Women Are Sexists

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Regarding women slapping/hitting men

If a man retalliated against a woman, they would say; "it doesn't matter, you NEVER hit a woman"."He cant hit her back. she only hit him in the first place cause he deserved it." That's how females think, they say if a woman hits a man then there must have been a damned good reason, but if a man hits a woman in self defence in order to save his life then people will condemn him and state he should be castrated.

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

There is no such thing as a 'strong' or 'independent' woman

Let's start with this, the google dictionary's defintion of strong: having strength or power greater than average or expected; "a strong radio signal"; "strong medicine"; "a strong man".

Ok. So a strong woman is a woman with greater strength or power than the average woman. Assuming this is possible, how could you measure such a thing? How does the particular woman in question know that she is stronger than average? Do you take a survey? Is this strength or character? Physical strength? Emotional?

When women say they are 'strong', they dont mean physically. They mean they are strong-willed.

This is what they truly mean when they say 'strong woman':
obnoxious, inflexible, stubborn, loud-mouthed, opinionated, argumentative, confrontational, condescending, androgynous, misandrist.

If you ever notice, when a woman says she is 'strong', it is often phrased this way - "You can't handle a strong woman." This is a shaming tactic. This type of woman refuses to be flexible in any way. She's lost her femininity. If you refuse to deal with her, then she will say you arent a real man. Let's reverse this. Do women want a feminine man? I believe that all (straight) women seek a man that is stronger than she is. But it's not ok for a man to seek a woman who is more feminine than he is? A woman wants a masculine man. A man wants a feminine woman. Are men not entitled to obey the same biological instincts that women follow and which make us human, in this regard? These women have bought into the feminist lie that to be in any way feminine is demeaning (re: housewives, Asian women), and at the same time they try to be men. But they are at best caricatures of men (zenpriest). They take all of the stereotypically bad characteristics of men and grossly emulate them. (sidenote 1)

And if the so-called 'weak' man doesnt want her, then why doesnt she simply move on instead of trying to insult and shame him into submission? This is a case of the "if the world doesnt like me, then the world must change. Cause there certainly aint nothing wrong with me" syndrome.

I submit to you that there are no strong women. There are only women who seek to be more like caricatures of men. I could accept a woman saying she is strong if she had grown up say in somewhere that had no modern conveniences, or where she nearly starved but pulled herself up by the bootstraps to make something of her life, or any other such RARE event. The fact of the matter is that there are far more 'strong women' than there ever could be such events (in the United States).

The Independent woman.

When we live in a society, we are all interdependent. That's a fact. So just by extension there are no independent women. But I suppose their definition of independent means they dont need a man. I dispute that as well. I cant say this for every woman, but the very same women who claim independence also expect chivalrous behavior. Sure, she's independent, but you have to pay for the dates. Because, although she's independent, she also respects an old-fashioned man. Sure, she's independent, but when that bad boy in the club insults her, when there's heavy lifting to be done, when she has to walk across the street to her car at 3am, she wants YOUR protection (come on, be a man!). Sure, she's
independent, but she still expects you to earn enough money to support her, just in case she decides to stop working. Sure, she's independent. That's why after your divorce she will raise your sons to be wimps without you, cause she dont need no stinking man, just his money.

It is not woman's place to be "strong" or "
independent." Neither one of these is compatible with female instinct or biology.

sidenote 1: While society seeks to make women more masculine (deeper voices, dress, promiscuous behaviour, haircuts, jobs), it also seeks to make men less masculine. By this I mean that it is becoming more illegal to be manly everyday (see posts on sexual assault). These also include the war against boys in schools, the quotas for women for jobs and for college entry, ADHD, and family court. Is there any wonder chivalry is dying? But this also explains why AW are so attracted to bad boys. In a world where it is illegal to be manly, the only males who can (or will) be men are the criminals. Of course these thugs are guilty of the same behavior that women say they despise. (more later)

Is America a Matriarchal Society? you bet your bottom dollar it is!

The following is a quote from Chris Key:
"As the Western world is democratic, the politicians are dependent on the support of the majority if they be elected into power and with females making up 52-56% of the population; that means that females are the majority. As a result the politicians are required to base their policies around feminist ideology as the politicians NEED the support of the majority who just happen to be females.

The acceptance of women's suffrage along with the effects of the two World Wars allowed female population to outnumber the male population; therefore it was these events that handed females a great deal of political power, and since then all forms of Government have focused on the instilling of a feminist indoctrinated law system. As a result, the law system has passed laws that oppress males while giving females at least partial impunity (eg. Family Court, Divorce Law, Alimony, Child Support, Domestic Violence, Affirmative Action, Paternity Fraud, etc)

This explains why women's health is given 8 times MORE funding than men's health; even though males on average live 5 years less than females and 80% of suicide victims are men.

In order for this society to be *patriarchal*, the father would have to be the head of the family as that is the actual definition of *patriarchy*. In this society mothers have MORE rights than fathers (Alimony, Child Support, Paternity Fraud etc); therefore this society is matriarchal as the MOTHER is the head of the family."

I want to note here that women are granted custody in 90% of divorce cases. This fact alone would make our society matriarchal, since the mother is the head of the household in those cases.-tyhigs

"The industrialised revolution was the period in which the mother became the head of the family as the father was working within the industries and the children were raised by their mothers; meaning that the mother was the dominant person within the family unit.

pa·tri·ar·chy (pā'trē-är'kē
n., pl. -chies. In both senses also called patriarchate.
A social system in which the father is the head of the family and men have authority over women and children.
A family, community, or society based on this system or governed by men.

http://www.answers.com/patriarchy&r=67 "

Sunday, July 17, 2005

White women, black women, latin women, and asians

White women. White women are the standard of beauty in the west. They grace most magazine covers, movies, and TV shows. But IMO, they are the most neurotic of all the races. They have a princess complex, feel exceedingly entitled to everything, believe the feminist lies, and arent giving or willing to sacrifice for their man. Personally, I think it is the romance movies and novels that ruin white women. They honestly expect everything to come to them without having to work for it. They are looking for that white Knight in Shining Armor.

In their youth they will ignore the decent men (men with manners who are actually concerned about their economic future). Instead they will go for the bad boys, fratboys, jocks, rich kids, or the tall guys (taller than say 6 ft). But lets suppose they are actually interested in you. They dont know how to send direct signals most of the time. They expect you to get it through osmosis. They will send quick glances from across the room, and then expect you to get the hint. That might be sufficient, if they werent such attention whores. A recent study in England showed that 65% of women there would rather be strippers or a magazine model rather than teacher, engineer or any other traditional job. I know what you're saying. How can you compare England to the US. Let me answer with this. Do you honestly believe that the USA is less degenerate than England? Just look at the trend of obesity rates and you will see that England is still behind us. Back on topic. There are white women specifically who will stare at you and smile from across a lecture hall for hours. There are women who will smile out of nowhere as they are walking by. There are women who will come up to you everyday and rub your arm and say "Hi, Ty!" But guess what they say when you approach them? "Oh sorry, I have a BF."

This is proof of a few things.
1. They are attention whores. They know that prolonged eye contact will prompt most men to approach them.
2. They have no consideration for how difficult it is for some men to approach women. There is some anxiety involved for most of us, and a woman jerking our stick makes it more likely for us to stop approaching women altogether. Because...how can you tell which ones are attention whores and which ones arent?
3. No consideration for the damage it does to male-female relations. As mentioned in number 2, it will make men less likely to approach, which makes it harder for strangers to meet. Studies show that 70% of people meet through friendship (I assume this also includes the proximity of work and dormitories). The other 30% probably meet while in some intoxicated state.

I want to note a difference between the German women I met and an American woman. When I was in Germany I had to return a rental car and then go back to the place where I was staying. The girl that I was currently "dating" volunteered to drive to the airport to meet me, drive me where I had to go, then drive back to her place. All this was more than 100 miles for her. All this because she felt that I needed a 'good woman in my life'. Contrast that with an American girl who LIKED me. I had missed class one day and I asked her to photocopy the notes. She said yes but she never did it. She proceeded to ignore me every class after that until right before the spring semester was about to end (I assume she wanted a summer BF), then she started paying attention to me again, but I ignored her. This girl would walk 4 miles out of her way because she felt she ate too much food. But she was only around 4'11'' and 90lbs. I could have tossed her with one arm. Why does any of this matter? Relationships are about sacrifice on some level.

Black women. I will make the most ignorant, generalized statement I can regarding black women - JUST STAY AWAY! By far, these are the most man-hating (misandrist) women on the planet. Their attitudes are definitely intolerable. Unless you are an Eminem type, you dont want to deal with the attitude that eminates from the average black woman.

Here's a test. Talk to 30 black women. I bet at least 25 of them will have horrible attitudes. They think it is their right to add their 2 cents to your conversation, although they dont know you. They will embarass you in front of your friends or the girl you are with. What recourse do you have because she's a woman? And she knows this. She knows the reason she can get away with such horrible attitude is because she's a woman, and there's nothing a man can do about it. Thats not to say that these women are polite to white or latin women.

If you want to live long, you must keep the amount of stress in your life to a minimum. Black women will take great pleasure in aggravating you. In comparison, white women are easy to deal with, despite being neurotic.

Personal story, and this is just one example. I was sitting in a diner with a young lady once. I had my back to a group of black women. There was some commotion behind me. The girl I was with started to giggle. So I turned around to look. (who wouldnt look?) This beautiful black girl behind me says "Turn your head around, motherf-cker!" It was that experience, along with about 20 more experiences just like it, which made me realize that the common factors were me and black women. White, latina, and Asian women never treated me that way.

Latinas. By far these are the best kind of women. I believe this is because the family is still ruled by the patriarch, who most likely came to the USA with only a few dollars in his pocket (at least isnt that how the story always goes?) They will give direct signals as to when they want you to approach. They will smile when they are interested. They will make direct eye contact without looking down or away like a shy robot. They do appreciate a man who takes charage, and, in my experience, they will offer to pay and they will pay their half of the bill. This is not to say that they cant Americanize. I find some Puerto Rican women to be very shrewd. But on average, I'd have to say that latinas are more family oriented than any other kind.

I still wouldnt marry one if she grew up in the USA though. But seriously date them? Definitely! White and black women can kiss it where the sun doesnt shine! And no, Im not latino.

I havent had extended contact with Asians because they seem to only run in cliques. The few I knew who had accents did seem wonderful. The others who were American born seemed no different from the white women, except for appearance of course. The same is true for the Indo-Pakis.

If you can, avoid ALL female professors

Why? Here are some reasons off the top if my head.
1. Oprah will be quoted quite frequently, cause, as I like to say, Oprah is the AW's god.
2. The topic will inevitably turn to how bad women have it in society today. If these women think they have it bad, they need to visit Russia or south east Asia where the women wash clothes by hand. You will hear such things as: "The pressures of work and motherhood put women under increased stress." But she will never mention the pressure of fatherhood and work. Interesting? This is typically where I walk out of the room thinking "Yes, and this is what your mother wanted for you! So suck it up!"
3. She will blame men for all her problems. I kid you not, I have a 5' 350 teacher telling the class that the reason for the high divorce rate is because men choose women based on looks. God, it couldnt possibly be that women have a cash incentive for divorce? She obviously doesnt believe that 80% of divorces are intiated by women, but if women do, it is cause all those men beat them, right?
4. You will hear such things as: older men have problems achieving erection because during their youth they had sex with many women while cheating on their wives. My question? Hows that any different than having sex with the same women as many times as all the other women put together? It must be a punishment from God.
5. The question of singlemotherhood and how it is a good thing for society. There are many statistics which show that children without a male role model are far more likely to commit suicide, commit crime, end up in prison, rape, murder and the list goes on.
6. You will have to jump through more "communication" hoops. Things like working in groups, public speeches, interviews, etc.
7. Men are irrelevant. Everything will be built for the female sex.

By the way, I've never met a female math, physics, chem, or statistics professor. It must be because the patriarchy (actually we live in a matriarchy, folks) is holding them down. It couldnt possibly be that male and female brains are wired differently. Of course if you say women are better at verbal tasks, multitasking, communicating, then yes, you are enlightened. But if you dare say women arent as naturally inclined toward math and sciences as men, then WOMEN (yes even the non-feminist card holders) will want your head.

Here's a test. As a woman if women are better at the above. Then ask her if men are better at the above. By the way she answers, you will know if you are dealing with a brainwashed woman.

Friday, July 15, 2005

30 second rape laws.

30 second rape laws.

Preface:These are laws in some states and Australia in which a woman can tell the man to stop during orgasm, and if he does not (or can not) stop at that exact moment, he will be charged with rape. I am not defending a woman's right to refuse to have sex. I am saying it sets the system up for false accusations. How much harm or psychological damage is done to a woman who had already consented to sex?


I remember on POF some guy brought up the 30sec rapist law, and all the women didnt bother attacking the law itself. They said the men should not have sex with mentally unstable women.

But no woman is stable all the time, and a large percentage are unstable most of the time. AND that doesnt change the fact that a stable, yet conniving, vindictive woman CAN still charge rape any time she wants. They fail to see that the law is inherently anti male no matter if there are unstable women or not.

Essentially women are saying it's the man's fault he's charged with rape cause he had sex with the wrong woman.

Chris Key says: "They KNOW it's anti-male and they want it to STAY that way; therefore they try to divert attention away from the state of the law system in order to prevent men from discussing the structure of the system as they fear that if more men become aware of the system then they may be able to change the system. Therefore (by their logic), if a woman gets beaten up it is HER fault and if a woman is raped it is HER fault, as she mixed with the wrong man."


This is the first post on rape, but it wont be the last.

It is said that one in four women are raped in America. This is a lie. That number is closer to 1 in 50. By the way rape is defined, it means that EVERY man is a criminal. Let me explain. If I was having drinks in a bar with a woman, and I wasnt forcing her to drink and I wasnt dropping some drug in her drink, if we later had sex, it would be rape, by law. How ridiculous is that? By that definition, any man who gets drunk WITH (meaning both people) his wife is a rapist.

I might agree that the man would be a rapist if he could somehow get her drunk without her knowledge, but as we all know, getting drunk is something women do on their own (with perhaps financial support from some suckers). These laws are essentially saying that men are evil. It automatically assumes that the man forced himself on the woman. It is entirely anti-male and gives women the power to punish any man she feels has wronged her. This law assumes that men are always the aggressors. Women have the power to intiate sex also.

Also, if one defines sexual assault as touching a woman's breasts without her permission, then all of us may be guilty as well. Guys, the first time you are making out with a new girl, do you say "May I touch your breasts now?" Well you'd better not. With the psychological "I'm not a slut" defense of women, the moment you actually verbalise anything, you have broken the unwritten contract that you are the aggressor, and she's just the poor innocent victim. She will most likely make you stop. It may be the polite, nice guy thing to do, but it certainly is not the manly thing, and despite all the BS, all women want a manly man. Dont get me wrong though. I do think it is in women's nature to be passive (from the start, they expect men to approach them).

If you define sexual assault as a normal sexual act (i.e. touching a woman's breasts), it not only shows how anti-male society has become, it also shows how much the feminists want men to go to prison. Sure, I know what you're saying..."No woman would do that." Later, I will be compiling tons of articles in which women HAVE LIED with impunity. Not to mention that any case of sexual assault is always going to be "he said she said", and guess who the judge/jury is going to believe.

But tell me, what happens when a woman touches my chest without my permission?
That's right. That's different.

Are women really oppressed in the west?

Absolutely! I mean anyone can see that. I mean 1 in 4 women are raped everyday, but most rapes go unreported (so how do they know 1 in 4 women are raped?) Women are paid 25 cents less than a man, despite goverment intervention, class-action lawsuits, bad publicity and the potential loss of revenue that a company would receive if such things were known.

But do you want real proof that women are oppressed? Well here it is! Women are not allowed to change their clothes in the MEN'S locker room before co-ed athletic events! Jesus! Who would have thunk it? I think whoever set this system up so that women had their own locker room and men had their own must have been a patriarchal sexist, trying to keep women out of the major life-altering decisions. As we all know, the locker room is the place where men conspire to hold women down. It is certainly not the place where guys are rough-housing, talking about sex, and hitting each other with a towel.

So some mother wants her daughter to change in the men's locker room. Women say it is unfair for men to have their own place. But is the reverse true? Is it unfair for women to have their own place to go? Certainly not! Why? Because!! If men were allowed into the women's place(s), those men would rape all those women. ----But let me ask you this. If women were truly so concerned about being raped, then why would they want to join an all men's group? Couldnt they be raped and sexually assaulted in the men's groups as well? Please comment and tell me where my logic is flawed.

Read this article:
[begin article]
Hockey mum wants co-ed locker room
Last updated Jul 12 2005 01:57 PM PDT
CBC News
A B.C. mother is demanding that her 14-year-old daughter be allowed to change in the same locker room as the boys on her co-ed hockey team, and has taken the issue to the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal.
Minor hockey league policy is B.C. dictates that there be separate dressing room for boys and girls once they turn 11. But Jane Emlyn and her daughter Jewel, who live in the north Okanagan community of Lumby, says that's discrimination. "It's their right to be in the change room. It's not a privilege, And I feel that if they can play hockey then they should be exposed to all the opportunities that minor hockey players have," says Jane Emlyn.

Jewel plays defence for the Lumby Stars. The team is co-ed, but most of the players are teenage boys. She is only allowed in the male change room 15 minutes before game time. She says she feels like a "second-class player" because of that restriction. "People shouldn't be making a big deal whether they're changing in a different dressing room, changing in the same dressing room. We should all just be able to play hockey and have fun, you know in the same dressing room, right?"
The Emlyns say the solution is shared change rooms with a dress code. And that when it comes time to shower, they say the minority gender would have to leave the room. Minor hockey coach Bob McCuaig coached a Lower Mainland team of 14 to 16 year olds last season – a team that included one girl. He says separate change rooms have nothing to do with discrimination, and everything to do with avoiding the possibility of harassment. "In order to have a safe environment for everybody, where they are not going to feel threatened I would rather have a girl feel a little bit left out than threatened by, 'I have to change in the room with guys.'" A decision by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal is expected next week.

[end artcle]

As Chris Key predicts, "The double standards of women will lead to men rejecting women and no longer caring about their rights."

I'd like to thank Steve Case for bringing us AOL

Disclaimer: This is in no way meant to libel AOL or Steve Case.

Just think. Women in the USA would have everyone believe that they are about 'fairness' and 'equality.' It runs so deep in them that they cant even see their own BS; they believe their own lies. And yes, I blame feminism. One need only read a few women's personal ads to see how delusion, selfish, entitled, spoiled, sexist, -itchy, and golddigging they are. But specifically today I am referring to their double standard that men are superficial, but women are only picky.

I used to frequent AOL chatrooms on a semi-daily basis. Yes, I would chat with women online when I was younger (20-23). I didnt know any better. But it did tell me a few things: most of the women online are the ones who dont get much attention in person, i.e. the fat/older/psychologically damaged women, or the single moms. Rarely you will see a woman digging for a rich man, but this is rare as there are better places to troll, and they usually just place personal ads instead of wasting their time 'chatting'.

Let's cut to the chase. I would often post asking for women that were 18 to 24 yrs old. After all, I was in that age range myself, but even if I were older, an 18 yr old woman is still legal, and who is anyone else to tell me who I can and can not date? (reference to gays).

Each time I asked for a young lady, I'd get bashed by an older woman, usually in her late 30's or early 40's. I guess I am only supposed to like women in their menopausal years. These women would say such things as "What? It sounds like you cant handle a STRONG woman!" OK. How bout this one? "You are ignorant!" "You want to control women!" "You are a pedophile." That's right. Since I like women that are both sexually mature and of the legal age of consent, I must be a pervert. Thank You, ladies.

Now, add in that I prefer thin women. "Are there any thin young ladies who'd like to exchange pictures?" ahaha, enter the floodgates. This would invite the fat women (which I soon realized are about 90% of the women online) to bash me. "You are superficial" "Why does the outside have to matter so much? What about the inside?" First, let me say that no one would give the time of day to someone they found repulsive. There must be a physical attraction. It's just that women want men to overlook THEIR physical flaws, while they demand near-perfection from the man. Other such shaming tactics include "You cant stereotype and exclude all fat women! Give big girls a chance!" OK, right, and if I were too short for you, would you give me the time of day? Didnt think so.

The fact of the matter is that once their pussypower runs out (i.e. the power of their youth and beauty), all they have left are shaming tactics. These never worked on me. All it really did was open my eyes to how sexist (yes, sexist if the same rules dont apply to both sexes) women actually are.

These very same women will explicitly state in their profiles that they prefer men who are "6'3'' or better". Just forget the fact that only a small percentage of men are taller than 6'3'', "225 of rock hard muscle." Yes, this request usually comes from the same woman that will say "What? I'm not fat. I just had a kid 4 yrs ago, and I can lose the weight!" Add in "Must be ambitious, knows how to treat a lady, and above all, not cheap." Yeah, umm prostitute? "Must have a few tattoos, dress like tupac, and not always follow the rules." OK. So she wants a drug dealer. "Most of all, doesnt think that kids are baggage. I love all my kids, and my man must love them as well." Yes, the kids you had with the previous bad boys.