Article here. Excerpt:
'A Mississippi teacher admitted to cops that she had sex with a 15-year-old male student to whom she sent explicit text messages and trysted with in her Jaguar, which bore the license plate "GRRRRR."
Will she be let go because of some "emotional" issue? She's already back on the street and most likely will get her job back if she gets off.
When a girl is penetrated without her consent, she has been "raped."
When a boy is engulfed without his consent, he is "lucky."
Ladies, when was the last time you visited a nursing home? Did you wonder why nearly all the residents were women? The reason is simple – men meet their maker 5 years sooner than members of the fairer sex.
It wasn’t always that way. Back in 1920, men and women had almost identical life spans. But the looming threat of heart disease widened that gap. American men now have heart disease death rates that are 50% higher than women’s. (The federal report Health, United States, 2007, Table 29 reveals the death rates are 268 in men, compared to only 177 in women).
Most persons have never heard of Lois Verbrugge, a researcher at the University of Michigan. A few years ago Dr. Verbrugge did a study on elderly women. She found that compared to their married counterparts, single elderly women are four times more likely to end up in a nursing home.
Which means after your husband dies of heart disease, you are four times more likely to be removed from your home and taken to an institutional setting to spend your last days in medicated bliss. That’s what happened to several ladies I’ve known.
And what about men who keel over from heart disease in their 40s and 50s? What happens to their wives and children?
Last year my friend Bill died from a debilitating heart problem. His wife never wanted to be the family breadwinner. That’s what she’s doing now.
And Randy died suddenly while jogging one morning. His two sons, now in their 20s, will never again experience a father’s love.
So men are at far greater risk of heart disease, and their premature deaths portend institutionalization and financial hardship for their wives.
You’d think the American Heart Association would have programs designed especially to help men. They don’t.
But not to worry, the AHA does have a gender-specific program – “Go Red for Women.”
That’s right, the Heart Association has designated this Friday, February 1 as National Wear Red Day. Here’s the latest fashion tip from the AHA:
“National Wear Red Day has its own dress code. Wear your favorite red clothes or accessory – a red blouse, a red dress pin, a fabulous red handbag.”
That’s not all: “Put on red lipstick, or sport a red tie and red socks. Go red in your own fashion show to show your support for women and the fight against heart disease.” [www.goredforwomen.com/national_wear_red_day.aspx]
Really folks, I’m not making this up!
So when you pay a visit to grandma at the nursing home this weekend, she’s gonna feel a whole lot better if you’re sporting red socks and red shoes. And that widow who lives down the street – be sure to remind her to pull out that fabulous red handbag she stowed away after the funeral.
To complete the irony of Go Red for Women, show her a tribute card, courtesy of the AHA: “Go Red for Women – American Heart Association – A donation has been made in honor of [fill in name of former husband, father, brother, or son].”
Seriously, when it comes to the real needs of real women, it’s obvious the pointy-headed execs at the AHA don’t have a clue. So it’s up to women bring the Heart Association to its senses.
Call Mr. Cass Wheeler, head of the American Heart Association. His number is 1-800-242-8721. Send a message to the PR department: elizabeth.moreno@heart.org [elizabeth.moreno-at-heart.org]. Or just call your local heart association office.
We all want to know how the American Heart Association answers these two questions:
1. Why does the Heart Association want to deprive aging women of the main source of their financial support?
2. Why does the AHA want to send more elderly women to nursing homes?
And while we’re at it, why don’t we ask if they believe men’s hearts count for less?
Background: Recently I criticized USA Today financial columnist Sandra Block's column Husbands should consider delaying Social Security benefits (USA Today, 1/15/08). I wrote:
"[Block] all but comes right out and says that men are selfish for retiring at retirement age. Instead, men should continue to work, work, work while--guess what?--women should retire earlier. According to Block, by working well past retirement age, men can 'make up for all the times you came home with beer on your breath, left your socks on the bathroom floor or gave your wife a DustBuster for Valentine's Day.'
"I guess 40 years of working longer hours than your wife at a job more demanding and hazardous than hers--as most men do--isn't enough...to write a Letter to the Editor of USA Today, email letters@usatoday.com."
Two of our blog readers' letters were published in USA Today's January 24 edition--"Husbands don't 'owe' a delayed retirement" by Robert Franklin and "Cease stereotypes" by Tim Murray. The letters appear below--well done gentlemen.
Husbands don't 'owe' a delayed retirement
Robert Franklin - Utopia, Texas
I was extremely disappointed with Sandra Block's column "Husbands should consider delaying Social Security benefits" (Your Money, Money, Jan. 15).
Block writes: "Here's some advice for married men who will turn 62 this year: If you want to make up for all the times you came home with beer on your breath, left your socks on the bathroom floor or gave your wife a DustBuster for Valentine's Day, hold off on filing for your Social Security benefits."
Why does she not just first make her case, which boils down, in part, to the fact that a spouse can choose the higher of the two spouse's Social Security payments upon the death of one partner?
Why does she need to throw in the notion that the man owes it to the woman to work more years because he's deficient?
Isn't a main concept behind the column that the husband's payout is probably higher than the wife's? That means he has probably worked more, earned more and contributed more money to the support of the family. And according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics survey, on average, men work about an hour more than women per day.
So why the disrespect for the man? Why the misandry?
Cease stereotypes
Tim Murray - Pittsburgh
I suppose Sandra Block thought she was being humorous when she wrote her column "Husbands should consider delaying Social Security benefits."
If the column is intended to explain an economic issue, why does she go out of her way to lead off with good old-fashioned male-bashing? Husbands don't "owe" it to their wives to continue working past retirement age to make up for stereotypical male failings. I guess we husbands owe it to our wives to keep working until we drop dead — all to make up for being born male.
|
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
'... some proud, single men say they're better off alone.
"A man is a sperm bank, a meal ticket, a handyman and an early retirement plan," Gulvin says.
For those reasons and others, he has decided to go through life without committing to one romantic relationship.'
This is an AP story that appeared on the back page of the local paper today. The treatment is not as even-handed as one would like, but is better than I would have expected from my local Leftist/Feminist fish-wrap. I think the reporter wasn't sure how to sneer at men for being single by choice when women have been lauded for "independence" for so long.
Men are learning to take a long, cold look at the women that are trying to manipulate them into a "relationship", and ask the key question, "what's in it for me?". Most of the time, the answer is going to be "Not as much as it is going to cost you." This story is about some men who have asked the question and come up with a realistic answer.
Article here. Excerpt:
'In that decade, I found myths and lies about “Violence Against Women” with respect to both rape and domestic violence were both de rigeur, and vehemently defended by many who knew good and well they were defending myths and lies, and would privately admit as much. Their justification for this dishonesty was simple and pragmatic - police work is after all, a political job. Anyone who seeks advancement to positions that involve more face time with cute reporters and television cameras than with burglary reports and false alarm calls will keep their ears open for the latest tune being called by the politicians. “Violence Against Women” has been a buzzword for at least a generation now, and any police officer of any rank that exposes a reality not in concert with the absurd statistics and draconian measures put forth to combat this “epidemic of violence” is unlikely to advance.'
Ben Franklin is reported to have said that for the American people the Founders had created a Republic but he added the caution "if you can keep it." By that he meant, of course, that it was up to future Americans to maintain the system grounded upon the first principles the Founders bequeathed to us. The same can be said of any society for if a society throws away or strays too far from its beginnings it becomes a materially different entity. Now sometimes it's a good thing when a society strays from its genesis, to be sure. Leaving behind certain prejudices, rectifying the suppression of ideas or ending the oppression of minorities is the mark of a maturing, benevolent society. But, too much change can also be a bad thing. And change merely for changes sake is not a legitimate goal."
I thought there was a great comment by Loyd Selberg:Righteous men, not women, gave ther lives to built Western civilization for the benefit of women and children and are now being marginalized by the women that motivated their actions. Someone must have the courage to ask why no matriarchal society has ever succeeded in recorded history.
Fearful women seeking security will give up Western freedom and first principles rather than fight like men. There was a reason that our founding fathers didn’t give women the right to vote.
Winston Churchill understood: “The women’s suffrage movement is only the small edge of the wedge, if we allow women to vote it will mean the loss of social structure and the rise of every liberal cause under the sun. Women are well represented by their fathers, brothers, and husbands.”"
While dozens of studies focusing on male victims of domestic violence have been made abroad, only one survey on this subject has been conducted in the Czech Republic, without the media even noticing it, Tyden writes.
The survey made by a team of lecturers and students from the South Bohemian University, published in the book "Domestic Violence Committed on Men and Seniors" in 2006, reveals that "every tenth Czech man experiences in his partnership something that goes beyond a common argument and that is close to violence, either physical or psychological," Tyden writes.
see article
Fortunately, Ms. Jong speaks only for the few sociopathic women who wouldn’t know what to do with a good man if he fell out of the sky and landed right in her lap.
“Who’s Tired of Pink” is certainly an excellent question in this day of collapsing end-stage radical feminist theory and politics. Therefore, I will now answer this question on behalf of the 99% of recovering feminists in the mainstream, who know that feminism no longer stands for equality, and who are running away from the National Organization for Women in droves.
Who’s Tired of Pink? (The Matter-Of-Fact Mainstream Version)
We are tired of the Pink Feminist Klan and their bought-and-paid for Pink Politicians (of both sexes) telling us that only women are qualified to protect women. We are tired of the Pink Klan controlling our educational systems, law, psychology, and media. We are disgusted by those who insist that worshipping the Vagina Monologues and the Pink Oedipus Complex is a good thing.
We are tired of Pink Warriors of both sexes who converted marriage from a cooperative institution into a war for domination and submission. We are disgusted by those who tell us that marriage is a trap, when we know that it normally provides a much better life for the vast majority of women than anything that the Pink Klan ever accomplished. We are saddened because so many good women bore heavy costs in their personal lives because they were fooled following the Pink Piper down a troubling path that is difficult to get out of.
We are disgusted by those who deny that women are responsible for over half of all serious spousal altercations so they can control family law, child custody, and billions of feminist entitlements from perfume-marinated perches founded on political and scientific treachery. We are horrified that feminists refuse to spend these funds to help women get well so they do not willfully cause or escalate violence that too often leads to injury to women. We are sick of the violations of human rights that occur because so many allegations of abuse and rape are false or completely unsupportable.
We are tired of entitling elective illegitimacy and divorce-for-the-hell-of-it. We can not believe that one-third of women “accidentally” get pregnant out of wedlock when women have the most effective forms of birth control in history of civilization at their sole disposal. We know this happens because federal government has entitled illegitimacy and divorce – enticing women to do things that in the end put them in a position of “having to do it all”, on less money, in cities full of men they rejected in favor of a government check and Kinsey’s idea of perennial sexual liberation.
We are disgusted by movies such as “First Wives Club”, which would have us believe that it is funny for women to torture, extort, and economically abuse men who have done nothing evidently wrong. We are disgusted by television shows where men are commonly portrayed as near-idiots and punching bags for sneering violent women. We are horrified and the American Bar Association, who in conjunction with the APA and courts execute similar forms of organized misandry every day in our courts at the direct expense of marriage and the futures of children.
We are tired of Pink internationalists who export Femocracy in the name of Democracy and then wonder why some countries do not like us. We are tired of being bombed and tired of feminist politics attracting the ire of hyper-masculist radicals who are essentially as insane as their American and European feminist counterparts.
We are tired of Pink Politicians of both sexes wantonly serving men, women, and children up on the smoking platter of radical feminism for political or business profit. We will vote only for those running on pro-social “Marriage Values” changes to social policy and law. We want policies that expect and reward heterosexual marital responsibility, and improve marriage retention rates by helping spouses work through the common problems of marriage and aging when they ask for assistance. We expect legislation to reform discipline of attorneys by commissions operating independently of the state Bar associations. We expect oversight of the American Psychological Association to end the practice of psycho-feminism over that of established scientific knowledge.
We will not vote for any pink politician who plays the “deadbeat dad” card, or insists on passing marriage-negative programs such as nationalized health care for children of mothers who chose to marry Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Republicans who created the Millennium neo-welfare state in the name of “family values”. We will not support or vote for any candidate who refuses to run an aggressive “marriage values” campaign based on wholesome policies restoring heterosexual marriage as the norm in America.
mdkn1 said,
That article just exposed women for what they are and how they think. You are nothing but a money and sperm bank and thats all.
Do NOT get married ! You can but whatever it is that you need and keep your money as well. The sooner the younger generation of males understands this the safer they will be. Do your best to educate young men as to the real woman.
donnieboy57 said,
my son is 33 and has yet to wed OR sire. i am thankful for that. my ex, his mother hates me and says it my fault he hasn't given her grandchildren. makes me smile a lot. cackle cackle cackle.