Feminism ruins society, men blamed


——————————————————-

16 February 2007

gun.jpg

Cameron blames fathers for ‘broken’ society (PDF)

Fathers should be compelled to look after their children in an effort to tackle the breakdown of family life and discipline in society David Cameron, the Conservative leader, said today.

Father’s children”? I didn’t realise fathers had children these days, they belong to women. Women can abort kids, get full custody, get pregnant via a sperm donor (willing or otherwise) with no intention of the father having any input at all…whatever they want.

Hang on a minute though, it looks like some blame has to be placed for children’s misery, and that means – ta-daah! – suddenly children belong to father’s again! What a shocking surprise.

He said the shooting of three teenage boys in south London in the last fortnight had shown that British society was “badly broken”.

Issues like teenage gun crime, Mr Cameron said, could not be dealt with by better policing or tighter gun controls alone when the problem – and the solution – lay within families and communities.

Indeed it does lie in families and communities. Not in more laws and government interference, which is usually proposed as a solution, as Cameron pretty much proceeds to do.

“Every working parent knows that you can’t have it all.

Not really. Plenty of women still labour under this assumption.

“There is a natural conflict between hours worked, money earned and the time you spend at home. I believe that businesses have an overriding corporate responsibility to help lessen this conflict, and make it easier for parents to find the proper balance for their lives,” he said.

No, businesses don’t have to make it easier for parents. Businesses are there to make money. All this forcing of businesses to ensure people (primarily women) get their work/life balance in order is fucking the economy up, not to mention causing increasing resentment.


The old way was pretty good. Men worked and made money, thus able to do their jobs and provide for the children. Women stayed at home and ran the home, thus able to devote themselves to the kids. And, of course, contrary to what feminits say fathers – even ones who work full-time – do have a significant input in their children’s lives, particularly when they are entering adolescence. Businesses, men, women and children were happy. Okay, it was never a utopia, never a perfect set up for all, but overall it seemed to be better for kids and the crime rate wasn’t spiraling out of control.

Anywhere feminism goes, you get a reverse of civilisation.

It doesn’t take a genius (but it does take an IQ over 50, thus ruling out feminists) to figure that children raised with two-parents and full-time care from their mother or father in their early years are less likely to become criminals than children raised by single slut-bag mothers and spending much of their early years in grotty state daycare centres and, later, hanging out in big Matriarchal ghettos hanging out with other illegitimate bastards whilst mother is indoors humping her latest bad-boy lover or watching East Enders.

Mr Cameron said his support for marriage did not mean “bashing single mothers”.

This is the big stumbling block today. Criticising women or feminists is taboo and criticising single mothers is impossible. That’s why these women will never be held responsible for divorcing husbands on a whim or just getting knocked up by a thug and knowing that nanny government will take care of them with some taxpayers money.

But he wanted to see more couples stay together – and the best way to do that was to support marriage.

He confirmed that the Tories were looking at reintroducing tax breaks for married couples, though he said the party was still looking at the best way to do that.

Not a bad start but first of all the taxes should be lowered across the board anyway by reducing the welfare state, and then divorce and child custody laws need to be overhauled (primarily by reducing them; the government and the legal system should have minimal say in relationships and child custody, unless there is an actual crime involved.)

He said child maintenance laws needed reform “to compel men to stand by their families”.

“It means finding the father, it means attaching an order to their benefits or their earnings and taking the money out of their bank account and giving it to the mother. That’s what compulsion means,” he said.

Yeah, nothing like shaking men upside down and collecting cash what falls out of their pockets and handing it to women.

This will simply not work to somehow reduce single-motherhood. It won’t do a thing to make men compelled to stand by their families.

Most of the thugs who get women knocked up – and who many liberated grrls like to get knocked up by – don’t have incomes, or at least not legitimate incomes. Why would some feckless loser or dope-dealer worry about his non-existant money being plundered? Note how he is steadfastly refusing to criticise women in any way, or even hold them responsible for their actions, yet quite content to talk of stealing money from men’s bank accounts.

Women have all the reproductive rights. If they don’t use the many contraception choices they have and get knocked up they can have the child killed at taxpayers expense. “My body, my choice!” goes the endless chant. Fine. Then for us men it “My money, my choice.” We’ll spend it on who we want. Nevermind “but what about the children”, no-one asks that when it comes to women having abortions at the drop of a hat.

What should happen is the opposite. There should be no benefits or Child Support for single mothers who have kids out of wedlock. Only for those who marry and are divorced and deserted by a husband, or are widowed, could claim any benefits/Child Support. If a woman divorces a man then, unless he’s proved to be abusive or an adulterer, or if a man divorces a woman and she’s proved to be abusive or an adulterer, then the man gets custody of the children. If a woman gets knocked up out of wedlock; no benefits, no Child support.

That will be more effective. It will ensure women will find a good man and marry him to have children, and like her husband, she will feel compelled to stay married or face the consequences. Thus the kids have a mother and a father. At the moment, women can get pregnant to any loser who has no ability or willingness to be a good father, and know that the government (with lashings of taxpayer’s money) will step in and rescue her from the consequences of her own stupidity and selfishness.

Feminists and their political lackeys may want women to be treated the same as men but not when it comes to responsibility or punishing anti-social actions. Cameron and all the others constantly ignore the fact that women are to blame for getting pregnant out of wedlock as the man (‘it takes two to tango’, to quote the line trotted out when a man might expresses resentment at paying Child Support), if not more so thanks to them having the pill (and the option of keeping their legs shut until marriage), and furthermore women are more likely to file for divorce and fight tooth-and-nail for child custody. To even notice this, let alone draw attention to it in public, brings down a big torrent of shrieking and demands for resignation from single mother groups and fembot politicians.

The whole blithering tripe Cameron and others (from all parties) who condemn “absent fathers” as being the scourge of society stinks of hypocrisy. Single women can now get IVF to become single-mothers by choice, women nearly always get custody in divorce, and some politicians (like Harriet Harman) have been on record as pointing out that fathers are not only unnecessary but unwanted in families. Yet they have no worries about then blaming absent fathers (never mind many are absent because wifey divorced them and excludes them from the kid’s lives) when it suits them. If a woman becomes a single mother by choice, she’s liberated and battling the sexist belief that fathers are necessary, but if a man makes a woman become a single mother by getting her pregnant and deserting her, he’s a vile disgusting cad responsible for the impending apocalypse. Like I said at the start of this post, children belong to mothers only until blame needs be handed out or Child Support needs to be handed in.

It is a step in the right direction that lack of fathers in families is being noted as a major problem, but unfortunately the blame is only being placed on men, not where it lies; feminism.

Feminism set out, with unashamed zeal, to remove men from families. They made it utterly clear. Feminists, vile worthless scum that they are, should shoulder most of the blame. But then, thanks to this repugnant ideology itself and its hold in society, criticising feminists or women in general is taboo, so instead men are just flat-out blamed by manginas like Cameron.

The irony is that the relentless knee-jerk reaction of Always Blame Men only serves to further increase the resentment of young men, and will make them even less likely to give a damn about this very badly broken society.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:12 PM
——————————————————-

At 7:38 PM, Captain Zarmband said…

This series of stupid comments against men is typical of this prick Cameron. Many men, like me for instance, never see our kids thanks to the feminists and manginas in the Family Courts system backed by idiot politicians. So how the hell can I supervise my kids if the law stops me from seeing them. And while we’re at it….the gun problem is almost exclusively within the black community so how come he never mentions this glaringly obvious point. While ever prats like Blair and Cameron are in charge our country has no hope.

——————————————————-

At 8:45 PM, Lisa said…

To me, it’s not just the knee jerk reaction to blame men and coddle women. It is also the knee jerk reaction to assume money is the solution to the problem. Kids grow up in utter poverty with the love and support and companionship of both parents and do better than many kids who grow up well funded, yet without complete access to both parents. A check isn’t going to keep a kid out of trouble. A hug will. A late night talk on the front porch will. Sitting down to a dinner every night with both parents at the table will. I don’t think there should be any such thing as child support. I think it is gross to assign a dollar value to a child. With the exception of violent situations, both parents should remain with their children. Forget about the money issue, mandate individuals who have a child together MUST cohabitate (except in violent situations) until that child is a legal adult. Don’t grant divorces on the basis of irreconcilable differences to spouses with children. Period! Men and women will put a little more thought into who they sleep with if a surprise pregnancy would equal 18 years of living with that person. Some men might remark this will increase the occurrence of women trapping men through pregnancy. Guess what, that will never happen if you don’t sleep with her or if you take steps to be sure you are protected. Do I think it’s disgusting when women intentionally get pregnant to hold onto a man? Yes. Do I think it is an outcome men can prevent? Also yes. Give some of Christopher in Oregon’s “Stay Celibate” posts a read.

As I’ve stated in previous posts (mostly on Outcast’s site), I have very strong views on the commitment of marriage. I’m sure many ‘psychologists’ would read my words and come up with all sorts of reasons why it’s bad for kids to be in homes where both parents don’t love each other. I agree it is bad when the adults act like idiots and CHOOSE to be foul, rude, loud, aloof and idiotic. These supposed psychologists need to see the problem for what it is, adults shirking responsibility and acting like children. They need to stop justifying the behavior and start encouraging people to do what is right by their marriage and their children. The right thing is to actively communicate and compromise so your home remains stable and pleasant and safe for the children.

——————————————————-

At 8:48 PM, Anonymous said…

Compel men to stand by their families???

The entire problem is that no one is compelling WOMEN to stand by their families, and no one intends to. The miracle is that men still attempt to build families at all. For the time being, anyway.

Richard

——————————————————-

At 8:58 PM, Anonymous said…

The quicker the country is destroyed the quicker the government (and its sick parasites) will fall.

Duncan, let’s not stomp on the brake. Stomp on the accelerator.

I’d like to see feminism work when the electricity goes out. LOL.

ANNOUNCEMENT
I hereby officially welcome all Muslims to feast on western women — modern day Whores of Babylon. Western men WILL NOT stand in your way. Rape and pillage away Mohammad! LOL.

(Stellar post again Duncan, BTW).

——————————————————-

At 10:12 PM, zzoonn said…

Politicians and women are bread and butter in this journey of broken families, fatherless children, materialistic society, not to mention other things.Politicians are stupid but they know that women are f****** the society at all. What is easier for them:blame men or lose thousands of females votes?

——————————————————-

At 11:12 PM, bazil said…

All the more reason to send these utterly useless political slimes a message in the form of a protest vote.

I’m voting for UKIP this time.

——————————————————-

At 2:29 AM, Anonymous said…

Duncan, you were right when you put it like this: David Cameron “Mangina To The Max”.

“That’s what compulsion means.” Raping men’s financial independence even more. Cameron doesn’t care whether men are “part of their children’s lives”, he’s just furthering the feminist line of shaking men up and down, seeing what drops out of their pockets and handing it to women. Macro wealth transfer with marriage-and-divorce, micro wealth transfer with regular skimming of their bank accounts and state benefits.

What a piece of shit you are Cameron. But we could hardly expect any better from British politicians, could we?

Another good post Duncan.

——————————————————-

At 10:08 AM, Verlch said…

When in doubt, blame men. Blame the patriarchy, blame men again.

It’s part of this idea that women are never wrong. Where and when did that start? I dunno. But I will continue to drive in the dagger and twist it, into the rotting corpse of feminism.

I have declared war on that institution and will spend my life battling it. If I ever get out of line with facts not supported by truth, please let me know so I can correct any errors before I repeat them 2 million times!!!

Keep up the good fight bros!!!

——————————————————-

At 10:26 AM, Anonymous said…

Lisa –
It sounds like you live in fear of being dumped by a man for a younger girl who hasn’t gotten as fat as you. Also, men won’t put more thought into sleeping with hot tramps..except for wearing 2 condoms. Men will still ALWAYS go for the attractive, hot, tramp… even if it means shagging through a garbage bag!

In reaction to your proposed mandate..I propose that a “no strings attached” divorce be automatically be granted to any male whose female exceeds 25% body fat.

Cheers!

——————————————————-

At 10:30 AM, Candide said…

I believe men need to become as worthless as feminists say they are. Any real assets should be held in such a way that appear to be at-arm’s length, yet in fact are not. Men need to look at bartering skills; producing for one’s own basic needs, eg gardening and the like. A man needs to avoid having their saved earnings/net equity open for the feminazis to loot. Or in fact avoid having any. The worst thing that could happen to feminism would be for men to start utterly complying with it. Avoid going to university only to find reverse discrimination at the end of it.w

——————————————————-

At 1:48 PM, Anonymous said…

Firstly, I would like to commend Duncan for yet another brilliant post.

With regards to the pathetic comments made by David Cameron, this just proves politicians can never accept responsibility for their awful policies (ie.buying the female vote, by supporting feminism).

If this brain-dead idiot (David Cameron), and all the other clueless politicians wanted to know why youth crime rates are on the increase…the answer is staring right at them ie.dysfunctional families and the decline of discipline both at home, and at school.

It is not rocket science to work out, that children raised in a stable two parent family will, in most cases, turn out to be well adjusted and law abiding people.

Unfortunately, our feminist dominated divorce courts have effectively destroyed the once respected institution of marriage.In most western countries, we have this crazy “no fault divorce”.”No fault divorce” effectively gives women the green light to behave badly and not get punished for it.In fact a woman these days actually gets rewarded for skanky behaviour by getting the man’s house,his assets and generous child support payments.

So, finally David Cameron please do not blame all men for the disastrous legacy that feminism has left us with. The people responsible for this mess are the evil men-hating feminists and the brain dead and corrupt politicians that support them.

Seb
Sydney, AUSTRALIA

——————————————————-

At 2:48 PM, Christianj said…

“As I’ve stated in previous posts (mostly on Outcast’s site), I have very strong views on the commitment of marriage. I’m sure many ‘psychologists’ would read my words and come up with all sorts of reasons why it’s bad for kids to be in homes where both parents don’t love each other.”

The sad and sorry fact is that your sex has blown and will never accept that fact.

Women have always lived in denial…

“Da.nile is not just a river that flows through Egypt”.

Women will always deny any responsibility for any of their actions and thereby readily blame males.

Women are exempt of all responsibility.

Women will always be that self-serving hypocrite and denier.

So what next ?

——————————————————-

At 2:55 PM, Anonymous said…

Fellas,

I have read most of your posts.

For the record: I am American, 53 year old male, quite athletic, retired military, financially quite well, never married, no kids.

What you describe in your posts, I saw early on as a young man and decided to NEVER marry. I do *NOT* get angry with women, the court system, feminists or society in general. It is futile to do so. The parameters and dynamics regarding the current appalling state of male-female relationships are much bigger than I (or you). *IT IS JUST THE WAY IT IS.* Get over it.

My advice to all males ….. disregard women in a romantic context. Ignore them. Do not marry. If you do marry, you voluntarily relegate yourself to little more than a lifelong “checkbook on legs.”
If you have kids …. do your best for the child/ren. If not, don’t have them and enjoy your life sans a woman or kids.

Fellas, I wish all of you the best

——————————————————-

At 3:00 PM, Lisa said…

Anon @ 10:26, I’m 123 pounds 10 months after having a baby. I wear a size six better than most teenagers these days. Of course, I’m not living at McDonald’s. To date, I have one chin, one set of buns and cottage cheese is only in my frig. My husband is balding with a paunch belly (admittingly from my cooking). Women can, and should, have strong convictions about marriage period. It’s a shame it has come to a point where one would assume my convictions stem from insecurity.

Interestingly enough, the women I’ve known who have initiated divorce have been the ones who haven’t taken care of themselves. That’s really no surprise to me. If they aren’t inclined to take care of themselves, they are probably less likely to take care of their marriage. They are unhappy and bitter and looking to blame anyone but themselves.

Something to think about. You suggested my position towards marriage stemmed from my insecurity of being dumped. The feminists say my position towards marriage stems from my insecurity of making it on my own and making decisions for myself. Women like me are waging a war from both sides. Though you would never claim to be a feminist, you used the same tactic of challenging my belief system by making my position as negative as possible.

——————————————————-

At 3:55 PM, Legion said…

I’m wary of the women’s comments on MRA or anti-feminist sites. They seem so reasonable and then always come back to “adults need to be more responsible for families and children”.

This invariably means: “Men need to pay women, pay children, and back out of family life if women or the government feel they aren’t necessary or are destructive.”

There are a lot of women who disagree with feminism. However, 99% of them don’t want to give up any of what feminism has brought them.

“I hate no-fault divorce, but I demand the right to divorce!”

“Children should have both parents as they grow up, but the mother decides custody and visitation.”

“Men will not commit to trashy women, but women demand sexual freedom for many years before considering marriage.”

It is true that feminism is so mainstreamed that most women don’t consider themselves feminists at all, but they have 100% feminist values. They will not give up their legal and social advantages to save society or make human relationships work again. Women don’t get it. That is why systems were in place for thousands of years to manage women’s emotional take on life. Remove those barriers and you have a lot of screeching and hysterical manipulators who will not embrace equality, but will enslave their natural male partners.

——————————————————-

At 3:57 PM, ThugBack said…

@Zarmband

Who reckons:

“And while we’re at it….the gun problem is almost exclusively within the black community so how come he never mentions this glaringly obvious point.”

Oh yeh? Well if it’s so obvious, what purpose will stating the obvious serve?

Furthermore almost all high school shooters in the States are carried out by young white males; their colour is never mentioned either.

Also the most disgusting and vile miscreants to stain the earth are ARMS Manufacturers and

ARMS DEALERS

(who, oddly enough, make and sell ALL the weapons being used in ALL these shootings).

How come we don’t mention the fact they are almost all American, British and French made weapons? Sold by:

WHITE MEN?

Fool.

I told ya before, leave black men out of your shit.

I’m a THUG and I’m getting paid and laid as “legitimately” as your friendly neighbourhood.

ARMS DEALER

NOW WHAT?

Now bitch cry and whine on that.
_______________________

Now me personally, I aint got no use for most Hags and the Manginahood they owe their priviledged existance to.

But I’ve got even less use for males (or lames) who attack womens CHOICE OF MAN –

rather than attack the POLITICAL SOCIAL CULTURAL AND LEGAL biases and double standards that empower women to abuse all MEN.

Why?

Because you are no better than the Manginas you bitch about.

Your only real issue is – “I can’t get the woman or, more likely -WOMEN, I want, so it serves the bitch right if she picks a man who fucks her over”.

That dear Sirs, is PUNKHOOD incarnate, Playa hatin extreme, so glaringly apparent that even a man whose lost all 5 senses could percieve it.

If man is a thug, loser or whatever derogatory term you want to label him with, it might just be because he never had a father or that the FEMINISED education system has failed him or that finding work in a job market where female “skills” are in and traditional male skills are out, is very challenging.

Not to say that this gives a man the right to be a loser but since we are men we could at least take these things account when we’re bragging that we’re the one in million “good” man that women should want to fuck instead of Bad Boy.

If you’re a good man then you don’t need to beat down on the next guy to impress women. Doing that automatically counts you among the no good since you’re not really a good man just a jealous one.

There are no requirements to being a good man other than doing GOOD. You’re not a good man just because you yearn to facilitate the domestic bliss of some random Hag.

Truth is, you’re no different the Thug, Playa, Bad Boy, whatever, you just aint got the balls to do what he does.

🙂

Check this: The world Greatest men are men had the Bad Boy attitude. They do what other men dare not. They break the rules and break NEW ground. They are Risk takers who say to the world ‘fuck y’all, Imma do dis –

MY WAY’.

That’s the creed they live and die by.

Not like the simpering sex starved losers who are to weak to get theirs.

If men are to recover some of the ground we’ve lost over the last 40 years then the first place to start is to stop attacking the least powerful men and boys in society. All you do when you that is validate the feminist demonisation of masculinity and play right into the hands of those you claim to oppose.

Now me personally I want this Gender War gig wrapped up quickly so that men can get back to the bizniz of slaughtering each other over race, money, power –

in peace

🙂

ThugBack

——————————————————-

At 5:08 PM, Anonymous said…

What a joke!

THUGS and playa’s gettin’ they bitches? They havin’ sex when you guys ain’t gettin’ none?

Puh-lease!

I worked around law enforcement for years. I’ve seen thugs come and go. They all think they are in control of their lives. So proud, so stupid. Sure they have lots of sex. Usually with the same 15-20 prostitutes that live in their neighborhood. Lots of these playa’s have HIV/AIDS and happily spread it around.

It is NOT cool to be a thug or a player. It is not cool to fuck around and spread AIDS. It is not cool to get a woman pregnant and then walk away.

Forget all this black/white talk. Blacks are 100% responsible for their situation. Listen to your own people: Bill Cosby, Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas. Listen to real men, not nigga thugs. You might learn something, playa.

——————————————————-

At 7:18 PM, patriarchal phoenix said…

Wow!

Young men not giving a damn about a society that’s screwing them over. . . Color me perplexed!

*Shakes head at absolute insanity coming from that little island across the pond. . .*

Seriously… These comments are coming from the same nation that brought us Vice Admiral Horatio Nelson?!?!

*Walks off to do something fun. . .*

——————————————————-

At 8:53 PM, Anonymous said…

Legion, 3:55 post, is spot on here !! Baaaaad scene in UK!

Also…@Anon (Yank) 2:55 above…
Live with it ??
WTF…. Your wonderful cuntry has 3 times our GDP per head -I think? You won’t feel ‘our pain’ till later- when you get a similar dose hopefully 🙂
Your people may have saved us in WW2,sure- but also let ‘Fems’ and CSupport go ape..Yeah ? We can’t afford it NOW.
5K

——————————————————-

At 9:39 PM, Lisa said…

Legion, I agree with you a great deal. Especially your point about women not considering themselves ‘feminists’ yet clearly entrenched in its ideals. With all of the messages that have been hammered at us through the years (some covert and some blatant), it is impossible to come out unscathed. I think women would benefit a great deal from just taking time to absorb the positions of the MRA without getting their undies in a bunch. Though I was somewhat aware of the imbalances before reading sites such as EB and Outcast Superstar, I was a far cry from seeing it all. Whenever I read something here, I walk away with eyes that are more open. It is truly amazing what I notice now that escaped me before.

A quick example…I never paid much attention to commercials before. Duncan’s post on messages through television shows and ads opened my eyes. The new Honda Civic Coupe commercial shows a supposedly hot (though I would beg to differ) woman speeding around and driving dangerously. She gets pulled over by a cop and immediately primps herself in the mirror, applies lipstick and adjusts her shirt to show cleavage. She clearly plans to manipulate the situation so she is not held accountable for her behavior. The cop turns out to be a woman and her plans go down the tubes. Before, I would have thought commercial was funny. Now I really see how disgusting it is b/c of the truth behind the joke. Women are using their sexuality/gender to escape accountability and they are doing so without apology.

——————————————————-

At 9:42 PM, Anonymous said…

Thugback wrote:

“But I’ve got even less use for males (or lames) who attack womens CHOICE OF MAN –

rather than attack the POLITICAL SOCIAL CULTURAL AND LEGAL biases and double standards that empower women to abuse all MEN.

Why?

Because you are no better than the Manginas you bitch about.

Your only real issue is – “I can’t get the woman or, more likely -WOMEN, I want, so it serves the bitch right if she picks a man who fucks her over”.

That dear Sirs, is PUNKHOOD incarnate, Playa hatin extreme, so glaringly apparent that even a man whose lost all 5 senses could percieve it.

If man is a thug, loser or whatever derogatory term you want to label him with, it might just be because he never had a father or that the FEMINISED education system has failed him or that finding work in a job market where female “skills” are in and traditional male skills are out, is very challenging.

Not to say that this gives a man the right to be a loser but since we are men we could at least take these things account when we’re bragging that we’re the one in million “good” man that women should want to fuck instead of Bad Boy.

If you’re a good man then you don’t need to beat down on the next guy to impress women. Doing that automatically counts you among the no good since you’re not really a good man just a jealous one.

There are no requirements to being a good man other than doing GOOD. You’re not a good man just because you yearn to facilitate the domestic bliss of some random Hag.

Truth is, you’re no different the Thug, Playa, Bad Boy, whatever, you just aint got the balls to do what he does.

🙂

But I’ve got even less use for males (or lames) who attack womens CHOICE OF MAN –

rather than attack the POLITICAL SOCIAL CULTURAL AND LEGAL biases and double standards that empower women to abuse all MEN.

Why?

Because you are no better than the Manginas you bitch about.

Your only real issue is – “I can’t get the woman or, more likely -WOMEN, I want, so it serves the bitch right if she picks a man who fucks her over”.

That dear Sirs, is PUNKHOOD incarnate, Playa hatin extreme, so glaringly apparent that even a man whose lost all 5 senses could percieve it.

If man is a thug, loser or whatever derogatory term you want to label him with, it might just be because he never had a father or that the FEMINISED education system has failed him or that finding work in a job market where female “skills” are in and traditional male skills are out, is very challenging.

Not to say that this gives a man the right to be a loser but since we are men we could at least take these things account when we’re bragging that we’re the one in million “good” man that women should want to fuck instead of Bad Boy.

If you’re a good man then you don’t need to beat down on the next guy to impress women. Doing that automatically counts you among the no good since you’re not really a good man just a jealous one.

There are no requirements to being a good man other than doing GOOD. You’re not a good man just because you yearn to facilitate the domestic bliss of some random Hag.

Truth is, you’re no different the Thug, Playa, Bad Boy, whatever, you just aint got the balls to do what he does.

🙂

Check this: The world Greatest men are men had the Bad Boy attitude. They do what other men dare not. They break the rules and break NEW ground. They are Risk takers who say to the world ‘fuck y’all, Imma do dis –

MY WAY’.

That’s the creed they live and die by.

Not like the simpering sex starved losers who are to weak to get theirs.

If men are to recover some of the ground we’ve lost over the last 40 years then the first place to start is to stop attacking the least powerful men and boys in society. All you do when you that is validate the feminist demonisation of masculinity and play right into the hands of those you claim to oppose.

Now me personally I want this Gender War gig wrapped up quickly so that men can get back to the bizniz of slaughtering each other over race, money, power –

in peace

🙂

ThugBack

3:57 PM

That’s the creed they live and die by.

Not like the simpering sex starved losers who are to weak to get theirs.

If men are to recover some of the ground we’ve lost over the last 40 years then the first place to start is to stop attacking the least powerful men and boys in society. All you do when you that is validate the feminist demonisation of masculinity and play right into the hands of those you claim to oppose.

Now me personally I want this Gender War gig wrapped up quickly so that men can get back to the bizniz of slaughtering each other over race, money, power –

in peace

🙂

ThugBack

3:57 PM”

What a truly ridiculous and idiotic post!!!

Being a thug/bad boy/player does not make you a real man. If you need to prove your manhood by beating up/or mistreating women, then you are nothing but a weak minded fool, and so are the women that date these creeps. Real men only fight in self defence to protect themselves or others.

One of the main reasons for the ever increasing crime rates in Western societies is due to the fact that children are no longer being a raised in a stable two parent family where there is love and discipline.

And unfortunately “thugback”, it is my sad duty to report to you that your beloved “thugs/bad boys/players” usually make lousy fathers as these types usually don’t stick by the skanks they impregnate.

This quote also proves thugback is a deluded fool.

“The world Greatest men are men had the Bad Boy attitude. They do what other men dare not. They break the rules and break NEW ground. They are Risk takers who say to the world ‘fuck y’all, Imma do dis –

MY WAY’.

That’s the creed they live and die by.

Not like the simpering sex starved losers who are to weak to get theirs.”

You are partly correct in stating that great/successful men are risk takers and have courage. True, but successful people like Bill Gates have BRAINS, and most importantly great business acumen, something that most thugs and bad boys don’t have and never will have because they are simply too stupid. Yes, you are also correct in stating that thugs and bad boys get more pussy than us so called “nice guys”, so fucking what?? does that you a better person than me??, does it make you a real man??

As far as I am concerned, a real man is man who:

1) Can take care of his family, and spends time with his family (when possible).

2)Treats his wife and children well, but at the same time instilling discipline in his children.

3)Is kind (not a wimp),decent and trustworthy, but is firm and strong when necessary.

4)Is responsible, and accepts responsibility for his actions.

So, thugback being a nice guy does not make you a loser (in your eyes).

Yes, I agree to succeed in this world (particularly in business), you need to take risks,but as I mentioned previously successful people have great business acumen and are smart.

Thugs and bad boys usually tend to have low self esteem, but cover this up by behaving badly to trick women into believing that they have self confidence, and usually the gullible skanks fall for it.

Anyway, that’s my two cents worth.

Seb
Sydney, Australia

——————————————————-

At 10:35 PM, Nerzhin said…

Hey. Long time reader. Like the blog. Thought you might be interested in this link about false drug rape claims.

——————————————————-

At 10:45 PM, Captain Zarmband said…

Anonymous wrote:

“Furthermore almost all high school shooters in the States are carried out by young white males; their colour is never mentioned either.”

The story we are talking about are events that have happened in London and have been exclusively within the black community. I don’t know about America but my comments were clearly about the events in Britain. Your little tantrum is inaccurate and very childish. Check your facts before mouthing off in future.

——————————————————-

At 11:07 PM, Duncan Idaho said…

I wouldn’t worry about that Thugback freak, it’s probably some 15-year-old kid who has listened to too much 50 Cent, or if it is a genuine ‘thug’, one who’ll hopefully end up getting shot by a fellow thug or the next cop he mouths off at.

He did post another comment full of inane twittering, his support for feminism to ruin “our” society, and as well as some racist drivel and some rather alarming comments about what he’d like to do to our sisters. Very tedious. I didn’t deign to approve it lest it take things too off-topic.

Oh well, I’ll leave his original comment above for us to to laugh at.

——————————————————-

At 12:41 AM, Mamonaku187 said…

Wow… talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

But all of the posturing by politicians such as your Cameron will be to no avail.

Men such as ourselves will continue to criticize feminism RELENTLESSLY; and more men that are at present stuck in the FeMatrix will run into one of our posts at some point.

The public at large will wake up and smell the Poo-Poo eventually.

Unfortunately, enlightenment will come too late. Our society will fall, and I for one, will do nothing to defend it.

Not our fault… not our problem.

Take care of yourself and your loved ones only.

The Matriarchy deserves neither your respect, nor your allegiance.

Let it all fall down!

——————————————————-

At 1:40 AM, Mark said…

A couple of points:

Firstly, Lisa. Guys, if we are to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, we need to recognise that while there are large numbers of bitter feminists who hate us simply for the way we were born and who will not be swayed by incontrovertible evidence or gross injustice, there are many many more decent ladies out there who ARE open to rational discussion and reasoned debate: ladies such as Lisa. It is these ladies whom we need to reach. Not only do such women represent a large and influential voting block, but at the end of the day, if feminism so degrades our economic, military or societal strength that Moslem attitudes to women prevail, by peaceful means or otherwise, it is these ladies who stand to lose the most. Each and every one of them who can come to understand just how harmful feminism is in this big picture, and many other ways, is one who is likely to help abolish hateful law and government sponsored discrimination, to open the family courts, and to push for justice rather than that spurious catch-all and tyrants best friend, the ‘best interests of the child’. Lisa is clearly an early convert. She has she demonstrated not only considerable open mindedness but also a willingness to spend her time learning more about what is really going on. Our increasingly fragmented media means that she will be exposed to inputs that diverge considerably from ours and so even if there were no other reason than that – and there is -, she is in a position to provide us with valuable insight. We need her and many more like her and I for one welcome her and as many others as she can encourage, and I would suggest that the rest of you do the same.

Secondly, ThugBack, FYI Captain Zarmband was referring to the UK in his post saying that “the gun problem is almost exclusively within the black community”. As you may or may not be aware, the UK has THE MOST restrictive anti-firearms laws of ANY democracy. ALL non-military/police ownership of handguns is illegal and ALL legal ownership of shotguns and rifles is highly restricted and subject to extensive background checks, storage requirements and surprise inspections. Despite this, so-called black-on-black shootings are endemic, are rising, and are sufficiently prevalent that ‘the Met’ – the London Police – have a division specifically dedicated to tackling them. The ‘Captain’ is correct in his statement that ‘the gun problem is almost exclusively within the black community’…
see this article from the (London) Times stating “Between April 2001 and October 2005, 63 per cent of victims of murder and attempted murder involving firearms in London were black.”
http://timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article1391199.ece
that when blacks are only around 11% of Londonders…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Ethnicity
…and that’s murders only – the figures I have seen for all gun crime are approaching 90% black for both victims and perpetrators. However, I believe that due to the tendency of raging political correctness to try to bury these numbers, his comment that this is a ‘glaringly obvious point’ in incorrect. Blacks in both the UK and the US suffer similar problems, but I am afraid that while US blacks might be able to blame gun dealers and a history of slavery, that is simply not possible here as we have had neither. What we do both have is rampant feminism tearing families apart, and that, I believe, is where you need to look for your solution.

——————————————————-

At 7:09 AM, Anonymous said…

“It means finding the father, it means attaching an order to their benefits or their earnings and taking the money out of their bank account and giving it to the mother. That’s what compulsion means,” he said.

People see that there is a problem, they sdo not see the root of it. This will further destroy families, because women will now be able to neglect their responsibilities towards their legitimate husbands completely.

——————————————————-

At 7:17 AM, Anonymous said…

This will simply not work to somehow reduce single-motherhood.

It will do the opposite: women get encouraged to leave their legitimate husbands.
And everywhere such measures got introduced what men had to pay was way too much: a child and a mother can cost a more than several children when he is married. And he is not able to prepare for retirement.
Do not marry, do not get children.

I would love to have money and to care for a wife: but not in such a legal environment – I could not trust her for staying with me and doing a her duty.

Politicians do not get the problem. They believe they need to facilitate womens access to the workplace. Most women do not want to work they want children.

Politicians do not see that men are the ones who refrain from having children because they have nearly no rights. It is the men who decide not to have a family because it can easily be financial suicide.

——————————————————-

At 8:09 AM, Anonymous said…

What should happen is the opposite. There should be no benefits or Child Support for single mothers who have kids out of wedlock. Only for those who marry and are divorced and deserted by a husband, or are widowed, could claim any benefits/Child Support. If a woman divorces a man then, unless he’s proved to be abusive or an adulterer, or if a man divorces a woman and she’s proved to be abusive or an adulterer, then the man gets custody of the children. If a woman gets knocked up out of wedlock; no benefits, no Child support.

That will be more effective. It will ensure women will find a good man and marry him to have children, and like her husband, she will feel compelled to stay married or face the consequences. Thus the kids have a mother and a father. At the moment, women can get pregnant to any loser who has no ability or willingness to be a good father, and know that the government (with lashings of taxpayer’s money) will step in and rescue her from the consequences of her own stupidity and selfishness.

Well spoken, this should be made into a law.
Many women dont want losers though, they get good men and divorce them.

——————————————————-

At 8:14 AM, Anonymous said…

@captain zarmband
This series of stupid comments against men is typical of this prick Cameron. Many men, like me for instance, never see our kids thanks to the feminists and manginas in the Family Courts system backed by idiot politicians. So how the hell can I supervise my kids if the law stops me from seeing them. And while we’re at it….the gun problem is almost exclusively within the black community so how come he never mentions this glaringly obvious point. While ever prats like Blair and Cameron are in charge our country has no hope.

The reason is simple: first he would attack feminists and women who divorce (they need protection etc.). Then he would be called a racist.
It is the same in other parts of Europe.

——————————————————-

At 8:20 AM, Anonymous said…

@seb
“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.

——————————————————-

At 11:39 AM, Paul Parmenter said…

At least we are now clear on where Cameron stands – or rather kneels – so it must be obvious that there is no point supporting the Conservatives. Any party that can place such an ignorant and fatuous twit at its head must have a death wish, which we have to hope will soon be granted.

By my reckoning that now means that the Conservative party is solidly aligned with Labour and the Lib Dems in having jettisoned all belief in giving men any rights, respect or authority within families. As it is only those parties that can win the next election, we now have to face the prospect that along with the demise of men’s influence in families, so also will go any hope of reversing the downhill slide in the behaviour and morality of women and children.

It’s going to get worse, folks, a lot worse.

——————————————————-

At 11:41 AM, Anonymous said…

@lisa

I’m 123 pounds 10 months after having a baby. I wear a size six better than most teenagers these days. Of course, I’m not living at McDonald’s. To date, I have one chin, one set of buns and cottage cheese is only in my frig. My husband is balding with a paunch belly (admittingly from my cooking).

Very well done. Continue to cook this well. How many children do you intend to get?

——————————————————-

At 11:45 AM, Anonymous said…

@thugback
Also the most disgusting and vile miscreants to stain the earth are ARMS Manufacturers and

ARMS DEALERS

You are wrong: long live the Second Amendment, long live the NRA!
“The Right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Everybody should have assault weapons and ammunition.

——————————————————-

At 7:31 PM, Anonymous said…

Mr.Cameron is what we call a chancer.
We cannot vote labour so please,please think about trying to get Anne widdecombe to stand against Davey Dell Cameron.
She is eminently suited having written Knowledgeable books about how badly the male sex is treated,her record stands for itself,she would be voted for by both men and women and has the guts to effect change.
Why then go blathering off about
obscure persons and parties with no chance.
We should start the campaign now ,not when it’s too late or are some people on these blogs happy with the status quo?

——————————————————-

At 8:11 PM, beyochfukker said…

I hereby officially welcome all Muslims to feast on western women — modern day Whores of Babylon. Western men WILL NOT stand in your way. Rape and pillage away Mohammad! LOL

Lol – yaa – BRING IT, ClA-backed L-kda etc!

We need YOU to liberate US from feminism!!! Please restore our freedom! Help!

——————————————————-

At 9:12 PM, Anonymous said…

the gun problem

The gun problem is actually a symptom. Destroyed families beget destroyed kids which beget destroyed young adults. If it wasn’t guns it would be machetes. If we were pre-Iron age it would be rocks. A society that can’t see how feminism destroyed families is certain incapable of seeing how the criminal use of guns is an outcome of disemboweled families.

I agree with the sentiments above. As Western Civilization continues to implode the lifestyle women are accustomed to is in most peril. Spoiled WASP women are living on borrowed time.

——————————————————-

At 9:47 PM, Hero said…

And I thought the USA was screwed up. Apparently things are much worse in the U.K. You Brits have my deepest sympathy.

——————————————————-

At 11:51 PM, Anonymous said…

Forget all this black/white talk. Blacks are 100% responsible for their situation.

This is off topic, but I wanted to comment on this. So you say that blacks are completely responsible for their situation? I can’t agree with this because, although we all need to take responsibility upon ourselves to make a good life for one another, there are still obstacles that are forced upon us do to no fault of our own simply because of who and what we are. I still believe that racial discrimination exist believe it or not and some blacks grow up in life with limited options and end up in poverty mainly because of discrimination. They have low self-esteem and see little reason to succeed in life. There is a correlation between crime and poverty. When times get hard people get desperate and resort to crime to survive. Crime is pretty much a poverty concern, not a racial concern and most of the people who are more than likely to end up in poverty are unfortunately minorities such as: blacks and mexicans. This is why some people, particularly racists, assume that blacks are prone to crime by nature when it is not true at all. If things were reversed, and most whites were in poverty, it would be the same thing with them.

Listen to your own people: Bill Cosby, Walter Williams, Clarence Thomas. Listen to real men, not nigga thugs. You might learn something, playa.

Out of all the successful black men out there, Bill Cosby would be the last person that I would want to listen to. He only focuses on the negatives of the black community and not on the positives. I doubt that he has done anything to contribute or to encourage blacks at all. It seems like he is basically reiterating what racists believe is true about blacks and that just makes him come off as an uncle tom. I think that the only people who would think that he is right are racists.

——————————————————-

At 12:30 AM, Christopher in Oregon said…

What Beyochfukker has said is pretty wise. I suppose I could pretend to be a Muslim if it meant that women finally “got theirs”. It might be disingenuous, but it could be worth it. Women are already being raped on a wholesale basis in Scandinavia by Muslim men, and personally, I think it’s hilarious. Rape away, my Muslim friends. You at least have the courage to treat western women with the contempt they deserve. Rape away.

——————————————————-

At 8:34 AM, Anonymous said…

I was watching “The Antiques Roadshow last night. (7:30ish BBC1) Some old git “ex-spurt” was going on about a suffra-git medal handed out to an early femi-shit. Two young kids were standing there when this BBC fart starts talking to them about how the violence these women used was wonderful and how they had to use it to make a political point. I picked my jaw up off the floor, only for it to drop again as the said, BBC wanker then told these two kids…”I wish more people would use violence today when they protest.” I thought, ‘Hang on a sec…! That wanker Abu Hamser was jailed for saying things like this.’ So I sent Scotland Yard an email asking if inciting violence was still and offence and if so, would they mind awfully investigating the BBC and assorted antique wankers. I await a reply.

Politicians know exactly what the feminists are doing…so do the BBC and the rest of the wankey press in this country. They want it to happen. It’s men that are slow to catch on. The BBC produces more feminist propaganda than any other broadcaster so we pay to be indoctrinated. Until we all stand together and march on these bastards we will never stop them. They will go on taking our families, kids and cash. Naturally, the stupid cops will shoot at us so we need to encourage all those black kids with guns to fucking come with us…..Whoops! That is inciting violence and that’s illegal. No, don’t worry. I saw the BBC do it last night so it must be OK!

Just in case you don’t think the conservatives do really know what the femi-shits are up too, may I draw your avid attention to this sentence from the Childrens Act brought in by Thatcher.

“The rule of law that a father is the natural guardian of his legitimate child is abolished” The Children Act 1989,. Sect.2(4)

I rest my case me lud!

——————————————————-

At 6:36 PM, Paul Parmenter said…

To Anonymous 7.31 PM

I would not go overboard on Anne Widdecombe’s commitment to the cause of men’s rights. I read an article by her a few months back in which she attacked men for their lack of commitment. She actually came out with the accusation that “no man has ever made any commitment to anything since the beginning of time”, or twaddle to that effect.

Now I don’t believe any so-called educated woman who can write such insulting drivel really has any deep-seated respect for men at all.

Then I recall how she talked down a group of F4J protesters at the Houses of Parliament a while back. They were actually quite harmless, but as usual the Met police completely over-reacted like the panicking idiots we have become accustomed to, and treated them as if they were a bunch of terrorists. AW talked the men into abandoning their protest, thus giving the police and other enemies of fathers’ rights an easy victory.

If she had really sympathised with the cause she should have used her influence to talk the police out of their actions instead, and let the protest continue.

Always maintain a healthy distrust of women, even those who purport to be on your side. They are fickle and unreliable.

——————————————————-

At 8:37 PM, Anonymous said…

Anon 11:51, if minority status = poverty = criminality how do you explain the success of the USA’s East Asians? They arrived in the States later than most Blacks, shared neighbourhoods with them and faced their share of discrimination, yet managed in many cases to succeed to the extent they have surpassed both black and white.

I’ll have no truck with this ‘low self-esteem’ bollocks. Black or white, few young people in the West know what true poverty and degradation is and it’s long time blacks took responsibility for their own destiny – in your country and ours.

——————————————————-

At 3:29 AM, Phoenix said…

anon@8:37

Really? East Asians? Funny, I looked at the census for income, and only Indians and Japanese have high incomes. India is not East Asia, and Japan is only one country (it’s actually behind India too, but everything was lumped as Asia). Southeast Asia is absolutely terrible in terms of income. China and Korea are pretty bad to average.

So if by East Asia you mean just Korea, Japan and China, sorry, no sale, 1 nation, and a minority numbers wise in comparison at that, doesn’t validate your point.

I don’t disagree with your main point, but I do disagree with faulty claims. I also don’t like being told I’ve been surpassed. I actually respect blacks more than east asians, at least I’ve seen a black person succeed in the real world, all I ever see/hear from an asian is academic results and a ridiculous amount of bragging and ego, combined with complete and total futility. Especially the asian females, hoo boy, some funny stories with them. They are like Western White Women with the dial turned up, if you thought feminists were bad before, wait until the asian females start getting really widespread, they’re terrible.

——————————————————-

At 11:31 AM, Anonymous said…

I meant East Asians (Chinese / Koreans / Japs) IN THE WEST specifically.

Statistics show your average East Asian of whichever flavour does outdo both black and white males academically, at least in the UK, as do the Indians.

I appreciate most academic qualifications are overrated, but we can surely agree it’s kind of pathetic to blame continuing Black underachievement on slavery / colonialism when people from countries that experienced the same and worse in recent time just seem able to rise above it.

As for the relative merits of Asian and Black women – that’s a non-issue for me. I can honestly say I’ve never been faintly attracted to a Black woman who wasn’t heavily mixed. But that’s just an aesthetic preference I suppose and ymmv.

——————————————————-

At 8:18 PM, Captain Save’aHo said…

I think David Cameron is right. Deadbeat dads need to be held accountable.

You can’t keep blaming mothers for fathers who get kicked out of the house because of domestic violence!!!

——————————————————-

At 7:42 AM, Candide said…

This is my reaction to the Sheila who commented earlier about how a “real” man should act. As a male, I most certainly do NOT appreciate being gratuitously told how I should be one, especially by a female. I view the “free advice” people choose to inflict on me – generally delivered in the second person imperative- as spam. Worth spending minimal to no attention on. Much like effectively all Western Women, who view men contemptuously as Walking Wallets and Sperm donors.g

——————————————————-

At 12:58 PM, Anonymous said…

Paul Parmenter-I take your point about Anne Widdecombe but we all say things sometimes foreign to our beliefs.I am trying to point out that we are not likely to get an angry harry elected this time round and Widdecombe is our best hope-it’s either her or Cameron,take your pick,THERE JUST IS NO ALTERNATIVE.

——————————————————-

At 5:52 AM, Anonymous said…

I still believe that racial discrimination exist believe it or not and some blacks grow up in life with limited options and end up in poverty mainly because of discrimination.

It’s a chicken and egg argument.

Racism drives young black males to criminal behavior because they cannot find employment.

Employers won’t hire semi-literate criminals.

——————————————————-

At 5:07 AM, Masculist Man said…

Feminism has two wings: a left (liberal) one and a right (conservative) one. Respectively speaking: there is little difference between Blair and Cameron.

——————————————————-

At 5:54 AM, Masculist Man said…

There is a correlation between crime and poverty.

How does this explain white collar crime?

And to thugback: shut your mouth,nigga and accept some responsibility.

——————————————————-

%d bloggers like this: