Kill baby girls to make men less sexist


05 April 2006

This article by Time’s regular feminist shit-spouter Caitlin Moran betrays the usual mentality feminists have, namely that despite their supposed independence they are jolly upset that men are avoiding them.

Caitlin is jolly upset that women are having to settle for men that don’t fit modern women’s high standards, that women might actually have to settle for guys that are not super-educated rich alpha-males (Caitlin’s bio at Wikipedia doesn’t mention her marital status, but I dare say she’s a spinster, judging by her Dowdesque bitterness. It’s also her 31st birthday today, 5th April. Getting on a bit then.)

It doesn’t occur to her than men are avoiding women because women are a pain in the arse – as she proves with every misandrist article she produces. It doesn’t occur to her that women should, perhaps, treat men with the same respect they demand in return, and act a bit nicer, because no men in their right mind would consider ‘duking it out’ (to use her term) for today’s women.

Instead, she has a better solution: sex-selected abortion, inspired by the habit of people with such a choice to abort baby girls more often than boys.

Sex selection, then, is the unexpected cure for a misogynistic society. The only surefire way to stop men being sexist pigs is to limit severely the supply of women.

Prolonged exposure to feminist ranting does make one almost immune to their twisted ideas, so it’s worth emphasising and repeating what she is suggesting:

She is advocating killing unborn baby girls – the sex she supposedly stands up for – so that she and other Western women will have a better chance of landing a husband up to their petulantly high standards.

For fucks sake!

I’ve heard feminists spew a lot of evil shit before, but this candidly proposed idea really is on a higher plane of twisted selfishness. This selective breeding is the sort of eugenics style shit that Nazis suggest. It’s hard to say who is more fucking evil; neo-Nazis for advocating eugenics to purify their so-called ‘master race’, or neo-feminists for advocating eugenics just so they can get a date!

Not that it would work anyway. Females would have a hard time getting a husband even if there was only one woman for every four men, because the way things are going these days three of the guys would probably ignore her and go off for a multiplayer session of Quake 4 or watch footie down the pub, and the fourth guy would be a “player” who would just get her drunk, fuck her up the arse and clear off before demands for commitment entered her hangover-addled brain.

In fact I think this highlights one of the less-publicized reasons young feminists are so in favour of abortion; they know 50% of babies hacked up and dumped in a bin will be female and this will cut down on the competition. A young feminist women will probably guess, deep down, that when she’s 40 she’ll probably want to grab a husband if she’s bored of her career and wants kids, and she most certainly doesn’t want potential suckers having plenty of 20-year-old women to choose from over her own skanky middle-aged hide.

It’s almost like The Terminator plot; “I have come to kill your unborn daughter who, in twenty-one-years-time, will be chatted up by Gerald from accounts at the office party instead of meeee!

Obviously there’s not one single trace of logic within her warped idea, as proved by her belief that creating a generation of ‘feminist men’ – meaning men bought up with feminism – will somehow mean all us mere men will worship and adore women, failing to realise we already have a generation – two, in fact – of men raised by feminism. Do we worship women, fight over them and treat them like Princesses?

Erm, no. Given that there’s a ‘man drought’, as this whore confirms.

This drought will continue, Muzzz Catty Moron, so long as men-hating scum like you continue to have any influence in society. Happy fucking birthday.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:16 PM

At 10:35 PM, Anonymous said…

sorry hiney, married with kids

%d bloggers like this: