Archive for the ‘skanks’ Category

The rise of single mothers is no accident
September 24, 2007


14 June 2007

Family misfortunes


The figures are stark and astonishing: because of the huge bias in favour of single parenthood that prevails in the tax credit system, a single mother with two children under the age of 11 who works 16 hours a week on the minimum wage, receives, largely thanks to tax credits, an income of £487.

A two-parent family, on the other hand, also with two children under 11, in which either one or both partners works for the minimum wage, would have to put in a total of 116 hours a week to take home the same income.


In effect, unmarried women with children are being bribed to remain single, while existing two-parent families are penalised.

The above article from The Telegraph is simple, to the point, and correct, as is this reply from a commenter:

Labour, being infected with old, Marxist, collective dogma, hates the family. Ultimately people will always be more loyal to families than the State. The first thing any totalitarian state does is to nationalise children by conscripting them into the ‘Pioneers’, the ‘Hitler Youth’ etc. Mr [Gordon] Brown wants to make us all vassals of the state.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:05 PM


Female child abusers
September 24, 2007


09 June 2007

Monsters and Men is a book published by the BBC about child sexual abuse, and accompanied a 2002 television series. As the title suggests it is primarily focused on male abusers, but there was, astonishingly enough (bearing in mind this is from the leftie feminist-infested BBC) references to female paedophiles. There are even references to how female abuser’s activities are hidden behind the media’s lace curtain, and how they often get away with it – or merely receive a slap on the wrist – because their male victims are regarded as somehow being ‘lucky’ to be abused.

There are a few statistics quoted regarding female child abusers:

In terms of what academic research has discovered, it has been found that adult females abuse in 6% – 17% of cases with female victims and in 1% – 24% with males. Female offenders abuse more girls than boys, and it has been speculated that females commit between 3% and 13% of all sexual abuse.

Regardless of where the real figures lie within these somewhat vague speculations, there is no doubt that the feminist’s insistence that men have a monopoly on sexual abuse of children is total rubbish (just like everything else that that hateful ideology insists.)

A police chief is quoted at length in explaining why (in 2002) there were only nine women in the British prison system convicted of sexually abusing children when it was clear that there should be far more if women are responsible for as many as 13% of all child sexual abuse cases. Primarily it is because people assume women never abuse children – and indeed the BBC guy who wrote the book states that he assumed women ‘just didn’t do it’ – and this, of course, is thanks to feminism and its all-pervasive ideology that women are never ever perpetrators of wrongdoing.


Lock up your daughters. Even the rich slutty ones.
September 24, 2007


09 June 2007


America tunes in to see Paris [Hilton] sent back to jail, kicking and screaming


The celebrity heiress was dragged from a courtroom screaming and crying after a judge ordered her to go back to jail. She was whisked off to the medical centre at Los Angeles’s Twin Towers jail less than 36 hours after the local sheriff’s department had told her that she could serve out her sentence at her luxury home in the Hollywood hills.

“Mom! Mom! Mom!” she shouted as a female deputy escorted her from the courtroom. “It’s not fair. It’s not right!”

Much as I hate to give yet more attention to this tedious brat, it is funny to see her get what she deserves. A lot of people have been saying that she only got out after three days because she was rich. Maybe so, but being female no doubt played a big part in it.

Sadly enough, her behavior is only remarkable for being so public; this hysterical whining about being held responsible for her actions is common amongst most women, even non-rich ones.

What’s worse is the fact that, in the UK, the idea of women not having to be punished for their actions could become an official reality. A serious suggestion in the UK to all but abolish prison for female criminals and give them community service sentences by default was made in the UK earlier this year. Oh, and the report suggested the empty former women’s prisons could be filled by – you guessed it – men. All this because some women in prison have committed suicide (like male prisoners don’t? A boy of just fourteen did so recently. In 2002, there were 94 suicides in UK prisons, and outrage because – oh no! – nine of them were women. More shock in 2004 when a whole thirteen of 95 prison suicides were women. Nevermind the men I suppose.)

Paris Hilton, at least, won’t be getting off as easy as she’d liked.

Judge Michael Sauer declared that she should serve the entirety of her 45-day sentence for breaching probation on a reckless driving offence. Before her early release on Thursday morning, she had expected her sentence to be cut in half.

Good. Nice to see there’s a judge somewhere in the West who refuses to accept the Pussy Pass. Off to jail you wench!

Incidentally, if you haven’t seen it, check out the South Park episode Stupid Spoiled Whore Play Set:

Wendy: Who’s Paris Hilton?
Red: “Who’s Paris Hilton?”
Annie: You don’t know?
Announcer: [someone takes a picture as he approaches the mic.] Hello, everyone! [drumroll] The Guess Clothing Company is pleased to have as its new spokesperson model, a woman all you young ones can look up to, Ms. Paris Hilton. [she appears and flashbulbs go off amid squeals from females in the crowd. She then lifts her bra and shows off her breasts]
Bebe: Wow, that’s really her! Paris! Over here!
Wendy: I don’t get it. What does she do?
Annie: She’s super-rich!
Wendy: …but what does she do?
Red: She’s totally spoiled and savvy.
Wendy: [annoyed] What does she do?!
Man: [walks by and overhears] She’s a whore. [takes his camera and snaps a few pictures]
Paris: [her left eyelid hangs heavy] Hey everyone. Sorry if I’m a little spent. I did a whole lot of partying last night with a LOT of different guys.

Great stuff.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 8:33 AM


The Hunt & Humiliate Broke Men Agency
September 24, 2007


06 June 2007

Mothers to name and shame absent fathers


Single mothers will be invited to name and shame fathers who fail to support their children.

Mothers invited to name and shame absent fathers

Letters are going out to around 100 parents – almost all of them mothers – asking if they want their former partner’s name to be included on an online list of people who have dodged maintenance payments.

More complete anti-male shit from a corrupt government. All the Child Support industry is there to do is to keep the flow of money going from hard-working men to spend-happy women.

Why the fuck should us men have to pay for women’s children? After all, children do, in fact, belong to women in this society.

Women get to choose whether to abort the baby. They virtually get automatic custody. Fathers are not required officially, as single women can get IVF treatment. A ‘family’ is now a mother and her children, with a father as optional.

So, John Hutton, you odious tit, shut the fuck up about demanding men pay for ‘their’ children; they are not theirs!

It cannot be said often enough; children belong to women now. That’s the primary principle in defining a Matriarchy, which the UK now is. Hence women can damn well support ‘their’ children, not the dad – who is only referred to as such when it comes to taking responsibility – and not us taxpayers.

At the very least a man should only have any obligations to support a child if the child was born when the man was married to the kid’s mother, and the child still has his surname. Otherwise it’s mummy’s little darling and mummy’s little responsibility.

One last thing; if parents are to be named and shamed for not supporting their children, surely that would mean any and all women who apply for Child Support should be named and shamed. After all, if they’re applying for Child Support they are clearly unable or unwilling to support their child themselves and, if the same definition of a ‘deadbeat parent’ is applied to them as it is to men, then such mothers are deadbeats.

It’s a dumb scheme anyway, it won’t work. Few men with any dignity will give a shit about being ‘shamed’ by spiteful ex-wives or ex-girlfriends, or by the fucking dipshit government. After all, you can only be shamed by people whose opinion you respect, and more and more men just don’t respect women or the government’s opinions one iota.

I’d imagine the sort of thugs who many single mothers have breeded with will most certainly not care anyway. In fact they’ll probably regard it as a rather funny badge of pride. “Hey look at the CSA website guys, it’s me! I’m on teh internet! WOOOH!”

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:31 PM


‘He earned it, but you have half anyway.’
September 23, 2007


24 May 2007

“I’m a multi-millionaire…and I didn’t have to work for a penny of it!

‘Housewife’ keeps record £48m divorce payout


A woman awarded the biggest divorce payment in British legal history was today told that she is entitled to keep the £48 million settlement that her insurance chief husband labelled “grotesque and unfair”.

John Charman, 54, took the case to the Court of Appeal after contesting his wife Beverley’s share in his fortune. The head of the Axa Insurance group argued that his £20 million offer was more than adequate and a £70 million family trust should not have been taken into account when the total assets of the marriage were assessed at £131 million.

I’ve commented on this case before, it’s fucking sick. This cunt gets £48,000,000 (almost $100,000,000) just because she happened to be supported by a hard-working husband for 28-years.

Surely she should owe him money. Think of how much more cash her ex-husband would have if he hadn’t had to support her for 28-years. The guy would have been better off hiring a maid and calling for a high-class 18-year-old escort girl every night.

This goes for non-millionaires too. Think of an average guy who has been married for more than ten-years. Think of how much more money he would have saved away, or at least have to spend on himself (without having to ask for anyone’s permission to do so) had he not had some ungrateful fucking harpy sitting on his couch spending his money and creeching for more.

This goldigging cunt spent almost three-decades not having to work but living a life of leisure (I cannot imagine she did one ounce of housework once hubby reached his first million), and the courts have decided she is entitled to half the money that he earned!


Woman escapes prison for trying sell 13-year-old’s virginity
September 23, 2007


23 May 2007

Porn Star’s Virginity Sale Shame


A former porn star who tried to sell a 13-year-old girl’s virginity for £30,000 so she could buy a car was spared jail today.

Fleur Brown, 32, was given a 12-month suspended jail sentence after offering the girl to an undercover journalist posing as a representative to a wealthy Arab businessman.

Shamed crack addict Brown had previously won the European Gang Bang trophy after having sex with 466 men within four-and-a-half hours.

Just goes to show that the pussy pass works even if it’s had umpteen-trillion cocks up it and top-billing in a long string of porn movies.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:30 PM


Us nasty men aren’t complimenting women enough, it seems
September 23, 2007


18 May 2007

Men wary of paying women compliments


Men have become too worried about political correctness to pay women simple compliments, according to a new survey.

We’re not worried about political correctness; it’s the sexual harassment laws that political correctness bought about that worries us, not to mention the fact that a woman can retort with an abusive insult that you can’t respond back to without either getting sacked, arrested or beaten up by a passing Captain Save-a-Ho.

There have been several reports of this today – slow news day I guess – and all invariably have comments or quotes from women saying how they love compliments and want to receive them.

Aw, poor girlies. They’re not getting enough attention, or being told how pretty they are. Maybe they shouldn’t have followed their ‘liberation’ movement that demonised and even criminalised male sexuality.

It’s like a report from California last year about how career gals were getting all upset because men in the workplace often didn’t talk to them or invite them out for after-work drinks because the guys were worried about sexual harassment charges. Back then – like now – there is no talk of relaxing these rules or perhaps changing women’s attitudes (like not being man-hating entitlement princesses.)

Fewer than one in five women questioned (16%) received the “recommended” five compliments a day, and 12% said no one had paid them a compliment in the past three months.

What’s this about the ‘recommended’ five compliments a day? Do women fall into a coma if they don’t get them?

Another important reason why women aren’t receiving as many compliments these days is because many don’t deserve them. That seems to have been overlooked by all these news reports on the story.

If women want more compliments, how about acting and dressing as if they deserve them? It’s rather hard to find anything about most modern women to compliment (let alone an incentive to do so) when many act and dress like either sluts, or like some bizarre, warped, confused wannabe-man.

Complimenting modern Western Women
A beginner’s guide

“Nice slag-stamp. Makes you look like a right slag, as well as
drawing attention away from the vastness of your enormous arse.”

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:09 PM


September 23, 2007


08 May 2007

A mildly amusing incident on Monday.

Whilst taking a short-cut through a park on my way to purchase some beer, I spied a woman sitting on a bench. She was about twenty-five, wearing a tight top and jeans, and was yakking loudly on a mobile phone. She seemed somewhat annoyed at whoever she was talking to, with some dispute as to plans for a night out that evening.

What I immediately noticed was a boy, aged about ten, standing behind her with his hand over his mouth, trying to muffle his giggling. Something about the rear of this woman was causing much mirth. He silently beckoned over a girl, who was a bit younger than him and probably his little sister, who came over and joined him in giggling and pointing at the woman’s rear.

The woman was too busy on the phone to notice the kids, and she continued yapping away. When she ran her free hand through her hair, the children seemed to think she was about to turn around and scurried away, still giggling.

On the return journey about five-minutes later, carrying several cans of lovely beer, I saw the woman was still there sitting on the bench (although the children had gone.) I decided to walk behind the woman to see what the kids were sniggering at.

It turned out to be what I thought they’d been sniggering at; the woman’s jeans were rather low-slung and, sitting there slightly hunched forward, giving an earful to the person on the other end of her phone, a fair portion of her arse was visible, and the top of her thong was riding high; pink, lacy and proud.

The incident rather amused me. The kids had been giggling in a rather derisive manner, which is understandable; here’s a woman – a grown-up – sitting there with her arse hanging out of her jeans and her underwear on display, like it was normal behaviour, like it didn’t in anyway detract from the authority she was trying to display towards whoever she was yelling at on the phone.

Stupid slut.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 9:56 PM


Skanky sis
September 23, 2007


04 May 2007

‘If my sister’s kidney fails I won’t donate one of mine’


This is the case of a woman refusing to donate her kidney to her sister – should she need it – on the understandable basis that her sister is a drunken slut.

Here’s the healthy non-kidney-donating woman describing her sister’s life:

At first, [my sister’s] career went well; she was promoted to the company director’s PA by the time she was 19.

She was earning good money, while I was struggling to get by on a student grant; generous to a fault, she bought me expensive presents and always paid for dinner when we met up.

But then it all started to go wrong for her. She started a doomed affair with a married man who took advantage of her youth and naivety.

He treated her very badly and broke her heart, and I think many of the things that went wrong for her later in life can be traced to this man.

Ah right, so it’s all this man’s fault then is it? He “took advantage of her”? It’s always the same; when something goes wrong in a relationship the woman was taken advantage of. As opposed to accepting that she deliberately got involved with a married man who only wanted her for sex.

And as for her “youth and naivety”…she was over 19, she was an adult. Aren’t women meant to mature quicker than guys?

Anyway, back to the biography of this charming woman:

Not long after he ended their relationship, [my sister] suddenly announced her engagement to a young man she’d known only a few weeks.

It was clearly a rebound relationship, but within months, they were married.

We all knew it was going to be a disaster, so no one was very much surprised when they split up less than two years later.

Perhaps she could have put it down to experience and moved on with her life – but then she found out she was pregnant.

Her ex-husband demanded a paternity test, which duly proved the baby wasn’t his, and when she was just three months pregnant, she moved in with a new boyfriend. He was initially very supportive, but when the baby was born, he started to resent him.

So she split up with her hubby, fucked another guy then got pregnant by him, then was soon shacked up with another guy. What a slag.


Benefit-scrounging, child-abusing, shameless, no-good fucking skank
September 20, 2007


30 April 2007


Mother who forced toddlers to fight can’t see what the fuss is about

The most infuriating this about this article is not that the (unfortunately surnamed) Zara Care doesn’t know why anyone is bothered that she enjoyed making her toddlers fight and filming them, or that she even wanted to work in Child Care, it’s this bit:

Care and her family live in Plymouth and receive an estimated £40,000 in benefits a year between them.


She and her family all live in council or housing association properties and pay little or no rent. They receive income support and – apart from Care – child tax credit.

I read elsewhere that Zara and her two sisters – all unmarried – have ten kids between them. This is what the UK is like; the more illegitimate kids a single mother slag has, the more money she gets. This cunt is even going off on holiday to Spain soon, she says. I work full-time and I haven’t had a foreign holiday in two-years thanks to the ever-rising taxes – income tax, council tax, etc – I have to pay to help fund these fucking scum. And she’s swanning off to Spain? I hope she gets gored by a stray bull.

Yet this is what feminism is all about; it set out at the start to ensure single mothers are as affluent as two-parent families, with high taxes for hardworking married couples and childless singles being the only way to bring this about. Now, after a few decades, we’re fleeced remorselessly by the government and drowning in single mother whores like this.

It cannot be said often enough; feminism is very bad for a society’s health.

£40,000 a year just for one family. Jeez. No wonder so many people are fleeing this country. They’re sick to death of working just to support scum like this.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 6:22 PM


The youth of today
September 20, 2007


28 April 2007


posted by Duncan Idaho @ 10:56 AM


Thrill killing
September 20, 2007


25 April 2007

Amidst recent comments, mikeray provided a link to this article:

Girls ‘just felt right’ murdering friend


TWO teenagers who wanted to experience murder told police it “felt right” to strangle a friend and bury her body in a shallow grave beneath her West Australian home.

The 17-year-old girls, who cannot be named due to their age, today faced a sentencing hearing in Perth Children’s Court after pleading guilty to murdering Eliza Jane Davis in the small coal mining town of Collie on June 18, 2006.

I suspect brief custodial sentences followed by a bit of counselling will no doubt be applied, rather than the life sentences requested by the prosecutor. After all, the killers have vaginas, and that, seemingly, excuses any behaviour.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 7:16 PM


Drunken bitch’s lies almost ruin man’s life
September 20, 2007


24 April 2007

Teenage girl jailed after ruining taxi driver’s life with drunk rape lie

A teenage girl who lied about being raped by a taxi driver has been sentenced to a four-month detention and training order.

The 17-year-old, from Shipley, West Yorkshire, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice at a hearing last month


“He was a taxi driver who had undertaken to take you home that night because you were completely incapable of looking after yourself and your friends and sister were concerned about it.

“He couldn’t find your home because you were not in a position to direct him to it and he took the trouble to ask at several places.

“You repaid that kindness by alleging that he had raped you. The consequences were disastrous for Mr Ahmed, who was arrested in front of his family.”

At least she’ll serve a bit of time in custody, but it’s an utterly pitiful amount. She should have gotten fifteen-years or so. That’s what the man she accused would have been given had he been found guilty on this woman’s word alone.

Plus the lying whore is allowed to remain anonymous.

Fucking bitch.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:33 PM


The Pussy Pass
September 20, 2007


20 April 2007


Preacher’s wife found guilty in husband’s death

This cunt, with blatant premeditation and malice, blew her husband away with a big assed shotgun and immediately fled the scene of the crime and yet, thanks to (a) having a vagina and (b) claiming the old ‘I was teh abused!’ excuse (even though her own daughter rubbished that claim) gets a measly Manslaughter conviction.

And the highest sentence she can expect is six-years. She’ll no doubt get less than that and serve probably a fraction of it. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised if she didn’t serve any time at all. She’s even free right now awaiting sentencing.

That ol’ pussy pass and baseless claims of ‘abuse’ work wonders. Switch the sexes and you’d be seeing a First Degree Murder conviction with a sentence of life-without-parole handed down without hesitation.

Hopefully, whilst on bail awaiting sentencing, she’ll be run down and killed by a truck.

And here’s more evidence of the Pussy Pass:

Toddler fight women spared jail

Four Plymouth women who goaded toddlers into fighting and filmed it have been given 12-month suspended sentences.


During the case, seven minutes of video was shown. A boy wearing a nappy was called a “wimp” for not hitting a girl back after she struck him in the face.

The four women are heard laughing as the toddler brother and sister are urged to keep on fighting.

The boy, aged two, is seen crying after being punched in the face by his three-year-old sister and is told by one of the four women in the room “not to be a wimp or a faggot” and to hit her back.

And they don’t even get prison time. Fucking hell.

Judge Francis Gilbert, gave all four women a one-year suspended sentence, saying they posed no risk to the public.

Well they seem to fucking pose a risk to toddlers!

The only good thing about the case is that at least the kids are in the custody of their father. Perhaps they should have been all along.


Hopefully they’ll be hit by a truck too.

Or even better, a more appropriate bit of justice would be to arm them with a plastic fork each and have them fight lions whilst an audience can yell at them to “fight back, don’t be such a wimp or a faggot!” whilst the nasty bitches are clawed and bitten into bloody chunks. And it can be filmed and uploaded to YouTube of course.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:20 PM


Worn out wannabe brides
September 20, 2007


20 April 2007


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.


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.)


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


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.


Woman sued for paternity fraud, claims remorse
September 19, 2007


29 March 2007


Woman ‘deeply sorry’ for duping lover over paternity of his ‘son’


A woman accused of deceiving her former lover into believing he was the father of her son broke down in tears as she told a court that she felt ‘deeply sorry’ about the distress caused when he discovered the child was not his.

Giving evidence at the High Court in London, where she is contesting his claim against her for around £100,000, the woman said that what had happened was a ‘great scar on my life and on all of us’.

Yeah, she’s sorry now because she’s being held accountable for her actions. Women are never sorry for the shit they pull on men unless they are caught.

Wipe those crocodile tears away bitch.

Good on this guy for suing her though. If he’s successful it’ll be a significant step against paternity fraudster whores, although ideally a guy should not have to go through private channels to get justice, paternity fraud should be a criminal matter.

It is the mother’s case that she had no reason to believe A was not the father, and had not deliberately pulled the wool over his eyes.

How the fuck can she expect anyone to believe that she had “no reason” to doubt the guy was the father.

Is she honestly trying to say she couldn’t recall having unprotected sex with another person around that time? No doubt this bitch just named the man as the father because he was the wealthiest one of the men she fucked that year. Whore.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 7:03 PM


Mothers who can’t be arsed to raise their baby can dump it in a hatch
September 19, 2007


26 March 2007

‘Dump your children here’ drive to stop mothers killing their babies

Desperate mothers are being urged to drop their unwanted babies through hatches at hospitals in an effort to halt a spate of infanticides that has shocked Germany.

At least 23 babies have been killed so far this year, many of them beaten to death or strangled by their mothers before being dumped on wasteland and in dustbins.

Fucking hell, is this what the West has come to, whereby babies can be dumped into hatches? There was a similar scheme started in Italy a while back.

Incredible. To stop women from killing their babies, the government let them just dump them? How about actually fucking punishing the murderous cunts for once? If a woman kills her baby, try charging them with murder and banging them up for life, rather than with the bullshit charge of infanticide and giving them a suspended sentence or community service. Hold women responsible for fucking once.

But no, instead they’ll just let women dump their babies. No mention of what a child’s father might think (assuming the sort of mothers who would dump an unwanted baby in a hatch would actually know who the father is) about all this. Then again, men will have the same say in whether their baby is dumped as they do in whether their baby is hacked up and flung in a bin behind an abortion clinic; absolutely fuck all.

If men won’t – or even can’t – pay Child Support, they are damned as Deadbeat Dads and hounded, investigated and imprisoned, told to be responsible for their children. Yet women can abandon them, assuming they didn’t get round to having it aborted. “Never mind loves, you don’t want to have to take responsibility for your children. Only men do. Come and dump your kids anonymously, no worries.”


Blog whores
September 19, 2007


17 March 2007

Laptop ladies discuss when it’s all right to kiss and blog


A bizarrely flattering article about a load of sluts who sleep around and blog about their antics, even one woman who does so despite having a 13-year-old daughter (and was surprised when some people implied she was a bad mother.)

It’s rather interesting that one woman seems to be on a crusade to ‘expose’ men who cheat on girlfriends. How does she do this? She shags the guys and then exposes them. Hmmmm. That’s like asking someone to punch you in the face and, if they do, denouncing them as being a violent thug who goes around punching people in the face.

This is the most revealing quote:

“If I decide he’s the guy I am going to marry, I don’t want him to read that [blog]. It spoils your dating strategies.”

For starters it shows the arrogance of this woman who, like a lot of women, assume that if they want to marry a guy, then they’ll end up getting married. No concern over whether he may want to marry her, unlikely given that she’s a slut who humps her way through guys and enjoys gossiping about it with other women online. Furthermore, I can’t imagine her proposing to him. Women will decide they want to marry a guy but will wait for him to get down on one knee and give her a big lump of over-priced carbon and ask for the honour of being chained to her for life. Or until the divorce.

Most significant is the way she keeps her blog a secret from a guy she intends on marrying. “It spoils your dating strategies.” Yeah, it spoils the chances of him wanting to marry her if he finds out she’s a gossipy used-up tart. It may ruin her chances of snagging the sucker if her mask of respectability slips.

Feminists bang on about men being predators on the hunt for sex, but women are the predators in that (usually once worn out and aging) they seek out a sucker to marry them, filtering out guys not rich enough for their liking, and then putting on the pretense of being chaste and pleasant until he’s signed the dotted line. Then the guy is caught and done for.

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 11:43 AM


%d bloggers like this: