Women can’t spell
Did you know that women are atrocious spellers? It’s an obscure caveat of womankind that will usually elude detection, but I assure that it’s absolutely true.
In order to prove this I’ve compiled a short list of words that women have historically suffered only complete and disastrous failure when attempting to spell. Here is the list:
Chevrolet
bullion
kernels
sandwich
duct tape
beans
trophy
If you want to see this phenomenon in action (and have quite a good laugh at the absurd letters women will attempt to piece together in desperation) prepare yourself for quite a struggle. You see when asked to do things that they are no good at (ie, driving, thinking that does not involve puppies or how much they hate their best friends) women will defer the task immediately to the nearest man. This includes spelling.
Since it is part of our nature to be of assistance — to be constructive and positive at all times (probably because we know so much about so many fucking things), this ploy will work one hundred percent of the time. It’s typical woman manipulation though and nothing else.
I tested woman’s inability to spell properly in the real world by asking a group of ten women to spell the word foundation, which I learned had something to do with make-up completely by accident in an episode of CSI. I felt that this word-familiarity would give women the manufactured advantage that they so desperately need and crave in every fucking thing that they do.
My results not only proved conclusively that women cannot spell, but also that women will refuse to do any task that they cannot.
Now that we say for certain that men are better than women at spelling as well as everything else, I think as men it is our duty as the superior spellers par excellence to save women the disgrace and humiliation of having to clumsily defer any such spelling requests.
To a woman, the alphabet and its inner workings are like the mysteries of a Jack in the Box in the eyes of a child.
Related Articles:
Pages: « 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 [4] 3 2 1 » Show All
The heart of the issue is all women are fundamentally bonkers. That is exactly why. That is the indellible truth. I too now speak from experience.
The only thing that can keep a nut’s act together is the knowledge that death is not the ultimate and supremely definitive state and the will to better him/herself and thus earn a better life after death.
When, as far as you’re concerned, there’s no remnance after death but the physicality of the being and nothing to earn through virtuousness pending payment on death, is there any really wonder that people act the way they do?
Especially women, who, though thoroughly lovable and cherishable, are all naturally confoundedly deranged.
- The Streets Of Philadelphia
I think you are mistaken if you seriously think that getting a divorce is fun for a woman either. I am talking about real divorces, not like celebrity ra-ra-ra Heather I’m-going-to-bank-my-millions-from-divorce McCartney, not all women get EVERYTHING from a man out of a divorce, for the most part they split assets between them… but even if a woman did get the house, the children and money, do you really think that the material assets heals the disappointment and pain of a broken marriage and family?
Do you not consider that maybe a woman did love her husband, that she is bitterly disappointed that it didn’t work out despite their efforts? I think it would take a horrible and very very very very cold materialistic woman to enter into a marriage with a divorce in mind from the beginning. What draws women into marriage in the first place and why don’t these marriages work out?
What I want to know is why so many women are supposedly filing for divorce? Are you really certain it is because they get all the material goods and the children? If so, how can you be so certain? Financially a woman is better off with a second source of income that comes with marriage rather than living off her own income or even alimony after divorce, so it is hardly fair to suggest that women divorce for the money alone. It doesn’t really add up as far as I am concerned.
You can dismiss my point of view as much as you like son of the suns, but you haven’t even made an attempt to argue why my views are “barely feminist” nor have you suggested where and how these views may be wrong or misinformed.
Am I wrong to say that divorces were more of a stigma before than it is now? Is this not true? Attitudes towards cheating behaviour are more relaxed now than how they once were, is that not correct? There are cases where divorce is necessary and whoever tries to suggest that divorce is simply throwing in the towel in those circumstances is being blind to the complexities of marriage break downs.
Can you not see the danger of painting the past as a gorgeous portrait of happy marriages and loving husband and wives, rather than the reality that it was?
Luka said:
Oh dear, Billy has given into the ‘everything was amazing before women were libeated’ mind-trick.
-Indeed he has-
Billy, the reason divorce rates were much lower was due to the fact that divorce was more of a stigma. The marriages were probably not much better than they are today, the only difference was men and women could not get out of them bak then. Not getting a divorce doesn’t mean that they made the marriage work, or even that they had happy marriages.
-As opposed to nowadays, where there’s more benefits if you get divorced. No-fault divorce has really done so much good Luka. For women at least.-
It doesn’t make sense to measure the divorce rate as a means to define what is wrong with the feminist world, yes it is a symptom but not more than that. I would even suggest that female/male promiscuity has not changed much over the decades, except the attitudes of society towards that behaviour. Before, people looked on such behaviour as wrong, wheras now it is seen as the norm.
-Human sexuality hasn’t changed at all. All we have done is define it better Luka. It does make sense to measure the divorce rate, since 70-80% of the people initiating divorce are women. It seems theres a lot of “irreconcialible differences” or emotional stress or what have you. One reason not to get married.-
Having a divorce is not necessarily giving up on a relationship, if the relationship has broken down due to infidelity and other issues, and both partners are making each other unhappy, then having a divorce is often a courageous choice in the face of beating a dead horse. On the other hand, hanging onto a dead relationship in the small hope of bringing it alive is sometimes due to fear of being alone, not ‘wanting to keep a family together’. It is all in the way you deal with it.
-Sure, everyone lives in a happy little dreamworld where the fairies bring you tea and we all ride unicorns as well. Divorce is probably one of the worst things that could happen to a Man. Women for the most part are given EVERYTHING that a Man has worked for. The current state of affiairs leaves me bewildered. I have no intention to get married at all, ever.-
-Strength and Honor-
Typical “barely feminist” viewpoint Luka.
Oh dear, Billy has given into the ‘everything was amazing before women were libeated’ mind-trick.
Billy, the reason divorce rates were much lower was due to the fact that divorce was more of a stigma. The marriages were probably not much better than they are today, the only difference was men and women could not get out of them bak then. Not getting a divorce doesn’t mean that they made the marriage work, or even that they had happy marriages.
It doesn’t make sense to measure the divorce rate as a means to define what is wrong with the feminist world, yes it is a symptom but not more than that. I would even suggest that female/male promiscuity has not changed much over the decades, except the attitudes of society towards that behaviour. Before, people looked on such behaviour as wrong, wheras now it is seen as the norm.
Having a divorce is not necessarily giving up on a relationship, if the relationship has broken down due to infidelity and other issues, and both partners are making each other unhappy, then having a divorce is often a courageous choice in the face of beating a dead horse. On the other hand, hanging onto a dead relationship in the small hope of bringing it alive is sometimes due to fear of being alone, not ‘wanting to keep a family together’. It is all in the way you deal with it.
Of course a philanderer would strive to keep his family together, while maintaining his philandering ways. What man wouldn’t prefer to shag women on the side, go home to his wife, get fed, have all his ironing done for him, then go to bed and shag her too?
Thank you NO FAULT (as if) DIVORCE, now women don’t have to suffer the insufferably selfish. Men had it so easy in the 50 - early 70s, before they were practically forced by the law to up their standards of decency. Boo hoo, poor babies, I am so upset for you. ha ha.
True. But going back in days before feminuts ruled our land you will find that divorce rates were much lower. It’s a fact that men strive to keep a family together during difficult times when a woman would give up. 426th Reason why MenAreBetterThanWomen.
What the fuck is an Armageddon clock.
Oh. I see. Quite simple, really. The fewer people that can physically initiate a launch, the lesser the actual chances for a launch.
- benassi bros - every single day
http://darthside.blogspot.com/
“And in the time of greatest despair there shall come a saviour, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns”
Thats why I said “similar” Sots. By the way where did you get your screen name if I may ask. Its interesting to say the least.-
-Strength and Honor-
wolfe, what did you disagree with?
No that had to do with nuclear proliferation, which has happened and no one’s shooting. For all the hype about Iran, they aren’t going to be an offensive power until Israel or the US attacks them first, which will likely happen.
Western elites think they can postpone the inevitable demographic death and reasserting masculinity by beating the war drums and asskicking weak nations, but that’s not going to make western women stop being whores and make birthrates go up.
Similar to the Armegeddon clock that the scientists made in the 60’s-70s?
-Strength and Honor-
@Golden “Although that’s really giving them too much credit. I don’t need to check this as it’s most probably correct”
Quite true. You’re a man after all. Try not to refer to women so harshly though.
@Billy “If we returned to that idea. I gaurantee you would see divorce rates plummet.”
Cuts both ways. Means a man can’t dump his aging wife. I’m all for that. Do keep in mind this hasn’t been one-sided; promiscuous men have benefited from naturally promiscuous women.
@SotS I disagree with your premises. You do raise an interesting point in your ’suicide countdown clock of the West’.
-wolfe
According to historical revisionist Christian feminists(paradox).. Everything GOD told the Israelites in the Old Testament is null because Jesus told people not to beat and stone their wives.
Naturally, the feminist/mangina translation of Christ saying “don’t stone whores” is “We can fuck, lie, cheat, and steal as much as we want and no negative consequences should occur.”
All part of the suicide countdown clock of the West. Us in the know can simply choose not to marry, but there’s the problem of creating new males to succeed us.
I believe God said that men rule. And he meant we should rule and that women needed to be ruled over. Women being like children need mens direction whehter they want it or not. The bible says that if a man and woman divorce then she should return to live with her Father if he is alive and of course another man of the family if not.
She gets nothing from a bad marraige.
If we returned to that idea. I gaurantee you would see divorce rates plummet. Children should never be allow to raise themselves.
What they want isn’t always good for them.
Another great article, thanks for this site it’s informative and funny, which is not surprising considering it’s written by a man. My point is, although women are crap at spelling and communication in general, it is not only because they do not think, but also because of their Princess Complex and their assumption that everyone should be able to read their minds that they do not feel the need to correct themselves or check their work. Great example is using a messenger like MSN, I’ve chatted to loads of bitches and the way they type is almost illegible, save for the fact that I can (being a man) successfully interpolate and estimate sentences and written structures sufficiently to understand what they are talking shit about. Although that’s really giving them too much credit. I don’t need to check this as it’s most probably correct.
What the fuck do I do that tests faith?
Fidelity? Honesty?
@SotS Ha!
Of course, it’s also possible He is testing women’s faith via men.
-wolfe