Funny rape website

[Teal Lantern]

Yes. Obviously women don't care about other people and are hard wired to suck up to the men in charge while dumping on everyone else. Expecting sympathy from a woman is as stupid as expecting intelligent discussion. People really need to stop anthropomorphisizing women.

hmm.. interesting. Now I imagine if a woman said, "Yes. Obviously men don't care about other people and are hard wired to be violent aggressive cheaters. Expecting goodness from a man is as stupid as expecting him to be a civil being. People really need to stop anthropomorphizing men.".
You be crying misandry, and how she a feminazi.

So by your own logic and beliefs, what should I call you?

The major difference in the two sentiments is that examples of one can be much more easily found than the other in the real world.
One can easily find video clips of women on daytime talk shows laughing and joking about sexual mutilation of men (Lorena Bobbit, Catherine Becker). Try finding a talk show panel of men making jokes about the reverse.
One can easily find movies glorifying "taking him to the cleaners". (First Wives Club) Try finding the reverse.
One can find songs ("Before He Cheats") and movies glorifying destroying a man's property (or ruining his life) for cheating (Waiting to Exhale). Try finding the reverse.
A cheating man = Fatal Attraction.
A cheating woman = Bridges of Madison County.

[annie]

So let me get this straight.

You say AW don't care about AM ----------> one (or a few who have shown up) with genuine interest --------> you question it and brand her as a TROLL, incapable of CARING, intelligent thought (w/o knowing anything about me)---> told to SHUT UP and go back to the kitchen -----------------------> she will most likely stop caring due to the negativity received when attempting to give a crap -----> (cycle this arrow back to the first word)

What a catch-22.

[annie]

The major difference in the two sentiments is that examples of one can be much more easily found than the other in the real world.
One can easily find video clips of women on daytime talk shows laughing and joking about sexual mutilation of men (Lorena Bobbit, Catherine Becker). Try finding a talk show panel of men making jokes about the reverse.
One can easily find movies glorifying "taking him to the cleaners". (First Wives Club) Try finding the reverse.
One can find songs ("Before He Cheats") and movies glorifying destroying a man's property (or ruining his life) for cheating (Waiting to Exhale). Try finding the reverse.
A cheating man = Fatal Attraction.
A cheating woman = Bridges of Madison County.

That I agree with. I don't think that is fair, nor does it honour equal rights. That means respecting both genders equally, as oppose to berating one more than the other. Or glorifying one more than the other.

However, my response was specific to Cornfed's words, and whether he realizes that, if a woman had said the same thing, he'd be branding them feminazis. I think it is important not to lose your humanity when fighting for your cause. I find that people become so entangled in their causes, and they forget that they are slowly becoming exactly what they are fighting against.

I see this all the time. I see it with feminism.
Women being so polarized about female rights that they forget they are stepping over men's right.
And this is what I am seeing here. Cornfed seems to be so polarized about male rights, he seems to forget every word he uttered is the reason feminism occurred in the first place. You know what I mean?

[The_Hero_of_Men]

Annie, you just don't get it, do you? Every time an American female comes here claiming to understand where we come from, it always ends up in the same place: her trying to convince us to give American women another chance, and failing that, using the same shaming tactics and shaming language against us. You're a woman here in America, and even if you "don't agree" with the current system, you would still benefit from it merely because you have breasts and a vagina. Because you're not a man, you could not begin to understand where we are coming from, so stop trying to pretend to give a damn. Females like you are the most dangerous to our cause; even more so than card carrying NOW members. The reason being is that females like you will come in, pretend to give a damn, and some simp mangina/Captain-Save-A-Hoe will come to her rescue, and that will divide the men in the cause. By the way, don't come in our backyard and tell us how to think!

[annie]

I have not imposed any thoughts on you. Merely observed what you have said, and responded in accordance.

[Jester]

That I agree with. I don't think that is fair, nor does it honour equal rights. That means respecting both genders equally, as oppose to berating one more than the other. Or glorifying one more than the other.

I have no doubt you are trying to be a fair-minded person. But many of us are no longer swayed by phrases like "equal rights". Our great-great-grandparents didn't earn freedom, fight Indians, Turks etc through fairness or "equal rights" with women. They ruled their homes. That "equal rights" stuff was just Anglo-Zionist baloney that was hatched by Jewish Communists in the nineteenth century, and propagated by Gentile elitists as a way to control the masses. Thanks to the internet, now we know. Men are in charge, as they always have been, and everything else is deception. The only question is WHICH men. Sure, one man cannot single-handedly destroy the Anglo-Zionist cartel, but on an individual basis, each man can assert his own autonomy. No more PC, no more 50/50 BS.

If you want to experience bliss, go learn to be a "submitted woman" etc., and attract a man who will rule over you.

However, my response was specific to Cornfed's words, and whether he realizes that, if a woman had said the same thing, he'd be branding them feminazis. I think it is important not to lose your humanity when fighting for your cause. I find that people become so entangled in their causes, and they forget that they are slowly becoming exactly what they are fighting against.

Here I agree with you. Bitterness ain't good for a man.

But sometimes expressing it, and getting it out is necessary. As I said before, this thread is not the place to argue about this. If you want to stick around HA and look and learn, fine. It ain't your place to "educate" the guys here.

I see this all the time. I see it with feminism.
Women being so polarized about female rights that they forget they are stepping over men's right.
And this is what I am seeing here. Cornfed seems to be so polarized about male rights, he seems to forget every word he uttered is the reason feminism occurred in the first place. You know what I mean?

You're confusing cause and effect.

[annie]

Hi Jester,
You seem to be one of the more open minded guys here, in the sense that you aren't taking my every word as an attack, which is great (since that isn't my intention in the first place) and responding with mature intelligent replies. So I am more interested in reading your replies. Also, Teal Lantern's.

Annie please stick around and keep posting now and then. I really needed the laugh!

-not sure if you are laughing with me or at me? =)

Our great-great-grandparents didn't earn freedom, fight Indians, Turks etc through fairness or "equal rights" with women.

-Yah, I have never been pro-war. It isn't fair that men who didn't start wars, were forced to fight them. I chose to use "equal rights" as opposed to feminism, because I think equal rights means that. It means just because you are a man, you are not expected to conform to traditional male roles. Just because you are a woman, you are not expected to conform to traditional female roles.

If you want to experience bliss, go learn to be a "submitted woman"etc., and attract a man who will rule over you.

-I would reply to this, but I don't want to jump guns without knowing what you define as a "submitted woman". So, what exactly does that mean?

You're confusing cause and effect.

-I don't think I am. Women didn't have any rights before today. Women were not considered person's in the US/Canada until 1940s. They were not allowed to have property or have a say in government that affected them. Along came the feminist movement. And then, as you guys say, it seems to have gone too far into misandry, which I agree with. Now, I haven't seen any strong men's rights movements so far. But from this forum is a representation of the men's right movement, then the mentality presented here, it sounds to be infringing upon women's right (as in limiting their roles due to biological gender = kitchen as Cornfed said)


Night!

[Cornfed]

Women didn't have any rights before today. Women were not considered person's in the US/Canada until 1940s.

This is an example of how incredibly ignorant and stupid the average woman really is, and how they are so ignorant and stupid about their own ignorance and stupidity that they think they can actually have something to offer in a conversation with intelligent men. I would counsel against any futile attempts to educate women such as this. Women will just say and do what the men in charge tell them so it doesn't matter what if anything they "think", and if you can still hear a woman talk it just indicates that your dick is not stuck far enough down her throat.

[Jester]

Women didn't have any rights before today. Women were not considered person's in the US/Canada until 1940s.

This is an example of how incredibly ignorant and stupid the average woman really is, and how they are so ignorant and stupid about their own ignorance and stupidity that they think they can actually have something to offer in a conversation with intelligent men. I would counsel against any futile attempts to educate women such as this. Women will just say and do what the men in charge tell them so it doesn't matter what if anything they "think", and if you can still hear a woman talk it just indicates that your dick is not stuck far enough down her throat.

Cornfed,
your vulgarity shocks me, but I admit you are right.


Annie,
google works on your computer like it does mine. Cornfed is right. It's not my job to educate you, even if you were willing. If you want to educate yourself, then:

(1) google "Henry Makow" and read what he says about men, women and feminism. Read the archived articles. Believe them.

(2) click on
http://thecampofthesaints.org/2011/05/0 ... nking-etc/
Though humorous this is pretty much how I see things. You can listen or you can ignore.

(3) once you've read, absorbed, and PRACTICED what these folks say (not agreed - PRACTICED) then come on back and let us know. Or just google around. Noone cares what you heard in school or on Oprah. It's all BS. You can open your eyes or stay programmed.

You are really a microcosm of the tragic loss of American womanhood. You mean well, but you think that what you think matters. It doesn't. You need to listen.

Good luck.

If it helps, it took many of us sveral years to open our eyes. And that's with skeptical male minds. It's a Matrix. You choose the pill.

I already chose.

[Teal Lantern]

-I don't think I am. Women didn't have any rights before today. Women were not considered person's in the US/Canada until 1940s. They were not allowed to have property or have a say in government that affected them. Along came the feminist movement. ...

Maybe you meant 1840s?

Black and white females earning various college degrees in the 1800's America.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_ ... in_America

Married Women’s Property Acts, in U.S. law, series of statutes that gradually, beginning in 1839, expanded the rights of married women to act as independent agents in legal contexts.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... perty-Acts
(As an aside, pre-nups were originally created to protect women who had inherited property.)

[All_That_Is_Man]

"Even the very few American women who want to understand your feelings, are largely a waste of time. They will talk and talk and talk with you. They will sympathize and intellectualize. But in the end, you'll find that there was no real conclusion. They talked so much, they managed to evade the point." - Anonymous

Time will reveal that annie is just another troll who doesn't belong on this site, no matter how "understanding" she thinks she is. The quote above also sets a prime example of why men need to stop having platonic friendships with western females altogether.

Harsh, my brother. Harsh but true.

I told my son this just 2 weeks ago. Sad, harsh, because women are fun to talk to and be around. But being around them in a platonic way does us absolutely no good.

I agree that foreign women are fun to talk to and be around. I would carefully only choose foreign women as platonic friends (or lovers as well). You should only associate with American women if you are fu¢king her or soon will.
I cringe when guys on these forums share the harsh judgment that they receive from their American/western female friends about traveling abroad to meet foreign women. Just why the fu¢k are you in a position to seek approval from western females??? Being close friends (and "close" as in sharing your companionship issues and travel plans) with women in a western country sets yourself up for your own problems and anguish.

I was at the eatery in the mall today, and I was looking good. Unfortunately for me, only sheboon American black females were the only ones who noticed, and were gawking at me. So I got my food from the local Japanese restaurant, and in an attempt to dodge all of the predatory-like, hungry stares from all the ghetto "Shaniquas" surrounding me, I walked over to a table where an Asian woman was sitting alone and asked if I could eat with her - she kindly welcomed my company. For once in a long time, I had a genuine, platonic connection with a female stranger (a western female would have ran off and informed security that someone born with a penis just talked to her), and she was friendly and open. Anyway she was born in China, had just married an America man in the service, she is 30, she teaches Mandarin but for now she works at the Japanese restaurant, and she had only been in America for 4 months. I told her that American men are waking up and looking for wives in Asia because they are seeking feminine, friendly women. Anyway, I could already sense that she hated the "Americanization" of her new surroundings here, and I genuinely hope that she and her husband (who is probably a fellow red piller) decide to ditch this hellhole before his lovely wife becomes an American (or worse: a Chicagoan female)!

[annie]

@Teal Lantern. No I meant the Person's Case, in Canada. Various different rights were being granted throughout the years, and finally around late 1930, women were legally considered person's in Canada. (I see, as you pointed out, it was different in the US).

@Jester. Since you skimmed over the fact that women did not have rights in the past (could not get education, could not vote, could not own and control their property) just as Cornfed did, and agreed with his berating remarks, and the websites you pointed out, I can conclude that you guys believe in:


-restoring life back to before feminist days to the "natural" roles of men and women
-where women can't get educated, or inherit property, or have jobs.
-and everything in this world is a conspiracy.

So your movement isn't a men's right movement. It's rather a reversal of feminism and stepping on women's rights (because naturally they aren't suppose to have any, the the man lays down the law ).

Which is a fascinating revelation!

What is interesting is there are catch 22's regardless of how you want it. I have seen it on this board.
-you want the woman to be a housewife, but then complain if the woman desires financial stability in her husband. Of course she does! She doesn't have any earning potential, so she's going to want to make sure you can support her needs, clothing, food, children etc.
-and I have also seen some of you say, oh she should get a job and not need financial security from her husband. Well, she is too DUMB to get a job, because women are naturally stupid and incapable. She can't do anything except for cook, clean, raise children and be sexually available for you.

So THANKS! I have learned exactly what I came here for. To see what you believed in.

Up until now, I thought you had a cause, asking men to be respected and valued. But you're not. You're asking for that, via disrespecting and devaluing women (see Cornfed responses for example).

So definitely look for women abroad. The women you are looking for definitely do not exist in the west.

And good luck in your search!

[The_Hero_of_Men]

See, brothers? Annie failed to convince us that she is different and that she "gives a damn", so she gets upset and accuses our movement of not being legitimate because we aren't behaving to her standards (i.e. kissing American women's collective ass/asses). She also tried to Shame us by saying that we desire a return to "pre-feminist" days when women had no rights. There were historical societies where women had no rights. I am a student of history, and even though these past societies had their Share of problems, they at least kept their women in line, so their problems were kept to a minimum. The Roman Empire was the most advanced empire/feared power if its time, but once they started giving women more rights, that was the beginning of the end of the Roman Empire-- feminism was one of the major causes of the collapse of the Roman Empire. Look at Muslim society, then compare it to modern Western society-- While I personally disagree with the (occasionally) extreme way that Muslim women are treated (simply because extremes are never good), Muslim society generally has much less problems than Western society. Muslim men at least keep their women in check. While I may disagree with some of their methods, American society could learn something from them. Anyway, back to you Annie: Your standards here mean squat to us. If you do not like the way we express our views here, then you're free to leave , and don't let the doorknob hit you where the dog should've bit you. You came to this forum, knowing that our views would be... different (did you NOT read Winston's disclaimer, IN RED, at the top if the page???). You came here with the intent on trying to change our minds (or at least troll), and you failed, so you proceeded to try to attack us, if you did so indirectly. Of course we don't want Western women.

[annie]

How did I know you were going to accuse me of not caring. Read what I wrote above about how, I came here to "care". And then you guys "shamed" me by calling me stupid and unintelligent.
Now when I tell you what I EXACTLY learned from what you demonstrated here, you tell me, oh look, she doesn't care, and accuse me of shaming you.

Again, bravo on the catch-22s left and right.

I am not shaming you. Am I not correct in saying that you want to return to pre-feminist days? I mean, that's what you guys just said above. What's wrong with that. Either you do, or you don't.
What's wrong with me stating something you believe in.

so you proceeded to try to attack us

I didn't try to change your views anywhere. Find me one instance where I said anything even remotely insulting like Cornfed or yourself. And show me where I said something you don't already believe in.

[The_Hero_of_Men]

The problem is; you're saying a lot of the same crap that past female trolls here have said, so excuse us for being skeptical of you. You come here, say you care, and you expect us to immediately fall at your feet (I.e. expecting us to believe you without question). Like I said, if you truly have a problem with our views... don't let the door hit you on the way out.