Category: Sane Pro-Woman

“Are All Men Rapists?” by Alpha Unit

New Alpha Unit. Good stuff. I agree with her though, we men are basically dogs, it’s true. But that’s the way we are supposed to be. It’s natural, normal.

By my own reasonable definition of the word, I’ve never raped a woman. Yet I’ve been accused of rape by a woman, actually a girl, Hell, a 14 year old girl at that! It didn’t happen. I had sex with her all right, but I sure didn’t rape her. She was drunk, but so was I. So what?

By the daffynitions of Lady Raine and Denise Romano, I’ve been raping women all my life. I don’t agree with that daffynition, but hey, if that’s the newfangled Feminazi daffynition of rape, so be it. In that case, I’m a rapist. And much worse than that. As far as their redaffyning seduction as rape goes, in that case, speaking of seduction-rape only, I also say that rape is fun! Put that in your pipe and smoke it, feminists.

I’ll have more to say about this in a bit.

Clint Eastwood, whose name I brought up the other day in one of the comments threads, has always been one of my favorite actors – at least in his Westerns. He played a number of roles in which he is this stranger who rides into town and sets things straight. He’s tall, lean, rugged, laconic – his entire demeanor says, “I don’t know you. And I don’t need to know you.”

His name? What do you care?

In 1973 he appeared in a film called High Plains Drifter. Critics praised it; audiences enjoy it to this day. But as you might expect, some people have a problem with a particular scene that occurs at the beginning of the movie. The Stranger drags a woman into the stables and rapes her.

What’s even more appalling is that after a while, she seems to enjoy it.

What?

What is this scene doing in this film? Were the writers misogynists? Was Clint Eastwood a misogynist?

Some people who comment on this scene call it “disturbing.” I think people find it disturbing not because of what it suggests about men but what it suggests about women.

In another scene, he grabs the hotelkeeper’s wife to force her into bed with him – in the presence of the hotelkeeper! She fights and resists and calls out to her husband to stop what’s happening. But later she is seen lazing about in the bed in which she has been raped, quite contented.

There is no doubt about it. The Stranger is a rapist.

The first woman he raped is the stereotypical Bad Woman – the town tramp. In fact, it’s clear from the beginning of the scene that she sets her sights on The Stranger and deliberately makes a play for his attention. She runs into him on purpose and proceeds to insult him. He tries, in fact, to walk away from her, more than once. But she won’t let him.

The second woman is the Good Woman. The only person who tried to intervene in a lynching – a pivotal incident that is shown in flashbacks.

Both women get raped. Both apparently derive enjoyment from it. And the rapist is presented as The Good Guy.

Do good guys rape women? Or is that something only done by bad guys?

This is a difficult question, only because there are men out there who consider themselves good guys, in spite of the fact that they have raped. There are ostensibly good guys out there who feel that it’s okay to rape under certain circumstances. Some male college students who have been surveyed in the United States and elsewhere report not only that in some situations a woman is “asking for it,” but if there were no chance of getting caught, they would definitely rape!

Many of these young men are “good” guys. With good upbringings in good homes. But if they could get away with rape, they’d go for it. Are we to believe that there’s something abnormal about them?

As I’ve mentioned previously, armies throughout history have engaged in the systematic rape of female civilians during war. Military commanders have at times encouraged it. Aren’t some of the soldiers who succumb to this pressure “good” guys?

There are many men who report that under no circumstances is it okay to rape. If some wholesome-looking young man were to say to me, “I’d never do something like that,” I’d admire his sincerity. But I’d probably be thinking to myself, “Never say never.”

"Are All Men Rapists?" by Alpha Unit

New Alpha Unit. Good stuff. I agree with her though, we men are basically dogs, it’s true. But that’s the way we are supposed to be. It’s natural, normal. By my own reasonable definition of the word, I’ve never raped a woman. Yet I’ve been accused of rape by a woman, actually a girl, Hell, a 14 year old girl at that! It didn’t happen. I had sex with her all right, but I sure didn’t rape her. She was drunk, but so was I. So what? By the daffynitions of Lady Raine and Denise Romano, I’ve been raping women all my life. I don’t agree with that daffynition, but hey, if that’s the newfangled Feminazi daffynition of rape, so be it. In that case, I’m a rapist. And much worse than that. As far as their redaffyning seduction as rape goes, in that case, speaking of seduction-rape only, I also say that rape is fun! Put that in your pipe and smoke it, feminists. I’ll have more to say about this in a bit. Clint Eastwood, whose name I brought up the other day in one of the comments threads, has always been one of my favorite actors – at least in his Westerns. He played a number of roles in which he is this stranger who rides into town and sets things straight. He’s tall, lean, rugged, laconic – his entire demeanor says, “I don’t know you. And I don’t need to know you.” His name? What do you care? In 1973 he appeared in a film called High Plains Drifter. Critics praised it; audiences enjoy it to this day. But as you might expect, some people have a problem with a particular scene that occurs at the beginning of the movie. The Stranger drags a woman into the stables and rapes her. What’s even more appalling is that after a while, she seems to enjoy it. What? What is this scene doing in this film? Were the writers misogynists? Was Clint Eastwood a misogynist? Some people who comment on this scene call it “disturbing.” I think people find it disturbing not because of what it suggests about men but what it suggests about women. In another scene, he grabs the hotelkeeper’s wife to force her into bed with him – in the presence of the hotelkeeper! She fights and resists and calls out to her husband to stop what’s happening. But later she is seen lazing about in the bed in which she has been raped, quite contented. There is no doubt about it. The Stranger is a rapist. The first woman he raped is the stereotypical Bad Woman – the town tramp. In fact, it’s clear from the beginning of the scene that she sets her sights on The Stranger and deliberately makes a play for his attention. She runs into him on purpose and proceeds to insult him. He tries, in fact, to walk away from her, more than once. But she won’t let him. The second woman is the Good Woman. The only person who tried to intervene in a lynching – a pivotal incident that is shown in flashbacks. Both women get raped. Both apparently derive enjoyment from it. And the rapist is presented as The Good Guy. Do good guys rape women? Or is that something only done by bad guys? This is a difficult question, only because there are men out there who consider themselves good guys, in spite of the fact that they have raped. There are ostensibly good guys out there who feel that it’s okay to rape under certain circumstances. Some male college students who have been surveyed in the United States and elsewhere report not only that in some situations a woman is “asking for it,” but if there were no chance of getting caught, they would definitely rape! Many of these young men are “good” guys. With good upbringings in good homes. But if they could get away with rape, they’d go for it. Are we to believe that there’s something abnormal about them? As I’ve mentioned previously, armies throughout history have engaged in the systematic rape of female civilians during war. Military commanders have at times encouraged it. Aren’t some of the soldiers who succumb to this pressure “good” guys? There are many men who report that under no circumstances is it okay to rape. If some wholesome-looking young man were to say to me, “I’d never do something like that,” I’d admire his sincerity. But I’d probably be thinking to myself, “Never say never.”

Statement on Game/PUA Community

The “Game” and PUA (Pickup Artist Community) guys is a movement of guys who are trying to teach other guys how to get women. More crudely, you can say they are teaching them how to get laid. However, some married men with no interest in cheating are just using game to try to control their out of control wives, or as one man put it, “to deal with the insanity of the typical American wife.”

Game teaches you how to manipulate and control women in order to get them to do what you want them to do. Women use Game on us all the time. They constantly try to manipulate and control us to try to get us to do what they want us to do. Each sex is entitled to use Game or any other legal techniques to try to get their partners and love interests to do what they want them to do, assuming everything is legal.

There are no moral issues here, because all’s fair in love and war. Tell you what, women? You first. You stop fighting dirty first (Women are the ultimate champions at fighting dirty; men are just cheap penny pikers), then we’ll follow suit.

What the PUA community does and the techniques it uses go for beyond the scope of this post.

Some of their techniques involve phrases like ASD, LMR and bitch shield. When a woman is not giving you sex or physical affection, she is said to have her bitch shield up. Ok, that’s kind of funny. Me? I just might not call her back unless I have a chance soon. I go to work real soon, and I am manhandling and getting physical by the first date. I get slapped down a lot, and it doesn’t always get me into bed, but in general, it works great. You have to get physical with these women!

ASD and LMR stand for anti-slut defense and last-minute resistance. This is when the woman is holding out on you. Ok, that’s kind of funny too. Usually in my case she has already gotten really physical with me but is now holding out on the best part of the game. Of course I have utilized all sorts of psychological techniques to wear down these common defenses. I recommend other guys do too.

These PUA guys also do stuff called “negs,” and “refusing to validate.” I don’t see the point. Negs is where you insult her, often openly and in front of others. It’s testament to the extremely low moral quality of the female in general that this disgusting technique makes them want to mate with us.

“Refusing to validate” is similar. To some extent, this makes sense, but I’m not going to do it in that callous PUA way. Problem is that most guys fall all over themselves like puppy dogs or babies when they are with women, kissing women’s feet, showering them with stupid lines, gifts, compliments and adoring, puppy-like affection. Reasonably enough, many women find such self-abasing behavior disgusting.

My technique is to act like, “Hey look, I’m too busy to chase women! What the Hell do you want anyway?”

Another one is to act like you have women after you all the time.

“Oh boy, here’s one more, just what I need? So impress me babe. Realize you’re competing with hundreds of other females for my overwhelmingly desired attention? How are you going to show me you’re better than the rest? How are you going to beat all these other women.”

Another thing is to never let a woman know you’re not dating anyone. Traditional women don’t mind hearing it, but American women are psycho. He not dating anyone means, “He’s a loser.” Women only want what others want or better yet have. Never let them know at the beginning that they are the only one. Never let them know that you aren’t getting any. Always give them the impression that you have an easy return no questions asked policy and she can be replaced with a better model anytime.

Never let a woman know you’re lacking in sexual experience. Never let a woman know you’ve been celibate for any length of time at the present. A history of many women works better than a history of few to none. Women say they hate studs, but they can’t stop sleeping with them.

As soon as women figure out you haven’t been getting any, or you lack sexual experience, or haven’t had many women in your life, they will start running their own Game on you, and boy! You think the PUA guys’ Game is evil! Wait til you see this Game she’s about to run on you! The only way to deal with women is from a position of strength. Women see weakness, grab the ball and make a 90-yard dash to make a touchdown in your territory, then throw the ball to the ground and dance a little jig right on your balls.

It’s sad that we have to act this way, but really, these somewhat shitty techniques work great.

Anyway, that’s my version of Game. It’s worked quite well for me in life.

I don’t like the PUA or game community all that much. They say to get women you need to act like an asshole and treat women like shit to some extent. They’ve tested these theories as scientifically as you can, and they’ve proven that they’ve worked. They throw out theory that doesn’t work and try new things all time. It’s a very science-based approach.

This just reaffirms my increasingly low opinion of women. I see. So…the way for me to get women is to be mean to them, do “negs” on them, treat them like shit, “refuse to validate them,” on and on.

Well, nothing new here. I’ve noticed for 35 years that the assholes get most of the women, and the rest of the guys don’t get crap, or get evil carping bitches. Worse, the women are nice to the assholes, and seem to enjoy being treated like shit by a bunch of near sociopaths.

Well, that’s just wonderful, isn’t it? Want to be successful with women? Just act like a quasi-psychopath, treat ’em like crap, insult them, cheat on them, psychologically abuse them, because the damned bitches are masochistic freaks and get off on being treated like shit by a modern day Caveman with a club. And the nice guys get kicked in the balls and then kicked to the curb.

Wonderful, just wonderful. Game isn’t telling me anything new. If mentally ill masochistic females reward the most callous, cruel and sociopathic males with the most love, sex and obedient behavior, while the nice guys always lose, who can blame guys for giving some of these crazy biatches what they want? I won’t.

But it’s not for me. If I have to “invalidate,” “neg,” treat like shit, insult and abuse women in order to get laid, Hell, I’ll just stay home. I have a hard drive full of porn, and that’s all I need, but at least my conscience will be clear.

Alt Left: Female Rule Violates the Laws of Nature

In the provocatively titled The Cunts Versus the Men post, perceptive commenter Tyciol writes:

Maybe a better word as opposed to feminism would be equalism or something?

Like it’s relative to position.

Women were certainly downtrodden in the past and lacking rights, so equalism would be feminist in that case.

But in the reverse scenario, if men could not vote, etc., then any resulting equalist movement would have to have a masculinist agenda.

Suffrage to me has never been about focusing on women’s rights but simply more about simple equality, since women are also people and have opinions which should be counted. Similarly, the right to choice (abortion) to me is not about favoring women but rather that people should not be forced to carry parasitic feti for months if they don’t wish to.

I’m pro-choice, and I’m all for equality for women in all of the sane ways. But I wonder if equality ever works. We offered women equality, and instead they took their equality and ran past the 50 yard line heading for our goalposts to try to dominate us and rule us. I guess it’s natural. Neither sex is going to be happy with mere equality. If you give women equality, they’re always going to use that step stool to try to install Female Rule. And I guess we asshole guys will always try to install Male Rule.

Sigh.

Nevertheless, equality is surely something to support. Better than equality: how about this? Rights. Not necessarily equality, but rights. No matter what we think of them, females have basic rights, and in most ways, they have the same basic rights as we do. So do gays, Blacks, lots of folks. It’s not a matter of liking. You don’t have like Black people; a lot of White people don’t. And a lot of straights are not too fond of gays. But how can we deny that gays and surely Blacks have the same set of basic rights that any human does?

I have nothing against Female Rule in principle, assuming they were capable. But I don’t think they are. And I don’t want to live under Female Rule. The chicks will dig it (I guess! Or maybe they won’t?!), but it will suck for the guys. We already have a Matriarchy with the Politically Correct crowd, and honestly, it sucks.

Male Rule sort of sucks for women, but they seem to be happy, and the men surely are happy. Female Rule violates Nature* and seems to make both sexes increasingly miserable.

I don’t think that females ought to be allowed to install their Female Paradigm in society. Think about it. Is there any society that ever let the women rule? I can’t think of one. Why is that? Surely it must have been tried in the past. Not all human males are patriarchal shits, and a lot of us are lazy. Surely there were times in the past when the lazy guys said, “We give up. You do it. You rule. Go for it.” I assume it was tried in many cases in the past, and the result was the same as it is now: chaos. In which case, the sane people realized that either you have Male Rule or you have Chaos.

Allowing the Male Paradigm to rule society works, and most societies work that way, but it also often violates women’s rights at least somewhat most of the time and keeps them down. But in a lot of these societies, like Hispanic ones and many other traditional societies, women seem to like living under Male Rule. You go to these places, and as long as Male Rule isn’t too evil, everyone seems happy. It’s like they know they are Living In Nature.

I don’t hear a lot of complaints from the Hispanic females around here about the Male Rule they live under. Women get to be feminine, men get to be masculine, and everyone is happy. I don’t think Hispanic women want to rule. They want some relative equality, at least in terms of earning power, and around here they are granted that. Hispanic women can make quite a bit of money, and some do here. But they’re still quite feminine.

On the other hand, White women seem to have so much greater freedom than Hispanic women, but they seem to be so much more miserable! It’s like the more freedom you give women, the less happy they are, and the more they complain about Male Rule.

Even when the women are in charge, increasingly the case nowadays, the women keep complaining about the Patriarchy. As Female Rule deepens, the women get angrier and angrier (paradoxically as they get more and more rights and power!) and become more and more masculine. This upsets Nature, and Nature doesn’t tolerate defiance. She demands balance, just like in the forests and jungles.

As the women get increasingly masculine, the males will have to become increasingly feminine to compensate and create the balance that Nature demands. As women become increasingly masculine, they get more and more unhappy, because it violates women’s own nature. On some level, the female organism knows that acting masculine is fucked up, and this throws the organism into disarray.

Of course, as males become increasingly feminine, they get more and more miserable too, because femininity violates man’s own nature. So you end up with Northern California White People, where even the straight people act like queers and dykes.

It follows from this scenario that you would see increasing situational and opportunistic homosexuality in both sexes. As males feminize, they tend to engage in increasing amounts of homosexuality. As females masculinize, they also tend to engage in increasing amounts of homosexuality.

As Female Rule deepens, women will increasingly reject continuous marriage and raise fatherless men. Once again, a violation of Nature. Nature demands that both males and females have fathers. Nature punishes those who defy her. She punishes fatherless males by turning them into criminals who lash out at the world as a surrogate for missing father. She punishes fatherless females by turning them into sluts, trying to screw their way to Daddy’s missing love.

Both criminals and sluts are often unhappy, probably because most men are not supposed to be criminals and most women are not supposed to be sluts. Both criminals and sluts frequently lead at least difficult and often tragic lives.

Women can have power, but only if they either don’t upset Male Rule or at least only try to be equal.

*I am applying Nature in the sense of Natural Law, especially the Catholic or philosophical sense. When I say something violates Nature, I mean it violates Natural Law – that is, it’s unnatural in terms of mankind’s evolution.

Of course violations of Natural Law occur, but as they violate our evolutionary imperative encoded in our genes, there will be ill effects, since humans are not meant to violate Natural Law. Violations of Natural Law will have consequences.

Feminine men and masculine women are miserable. Female Rule (matriarchy) violates Natural Law and results in chaos and even unhappiness for females, since even females dislike Matriarchy deep down inside because it’s unnatural. Fatherless families violate Natural Law and result in criminal boys and slut daughters, both of whom are miserable.

When I say something violates Natural Law, I mean it violates our evolutionary imperatives coded in our genes. The result will be unhappiness and pathology, as our natural and genetic imperatives are violated, thwarted, and twisted.

“Lesson Learned,” by Alpha Unit

Thinking of girls I met my freshman year of college reminded me of one girl who ended up leaving school not long after her year began.

I was never particularly close to her, but one of my good friends was. At one point I noticed that I wasn’t seeing this girl, whom I’ll call Jan, on our floor anymore. My good friend informed me that Jan had left. Gone home. She was no longer a student.

“Why?” I asked.

“They ran a train on her,” my friend told me.

Jan had supposedly been in love with this athlete. Well, this athlete and a bunch of his friends had a good time one night at Jan’s expense.

I remember my mother giving me an oblique warning about things like that. I had never thought I would know someone to whom it had happened – or that I would hear about such a thing so soon.

What my mother had suggested to me, of course, was that sex and aggression are interwoven. Especially in young men. And that I had better know it.

Fraternity brothers have gang-raped. Groups of athletes have done it. Military units have. Criminal gangs have. Some of the people who study this sort of thing report that a lot of these young men are actually quite nice to women they actually care about. What could make them treat their victims this way?

It’s simple. She wanted it.

This seems to be the universal defense in these cases once they’re investigated.

“What do you mean, ‘she wanted it’?” you might ask. “Wasn’t she unconscious at the time?”

What you get next, essentially, is the assertion that if she hadn’t wanted it, she wouldn’t have been there.

First of all, this is nonsense. I am the first to admit that naive young women unwittingly put themselves in harm’s way. But a lot of the girls who end up in this awful situation are actually intoxicated when it happens, or they have been drugged specifically for that purpose. Sometimes they are lured into rooms and locked inside.

So, no – not every girl who finds herself a part of the “express” wanted to be.

But, yes, in the minds of some of these assailants, she wanted it. Because the world is divided into two kinds of women: women we respect and women we don’t. And women dumb enough to end up on the receiving end of a gang bang are definitely women we don’t.

According to some, there is nothing within males that causes this behavior, that it is culturally encoded and all about power relations – males proving their “manhood” to one another by asserting dominance over a woman. Any man refusing to go along is something other than a “real man,” to put it nicely.

Maybe so. Or maybe when you have males bonding in a testosterone- and adrenaline-driven environment, heaven help any vulnerable female who wanders into that environment. But what stands out to me is the fact that these guys believe that there are some women you don’t do this to.

To be the kind of woman you don’t do this to, a woman has to be someone with whom there is a bond. She has to be, in some way, a part of him. Whoever is a part of him, he will defend and protect, whether it’s a woman or one of his “brothers.”

Bonds are crucial when it comes to male socialization, as it is widely recognized. A man in a close relationship with someone he feels no bond with can be cold or predatory toward that person. A lot of stepfathers and boyfriends abuse, rape, or kill the children of women they are with. Many don’t, obviously. But this situation is inherently risky, and some women don’t realize it.

In a world where men and women are basically the same, women don’t need men. They can be independent, thank you, and handle their own business. But in the world we actually live in, women need men. The more men that care about you, the better off you are as a woman.

As a naive young freshman, I too put myself in risky situations. Nothing horrible ever happened to me. But I know that in one situation I was in, it was the affection that a certain young man felt toward me that saved me from my own foolishness – and from what might have been brewing in the minds of some of his friends.

"Lesson Learned," by Alpha Unit

Thinking of girls I met my freshman year of college reminded me of one girl who ended up leaving school not long after her year began. I was never particularly close to her, but one of my good friends was. At one point I noticed that I wasn’t seeing this girl, whom I’ll call Jan, on our floor anymore. My good friend informed me that Jan had left. Gone home. She was no longer a student. “Why?” I asked. “They ran a train on her,” my friend told me. Jan had supposedly been in love with this athlete. Well, this athlete and a bunch of his friends had a good time one night at Jan’s expense. I remember my mother giving me an oblique warning about things like that. I had never thought I would know someone to whom it had happened – or that I would hear about such a thing so soon. What my mother had suggested to me, of course, was that sex and aggression are interwoven. Especially in young men. And that I had better know it. Fraternity brothers have gang-raped. Groups of athletes have done it. Military units have. Criminal gangs have. Some of the people who study this sort of thing report that a lot of these young men are actually quite nice to women they actually care about. What could make them treat their victims this way? It’s simple. She wanted it. This seems to be the universal defense in these cases once they’re investigated. “What do you mean, ‘she wanted it’?” you might ask. “Wasn’t she unconscious at the time?” What you get next, essentially, is the assertion that if she hadn’t wanted it, she wouldn’t have been there. First of all, this is nonsense. I am the first to admit that naive young women unwittingly put themselves in harm’s way. But a lot of the girls who end up in this awful situation are actually intoxicated when it happens, or they have been drugged specifically for that purpose. Sometimes they are lured into rooms and locked inside. So, no – not every girl who finds herself a part of the “express” wanted to be. But, yes, in the minds of some of these assailants, she wanted it. Because the world is divided into two kinds of women: women we respect and women we don’t. And women dumb enough to end up on the receiving end of a gang bang are definitely women we don’t. According to some, there is nothing within males that causes this behavior, that it is culturally encoded and all about power relations – males proving their “manhood” to one another by asserting dominance over a woman. Any man refusing to go along is something other than a “real man,” to put it nicely. Maybe so. Or maybe when you have males bonding in a testosterone- and adrenaline-driven environment, heaven help any vulnerable female who wanders into that environment. But what stands out to me is the fact that these guys believe that there are some women you don’t do this to. To be the kind of woman you don’t do this to, a woman has to be someone with whom there is a bond. She has to be, in some way, a part of him. Whoever is a part of him, he will defend and protect, whether it’s a woman or one of his “brothers.” Bonds are crucial when it comes to male socialization, as it is widely recognized. A man in a close relationship with someone he feels no bond with can be cold or predatory toward that person. A lot of stepfathers and boyfriends abuse, rape, or kill the children of women they are with. Many don’t, obviously. But this situation is inherently risky, and some women don’t realize it. In a world where men and women are basically the same, women don’t need men. They can be independent, thank you, and handle their own business. But in the world we actually live in, women need men. The more men that care about you, the better off you are as a woman. As a naive young freshman, I too put myself in risky situations. Nothing horrible ever happened to me. But I know that in one situation I was in, it was the affection that a certain young man felt toward me that saved me from my own foolishness – and from what might have been brewing in the minds of some of his friends.

“Action In the War Zone,” by Alpha Unit

Carelessness will cost you if you’re serving under Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo in northern Iraq.

Pregnant soldiers and the men who got ’em that way will face disciplinary action, pursuant to an order the General issued last month. He has the right to pursue court-martial in such cases, but because of outcry from certain quarters, he has gone on the record to say that no one is going to be put in jail for being pregnant.

This whole story is like a nicely wrapped Christmas gift for the perennially outraged. After all, sex is a part of life, right? You put young people together in these situations and you expect celibacy? The military has no business interfering in personal freedom in this way. Especially not the personal freedom of women.

In high school, I had female friends who joined ROTC, and their decision mystified me. “Why would you want to join the Army?” I would wonder. Being in the Army was for guys, as far as I was concerned, because being tough, fighting, and being shipped off to strange places to kill people was for guys. As a teenage girl, there was no chance of getting me interested in stuff like that.

But plenty of women are interested in stuff like that, and so be it. Women have served in the U.S. military in nearly all wars, and in many different capacities. They have served in noncombat duty positions such as radio electrician, telephone operator, cryptographer, and mechanic. They have been messengers, spies, nurses, physicians and pilots. And during the 70’s, opportunities for women expanded as the U.S. turned to an all-volunteer Army and the cultural climate insisted that women be given the same opportunities as men.

And so women are fully accommodated in today’s armed forces.

Some things don’t ever change, though.

Sexual harassment is an ongoing problem for women in the military. Sexual assaults are a genuine threat, and sometimes a reality. And female soldiers do end up pregnant while serving in war zones. This isn’t supposed to happen. And now that an Army General is promising to enforce regulations concerning this sort of thing, certain people are crying that this just isn’t fair to women.

Really? Don’t men and women forfeit a lot of the personal freedoms they take for granted as civilians when they join the military? Aren’t women responsible for knowing what they must and must not do while they serve? And aren’t women to be held responsible when they violate regulations?

Some of these feminists need to make up their minds. Are women to be treated as equals or not? You can’t say, “Give me all the opportunities you give the guys and all the responsibilities, too,” and then turn around and say, “But I’m a woman, so give me special treatment when I say so.” You’re either special or you’re not.

Maybe what really makes you special is that you get to have it both ways.

"Action In the War Zone," by Alpha Unit

Carelessness will cost you if you’re serving under Maj. Gen. Anthony Cucolo in northern Iraq. Pregnant soldiers and the men who got ’em that way will face disciplinary action, pursuant to an order the General issued last month. He has the right to pursue court-martial in such cases, but because of outcry from certain quarters, he has gone on the record to say that no one is going to be put in jail for being pregnant. This whole story is like a nicely wrapped Christmas gift for the perennially outraged. After all, sex is a part of life, right? You put young people together in these situations and you expect celibacy? The military has no business interfering in personal freedom in this way. Especially not the personal freedom of women. In high school, I had female friends who joined ROTC, and their decision mystified me. “Why would you want to join the Army?” I would wonder. Being in the Army was for guys, as far as I was concerned, because being tough, fighting, and being shipped off to strange places to kill people was for guys. As a teenage girl, there was no chance of getting me interested in stuff like that. But plenty of women are interested in stuff like that, and so be it. Women have served in the U.S. military in nearly all wars, and in many different capacities. They have served in noncombat duty positions such as radio electrician, telephone operator, cryptographer, and mechanic. They have been messengers, spies, nurses, physicians and pilots. And during the 70’s, opportunities for women expanded as the U.S. turned to an all-volunteer Army and the cultural climate insisted that women be given the same opportunities as men. And so women are fully accommodated in today’s armed forces. Some things don’t ever change, though. Sexual harassment is an ongoing problem for women in the military. Sexual assaults are a genuine threat, and sometimes a reality. And female soldiers do end up pregnant while serving in war zones. This isn’t supposed to happen. And now that an Army General is promising to enforce regulations concerning this sort of thing, certain people are crying that this just isn’t fair to women. Really? Don’t men and women forfeit a lot of the personal freedoms they take for granted as civilians when they join the military? Aren’t women responsible for knowing what they must and must not do while they serve? And aren’t women to be held responsible when they violate regulations? Some of these feminists need to make up their minds. Are women to be treated as equals or not? You can’t say, “Give me all the opportunities you give the guys and all the responsibilities, too,” and then turn around and say, “But I’m a woman, so give me special treatment when I say so.” You’re either special or you’re not. Maybe what really makes you special is that you get to have it both ways.

“Girls,” by Alpha Unit

Gil Elvgren was a Minnesota-born painter who is famous for his pinup art. Some think of him as the most important of all the pinup artists.

To Elvgren, the ideal model had the face of a 15-year-old and the body of a 20-year-old. It is always noted that his art combined the two.

I’ll say that for artistic purposes, Elvgren’s ideal woman was probably between 17 and 18, only because the average of 15 and 20 is about 17–the age that men evidently find women to be most beautiful (see here). To me, the women in Elvgren’s paintings appear mainly to be adult women who might be posing as 17-year-olds.

The artist George Petty, on the other hand, seems really to have captured this image of the 17-year-old in his pinup art, not only because of that big, wholesome smile he gave his girls but because a lot of them are on the telephone! The women in these idealized portraits of American White womanhood are always called pinup “girls.” Just as dancers of all varieties are called girls. Models are routinely called girls. So are prostitutes.

When women are presented for mostly male “consumption,” they are nearly always presented as girls.

Many men describe young women as “happy,” which is part of their appeal. In a Bob Seger song about a man who has fallen for a dancer he likes to watch in “a little club downtown,” he says of her:

Unlike all the other ladies, she looked so young and sweet…

Young. Sweet. Happy. An infatuating combination.

You don’t stay young. So you don’t stay sweet. But a charming older woman is one who has retained a spark of that girlish sweetness. Or at least one who can give that impression.

References

Seger, Bob. 1976. “Main Street.” On Night Moves [Record]. Hollywood, CA: Capitol Industries-EMI.

"Girls," by Alpha Unit

Gil Elvgren was a Minnesota-born painter who is famous for his pinup art. Some think of him as the most important of all the pinup artists. To Elvgren, the ideal model had the face of a 15-year-old and the body of a 20-year-old. It is always noted that his art combined the two. I’ll say that for artistic purposes, Elvgren’s ideal woman was probably between 17 and 18, only because the average of 15 and 20 is about 17–the age that men evidently find women to be most beautiful (see here). To me, the women in Elvgren’s paintings appear mainly to be adult women who might be posing as 17-year-olds. The artist George Petty, on the other hand, seems really to have captured this image of the 17-year-old in his pinup art, not only because of that big, wholesome smile he gave his girls but because a lot of them are on the telephone! The women in these idealized portraits of American White womanhood are always called pinup “girls.” Just as dancers of all varieties are called girls. Models are routinely called girls. So are prostitutes. When women are presented for mostly male “consumption,” they are nearly always presented as girls. Many men describe young women as “happy,” which is part of their appeal. In a Bob Seger song about a man who has fallen for a dancer he likes to watch in “a little club downtown,” he says of her:

Unlike all the other ladies, she looked so young and sweet…

Young. Sweet. Happy. An infatuating combination. You don’t stay young. So you don’t stay sweet. But a charming older woman is one who has retained a spark of that girlish sweetness. Or at least one who can give that impression.

References

Seger, Bob. 1976. “Main Street.” On Night Moves [Record]. Hollywood, CA: Capitol Industries-EMI.

What Happened To All The Good Men? You Did.

Sorry folks, I’m still on that War Between Men and Women post. I just can’t get enough of it.

Plus I think I’m a bit sick. There’s all sorts of flu bugs going around, including the Swine Flu, here in California. I know a couple of people who got that Swine Flu, and it is no ordinary flu bug! No way! They are sick as Hell! For like two or three weeks. We are talking older adults here, 40’s.

This post was very interesting. Feminists want the career and all that, no problem, but then they still want to be Cavewomen and chase worthless Alpha Bad Boys. That’s who they leave their dutiful husbands for, holding the bag too. American feminists were largely responsible for a bill that incredibly passed the US Congress to crack down on “mail-order brides” from overseas. The rationale was that the brides are abused, so the law was to protect them. In truth, it makes it hard for US guys to get a bride from Overseas.

This bill was clearly motivated by spite and hatred. American women, especially older ones, feel that they can’t compete with babes from Russia, Thailand or the Philippines. These foreign women have way too many positive attributes – like being nice!

Reading about the horrors of divorce, or even, sadly contemporary American marriage* (especially the no sex bit) makes me glad I never took the plunge. It’s funny that people have been thrashing me my whole life for making this decision. Especially women. The implication, also, was that I wasn’t much a man for not marrying. Guys don’t seem to give a fuck, really. Some young married men were pissed, but you wonder if it’s insecurity. Why are women so pissed at guys who won’t marry? Hmmm. Looking at the horrorshow below, I wonder…

Having to give money to help support the woman’s new boyfriend must be incredibly painful and humiliating. That’s the sort of thing that hits a man’s ego in the most painful and sensitive place. It’s Impotence territory! It makes my dick droop just thinking about it. Think of it in Caveman terms. Your Cavewoman left you for another guy. Implication – you’re not much a man, and he is. He’s a man and you’re not. Now you have to hunt food and bring it to the smirking bastard sitting in his cave with your cheating ex-girl and your kids. That motherfucker is raising your kids!

They snipe and nag until he gives in to keep the peace. Once she has his testicles in a jar over the mantle, she loses respect and the attraction is no longer there. The only thing left is the money. So she leaves him and takes half.

That part is incredible. Well of course. Women want power over men. So they snipe and nag until he gives in, and now he’s a pussy whipped idiot. Of course, now she has no respect for him whatsoever, since no woman respects a pussy-whipped idiot, even when they create one. What’s left? His money. She leaves him and takes half of that. Think of it, in Caveman terms, the guy’s been humiliated over and over and robbed blind. Wow, I can’t imagine it.

And career women often don’t clean house or cook anymore. I’m amazed at the number of young women these days who can barely even cook toast. Incredible. What man would marry one of these? So on top of everything else, the house is a mess and there’s no cooking. WTH, man? What is the guy getting out of this deal?

The solution, according to this guy, is a return to traditional role models. Why we ever thought that anything less than Nature’s Way could ever work in the first place is a mystery.

*I honestly do not mean to hammer on you married guys out there. If you’re happily married, all the power to you, man!

anti-feminism makes you sexy June 9, 2009 by Anonymous, 18 weeks 4 days ago Comment id: 37152

There is a reason why older women are hostile to this idea. They are also hostile to the idea of an American male marrying foreign women. This hostility often sounds like your typical women-hating-women jealousy crap, or maybe it is expressed as racism. How many women have you heard call an Asian girl a slut when she is dating an African American or Caucasian? Older single women are having a hard time finding men who are serious about marriage.

I watch my brothers get screwed in court, lose their kids, assets, and income. I watch them forced to send money to their ex-wife’s boyfriend(s). I hear all of them complain about not having sex after marriage (usually because either or both are too damned tired), but sometimes they get cutoff almost immediately after the ceremony. Possibly the worst is child support for a child that is not yours.

The cases of women lying about being on birth control, or having your baby without your consent. There is a trend that nobody wants to admit. Modern feminist women are crappy wives. They cheat with immature alpha males- hence the growing forever-bachelor pick up artist population. They treat the real men like crap.

They snipe and nag until he gives in to keep the peace. Once she has his testicles in a jar over the mantle, she loses respect and the attraction is no longer there. The only thing left is the money. So she leaves him and takes half. The worst offense of them all- they put career over their kids. The division of labor in the household is extinct. We have sloppy houses and kids fed on a constant stream of fast food or frozen crap. Honestly, is this how you remember growing up?

Ladies- you can fixate your anger on us. Call us perverts, call us immature, etc. All your arguments here don’t seem to be changing my mind. I am one of those elusive men that you can’t find.

42 yo widower, married for 22 years, who was primary caregiver to a woman who suffered more and longer than anyone should. Luckily we married young and she was a true believer in traditional marriage. We had bliss while she was with us. We barely ever fought- and when we did, we followed the rules given to us by our chaplain when we were first married. It was a very very rare thing.

Anyway- there is an answer out there to your question- “What happened to all the good men?”

The Answer is this:

You did.

And do you know how to fix it? I will tell you, but you will call me a sexist – here it is:

Play to your strengths and let men play to our strengths. I will love you, protect you, and provide for you. In return you will be supportive and nurturing. You will take child raising seriously. We’re talking about cooking meals, cleaning the house, and teaching our children. Anything less is a career woman or just plain lazy.

I personally have no issue with career women- I have some close friends who have taken that path. But don’t wake up one day after living the “Sex in the City” lifestyle and decide that I’m your guy. Guess what- I have no use for you. I don’t need your money and I don’t need your sex. If that is all you offer, then the risk is just too great.

What I need is what nature gave you – your maternal instincts. Whether you admit it or not, what you need is my paternal instincts. So – if you want to compete with the foreign and younger ladies – just write down these traits and start working on them – or you could hang out with your bitter girlfriends and have misandry hate parties. I wonder how long that will make you happy.

"Bitter Old Harpies vs. Dirty Old Men," by Alpha Unit

Latest from Alpha Unit. I really like this post. She and I have been reading the comments on this post for the past couple of days. In fact, my eyes are aching right now. The whole older man – younger woman thing is a little bit silly, because it doesn’t exist all that much, really. In this town here, you almost never see any outrageous examples of it. Up in the mountains, you never really see it either, except for Harry Baker, and he was anomalous. There was another fellow in town who recently died of a drug overdose at age 47, and he liked young women too. Well, he liked them of all ages really. His name was Richard. He died like he lived, in a woman’s bed in Mariposa. But Richard was Rich, from Newport Beach, with Newport Beach family money. He ran a business in town, but the money came from the family. The only place I saw a lot of younger women – older guys was in Hollywood and Beverly Hills. I used to live and work up there and I spent most of my 20’s in Hollywood nightclubs as part of the LA Music Scene. I was one of the first punk rockers, and I’m still a punk. Anyway, you did see it up there. I can’t get a real young woman these days, but a few years back I could. At age 44, I had an 18 year old Korean girlfriend. Since then though, not so much. At age 52, the women I can get at best as young as 26-33 and up. Under 25, and it seems like they think I’m too old. To me, a young woman is an object of beauty. Like a Redwood tree, a waterfall or a European cathedral. They are simply an aesthetic pleasure to look at, like looking at fine art. And I still fine myself looking at them sometimes, even though a lot of them really hate it. If they ever bothered me about it, I would have to say, “I’m sorry, but you’re so beautiful, I could not help looking at you.” Young women always think guys my age are trying to fuck them. Truth is, we are not. We know we don’t have a chance with these chicks. They’re obviously way more dirty-minded than we are. If I’m discussing the weather, to the young woman’s mind, this is secret code for, “I want to fuck your brains out baby!” Truth is, I’m actually just talking about the weather. Really. Around here, the Hispanic girls look really hot from teens to about mid-20’s or so. After that, they get married, pregnant and fat. These Hispanics are a handsome race, though, I must say. It’s a nice mix, the Indian and the White. When a teenage girl, age 16 or so, starts getting that classic curved body, to me it simply excites a primal impulse. I look at it, and the Caveman in me says, “Jump on it! Impregnate it!” What you are seeing is an evolutionary advertisement of extreme fertility. Around here, these young Hispanic chicks are so fertile I think you can probably impregnate them by looking at them with lust in your eyes. When those immaculate rounded hips start showing up, that looks like an ad too. It’s an advertisement screaming, “These hips are meant to carry babies. Impregnate me baby!” As far as the older women are concerned, it’s just sour grapes, that’s all. The guys? I dunno. 7 years of marriage, a couple of kids, she’s 35, and sex is a memory. After age 40, a lot of couples are hardly fucking anymore. Maybe the women don’t care, but a lot of guys in their 40’s are still horny as Hell. It seems to be a fact of life that older men like younger women, and in some cases, vice versa. It seems true over most all human cultures all down through time. Screaming “pedophile” at Mother Nature isn’t particularly helpful. Mother Nature didn’t make most males natural “pedophiles.” On the other hand, most older women could not be less interested in boy toys. The Cougar phenomenon offers women a chance to do what the boys do, but that seems to be a minor movement. I don’t know any older women around here with much younger guys. I used to be involved in relationships like that. Lot of fun, I was 21 and she was 37. Both at the peak of their sex drives. Match made in heaven. Onto Alpha Unit:

I’m a 50 yr Aussie male and I love younger women. The women I see my age are fat or just plain ugly and no amount of help will fix them. Who wants to go after something all worn out? I think after women have menopause the ugly factor kicks in.

So said the Aussie male in the comments section of a blog post Old Men Chasing Young Women: A Good Thing. This is the post Robert referred to in “Perverts” Are Adaptive. The most common description some of the older men gave of older women was “bitter.” So in addition to being fat and ugly, they were bitter, which amplified their ugliness tenfold. So what do the fat, the ugly, and the bitter think of older guys who try to get young women into bed?

Worn out men belong with worn out women.Old men coming on to you is also, erm, rather gross. Shame nature cruelly made the old badgers pointlessly reproductive. …I have never understood why a young woman wants a wrinkled, boring old man, who tells stories of the times when she wasn’t born yet and complains of aches and ways of the modern world.”

Some of the comments were far more vicious, including references to adult diapers. But most arresting is the sentiment expressed by the commenter who said to a 25-year-old woman:

Your worn out 48 year old boyfriend is an old pervert and you have no integrity.

A 42-year-old man with a 22-year-old girlfriend was told that he is:

…a pedophile whose moral codes are corrupted.

How is this man’s involvement with a 22-year-old woman an example of pedophilia? Or, as Robert put it to me, basically, “What is up with these women?” If it is perfectly natural for a mature man to be sexually turned on by a beautiful young woman (and it is), then why is that natural desire labeled “dirty?” Anyone who thinks this must think sex itself is dirty. Or at least scary. Which it is. The sexual impulse can be disruptive, destabilizing, or even destructive if not properly channeled. No wonder human beings instituted marriage. In their wisdom our forebears knew that such a tremendous force needed to be contained. Maybe these women fear men who don’t seem to recognize this. To them, maybe these guys are just having way too much fun wallowing in unbridled lust with young luscious babes. A man is apt to forego all rectitude with such a distraction. And Civilization will collapse. Don’t you guys see that? Since men are bigger and stronger and less likely to give a damn, women can’t really stop them. So we resort to shrill denunciation, hoping to shame them into behaving themselves. But it might as well have been a scene from A Streetcar Named Desire on that comments thread. Those men were Stanley Kowalski to their Blanche du Bois.

I’ve been on to you from the start! Not once did you pull any wool over this boy’s eyes! You come in here and sprinkle the place with powder and spray perfume and cover the light-bulb with a paper lantern, and lo and behold the place has turned into Egypt and you are the Queen of the Nile! Sitting on your throne and swilling my liquor! I say – Ha – ha! Do you hear me? Ha – ha- ha!

References

Williams, Tennessee. 1947. A Streetcar Named Desire. The Estate of the Late Tennessee Williams.

“Bitter Old Harpies vs. Dirty Old Men,” by Alpha Unit

Latest from Alpha Unit. I really like this post. She and I have been reading the comments on this post for the past couple of days. In fact, my eyes are aching right now.

The whole older man – younger woman thing is a little bit silly, because it doesn’t exist all that much, really. In this town here, you almost never see any outrageous examples of it.

Up in the mountains, you never really see it either, except for Harry Baker, and he was anomalous. There was another fellow in town who recently died of a drug overdose at age 47, and he liked young women too. Well, he liked them of all ages really. His name was Richard. He died like he lived, in a woman’s bed in Mariposa. But Richard was Rich, from Newport Beach, with Newport Beach family money. He ran a business in town, but the money came from the family.

The only place I saw a lot of younger women – older guys was in Hollywood and Beverly Hills. I used to live and work up there and I spent most of my 20’s in Hollywood nightclubs as part of the LA Music Scene. I was one of the first punk rockers, and I’m still a punk. Anyway, you did see it up there.

I can’t get a real young woman these days, but a few years back I could. At age 44, I had an 18 year old Korean girlfriend. Since then though, not so much. At age 52, the women I can get at best as young as 26-33 and up. Under 25, and it seems like they think I’m too old.

To me, a young woman is an object of beauty. Like a Redwood tree, a waterfall or a European cathedral. They are simply an aesthetic pleasure to look at, like looking at fine art. And I still fine myself looking at them sometimes, even though a lot of them really hate it. If they ever bothered me about it, I would have to say, “I’m sorry, but you’re so beautiful, I could not help looking at you.”

Young women always think guys my age are trying to fuck them. Truth is, we are not. We know we don’t have a chance with these chicks. They’re obviously way more dirty-minded than we are. If I’m discussing the weather, to the young woman’s mind, this is secret code for, “I want to fuck your brains out baby!” Truth is, I’m actually just talking about the weather. Really.

Around here, the Hispanic girls look really hot from teens to about mid-20’s or so. After that, they get married, pregnant and fat. These Hispanics are a handsome race, though, I must say. It’s a nice mix, the Indian and the White.

When a teenage girl, age 16 or so, starts getting that classic curved body, to me it simply excites a primal impulse. I look at it, and the Caveman in me says, “Jump on it! Impregnate it!” What you are seeing is an evolutionary advertisement of extreme fertility.

Around here, these young Hispanic chicks are so fertile I think you can probably impregnate them by looking at them with lust in your eyes.

When those immaculate rounded hips start showing up, that looks like an ad too. It’s an advertisement screaming, “These hips are meant to carry babies. Impregnate me baby!”

As far as the older women are concerned, it’s just sour grapes, that’s all.

The guys? I dunno. 7 years of marriage, a couple of kids, she’s 35, and sex is a memory. After age 40, a lot of couples are hardly fucking anymore. Maybe the women don’t care, but a lot of guys in their 40’s are still horny as Hell.

It seems to be a fact of life that older men like younger women, and in some cases, vice versa. It seems true over most all human cultures all down through time. Screaming “pedophile” at Mother Nature isn’t particularly helpful. Mother Nature didn’t make most males natural “pedophiles.”

On the other hand, most older women could not be less interested in boy toys. The Cougar phenomenon offers women a chance to do what the boys do, but that seems to be a minor movement. I don’t know any older women around here with much younger guys. I used to be involved in relationships like that. Lot of fun, I was 21 and she was 37. Both at the peak of their sex drives. Match made in heaven.

Onto Alpha Unit:

I’m a 50 yr Aussie male and I love younger women. The women I see my age are fat or just plain ugly and no amount of help will fix them. Who wants to go after something all worn out? I think after women have menopause the ugly factor kicks in.

So said the Aussie male in the comments section of a blog post Old Men Chasing Young Women: A Good Thing. This is the post Robert referred to in “Perverts” Are Adaptive.

The most common description some of the older men gave of older women was “bitter.” So in addition to being fat and ugly, they were bitter, which amplified their ugliness tenfold.

So what do the fat, the ugly, and the bitter think of older guys who try to get young women into bed?

Worn out men belong with worn out women.Old men coming on to you is also, erm, rather gross. Shame nature cruelly made the old badgers pointlessly reproductive.

…I have never understood why a young woman wants a wrinkled, boring old man, who tells stories of the times when she wasn’t born yet and complains of aches and ways of the modern world.”

Some of the comments were far more vicious, including references to adult diapers.

But most arresting is the sentiment expressed by the commenter who said to a 25-year-old woman:

Your worn out 48 year old boyfriend is an old pervert and you have no integrity.

A 42-year-old man with a 22-year-old girlfriend was told that he is:

…a pedophile whose moral codes are corrupted.

How is this man’s involvement with a 22-year-old woman an example of pedophilia?

Or, as Robert put it to me, basically, “What is up with these women?”

If it is perfectly natural for a mature man to be sexually turned on by a beautiful young woman (and it is), then why is that natural desire labeled “dirty?”

Anyone who thinks this must think sex itself is dirty. Or at least scary. Which it is.

The sexual impulse can be disruptive, destabilizing, or even destructive if not properly channeled. No wonder human beings instituted marriage. In their wisdom our forebears knew that such a tremendous force needed to be contained.

Maybe these women fear men who don’t seem to recognize this. To them, maybe these guys are just having way too much fun wallowing in unbridled lust with young luscious babes. A man is apt to forego all rectitude with such a distraction.

And Civilization will collapse.

Don’t you guys see that?

Since men are bigger and stronger and less likely to give a damn, women can’t really stop them. So we resort to shrill denunciation, hoping to shame them into behaving themselves.

But it might as well have been a scene from A Streetcar Named Desire on that comments thread. Those men were Stanley Kowalski to their Blanche du Bois.

I’ve been on to you from the start! Not once did you pull any wool over this boy’s eyes! You come in here and sprinkle the place with powder and spray perfume and cover the light-bulb with a paper lantern, and lo and behold the place has turned into Egypt and you are the Queen of the Nile! Sitting on your throne and swilling my liquor! I say – Ha – ha! Do you hear me? Ha – ha- ha!

References

Williams, Tennessee. 1947. A Streetcar Named Desire. The Estate of the Late Tennessee Williams.

"The Burden of Being Equal," by Alpha Unit

New post by Alpha Unit. This one is really great! She and I really see eye to eye on a lot of issues, and this is one of them. To me, it’s the idea that men are men and women are women and you just have to deal with that. Radical feminists have decided that men acting men means men being evil, while women acting like women means being the penultimate in righteousness. A lot of the rest of the time, radical feminists seem to be waging a war against biology and indeed reality. I’m all for single Moms. No problems there. But it ought to be clear by now that boys growing up without fathers is not such a good thing. True, outcomes are different in different communities. A lot of the young Hispanic gang members and delinquents that I know were raised by single Moms. In one family I am thinking of, the boys just went insane after the father died of cirrhosis. The mother tried, but she just couldn’t control them at all. In the White community, it’s different, and you end up with these wimpy, passive-aggressive, super-immature Momma’s boy cum psychos. What’s interesting is the resentment you see in a lot of fatherless boys, especially the ones who were abandoned by their fathers. They really hate their Dads for leaving them like that. Hating your father is not the end of the world. 37 Go to a prison and ask those guys about their fathers. The ones who had active fathers all hate them and will tell you they want to kill them. The rest had no active fathers. But most of these guys love their Moms, and I bet their Moms still love them. Having a good relationship with Mom is a good thing for a man; it doesn’t necessarily make you a Momma’s boy. Try calling those prisoners with Mom tattoos Momma’s boys. As soon as they get released, a lot of those grown, hardass men end up on Mom’s doorstep, if only temporarily. On the other hand, it seems like if you have a good relationship with your Dad, it’s hard to be a criminal. How many male criminals get along great with Dad? Hating your Mom does not seem to be good for a man. It’s possible for men who hate their mothers to be normal, but many are not. A lot of them turn into misogynists. They simply project their feelings about Mom onto all the women in their life, or recreate their relationships with Mom with all the new women they meet. Just about every mass murderer or serial killer of women hates his Mom. Hating your Mom is a lot worse than loving your Mom too much, a “problem” much blown out of proportion by society, especially women. Women and girls always resent the mothers of the guys in their lives. This is a fact of nature. The two females are competing for the attention of a male, and females don’t compete all that well. So the females in men’s lives are always accusing their guys of being Momma’s boys if these guys have any affection at all towards their Moms. Fuck that. There are Momma’s boys, but I don’t think there are as many as you think. Society cures you of that affliction pretty quickly. The worse thing that happens to a Momma’s boy is he turns into a wimp, and about 50 Wimpy guys is a woman issue. Women hate them. But I could care less about wimps. If you’re a wimp, that’s your problem. Why should I care? Women are going to be kicking your ass forever anyway, so why should I join the cackling Domintrices in the Misandry Fest? Forget it. I believe in Solidarity with my Brothers. Even the wimps. On to Alpha Unit! If you want to know the end result of Equality Between the Sexes, look no farther than the Black Community. For in the Black Community you can observe what happens when women are seen as equal to men, just as capable of heading families as men, just as capable of raising boys as men. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was correct when he stated in his controversial report of over forty years ago that such a community asks for and gets chaos. And the reason for that is an indisputable although politically inconvenient fact: fathers are indispensable for the well-being of children. But my focus in not on fatherhood and parenting as much as it is on the idea that women are essentially the same as men. Well, the experience of Black women shows that a woman is great at being a woman but she is a piss-poor substitute for a man. The concept that a woman should have as much autonomy as a man is one we’ve taken for granted for quite some time now in the West. Like most people, I enjoy having as much freedom as I can in the world, and I don’t think I would ever be happy in a place where women are controlled in nearly all their behavior both public and private. But that concept degenerated some time ago into the idea that there are no important differences between men and women; and while some feminists will acknowledge that there are, in fact, important differences, the damage has already been done. Many people think that a woman should and must be able to hold her own in the world alongside men. As I said at the beginning of this post, if you want to know how that experiment turns out, the Black Community in America will give you a good idea. All the historical reasons and explanations for this are a well-traveled road. Everyone can tell you that slavery and segregation demanded that Black women be as “strong” and capable as men. Often it was a matter of survival, not choice. To this day, Black women are accused of being “unfeminine” – as if America ever gave them the luxury of being “feminine” to begin with! So you say to a group of women, “You’re not some dainty, feminine flower in need of sheltering – you are as capable as any man. Now get out there and pull your weight the same as any man.” You say this to them in an environment in which some women are indeed seen and treated as feminine, and in an environment in which no group of men is prepared to tell them anything different. Wouldn’t they end up assuming the traditional roles of men? The only problem is that they are no good at it. Black women are no good at assuming the roles of men. It’s because they’re not men. They aren’t like men. They are no more like men than any other group of women are like men. They were never up to the task of what was expected of them, and they still aren’t. They are weak and incompetent in assuming the roles of men – just as anybody else’s women would be. Black people will recite the familiar refrain that Black men couldn’t assume the traditional protective role toward Black women, because Black women (and men) were the property of White men. And after slavery, Black men, most of whom were in the South, were not allowed to assume the traditional role – because Black men (and women) were under the control of White men. All the excuses have been set in stone by now. But it’s very clear what happens when women are left to their own devices in a society that says they can do anything a man can do. What everyone gets is exactly what Moynihan said they would get.

“The Burden of Being Equal,” by Alpha Unit

New post by Alpha Unit.

This one is really great! She and I really see eye to eye on a lot of issues, and this is one of them. To me, it’s the idea that men are men and women are women and you just have to deal with that. Radical feminists have decided that men acting men means men being evil, while women acting like women means being the penultimate in righteousness. A lot of the rest of the time, radical feminists seem to be waging a war against biology and indeed reality.

I’m all for single Moms. No problems there. But it ought to be clear by now that boys growing up without fathers is not such a good thing.

True, outcomes are different in different communities. A lot of the young Hispanic gang members and delinquents that I know were raised by single Moms. In one family I am thinking of, the boys just went insane after the father died of cirrhosis. The mother tried, but she just couldn’t control them at all. In the White community, it’s different, and you end up with these wimpy, passive-aggressive, super-immature Momma’s boy cum psychos.

What’s interesting is the resentment you see in a lot of fatherless boys, especially the ones who were abandoned by their fathers. They really hate their Dads for leaving them like that.

Hating your father is not the end of the world. 37

Go to a prison and ask those guys about their fathers. The ones who had active fathers all hate them and will tell you they want to kill them. The rest had no active fathers.

But most of these guys love their Moms, and I bet their Moms still love them. Having a good relationship with Mom is a good thing for a man; it doesn’t necessarily make you a Momma’s boy. Try calling those prisoners with Mom tattoos Momma’s boys. As soon as they get released, a lot of those grown, hardass men end up on Mom’s doorstep, if only temporarily.

On the other hand, it seems like if you have a good relationship with your Dad, it’s hard to be a criminal. How many male criminals get along great with Dad?

Hating your Mom does not seem to be good for a man. It’s possible for men who hate their mothers to be normal, but many are not. A lot of them turn into misogynists. They simply project their feelings about Mom onto all the women in their life, or recreate their relationships with Mom with all the new women they meet. Just about every mass murderer or serial killer of women hates his Mom.

Hating your Mom is a lot worse than loving your Mom too much, a “problem” much blown out of proportion by society, especially women. Women and girls always resent the mothers of the guys in their lives. This is a fact of nature. The two females are competing for the attention of a male, and females don’t compete all that well. So the females in men’s lives are always accusing their guys of being Momma’s boys if these guys have any affection at all towards their Moms.

Fuck that. There are Momma’s boys, but I don’t think there are as many as you think. Society cures you of that affliction pretty quickly.

The worse thing that happens to a Momma’s boy is he turns into a wimp, and about 50

Wimpy guys is a woman issue. Women hate them. But I could care less about wimps. If you’re a wimp, that’s your problem. Why should I care? Women are going to be kicking your ass forever anyway, so why should I join the cackling Domintrices in the Misandry Fest? Forget it. I believe in Solidarity with my Brothers. Even the wimps.

On to Alpha Unit!

If you want to know the end result of Equality Between the Sexes, look no farther than the Black Community.

For in the Black Community you can observe what happens when women are seen as equal to men, just as capable of heading families as men, just as capable of raising boys as men.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan was correct when he stated in his controversial report of over forty years ago that such a community asks for and gets chaos. And the reason for that is an indisputable although politically inconvenient fact: fathers are indispensable for the well-being of children.

But my focus in not on fatherhood and parenting as much as it is on the idea that women are essentially the same as men. Well, the experience of Black women shows that a woman is great at being a woman but she is a piss-poor substitute for a man.

The concept that a woman should have as much autonomy as a man is one we’ve taken for granted for quite some time now in the West. Like most people, I enjoy having as much freedom as I can in the world, and I don’t think I would ever be happy in a place where women are controlled in nearly all their behavior both public and private.

But that concept degenerated some time ago into the idea that there are no important differences between men and women; and while some feminists will acknowledge that there are, in fact, important differences, the damage has already been done. Many people think that a woman should and must be able to hold her own in the world alongside men.

As I said at the beginning of this post, if you want to know how that experiment turns out, the Black Community in America will give you a good idea.

All the historical reasons and explanations for this are a well-traveled road. Everyone can tell you that slavery and segregation demanded that Black women be as “strong” and capable as men.

Often it was a matter of survival, not choice. To this day, Black women are accused of being “unfeminine” – as if America ever gave them the luxury of being “feminine” to begin with!

So you say to a group of women, “You’re not some dainty, feminine flower in need of sheltering – you are as capable as any man. Now get out there and pull your weight the same as any man.” You say this to them in an environment in which some women are indeed seen and treated as feminine, and in an environment in which no group of men is prepared to tell them anything different.

Wouldn’t they end up assuming the traditional roles of men? The only problem is that they are no good at it. Black women are no good at assuming the roles of men. It’s because they’re not men. They aren’t like men. They are no more like men than any other group of women are like men. They were never up to the task of what was expected of them, and they still aren’t.

They are weak and incompetent in assuming the roles of men – just as anybody else’s women would be.

Black people will recite the familiar refrain that Black men couldn’t assume the traditional protective role toward Black women, because Black women (and men) were the property of White men. And after slavery, Black men, most of whom were in the South, were not allowed to assume the traditional role – because Black men (and women) were under the control of White men.

All the excuses have been set in stone by now.

But it’s very clear what happens when women are left to their own devices in a society that says they can do anything a man can do.

What everyone gets is exactly what Moynihan said they would get.

"To All the Pretty Young Things," by Alpha Unit

Latest by Alpha Unit. When I first read the title, of course I had to think of David Bowie’s song , right? If you’ve never heard it before, check it out. It’s from Hunky Dory, one of his greatest albums, but it’s not very well known. Early Bowie is like early Elton John. Great but little known. Rick Wakeman (later of  the band Yes) is on piano, and the rest of the lineup is the same as the Spiders From Mars. It’s now widely regarded as one of the best rock albums ever made, but at the time, hardly anyone was listening to it, and it was extremely underground, druggy, counterculture music. Bowie was also widely despised by many young rock fans. The previous album, The Man Who Sold the World, was even more underground, druggy, counterculture and hated. My father is one of my heroes. He is the standard by which I measure a lot of men, especially young black men. I am always saying, “If my father could succeed against the odds dealt him, then what’s their excuse?” My father was a true Alpha Male in my eyes: disciplined, hard-working, dependable. I get my stubborn streak, along with my eyes and a certain way that I smile, directly from him. I am very happy that the first man in my life was someone I respect enormously. Now, was my father a saint? I can see my mother getting a laugh out of that. Of course he wasn’t. Even the canonized weren’t actually saints. All of the people we have great admiration and respect for have character flaws, weaknesses, shortcomings. But the good they’ve done is undeniable. I am a great admirer of men. I like them, in general, and when I was younger, I used to envy their greater exercise of freedom in the world. There is plenty about them that young girls don’t know yet. Especially about their lust. Male lust is the most abundant thing on earth. So it really isn’t very valuable, in a sense. It has great value to pornographers and brothel operators, for sure. But the fact that it is directed at you doesn’t make you special. Young girls don’t know this. They don’t know, many of them, that males will screw just about anything. Many others have pointed this out and explained it better than I can. But males have been known to have sex with women both young and old. They have sex with children, sometimes even babies. They have sex with other men, sometimes, even if they are not normally inclined to. They have been known to have sex with animals. They’ve been known to have sex with inanimate objects–including corpses. Girls, have you ever heard of something called “sloppy seconds?” Some of you have, even though at your age I hadn’t yet. Well, you see, males will actually line up to take turns having sex with one female. You can imagine how that gets after a while. Ewwwww. For most of you, things like this aren’t even on the radar screen, and rightfully so, I suppose. You just want to have fun, like Cyndi Lauper said. (Ask your mom who Cyndi Lauper is.) And carnal pleasures can be so exquisite. Well, you’ll learn one day that what’s really impressive about guys isn’t what’s in their pants. That there are things they can deliver besides a good time. You might even find that now, while you’re so nubile and hot, that you can offer yourself up to one like a platter of goodies, and he’ll actually turn you down! Those are the really smart ones, especially if they are quite a bit older than you are. Those are the ones who are going to look really good years and years from now.

60th Anniversary of the Liberation of China

Very nice article sums up very well the great changes that occurred in China on October 1, 1949. The author finds that almost every Chinese woman he meets his joyous about the Chinese Revolution. Why? It was the greatest movement for he liberation of women that has ever occurred in the history of the world. On that day, for instance, Mao issued a decree forbidding forever the binding of feet, a practice that was rampant under Chiang’s Nationalist government. Arranged marriages were ended and women received 1/2 of their husband’s property. As Mao put it, “China stood up.” Indeed. Were the Revolution never to have taken place, surely Chinese women would still have bound feet, would get screwed (literally in marriage) and would suffer form arranged marriages. In the rural areas, education and health care would be rare to nonexistent, just as it is in India today. Mao also tried to stop wife-beating, an ancient tradition in China. His methods were ingenius. Mao ordered women all across China to order the men in the villages to stop beating women. If they did not stop, there would be consequences. Many men did not stop, so party cadres in the villages told Chinese women to gather up their farm implements and raid the houses of the beaters and beat them up with farm tools. So all across China, in 100’s of thousands of villages, women armed with hoes and shovels stormed into houses and beat up men who were beating their wives. Wife-beating quickly dropped to a low level, though unfortunately it still continues today. The Chinese government is said to be capitalist, but that is not really true. The latest government educational decree sent teachers to all villages with over 200 residents. In the 3rd World, capitalist countries don’t do things like that. The reigning neoliberal model says the less the state spends on education, the better, as it is regarded as a waste of society’s money that would be better spent by the public sector. Instead, private schools are encouraged. The US “liberal”mass media cheers the closing of schools in the Third World and government issuance of nonpayable school fees. When the Sandinistas were thrown out of office in 1990, the entire US media stood up and cheered. Nearly all legislators of both US parties (the “liberal” Democrats nearly more than the Republicans) roared their approval for the defeat of the Sandinistas. The ultra-reactionary Violeta Chamorro got down to business very quickly. One of the first things she did was to close health clinics all over Nicaragua. Next she issued a $30/year fee that parents had to pay for every student in the public schools. This was unpayable for huge numbers of parents, so swarms of students all over Nicaragua quickly dropped out of school. I assume that that’s still the case today. It is for such things that the entire US media cheers. Floods of students being thrown out of schools all over the land because they can’t pay the bills. Countless health clinics closing all over the land, leaving poor 3rd Worlders with no medical treatment. Both parties, “liberal” Democrats and Republicans, roar their approval of such atrocities. The World Bank and the IMF, both of which are controlled both by US imperialism and also by World Jewry, imposes similar conditions all through the 3rd World. In order to get a loan, government spending must be slashed to the bone, especially health and education spending. Subsidies to poor for anything, for food, transportation, utilities, anything, are ordered to be slashed or ended altogether. Prices for food, utilities, transportation, you name it, rocket upward and taxes are raised on the poorest of the poor. At the same time, taxes on business and the rich are gutted or eliminated and poor country must be opened up to economic colonization by corporations from the rich nations, often US corporations. Careful studies have shown that IMF/World Bank policies have resulted in declining education and health figures across the board. The best estimates show that these sanctions have killed millions over the past couple of decades, and possibly continue to kill millions every year. So US imperialism and World Jewry are probably deliberately killing millions every year in the 3rd World through structural adjustment alone. So any government that massively increases education to its people in these days must be a socialist nation, since capitalist countries by their nature do not do such things. In the US, on Wikipedia and among reactionaries everywhere, there’s a new line out: the Chinese Revolution failed. Next time someone tells you that, think again.

Great Pro-Choice Site

In these times when the pro-choice movement seems to be more at risk than in decades, it’s heartening to see a pro-choice website that is as large and active as Rh Reality Check. It covers not only pro-choice views, but also contraception, sex education, sexual health and just sex news in general. It has a great attitude. All the writers are women, many of them young women, and many are Black, Hispanic or Asian. The pro-choice movement really needs a shot in the arm nowadays, as its been under withering assault since the rightwing backlash started under Reagan in 1980. We have almost 30 years of rightwing blowback, and maybe the winds are finally shifting. Taking the race of the anti-abortion folks into consideration, I would say that most of the anti-abortion folks are Whites, usually conservative Whites. I find it fascinating that almost all White nationalists and other racist Whites really hate abortion. Do they realize how many more Blacks and Hispanics would be born if there were no abortion, since Hispanics and especially Blacks have far more abortions proportionately than Whites? Blacks, despite their religiosity, seem to be pro-choice, and Black women are more likely than non-Blacks to have abortions. Latinas are more likely to have abortions than non-Latinas, I believe that by the second generation or so, they are about as pro-choice as anyone, both unusual facts considering their Catholicism. In fact, Catholic women in general are more likely to have abortions than non-Catholics, which implies that a lot of Catholics think the Church is full of shit. And most of the anti-abortion folks are coming from a religious point of view, which is interesting since neither the Bible nor Jesus deal with the issue at all. All it is says is, “Thou shalt not kill.” But we kill all the time, in justified homicide by cops and folks defending themselves, in wars; Hell, nothing kills like capitalism itself. The US government has been funding and/or committing mass murder for a long time now. It’s called imperialism. We fund and advise death squads in the Third World and shower military aid on the most murderous fascist regimes. Then, every now and then, we start a war ourselves and slaughter lots of folks. We started a Nazi-like war of aggression in Iraq which has resulted in over 1 million deaths. It’s also interesting that the anti-abortion idiots seem to love fetuses so much, but they don’t seem to give a fuck about kids as soon they done get themselves borned. The fact that the anti-abortion crowd is coming from a usually fundamentalist religious point of view implies that their position is irrational. It can’t be justified by philosophical traditions outside of some Holy Book. Religion is fine, but we have separation of Church and State here, and religion is not supposed to guide public policy. Even the Catholic Church itself allowed abortion until the time of “quickening” up until about the 17th Century. The opposition to it in toto is simply a Papal Canonical matter that is not necessarily consonant even with Catholic theology. Islam tends to take a pretty hands-off position to abortion, although the fundamentalists hate it. Anti-abortion views are associated with fundamentalism, backwardness, obscurantism and in particular, anti-woman politics all over the world. Pro-choice societies are more scientific, rational, humane, modern and especially pro-woman than those who are not. Buddhism and Hinduism don’t appear to take a stand on abortion. I admit to being queasy about late term abortion, but if the life or the health (Not the mental health!) of the mother is truly or at risk, it’s reasonable. However, I don’t approve it in other circumstances, and using abortion as birth control, which I am convinced some of my female acquaintances have done, makes me ill. It’s still killing, not of a life, but of a potential life, and that is not a breezy matter.

"Woman's Choice, Man's World," by Alpha Unit

New post by Alpha Unit, our female guest poster. Great stuff. The late Godfather of Soul, the inimitable James Brown, sang from his heart and gut that this is a man’s world. Rhythm and blues was always about the truth. The singer makes it known that the world would be nothing without a woman or a girl. But women and children live in a world that men rule. And whoever rules gets to call the shots. You got that, women? Men know freedoms that women, for the most part, never can. We are slaves to our bodies, and to the offspring of our bodies, in ways they will never be. And so they have been free to go out and make the world the way it is. And the rules that apply are of their making. There are places on this earth where this is explicit, and unapologetically enforced. Sometimes brutally enforced. (I have no interest in being in any of these places, either.) But quite often it gets quietly enforced in nice, well-developed, Western communities where it is completely unexpected. Civilized men will protect those weaker than themselves. But the sexual impulse exists beyond notions of propriety. If people are going to behave themselves sexually, then they are going to need the strongest of incentives to do so. Where there is no pressure to do what’s “right” or where there is the opportunity to disregard what’s “right” then people do whatever they feel like. And in this arena men have the upper hand. I remember a case in which a young woman was making out with a guy and had started to have sex with him–and right in the middle of the sex act, she decided she didn’t want to do it anymore. Ha. It became a legal matter, of course. And I’m sure you can guess why. The young man had introduced her, probably to his lasting regret, to one of the rules: Thou shalt not make out with a guy, get naked, open the pearly gates, and then, while he is bringing this encounter to its natural conclusion, proclaim, “On second thought, I don’t feel like it.” Already I can see The Outraged Liberal Woman raising herself up like a cat and hissing at me. “Alpha Unit, you are suggesting that a man has a right to force himself on a woman even after she has clearly told him No. This is not only disgusting, but outrageous.” Actually, I’m not. What I’m stating is that the young woman’s act was not only selfish and inconsiderate; it was dumb. It doesn’t matter if the guy in question is the dearest, politest, most sensitive guy on earth. It doesn’t matter if the guy would immediately jump up and ask in the nicest way if everything is all right and if there’s anything he can do for you. It’s a really dumb thing to do. Why? Because unless you know for a fact that a guy will stop, there is a very good chance that he won’t. There is an excellent chance that he’ll feel that you are jerking him around. A smart woman knows that you don’t summon up this kind of feeling in a guy – especially if you are alone with him. What’s disheartening is that there are young women out there who can’t fathom why the scenario above is so dangerous. They are the same type who’ll say, “I think I should be able to go out drinking until three a.m. and walk around by myself in the neighborhood without anyone bothering me. This is a free country, damn it, and women have the right to do whatever they want.” Since when? There are a lot of guys out there who would be happy to school you in the way things really work. There are guys out there who would have no problem physically overpowering you. Some of them enjoy it. In fact, there are guys who would enjoy hurting you, period. Don’t you know that? That there are people for whom lust and female vulnerability are a favorite combination? These types are outnumbered, I think it’s fair to say, by the civilized, decent guys. But even a civilized, decent guy can be pushed over the line. Under certain circumstances, civilized and decent guys have been known to do things they never would have imagined themselves to be capable of. A lot of times this happens during wars. You should thank God for the civilized, decent guys. They are really the only thing standing between you and that other type. They are the ones who give women and children safe passage in a world in which they could easily be – and sometimes continually are – at the mercy of men. The last thing you would ever want to do is bring out the worst in a civilized, decent guy. It’s incredibly stupid. Either the civilized, decent guys are going to be running things, or those other guys will. But one thing is for sure: women won’t be running things at all. Don’t kid yourself. If you jerk around bad guys, you lose. But if you jerk around good guys, you really lose.

"You Can't Have All of Him," by Alpha Unit

Yet another fantastic post by guest poster Alpha Unit. Alpha Unit is a woman. Yet again in America we are subject to the “confessions” of an adulterous husband, this time the governor of South Carolina. Not long ago it was a Senator from Nevada. And who was it before that? The governor of New York? It isn’t important. If anything is assured, it is that some prominent man is going to be exposed as an adulterer or philanderer–something other than the loyal and loving husband he held himself out to be. Why can’t a man be true, for heaven’s sake? Where does it begin–with the eyes? If he really loved his wife, his eyes would be for her alone. He wouldn’t pay the slightest attention to that woman over there, no matter how much she jiggles ever so slightly as she walks. Once he has seen his wife’s bosom, he is stricken blind to the charms of anyone else’s. Because love does that to a man. If he even notices another woman’s cleavage, no matter how much it is sitting up and begging for attention, it means his devotion to his wife is suspect. Everybody knows this. His gaze would never, ever again be cast upon images of lovely women, particularly lovely women in varying states of undress. Because love does that to a man. Once he’s all yours, he couldn’t care less what any other woman looks like without her clothes on. Your exquisite gorgeousness is all that could ever satisfy him now. And if he is ever caught looking at such images, a display of horror and outrage on your part should be sufficient to ensure that it never happens again. Female horror and outrage have always kept men in line. (As a last resort, female tears have proven to be effective.) And a devoted husband never has the slightest inclination, ever, to have sex with another woman. That’s because no other woman can compare to you. He married you, didn’t he? He wouldn’t have done that if he were still capable of finding other women desirable. Once he set eyes, and hands, on you, you rendered him incapable of acting upon the same impulse he acted upon when he saw you. Because that’s what love does to a man. On the other hand, there is occasionally the woman who recognizes her husband’s devotion in his truthfulness, his insistence on keeping his word, his exercise of discipline in his actions, his unwillingness to do anything that he knows will cause her harm. I’ve heard that such a woman can actually be quite happy, and could care less if her husband’s eyes linger a little bit over the physique of some other woman. Perhaps she figures that if she has his loyalty, she’s gotten one of the best things he could ever have given her. The body can be devout. But the eyes? Unlikely. And the imagination? Never.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)