the children of an indifferent skank mother would gravitate toward a receptive “natural” mother, even if the natural mother was not their biological mother.
LikeLike
Dave, I wasn’t responding to you, just riffin off of a subject that you brought up.
I’ve not read Percy, but perhaps what he meant by natural fathers is what is commonly termed a family man. I’m not one of those. I wonder what percentage of men are?
In nearly all arguments I lean nature over nurture. I think anyone who pays close attention to the BBC TV special on twin studies, or who has read much work on twin studies would lean the same way. Or maybe even the ability to lean that way in the discussion is biologically supported.
LikeLike
“many women are serially monogamous, which isn’t really being monogamous at all. ”
That’s an interesting take. That could only come from the frame of reference of a family man, I’d think.
LikeLike
Dave (the wise) has just described what my marriage was with his definition of Marriage 2.0 but I lucked out. I figured out her scam before she was able to cash out with full retirement benefits.
His description perfectly describes my shame marriage.
LikeLike
There are deeper, more significant philosophical issues lurking behind “teach me how to pick up a hot chick”. An aside – when in a bar, I spied a young guy, who was up periscope looking around, and seeing what was available. Knowing some game, I walked over to him and berated him – “act disinterested – your up periscope behavior only makes women nervous”. He said “what do I know?”. I had worked out that day. So I went back to my seat, slumped in the seat, and put the biggest hangdog look on my face I could muster. Someone looking at me would think he’s not only not aware of what’s going on in the bar, he’s a million miles a way. Not immediately, but not long thereafter, a woman came up to me to ask me what the problem was. I said nothing serious, but I was beat after having worked out and I had a lot of stuff on my mind. We struck up a conversation, and the next thing I know she’s massaging my shoulders. I looked back at the young guy and he’s totally pissed. Game is evil, ain’t it.
End of the aside. Ancient greek city states required all male citizens to marry for the obvious purpose of replenishing the army with young men. The city states were often at war with one another so an army was necessary. Fast forward 2300 years or whatever. Since the creation of a new generation of law-abiding and productive citizens can be viewed as a common good that benefits everyone (it perpetuates civilization and culture at the very least), what laws or policies (if any) should the state enact to encourage procreation? Should procreation be viewed as a duty both sexes have? This isn’t hypothetical. You can’t say the state hasn’t acted because it has. The state already treats one sex as if its their duty to procreate with no laws that encourage the behavior and often act as punishments (sucker punching the well-intentioned) for taking on the responsibility. Even those that don’t procreate are taxed to support those that do – some of those taxes you pay go to support single moms. Is the current regime fair or just? If not, how should it be modified?
LikeLike
Dave, if your question is what is the best state policy in regards to making babies, the bigger question still would be should there be any state intervention at all. It comes down to a socially constructed or individually constructed society. The common good versus the individual good. Communism versus free market.
Men traditionally lean more free market and individualist than do women. I personally lean strongly individualist, but recognize that any healthy society requires a balance between socialism (in it’s widest possible meaning) and individualism.
From my point of view, anarchy will reign, and the fittest systems anarchy produces will for a time reign as the top organizations. I don’t believe people do a good job of managing what are the fittest systems. But if I did, we’d obviously go for eugenics and from there move towards biologically engineered people, and from there to cyborgs and from there to the borg. Sooner or later eugenics becomes besides the point, because we can more directly create the end game without generations of breeding.
Maybe I’m reading too much into what you are pointing to, but seems to me you are into a tribal notion of let’s us breed the best so we can out-compete the rest mentality. Eventually that game is not enough to compete.
LikeLike
Its a rabbit whole, ain’t it? There was a news report a few years back about how Singapore was adopting policies that tried to encourage marriage between the bright of both sexes, since they often were the most reluctant (least successful) in accomplishing these lower biological functions. My point is that the state (US specifically and the west in general) has already made choices. Do you like those choices? The choices in place represent mostly the interests of one group (more accurately a particularly vocal subset of one group) and males were given little or no hearing in selecting these choices.
Speaking of rabbit holes – one of my favorite cartoons:
LikeLike
As regards to how the state affects choices, my choice was to expatriate.
LikeLike
Another perspective:
Marriage 2.0 resulting in children and wife-initiated divorce – a stud arrangement where the stud pays the stud fee. Isn’t this backward?
LikeLike
Xsplat & Dave,
You are both making a lot of good points.
LikeLike
An older definition of marriage: a legal means of regularizing a man’s relationship with a woman that promotes the man’s quiet enjoyment of title.
For further education of the males here – there are other movements afoot besides the encouragement of pre-nups. Social conservatives have been active in some states seeking to institute something called “covenant marriage”, by which the social conservatives are trying to reinstitute the availability of a state-sanctioned marriage 1.0 relationship. The more liberal males out there should not laugh out loud. The widespread availability of such arrangements – even if you are not interested in them – would be great for smoking out a woman. You: I want a pre-nup. Her: You don’t love me, no one who truly loves me would ask for a pre-nup. You: a couple of days later: Honey, I heard about something called covenant marriage, that makes it really hard for people to divorce. I am totally committed to you and am ready to enter a covenant marriage. Her: That’s old-fashioned. No way would I consider something like that. You: Wow, you talk about love but honey you seem to want the relationship to be totally open-ended and ill-defined. I think we should continue to co-habitate. If your dealing with a dishonorable women, it should become clear to you that what she wants is entree into the marriage 2.0 regime, and the options it provides her to attack you. Back to xsplat’s point – why marry? You say this would never happen to me. Paul McCartney!
covenant marriage:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covenant_marriage
LikeLike
Fuck Roissy, this has nothing to due with Feminism. If I were you I’d immediately quit writing to Spearhead. WTF???
I liked your post, but why the fricking reference to the video what Spearhead!? What comes???
LikeLike
[…] The State + Women = Boot Stamping On A Beta Face, Even Blind Men Prefer The Optimal 0.7 Waist-To-Hip Ratio, […]
LikeLike
[…] – “The State + Women = Boot Stamping on a Beta Face“, “It May Be Better to Game in Small Groups“, “Ass Saving and Wife […]
LikeLike
From postsecret.com in case anyone thinks that women do not falsely accuse men of abuse:
LikeLike