Want to Help Women? Punch One in the Face
Women have no fear of anything.
They have no fear of any shit breaking because some man will always fix it in a charming attempt to fuck them — which usually works. They have no fear of losing their jobs because they don’t ever support themselves anyway. Women are like shrieking monkeys jumping like silly jackasses from tree to tree in a forest of men with big burly arms and deep pockets.
Women especially have no fear of saying or doing anything stupid. You really want to do something for women? Next time you hear one acting stupid, just knock the shit out of her.
That would make a hell of an alibi too. After all, who would believe her?
“Defendant, you stand accused of striking this woman because she didn’t know the difference between her office key and her apartment key even though one has flowers and shit all over it. How do you plead?”
“Your honour…are you fucking serious? What kind of person would do that?”
The classic, “Are you fucking serious” defense. I’ve seen it a hundred times.
Let me step back for a moment before my manjo gets carried away with itself. I’m not saying that all men should go out and start beating women like they’re piñatas until cogent ideas start pouring out of their mouths like delicious candy. First of all, that would never work. Even with a gun to their heads, women can’t make any sense. Secondly, violence against women is uncivilized.
What I am suggesting is simply that women spew garbage out the mouth 27/7 because they have no internal filter of fear. That’s because fear is a very manly thing. Without fear, where does a man get his adrenaline to accomplish heroic man-feats of car lifting and lion fighting and tearing trees out by their roots? Redbull? I don’t fucking think so. Without fear would a man think to himself, “maybe I shouldn’t get herpes from this drunk skank”? The answer is no, he would not. That’s why so many women have STD’s and don’t even know it. Because they’re idiots.
Fear is a man’s life compass. Fear is Jiminy fucking Man-Cricket. The fear of looking like a jackass; the fear of getting kicked in the teeth for grabbing some seemingly unattended woman’s boob; fear is what keeps men drawing between the lines at all times and what keeps us preparing for rough weather ahead.
Curiously to none, women are afraid of nothing.
Women and their outrageously inflated confidence — it’s a bit like the eight year old who won the spelling bee for correctly guessing establishment.
Yes, we’re all very impressed, son; but you’ll still feel like a jackass if I pour this punch all over the front of your pants like you pissed yourself, won’t you. That’s life, kid. Best shut your fucking mouth and swallow that lump in your throat.
Related Articles:
March 29th, 2008 at 8:17 pm - IP Man-Hash: d653cff06dec4
The last gasp about cum holes is they like to propaghandize their utlitity as “the emotional being”.. that is to say they lack our strength and intelligence but are always ready to commit faithfully and raise offspring.
That is a fucking joke. Women are commitment-phobes.. they can’t even decide on makeup or which career field they want to be typists for, or which of their cow friends are bitches or ‘bffs’ - and these biped primates except us to believe they are capable of staying with one man.
Start the slaughter of public harlots like hollywood scum and famous feminists and all the role models of decadence… the rest will fall in line.
March 30th, 2008 at 9:55 am - IP Man-Hash: 3b049aa33ce07
I was curious about the Ho (1980) reference so I went to my local university library and looked it up: Ho et al., “Analysis of Brain Weight”, Arch of Path and Lab Med 104:536 (1980). These researches found that brain weight maximizes at about age 25 and then slowly drops at a rate about about 2g/yr. Ineterstingly, even the abstract (link below) suggests that white male brains shrink faster the white female brains, although they say the difference in rates is statistically insignifcant (graphed in Fig 2). So Commissar Scott is lying when he says that there is massive female brain shrinkage after age 45 reported in the paper; nowhere did they say this, because they could not say it.
Fig 3 is a description of gaussian distributuons of brain weights for white and black males and females. Interestingly the brain weight of a male is 10% greater than a female but also b/c of the gaussian distributions are somewhat seperable, one could argue that brain weight is more of a dimorphic trait then intelligence b/n the genders. I feel, however, the final measure of intelligence is better reflected from a final testing of individuals, as individuals are a sum of individual physiological traits, such as brain weights.
More evidence that Commander Scott is a fraud.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6893659?ordinalpos=4&itool=EntrezSy stem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
March 30th, 2008 at 10:01 am - IP Man-Hash: 3b049aa33ce07
Small correction: the greater rate of decline of white male brain size compared to the decline for white female brain size is statistically significant, but its a very small difference; but, male brains apparently shrink a little faster than female brains. Commander Scott is lying.
March 30th, 2008 at 12:40 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
If average male brain weight exceeds that of women by 100g and both genders are losing an average of 2g of brain weight per year, then whose brain shrinks the fastest to the smallest dimensions? Given the smaller dimensions of the female brain, it is extremely obvious that it would shrink to the smallest size in the shortest amount of time regardless of whatever rate of brain shrinkage the male undergoes. Patterns of brain shrinkage do not overlap between genders. The graph produced by Ho et al (1980) clearly demonstrates that, given the greater physical dimensions of the male brain, it never shrinks to the size of the female brain; the female brain always shrinks to the smallest amount of size and weight within the shortest period of time. Interestingly enough, although brain size begins to decrease at the age of 25 for both genders, the graph clearly reveals that it is women who suffer the sharpest decrease in brain weight from about the age of 45 onwards, apparently losing 50g more brain tissue than men.
The notion that men are considerably smarter than women because men have substantially greater cranial capacity is an idea that dates from the time of Paul Broca (1861), one of the first pioneers in both physical anthropology and clinical neurosurgery. In fact, there is a tremendous amount of contemporary evidence pointing in the direction of men being significantly more intelligent than women because males possess both greater relative brain size and mass; those who deny this connection clearly contradict the findings of modern science. The famous neuroanatomist C.D. Ankney, in his morphometric analysis of gender differences in relative brain size and intelligence (1992), shows that men have greater intellectual capacity than women because men possess a neurological apparatus of considerably larger physical dimensions than women.
March 30th, 2008 at 1:02 pm - IP Man-Hash: 0a074b6031993
Commissar; Lets say the rate of brain tissue loss is 2 r/yr for both male and female, which the paper states it is. Lets say that the brain mass for a male is approx 1100 g, and that for a female is 1000 g at age 25. By age 80, they will be down to 990 and 890 gr, respectively, which is a 10.0% and a 11.0 % loss of total brain tissue by age 80, which obviously is not much of a difference. You seem to be confusing rate of loss for % of total mass lost, dumb-dumb. Obviously, the difference is very little. The paper (Fig 2) DOES NOT show a dramatic change of female brain loss at age 45 as you stated; in fact, I cant even discern a change in the female line, and the authors would have said something if there had been. Stop lying, Commander.
It should be obvious that a physiological factor like brain size, while in all likehood contributing to an individuals intelligence, wont be the only thing. Apparently its not the major thing as well, since there are, for any cohort of men of a certain IQ, anywhere from up to 45% of women in that population that have an equal or greater intelligence.
March 30th, 2008 at 2:23 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
It is obvious from empirical observation alone that the human female possesses a much smaller brain than the human male. It is because of the fact that neither male nor female brains overlap in terms of both size and overall patterns of decrease in relative weight that the female brain always shrinks to the smallest size in the least amount of time (your example simply proves that not only do women have smaller brains than men but that female brain size shrinks to much smaller dimensions at a more accelerated pace than that of the male). Obviously, the rate of brain shrinkage ultimately contributes to the relative magnitude of total brain weight between both genders. The graph of Ho et al (1980) clearly demonstrates that although men suffer a major decrease in brain weight immediately after the age of 25, women suffer a cumulatively greater decrease in mean brain weight throughout their entire life cycles due to the considerably smaller size and proportions of the female brain.
According to the most rigorous analysis of gender-based differences in intelligence, there is a 35% probability that the average woman will be more intelligent than the average man.
March 30th, 2008 at 3:11 pm - IP Man-Hash: d3f0e6c0e32c4
another man who thinks size matters
March 30th, 2008 at 3:56 pm - IP Man-Hash: 271ca43bb0c55
All this is irrelevant, as the far greater numbers of men occupying higher ability ranges means men are gods and more valuable than women, anyway. The key thing to remember is that women are expendable. Flying kicks to their heads will set them straight.
March 30th, 2008 at 4:00 pm - IP Man-Hash: fd75e0a5fe9c4
This statement is false. Men have a 10% greater brain mass then women as adults, and this difference carries on until death b/c the rate of brain tissue loss is about the same for both sexes–in fact, the authors say the overall rate of brain tissue loss for a white male is slightly higher than that for a white female, at a statistically significant level.
By the time a woman dies, at average age of 80, she has loss 11% of her brain tissue. A male at this age has lost 10% of his brain tissue. The rate of loss at approximately 2 g per yr for both sexes is too slow during our relatively short lifespan to make any significant difference between the sexes in brain tissue loss.
Yes of course, but by the time we die at age 80, only about a 11 and 10% loss of brain tissue has occurred for females and males, respectively.
This statement is false. Figure 2 clearly shows that male and female brains both start losing tissue at age 25, at about a rate of 2 grams/yr. The authors state that this rate, for both genders, does not change until age 80, when the rate increases. There were not enough individuals over age 80 autopsied to make any certain conclusions about the rate of loss of brain tissue after age 80.
I will order this article you keep citing that you use to generate this statistic.
March 30th, 2008 at 4:56 pm - IP Man-Hash: 189d7c092be2b
They do have a fixation with measuring things don’t they?
March 31st, 2008 at 7:42 am - IP Man-Hash: 271ca43bb0c55
Afarensis had no tail. In fact, no species of Australopithicus sported a long tail.
March 31st, 2008 at 2:02 pm - IP Man-Hash: 271ca43bb0c55
*Australopithecus* - keyboard knacked
April 4th, 2008 at 2:52 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
The notion that women are intellectually inferior to men is one of the cornerstones upon which the modern psychometric investigation into gender-based differences in both fluid and crystallized intelligence, expressed as global mental capacity, is based. In fact, female intellectual inferiority can be readily demonstrated on the basis of that elementary principle of physiology which states that larger brain size = higher intellectual capacity. Thus, it has been established that men exceed women in brain size by an average of .78d. When this is multiplied by the .45 mean correlation between brain volume and g relationship derived from the research of Shoenemann et al (2000), we are left with a standard deviation of 0.351. Further multiplying this figure by 15 (the unit conversion of SD into IQ points) produces a male lead in average intelligence by about 5.265 IQ points. Therefore, because the average man has a significantly bigger brain than the average female, it can be mathematically calculated with ease that the average male is considerably more intelligent than the average female; the greater size of the average male brain in comparison to the female is central to being able to fully comprehend male intellectual superiority over the lesser mental capacity of the female.
In addition, it has been further argued by the British psychologist Richard Lynn that relative brain size and mental capacity is highly correlated; because men have larger brains than women it follows logically that men have higher levels of intelligence than women. Lynn also notes, on the basis of current psychometric research, that occupational status and income are also highly correlated with intelligence; men have greater occupational status and income than women, therefore men have higher levels of intelligence than women. Even the greater male advantage in mean intelligence, estimated by both Lynn and Irwing (2005), in their meta-analysis of gender-based differences in global intelligence as revealed on the highly g-loaded Progressive Matrices, as being roughly .33d or 5 IQ points, cannot be interpreted as being statistically insignificant.
Whether we accept a determination of the gender gap in mental capacity as being the equivalent of 8.4 IQ points in favour of males as uncovered by Stumpf and Jackson or Lynn and Irwing’s measure of male-female differences in global intelligence as being approximately 5 IQ points, it would be foolhardy to dismiss these results as being of little consequence. The effect of even a 5 IQ point gap favouring males in gender-based differences in intelligence is ultimately translated into an exponentially increased series of male-female ratios at the higher end of the normal distribution curve of intelligence. Therefore, the male advantage over the lesser intelligent female would be formulated as a ratio of 2.3:1 with IQs exceeding 130, 3:1 with IQs exceeding 145, 5.5:1 with IQs exceeding 155, and 30:1 with IQs exceeding the range of 170. Consistent with the foregoing, Benbow (1992) and Benbow et al (2000) both observe that male intellectual superiority over the lesser evolved and smaller brained female is most likely revealed in tasks of high complexity such as problem-solving with high level abstractions in mathematics, engineering, physics as well as other tasks calling for high degrees of spatial visualization, the sex-typical neurological specialization for which has been heavily integrated into the male central nervous system by a process of gradual biological evolution.
In light of the entire discussion so far, it follows that the greater advantage of the average male in both relative brain size and intelligence should also go a long way in providing an explanation for the omnipresence of male dominance throughout all social, economic, and political institutions around which human civilization is organized. The greater variability in male intelligence as opposed to female, as the German-British psychologist Hans Eysenck has pointed out, has tremendous implications for the socio-economic and political organization of human socio-sexual relations. It produces a significantly greater proportion of males at either end of the normal distribution curve of human intelligence. For example, it can be shown from the research of Benbow (1988) that of those students between the ages of 12 - 15 who scored over 700 on the mathematical section of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), there was a ratio of 12.9 boys for every one girl. Thus, it is results such as these which help explain why a disproportionate number of those positions requiring high levels of intelligence or spatial and technical ability are always occupied by men; it helps elucidate the reasons as to why male patriarchal dominance has been both universal and psycho-physiologically inevitable throughout all societies and cultures.
In the final analysis, it would seem that the radical gender feminist theory of a ‘glass ceiling’, in which women face constant discrimination from men resulting in the routine social exclusion of women from the professions and senior level positions in industrial management, is shameless drivel. Male intellectual dominance over the lesser evolved and mentally inferior female is a product almost exclusively of genetic factors; it has absolutely nothing to do with the false ideological construct of male chauvinism, which essentially constitutes a theoretical leftover from the days when Marxist sociological analysis was fiercely advocated by the now defunct Frankfurt School of Dialectical Materialism.
April 4th, 2008 at 3:12 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
According to Paul Broca (1861), males have an average brain weight of 1325g and females have an average brain weight of 1144g, leaving us with a mean difference of 181g between both brains. Neither male nor female brains overlap in size or weight and both decrease by an average rate of 2g per annum. On the basis of this information, is it the male or the female brain which shrinks to the smallest possible dimensions within the shortest period of time? If the male brain is substantially bigger and heavier than the female brain, and neither overlaps the other in both size and weight, it logically follows that the female brain shrinks to the smallest possible dimensions within the shortest period of time, regardless of whatever the actual rate of quantifiable brain tissue loss is between both neurological systems.
April 4th, 2008 at 4:14 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
Women are intellectually inferior to men because, as the great German philosopher Schopenhauer says, ‘women were meant to obey’. It was the process of biological evolution through natural selection which made women significantly less intelligent than the superior mind of the dominant male; it is through this mechanism that nature would ensure that the human female would willingly co-operate, in a state of total subjection, with the superior male in the building of human civilization and culture.
April 4th, 2008 at 6:34 pm - IP Man-Hash: 0a074b6031993
You know, Commissar, I find it interesting that you feel I am a functional austic. Well, if so, then I guess it takes one to fucking know one, in light of the fact that you and I have gone over the brain loss hypothesis multiple times and you keep repeating to yourself and the denizens of this site the same fucking thing over and fucking over again–that women have a greater fraction of brain tissue lost then men. Since this fact is somewhat true suggests that your autism maybe slightly functional, however, you keep rejecting the obvious fact that by the time women and men die at age 80 the loss for women is 11% and that for men is 10%. So, consisitent with the fact that we maybe both high functioning autistics, I will repeat myself again: THERE IS NO FUCKING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN HERE. Got it?
Commissar Scott: I can only hope, for the welfare of the denizens of this site and the communities that you inhabit on the whole, that you pay a visit to your favorite Dominatrix, Mistress Alexis (remember, that sweet lady you wanted to choke?). In her dungeon, we can only hope that you will be stripped and forced to wear a ball gag, so that your teeth have something to bite into when she lashes your hairy australopethicus-like ass at US$50.00 a belt. At that time, my hope is that your ejaculate (collected into a small white cup, and immediately sterilized) coincides with a grand-mal epileptic seizure such that we will be spared your autisitic repetative rantings for 48 hrs.
Good day, Commissar.
April 4th, 2008 at 8:15 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
Miss Manhole (I hope I never have to stoop to your level and address you personally on this site ever again):
Weren’t you the one who suggested that Australopithecus sported a long tail? Moron; how can you compare me to one when you don’t even have the faintest idea as to what one looks like?
Functional autistic? You obviously have a severe deficiency in both personal levels of creativity and innate mental capacity if you still need to regurgitate everthing I say and spew it back at me. Learn how to be original and think for yourself, moron.
Ah well, what do you expect from an obviously lesser evolved and intellectually inferior female brain such as yourself? Women are truly mentally inferior to men and your pathetic, unfortunate existence simply proves that neurological fact.
Judging by the highly sexualized language you frequently employ in that mindless, highly repetitive autistic manner you enjoy so much, it sounds like you have a lot of pent up sexual aggression built up inside that highly masculinized female body of yours. Here’s a suggestion: why don’t you go find a nice quiet spot where you can frig that vestigial organ you call a cliteris all bloody day long. If you keep at it, you might (although statistically unlikely) eventually achieve orgasm and break that permanent state of sexual frigidity you have known all your life.
Hopefully, by the time you achieve orgasm (if ever), we will have been spared the (dis)honour of your presence for the next few years.
April 4th, 2008 at 8:29 pm - IP Man-Hash: b5b2efb545eed
Its funny, Commissar, how you accuse me of doing all the things that you do yourself. You accuse me of make speculations of what I look like but then you do the same of me; in fact, you did it first by suggesting that I was a wheel chair bound autistic. I make sexual insinuations of you, and then you do them back at me–oh Commissar, your so fucking creative.
Yea, I blew the austalopithecus description, but at least I have not constantly cherry picked facts and apparently willfully distorted details to support hypothesis that are absolutely ridiculous. A good word to describe you, commander, is the word “charlatan”.
I’ll be quite happy if you no longer address me; I really don’t care to have the attention of a chronic liar. A liar, in my view, is the lowest form of life that is humanly possible. However, whenever possible, I will deconstruct your ridiculous hypothesis to expose you to be the pathetic idiot/charlatan that you truly are. Good day, Commander.
April 8th, 2008 at 1:35 pm - IP Man-Hash: 3e8d1e2b2a4c4
Miss Manhole:
You’re a frigid, psychopathic Anglo-Saxon whore who deserves to have her face busted in with a baseball bat. And yes, you ignorant, uneducated female cretin, it is an established scientific fact that men are considerably more intelligent than women because men have bigger brains that don’t shrink as fast as the typical female brain does.
I hope someone throws a vial of sulfuric acid into that Yankee American face of yours. Maybe a little disfigurement would go along way with enhancing your personal physical appearance and actually making you popular once again (as a readily disposable sex object) with the boys.
Au revoir.
April 12th, 2008 at 8:25 am - IP Man-Hash: af85fe35755b3
My name is ryan, hi, i like this article. Goodbye~