Marriage is a bitch

I saw this post on a forum that I visit the other day... this guy is married with a toddler, and his wife is starting the descent into insanity that will end with him penniless and unable to see his kid. Men who marry today are just stupid.

Alrighty, here goes...wanted to get some general opinion on this and see how common this kind of thing is.

Last night, my buddy Mike calls me and asks if I want to go engagement ring shopping with him. Long story short, I end up not going, but tell him that I'll come over to his house to check it out when he gets home. In the meantime, my wife wants to watch a movie. We end up watching the movie, which was turning out to be pretty good, and she ends up falling asleep. I turn the DVD off and tell her that I'm going to go to Mike's because he really wants me to see it (he was proud, ya know), and that this would be be only chance to do so before he pops the question (we are heading out of town today to visit the in-laws). She looks at me like I just lit a baby on fire.

I ask her what is wrong...she just stares at me, looks at the clock, then looks back at me and says "That is just STUPID!, it's so late!". Granted, it was about 10pm, but that's not incredibly late, he only lives a mile from my house, and I wasn't going to be there long. He's a good friend, and really just wanted to show it off. I then call him, and tell him that I wont be coming over because my wife said it was stupid that I'd want to come over so late, so in order to avoid a fight, I'm just going to stay home. She hears this, and says "Oh fuck you!". She then runs in to the kitchen where I am and screams "FUCK YOU! I didn't say you were stupid! I can have my own opinions! We don't have to agree on everything, FUCK YOU!".

Now, this isn't the first time she has talked to me like this. Last week she cut me down and I spent three nights on the couch because I didn't want to sleep near her. There have been plenty of other times she has done shit like this. One time, she was sitting down with our daughter on her lap and screamed "you're a total FUCK" at me.

Hell, one night we went out to a local bar to watch a band play. I'd had four drinks the entire night. We came home, went to bed etc. Her mom was staying the night and had babysat for us. Well, I guess at about 4 am, I woke up, went to the bathroom, started moaning and pissed all over the sink. She came in to the bathroom and asked me what I was doing and I replied "Computer programming" and went back to bed. Obviously I had been sleep walking, as I've been known to do. I finally came to with her screaming at me telling me how she was going to call the cops on me because I was "so drunk". I reminded her that we had a totally lucid, normal conversation when we came home, and since I wasn't drunk then, how could I be drunk after sleeping for two hours? It was super great, especially since her mom got hear her daughter SCREAM at her "drunk" husband about how she was going to have him arrested, for being "drunk" in his own house.

I know this isn't "normal", but how common is stuff like this in marriages?

Oh its really common boyo. More common than you think. And if your wife were a man, you'd be able to get her hauled away on multiple domestic violence charges, have her go through anger management classes, forced therapy (brainwashing) according to the Duluth Model of Men are Always Perpetrators, the whole nine yards.

But since she's a woman, she's immune. She can call the police at any time and have you taken away. And other men will laugh at you and say "You must have done something to provoke her, she's a woman, only next to God in virtue."

Here's a clueless fuck:

Haha, I'm not married, but in my relationship experience it happens pretty rarely. I'm going to guess that she will apologize for over reacting. What is wrong with your relationship that you're not allowed to go to a friends house? Especially if she was sleeping after you ditched a friends big plans to hang out with her for some (apparently) boring ass movie?

Rationalize with her, and if she doesn't follow, then just drop it and wait for her to think it over.

Here's someone who believes the man is ALWAYS at fault:

How come you didn't want to sleep near her?

Because she cut him down in an argument.

Here's further explanation by the idiot who got married:

Well, yes, I did say that. More or less because she get's mad any time I hang out with my friends. Basically she gets mad if I go out to a bar, for any length of time, because for some reason, she can go out with her friends to a bar, but I cannot. Not sure why that is. However, on this particular night, I wasn't going to a bar, was simply going to a friends house. Any time I go anywhere with friends I get the third degree. My friends rarely visit because they feel uncomfortable in my home.

Controlling behavior, nagging and withholding sex are the order of the day when you've signed over yourself into lifetime servitude. The worst part is all the idiots in the thread who just can not imagine that the woman could possibly be at fault. It is just unthinkable for them. They keep coming up with excuses for her, trying to elicit some sort of confession from the married dolt that he has done something to upset her, maybe if not in this life then in a past life, if not then maybe there's some other way he's at fault... its just insane.

She works outside of the home, school teacher. She did not work, she was finishing up college. My behavior has changed some.

The day we brought home our daughter, my wife basically pretended that I no longer existed in the home. I thought it was a "phase" that a lot of new families go through. The thing is, it never changed. She devotes ALL of her attention to our daughter while she is at home and awake. This sounds great in theory, but it's almost over bearing.

It has gotten to the point where my daughter, now almost two, has no independence what-so-ever when mommy is around. My daughter even flat out rejects me when my wife is around. When my wife is not around, my daughter is super affectionate and fun to play with. Hates me when the wife is around though. My wife has even flat-out told me that our daughter gets all of her attention when she is awake. Afterwards is her time to grade, and after that, if there is time, that time she can give to me.

See that? That's what is in store for you if you get married. This is why Parental Alienation Syndrome is not recognized - because its the order of the day, its what 90% of marriages with kids are like. A quote:

Basically, I think she resents me.

Probably, because you knocked her up and ruined her life. And yours, too.

Pinning responsibility on a woman? AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.

We are not intimate very often. Maybe once every 10 days or so, and most of the time, she is pretty disinterested and makes it out to be like she is doing me some huge favor. Daughter is almost two. She wasn't really like this prior to my daughter's birth. I do not think she was terribly upset by my sleeping on the couch.

Another poster replied with "You sound like you're willing to accept horrible treatment and haven't established what you will and won't accept in a relationship. Your partner is completely neglectful of your needs, and that means it's not much of a relationship."
----------It's not that I'm willing to accept that, and it's not that I haven't tried to establish bounds, but seriously, and I mean this, how does one try to set these bounds, and have them crushed time and time again, and still try to have said bounds. I don't know what I'm trying to say...i've told her that I do not want to be talked to that way. I've told her to never do it again. She keeps doing it. What do you do to remedy that? I really don't know.

She had the summer off, for the most part. She did a few random catering gigs for weddings. The summer was about the same, maybe a little worse. I was working full time (still am, of course) and she was staying home. There would be trash on the floor, dishes laying around the house, laundry not done, filth everywhere.

I did a lot of the cleaning. Not once during the summer did I come home to a decent looking home. I'm not saying "its a woman's job to do a woman's work, har har har" I am simply saying that if you have an entire summer off (without pay, she wasn't contracted yet), and I'm working, still doing the yard work, cleaning the cars, etc, I could have at least gotten a clean home once.

Instead it fell to shambles, and that bothered me a lot. She told me the whole reason nothing was getting done was because she "didnt have time" but oddly, she had time to take all kinds of fucking surveys on the internet. every day.

Here's an idiot who would fucking lick the ass of a whore on the street just because she's so superior to the male sex in every way:

She's probably depressed. Teaching is a demanding, thankless profession. Some people just aren't cut out for it.

As for her sitting home all summer, the transition from work->no work is stressful, and then she has only two months before she has to go back to her thankless, packed-full schedule, so she feels like she shouldn't have to work around the house (my wife is also a teacher, and she comments on this at times - thankfully, she deals with it in a more positive manner).

Your wife is unhappy, and you're there at home and it's convenient for her to take her frustrations out on you. Sounds like she's taking you for granted. This is common in marriages, and it's something marriage counselors see and work with all the time.

And THIS is the pinnacle of the whole skimmity-riding thread.

Play another DVD,and when she falls asleep, it's OK to do the nasty. She's your wife, and this is well withing your rights as a husband.

How the fuck do people not know about the concept of marital rape? Why the hell are men so goddamn stupid? Why don't they know all this stuff, they have parents, neighbors, friends, uncles who went through the bullshit of marriage, divorce, alimony and child support, did they not? Why don't they fucking learn?

I can excuse somebody who recently came to the US and wants to fit their culture in with American laws, but how the hell does a man who has lived here his whole life, who doubtless knows men who were devastated in divorce, think "OH THAT'S A GOOD IDEA, I'LL MARRY!" People are way too ignorant of the truth, as is demonstrated above.

I'm betting that marital rape was enshrined in law before this jackass was a twinkle in his mother's eye, yet he thinks that we're in the 1950s or something. "This is well within your rights as a husband" indeed.

Hey you idiot, the husband has NO RIGHTS in marriage or in divorce. Get that through your thick skull.

Australian Navy paying for breast enlargement surgery

The Australian Navy is paying for boob jobs

Wow, can you believe this shit? Can you just imagine this sort of stuff being allowed if men were on the receiving end? How about "After doctors and researchers worked round the clock for years to find a safe alternative to steroids, the Navy and Army are paying for muscle treatment for its deskbound workers who don't get the workouts that their field-working brethren do."

This stuff is beyond the pale, it really is. How can this be defensible at all?

Defence officials claim the surgery is justified because some servicewomen need bigger breasts to address "psychological issues".

Ah yes, "psychological issues" - the same excuse that got Andrea Yates therapy instead of prison, that gets women tons of misandry IV drips disguised as "therapy" and "counseling," psychological issues is the catchword of the decade. But of course, gotta remember that double standard...

If women have psychological issues, they need counseling and therapy.

If men have psychological issues, they need to be put in prison because they are potentially dangerous.

Anyway, this is the here and now. Right now the women are being paid for the boob jobs, and five years later, they'll be paid for the reductions/maintenance, and ten years after that, for treatment of the inevitable breast cancer. Women just have a knack for getting the free ride even when there's no man to pay for it, don't they.

 

THE Royal Australian Navy is paying for women sailors to have breast enlargements for purely cosmetic reasons, at a cost to taxpayers of $10,000 an operation.

Defence officials claim the surgery is justified because some servicewomen need bigger breasts to address "psychological issues".

Darling Point plastic surgeon Kourosh Tavakoli told The Sunday Telegraph the navy had paid for two officers, aged 25 and 32, to have breast-augmentation surgery at his private clinic.

Dr Tavakoli said the women had not been injured but claimed to suffer "psychological" problems.

"I've had two female officers who have got the navy to pay for breast augmentation for psychological reasons," he said.

"I know for a fact two patients claimed it back on the navy. They (the navy) knew it was breast augmentation and paid for it.

"I don't know why they pay for it. There's no breast augmentation, that I know of, for medical purposes. You've got to be fair to yourself."

A Defence spokesman admitted cosmetic surgery occurred at "public expense" when there were "compelling psychological/psychiatric reasons", but refused to say how many such cases were taxpayer-funded.

Cosmetic surgery was also provided for servicemen or women who were disfigured by work-related injuries, he said.

"Cosmetic procedures undertaken solely for the purpose of preserving or improving a person's subjective appearance will be considered only if the underlying (psychological) problem is causing difficulties that adversely impact on the member's ability to do their job.

"Operations purely for cosmetic reasons are not allowed."

The Sunday Telegraph asked Defence Minister Brendan Nelson, formerly a GP, how many members of the armed forces had received taxpayer-funded cosmetic surgery.

A spokesman said figures would not be available until next week.

Australian Defence Association spokesman Neil James defended the practice of taxpayers funding medical procedures such as breast enhancement surgery for psychological reasons.

He said young men and women were attracted to defence careers because they offered free medical care. This, in turn, improved the efficiency of the force.

"Just as there are in civilian life, there are some females who feel their breasts are too small and if their breasts were bigger, they might be more of a 'normal' woman," Mr James said.

"If they were lacking in self-confidence, this might provide the measure of self-confidence that would help them tackle their wider job.

"There are privacy issues here for people. It's not as if they keep a record of who has had a nose job in the Defence Force over the past 100 years."

Dr Tavakoli, a member of the Australian Society of Plastic Surgeons, said the navy officers had visited him in 2005 and 2006.

Each had had $10,000 worth of surgery, which required a recovery period of at least two weeks.

Boosting self-esteem was the biggest motivation for cosmetic surgery, Dr Tavakoli said.

The Sunday Telegraph understands Dr Tavakoli is not the usual surgeon used by the navy for reconstructive/cosmetic surgery.

"I don't see a lot of them (naval officers) because they have their own plastic surgeon," he said.

"I know for a fact they have their own surgeon."

Last year, a Brisbane surgeon revealed that an army cook had had a taxpayer-funded nose job.

Poems

If I Only Had a V - by Angry Harry

If I only had a V
I could be accusatory
And hide in anonymity
Despite my obvious perjury.
If I only had a V
I could live so happily
Causing untold agony
To the man who married me.

If I only had a V
I would be officially
protected by immunity
With no responsibility.

If I only had a V
I would dress most prettily
And all of the judiciary
Would judge my claims most favorably.

If I only had a V
I would use it expertly
To generate equality
That somehow always favors me.

If I only had a V
I could act appallingly
And cause my partner misery
No matter how atrociously.

If I only had a V
I would stroke it tenderly
Because quite unbelievably
It is my gold-filled treasury.

 

And one by Dr. Evil from SYG:

When do you get full reproductive choice?
When you have a vagina.

When is cold blooded murder "voluntary manslaughter"?
When you have a vagina.

When is it cruel and illegal to circumcise?
When you have a vagina.

When do you get safety from DV?
When you have a vagina.

When is it easy to get a restraining order?
When you have a vagina.

When can we get full custody of our kids?
When you have a vagina.

Divorce Insurance for Men

The past couple of days, talk has been going around of a concrete idea for "Marriage Insurance" or "Divorce Insurance" - the idea being that the man can pay to keep his assets protected in times of divorce - maybe he is under pressure to marry no matter what, maybe he really loves his girlfriend, maybe he's just insane.

No matter, never fear! Divorce Insurance is here! The claims are that you can pay the insurance, and if you do end up losing the game of Russian roulette where the woman is holding the gun and the bullets, you won't end up living under a bridge because that is the only place the restraining orders and registries allow you to be.

I think its a fucking terrible idea. There are many reasons. First of all, if you have ever taken insurance, you know that they are only too happy to take your money for years, but as soon as a claim comes in, they will weasel their way out of it and pay as little as they can, and then jack up the prices to astronomical levels for years.

Next, the idea of divorce insurance is terrible because just like pre-nups, it will give scheming women a chance to lasso innocent lovestruck men with claims of "its going to be OK, we have the insurance, see? I'll even pay half of the premiums!" Make no mistake, the 75% of divorces initiated by women is not because all the men are assholes.

Finally, and more importantly, the government needs to be held accountable to fix what they broke. I don't mean to patch it up with more half-assed solutions that hurt more than they help, but to repeal no-fault divorce, to introduce the foreign concept of equality into the courts, and fire fry misandrist and misogynist judges.

So what do you think? Am I totally off-base here? I just think its a terrible idea, and I pay for car and home insurance. I'm not stupid enough to pay for the other kinds of insurances you get offered at every place you shop, but a lot of people are. And while I wouldn't say

The white man's burden

Way back in the day, when Africa was known as the Dark Continent and America had just been discovered, taming the natives was the White Man's burden. The natives were so savage that it fell upon the white men (missionaries) to tame them and harness their power for the greater good of (white) mankind.

Today, men are the fairer sex's burden. It falls upon women to tame men, to harness them for the greater good of womynkind. Interestingly enough, this dictionary recognizes womankind as a word but doesn't recognize misandry.

Anyway, I present to you the travails of a teenage boy who just wants to have safe sex. This series of posts was made by Pentium 4 on SYG:

I was talking to my 14 year old nephew just now and he said that he had to go get a booster shot in order to go to school this year.
So, at the health department he asked for some condoms. He was told they only give them to females unless he is tested?

What does "tested" mean?

Can someone explain the logic in giving MALE birth control devices ONLY to females???

Called them, my nephew was telling the truth!

They give them to women who come in to get birth control or pap smear.

I asked if there was any condition where men could get them for free and she said only if they come in to be tested for an STD and are positive!
So let me get this straight. Women get free birth control pills and free condoms. Yet men get nothing UNLESS they are positive for an STD!!!
She said: "It was just too expensive to give them out to men".

How is this not the government giving women FULL reproductive control when they can get both the female contraceptive and the male contraceptive for FREE more readily than men can get male contraceptives for free?

Well, my nephew isn't into Men's Rights, he was just telling me what happened. He thought it was funny. I DID NOT!

Where I live (ND) they are out on the counter, where he lives apparently they are not.

I have no problem with the "it's too expensive" stuff. My problem is that the ones they do give out are given to FEMALES ONLY...unless a male has an STD.

It is all about women. They seem to want to give 100% reproductive control to women by giving them free birth control for both males and females. That she might punch holes in it is just one aspect. It sends the message that SHE is control of the use of contraceptives (ex, to use it or not to use it is not his choice as he isn't the one who brought it to the party) and if she did poke holes in it you can bet she will be pushing him to wear HER FREE condom not the one he BOUGHT! Men like to save money, even when horny.

They will give them to males ONLY if they have an STD. It is all about protecting women from men with STD's but otherwise, it is about women having 100% reproductive control in a sexual encounter. No matter how you look at it, they don't appear to give a shit about male reproductive rights but are all about helping to protect the woman if he has an STD.

A post by Brian:

Sounds about right. The woman is a victim and so she gets taxpayer paid for services for free. The man is told to get a job and pay for his own(and hers too by virtue of the taxes he pays) condoms. Now switch it around and watch how quickly the NAGS file a discrimination suit. Tell you nephew to make an EO complaint.

One from typhonblue:

I think it's even more insidious.

The idea behind it is that women need to have their precious sexuality protected. But a man only needs protection if it's necessary to protect his female partner from him.

I guess they believe STDs only go one way. From man to woman. And protection is only needed if you're protecting a woman from a man.
BTW, what about gay youth?

You could get him to ask the nurse why she thinks a girl needs protection, but he doesn't.

This is the kind of thing we're dealing with here. People just naturally assume that teenage boys aren't worthy of getting the same services that teenage girls are. If boys cost the healthcare system as much as girls do, what with routine visits, monthly appointments, pap smears and whatnots, people would blow a gasket and tell them to "man up and stop running to the doctor for every little thing."

Turning around the feminist canard of "If men got pregnant,"

If men got pregnant, they would die at childbirth, because nobody cares when men die.

For Single Guys

An excellent post by uzemandluzem... about how western women are sluts...

from Unhooked:
"Stepp follows three high school girls and six college women through a year in their lives, chronicling their sexual behavior. These girls and women don't date, don't develop long-term relationships or even short, serious ones -- instead, they "hook up." Hooking up, Stepp writes, "isn't exactly anything." It can "consist entirely of one kiss, or it can involve fondling, oral sex, anal sex, intercourse or any combination of those things."

As I stated in another thread, "The real and not often recognized root of women’s power in our society is that 90% of them are really only truly interested in 5% of guys. Just as importantly, when these girls are young (under 30) they’d much rather share the 5% than have one of the 95% all to themselves."
Obviously, it can only be a best guess but I would breakdown the 5% as follows:
Players: 2%
Bad Boys: 2%
Studs:1%
Good players are smooth talkers so they generally do well in clubs. While they do get plenty of sex, its not necessarily easy sex because they still have to make the effort and encounter lots of rejection. While they do have many more one night stands than the average guy, most of the time they still have to take the girl on at least one date before they get any action.
As for bad boys, women perceive them to be very masculine, adventurous and dangerous - and when dealing with the shallow, arrogant creature that is WW, perception is reality. If a bad boy isn't a smooth talker then he won't get laid like crazy but like rich dudes, he will always have a girlfriend because girls tend to be drawn to them like stink on shit.
The Studs however, are the true chosen ones: they get easy sex and lots of sex because they have the package (like the bad boys) and the skill (like the players) that allows them to bypass the whole dating scam - I mean scene. The classic example of the stud is the hi school or college quarterback. The following are just a few of the characteristics of the stud:
He has lots of female friends (and many of these girls have borefriends) and he is the king of the "one thing just led to another" hookup - No need to get numbers and certainly no need to waste time or money "dating".
For example, as the article above alludes to:
He'll be just hanging out watching a movie with 2 girls and the next thing you know (ATNTYK) he's piling both of them
He'll be studying with a girl at a library ATNTYK they're fucking under the stairwell
He'll go to a party ATNTYK a girl's blowing him while her bf's in the other room
He'll go to a club with his buddies ATNTYK he's fucking a girl in the bathroom
He'll give a girl a ride home from work ATNTYK he's riding her in the back seat or
He'll meet a girl on the street ATNTYK he's on her sofa with her ankles pinned behind her ears like bugs bunny.
Of course, the distinction between players, bad boys and studs is not black and white but the important thing to remember is that women are really only truly interested in the studs and the bad boys. They are entertained by players and the good ones do get lots of action but mainly because there are not enough bad boys and studs to go around - despite the fact that they do their best to spread their seed.
So what about the other 95% of guys?
As far as WW are concerned they are worker bees and sexual drones. In other words, WW simply are NOT INTERESTED IN 95% OF MEN. Instinctively, your gut has been telling you that and your gut has been 100% right as the article above proves.
It proves it because you can only be "casually hooking up" with these whores if you are already in their circle. Women operate in cliques and they only let the studs and bad boys into their cliques because they are the only guys that they are really interested in. For everyone else, including the players, they make it extremely difficult just to talk to them. This is not an accident.
The players and rich dudes are third and fourth in line but they are still made to jump through hoops (i.e. do the dating thing) whereas the studs and bad boys get the "advance straight to pussy - no need to ask for my number and no need to take me on a date" pass.
To Summarize
For non gold digging woman their genuine preference in men before they are ready to get married is as follows:
First Choice: The Stud
Second Choice: The Bad Boy
Third Choice: The Player
Fourth Choice: The Rich Guy (he can provide material excitement)
Fifth Choice: The Catch (good looks, right family & fast track career)
Last Resort: The Average Joe (who in reality is far more of a "catch" than the average WW)
When WW are ready to get married the key thing to remember is that their preferences stay the same but their choices change. So even the non gold diggers will try and get a rich guy or a catch. Since there are not enough of those men to go around they will begrudgingly settle for an average Joe.
And therein lies part of the reason why the typical wife is so angry. She is deeply resentful that she wasn't able to land a meal ticket and retirement plan so payback comes by cutting her hair, ballooning into a beached whale, making her husband's life as miserable as possible and of course (in 75% of the cases) the coup de grace, eventually divorcing his ass and cleaning him out.
Of course, we can't forget that if she thinks she can get away with it she will try and find a stud, a bad boy or a player to knock her up and have the sucker (the rich guy, the catch or the average Joe) raise it.
The irony is that even if a WW can land a rich guy or a catch, in her shallow, arrogant, twisted and entitled little mind, she still will not be happy because to her, such men are not really men, they are personal slaves - suckers, just like the average Joe - only a lot more useful.
Always remember that a western woman's "heart" will always be reserved for the studs and the bad boys.
To summarize:
WW love Studs & Bad Boys (to the extent that WW are even capable of loving)
They respect players (women only fuck guys they respect**)
They use (while resenting) rich guys and catches & (most disturbingly)
They contemptuously think of average Joes as last resorts
Since bad boys and studs are born not made, unless you've always been getting tonnes of easy pussy while rarely spending a dime, the only self respecting option - aside from opting out from dealing with WW completely - is to (learn to) be a master player.
Uzem & Luzem
**hopefully by now, having the "respect" of WW means about as much to you as having the respect of a vulture or a rat - it only matters if you want to fuck them.

Our Own Enemies

Here are a couple of posts I made recently, about how I feel that men are our worst enemies.

It started with this post by Mr. X:

yeah that whole ED stuff is really pissing me off. Men haven't changed. Its not like some meteor hit the earth and all of a sudden men are impotent. I think women are actually insulted men aren't on the jazz 24/7 and thinking with our groins like they were told.

As usual, my reply was tangential. I responded:

The problem is that men are their own enemies. Men are the ones who keep prattling on about how we men think with our little heads, we tell our daughters that their boyfriends are only interested in one thing, and we are the ones who make a big deal of wanting to bone every attractive woman who crosses our line of sight.

Not all men obviously, but too many.

To that, LAYM said:

Rather,such men are the enemies of independent thinking MRA men,and pretty much whoever comes his way the wrong time,like a father hating on his daughter's harmless boyfriend. Of course they are hypocrites,as they allowed themselves to inseminate a young woman once in their youth,despite the similar guys of the then generation giving the same look. I don't think you believe what you wrote really hard. As it implies all of men's problems are caused by men and only by men.

And I said:

I don't think all of men's problems are caused only by men, but its pretty close. Men have willingly allowed themselves to be sacrificed for the good of societies for hundreds of years, and its showing now - in the way that misandry is everywhere, in how feminism took over our justice system and in how men commit suicide more than women at any age.

Often, men are the first ones to cut other men down. I don't expect a positive response from women, but I also don't expect such a negative response from men.

And its true. How can men catch a break when the people most willing to hold them back are other men? When a thousand men will stand up and say "there's no problem" in any discussion about gender issues or about boys falling behind for every one man saying "there is a problem," how can we get ahead?

Feminists are all too quick to point to the bootlickers and say "Well these men don't seem to have any problems," how can the rest of us persuade any audience that there is a problem?

How can we be in any debate when other men are the first to muzzle us and push us down, and out of sight?

Responsibility for the other

You know, it is often said, mostly by feminists, women, and women-firsters, that men need to take responsibility for who they marry. If they marry a gold-digger, they themselves are solely responsible for her actions, she is but an agent of nature and does not have any more conscience than a bird, whose shit has an equal chance of falling on a Lexus or a Lada. Your mistake for keeping the top down, now the poo is on the seats and has stained the leather.

The assumption is that men need to apologize for another's behavior when it doesn't turn out right. So if she decides to leave you and takes half of everything, you should have seen it coming because you're a man, and men are clairvoyant.

Sayeth the woman - they aren't? Then how come they always know what gifts to give me? How do they always know where all the romantic places are?

Heh, heh.

I was reading a letter that Glenn Sacks put on his blog, from a witch (who else can be that angry and evil?) who doesn't like that her ex has a new life. Vindictiveness and spite, ahh what a beauty the fair sex is.

There's a rabble-rouser in the comments, a female supremacist in the purest sense of the word - Annie. You can read her comments if you have the stomach. I bet the WKKK would be proud of her. There are a few choice comments too...

Here's a comment from Mark:
The other problem I see on this blog is that men tend to get a pass on everything, feminism in reverse if you will. The answer isn't not getting married, it's making a good choice on whom you marry. Sorry, but there are no shortage of men that think it's just great the woman they're dating is really impressed with their car and Visa card then act shocked when they "pretend" to realize the woman was just after someone to pay her bills.

Comment from Rosemarie:
Ding ding ding! We have a winner - Mark, you have hit the nail on the head when it comes to men who try to impress women with their Porches and their sailboats and their Amex, then cry foul when they realize they've attracted a money-grubbing opportunist.

As usual, the man gets the responsibility, the woman gets a free pass. I'll show you why.

Just think for a moment that a man meets a woman. She is highly sexual, sensual, free with her body and takes care of his intimate needs like no other. Let's not bring money into this; let's say they are both young and carefree with nary a penny to their name.

They marry, thinking that the bliss is going to last forever. Pretty soon, she pops out a kid, then another. Her gyno puts her on some pills, the sex dries up, she doesn't feel attracted to him anymore now that she's got what her biological clock was telling her to get.

Does the man have a right to expect sex to continue? Actually, if you answer in the affirmative, your opinion doesn't matter because of a simple little thing called marital rape. Law trumps opinion. This little feminist invention allows men to be prosecuted for the most basic function of marriage - sex.

He's a beast if he wants sex when she doesn't.

He's a beast if he doesn't want sex when she does.

So if a man cannot expect the good sex to continue, and cannot take it from her forcibly, what right does a woman have to expect the support to continue?

Ah, there we have the double standard. Money is not deemed personal like the body is, because men have money and women have the body. Simple gender politics.

A woman having to have sex with a man she does not like is a travesty, a human rights violation, it is everything that is wrong with the world; whereas a man having to support a woman he does not like is called marriage.