Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Mass Murderers, Serial Killers, Single Moms, and Feminism


Tonight I'm going to tell you how a single mom made a false rape claim to her son, which resulted in the murder of two innocents and the subsequent incarceration of the perpetrator who in my mind is really a victim in this too.

Harold Laird's mother told her son that they moved away from their last residence because their neighbor who Laird liked, and who was a good influence to the boy, sexually assaulted her repeatedly. So Harold went over to Douglas Redd's home, killed him and killed a woman who was also in the house.

Laird was raised by a single mom, a single mom who told her son a story about a sexual assault, claims that she never substantiated. The end result of this was the boy was incarcerated for life at 17 because his mother sent him off on a killing frenzy. Even worse, Laird couldn't even get along with other prisoners, and is a constant problem child in prison. Laird's only, brief, father figure was Redd, the man he killed.

Then we have Tyler Witt, 14, and Steven Colver, 17. Tyler and Steven had something in common, they both were raised by single moms. They also had something else in common, they both plotted to kill Tyler's mom.

Tyler's grandmother gave a proud testimony on how Tyler's mother raised her daughter, "Without out any involvement from the father at all." How proud she was! But then she pronounced, "Tyler was always a difficult child." I guess difficult's one way to describe it.

After Tyler talks Steven into killing her mother, she rolls on him and he ends up getting life in prison. She gets a lighter sentence, fifteen years to life. Guess his dad should have told him not to get involved with girls like that. Whoops, he didn't have a dad!

Let's move on to some facts about serial killers:

1) Over 90 percent of serial killers are male.

2) Serial killers hate their parents.
Sounds like most feminists I know.

3) Serial Killers tend to be intelligent, have high IQ’s and “street smart.”

There goes the feminist theory

4) Serial killers tend to come from unstable or dysfunctional families.

Yeah, no shit.

5) Serial killers usually come from single parent homes, abandoned by the father and raised by an aggressive mother.

I think "aggressive" here can be substituted by 'nasty, crazy, bitch.'

6) A serial killer’s family often has a history criminal, psychiatric and drug-abusing legacy.

7) Serial killers have a history of doing poorly in school. They have trouble keeping a job and often work as unskilled laborers.

Or as New York Times columnists

8) Many serial killers were abused as children. This abuse included, physical, sexual and emotional abuse. Often this abuse has come at the hands of another family member.

They probably makes them watch MSNBC or something

9) While growing up, many serial killers spent time in mental health facilities and have records of early psychological problems.

Making them eligible for their own show on MSNBC

10) Serial killers often began their practice by tormenting small creatures or animals.

Definitely sounds like a host on MSNBC


12) From an early age, many serial killers have shown an interest in pornography. This interest was often intensely and often included sadomasochistic pornography.

So, what are you saying here, is that really so bad?

13) More than 60 percent of serial killers are bedwetters- beyond the age of 12.

So, what's so bad about that? Many serial bed wetters go on to successful musical careers. Look at Coldplay.

http://www.refugees.bratfree.com/read.php?2,136790

Serial killers are a feminist by product. Listen to what the web site Instigated has to say about it:

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"

And he goes on here:

"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. ...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:"


http://trueinstigation.blogspot.com/2006/04/most-serial-killer-are-men.html

From the book, Serial Killers, the Method and Madness of Monsters:

"Feminist theoreticians deeply dislike the mother component of serial killer
theory, dismissing it as just another aspect of the “blame it on mother” gynocidal
aspect of the male drive to kill females. Perhaps. Nonetheless,
there are remarkably many serial killers whose mothers showed tendency to
be highly controlling, overbearing, or overprotective of their sons.
This supports the theory that some serial killers’ behaviors are rooted in
gender identification involving a boy’s ability to successfully negotiate his
masculine autonomy from his mother—a challenge not faced by females.
When a boy cannot achieve this autonomy or when there is no solid foundation
for him from which to negotiate this autonomy, a sense of rage develops
in the child, and he subsequently carries the anger into adolescence
and adulthood."

This is a fancy way of saying the boy doesn't have a male role model to imprint on, to establish distance from his mother. This need for a male role model to show them the way was described in a baptism that I attended, where the pastor said, "They will sometimes listen to what you say, but they will always watch what you do."

But don't expect the feminists to accept statistics and rationality. Here's a post from the Puffington Host:

"A few months ago, social scientist W. Bradford Wilcox insisted in Slate that it’s worse to be raised by a single mother even if you’re not poor. Children of single mothers, he argued, are more likely to end up as pregnant teens, or in jail, or otherwise in trouble. For centuries Wilcox’s has been the common view. But in an age when single motherhood is becoming more common, these mothers (and social science research) are starting to challenge that view. In fact, some believe that in an era when children  are coddled and dependent for way too long, being a child of a single parent has distinct advantages."

Oh really? What advantages are those? Having a diverse group of brothers and sisters from different daddies? Living in section 8 housing? Raising a mass murderer or a serial killer?

What's going on over there at the Puffington Host:
James Franco Doesn't Look Like This Anymore

and... Pregnant Kourtney K..

 and New Tampon-Like Device Could Protect Women Against HIV

Which is important if you want to have five kids with different fathers

Here's some more fun facts from billmuelhlenberg.com:

"A study reported in Psychology Today found that “90 per cent of repeat adolescent firestarters live in a mother-only constellation”. A Michigan State University study of 72 adolescent murderers discovered that 75 per cent of them had divorced or never-married parents. And a 1987 study by Raymond Knight and Robert Prentky of 108 violent rapists, all repeat offenders, found that 60 per cent came from single-parent homes."

http://billmuehlenberg.com/2010/02/16/the-dangers-of-fatherlessness/

But don't listen to any facts or statistics, or any kind of reality. According to an opinion piece in the New York times by feminist Katie Roiphe in defense of single motherhood:

"Conservatives obsess over moral decline, and liberals worry extravagantly — and one could argue condescendingly — about children, but all exhibit a fundamental lack of imagination about what family can be — and perhaps more pressingly — what family is: we now live in a country in which 53 percent of the babies born to women under 30 are born to unmarried mothers. I happen to have two children with two different fathers,"

Good job Katie, how do you do the last names. Everyone have a different one? Here's some more bull shit from Katie:

"It is, in fact, our fantasies and crude stereotypes of this “typical single mother” that get in the way of a more rational, open-minded understanding of the variety and richness of different kinds of families."

Rational? There is nothing rational about this if you know anything about criminal behavior and where it originates. This is not a rational thing to do, this is something you do if you want a 250% increase in the chance of your child becoming a criminal.

By the way, is it just my imagination, or does this woman Katie Roiphe look like an insane bitch herself? Just saying...there are some desperate men out there, to procreate with this. Or, maybe they're just too lazy to masturbate.

What's going on over there at the New York Times?

The Enigma of Animal Suffering. We can’t assume that a cow raised for food experiences what a slave or victim of genocide does.

No, no we can't

and:

Controlling the Ebola Epidemic Or, why we at the New York Times, don't know what the word epidemic means

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/12/opinion/sunday/in-defense-of-single-motherhood.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&


Here's an article called "The Kids Are Not Really Alright" on Slate:

It’s worse to be raised by a single mother, even if you’re not poor."

"Take two contemporary social problems: teenage pregnancy and the incarceration of young males. Research by Sara McLanahan at Princeton University suggests that boys are significantly more likely to end up in jail or prison by the time they turn 30 if they are raised by a single mother. Specifically, McLanahan and a colleague found that boys raised in a single-parent household were more than twice as likely to be incarcerated, compared with boys raised in an intact, married home, even after controlling for differences in parental income, education, race, and ethnicity. Research on young men suggests they are less likely to engage in delinquent or illegal behavior when they have the affection, attention, and monitoring of their own mother and father."

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/07/single_motherhood_worse_for_children_.html




Sunday, August 10, 2014

Marine Corps Feminist Pandering, and Readiness Degraders









The fact that a full bird colonel is debasing himself in this way is sickening to me. Why didn't you just retire Colonel? Do you need the star of a general that bad, that you would prostrate yourself like this on youtube and embarrass yourself and the Marine Corps?


Now I have this other story, of this woman, the deputy commandant of midshipmen Colonel Shea. Now, I don't know Colonel Shea, and I'm sure she's a good communications officer. But we don't have enough colonels who have experience as combat arms officers that we can put in this billet? We have to pander to the administration and put a woman in here? This post should be manned by someone who is going to provide a good example and someone who has seen some serious shit. This post is for someone who is supposedly training the future leaders of the Navy and Marine Corps. And they put a comm officer in there, so they can fill the billet with a woman?

http://www.usna.edu/Commandant/deputybio.html

Worse yet, someone gave her a Bronze Star. Let me tell you something about the Bronze Star. You can get it with combat V, or without combat V. Without combat V, the Bronze Star is something you can give a mail clerk when they do a good job. In my opinion, it shouldn't be given out at all except for acts of heroism. which means combat V. Unfortunately the services have been doing shit like this for the last few years, giving them out to woman to pander to Congress and the Administration.

Two women in 2012 got bronze stars from the Air Force, one of them "accurately executed operational funds across eight remote bases."

Holy shit! She did her job as an accountant. We have a bona fide war hero here!

And here's the other one:

"She fought through long days and expended every ounce of her expertise to develop the financial processes for the command"

We have brave men who died in Iraq and Afghanistan, were maimed in combat, who committed acts of bravery that were overlooked by their commanders. But if you're handling finances in the Air Force get out of the way, you just saved America.

http://www.airforcetimes.com/article/20120416/NEWS/204160301/Tech-sgts-take-heat-after-receiving-medals

Now I have nothing against these women, I really don't. I have something against the incompetent pandering jagoff officers who are committing  these acts of dishonor on a daily basis, recommending awards for boot polishing, giving commands out because of your sex and the like.

Not only that, but this kind of shit builds some serious resentment in the ranks from those brave men who are walking patrols, running convoys, on training teams, and the thousand other jobs that involve true risk and sacrifice. Then they get passed over for medals, commands, and promotion because they aren't women. This is complete and utter bullshit.

But I shouldn't be salty about it. Not all women are getting commands and medals. Here's a story about women in the Navy that are getting pregnant while on cruise, and have to be airlifted back:

Baby Aboard: The Navy Responds to High Rates of Unplanned Pregnancies Among Sailors

Unintended pregnancies are even more common among women in the Navy than they are in the general population and they can be even more disruptive to their lives and careers. The Navy is spending January addressing this issue through its peer-mentoring group, Coalition of Sailors Against Destructive Decisions (CSADD). Chapters “across the fleet” will spend the month focusing on “Planning a Family During Your Navy Career.”



Is the American taxpayer paying these sailors to go to family pregnancy classes, or are they paying them to man a station on a ship to protect this country? Honestly, if we were in a no shit war with someone like the Empire of Japan, or The Third Reich right now, we would be getting our ass kicked. This shit has got to stop.




Thursday, August 7, 2014

Why I'm wearing this stupid helmet





So, you might have heard that Burn the Ender is back on youtube, now calling himself Serin Edger, so make sure you cruise over to his new channel and see what's going on over there:


And that ties in nicely with why I'm wearing this stupid helmet. It goes with Freedom of Speech, or why I can't show my face on youtube. Freedom of Speech to me is a sacred right, the most sacred of our rights, given to us by the Framers of the Constitution, our Founding Fathers, and kept alive by the American fighting man. 

Why is this so important? The great economist and libertarian Milton Friedman once said that freedom was not the normal condition of man, oppression was the normal condition of man. And if you go back over human history for a couple of thousand years you will see, that this is correct. There were only a few times when human beings were not being oppressed by the individuals in power.

We are seeing this again, here, now, on youtube and the internet. This soft oppression is the case of feminists and their mangina allies going after MRAs and others who are critical of them, and asking youtube to ban their videos, label them as hate speech, or going after our livelihoods.

This is vile and despicable behavior. How many feminists have I gone after because I didn't like what they had to say? I'll tell you, not a single one. Even if I could stomach watching their drivel for more than a few seconds. But this is the way they want to fight, and will fight, by banning OUR speech, burning OUR books, censoring OUR videos. I say to them, who are the oppressors? Who are the ones that would chain us if they could, by banning our message, taxing us to death so we can pay for their healthcare, food, shelter, abortions, birth control, protection, and education? And then taking away our right to speak freely, that right paid for by the blood of the American fighting man for the last two hundred years, the men they defile at every opportunity.

I'll give you an example. A few years ago, some people wanted to honor the name of Colonel Gregory Boyington, a Marine hero who fought in the second world war by putting up a statue in his honor at the University of Washington

"Student senator Jill Edwards, according to minutes of the student government’s meeting on the subject, said she “didn’t believe a member of the Marine Corps was an example of the sort of person UW wanted to produce.”

And

Ashley Miller, another senator, argued “many monuments at UW already commemorate rich white men.”


First of all, you stupid white bitches, Col Boyington was half Cherokee Indian. Second of all, stupid white bitches from upper middle class America, he was far from rich. Now you twits have the right to speak your mind, but only because of men like him, or else you would really know the definition of what a rape culture was.

What's going on over there at the University of Washington? Let me check out their newspaper, the Daily...

UW professor strives to understand societal change,

WANPRC accused of violating the Animal Welfare Act, and

UW students, alumni, share their voice for events in Gaza.

You know, I must be some kind of idiot, I thought the University of Washington was an education facility, not a place where you can get indoctrinated so you can enjoy your new career as a barista. The only reason why I would go to school there would be because all the Manginas would make it a free for all as far as chicks, it would be like you're the only man on campus. Instead of big man on campus, you can be the only man on campus.

So we are beset by a cloud of moronic uneducated twits who are trying to silence us, and go after our livelihoods. Since I refuse to stoop to that level by silencing them, we have few options other than to get our brothers out there involved in the movement. Without men to protect them, provide them employment (the vast majority of entrepreneurs are men), or fix their houses and cars, they are completely screwed. 

So, I do refuse to go after their right to speak. But there is nothing that says they have the right to a husband, the right to have their car fixed, or the right to a plumber in the Constitution. So that is the tact we have to take. We have to spread the word to all men to start a silent protest, in Ghandi-esq fashion. You don't have to refuse service to women, but if they support feminists, if they come after our livelihood, if they try to silence us, it's going to have to come to this.

Then there is stuff like this on the Roosh forum:

Witchhunts are becoming more and more common. A full list of people purged from their jobs for their political or social views can be found here. The most recent and famous is the Modzilla CEO. Now it looks like another tech startup founder is about to go.


Imagine your account is connected to your real name. A liberal staff writer publishes a viral piece on an unpopular opinion you hold. A former girlfriend spreads a false abuse rumor. An employee part of a protected minority calls you bigoted because you don't share their politics. The mob realizes you aren't one of their tribe.

Whatever the accusation, your off hand comment or personally held view spins into a scandal as cultural elites and twitter mobs call for your resignation. Industry peers begin to distance themselves from you anticipating a purge. What would you do?

Hat tip: Vox Popoli

Here's another article from a creature named Alyssa Rosenberg, writing for the publication Thinkprogress.org. The "progress" that thinkprogress.org wants to inflict on us, is the progress of censorship of what they call 'hate speech.' The article is titled, 

"Facebook Sexism, YouTube Attacks On Feminist Frequency, And How Hate Speech Make Tech Take Sides"

Hate speech is a term you'll never hear a genuine lover of free speech use. In the article, Rosenberg wants youtube, facebook, and anybody else to ban what she thinks is 'offensive material' i.e. this 'hate speech.' Of course, she and her feminist friends and manginas get to determine exactly what this hate speech is. Right now she's saying it stuff that talks about rape. Soon it will be anything that mentions men's rights or father's rights. 

When they got some facebook posts removed, and some Anita Sarkeesian bullshit reinstated, Rosenburg trumpets, "the YouTub system worked exactly like the women’s coalition would like Facebook’s system to work.

By the way Allysa, I know you're going over to the Washington Post soon, and they don't exactly care about accuracy in reporting, but I believe that it's youtube, not youtub. 

Here's another blurb from Rosenberg, "heavily moderated sites like Ta-Nehisi Coates’ blog at The Atlantic exist, but they’re considered exceptions rather than the general rule, which tends more towards a consensus around sentiments like “don’t read the comments.”

Yes, Rosenberg, that's a good idea. If you don't like how someone uses free speech, don't read it. You have that right. Don't listen to it. Don't play that video game that you think is too violent. You can do all these things besides becoming the little Stalinist censor that you want to be. 

Here's another gem: "these conflicts aren’t always simply a matter of community governance. Reddit’s attempts to identify the Boston Marathon bombers, for example, may have had real repercussions for falsely-identified suspects and their families."

So, we don't want to trample on the rights of terrorists or anybody, but if you post something that the little feminists don't like, well we better hang those bastards! They must be silenced.

Hey Rosenberg, I have a question for you. Any relationship between you and the Rosenbergs that sold out their country by giving the Soviets secrets of the Atomic Bomb? I'm just curious, because you seem to have a preference for Stalinism also. Just asking. By the way, this woman is absolutely hideous. She doesn't have the garish orange hair, and fatness yet, but she definitely looks like she's protesting against makeup and a good haircut. Her degree is in Humanities of course. "I care about humans. Now shut the hell up, hatespeecher!"

What's going on over there at thinkstalinism, I mean thinkprogress?

Here's some good stuff: Nicki Minaj doesn't think her butt is unacceptable,

Guardians of the Galaxy: A Superhero movie that actually cares about innocent civilians,

and the unbearable whiteness of Moses written by Jack Jenkins.

I'm sorry you think Moses, being a white man is unbearable, Jack Jenkins, white man. If you're ashamed of your whiteness, perhaps you can move to another country where they will publicly humiliate you for being white. Like Washington DC.

So we don't have any freedom of speech. Not while the little femist stalinists are trolling around facebook and youtube, excuse me youtub. Not while the trolls look up what you've been doing and go after your job. So, this is to all you Rosenbergs, and Sarkeesians, who don't like free speech, except when it's theirs, who want to burn books, and censor video games. 

Get the hell out of my country. Pack up your shit and leave. I don't care where you go, just go. We don't want to fight for you, we don't want to bleed for you, we don't want to sacrifice our lives to protect you, and we certainly don't want our free speech restricted by the likes of you.

Get out.

 No offense






Friday, August 1, 2014

How Emasculizing Men via Facebook, Valentine's Day, Anniversaries, and Nasty Female Entititlement is a Socialist Democrat War on Men



The other day on facebook, someone reposted this disaster of a video:



In the first scene we're treated to the picture of a man who is arguing with his wife for permission to golf. Then he whips out his handy "Manslater," a handy device where the hapless, silly, man who doesn't understand female behavior can translate her seemingly irrational behavior and do what she wants to do instead of playing golf.


Which, according to the video is stay at home and watch The Notebook. I have a few things to say about this. First of all, if you have to ask a woman for permission to play golf on a Saturday and she throws a temper tantrum because she wants to stay home and watch the notebook, and you stay with that woman, then you deserve everything you get.

Now I realize that I'm lucky with Penelope.When I want to go out and play Texas Hold'em, the only thing that would piss off Penelope is that I didn't take her with me. Last week she took 1st place at a tournament. Same when I want to go down to the local range and cap a few rounds. But I noticed that almost all the men that we play with don't have their wives or girlfriends with them.

But the women (and men) that chuckle at the manginas in this video that stay home with their wives to watch the Notebook, or the guy in the second scene that puts up with his wife's nasty behavior because he forgot their anniversary. Let me tell you something, if you're a woman and that shit is so important to you, then I suggest you plant a few direct reminders. AND our involvement in an anniversary, Valentine's day, your birthday and the rest of that happy horse shit is a privilege, NOT a right.But the video is telling us that anniversaries, time on a Saturday, and Valentine's day presents are a right.

What does this mean, privilege versus right? Driving is a privilege, that means that we as a society will let you drive a car, as long as you prove that you're not a danger to the rest of us. Once you become a danger, then your privileges will be revoked.

But this is the thing with our matriarchy, socialist, feminist bullshit society tells us all these things are a right instead of a privilege, a kind of super-shit test. We must tell them otherwise. I had nasty ex-wives that decided that all these things were rights, that they could act like little entitled bitches right after we got married because society had told them that I had to put up with it. Well, I didn't have to put up with it and put I the little bitches on the launch pad. And when you don't have kids or property together, it's a matter of going down to the local courthouse and filing the papers. Three months later and the bitches are out on the street. And I think finally some of them are getting the message.

The other night, we were at a high class steakhouse here in Ithaca where your dinner is going to run you a couple of hundred bucks, where a man was with his woman at the next table, and the conversation went something like this:

Her: "Did you call ahead and tell them I like my cod like their Chicago restaurant."

Him: "No, we can tell that to the waiter."

Her: "You didn't call ahead! I told you, you need to call ahead for that. You just don't care about my needs. I can't believe that you didn't take care of that."

Him: "You are a spoiled little bitch. I'm taking you to this expensive restaurant for your birthday, and you are bitching me out about it. That's completely inappropriate. I suggest you change your attitude, or you're going to end up like the last three bitches I kicked to the curb."

Her: "I'm sorry, I'm sorry."

Now obviously this man knew how to handle the situation, and had the history of putting them on the launch pad to back up what he was saying, but his bitchy, spoiled little princess had gotten some kind of wrong idea that not only was he supposed to take her to an extremely expensive restaurant for her birthday, but kiss her ass some more while he's doing it. After that discussion, I noticed that the man did not order any dinner, but sat there while his wife ate by herself drinking a glass a whisky. The message was clear without any translation device.

If you're going to be a nasty bitch, get used to eating alone.

Here's another gem of a video, about a nasty little bitch who didn't get her way:






Perhaps even more disturbing that the video, is the myriad of comments by women who claim that the husband (now ex-husband, he wised up about that) provoked her and did something wrong, or that "they were both acting childish," or here are some other nasty indoctrinated bitches, talking about it:

pl414 says; "I agree that he set her up. I agree that this is crazy-making behavior and gas lighting. She didn't handle this well, but there is always a last straw when one is being emotionally, and mentally abused. "
First of all, what is this term 'emotionally abused?' What the hell is that? Here's another bullshit entry from Wikipedia:

"Psychological abuse, also referred to as emotional abuse or mental abuse, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another to behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxietychronic depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder.[1][2][3] Such abuse is often associated with situations of power imbalance, such as abusive relationshipsbullying, and abuse in the workplace"

So this is one of these psycho-babble terms that some head headshrinker in one of the 'soft' sciences claim is doing 'psychological' trauma. They claim that because there's no way to prove it of course, unless you run into somebody who believes in soft science, like someone with a soft head. Like pl414.

Here's another comment that pl414 left on a Pat Condell video:
"Dear Pat,
OMG, OMG, OMG,
I can't take any more. I love you till enternity and all. I pledge my everything to you and all but, I do have to tell you that I have relatives in England.  May GOD be with you. Tee Hee Love Pauline

Pauline, stay in Canada, we're emotional abusive down here. This emotional abuse bullshit is part of the war on men by the Matriarchy. This is the shit that women pull in divorce court, to try and get more alimony, more child support, and more power over their former spouses. By saying "He was emotionally abusing me," and using court whores, also know as 'expert witnesses,' moron counselors and psychologists, they will conduct their own type of psychological warfare on us by using feminist judges and legislatures.

I myself has a former spouse, who went on a military base, talked to a free counselor for fifteen minutes, and got herself her very own 'I was emotionally abused' certificate for our divorce, without any testimony or proof whatsoever necessary. And if you are a U.S. taxpayer then congratulations, you paid for it. Luckily her little certificate was worth exactly what she paid for it, because since we didn't have kids and were married for only a year before I put the bitch on the launch pad, the judge didn't give her shit.

Here's a response to the video by Shannon Engli:





"i think its his fault and he was mistreating her....no one just asks like that for no reason ....any husband out there trying being selfish...after awhille you will find your self right where this guy is..i think he set her up what a jurk"


This lady Shannon Engli is some piece of work, isn't she. What's Shannon been up to lately on youtube? Let's see.  "Missy Cat Loves Sylvester the talking cat" video. Better get used to having a lot of cats around, Shannon. And "Lady Diana Ghost at prince william wedding." You know there's no such things as ghosts, right Shannon? Its kind of like looking for a feminist in a differential equations class, you might think you saw one, but they were really a trick caused by someone who was lost on her way to her woman studies class on the first day of the semester.

I agree with her ugh what a shame a small portion of women find the good man they deserve

Here we have the entitlement culture that Pyramid Falls is
promoting. This woman, Whitney Mongiat, had an interlock
device on her car, and pulls crap like this, who the hell is
the 'good man' that she deserves? Satan? Pray you never
become the good man that she deserves. Pray!







jangofettish1 says:


"His primary maintenance is the welfare of his wife and she 

obviously has issues that are perhaps hormonal and 

psychological combined,add to that a nicotine habit and 

you have the ingredients for a meltdown of this magnitude."



So jangofettish1 is putting it back on him, like he's some
sort of baby sitter for this temper tantrum laden child in an
adults body, because of her nicotine habit and hormones,
she's a woman so just deal with it.
This is complete an utter bullshit. She is a grown-ass adult,
and if she can't control herself, she belongs on the
launching pad. Do we have to deal with it when she's
intoxicated and driving because she's got a drinking
problem? Is that my problem? NO! That's why she has an
interlock device, she can't control herself, mommy's little
princess is all grown up now, but she still expects other
people to clean up her messes, and so does jangofettish1.
What's jangofettish1 been watching on youtube? Lets
see...BIGBUTYASS FLOREE. Erik Karros's channel,
which has a picture of a huge woman's ass, and "She
walks nakad ass jeans in da street." You know
jangofettish1, unless you make your history private, we can
all see it. And by the way, your psychological prattle
doesn't seem too impressive when I see a list of big booty
videos on your channel. Dumbass.




Cindy Bonilla says:

granted she overreacted, but he is a douche for putting this up...

So listen to this idiot Cindy Bonilla who's picture on Youtube looks like she got it done ten years ago and is trying to convince people that she's young and pretty. Cause back when she was young and pretty, stupid was only one out of three. But know that you're not so young and not so pretty, you're zero for three. 

She "overreacted." That's what you call it, Cindy? Which
means you probably pull the same crap, or some other
similar nightmare. Then she tries to put it on the man,
he's a douche for putting this up. And what is she?
Probably another nasty bitch who practices the same
type of hyper-tantrum feminism.

And it goes on, and on, and on, with the women
commentators, and some of the manginas trying to
justify this reprehensible behavior. Not only does this
crazy beast indicate the major feminine problems we
have in the new Matriarchy, but the women and men
justifying her behavior and trying to indite her husband
show the problems are now deep-set.  

Friday, July 25, 2014

Feminization of the Military and Accompanying Corporate Douchbaggery




 Last week, I was fired from a project by a special kind of corporate douchebag, a retired Air Force officer, who went into the corporate world and immediate knew the game. What is the game you ask? The game in the corporate world, if you work in a dysfunctional corporate atmosphere is hide poor performance, and tell the execs what they want to hear.

This is feminization of the workplace. How so? According to this shitty Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminisation_of_the_workplace

Feminization of the workplace is operating "with more feminine modes of interaction."

The article also specifically states that "opportunity and redistribution in society overcome economic inequalities and find more balance to combat income inequality, social exclusion and cultural imperialism."

Obviously written by a Marxist who couldn't pass calculus and get an engineering degree. What exactly does this mean, 'more feminine modes of interaction?' From this article:

http://personal.tcu.edu/pwitt/Wood.pdf


"1) Use collaborative, cooperative talk to create and maintain relationships. The process of communicating, not it's content, is the heart of relationships."

I agree, this is a feminine mode of interaction. Unfortunately, in a business this equates to a meeting where nothing gets done. And this Air Force trained corporate douchebag would have a team meeting every day where he would ramble on for an hour about nothing that is pertinent, not let anyone else talk, and then wouldn't hang up the god damn phone. To make matters worse, he had just gone through a bad divorce where he got joint custody, so he would call a teleconference from Chucky Cheese's or some other totally inappropriate spot where we could hear kids screaming in the background.

"2) Avoid criticizing, outdoing, or putting others down unless criticism is necessary

Well, you should always avoid criticizing, unless criticism is necessary, shouldn't you. The issue is, is when criticism is necessary, they dance around the issue. Like, when they had issue with my work, they wouldn't criticize it to my face, they would go behind my back. This is the catty shit that some women and corporate douchebags do. As far as the 'avoid putting others down,' goes, that is all these corporate bitches do, for a detailed explanation of this, see my previous article on Ban Bossy.

http://anonymousgovernmentcontractor.blogspot.com/2014/06/ban-bossy-and-anti-entrepreneur.html


"3) Pay attention to others, and to relationships; interpret and respond to others feelings sensitively."

This might win you an award on Oprah, but we're supposed to be running a business here. That means you have a job that I give you, and I pay you to do that job. While that job may be complex, and interpersonal relationships need to be maintained, there aren't a lot of job descriptions that say 'interpret and respond to others feelings sensitively. If you saw that on a job description on linkedin or indeed, you would have to be pretty damn desperate to take that job.

What is the environment in the Air Force that created my former corporate douchebag project lead?  According to this article in the Washington Free Beacon, the Air Force Academy just hired some crazy feminist bitch/mangina named Dr. Chris Kilmartin (is that like Pat Kilmartin? I'm not going to make any statements about gender here, cause last time I guessed I got it wrong, hence the bitch/mangina identifier) that makes statements like, "telling a boy that he “throws like a girl” represent “the cultural undercurrent of rape.”

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/the-nutty-professor/

“Calling men and women opposites is like calling an IBM computer the opposite of an Apple"

Well, I know you being a feminist and all, you're about as far from being an engineer as Hitler is from Ghandi, so let me just tell you from a computational standpoint, IBM Computers were just about the opposite of an Apple. And you sir/ma'am, are a complete moron for making that statement since IBM hasn't made personal computers for over ten years. Which is, if you use Moore's law stating that one generation of computers is eighteen months, is the equivalent of six generations.

Let me read from Wikipedia article on the subject, "The term "IBM PC compatible" is not commonly used presently because all current mainstream desktop and laptop computers are based on the PC architecture, and IBM no longer makes PCs"

Yeah, no shit. Try to keep up. Chris. Can I call you Chris? Kind of like the feminist shit that comes out of your mouth, your computer knowledge is way behind the times. Wake up.

Here's a story from Militarycorruption.com:

FEMALE COLONELS ASSIGNED TO TOP
POSITIONS AT TROUBLED AIR FORCE
ACADEMY – BRASS SCRAMBLE TO DO
“DAMAGE CONTROL”



The dust hasn’t settled yet at the troubled Air Force Academy, rocked anew by the latest sex scandal. But already we see that MilitaryCorruption.com was absolutely “on target” when we predicted (see related story at end of this article) that Commandant of Cadets, Brig. Gen. Taco Gilbert III’s head would be “the first to roll.”
Sure enough, he was “axed” by Air Force Secretary James “Bullfrog” Roche, whose primary aim was to save his own job.
Two female colonels – Debra Gray and Clada Monteith – have become the new vice-commandant and commander of the 34th Training Group at the Air Force Academy.

Also the Air Force Academy used to have a warrior ramp with the words, "Bring Me Men." This was removed and replaced with, "Bring me manginas." Well, not really. But it might as well have been.

Here's another gem about the feminized Air Force from thinking housewife:

Woman Non-Pilot to Command Air Force in the Pacific

"AIR Force Lt. Gen. Lori J. Robinson represents a particularly striking example of military affirmative action. Robinson has been nominated as commanding general of the Air Force’s Pacific operations and for a promotion to four-star general. Robinson is not, however, a military pilot. She will be the first non-pilot to command such a large theater of operations"

According to her wikipedia page she was "command briefer at Headquarters Pacific Air Forces, Deputy Chief of Staff and executive assistant to the Director at the Defense Information Systems Agency."

And has a "Master of arts in education leadership and management."

Holy sheepshit batman, what a warrior. But to her credit, she did attend the Air War College. By correspondence. This is an Obama pick. Of course.

What else is going on in the Air Force. Let's check the Air Force Times:

5 yoga poses to complement your runs

Can a trademark restrict who wears flight suits?

By the way, the project manager that started this rant of mine, has no leadership experience in the Air Force. If you can get any leadership experience. Apparently, he was on a missile crew in a silo where they keep their finger on a button for a watch, deep in the ground, which is probably where he belonged. Then he went to the Air Force Institute of Technology, where he completed a thesis on Breast Cancer analysis.

This is not a slight on Breast Cancer survivors or researchers, but what the hell does Breast Cancer have to do with the Air Force? Absolutely nothing. Graduate students at these institutions, military they may be have a lot of leeway in what they do their thesis in. The fact that this mangina did his thesis on breast cancer is him playing the game in the feminized Air Force way, bowing down and kissing the un-pedicured toenails of the manly women currently running the Air Force.

What's going on over their at the Air Force Institute of Technology nowadays?

Oh, here, here's a thesis where the author thanked the entire "Breast Cancer Research Group."

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a335734.pdf

They had an entire breast cancer research group. Its good to know, that are military is so well equipped and casualty rates our so low, that we can devote time to such militarily important topics. By the way, the casualty rate of our military went up by a factor of seven when the current administration took over the theater of operations and changed the rules of engagement. Just so you know.

Here's another one on "An object-oriented approach to the modeling and visualization of early-stage breast cancer tumors."

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a378242.pdf

And last, but not least, here's a captain who wrote a thesis on "Military Member Responses to Sexually Harassing Behavior: Response Types and Efficacies."

Is it Efficacies or Effeminatecies? Hard to say really.

Last, but not least, look what this mangina put on his corporate profile:

"...But my greatest joy is being 'Dada' to my little girl. No math, no physics, -just LOVE."

Who puts that in a corporate profile that anyone can see online? Someone interested in impressing their male colleagues, or the biggest male vagina on the planet Earth? Seriously, if this guy had been a jarhead, we would have held nightly blanket parties to try and squeeze the vaginal secretions out of him, so he could stop being such a mangina.

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

BS from Main Stream Media about why men stop having sex

I was just looking over this book by Bob Berkowitz and Susan Jager-Berkowitz called Why Men Stop Having Sex.

Why Men Stop Having Sex: Men, the Phenomenon of Sexless Relationships, and What You Can Do About It

Berkowitz was the former White House correspondent from CNN, whose reporting mantras include "Conservatives bad, liberals good." CNN I mean, not Berkowitz.

Anyway, in the book they talk about a bullshit survey they put out on why men stop having sex with their wives. Here's the top reason:

Reason                                                              Percentage
She isn't sexually adventurous enough for me        68%


Here's two more issues buried in the survey:

Reason                                                              Percentage
She has gained a significant amount of weight        38%

and

I no longer find her physically attractive                32%


See what they've done here. The wife got fat, and/or let herself go, and the man doesn't want to sleep with her any more. Even though the authors state there is some overlap here, this is 70% when you add the two together into: she looks like ass now, and doesn't want to put forth the effort to be attractive any more. That's the number one reason. The two Berkowitzes that wrote this book, are either being purposefully deceptive, or wrote this shit for women and want them to believe that if they put their fat asses in some Victoria Secret undies and buy a trapeze, then their hubbies are going to want to rip their clothes off.

Nothing could be further than the truth. They should have told them to get some Botox and a gym membership, and stop with the deserts. But that would require real effort, and no lazy woman wants to hear that. So they bury the results at the bottom of the survey.

Friday, July 11, 2014

The American Revolution, the First International Conference on Men’s Issues, the British, and the Main Stream Media

When things started warming up in the American Colonies during the beginning of the American Revolution, not all the colonists were on board with revolting against the crown. In fact, maybe 20% of the colonists wanted to revolt, 20% were Tories who supported the Crown, and everyone else just wanted to be left alone. Although the British government could be a pain in the ass sometimes, they were basically benevolent, and did rack up some serious bills protecting the colonies. They had some legitimate points on taxing the colonies. A tax that was only 4% by the way. We pay twice as much as that in sales taxes alone, and our income tax system is horrible.

Ben Franklin was loyal to the Crown, and felt he could speak for the Colonies and patch things up with England. He went to Parliament, but was grilled by them about the Boston Tea party and American reaction to the Stamp Act, and basically treated like crap. In this way, the British alienated Franklin, and with a series of similar outrages on American soil turned the colonists against them, so by the end of the war, it was more like 80% of the colonists hated their guts, and the Tories had to leave. And if there was one guy you didn't want to piss off, it was Ben Franklin. Although he wasn't a young man at the time, he had enormous influence, and was a Polymath. Now, we have another revolution brewing. The men's right's revolution. And this time, the part of the British government will be played by: the Main Stream Media.

How? There was an MRA conference last week, the First International Conference on Men's Issues in Detroit. I had heard about the conference and Paul Elam, but I really didn't think much about it. I agree with Elam on some things, as do I with some of the other speakers at the conference, and the organizers of the conference, but I'm not aligned with them on everything. I was fairly ambivalent about the it.

Then I saw this piece by a twit who writes for Time magazine called,

"I went to the conference in suburban Detroit expecting a group of feminist-hating Internet trolls; I found much more"


Where this piece of Main Stream Media garbage named Jessica K Roy, wrote crap like, 

"Still, being surrounded by men who belly-laughed at rape jokes and pinned evil elements of human nature wholesale on women was emotionally taxing at best and self-destructive at worst. Once, during a particularly upsetting segment of the program, I had to excuse myself from the auditorium to seek refuge on the bug-filled bank of Lake St. Clair. I kept wondering why I had volunteered to fly 600 miles to attend the conference alone, to surround myself not just with crass ideological opponents, but with people with violent Internet histories who believed my very existence oppressed them. "


There's that word violent again (italics mine), connected with the internet and MRAs. What do you mean by violence, Jessica? Were they going around chopping heads off? Were they raping and pillaging? No, they were exercising their right to free speech, and the word violent doesn't belong in the same sentence with talk, or speak, or write, you stupid sack of media garbage.

Here's another jewel from the article, "...Elam published a post to A Voice for Men taking issue with my tweets during the conference, which made clear that I was upset by many of the sentiments expressed."

You don't get to be upset (italics mine) when you're reporting, Miss Shitty. You don't get to be upset, because that Freedom of the Press, that was paid for in blood by the same men you are shitting all over, that freedom is for you to report unbiased facts. Which you are obviously unable to do. Because you're UPSET.  That pisses me off. And you piss me off. 

So here's some more internet violence for you, Jessica Roy. You have absolutely no business being a reporter. You have no business advocating for a cause, or NOT advocating for a cause. Freedom of the press is a sacred right, because of the price good men paid for it. It isn't sacred so that you can be a little bitch making shit up when people are talking about ruined lives at the Men's Issues Conference. It was given to you so you can uncover corruption, like that of the current administration which you helped bring to power, or the Feminist Crap going on in courtrooms across America. The freedom of the press was given to you so you can make this world a better place, not make shit up so you can turn the US into the Feminist, Socialist, Ghetto, Dystopian States of America.

So keep it up, Jessica, and the main stream media. Keep passing those stamp acts, keep making shit up about the men's rights movement, keep getting my taxes raised so I can pay for single moms like the one that was in the checkout line in front of me today, paying with an EBT card,  while I had to make a quarterly payment to the IRS of 15,ooo dollars to pay for her brood of three kids from three different fathers. Keep acting like the British in 1775, Main Stream Media. See what happens next.

And, my ambivalence on the Conference is officially gone. Next year, they'll be getting a fatty check from me, while I have my checkbook out writing checks to the IRS. Put that in a tweet, Jessica.