Septic Septuagenarian Skank Spouts Off


——————————————————-

22 March 2007

mfrench.jpg

Still a burning issue

Marilyn French, the author of The Women’s Room, tells why she is still full of fury that the world remains a place messed up by men.

Short answer; she’s angry because she’s a Western Women, who are nearly always pissed off and moaning about fucking something, and she believes it is all men’s fault because she’s a Western Woman and a feminist to boot, and thus unable to accept any blame for her own misery.

The long answer…well, let’s read the article and sneer at the fucking bitch.

The girl at the Bobbi Brown make-up counter at Barneys wants to know what I’m doing in New York. I tell her that I’m interviewing Marilyn French, who wrote a book in the Seventies called The Women’s Room, bought by 20 million people and read by many more: dog-eared copies passed around neighbourhoods, hidden from husbands, read in secret at kitchen tables when the kids had gone to school. Hailed as the first feminist novel, it was devoured by desperate housewives around the world for its dramatisation of their feelings of rage and frustration, its offer of freedom through sisterhood and radical politics.

And now women have that wonderful freedom to be old and single and angry, not to mention slaving away at soul-crushing jobs. Brave girls.

“Wow!” breathes the girl, a blonde American beauty with flawless skin. “Yeah, wow!” says her colleague, who has a mane of dark hair and scarlet lips, “that’s so cool.” The blonde girl had done a semester of women’s studies at college and was getting married soon: she wanted to keep her career but also to have babies and make a nice home.

Typical dumb greedy bitch; she wants it all – to be a career woman, a housewife and a mother – but can’t comprehend the idea that she can’t. No-one can.

“I don’t want to have to choose,” she says.

You will do. Deal with it.

The dark girl lived in Brooklyn and was a singer-songwriter: “I write, like, empowering songs for women,” she says.

Snigger. “Empowering songs for women.” This could have been written as satire.

Young women and feminists are turning into parodies of themselves without knowing it.

“I’ve had heaps of boyfriends but they can’t seem to handle it when I’m on stage; they find it threatening to their ego, I guess.”

That’s probably because you sing about how much you hate men and don’t need a boyfriend. Most guys don’t find feminists or “empowered” women or whatever “threatening”, just irritating.

French would certainly have something to say about these things, I tell them. They make me write down the name of her book: they will read it, they say.

Yeah right, as if dizzy sluts such as these girls, like, read, like, books ‘n stuff.

That afternoon I take the lift up to the 48th floor of an apartment block in TriBeCa: the wind is audible in the corridor, blowing in from the river, sucking and funnelling around the building. French opens the door, a tiny hunched figure, now 77 and much diminished by the cancer that she survived, somehow, in the early Nineties, despite doctors’ predictions that she would be dead within the year. Elegantly made-up and dressed in blue cashmere, she walks gingerly ahead of me in a cloud of Mitsouko to a big room full of light from a wide grey sky.

“I’m a mess,” she says, lowering herself into the corner of a velvet sofa. “The treatment for cancer ruined almost every organ in my body.” She has neuropathy in her hands and feet, crunched vertebrae, a heart condition and she nearly died from kidney failure. “I enjoy life to the degree I can,” she goes on. “I hate what my country has become. The future doesn’t look happy; whoever thought it would come to this?” She stares off, silent for a moment. She is angry, obviously? “I’m very angry. We should never have gone into Iraq. I don’t know how we will recover.” Straight into it, then.

Waffle-waffle, I’m miserable, blah-blah, I’m still angry, yadda yadda, my health is failing, give me sympathy, etc.

Over the next three and a half hours it becomes clear that the implacable fury that fuelled her writing of The Women’s Room 30 years ago, and the dozen or so books that she has produced since, impels her still, and still she lays the blame at the feet of men.

Well, we can’t have women accepting blame for anything can we? Nevermind that, although men may make up most politicians and business leaders, it is women’s votes and women’s money (usually earned by men though, and funneled to women through taxes or alimony) that these powerful men pander after, and so it is women who help pull the strings in shaping society, amongst other things encouraging the consumerist culture of debt, and the slut-culture of whoredom and single-motherhood.

These are things that women seem to get all pissed off by; working depressing jobs, being fucked ‘n chucked until they’re just flat out ignored, and realising a hundred pairs of shoes doesn’t really mean much in the end when you’re going to die alone.

But they blame men because that’s easier than blaming their individual choices, or blaming the feminist movement they stupidly followed.

Patriarchy — that word we used to hear so often, now sounding oddly dated — is responsible for the world’s ills, according to French. And feminism, another out-of-favour concept, holds the solution: “If you had a feminist world, you wouldn’t have a hierarchical world,” she says. So a feminist world is a Utopia? “Yes, yes it is.”

So that’s her argument for feminism then? A feminist world is a utopia. Why? Because she says so. Because she feels it would be. End of argument.

And feminism is all about hierarchies, but the difference between Patriarchal and Matriarchal hierarchies is that the former relies on merit and honour, the latter on the simple notion that women rule over men and children and what the female rulers feeeel is right…is right.

The other day,a bright, academically able 18-year-old curled her lip when I asked her if she considered herself a feminist. “None of us do,” she said, “Well, there’s one girl but no one likes her.”

French can do a mean lip curl too: “Young women — I don’t think they realise that they don’t have a voice in the world — they haven’t found out yet.”

Yeah, women don’t have a voice do they? Their blithering opinions only crop up in daily articles like this in a thousand newspapers, on TV, from the gobby feminist politicians who fill the halls of power and who care about no-one but their own sex, etc.

Men, on the other hand, don’t. Not those of us who criticise feminism. Articles by women on how to be a slut, sucker a man into marriage, why women are great, why men are bastards, etc, fill the newshelves; there whole magazines dedicated to such articles. One of the few articles in a mainstream publication recently was Noer’s infamous one in Forbes pointing out career women made shit wives. That was pulled swiftly from the website and only reinstated after an anti-male tirade from some cunt could appear alongside it.

Women do have voices. They don’t shut the fuck up!

For the older members of the group in The Women’s Room, born in the Thirties, marriage was an impossible trap; they found themselves slaves to “nappies and string beans”, shackled to men who ignored their sexual needs and demanded subservience.

I’m sorry, ignoring women’s sexual needs? I thought, according to feminists, men were evil sex-mad brutes who force themselves on women? Make your minds up.

And men may have demanded subservience, but women demanded men be in charge! They still do, which is why they end up miserable and complaining “there are no real men left” when they find that only simpering emasculated manginas are willing to marry them. Plus us men were enslaved to taking responsibility as head of the household, and to provide and protect. Feminists always ignore the obligations men used to have (and still do, even though we now have no rewards or incentives.)

Even the younger women, liberated by the Pill and the washing machine, struggled to square the excitingly radical ideas of the time with the expectations of their husbands and partners.

But we’ve moved on, haven’t we? I tell French about the girl in Barneys: her future husband cooks, does the laundry, washes up; with that kind of shared life, she should not have to choose between career and family?

So what does this woman do then if her future husband (that’s a bit presumptious isn’t it, that he’ll go through with marrying her?) does all the housework? No doubt he has to hold down a job too.

“No, but she’s not going to get what she thinks she’s going to get,” says French crisply. “Proprietary issues come up the minute a man marries: he feels he owns his wife as he didn’t own her when she was his girlfriend. Then when the child is born, everything changes.”

Damn right everything changes at that point. The woman will quit her job, dump the kid in childcare, do fuck all and the man, fearful of the financial bum-raping of divorce, will be up shit creek. With a paddle up his arse.

Childcare is seen as a job with no status and no pay.

Full-time mothers don’t need pay! If they’re married then hubby pays the bills, puts the roof over their head, supports her and their children. (And if a full-time mother doesn’t have a husband because she got knocked up out of wedlock…then it’s tough shit on her.)

Furthermore, full-time mothers do have status. They are held in high esteem by their husband and traditional men if she is successfully raising the children and running the home. It is only feminists who look down on such women. Hate-filled wannabe-dictators like Marilyn French. These feminists looked down at women who marry and raise children as losers wasting their lives…then moan years later that women who marry and raise children are looked down on by the evil Patriarchy.

So it’s difficult; either you do it by yourself, which is hard, or you have to marry a guy, which isn’t easy either.”

Whine whine, it’s so difficult, blither blither, us women are victims, and so on and so forth.

Change the record you miserable old cunt!

“So, what is happening in places such as Japan and Italy is that women are refusing to have babies.

Actually, most women want children at some point. It is men who are refusing to have babies because (a) we daren’t risk having our children taken from us in the divorce courts then ordered to pay child-support, and (b) on a grander scale we are ensuring dumb feminist bitches in the West are culled from the gene-pool and don’t get to pass on their hateful ideology or their genes by refusing to breed with them (something Matriarchies are trying to overcome by forcing sperm-banks to help single women too old or deranged to get a man get pregnant.)

Besides, whoever is choosing not to have babies, it shows how much of a dead-end feminism is, that it’s end result, one way or another, is a plummeting population. And furthermore femhags like this old crone are actually proud to see a society dying.

Scandinavia has it right: they pay for the raising of the next generation, and that’s what the rest of the world needs to do.

Scandinavia doesn’t have it right, their societies are dying out and being taken over by muslims, who keep their women in check, and furthermore, men who are not totally emasculated are fucked off at having to pay to support single mothers and subsidise childcare for other people’s kids.

At least this gets to the heart of it; this feminist, like all feminists, wants money. Money to be taken from individuals (primarily men) and pooled together to fund women and implement retarded fembot goals of Marxism.

“Family life is so difficult because companies expect people to work an 80-hour week. It’s inhumane. Greed has to be tamed.”

Well, you women didn’t have to work when us men provided for you. Then feminism shoved women into the workplace. Furthermore, have fun trying to tame women’s greed! It won’t work, they just can’t stop spending.

French was born in 1930, the daughter of timid, bourgeois parents and, like Mira, one of her two autobiographical doppelgangers in The Women’s Room , married early to escape what she saw as the invidious choice between sex and independence: “Since she always risked pregnancy, which meant dependence, a sexual woman lived with Damocles’s Sword over her head. If Mira wanted the independent life, she would have to give up being sexual. Women were indeed victims by nature.” French had two children and was the first among her circle of suburban couples to get divorced. “My mother was appalled; as far as she was concerned, if my husband didn’t beat me or gamble or drink, then I should stay.” The marriage lasted 17 years: “It was absolutely horrible and I have never gotten over it.”

More victimhood. “A vicim of nature.” Bollocks. Shut the fuck up. If hubby was sooo ‘orrible, why put up with him for seventeen-years you masochistic harpy?

No doubt she’s proud that her children are the children of divorce. Actually she probably doesn’t even think about it. She’s a feminist; all that matters is that she’s having a good time. Nevermind her husband, her children or anyone else in the world which, in her view, revolves around her cunt.

She gives another of her severe stares off into the distance, her mouth set in a thin line. How was it so horrible? “Well I don’t like to talk about it much: in public he was affable, charming, humorous; alone with his family, he became a monster.” Did her children continue to have a relationship with him? “They tried. They loved him. He died.” She shrugs: “You can’t be in that kind of a rage and live. Rage is very hard on a person.” But she has raged and railed all her life, and had cancer that was supposed to kill her, yet she is still alive. She smiles; she has the loveliest, sweetest smile, which transforms her face: “I’ve had some very good friends, people who loved me, and moments of community that sustained me. Tremulous though those moments were, they were touchstones for the rest of life.”

What a self-centred bore.

The consolation of human affection and understanding — usually between women — is the music that plays consistently through The Women’s Room and yet critics concentrated on her portrayal of men as inadequate, selfish stereotypes and of the doomed relations between the sexes. Did she hate men?

She looks weary: “I crossed the United States on book tours and every single interviewer was insulting and nasty to me, accusing me of hating men. I am a heterosexual woman — though many people doubt that — and the book proved to be a great sacrifice for me: all my previously ardent men friends were no longer ardent; they avoided me.” She sighs: “I do not hate men: what I am opposed to is the notion that men are superior to me. It’s a problem for men as well as women: it’s very expensive maintaining a falsehood, the falsehood that men are divine. No man can prove it and they have to find ways of wielding power to mask their feelings of inadequacy.”

Aside from the laughable attempt at shaming language – we don’t wield power over women to “mask feelings of inadequacy”, it’s to keep the amoral creatures in check – she is once again living in some reverse-universe. Except for exceptions, such as megalomaniacs (male feminists being a prime example), us men don’t claim to be divine. Humility is one of our strengths. It is women who think that they, individually and collectively, are divine; never in the wrong, always victims, the centre of the universe. Marilyn French proves this with every sentence.

She was also castigated for coining the famous phrase “All men are rapists”, though she always pointed out that it was uttered by a character in the book whose daughter had just been raped — as French’s daughter was in real life — and was therefore liable to have a particularly harsh view. But she insists that men benefit from being men and all over the world are investing in the status quo.

Yeah, us men benefit so much; we die younger than women, commit suicide more often, get harsher jails sentences, and on and on. Yet all we get is the endless moaning from women, whose every pitiful complaint brings forth a horde of vote-hungry Save-A-Ho politicans to the rescue.

“I remember meeting Saul Bellow at a party — he kept asking me to feed him from my plate. I asked him what he thought of feminism and he said, ‘I don’t like it much; it makes for a lack of comfort’. So all women should stay in bondage to avoid making men uncomfortable?” At another party she was introduced to Norman Mailer by a host who assumed that they would loathe each other: “Mailer said, ‘Oh I know Marilyn French; she wrote one of the best reviews of me I’ve ever had’.” French nods: “That’s all I meant to him. Men don’t leave the circuitry of self.”

Again, this is another example of the immensely fucked-up topsy-turvey land feminists live in, whereby men are supposedly self-centred whilst women look out on the world. Bollocks. Men look out on the world, have outside interests, are fascinated by the way the world works, and so on. It is women who spend their lives looking in a mirror. This cunt utterly proves this; all she writes about is women. Women in the world, the war on women, how women have progressed in life, women women women women.

When I told people that I was going to interview Marilyn French, they could all name The Women’s Room but often said: “Did she write anything else?” When I put this to her, the author of a dozen books since that bestseller, she looks stricken. It must be awful — the albatross of early success?

“Yes,” she says, “it is. Nobody can deal with me and nobody tries. The publisher wanted another Women’s Room — how could there be? Warner Bros wanted a sequel for another movie. The eight novels I wrote afterwards did OK, but they wanted me to be Jacqueline Susann or, in contemporary terms, another Danielle Steel.” While The Women’s Room was a hugely popular hit, a book absolutely of its time, it is not great literary fiction. Rather, its author is essentially a polemicist who, she claims, puts men’s backs up: “I have never received a good review from a woman,” she says, “because they are trying to please the men who want them to say bad things about me.” This sounds plain paranoid. “I’m sorry,” she says firmly, “but it’s the case.”

Jeez, more self-centredness and refusal to take responsibility. So she never gets a good review from a woman because these women are trying to please men? Right…so it doesn’t occur to her that her book is just plain shit (plus, she doesn’t mention that no man gave her a good review. So presumably some have? Better not mention that dearie, it might come close to a hint of niceness towards men.)

Note once more her immeasurably arrogant opinion, backed up with no proof. The interviewer points out that she’s acting a bit paranoid in refusing to accept that her book’s shittiness is why she doesn’t get good reviews, but she just claims that no, it’s all a conspiracy to keep her down, stating “it’s the case” and leaves it at that. She feels right, ergo she is.

Plus, when have women ever written to please men? Since when do women in this day and age have any desire to please men? Or even to not be shitty to us for a while? (Except when they want something, like a diamond.)

The War Against Women is her three-volume history of the oppression of women to the modern day, which took her 20 years to research and write. She could not find a publisher until a friend, the writer Margaret Atwood, persuaded a Canadian publisher to take it on, and subsequently it came out in Australia and Britain. It still has not been published in the US. Is feminism dying? “It’s censored here in the US,” says French, typically bellicose. “But it’s going on in villages in Africa, India, South America. It’s all happening at the grass roots.” But while African women get bank loans to start cooperatives and campaign against cliterodectomy, young and not so young women in the West swarm through bars and clubs, embracing raunch culture and claiming the sexual freedoms of lads on the town. Is this progress?

Yeah, feminism is censored. Feminist books are not published, feminists are not allowed on TV, feminists are never interviewed in newspapers, no self-professed feminist is allowed in government or to run for President of the USA…whatever. You old nutter.

“Well, they say it is empowering,” she muses…

Strange how every damn thing has to be “empowering” with these feminists. She laughably claims that there would be no hierarchy in a feminist utopia (an obvious misnomer) yet she and all other feminists go on and on about empowerment, at being empowered, about grabbing power.

… “but it seems to me the very opposite. It fits exactly with that other cutting-edge thing, hip-hop: women are bitches, good for nothing except screwing.”

Well, thanks to feminism, this attitude of women being bitches and sex-objects is becoming more prevalent, because (a) the sexual revolution and the way Daddy Government bails out single mothers ensures many women will happily become bitches and sex-objects to thugs, and (b) women have, largely, turned into obnoxious bitches with nothing to offer but a fuck anyway. Act like whores, get treated like whores.

The fact that thug rappers have “bitches” flocking round them says quite a bit too. These guys insult women and get women, whilst the young woman mentioned at the beginning of the article has boyfriends ditch her when she gets on stage and insults men (well, she said she sings songs that empower women, but women empower themselves through denigration of men.)

So if men insult women, women flock to them. If women insult men, men bugger off and find someone more pleasant. I don’t find that supportive of the theory that women are smarter than men.

She shrugs, looking suddenly tired: “But what do I know? I’m too old to know.” She has a son: “He is a feminist; he has lots of women friends and a partner he has been with for 20 years.”

Yeah, loads of women friends who, as they do with all manginas, no doubt use him as an emotional tampon whilst fucking non-feminist guys. And his “partner” is probably either his boyfriend or an angry fembot girlfriend who never puts out (except to her thug-on-the-side.)

“Some young men are more evolved than others. Let us hope. I wish everyone the same thing: a good relationship, good work and the ability to calm yourself down.”

Manginas are not “more evolved”, they’re a step backwards down the evolutionary ladder, reverting to prehistoric mother-worship caveman times. They’re losers. Wankers.

And this woman going on about wishing people good relationships is a laugh. She’s a feminist. Feminists hate the idea of men and women having good relationships.

Before I leave, we take in the view from her vertigo-inducing wall of windows looking over the Hudson River, the harbour, the East River and the hole where the World Trade Centre used to be. “I’ve always had a view wherever I’ve lived,” she says. “What does a writer do but look out on the world?”

Yes, a writer should look out on the world, not do what she and other female writers do, which is to look inwards and write about themselves and women and themselves as women and how women relate to themselves and other women and women and women and etc.

Amazing. This woman is a published author, lives comfortably in a high-rise apartment in one of the richest cities of the world, and has already passed the life-expectancy of the average Western Man…yet she mopes about all angry and cross and whining about how oppressed she and her sistahs are. Tell that to the multitude of homeless men living on the streets below.

And she bitches randomly about Iraq. Yeah, I’m sure many guys out there being shot and blown up probably didn’t think the whole thing was a great idea either, but this femcunt wouldn’t give a shit, she and her fellow women have never been in danger of being sent off to war, and even if they do join the army they are kept away from the front line. Or can always just get pregnant and go home.

Marilyn French is a whining fucking myopic old cunt. Hopefully she’ll die soon.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; the only good feminist is a dead one.

Shame more of them don’t die young, before they’ve spent a lifetime of emptying their bilge tanks of snivelling and corrosive neurosis all over society.

Incidentally, some woman left this comment:

I am a feminist because I value myself too hold back in expressing my opinions. I choose not to spend hours everyday on my appearance as I think it is more important to be a good person than look good. In the eyes of society this makes me someone to whisper behind your hands about but I would rather that than be unhappy. I pity those women who choose to give their future into the care of someone who doesn’t care enough, and then find themselves old and alone without knowing how to be alone. I think it is every woman’s duty to teach her daughters to be selfish and prioritise their own wellbeing over that of any man that they are involved with. If all women truely valued themselves then men would have no choice but to change to become better human beings.

Rachel, Chch, NZ

Check out the bit in bold.

Jeez, like girls have to be taught to be selfish and not care about men.

What’s more important is that boys need to be taught to be selfish and not to care about women. That’s not possible due to many boys being raised by single-mothers and schools infested with feminists, but no matter. These boys will figure it out for themselves. They may be be bought up to respect women, but when they get older and date a few of them, that’ll go straight out the window.

(I did post a comment at The Times to that effect, but curiously enough it didn’t get published. Strange. I thought us men had a voice but not women, not the other way round.)

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:03 PM
——————————————————-

At 6:57 PM, Anonymous said…

When I tell women I would never marry because marriage is oppression to women, they get all angry about it. Women lie all the time, why are we actually taking them seriously?

——————————————————-

At 7:17 PM, Davout said…

Marilyn French’s present circumstances encapsulate the inevitable future for every unrepentant feminist.

Maybe someone should drop kick that commenter Rachel into the epitome of matrilineal ‘civilization’: sub saharan africa, where she can join the rest of her feminist sisterhood in their grass huts.

I cannot understand why any man with enough money to immigrate still bothers to stay in NZ.

——————————————————-

At 7:31 PM, Lisa said…

Patriarchy — that word we used to hear so often, now sounding oddly dated — is responsible for the world’s ills, according to French. And feminism, another out-of-favour concept, holds the solution: “If you had a feminist world, you wouldn’t have a hierarchical world,” she says. So a feminist world is a Utopia? “Yes, yes it is.”

I wonder what excuse Ms. French has for the world continuing to deteriorate even as patriarchy loses ground. Shouldn’t we be waking up every morning to a happier and more just world with the spread of feminism?

——————————————————-

At 7:43 PM, Lisa said…

I am a feminist because I value myself too hold back in expressing my opinions. I choose not to spend hours everyday on my appearance as I think it is more important to be a good person than look good. In the eyes of society this makes me someone to whisper behind your hands about but I would rather that than be unhappy. I pity those women who choose to give their future into the care of someone who doesn’t care enough, and then find themselves old and alone without knowing how to be alone. I think it is every woman’s duty to teach her daughters to be selfish and prioritise their own wellbeing over that of any man that they are involved with. If all women truely valued themselves then men would have no choice but to change to become better human beings.

Rachel, Chch, NZ

This is the type of comment that irks me to the bone and clearly shows how brainwashed women are by the feminist movement. This gal doesn’t even know what she’s talking about. Since when do you have to be a feminist to express your opinion? She’s also implying the non-feminists of this world are spending all of their time primping and getting dolled up. ‘Business women’ invest a lot more into their appearance in terms of fashion, make-up, perfume and cosmetic surgery than the women this person is supposedly feeling sorry for. Whose the one putting on a costume and dancing to the beat of another person’s drum? Truly dense.

And as for her concern over women investing their time in caring for someone and never learning how to be alone until it’s too late, how sweet of her to be concerned. Isn’t it great how the feminist movement she supports is considerate enough to groom her for a life of loneliness and solitude early on? I mean, it’s much more appealing to be alone all your life and used to the emptiness versus us poor non-feminists who have built a marriage and given birth to children and yet may experience loneliness some day. Oh wait, I won’t be lonely. I’ll have children and grandchildren to visit me.

——————————————————-

At 8:22 PM, Javier said…

I wonder what she thinks about the MEN who built her high-rise apartment she now lives in? Or the MEN, who by scientific discovery over the span of human’s existence, enabled her to continue living? Or to the MEN …

Nah!

——————————————————-

At 8:24 PM, Anonymous said…

With any luck, Marilyn will be reincarnated as an african tribal woman. Then she’ll get to see the Matriarchal Utopia first hand.

I hope she enjoys the view.

——————————————————-

At 8:33 PM, Field Marshall Watkins said…

Great article Duncan. What a miserable old bitch. Moaning skank bitch. lol I don’t have anything else you say, you said it all. 🙂

Fucking bitch LOL.

——————————————————-

At 10:14 PM, Anonymous said…

The only time these aging childless skanks will shut up is when they finally assume room temp. Let’s face it, they’re going to keep squawking until the day their bodies stop working. Did I mention childless? LOL, btw, she had many boyfriends? Good for that slut, but did anyone tell her, lesbians with strap ons aren’t considered boyfriends?

——————————————————-

At 1:00 AM, Patriarchal Phoenix said…

Hmmm… What does a feminista, who has long since sprinted beyond her expiration date, have to say on life, the universe, and everything…

In one ear, out the other.

My new car is begging to be be driven on the interstate at 80 Miles Per Hour!!!

So feministas, with all the respect that is due to all you wonderful, heavenly, divine creatures from a happy single 21 year old male with a smile on his face, Fuck You.

——————————————————-

At 5:32 AM, Anonymous said…

Pfft! Nothing but an attention seeking old fool.

——————————————————-

At 10:23 AM, Randall said…

If there is a bright spot here it is simply this. She is the face of what Feminists end up as. Lonely and bitter. And still whining about how Men are screwing up their Lives. This is textbook Mental Illness. She is self deluded, and the brain dead young Femifascists are removing themselves from the gene pool. How fitting.

Khankrumthebulgar

——————————————————-

At 10:50 AM, nevo said…

The fact is that most die hard feminist are so ugly that it takes ages before they get a date. So they turn to feminism to be able to spew their inner bile against men.
Many deformed by accumulated fat are resentful of being left on the shelf gathering dust.
Too right it is so.
We men have a greater advantage which is our male strength.
Make the best of it.

NEVO

——————————————————-

At 2:15 PM, Dane said…

Great rebuttal!

Simply awesome!

And do not buy into the crap about Scandinavia setting a good example.

I used to live there. Daily you get fucked over by the Daddy State to pay for some hoe demanding special privileges.

——————————————————-

At 2:23 PM, Anonymous said…

Outstanding analysis Duncan! Good job!

Interesting, from a psychoanalytic perspective, how she PROJECTS onto men her own subconscious desires (e.g., power-hungry, controlling, inflicting social damage, destroying children, silencing opposition).

The subconscious never lies.

She belongs right up there with Karl Marx and other diseased minds. Feminists will never admit their failure and the damage they inflicted on society. They DO NOT have good character.

——————————————————-

At 4:11 PM, Anonymous said…

The whole article is so laughable.
You hit the nail on the head, you simply exaggerated a bit.

Feminism destroys itself by destroying the rights of men, children and families.

Feminism will not survive for long.

I still love women and would like to care for one and share my wealth with her. But not here not now.

It is sad, i could marry and have 15 children and a caring wife in another world but not here and not now.

——————————————————-

At 4:13 PM, Anonymous said…

When I tell women I would never marry because marriage is oppression to women, they get all angry about it. Women lie all the time, why are we actually taking them seriously?

Women need men and they know it. Women do not want to work they want to be provided for. But they also want to bitch around, lie in divorce court and make their mens life miserable.
Most of them.

——————————————————-

At 4:37 PM, ze german said…

Duncan, this post made me get goose bumps.

I mean I read lot of shit from these Satan’s bitches, but this one was over the top.

Unbelievable.

How come everything can still be men’s fault when we have nothing left on earth that we can control…

“What’s more important is that boys need to be taught to be selfish and not to care about women. “

When I realized this, my relationship changed.

There is no more hypocrisy in the world than what women do.

——————————————————-

At 5:01 PM, Anonymous said…

One of the students learned women studies.
With that she will not be able to work, and she will not be able to find a husband.
The first is obvious, the degree is useless. The latter is obvious, too: she never learned to cook and care for children, she has become old and she is full of hatred towards men.

Still she will have to find a man to provide for her, as she cannot find work herself.
The poor guy will have to pay off her debts, too.
Obviously women are oppressed.

Avoid oppressed women at all costs!

——————————————————-

At 5:03 PM, Anonymous said…

One of the women learned women studies. With that she will not find a job, nor be able to be a good dutiful wife: she has not learned to cook.

She will need a man to provide for her and pay of her debts.

Avoid these women at all costs!

——————————————————-

At 5:11 PM, Anonymous said…

See the comments:

“Feminism is dead in America, pick up any magazine or newspaper here and read how you should be thinner, work harder and make more money but spend more time with your kids than any generation has done before though you are home less, and don’t forget to be sexy and beautiful – looking 20 even in your 40’s. Its exhausting being an American woman and I look at woman younger than my 35 and feel desperately sorry for their alcohol-fueled culture. I’m with Marilyn, its backwards every minute.

Lauren, Midland, MI , USA”

feminism is dead because women have to work harder?!?

HAHAHAHAHA!!

That is typical: women believed feminism would mean no work at all. In many cases it is just that.
But some actually have to work – and now they complain.
It is no wonder women are not conscripted: fighting and dying is not what feminism “should be”.
Being a general though that is good enough for them.

A 40yo woman never had to look like being 20 in former times. Maybe it is because now they want to get pregnant for the first time at 40?

Well women 50 years ago knew better: get married at 20 and at 40 you can be and look like a grandma.

——————————————————-

At 5:49 PM, Anonymous said…

Strip away her rhetoric and pretense. Immaturity remains. Apparently she never developed the capacity to acknowledge culpability or take personal responsibility. Her introspection is born of narcissism, not analytical honesty. Feminism writ large is immaturity and malignant narcissism on a global scale.

——————————————————-

At 6:29 PM, mike said…

“Since she always risked pregnancy, which meant dependence, a sexual woman lived with Damocles’s Sword over her head. If Mira wanted the independent life, she would have to give up being sexual. Women were indeed victims by nature.”

Ahh I see. So if a ‘sexual’ woman gets pregnant and has to deal with the consequences then she is a: “victim of nature”.

But if a ‘sexual’ man (who’s birth control options are extremely limited and who has no non-surgical non-perminate way to control his fertility) sleeps with a woman and gets her pregnant and is made into a wage slave by the government for 18 years he isn’t a victim at all; he is just ‘fulfilling his obligations’. And damn him if he doesn’t.

What a hypocrite.

“…young and not so young women in the West swarm through bars and clubs, embracing raunch culture and claiming the sexual freedoms of lads on the town.”

What the fuck is this old crone whining on about? Does she want society to apply a double standard to womens’ sexuality or not? I thought that most femi-nazi’s claimed that feminists just wanted to be treated ‘equally’.

——————————————————-

At 7:53 PM, Male Rights Network said…

“I wonder what she thinks about the MEN who built her high-rise apartment she now lives in?”

Nothing. When was the last time you thought about the men who built an apartment you live in? Or factory workers who put together your clothing? Proles are proles; no-one gives a shit about them. It’s not a matter of not appreciating men, it’s a matter of not appreciating the working class, i.e. proles. The question: “They should appreciate the men doing these dirty jobs” should be replaced with “They should appreciate the proles doing these dirty jobs”. Of course, society never has and never will appreciate proles. Most men, through Systematic Wealth Transfer (Marriage/Divorce), Feminised Education and Pro-Female Sexism (Civil Servants, UK) will be proles in the near future, and will thus be unappreciated. Simple equation.

“Or the MEN, who by scientific discovery over the span of human’s existence, enabled her to continue living?”

Feminism has always showed contempt for the very people who allowed women to live the kind of lives they do today. They are utterly hypocritical in that regard and I don’t expect it to change. You see, about 95% of how and when women’s liberation happened was due to man’s ingenuity, science and technology. Without science and technology, feminism would never have happened. In some regards, technology liberated women while it enslaved men. The rhetorical cankering of feminists, and their “theories” in this Century was only about 5% responsible for how feminism happened. It simply brought forward the inevitable which man’s technology had opened the floodgates to. Thus Matriarchy can only exist in a highly privative, or a highly advanced society.

Ditto for the men who invented TCP/IP, The World Wide Web which created the Internet as we know it today. On “A Bird’s Nest” blog, these feminists engage in a hypocritical chorus on the virtues of the Internet:

Kate says: “But I do think that Internet has been kind to them — given them a wider voice than perhaps they actually have in the wider community. Certainly more legitimacy and more power in preying on the vulnerable, anyway.”

Our good old “respected blogger” uccellina: Kate – You’re right, the internet has certainly given them a larger voice; it is, after all, an awesome tool for social networking and organization. That’s part of what worries me.”

It’s basically the same thing. But I don’t expect it to change. Hypocrisy and incapability to understand cause and effect have always been central to feminist mentality.

——————————————————-

At 9:09 PM, Anonymous said…

Look EB, I know you’ll probably jump down my throat for asking this. You will also most likely start ranting about how I’m stupid and selfish, blah, blah. However, I honestly want you to explain to me something. Why do you think that men can have “soul-crushing” careers and still be excellent fathers, but you don’t see to think that women can have “soul-crushing” careers and be excellent mothers. Please explain.

——————————————————-

At 4:03 AM, Anonymous said…

“These are things that women seem to get all pissed off by; working depressing jobs, being fucked ‘n chucked until they’re just flat out ignored, and realising a hundred pairs of shoes doesn’t really mean much in the end when you’re going to die alone.”

You will die alone as well, Duncan. The difference is, I suppose, that you will be content to die alone and the feminists will die in misery.

——————————————————-

At 11:05 AM, Anonymous said…

Quote:….boys need to be taught to be selfish and not to care …

Could this be better put thus EB (good man)-
Boys need to be taught to be [more] selfish and not to care [overmuch] about women ?
Reasons..?
Selfishness- as a lifestyle can’t be recommended..it is self defeating ego massage.
Women are more than receptacles for male urges -if we want to restructure society again and protect it’s offspring.
Hence some male ‘caring’ is much needed still.
I’m angry after 40 years of struggle..but strive against bitterness,that is for fems to savour alone.
5K

——————————————————-

At 1:27 PM, unpleasant bitter git said…

Regarding this whacko feminazi’s health issues.

What is the lowest state of health you could possibly get?

I would have thought it was ‘non-life’ also known as death.

But according to this Canadian ‘womans health’ web page that’s just not true!

“Canadian women live longer than men, but that doesn’t mean they’re healthier.”

You see, everything hits women hardest.

LOL!

——————————————————-

At 6:21 PM, Anonymous said…

I don’t know if you’ve heard of Kevin Myers but now I’m a fan. In the Irish Times or Independent(can’t remember) he recently wrote a good article entitled “Respected Professor recants statement to avoid facing the feminist Berias’ gulag” where he defended the professor and said “Bright men are not a bit better at engineering and mathematics than women, but entire continents better.” He is sort of well known so it is good to hear.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Myers

——————————————————-

At 7:23 PM, big sister said…

[This is an automated response, please do not reply]

Date:24/03/2012

Your IP address has been logged and your ISP informed you have been posting ‘hate speech’ against a victimized and oppressed group (women). This information is, by process of law, automatically passed on to the relevant authorities.

Your re-education papers will be dispatched shortly and you will be required to attend a ‘Center For Equality And Diversity’ in your designated area. Please remember to bring your papers with you and arrive promptly.

Failure to attend or late arrival will result in the immediate issue of an E-warrant for your arrest.

STATUTORY WARNING: A ‘terminate with extreme prejudice’ policy is in force for those who attempt to evade capture by either:

A) Attempting to impersonate another ‘citizen:3rdclass;male’.

B) Forging and/or tampering with your identity card.

C) Straying from your designated existence boundaries.

D) Trespassing into forbidden existence boundaries.

E) Any or all of the above.

Resistance is futile as we move towards a brighter, more peaceful and feminine global society.

Big Sister is watching you.

——————————————————-

At 5:27 AM, Anonymous said…

that is a video of what will happen to all the fembot sluts under sharia law.

——————————————————-

At 10:52 AM, Anonymous said…

Rachel in Chch is sadly typical of what you get in NZ these days. Women who’ve carefully been taught to put themselves first and foremost are pretty much the norm in my country now. End result: stuffed relationships, gender war, plummeting birthrate and skyrocketing real estate prices as divorced dads have to find somewhere else to live!!
Thanks Rachel, when you finally get bored with your husband and push the poor bastard out the door, then find out that no man worth having wants anything to do with you, you’ve nobody to blame but yourself.

——————————————————-

At 2:54 PM, Days of Broken Arrows said…

They say a picture is worth 1,000 words. Well, with the picture you posted of Marilyn French, each one of those words is “vomit.” She looks like a frightening product of science gone wrong. Yuck!

——————————————————-

At 10:44 PM, Anonymous said…

I’m a young American girl and I generally disagree and dislike with modern feminism. I’m passionate about men’s rights, however, and improving the lives of boys and men. I don’t know how much power I would or will ever have over the masses, but I do know that if I ever had children, I would strive to nurture them all equally and teach them to value themselves regardless of their gender because as human beings with souls, we all should value ourselves and each other. That’s just the bottomline.

And I would sure as hell emphasize to any sons of mine to never, ever take shit from women.

— Marie, AZ, USA, 16-almost-17

——————————————————-

At 9:49 AM, Anonymous said…

The Bible said that God claimed that it was not good for man to be alone, a helpmate was needed for him. And thus woman was created.

Unfortunately, most women nowadays are far from helpmates – they are selfish scums, devoid of any loving and nurturing qualities that redeems and uplifts them. The Bible also reminded us that it was better for a man to live in the wilderness than with an angry and contentious woman.

There is nothing wrong with dying alone, so along as you inform your neighbours and don’t stink up the apartment with your corpse. Beasts of the wild, birds of the skies do the same. They go quietly aside to die when their short lifespans are up.

Men do not have biological clocks – women do. There is no hurry for us. A good woman is certainly an icing on the cake, but not the cake of life unto itself.

——————————————————-

At 5:46 PM, Outcast Superstar said…

Hey Duncan you guys really do have it worse than we do.

Check out this article.

Looks like you guys soon will have another bullshit man tax. At least here in America as long as I rebuke American Women I can still live a good life and they won’t be reducing our salaries in the name of “equality”.

——————————————————-

At 12:14 AM, Male Rights Network said…

Can anyone give us more information on why male civil servants in Britain are being forced to accept wage cuts based on their gender? The mainstream media seem to be scant on details, preferring neutral euphemisms instead? Basically we’re talking about paying men less for the same work, right? It’s time to stop sitting back and taking it, folks. Yes, we are talking about sexism and a legitimised wage gap. More details would be welcome, and maybe a few blog posts by prominent MRA bloggers. Then it’s time to take on the sexist British government.

——————————————————-

At 1:45 AM, mfsob said…

Why is it that EVERY femihag in England is ugly enough to scare a buzzard off a shit wagon? Is that some kind of socialist law or something?

——————————————————-

At 7:55 AM, Chris Laing said…

This article pretty much speaks for itself.

Women are God, they rule, boys drool, blah blah buggering blah.

Now fuck off to the kitchen and cook me some eggs, you snivelling feminist coward.

I’m only a few hours drive from Christchurch (Chch). Maybe I should go find this “Rachel” bitch…. anyone logged an IP address? muahahaha

——————————————————-

At 8:42 PM, Lisa said…

Look EB, I know you’ll probably jump down my throat for asking this. You will also most likely start ranting about how I’m stupid and selfish, blah, blah. However, I honestly want you to explain to me something. Why do you think that men can have “soul-crushing” careers and still be excellent fathers, but you don’t see to think that women can have “soul-crushing” careers and be excellent mothers. Please explain.

Anon@9:09, since no one has responded to you just yet, I thought I’d take a stab.

The problem is kids need access to parents. You’d think with all feminism has supposedly done to launch women into the career world, it would lower the burden on men to be providers for their families. With women willing to take on the “soul crushing” jobs, men should have more opportunity to take on the role of care giver to the kids. Not so. With all of the opportunities feminism has afforded women, it has done nothing to free men from the bonds of the office. If anything, they are more constrained than ever before. Not only does he have to be financially prepared for divorce, the rising cost of living and unforeseen expenses, he also has to be ready should his working wife decide she no longer wishes to run the rat race. It’s much more socially acceptable (and common) for women to decide they’ve had enough and cut back or stay home. When that income goes away, the bills that were there with a dual income don’t disappear.

I would like to elaborate more on how men aren’t really socially encouraged to be with their kids. Men who choose to stay home with the kids while their wives work are viewed as lazy leeches who likely have something wrong with them. (By the way, when a stay at home dad was interested in joining a mom’s group I belong to, an email went around to see if we’d be ‘comfortable allowing him to join’…as if he might be shady or something.) If a custody issue was in their future, the time they spent with the kids as a stay at home parent would point to the man’s irresponsible loafing nature while the woman was out working for the family. For women, soul crushing careers are still a choice. For men, they are the expectation. There is no way for a man to be 2 places at once. Since society expects him to provide for his family (current and ex), he has no choice but to dedicate a significant portion of his day to an office to be a good father. Spending time with his kids is important to the extent he is able to do so while meeting the level of needs his family (namely his wife) has carved out for him. Because women are still the ones with true choice to be the ‘present’ parent, they are the ones who are truly being a bad parent if they are choosing to follow a time and energy consuming career that leaves no time for the non financial needs of the kids. Yes, some women work because a dual income is necessary for the family. That is understood. But the ones who are simply overextending themselves in the boardroom to the detriment of their kids because they “want to have it all” are really not fulfilling the needs of their kids.

Feminists may call this sexist, but until they come up with a way for it to be as acceptable for men to be home with the kids as it is for women, they have no real argument. Until they find a way to pressure women (as men are pressured) to remain in soul-crushing careers once their family has become accustomed to their income, there is no way for men to truly trust the women can truly be counted on as providers. Feminists have cleverly crafted the situation so men are in the wrong no matter which way it goes. Work hard to meet the expectations of providing for your family and we’ll take your kids away from you in divorce because you weren’t there. Let your wife work hard to provide for your family while you care for the kids and you are irresponsible and modeling poor behavior for your kids. Never mind you might be using the time to molest the kids. Women win both ways…surprise, surprise. If women stay at home, they were the ones giving the care and they are the ones who know the kids’ needs best. If they were the ones working, they were providing for their family’s needs while the men were loafing and unable to be counted on. Yadda, yadda.

No matter how you spin the bottle, the kids need a present parent. Since men can’t be there as much it isn’t fair to put as much weight on their time in the home as women’s when measuring how good a parent they are.

——————————————————-

At 8:04 PM, Anonymous said…

Feminists have cleverly crafted the situation so men are in the wrong no matter which way it goes.

Hence, the marriage/mating strike.

——————————————————-

%d bloggers like this: