Rorschach - or - What the fuck is that supposed to be?

After reading my posts regarding my recent experiences with bikini-clad women on the Florida beach finding me so very attractive only to turn around and try to have me arrested for an illegal boner, it was recommended that I see a psychologist or other similar professional. I tried to argue against this. I swore up and down, "your honor, those women had the hots for me like you would not believe. It was insane!"

Alas, I did not help my case at all.

The very first thing my new 'friend' did upon meeting me, was to sit me down with some not-very-good finger-paintings that she had done and ask me to look at them and tell her what I saw. Some people call this the Rorschach Test, but I call it smeary shit that looks like a lot of different things depending on how drunk you are.

Anyway, here are the paintings she showed me along with my interpretations. I'm sure you'll see exactly the same things I saw because it was just all so ridiculously obvious and also I was painfully sober at the time:

One of those old-fashioned girdles from the '50s

Girl in a raincoat walking down a path between two hills. She's having the period from hell.

Two big-tittied chicks holding expensive purses and dancing together.

Man lying on his back staring up at the sky because he's fucking lazy. He also appears to have a stick up his ass.

Mothra! AUGH!!! Someone call Godzilla!

Dragon fly escaping a woman's vagina. Or maybe skimming the water. Yeah, that'd make way more sense, wouldn't it?

2 1950s era sockhop high school girls dancing, ponytails flying up in the air, pregnant bellies touching

2 bears and a pterodactyl playing poker around a campfire

2 Chinese dragons facing off in an ultimate fighting cage match. The audience is in red because China is communist.

A cow in a blue bikini top, big red shawl, yellow gloves and green stretchy pants dancing in front of the Eiffel Tower. Two women in blue wigs, yellow tops and orange pants are dancing on either side of the cow. It must be some sort of French disco for cows or something.

So anyway, there you have it. I don't see how this is any big deal, but she seemed to feel that it was very important. I also complimented her on her big boobs and giant '80s-style glasses, but on retrospection, I probably shouldn't have mentioned the ugly glasses. She's probably pretty self-concious about those.

Next week I should find out what she thought that my opinions of her paintings means on some 'deeper' level. I hope she doesn't show me any more of them, though, because to be honest, her work really sucked and it was hard for me to hide my real opinions. I don't want to hurt her feelings. She strikes me as a really lonely woman who probably doesn't get out much.

My stupid doctor who can't paint worth a shit

So anyway, what do you see when you look at the Rorschach paintings?
You have read this article rorschach inkblot test with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!

Defective Chinese-Made Chairs from K-Mart

Another serious problem with defective Chinese products.

The latest cheap K-Mart outdoor chairs are made in China.

The lack of quality control has meant that the plastic used to rest on is very, very cheap and thin.

Purchase them at your own risk.

Attached is an example of the problem.

Don't buy them, or this could happen to you too.

You have read this article faulty product warning / humor / tits with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!

Misandric Monday - Men's Health Magazine

I can do anything better than you!

Ever since the death of Mr. Robert Rodale, the man who founded Men's Health Magazine and subsequent takeover of Rodale Press by his wife and daughters, one of whom majored in women's studies, the quality of this particular magazine has steadily declined. But the biggest problem isn't the increasing amount of misinformation inside the magazine, much of which is grossly outdated or just plain wrong. No, the real problem is that the magazine is now run by a family of feminist New York women and the handful of 'men' whom they hire.

Here are some excerpts from this September's issue. I think they speak for themselves, but naturally I'm going to comment because I feel like it.

Page 18 From The Editor : editor David Zinczenko writes, "7 million people have lost their jobs in the current recession ... 80 percent of the jobs lost belong to men. ... When it comes to handling changes, the best people for men to learn from are the women in their lives."

Learn from the women? Learn to be more like women? Men should learn to be more like women, because the differences in sexes of those laid off is a result of men not being good enough, smart enough, or liked?

Later in his full-page affront to men he says, "it's women who know best."

Now, come on, this is the advice that Men's Health has to offer to men?

No, seriously, this is Men's Health magazine. Believe me, I checked and rechecked several times just to be sure. This all sounds so familiar, so deja vu. Where have I heard this argument before? Oh yes, my mom's old copies of Ms!

Page 20 The Gender Judge "Women are outperforming men in the workplace."

This claim is quoted from Janet S. Hyde, a feminist psychologist from the University of Wisconsin. She gives no stats to support this claim, nor does she direct us to any research or facts of any kind. Apparently she feels that the idea that men are inferior is a given and needs no facts to support it. And shockingly, Men's Health agrees.

Janet Hyde - circa 1980 maybe?
actual goofy photo from Men's Health

Putting her sexist statement aside, let's get to the more important question of What the fuck is a feminist psychologist doing being quoted in Men's Health magazine in the first place? You sure as hell won't see Glenn Sacks or any other men's rights advocates being quoted in Women's Health.

Of course, Men's Health didn't actually mention that Janet S. Hyde is a professor of feminist psychology when they quoted her. They also didn't mention she is a women's studies professor, a fairly significant omission.

No, they simply listed her as a psychologist, a respected expert, someone we are supposed to trust. And seeing as we are reading Men's Health, you would think we could. But you would be wrong.

Now getting back to her statement that women are outperforming men in the workplace, what is this blanket statement of male inferiority based on? If women are outperforming men in the workplace, what have feminists been complaining about all this time? Under capitalism, without socialist interference like affirmative action, or now in the UK, "positive discrimination", all business would choose women over men willingly and without the U.S. Government forcing them to do so.

More importantly, though, what is this statement doing in Men's Health magazine in the first place? What is wrong in corporate America that major publications such as this, or the Wall Street Journal to name another, where the subscribers are known to be over 80 percent male, don't see what might be wrong with shoving male-bashing down the throats of the male readers? Why are Janet Hyde's female-supremacy theories not simply being limited to the pink pages of Ms magazine, where sexist male-bashing and feminist chest-beating is expected and even desired by those who buy it? How have our nation's corporate leaders come to be so short-sighted and incompetent in such large numbers?

Oh, I know I'm talking specifically about Men's Health magazine here, but anyone who has been paying attention has surely noticed that this lack of competent leadership is a nationwide phenomenon in the United States. It reminds me of the British Empire, just before it fell. Or Rome, for that matter. Nero Obama, see how easily that rolls off the tongue?

Page 28 On The Minds of Men - a poll asks "Would classes that are gender-segregated improve education?"

The use of the term "Gender" when what is actually being referred to is biological sex is a purely femingst trend, pushed through colleges and universities and especially law schools to satisfy the lesbians who deny the existence of any sex differences, just as Janet S. Hyde does in one of her books. Medical professsionals* (see note) don't use the term "gender" because it's vague and incorrect. Men don't do it because it's bullshit. A boy dressed as a girl and presenting himself as such is of the female gender, and feminists insist we all must call him "she". But his sex has not changed and calling him "she" is a lie. Men know this. Men don't use ambiguous bullshit terms when there are better, more accurate terms available. Men don't like vague, feel-good, bullshit, Oprafied double-talk. And up until recently, Men's Health Magazine didn't use the term "gender" in its pages in place of "sex".

Gender - Chris Crocker has none

* page 25 of the Journal of the ADA Style Guide (which is based on the AMA Manual of Style), you will find clearly stated:

gender vs sex: gender refers to the psychological/societal aspects of being male or female, sex specifically to the physical aspects. Do not interchange.

Page 38 Not in the Office - "... They surveyed more then 1200 women and men about workplace sexual behaviors ..."

Quick quiz for all native English-speaking people, especially in the United States - who says "women and men" instead of the more free-flowing "men and women"? Who can you think of right off the top of your head that speaks this way? Do men speak this way? Do women who aren't man-hating, predominantly lesbian, feminists speak this way? Or is it only misandric feminist professors and the men who kiss their asses (Obama) who ever, ever say "women and men" and "she or he" and "lesbians and gays" even though it is awkward, artificial, and intentionally sexist?

Yes, in America we always put the shorter word first. It's for the sake of convenience, not a partriarchal conspiracy to "keep the woman down". For example, we say "men and women", but "ladies and gentlemen" and for 100 years no one thought anything of it. What flows is what we'll use, no matter who says otherwise. But to female-supremacists this is unacceptable. Women and lesbians must always be first. Men are an accident, er, afterthought.

Once again I have to remind you that this is printed in Men's Health, not Women's Health. In fact, having read several issues of Women's Health, I have to say that to some extent it is less misandric than Men's Health. Not always, but often enough that it surprised me considering the same Rodale family of women control both.

Page 130 - the featured article

"In the modern workplace, the best way for a man to succeed might be for him to think like a woman"

So I picked the magazine up off the floor where it had somehow landed and I went to the article that promises to teach us inferior males how to be women in the workplace and thus get ahead.

Here are some excerpts. See if you might consider this odd for a men's magazine to say:

"sometimes it might work better to not act like such a guy ... Or at least that it might make sense to be a stealth guy, cleverly disguised by day as a mild-mannered, semirational member of the community? In the modern workplace, the best way for a man to succeed might actually be to suppress his caveman and try to think like a woman instead."

Disguised as semirational? Suppress his "caveman"? Those Geico commercials featuring cavemen who get offended are starting to make sense all of a sudden. This castrated momma's boy thinks men are hysterical cavemen. Except himself, of course.

Ah, but he goes on:

"Four out of five jobs lost in the current recession belonged to men. (It's been dubbed the "he-cession.") Male-dominated construction and manufacturing sectors are taking the hardest hits.

Even in white-collar industries, men often look more expendable than women. "Women work a little harder," says one male boss in market research. ... And
(the author throws this feminist propaganda in from out of left field) they're frequently paid less."

"Says one male boss" whom he singled out from all the others who didn't say this and thus weren't quoted in his article. Men in management are notorious ass-kisssers when it comes to political correctness. And nothing could be more politically correct than to say that men are inferior to women on the job, or anywhere.

And what about that last claim, that women are frequently paid less than men for the same work and with the same qualifications? Not according to research conducted by anyone other than feminists, feminist research being the only research in which no documentation of any kind is required. Actually, in I.T. and engineering women have been paid on average 20 percent MORE than men for the same work and with the same qualifications for the past 20 years. And in some fields, such as sales engineer, women make up to 43 percent more for the same work. It's a direct result of low supply vs government-mandated demand. It's also sex-discrimination, but it's the OK kind because it's sex-discrimination against men.

The author continues:

"The political zeitgeist also favors women. One business magazine (never specifically named) recently offered a predictable list of ideal qualities for a chief financial officer, and then added, "Oh, yes, and the company might be better off if it chooses a woman."

You can't get much more blatantly sexist than that. "Just hire a woman and you'll be better off." But here in the United States, this is the norm. Some people don't even recognize what they're seeing as sexism anymore as long as the target group is male.

The castration continues:

"And in financially struggling Icland, the women who run one of that nation's only investment firms still turning a profit recently blamed the country's economic collapse on "typical" aggressive, indiscriminate, high-risk, "male" behavior."

What a coincidence, the feminazis in the press here in the US did the same. But when the market was screaming upward in the years from 1988 to 2000, not once did any of these women, or anyone at all, credit those same men and their "aggressive ... high-risk, male behavior" for making everyone rich. Funny how it always works that way.

Clearly the author of this article, much like Janet Hyde, has never heard of the EEOC or Federal Government mandates that women be hired and promoted above males of any race, and that in times of layoff, women must be maintained on the employment roles, but men can be let go entirely, leaving not a single one, if a company so decides. In other words, the US Government mandates by law that women do better than men in the workplace, even if a non-merit-based push is required. Men, on the other hand, may be openly and blatantly discriminated against both in hiring and in promotions. But all of this has somehow escaped the notice of the author of this article as well as the rest of the "men" at Men's Health Magazine.

Now, at this point I put down the magazine and went to the phone to call Men's Health Magazine and cancel my subscription. I have tried writing to them off and on for years only to watch a once-useful magazine for men steadily transform into a women's studies textbook for indoctrinating fatherless boys and gay men who simply want to smell nice and lose weight. I dialed the number and was connected with an automated phone system. The voice, of course, was female. I was transferred to 4 different automated phone voices, all females, until they finally told me I had to call back on Monday, apparently to talk to more automated female voices before I could finally cancel and request my money back from my recent renewal.

Welcome to Men's Health, you pig!
You have read this article men's health / misandry with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!


1. I've come to realize that my chest-size...
is less important than the length of my penis.

2. I've come to realize that my job...
pays less than teenaged girls make for working as strippers.

3. I've come to realize that when I'm driving...
I like to imagine cell-phone driver's heads exploding in a ball of fire and blood.

4. I've come to realize that I need...
blow jobs and porn

5. I've come to realize that I have lost...
the ability to get throbbing erections at random and totally inappropriate times, like I always did back in high school.

6. I've come to realize that I hate it when...
my 4-year-old great-niece accidentally hits me in the balls in the middle of a crowded restaurant while we're walking to our table.

7. I've come to realize that when I'm drunk...
I still can't dance or sing worth a shit.

8. I've come to realize that money...
can buy hookers and alcohol at the same time!

9. I've come to realize that certain people...
don't appreciate the valuable contribution that hookers offer to society.

10. I've come to realize that I will always...
crap in the handicapped stall whenever it is available.

11. I've come to realize that my sibling(s)....
are all screwed up, too, just in different ways.

12. I've come to realize that my mom...
will never be able to drive or cook very well, and we should all just learn to accept this.

13. I've come to realize that my cell phone...
doesn't float, and I don't care enough to go in after it. BLOOP!

14. I've come to realize that when I woke up this morning...
I had a stiffer one than I'm likely to have the entire rest of the day.

15. I've come to realize that last night before I went to sleep...
I shouldn't have watched porn on Showtime.

16. I've come to realize that right now I am thinking...
about the porn on Showtime.

17. I've come to realize that my dad...
was a good man for introducing me to porn.

18. I've come to realize that when I get on The Blog...
I can waste an entire night without accomplishing one damn thing.

19. I've come to realize that today...
is a good day to moon a cop.

20. I've come to realize that tonight...
I may be in jail for mooning the cop.

21. I've come to realize that tomorrow...
there will be more cops and strippers and porn.

22. I've come to realize that I really want to...
lick Jessica Biel and make her call out to "Oh God."

23. I've come to realize that the person who is most likely to repost this is...
Barney Frank, while cursing me for calling him an Elmer Fuddling.

24. I've come to realize that life...
is like a box of chocolates. And you can use those chocolates to bargain for sex from a hot woman who likes chocolates, which have somehow been mysteriously injected with tequila.

25. I've come to realize that this weekend...
all the hookers were busy with Elvis freaks.

26. I've realized the best music to listen to when I am upset...
is the sound of hundreds of helpless people screaming in terror at the top of their lungs, begging me to spare their lives. Wait, what were we talking about?

27. I've come to realize that my friends...
used to get laid more than I did back when we were younger.

28. I've come to realize that this year...
I need to make up for those younger years.

29. I've come to realize that my exes...
didn't get along well with my 'Oh's.

30. I've come to realize that maybe I should...
be nicer to strippers, because one day, probably next weekend, I may need them to be nice to me.

31. I've come to realize that I love...
strippers and hookers and tequila.

32. I've come to realize that I don't understand...
why more attractive young girls don't become strippers.

33. I've come to realize my past...
would've been better if it had included more strippers.

34. I've come to realize that parties...
go better with strippers.

35. I've come to realize that I'm totally terrified...
of hiring a stripper while drunk only to discover that she's a he.

36. I've come to realize that my life...
can be enhanced by liberal doses of strippers and tequila.

You have read this article hookers / life / strippers with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!

American Cop Show

Bad boys, bad boys!

I was just now watching one of those 'real life' cop TV shows where they follow actual cops around with a camera. It was Colorado. The cops got a call to a 'domestic'. They go to an apartment and knock on the door.

A woman answers the door. She called, apparently. The cops walk in. There is crap all over the apartment. But the woman doesn't look ruffled at all. Even her hair is perfect.

The cops immediately ask "Where is he?"

She says "he isn't here. I don't need you. I'm OK. He left. I don't need you."

The cops ignore her and search every room until they find a man. They start yelling at him "put your hands where I can see them! Keep your hands where I can see them!"

They immediately handcuff the man and start taking him outside to their car. As they drag him outside they're asking him what happened.

"Nothing happened. She went to some bachelor party and did something with some guy. I didn't like it, so I told her so. But I never touched her."

The man's face is beat to hell. His cheek is bleeding and one of his eyes is swollen and black. He has no shirt and looks like he's been attacked by a mountain lion.

They take him to the patrol car and stop there, holding him next to the car while he is still in handcuffs. Then they turn on the woman.

She doesn't have a scratch on her. Not a mark. Her hair isn't even messed up.

"How many times did he hit you?" the office in charge screams at her.

"He never hit me."

"I never touched her, officer," the man says.

"You shut up!" the officer in charge shouts at the man. Then he turns back on the woman, barking at her. "Where did he hit you? How many times did he hit you? You have a responsiblity to protect that child up there. We can take that child from you. Where did he hit you? How many times did he hit you?"

"He never hit me! I hit him!" she shouts in obvious frustration.

"He never hit you? Did he ever push you? Did he ever touch you?"

"No, he never pushed me."

"You are caught in a cycle of violence," he shouts at her as he leans in until he's right up in her face, nose to nose. "He will only get worse until he hurts you and that child! You have an obligation to protect that child! Where did he hit you? Where did he push you? He hit you, didn't he?"

"He never hit me," she responds, leaning away from the officer.

"He touched you? Did he touch you?"

"He touched me once." By this point the formerly calm woman is starting to cry. The police are upsetting her more and more, scaring her by mentioning the child.

"Where did he touch you?"

"Touched me? He touched me once on my shoulder. Right here," she said, pointing to her right shoulder, crying and seemingly in fear of the police officer.

"He TOUCHED your shoulder?" the officer demands.

"Yes, right there," she repeats. "He just touched me."

"That's all we need," he said, turning to the officer standing next to the battered man.

Then they threw the man with the battered and bloody face into the car, telling him he's a wife beater and he is being charged him with domestic violence.

The woman without a mark on her begins to cry much harder at this point.

Then the officer turns on her again. "You need to get counseling about being a victim! You need to get help to protect you. This will happen again and it will only get worse."

The officer then says to the camera, "we are taking him to jail. He is going to be made to get counseling to face the fact that he is an abuser. He is an abuser and he will only get worse without help."

They drive away with the battered husband in handcuffs in the back of their patrol car while his wife, the woman who pummeled his face into a bloody mess, stands now crying her eyes out in the parking lot, watching the father of her child being taken away to jail for touching her shoulder while she pounded him in the face.

Dating in the 21st century

One of them certainly does have a problem. One of them probably is going to get much worse. Especially since one of them, the one who did all the hitting and the punching, is going to be constantly told that they are the 'real victim' and need to go find a taxpayer-funded government counselor to 'help' them learn all about how to view themself as the victim even as their fists continue to pound their spouse into a bloody mess again and again. And any time the target of their fists says or does anything they don't like for any reason, they will simply pick up the phone and threaten him with the police and jail as punishment for daring to defy them, keeping him perpetually under their thumb until he either snaps and kills, or packs up his things and leaves for good.

Of course, even if he does leave, the police will continue to hound him. He's a dead-beat dad the minute he flees the abusive situation, unless he takes the child with him, in which case every woman in America will be asked to help the police hunt him down for daring to "kidnap" his own child from a violent, abusive home. And they will help hunt him down. Because CNN will tell them over and over again that he was arrested for domestic violence. HE is the abuser. SHE is the victim. It must be so because he was the one the police arrested and the police aren't suppose to arrest victims, only criminals.

They aren't supposed to, but sometimes they do.

Oh Lucy! You Gotta Lotta 'Splainin To Do

You have read this article I hate TV with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!

Amazing Elephant Tale

bull elephant

In 1972, Joe Miller was on holiday in Kenya after graduating from Tulsa Junior College .

On a hike through the bush, he came across a young bull elephant standing with one leg raised in the air. The elephant seemed distressed, so Joe approached it very carefully. He got down on one knee, inspected the elephants foot, and found a large piece of wood deeply embedded in it. As carefully and as gently as he could, Joe worked the wood out with his knife, after which the elephant gingerly put down its foot.

The elephant turned to Joe, and with a rather curious look on its face, stared at him for several tense moments. Joe stood frozen, thinking of nothing else but being trampled. Eventually the elephant trumpeted loudly, turned, and walked away. Joe never forgot that elephant or the events of that day.

Thirty years later, Joe was walking through the Tulsa Zoo with His family. As they approached the elephant enclosure, one of the creatures turned and walked over to near where Joe and his Family were standing. The large bull elephant stared at Joe, lifted its front foot off the ground, then put it down. The elephant did that several times then trumpeted loudly, all the while staring at the man.

Remembering the encounter in 1972, Joe could not help wondering if this was the same elephant. Joe summoned up his courage, climbed over the railing, and made his way into the enclosure. He walked right up to the elephant and stared back in wonder. The elephant trumpeted again, wrapped its trunk around one of Joe's legs and slammed him against the railing, killing him instantly.

Probably wasn't the same elephant.

You have read this article joke with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!

Where the hell did I go?

I forgot to tell you guys, but I'm over at Burt's Stache and I have been since late last week. It's not that I'm being unfaithful. It's just that sometimes I wander over to the wrong website and start writing. Once I start, well, you know I can't stop my amazing genius or anything.

Burt's Stache?
What the fuck is that?

By the way, over on Twitter, Elizabeth Banks is entertaining us with this:

ElizabethBanks Do I still have to tip a town car driver who doesn't carry my bag, then farts in the car? Also, it's raining so the window roll-down sucked.

ElizabethBanks When this driver tweets that I'm cheap, I want my side of the story known: He is non-bag-carrying farter who listens to lite rock.

ElizabethBanks Some clarification - he didn't roll down his window - he instead pretended the fart didn't happen. AND he didn't wear his seatbelt.

ElizabethBanks Maybe he was afraid that if he tightened his seatbelt a couple more farts would be squeezed out. A gentleman.

You have read this article burt reynolds mustache / lost blogger with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!

Misandric Monday - that's what SHE said - "I don't need a man"

My favorite Australian radio DJ got into a pseudo-argument the other day with a man over her statement that she's married, but she doesn't NEED a man. She proudly spouted off all the usual feminist rhetoric about being a strong, independent woman and not needing a man. Then added, 'but I choose to have one in my life.'

The dispute that resulted was easily predictable, as it happens frequently. She quotes the dogma of the feminist church of female supremacy, thinking her statement is merely one of proud independence, and then is shocked when men are insulted by it. What's the deal here?

That's what SHE said:

She explained to the caller, who was mercilessly harassing both her statement and her Aussie accent (which he imitated very badly), that what she MEANT was: 'I don't need a man in my life. I can do it all by myself. But I choose to have one because I want to. ' She didn't see anything wrong with this statement and clearly failed to understand why the caller, or any man, might have a problem with it.

Here is what HE heard:

'I don't value men. I can take them or leave them and be just as happy either way. If every man on the earth dropped dead, I honestly believe my life wouldn't change in the least. I see no real use for men in this world and do not feel that I benefit from their existence at all. They are merely window-dressing, something to be played with or admired for a short time and then cast aside at the first sign of the slightest inconvenience or boredom.'

Let me explain it another way. I have several cars. I drive a 4-wheel-drive truck most of the time. But I own a 1970 Chevelle SS454 musclecar which mostly just sits in my garage and pees transmission fluid all over the floor. It's shiny and pretty and makes a lovely rumbly noise when I start the engine, but the fact is, I don't NEED it.

My truck, on the other hand, I DO need. I drive it everywhere I go and without it I would be stranded. I NEED my truck. But I don't NEED my musclecar. It's just a toy.

If a tornado hit my house tomorrow and crushed my garage, squashing my musclecar into scrap metal, I would be upset for the loss of the garage and then call my insurance agent to see how much money I was getting for my destroyed musclecar. I would not cry for the car. After a week or so I wouldn't really even miss the car. I don't NEED it, therefore the loss of it would not change my life one tiny bit.

I do NEED my wife, though. If the tornado crushed the house and killed her, I would be quite upset. I would cry and miss her and my life would suddenly have a large gaping hole in it for the loss of her. Things she did which I took for granted would suddenly not get done and I would be stretched to my limits trying to take up all the work she did for me in addition to my own pre-existing workload. Emotionally I would be deeply wounded by her loss. I would be affected by it. I would be hurt by it. I would go on without her, but it would not be easy and I would be upset for a long time to come.

When a man hears a woman say, "I don't NEED a man, I merely choose to have one" what he hears is "I would not cry one single tear if he died tomorrow. I am fine without him. I can do it all with the greatest of ease all by myself. He adds nothing significant to my life. To hell with "for better or for worse" and all that crap. The minute things get difficult between him and I, he is going to be tossed out into the street. I'll sue him for alimony and child support and generally ruin his life because all he is to me is a meaningless object, an extra paycheck, a pair of hands to help me around the house which can easily be replaced with a maid or a gardener. My new iPhone means more to me than he does. I don't need a man, but I need my cellphone."

Men don't often go where they aren't wanted. Especially where women are concerned, men avoid women with hostility towards men like the plague she will inevitably become. Thanks to the Marxist identity politics of feminism, men have for the last 40 years or more been walking on eggshells trying never to say or do anything that in any way offends the perpetually offended feminist women of the West. It is an impossible task and leaves us exhausted and hurting much of the time, silently wishing that women would one day stop hating us so much and finally love us just a little bit as much as we love them.

I went to a bar the other night. There was a woman there who seemed to have it all. She was blonde and beautiful and had the looks of a movie star or supermodel. She strolled in confidently and quietly sat herself down alone at the bar. I watched her off and on all night, waiting for the men to swarm in and try desperately to get her attention.

But no one ever did. Not one man sat down on either side of her or spoke to her even once. After awhile, she got bored and left, looking a bit discouraged as she went out the door. She was a woman who appeared not to need a man. People tend to assume things about one another based on looks and her looks said that she was successful and well-off and independent, in need of no one and nothing. And so the men took the perceived message to heart and left her alone. It happens all the time.

I know a woman who is a wealthy adviser to several mega-rich individuals in various countries. She's all the time taking trips all over the world, joyrides in exotic sports cars, flights in her private plane which she pilots herself, and partying with celebrities. She's beautiful to look at, the sort of woman that attracts men's attention when she enters a room. She's even modeled in magazines. She's got it all - looks, money, success, and confidence in spades. One thing she does not have, though, is anyone in her life to share any of it with.

According to the values of feminism, this woman is the ideal, she's got money and power and everything she 'needs', and the fact that she has no one to love is utterly meaningless. Money and power are their goals. Everything they do is designed to increase women's wealth and power over men, while decreasing men's wealth and power down to absolute zero, if possible. Love is rarely acknowledged in feminist circles, except when used to push some sort of political agenda, such as gay marriage. Once the political goal is achieved, all talk of 'love' disappears. In the world of feminist identity politics, love is merely a word, a tool that can be utilized when needed to elicit the desired emotional response from the target audience. It is something used to manipulate, but never truly understood.

I've heard a lot of women over the years say "I don't NEED a man" only to later bitterly complain when they ultimately find themselves without one. Sometimes I think women don't realize just how much men are affected by the things women say. We don't always respond to the things they say and so they incorrectly assume we weren't listening or didn't care. We do care. We care a lot.

A few years ago a columnist named Kathleen Parker wrote an article about how sick and tired she was of all the male-bashing in American society and our media. She said that she appreciated men and all the things which we do for women. She didn't dress the article up and rattle any sabers as if expecting a significant response. It was a casually written, from-the-heart article about something that just happened to bug her. The response she received from men was so intense and unexpected that she wrote a second article just to respond to the responses. She said that men were writing to her from all over to tell her that they had NEVER before heard any woman say much of anything nice about men or that they valued men in any way. The outpouring of gratitude and emotion from her male readers was unlike anything she said she had ever experienced before. Men who had never even heard of her had received the article in their email from friends and felt such overwhelming gratitude for what she had said that they felt compelled to write her and say 'thank you!' Some of the men confessed to even crying as they read her article.

In the book of Genesis, it says God created Adam as the first man. Adam was alone except for the animals. Adam had all the power and control any feminist could ever wish for. But Adam was unhappy. Apparently God looked at Adam without Eve and said "it is NOT good." I think it is a mistake to say that men and women don't need each other. The mere fact that we could theoretically survive, grow old, and die without each other is not the same as not needing each other. What good is a world without love? What happiness is there in a world in which the only love we ever experience is the love of ourselves?

A woman who says "I don't need a man" is saying to men "go away and leave me alone", regardless of whether she intends it this way or not. Men hear this message loud and clear. And we go elsewhere, in search of a woman we can love and be loved by in return.

Don't you NEED love?

You have read this article but sometimes a little rough sex can be good / love is all you need / too with the title August 2009. You can bookmark this page URL Thanks!
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...