How To Shut a Woman Up
Women don’t actually want equality. Women are like the five year old that wants a dog for Christmas and we men are like parents. You’re not getting a fucking dog. Five year olds don’t get dogs because they have no responsibility. They’re immature. They get goldfish or Nintendo’s or other things that don’t require moments from their precious days of doing nothing.
Equality for women is exactly the same. Let me give an example.
There’s six ways to make a woman shut her fucking mouth — and you can count five of them on your hand.
I’m kidding of course. I would never advocate violence against women. Women are like television sets. They’re fun to watch, and smacking them around rarely improves their malfunction. When they start acting up and getting old on you, it’s just time to get a new one.
The sixth way to get a woman to shut the fuck up is not a joke. Women bitch and moan about equality like a baby whinging for its bottle. What happens when a baby gets its bottle? It shuts the fuck up.
Does that sound radical? Giving a woman equality? Perhaps even a bit mad?
Your man-stincts are correct. Giving women equal of anything is a stupid idea: voting rights, custody, slices of delicious pie. No matter what, you end up with something that isn’t pretty and is about ten to twenty years away from biting you in your man ass.
Think about it for a minute. If women really wanted equality, why dress like whores? And why all the silliness with alimony? Alimony is more objectifying and exploitive than prostitution, porno, and the entire Blackula series combined. All it’s saying is that the only thing women can do in the world is fuck for money. It’s a severance package for retired whores. But I digress.
I said earlier that I would be dispensing the mystical secret that has haunted man since the beginning of time. Not where we’re from or where we’re going, but how to shut women the fuck up. It’s easy. All you have to do is speak to them like equals. For example, what would you say if your very good man friend was drunk or hypnotized into losing Man Points and came up with a comment like, “Kathy at work is such a bitch. I don’t know why she hates me.”
Something immediately springs to mind.
“Who the fuck cares.”
Give the baby her bottle. And silence, my man friends, is golden.
Related Articles:
December 30th, 2005 at 11:52 am - IP Man-Hash: b522825ecb752
To quote the great poet laureate of our time, Andre Young (aka: Dr. Dre):
“Bitches ain’t shit but hoes and tricks.”
The nail has suffered yet another firmly centered blow from the hands of Mr. Masterson via this article.
December 30th, 2005 at 1:43 pm - IP Man-Hash: d754ab99d7c00
Once again your lack of knowledge of the language fails you. I did not call you a deceased, disease-infested rodent; I merely used a simile.
No, I don’t especially want to help you (though I thought I’d sincerely offer), because you are not a very nice person. You came on these boards, cursed repeatedly, acted like a drunk or drugged lunatic (and even admitted being high at one point), blindly attacked everyone. I was fairly polite (though at times condescending) to you and refrained from like behavior until finally you jumped the shark shortly before Christmas.
I cautioned you you’d lost my respect; rather than apologize, you announced you’d not see the difference in the way I treated you. Perhaps you do now.
In kindness, since I’d hate to see even you reduced to retiring poor, I would suggest you talk (but not take any specific investment advice whatsoever from) a man (or woman) who understands mathematics, stocks, bonds, and hedging to arm yourself with the tools you will need to have to talk to a competent financial planner. Get an inexpensive spreadsheet and learn to use the formulas. You need strategic help from someone who understands mathematics (maybe a relative?) and very basic economics, and tactical/logistical help from a competent financial planner, though you should be very cautious here since a lot are raking a good deal of money off you and offering little or nothing.
Now, kindly mode off, and back to the subject at hand: your appalling activities.
You repeatedly attempt to spread material on these boards that is flatly factually false, ridiculously racist, bizarrely bigoted, and hideously hateful. Your attempts to propagate intellectually incoherent incontinent ideas and moronic memes while all the while displaying a smug stupidity is like the effect of a rat spreading plague. (NB- that’s a simile. See the word “like�? No dear, “simile�, not “smile�. You can look it up).
Credulous minds can be affected, nay, infected by the bigotry, even the stupidity you spew.
There are two places where one would expect to see your particular combination of arrogance and stupidity: in the mind of a recently promoted $20 dollar a trick streetwalker, and in the mind of a particularly slow-witted circa-1975 feminist.
The former verifies Esther’s/Andre Young’s assessment of you; the latter (or the thought you’re Dick’s friend brilliantly playing a crazy woman) my own.
-wolfe
December 30th, 2005 at 2:03 pm - IP Man-Hash: dc6df4d5c25ad
Oh I see, so I’m like a deceased diseased infested rodent but not actually one? What a relief. Pity then that according to you, I actually am an ignorant mule and a cretinous cow with either a mind of a whore or a slow witted baby boomer feminist. Your imagination is so entertaining but your bigotry against livestock is disgusting.
In regards to your recent financial advice, I’d hestitate to say you are stating the absolute obvious, but then I don’t like embarrassing financial planner wannabe chartered accountants straight out of night school. Now, if you are a futures trader, maybe we can talk.
December 30th, 2005 at 5:00 pm - IP Man-Hash: d754ab99d7c00
Have you never heard of figurative language? Pity.
Yes, because from what you’ve written, you need to start again from the obvious, and I didn’t want to waste my time (or that of anyone else) writing more than a paragraph. You either have done a poor job of financial research to come to the conclusions you came to above, or you are stupider than you appear to be. Your conclusions are, simply put, wrong unless you have grossly unrealistic expectations in some way. I assume it is the former for both; if it’s the latter, fair enough. In either case, I don’t want to waste my time.
I’m not a financial planner and have no desire to be one. As part of my career I have hedged large international currency risks, and those I worked with have been very happy. Did that make me a futures trader? No. In any event, if you want to save for your retirement by futures trading, you are a fool.
You’re welcome to irrationally insult (you’ll note I base my insults on actual flaws in what passes for your thinking), but it will guarantee the rest of us simply continue to laugh at your statements.
Don’t engage in a battle of wits when you are unarmed by nature, nurture and practice.
-wolfe
December 30th, 2005 at 5:13 pm - IP Man-Hash: dc6df4d5c25ad
LOL. Okay then, so because it’s figurative, regardless of actual content, it’s supposed to be poetic. You’re hysterical. I can just imagine the type of compliments you must give to your girlfriend when she dresses up to go out. “What’s that sweetheart? Does your arse look big in that? Only in comparison to an airbus, don’t worry about it, where not going anywhere near an airport.”
Well actually, a software package specifically designed for superannuation calculations did it for me. But if you want to start on insulting the software, I’ll be sure to let it know.
Cheers. I will.
December 30th, 2005 at 5:38 pm - IP Man-Hash: dc6df4d5c25ad
Not only does this quote confirm my statement that this site does nothing but portray women in only a limited number of ways, one being a whore, the other being either a spinster feminist or a stepford wife, but wolfe, telling us that you know the inside workings of the mind of a streetwalker is a little too much information. Seedy and sordid back alley shenanigans are never a good look.
December 30th, 2005 at 7:25 pm - IP Man-Hash: 957564b4aff6d
A reference to “figurative” has nothing to do with poetic language, Female. I think you just proved Wolfe’s surmise.
December 30th, 2005 at 7:31 pm - IP Man-Hash: dc6df4d5c25ad
I so do not care right now. Have a good night.
December 31st, 2005 at 6:54 am - IP Man-Hash: eeffcc3f4c66e
Think about it for a minute. If women really wanted equality, why dress like whores? And why all the silliness with alimony? Alimony is more objectifying and exploitive than prostitution, porno, and the entire Blackula series combined. All it’s saying is that the only thing women can do in the world is fuck for money. It’s a severance package for retired whores. But I digress.
January 1st, 2006 at 5:49 pm - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
Spinmeister, women do not “dress” like whores. Categorising someone based on the way they dress is in the eye of the beholder. Sure, some people dress to make a statement, like youth in sub-cultures, but the average, adult female chooses clothes based on a number of factors, such as,
1. Fashion (if the style is whorish, blame the trendsetting designer of the season, most of whom are male.
2. Climate. When weather is like living in a furnace, you’re not going to get around in three layers of clothing are you? Unless of course, you’re culture is pathologically oppressive (see Taliban/Afganistan). At least their women won’t suffer from too many melanomas.
3. Comfort/financial reasons. If you can’t afford a Sass & Bide dress (forget ebay, they’re all ripoffs, go direct to the factory outlet); your cash strapped and/or got three young children, then you’re typically going to either (a) know nothing about designer clothes, (b) give a shit and (c) have a partner who fees the same. Next stop: Target.
In regards to alimony. Men should pay it, even if (a) he and his former partner never had children, provided former wife did not work during the marriage.
If the ex-wife gave up employment at her ex-husbands request or if her decision to do so was supported by him, this decision would have been based on the thought that their financial situation was stable or would be unchanging for the worse and that of course, the marriage was going to last. Based on these beliefs, the women risked exiting the workplace and all the associated shite that goes with that. Such as, downgrading of skills, inability to save superannuation etc. So, when the marriage breaks down and she is forced into employment, she is behind the eight ball in getting a decent paying job, in proportion to the number of the years of the marriage. The alimony therefore makes up for the payrises etc that she missed out on by not working. Do not think that women do not give up much in the way of things seen and unseen just because they stay at home and do not work in the external world.
January 2nd, 2006 at 5:15 am - IP Man-Hash: d754ab99d7c00
That’s ridiculous. Women have the power to choose not to accept a ‘whorish’ fashion. You rabbit on and on about all their freedom, yet now you want us to believe they are powerless to choose how to dress?
I don’t care what the fashion is; a spandex micro-mini and latex tube top a la Britney Spears is whorish. Looking sexy is quite distinct from looking whorish.
-wolfe.
January 2nd, 2006 at 1:36 pm - IP Man-Hash: 957564b4aff6d
I’ve seen plenty of women dress like whores. I’ve even bordered on whorish dress myself, prior to getting a wake-up call. Many more women dress like sluts - their clothing (and their behavior) advertises wanton, promiscuous sexuality.
I was amused when Dave Chapelle performed a skit wherein he made fun of women that dress in very sexually provocative styles, then get mad when they’re treated according to the way they are dressed. Chapelle highlighted this absurdity by dressing as a police officer, then saying “look, just because I’m dressed this way, doesn’t mean you can come to me for help.”
It’s naive and ignorant to assume that everyone out there will behave the way you want them to, just because you get indignant and tell them how they should act. If you were to go traipsing through the Australian outback, you would take care to avoid the predators and not attract their notice if possible. Dressing in a sexually provocative manner is like smearing yourself with chunks of raw meat, then lying down in the middle of a pack of starving dingos.
January 2nd, 2006 at 2:18 pm - IP Man-Hash: f3ae1ac46a2e3
“Entitled.” Women can’t put together a thought without their very favourite word.
-Dick
January 2nd, 2006 at 3:21 pm - IP Man-Hash: dd1b911ab43ac
The problem (omg, what the! A preview function!!! About time dicktator, I was beginning to wonder what had happened to standard entitlements). As I was saying, what pisses me off about ‘whorish’ dress sense, is not that too much information is on display, but the unsexyness of it. Some people can wear next to no clothing and look great even if they are not an AU size 6. Such clothing typically comes with a heart attack inducing price-tag. I don’t care what you say, expensive clothes do not look cheap, no matter how small they are. I personally blame Britney for fostering the seriously cheap, garish, tacky, bogan look. That women is the she-male version of a yobbo. A male is the male version of a yob. Yobs have beer guts, probably only read the betting section out of the paper, like V8 cars, wasting petrol, fishing, getting pissed on cartons of VB and hanging out in topless bars. If they work, they don’t work around women (thank god).
Britney spears has no dress sense. She’s a walking wardrobe disaster and I’m sure a blind person could better coordinate an outfit. She also looks like she shops at K-mart. And as we all know, K-mart sux. Impressionable young girls, who have no exposure to Country Road, let alone the platinum credit card to spend up big there, cannot be blamed for thinking K-mart/Britney fashion looks good. Just because they expose their naval, doesn’t mean they want some.
January 4th, 2006 at 1:25 am - IP Man-Hash: eadd56da2c7c9
Of course not. They’re women.
If they were men, just because they put on their web site “Ladies, as always, this site is strictly off limits” or “No women allowed”; it would mean that they wanted to be bothered by some elitist hectoring troll who thinks that the planets made her do it and that anyone who disagrees with her should be executed.
They expose their thoughts. They want some.
January 4th, 2006 at 2:04 am - IP Man-Hash: ffdf937c0101a
Is that right? Women are not allowed on this website?
According to your logic Al, because I post here, I am after sex with a misogynist; because girls expose their navals, they all want sex with anyone who sees their naval; and because Dick has “no women allowed” this is secret code for “all women allowed.” I know I’m not wanted here, but if you are all so keen to get rid of me, why don’t you do what everyone, everywhere does when they want to be rid of a troll - ignore me. Don’t post to me, don’t provoke me, don’t challenge me, and see how fast I hang around. I dares ya.
January 4th, 2006 at 7:23 am - IP Man-Hash: f33c128f235e8
I stayed out of the workforce and raised my children for over a year. I still got stuck with a $4,500 a month tab from the state for child support. Equality indeed…
January 4th, 2006 at 9:13 am - IP Man-Hash: 8dd3dc862afae
Yes that’s absolutely right. You’re a whore.
-Dick
January 4th, 2006 at 3:45 pm - IP Man-Hash: a1da9f9ac370d
I bet I know where Female lives, second star on the right, then straight on until morning.
January 12th, 2006 at 8:09 am - IP Man-Hash: 065b11b01d70f
So, what you are promoting is reverse discrimination. Women are allowed to retire @ 63 and men @ 65. You support vaginomy for women, but I am sure that you oppose it for men. Please correct me if I am wrong. Otherwise, please shut the fuck up.