Who has heard of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder? It affects millions of women around the globe, mostly from raising children, having careers, cleaning, cooking, working, and "several other things".
I shall assume these several other things involve everyday activities.
Mostly, the only discernible cause of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder that I can find is living. Seeing as how this affects women of "any age, race, or overall health", and is a "serious and damaging condition"; I can only conclude that there is something wrong with you if you don't feel the need to have sex with someone.
Especially given the existence of asexual people.
I take great offense to this, myself identifying as asexual. I resent being told something is wrong with me when I lead a perfectly healthy life with just friends and family. I have never had a boyfriend, girlfriend, or any other sort of partner you care to imagine. This has not affected me adversely in any way. In fact, I consider myself to live a rather better life than my peers. They are always having problems upon problems about dating and sex and emotional attachment. I do not.
Let's take a look at the definition of an asexual person as given by The Asexuality Visibility and Education Network:
"An asexual is someone who does not experience sexual attraction. Unlike celibacy, which people choose, asexuality is an intrinsic part of who we are. Asexuality does not make our lives any worse or any better, we just face a different set of challenges than most sexual people. There is considerable diversity among the asexual community; each asexual person experiences things like relationships, attraction, and arousal somewhat differently."
I would especially note the sections on arousal and attraction:
"Attraction: Many asexual people experience attraction, but we feel no need to act out that attraction sexually. Instead we feel a desire to get to know someone, to get close to them in whatever way works best for us. Asexual people who experience attraction will often be attracted to a particular gender, and will identify as lesbian, gay, bi, or straight.
Arousal: For some sexual arousal is a fairly regular occurrence, though it is not associated with a desire to find a sexual partner or partners. Some will occasionally masturbate, but feel no desire for partnered sexuality. Other asexual people experience little or no arousal. Because we don’t care about sex, asexual people generally do not see a lack of sexual arousal as a problem to be corrected, and focus their energy on enjoying other types of arousal and pleasure."
I find it especially telling that it specifically says that "people do not need sexual arousal to be healthy" right after that.
So, therefore, this posited Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder is either a) idiocy or b) a ploy for pharmaceutical companies to make money. I would choose c) both.
-
I find this whole idea offensive in other ways, as well. It again confirms society's fixation with sexuality (specifically female) and the still-lurking assumption that women should have sex, no matter what their body tells them. The fact of life is that it is much easier for a woman to not be interested in sex than it is for a man. Things like working and holding a job take up energy, energy that may have been used for sex but most likely would have gone toward things like organizing the house in activities like cleaning and cooking after work. Women's sexuality works differently from a man's, as well. For men, it takes only about three minutes before coital acts to become sufficiently aroused to reach orgasm; for women, the period is something in the order of a full twenty-four hours. The system is much more complex. Various emotional states need to met and certain neurochemicals, like oxycontin and serotonin, need to be released. With women who are taking care of children, especially babies and toddlers, these neurochemical and emotional needs may already have been satisfied by basic biological prompting. This, along with general exhaustion, explains why many new mothers feel no desire for sex of any kind.
Aside from difference in the system of sexuality, there is an underlying societal idea here too. Women are to have sex. That is what they are there for. This does not even address, of course, the double standard towards sex for the genders. With that note, I would like to address the fallacy that is "Low T".
One, just come out and say that it is low levels of testosterone. Two, admit that this is a natural thing in older men known as andropause, more popularly male menopause. Testosterone levels drop and estrogen goes up. Older men are more likely to enjoy cuddling, hugging, and intimate touch at this point in their lives. The sex drive decreases. This is naturally, yet these commercials that I see popping up all over the place seem to try and bill it as a life crisis. The website does concede the point that levels naturally rise and fall over the course of a man's life, but do the commercials say anything of this? No. How many people really look at the medical commercial's websites and how many just take the marketing ploys at face value?
-
I protest at both these so-called conditions. How many people already have socialized issues with their sexuality? How many people now, after seeing the advertisements for this, feel even worse about themselves and will suggest to their doctor that they begin taking unnecessary medication? How many doctors will prescribe unnecessary medication because the pharmaceutical companies pay them to get business?
How many people will develop actual problems from this idiocy, and how many people will never bother to try and take control of their sexuality and own their bodies because their "problems" can be medicated away?
Showing posts with label insanity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label insanity. Show all posts
June 16, 2010
June 7, 2010
'Tis the season
Its that time of year again. The National American Miss people are sending out flyers. Last year's I really didn't like, and this year's I found more issues with, after a year of paying attention to feminist blogs. Lets examine this:
First, the cover
Typical Euro-centric ideal of beauty? Check. Airbrushing? Check. "Fashionable"? Check. Vaguely pained look? Check. "Sexy" Posing? Check. Looks old enough to be the mother of the audience targeted? Why is she even on this thing?
The inside
EVEN MORE European girls? Check. Posing? Check. Now onto the highlighted stuff. That's were it gets really insidious.
And the back
Finally, some token racial diversity! Posing? Check. Airbrushing? Check. Ridiculously happy smiles? Check. People who are clearly models with their perfectly white teeth and shaped eyebrows who are surely not the sort of people who would actually be at this? Check.
One last highlighted thing:
"All you'll need is:
Total cost: $870. Way to raise the bar. Now they only want you if you've got about a thousand dollars lying around! Now I know why the popular pretty girls on TV are always rich whites! They're the only ones with enough money to be official.
Congratulations, National American Miss pageants. You have now officially sent the most racist and classist bit of mail I have ever seen.
First, the cover
Typical Euro-centric ideal of beauty? Check. Airbrushing? Check. "Fashionable"? Check. Vaguely pained look? Check. "Sexy" Posing? Check. Looks old enough to be the mother of the audience targeted? Why is she even on this thing?
The inside
EVEN MORE European girls? Check. Posing? Check. Now onto the highlighted stuff. That's were it gets really insidious.
- "Makeup is not allowed on our participants ages 4-12 during the event." Well, that sure didn't stop you from airbrushing their pictures, did it?
- "The National American Miss pageants are dedicated to celebrating America's greatness and encouraging its future leaders." Apparently "America's greatness" is little pretty white girls. Also: to be a leader and a girl, you must be pretty. No two ways about it.
- "You'll gain... self-confidence...You'll feel good about yourself." Yes, I'm sure it will help boost the Hispanic girl from my old hometown who also received this flyer's self-confidence that the only girls pictured on the sides are clearly European and the overweight girl down the street will feel better about herself when all the girls there are thin.
- "If not accepted into the pageant..." Way to judge a girl on her looks when she's supposed to be a "future leader".
- "The total fee for the pageant is $440." Well, my goodness, that sure explains why there's pretty much just white girls on this! You only want people with half a thousand dollars lying around! Poor people, obviously, are ugly; and unfit to associate with you until they can cut food or utilities bills to pay for this.
And the back
Finally, some token racial diversity! Posing? Check. Airbrushing? Check. Ridiculously happy smiles? Check. People who are clearly models with their perfectly white teeth and shaped eyebrows who are surely not the sort of people who would actually be at this? Check.
One last highlighted thing:
"All you'll need is:
- A prom dress or evening gown
- A suit or dress for interview
- Official production number t-shirt outfit (available on pageant weekend for a nominal charge)"
Total cost: $870. Way to raise the bar. Now they only want you if you've got about a thousand dollars lying around! Now I know why the popular pretty girls on TV are always rich whites! They're the only ones with enough money to be official.
Congratulations, National American Miss pageants. You have now officially sent the most racist and classist bit of mail I have ever seen.
May 26, 2010
The Professors: The 100 Most Dangerous Academics in America
The author is David Horowitz.
A book review:
The author does manage to find some truly despicable people (mostly affirmed Jihadists, violent anti-whites, and convicted domestic terrorists). However, I find that most people in this book are not as extreme as those and a few choices are extremely laughable*. Also, most of the people in this book did not support the war on terror for various reasons; that coupled by the designation of nearly all the professors as liberals leads me to believe that the author is a dedicated conservative. Which, of course, would lead to bias on all cases, with the skew on people's views getting decidedly more negative the less extreme the case (in perspective).
Another thing that really stood out for me is that the author mentions feminism where applicable and fails to make any connection as to how this is relevant to the professor being dangerous. This lack leaves me with only the conclusion that the reader is to associate feminism with danger. The other thing was the lack of opposing viewpoints. If the author could find so may Jihadists, militant anti-whites, and domestic terrorists; surely he could locate anti-Muslims, anti-minorities, and American supremacists as well.
*Most of these people are proponents of Marxism or Leninism and/or take an anti-American stance. A continuing point made was opposition to the Vietnam war.
A book review:
The author does manage to find some truly despicable people (mostly affirmed Jihadists, violent anti-whites, and convicted domestic terrorists). However, I find that most people in this book are not as extreme as those and a few choices are extremely laughable*. Also, most of the people in this book did not support the war on terror for various reasons; that coupled by the designation of nearly all the professors as liberals leads me to believe that the author is a dedicated conservative. Which, of course, would lead to bias on all cases, with the skew on people's views getting decidedly more negative the less extreme the case (in perspective).
Another thing that really stood out for me is that the author mentions feminism where applicable and fails to make any connection as to how this is relevant to the professor being dangerous. This lack leaves me with only the conclusion that the reader is to associate feminism with danger. The other thing was the lack of opposing viewpoints. If the author could find so may Jihadists, militant anti-whites, and domestic terrorists; surely he could locate anti-Muslims, anti-minorities, and American supremacists as well.
*Most of these people are proponents of Marxism or Leninism and/or take an anti-American stance. A continuing point made was opposition to the Vietnam war.
May 22, 2010
Milwaukee County Superviser John Chianelli Endorses Sexual Assaults
Supervisors call for firing of county mental health chief
Milwaukee Offers up Mentally Ill Women as Sexual Bait to Soothe Violent Male Inmates- Candidate for Governor Supports
Let me outline everything that is wrong about this.
Milwaukee Offers up Mentally Ill Women as Sexual Bait to Soothe Violent Male Inmates- Candidate for Governor Supports
Let me outline everything that is wrong about this.
- One, rape and sexual abuse should never be a trade-off for anything. If Milwaukee has a problem with violence in male wards, then something should be done to curb the violence such as keeping the inmates away from each other.
- Two, essentially, what they are doing is allowing things such as rape and sexual abuse in state-sponsored facilities. I fail to see how this is in any way a good idea, as both rape and sexual assualt are illegal.
- Three, they are devauling women. They are telling women that they are expendable, tools, and it does not matter if they are hurt as long as it somehow helps men.
- Four, they are showing callous disregaurd toward persons with medical conditions. I am quite sure that people with psychiatric problems are covered by the Americans With Disabilities Act. Again, this is illegal.
- Five, sexual assault and rape are simply different forms of violence than beatings, scratching, biting, and whatever else the facility was having problems with. Trading one sort of violence for another sort solves no problem, it simply reinforces the pattern and adds even more to the things be fixed later.
- Six, it would seem that they are operating off the 1950s stereotype that women are somehow more docile or more likely to quell violence by their mere prescene. This is clearly wrong, as there are 100 men born for every 104 women and the world still has problems such as war, theft, and general violence.
- Seven, whatever causes the violence in the first place will not be magically cured, it will just be redirected. Again, this solves nothing.
Send an e-mail to Candidate Scott Walker at info@scottwalker.org, and one to John Chianelli at john.chianelli@milwcnty.com.
May 21, 2010
Discrimination. Again.
A man named Rand Paul has issues with accomodating people with disabilites. Or admit to racism.
Because business should be all about money.
Here's what Womanist Musings has to say about it:
Tea Party Member Rand Paul Does Not Believe in the Civil Rights Act
Tea Party Member Rand Paul Wants to Abolish the Americans with Disabilities Act
Because business should be all about money.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Here's what Womanist Musings has to say about it:
Tea Party Member Rand Paul Does Not Believe in the Civil Rights Act
Tea Party Member Rand Paul Wants to Abolish the Americans with Disabilities Act
May 15, 2010
May 1, 2010
In the spirit of fairness
I decided to take a look at the anti-feminist point of veiw today, to see if there was anything there that wasn't "women are evil", which is what I had heard.
Sadly, it seems the people I had heard were right.
From Angryharry.com
Immodest Women Cause Earthquakes Women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes, a senior Iranian cleric has said.
Correct!
From The Ghost Nation
Hate Crimes Against This Website
"Most people that have attacked this website have been male homosexual mobs, PAMs, sodomites, atheists, agnostics, whitey haters, gang stalkers and pro-Israel zealots."
Anti-Feminism Definition
"An anti-feminist has a sincere belief in God.
An anti-feminist is anti-Zionist.
An anti-feminist is heterosexual.
An anti-feminist is anti-abortion.
An anti-feminist is rational.
An anti-feminist is logical.
An anti-feminist is fair.
An anti-feminist is polite.
An anti-feminist is head of the household.
An anti-feminist is fun to be around.
An anti-feminist is trustworthy.
An anti-feminist is calm.
An anti-feminist is heterosexual.
An anti-feminist is creative.
An anti-feminist is constructive.
An anti-feminist is caring.
An anti-feminist is trustworthy.
An anti-feminist is wise.
An anti-feminist is helpful.
An anti-feminist is pro-life.
An anti-feminist is orderly.
An anti-feminist is caring.
An anti-feminist is humble.
An anti-feminist is hygienic.
An anti-feminist is non-violent in most circumstances.
An anti-feminist is honest.
An anti-feminist is forthright.
An anti-feminist is sincere.
An anti-feminist does not manipulate people.
An anti-feminist does not knowingly associate with criminals, Zionists, SADs, sodomites, psychopaths or sociopaths.
An anti-feminist does not harass, menace or stalk.
An anti-feminist does not use treachery as a means of fighting.
An anti-feminist does not use illicit or psychotropic drugs.
An anti-feminist plays sports rather then watch sports.
An anti-feminist is not two faced nor does he/she fake friendships.
An anti-feminist is not an atheist or an agnostic.
An anti-feminist supports heterosexual marriages only.
An anti-feminist dislikes rap, death metal and hip hop music.
An anti-feminist registers to vote as an Independent.
An anti-feminist believes that men that engage in rectal intercourse with their girlfriend or wife are homosexuals.
An anti-feminist is respectful of a person's right to privacy.
An anti-feminist believes that tattoos are the mark of the beast and is disgusted by them.
An anti-feminist believes in homeschooling his or her children.
An anti-feminist believes that when one surrounds himself/herself with evil then he/she becomes evil.
An anti-feminist believes in dating foreign womyn.
An anti-feminist is not a misogynist.
An anti-feminist is not a misandrist.
An anti-feminist is not a vulgar person."
Top Ten Reasons Feminists Suck
"1) Selfish - to the point where they don't know the difference between love of self and plain downright greed--and drilled into believing that whatever happens is the fault of whatever man is in their life because of the feminist crud drilled into them by the cadre of asexual closet cases called "therapists" who appear on "Ricki", "Oprah" or other such electronic drivel.
2) Deluded - into thinking they "deserve" a rich, model-handsome husband who will "take them away from all of this"--whatever the "this" might be--and leading to resentment when they discover that the universe does NOT revolve around them.
3) Angry - ALL the damn time about things which are so far out of their control as to be nonsensical--and constantly wanting to "discuss" this mind numbing drivel ad nauseam.
4) Psychotic - multiple personalities in the same woman - as "Nomad" put it in the "Star Trek" episode: "Woman...a mass of inconsistencies...", and also when the feminist voices in their heads start with the regrets and victim acculturation.
5) Worthless - anything that does not immediately resolve itself in her favor or to her benefit is meaningless to her, especially husband and family.
6) Lazy - drilled into their head that they "deserve" a maid, nanny and personal slave to take care of every detail - and that their husband/boyfriend is REQUIRED to cater to their each and every mindless whim.
7) Resentful - especially of other women who have things that they do not, in material, spiritual and esoteric senses.
8) Greedy - to them, "housekeeping" means getting the house in the divorce (thanks to Zsa Zsa for that immortal line) and sucking the guy for every last cent, even if they had nothing to do with the building of the nest egg.
9) Mindless - constant, irritating, idle prattle about topics they read about in some women's magazine and then become instant experts--particularly pop psychology and the latest &^%$% they see on "Oprah" or "Ricki".
10) Vain - believing that they are irresistible to everything in pants and therefore are allowed to behave sluttish and without any honor."
"No Fault-Divorce" is no divorce at all
Collection of quotes complied by Uzem & Luzem. The blog uses language and links inappropriate to be directly hot linked. Some of Uzem & Luzem's "unknown" quotes and "unknown" anecdotes come from the americanwomensuck.com forum's old database.
"No fault divorce" is no divorce at all: men continue to have the same duties as if they were married. It is just women who stop doing their duty.Unknown
I used to get depressed and would despair at my lack of "success" with women, but when you see so many decent men get "chewed up and spat out" by the divorce industry, then in some ways I am a lucky guy. Even my own mother (who was raised as a strict Catholic), is appalled at the way modern women behave eg. lack of life skills, sluttiness, extreme narcissism, unfaithful etc. And now even my own mum often said to me: "Seb, you are better off alone, rather than being ruined by some unfaithful and treacherous slut", and "if your sex drive gets the better of you, go pay a hooker".Seb
Marriage adds nothing to a man's life but risk and obligation.Unknown
All is fair in love and war. And women have definitely declared war on men...Unknown
Women are cold blooded creatures by nature. At divorce the act is dropped.Ztp
Rumors of happy, well-adjusted and non-man hating AW are vastly over exaggerated.Shard43
I frankly think most Western women are too far gone to be brought back down to earth and right the ship. Lord knows I've tried to reason with them and the blogosphere is full of sage and sane advice for how society ought to be run and how people ought to act. They take the society around them for granted as a birth right as though it grew on trees just to please them and takes no disciplined effort to maintain. They show no ability or desire for introspective accounting of their behavior. Really, they are truly boring individuals.Mandy
Woman's behavior across the board teaches us time and again that morality is a foreign concept to huge numbers of them.Unknown
The hidden cost of allowing women to demonize men as violent child molesters with zero proof is that men don't get married, don't have kids, don't enter professions that require interaction with kids, don't save kids when they are in danger, and generally abandon their traditional role as protectors of the young. It's as though we have been sent to internal exile in a virtual gulag. Touch a child, go to jail. If his mom dislikes you, this can happen even if you are his father. And yet, we are still lambasted by feminists as members of the all-powerful patriarchy.Nemo
The people responsible for orchestrating this situation want it precisely as it is. Step one: disenfranchise fathers and men. Women naturally return to their asocial, destructive behavior because - unlike men - they have no consistent internal monologue, hence no moral basis to govern their actions. They might be taught to behave at a young age, but as newer generations are increasingly raised by women only, over time they lose what values the last decent male bestowed upon the family line. The end result: complete social destruction as all values are lost and people become amoral, asocial loners.Unknown
I didn't realize HOW stressful [working with women was] until I no longer worked with them; I didn't really see this until I worked with men only. Wow, what a difference there was! There was no drama, no $%#@$#%@; we just came in, did our jobs, then went home. You don't have to worry about sexual harassment; you don't have to worry about saying the wrong thing, nor saying it in the wrong way. You don't have to worry about a woman laughing at your joke, then turning around and crying sexual harassment to your boss; you don't have to worry about her back stabbing you. If a man has a problem with you, he'll pull you aside, tell you what it is, and what he wants you to do about it; as a man, you say sorry, then make a sincere effort to address his grievance. Then (gasp!)-it's over!! No more BS to worry about! With men, conflicts are quickly resolved, then they're forgotten. Working with men, you don't have to worry about walking on $%^&^%$ eggshells all the time-thank goodness!!Markymark
Educate a man, and you'll feed a family. Educate a woman, and you'll feed a multinational corporation.Unknown
The hidden cost of allowing women to demonize men as violent child molesters with zero proof is that men don't get married, don't have kids, don't enter professions that require interaction with kids, don't save kids when they are in danger, and generally abandon their traditional role as protectors of the young. It's as though we have been sent to internal exile in a virtual gulag. Touch a child, go to jail. If his mom dislikes you, this can happen even if you are his father. And yet, we are still lambasted by feminists as members of the all-powerful patriarchy.Nemo
Marriage is a three ring circus:1. Engagement ring.2. Wedding ring &3. Suffering.Unknown
Feminists bang on about men being predators on the hunt for sex, but women are the predators in that (usually once worn out and aging) they seek out a sucker to marry them, filtering out guys not rich enough for their liking, and then putting on the pretense of being chaste and pleasant until he's signed the dotted line. Then the guy is caught and done for.Unknown
A scorpion was wandering along the bank of the river, wondering how to get to the other side. Suddenly he saw a fox. He asked the fox to take him across the river.The fox said, "No. If I do that, you'll sting me and I'll drown."The scorpion assured him, "If I did that, we'd both drown."The fox thought about it and finally agreed. So the scorpion climbed up on his back and the fox began to swim. But halfway across the river, the scorpion stung him. As the poison filled his veins, the fox turned to the scorpion and said, "Why did you do that? Now you'll drown too.""I couldn't help it," said the scorpion. "It's my nature."posted by Ztp(original author unknown)
It is significant that women so regularly ask "What are men for then?" It shows women's selfish and spoiled ways, namely that they automatically assume everyone and everything else in the Universe is for their benefit. Women are thrown into confusion if they attempt to grasp the idea of there being anything or anyone that isn't there solely to serve their whims. Incidentally, if you want to see a world without men, just pop along to the nearest crime-ridden poverty-reeking inner-city single-mother populated ghetto. Such charming places pretty much pure Matriarchies with just women and "their" children.Unknown
The Catalog of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics
"Shaming tactics." This phrase is familiar to many Men's Rights Activists. It conjures up the histrionic behavior of female detractors who refuse to argue their points with logic. Yet women are not the only ones guilty of using shaming tactics against men. Male gynocentrists use them, too.Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man's insecurities and shut down debate. They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions. Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks.Anyway, it might be helpful to categorize the major shaming tactics that are used against men whenever a discussion arises about feminism, men's issues, romance, etc. The following list contains descriptions of shaming tactics, some examples of quotes employing the tactics, and even color-coded aliases for mnemonic purposes. Enjoy.
Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)
Discussion: The target is accused of having anger management issues. Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable. Examples:
"You're bitter!"
"You need to get over your anger at women."
"You are so negative!"
Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice. It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.
Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)
Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women. Examples:
"You need to get over your fear."
"Step up and take a chance like a man!"
"You're afraid of a strong woman!"
Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and &%^&*&^%. The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks. One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks. As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.
Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) - The Crybaby Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing "Chicken Little"). Examples:
"Stop whining!"
"Get over it!"
"Suck it up like a man!"
"You guys don't have it as nearly as bad as us women!"
"You're just afraid of losing your male privileges."
"Your fragile male ego ..."
"Wow! You guys need to get a grip!"
Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men. It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not ("yes" or "no"), however small it may be seem to be. If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser's welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned. If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.
Charge of Puerility (Code Green) - The Peter Pan Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male. Examples:
"Grow up!"
"You are so immature!"
"Do you live with your mother?"
"I'm not interested in boys. I'm interested in real men."
"Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children."
Response: It should be remembered that one's sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability. If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.
Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) -The Elevated Threat Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner. This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target. Examples:
"You guys are scary."
"You make me feel afraid."
Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them. One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man's legitimate freedom of expression.
Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) -The Sour Grapes Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems. Example:
"You are just bitter because you can't get laid."
Response: In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth. In other words, one may submit to the accuser, "What if the grapes really are sour?" At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called "circumstantial ad hominem."
Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) -The Brown Shirts Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint. Examples:
"You're one of those right-wing wackos."
"You're an extremist"
"You sound like the KKK."
"... more anti-feminist zaniness"
Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are "out of the mainstream" is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of "False Compromise").
Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)
Discussion: The target's sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question. Examples:
"Are you gay?"
"I need a real man, not a sissy."
"You're such a wimp."
Response: Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.
Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)
Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women. Examples:
"I'm not like that!"
"Stop generalizing!"
"That's a sexist stereotype!"
Response: One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men. Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point. Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing. Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.
Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)
Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:
"You misogynist creep!"
"Why do you hate women?"
"Do you love your mother?"
"You are insensitive to the plight of women."
"You are mean-spirited."
"You view women as doormats."
"You want to roll back the rights of women!!"
"You are going to make me cry."
Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are "not a zero-sum game"). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target's viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of "argumentum ad misericordiam" (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or "argumentum in terrorem" (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).
Charge of Instability (Code White) -The White Padded Room Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable. Examples:
"You're unstable."
"You have issues."
"You need therapy."
"Weirdo!"
Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target's mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.
Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)
Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory. It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits. Examples:
"You are so materialistic."
"You are so greedy."
Response: It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge. For instance, one may retort, "So you are saying I shouldn't spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you ---and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?"
Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) -The All-That-Glitters Charge
Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences. Examples:
"If you didn't go after bimbos, then ..."
"How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?"
Response: Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, "high-maintanence" women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).
Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan)-The Ugly Tan Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned. Examples:
"I bet you are fat and ugly."
"You can't get laid!"
"Creep!"
"Loser!"
"Have you thought about the problem being you?"
Response: This is another example of "circumstantial ad hominem." The target's romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.
Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)
Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target's negative or guarded attitude about a situation. However, the focus is not so much on the target's anger or fear, but on the target's supposed attitude of resignation. Examples:
"Stop being so negative."
"You are so cynical."
"If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat."
"C'mon! Men are doers, not quitters."
Response: The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation. Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist. Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.
Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) -The Pink Whip
Discussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate. Examples:
"No woman will marry you with that attitude."
"Creeps like you will never get laid!"
Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy "argumentum ad baculum" (the "appeal to force"). The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position. Really, the only way to deal with the "Pink Whip" is to realize that a man's happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage)
Some Hard Questions Working Women Must Ask Themselves Regarding Being A Good Wife
1. Do I work outside the home because I am bored as a homemaker? Many women today place too much emphasis on career and fulfillment outside the home. Young women need to be taught that being a godly wife and mother is a lofty and admirable aspiration.
2. Do I work to satisfy my pride? Do I work just to prove I can make it in a "man's world?" The woman who chooses to marry is to submit herself to the Lord and her husband and her role of "helper" to him.
3. Do I work to satisfy my own or my husband's greed? Greed and covetousness are never proper motives for work (1 Tim. 6:6-10).
4. Do I work because the children "get to me?" Do your children make you nervous or "drive you up the wall" so that you cannot stand to be at home with them? Or do they make you feel that because of them you have been shackled at home? If either of these describes your feelings,is this not a sign of improper perspectives and priorities?
5. Does working outside the home constantly interfere with my responsibilities to God, Christ and the church? (Matt. 6:33; Col. 3:1).
6. Does working outside the home interfere with my responsibilities as a godly wife and mother? Has it interfered with providing for the emotional and physical needs of your husband? Has it affected your attitude by making you independent and aggressively destroying your submissive spirit toward your husband? Has work outside the home taken you from your responsibilities to not only bear children but to raise, nuture and teach your children -- especially during their most formative years?
13 Indicators Of Matriarchal Madness
1) The systematic entitlements and favoritism that women receive in family court.
2) The systematic entitlements and favoritism that women receive in divorce court.
3) The systematic entitlements and favoritism that women receive in the work place, schools, universities, military, police, etcetera (and are exploited by the vast majority of American/Western women).
4) The systematic entitlements that women criminals receive from the media, the police force, and the criminal justice system.
5) The systematic entitlements that false accuser women receive from the media, the police force, and the criminal justice system.
6) The selfishness that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
7) The fraud that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
8) The manipulation that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
9) The narcissism that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
10) The insane, selfish, and shallow behavior of feminists and vast majority of American/Western women.
11) Feminists and vast majority of American/Western women make terrible mothers.
12) Since the rise of feminism, the USA has had the highest incarceration rate in the world and highest drug use rate in the world.
13) The media, feminists, and man-ginas will not hold American/Western accountable for their indefensible actions, allowing women to engage in behavior that is damaging to society with 100% impunity.
My issues with this website need an entire other post to articulate. I therefore leave you with a post that at least begins and ends partly decently.
Where Did The Phrase "American Women Suck" Come From?
The name American Women Suck was originally created by AWS who is now a member of The Ghost Nation.www.americanwomensuck.com was up about 5 years before changing names and urls. We told people that the policies of corporate America and the feminist USA government would lead to financial disaster and we were correct. Now the most ardent anti-feminists are part of www.theghostnation.com. The terms "femerica", "AW", "SADs", "PAMs" and "hollyweird" were also created by AWS. The modern anti-feminist movement is now defined by www.theghostnation.com.Below is a very accurate definition of the phrase "American Women Suck":
The problem with modern American feminism is the inability of this political and social movement to effectively adapt to the differing expectations of American women. American women are caught in the relentlessly changing cultural expectations. Career? Family? Marriage? Independence? American feminism seems to only present one answer – career and independence at the cost of marriage, healthy relationships with men, family. Yet when an American woman’s biological urges for procreation and domesticity surface (as they almost always do), the women are caught in an ugly vice. The jaws on one side are the needs to be a wife (and possibly mother) the jaws on the other are the feminist ideals of career and independence. American women lack the cultural and emotional sophistication to deal with this.
A female friend of mine recently tried to join a local political group that seeks to be mentors to teenage girls. However, this friend of mine lacks the advanced professional credentials that this group wants. My friend works in an office during the day and works in a restaurant at night – perfectly reasonable jobs and both worthy of respect.
However, the group of women she wanted to become involved with – spearheaded by a local female TV news reporter – made it clear that the group of women mentoring young girls would be made up of CEOs, doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. Are these the only role models for girls? Should there not be a whole bevy of options for American girls? How about a happy, stay-at-home mom or a contented wife in a childfree relationship as role models? Apparently these options are not viable for young American girls, if this group of modern feminists is to be believed.
Feminism also teaches women that men are the enemy, that we are brutish and foul creatures whose only point in life is to subjugate women with our sexual urges. So, the lesson continues, there can be no compromise with the enemy for that is losing the battle. God forbid that an American woman would want to make a man happy. That would be treasonous to the cause! When American women get together to compare notes, the peer pressure is not about happy relationships, but more about swapping stories of how they acquired the trappings of status regardless of state of their relationships. There is almost glee when women denigrate their boyfriends and husbands. “Oh, I really don’t care about making him happy, as long as have my (insert status symbol here)”.
I have an anecdote about my ex wife. I recently corresponded with her just before a hurricane was to strike where I live. She offered that I could stay with her in the event of evacuation. It was a gracious invitation. Yet, in her email she stated, “I’m sure my boyfriend won’t mind”. It was that one sentence revealed her true nature. It summarized everything that is so unappealing about American women and was a stark reminder of the reasons behind our divorce. Imagine, she invites her ex husband to stay with her but does not ask her boyfriend? Has she no respect for his feelings in this matter? That one sentence in her email is damning of her and insulting to him. I wish him luck.
The worst lessons of feminism – and the lessons that almost all American women have learned too well – is that women deserve it all without commensurate levels of sacrifice. It is the lesson that compromise is weakness. It is the lesson that they deserve affluence, the perfect family, the perfect man, and a life of entitlement without any cost to her.
Men know better. We knew that there is no “having it all”. There is no free lunch. We know that corporate success requires great sacrifice. Friends, relationships, hobbies, all play second fiddle to the climb up the corporate ladder. This we know. This we accept. We know that being an involved father usually means not getting all the promotions at work. Frustratingly, American women have not learned this lesson. So, they vent their frustrations at home and in the workplace, making for both difficult colleagues and second-rate mothers.
Feminism cannot accept that women cannot both be strong and independent while at the same time being the perpetual victim. Oh righteous feminist, which is it? Are women strong? Or are they weak? Do we hold open to door for the strong female executive? Do we not help a mother with young children by helping her with her grocery bags? You, righteous feminist, have recast the cultural rules yet you refuse to follow them. Is it any wonder why so many millions of men eschew marriage and relationships with American women? Can you not see the unintended consequences of your actions? Perhaps we are asking too much of you.
When an American man pitches woo to a foreign woman, it is a direct and bold statement that the man is not going to play the game that the American feminists so desperately want. A foreign woman is not (yet) burdened by the clash of expectations that American woman cannot cope with. A foreign woman typically has no problem with making a man happy because her culture tells her that a man’s happiness reflects well on her own success as a woman. Foreign women know that if they give love, they will receive love. They know that the unintended consequence of independence is loneliness.
The sad stereotype of the shrill, unfriendly, independent American career woman is becoming stronger and stronger. The equally repellent stereotype of the overwrought and unfriendly soccer mom shuttling her kids around while trying to keep her independence is also becoming part of our cultural landscape. The scowling American woman is all too common. It’s not men making her scowl. It’s her inability to see reality and choose appropriately that is making her scowl.
I am not angry with American women. I merely pity them. I pity them for embracing feminism without any critical thought. I pity them for making men the enemy and not loving partners. I pity them for their unsuccessful struggle with their own rules. I pity them for not understanding that life is about compromise and that compromise is not weakness.
When an American woman asks about my job, my car, my home I can only sigh in dismay. Men are not simply wallets to be looted. Nor are we all rapists and gorillas. We are complex and interesting humans who need respect and love, as do women. Pathetically, American women have been brainwashed into thinking that giving love and respecting men is somehow evil and wrong. No matter, American women can wallow in misery as much as they want. I will happily and respectfully court my Latin girlfriend and let independent and unfriendly American women enjoy their cats.
I hope I will someday find an anti-feminist website that doesn't just try and reflect the problem through a distorted mirror.
Sadly, it seems the people I had heard were right.
From Angryharry.com
Immodest Women Cause Earthquakes Women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes, a senior Iranian cleric has said.
Correct!
From The Ghost Nation
Hate Crimes Against This Website
"Most people that have attacked this website have been male homosexual mobs, PAMs, sodomites, atheists, agnostics, whitey haters, gang stalkers and pro-Israel zealots."
Anti-Feminism Definition
"An anti-feminist has a sincere belief in God.
An anti-feminist is anti-Zionist.
An anti-feminist is heterosexual.
An anti-feminist is anti-abortion.
An anti-feminist is rational.
An anti-feminist is logical.
An anti-feminist is fair.
An anti-feminist is polite.
An anti-feminist is head of the household.
An anti-feminist is fun to be around.
An anti-feminist is trustworthy.
An anti-feminist is calm.
An anti-feminist is heterosexual.
An anti-feminist is creative.
An anti-feminist is constructive.
An anti-feminist is caring.
An anti-feminist is trustworthy.
An anti-feminist is wise.
An anti-feminist is helpful.
An anti-feminist is pro-life.
An anti-feminist is orderly.
An anti-feminist is caring.
An anti-feminist is humble.
An anti-feminist is hygienic.
An anti-feminist is non-violent in most circumstances.
An anti-feminist is honest.
An anti-feminist is forthright.
An anti-feminist is sincere.
An anti-feminist does not manipulate people.
An anti-feminist does not knowingly associate with criminals, Zionists, SADs, sodomites, psychopaths or sociopaths.
An anti-feminist does not harass, menace or stalk.
An anti-feminist does not use treachery as a means of fighting.
An anti-feminist does not use illicit or psychotropic drugs.
An anti-feminist plays sports rather then watch sports.
An anti-feminist is not two faced nor does he/she fake friendships.
An anti-feminist is not an atheist or an agnostic.
An anti-feminist supports heterosexual marriages only.
An anti-feminist dislikes rap, death metal and hip hop music.
An anti-feminist registers to vote as an Independent.
An anti-feminist believes that men that engage in rectal intercourse with their girlfriend or wife are homosexuals.
An anti-feminist is respectful of a person's right to privacy.
An anti-feminist believes that tattoos are the mark of the beast and is disgusted by them.
An anti-feminist believes in homeschooling his or her children.
An anti-feminist believes that when one surrounds himself/herself with evil then he/she becomes evil.
An anti-feminist believes in dating foreign womyn.
An anti-feminist is not a misogynist.
An anti-feminist is not a misandrist.
An anti-feminist is not a vulgar person."
Top Ten Reasons Feminists Suck
"1) Selfish - to the point where they don't know the difference between love of self and plain downright greed--and drilled into believing that whatever happens is the fault of whatever man is in their life because of the feminist crud drilled into them by the cadre of asexual closet cases called "therapists" who appear on "Ricki", "Oprah" or other such electronic drivel.
2) Deluded - into thinking they "deserve" a rich, model-handsome husband who will "take them away from all of this"--whatever the "this" might be--and leading to resentment when they discover that the universe does NOT revolve around them.
3) Angry - ALL the damn time about things which are so far out of their control as to be nonsensical--and constantly wanting to "discuss" this mind numbing drivel ad nauseam.
4) Psychotic - multiple personalities in the same woman - as "Nomad" put it in the "Star Trek" episode: "Woman...a mass of inconsistencies...", and also when the feminist voices in their heads start with the regrets and victim acculturation.
5) Worthless - anything that does not immediately resolve itself in her favor or to her benefit is meaningless to her, especially husband and family.
6) Lazy - drilled into their head that they "deserve" a maid, nanny and personal slave to take care of every detail - and that their husband/boyfriend is REQUIRED to cater to their each and every mindless whim.
7) Resentful - especially of other women who have things that they do not, in material, spiritual and esoteric senses.
8) Greedy - to them, "housekeeping" means getting the house in the divorce (thanks to Zsa Zsa for that immortal line) and sucking the guy for every last cent, even if they had nothing to do with the building of the nest egg.
9) Mindless - constant, irritating, idle prattle about topics they read about in some women's magazine and then become instant experts--particularly pop psychology and the latest &^%$% they see on "Oprah" or "Ricki".
10) Vain - believing that they are irresistible to everything in pants and therefore are allowed to behave sluttish and without any honor."
"No Fault-Divorce" is no divorce at all
Collection of quotes complied by Uzem & Luzem. The blog uses language and links inappropriate to be directly hot linked. Some of Uzem & Luzem's "unknown" quotes and "unknown" anecdotes come from the americanwomensuck.com forum's old database.
"No fault divorce" is no divorce at all: men continue to have the same duties as if they were married. It is just women who stop doing their duty.Unknown
I used to get depressed and would despair at my lack of "success" with women, but when you see so many decent men get "chewed up and spat out" by the divorce industry, then in some ways I am a lucky guy. Even my own mother (who was raised as a strict Catholic), is appalled at the way modern women behave eg. lack of life skills, sluttiness, extreme narcissism, unfaithful etc. And now even my own mum often said to me: "Seb, you are better off alone, rather than being ruined by some unfaithful and treacherous slut", and "if your sex drive gets the better of you, go pay a hooker".Seb
Marriage adds nothing to a man's life but risk and obligation.Unknown
All is fair in love and war. And women have definitely declared war on men...Unknown
Women are cold blooded creatures by nature. At divorce the act is dropped.Ztp
Rumors of happy, well-adjusted and non-man hating AW are vastly over exaggerated.Shard43
I frankly think most Western women are too far gone to be brought back down to earth and right the ship. Lord knows I've tried to reason with them and the blogosphere is full of sage and sane advice for how society ought to be run and how people ought to act. They take the society around them for granted as a birth right as though it grew on trees just to please them and takes no disciplined effort to maintain. They show no ability or desire for introspective accounting of their behavior. Really, they are truly boring individuals.Mandy
Woman's behavior across the board teaches us time and again that morality is a foreign concept to huge numbers of them.Unknown
The hidden cost of allowing women to demonize men as violent child molesters with zero proof is that men don't get married, don't have kids, don't enter professions that require interaction with kids, don't save kids when they are in danger, and generally abandon their traditional role as protectors of the young. It's as though we have been sent to internal exile in a virtual gulag. Touch a child, go to jail. If his mom dislikes you, this can happen even if you are his father. And yet, we are still lambasted by feminists as members of the all-powerful patriarchy.Nemo
The people responsible for orchestrating this situation want it precisely as it is. Step one: disenfranchise fathers and men. Women naturally return to their asocial, destructive behavior because - unlike men - they have no consistent internal monologue, hence no moral basis to govern their actions. They might be taught to behave at a young age, but as newer generations are increasingly raised by women only, over time they lose what values the last decent male bestowed upon the family line. The end result: complete social destruction as all values are lost and people become amoral, asocial loners.Unknown
I didn't realize HOW stressful [working with women was] until I no longer worked with them; I didn't really see this until I worked with men only. Wow, what a difference there was! There was no drama, no $%#@$#%@; we just came in, did our jobs, then went home. You don't have to worry about sexual harassment; you don't have to worry about saying the wrong thing, nor saying it in the wrong way. You don't have to worry about a woman laughing at your joke, then turning around and crying sexual harassment to your boss; you don't have to worry about her back stabbing you. If a man has a problem with you, he'll pull you aside, tell you what it is, and what he wants you to do about it; as a man, you say sorry, then make a sincere effort to address his grievance. Then (gasp!)-it's over!! No more BS to worry about! With men, conflicts are quickly resolved, then they're forgotten. Working with men, you don't have to worry about walking on $%^&^%$ eggshells all the time-thank goodness!!Markymark
Educate a man, and you'll feed a family. Educate a woman, and you'll feed a multinational corporation.Unknown
The hidden cost of allowing women to demonize men as violent child molesters with zero proof is that men don't get married, don't have kids, don't enter professions that require interaction with kids, don't save kids when they are in danger, and generally abandon their traditional role as protectors of the young. It's as though we have been sent to internal exile in a virtual gulag. Touch a child, go to jail. If his mom dislikes you, this can happen even if you are his father. And yet, we are still lambasted by feminists as members of the all-powerful patriarchy.Nemo
Marriage is a three ring circus:1. Engagement ring.2. Wedding ring &3. Suffering.Unknown
Feminists bang on about men being predators on the hunt for sex, but women are the predators in that (usually once worn out and aging) they seek out a sucker to marry them, filtering out guys not rich enough for their liking, and then putting on the pretense of being chaste and pleasant until he's signed the dotted line. Then the guy is caught and done for.Unknown
A scorpion was wandering along the bank of the river, wondering how to get to the other side. Suddenly he saw a fox. He asked the fox to take him across the river.The fox said, "No. If I do that, you'll sting me and I'll drown."The scorpion assured him, "If I did that, we'd both drown."The fox thought about it and finally agreed. So the scorpion climbed up on his back and the fox began to swim. But halfway across the river, the scorpion stung him. As the poison filled his veins, the fox turned to the scorpion and said, "Why did you do that? Now you'll drown too.""I couldn't help it," said the scorpion. "It's my nature."posted by Ztp(original author unknown)
It is significant that women so regularly ask "What are men for then?" It shows women's selfish and spoiled ways, namely that they automatically assume everyone and everything else in the Universe is for their benefit. Women are thrown into confusion if they attempt to grasp the idea of there being anything or anyone that isn't there solely to serve their whims. Incidentally, if you want to see a world without men, just pop along to the nearest crime-ridden poverty-reeking inner-city single-mother populated ghetto. Such charming places pretty much pure Matriarchies with just women and "their" children.Unknown
The Catalog of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics
"Shaming tactics." This phrase is familiar to many Men's Rights Activists. It conjures up the histrionic behavior of female detractors who refuse to argue their points with logic. Yet women are not the only ones guilty of using shaming tactics against men. Male gynocentrists use them, too.Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man's insecurities and shut down debate. They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions. Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks.Anyway, it might be helpful to categorize the major shaming tactics that are used against men whenever a discussion arises about feminism, men's issues, romance, etc. The following list contains descriptions of shaming tactics, some examples of quotes employing the tactics, and even color-coded aliases for mnemonic purposes. Enjoy.
Charge of Irascibility (Code Red)
Discussion: The target is accused of having anger management issues. Whatever negative emotions he has are assumed to be unjustifiable. Examples:
"You're bitter!"
"You need to get over your anger at women."
"You are so negative!"
Response: Anger is a legitimate emotion in the face of injustice. It is important to remember that passive acceptance of evil is not a virtue.
Charge of Cowardice (Code Yellow)
Discussion: The target is accused of having an unjustifiable fear of interaction with women. Examples:
"You need to get over your fear."
"Step up and take a chance like a man!"
"You're afraid of a strong woman!"
Response: It is important to remember that there is a difference between bravery and &%^&*&^%. The only risks that reasonable people dare to take are calculated risks. One weighs the likely costs and benefits of said risks. As it is, some men are finding out that many women fail a cost-benefit analysis.
Charge of Hypersensitivity (Code Blue) - The Crybaby Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being hysterical or exaggerating the problems of men (i.e., he is accused of playing "Chicken Little"). Examples:
"Stop whining!"
"Get over it!"
"Suck it up like a man!"
"You guys don't have it as nearly as bad as us women!"
"You're just afraid of losing your male privileges."
"Your fragile male ego ..."
"Wow! You guys need to get a grip!"
Response: One who uses the Code Blue shaming tactic reveals a callous indifference to the humanity of men. It may be constructive to confront such an accuser and ask if a certain problem men face needs to be addressed or not ("yes" or "no"), however small it may be seem to be. If the accuser answers in the negative, it may constructive to ask why any man should care about the accuser's welfare since the favor will obviously not be returned. If the accuser claims to be unable to do anything about the said problem, one can ask the accuser why an attack is necessary against those who are doing something about it.
Charge of Puerility (Code Green) - The Peter Pan Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being immature and/or irresponsible in some manner that reflects badly on his status as an adult male. Examples:
"Grow up!"
"You are so immature!"
"Do you live with your mother?"
"I'm not interested in boys. I'm interested in real men."
"Men are shirking their God-given responsibility to marry and bear children."
Response: It should be remembered that one's sexual history, marital status, parental status, etc. are not reliable indicators of maturity and accountability. If they were, then we would not hear of white collar crime, divorce, teen sex, unplanned pregnancies, extramarital affairs, etc.
Charge of Endangerment (Code Orange) -The Elevated Threat Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being a menace in some undefined manner. This charge may be coupled with some attempt to censor the target. Examples:
"You guys are scary."
"You make me feel afraid."
Response: It may be constructive to point out that only bigots and tyrants are afraid of having the truth expressed to them. One may also ask why some women think they can handle leadership roles if they are so threatened by a man's legitimate freedom of expression.
Charge of Rationalization (Code Purple) -The Sour Grapes Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of explaining away his own failures and/or dissatisfaction by blaming women for his problems. Example:
"You are just bitter because you can't get laid."
Response: In this case, it must be asked if it really matters how one arrives at the truth. In other words, one may submit to the accuser, "What if the grapes really are sour?" At any rate, the Code Purple shaming tactic is an example of what is called "circumstantial ad hominem."
Charge of Fanaticism (Code Brown) -The Brown Shirts Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of subscribing to an intolerant, extremist ideology or of being devoted to an ignorant viewpoint. Examples:
"You're one of those right-wing wackos."
"You're an extremist"
"You sound like the KKK."
"... more anti-feminist zaniness"
Response: One should remember that the truth is not decided by the number of people subscribing to it. Whether or not certain ideas are "out of the mainstream" is besides the point. A correct conclusion is also not necessarily reached by embracing some middle ground between two opposing viewpoints (i.e., the logical fallacy of "False Compromise").
Charge of Invirility (Code Lavender)
Discussion: The target's sexual orientation or masculinity is called into question. Examples:
"Are you gay?"
"I need a real man, not a sissy."
"You're such a wimp."
Response: Unless one is working for religious conservatives, it is usually of little consequence if a straight man leaves his accusers guessing about his sexual orientation.
Charge of Overgeneralization (Code Gray)
Discussion: The target is accused of making generalizations or supporting unwarranted stereotypes about women. Examples:
"I'm not like that!"
"Stop generalizing!"
"That's a sexist stereotype!"
Response: One may point out that feminists and many other women make generalizations about men. Quotations from feminists, for example, can be easily obtained to prove this point. Also, one should note that pointing to a trend is not the same as overgeneralizing. Although not all women may have a certain characteristic, a significant amount of them might.
Charge of Misogyny (Code Black)
Discussion: The target is accused of displaying some form of unwarranted malice to a particular woman or to women in general. Examples:
"You misogynist creep!"
"Why do you hate women?"
"Do you love your mother?"
"You are insensitive to the plight of women."
"You are mean-spirited."
"You view women as doormats."
"You want to roll back the rights of women!!"
"You are going to make me cry."
Response: One may ask the accuser how does a pro-male agenda become inherently anti-female (especially since feminists often claim that gains for men and women are "not a zero-sum game"). One may also ask the accuser how do they account for women who agree with the target's viewpoints. The Code Black shaming tactic often integrates the logical fallacies of "argumentum ad misericordiam" (viz., argumentation based on pity for women) and/or "argumentum in terrorem" (viz., arousing fear about what the target wants to do to women).
Charge of Instability (Code White) -The White Padded Room Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of being emotionally or mentally unstable. Examples:
"You're unstable."
"You have issues."
"You need therapy."
"Weirdo!"
Response: In response to this attack, one may point to peer-reviewed literature and then ask the accuser if the target's mental and/or emotional condition can explain the existence of valid research on the matter.
Charge of Selfishness (Code Silver)
Discussion: This attack is self-explanatory. It is a common charge hurled at men who do not want to be bothered with romantic pursuits. Examples:
"You are so materialistic."
"You are so greedy."
Response: It may be beneficial to turn the accusation back on the one pressing the charge. For instance, one may retort, "So you are saying I shouldn't spend my money on myself, but should instead spend it on a woman like you ---and you accuse me of being selfish?? Just what were you planning to do for me anyway?"
Charge of Superficiality (Code Gold) -The All-That-Glitters Charge
Discussion: The charge of superficiality is usually hurled at men with regard to their mating preferences. Examples:
"If you didn't go after bimbos, then ..."
"How can you be so shallow and turn down a single mother?"
Response: Average-looking women can be just as problematic in their behavior as beautiful, "high-maintanence" women. Regarding the shallowness of women, popular media furnishes plenty of examples where petty demands are made of men by females (viz., those notorious laundry lists of things a man should/should not do for his girlfriend or wife).
Charge of Unattractiveness (Code Tan)-The Ugly Tan Charge
Discussion: The target is accused of having no romantic potential as far as women are concerned. Examples:
"I bet you are fat and ugly."
"You can't get laid!"
"Creep!"
"Loser!"
"Have you thought about the problem being you?"
Response: This is another example of "circumstantial ad hominem." The target's romantic potential ultimately does not reflect on the merit of his arguments.
Charge of Defeatism (Code Maroon)
Discussion: This shaming tactic is akin to the Charge of Irascibility and the Charge of Cowardice in that the accuser attacks the target's negative or guarded attitude about a situation. However, the focus is not so much on the target's anger or fear, but on the target's supposed attitude of resignation. Examples:
"Stop being so negative."
"You are so cynical."
"If you refuse to have relationships with women, then you are admitting defeat."
"C'mon! Men are doers, not quitters."
Response: The charge of defeatism can be diffused by explaining that one is merely being realistic about a situation. Also, one can point out that asking men to just accept their mistreatment at the hands of women and society is the real attitude that is defeatist. Many men have not lost their resolve; many have lost their patience.
Threat of Withheld Affection (Code Pink) -The Pink Whip
Discussion: The target is admonished that his viewpoints or behavior will cause women to reject him as a mate. Examples:
"No woman will marry you with that attitude."
"Creeps like you will never get laid!"
Response: This is an example of the logical fallacy "argumentum ad baculum" (the "appeal to force"). The accuser attempts to negate the validity of a position by pointing to some undesirable circumstance that will befall anyone who takes said position. Really, the only way to deal with the "Pink Whip" is to realize that a man's happiness and worth is not based on his romantic conquests (including marriage)
Some Hard Questions Working Women Must Ask Themselves Regarding Being A Good Wife
1. Do I work outside the home because I am bored as a homemaker? Many women today place too much emphasis on career and fulfillment outside the home. Young women need to be taught that being a godly wife and mother is a lofty and admirable aspiration.
2. Do I work to satisfy my pride? Do I work just to prove I can make it in a "man's world?" The woman who chooses to marry is to submit herself to the Lord and her husband and her role of "helper" to him.
3. Do I work to satisfy my own or my husband's greed? Greed and covetousness are never proper motives for work (1 Tim. 6:6-10).
4. Do I work because the children "get to me?" Do your children make you nervous or "drive you up the wall" so that you cannot stand to be at home with them? Or do they make you feel that because of them you have been shackled at home? If either of these describes your feelings,is this not a sign of improper perspectives and priorities?
5. Does working outside the home constantly interfere with my responsibilities to God, Christ and the church? (Matt. 6:33; Col. 3:1).
6. Does working outside the home interfere with my responsibilities as a godly wife and mother? Has it interfered with providing for the emotional and physical needs of your husband? Has it affected your attitude by making you independent and aggressively destroying your submissive spirit toward your husband? Has work outside the home taken you from your responsibilities to not only bear children but to raise, nuture and teach your children -- especially during their most formative years?
13 Indicators Of Matriarchal Madness
1) The systematic entitlements and favoritism that women receive in family court.
2) The systematic entitlements and favoritism that women receive in divorce court.
3) The systematic entitlements and favoritism that women receive in the work place, schools, universities, military, police, etcetera (and are exploited by the vast majority of American/Western women).
4) The systematic entitlements that women criminals receive from the media, the police force, and the criminal justice system.
5) The systematic entitlements that false accuser women receive from the media, the police force, and the criminal justice system.
6) The selfishness that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
7) The fraud that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
8) The manipulation that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
9) The narcissism that is feminism and vast majority of American/Western women.
10) The insane, selfish, and shallow behavior of feminists and vast majority of American/Western women.
11) Feminists and vast majority of American/Western women make terrible mothers.
12) Since the rise of feminism, the USA has had the highest incarceration rate in the world and highest drug use rate in the world.
13) The media, feminists, and man-ginas will not hold American/Western accountable for their indefensible actions, allowing women to engage in behavior that is damaging to society with 100% impunity.
My issues with this website need an entire other post to articulate. I therefore leave you with a post that at least begins and ends partly decently.
Where Did The Phrase "American Women Suck" Come From?
The name American Women Suck was originally created by AWS who is now a member of The Ghost Nation.www.americanwomensuck.com was up about 5 years before changing names and urls. We told people that the policies of corporate America and the feminist USA government would lead to financial disaster and we were correct. Now the most ardent anti-feminists are part of www.theghostnation.com. The terms "femerica", "AW", "SADs", "PAMs" and "hollyweird" were also created by AWS. The modern anti-feminist movement is now defined by www.theghostnation.com.Below is a very accurate definition of the phrase "American Women Suck":
The problem with modern American feminism is the inability of this political and social movement to effectively adapt to the differing expectations of American women. American women are caught in the relentlessly changing cultural expectations. Career? Family? Marriage? Independence? American feminism seems to only present one answer – career and independence at the cost of marriage, healthy relationships with men, family. Yet when an American woman’s biological urges for procreation and domesticity surface (as they almost always do), the women are caught in an ugly vice. The jaws on one side are the needs to be a wife (and possibly mother) the jaws on the other are the feminist ideals of career and independence. American women lack the cultural and emotional sophistication to deal with this.
A female friend of mine recently tried to join a local political group that seeks to be mentors to teenage girls. However, this friend of mine lacks the advanced professional credentials that this group wants. My friend works in an office during the day and works in a restaurant at night – perfectly reasonable jobs and both worthy of respect.
However, the group of women she wanted to become involved with – spearheaded by a local female TV news reporter – made it clear that the group of women mentoring young girls would be made up of CEOs, doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. Are these the only role models for girls? Should there not be a whole bevy of options for American girls? How about a happy, stay-at-home mom or a contented wife in a childfree relationship as role models? Apparently these options are not viable for young American girls, if this group of modern feminists is to be believed.
Feminism also teaches women that men are the enemy, that we are brutish and foul creatures whose only point in life is to subjugate women with our sexual urges. So, the lesson continues, there can be no compromise with the enemy for that is losing the battle. God forbid that an American woman would want to make a man happy. That would be treasonous to the cause! When American women get together to compare notes, the peer pressure is not about happy relationships, but more about swapping stories of how they acquired the trappings of status regardless of state of their relationships. There is almost glee when women denigrate their boyfriends and husbands. “Oh, I really don’t care about making him happy, as long as have my (insert status symbol here)”.
I have an anecdote about my ex wife. I recently corresponded with her just before a hurricane was to strike where I live. She offered that I could stay with her in the event of evacuation. It was a gracious invitation. Yet, in her email she stated, “I’m sure my boyfriend won’t mind”. It was that one sentence revealed her true nature. It summarized everything that is so unappealing about American women and was a stark reminder of the reasons behind our divorce. Imagine, she invites her ex husband to stay with her but does not ask her boyfriend? Has she no respect for his feelings in this matter? That one sentence in her email is damning of her and insulting to him. I wish him luck.
The worst lessons of feminism – and the lessons that almost all American women have learned too well – is that women deserve it all without commensurate levels of sacrifice. It is the lesson that compromise is weakness. It is the lesson that they deserve affluence, the perfect family, the perfect man, and a life of entitlement without any cost to her.
Men know better. We knew that there is no “having it all”. There is no free lunch. We know that corporate success requires great sacrifice. Friends, relationships, hobbies, all play second fiddle to the climb up the corporate ladder. This we know. This we accept. We know that being an involved father usually means not getting all the promotions at work. Frustratingly, American women have not learned this lesson. So, they vent their frustrations at home and in the workplace, making for both difficult colleagues and second-rate mothers.
Feminism cannot accept that women cannot both be strong and independent while at the same time being the perpetual victim. Oh righteous feminist, which is it? Are women strong? Or are they weak? Do we hold open to door for the strong female executive? Do we not help a mother with young children by helping her with her grocery bags? You, righteous feminist, have recast the cultural rules yet you refuse to follow them. Is it any wonder why so many millions of men eschew marriage and relationships with American women? Can you not see the unintended consequences of your actions? Perhaps we are asking too much of you.
When an American man pitches woo to a foreign woman, it is a direct and bold statement that the man is not going to play the game that the American feminists so desperately want. A foreign woman is not (yet) burdened by the clash of expectations that American woman cannot cope with. A foreign woman typically has no problem with making a man happy because her culture tells her that a man’s happiness reflects well on her own success as a woman. Foreign women know that if they give love, they will receive love. They know that the unintended consequence of independence is loneliness.
The sad stereotype of the shrill, unfriendly, independent American career woman is becoming stronger and stronger. The equally repellent stereotype of the overwrought and unfriendly soccer mom shuttling her kids around while trying to keep her independence is also becoming part of our cultural landscape. The scowling American woman is all too common. It’s not men making her scowl. It’s her inability to see reality and choose appropriately that is making her scowl.
I am not angry with American women. I merely pity them. I pity them for embracing feminism without any critical thought. I pity them for making men the enemy and not loving partners. I pity them for their unsuccessful struggle with their own rules. I pity them for not understanding that life is about compromise and that compromise is not weakness.
When an American woman asks about my job, my car, my home I can only sigh in dismay. Men are not simply wallets to be looted. Nor are we all rapists and gorillas. We are complex and interesting humans who need respect and love, as do women. Pathetically, American women have been brainwashed into thinking that giving love and respecting men is somehow evil and wrong. No matter, American women can wallow in misery as much as they want. I will happily and respectfully court my Latin girlfriend and let independent and unfriendly American women enjoy their cats.
I hope I will someday find an anti-feminist website that doesn't just try and reflect the problem through a distorted mirror.
November 29, 2009
Still unhappy about that
You remember those people in the last two posts, the one guy who had the 'shaming language' thing going on and the other guy with circular logic?
Their arguments have just been entirely deflated.
How?
The writer of the original Star Treck, the classic, the one with William Shatner as James Kirk and Spock and Uhura the communications operator and Doctor McCoy and Scottie from the "Beam me up, Scotty" fame, was DC Fontana.
Full name: Dorothy Catherine Fontana.
The writer of Star Trek was a woman. Tell me again how women are ruining science fiction?
Also: Ursuala K Le Guin. Andre Norton. Madeleine L'Engle.
Their arguments have just been entirely deflated.
How?
The writer of the original Star Treck, the classic, the one with William Shatner as James Kirk and Spock and Uhura the communications operator and Doctor McCoy and Scottie from the "Beam me up, Scotty" fame, was DC Fontana.
Full name: Dorothy Catherine Fontana.
The writer of Star Trek was a woman. Tell me again how women are ruining science fiction?
Also: Ursuala K Le Guin. Andre Norton. Madeleine L'Engle.
November 26, 2009
Theory on Political Insanity
Lots of people seem to complain when the same politicians get elected time after time, despite how bad they are. Here's my answer to that:
Politics is mostly showmanship.
If you put on a good enough show, then enough people won't care about your platform to vote you into office. People will vote for what they feel is right instead and/or in spite of what they know is right. Think about it:
You remember the charmers and the con artists and the charismatic people in politics. The good speakers and the ones with the good public relations. The people who know what their constituents want and/or need. The masses remember Obama's "Yes we can" and "Change you can believe in" because that's what everyone felt they needed. When everyone was worried about communism, we got McCarthy. When Germany was sore over loosing so much, the world got Hitler. How many times has there been a change in government because people felt they couldn't live with the old one anymore; and then those same people make the government just the same as before? To many times to count since the rise of even a vestige of civilization and there will be many more to come.
Politicians are elected on feelings, it seems, more times than not. Certainly there are politicians who are decent people; I certainly know of some. Given that calling yourself a 'politician' usually gives people a bad feeling anyway, saying that you are a 'legislator' may help. However, that wouldn't change the situation at all if the politicians/legislators didn't change how they worked at all. We'd just have more complaining about 'two-faced politicians'.
If people thought more, perhaps then they would complain less.
Politics is mostly showmanship.
If you put on a good enough show, then enough people won't care about your platform to vote you into office. People will vote for what they feel is right instead and/or in spite of what they know is right. Think about it:
You remember the charmers and the con artists and the charismatic people in politics. The good speakers and the ones with the good public relations. The people who know what their constituents want and/or need. The masses remember Obama's "Yes we can" and "Change you can believe in" because that's what everyone felt they needed. When everyone was worried about communism, we got McCarthy. When Germany was sore over loosing so much, the world got Hitler. How many times has there been a change in government because people felt they couldn't live with the old one anymore; and then those same people make the government just the same as before? To many times to count since the rise of even a vestige of civilization and there will be many more to come.
Politicians are elected on feelings, it seems, more times than not. Certainly there are politicians who are decent people; I certainly know of some. Given that calling yourself a 'politician' usually gives people a bad feeling anyway, saying that you are a 'legislator' may help. However, that wouldn't change the situation at all if the politicians/legislators didn't change how they worked at all. We'd just have more complaining about 'two-faced politicians'.
If people thought more, perhaps then they would complain less.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
