Archive for the ‘career women’ Category

Old article
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

05 June 2007

The Man Shortage

(From Spinbusters.)

I’ve linked to this superb four-part article before but I’ll put it up here again anyway just in case anyone hasn’t read it yet.

Where, asked these Baby Boom women, were all the men? I could have told them, of course, where the men were and are, but being already in possession of all correct wisdom — not to mention Incarnated Goddesses — no female ever bothered to ask me. To date, not one has. What could I know? I am, after all, only a male.

The men – what’s left of them — are in hiding, of course. That’s what any refugee population does when war is made on it, and its homeland is laid to Waste. Sister, understand: only the weakest of males serve the totalitarianism of gynocracy. No real man, confronting his betrayal by American culture and femininity, will teach in your schools, for the lessons are false, and he knows he is conditioning more kids – especially more boys – into further betrayals. No real man will drone in your corporations, corrupt collectivities hiding behind the stained skirts of “market forces.” Go to any indigenous town on the planet. The market is the locus of women, their interests and their power. As for the coercive “forces” of the market — well, modern American men know all about social coercion.

Man shortage? Fuckin’ A there’s a man shortage.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 8:39 PM

(more…)

Rant from a single mother by choice
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

05 June 2007

This article is about a 37-year-old career woman who has decided she doesn’t want kids and is fine with this decision. Fair enough, it’s her life. Good for her I say.

She quite refreshingly insists that she believes clearly need a father and thus would never have kids before marriage.

Unfortunately this is not the case with an increasing number of single-mothers-by-choice, such as this man-hating bitch who left a comment at the article, someone called ‘Ekaterina’ from London.

Very sad! I am one of those who decided to be a mom without a man – IVF and all that. What really makes me angry is that the society blames women (as always) for not having kids early. Give me a break! I always wanted to have kids but I met very similar men as the author – some wanted to have more money first and then kids, others did not earn a penny and I was not sure if I wanted to feed a man and a child etc. Men are always fertile so they do what they want. We have to pay a high price! So, I decided that I send all men to hell and have my own family. Some women are not ready or not brave or don’t have the means – but it is MEN to blame for that and not women!

Amazing. In one paragraph we have nearly every damn double-standard and example of man-hatred, broken down thusly:

What really makes me angry is that the society blames women (as always) for not having kids early.

Well, more and more women are putting off having children early by their own choice. I guess it makes Ekaterina very very angry that women are being blamed for their own choices. And what does mean ‘as always’? Society hardly ever blames women. For anything.

I always wanted to have kids but I met very similar men as the author – some wanted to have more money first and then kids…

She didn’t want to have a child with a man who wanted to make more money so he could be a better provider because although such a man’s attitude was surely very sensible and responsible, it didn’t fit in with her impatient demands for a child now!! Basically she wanted a ready-made-millionaire. How awful of society to not be replete with millionaires lining up to marry horrible hags like her.

others did not earn a penny and I was not sure if I wanted to feed a man and a child etc.

Here we get yet another example of how women do not want equality, ever! Only when it suits them. She didn’t want to support a man and a child, she wanted a man to support her and her child. Nevermind that us men have supported women and children for generations (and were told that this was oppressive by feminists. Go figure!)

So, I decided that I send all men to hell and have my own family.

This is what women call ‘liberation’ I guess; damning all men to hell as useless just because one fitting her astonishingly high demands didn’t scoop her off her feet when she wanted. Also, she’s wrong in thinking she has her own ‘family’. She doesn’t. She has an illegitimate bastard whose father is some anonymous guy who wanked into a jar for some beer money. That’s not a family.

(more…)

More man-bashing in The Times – there’s been a lot of it recently
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

22 May 2007

Beware of the nanny

PDF

It is a strange fact of life that most women, no matter how high-achieving, beautiful or intelligent, have, at the back of their minds, a worm of anxiety about their nanny and her effect on their husband.

Or, to put it in another – more rational – way:

It is an obvious fact of life that most bitchy career women, no matter how fancy their job-title, how beautiful she thinks she is or how many worthless qualifications she has, have, at the back of their minds, a justified worm of anxiety about their attractive, pleasant and feminine nanny and her attracting effect on their husband.

This India Knight – arch-man-hater extraordinaire – is rambling and complaining about men in the usual manner, that just because of one or two recent cases, all us men are fiendish adulterers ready to elope with the nanny at a moment’s notice (how many fucking people have nannies anyway? It shows the tiny circles these pompous feminist columnists inhabit when they discuss having nannies in such a casual way, as if we all have them.)

One of the reasons a guy would probably fancy his nanny more than his wife is because (a) the nanny will probably be nice and young, (b) could be foreign, perhaps from one of the few counties in the world where women are not raised to compete with – and hate – men, and (c) in seeing a woman actually care for his children, a man may suddenly realise what a worthless, non-nurturing, unfeminine piece of shit his career-wife is, as seen as she ditched her kids with a stranger before they were even six-months old.

Most of the article is not worth reading, except for the last bit:

Men don’t fall in love with nannies but with the alternative world the nanny represents.

Perhaps. Or perhaps men just fall in love with the nanny’s really nice pert young arse.

(more…)

Women in/out the workplace
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

17 May 2007

We hear a lot about “getting women into the workplace”, about new schemes or ideas to ensure more women (or subcategories thereof, such as mothers, single-mothers, female ex-convicts, women with AIDs, etc) are in the workplace. Or in a specific workplace (e.g. company directors, I.T., film directors, journalism, politics, etc. But never – strangely enough – construction, sewer maintenance, front-line soldiers, pest-controllers, etc.)

All these schemes and plans always seem to talk of offering:

* Paid maternity leave
* Flexi-time
* Job-Sharing schemes
* Part-time position
* Career breaks
* Paid leave when a child is ill
* No harm done to promotion prospects for taking an X-years-long career break
* Opportunities to work from home

Every damn time there is talk of getting more women into work, or a certain industry, the above items are touted as ways to accomplish this.

Forgive me if I’m being silly, but are all those things actually orchestrated to ensure the woman in question is actually out of the workplace? Either whilst she has kids, whilst she raises them, whilst the kid is ill, or even just to fuck off at three o’clock every day to make the school run?

There’s always a bit of the old positive discrimination/affirmative action thrown in too of course; nothing like boosting the numbers of women in a job by forcing companies to recruit them under threat of fines or closure. But otherwise, it seems the best way to get woman into a certain job is to provide her with plenty of opportunities to be paid without having to be there all the time, or indeed at all for considerable periods of time (working full-time for ever and ever and ever is, it seems, only us men have to do.)

Whilst, of course, she keeps her fancy job title – for her grrl-power ego-boost – and, most importantly of all, the full salary too.

It says a lot about women’s attitude to work that even the government implicitly accepts that the only real way of encouraging more women into a workplace is to ensure that the women have plenty of opportunities to not actually have to be there.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 7:38 PM

(more…)

The spy who came in from the cold…to make the school-run
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

14 May 2007

MI6 woos ‘Jane Bonds’ with offers of family-friendly employment

James Bond would surely raise an eyebrow. MI6 has decided that, if it wants to recruit more female spies, it must move with the times.

..

MI6, like its domestic counterpart MI5, is desperate for more women officers so part-time spying, childcare vouchers and “generous maternity pay” are on offer.

And women who are single when they join up are promised they will not have to leave should they marry, and have children.

“Part-time spying”?

Oh, fucking great, now we’re really up shit-creek.

So we’re going to have female spies and agents carrying out surveillance on a suspected terrorist cell, or deep undercover at Finsbury Mosque, except they go home at three, don’t work weekends and take a year off occasionally for maternity leave? Yeah, that’ll work.

And “childcare vouchers”? Hey, Miss Jane Bonds, how about letting hubby stay at home and take care of the children instead of insisting on dumping them on strangers? At taxpayer’s expense.

Why do we need more female spies anyway? It says 38% of applicants are female. It’s not as if that’s a teeny tiny minority. And if the only way to get more female recruits is to just offer them whopping amounts of (paid) time off for maternity leave and the choice of working part-time, then what’s the point? In any case, like soldiers, many female agents would only get knocked up if they sense they are about to be posted somewhere dangerous.

Then again, women would make fairly good undercover agents I suppose; they’re experts at faking attributes and even entire personalities to get what they want.

Oh well, the James Bond movies have long since turned into a pile of politically correct mangina hogwash, the real MI6 might as well go the same way. Life imitating art and all that.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:27 PM

(more…)

Hags Mags
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

09 May 2007

At my local newsagent the women’s magazines are, inexplicably, laid out on the counter; Women’s Own, Bella, She, Elle, Chat, Heat, Stupid Cunt (okay, I made that last one up, but it would do as the title of them all.)

Whilst queueing up I usually scan the covers and headlines and snicker at the brainless articles of celebrity gossip and ‘True Story’ tales that these tomes of glossy stupidity contain.

It’s amazing how much women seem to love tragedy, going by these magazines. There seem to be plenty of articles advertised on the front along the lines of Raped by my step-dad! and Face to face with my sister’s killer! It’s as if, even when heart-wrenchingly real, tragedy is just another bit of gossip for women to ingest at lunchtime and then vomit forth over other women at the water cooler when they should be working that afternoon. Then again, it says a lot that the women at the centre of these stories seem to be quite capable of selling their stories to some dumb magazine that averages fifty-pictures and fifty-words per-article.

What I notice the most about these magazines is who is on the cover; women.

Women, women, women and more women. That’s all there is on magazines for women.

Men’s magazine covers feature trains, planets, aeroplanes, computer game characters, naked women (in the case of porn mags), naked men (in the case of gay mags), half-naked women (photography mags), rock stars, computers, DVD players, guitars, sailing boats, motorboats, motorbikes, cars, guns, model train-sets…and so on.

Obviously the cover of magazines depicts what is of interest to the publication’s readers.

Scan the covers of magazines for men; they depict a whole vast spectrum of things.

Scan the magazines for women, and they all depict are women. Women, women, women, cunting fucking women!

Whilst men are fascinated by a whole range of stuff, all women are interested in, it seems, is women. If they show a passing interest in anything else (like men) it’s only in how they relate to women.

To quote, once again, from Richard Ford; men look out on the world through a window, whilst women gaze endlessly into a mirror.

Finally, what is the most visible achievement of feminism in academic circles?

That’s right; Women’s Studies

They fucking study themselves. Then they study themselves studying themselves!

And women dare to wonder why they are under-represented in the invention and scientific discovery stakes. How can they invent or discover anything when all their sex indulges in is dolorous naval gazing?

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:39 PM

(more…)

The Onion article
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

07 May 2007

Women Now Empowered By Everything A Woman Does

According to a study released Monday, women—once empowered primarily via the assertion of reproductive rights or workplace equality with men—are now empowered by virtually everything the typical woman does.

..

Other acts of empowerment include gossiping about the sexual proclivities of male acquaintances, lunching with other women in small groups, taking calcium-rich antacid tablets, and reading The Nanny Diaries.

The study also cites the act of pumping one’s raised fist in a gesture of female solidarity against the oppressive forces of air pressure.

“Nearly 90 percent of study participants have done this at least once in their lives, often accompanying their action with the exhortation ‘You go, girl!’ or, simply, ‘Whooooooo!'” Klein said.

Although satirical, this article is actually pretty close to the truth.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 9:25 PM

(more…)

A quickie
September 23, 2007

——————————————————-

04 May 2007

Women worry about the future until they get married.

Men don’t worry about the future until they get married.

(I read that somewhere ages ago – I can’t remember where – and those two sentences perfectly encapsulate the reason more and more of us men are on the marriage strike, and why the marriage strike is clearly annoying a lot of women and causing them to bring out the barrage of shaming language to try and get us to end it. It won’t work bitches. Save your breath. The marriage rate is plummeting and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Co-habiting will go the same way soon as well.)

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:38 PM

(more…)

Worn out wannabe brides
September 20, 2007

——————————————————-

20 April 2007

enjoy_cock.jpg

Before feminism, females would generally marry young, often before turning 20. Thus they gave most of their prime and fertile years (16 – 24) to a husband who – assuming he was a good husband, and most were – would be loyal to her and give to her the best and most productive of his years by providing for her.

Now, of course, most women want to marry later, often past 25 or even 30. There is talk of the ‘eleven-year party gap’ in some women’s articles, whereby women sleep around for a decade after leaving University then marry at 32. Once they’re all used up. That’s the plan anyway, none of the articles along these lines seem to mention post-31 women who went along this route and managed to find a devoted hubby, they just talk to the deluded party-girls in their twenties who insist everything will all go to plan.

I hear plenty of young women at work talk of putting off marriage, one even getting worried when she thought (incorrectly, as it turned out) that her boyfriend was planning on proposing to her.

“No way am I getting married now,” the 22-year-old said, “I won’t marry until I’m at least 26. After all, what if someone better comes along in that time?”

Another young woman insisted – in all seriousness – that “40 is a good age for a woman to marry.”

Not all women use these youthful years to sleep around wantonly, but plenty do. One 24-year-old woman at work is apparantly on her third boyfriend of the year already and it’s only April (she is talking of wanting to get married soon, but that’s probably because she had an illegitimate kid by some thug a couple of years ago, and she no doubt wants a stepfather for the bastard.) The article I posted about a few weeks ago, about the ‘eleven-year party gap’, quoted one woman of 23 who bragged of sleeping with 40 men.

One woman I dated a few years ago (and ditched after just the one date) happily told me over dinner an anecdote of getting yelled at and grounded by her parents when she was 13 ‘because I was always sneakin’ out and getting drunk with these older guys from school who I hung out with and who bought me and me mates booze.’

Yeah, I can figure what ‘hung out with’ means. She and her drunken mates were getting some of the old in-out from these older guys. This woman was 27, so she’d evidently been humping away for fourteen-years. Eew! Swiftly-nexted. Pronto.

(more…)

Think of the children!
September 20, 2007

——————————————————-

19 April 2007

We are constantly told that women are the ‘fairer’ sex, especially with regards to children, that women are caring and nurturing towards little ‘uns whilst us men are cruel and harsh with them.

Amongst many examples is the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) which, in all its adverts, invariably implies children being beaten by their fathers. This is despite the fact that, whilst men may be responsible for the majority of sexual abuse of children, it is women who are responsible for the majority of physical abuse of children (and boys are more likely to be physically abused.)

Whenever you hear a child screaming and being smacked in public, it’s nearly always the kids mother belting the shit out of him/her (usually it’s a him.)

Plus women are far more likely to kill their babies than men are.

Then there’s abortion. 190,000 abortions are carried out in the UK each year, and it is estimated 1-in-3 women will have had an abortion by the age of 40. Some may be for genuine health reasons, or the rapes resulting in pregnancy, but most commonly it is because the woman just can’t be fucking arsed to have and raise a child. More than half of all women agree with abortion-on-demand. A couple of recent debates online that I’ve seen have involved mostly men disgusted at abortion, many women – usually bragging of having had an abortion, and that it was usually just because “I wasn’t ready to have kids.” – all telling men to basically shut up and fuck off, that we have no right to even have an opinion on abortion (though they never see the hypocrisy of saying men should be forced to take responsibility for their kids and pay Child Support whilst women should never have to take responsibility for their kids and actually not kill them.)

(more…)

Whatevva!
September 20, 2007

——————————————————-

11 April 2007

There was a report on the news tonight concerning the release of various statistics about British society:

One-in-four children are raised by single parents (nine-in-ten single parents are women.)

For every three marriages there are two divorces.

Marriage rates have never been lower.

7,000,000 people live alone (out of a population of 60,000,000.)

One-in-six men aged 45-64 live alone.

Being from the BBC it naturally gave a positive spin to the report of rising single mothers.

There was some skally single mother waffling thusly (spelt phonetically to capture the skalliness of the fat rotten old bitch):

“Me and uvva single muvvas are, like, strong and, like, independent! We’re just not gonna bovva puttin’ up wiv rubbish from men anymore and go it alone.”

Incidentally she packed the word ‘men’ with as much venom as possible, indicating clearly how much hatred she had towards the male sex (she had two young sons by the way; poor kids.)

Strong and independent! Hah! It didn’t go into details about her but I dare say she’s probably on benefits, or if working relies on taxpayer-subsidised childcare, and if ever married, relied on legal aid and the divorce courts to ensure she got ‘her’ house and the kids.

Incidentally the BBC reporter whined that “Women are left looking after the children whilst men live alone”, as if the poor women don’t fight for custody, initiate most divorces and increasingly choose to be single mothers.

Although the BBC tried to make it sound all positive, they did admit that there were ‘great challenges’ ahead, as the breakdown of family life was causing increasing isolation and rising mistrust. However, women living alone raising children, and men living alone with little or no contact with any child they may have is exactly what feminists wanted. And they made that fairly clear at the start; the removal of men from families. This is what they – and society, and obviously women – have got. For women to complain about this state of affairs is laughable. They got what they wanted. Now they can fucking deal with it. Without the help of us men, obviously.

There was one decent little bit whereby one of the many men living alone these days was interviewed. He was in his twenties and lived in a neat flat with his collection of guitars. He bragged that he loved living alone and being free and wouldn’t want to live any other way.

MGTOW in tha house!!!

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 9:13 PM

(more…)

Selfish woman wants sympathy for leaving motherhood far too late
September 20, 2007

——————————————————-

05 April 2007

Why two miscarriages and a termination has not deterred a wannabe mum

After three pregnancies, one reluctant termination and two miscarriages, Louise Janson has just embarked on her fifth cycle of IVF at the age of 41.

Louise, a writer from North London, is single. Having always longed to be a mother, she made the difficult decision to try for a baby on her own four years ago.

Why the fuck are women who choose to become Single Mothers By Choice always thought of as ‘brave’ or applauded for making a ‘difficult decision’? They’re selfish fucking bitches making selfish decisions. I hate them. Single Mothers By Choice are repulsive child abusers.

I’m undergoing medical treatment as a direct result of a social problem: I’m single. Four years ago, aged 38, I made the agonising decision – after years of reflection, research and discussion – to try to become a mother on my own.

I had six months of inseminations with donor sperm, but decided the method was so unreliable, I would have full IVF treatment, which meant registering with a fertility clinic.

I never wanted to be a ‘single mother’ and I’m sure I could describe for you in painstaking detail the shock, panic, depression and bewilderment that overwhelmed me in the years leading up to that decision – and those immediately after.

But quite frankly, there aren’t enough variations on ‘despair’ in my Thesaurus, there isn’t enough space on this page, and there’s not enough time in your lives or mine to do it justice.

And there are not enough variations on ‘selfish’ to do your actions justice.

(more…)

Thanks to feminism, there are not enough rich men to go round. Boo-fucking-hoo!
September 19, 2007

——————————————————-

02 April 2007

Post-Bridget, it’s looking even worse for the girls

PDF

It is a truth universally acknowledged that an alpha female requires an even more alpha male as a mate. But a recent report suggests today’s successful woman with her high standards and picky notions will have nobody to marry: women now make up 57% of university graduates and outnumber men in every subject in higher education (though not engineering or maths, yet).

For the post-Bridget Jones and Sex and the City generation, it’s bad news. The sobering truth is that demographics being what they are, more and more educated, eligible women are facing a choice: downgrade your notions of Mr Right, or face up to life alone.

I love articles like this, that reveal how badly women have shot themselves in the foot.

“Oh boo-hoo, we stormed into the universities and workplace, shoving men out of the way in the process, and now we’re finding we’ve inadvertantly hampered our chances of marrying Mr Right Sucker who’ll let us retire in our 30s.”

Stupid cunts.

Women are getting better degrees — more 2:1s and firsts in every subject — and two-thirds of medical students are now women, compared with 29% in the 1960s. So not much point in hoping that a handsome consultant will come along, whose Harley Street earnings will pay for the school fees and the 4×4.

Damn right you can throw those hopes away bitches. You left the home in the 1950s and demanded us men iron our own clothes and cook our own tea. Fine. We will do. Now we’re dropping out of universities and the workplace and telling women to pay their own mortgages and support themselves.

(more…)

Pregnant women don’t have a good time at work. Aww!
September 19, 2007

——————————————————-

29 March 2007

‘Pregnant workers badly treated’

Most bosses fail to properly manage pregnant staff and many mums feel badly treated at work after maternity leave, a report claims.

So? Why should I, as a man, give a fuck?

This is the simple retort us men should adopt whenever presented with some real or imagined complaint women have; Why should I give a fuck? How does this effect me? If it doesn’t effect me, I don’t care.

After all, women moan about anything and everything.

If pregnant women and new mums can’t cut it in the workforce, even in cushy offices, they can stop moaning, resign and fuck off. There are plenty of men who are willing to work properly without demanding their employer cater to their every need.

EOC chairwoman Jenny Watson said: “Women are now nearly half the workforce. There’s no turning back from this major social change…”

Snigger! Want a bet?

Actually, thinking about it, maybe women will soon make up 99% of the workforce as more men drop out and refuse to slave away for the Matriarchy (and, of course, we’ll be hearing endless whining from the EOC that women are burdened with having to do all the work, boo-fucking-hoo!)

…so it’s vital that workplaces are equipped to make pregnancy at work a good experience.”

What the fuck? It’s not a workplace’s responsibility to ensure women have a fucking ‘good experience’, pregnant or otherwise. They, the women, are there to do what the men are there to do; fucking work!

(more…)

Septic Septuagenarian Skank Spouts Off
September 19, 2007

——————————————————-

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.

(more…)

Another mining disaster
September 19, 2007

——————————————————-

20 March 2007

Russian mine explosion kills 75

At least 75 miners are dead, a number that could rise, and at least 43 are missing after a methane gas explosion Monday at a coal mine in southwestern Siberia, the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations said.

My deepest sympathies for the men and women who have died in this disast…

Sorry. I mean, my deepester sympathies for the MEN who have died in this disaster.

The sex of the deceased is not noted but I doubt very much if 50% of them are women. I would be surprised if one fucking cunt was amongst the dead.

And I doubt very much if the ‘non-equal-outcome gender-specific quota’ of the death-toll of this tragedy is going to spur some fembots into a big push to shove some more token-women into mining.

After all, despite women’s collective demands for “equality in the workplace”, they don’t seem want to do dirty and dangerous jobs.

Such jobs, apparently, are too good for them.

Dirty jobs, dangerous jobs, harsh jobs are, in the eyes of women, the responsibility of the expendable and worthless half of humanity.

Us men, basically.

Yes, us men, us men who are somehow expected to form an endless queue of volunteers who will happily risk life and limb on oil-rigs or down mineshafts to ensure cunts the world over have enough fuel to drive to their Wimmin’s Studies Class to bitch about how victimised they are, or enough electricity to power the televisions through which some Talk-Show Host informs them they are the most oppressed demographic in history, to which lazy do-nothing “housewife” Western Cunts bark and shriek in multiple-chin-wobbling approval like clapping seals, in between scoffing down yet another tube of Thug-Spunk Flavoured Pringles.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 11:01 PM

(more…)

Parents almost officially redundant in UK
September 19, 2007

——————————————————-

16 March 2007

babyike.gif

Is your baby playing with its toes yet? If not the government wants to know why

Babies will be assessed on their gurgling, babbling and toe-playing abilities when they are a few months old under a legally enforced national curriculum for children from birth to five published by the government yesterday.

Every nursery, childminder and reception class in Britain will have to monitor children’s progress towards a set of 69 government-set “early learning goals”, recording them against more than 500 development milestones as they go.

Nothing smacks of a Socialist tyranny more than a government’s obsessive interest in its people’s children.

First off – thanks to Socialism and it’s angry big sister, Feminism – young children spend more and more time in daycare centres as women go off to the ‘fulfilling’ 9-to-5 jobs feminism promised them. Then these daycare centre’s staff are issued clip-boards and told to assess the babies.

Throw in a vast Social Worker industry with the power to take children from parents based on any old criteria, and you’re not far off the Marxist ideal of men and women as identical drones working away whilst their babies are raised by the government.

(more…)

Feminism is succeeding in parting the sexes
September 18, 2007

——————————————————-

16 March 2007

bridgetjones.jpg

Bridget Jones generation will dominate UK by 2029

PDF

The number of people living alone is predicted to soar from 6,536,000 three years ago to 10,347,000 in 2029, creating a Bridget Jones generation.

Well, marriage is too risky for us men, there are few women worth marrying, and women are seemingly incapable of shaping up or proposing to men anyway. And the government, using taxpayer’s money, has taken of the role of Father for all those single mummies out there. Plus co-habitation will go the same way as marriage now that it’s been re-branded Marriage Lite. What did the government think would happen? Dumb motherfuckers.

Gotta hand it to feminists, they did a good job. I mean, credit where it’s due, they have succeeded in their aims at driving the sexes apart and ensuring more and more women will, like hardcore fembots themselves, grow up alone and single. Rather amusingly, on the other hand, us men seem to be coping quite fine with eternal bachelorhood.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:51 PM

(more…)

Women are great, yadda yadda
September 18, 2007

——————————————————-

12 March 2007

We’ve never had it so good

PDF

They outperform boys at school, university, and work. They’re the twentysomething Generation Y women – educated, ambitious, successful. But is life really as good as it looks? Louise Carpenter reports

Indeed, another pile of triumphant nonsense about how women are so brilliant and outperforming men, the sort that regularly crops up from feminists, often lying side-by-side with articles that, paradoxically, bang on about how women are held back by the Patriarchy, under-represented on boards of directors, and glass-ceiling this, wage-gape that, blah-buggering-blah.

Still, to be fair, the writer does acknowledge her study isn’t scientific (well duh, like we couldn’t work that out for herself) and she also points out (but without condemnation) the shocking sense of entitlement of young women.

At the end of each day of interviews with the girls, I’d emerge from my study punch-drunk from their undiluted self-confidence; the absolute cast-iron belief in the power of their own will.

Really? After a day with them, I’d have come out disgusted by the infinite arrogance, stupidity and narcissism shown by these entitlement princesses. I’d have probably punched them too.

Amongst the things that stand out are these:

All of them bore out the theory that girls are easier to educate than boys. Many grew up being told by parents and teachers they were the best, certainly better than boys – which, for some, had caused its own problems.

Indeed, girls are easier to educate. Did I say educate? I mean indoctrinate. They sit still, shut up and do anything to please, and tell them something will empower them – like working in a soul-crushing office job for 45-years – and they’ll often do it. Boys will think for themselves and rebel against things that aren’t in their own interest; unless, of course, they have been successfully emasculated by feminist teachers and therapists and their truck-loads of Ritalin.

(more…)

Part-time pilot
September 17, 2007

——————————————————-

10 March 2007

oops.jpg

BA pilot’s part-time work victory

A female British Airways pilot has succeeded in a three-year campaign to be allowed to work part-time.

Jessica Starmer, from Wareham in Dorset, had been denied a request to work part-time so she could look after her daughter, Beth.

BA said it had withdrawn an appeal against a previous sex discrimination employment tribunal ruling, which had found in her favour.

Fucking hell. What the fu…?

Why is it ‘sex discrimination’ just because they denied her the chance to work part-time? Are male pilots allowed to? No.

Oh, but wait, women are special creatures who need pampering and privileges to ensure they can be “equal.”

BA had argued that its refusal to allow Ms Starmer to work fewer hours was a health and safety issue, because she had not completed the required amount of flying hours under the company’s rules.

See? It’s not a ‘sex discrimination’ issue, it’s health & safety. You can’t have a pilot who hasn’t flown the required number of hours because she had to go home and make the school run.

What’s the point in her having a wonderful empowering career if she’s not going to bother half the time? That job could go to a man who’ll do the job properly. Not someone who only wants the job for a bit of empowerment in between being a housewife.

“This is your pilot speaking, we are currently half way across the Atlantic and are due to land in New York in four-hours…or rather we would be if we were still going there. However, my kid’s school has just rung up saying little Johnny is ill and needs taking home, so sit tight as I turn around and head back to Heathrow.”

Okay, I exaggerate, but still, surely anyone would rather have a pilot who flies full-time and not a part-time one. And even if she has now flown the suitable amount of hours, fuck it, why should any employer be obliged to offer staff part-time, especially if it is something as important as flying commercial airliners? Companies are there to provide a service or product and make a profit, not bend over backwards and compromise health and safety to ensure some fucking woman can have her bloody work/life balance.

(more…)

%d bloggers like this: