Showing posts with label women. Show all posts
Showing posts with label women. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 12, 2020
Sunday, June 14, 2020
Tuesday, June 2, 2020
The Tinder Experiment
Talk about regret. "I'm sorry I even did this in the first place" sure applies here. For some this may a major WTF moment. For others, he may confirm what they already know. Looks are what drew these women in but looks alone didn't keep their interest. Looks? Money? Elliot Rodger had both and look what happened to him. I would say it is more confidence and style.
Tuesday, May 26, 2020
Tuesday, December 17, 2019
Women drugging men and robbing them
NASHVILLE, TN (WSMV) - A Wilbraham, MA, resident is now the fifth man to confirm to News4 Investigates that he was drugged in downtown Nashville this year.
A police report narrative obtained by News4 Investigates shows the first indication of what has long been rumored: that men claim they were ro…
John Walsh Jr. filed a police report claiming on Nov. 19 he, his son and nephew were having drinks at The Diner on Third Avenue South.
After his son and nephew decided to go to a hookah bar, Walsh said he struck up a conversation with an unknown woman and had his third drink of the night. The next morning, he awoke in the Metro jail.
“The most devastating thing that's happened in my life,” Walsh said.
Walsh said he remembers nothing between that last drink at The Diner and waking up in the jail that morning.
“Around 1:00 in the morning, I have no memory from there,” Walsh said.
He would later learn that he was found asleep in a chair in a hotel miles away from where he was staying.
When police arrived, they described him as smelling of alcohol and could not form coherent sentences and took him to jail on a charge of public intoxication.
Walsh said when his son and nephew returned that morning, the door to the room where he was staying was closed, so they believed he was sleeping.
He called his son and explain that he needed to be picked up, and then filed a police report claiming he had been drugged.
News4 Investigates asked him the question you may be wondering yourself.
“Is it possibly you had too much to drink and someone took advantage of you?” asked News4 Investigates.
“Absolutely not. Never in my life. I don’t do drugs, and I don't drink to black out,” Walsh said.
Walsh said his debit and credit card, along with at least $500 and his phone were all stolen. Walsh provided a screen grab that shows how he was able to track his stolen phone, which traveled from Bordeaux to Murfreesboro and, at one point, back to downtown Nashville.
Metro Police Central Precinct Commander Gordon Howey confirmed to News4 Investigates that they believe women are targeting men downtown.
“These women know they've got a pretty good place to go hunting,” Howey said.
Howey said they believe unrelated groups of women, come coming from as far as Wisconsin and Minnesota, are traveling to downtown Nashville to find men who are out drinking, drug them and then rob them.
“Men are being targeted by women,” Howey said.
Howey said while police have been able to arrest women for stealing from men after a night of drinking, they have not yet been able to charge them with drugging them. Part of the problem, Howey said, is that men are failing to go to the hospital to get blood tests to confirm their suspicions. Walsh said he feels that’s exactly what police should have done: taken him to the hospital instead of the jail.
“I feel totally violated - in many ways. I feel law enforcement failed me,” Walsh said.
Howey said in Walsh’s case, which is further detailed in the police report, officers found him asleep with blood shot eyes, smelling of alcohol and unable to former coherent sentences, which was why he was taken to jail.
Howey said if Walsh had a medical condition, he would have been taken to the hospital. Howey did say, however, that the staff of The Diner had provided video from inside the bar that could aid in catching the person responsible.
Source
A police report narrative obtained by News4 Investigates shows the first indication of what has long been rumored: that men claim they were ro…
John Walsh Jr. filed a police report claiming on Nov. 19 he, his son and nephew were having drinks at The Diner on Third Avenue South.
After his son and nephew decided to go to a hookah bar, Walsh said he struck up a conversation with an unknown woman and had his third drink of the night. The next morning, he awoke in the Metro jail.
“The most devastating thing that's happened in my life,” Walsh said.
Walsh said he remembers nothing between that last drink at The Diner and waking up in the jail that morning.
“Around 1:00 in the morning, I have no memory from there,” Walsh said.
He would later learn that he was found asleep in a chair in a hotel miles away from where he was staying.
When police arrived, they described him as smelling of alcohol and could not form coherent sentences and took him to jail on a charge of public intoxication.
Walsh said when his son and nephew returned that morning, the door to the room where he was staying was closed, so they believed he was sleeping.
He called his son and explain that he needed to be picked up, and then filed a police report claiming he had been drugged.
News4 Investigates asked him the question you may be wondering yourself.
“Is it possibly you had too much to drink and someone took advantage of you?” asked News4 Investigates.
“Absolutely not. Never in my life. I don’t do drugs, and I don't drink to black out,” Walsh said.
Walsh said his debit and credit card, along with at least $500 and his phone were all stolen. Walsh provided a screen grab that shows how he was able to track his stolen phone, which traveled from Bordeaux to Murfreesboro and, at one point, back to downtown Nashville.
Metro Police Central Precinct Commander Gordon Howey confirmed to News4 Investigates that they believe women are targeting men downtown.
“These women know they've got a pretty good place to go hunting,” Howey said.
Howey said they believe unrelated groups of women, come coming from as far as Wisconsin and Minnesota, are traveling to downtown Nashville to find men who are out drinking, drug them and then rob them.
“Men are being targeted by women,” Howey said.
Howey said while police have been able to arrest women for stealing from men after a night of drinking, they have not yet been able to charge them with drugging them. Part of the problem, Howey said, is that men are failing to go to the hospital to get blood tests to confirm their suspicions. Walsh said he feels that’s exactly what police should have done: taken him to the hospital instead of the jail.
“I feel totally violated - in many ways. I feel law enforcement failed me,” Walsh said.
Howey said in Walsh’s case, which is further detailed in the police report, officers found him asleep with blood shot eyes, smelling of alcohol and unable to former coherent sentences, which was why he was taken to jail.
Howey said if Walsh had a medical condition, he would have been taken to the hospital. Howey did say, however, that the staff of The Diner had provided video from inside the bar that could aid in catching the person responsible.
Source
Women who rape men
Writing in Time, Cathy Young notices something interesting in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention figures on rape: Women rape a lot more than people think..
If the CDC figures are to be taken at face value, then we must also conclude that, far from being a product of patriarchal violence against women, " rape culture " is a two-way street, with plenty of female perpetrators and male victims.
How could that be? After all, very few men in the CDC study were classified as victims of rape: 1.7% in their lifetime, and too few for a reliable estimate in the past year. But these numbers refer only to men who have been forced into anal sex or made to perform oral sex on another male. Nearly 7% of men, however, reported that at some point in their lives, they were "made to penetrate" another person — usually in reference to vaginal intercourse, receiving oral sex, or performing oral sex on a woman. This was not classified as rape, but as "other sexual violence." And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being "made to penetrate" — either by physical force or due to intoxication — at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1% in 2010, and 1.7% and 1.6% respectively in 2011).
In short, men are raped by women at nearly the same rate women are raped by men.
According to a recent study from the University of Missouri, published by the American Psychological Association, male victims of sexual assault are often victimized by women: "A total of 43% of high school boys and young college men reported they had an unwanted sexual experience and of those, 95% said a female acquaintance was the aggressor, according to a study published online in the APA journal Psychology of Men and Masculinity."
This shouldn't be so surprising. Back in the old days, when talk of "rape" or "sexual assault" generally meant forcible penetration at the hands of a stranger, rape was unsurprisingly pretty much a male-committed crime.
But feminists pushed for a broader definition of rape, going beyond what Susan Estrich, in a very influential book, derisively called Real Rape, to encompass other forms of sexual coercion and intimidation. And so now the term "rape" as it is commonly used encompasses things like "date rape," sex while a partner is intoxicated, sex without prior verbal consent and even — at Ohio State University, at least — sex where both partners consent, but for different reasons.
Unsurprisingly, when the definition of rape — or, as it's often now called in order to provide less clarity, "sexual assault" — expands to include a lot more than behavior distinguished by superior physical strength, the incidence of rape goes up, and behavior engaged in by women is more likely to be included in the definition. (At juvenile detention centers nine out of 10 reporters of sexual assault are males victimized by female staffers.)
Thus, as Young points out, the CDC finds that men make up over a third of the victims of "sexual coercion," which can include such things as "lies or false promises, threats to end a relationship or spread negative gossip, or 'making repeated requests' for sex and expressing unhappiness at being turned down."
Students and staff protest against sexual violence.
Critics tend to dismiss these as trivial, suggesting that the men involved should just "man up." But, of course, there's no reason to think that such coercion is any more trivial where men are concerned than where women are concerned, unless you believe that women are such fragile flowers that they cannot possibly withstand things that men are supposed to ignore.
It will be interesting to see how college disciplinary boards handle this. If, in light of the data, women exhibit a similar predilection for sexual misbehavior to men, then surely the colleges should be punishing roughly as many women as men for such conduct. If they are not, the only possible explanation is some form of institutional sexism. That should be good news for Title IX attorneys, at any rate.
Finally, all this talk of rape on campus must be making college enrollment officers — already having trouble filling seats — even more nervous. Telling female students that they have a one-in-five chance of being raped (even if it's not true) isn't going to make them, or their parents, more likely to spend six-figure sums sending them to college. It might even push them toward online alternatives, as a YouTube parody video suggests.
With rape rates actually falling sharply, the current moral panic over campus rape seems more like political agitprop and mass hysteria than anything else. Like all such, this, too, will pass. But it will also do damage along the way. May reason assert itself sooner, rather than later.
Source
If the CDC figures are to be taken at face value, then we must also conclude that, far from being a product of patriarchal violence against women, " rape culture " is a two-way street, with plenty of female perpetrators and male victims.
How could that be? After all, very few men in the CDC study were classified as victims of rape: 1.7% in their lifetime, and too few for a reliable estimate in the past year. But these numbers refer only to men who have been forced into anal sex or made to perform oral sex on another male. Nearly 7% of men, however, reported that at some point in their lives, they were "made to penetrate" another person — usually in reference to vaginal intercourse, receiving oral sex, or performing oral sex on a woman. This was not classified as rape, but as "other sexual violence." And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being "made to penetrate" — either by physical force or due to intoxication — at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1% in 2010, and 1.7% and 1.6% respectively in 2011).
In short, men are raped by women at nearly the same rate women are raped by men.
According to a recent study from the University of Missouri, published by the American Psychological Association, male victims of sexual assault are often victimized by women: "A total of 43% of high school boys and young college men reported they had an unwanted sexual experience and of those, 95% said a female acquaintance was the aggressor, according to a study published online in the APA journal Psychology of Men and Masculinity."
This shouldn't be so surprising. Back in the old days, when talk of "rape" or "sexual assault" generally meant forcible penetration at the hands of a stranger, rape was unsurprisingly pretty much a male-committed crime.
But feminists pushed for a broader definition of rape, going beyond what Susan Estrich, in a very influential book, derisively called Real Rape, to encompass other forms of sexual coercion and intimidation. And so now the term "rape" as it is commonly used encompasses things like "date rape," sex while a partner is intoxicated, sex without prior verbal consent and even — at Ohio State University, at least — sex where both partners consent, but for different reasons.
Unsurprisingly, when the definition of rape — or, as it's often now called in order to provide less clarity, "sexual assault" — expands to include a lot more than behavior distinguished by superior physical strength, the incidence of rape goes up, and behavior engaged in by women is more likely to be included in the definition. (At juvenile detention centers nine out of 10 reporters of sexual assault are males victimized by female staffers.)
Thus, as Young points out, the CDC finds that men make up over a third of the victims of "sexual coercion," which can include such things as "lies or false promises, threats to end a relationship or spread negative gossip, or 'making repeated requests' for sex and expressing unhappiness at being turned down."
Students and staff protest against sexual violence.
Critics tend to dismiss these as trivial, suggesting that the men involved should just "man up." But, of course, there's no reason to think that such coercion is any more trivial where men are concerned than where women are concerned, unless you believe that women are such fragile flowers that they cannot possibly withstand things that men are supposed to ignore.
It will be interesting to see how college disciplinary boards handle this. If, in light of the data, women exhibit a similar predilection for sexual misbehavior to men, then surely the colleges should be punishing roughly as many women as men for such conduct. If they are not, the only possible explanation is some form of institutional sexism. That should be good news for Title IX attorneys, at any rate.
Finally, all this talk of rape on campus must be making college enrollment officers — already having trouble filling seats — even more nervous. Telling female students that they have a one-in-five chance of being raped (even if it's not true) isn't going to make them, or their parents, more likely to spend six-figure sums sending them to college. It might even push them toward online alternatives, as a YouTube parody video suggests.
With rape rates actually falling sharply, the current moral panic over campus rape seems more like political agitprop and mass hysteria than anything else. Like all such, this, too, will pass. But it will also do damage along the way. May reason assert itself sooner, rather than later.
Source
Sunday, March 3, 2019
Saturday, March 2, 2019
Gutfeld and his guests weigh in on the draft and the NCFM
On tonight's Greg Gutfeld Show (March 2,2019) the subject of the draft came up with the National Coalition For Men
and their victory in this case. One of the guests Emily Campagno,federal prosecutor and Raiderette cheerleader. Shot down the idea of women being drafted. Host Greg Gutfeld also mocked it. In that case perhaps women shouldn't have civil liberties if they are going to act like arrogant bitches. If women don't want to serve their country then perhaps they should not work outside the home and do as men tell them.
Gutfeld is scared of his wife so that is expected. One of the guests did surprise me in his reaction. That is Tyrus. I thought Tyrus would be sympathetic to the man's rights cause.
Monday, February 20, 2017
Let's remind President Trump about men and our concerns
From a White House mailer:
Along with Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, President Trump created the United States-Canada Council for Advancement of Women Entrepreneurs and Business Leaders, to ensure that all Americans have ample opportunities in the workforce.
What about the men? Where do we fit in? Let's contact the President and ask him. Let's bring up our concerns and that we want them taken seriously. The more of us he hears from the better.
Along with Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, President Trump created the United States-Canada Council for Advancement of Women Entrepreneurs and Business Leaders, to ensure that all Americans have ample opportunities in the workforce.
What about the men? Where do we fit in? Let's contact the President and ask him. Let's bring up our concerns and that we want them taken seriously. The more of us he hears from the better.
Friday, November 11, 2016
Female Clinton Supporters Are Left Feeling Gutted
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — It was visceral. Women felt gutted, shocked, appalled, afraid. The prospect of celebrating the election of the nation’s first female president had been crushed by Donald J. Trump.
In this liberal enclave, where Mrs. Clinton won 89.2 percent of the vote, one of her strongest showings anywhere, Molly Hubner, 33, said she was having difficulty explaining the result to her 6-year-old daughter.
Pushing her young son in a stroller as she jogged down a leaf-covered sidewalk, Ms. Hubner said, “We had told her that he wouldn’t be a good president because he’s not very kind and just cares about himself.”
Women across the country who supported Mrs. Clinton are just starting to process their feelings about the long roller coaster ride that in their view ended in disaster.
The shock they feel that a man whom they describe as sexist, misogynistic and boorish was elected has overshadowed some of their grief about Mrs. Clinton’s loss. Like so many of the other rivals in his path, they say, the most famous woman in the world has been reduced to one more piece of collateral damage.
Really,are you aware of what Hillary had in store for men if she had won? Go Trump/Pence.
And these feelings have morphed into a genuine sense of foreboding.
“I woke up in a strange country,” said Jill Laurie Goodman, a lawyer who lives on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. “I’m about Hillary’s age. I went to law school about the same time she did, coming out of the antiwar and civil rights movement.”
She had believed that society was moving forward, Ms. Goodman said. And yet, “I woke up yesterday feeling as if everything I thought 45 years ago was wrong, that I had just gotten it wrong.”
Yeah,basically. You are way off.
In Berkeley, Calif., Hope Friedman, a 62-year-old retired nurse, said she was also stunned by the result.
“I was a big Hillary supporter, but I am not in love with Hillary the way I was with Obama,” she said of the president. “My motivation for being active in the campaign was much more about being terrified of a guy that says and does the things that Trump has said and does.”
As she described her reaction to Mr. Trump’s victory, she wept.
We're going to give you lots grief,bitch. I suggest you get used to it real quick.
“It kind of felt like being punched in the stomach,” she said. “It feels like when you get a cancer diagnosis and you are sick to your stomach and you can’t believe it and your mind is spinning.”
Sally Waldron, 69, an adult educator here in Cambridge, finds that her sorrow is rooted more in the dread she feels about a man with attitudes like Mr. Trump’s becoming president than it is borne of Mrs. Clinton’s loss.
“Part of me thinks this should be about the first woman losing,” Ms. Waldron said as she watched her grandson play in a sandlot.
Do you know what Hillary had in store for your grandson? A school environment that is hostile to boys. That includes higher learning in colleges and universities. She would back any woman making an accusation against your grandson and deny him due process rights and the right to have a real judge and jury preside over his case not a bunch of college kids that may be friends with the accuser or are influenced by her.
“I would have loved if she was the first woman president, but that’s not where the disappointment is for me,” she said. “The disappointment is in the values that won and what it means for lots of people.”
Being a man won. Not being a mangina won. That is great.
Even in the more conservative South, Clinton supporters expressed the same kind of disappointment and dread.
“I’m horrified because I have two daughters,” Kelly Cobb, 40, said as she bought slices of cake near Emory University in Atlanta.
Ms. Cobb, a stay-at-home mother, said she believed that Mr. Trump had managed to define Mrs. Clinton in the public imagination as a criminal, and that he had benefited from gender stereotypes.
How often have women benefitted from gender stereotypes? A lot. They use false female nature to get out of responsibility (women are kind stereotype. Women are sweet stereotype.)Beneficial sexism helps women get rights without responsibilities. They have no problem with this type of sexism.
“I think there’s huge disdain for her because she’s a woman, but she’s also been in politics for a long time,” said Ms. Cobb, who also said she was uncertain what Mrs. Clinton’s defeat signaled for other women seeking office.
“I don’t know if it’s Hillary Clinton and who she is, but I have to think it does have something to do with the fact that she’s a woman,” she said. “People are just unaccepting of that and judge her to a much higher standard than they would a white male.”
Or we didn't want a misandrist in the White House. Did you think of that?
Women did not turn out for Mrs. Clinton in the numbers that her campaign expected, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster. The electorate was 52 percent female, slightly lower than the normal 53 percent. She was strongly supported by white, college-educated women, black women and Latina women, but white, blue-collar women and white, non-college-educated women sided heavily with Mr. Trump.
Her failed bid raises the question about whether Mrs. Clinton’s experience will discourage other women. Did she break a barrier, or did she inadvertently reveal how high that barrier is?
Women began entering government in bigger numbers in the 1970s, but any rush has stalled. The number of women in Congress is about 19 percent. Research has shown that women are such a minority in government not because they are less likely to win — they are just as likely, over all — but because they are so much less likely to run in the first place.
Political scientists say this so-called ambition gap is because women are less likely to be encouraged or recruited to run, underestimate their own abilities, assume they need to be more qualified than men and view politics as sexist.
Now, Mrs. Clinton’s loss may lend credence to those doubts.
“Because there was general consensus on both sides of the aisle that she was the most qualified presidential candidate we’ve ever seen, and she lost, it reinforces the notion that maybe it’s not even enough to be twice as good to get half as far,” said Jennifer L. Lawless, professor of government at American University who studies gender and political ambition.
Caroline Elkins, 47, a professor of history at Harvard, said she was profoundly disappointed and could not separate the outcome from Mrs. Clinton’s gender.
“To think that gender wasn’t a factor would be ludicrous,” she said. “You’d be hard-pressed to find someone more qualified than Hillary Clinton, in my view, and yet she was scrutinized above and beyond any male candidate we’ve ever seen.”
You mean the same media that paints Trump as a racist,a rapist and an ogre. That mainstream media. The same media that covered for Hillary. In fact Donna Brazille emailed Hillary the questions they were going to ask in advance.
That Mrs. Clinton’s flaws were “thrown into a hyperbolic relief,” she said, suggests that being highly qualified for the job was not enough, that a woman still has to be “twice as good and half as threatening” as a man to succeed.
Then why did Trump have to work overtime to calm women down and not to let their fears get the best of them?
Ms. Friedman, the retired nurse in Berkeley, who made phone calls on behalf of Mrs. Clinton, was convinced that gender was a factor.
“I underestimated the level of misogyny in the country,” she said. “Which is surprising, because usually I see it where it’s not.” But during her calls, she was sometimes met with crude responses.
“I forget how much people hate women,” she said.
Could it be due to the misandry that comes from women at the expense of men. Could it be due to the special treatment women demand or they call you a misogynist.
Mary Jane Judy, 35, a lawyer in Kansas City, Mo., said Mrs. Clinton lost more because of herself than because she is a woman.
“I think the baggage with her as Hillary Clinton over the course of the years was just stuff that people couldn’t get past,” she said. “I’ve heard people say, ‘Anybody but Hillary.’”
In Belfast, Me., Anita Zeno, an innkeeper on the pristine Atlantic Coast, knew Mrs. Clinton had flaws. But when she voted, she felt a rush.
“I was surprised at how good it felt to be voting for a woman,” said Ms. Zeno, 70.
But on Thursday, as Ms. Zeno examined the shallots in a farm store and cafe, her eyes welled with tears at the very mention of Mrs. Clinton’s defeat. She was worried about the country, the fate of the Affordable Care Act and climate change.
There is no climate change. The Affordable Care Act is not so affordable.
And one more thing.
“At my age, it’s now likely I’ll never see a woman elected president,” Ms. Zeno said. “And that really mattered to me.”
Source
My rights matter to me and I don't want some misandrist taking them away.
In this liberal enclave, where Mrs. Clinton won 89.2 percent of the vote, one of her strongest showings anywhere, Molly Hubner, 33, said she was having difficulty explaining the result to her 6-year-old daughter.
Pushing her young son in a stroller as she jogged down a leaf-covered sidewalk, Ms. Hubner said, “We had told her that he wouldn’t be a good president because he’s not very kind and just cares about himself.”
Women across the country who supported Mrs. Clinton are just starting to process their feelings about the long roller coaster ride that in their view ended in disaster.
The shock they feel that a man whom they describe as sexist, misogynistic and boorish was elected has overshadowed some of their grief about Mrs. Clinton’s loss. Like so many of the other rivals in his path, they say, the most famous woman in the world has been reduced to one more piece of collateral damage.
Really,are you aware of what Hillary had in store for men if she had won? Go Trump/Pence.
And these feelings have morphed into a genuine sense of foreboding.
“I woke up in a strange country,” said Jill Laurie Goodman, a lawyer who lives on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. “I’m about Hillary’s age. I went to law school about the same time she did, coming out of the antiwar and civil rights movement.”
She had believed that society was moving forward, Ms. Goodman said. And yet, “I woke up yesterday feeling as if everything I thought 45 years ago was wrong, that I had just gotten it wrong.”
Yeah,basically. You are way off.
In Berkeley, Calif., Hope Friedman, a 62-year-old retired nurse, said she was also stunned by the result.
“I was a big Hillary supporter, but I am not in love with Hillary the way I was with Obama,” she said of the president. “My motivation for being active in the campaign was much more about being terrified of a guy that says and does the things that Trump has said and does.”
As she described her reaction to Mr. Trump’s victory, she wept.
We're going to give you lots grief,bitch. I suggest you get used to it real quick.
“It kind of felt like being punched in the stomach,” she said. “It feels like when you get a cancer diagnosis and you are sick to your stomach and you can’t believe it and your mind is spinning.”
Sally Waldron, 69, an adult educator here in Cambridge, finds that her sorrow is rooted more in the dread she feels about a man with attitudes like Mr. Trump’s becoming president than it is borne of Mrs. Clinton’s loss.
“Part of me thinks this should be about the first woman losing,” Ms. Waldron said as she watched her grandson play in a sandlot.
Do you know what Hillary had in store for your grandson? A school environment that is hostile to boys. That includes higher learning in colleges and universities. She would back any woman making an accusation against your grandson and deny him due process rights and the right to have a real judge and jury preside over his case not a bunch of college kids that may be friends with the accuser or are influenced by her.
“I would have loved if she was the first woman president, but that’s not where the disappointment is for me,” she said. “The disappointment is in the values that won and what it means for lots of people.”
Being a man won. Not being a mangina won. That is great.
Even in the more conservative South, Clinton supporters expressed the same kind of disappointment and dread.
“I’m horrified because I have two daughters,” Kelly Cobb, 40, said as she bought slices of cake near Emory University in Atlanta.
Ms. Cobb, a stay-at-home mother, said she believed that Mr. Trump had managed to define Mrs. Clinton in the public imagination as a criminal, and that he had benefited from gender stereotypes.
How often have women benefitted from gender stereotypes? A lot. They use false female nature to get out of responsibility (women are kind stereotype. Women are sweet stereotype.)Beneficial sexism helps women get rights without responsibilities. They have no problem with this type of sexism.
“I think there’s huge disdain for her because she’s a woman, but she’s also been in politics for a long time,” said Ms. Cobb, who also said she was uncertain what Mrs. Clinton’s defeat signaled for other women seeking office.
“I don’t know if it’s Hillary Clinton and who she is, but I have to think it does have something to do with the fact that she’s a woman,” she said. “People are just unaccepting of that and judge her to a much higher standard than they would a white male.”
Or we didn't want a misandrist in the White House. Did you think of that?
Women did not turn out for Mrs. Clinton in the numbers that her campaign expected, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster. The electorate was 52 percent female, slightly lower than the normal 53 percent. She was strongly supported by white, college-educated women, black women and Latina women, but white, blue-collar women and white, non-college-educated women sided heavily with Mr. Trump.
Her failed bid raises the question about whether Mrs. Clinton’s experience will discourage other women. Did she break a barrier, or did she inadvertently reveal how high that barrier is?
Women began entering government in bigger numbers in the 1970s, but any rush has stalled. The number of women in Congress is about 19 percent. Research has shown that women are such a minority in government not because they are less likely to win — they are just as likely, over all — but because they are so much less likely to run in the first place.
Political scientists say this so-called ambition gap is because women are less likely to be encouraged or recruited to run, underestimate their own abilities, assume they need to be more qualified than men and view politics as sexist.
Now, Mrs. Clinton’s loss may lend credence to those doubts.
“Because there was general consensus on both sides of the aisle that she was the most qualified presidential candidate we’ve ever seen, and she lost, it reinforces the notion that maybe it’s not even enough to be twice as good to get half as far,” said Jennifer L. Lawless, professor of government at American University who studies gender and political ambition.
Caroline Elkins, 47, a professor of history at Harvard, said she was profoundly disappointed and could not separate the outcome from Mrs. Clinton’s gender.
“To think that gender wasn’t a factor would be ludicrous,” she said. “You’d be hard-pressed to find someone more qualified than Hillary Clinton, in my view, and yet she was scrutinized above and beyond any male candidate we’ve ever seen.”
You mean the same media that paints Trump as a racist,a rapist and an ogre. That mainstream media. The same media that covered for Hillary. In fact Donna Brazille emailed Hillary the questions they were going to ask in advance.
That Mrs. Clinton’s flaws were “thrown into a hyperbolic relief,” she said, suggests that being highly qualified for the job was not enough, that a woman still has to be “twice as good and half as threatening” as a man to succeed.
Then why did Trump have to work overtime to calm women down and not to let their fears get the best of them?
Ms. Friedman, the retired nurse in Berkeley, who made phone calls on behalf of Mrs. Clinton, was convinced that gender was a factor.
“I underestimated the level of misogyny in the country,” she said. “Which is surprising, because usually I see it where it’s not.” But during her calls, she was sometimes met with crude responses.
“I forget how much people hate women,” she said.
Could it be due to the misandry that comes from women at the expense of men. Could it be due to the special treatment women demand or they call you a misogynist.
Mary Jane Judy, 35, a lawyer in Kansas City, Mo., said Mrs. Clinton lost more because of herself than because she is a woman.
“I think the baggage with her as Hillary Clinton over the course of the years was just stuff that people couldn’t get past,” she said. “I’ve heard people say, ‘Anybody but Hillary.’”
In Belfast, Me., Anita Zeno, an innkeeper on the pristine Atlantic Coast, knew Mrs. Clinton had flaws. But when she voted, she felt a rush.
“I was surprised at how good it felt to be voting for a woman,” said Ms. Zeno, 70.
But on Thursday, as Ms. Zeno examined the shallots in a farm store and cafe, her eyes welled with tears at the very mention of Mrs. Clinton’s defeat. She was worried about the country, the fate of the Affordable Care Act and climate change.
There is no climate change. The Affordable Care Act is not so affordable.
And one more thing.
“At my age, it’s now likely I’ll never see a woman elected president,” Ms. Zeno said. “And that really mattered to me.”
Source
My rights matter to me and I don't want some misandrist taking them away.
Friday, October 14, 2016
Trump Jr.: Women Who 'Can't Handle' Harassment Should Teach Kindergarten
In a 2013 radio interview on the "The Opie and Anthony Show" surfaced by Buzzfeed News on Thursday, Donald Trump Jr. complains about women making charges of sexual harassment in the workplace, suggesting that women who have a trouble with men making certain comments should go teach kindergarten.
The comments came as Trump Jr. and the hosts were discussing whether women should be allowed at male-only golf courses.
“If you have a guys’ place you have a guys’ place," Trump Jr. said.
One of the hosts then lamented that women "complain" about "harassment."
"That’s why we hate having them around. They stop us from doing what we want to do," the host said.
Trump Jr. said that "in the club house, guys just want to be guys" and converse freely "even if you’re just talking s**t and it’s not really true."
One of the hosts then said that it's mostly "just bulls**tting around" and then suddenly human resources is intervening.
Trump Jr. then said, "I’m of that mindset — and I’ll get into trouble, I’m sure — I’ve been on this show enough, I’m sure I’ll get myself in trouble one of these days — but like, if you can’t handle some of the basic stuff that’s become a problem in the workforce today, like you don’t belong in the workforce. Like, you should go maybe teach kindergarten. I think it’s a respectable position."
"You can’t be negotiating billion-dollar deals if you can’t handle, like, you know...” Trump Jr. continued. “But listen — there’s a place where you have to draw the line — but today the stuff you get in trouble for…”
Source
Dad gets it. Son gets it. It is the Hillary camp that is clueless. Thanks to Donald Trump Jr. for being a man and for not giving in to feminism and gynocentricity. Just like Scott Baio both Trumps don't give a rat's ass if these bitches like it or not. Just like me. The gynocentrists can go shove it up their asses for all I care. The line in the sand has been drawn. We are making a stand.
The comments came as Trump Jr. and the hosts were discussing whether women should be allowed at male-only golf courses.
“If you have a guys’ place you have a guys’ place," Trump Jr. said.
One of the hosts then lamented that women "complain" about "harassment."
"That’s why we hate having them around. They stop us from doing what we want to do," the host said.
Trump Jr. said that "in the club house, guys just want to be guys" and converse freely "even if you’re just talking s**t and it’s not really true."
One of the hosts then said that it's mostly "just bulls**tting around" and then suddenly human resources is intervening.
Trump Jr. then said, "I’m of that mindset — and I’ll get into trouble, I’m sure — I’ve been on this show enough, I’m sure I’ll get myself in trouble one of these days — but like, if you can’t handle some of the basic stuff that’s become a problem in the workforce today, like you don’t belong in the workforce. Like, you should go maybe teach kindergarten. I think it’s a respectable position."
"You can’t be negotiating billion-dollar deals if you can’t handle, like, you know...” Trump Jr. continued. “But listen — there’s a place where you have to draw the line — but today the stuff you get in trouble for…”
Source
Dad gets it. Son gets it. It is the Hillary camp that is clueless. Thanks to Donald Trump Jr. for being a man and for not giving in to feminism and gynocentricity. Just like Scott Baio both Trumps don't give a rat's ass if these bitches like it or not. Just like me. The gynocentrists can go shove it up their asses for all I care. The line in the sand has been drawn. We are making a stand.
Sunday, June 26, 2016
Tuesday, June 14, 2016
Senate votes to require women to register for the draft
The United States Senate voted to pass a defense bill today that would require young women to sign up for a potential military draft for the first time in U.S. history. The vote was 85-13 in favor of the National Defense Authorization Act, a $600 billion defense spending bill that had a host of other controversial provisions in it, including prohibiting the closure of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and denying the Pentagon’s attempt to close military bases.
Republicans were divided about whether the U.S. should require women to register for the draft when they turn 18. Sen. Ted Cruz told Politico it was a “radical change that is attempting to be foisted on the American people,” while Sen. John McCain said “a large bipartisan majority on the Armed Services Committee agreed that there is simply no further justification to limit Selective Service registration to men.”
The Senate and the House will now meet to compare and resolve differences between the two versions of the defense spending bill. The House version does not have the female draft requirement in it.
Source
I love this. I am loving it. It's about time women did their fair share and not heap burdens upon men and men only. Let's send a "atta boy" to Senator John McCain and tell him he's right. The burden should not be upon men and men alone. On the other hand,I am disappointed in Senator Ted Cruz for taking the position he did. Perhaps we should remind him that selective service is a burden that is already heaped upon men whether they like it or not so requiring women to fulfill the same requirements that men are forced to do is not much of a stretch. The country can handle it.
Republicans were divided about whether the U.S. should require women to register for the draft when they turn 18. Sen. Ted Cruz told Politico it was a “radical change that is attempting to be foisted on the American people,” while Sen. John McCain said “a large bipartisan majority on the Armed Services Committee agreed that there is simply no further justification to limit Selective Service registration to men.”
The Senate and the House will now meet to compare and resolve differences between the two versions of the defense spending bill. The House version does not have the female draft requirement in it.
Source
I love this. I am loving it. It's about time women did their fair share and not heap burdens upon men and men only. Let's send a "atta boy" to Senator John McCain and tell him he's right. The burden should not be upon men and men alone. On the other hand,I am disappointed in Senator Ted Cruz for taking the position he did. Perhaps we should remind him that selective service is a burden that is already heaped upon men whether they like it or not so requiring women to fulfill the same requirements that men are forced to do is not much of a stretch. The country can handle it.
Saturday, May 28, 2016
Modern dating
If you’re a man who’s tried (or considered trying) online dating, chances are you’ve worried you might meet a woman looking to use you for a free expensive dinner. It seems trivial in comparison to what women have to worry about when they filter through men on dating sites, but it’s still a concern, and it still happens to the best of us.
I’m a high school teacher and a freelance writer, but I’m also the son of a Michelin-awarded restaurateur. My online dating profile doesn’t mention my dad’s accomplishments, but in moments of insecurity, I’ve been known to name-drop in order to keep the woman interested. It’s never gone well, and it’s never attracted the right women. The women who see me as “Giorgio the teacher” or “Giorgio the writer” have never tried to use me for a free dinner. In fact, many of them seemed to feel guilty when I took them to expensive restaurants too early in the dating process. But the women who saw me as “Giorgio the restaurateur’s son” had no such reservations, and even that was fine, as long as we were having fun.
See more of our top stories on Facebook >>
Last December, I met someone who finally crossed the boundaries. She made the initial move by “liking” my profile, so I “liked” her back. Her profile was laced with the razor-sharp wit that I look for in a romantic partner, and one of her stated life goals was to try all 101 of Jonathan Gold’s top restaurant picks. Without promising anything, I noted that I too was a fan of Mr. Gold and was also hoping to one day frequent all 101 of his restaurant choices. We had the same dry humor and were equally excited about the then-new Star Wars movie, so I thought those would be our primary points of connection. It wasn’t until I asked her out for a drink that I suspected something was off.
“I’m not huge into drinking but maybe we can grab dinner sometime,” she replied, followed by a smiley face emoticon.
Nobody has to be “huge into drinking” to join you for a cocktail on a first date; this was a push that men who’ve dated in Los Angeles know all too well. The woman was setting the expectations high from the beginning, letting me know that her evenings were in high demand and that if I wanted one I was going to have to cough up more than $15 for a cocktail.
I told her my Tuesday night was open, and she wrote back, “I’m booked for Tuesday. Let’s do Saturday instead.” I was starting to find her pushy, but I thought maybe it was just in my head. I was lucky this girl wanted to offer her Saturday night to me, wasn’t I?
Are you a veteran of L.A.'s current dating scene? We want to publish your story
I suggested we try a new Italian restaurant in Silver Lake where an old friend of mine works. I wasn’t looking for a free dinner, but I was hoping to surprise him, and I was hoping that once this girl saw my restaurant connections, she’d be impressed enough to take me seriously as a romantic partner. The stakes were high for a first date. I felt like I was being pressured to overplay my hand, but I wanted to try this restaurant anyway, and going there with a pretty girl felt better than going there alone.
When we sat down for dinner, she suggested we order a bottle of wine. So much for “not huge into drinking.” Then she started suggesting items to share, which slowly crept into the $80 range. I declined on the bottle of wine but was too tempted by the various entrees to let her starve. We ordered four dishes to share, and I didn’t have to fight her for the privilege of paying the whole $130 check myself.
Our conversation was mostly superficial. I found myself retelling her key information that I’d mentioned in my profile, as though she’d never read it; she kept talking up her past accomplishments and future ambitions, even though for the time being she was living with her parents.
She kept mentioning that she had a high standard when it came to Italian restaurants, and eventually I reached a point where it seemed appropriate to name-drop my father. She had never heard of him, nor had she heard of his restaurant.
More L.A. Affairs columns
When the waiter brought us our check, he gave us a spiel about how their establishment is unique because customers have the “privilege” of being “allowed” to tip the kitchen as well as the servers. I asked my date how much I should tip. That’s always a bad sign: when you’re so desperate to impress your date that you have to ask her how much to tip, even though she has no intention of even attempting to pay.
She told me to tip 20%, so I did.
As we left, she told me without hesitation that she would love to see me again. I loved the reassurance. I hate spending the next few days after a date staring at my phone, waiting for a follow-up text message that never comes. I hugged her goodbye and watched her step into an Uber, hoping it would all lead to something as we got to know each other better.
Two days later, I received a text from her, excitedly informing me that she had made a reservation at my dad’s restaurant. She was going there on a Saturday night, company unspecified. Could it be that another poor sucker had been roped into sating this girl’s fine-dining craze? No, why would she text me to tell me about it? That would be shameless.
Even so, it made me uncomfortable. This girl hardly knew me. We had been out one time, and we hadn’t even kissed yet. Imagine if a man had gone to a woman’s father’s workplace after a first date. That would be creepy, right? What was the difference? Was she testing me to see how I’d react?
I told her, “Wow, you’re going to meet my dad. Weird…”
“Oh, yeah, I guess I am. Well, I’ll put in a good word for you!”
Her creepiness had officially killed any charm she’d once had on me.
I didn’t pursue her after that, but about a week later she contacted me again. She told me the person who was taking her to my dad’s restaurant had flaked on her and suggested, as though it was no big deal, that we go there together instead. This was too weird for me. I took a screenshot of the text, sent it to my best friend and asked what I should do.
“I say bail,” he advised.
I composed our parting text: “I’m going to have to say no. To be honest, it makes me really uncomfortable that you would make a reservation at my dad’s restaurant when we’ve only been out one time. I think you’re a great girl, though, and I wish you the best.”
She promptly came back at me with three consecutive texts:
“I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to make you uncomfortable.”
“I really don’t take this stuff too seriously.”
“Good luck to you.”
I had so many questions for her, like why she expected expensive dinners and bottles of wine if she “didn’t take it seriously,” but I thought asking would be in poor taste. So instead I just wished her good luck too, and in the end I didn’t even get to do that because my number had already been blocked.
Some men, frustrated after not getting a second date or not getting any action on the first, will wrongly accuse women of “just dating for the free meals.” I’m not that man. If a woman doesn’t want a second date, it’s not my business why, and I don’t know her well enough to hurl those kinds of accusations. I also don’t really mind if women are out there using men for free meals, because there are plenty of men out there using women for other things, and in the end our job is to learn from our experiences and spot the red flags so we aren’t the one getting used.
Source
This is a follow up to the previous story.
I’m a high school teacher and a freelance writer, but I’m also the son of a Michelin-awarded restaurateur. My online dating profile doesn’t mention my dad’s accomplishments, but in moments of insecurity, I’ve been known to name-drop in order to keep the woman interested. It’s never gone well, and it’s never attracted the right women. The women who see me as “Giorgio the teacher” or “Giorgio the writer” have never tried to use me for a free dinner. In fact, many of them seemed to feel guilty when I took them to expensive restaurants too early in the dating process. But the women who saw me as “Giorgio the restaurateur’s son” had no such reservations, and even that was fine, as long as we were having fun.
See more of our top stories on Facebook >>
Last December, I met someone who finally crossed the boundaries. She made the initial move by “liking” my profile, so I “liked” her back. Her profile was laced with the razor-sharp wit that I look for in a romantic partner, and one of her stated life goals was to try all 101 of Jonathan Gold’s top restaurant picks. Without promising anything, I noted that I too was a fan of Mr. Gold and was also hoping to one day frequent all 101 of his restaurant choices. We had the same dry humor and were equally excited about the then-new Star Wars movie, so I thought those would be our primary points of connection. It wasn’t until I asked her out for a drink that I suspected something was off.
“I’m not huge into drinking but maybe we can grab dinner sometime,” she replied, followed by a smiley face emoticon.
Nobody has to be “huge into drinking” to join you for a cocktail on a first date; this was a push that men who’ve dated in Los Angeles know all too well. The woman was setting the expectations high from the beginning, letting me know that her evenings were in high demand and that if I wanted one I was going to have to cough up more than $15 for a cocktail.
I told her my Tuesday night was open, and she wrote back, “I’m booked for Tuesday. Let’s do Saturday instead.” I was starting to find her pushy, but I thought maybe it was just in my head. I was lucky this girl wanted to offer her Saturday night to me, wasn’t I?
Are you a veteran of L.A.'s current dating scene? We want to publish your story
I suggested we try a new Italian restaurant in Silver Lake where an old friend of mine works. I wasn’t looking for a free dinner, but I was hoping to surprise him, and I was hoping that once this girl saw my restaurant connections, she’d be impressed enough to take me seriously as a romantic partner. The stakes were high for a first date. I felt like I was being pressured to overplay my hand, but I wanted to try this restaurant anyway, and going there with a pretty girl felt better than going there alone.
When we sat down for dinner, she suggested we order a bottle of wine. So much for “not huge into drinking.” Then she started suggesting items to share, which slowly crept into the $80 range. I declined on the bottle of wine but was too tempted by the various entrees to let her starve. We ordered four dishes to share, and I didn’t have to fight her for the privilege of paying the whole $130 check myself.
Our conversation was mostly superficial. I found myself retelling her key information that I’d mentioned in my profile, as though she’d never read it; she kept talking up her past accomplishments and future ambitions, even though for the time being she was living with her parents.
She kept mentioning that she had a high standard when it came to Italian restaurants, and eventually I reached a point where it seemed appropriate to name-drop my father. She had never heard of him, nor had she heard of his restaurant.
More L.A. Affairs columns
When the waiter brought us our check, he gave us a spiel about how their establishment is unique because customers have the “privilege” of being “allowed” to tip the kitchen as well as the servers. I asked my date how much I should tip. That’s always a bad sign: when you’re so desperate to impress your date that you have to ask her how much to tip, even though she has no intention of even attempting to pay.
She told me to tip 20%, so I did.
As we left, she told me without hesitation that she would love to see me again. I loved the reassurance. I hate spending the next few days after a date staring at my phone, waiting for a follow-up text message that never comes. I hugged her goodbye and watched her step into an Uber, hoping it would all lead to something as we got to know each other better.
Two days later, I received a text from her, excitedly informing me that she had made a reservation at my dad’s restaurant. She was going there on a Saturday night, company unspecified. Could it be that another poor sucker had been roped into sating this girl’s fine-dining craze? No, why would she text me to tell me about it? That would be shameless.
Even so, it made me uncomfortable. This girl hardly knew me. We had been out one time, and we hadn’t even kissed yet. Imagine if a man had gone to a woman’s father’s workplace after a first date. That would be creepy, right? What was the difference? Was she testing me to see how I’d react?
I told her, “Wow, you’re going to meet my dad. Weird…”
“Oh, yeah, I guess I am. Well, I’ll put in a good word for you!”
Her creepiness had officially killed any charm she’d once had on me.
I didn’t pursue her after that, but about a week later she contacted me again. She told me the person who was taking her to my dad’s restaurant had flaked on her and suggested, as though it was no big deal, that we go there together instead. This was too weird for me. I took a screenshot of the text, sent it to my best friend and asked what I should do.
“I say bail,” he advised.
I composed our parting text: “I’m going to have to say no. To be honest, it makes me really uncomfortable that you would make a reservation at my dad’s restaurant when we’ve only been out one time. I think you’re a great girl, though, and I wish you the best.”
She promptly came back at me with three consecutive texts:
“I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to make you uncomfortable.”
“I really don’t take this stuff too seriously.”
“Good luck to you.”
I had so many questions for her, like why she expected expensive dinners and bottles of wine if she “didn’t take it seriously,” but I thought asking would be in poor taste. So instead I just wished her good luck too, and in the end I didn’t even get to do that because my number had already been blocked.
Some men, frustrated after not getting a second date or not getting any action on the first, will wrongly accuse women of “just dating for the free meals.” I’m not that man. If a woman doesn’t want a second date, it’s not my business why, and I don’t know her well enough to hurl those kinds of accusations. I also don’t really mind if women are out there using men for free meals, because there are plenty of men out there using women for other things, and in the end our job is to learn from our experiences and spot the red flags so we aren’t the one getting used.
Source
This is a follow up to the previous story.
Men are catching on,insist on Dutch treat
So much for chivalry.
Venmo, a peer-to-peer payment app owned by PayPal and popular with millennials, isn’t just letting 20-somethings split cab fares and utility bills — it’s turning guys into really stingy dates.
Shaquan Bailey, a 22-year-old caretaker, was thrilled when a guy she met online invited her out for their third date at a restaurant near her Bed-Stuy apartment.
She found the man charming over pizza and wine and, like a gentleman, he picked up the check and then walked Bailey back to her apartment.
She thought the date had gone well — until the guy sent her a $30 payment request on Venmo to cover half the dinner bill, which she grudgingly paid.
I was LMAO after reading that. Way to go,bro. If you're reading this cyber high 5.
“I cut him off so quickly and stopped texting him back,” Bailey told The Post. “I do not have time for scrubs.”
We don't have time for attention whore cock teasers either who commit date fraud by giving the promise of sex then retracting that at the last minute. Don't like bullshit don't hit us with bullshit. It's that fucking simple.
The app, launched in 2012, lets users link debit and credit cards online to send and request money.
In January, users digitally transferred more than $1 billion on the app.
“I had a guy who asked me to Venmo him to pay for a $3 well drink,” fumed Tammy, a 21-year-old beauty blogger who asked that her last name be withheld for professional reasons.
The last time I checked alcoholic beverages are not free so they have to charge you something. Three dollars sounds about right for an alcoholic beverage in a bar. It depends on where you go and how much they charge.
“And I was like, ‘Bye.’ Where are all the real men?”
We're on to bitches like you. You want equality in the boardroom and special treatment on a date. You want old fashion behavior from a man like picking up the tab but you think about providing sex. With me it's like if I spend money on you I want sex. That is the bottom line. On equality: it's all the way or not at all. Enough of this cherry picking bullshit.
She refused to cough up the dough.
Although what these guys did was in poor taste, financial expert and author Lynnette Khalfani-Cox defends them, noting that going Dutch is a sensitive topic.
“Communication about money matters is always fraught with misunderstanding, and Venmo is kind of a technological twist to these age-old issues about money and dating,” Khalfani-Cox told The Post. “Maybe these guys thought they were being modern by splitting the bill and acknowledging that women can pay for their fair share?”
These are guys the who are tired of the bullshit double standards. These are the guys who are tired of super empowered feminists one minute scared little waif the next. These are the guys that read my blog.
But to women like Kisha Pace, 31, of The Bronx, who was Venmo-requested by a former fling for a $50 meal, men should always pay for the first few dates.
Why? Because you're entitled to free entertainment? I don't know who told you that you are but the gravy train is derailing. You've pushed us too far and as men we will push back. Count on it.
“I can pay for my own bills, but I don’t think we should be splitting the bill until we’re seriously dating,” Pace, who did pay up, told The Post.
Then you can pay for your own meal and drinks. Why should it be on him? Seriously dating? Sounds like procrastination to me. Which means you expect it to be always on him.
The solution to the dilemma is simple, if a bit awkward.
“Both parties should agree on who’s paying for what before going on a date,” Khalfani-Cox said.
Source
Venmo, a peer-to-peer payment app owned by PayPal and popular with millennials, isn’t just letting 20-somethings split cab fares and utility bills — it’s turning guys into really stingy dates.
Shaquan Bailey, a 22-year-old caretaker, was thrilled when a guy she met online invited her out for their third date at a restaurant near her Bed-Stuy apartment.
She found the man charming over pizza and wine and, like a gentleman, he picked up the check and then walked Bailey back to her apartment.
She thought the date had gone well — until the guy sent her a $30 payment request on Venmo to cover half the dinner bill, which she grudgingly paid.
I was LMAO after reading that. Way to go,bro. If you're reading this cyber high 5.
“I cut him off so quickly and stopped texting him back,” Bailey told The Post. “I do not have time for scrubs.”
We don't have time for attention whore cock teasers either who commit date fraud by giving the promise of sex then retracting that at the last minute. Don't like bullshit don't hit us with bullshit. It's that fucking simple.
The app, launched in 2012, lets users link debit and credit cards online to send and request money.
In January, users digitally transferred more than $1 billion on the app.
“I had a guy who asked me to Venmo him to pay for a $3 well drink,” fumed Tammy, a 21-year-old beauty blogger who asked that her last name be withheld for professional reasons.
The last time I checked alcoholic beverages are not free so they have to charge you something. Three dollars sounds about right for an alcoholic beverage in a bar. It depends on where you go and how much they charge.
“And I was like, ‘Bye.’ Where are all the real men?”
We're on to bitches like you. You want equality in the boardroom and special treatment on a date. You want old fashion behavior from a man like picking up the tab but you think about providing sex. With me it's like if I spend money on you I want sex. That is the bottom line. On equality: it's all the way or not at all. Enough of this cherry picking bullshit.
She refused to cough up the dough.
Although what these guys did was in poor taste, financial expert and author Lynnette Khalfani-Cox defends them, noting that going Dutch is a sensitive topic.
“Communication about money matters is always fraught with misunderstanding, and Venmo is kind of a technological twist to these age-old issues about money and dating,” Khalfani-Cox told The Post. “Maybe these guys thought they were being modern by splitting the bill and acknowledging that women can pay for their fair share?”
These are guys the who are tired of the bullshit double standards. These are the guys who are tired of super empowered feminists one minute scared little waif the next. These are the guys that read my blog.
But to women like Kisha Pace, 31, of The Bronx, who was Venmo-requested by a former fling for a $50 meal, men should always pay for the first few dates.
Why? Because you're entitled to free entertainment? I don't know who told you that you are but the gravy train is derailing. You've pushed us too far and as men we will push back. Count on it.
“I can pay for my own bills, but I don’t think we should be splitting the bill until we’re seriously dating,” Pace, who did pay up, told The Post.
Then you can pay for your own meal and drinks. Why should it be on him? Seriously dating? Sounds like procrastination to me. Which means you expect it to be always on him.
The solution to the dilemma is simple, if a bit awkward.
“Both parties should agree on who’s paying for what before going on a date,” Khalfani-Cox said.
Source
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Hillary and The Donald are neck and neck
Today Fox News, CNN, and ABC News are completely bewildered at the latest poll numbers showing Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton neck and neck in key swing states which may determine the November election.
CNN picked apart survey data and found Donald Trump essentially tied with Hillary Clinton in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania. Not too surprisingly, Donald Trump has a double-digit lead in male voters in each of these three states. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is up nine points with women voters in these key states. ABC News also supported this data showing Donald Trump surpassing Hillary Clinton in male voters by a very wide margin.
The point best sums up the Quinnipiac University poll released today is this… Hillary Clinton does not believe men are worth talking about. Even the casual political observer has noticed in recent weeks Hillary Clinton does not discuss men or men’s issues at all. It’s almost like she has a philosophy which radiates “men don’t have issues”, “men don’t need a voice in society” and “men need to get on board with women’s issues”.
Men are tired of being scapegoats in society for women’s problems. For decades men have been the scapegoats for women not succeeding in the workforce, becoming victims of domestic violence, blamed for divorce, not having equal educational opportunities and a whole list of other social ills too many to count.
The Fox News segment with Megan Kelly is right on point. When Hillary Clinton is forced to defend her record against a male opponent she immediately goes to the women’s card and avoids answering the questions or fails to stand by her previous position. Hillary Clinton’s defenders step in and claim sexism on Hillary Clinton’s behalf, defending her lack of answering tough questions. Bill Clinton, for example, even accused Bernie Sanders of being “sexist” when he forced Hillary to “own up” to her own behavior.
Clearly, every time Hillary Clinton is forced to answer tough questions she throws the woman card on the table as a shield to deflect against her bad judgement. Men in our society know exactly how this system works. As men, we’ve all been there and experienced this form of gender shaming. Women voters also know how this game is played. Donald Trump even alluded to this phenomenon in a recent speech that had plenty of news coverage.
Today, if a male employee criticizes a fellow female coworker or subordinate justifiably, in many cases women turn around and claim discrimination, sexism, biased against women and a whole host of other social evils “men can only do against women”.
Katrina Pierson, the National Trump Campaign Spokeswoman said it best on Fox News,
Just because you criticize a woman, particularly in her criticism of you, does not make you a sexist.
Over the course of the next six months we will learn how deep the gender divide in our country has become. Will Hillary Clinton win the presidency by continuously playing the “woman card” by blaming men for our social problems? Or will Donald Trump finally put radical feminism, progressive feminist and a whole list of anti-male and anti-father groups back in the cage where they belong? Only time will tell which side will triumph in November. Regardless, this election season will not be so much about Republican or Democrat social policy as much as it will be between “common sense” or “sexist feminism”.
Source
CNN picked apart survey data and found Donald Trump essentially tied with Hillary Clinton in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania. Not too surprisingly, Donald Trump has a double-digit lead in male voters in each of these three states. On the other hand, Hillary Clinton is up nine points with women voters in these key states. ABC News also supported this data showing Donald Trump surpassing Hillary Clinton in male voters by a very wide margin.
The point best sums up the Quinnipiac University poll released today is this… Hillary Clinton does not believe men are worth talking about. Even the casual political observer has noticed in recent weeks Hillary Clinton does not discuss men or men’s issues at all. It’s almost like she has a philosophy which radiates “men don’t have issues”, “men don’t need a voice in society” and “men need to get on board with women’s issues”.
Men are tired of being scapegoats in society for women’s problems. For decades men have been the scapegoats for women not succeeding in the workforce, becoming victims of domestic violence, blamed for divorce, not having equal educational opportunities and a whole list of other social ills too many to count.
The Fox News segment with Megan Kelly is right on point. When Hillary Clinton is forced to defend her record against a male opponent she immediately goes to the women’s card and avoids answering the questions or fails to stand by her previous position. Hillary Clinton’s defenders step in and claim sexism on Hillary Clinton’s behalf, defending her lack of answering tough questions. Bill Clinton, for example, even accused Bernie Sanders of being “sexist” when he forced Hillary to “own up” to her own behavior.
Clearly, every time Hillary Clinton is forced to answer tough questions she throws the woman card on the table as a shield to deflect against her bad judgement. Men in our society know exactly how this system works. As men, we’ve all been there and experienced this form of gender shaming. Women voters also know how this game is played. Donald Trump even alluded to this phenomenon in a recent speech that had plenty of news coverage.
Today, if a male employee criticizes a fellow female coworker or subordinate justifiably, in many cases women turn around and claim discrimination, sexism, biased against women and a whole host of other social evils “men can only do against women”.
Katrina Pierson, the National Trump Campaign Spokeswoman said it best on Fox News,
Just because you criticize a woman, particularly in her criticism of you, does not make you a sexist.
Over the course of the next six months we will learn how deep the gender divide in our country has become. Will Hillary Clinton win the presidency by continuously playing the “woman card” by blaming men for our social problems? Or will Donald Trump finally put radical feminism, progressive feminist and a whole list of anti-male and anti-father groups back in the cage where they belong? Only time will tell which side will triumph in November. Regardless, this election season will not be so much about Republican or Democrat social policy as much as it will be between “common sense” or “sexist feminism”.
Source
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Gynocentrist Carly Fiorina
Do men count with this VP? Apparently not. Gynocentricity to the left of me gynocentricity to the right. Here I am. Trump is starting to look better and better.
Saturday, September 27, 2014
Welcome to the matriarchial world order
Welcome to the matriarchial world order. There are major differences between the traditional society and the matriarchial world order. Well, for women anyway. In the traditional society men and women sacrificed for the children. Today in the matriarchial world order the men and children sacrifice for the women. Welcome to the queendome,guys. Who is the queen? Good question only too singular. A better question would be who are the queens? Who are they? Every woman out there. In the matriarchial world order males, even boys, are held more accountable than females, even grown women, of any age. In the matriarchial world order only males are guilty of sex crimes while women are just fostering relationships,even with children and females are spared the horrors of the sex offender registry no matter what sex crimes they have committed meanwhile men are placed on it no matter what. Even if they irrinating in public,in a alley out of view of the public at large or if their pants split and they are detained while enroute to their residence to change. Meanwhile a woman can sexually diddle herself in front of pre-schoolers and society is "sex crime? what sex crime?" Then there are the female only legal defense moves that men are forbidden to use. Female favoring affirmative actions laws along with female favoring agencies or agencies that exclude men altogether. To sum it up in this society it is female favoring everything: from law to the courts to society at large. Back in the 70's there was a slogan:"You've come a long way,girl". Today that slogan would be updated:"You've gone too far,girl".
Sunday, August 31, 2014
Time to say goodbye to a voice for men
ShlomoShunn • 4 days ago
Howzabout WOMEN learning to be more respectful of men...and not be so slutty, manipulative, passive, blame-mongering, childish, irresponsible, etc....hmmmm?
Frodo Mod ShlomoShunn • 4 days ago
Comment is bordering on misogyny sir.
Do not do it again.
I suggest you read the new TOS
Source
One would think this was posted on the NOW website or any other feminist website. It is not. The source is the A Voice For Men website. What has happened to this site? For one thing they let women and fags become moderators thus putting them in control of what real men can post. It has been demonstrated over and over again that women in the men's movement is a bad idea,even worse to put wannabe women in charge. If you are an MRA (by that I mean male MRA dedicated activist) then desert A Voice For Men and and instead work with us at the Men's Right's Blog. Here there are no female nor gay moderators and they're never going to female or gay moderators here. This is a dedicated men's rights site. No fags nor female cowshit here. Join us.
Howzabout WOMEN learning to be more respectful of men...and not be so slutty, manipulative, passive, blame-mongering, childish, irresponsible, etc....hmmmm?
Frodo Mod ShlomoShunn • 4 days ago
Comment is bordering on misogyny sir.
Do not do it again.
I suggest you read the new TOS
Source
One would think this was posted on the NOW website or any other feminist website. It is not. The source is the A Voice For Men website. What has happened to this site? For one thing they let women and fags become moderators thus putting them in control of what real men can post. It has been demonstrated over and over again that women in the men's movement is a bad idea,even worse to put wannabe women in charge. If you are an MRA (by that I mean male MRA dedicated activist) then desert A Voice For Men and and instead work with us at the Men's Right's Blog. Here there are no female nor gay moderators and they're never going to female or gay moderators here. This is a dedicated men's rights site. No fags nor female cowshit here. Join us.
Saturday, January 18, 2014
On women and nice guys
Hitting the gym is up to you. There are male models that strike out with women while there are regular guys who are pussy magnets. So I don't buy into this "hit the gym and it'll be alright" attitude.
Finally honesty from a woman:
I hate wasting my time because of some attention whore. I don't blame him for being pissed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)