Sunday, June 18, 2006

Who says men are insensitive?According to the lastest research, that isn't the case at all!

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

From one of my fave blogs...

Bullshit saying of the day!
"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."

- rubbish author Jane Austen (1775 – 1817)

Hardly surprising a woman wrote that is it? One who never married and supposedly died a virgin too.

The sad thing is that, although the above was written (in her novel Pride & Prejudice) back in 1797, when women generally were reliant on men for an income, most liberated independent womyn in the 21st Century wander around still believing that. Even career girls seem to think that way, that a rich man needs a wife, and that there is something wrong with such a man if he shuns marriage like a barefoot man shuns dog-shit.

Whether back in the 18th Century or today, women generally don't like to accept their own greed and materialistic shallowness, and go to great lengths to disguise these attributes in veils of self-deception, such as by laughably claiming that it is rich men who need wives, rather than greedy women who want rich men.Or as one KBW girl put it, wealth shows that he is responsible and would make a good partner.

In the 21st Century it is a truth universally acknowledged that a man in posession of a good fortune is single.
A man with a good fortune needs a wife the same way a fish needs a bicycle.All the benefits of marriage can be obtained without it.Wealthy men should marry at their own risk!When wealthy men are single they are called playboys and irresponsible and when wealthy women are single they are called focussed and an example.Screw those double standards!

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

For those of you who are telling us folks abroad to come home and build Kenya. Read this and then shut up!A great mind rots away because of patriotism...

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Girls--have a sense of humor....

Culled from one of my favourite blogs....
I never quite figured out why the sexual urge of men and women differ so much. And I never have figured out the whole Venus and Mars thing. I have never figured out why men think with their head and women with their heart.

FOR EXAMPLE: One evening last week, my girlfriend and I were getting into bed.

Well, the passion starts to heat up, we were all over each other and just when I was ready to pound nails through two inch plywood she looks up at me and says "I don't feel like it, I just want you to hold me."

I said "WHAT??!! What was that?!"

So she says the words that every boyfriend on the planet dreads to hear... "You're just not in touch with my emotional needs as a woman enough for me to satisfy your physical needs as a man." She responded to my puzzled look by saying, "Can't you just love me for who I am and not what I do for you in the bedroom?"

Realizing that nothing was going to happen that night, I went to sleep.

The very next day I opted to take the day off of work to spend time with her. We went out to a nice lunch and then went shopping at a big, big unnamed department store. I walked around with her while she tried on several different very expensive outfits. She couldn't decide which one to take so I told her we'd just buy them all. She wanted new shoes to compliment her new clothes, so I said lets get a pair for each outfit. We went onto the jewelry department where she picked out a pair of diamond earrings. Let me tell you...she was so excited. She must have thought I was one wave short of a shipwreck. I started to think she was testing me because she asked for a tennis bracelet when she doesn't even know how to play tennis. I think I threw her for a loop when I said, "That's fine, honey." She was almost nearing sexual satisfaction from all of the excitement. Smiling with excited anticipation she finally said, "I think this is all dear, let's go to the cashier."

I could hardly contain myself when I blurted out, "No honey, I don't feel like it."

Her face just went completely blank as her jaw dropped with a baffled WHAT?"

I then said "Honey! I just want you to HOLD this stuff for a while. You're just not in touch with my financial needs as a man enough for me to satisfy your shopping needs as a woman." And just when she had this look like she was going to kill me, I added, "Why can't you just love me for who I am and not for the things I buy you?"

Apparently I'm not having sex tonight either....but at least that bitch knows I'm smarter than her

Saturday, April 15, 2006

Most serial killer are men.But the interesting thing is that most serial killers are people who suffered abuse of sorts mostly from their mothers.It seems that the hand that rocks the cradle not only rules the world but can lead to it's destruction.Mothers of the world, you have great power; please use it for good!
But Duncan Idaho doesn't have an opinion as benign as mine!

Serial killers and the matriarchy

Feminists often love to mention serial killers and serial rapists as examples of men being horrid misogynists, forgetting that murderers and rapists make up a tiny fraction of a percentage of all men. Furthermore, they seem to forget that most serial killers suffer abuse from the hands of violent mothers and/or rarely have fathers present. At the very least they invariably have a dominant mother and weak father. If feminists want to start throwing about anecdotes of serial killers and rapists to criticize men, then I think we can do the same to criticize them back.

For example, Edmund Kemper was belittled and abused by his thrice-divorced mother and not allowed to see his father. Pissed off at getting regularly locked in the basement for disobeying his mother, Ed blew his grandparents away at the age of 15 and, after six-years in a mental asylum, he was released, albeit back into the custody of his shrewish nagging mother. He subsequently chopped up a load of college girls before decapitating his mother then turning himself in to the police.

Ed Gein - the model for Norman Bates in Psycho - was raised by a mother who told him women were all evil whores (except herself of course) and after mummy died he proceeded to dig up dead women and make lampshades and vests out of them. He got nabbed after turning a couple of living women into dead ones.

Then there was Eddie Cole, whose mother dressed him as a girl, beat him and threatened to kill him if he ever uttered a word about her adulterous escapades with local bad-boys when her husband was busy being shot at by the Japanese during World War II. Cole spent his adult life drifting around bars, picking up women and killing them if they turned out to be sluts just like his mum. He once throttled to death a woman during sex when she happened to admit she was married.

These are just three examples of killers whose tortured psychopathology's roots lies with their mothers.

In his book Serial Killers, Joel Norris highlights the strong link between serial killers and other violent individuals with the breakdown of the family which, in turn, leads to children being abused more often (children are more at risk from abuse when their father is removed) and with more unstable home lives. He doesn't explicitly mention feminism, but certainly feminism is the leading reason for the rise in single-mother households, the rise in divorce, children being dumped in childcare and having multiple 'fathers' as mummy goes from one thug-lover to the next:

Over the course of the twentieth century, families have been getting smaller, they have become highly unstable, with children going through serial families of pseudo fathers as a result of multiple marriages. Now, in the middle of the final quarter of the century, families are in danger of breaking down and the very concept of parental responsibilities is undergoing redefinition in the courts as a result of surrogate parenting. Children are routinely placed in child-care programmes at age two, often under instense pressure to qualify, and the parents themselves are more often than not involved in serial sexual relationships with multiple partners even while they are married. There are now more children living in homes with divorced parents than there are children living in the same home with both biological parents. In other words, the family structure is undergoing a massive restructuring, especiallyi n the postwar period...
In single-parent [read: single-mother] homes, the situation can be even more devestating for the child. An entire generation of children will shortly emerge for whom there are no normal, supportive parental relationships...they represent the largest area of population growth of our society, and they will in turn give birth to a succeeding generation of children out of control, who will carry the disease of generational violence well into the next century and well beyond the borders of the United States.

The above was written in 1988 and the spiralling rise in violence in Western societies by alienated youngsters from broken homes can be seen in events like the Jamie Bulger killing or the Columbine shootings.

In the early 1980s the FBI conducted a study of convicted sex-murderers and thrill-killers and found that 47% did not have a father present throughout most or all of their childhood, and of those that did have fathers present, 71% reported that their mother was the dominant parent.

In his 1997 book, Of Men and Monsters, Richard Tithecott explains how female-dominated or female-only households are more likely to produce violent criminals because the matriarchy, on any scale, is chaos and non-logic, compared to the patriarchy, which is order and rules. Tithecott does use the terms "perceived" and "according to common wisdom" which may imply he may not accept the ideas he is putting down here (although this may be simply a way of distancing himself from such criticism of women to avoid being condemned for being 'sexist') but he makes some fine points. After all, you don't have to study serial killers to see that the matriarchy and feminism are as far from logic, fairness and order as you can get.

The dysfunctional family unit is largely figured as a place lacking the father. With patriarchy absent, matriarchy rules, and the results are perceived as monstrous: "Serial killers are almost invariably found to have experienced environmental problems in their early years. In many cases they stem from a broken home in which the parents are divorced or separated, a home with a weak or absent father-figure and dominant female, sometimes a home-life marked by a lack of consistent discipline." (Wilson & Seaman, The Serial Killers, 1990)
With the family figured as the originator of the meaning of our lives, the amount of structure in our lives depends on the type of family from which we come. And we have come to expect that to defy the law of the father is to disperse meaning, that martiarchally produced narrative is inevitably chaotic. Like Jeffrey Dahmer, whose life, in the words of Oprah Winfrey "spun out of control" (Oprah, 4 September 1991), the individual growing up in a female-dominated family (Dahmer lived with his grandmother after his parents were divorced) is commonly perceived as an unpredictable figure whose actions appear motiveless.

Jefrfrey Dahmer's father, a chemist, spent a lot of time at work, leaving Jeffrey and his brother with their mother. She was a hysterical hypochondriac who spent most of her life in bed popping pills. She divorced her husband because he dared to work long hours and practically cleaned him out. She fought for custody of her youngest son, but not Jeffrey, who was eighteen at the time of his parent's split and who committed his first murder not long afterwards.

Tithecott continues:.

Do we fathers or potential fathers-to-be feel anxious about the possibility of father a monster? According to common wisdom, if we do, it should be because of our absence [from our child's life], not our active participation. While Lional Dahmer [Jeffrey's dad] feels guilty for not spending enough time with his son, masculinity's involvmenet in the "creation" of Jeffrey is represented negatively, as a "good" force not implemented. From the perspective which sees men as the originators of structure, of a sense of place, of visibility, the serial killer, the archetypal purveyor of meaninglessness, can only be the product of femaleness.
The struggle between our law-enforcers is represented as the struggle between the law of the father and the disorder of the mother, between post-Oedipal language spoken by the police and heard nightly on crime shows, and pre-Oedipal language spoken by the killers, by "mummy's boys" who never grew up to be real men. Our policing discourses, implied to be valorized as masculine, conflict with feminine discourse, discourse lacking motive and logic.
Tell that to a feminist next time she starts banging on about how women are the nurturing sex from which comes all civilized behaviour.

Monday, April 10, 2006

Hello people!Guess who's back!When I tried to die they dragged my corpse through the mud and tried to dismember me but guess what?You only re-energised me!I'm back to stay!Stay tuned!

Monday, April 03, 2006