Women Would Vote for Hitler
A woman voting on anything other than American Idol or her personal favorite type of chocolate is like watching a small child run full speed into a wall. Clearly the fundamentals are understood. The child runs, it’s going somewhere and there’s no doubt about that. The child can run. But very quickly one comes to the understanding that somewhere, somehow, the process has been perverted. Then comes the wall. Then comes the crying.
Women would vote for Hitler. Not because a woman could be talked into buying a catsup Popsicle while she was wearing white gloves, but because women are all fascists.
Don’t believe me? Let’s leave the constant threat of castration out of it for the moment. That makes it a slam dunk in my book, but that’s fine. Women are just “joking” whenever they play fascism card #1.
How about oppressive dictatorship by force or threat of violence?
Anyone who’s married will tell you a lot of things. The first of which will be, “Don’t get fucking married for any reason you dumb shit.” But a likely secondary is that marriage is not a democracy. What is it then?
Marriage is a fascist dictatorship of oppression — and so is any relationship with a woman. Work, professional, “professional”; they’re all the same. If you don’t like the flavor of the Kool-Aid and you want to add some mix, prepare to have a wailing siren of bullshit go off in your ear. That’s assault and that’s oppression. That’s enforcing your opinion through the threat of violence. If you press the issue, prepare to receive the threat of withheld friendship — or even sex whether it’s applicable or not! There was another man who pulled the same kind of shit. Yep, Hitler.
The biggest women/fascism link is a woman’s reliance on violence. Women will be the first to hit during any kind of dispute. It’s not even a percentage. It’s as much of a guarantee as it is that the sun will rise tomorrow. And as men we can all understand that the sun rises because it’s actually a star that our planet rotates around, therefore it is guaranteed to rise. We are able to remove ourselves from our personal point of view and understand that the sun isn’t rising at all. It’s actually us who are spinning around the sun. Women don’t even fucking know that.
Every morning when a woman wakes up at the crack of 10:30 she’s thrilled to shit to see that the sun’s in the sky again and her fake orange tan will look just as radiant as it did yesterday. That’s one of the biggest reasons why women shouldn’t vote. They don’t know fucking anything about anything. They know nothing.
But that’s not why women would vote for Hitler if given the chance. Say what you want about the merits of an individual ethos of governments as you will. You’re all men and therefore deserve the right to express opinion unmitigated by slander or censure. What I’m saying is that by an intrinsic party affiliation — fascist — all women would check the box marked ‘Kill Or Savagely Beat Anyone Who Doesn’t Agree With Me’. That fact has always held women back more than any mythical glass ceiling.
Related Articles:
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:32 am - IP Man-Hash: 4b8494f25ae28
Why are you addressing me?
More importantly, why is a NOT-MAN giving me life advice? I mean, you can be better than impersonating a man on the internet - who the fuck cares what others think of you, right? Go on, be your own slutty self. Live by what you preach - then again, we all know you feminists are full of shit.
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:34 am - IP Man-Hash: 4b8494f25ae28
You don’t need a degree to read Shakesphere, honey. We never said that, and now in your haste to save face you’ve proven us right.
She just makes things worse and worse for herself. She also insults Bush when she does the exact thing he’s criticized for - not knowing how to admit she is wrong, and not knowing when to cut your losses. Now watch her prove me right with her ‘rebuttal.’
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:36 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
Einstein was a revolutionary in his field, they rarely do get straight As. Elvis Presley notoriously failed music at school.
You did not fail because you were a revolutionary, you failed because you were a retard.
Are you now going degree to explain in what way a m asters is less beneficial than getting a job in the local Grocery store? Its in “those pamphlets” for a reason.
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:37 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
Post deleting isn’t very manly though is it?
How many man points do you lose for that form of cowardice?
Tart it up however you like, cowardice is what it boils down to.
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:44 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
Skills in literature do not develop from reading the texts but from forms of assessment and required self disciplines.
People without this degree can read Shakespeare yes, but not effectively and they can’t prove it.
You prove your lack of education with your constant “feminist” referrals.
March 23rd, 2008 at 3:52 am - IP Man-Hash: c1d62f4b9e829
Maybe if you did plumbing you could market your business towards female customers. That way, both parties could feel safe.
Official figures in the States demonstrate liberal arts degrees to be considerably less lucrative than their more pragmatic counterparts, whatever you think. Some liberal arts women can flash their tits and fuck their way into management positions, but this hardly relates to their abilities. Believe me, I’ve met SSSoooo many girls with liberal arts backgrounds working as secretaries and menials for three bucks an hour, you would not believe it.
Even from an intellectual perspective, the liberal arts are cock-rot. Evolutionary psychology has largely shredded the near universal liberal arts obsession with cross-class relationships. Everyone knows that women are selfish and grasping and that they shun males of low socio-economic status. Their mouths say one thing, their do something else. As Stephen Pinker says, it is amazing that people used to believe such treacle. The fact that women are sexual fascists entirely undercuts the whole liberal arts agenda.
March 23rd, 2008 at 4:19 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
The plumbing idea is novel, but too niche and there is no guarantee it would be a woman you serviced and not a deceptive man, or a man and woman partnership.
I understand that statistically graduates of the arts have lower paid jobs than graduates of the sciences, but the arts includes many useless degrees, such as media studies and fine art, degrees that teach very niche skills which are difficult to transfer into the workplace.
If I already know my career path and my chosen subject is integral to it, as a basic requirement, I am happy that I have chosen the path that is specifically right for me.
Especially when I believe earning a decent (n.b.-decent, not low) wage in a job you enjoy is preferable to earning a high wage in a job that makes you unhappy.
As I have alluded to before, women, or at least myself and my friends, like intelligent men for the sake of conversation and identification, they often tend to have higher earning potential as a side affect. It is not the defining factor in choosing a partner though. I currently earn more than my partner, but I never give it any thought.
If a man chooses a woman with a low earning potential, she will more than likely have a lower level of intelligence, and why you would want to start a relationship with someone that will never really understand you on your own level I have no idea. In this case it is the man who is idiotic for dating someone he can never really get on with all that well. I for one find it particularly difficult to form friendships with people with a certain lowliness of intelligence as it is difficult to talk to people like this and have sufficient things in common with them, and friendship is the basis for long lasting relationships.
Also, I am from England and issues of class, higher and lower culture and other that is reflected in literature, theatre and arts is still obviously a large concern, more so assumingly than in the States where no such class system exists.
March 23rd, 2008 at 4:43 am - IP Man-Hash: c1d62f4b9e829
The US has no class system? Ever heard of the Ivy League, Yale’s Skull and Bones or California’s Bohemian Grove? The US has LESS of a class system than Britain - that is somewhat distinct from not having a class system. Only uneducated Americans believe America has absolutely no class system, mainly because they need that illusion to keep them going.
Also, when you say ‘women’ prefer intelligent males, you are tacitly referring to educated middle class women. Unintelligent lower class women (the vast majority as determined by inexorable power-law) are largely attracted to boorish, violent thugs. They despise intelligent men - obviously a problem for intelligent, upwardly mobile men from low social backgrounds (which is probably why high IQ serial killers tend to be men of this type, and their victims lower class women).
I knew an educated Englishman who alluded to interesting research that indicated lower class women of inferior intelligence tend to much more fascistic than intelligent, middle class women. I can well believe this, but have never been able to track the work down. American social psychology tends to be somewhat ‘class blind’ unfortunately.
March 23rd, 2008 at 4:56 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
I said “no such class system”, i realize now it wasn’t as clear as I intended, I do realize America homes a distinct “money” and “no money” categorization, but as you said, it is much more clear cut in England and it attributes highly to each Briton’s identity.
These working class women who are attracted to boorish and thuggish men are not attracted to men with socio-economic standing either, these are the kind of men who have no jobs, who live off benefit checks and pints of carling lager.
I would also like to point out that as a working class girl myself I have little sympathy for these women who date these kinds of men because I know first hand that although it is distinctly harder to get a better education, it is not impossible.
The pity lies in the fact that it is these thuggish men and these idiotic girls, all with no money, who are having all the children, and children born to stupid parents have an even harder time of getting a proper education, I at least was blessed with intelligent parents, albeit poor ones.
I therefore agree with most of what you are saying, but saying that working class women being attracted to boorish men is a problem for intelligetn working class men is not really true, the class systems in England are much more mobile than they may first appear.
If you are intelligent and working class, since your class is defined by your job, as long as you try hard you can always move upwards socially with a reasonably decent job, say as a teacher or doctor. For a working class person to become a teacher or doctor is far from unachievable.
March 23rd, 2008 at 5:12 am - IP Man-Hash: c1d62f4b9e829
Recent studies show Britain to have one of the worst class systems in the advanced world. For example, someone born today has less chance of improving themselves than someone born in the 1950s, while an American has about the same chance. Australia is the most classless English-speaking country as measured by mobility levels.
The issue is, lower class women become a problem for mobile intelligent males in adolescence, a time anthropologists aver is particularly stressful for young males. If one is surrounded by lower class filth, one can internalise their negative perceptions of positive traits like diligence and intelligence, which can cause a lifetime of reflexive psychic injury. Mr Bundy reported this in his criminological speculations.
Also, you said your mother was an accountant, which hardly qualifies you as working class, you know. Hardly a store teller.
March 23rd, 2008 at 5:26 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
My mother is an account, but I am from a single parent family, I live only with my father and he receives benefits, as when my mother left, he had no job as he quit to raise his kids when my parents were together, and he was left with five children. My mother pays as little child support as she can and gives me no money at all on top of it.
It is an unfair conclusion that working class girls ruin things a for working class boys. Gender and class are not correlated. Studies show that boys who go to single sex schools do get higher grades than they do when they attend mixed schools, however, studies also show that girls receive higher scores at single sex schools compared to mixed schools, and the difference in girls’ scores compared to mixed schools is relatively greater than the difference for boys in single sex education as opposed to mixed.
There are many studies that indicate that boys hinder the education of girls in various ways. The unusual levels of stress you describe release themselves as that horrid, testosterone fulled unrest, diva strops and general teen angst.
Class issues derive very much from class and class alone. Gender has very little part. Even as a young child, it was always very clear which children, boys and girls, from primary school were going to grow up middle class, which ones were going to never finish college, which ones were going to leave school with kids.
I am sure you are familiar with facebook, and people are always trying to request your friendship even though you haven’t seen them in years, through glancing their profiles there has not yet been anyone whose social status surprises me. Buys and girls, a majority of them have pictures of their children, their lads holidays to magaluf, their drinking every week in the same bar with the same people without fail. It is possible to change class if you try, but like I said, it is still difficult and many people lack the motivation, the fact that you can see it in them as a child though suggests that adolescence is not the main period in defining your future class.
March 23rd, 2008 at 6:01 am - IP Man-Hash: c1d62f4b9e829
I never said adolescent travails determine class. I said they damaged people. A person can be upwardly mobile and still damaged psychologically. Look at me!
Besides, many researchers report that ‘working class’ interest in education begins to wane in adolescence, not before. Even when the working class student is highly able, their interest in education begins to wane around age 14. Why this should be, no one knows. Researchers like Bernstein argue the working class use language differently, that is, their distinctive ‘public code’ cannot embrace abstractions essential to understand higher educational concepts. Working class speech patterns start to fail around the same time working class interest in education wanes, surely no coincidence.
My own issues with liberal arts education arose much later, when I realised socio-biological pictures of human sexuality matched reality much better than liberal arts ones. That is, women use sex to manipulate and exploit men, seldom if ever form relationships down, and are sexual fascists using sexuality to manipulate men at the bequest of the State, which in turn sets them atop pedestals. Ever since then I have taken liberal arts claims about these issues with a healthy pinch of salt as simply not true or valid, and never looked back. Romantic films and other populist media are just as much falsehood as ‘high art’.
In sum, liberal arts education is a throwback to when aristocratic people could indulge themselves without ever having to plan for a career, as they had private incomes. It is irrelevant to the modern world, or modern conditions.
March 23rd, 2008 at 8:32 am - IP Man-Hash: c6f24310788d2
Again, you prove that you don’t really know much about the American education system. NCLB applies to public schools (elementary & high school) only. It does not apply to those who are home-schooled or those who attend private schools. It doesn’t even apply to community college where many high school kids finish. This is a larger percentage of children than you seem to believe. I will agree with you that NCLB is trash, but to assume it affects the education of all Americans is just inaccurate.
Concerning school violence: there was a school shooting in the UK March 1996. Thomas Hamilton shot 16 children and one adult. Oh, and the last time I checked there are no holding cells in any of the public schools here. The SRO, may arrest a few, but they aren’t held on school grounds. You are sorely misinformed in that regard.
No matter how badly you’re treated, coming off as superior only serves to validate my accusations. People may insult me, it may make me feel bad, but if mine is an egalitarian philosophy, that is not an excuse to indulge in a display of conceited superiority. That is not to say you should not defend yourself, but there is a difference.
Concerning marriage: In eighty-five percent of custody disputes the mother is awarded guardianship. Men are attacked relentlessly as “deadbeat” dads, and yet according to researchers Nathanson & Young in “Legalizing Misandry,” women (mothers) have a lower compliance with child support than men. Women are given the house in divorces much more of the time, while the man still pays the mortgage. In fact, since the 1960’s women who initiate divorce has grown from being less than half of all divorces to nearly 70% in the USA, and higher than that in Canada, UK, and Australia (Bernard Chapin, Women: Theory and Practice). While I haven’t sworn off marriage, my expectations have dwindled to near-nonexistent levels. Marriage with any woman (let alone the right one), is taking one hell of a risk.
I’m surprised you’d never heard the Orwellian critique of feminism. Orwell was clearly using satire to show how despicable Marxist socialism would be in practice. Feminism is just another form of Marxist socialism to me.
March 23rd, 2008 at 9:03 am - IP Man-Hash: c6f24310788d2
Here’s something I forgot to include about marriage. A new law called “Equitable Paternity” states that if a man acts like a father, then he is a father. Even DNA testing cannot absolve a man of this responsibility. So if a wife cheats, gets herself pregnant, and then tells her husband that he got her pregnant, she’s just committed fraud. Yet, it’s not fraud, legally anyway. Because he was lied to, the man bares an 18 year responsibility that’s not even his. Marriage is looking worse for men all the time. For as long as misandric laws like this one are passed, I’ll be sure to steer clear of any wedding chapel.
March 23rd, 2008 at 11:27 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
It may be irrelevant to you, but if I can make a career from it then it is highly relevant to me. As I said before, it is not just about gaining knowledge in a particular field, it is about developing important analytical and presentational skills. This is relevant to most people in the modern world.
Adolescence is a period of change for everyone, and not everybody comes out of it unscathed, you cannot specifically blame it all on women. You say I should take you as an example, which I am only willing to do so if you take me as an example too. Of someone who knows the trials of working class life and worked to overcome them.
In the UK university system, many universities discriminate against English students and the working class. Foreign students and middle class students put more money into universities, therefore universities are statistically more likely to accept them. Cambridge interviews for example are merely to gauge quite how posh the applicant is.
Also, coming from a working class background, living in a working class area, your entire education is affected from day one, by the distribution of funds your particular school chooses, to your fellow class mates and how distracting they can be.
I am only too well aware of class prejudices and constraints, but know that ultimately I have the power to overcome them, and no one else can do it for me.
You may claim that some women use sex to manipulate men, but it is clearly not all women, and art never professes to be the absolute truth, just one version, one opinion, one aspect. The danger in art is when it is mistaken for absolute truth. What you seem to be describing is a disagreement with opinion, but if you recognize art as an opinion then its study is rewarding.
Of course not all romantic art is true, but to each person a different aspect of it is. One person may be familiar with a spontaneous, reckless portrayal of romance, another with a lustless but comfortable kind, several aspects can be contained in one book and all aspects can be true to different people at different times. If your aspect of romance is different to those portrayed, it does not make the art invalid, it makes it different to what you believe.
Literature has always been a passion of mine, if I can make a career of it, and if society makes it possible for me to do so, then I see no issue in using literature as a medium to teach valuable skills.
March 23rd, 2008 at 11:54 am - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
Just because feminism is another form of Marxist socialism to you, does not make it an opinion of Orwell’s. Orwell was a socialist and the only glimpse of freedom in the novel, of revolution and rebellion from the fascism of the Big Brother government is through Julia, the female protagonist.
Again, I never said the NCLB affected all Americans, I said it is part of the education system in general, if it does not reach as a wide an audience as I was lead to believe and it is really not wide spread enough to justify my point then I apologise.
As for the the Dunblane Massacre, the shootings of Thomas Hamilton, this serves to support my point I’m afraid and not yours, I described high school shootings, the example you picked is not only over a decade old, but I remember that incident well, it was not a high school shooting, it was a sick and fully grown adult who went in to a primary school and murdered very young children and himself as they took physical education. That single incident is responsible for every lock and code that found its way onto my primary school building.
I apologize for insinuating holding cells, I heard that there were some schools which did have rooms on school properties where students could be detained for up to a night. However, there is no body of authority in England that is ever responsible for the arrest of school children except the police themselves. There are no forms of security guards in any English schools I have ever heard of.
You say I am not supposed to defend myself by acting superior, and it is not something I regularly do, however, I sometimes feel the best form of defense is attack and this is a way in which I do so.
I do agree with you that the laws on divorce favoring women are obscene, I support fathers for justice very much so for example. However, I disagree that this constitutes a significant risk with every woman. It indeed constitutes a risk in some, but if you marry a woman who disagrees with these unfair laws, it is very rare she is going to take advantage of them.
Granted there might not be a whole lot of women like this out there, but when it comes to marriage, it is worth looking that little bit harder. I believe that there are many positive aspects to marriage, and if you can find the right woman, even if the right woman to you is all about being a woman who shares a similar stance on divorce law, it is worth a shot.
My mother left my father with five children and tried to claim half of the house we lived in, even though it was left to her and my father in the will of my paternal grandmother, who if she knew my mother would try that wouldn’t have considered including her in the will. I know how some women can be materialistic and inconsiderate when it comes to separation, but every man only needs to find one that isn’t. I wouldn’t dream of taking things that I did not deserve from my partner because even if our relationship dissipated I can take care of my self and know he is a good man who works hard for what he gets. I do not believe in materially or sexually motivated manipulation or revenge.
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:00 pm - IP Man-Hash: 822c948329db7
I saw this on the Ricki Lake show (appalling reference point, but relevant still) I agree with you whole heartedly that this is a complete joke.
I can see however that it does work out positively for the child though in some lights. I also believe that when you find a partner you can trust, and/or one who is especially independent and honest, you would not consider this an issue.
I for example would never cheat on my partner, if we were not happy and we could not repair it, I would rather end the relationship than make a farce of it. I also wouldn’t have the heart to do such a hideous thing to a man as make him pay for my dishonesty for eighteen years. No self respecting woman would.
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:04 pm - IP Man-Hash: 9cfdf00b83713
I dont know much about the marraige laws in other states, but where i’m from when you divorce you split everything right down the middle even if you have to sell it.
My parents both had nothing when they married, worked hard and invested in property together, and are now divorcing and splitting it all in half with a written contract that nothing is to ever be sold and one property will go to each child. (that is my fathers lifes goal he always says) Since they invested equally, it worked out.
My aunt actually had to give my uncle part of her annuity and savings in the divorce because he had less than her.
Every case is different, and sometimes the woman actually gives the man her assetts in a divorce.
The reason why most men end up paying is because the vast majority of men choose to marry women with little to no income or assetts and no career plans or aspirations. Usually they want a housewife. When they divorce, splitting it down the middle means giving her some of his assetts. Hower the courts dont discriminate in that if a woman is better off she is expected to do the same for her husband.
I think if a man or woman doesnt want to give anything to their spouse in the divorce, they should have a prenup, or maybe think about marrying a person with similar income or aspirations, and not a housewife.
Marraige is bullshit anyway. Whats the point? Oh yeah, a tax break. You can live a happy life with a person until the day you die without ever getting the state in on it to tell you what you have to do if you break up. Two reasonanble people can work out their own relationship.
I will never get married and i dont blame anyone else for not wanting to, but its silly to blame women. Those men, knowing full well the divorce laws, should have told their wives to get off their ass and work if they didnt want to support them.
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:12 pm - IP Man-Hash: 9cfdf00b83713
And you are absolutely right about “deadbeat dads”
62% of custodial mothers do not receive child support, however, of that number, three-fourths of them simply dont want child support, haven’t asked for it, have accepted other financial arrangements instead of child support, or the father does not have the money.
Only 11% of custodial mothers who dont receive child support, is because of “deadbeat dads”.
Men who provide non-monetary support are deadbeat dads according to the child-support system.
Mothers and fathers often work out agreements for child support that involve dad fixing the car, buying groceries, baby-sitting the children, or getting clothes for the children. These men may be unemployed, but they want to help their children. None of the non-monetary support counts, even if the mother and father want it to count and even if they agree in writing that it should count.
So not only is the deadbeat dad accusation bullshit, but the greedy ex-wife accusation is bullshit as well.
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:19 pm - IP Man-Hash: 9cfdf00b83713
Why not? Just buy a gun. Thats what my mom did before she became a real estate agent going out to creepy houses inthe middle of nowhere.