Category Archives: Gender Studies

Legalize Theft

Well at least this kind.

I honestly think this sort of theft should be legal. You lose something in public, it’s gone. Finders keepers, losers weepers.

You leave your stuff out in the open for anyone to take, screw you. I might just steal it, and in all other circumstances, I am not a thief at all. In fact, I am profoundly unthieving for a male in Hyper-Capitalist Ultra-Individualist Reactionary Asshole Libertarian America.

On the other hand, I believe in punishing people for being idiots.

In Man World, if someone is a moron, he needs to be punished somehow. Most men feel that idiots, fools and dipshits deserve whatever meager punishments they receive. Anything more than that is pushing it, and punishments should not be excessive.

But in Man World, there is little enough sympathy for the truly deserving, especially in Ultra-Individualist America. There is a vast political movement called American Conservatism dedicated to the notion of “No sympathy for anyone, dammit, and whatever happened, it’s your own damn fault and you deserve what you get.”

The stupid and especially the criminally stupid pretty much have it coming to them in Man World. We laugh at people like that. If a man is so insanely stupid to do something so ridiculously dangerous that he might stand a good chance of getting hurt or killed, we men do not care if they get hurt or die.

We laugh at their misfortune, and we do not feel bad about it. We give them Darwin Awards and say they deserved to die.

We say, “I will not weep for him…He got what he asked for…He got what he deserved…Serves him right.”

Man World is a brutal, vicious, savage, coldblooded, merciless place. It’s a damn jungle. Most other men are probably out to screw you over in some way, and who can blame them? I mean they are just being men, right? It’s like getting mad at your cat for acting like a cat.

In Man World, you are expected to be smart at all times. There is no sympathy for dumbasses. In a jungle, the dumb animals get killed off real fast, and they asked for it anyway. Man World feels the same way.

Moral Dilemma: Found Wallet with $500:

Suppose you find a wallet with five $100 bills. Moral dilemma. What do you do? Most men would say pocket the cash, keep the wallet and try to return it to the owner somehow. Mail it back to the owner, or put it in an envelope and drop it off at the guy’s house, turn it in to the police – there are all sorts of things you can do with it.

Cops suck, and in Man World, a lot of men hate cops. Even many good men hate cops. Why do they hate cops? They hate cops because cops suck. Real simple.

Turning it in to the cops is stupid. Cops suck, so they might think you stole the wallet. But if you stole the wallet, why would you turn it in to police? But cops don’t think like that because they suck.

The cops might grab you and try to get your name.

One thing you might want to do is call the police department and see what their policy is for turning in lost items.

One problem with going to the person’s house is if you ring the doorbell and give it back to the person minus the money, they might get into a nasty fight with you if they think you stole the money in the wallet.

So maybe put it in an envelope and drop it on their doorstep, ring the doorbell and run to your car. Drop it off in the middle of the night. Leave a message on their door with your phone number asking them to call you to arrange returning the wallet. Tell them you are not really interested in meeting up with them, but you will arrange some sort of a drop-off in a public place.

Most sane people who lose a wallet are overflowing with gratitude just to get it back at all.

In Man World, if you lose your wallet:

  1. You are an idiot, and you deserve what bad things flow from that incident.
  2. Consider all of the money gone. Be overjoyed if there is $1 left. Consider the credit cards gone. Be overjoyed if even most of them are there. Bottom line, consider anything valuable gone. You have no right to expect to get one dime of your money back because you were stupid enough to lose your wallet.

Most decent men would try to return the wallet in some way. Many good men would take some or all of the money. No good man would ever steal even one of the credit cards. That is a bridge too far.

A very good man would not steal one dollar from the wallet, would return it to the party with all the money intact and would not accept any reward or would even turn down a reward. In Man World, this man would not be put down, but he would be considered a male Mother Theresa, and most men would say, “He’s a better man than I am…”

Some men would return the wallet with all of the money in it, hoping for a reward. In Man World, if you give a wallet full of money back to a man, he should give you a big reward. In fact, it is absolutely mandated that he at least offer you an award. If it had $500 in it, he should give you $100 minimum. A man who does not give you a reward is being an extreme jerk and idiot, and he is widely hated as a small, mean, vicious, petty, womanly man with no sense of honor.

Many good men might pocket $100 and turn the wallet back in on the off chance that the person you return it to is such an jerkoff that he won’t give you a reward. Then they might give it back in person with $400 on the off chance that the guy might give you some of the money as reward. Others would avoid this option, as as the returnee might be so small-minded at the missing $100 that they would accuse you of taking it, and a scene might ensue.

Some good men might pocket the $500 and then return the wallet somehow. In Man World, you can do this and still be a good man. The idea is that once you lose a wallet with money in public, just consider all the money in it to be gone. Be grateful if you get even one note back.

The guy who took the money is not a bad man. Yes, he is opportunistic, but many good men are opportunistic and try to take advantage, get one up or get away with things, simply because they are weak humans who are susceptible to the temptation of minor moral corruption. In Man World, many good men are always fighting off their perfectly natural, normal and understandable temptations and urges to be bad people.

A good man in Man World is simply a man who is able to resist many if not most of his temptations towards minor transgressions. In Man World, it is accepted that most good men will fail morally at times, hopefully in minor ways, simply because Man World has somewhat of an Original Sin type philosophy similar to Christianity that sees men as “born sinners” in a sense that we men only act decent because society forces us to, not because we want to.

If we succumb at times to petty moral crime, this is perfectly understandable, as in Man World, male humans are morally weak, fragile and subject to extreme, nearly innate temptations to act bad simply due to our base animal nature. This view is quite similar once again to the classic Christian view of the Fall from Paradise and the notion that we are basically no good but only rescued for moral salvation by the miraculous intercession of religion and whatnot.

Not giving back the wallet if you could figure out who the owner was would be considered minor bad behavior. The idea is that a good man should somehow try to give the wallet back, because wallets are important for various reasons, especially credit cards, driver’s licenses, bank cards and whatnot.

Bad men would simply pocket everything valuable in the wallet and throw it out or toss it in a field somewhere. They would surely steal the credit cards. This man would get little or no respect from most men in Man World. Bad men are widely disliked in Man World, and we men give other men wide latitude and breaks in terms of  “acting bad.” The men we say act bad, well, they act very, very bad. Our attitude is “Don’t put him in the jail, put him under the jail.”


Filed under Christianity, Conservatism, Crime, Ethics, Gender Studies, Law, Law enforcement, Man World, Philosophy, Political Science, Religion

How to Go Invisible

Real simple:

  1. Be a man.
  2. Age yourself slowly over a medium low heat on a slow cooker to anywhere between 47-57 years old.
  3. Turn down the heat to low and allow to simmer  for 7-17 years until you are now between 47-57 years old.
  4. Remove from heat and walk around in the world encountering fellow humans where they can get a good look at you.

Wa-la! Congratulations! You are now invisible to most of the female population! At the very least, you are invisible to almost all women between the ages of 18-25 and a very large % after that. You won’t be invisible to a lot of the women your own age, but by a trick of nature, a lot of them are turning invisible too, even more invisible than you. And not only that, but they even starting to become invisible to you!

Internet porn is your friend at that age.

That is if you haven’t had to call 911 on your dick yet.

Take care of that hard drive, young man. One day that drive is going to fail, and you will lose all your female data if you don’t have any backups. Not only that, but you will be left with a floppy drive as your only drive.


Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships

No Wonder Return of Kings Is So Awful

ROK is here.

It turns out that Return of Kings was created by Roosh in 2012! So the whole site is shot through with Roosh’s monstrous worldview from start to finish. All of the authors and guest authors along with most of the commenters are seeing the world through Roosh’s eyes.

It only took me a few trips to that site to decide that it was horrifying. Bottom line is that place is ugly, mean, nasty hypermasculine, wildly misogynistic and utterly lacking in empathy. In other words, it’s a typical Manosphere site!  I agree it’s not quite as bad as the sociopathic Heartiste but few sites in that sphere are.

It’s all starting to add up now.

I do think there is a need out there for Manosphere sites – sites where men can discuss what it means to be a man in all of its manifestations and in particular talk about ways to get women and get along with them after you get them. I mean all men want to know how to get women and how to get along with them once you reel one in. These are universal male concerns.

Why every such site dealing with these universal male concerns is insanely misogynistic and fanatically reactionary, I haven’t the faintest idea.

It wasn’t always like this. I grew up in the 1970’s with magazines like Hustler, Playboy, Penthouse, Chic and High Society. Most of these magazines were coming from the Left, although Hustler did try to appeal to the working class redneck guy.

The very idea of a society where the playboys are all rightwing fanatics is simply bizarre. Womanizers have been progressive men in the West for hundreds of years.

However, like I said, there is a need for Manosphere-type sites for men who actually don’t hate women, are not strutting, assholey, douchebag blowhards, and who have sane Centrist to Left politics.

As it is men have a choice between two insane views to line up with:

Male feminism: About as stupid, incompetent, wimpy and pussy as you can get. Your average male feminist looks like he needs to lose 75 pounds and even after that, he couldn’t get laid with God’s help. These white knight, save-a-ho, cock-blocking, fanatically PC Cultural Left men are truly pitiful. They’ve more or less gone over to the enemy and they’re traitors to their gender. They’re male Andrea Dworkins. How pathetic.

Manosphere: See above.

There’s literally nothing in between.

It’s like race where you have a choice between being a classic modern antiracist idiot or a hardcore White racist or White nationalist. People get shoved into one box or the other. The antis are so insane that anyone who isn’t 100% anti and as nuts they are is instantly labeled “a virulent, vicious, repugnant racist” and shoved over towards the American Renaissance types. The Amren types say you’re either one of us or you’re a “liberal,” a moronic anti and a supporter of White genocide.

Once again there’s nothing in between.

People are shoved towards one whacked out pole or another and forced to choose which brand of insanity tastes better.



Filed under Conservatism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Left, Liberalism, Man World, Political Science, Pornography, Sane Pro-Woman, Sex

Stupid New Word Invented for No Good Reason

The otherwise sensible Oxford English Dictionary has just invented a crazy new honorific title to go along the sane titles Mr., Mrs., Miss and Ms., all of which makes some sort of sense. The stupid honorific is Mx. So now we have Mr., Mrs., Miss, Ms., and Mx. Mx. will be used to transgender people who can’t figure out whether they are men or women or both or neither. It can also be used for idiots who “do not want to identify their gender.” Why would anyone not want to identify their gender!?

The otherwise sensible editor of the OED said it was an example of people using language in ways that suit them rather than having language dictate identity to them. I agree that this has been a serious problem. It is almost a crime the way our honorifics force you to decide whether you are a man or a woman. What a terrible choice to ask people to make.

The Cultural Left Freakshow has just scored another victory in their neverending war against common sense and sanity.

Let’s hear it for the Cultural Left!

Yay Cultural Left!

Go, Cultural Left go!


Filed under Cultural Marxists, English language, Gender Studies, Left, Ridiculousness, Useless Western Left

The Latest Dumb Idea from the Cultural Left

Fat acceptance.

As you might guess, this movement is coming out of gender feminism because it’s only fat women who are up in arms about the fact that people think they look gross. Fat men don’t even get to weigh in, so to speak.

I don’t talk much about fatties on here because I honestly don’t care much one way or the other about them. And if you are fat due to medication, you have my sympathy. I was on a drug that made me gain 47 pounds, and it all melted off as soon as I went off the drug. All the eating less and exercising more BS didn’t do a darn thing to arrest the process.

Other than that, I doubt if there are many excuses for being fat. There are tribes where not one person is fat. There are communities in the Solomon Islands where a recent study of 3,500 residents found only fattie, and he had just spent some time in the city. In the cases of fat-free and low-fat communities, guess what? It’s all down to diet. 100% of it. And a lot of it seems to have to do with salt and processed, canned foods.

I have an acquaintances at and outside of work who were extremely fat, and I liked them just fine. Of course they were men. I don’t really care if a guy is fat, except that he is committing suicide by fork, which is mystifying.

I don’t care too much about fat women either other than I don’t want to date them. I have even had sex with a few fatties in my time. They were actually pretty good fucks.

On the other hand, I am not really fat. My BMI is ~25. I am supposedly overweight at 179, but due to my thin body type, I don’t even look fat even when I am overweight according to my mother. Lately it has been hovering around 183, so I figure I can accept it if a woman I want to date is up to 5 pounds overweight.

Other than that though, if I’m not fat, why can’t I put limits on fat women as far as dating? I figure if one is handsome, one can place an order for attractive women. If one is not overweight, one can say “no fat chicks.” What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and one should not be a hypocrite. If you are fat yourself, you have no right to demand that the women you date be slim. If you are not an attractive man, why are you demanding fashion models? On the other hand, the successful have a right to be picky, as they have earned it. I starve myself all the time. You think this is easy or fun?

I have had women who wanted to date me burst into tears when I told them “no go” over their weight. It was pretty hard for me to take, so I have some sympathy. Like I said, it is not an issue that I want to spend a lot of time talking about. Perhaps some of my commenters, male or female, are fat. If they are, I could care less. I figure that’s their problem.

But one thing I have noticed about fatties is most of them aren’t exactly starving themselves. In fact, they tend to pig out on fattening foods rather grotesquely. A fattie on a starvation diet gets my sympathy. One who constantly has their nose in the trough gets no such pass. Sorry.

Fat acceptance is stupid. We already do a lot of it anyway as White middle class society is getting more and more porked out. I grew up around a lot of fatties and even had a fattie who was my best friend for many years. In fact, we are still close, and he is still fat. In White middle class communities, most people seem to be pretty nice to fatties. After all, there are so many of the heifers about that people figure you might as well be nice. So I am not sure if I believe that they are constantly getting fat-bashed.

White society seems to have a resigned attitude about it as it such an omnipresent problem. We have fatties in most of our extended families, often people we love very much who are some of our closest relatives. There are fatties all around us, at work, at parties, next door, at the store, they’re everywhere, blotting out the sun, waddling down the isle, turning sideways to make it through doorways,clogging the arteries of our metropolitan byways. If your community looks like an industrial hog farm, that is pretty sorry, but there is no point in being mean.

“Fat acceptance” is another kooky Identity Politics issue coming out of the West where the Cultural Left has declared war on being normal. Other societies don’t share our kindness in this regard.

However, I do think that health is an important issue. Bottom line is turning yourself into a human dirigible is simply bad for your health. Very bad for your health. In fact, we now have a whole disease epidemic unfolding in our country because we can quit stuffing our faces. The toll im disease, disability, suffering and death cannot be measured, and the monetary cost is high too.

When you say no fat-shaming, you are saying that human beach balloons should never be told, even as kindly as possible, that they are gorging themselves to death. We stage interventions for dopers. We refer drunks to AA. Why is being obese so different?

Fatness is not something that should be accepted. Tolerated, ok. Treated with kindness but frankness, sure. Celebrated or told that they are just fine the way they are? Um, no. Bad idea.


Filed under Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Health, Illness, Race/Ethnicity, Radical Feminists, Whites

Being a Creep Is Fun

I just learned from this insipid post that any man who violates the 1/2 your age plus 7 rule is a creep. The rule means that you can probably get a woman who is half your age plus 7 years. Beyond that, it’s going to very hard to get a younger woman. So at my age, 57, the youngest woman I could get reasonably would be a 35-36 year old.

  • At age 50, you can get a woman 32+
  • At age 40, you can get a woman age 27+
  • At age 30, you can get a woman age 22+

By the time you are 24, 18 year olds are already out of reach, and you can only get women aged 19+.

I suspect the rule does not work so well at the lower end.

There are men who can violate this rule. But those men have to have something going on that makes them stand out from other men their age. This is because most younger women do not want a man so much older that he breaks that rule.

Why? Because young women don’t really want old guys. They want older men, but not old men. By the time you hit middle age, the whole group of women aged 18-26 has already lost interest and you are an old man. I am perfectly aware that to most women aged 18-23 or so, I am now an old man. I am not even Daddy anymore, I am getting to the point where I am Gramps!

What this means is that because women usually do not want a man so much older that he breaks the rule because he is “too old” for them, the only who will be able to break this rule will have to have so something so special about them that will make them stand out and will make her be tempted to violate the rule.

That means he must have:

1. Status
2. Money
3. Power
4. Fame

Barring all of those, he will need:

5. Great game or fantastic game.
6. Good looks would be a definite plus, especially if an older man looks and acts much younger than his age.

Note that 1-4 are pretty much all wrapped up in each other, though that’s not always the case. In particular, you can be slightly famous and broke. Apparently I am a good example of this.

Anyway, for the last few years, I have been breaking the rule. Actually much before then. In my early 40’s, I had 18 year old girlfriends. The rule says I could not get below 27-30.

For the past few years, I have been involved with some women aged 26-29. I haven’t the faintest idea how I am accomplishing this seemingly impossible task. Perhaps I have good game; I have no idea. I think I may have had good game since age 19 or so, but I never thought much about it. Perhaps I have “natural game”; I really do not know because at this point all of that behavior is simply my normal way of being. I don’t even have to think about it.

I think I am a “bad boy” because women have been telling me that since adolescence, and I still hear it to this day. I will probably still be a bad boy when I am in my 80’s. Maybe that has something to do with it.

Anyway, according to the laws of attraction, I am a creep. I never knew being a creep could be so much fun.


Filed under Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex

Should You Ask If a Man Is Gay?

Gay but don’t know writes:

I really like your information but i think that if u work hard enough to hide your sexuality it will work. This is a known fact by me because i do it all the time with my friends and family. The truly people who u should trust about your homosexuality is really your BFF who should probably be a girl. This is my opinion of how to hide your sexuality.

There are some guys that I know are gay but of course I am never going to say that to them. Why should I? What’s there to say? “Hey dude I think you’re a fag!” I mean there’s nothing to talk about. I think it’s rude to talk about someone’s homosexuality that way anyway. Maybe he doesn’t want to be so out.

On the other hand, when I meet people I assume are straight, I often figure that out right away and comment something along those lines if he is going to be my friend. “Well I can see you like girls…” I would never ask someone if they were gay. What a rude thing to ask!

Even if I had a friend who I suspected, well, this would never happen because gay men simply do not befriend me. I am basically a maniacal pussy hound, so most men who befriend me do so in the context of frequent conversations about women and sex. Gay men never talk about women and having sex with them and I’ve never met a gay men who pretended to be straight, although I met some pretty funny bisexual guys who seemed to have beards. But both of those guys never looked at a woman, never talked about women ever, never talked about sex with women, and they both gave off the most massive gay vibes like you could not believe. If they were pretending to be straight, they sure were doing a lousy job of it.

I just assume that any guy who is hanging around with me is straight. Every now and then I confirm the obvious just to make sure. But I am not worried about, “What if this guy I am hanging around with is a fag oh noes!” If he’s gay, he’s probably going to hit on me almost immediately. I have befriended many gay and bisexual men, and almost all of them came onto me or started flirting with me almost immediately. I assume that’s just what they do. If I’ve been hanging around with him for a while, he hasn’t hit on me yet and he seems to be really into chicks, I am not going to worry about it.

Even if I befriend a gay guy and he hits on me, it’s not the end of the world, and I have been through this so many times anyway. Just turn them down and don’t freak out. They’re not going to rape you or anything like that. I don’t know why straight guys are all worried, “Whoa dude is that guy a fag man!? I would not want to hang around with him. He seems like a fag!” It’s just a dumb thing to worry about.

Now if you are a woman, you may have other reasons for asking a question like that.

But if you have been involved with a man for a while and he is always looking at you in a sexual way, always looking at women, always talking about women and sex and trying to engage in sexual activities with you a lot of the time, I would assume he’s certainly not gay.

Gay men typically have rather strange and cold relationships with the women they date as beards or covers.

Often the women involved with these men say they seldom if ever look at them in a sexual way, never look at women, never talk about women, seem to be excessively interested in men, male bodies and male activities, have some rather hazy and suspicious male friends, and don’t like to have sex much and when they do, they often like doggy style from the rear (I assume so they can fantasize they are with a man).

They often display a strong aversion to cunnilingus. Often they will have a lot of posters of men on their walls of magazines full of pictures of men such as body builders, male athletes, etc. They often spend far too much time with and seem to be far too close to some of their suspicious male friends. In a number of cases, gay men are frequently impotent during sex with their woman.

If you are a woman who is involved with a man and you have a reasonable suspicion that he is gay or bisexual, you really ought to know that for a lot of reasons. Honestly though, this stuff isn’t rocket science, and it’s insipid to ask men with obviously strong drives towards women if they are gay. It is almost the dumbest question you could possibly ask and it is very insulting.

The real problem is bisexual men. Even though I don’t swing that way, I have known quite a few of these men, and all the rules go out the window with them. They often act no more gay than you, me or any other man. They can be shockingly masculine. They can hide it quite well. I think in a lot of cases, it might be very hard for a woman to detect a man who is a strong bisexual or a straight-leaning bisexual. And the vast majority of men with bisexual interests lean straight, often dramatically so.

A real problem here is that bisexual men are typically notorious liars with the women they are involved with. They figure, probably correctly, that if they identify as bisexual, few women will want to be involved with them. They want to continue having sex with women, and they figure being open is sexual suicide. So they typically lie and lead double lives.


Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex

How Many Females* Did Casanova Have Sex With?


Answer in the comments.

* I say females because he didn’t just have sex with women. He did teenage girls too. And shockingly, girls even younger than that. Once he had sex with an 11 year old girl and a 9 year old girl on succeeding nights. First he bedded the 11 year old, then the next night, her 9 year old sister came up to him and said something to the effect of, “Well you had sex with my sister, why don’t you have sex with me too?”

Nowadays he would be called “pedophile,” but that’s just stupid. Of course he did not prefer little girls to mature females. I think he falls into the category of “trysexual.” There are a lot of men out there who are just perverts who will do just about anything when it comes to sex, even little girls. Maybe for the rush, the taboo, who knows? Some of these guys will do most females if they can find a hole to put it in. However, it is true that he was a child molester by today’s standards. But perhaps back in those days this sort of thing was no big deal.




Filed under Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Lolitas, Man World, Sex

Women’s Double Standards on Staring

Jason Y writes:

I think there is a fine line between flirting and staring (like “Why don’t you take a picture. It lasts longer :lol:.) Good idea not to stare even if it was back in the 1950s.

Flirting is even worse than staring. Women get stared at all the time, so what? But you really ought to be careful who you flirt with. If you flirt with a woman who is not receptive to your flirting, you’re going to make her angry and it’s not a pleasant scene

I am not really into staring at women myself. I look at them, but I know how to look at them without staring.

  • Look a bit, then look away, then look a bit, then look away.
  • Look at the whole group of them and no one in particular, and she will be part of that group.
  • Look at her out of the corner of your eye.
  • Wear sunglasses, and look at them out of the corner of your eye.

Anyway, women and girls have been staring at me all my life, when these bitches complain about men staring at them, they leave me cold. You bitches do it too, so shut up!

What Does It Mean When a Woman Stares at You?

When a woman stares at you, it usually means she wants to fuck. Especially if they stare at you in a particular way like they are robots, frozen, hypnotized or one of the Stepford Wives. When they go into that trance/hypnotized state, it always means that they either want to fuck, they like you in a sexual way, or maybe they are just having a sexual fantasy about you. Guaranteed.

I don’t get these stares much anymore at my age, but if I do, I am certain of what it means.

I suppose there are other stares that do not mean she likes you, but usually women who hate you, think you’re weird, think you’re a creep, etc. don’t stare at you. That’s pretty much the last thing they do. You disgust them, so they are trying not to look at you.

I haven’t run into a lot of unpleasant stares from females in my life. I suppose they exist, but I do not have a lot of experience with that.


Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Sex, Women

Feminism As War on Heterosexual Males

Jason Y writes:

Flirting at work usually isn’t cool, or staring at women at work. But it’s not grounds for crucifixtion lol: They get way too angry about it. Maybe a woman or a man in the office, can just nicely tell the man, “Your behavior isn’t cool, please stop it, or tone it down.

Dude. People at work are always flirting with each other. Nowadays people are spending all their time at work. Very large numbers of people date others at their work. This behavior is ubiquitous and extremely common. If people are spending all their time at work, of course it makes sense that they will meet people there. Humans have been meeting dates, lovers and spouses at work forever now. My parents and grandparents generation did it too. It is normal.

I worked at a magazine as an editor, and the secretaries were always coming over to my desk and flirting with me. The layout editor invited me to a party at her house. One of the secretaries asked me out. Previously I had asked out her best friend, another secretary. This secretary was having an affair with one of the main artists. They took long 2 hour lunches every day, and it was obvious they were taking fuck lunches. I was only there a month, and two chicks asked me out, and I asked one out. That is normal for any workplace, or at least it used to be.

The whole problem in the workplace with sexual harassment is quid pro quo. This was a problem. In a nutshell, it is either you fuck me or I fire you, you want a raise or a job, sure, first you fuck me. Basically fuck me or else, or if you want good treatment, work, promotions or raises, then fuck me.

Women have been putting up with this crap forever. But a lot of women are just whores and take advantage of the situation and frankly fuck their way to the top of various groups. This is not fair to the non-whores who won’t do this, but there is nothing to be done about female sexual opportunists in organizations. I assume the feminists will try to make that illegal too although that would mean coming down on the sisterhood and women are always 100% innocent and men are always 100% guilty in feminism.

The feminists are extremely puritanical, mirroring female sexuality. Feminists have been highly puritanical from Day One. This is one of the essential features of this poisonous movement.

So of course after making quid pro quo actionable (which I support), the feminists went further and tried to make all workplace sex illegal. I honestly think that feminists do not want any heterosexuals flirting, dating or fucking at all. Maybe if you are married, it’s ok, who knows?

As far as homosexuals go, feminists have nothing but love for them. I guess feminists think all guys should just fuck guys like the queers they love so much, and all women should just be dykes like most feminists are anyway.

According to feminists, there is no limit to the sickness, depravity, degeneration or outright evil that homosexuals and lesbians may engage in. Gay sexuality is very extreme and spreads lots of very bad diseases among other things. Gay men routinely use blackmail and any extremely dubious or amoral means they can think of to get laid, and feminists are silent. Sexual harassment is reportedly epidemic in the gay community but no one cares.

Gay sex causes an incredible amount of disease some of which gets spread into the straight community. Feminists think all of this is a fine and dandy “expression of the wonderful gayz and their glorious superior sexuality,” and they will never say one word against any homosexual sexual behaviors.

But when it comes to men trying to fuck women, the feminists never relent from the warpath.

The truth is that many hardcore feminazis are lesbians. Many others are not lesbian but nevertheless have very high levels of anger, hostility, resentment and contempt for men, who they regard with disdain as inferior. Almost all of them hate men and many have a hatred of men that borders on the psychotic and looks a lot like a mental illness.

It is heterosexuality that feminists hate. They hate heterosexual male sexuality. They are also mad at straight women for fucking “da evil mens.” Feminists have been railing at men for decades now trying to get women to stop fucking us and promoting lesbianism instead, but they have had little to no success.

So feminists have extended their war against heterosexuality to other arenas such as lunatic rape law in the UK and on California college campuses where men are presumed guilty until proven innocent, bonkers sexual rules on California college campuses requiring men to get permission for each escalation in a series of sex acts. If they do not get explicit permission to say go from tongue kissing to dry humping, it is rape. If a woman neither says yes nor no to a sexual advance (she makes no comment on it), this also could be rape because she was “resisting in her mind.” So if men can’t be mind-readers and read women’s minds correctly, it is rape.

In addition, feminists have extended quid pro quo to the workplace in a dangerous expansion called “hostile workplace environment.” More on that nuttiness in another post later on.


Filed under Britain, California, Europe, Feminism, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Illness, Law, Public Health, Radical Feminists, Regional, Sane Pro-Woman, Scum, Sex, USA, West