Women’s Vaginas Are Puke City
I’m going to talk about Britney Spears’ stupid vagina today even though I don’t see anything newsworthy or remotely interesting about what’s happened.
In that case, I’m going to use my man ability to turn something stupid and dull into something of value. Have you ever seen some homeless weirdo on the beach paint beautiful pictures out of chalk and trashcans? Or some other man and some fire turn a bunch of wood into more fire? That’s what I’m talking about.
Men are better than women because penises are better than vaginas.
Here’s why I don’t give even half a damn about Britney Spears and her precious fucking vagina.
Item 1: A female celebrity took some whorish pictures.
So has every woman. Browse MySpace for about five seconds for proof of that, or better yet just go take some random pictures of naked women. Why do you think photographers get laid so much? Women love that compromising manner of shit.
Item 2: A recently divorced woman took some whorish pictures.
Women are so completely incapable of affecting the world around them the only way they can try to hurt anyone (including an ex-husband) is by hurting themselves. Have you heard of bulimia? A lot of men haven’t because it’s a stupid problem and men don’t waste their time on stupid bullshit. Bulimia is the condition in which some poor fucking princess tries to get back at the world by abusing herself alone in the dark. What a waste of time!
Item 3: Vaginas are gross.
I’ve heard about Britney Spears and her fucking vagina pictures from three separate women today, who were each frothing at the mouth like rabid turkeys and flapping their giblets in such fervor I thought something gross was going to pop off of something else gross.
And so did they.
Women are gross and have cooties and they know it. That’s why they’re all so fucking excited about Britney Spears and her vagina and her smiley face caesarian scar. It’s like women all over the world are walking around this week wearing T-shirts that say “Vaginas Are” on the front part and then “Gross!” in big fuck off capital letters on the back.
Well you know what, for once women are right.
Men and their penises are featured not only in historic statues of artistic fame and incalculable worth, but also in comedies like Something About Mary and the advertisements for Deuce Bigolo 2. The man fact of the world is that penises have been bringing laughter and wonderment to the world for hundreds of thousands of years.
The only thing vaginas have ever done is ruined tasteful photos.
Related Articles:
December 21st, 2006 at 12:58 pm - IP Man-Hash: 98c4f9c613c11
Yes, he’s chivalrous femicunt. He loves women and will do anything to please them. And thanks you for seeing what an easy reide girls ALWAYS had in the Society, which only became worse after the institutionaliztion of feminism - all the rights, but noone of the resposabilites.
December 21st, 2006 at 1:06 pm - IP Man-Hash: 98c4f9c613c11
Yes, my sister is a whore. So what? Yours is one as well. As for the bisexualism, let’s not bring it up because it disgusts you, right? I think it’s funny that in a thread that is entitled “women’s vaginas are puke city”, you guys can’t stop to reiterate how much you love to enter the puke-city.
Actually, I’m going further than this and say what’s evident: most of you here are not interested in a libertarian revolution for men’s rights, or even a return to the disgusting traditionalist chavalry; you’re all just bitter becuase you don’t get enough pussy. That’s what it’s all about, huh? You realize that women control and do with you ad they please, but yet you can’t getenough of that stinky pussy!(rolls eyes)
And what’s so fucking great about male heterosexuality? Women are mostly short, squat, with road hips, narrow shoulders and have stinky gnetialias - as the thread’s author explicitely said. Funny that in Ancient Greece they made tons of statues praising the physiques of young men, but very few of women. And before you say tey were effeminate queers, just consider that the Greeks actually went to wa and defended their city-states, unlike most modern exclusively heterosexual men, who are mild-mannere3d office workers who are pussy-whipped by their wives at home.
P Coderch
December 21st, 2006 at 1:12 pm - IP Man-Hash: 98c4f9c613c11
You’re confusing me with someone who cares about your opinion. In my book, the way traditional fathers raise their sons, to respect “ladies”, and open doors to them, and put their well-being above their own does make them real men; it makes them a bunch of pussy-whipped morons. There’s nothing manly about kow-towing to a bunch of bitches whoa re pysically and intellectually inferior to men. It’s not my fault that your parents treated you like the social inferiors of your sisters and told you that this is what being a real man is about, and you were stupid and passive enough to let them have their way with you.
P Coderch
December 21st, 2006 at 1:13 pm - IP Man-Hash: 12ba2642e47bb
I must admit P Cod that calling you a woman was indeed a massive insult to womankind. It’s not often you see a woman act like an adolescent male having a hormonal temper tantrum, but perhaps wolfe has seen this kind of thing before and is thus basing his comments on personal observation.
December 21st, 2006 at 2:46 pm - IP Man-Hash: 5fdb78f644952
An important note:
This site is not http://www.start-the-libertarian-revolution-against-feminism-now.com.
There will therefore be a disparate group of people, many who don’t believe in revolution, some of whom may not even be purely libertarian, who post here.
@dutch no, I’m not a “referee”. I’ve been a poster here for a good long time. Probably longer continuously than anyone except Dick. You can peruse my many posts on this site. You might start with the Laws of Women on the forums to get a beginning idea of some of my views. A number of people here might benefit slightly from reading more of the site.
That said, I don’t see it as productive to simply slam people, especially longstanding posters on the site who’ve contributed.
Mindless hate can only carry one so far, though it’s clear there is a substantial constituency for some of that. The problem is that one utterly marginalizes oneself from society when one does that. If that’s a desirable goal for some, it’s certainly not a desirable goal for all.
@BMU: I’d say your parents helped wreck your sister’s life. Not clear to me how they wrecked your life by letting her screw around and treating you unfairly. At some point — 16 — 17 — 18 — a man has to own his own life and be responsible for the consequences. I’d agree your sisters (and parents) seem to have been considerably more destructive than mine. You’ve got my sincere sympathy for that, but only to a point. Your life is your own; your destiny is in your hands, not those of your parents.
Yes… except Coderch started being repulsively insulting; from his/her behavior, I concluded Coderch was not a sane rational male, and judged him/her accordingly, and responded accordingly that s/he’d forfeited the right to be treated as a man.
So, Coderch attacks me, I respond and then s/he explains that my response justifies your attack. Impressively irrational.
It’s rather fascinating that instead of manning up and saying “Hey, I was an ass”, s/he instead chooses to double up, lie, say ridiculous things in an attempt to smear the sequence of events.
No sane rational man does that.
S/he is either crazy, irrational, or not a man. I neither care nor wish to find out which.
Whatever it is, it’s pathetic, and these repeated post after post all in a row with giant walls of text that make pathetic excuses… well, to me that’s not what a man does.
-wolfe
December 21st, 2006 at 3:43 pm - IP Man-Hash: 44ccf12b70965
“And what’s so fucking great about male heterosexuality? Women are mostly short, squat, with road hips, narrow shoulders and have stinky gnetialias - as the thread’s author explicitely said. Funny that in Ancient Greece they made tons of statues praising the physiques of young men, but very few of women. And before you say tey were effeminate queers, just consider that the Greeks actually went to wa and defended their city-states, unlike most modern exclusively heterosexual men, who are mild-mannere3d office workers who are pussy-whipped by their wives at home.”
I’m the last person to be preached to about Ancient Greece. Indeed Alexander and the Greeks were a force to be reckoned with, but for all their fury when they died there was nothing left of them. An apt end for a group of bisexual warriors who born and left few children behind as well.
Look at Rome however. The greatest experiment in Helenism in history, and fearsome warriors that had lasting power in the world. Quite the conservative culture too, very American pre-60’s scumbag revolution.
You dream about humanism and Libertarianism, because you seek to build systems that counter the will of Nature. Nothing beats the rutting pulse of evolution. Libertarians think people are robots, as well behaved and intentioned as them. The truth is far darker. Libertarianism is the ideology of Transhumanism and cyborgism, of the next millenium. Of SciFi fantasy. Of maybe some day but not in my lifetime.
December 21st, 2006 at 3:48 pm - IP Man-Hash: 44ccf12b70965
“@BMU: I’d say your parents helped wreck your sister’s life. Not clear to me how they wrecked your life by letting her screw around and treating you unfairly. At some point — 16 — 17 — 18 — a man has to own his own life and be responsible for the consequences. I’d agree your sisters (and parents) seem to have been considerably more destructive than mine. You’ve got my sincere sympathy for that, but only to a point. Your life is your own; your destiny is in your hands, not those of your parents.”
BS wolfe. A father who keeps a whore in his house and feeds and funds her bastards is a pisspoor example to a son and unfit to have one.
It’s also a Godless, dickless father who all his life couldn’t put his foot down to face the female essense unchecked, and to put it in it’s place.
December 21st, 2006 at 4:09 pm - IP Man-Hash: e7462212bfcde
Well sure you’re not going to find many men who act like this male having a hormonal temper tantrum but if you were an honest person which you’re aren’t you would admit that women behave like this ass wipe all the time.
P Corderch is one ass against the world.
December 21st, 2006 at 5:04 pm - IP Man-Hash: b9b7e9fe9772b
And?
I think you meant to write 0.1% which goes to show that there is a tiny chance of fatherhood being forced upon a man who uses condoms correctly.
Either way it should be the same for the woman. Thats the point
December 21st, 2006 at 7:01 pm - IP Man-Hash: 479ab57a00cdd
@All
Everyone here is basically cool, even though we disagree on many finer points, the fact is we are all here because we are aware of serious problem. We simply have different solutions. In a sense this board is too general to have these overly serious/divisive discussions. It’s a great site and Dick’s humor is great, but it’s not really the place to debate complex points .. more of a place for guys of all viewpoints to simply blow off some steam about the femicunts and their devious ways, to have a few laughs etc. Getting into to overly serious, overly divisive debates here, I think undermines that fun, entertaining “feel” Dick has created here, in my view, which is why I will try to avoid such debates here in the future.
@ Wolfe
I respect your right to hold your conservative position (a very reasonable mainstream position) but I do strongly disagree with it. I’ve always disagreed with conservatism, and in fact was a liberal when younger, but now just view both ideologies as two sides of the same coin: Imo, conservatives view women/children to be protected by men via the family, liberals view women/children to be protected by men via the government. I just see that as backward - not really what Thomas Jefferson, Adam Smith and other ideological fathers of westernism intended. I guess I still believe in the “western experiment”, as it were, a future where individuals interact in a fair and effective manner towards stronger, fluid, open cultural, political, economic markets.
I think it all comes down to the fact that I’m repulsed by traditionalism, and deeply drawn to technology, science, improvement of civilization and humanity - ie futurism - in a sense perhaps like SotS said in his post, my views have a bit of “transhumanism, SciFi visions” .. but we all have dreams of a better future, I guess, but of course differing views of what this means, and how to accomplish it.
@ P Coderch
In my view, you are a true revolutionary. Your writing, thoughts and ideas are extremely crisp and powerful .. Imo, they vividly paint a picture in my mind.. of the future of the male rights movement.. one that has intelligence, depth, strength, power.. one that simultaneously defeats feminism while advancing the libertarian/western dream it’s founders intended … instead of the “same ole, same ole” liberal/conservative bickering and tail-chasing that has been going on for the past 50 years… which, imo, is both the cause and the disease.
However, I think your swipes at other mabtw board members are overly harsh and uncalled for. This is just a general website for guys of all viewpoints to just blow off a little steam and have some fun, not really a hardcore political forum - which is where, in my view, your powerful ideas and observations would be best utilized - towards building and refining the ideological foundation of a future, libertarian male rights movement. Keep thinking, struggling, fighting up with these ideas, my friend, our futures depend upon it.
-BMU
December 21st, 2006 at 8:38 pm - IP Man-Hash: 5fdb78f644952
SotS you (and I think BMU) are still missing the point of what I’m saying. The focus is not on the father, it’s on the son. I don’t disagree with what you say. It’s not an argument against what I said. A man has responsibility for his own life. That’s it.
I’m not defending a father who lets his daughter behave like a whore. I’m simply saying a man has power over his own destiny. A father who lets his daughter destroy her life doesn’t force a son to destroy his. He doesn’t have the power. In either case.
-wolfe
December 21st, 2006 at 8:50 pm - IP Man-Hash: dee1398a8d68f
You’re too libertarian for your own good.
The sins of the father plague the son. Free will is far less eternal than you percieve it.
December 21st, 2006 at 8:53 pm - IP Man-Hash: 5fdb78f644952
I concur completely (see below). Hence my comment that it’s not “starttherevolutionnow.com”.
That said, I think there’s a place for such debates and such comments if Dick wants them. Why not ask him to create a forum for them?
See… here’s the odd thing. I see the views you espouse as being simply the flip side of the same coin of feminism. Everything is viewed through a gender matrix. I don’t view the world that way.
Viewing the world the way you do, you’re quite right to essentially say that I ideally believe that women and children should be protected by men via the family.
You are mistaken, however, if you think that I believe this should be something universal, automatic and without question regardless of deserts.
And this is where I find the insanely puritanical streak in some (which really seems simply feminism/marxism in another guise) to be somewhat baffling. People who insist on ideological purity above all else appear to quite consistently lead down a rather dark road.
I don’t think any of those men would have been advocates for the annihilation of the most successful social and economic institution in history: the family. I admire your honesty, though. It’s certainly a radical vision.
As do I. But I shall continue to argue that families matter, as do individuals.
You are indeed a revolutionary. You hate traditionalism; you hate what society is today. You wish a new order. I wish you luck.
Hmmm… improvement of civilization. Is that based solely upon the individual? I suppose the classic libertarian answer is ‘yes’. I don’t agree.
In any event, an interesting discussion, BMU.
-wolfe
December 21st, 2006 at 8:53 pm - IP Man-Hash: 5fdb78f644952
Heh. BMU, am I too libertarian for my own good?
-wolfe
December 22nd, 2006 at 4:05 am - IP Man-Hash: 479ab57a00cdd
@Wolfe
My worldview is based upon socio-biological theories and the evidence (evolutionary, genetic, and otherwise) amassed to support them.
As (my greatly simplified version of) the story goes, we are a polygynous species, like chimpanzees. This means that all females are naturally drawn to mate with the alpha males, and all males are naturally drawn to competing for dominant/masculine alpha status to gain monopoly over the females.
However, as the human brain evolved so did intelligence and morality, making the male strongly aware that this situation is inherently unfair, unequal, and oppressive to the majority of males - beta males. Beta males therefore further evolved their own set of values which center around the avoidance of emasculation - and from this came various systems (religion, marriage, family, civilization) to subdue alpha males and share the females more-or-less equally among betas.
The problem is, females view themselves as naturally deserving of sex with the alpha (who has superior genes), and naturally views the betas as a type of cuckold servant, who should simply be happy to provide free resources and protection to her and the alpha’s offspring.
And so the female sees marriage to beta as inherently oppressive and wrong, and evolved values/abilities for cuckolding, deceiving and restraining the beta husband, and for enabling and uplifting the alpha and his/her bastards.
Hence, females will always support cultural diversity and “peace” - not because of compassion, egalitarianism or libertarianism - but for sexual reasons.
This is why, at the end of the day, in my view, the institution of family is nothing more than a host for parasitic whores, alphas and bastards - for which no amount of authoritarianism, moralism, fundamentalism can prevent - the sexual drive is too strong and women’s methods too “under the radar” of male logic, too manipulative, too sneaky, too self-righteous. Feminism simply “unmasked” the true female value system which always existed; it did not create it.
Additionaly, all of this explains why feminists pushed to be free of marriage while simultaneously pushing for government programs: they feel entitled to beta male benefits without any of his costs.. to rights without responsibility. They see the typical beta male family man as simply a “little man strutting around” who must use force to oppress a woman he could not otherwise attract. It also explains why feminists pushed for sexual liberation and civil rights for various ethnic groups: they get to have sex with alpha males of all races, force beta males of all races via governmental and cultural chivalry to raise and support her and her bastards… it also explains why feminists claim to be socialist while milking the fruits of capitalism. To me, it explains it all, and (one of many reasons) why I oppose traditionalism. Instead I seek a system which more fairly balances rights with responsibilties, benefits with costs.. which deals with reality of human nature, instead of fantasy.
-BMU
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:58 am - IP Man-Hash: 5fdb78f644952
An articulately argued case. However, the very fact that chimpanzees, while very close genetic relatives, go into estrus (for example) suggests pause for any direct sexual comparison between them and humans.
Humans have both polygynous and monogynous tendencies. We can look at a variety of societies, but the most common seem to be monogamous with some degree of polygynous relations expected.
As you note, a factor which distinguishes us from Chimps — or bonobos for that matter — is intelligence, and the ability to form much more complex societal structures and codes of behavior. You suggest that these were created solely or primarily by beta males. I find this implausible, particularly since alpha males are not without intellect.
Certainly though, there are interesting discussions to be had here. To what degree, for example, were monastic and priestly orders a way for beta males to nominally take themselves out of the reproduction race and still have status and face in society? To what degree were these foisted on betas by alphas and to what degree were they self-invented and embraced? How many alphas chose this route to dominate others and still reproduce on the side?
That said, with all these codes and social structures, you seem to suggest that the best way forward is to simply surrender to our animal nature, and accept the base nature of women is that of cuckolding parasites as this nature will overpower any and every social attempt to regulate it. And operate as individuals, bereft of family (and both stronger and weaker for it) and society as we know it.
I say that that’s a great deal to throw away. If we look at the historical track record of such societies, it’s pretty much zero. The most successful societies for homo sapiens have all involved families based on monogamy (not, I agree, monogyny) and strong behavior and honor codes.
While it is certainly possible to throw all this away and seek out an ideal society of individualism without family, and without most of the restrictive rules that currently govern behavior, I see this as identical in tabula rasa aim to utopian Marxism and equally likely to succeed. Like the Marxists it is an incredibly radical and bold vision. Unlike the Marxists, I see it as an ultimately reactionary one — though one I have considerable sympathy for, given the rather despicable nature of the feminist forces it reacts against.
[NB- I don't compare your approach with Marxism to denigrate it or you; I do so because it was the last largescale intellectual attempt to propose a truly radical reordering of society. The feminists (even the Marxist ones) were pikers compared to Marx himself. What you propose is certainly comparable in magnitude]
It is certainly an interesting and intellectually coherent theory that you present. But it does require one to accept many precepts, not the least of which is that, again, every problem appears to be viewed first through the matrix of gender. To say nothing of the idea of destroying the family, probably the most successful social institution for generating progress that our race has ever seen.
-wolfe
December 22nd, 2006 at 4:29 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Nihilism, which libertarianism is uncompromisingly based upon, is not the answer to society’s ills. In the anarchy within lies exacerbation of all mankind’s evil traits, escaped from any restraint of law or society enforced moral code of conduct.
- Mozart - Carmina burana
December 22nd, 2006 at 5:23 pm - IP Man-Hash: 479ab57a00cdd
@Wolfe, I will admit to being an obsessive, misanthropic nerd who sees the human animal as greedy/evil and only producing death/destruction unless channeled into ethical/fair competitive systems containing effective checks and balances.
Once rights are properly balanced with responsibilities, any group or system can be dynamically, fairly and consentually be created/formed by individuals who so desire. And so, I don’t seek to destroy families.
Rather, I seek to update family, marriage and other traditional group “contracts”, so they can be governed by overt rules, rights, responsibilies, costs, benefits - instead of the covert, parasite/host relationship which inevitably develops when such terms are not dealt with in the foreground/daylight for all involved to understand.. understand what their costs/benefits will be so they can make an informed “purchase” and walk away from the situation feeling fulfilled and satisfied.. rather than angry, resentful, cheated.. which always further incites/justifies parasitism, cheating, violence, crime, resistance, revolution in the mind of the “cheated”…
@Sonyad, I don’t agree that I am a nihilist - far from it. A nihilist believes in nothing and rejects everything. I believe in the truth - no matter how ugly - and reject fantasy - no matter how pretty - and seek to build effective systems which utilize human nature towards productive instead of destructive ends. I prefer to think of myself as a cynical-but-hopeful, ethical, pragmatic rationalist.
-BMU
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:00 pm - IP Man-Hash: b02bdee7ba95c
“That said, with all these codes and social structures, you seem to suggest that the best way forward is to simply surrender to our animal nature, and accept the base nature of women is that of cuckolding parasites as this nature will overpower any and every social attempt to regulate it. And operate as individuals, bereft of family (and both stronger and weaker for it) and society as we know it.”
Too many good men are childless for BMU not to be right, irregardless of how cold a truth it is. The only good men you see with families and loyal wives are good looking and/or rich, him having honor is irrelevant to the female. How many with honor who are lower class or not underwear models are destined to a life of lonely nights? All.
Your optimism means you are good looking and/or moderately wealthy, and have no passion against this rotten system. Most are far less lucky. But I’m a nihilist who knows all too well that the Gods are myths and traditionalism is a lie, and no creature on this Earth will ever do anything other than its breeding dictates. Too bad we’re made of weak dying flesh, if I’m to be a DNA programmed drone I’d rather have a metal body and eternal life. Women are too stupid to go into the galactic void and bother me.
December 22nd, 2006 at 7:52 pm - IP Man-Hash: 479ab57a00cdd
@SotS: Bad boys/dishonorable alpha males (which is the only type women truly submit to) receive whatever they wish from women. The so-called feminist PC “rules” are not for them.. they are for beta males.. for cuckold servants.. for us.
Just look at all of the dumb/violent/corrupt criminals, gangsters, rockstars, rappers, athletes, ceo’s, etc - they have groupies worshipping their cocks AND a princess wife at home cooking and cleaning for him - AND both the whore and the wife are aware of this situation AND are quite happy with it. Why ? Because he is a bad boy alpha male - the only type of man females are truly attracted and loyal to.
Just one of many examples which comes to mind: Kobe Bryant. He has a beautiful wife who KNOWS he goes out on the road and fucks sluts AND she is quite happy to stay with him, bear children for him and mind them. Simliarly, the sluts/groupies all line up to suck/fuck his cock knowing he will never leave his wife for them. But both whores and wife both trip over themselves to do it - because of their strong sexual desire and loyalty to the bad boy alpha male.
All of the bad boy alphas have it like that, some even better than that.
And good boy betas simply go along like drone worker bees, building and sustaining the host these parasites survive on.
Until betas stand up and unite to get their fair share of rights and benefits - we will continue to only have responsibilities and costs - continue to be cuckold servants for the whores, the wife, the bad boy alpha and his bastards.
The average/beta western straight man likes to make fun of faggots. The fact is, gay men are simply engaging in a consentual act they themselves seek out, enjoy and benefit from. They have far more self respect for themselves as individuals than the average/beta western male - who is nothing more than a raped cuckolded dummy with a cock up his ass and a smile on his face trying to pretend he’s not.