Women Have Lead For Brains
Recently a woman was shot six times in the head and none of the bullets penetrated her skull.
What a fucking surprise I said to the television who told me about it. The pen is supposedly mightier than the sword, right? If something as powerful as an idea can’t penetrate the invulnerable layer of a woman’s particle board skull, what makes anyone think a fucking bullet could?
Women are like cockroaches. Their stupid opinions could survive a nuclear holocaust.
Here’s a fun mantivity that proves all the points I’ve ever made. In a matter of seconds, think of a question no woman can answer. You’re a man, so that should be easy for you. You probably think of several hundred every day without even realising it.
Here’s an example:
What the fuck happened to the television?
You can substitute whatever you want for ‘the television’. Usually your particular blank will have electronics in it, but it could easily be ‘our marriage’ or ‘your ass’. The point is a woman fucked it up when you weren’t looking. She also won’t be able to answer that question.
Now here’s the game: just keep repeating the question. Women are in their own little worlds of denial and delusion; and just like a bunch of bullets your words will completely fail to penetrate the thick mantle of a woman’s brain shell.
If you can’t explain something to a woman using crayons and construction paper, don’t bother. You’re firing blanks.
Literally (Figuratively though)
Related Articles:
Pages: [4] 3 2 1 » Show All
Hahaha I love this one, it’s perfect.
das y my gf so dence, but now da lead go to her ass
I beg to differ.
@phillazyjournalist
It’s generally a good idea to look around a bit before you start insulting the regulars so, yes, you maybe should find out. Particularly relevant in an environment where some satire is involved.
Female’s comment was quite clearly directed at wolfe and he would have understood precisely what she meant.
@Female
You are not boring.
Some other adjectives maybe but never boring.
@Billy Indeed.
@Phillazyjournalist On the contrary, the site is filled with humor. One has but to look.
I really shouldn’t Kerr, but I think Female was misspelling Boyer-Lindquist.
-wolfe
The “boyer-linquist coordinates” were an anonymous quote of Amefuto Mom. I’m sure that clears things a hell of a lot, eh? I can’t remember whether Amefuto Mom (alias Zogmama) said precisely that or Female paraphrased for stylistic effect.
Sorry, I can’t be arsed to look and link. And I’m not sure the blog owner would approve of me taking the liberty.
Cheers.
- The Chemical Brothers - Galaxy Bounce
The irony is killing me. You’re not a real journalist are you now?
Strangely enough, no, I don’t normally talk like that and again, your investigative skills have let you down. I hope you hang around to play and continue to tell me I am very boring, for you are far more amusing than you know.
You want me to actually find out who said what before making sweeping statements? And people normally do that?
It is slightly unfortunate, if they weren’t your words, but by God they were boring. Mind you: “boyer-linquist coordinates and had me move to a less hostile climate..” Do you genuinely talk like that? A little pretentious, non?
Wolfe you spoke too soon. But it’s just like a woman to disappoint…
Phillazyjournalist, I see your living up to your reputation as a journalist. You have misquoted Ian and put his words in my mouth. Good job.
wolfe, the fallen trees all over your land have skewed my boyer-linquist coordinates and had me move to a less hostile climate. Thankfully there are no noxious paint fumes in my new little den.
See, that’s more amusing. And yes, I am a tad on the unkind side, but it doesn’t appear to be a site filled with love, joy and happyness.
Thank you for the welcome
Phillazyjournalist, Female has apparently thankfully finally accepted advice and vanished. That said, you’re a trifle unkind, especially for a newcomer. I’m a wolf; I defend the pack. She was a pack member, albeit the crazy one on the outskirts that lapped lead-based paint.
She was smart enough to not make what she wrote pseudo-intellectual. She meant it, and wrote it sincerely.
Now, you’re welcome to the site. Enjoy.
-wolfe
God, that’s a laugh a minute. Couldn’t you try a bit harder and squeeze a few more big words in there? I’m sure your target audience are truly captivated
Wolfe, thank you for your remarks. I was unaware of that particular piece of information, but it certainly makes sense.
A very interesting analysis to read, Ian, although you seem to have read my comment as saying that religious conflict has been justification - casus belli - for wars, when what I said was that it has exacerbated wars.
Very well said, Iain. Quite true.
It’s worth noting that even this conflict had a substantial atheistic/communist link. Many of the core IRA were Marxist revolutionaries who sought to establish a ‘People’s Republic’ in Ireland.
-wolfe
The figure is closer to 200 million, but your assertion as to “most exacerbated by religious conflict” is misinformation perpetrated by pseudo-intellectuals who are biased against religion Quantitatively, yes, most individual conflicts do have a religious connection, so what they are saying is true, but their implication is that religion causes more bloodshed than non-religion. In terms of actual loss of life, however, most bloodshed in the 20th century was caused by Communist atheists. Let me give you a breakdown of who caused what wars. I’ll combine civillian and military deaths (where available and not already combined), since all humans are equal. I’ve taken figures from several of the top Google sites for “wars and casualties of 20th century,” and those sites in turn have citations. One excellent site has a list accounting for about 160,000,000 of the deaths: http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/massacre.html
Of course, available data is inconsistent in many conflicts, so any effort to create a 100% accurate tally of deaths is impossible.
My math brought me to about 190,000,000 deaths. This figure does not include deaths from plagues during the aftermaths of conflicts except where they were included in my source data. I’m going to round my percentages somewhat below:
27,970,000 deaths were caused directly by strictly religious/racist conflict and genocide in the past century. About half of these deaths were caused by Islamic states, with the balance going to tribal conflicts and the Holocost.
Communism (atheist regimes) accounted for more than half the bloodshed, coming in at 102,200,000 deaths. This is only accounting for available figures, the actual number of deaths is unknown and could be as high as 120,000,000 (most of the unaccounted would come from China). I include 1/3rd of the World War II casualties in this, though that particular figure isn’t the most accurate. Atheist fanaticism killed far more people than religious fanaticism.
The balance of the figure (about 60,000,000) are the result of other economic and political issues (tariffs, breaches of treaty, contested boundaries, etc.) including 2/3rds of the deaths of World War II. Most of the states involved have religious majorities, but religion was not a strong enough casus belli to be a credible argument.
The IRA conflict in Ireland, Catholics versus Protestants, has a whopping 2000 casualties. Combined wars caused by militant Christians over a strictly religious casus belli account for fewer than 100,000 deaths globally in the last century.
Being on the wrong side of a nasty truth doesn’t make the latter any less so.
- Music Instructor - Break Dance
I can’t believe a Romanian is saying this.
And a spanking good riddens to mister Friedman:
-Fuck you, el Presidente!
I apologise for writing ill to the croaked.
- Prodigy - Girls