Germain Greer is a Cunt (And a Whore) Part II
After writing my original article entitled Germaine Greer is a Cunt, I did some research on the dear lady doctor. After all, I did come at “Dr.” Greer like a venomous Ferrari (I’m sure I’m not the first — if you know what I sexually mean), and I didn’t want to sound half-cocked. I’m a man. If I’m going to sound anything it’s going to be all-cocked and I want to know about it first.
Not only did I discover that I was completely right in saying Germaine Greer is a cunt and also everything else I say about women not being as good as men, but I also found that Germaine Greer is even cuntier than I implied.
And she’s a whore.
Before I get into that, let me just say for the record that Germaine Greer has a nose like the cartoon version of Laurel from Laurel and Hardy. On a man it looks humourous, whimsical, and occasionally mischievous; on a woman, however — especially one as old and turkey chinned as “Dr.” Greer — it looks trashy and whorish, which she obviously is.
No woman has ever gotten to be a feminist without whoring the fuck out of herself for a good six or seven years prior. That’s why they turn into feminists. Five guys in one night, five guys at a time; your average feminist has fucked every combination she can count too and Greer is no exception. That’s why feminists (and specifically Greer) say they’re so comfortable in a world built by men for men. It’s because they’ve most likely fucked the sexual tension out of any situation.
Sounds like a pretty wild allegation doesn’t it? Well I have man proof. That’s the best kind of proof.
During her college years in like 65 BC, “Dr.” Greer joined a student acting troupe. I don’t know about you, but where I come from the only reason women join acting groups is because they want to sit on the casting couch. Whoring and attention whoring are pretty much the same thing anyway. I’ve man-proven elsewhere women can’t act anyway, so let’s just agree to agree and call that Exhibit A.
As Exhibit B, I present this anecdotal remark on a younger student Greer from one of her lady professors:
Germaine was explaining that there could be no liberation for women, no matter how highly educated, as long as we were required to cram our breasts into bras constructed like mini-Vesuviuses, two stitched white cantilevered cones which bore no resemblance to the female anatomy.
I’ve heard a lot of come-ons in my day. I’m a man after all and I wear a tie. That means women are coming on to me all the time. Try it for yourself. Fuck, wear a tie to the beach — just Speedos and a tie. You’ll need a lifeguard just to keep you from drowning in women. Actually, women are most likely coming on to you all the time anyway. As a man you just don’t notice because you’re too busy thinking of shit that matters, like getting a job or keeping a job by not fucking up. Women don’t have that option; thinking or not fucking up.
Do women look at your eyes or specifically avoid your gaze? Those are both classic female come-ons. Another classic female come-on is constantly ranting and raving about their breasts. Are they too big, are they too small? Do you not care for them, could they use a lift or a stuffing? Do you love them? Can they be aptly or cutely described by a volcano metaphor a fucking ten year old might concoct on a bad day?
There’s no better way for a woman to get attention from men than by talking about her tits. Just ask the America’s Women’s World Cup team — or Germaine Greer the student.
That’s strike one and strike two. In the whore game, that’s all you get. That’s a good thing too because Exhibit C is Greer’s own quote from a 1971 interview in the New York Times confessing that she was once a traveling unpaid sex toy for any and all bands; a period she calls her supergroupie phase. As a man, I am naturally more skilled than “Dr.” Greer at not inventing words where perfectly applicable ones already exist. That’s a waste of fucking time. In this case wanton, promiscuous slut seems appropriate.
Naturally, exhibits D through F are Greer’s advice to young women in Sex and Destiny to give up celibacy, monogamy, and finally to drink their own fucking menstrual blood — I assume that’s her homeopathic method of checking for STD’s.
And you thought the clitoris/penis thing was bad.
Germaine Greer is the real-life nightmare of every filthy, drugged up, and well abused whore who’s ever been typecast. She has no business speaking.
Related Articles:
September 29th, 2006 at 12:44 am - IP Man-Hash: 54f297af1830d
Very interesting anecdote sandra but how about answering the questions. I went to some trouble to answer yours.
It is essential that men do prevail else our civilisation is lost.
A return to a dark ages culture is quite possible and it could happen very quickly.
September 29th, 2006 at 11:18 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
A remarkably conservative view! (needless to say, one with which I agree).
-wolfe
September 29th, 2006 at 12:28 pm - IP Man-Hash: b25d3d040112c
Ironically enough in the Dark Ages that women will create, there will be no central fascist power to gaurantee their “rights” in exchange for their votes.
So men win either way.
September 29th, 2006 at 12:41 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Son, I really think your view is dark and overly pessimistic. But… yes, I think you’ve got the potential of being right. If it comes to that, society may well slip back centuries. That’s not something I welcome.
-wolfe
September 29th, 2006 at 1:17 pm - IP Man-Hash: b25d3d040112c
.
I’ve got a dark sense of humor, not an uncommon trait among veterans.
But the fact remains, if we go back into a Dark Ages of serfdom and high religiousity, men will rule. If we go back into a new Golden Age of technological progress like after the Dark Ages but before the 60’s, men will rule.
The scum and degeneracy of today is transient, and will soon be at an end.
September 29th, 2006 at 1:28 pm - IP Man-Hash: 2f2d948528fdf
i often wonder if most of the men on this site hate feminism or actually hate women in general…
but anyways-
i was meaning to answer them, but i forgot to include it at the end there. but i guess you have understandable reasons to disagree with feminism; its not about equality anymore and it gets out of hand. women’s liberation, thats a different thing since its actually about equality, not putting down the other side and well, acting insane and irrational and such.
good pt. it would most likely be the second one there.
October 1st, 2006 at 8:50 pm - IP Man-Hash: f1fc112d0a055
Feminism is a deceitful movement which relies on lies and halftruths to gain advantage for select groups of women. I put them on a par with the KKK and the Nazis. I have no problem with women unless they demonstate intractible feminist views.
LOL How womanly of you.
In that case I would hope that the next time you are confronted with a woman complaining about discrimination or oppression in vague terms that you quietly mention that these things are true for men and that NOBODY CARES.
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:23 am - IP Man-Hash: 61a4d5ccd0f8c
we love women!! feminists or not!!
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:31 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
How very indiscriminate of you.
-wolfe
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:43 am - IP Man-Hash: 61a4d5ccd0f8c
well come on mate women are great many things!
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:49 am - IP Man-Hash: 61a4d5ccd0f8c
ment to be for many things! and why do women never wear watches…………… cause they use the oven timer instead
October 2nd, 2006 at 8:33 am - IP Man-Hash: d2bf73bae8061
Gwallan- I agree with most of what you said. I’d identify much more with women’s lib, then… equality of opportunity, not outcome. Women, as you said, were not being treated as adults and weren’t given a fair shot and the majority of it was corrected fairly quickly. With affirmative action… it’s a difficult subject. When women’s lib began, certain businesses probably wouldn’t hire a woman over a man even if she was more qualified, and affirmative action meant to ensure that women would be given a chance. Without affirmative action, would businesses still hire men over women regardless of talent/qualifications? The same question arises with regards to minorities. It’s hard to tell when affirmative action has outlived its usefulness, but once it does, it does become damaging to the previously advantaged party. It’s just hard to tell when that point is. I think that the original goals of feminism were noble, but the philsophy was merely taken too far.
October 2nd, 2006 at 9:26 am - IP Man-Hash: f1fc112d0a055
Businesses are not charities. It is NOT in their best interests to employ lesser qualified people regardless of gender or anything else in order to “give them a chance”. It reduces their competitiveness and efficiency and in large systems adds to a shortcoming of bureaucracies known as the “Peter Principle”(which I will leave you to research on your own time).
Affirmative action ASSUMES discrimination where for the most part it did not exist. And if it did exist equal opportunity laws were already in place to deal with it. AA has already become damaging to it’s targeted beneficiaries because many already assume women and minorities are token appointments(or, as I’ve heard many times, “token titties”).
Basically AA came into existence because of feminist insistance that their grievances be fixed yesterday.
October 2nd, 2006 at 10:44 am - IP Man-Hash: 4555637db20cf
Really, gwallan? Please, don’t misunderstand and assume that I am for affirmative action; but I humbly ask that you do not give the impression that discrimination does not exist. Take a look at this article.
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:33 pm - IP Man-Hash: 4be7d1bf122ac
You’re right I was a bit all inclusive. Racial discrimination is far more of an issue than gender discrimination.
It does serve as a good example of how feminism co-opts the issues and solutions of other groups. The third wavers similarly have attached themselves to (for example) gay and transexual issues and created a “victimhood heirarchy”. It’s quite amusing on some feminist websites to see them jostling for greater “victim status”. For example a “lesbian woman of colour” gets ranked above a “straight disabled white woman”. They seem to have some points system that the rest of us plebs aren’t privvy to.
Of course it’s a necessity for them so as to retain their status as perpetual victims.
October 18th, 2006 at 2:28 pm - IP Man-Hash: 43908f8ff86fc
I am Dakota Smith`s ex girlfriend, the Lying Whore, not to be confused with Skank, but still notorious.
Thinking as rationally as possible for one with two X chromosomes, the nicest thing I could do for Dakota with respect to these forums is to stay the fuck away.
However, the quote above, from Female, has made it impossible. Dakota does not need my help defending himself from such libel, nor does my opinion matter.
The events that happened between Dakota and me, however, have caused me to wish I could do as Frank Abagnale, Jr., did in the movie Catch Me if You Can where after his prison sentence, he assisted the FBI and banks with designing check security so even a skilled forger such as he was would be unable to successfully copy checks.
I can provide a reality check for whether ones gf or wife is a lying whore because I have done it all, and the self examination of the past several weeks have caused me to come to the alarming conclusion that I have been a lying whore since I was underage.
For my seventeenth birthday, I spent my bookstore gift certificate on a number of titles, the most relevant and life changing being How to Marry the Man of your Choice and How to Drive Your Man Wild in Bed. Mind you, I did not wish to get married at seventeen, but I wanted every man I went with to fall desperately in love with me, whether I liked them or not. And if we did have a sexual relationship, I wanted it to be the best sex he had ever had, just in case I could not meet his emotional needs (and even at that age I was pretty sure I was too self absorbed to meet a good man`s emotional needs).
To be clear - I was completely in love with Dakota, had grown to love him for who he was, and wanted to be with him for the long term. But, at the first sign he was a nurturing, nice, damsel-rescuing, potentially caretaking-type of guy, it was as though a launch sequence had begun. Just as I had done with my then-ex husband of 13 years (getting knocked up may have sealed the deal, but he was already sucked into my How to Marry the Man of Your Choice vortex by then) and just as I had done with my high school boyfriend (we had agreed to see other people at our separate colleges but his notice we had broken up came in my wedding invitation) I ran the plays on Dakota.
Was it my intention to hurt him? No. I did love him. Then what was my fucking deal? I wanted to make damn sure that I was not the one dumped or left behind in a relationship, and with just two exceptions, I have bailed before being bailed on, rejected before being rejected.
Did the evil book teach me how to act sane when really I am arguably a sociopath? Nah, I did that all myself - attempting to cover up how messed up I am. And all the choices, in spite of the teachings of a manipulative book being ingrained for over half my lifetime and from the time I was young and vulnerable, and in spite of having problems with impulse control and relationships in general due to bipolar disorder, were mine and mine alone, and I lost genuine love by being a lying whore.
So, Female, coming from the worst sort of lying whore, I think your attitude is appalling. Dakota expected perfection? Nope, he was very supportive as long as I was attempting to control myself and be accountable for my actions - and I was trying through much of our 2 years together.
I couldn`t tell Dakota I was having a fucking breakdown? Hell, Female, he was there for the suicidal ideation that put me in the hospital last Spring and visited me almost daily for the week I stayed, and when I got out and couldn`t afford my meds while waiting to get them paid for by the drug company - he bought them for me.
If Dakota was so great, why was I suicidal? Because, Female, depression hurts everywhere, just like the fucking commercial. It`s clinical. It has nothing to do with whether you have a good boyfriend or not.
I will never stop being sorry that I have shattered Dakota`s ability to trust and love. Frankly, it is not my business if he chooses to one day shack up with AndyDroid. I hope he doesn`t because he is one of the mantastic ones and has love, compassion, nurturing, humor, intellect, attractiveness, and screaming multiple orgasms to offer a woman and pretty much all he asks is that she not be a lying whore.
Why I went off my meds, why I returned to my ex, and why I couldn`t stop being a lying whore, even for Dakota are probably not terribly relevant to this particular rant.
Again, if I can be of service to men who are in a relationship and want to get to the bottom of whether their gf or wife`s plausible reasons for things that nevertheless leave Man unsettled are really the concoctions of a lying whore, I believe I would be a worthwhile consultant to help you ferret out the truth and recognize when you are being manipulated before it is too late.
Female, from a true Lying Whore - stop being such a bitch.
October 18th, 2006 at 2:55 pm - IP Man-Hash: 8df4b9656c70a
Yea, I saw your post in the forums before. I don’t believe you are his ex-gf and if you are, then I think invading a space which he is known to frequent is a pretty poor act. I suggest you consider why you are now trying to displace your anger at yourself onto me. Don’t try and involve me further in your personal problems.
October 18th, 2006 at 3:38 pm - IP Man-Hash: 6897e3ddf8ad0
More inane chatter from a worthless cunt.
Female wouldn’t know the first thing about tact. She’s demonstrated so in the forums and in private emails hundreds of times.
-Dick
October 18th, 2006 at 3:39 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
I don’t know what to make of this. Unfeignly disconcerting. A copypaste simile of the post on the forums. Your claim seems more and more plausible.
October 19th, 2006 at 6:27 am - IP Man-Hash: 5f80156cc08ce
Female [sigh] I was not trying to involve you in my personal problems, I was admonishing you for railing on Dakota for something you know nothing about. To assassinate his character over your incorrect assumptions is more than I can take at this point, even being his ex.
I would never try to interfere with his free speech on this forum; he told me about this page when he first found it probably almost a year ago and I had read occasionally but never posted until the other day. Indeed, I did not see his posts about the end of our relationship until weeks after the fact and only then did a search on his man-hash to find your verbal diarrhea.
You could try harder to have some clue what you are talking about before you kick someone when he is down. Quit being such a bitch.