How men could make themselves useful to Katarina Kroslakova.

How could you make yourself more useful to Katarina Kroslakova while she is traveling on business? Katarina spells it out: Quit hitting on me and help me out

Has anyone ever helped pop my bag up into the overhead compartment? Nope. Have I seen any other woman helped? Nope.

This week, an engineer in his 50s just stood there in the aisle, his hands clasped, as I played Olympic weight-lifting with my suitcase right in front of him. Just stood there, looking intently at the sticky carpet. Probably afraid to chip a nail or something.

Articles like the above (and this one) are interesting not because the author is so stuck in her own head she can’t see how absurd her childish demands are, but that her editor didn’t see the problem either.  It is also worth noting that Ms. Kroslakova’s problem isn’t that men are afraid of being useful to her, or even that this is a movement designed to teach women a lesson.  Her problem is that this is the entirely foreseeable cultural change feminists like her have been championing.

She may not like the fact that men twenty years her senior don’t feel the need to lift the bag a 30 something businesswoman overpacked, and she may be unhappy after the first year of her marriage, but the feminist genie isn’t going back into the bottle any time soon.  

About these ads
This entry was posted in Chivalry, Feminists, Running with the bulls, Weak men screwing feminism up. Bookmark the permalink.

397 Responses to How men could make themselves useful to Katarina Kroslakova.

  1. sunshinemary says:

    the feminist genie isn’t going back into the bottle any time soon.

    On a related note:

  2. MarcusD says:

    Related:

    ‘Men are failing us,’ says woman planning demonstration
    http://articles.philly.com/2014-02-05/news/47009371_1_three-women-northern-liberties-two-women

    “Where are our men? Why are they not protecting us?” Sanchez continued, her voice full of frustration. “Men are failing us. I feel as though we are not being protected.”

  3. sunshinemary says:

    Katarina Kroslakova says:

    Unless your carry-on luggage contains an esky full of kidneys, I actually don’t think your meeting is more important than mine.

    Katarina Kroslakova is

    the editor of The Australian Financial Review’s Life and Leisure magazine.

    lulz
    Life and Leisure magazine is darned important, you know.

  4. She can thank her feminist older sisters and aunts for making men gun-shy about opening doors for women and other helpful acts.

    My current rule is that I help women who wear dresses or skirts. Not perfect, but a useful shorthand.

    Bonus chuckle: she denigrates the man who didn’t help her by calling him a woman: “chip a nail.”

  5. thenthejudgment says:

    That article on her marriage was tough to get through:

    “Hi. I’m a newlywed who’s fairly disappointed already by married life. Want to hear my advice on how to have a happier marriage?”

  6. By the way, I just plain don’t believe that she’s never been helped with a bag or seen a man help a woman with one. I suspect that’s the usual selective blindness: she’s never been helped by a man she found attractive enough to remember later, and when men do it for other women it’s just part of the background noise. There are still way too many white knights out there for me to believe it never happens.

  7. jf12 says:

    “Be what I want when I want, but go away otherwise.”

  8. HawkandRock says:

    What I learned: Men — not just any men but the creme de la creme of executives and movers and shakers et al. — peacock for her on these flights…. (except for 50 year old effeminate engineers). The subtext: she must be exceedingly desirable.

    The entire piece is a poorly disguised exercise in “look at my status all lesser mortals and despair!”

    Men have mostly learned to tune out and ignore this kind of crap but do women ever get sick of the constant solipsism?

  9. Some impressive humble-bragging there too, about how tiring it is to be hit on by PhDs and high-powered executives every time she gets on a flight. Poor thing.

  10. jf12 says:

    Leaving out the between the lines.
    “He’s guilty of the odd pick-up line, too.
    I promise you, I won’t get angry or defensive or give you attitude, I’ll in fact be super-grateful and flash you an extra-big smile despite the lack of sleep.”

  11. jf12 says:

    @Cail “I’d never thought that working for the The Australian Financial Review would be a turn-on,” “so it must be my awesomeness.”

  12. HawkandRock says:

    The rude engineer is someone who would otherwise be completely invisible to her. A complete non-entity just like the hundreds of other men she literally looks completely through throughout the course of her very important and fabulous day. UNITL he has the temerity to behave in a way that is not optimally suited to benefit her. Then and only then is he noticed and only as an object of derision.

    I’ve never met the woman, of course, but I am almost certain that I would not like her.

  13. HawkandRock, right. The rude engineer became visible because he didn’t treat her like a hot tamale the way she’s accustomed to.

  14. pabarge says:

    I help no women. Ever. Because, check your luggage. Seriously, if you can’t lift it into the overhead, just check it. You know you can’t lift it. And if you’re so frakin’ rude that instead of being a decent, considerate human being and checking your bag, you think I’m going to do your dirty lifting for you, in hopes of gaining some kind of respect thing from you? then you’re loco. And in that case, I refuse to help you.

    Are we learning yet?

  15. pabarge says:

    I’ve said this before: “I’ll lift your bag if you’ll make me a sandwich”. Stops the game, right there.

  16. Question: “Men have mostly learned to tune out and ignore this kind of crap but do women ever get sick of the constant solipsism?”

    Answer: No

  17. crowhill says:

    A long time ago I read “Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Fineman,” in which he relates some of his experiences with women. When a woman would ask him to buy her a drink, he would say, “Why? Are you going to have sex with me?”

  18. One word to sum it all up:

    Spoiled.

    If she’s attractive, she expects men to ignore her beauty, but still be willing to do manual labor to make her life easier.
    She expects her husband to morph to fit what she wants now, even though what he was then seemed to be just fine. Certainly good enough to marry and get all the benefits, but not good enough to change her name.

  19. jf12 says:

    Re: sandwich comment. At least you’ll have no fear that she’ll hit you with the heavy bag.

  20. Norm says:

    When a woman I don’t know asks me to buy her a drink, I say sure, but you have to buy me on to. They don’t know how to respond to that one. Deer in the headlights look. :)

  21. Novaseeker says:

    I discriminate in this area.

    I will help if the woman seems like the kind worth helping — i.e., basically not (1) any woman under 40 (they’re overwhelmingly strongandindependentwomyn so no)or (2) any woman 40+ who is a business traveler (by definition a strongandindependentwomyn). If it’s grandma, I’ll help. If it’s a woman who appears to not fall into those categories, I’ll help. If the woman is in one of those categories, I’ll just look away and not do a damned thing.

    I remember one flight to Europe there were two foul-mouthed business women in thir late 40s early 50s (I had heard them gabbing already in the preflight lounge, and they were getting fairly well oiled on the wine) who happened to end up seated in the row in front of me. Obviously they were struggling with their ridiculously overloaded carry on bags which they refused to check (important people don’t check bags, you know), and I just sat there. One of them was getting very frustrated, looking around. There was another guy waiting to move down the aisle and he didn’t lift a finger either. Eventually a flight attendant came and assisted. Yep, you reap what you sow, honey. Reap what you sow.

  22. Snowy says:

    I work in health care, an area dominated by women. The theatre manager (a woman) recently complained that a supply company rep (a man) had a limp handshake when they met. She said she thought less of the man as a man for having such a limp handshake. She asked me what my handshake was like (I’m a man) since we’d never shaken hands. I’ve never liked men who exchange handshakes with a grip that feels as loose and as slippery as a fish. My immediate inner response is usually one of distrust. As for shaking hands with women, I’ve never really been comfortable with it, and these days my tendency is to opt out of participating in this feminist, PC social convention. Handshaking between men and women has become such an ingrained social construct (par feminist ‘equality’), so PC, that even women who don’t necessarily overtly identify as feminist expect to do it. It’s just something we do in our role-reversed Western societies.
    Being challenged on this issue by my theatre manager took me aback, and I didn’t really know how to handle it. Any suggestions? Of course I told her that my handshake is just fine. I didn’t have the heart to tell her that she shouldn’t be shaking hands with a man in the first place; that I suspected that, like me, the man did not want to shake hands with her in the first place; that she shouldn’t be in a situation of shaking hands with strange men in the first place; that she is a woman, not a man; that she should be taking care of her duties as wife to her husband first and foremost (she’s nearly 60, and has been married to her second husband for 12 years); that she, and her women work colleagues, are taking work from men; that she has the roles reversed; that it is not the company rep’s obligation to shake hands with her in the first place; that her expectation is misplaced.
    Thoughts please.
    Regards from Snowy.

  23. Anonymous Reader says:

    MarcusD there is a key fact in that article from Philly:

    2:35 A.M.

    Everything revolves around that, in my opinion as a former bartender…

  24. Ceer says:

    Respect was withdrawn from men who do things like help women’s luggage into the overhead bin. Any good manager will tell you, you can only motivate people so hard by cracking a whip.

    Chivalry isn’t dead. The concept is alive and well among men when we deal with other men. A systematic lack of respect for men pushed us into denying it to you.

  25. RedDirtGirl says:

    Question: “Men have mostly learned to tune out and ignore this kind of crap but do women ever get sick of the constant solipsism?”

    I am a woman and YES, I am sick of this kind of crap. I like being a woman and I like men to be men. Not the emasculated dream man of the feminist movement.

    Whenever a man doesn’t open a door for me or offer to lift my baggage, etc… I don’t blame him a bit. Maybe I need a pin or something to identify myself as a non-feminist.

    To much of the world, diversity of every kind is touted as religion. Unless you are a white man. Then you are to be vilified.

  26. oblivion says:

    I had a talk with my coworker last night about how the women at work wanted us to do things for them. we both lauphed and said that they were our equals,and they needed to pull their own weight. we both “truly” believe in feminism lol.

  27. MarcusD says:

    Yes, that early in the morning is not likely to find demonstrations of chivalry, and probably not for women who are hanging around bars at that time.

  28. deti says:

    One of the lies women are brought up believing is that men, in general, exist to ease a woman’s life, particularly if she is not attracted to those men. Most women believe themselves entitled to any sort of assistance she wants or needs from any man who happens to be nearby. A man is required to move or lift heavy or out-of-reach objects; provide mechanical or automotive assistance, and otherwise put himself in harm’s way for any woman who requests it, simply by virtue of their respective genders. She is entitled to demand the help; and he is obligated to provide it.

  29. Anonymous Reader says:

    As for li’l Katarina – once again we see female solipsism at work. Everything is all about her, and maybe kinda sorta some other woman once in a while. The world simply must rotate in such a way that Kitty is the axis, and when it appears not to be the case, why, something is wrong,. Naturally, when something is wrong, it is all the fault of men, that is a given. Therefore, some man should do something, and without being asked to. He should, in fact, just get it and know instinctively when stowing her overpacked bag in the overhead would be pleasing to her (and Just Do It), as well as when it would be an oppressive gesture of Teh Patriarchy. And why won’t men Just Get It, and do what she wants, anyway?

    It’s just another manifestation of the Female Imperative.

    ( At least she’s not calling for the offending 50-something engineer to be put to death by “her tribe” for offending her. So she’s got a bit of a sense of proportion going for her… )

  30. crowhill says:

    Maybe Miss Kroslakova could have asked for help.

  31. I wanted to leave a comment on Katarina’s page, but I didn’t see a comments section. It does no good to leave a valued comment here since neither Katarina (nor any of her readers) will ever see it.

  32. This is a twist I hadnt considered… on “The Lift”

  33. Anonymous Reader says:

    MarcusD:
    Yes, that early in the morning is not likely to find demonstrations of chivalry, and probably not for women who are hanging around bars at that time.

    A wise man once told me the following:

    Do Not Associate With Stupid People.
    Do Not Go To Stupid Places.
    Do Not Do Stupid Things.

    The gal pals in Philly appear to have hit a trifecta…

  34. Anonymous Reader says:

    Crowhill
    Maybe Miss Kroslakova could have asked for help.

    Certainly not. That would require attempting to communicate with inferiors. No, no, no, men should Just Get It, and then they should manUP and serve her as she wishes to be served at any given instant, without being told what to do.

    Female Imperative in one of its many forms.

  35. I added a reddit. I sure hope she reads it. Even if she does, I seriously doubt she’ll get it.

  36. we both lauphed

    Demonstrate please

    (sorry, not my think to nit pick)

  37. That is karma…..my mistake as I pick it oblivions mistake. My chances of returning as a hefer sharply declined.

  38. MarcusD says:

    Maybe Miss Kroslakova could have asked for help.

    She likely prefers “Ms.”

  39. jf12 says:

    @deti “One of the lies women are brought up believing is that men, in general, exist to ease a woman’s life, particularly if she is not attracted to those men.” Good observation. Clearly, those unattractive men are blessed by her (attractive, naturally) presence and should therefore show their gratitude for her existence by getting busy easing her way already! Chop chop!

  40. HeligKo says:

    Chivalry existed because of man’s natural advantages in this cruel world. For that matter chivalry came from the knightly military traditions, so not even all men, but the strongest of men lived by chivalrous standards. As the government neuters those advantages, so it neuters chivalry.

  41. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    Excellent Post!

    “”I played Olympic weight-lifting with my suitcase right in front of him. Just stood there, looking intently at the sticky carpet””

    I would have done the same thing.I do nothing for Wimminz. Which includes opening doors,car doors,pulling out chairs etc.(I lied…just for my mother).My attitude F*** Them! They want to compete with men,then treat them as such.A couple of summers ago I was out for a ride on my motorcycle and was taking a break at a Tim Hortons off of the highway,having a Timmies coffee and enjoying a Backwoods Cigar on a beautiful sunny Sunday afternoon.Lo & behold,what pulls up to ruin my day?….a womyn with a flat tire. Eeee gads! She got out of her vehicle.I sized her up.38,nice rack,etc….and sat and watched as she proceeded to look through the trunk for the the spare tire,jack,tire iron etc(of which she has no f*****g clue how to use these tools).I sat there and watched her.She walked over to the picnic table where I was sitting and said..”are you just going to sit there?…or are you going to help me?”….My reply…”I am going to sit here.You don’t need me.I am a man…and modern femi-nazis like you don’t need men…I know I see your ilk everyday at work…now get your head out of stupid ass and change that tire…it isn’t going to change itself”….Her Reply…..”Your an asshole”……Me…”lauuuugggssss…………YOU GO GRRRRLLLLL”……So I proceeded to watch her.What a useless clusterf***.I finished my coffee….put on my helmet….got on my bike…and slowly rode past her shaking my head.Hit the highway and left her behind. F*** Her! Now don’t get me wrong here.I help ALOT of people.But,Wimminz like her EXPECT it.Again…F*** Her! If it was Dalrock or Deti or IBB etc…..I would have walked over to the car….”Hey Pal…looks like you need a hand”…and I would have proceeded to help them out.I would have bought them a coffee….exchanged pleasantries,even used my CAA card if they needed a tow truck….and they would have thanked me,shook hands,exchanged business cards…and said “hey we have to get together for beers sometime”….”You bet”…..The Womyn?…..Would she have done this?….HELL NO!….She would give a “pretend” thank you for your help! and drive off….because she expects men to answer every beck and call…..Once again!….F*** Them!

  42. Maeve says:

    I have not had the same experiences as Miss Katrina Whatshername. The last half dozen or so times I had to travel (every last one of them death-related), any number of gentlemen helped me out (I’m just too nervous to check my laptop). Maybe she gives off an imperious vibe or something.

  43. oblivion says:

    @empath

    we both lauphed because, we both know that feminism is bullshit. Woman just want all the benefits without any responsibility. The girls at work think that because we are men, that we are supposed to do their labor to make them money. The only woman that i would labor for would be the one at home who makes me sandwhiches, and wears dresses or preferable nothing at all to greet me at the door. ( I still havent found that woman, but one can hope lol) The underlining current of the conversation was that him and I both nearly 30 give or take, grew up in the girl power movement and we are just plain SICK AND TIRED OF THE BULLSHIT. Most young men are in fact reaching the tipping point where things will never go back to what we were taught. It is literally every man for himself and who cares about the stupid women, unless they are giving us sex. even if they are, can they really be wife material, and would we actually marry them under the current laws?

  44. When I fly with my wife and family (ands we fly often) because I’m taller and have slightly more upper body strength, I pretty much get everyone’s bags down from the overhead compartments. I point to a bag I’m close to, someone nods behind me, I pull it down. I don’t do this for chivalry. I do this for speed in getting us all off the plane as quickly as possible. I do this regardless of gender or age of the person who possesses the bag. I just do it for everyone because I’m standing there and there are people in the aisle in front of me. So I can’t get off the plane yet. I’m just making myself useful by helping everyone.

  45. deti says:

    Maeve:

    Obviously we weren’t there, so we don’t really know what happened or why no one helped. No photos of the woman.

    But in my experience the reasons most men don’t help women in such predicaments are:

    1. As Nova pointed out, she packed it, it’s her bag, she’s a strongindependentwoman ™, she can handle that bag in whatever way it needs handled.

    2. The men around her don’t want the woman to misconstrue their offers of help as sexual harassment. More particularly, they don’t want to have to fend off accusations that they thought a woman was “less capable” than they, simply because she’s a woman. Men have actually been reported to superiors for harassment for exactly this kind of thing. This kind of offering help to a woman is “sex discrimination” because such help isn’t offered to men.

    3. The men around her don’t want the woman to misconstrue the offer of help as a come-on, or an opportunity to cop a feel. Again – men have been written up for inadvertently touching women who asked for the help, or for making some offhand remark about her appearance or clothing or something else.

    Modern day feminism really has done a number on the way people just interact with each other.

  46. jf12 says:

    Re: “Maybe she gives off an imperious vibe or something.” Yeah, no doubt. And maybe you weren’t so afraid of giving a 50 yr old engineer the Wrong Idea that you managed to make yourself seen and heard needing help, and maybe even smiled.

    I can’t understand why so many of the Ms. Kroslakova type don’t realize they cannot simultaneously wish “Ugh! All these men! I wish they could all realize just how much I detest the thought of them as men thinking of me as a woman. Ugh!” and “Ugh! I wish all these men would Just Man Up!”

  47. Mark says:

    @Deti

    “”One of the lies women are brought up believing is that men, in general, exist to ease a woman’s life, particularly if she is not attracted to those men. Most women believe themselves entitled to any sort of assistance she wants or needs from any man who happens to be nearby. A man is required to move or lift heavy or out-of-reach objects; provide mechanical or automotive assistance, and otherwise put himself in harm’s way for any woman who requests it, simply by virtue of their respective genders. She is entitled to demand the help; and he is obligated to provide it.””

    Thank you!… for this post!

  48. Oh, come now, Anonymous. Do you really need to passive aggressively raise that in every thread? Drop it, already, or do something more than whine constantly.

    I had quite a few women startled when I told them to go ahead after they threatened to hit me. I made it clear that I would not hold back on my beating, and they were shocked that I would hit a girl. They had quite clearly never thought that equality would extend as far as to inconvenience them. Watching the realization come over them that I was serious was amusing. None of them ever followed up on their threats, of course. Whether they knew it or not, they were at least aware that it would go poorly for them. At some level, they knew how it would turn out.

    The Shadowed Knight

  49. Mark says:

    @Oblivion

    “”Most young men are in fact reaching the tipping point where things will never go back to what we were taught. It is literally every man for himself and who cares about the stupid women, unless they are giving us sex. even if they are, can they really be wife material, and would we actually marry them under the current laws?””

    DING…..DING….DING!……We have a WINNER!

  50. Random Angeleno says:

    I’ve put baggage in overhead bins a time or three for a woman I didn’t know. Usually it’s because she’s holding up me and the entire line behind me from completing the boarding and I do it to get rid of the bottleneck. I never do it for any other woman unless she’s old. Then I think about my mother. I always get a courteous thank you from the older ladies.

  51. Cane Caldo says:

    From the article:

    Unless your carry-on luggage contains an esky full of kidneys, I actually don’t think your meeting is more important than mine.

    Not only does she consider herself as the judge of what is important, but she believes that others do too. Their failure isn’t even that they can’t read her mind. She believes everyone is already making that effort; just failing to do so properly.

    @Nova

    I’ve had the, ah, honor to hold flight status for a decade and a half, and that’s my policy, too; with the inclusion of women with small children. I don’t want the bag to distract her from being beat upon by the little terrors.

    @Empath

    That is karma…..my mistake as I pick it oblivions mistake. My chances of returning as a hefer sharply declined.

    Haha! What about a as boll?

  52. RA,

    Usually it’s because she’s holding up me and the entire line behind me from completing the boarding and I do it to get rid of the bottleneck.

    Exactly. Screw chivalry. This is about speed. You are helping yourself and everyone else by helping (whomever.) You benefit.

  53. JDG says:

    I’ve said this before: “I’ll lift your bag if you’ll make me a sandwich”. Stops the game, right there.

    Made me laugh.

    Well said. I may borrow this except it will be SAMMICH!

    So many women want feminist ‘benefits’ with out losing pre-feminist advantages. They want to play ‘man’ while being treated like women, or they want to act like whores and still be treated like ladies. And many men encourage this behavior.

    Many of these women want the same respect that a man gets while using government enforced mandates to take and keep a man’s job without having to perform at the same level as men. My impression is that even the enablers of the above stupidity have trouble respecting them.

  54. guru_4_hire says:

    People who don’t check their luggage are the worst kinds of people. There are few things that more perfectly prove the tragedy of the commons quite like the airline overhead. I travel with a garment bag and some nice clothes that I wear for customers. If you are really a traveler you have enough miles/status to get free hold baggage. Everybody’s flying experience is directly related to how much crap people bring into the cabin. I travel with my briefcase, and I put it in the overhead. I checked baggage, I get to board first, that spot is mine.

    What makes these guys were hitting on her? Were they just talking to her because their business travelers and its a lonely life? I talk to the people who share a row with me all the time, it doesn’t matter if they are male or female.

    I find this woman to be extremely unpleasant.

  55. Joey says:

    A woman needs a man like a fish needs a… bicycle riding guy who hits the gym and keeps in shape so he can lift bags.

    He was just showing his respect for her by demonstrating his belief that she is just as strong and as capable as he is. It would have been a sexist insult to presume she was weaker than he, and needed an assist here.

    Well behaved women never made history… but neither did they hurt their backs lifting carry-on luggage into the overhead compartment.

    This was an example of unalloyed micro-non-aggression.

    In all seriousness, he’s just an engineer or something, and per the social schema of the chattering classes, engineers are basically blue collar and Not One of Us – similar to doctors or really well paid plumbers, just monied rabble. Now a CEO, or journalist or lawyer, that would have been different.

  56. Tam the Bam says:

    Er, how did she know he was an engineer? Unless he had on oily dungas and was toting a pipewrench? Maybe a shirt-pocket protector and an Otis King stuck in it? Most young modern engineers I know look like anarchist rioters, or mob wiseguys in ill-fitting suits.
    I’m putting this one in the Made-Up-Shit hopper.

    nova: ” Yep, you reap what you sow, honey. Reap what you sow.” lol at Lou Reed ref.

  57. Casey says:

    Welcome to Equality, BABY!

    I see this woman author Katarina is among other things:
    * A name-keeper – did not take her husband’s name
    * Adverse to cleaning – a cleaner is the best $ 50/wk she’ll ever spend (of your money)
    * Adverse to picking her husband’s clothes up off of the floor
    * A ‘dining-out’ specialist (i.e. either won’t cook, is a shitty cook, or both).
    * Men are ‘total bastards’ in her book.

    Oh Puhlease……where do I sign up for that deal?

    Is there any wonder whatsoever WHY men do not help business women with their bags?

    If not here is a clue: YOU ARE TOTALLY UNPLEASANT PEOPLE WHO MEN DO NOT WISH TO HELP!

  58. @Maeve
    I suspect that you’d have no problem *asking* in a *polite and humble* manner for help, and inasmuch as you don’t wear an entitlement attitude on your sleeve, I don’t think you’d even have to ask. I am all too familiar with the women described in the OP, and I am extremely selective with respect to who I help or offer to help. With respect to Mrs. Kroslakova I am reminded of some things I’ve read from time to time:

    “You have not for you ask not, and when you ask you ask for wrong motives” and “Humble yourself in the sight of the Lord and He will lift you up in due time.”

  59. Tam the Bam says:

    shad. k. “.. passive aggressively ..”
    Have you been spending too much time with Aquinas Dad? You’ll start bibbling on about having 99 ubermasculine sons and a whip hand over the missus soon, if you don’t stop being so suggestible.

  60. Eidolon says:

    My inclination would be to help, but I don’t follow it anymore. The risk is significant and the possible gain too small. I would feel good about doing something nice for someone, but that’s not worth the possible price of being stuck on an airplane with a nasty woman saying angry things about my presumptuous attempts to help. To the extent that I do anything anymore, such as holding a door, I try to do it with the least expectation of appreciation possible so I can avoid disappointment or annoyance with other people.

    As stated above, it’s not really much to ask that she actually request help in order to get it. That way the man doesn’t have to worry about what crazy crap she might do. And let’s not pretend she wouldn’t write an equally angry piece about a man who attempted to help her when she didn’t think she needed helping. I don’t really understand what it is with women generally and not being willing to ask for a thing they want; wives and girlfriends do this all the time as well for some reason. It’s strange how a woman will get anything within a huge range of things just by asking for it, and yet she still resents having to ask. I never noticed the people on Star Trek complaining because they had to tell the computer what they wanted it to instantly materialize for them.

  61. MarcusD says:

    2. The men around her don’t want the woman to misconstrue their offers of help as sexual harassment. More particularly, they don’t want to have to fend off accusations that they thought a woman was “less capable” than they, simply because she’s a woman. Men have actually been reported to superiors for harassment for exactly this kind of thing. This kind of offering help to a woman is “sex discrimination” because such help isn’t offered to men.

    That’s the situation in a nutshell. There’s little incentive (“you’re less of a monster than I thought”) and substantial disincentive. It reminds me of the “Good Samaritan” laws in parts of NA, basically preventing people from suing those who tried to help them (and potentially botched it up) – might be worth a look for these kinds of situations.

  62. galloper6 says:

    Why does “Katusha” here think she has status outside her office?

  63. Tam, I have neither wife nor children. God has been merciful in that respect. I stand by what I said. Snide remarks on a completely related subject are an irritation and a distraction. No one cares, or something would have been done. He should drop it.

    The Shadowed Knight

  64. g4h,

    People who don’t check their luggage are the worst kinds of people.

    That includes me. I never check a bag. Carry everything (even if we go on a cruise.) Guess I am the worst.

    There are few things that more perfectly prove the tragedy of the commons quite like the airline overhead. I travel with a garment bag and some nice clothes that I wear for customers. If you are really a traveler you have enough miles/status to get free hold baggage. Everybody’s flying experience is directly related to how much crap people bring into the cabin. I travel with my briefcase, and I put it in the overhead. I checked baggage, I get to board first, that spot is mine.

    Two things…

    #1) In the United States, the majority of airline travel (and it is an enormous amount) is leisure travel. Since airline deregulation of 1978 (went President Carter ceased Rent Seeking from airlines) the “commons” could increasingly afford to fly. Those who travel leisurely, don’t typically have enough miles or status for free hold baggage. Why pay for something you get for free?

    #2) In the United States, the “commons” do not trust baggage handlers especially if they are travelling leisurely. They want ALL THEIR THINGS with them inside the passenger cabin on the plane (not just luggage storage underneath) and they feel much more comfortable seeing to it themselves. More-so, this is the case if you have connecting flights.

    Really, your entire b*tch here is that lower class people (who have less financial resources than you) are flying with you, you arrogant f-ck. Too bad. Buy a first class ticket and stop worrying about the “commons.”

  65. Maeve says:

    I can’t blame any man for not wanting to offer assistance. As has been pointed out here, there’s just too much risk attached. And that’s positively shameful indictment of what our society has become.

  66. I can’t understand why so many of the Ms. Kroslakova type don’t realize they cannot simultaneously wish:
    “Ugh! All these men! I wish they could all realize just how much I detest the thought of them as men thinking of me as a woman. Ugh!”
    and
    “Ugh! I wish all these men would Just Man Up!”

    Oh, but women do. That’s the mistake so many of us make as men, not studying the female brain. It is not designed around lines, rules, boundaries and logic, like a man’s is.

    A woman’s brain is an M.C. Escher painting:
    http://www.mcescher.com/Gallery/recogn-bmp/LW399.jpg

    That’s why she doesn’t understand why she can’t have those physically impossible vectors exist out here in the real, three dimensional world. She thinks those physical paradoxes are not paradoxes at all.

  67. guru_4_hire says:

    That is an interesting perspective. The folks in 1st class aren’t any different.

  68. Spike says:

    Not exactly sure what her problem is. She – and an army of feminists who ‘blazed’ the way before her – wanted to be independence. That independence included sexual, employment and physical freedom.Now that independence is granted. She’s not complaining about men not being chivalrous, is she?

  69. Opus says:

    …so I am on the case.

    I just do not know what to make of this one. Most of the women we take to pieces at this blog are nobodies with fanciful ideas about themselves – such as Jennifer Erikson – but that is not the case with Katarina K.

    Although born Czech she has been an Australian since she was four which is about thirty years ago, but I have to confess that she is HOT, a solid 9 as Roissy would say, and so one can imagine that she is indeed being hit on all the time. She is also a pretty fantastic pianist – B.Mus from Sydney University and then studies at the RAM (Royal College of Music London) with Piers Lane. She has been on the television, a comedy show, panel-guest on a quiz show and seems to know all the glitterati and dated Andre Rieu.

    So why (with all that going for her) did she acquire a Masters in Journalism and abandon serious music (if indeed she has) and married a Disc Jockey who looks almost old enough to be her Father?

  70. Anonymous age 71 says:

    Looks old enough to be here father? Cool! Heh, heh.

  71. Mark says:

    @MarcusD

    Just read the article from the link that you posted.

    “”“Where are our men? Why are they not protecting us?” Sanchez continued, her voice full of frustration. “Men are failing us. I feel as though we are not being protected.”””

    Great find!….My attitude on this article?…..”Where are our men? Why are they not protecting us?……..We are at home…..playing video games….and jerking off to good porn…..or renting a good call girl………We have no reason to protect you…..be a fucking MAN for Crissakes!……That is what you wanted!……..What the hell is wrong with you?….you Wimminz wanted to grow balls?…..so use them!…….The more I read articles like this the more contempt I have for women!…..Let the Femi-nazis look after themselves……and these are the wimminz that want to go into combat in the front lines of the USA Military?……… Lmao!…..and they cannot handle a neighborhood scumbag!….Good look!!!!!!!………What a delusional c**t….

  72. A couple a weeks ago I was on a train heading home. It was crowded and people were fighting for their seats. At one station a male worker who had entered the train recently struggled to get a seat while a girl who just got one told him that she had spared the one next to her to another girl (implying their were friends). I had seen the whole scene and she just didn’t want the man to sit there so she pretended to know the other girl.

    10 minutes later at another station a very strange man enters the train and starts talking to himself, whistling, etc but not attacking anyone. First guy finally gets his seat besides the girl and she starts to show that she didn’t like the presence of the strange man whistling. The worker offers to exchange seats with the girl, she refuses, then he starts putting his arms between the girl and the strange man to avoid him doing anything to her (he wasn’t doing anything, and seemed to have no intentions, he was just a weirdo). Finally the worker man as a 200% white knight offers the girl to move to a new row of seats who had been freed recently.

    I was there staring at the whole scene. At how the girl acted in behalf of TEAM WOMEN preventing the guy to sit there to accomodate another woman and how the white knight didn’t have a clue of what happened.

    No need to mention that I was fully disgusted by the whole thing and thought a lot about chivalry dispensed to modern women. Thanks, but NO THANKS!

  73. jf12 says:

    Re: the aging engineer look. Around these parts, we visibly wear (me being the exemplar, like I was of 1950s boy nerds)
    1. Work boots. Mine are obscenely expensive custom mail-ordered (with foot molds) surprisingly light all-composite no-metal oil- and water- and corrosive- and nail- and chainsaw- resistant safety boots. Dull black, of course. Alternatively cowboy boots, brown of course.
    2. Work pants, like Dickies. Khaki is ok, but mine are invariably navy blue, or were at the time of purchase. My new ones have all-plastic fasteners (buttons and zipper) that are also navy blue.
    3. No-nonsense belt. Mine’s precision 1¼” heavy leather reversible (black/brown). I’ve never been able to find a nonmetallic buckle I like, but at least mine’s nonmagnetic (my only conductive clothing item). Holster for electronic device singular. If on plane then other holster for multitool conspicuously absent. (I keep feeling for it.)
    4. Button-down permanent press shirt. Mine is somewhat faded light blue striped shirt today, with a nondressy dark brown and silver tie, random guy choice. Ink pen (why do folks say ink pen? is there another kind?) is in shirt pocket, no protector, where IDs and clearances are normally displayed, and where local contact sticky note and boarding passes and baggage claim are clipped. I hate to carry stuff in my own hands. Especially papers. Anytime papers are in my hand I’m itching to throw them in the trash.
    5. Nondescript sport jacket. Mine has sort of larger checks made up of smaller checks, or maybe it’s just the weave, of black and gray and blue and brown. NO VISIBLE POCKET SQUARE! Handkerchiefs (plural, btw) are a sort of underwear. They are meant to be soiled, not seen.
    6. Wire-frame-look glasses. NOT hipster frames. Mine are larger-area-than-fashionable semi-aviator obscenely expensive all-composite yadda yadda multilayer double-gradient continuous bifocals. My glasses can beat up your glasses. I can and have stepped on them and kicked them across the room accidentally no problem, and I can and have tied the earpieces in a knot not accidentally. Not rated for lasers, not these ones anyway, these are everyday. The little metal screws are a continuing oversight on my part.
    7. No hat. In a plane counts as indoors. Short gray (charitably; actually white) hair.
    8. Nose in book. Science fiction with exploding robots according to the cover.

  74. http://therationalmale.com/2011/10/18/the-honor-system/

    Man Up or Shut Up – The Male Catch 22

    One of the primary way’s Honor is used against men is in the feminized perpetuation of traditionally masculine expectations when it’s convenient, while simultaneously expecting egalitarian gender parity when it’s convenient.

    For the past 60 years feminization has built in the perfect Catch 22 social convention for anything masculine; The expectation to assume the responsibilities of being a man (Man Up) while at the same time denigrating asserting masculinity as a positive (Shut Up). What ever aspect of maleness that serves the feminine purpose is a man’s masculine responsibility, yet any aspect that disagrees with feminine primacy is labeled Patriarchy and Misogyny.

    ‘Chivalry’ when needed, ‘Sexism’ when it’s not.

  75. SlargTarg says:

    Although born Czech she has been an Australian since she was four which is about thirty years ago, but I have to confess that she is HOT, a solid 9 as Roissy would say, and so one can imagine that she is indeed being hit on all the time. She is also a pretty fantastic pianist – B.Mus from Sydney University and then studies at the RAM (Royal College of Music London) with Piers Lane. She has been on the television, a comedy show, panel-guest on a quiz show and seems to know all the glitterati and dated Andre Rieu.

    A solid 9?

    Perhaps 20 years ago.

    This photo clearly shows she is well into middle age.
    Katarina Kroslakova

  76. John says:

    In her article about her first year of unhappy marriage, she talks about how her husband is named Mr. Big in her phonebook. She is a sex and the city inspired woman..

  77. Anonymous Reader says:

    SlargTarg
    This photo clearly shows she is well into middle age.

    Ouch. It’s probably just me, but her little mouth seems poised to drip acid.

  78. Opus says:

    I suggest you all look at her on YouTube to see why I reassert her 9-ness.

    My guess is that she is so used to attention that the lack of it confuses and annoys her – she simultaneously seeks attention and complains of it: her job puts her in the way of better or more famous musicians – love the photo where she makes Katherine Jenkins look dumpy.

  79. jf12 says:

    Her husband looks rather like an engineer in his 50s. Coincidence?

  80. Novaseeker says:

    I don’t really understand what it is with women generally and not being willing to ask for a thing they want

    It’s power. Asking for something admits a need, which can be seen as a weakness. Mizz K doesn’t think of herself as weak, and reflexively has trained herself to avoid saying and doing things that portray herself as weak. So she would never in a trillion years ask for assistance — that would mean she was admitting she was weak and in need.

    It’s all about maintaining frame.

  81. jf12 says:

    I bet she didn’t even consider saying please.
    http://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/please/

  82. minuteman says:

    Snowey – re the handshake issue. The man whose handshake the woman was complaining about was probably being gentle to avoid hurting her. A man of average strength can easily break the hand of an average woman. This is why shaking hands with a woman is not a good idea. If she insists on this ritual, make sure she regrets it.

  83. Anonymous Reader says:

    Rollo’s posting on The Honor System is a classic from a bit more than 2 years back, and it can be summed up as “Men Should Just Get It”. A man’s function in girlworld is to know what a woman wants the instant she wants it (or a moment before, better still) and to read her mind in order to know what she will want next. A combination between magic-lamp genie and Jeeves.

  84. Anonymous Reader says:

    Opus
    I suggest you all look at her on YouTube to see why I reassert her 9-ness.

    Erm, her past 9-ness, perhaps. I believe we can agree she desires fried ice, though.

  85. women really cannot be considered adults.

  86. …women really cannot be considered adults

    I don’t want to have to say it (as I’ve said it a million times and this shit keeps proving it), women are not moral agents. :)

  87. Caspar Reyes says:

    IBB,

    You should google “tragedy of the commons” before knee-jerking. “Commons” does not mean “commoners”, rather “the common” — the property in common. The tragedy is that those who can will use it for their personal advantage.

    Caspar

  88. Bilbao says:

    It’s like “violence against women”. Feminists say that a lot. I mean, in their world, isn’t that just violence? Like pro-gay marriage people say they just want it to be called “marriage”.

    I personally hate violence against women. I think it’s cowardly, low and utterly immoral. But that’s because I think men and women are different, and that men are there to protect women if necessary. The perversion of this into not just lack of protection but harm is doubly wrong. But you cannot believe in absolute gender equality and also say that violence against women is somehow worse…

  89. tz2026 says:

    There is an old book called IIRC “by love refined” by Alice Von Hildebrand.

    Within is a scene recounted where a woman was hopelessly trying to change a flat tire, and it only had a happy ending when she put up a sign saying “I am NOT a feminist”.

    Men are on strike. But women are free to cross to our side of the picket line.

    If she was in a T-shirt that said “I am not a feminist” and wore a modest skirt, I would consider helping lift this wayward daughter’s carry-on. (live grin.) Otherwise I would suggest checking it in the rest of the “baggage”.

  90. Micha Elyi says:

    An auto club membership fee is a way for men to get paid for what they once did for females for free.

    Gentlemen, how many times have you stepped up and offered a battery jump to a female whose car won’t start? How many times has a female likewise offered to help start your car?

  91. greyghost says:

    IBB
    Aw wicked selfishness disguised as helpfulness the essence of capitalism. A sane society women behave like that out of wicked selfishness too http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/how-men-could-make-themselves-useful-to-katarina-kroslakova/#comment-110519

  92. embracing reality says:

    Entitlement monsters like this Kroslakova are created by men, chivalrous fools. As a child she was pampered by adult men all around her and once she reached sexual maturity men everywhere were chivalrous in every way to her. Being attractive only exacerbated the chivalry by men who know full well she wouldn’t spit on the best part of them. Now as her looks are beginning to fade, and also possibly some men are starting to catch on, the mindless generosity toward her is starting to fade. She’s appalled? Who gives a damn?

    Ask yourself these questions.

    Was she born into the world entitled to your generosity simply by virtue’ of being born female?
    Were you born into the world obligated to women simply by burden of being born male?

    The answer is No. Chivalry is a dirty word, so what’s in it for me?

  93. TFH says:

    This is delightful to read, as I have personally decided to not help any woman who I don’t know (and like) in any form of chivalrous generosity. Glad to see that this is becoming common now, as it is a form of the cost of feminism being transferred onto women.

    On a separate note :

    How could you make yourself more useful to Katarina Kroslakova

    I get annoyed by the degree to which androsphere men deify women from Russia/Eastern Europe has somehow being magically free from every malady that Western women face. They may behave better in their own countries due to lack of a feminist-centric government and economy, but there is not some magical, fundamental difference.

  94. TFH says:

    Pabarge,

    I’ll lift your bag if you’ll make me a sandwich.

    Do you really think such a woman has the expertise to make a sandwich you would want to eat? Do you trust her not to poison you?

    This “make me a sandwich” line that the androsphere uses as a retort, is still far too generous in assuming that feminists have sandwich-making skills….

  95. greyghost says:

    I think this is the chick here. http://artsbykatarina.weebly.com/read-stuff.html
    I bet she feels entitled, look at the “I love me some me” awards list. That shit probably radiates out of her 24/7. I guy like myself now would just start laughing instantly at the sight of a woman like that.

  96. Novaseeker says:

    TFH –

    She’s been in Australia as a child. She grew up, therefore, in the Anglosphere, and is pure Anglosphere. I don’t think anyone has suggested that Slavic women living in the Anglosphere, or who are of Slavic descent, are any better than any other women in the Anglosphere. However, if you move to Moscow, things are very different there.

  97. TFH says:

    There were logical reasons that evolution optimized women to be good at just taking/demanding/consuming, with no restraint of any sort..

    The problem is, this is now obsolete, as women no longer perform the primary function for which both men and women have been hardwired to funnel all resources and safety towards women – the production of her maximum capacity of children, and their survival.

    Nowadays, since women produce just 10-20% of their possible number of children, and child mortality due to poverty is hardly a concern in the first-world anymore, funneling resources to women is obsolete. Our entire economy, for mortgaged wooden boxes, to purses, shoes, and jewelry, are all evidence of this obsolete misallocation of resources to women.

    This will correct, and it will be the biggest tear that the fabric of humanity has ever seen…

  98. TFH says:

    Novaseeker,

    I don’t think anyone has suggested that Slavic women living in the Anglosphere, or who are of Slavic descent, are any better than any other women in the Anglosphere.

    A lot of the commenters at Roissy’s, Roosh’s, etc. do in fact claim this. There is almost a deification of these women, even if they have been in the West for a long time. But most of the worshippers have no direct experience, from what I can tell….

    Moscow is better for exactly the reasons you mentioned – they don’t have a feminist industry/government to tip the scales in their favor, so the ‘natural’ balance still exists for the same reason it did in the US pre-1965 or so…

  99. Bones says:

    I will always stop to help a decently dressed older woman with a flat tire or whatever, and I’ve always received thanks and a grateful smile in return. However, as far the the younger ones and career hens are concerned….you go, grrrrrlllll!

  100. TFH says:

    Dalrock said :

    Her problem is that this is the entirely foreseeable cultural change feminists like her have been championing.

    Women don’t understand cause and effect very well.

    jf12 said :

    I can’t understand why so many of the Ms. Kroslakova type don’t realize they cannot simultaneously wish “Ugh! All these men! I wish they could all realize just how much I detest the thought of them as men thinking of me as a woman. Ugh!” and “Ugh! I wish all these men would Just Man Up!”

    What part of the concept of ‘compliance test/beta test/sh*t test’ is unclear?

    Also :

    Women don’t understand cause and effect very well.

  101. Anonymous Reader says:

    tz2026
    There is an old book called IIRC “by love refined” by Alice Von Hildebrand.
    Within is a scene recounted where a woman was hopelessly trying to change a flat tire, and it only had a happy ending when she put up a sign saying “I am NOT a feminist”.

    Over the years I’ve changed more than one tire for a woman by the side of the road. Not one of them was a feminist, or at least they sure weren’t at the time I was enabling them to move on…

  102. What a joke feminism is. Original thought, I know.

  103. Tam the Bam says:

    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/how-men-could-make-themselves-useful-to-katarina-kroslakova/#comment-110556
    Well you just ain’t gonna get on a plane in Yoorp, kitted out like that.
    Our glory is the budget/lo-cost carriers, where even your lunch goes in a metal box somewhat resembling a spittoon, and one is gouged accordingly. No bugger takes hand baggage.
    As for some pop-eyed, chinless, peasant girleen demanding service ..? Not a chance.

    My kid bro lives (as much as he is allowed) in tribal Thailand with his absurdly tribal wife (neck-collars lol!), and I .. am old as dirt, and remember that the Fenians “haven’t gone away, you know”, so we still share the instinctive childhood reflex .. “some other fucker’s luggage? Do Not Fingerprint! Run Like Fuck Away (and dive behind a dumpster)”

  104. Jeremy says:

    I had this exact experience this past week. The flight had too much carry-on-baggage that was checked at the gate such that the ground crew had to come on board and try to jam shit in the overhead bins. The result was some gigantic LV purse-bag monstrosity that was packed until it was nearly rounded being wedged quite nicely into a CRJ 700 overhead bin. There were three women in front of me, all passengers, one of which was trying to pull the bag out. I stood there and watched. The entire deplaning process stopped for these women to try to accomplish this feat.

    I was delighted to be a part of their daily equality pill.

    Mind you, I’m much younger than 50, I look younger than 30, but I am an engineer by profession.

  105. It’s worth noting that this is someone in Australia, which in some ways is even worse as far as feminism than the US.

  106. “Within is a scene recounted where a woman was hopelessly trying to change a flat tire, and it only had a happy ending when she put up a sign saying “I am NOT a feminist”.

    Men are on strike. But women are free to cross to our side of the picket line.”

    LOL there are more and more women crossing over I think.

  107. Robert says:

    Ever since feminists decided they’d rather compete with men rather than complement them, this is what they get. What in the world did they expect.

  108. Dalrock says:

    @Empath

    That is karma…..my mistake as I pick it oblivions mistake. My chances of returning as a hefer sharply declined.

    I lauphed out loud.

  109. tacomaster2 says:

    Several readers pointed out how Katarina acted as if the world revolved around her. I kind of got that feeling as well. Recently I had a similar experience when I flew Southwest. I was one of the last people on the plane and a young lady (pardon me I meant person of female persuasion) was sitting on the aisle seat with the two seats next to her empty. I had no where else to seat and I said “excuse me” so I could get in. She looked up from her phone and gave me this look as if I was ruining her day. She grudgingly ever so slightly moved her knee but not very much–practically made no attempt whatsoever. I pushed through her and sat down. Her whole aura was that of a self-centered, arrogant, entitled person. The flight attendants told her repeatedly to get off her phone so we could take off. Apparently she couldn’t be bothered with the rest of us.

    At the end of the flight she had a hard time with her oversized bag and no one offered to help her get it for her. I think this is where we are as a society. I know I’m not going out of my way to assist women anymore. They wanted to be equal blah blah blah so that’s exactly what I’m doing. There’s only a few women I do anything for.

  110. Pingback: No. I’m Not Your Lackey | hyperboleverbally

  111. Pingback: No. He’s Not Your Lackey | hyperboleverbally

  112. jack says:

    Wow, she’s kind of creepy.

  113. Wild Man says:

    Just the other day one of my co-workers came into the office with maybe 50 different items on her back, in her hands and slung over her arms. I didn’t bother to help; I actually teased her because she’s in the habit of doing it. So then she grumbled to me and the other man in the office: “Thanks, men, for helping me out!” I blew a raspberry at her and said, “I thought this was the age of the independent woman.”

  114. Chris says:

    Folks, put your camera, laptop, medications and earphones in a small bag. Carry that on: mine weighs well under 3 kg. Put your clothes in a big duffel and check it in. Most international airlines limit carry on to one bag and 7 kg, and are now weighing everything.

    If you can’t lift it, don’t take it.

    Interestingly, everyone in the world does this except American Businesswomen, who often drag onto planes bags bigger than the one I have checked in. Help them? Nah.

    Help someone like Maeve? All the time.

  115. Chris says:

    Read the article: you are all missing a few things.

    1. This is Aussie. It’s not the USA. The 6 am flights are full of specailists who are travelling to do clinics in the periperhy, and executves flying everywhere.
    2. Aussies treat women as equals. No, we will not pick up your freaking bags.
    3. And Aussie men will try to chat you up — the place is less PC than the USA.

    It is a different culture, and, quite bluntly, we don’t want the US corporate culture.

  116. Tom Water says:

    I loved this article. Without thinking I might have helped her to be “polite” – hahahahahahaha. No more. I respect her as a kick-ass business shark. Professional courtesy says that I give her nothing – “helping” her is condescending.

  117. Opus says:

    She obviously adores attention and meeting famous people. She is not without talent, but even if I wonder whether she did more than play Pianoforte for her BMus. what I want to know is what a degree – and a Masters at that – in Journalism involves. Obviously she can speak and write the Queen’s English, and can talk about herself all day, (just like Jenny Erikson) but a degree in Journalism seems to me about as useful as say one in Blacksmithery – you either are a Journalist or you are not.

    The other day some woman – I forget which one – revealed she had a Juris Doctorate, yet had never previously read any Law. I am thus reminded of Boswell’s Johnson, who on visiting Germany decided that he ought to award himself the title Baron as he, plain Mr Boswell, was of the same social class as those he met in that country with the title Baron. How does one go straight to a Masters in Journalism merely on the basis that one can play Piano?

    Australia is a musical backwater – all decent Australian Musicians come here (Malcolm Williamson, Don Banks, and more recently Brett Dean). Why then – where the competition must be limited – did she take what must be a Mickey Mouse degree in Journalism some fifteen years ago straight after her BMus. If she is not as hot as I thought (maybe those videos are not so recent) did she after a lengthy ride on the Carousel decide to cash it in with the D.J.? – but frankly I doubt she was a carouseller – more likely a prick-teaser – because she was surely good looking enough to gain all the attention she craved without doing a thing – such as asking for help in placing her handbag on the rack above her head. I suspect that the article is really her despair that she can no longer have a plane load of men fawning over her – and remember she is supposed to be nearly famous. A cry that she is beginning to hit that invisible wall.

  118. tsotha says:

    It is a different culture, and, quite bluntly, we don’t want the US corporate culture.

    Heh heh. We don’t want it either. Sure you won’t trade?

  119. an observer says:

    Australian women are entitlement obsessed.

    “I’ll lift your bag if you’ll make me a sandwich”.

    Good for a laugh if she actually asks for help, which she won’t. She will expect him too just get it.

    The only courtesies worth extending to women are those you would also give to men. I find this helps.

  120. Chris says:

    Opus: Crowded House, Lorder… musical backwater? (Joke: both are New Zealand). If she did a Music degree in performance, she would have had to be at grade eight and probably have her letters and auditioned: she would have been training for the concert stage.

    Not an easy degree (the journalism degree would be a doddle by comparison) but very poorly renumerated at the end. Most music teachers in the school system in the antipodes have a B.Mus — it is a living.

  121. Chris says:

    Aussie women are entitled? As us Kiwis would say — yeah, nah.

  122. Opus says:

    @Chris

    She asserts that she has a Bachelor of Music degree (1st Class Honours) – but I suspect such things are somewhat dummed-down these days. She was obviously above Grade 8 long before she entered University. Her mother was a Piano teacher and I am guessing that that was not a life that she wanted – who can blame her – when (despite her very obvious pianistic abilities) she realised that the decent gigs would be few and far between. Notice how she was fawning over Ashkenazy – I wonder whether she slept with him?

    She was at the RAM but returned to Oz: London is the centre of the musical world (always has been).

  123. Eric says:

    If she just had just asked nicely for help, a man would have helped her out of common courtesy … and so she could sit down sooner so everyone else could go past her to their seats.

  124. Opus says:

    @Chris

    Which reminds me – years ago – I was introduced to a young woman studying for a BMus. – and so I asked her to bring in some of her course work (in composition). The next day she produced what purported to be a piece she had written (in the modern style). I looked at it, and (addressing her) said ‘ that’s not real music at all is it – you just put down a load of notes’. She instantly confessed that that was indeed the case. You see why I think these degrees are dummed-down.

  125. Pingback: How men could make themselves useful to Katarin...

  126. feeriker says:

    She can thank her feminist older sisters and aunts for making men gun-shy about opening doors for women and other helpful acts.

    “Gun-shy?” No. Indifferent? Yup (with a little passive hostility mixed in).

    Why would an EmpoweredWoman need a disposable male

  127. feeriker says:

    “Hi. I’m a newlywed who’s fairly disappointed already by married life.

    Probably not half as disappointed as the blind/deaf/dumb betamangina you hoodwinked into ball-and-chaining.

    Want to hear my advice on how to have a happier marriage?”

    No, but I’ll wager that divorcing you would be a great start for achieving that goal.

  128. feeriker says:

    Inre a woman asking me to buy her a drink: on the few occasions when this has happened, the response is “Bartender! A glass of water for this thirsty lady!”

    Drives them off every time.

  129. jf12 says:

    Re: “How many times has a female likewise offered to help”? Once, last year. I had gotten a flat on my driver’s side rear tire, and I pulled off to change it on the wrong side shoulder of a busy road. I had not yet taken off my coat and tie, as I recall, still wrestling with finding the tire tool and not yet wrestling with the tire itself. A very young mother with a sleeping baby on board stopped and rolled down her window and asked if she could help. About a hundred other people did not stop (not that they had to).

  130. jf12 says:

    Re: Do Not Fingerprint. If you are intent upon the fashion-conscious and evidence-conscious mob wiseguy look, you could do no better to accessorize your dark shirt and dark sunglasses than with these stylish dark gloves.
    http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-25129519/stock-photo-hands-of-the-criminal-person-in-black-leather-gloves.html

  131. jf12 says:

    @TFH “Nowadays, since women produce just 10-20% of their possible number of children, and child mortality due to poverty is hardly a concern in the first-world anymore, funneling resources to women is obsolete. Our entire economy, for mortgaged wooden boxes, to purses, shoes, and jewelry, are all evidence of this obsolete misallocation of resources to women.

    This will correct, and it will be the biggest tear that the fabric of humanity has ever seen…”

    And none of the women wil remember how to sew!

  132. 8to12 says:

    No man VOLUNTEERED to put her suitcase in the overhead bin. She make no mention of asking someone for help. Would it have been so hard for her to turn to a man and say “would you PLEASE put my bag into the overhead bin, because it’s too heavy for me to life”?

    That’s her real problem. That’s she’s no longer on a pedestal; that men don’t drop everything to help her simply because she’s a woman/princess; that she has been reduced to doing things for her self or worse asking for help (gasp! oh the horror).

    As far as the car article, there’s no mention that she took even the basic steps to notify passers by that her car was broken down. Her blinkers were out–OK it happens. Did she open the trunk and hood (the standard signal for a broken down car pre-blinkers and still valid today)? No. Did she put out any kind of cones or folding safety triangles (the triangles are cheap and don’t take up much space in the trunk; like jumper cables they are something everyone should have in the trunk)? No.

    Like the woman on the airplane, she is upset that no man stopped and VOLUNTEERED to fix her car on the spot.

  133. APL says:

    deti: “More particularly, they don’t want to have to fend off accusations that they thought a woman was “less capable” than they, ”

    She can’t lift the darn thing, demonstrable proof she is less capable.

    There is another way, you could just lift the bag onto the rack, she complains ‘I’m an independent woman, I don’t need your help’, just get up and lift the fricking thing right back down.

  134. Boxer says:

    Today, young men are taught, as part of their “gender and diversity” requirements on college campuses, that holding doors and offering assistance to women is equivalent to rape. This is not a one time message, but is repeated over the course of various classes. It probably sounds shocking to many of you, and it did me too, at first. After a while, you just accept such insanity as part of the status quo.

    Who wants to be a benevolent sexist, the equivalent of a violent rapist? Better to mind one’s own business, and let these women find their empowerment with their sisters.

    Of course, if it’s an elderly man, I’m always glad to give up my seat, hold the door, or help with bags. That’s just common courtesy.

  135. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Inre a woman asking me to buy her a drink:

    I just act like I misunderstood and say, “Sure, I’ll have a Shiner Bock.”

  136. KB says:

    I saw this commercial last night and immediately thought of the commentary here.

  137. Opus,

    Australia is a musical backwater – all decent Australian Musicians come here

    All?

    I didn’t know that Olivia Newton John, the Little River Band, Sheena Easton, Men at Work, and AC/DC weren’t decent…. did the Bee Gees move toe Canada or England to do all their sh-t?

  138. Anonymous Reader says:

    Chris (in NZ)

    Read the article: you are all missing a few things.
    1. This is Aussie. It’s not the USA. The 6 am flights are full of specailists who are travelling to do clinics in the periperhy, and executves flying everywhere.

    Kroslakova has lived in Oz long enough to know this.

    2. Aussies treat women as equals. No, we will not pick up your freaking bags.

    Kroslakova has lived in Oz long enough to know this, too.

    3. And Aussie men will try to chat you up — the place is less PC than the USA.

    Kroslakova appears to be just humblebragging, but again, she’s lived in Oz…

    It is a different culture, and, quite bluntly, we don’t want the US corporate culture.

    Eh? An Ozzie journo whinges in an Ozzie paper about Oz men, you start going on about USAn corp-culture, erm…whot? Seems to me you should take it up with her, except The Aging doesn’t apparently have comments on their whinge-articles, and so she really isn’t interested in a convo, more of a “shut up you men and listen to me” chinwag.

    Thanks for the antipodal opinion, though, between you and Tam we’re getting a broader perspective…

  139. Ras Al Ghul says:

    As for the broken down car, in this day and age with women the way they are, the first thing that comes to my mind is “honey trap.”

    Occassionally some white knight goes to help a woman by the road side and ends up getting mugged or worse.

    You should never help someone you don’t know. For most of human history women were always escorted by a man for basic safety. But women wanted to be strong and independant with more security with more police. they don’t need a man, they can suck it up. Call it in if you care.

    Nothing more.

    Never risk your life for a woman, never go to rescue them. Choices have consequences.

  140. Fred Flange, Der Kommissar says:

    The Bee Gees were teen stars in Oz but their commercial recording career began and took off in London. The Easybeats did “Friday On My Mind” then begat AC/DC. Midnight Oil were the most overtly Oz band – their lead singer, Peter Garrett, was or is a senator there now, yes? And Gotye is from NZ along with Lorde.

  141. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    Awesome! I’ve been doing this on a really small scale, such as not holding the door open if there’s a chick behind me. The population of spoiled bitches in this part of the country is higher than normal, I suspect.

    I might, however, make an exception in cases such as this, if only to shame the Orcs who were undoubtedly on that train:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2561592/Pregnant-commuter-forced-sit-carriage-floor-no-one-seat-train-firm-refused-grant-special-pass.html

    I would do the same for an elderly gent.

  142. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    Katarina has a reason to complain.

    In my experience, there’s always some white knight beta-boy who’s willing to lend a hand.

    Perhaps she’s not attractive enough…?

  143. PJ says:

    TFH says:
    February 20, 2014 at 7:29 pm

    “Moscow is better for exactly the reasons you mentioned – they don’t have a feminist industry/government to tip the scales in their favor, so the ‘natural’ balance still exists for the same reason it did in the US pre-1965 or so…”

    There was no need for feminism in the Eastern Bloc, as communism effectively introduced equality of the sexes, with many social provisions that American feminists still fight for.

    In spite or because of it, or in no relation whatsoever, Eastern European women, though not necessarily Russian, are more feminine and attractive, and more focused on the family, than their Western counterparts, in my biased opinion. I’m married to one.

  144. Opus says:

    @IBB

    I was of course referring to serious music (as it is called) rather than the more popular variety. Williamson, whom I mentioned, became Master of the Queen’s Music – Australia is part of the Empire you may recall, however, your examples are ill chosen: Olivia Neutron-Bomb did indeed come to London and (before being more famous for Grease), in 1974 represented the U.K. in the Eurovision Song Contest coming 4th (and talking of 1974 Eurovision, Abba would never have happened had they not sung in English at Brighton that year and won; Newton John came 4th – Mamma Mia is of course an English musical: The Bee Gees also came to England and had considerable pre-disco success in England in the 1960s; who can forget their 1968 number one hit Massachusetts – I might have thought that you of all people would have known that song! As for the others you mentioned, I have never heard of them, which gives some idea of their likely success – predictable really. Come to London – outside the main railway stations are more than one free magazine aimed specifically at Australians largely advertising rentals apartments in Earl’s Court; that seems to be the preferred Oz ghetto.

    Percy Granger, of course, became an American citizen – as I said, cultural waste-land.

  145. Bucho says:

    Navigating the airport is pretty much a free for all. The guy probably could care less who was getting their baggage in the bins. He probably was ready to sit down and decompress from the charade at the ticket counter and getting worked over by the TSA. causing him to nearly miss his flight.

  146. Larry J says:

    Common courtesy freely given and gratefully received is a good thing. When I’m entering or leaving a building, I commonly will pause to hold the door for someone also coming through regardless of whether the person is a man or woman. They invariably smile and say thanks. Likewise, it’s routine for others to hold the door for me. I smile and say thanks. Perhaps most people I encounter here in Alabama aren’t assholes. Your mileage may vary.

    Like others have commented, helping someone get their bag into or out of the overhead bins in airliners helps speed the process. I’d rather do that than have to wait for several minutes while someone fumbles with their bag. I offer to help because it makes things better for me.

    Katarina has a very ugly attitude, one that may outshine whatever outer beauty she might have. She’s too proud to ask for help but expects it to be given just because she’s a woman, and yet she’s constantly talking smack about the men around her. Beauty may be skin deep but ugly goes down to the bone.

  147. jf12 says:

    Re: Ardinger. She doesn’t say how many of the (daytime?) motorists blowing their horns and giving her dirty fingers (whatev) were women.

  148. jf12 says:

    Re: “I played Olympic weight-lifting with my suitcase” What does this mean, precisely? Was she really doing either the snatch or the clean-and-jerk?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_weightlifting
    Either requires her to start by squatting, and it’s difficult to get a good wide stance in an airplane aisle. And if she HAD squatted and begun doing kiai noises, then men may have looked up from their newpapers to she what she had going on there.

  149. Bucho says:

    Of course, I’m left to struggle with my own bag. It’s not that I expect help, it’s just the harshness of it all I find a bit surprising.

    Welcome to the cut-throat corporate world. Not everyone has a job that can traipse around the countryside to find themselves while talking to interesting people.

    I actually don’t think your meeting is more important than mine.

    I doubt anyone said it was. Nobody wants to linger on a parked plane longer than they have to.

  150. jf12 says:

    Tatiana Kashirina with yet another world record snatch at age 20.

    Cute girl. A little on the broad-shouldered side for my tastes, though.

  151. jf12 says:

    BTW note that the audience is 90% men. Evidently men like to see women exerting themselves (not counting figure skating etc).

  152. 8to12 says:

    Larry J says: “Common courtesy freely given and gratefully received is a good thing.”

    Common courtesy includes words like “please” and “thank you,” none of which seem to be in the airplane woman’s vocabulary.

    She’s upset that she might have to show some common courtesy; that she might actually have to turn to a man and say “please help me.” So upset that she prefers stew in her private rage rather than lower herself to the level of others and politely request their assistance.

    She showed zero common courtesy in the situation.

  153. Opus,

    The Bee Gees also came to England and had considerable pre-disco success in England in the 1960s; who can forget their 1968 number one hit Massachusetts – I might have thought that you of all people would have known that song!

    They had a lot more than that pre-disco. How can you mend a Broken Heart went to number 1 on the single’s chart here in the United States in 1971. I have their greatest hits (pre-disco) on CD. (Of course for the young’uns here, saying something is on CD now is like saying you had something on reel-2-reel back in the 1990s, heh.)

  154. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    Tatiana Kashirina with yet another world record snatch at age 20.

    And by the looks of her, it’s bound to remain untouched.

  155. ana Kashirina with yet another world record snatch at age 20.

    And by the looks of her, it’s bound to remain untouched.

    Perhaps. But just imagine the physical power of her keggle.

  156. 8to12 says:

    innocentbystanderboston says: “I wanted to leave a comment on Katarina’s page, but I didn’t see a comments section.”

    I’ve noticed more mainstream media outlets doing this. They probably got tired of the comments section making their writers look foolish (as the comments on this article certainly would have).

    What they are missing is that there is a set of readers that will only come for the comments. Without the comments, they have no reason to revisit the page. They are losing readers by eliminating the comments section.

  157. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    Perhaps. But just imagine the physical power of her keggle.

    If it’s like her box squat, no thanks.

  158. To hell with all these spoiled entitlement-minded bitches. There is nothing written or otherwise that states they are supposed to get special treatment. You want me to help you with your luggage, get on ya fucking knees and ask me for help BITCH!!!!!!

  159. HadEnough says:

    InnocentBystanderinBoston : Not terribly well-read, are you?

    Before cranking up the self-righteous (or, perhaps in your case “self-lefteous”) rhetoric, you should learn what the “tragedy of the commons” actually refers to.

  160. I’ve noticed more mainstream media outlets doing this. They probably got tired of the comments section making their writers look foolish (as the comments on this article certainly would have).

    It really stings when your PRIDE is hurt. And nothing hurts your PRIDE more than when someone comes into your house and embarasses you in front of others. So, people who want to protect their PRIDE will do whatever they must to prevent it from being hurt in the future.

    This is one way.

  161. I don’t know… I think sometimes the attitude that this is what women get goes too far. My husband & I got married young & I was in college in my senior year when I got pregnant with my son and I had to ride the shuttle buses to class since parking was so far away. When my husband could, he of course, would drop me off. But I took to just walking the long distance (which got so much harder the further along I got in the pregnancy), because it was actually dangerous to ride the shuttles unless I was guaranteed a seat – even being pregnant, I’d have to stand. No one, women or men my age ever gave up their seats, and I was not about to risk falling and harming my unborn baby due to standing in a moving vehicle.

  162. HadEnough,

    Before cranking up the self-righteous (or, perhaps in your case “self-lefteous”) rhetoric, you should learn what the “tragedy of the commons” actually refers to.

    Fine.

    Tell me how people (trying to avoid paying extra for checking luggage) taking carry ons into the passenger cabin of the plane depletes a “common resource”? The only “resource” that it would deplete is the actual space of the overhead compartment. And that “resourc”e can be depleted entirely and completely (every single flight) and it is entirely renewed at the end of the flight. And any amount of that “common resource” that is not used during the flight is always wasted. (You can’t save empty space in an overhead compartment for later consumption. You must use it, or lose it.)

    Moreover, if there are too many people trying to use that “common resource” and it is used up completely, those who are boarding the plane last get to check their carry on bags for free. They leave it at the end of the ramp and pick it up in baggage claim at their destination. The only one who loses in this scenario is the airline as they can’t charge to check that bag. Are you that concerned the airline is making less money?

    I know what the term means. The term was inappropriately used. And I was right to correct the person who used it. And I am as far from the left politically as anyone at Dalrock’s blog.

  163. Larry J says:

    @8to12

    “Common courtesy includes words like “please” and “thank you,” none of which seem to be in the airplane woman’s vocabulary.”

    It does appear that way. That’s why I said that she appears to be quite ugly inside. I don’t care what someone looks like on the outside, if they show their inner ugliness, they’re toxic to be around and highly undesireable.

  164. Marissa says:

    I don’t know… I think sometimes the attitude that this is what women get goes too far.

    Of course you do, because it affected you personally.

  165. Snowy says:

    @minuteman (would that be the missile?)
    Thanks for the advice, mate. That’s excellent. Simple yet effective. Make sure the woman regrets insisting upon shaking hands. And…good point that the fellow was reticent to do just that…crush her hand…which still aligns with my thought that he didn’t want to shake her hand in the first place. Thanks again for this excellent piece of advice. Cheers from Snowy!

    @patriarchallandmine
    ‘women really cannot be considered adults.’
    If anyone ever asks me what it’s like working among so many women, that is my answer…it’s like working with children.

    @TheRealPeterman
    ‘It’s worth noting that this is someone in Australia, which in some ways is even worse as far as feminism than the US.’
    I’m an Aussie, mate. I’ve not yet been to the US, but I suspect you are well right. I’m in the thick of feminism here mate. Come join the fight Down Under mate! You’d be most welcome.

    @LarryJ
    ‘Katarina has a very ugly attitude’…and an ugly face too.

    From the photos I’ve looked at of this Katarina woman linked here, she looks to me like a very odd, caricature-like creature, and not at all attractive, in her younger days, or otherwise.

  166. As far as Katarina goes, I’m not sure if her opinion on this matter (just help me by doing things for me, but don’t ever make me feel uncomfortable by actally talking to me) is the most common one. Sure, there are far too many women who pretty much agree with the way Katarina thinks, but NAWALT.

    Another poster said it earlier, if they ask and ask nicely and politely, no problem. Would you please help me with my bag in the overhead? No problem. Thank you. Unfortunately, I don’t get the impression that Katarina has ever asked anything of a man she didn’t know.

  167. jf12 says:

    “How could you make yourself more useful to Katarina Kroslakova?” I could gaze intently up and down at her as she tries to lift, and provide real time critiques and suggestions to improve her form.

  168. Anonymous says:

    Thank Feminism, Katie. And, if a man just did decide to help you unasked, you’d have called him a “creep” and complained about him to the stewardess. Man aren’t scared, they’re just tired of getting sh*t for their trouble– why bother when they can hit on babes attracted by peacocking?

  169. Snowy says:

    Women crave the attention of men, regardless how they get it. Katarina has our full attention now, evidenced by the 160+ comments. I’m sure she wouldn’t give a second thought as to how she has brought that attention upon herself. Just the fact she has our attention is enough for her (for now).

    Also, while there is certainly something in women’s assertion that men should ‘Just get it’, that is: how to play their game (which Red Pill men know only too well), there is not one iota of reciprocation for men’s ideals of how they would prefer the game to go down. If men are not playing their game, they’re out; pooey to the non-Alphas; they’re out.

    Since taking my first dose of the Red Pill, I am constantly seeing how feminism has trapped women in their own game. The Catch-22 spoken of by Rollo has proved to be a Catch-22 for women themselves. Katarina’s is a perfect example of this. In their heart of hearts the attention women crave of men is to submit and be put in their proper place by men. Notwithstanding the White Knights and other totally Betaized effeminate men, women are not getting the attention from men that their heart of hearts truly desires; to submit and be put in their fucking place. They are caught between a rock and a hard place. The attention they get from the White Knights and effeminate men is not the attention they really want, which is to be put in their fucking place. And the Red Pill men who understand the game, but choose to go their own way, are also not giving them the attention they really want, which is to he put in their fucking place. When confronted with a Red Pill man who is playing the game, they are caught up in confusion in choosing between their hardwired programming (fuck up and do as you’re told), and their feminist programming; and I am finding that they are all too often choosing to go the way of their feminist programming. I read Katarina’s story as an inner cry to be put in her fucking place; an inner cry for the attention she really craves; the attention that is not satisfied by the supplications of feminized men, nor even given her in the first place by Red Pill men who choose to ignore her. The likes of Katarina are so far gone that no real man can even be bothered going to the trouble to put her in her place. It’s good for us Red Pill men to be Red Pill men, but for anything substantial to really change, women themselves are going to have to change.

    Do we really have to do everything for them? Do we have to give them their required attitude adjustment too? Maybe so.

    Perhaps the answer to the question, ‘How could you make yourself more useful to Katarina Kroslakova’ is to give her the attitude adjustment she so desperately craves, if we could be bothered.

  170. PJ says:

    “thepatriotblogspot says:
    February 21, 2014 at 12:16 pm
    “You want me to help you with your luggage, get on ya fucking knees and ask me for help BITCH!!!!!!”

    This kind of commentary does not fit with the supposedly Christian nature of your blog, Dalrock. Unless your “Christianity” is a cover for violent misogyny. Your blog, your prerogative.

  171. PJ says:

    “Perhaps the answer to the question, ‘How could you make yourself more useful to Katarina Kroslakova’ is to give her the attitude adjustment she so desperately craves, if we could be bothered.”

    What exactly do you propose?

  172. Thinkn'Man says:

    Watch this and tell me you aren’t hoping that case of books will fall on these hags and put them out of their self-imposed misery:

  173. Snowy says:

    “Laguna Beach Fogey on February 21, 2014 at 11:48 am
    Tatiana Kashirina with yet another world record snatch at age 20.

    And by the looks of her, it’s bound to remain untouched.”

    LBF: you’re a cunny funt! I wouldn’t touch that snatch with a twenty foot barge pole either! If I remember correctly, Tatiana is an Aussie too; such irony.

  174. greyghost says:

    PJ
    This is something you churchians need to understand. We are human men of this world. Christianity is faith not deeds and acts deemed righteous by some man. We are of this world an you have the privilege of playing Christian because you do have to get your soul dirty. Let the nonbelievers and men of faith that you find unpleasing do the heavy lifting for you churchian man

  175. MarcusD says:

    “[...] hockey is directly linked psychologically to the virility of the white cis hetero Canadian male [...]“

    A feminist on why Canadians shouldn’t care so much about hockey.

  176. Carlos says:

    Jenny Erikson:
    http://thestir.cafemom.com/love_sex/168626/confessions_of_an_online_dating (virgin)
    Just…can’t…look…away.

    Clueless.

    You can always tell a frivorcée…but you can’t tell her much.

  177. Anonymous age 71 says:

    Larry Ji; i will say in our travels around the eastern half of the USA over the last 15 years since we retired, Gadsden is probably the second town we have visited.

    we came in off the Interstate looking for a motel, and ended up way at the south end. We went into a hamburger place, may have been Wendies or Burger King. The multi-ethnic staff treated us as if we were old friends they had not seen in a long time. Unbelievable!

    Another time we pulled off at the north end, and talking to the clerk in the motel I mentioned my opinion. She said that is exactly why she chose to live there.

    The other friendly place we found was Sweetwater, Texas, west of Abilene. We like to walk after a day in the car, and asked at Motel-6 if it was safe. They assured us it was, and as we walked around town all the ethnic groups gave us the same friendly smile. (To clarify, my marriage is multi-ethnic, my wife is Mexican, so racial peace means a lot to us.)

  178. Anonymous age 71 says:

    I left out a word. I meant to say Gadsden is the second friendliest town we have visited.

  179. tacomaster2 says:

    Off topic but had to share with the group something that just happened here at work. A youngish, about to hit the wall, nurse coworker of mine frivorced her husband and it just was finalized two weeks ago. I overheard her talking that he is now dating a 19 year old (also said he’s 33) and that’s “practically statutory rape!”. I tried to hold in my laughter but was unsuccessful.

  180. ericcartman says:

    i love this, its great. women you are equals now. i never hold the door for women, when it comes to competing at work you will experience a full on competitive assault just like my make peers face. expect no quarter no mercy.

  181. Mark says:

    @MarcusD

    Here is a link for you:
    http://rentagent.me/

    And here is a good article on Canoe about the site.
    http://lifewise.canoe.ca/SexRomance/2014/02/20/21484121.html

    “”you have a large “supply” of successful and sexually empowered women with very few options for long-term partners””………………….Really?

    Note:If you or I were going to open a business like this….”Rent A Clam”…..we’d being going to jail! No double standard here?…..What a joke!

  182. PJ says:

    @greyghost

    Sorry, buddy, psychopathic threats and pompous pseudo-philosophizing do not a man make.

  183. MarcusD says:

    @Mark

    Undoubtedly there’d be screeching skjaldmaer coming out of the woodwork and hacking men down for even thinking about doing that kind of thing.

    And I’m sure there will be gynocentric feminists (a tautology?) supporting it regardless.

    I’d love a gorgeous guy to help me put together my Malm bookcase, but I’m smart enough to know that using my power to purchase men as men have purchased women in the past, doesn’t necessarily lead to equality or progress. As Dr. Wendy Walsh pointed out in her talk, if men and women are going to get along, we need to stop trying to level the playing field and instead, meet in the middle.

    This comes across as a token “but we believe in equality” protest before returning to the enjoyment of it.

    I’d also like to know what she means by “men have purchased women in the past.” If she’s talking about slavery, that definitely went both ways (more men were slaves, anyhow). If she’s talking about prostitution, that’s supported by feminism. There are a few other examples (with parallels/counter-examples), but I’d still like to know. I have a slight suspicion that her comment is an appeal to feminist doctrine.

  184. Snowy says:

    Thanks for chiming in, greyghost, re PJ. I’ll have my say now in response to her question ‘What exactly do you propose?’, a question that could only originate from the rarely-used brain of a woman intent on perpetuating and escalating the game; exactly the sort of question my mother would ask, in order to continue pushing a man’s buttons.

    When I was 14 years old my mother stood mere centimeters in front of me, her face shoved in my face, screaming and yelling, pleading with me, “Hit me! Hit me! Go ahead, hit me! Just hit me!” Needless to say, my feminazi mother frivorced my Dad when I was 6 years old, choosing to raise me and my older and younger brothers as a ‘single mum’. Again, probably needless to say, mum turned out to be quite the whore, having a revolving door of men coming into our house to keep her serviced. Although I can’t say for sure that actual cash was exchanged, I did see those men pay for it in one way or another. Although I had plenty of contact with my dad on school holidays, without a permanent father figure on the scene, and a feminazi mum, I was raised somewhat of a Beta chump, although I don’t believe mum beat my manhood out of me completely. And since taking Red Pills, I know dad was a Beta chump; and he still is, even at the age of 82. By the way; mum remarried in later life, and again divorced; she remains a bitter spinster, though likely still a whore (if any foolish man will still give it to her) to this day.

    So, knowing I was a Beta chump at the time, did I hit my mum? Also, knowing that mum had been pushing my buttons for all those years leading up to this particular event, including the particular circumstances surrounding this event? Yes; but just like the man shaking the woman’s hand with a fish-like grip so as not to hurt her, I restrained myself from the full blow. Knowing what I know now, I should have broken her jaw. I should have given her the attitude adjustment she so desperately craved. Like the man shaking the woman’s hand like he means it, to show her that he is a man and she is a woman (the weaker vessel), I should have broken my mum’s jaw to give her cause to regret her challenge.

    Women know how to press men’s buttons. They’re experts at finding men’s weaknesses and pushing the envelope. They’re experts at challenging men to be men. Even the most manly of Alpha men can have his buttons pressed by women; don’t be fooled; no man has ever had impenetrable frame, except the man Jesus.
    In overcoming my Betaness and, in more recent times my Churchian-ness, I now see that physical discipline of the out-of-line wymens is perhaps the only attitude adjustment the wymens understand, although I’ve never employed it myself. It’s taken a lot of self ego-denial for me to come to this understanding. I never would have thought I would come to such an understanding as this, because it is a shock to an ego influenced so heavily by feminism. But does anything else really work? Supplication certainly doesn’t. Talking logic certainly doesn’t. Does any other form of attitude adjustment work on the totally rebellious woman of today? Anything?

    So, we men are taken to the cleaners on a daily basis because the full weight of the law is behind the wymens in everything. Men have no real recourse to the wymens challenging our masculinity. Unless you’re prepared for loss of work, criminal record, fines, jail, ostacization, etc.

    The man-ing up that women really want from us in their heart of hearts for the most part simply cannot be enacted by us men without us breaking the law. And I’m not just talking about breaking jaws to instill an attitude adjustment. A man can’t even come on to a woman in the supermarket without fear that she’ll call the cops.

    I’ve heard it said in the manosphere that women have no fear of men, and it’s true. That’s the problem. Just as the fear of God is a healthy and desirable fear, so too is a healthy, respectful, honouring fear of men by women desirable. Women are a law unto themselves, and though their heart of hearts desires that we put them into line, under the laws of the land, we really have no recourse. Surely a woman should never push a man’s buttons to the point where physical discipline is the only option? Unless…physical attitude adjustment is what she truly desires. And now that she has the weight of the law of the land behind her (in everything) she can push and push and push, with impunity. Our hands are tied. They’ve got our balls in a sling. What a miserable world we live in.

  185. Solomon says:

    If women were equals, they wouldn’t have to fight for equality. It would naturally happen.
    Feminism is proof unto itself that it is wrong.

  186. Matamoros says:

    I’ve enjoyed the anecdotes, so I’ll share one also.
    I took my son to the shoe store, found a pair of shoes and went over to the chairs so he could try them on. He remembered he needed a sock, or whatever they are called, as he didn’t have socks on, and went to get one. He sat the shoe box on the chair and ran to get one while I stood beside it to show it was claimed.
    A woman with a maybe 8 year old daughter came up, picked up the shoe box and threw it on the floor. She didn’t drop it, she threw it down directly in front of me. I looked at her and asked, “What are you doing?” She looked at me and said she was going to use the chair. I said, “No you aren’t, it is claimed.” She made some remark about needing it for her daughter.
    I said again that it was claimed, but if she could do it quickly I wouldn’t mind. She huffed up and said, “I don’t have to do it quickly, I can take as much time as I want.” I said, “Fine”, and sat down in the chair.
    She looked at me and said, “You’re really going to do that. I can’t believe you are doing that.” Then she snarls at me, “You’re a dick!” My initial emotion was to say something back, but then I realized that, yes, by God I am a man and dick. So I looked at her, smiled, and said, “Yes, I am. Thank you!”
    She was a bit taken aback, and then out comes, “What ever happened to women and children first?”
    I just looked at her and said, “You feminists killed it.”
    She stomped off, my son came back, and the shoes fit.” I saw the woman trying to tell off one of the store employees, and just laughed as I went by.

  187. Anonymous age 71 says:

    MarcusD, yes interesting, but somewhat irrelevant.

    I know a brilliant Catholic intellectual who has studied the history of the church. Yes, they had women leaders and they had women priests. They stopped it, because they learned women would not obey, and were not capable of being disciplined.

    I remembered this a few months ago, while watching a video of the woman nun who was “ordained” by a slimy break-away bishop. In the interview, she said in plain English she didn’t care what a bunch of old men said. Thus proving what the ancient church knew. Women refuse to obey their leaders. So, no organization can rely on dearies, period. Church or military or social organization or company.

  188. Opus says:

    It is a curious thing, which obviously drives Female Supremacists and their Mangina-supporters mad and to which they have and can have no explanation, that if women are indeed the equal of men, then – notwithstanding that such would be highly unlikely given natures different functions for the two sexes manifested particularly by our different body shapes and size – how is it that through all human history and pre-history, that until recent decades, men have been able to subdue women, and without at least one Spartacus-like insurrection?

  189. Casey says:

    @ Everyone re: MarcusD’s link at the beginning of the article:

    “Women across the city are having similar conversations with themselves lately, as Philadelphia reels from yet another senseless purse snatching/homicide. The latest happened early Sunday as two women left the Tropical Heat nightclub at 53rd and Market streets following a night of karaoke. Two men in hooded sweatshirts confronted the women about 2:35 a.m., took their handbags, then opened fire, killing Melissa Thomas, 29, and injuring her friend.”

    Putting yourself in harms way leaving a nightclub in the middle of the night in what I presume is a seedy area of Philadelphia is foolhardy.

    “All because of a damn handbag.”

    Yes……stop being so chronically stupid by carrying around an item that attracts thugs.

    “She gave it up and she still was killed,” said Sanchez, 40, an administrative assistant. “It’s 2:40 in the morning. She’s just coming out of the bar. At 2-something in the morning, they probably didn’t have that much cash on them.”

    Again, don’t carry a fucking handbag in seedy areas of Philadelphia.

    “Where are our men? Why are they not protecting us?” Sanchez continued, her voice full of frustration. “Men are failing us. I feel as though we are not being protected.”

    Correct, you are not being protected……you are a strong, independent woman capable of getting herself out of the situation she’s blindly wandered into.

    “Like a lot of us, she’s hot as hell about what’s been happening. Sanchez, though, is turning her outrage into action by reaching out to other local women, urging them to gather with her at 9 a.m. Saturday at the site where Thomas was killed, to call on city officials and also on their communities to protect them. The demonstration is being billed as “Handbags 4 Peace.”

    I as a woman, shall scream LOUD & LONG until I get what I want……..I may even hold my breath and stomp my feet. But in no way whatsoever shall I stop carrying a handbag, or cease to patron seedy parts of Philadelphia.

    “This should be about women saying enough is enough,” said Mannwell Glenn, a political consultant advising Sanchez on Saturday’s event. “When women get pissed, they get things done.”

    No, when women get pissed……..they complain until white knights like you get things done.

    “He pointed out that the old code of the streets, that thieves don’t hurt women and children, is no longer honored. “This new generation, they don’t have a clue,” Glenn said disgustedly.

    Actually, this new generation is treating women as equals. It could not be a better microcosm of what feminism has wrought.

    While these women’s deaths are tragic, and unwarranted……..they themselves played a significant role in creating the opportunity that saw them killed. Asking men to come save you after you have stubbornly insisted on walking into a minefield is both wrong-headed & childish.

  190. greyghost says:

    Casey
    I don’t go milling around partying in area like that myself. Even in my younger days when I went to clubs I didn’t. Those women will go because those are their kind of guys ( gina tingle) The rest of us just have to make sure they are safe from harm. All of the laws of misandry and the culture of the expendable man are nothing more than the quest for toasted ice ( the bad boy that tingles her gina and doesn’t hurt her) The toasting of the ice is that as soon as she feels safe the tingle goes away. It has to be a war on women and new laws of more effective misandry must be written and enforced.

  191. jf12 says:

    “How could you make yourself more useful to Katarina Kroslakova?” I could easily build man-shaped asexual robots designed to cater to her every whim. However, autnomously anticipating her every whim will be more challenging.

  192. PJ says:

    I’m a man, Snowy. I find your fear of women and desire to control them laughable, but also disturbing. It is a sign of weakness and cluelessness,

  193. Ajax Murgatroyd says:

    I promise you, I won’t get angry or defensive or give you attitude, I’ll in fact be super-grateful and flash you an extra-big smile despite the lack of sleep.

    Because men love a fake, condescending smile and perfunctory displays of gratitude.

  194. Boxer says:

    PJ writes:

    I’m a man, Snowy. I find your fear of women and desire to control them laughable, but also disturbing.

    Can’t speak for Snowy; but, since you’ve arrived, you have played the white knight. Freud would have called what you’re doing *displacement*, and would have pointed out that you’re motivated by deep feelings of weakness and insecurity, yourself. Your desire to grandstand, and your attempts to symbolically put other men in their places, while being anonymous on the internet, suggests that this is a bit of psychodrama. You’re hiding your own frustrations (about women) under layer after layer of bluster.

    Hint: we’ve all seen it before. You aren’t fooling anyone but yourself with this crap.

    I like to argue and will debate with anyone (GBFM, feminists, etc.) but I don’t waste time on appeals to emotion or histrionics; so drop the pretentious stuff or have a good day.

    Regards, Boxer

  195. Boxer says:

    Dear Anon 71:

    I remembered this a few months ago, while watching a video of the woman nun who was “ordained” by a slimy break-away bishop. In the interview, she said in plain English she didn’t care what a bunch of old men said. Thus proving what the ancient church knew. Women refuse to obey their leaders.

    I have no doubt this is true, but there’s another perspective on it.

    Most men will obey the orders of a squared away woman that *they have tested, over time, personally*, but they will not obey the orders of a random woman. This was discussed quite openly and (surprisingly) without much hypocrisy in Israeli sociological studies in the 1990s. Female military commanders are simply not given the unquestioning authority by their male subordinates unless those same male subordinates know them well and had come to trust them.

    This all suggested that in a large organization, mixing men and women into the heirarchy is a recipe for inefficiency and tremendous waste. If women are to be admitted to organizations beyond the size of a small group, where everyone knows everyone else, then they ought to be put into a separate substructure, where they can lead other women, and men can lead other men, etc.

    Best, Boxer

  196. an observer says:

    6 am flights are full of specailists who are travelling to do clinics in the periperhy, and executves flying everywhere.

    She’s status mongering. Early flights are full of wage slaves playing the corporate game. Working for companies that were too lousy to lay for o/n accommodation the night before.

    Cappy has the right perspective on this. Corporate life is a mugs life, that women get sucked into. As a media scribbler, the woman fawns at the imagined status of suits, titles and early flights. That
    encapsulates the whole ethos of the mag she writes for.

    Pass.

  197. an observer says:

    “What ever happened to women and children first?” I just looked at her and said, “You feminists killed it.”

    Precisely why i enjoy watching feminists stand, during their daily commute.

    Getting what they asked for.

  198. Pingback: Poll: Would you rather be governed by Putin or Obama? | Occam's Razor

  199. Micha Elyi says:

    Christianity is faith not deeds…
    greyghost

    Christianity is faith and deeds. Those who will shout, “Lord, lord” have faith but if He never knew them, their faith alone was not enough–so off with the other goats they’ll go.

  200. Snowy says:

    PJ, I don’t know that discipline necessary equals control. When we submit to the chastening hand of God, are we submitting control to Him? Bearing in mind that He disciplines us for our ultimate own good? It becomes easier for us to submit to the will of God when we learn the precious truth that when we do, we are actually better off than when we don’t. When His will becomes ours, we are better off. But does that equal control? It equals sensibility as far as I can see (and it is what I experience). Women today have no experience of submission to authority. They are their own authority. They are a law unto themselves. They have no law, and they certainly don’t have God’s Law written on their hearts. How can they, without submitting to a Godly man, a Godly husband?

  201. feeriker says:

    What they are missing is that there is a set of readers that will only come for the comments. Without the comments, they have no reason to revisit the page. They are losing readers by eliminating the comments section.

    Who ever accused publishers of being intelligent?

  202. Snowy says:

    PJ: Control is not the right word here. The word ‘control’ is not used once in the entire KJV Holy Bible. The word is authority. So no, control is not connected with discipline, but authority is. Women today recognise no authority but themselves. They believe they are their own authority. And if you are talking about control, it is women who seek to control men today, not the other way around. Women seek to have men dance to their tune, whatever that is; puppets on strings.

  203. JDG says:

    Christianity is faith and deeds.

    Indeed, deeds because of faith.

    18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;

    If our faith produces no works, it is dead.

    26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

  204. tacomaster2 says:

    Matamoros, loved your interaction. I’ll have to remember that reply if I get called a dick.

  205. Murphy says:

    While it is tempting to suggest payback is a bitch, chivalry is a reflection of a man that does not measure what beneficiary deserves.

    Letting femanazi’s turn me in to a spiteful rogue ain’t gonna happen. I would have put the bag in the overhead with one hand and then looked down at her with a wry smile and it would have been quite obvious to all who the better person was.

  206. Boxer says:

    Precisely why i enjoy watching feminists stand, during their daily commute.

    I always try to be kind to people I know to be solid personally, but this “give up your seat for a lady” nonsense has got to go. Random women are nothing to me. Some of them might be decent, and others might be taking advantage; and I have seen men try to treat strange women kindly only to get shouted at “I can get my own door!!”, etc. So it’s better to just treat them as equals.

    They wanted equality, let them have it.

  207. MarcusD says:

    @Anon71
    @Dalrock

    Look at the juggling in this video:

    (They discuss marriage ["wives submit to your husbands" @13:00, and more], and the role of women in churches [throughout])

  208. MarcusD says:

    The Aristotle reference, plus related stuff:

    Physiological differences could be a factor, too. Men are obviously stronger than women, and physical strength appears to have often been a prerequisite for acquiring property in the ancient world. Aristotle observes that important techniques for acquisition were not only herding and farming but also hunting and fishing, not to mention piracy (see Pol. 1. 8. 1256a19-1256b2). He points out that even those who rule will on occasion engage in these activities (Pol. 1. 11. 1258b10-11; and 3. 4. 1277b3-7).

    Now one might object that Aristotle seems to reduce the rule over women to that over slaves. For men seem to use women only to maintain their property. But Aristotle explicitly distinguishes a female from a slave. The one is ruled for her sake, the other for the sake of a master (Pol. 3. 6. 1278b32-1279a8). Only a barbarian would fail to distinguish the two (see Pol. 1. 2. 1252a34-1252b9). The male would thus provide property for his wife and children. And the female would also manage property for her husband and children. Only accidentally do males and females benefit from their own roles (see Pol. 3. 6. 1279a1-8). But a slave who is truly a slave cannot rule at all. A natural slave cannot command but can only obey (see Pol. 1. 7.).

    One might also object that Aristotle refers to a household as a monarchy (Pol. 1. 7. 1255b 19-20). And he explicitly states that the male rules and the female is ruled (Pol. 1. 5. 1254bl3-14). I would answer that, when he does, he speaks of a natural rule not of a cultural one (again Pol. 1. 5. 1254b13-14). He also says that a household is a monarchy. But he would appear to speak not of marriage but of parenthood. For he argues that a parent rules a child as does a monarch (Pol. 1. 12. 1259a39-1259b2 and 1259bl0-17).

    A final objection is more difficult, however. Aristotle quotes favourably the assertion that silence for a woman is an adornment (Pol. 1. 13. 1260a24-31). And he argues that male courage is the courage to command, and female courage the courage to obey (1260a21-24). I cannot yet answer this objection, but I shall be able to do so after we consider the sexes and their political roles.

    Schollmeier, Paul. “Aristotle And Women: Household And Political Roles.” Polis: The Journal of the Society for Greek Political Thought 20.1-2 (2003): 1-2.

  209. tacomaster2 says:

    @ Marcus D, I tried to get through the first video but couldn’t stand her flat affect. I’m curious what her background is. Is she a Christian or just a person studying scriptures and theology? The second video I started at the 13 minute mark and wasn’t very impressed.

  210. jack_attack says:

    Am I the only one who read the article in my mind with a woman’s voice with vocal fry and high rising terminal?

  211. jack_attack says:

    Not Dalrock’s – the chick’s

  212. MarcusD says:

    http://www.hds.harvard.edu/people/faculty/laura-s-nasrallah

    I don’t know if she’s a Christian or not. You’re going to find some fairly creative interpretations of Paul in the Harvard Divinity School.

    Her collaboration with Fiorenza likely means she’s making a feminist/Marxist/liberal interpretation of things.

  213. MarcusD says:

    (The videos are from an online course I took, by the way – basically the first part of this one: http://www.hds.harvard.edu/academics/courses/course-detail.cfm?CrsNumber=1544&section=01&term=FALL&year=2014)

  214. tacomaster2 says:

    Okay. I felt there was something of a slant to it. It’s interesting the perspective of non-believers when they attempt to read the Bible as a text instead of from God. Her viewpoint was historical, cultural, and philosophical. My pastor made a statement recently, “just because you study German doesn’t make you a German and just because you study the Bible doesn’t mean you’re a Christian”. He was telling the men’s group that atheists and agnostics go to seminary for the sole purpose to learn to debate Christians.

  215. tacomaster2 says:

    Marcus, I really enjoy studying the letters of Paul. I went through a study program by Jack Hayford. The book we used is Acts: Kingdom Power. He has other ones besides that that cover Ephesians, Hebrews, Revelation, etc. He’s a good author and pastor.

  216. glamping4 says:

    tacomaster2 says:
    February 21, 2014 at 11:12 pm
    “… I overheard her talking that he is now dating a 19 year old (also said he’s 33) and that’s “practically statutory rape!”. I tried to hold in my laughter but was unsuccessful.”

    Is it even possible to parse that phrase for any real meaning?
    The word “rape” when used by most women has become nearly meaningless.
    Good luck with the rest of that three word Byzantine verbal conundrum.

  217. jf12 says:

    Re: quitting looking at me instrumentally and start thinking about me sexually. At SSM, Rollo linked this article:
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/02/19/women.bikinis.objects/index.html?_s=PM:HEALTH
    “Evolutionary psychology would theorize that men view women as objects in terms of their youth and apparent fertility, while women might view men as instrumental in terms of their status and resources”

    Although some men may objectify some women sexually, it is completely unlikely that ANY of the men on the plane that Ms. Kroslakova encountered saw her as an object they should be able to use sexually then and there. However, according to her testimony, SHE saw ALL of them as objects she should be able to use nonsexually.

  218. MarcusD says:

    Off-topic (a bit):

    I won’t link the video, but I will give the title:
    Gilbert Gottfried Reads Fifty Shades of Grey

    If that were the only way for people to access 50 Shades, I wonder how much better the world would be.

  219. Matamoros says:

    Murphy says: Letting femanazi’s turn me in to a spiteful rogue ain’t gonna happen.

    I see where you are coming from. But….

    Let’s remember that these are women without charity, who only use men to get what they want and refuse the system of chivalry from the female side. If men are gentlemen, women are gentlewomen. Otherwise it is only an exercise in futility.

    And remember our Lord said, Matt. 7:6: Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

    That aptly describes feminists. They will turn and rend you while trampling your chivalry under their feet. And it is a holy gift because Chivalry was a concept designed by the Church for Christian society, not a pagan one.

  220. I would hope that we could all show respect and Christian Love for Mr. Smith, by calling his wife Katrina by her proper name…either Katrina Smith, or Mrs. Smith.

  221. Last week i was walking through a parking lot to return a movie in one hand while talking on the phone in the other. I noticed a woman struggling to pop her hood to add windshield fluid. I continued talking on the phone and shuffled everything into one hand to quickly pop her hood with the other as I barely missed a step and continued on my way all while still talking on the phone.

    I don’t know if i should have helped or not. But i do know that too many men will make a big deal out of it and stick around and wait to receive their praises and pat on the head from the woman. To me, it was annoying to watch her struggle, so I gave myself a gift and got it done.

    If a woman is blocking the way trying to lift her bag, it’s better to get her out of the way quickly so that we don’t waste more of our life waiting for her. Just snatch the thing out of her hand, throw it up there, and then bump into her harshly as you pass, so that she knows how much of an inconvenience she has been.

  222. imnobody00 says:

    The problem is that Katarina has been received unasked help for decades (in fact, as long as she remembers). Every time she struggled to put a heavy bag to a plane compartment, a pair of hands automatically appeared and did the job. She was only barely conscious, the same way when I am in a hurry, I don’t notice an automatic door opening before me.

    Can you blame her? I don’t blame her. If somebody treat me that way for decades, I will also get used to it and consider it a fact of life. I blame the thousands of white knights that were eager to help her even without being asked. If you are a man and act like a slave to women, you don’t only harm yourself: you harm the entire male gender, because women get the idea that men are there to be their happy servants that do not ask anything in return (not even a polite question).

    The problem of feminism and modern women is not women: it is white knights. Without white knights, women’s suffrage, women’s default custody and women’s feminism would not have existed.

    What has happened now is that Katarina is not that hot (the wall) and white knights fail to instantly appear out of the blue. This is why she is so pissed off.

  223. tacomaster2 says:

    @Glamping4, yes rape and abuse are both misused and have lost their meaning. Dalrock did a good post on the misuse of the term abuse last year

  224. Pingback: My Favorite Manosphere Post This Week 2.23.14 | RedPillPushers

  225. Snowy says:

    LF&M said:

    “If a woman is blocking the way trying to lift her bag, it’s better to get her out of the way quickly so that we don’t waste more of our life waiting for her. Just snatch the thing out of her hand, throw it up there, and then bump into her harshly as you pass, so that she knows how much of an inconvenience she has been.”

    And that is why we have the problem in the first place: your giving tacit/passive approval by complying with Katarina’s unrealistic expectation. It is not a waste of life at all, and it was not a waste of life at all, to not comply with her passive (she didn’t ask anyone, man or woman) expectation of voluntary help (which is really an entitlement mentality). Although she obviously hasn’t learned her lesson (yet), she’s at least got a message, and may be on the way to better things; one can only hope.

    I like Matamoros’s summary re not casting pearls before swine; it’s true: God said it.

  226. Anonymous age 71 says:

    PJ says:
    February 22, 2014 at 12:19 pm

    >>I’m a man, Snowy. I find your fear of women and desire to control them laughable, but also disturbing. It is a sign of weakness and cluelessness,

    Yep, but it is you who are clueless. Women who are unable or unwilling to control themselves have destroyed the once greatest society in the history of the world. So, of course Snowy suggests that women need to be controlled. Men like you who encourage women to be out of control are the weak, clueless men, not Snowy. Since you are obviously a White Knight I am glad his viewpoint disturbs you.

    Boxer says:
    February 22, 2014 at 1:37 pm

    Dear Anon 71:

    >>>> I remembered this a few months ago, while watching a video of the woman nun who was “ordained” by a slimy break-away bishop. In the interview, she said in plain English she didn’t care what a bunch of old men said. Thus proving what the ancient church knew. Women refuse to obey their leaders.

    Boxer’s statement that men won’t obey untrusted women:

    But my intellectual friend’s research didn’t say that happened. It said they learned women could not be disciplined. And, we know that is true, don’t we? So, since he was talking history, it would seem you are trying to rewrite history, no?

    MarcusD says:
    February 22, 2014 at 8:51 pm

    Just so you know, Marcus, I am not going to watch a 30 minute video to find out the point you are making. At least give us a detailed summary in text format. Even as a retired person, my 30 minutes have some value to me. I have watched long videos on this blog, but only when I have an idea what it is about.

  227. 8to12 says:

    @Liberty, Family, and Masculinity says: “I noticed a woman struggling to pop her hood to add windshield fluid. I continued talking on the phone and shuffled everything into one hand to quickly pop her hood with the other as I barely missed a step and continued on my way all while still talking on the phone.”

    You didn’t do her any favors. If she doesn’t know how to open the hood, she doesn’t have any business adding fluids to her car. How much you want to bet she poured the windshield fluid in the radiator overflow tank? That would be an easy mistake for someone who had problems even opening the hood.

  228. MarcusD says:

    @Anom71

    Just so you know, Marcus, I am not going to watch a 30 minute video to find out the point you are making.

    Well, I did point to a specific part of the video for consideration. Beyond that, it’s up to you whether you want to watch based on my brief description of the contents (general, I know, but the discussion is so wide-ranging that it wouldn’t represent the video properly).

  229. Boxer says:

    Dear Anon 71:

    But my intellectual friend’s research didn’t say that happened. It said they learned women could not be disciplined. And, we know that is true, don’t we? So, since he was talking history, it would seem you are trying to rewrite history, no?

    You don’t seem to have understood my contentions, nor indeed your own. You were not “writing history”. You merely told an anecdotal story without a source. I was supporting your anecdote. Not to worry, I’ll let you continue babbling without further interruption.

    As I pointed out before, Anon 71 is not wrong. Here’s one example of an attempt at quantifying the costs of women in non-combat roles in the IDF (a society with far less margin for waste):

    https://www.academia.edu/713443/The_Military_as_a_Second_Bar_Mitzvah_Combat_Service_as_Initiation_to_Zionist_Masculinity

    Best, Boxer

  230. Boxer says:

    Off topic. There seems to be quite a successful blackout of this story:

    http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/state&id=9440046

    White person goes into a Native American tribal headquarters and starts blasting and stabbing away. At the end of the spree killing, four people are dead and others are in hospital for non-lethal injuries. The perp is now in custody. A 44-year old White woman named Sherrie Lash.

    Has anyone heard about this tragedy? Where is the outrage? Why do you suppose there isn’t national news on this, with addresses from the president and civic leaders?

    Let me now predict that she cries some tears to the judge, and gets released after a few years in minimum security mental asylum…

    Boxer

  231. Michael says:

    Take a look at this gold mine of women commenting on their post divorce situation (and everything they leave out).

    There is a “reel” which goes on. It’s not just the first women. Seems as the problems igniting Dalrock’s cause is starting to make inroads in some media outlets, in this case the Huffington Post.

    http://on.aol.com/video/the-price-of-divorce–going-from-manhattan-luxury-to-my-mothers-basement-517642247

    You will chuckle with pleasure. I promise. :)

  232. Boxer says:

    Take a look at this gold mine of women commenting on their post divorce situation (and everything they leave out).

    I had it all and it went away!! I was promised cash and prizes, but that bastard left the country!! I need tax handouts!! Someone needs to PAY!!

  233. myoung says:

    I don’t get what the problem is

    Most guys aren’t gonna help another man with their luggage, so why should we treat women differently? I’m sure women are just as strong and capable of lifting their own bags

  234. Micha Elyi says:

    The problem is that Katarina has been received unasked help for decades (in fact, as long as she remembers). Every time she struggled to put a heavy bag to a plane compartment, a pair of hands automatically appeared and did the job. She was only barely conscious, the same way when I am in a hurry, I don’t notice an automatic door opening before me.

    Can you blame her?
    imnobody00

    Yes, I can. A man is not an automatic door. One of many differences between a lady and just a female is that the latter doesn’t understand that a man is human being.

    Some of you here are too young to remember how much effort feminists put into getting the word lady replced with woman in popular discourse. As so many other ideological movements have, the feminists overshot the mark. Today the typical female is not even capable of behaving like a woman, much less as a lady. They’re just females now.

    The problem of feminism and modern women is not women: it is white knights. Without white knights, women’s suffrage, women’s default custody and women’s feminism would not have existed.

    The problem of feminism is “modern women” aka females.

    By the way, IIRC the deciding vote in the legislature that gave the last state’s consent necessary to ratify the 19th Amendment to the US Constitution (female suffrage) was a mama’s boy, not any kind of knight.

    What has happened now is that Katarina is not that hot (the wall) and white knights fail to instantly appear out of the blue. This is why she is so pissed off.

    This part of the diagnosis I agree with 100%.

    Now that she’s hit the wall, she’s living in something much more like a man’s world. She might even have to shell out cash to tip skycaps to move her bags. Like a man.

    P.S. Katarina didn’t get hit on and she’s still complaining. Typical female.

  235. imnobody00 says:

    Look Micha. Women have always had the same natural inclinations that could be summarized as “me, me, me, give me, give me, give me and the world can go to hell”. I lived in my country under the so-called patriarchy (in reality, just another kind of matriarchy) and they were the same.

    But, in the good old days of the patriarchy, a tremendous effort was put to turn women into ladies. That is, to suppress the worse female instincts and replace them with attitudes that were good for society. Everybody contributed to this effort: parents, teachers, priests, mass media, books, etc. For the female for whom this indoctrination didn’t kick in, the laws and customs did damage control, so women couldn’t do much harm.

    But some women started protesting (as they always do). Instead of ignoring their demands, some white knights gave them the suffrage. After that, every change in favor of the female has received approval by a fair part of men. You see these white knights every day, defending the worse attitudes of women.

    Women are like little animals. They are evil so they need to be controlled. They were once in control. Then a group of MEN decided to give them freedom and we know how this has turned out.

  236. MarcusD says:

    Interesting post from Matt Walsh: http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/02/22/your-husband-doesnt-have-to-earn-your-respect/

    What’s even more interesting are the 800+ comments he received in 24 hours.

  237. JDG says:

    MarcusD says:
    February 23, 2014 at 11:51 pm

    I read through a page full and only one person used the word submit in a positive light, and none used the word obey in spite of the fact that these are words that are used in the Bible when referring to a wife’s relationship with her husband. More than a few were not happy with his view even as watered down as it was. Sadly I am reminded once again how we are swimming in feminism, and even church going folks don’t know it.

  238. Boxer says:

    What’s even more interesting are the 800+ comments he received in 24 hours.

    Goodness me, what a looney tirade, full of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth.

  239. MarcusD says:

    @JDG, Boxer

    I didn’t waste my time reading through all of the comments, but I did go through a decent number of them, and I think our assessments match up. Walsh’s blog seems to be popular amongst feminists, yes, and even conservative ones (though I imagine many are actually gynocentrics – a tautology based on who’s doing the defining).

  240. an observer says:

    “If a woman is blocking the way trying to lift her bag, it’s better to get her out of the way quickly so that we don’t waste more of our life waiting for her. Just snatch the thing out of her hand, throw it up there, and then bump into her harshly as you pass, so that she knows how much of an inconvenience she has been.”

    Alternately, wait patiently for her to heave her illegally overweight bag into the locker. Offer helpful suggestions like “Wow, that looks overweight, are you sure its under the limit?” or wait until shes humped the thing into the centre of the locker, then flick it aside casually to fit your own bag. Feel free to crush it in the process. Be very casual. Dont offer to help. You wouldnt offer to help a man. Why help a strong independent woman?

  241. cdw100 says:

    Men have many choices, but in this day and age, here are the only women you are allowed to help:
    Grandmother, mother, daughter, old maid aunt, lesbian neighbour, lost child or potential victim of an honour killing.
    Any other woman has to earn your help. Chivalry, great, I will slay the dragon, and you will give me the lewinsky, and you do know what I mean.

    The lesbian neighbour may seem a strange choice, but she will have better power tools that you can borrow, and her insight into some of these kinds of women, will allow you to be 3 steps ahead of them at all times.

  242. @PJ
    “I’m a man, Snowy. I find your fear of women and desire to control them laughable, but also disturbing. It is a sign of weakness and cluelessness.”

    You’re not a man, you’re a white-knight mangina punk advocating for the princess treatment of bargain basement harlots that are an infested boil on the butt of humanity. Not exactly your finest hour

  243. Larry J says:

    @Boxer

    “White person goes into a Native American tribal headquarters and starts blasting and stabbing away. At the end of the spree killing, four people are dead and others are in hospital for non-lethal injuries. The perp is now in custody. A 44-year old White woman named Sherrie Lash.”

    According to the artice, the woman is a former tribal leader. The current tribal leadership was meeting to discuss removing her from the tribe. Doesn’t exactly sound white to me.

    “Tribal members were meeting about evicting Lash, also known as Sherie Rhoades, and her son from the Rancheria which, according to its website, is a federally recognized tribe with 35 members, the police official said.

    The station’s report said that Lash, a former tribal leader, allegedly pulled out a gun and shot four people in the building and a fifth person who tried to flee. After running out of ammunition, she grabbed a butcher knife and stabbed another person.”

  244. greyghost says:

    Larry j
    I guess the Native Americans don’t believe there is ever a reason to hit a girl also.

  245. greyghost says:

    Boxer
    he got a comment from me too. The article is kind of a sissy plea to females.

  246. Boxer says:

    According to the artice, the woman is a former tribal leader. The current tribal leadership was meeting to discuss removing her from the tribe. Doesn’t exactly sound white to me.

    You didn’t see her photo, obviously. She’s about as Indian as I am.

    More to the point: She’s a blonde haired woman with lots of jailhouse tats. Something looks decidedly, shall we say, *less than feminine* about her.

    Don’t want to jump to stereotypes, but her photos scream “dyke”. There’s nobody that the media is more adoring of than a big, ugly white dyke; so it’s surprising to me that they didn’t cover this strong empowered feminist hero as she righteously gunned down her patriarchal oppressors, then brought out the machete when she ran out of live rounds.

    I wonder why that is?

  247. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    I wonder why that is?

    Apparently, Native American beats White Lesbian in this week’s edition of the Minority Rankings Field Guide for Journalists.

  248. MarcusD says:

    http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/emphatic/9541258/story.html

    I always wonder how they consider themselves sex-positive feminists… Part of me thinks they really hate sex and the only way to help that feeling is by making all sex rape, then leaving the final determination up to the female.

    Besides that, another aspect of Marxism that ignores reality.

  249. Aquinas Dad says:

    Tam the Bam,
    You wrote,
    “You’ll start bibbling on about having 99 ubermasculine sons and a whip hand over the missus soon, if you don’t stop being so suggestible.”
    I have 5 sons, not 99. I would never use a made up word when ‘masculine’ will do. And I do not have a whip hand over anyone, just a faithful Catholic wife.
    In the meantime, why oh why did you go to all the trouble to invoke me here?

  250. UnicornHunter says:

    http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2014/2/17/the-dispossessed-elite

    The author’s point is in part that non-kinship-based reciprocity was the strength of the Anglo-Saxons and was at least to some degree a necessity for the rise of the West over those societies where non-kinship based reciprocity is weak.

  251. jsr says:

    Someone please help these poor, confused women understand what’s going on.

    http://tolovehonorandvacuum.com/2014/02/when-should-you-allow-your-teen-to-date/#comment-67721

  252. jsr,

    It is not surprising that the kids are hooking up and not dating. Kids aren’t getting married either (just hooking up is all.)

  253. Marcus,

    I always wonder how they consider themselves sex-positive feminists… Part of me thinks they really hate sex and the only way to help that feeling is by making all sex rape, then leaving the final determination up to the female.

    I don’t think it is that they hate sex. I think it is instead that they aren’t getting any sex because men see them as ugly. They have fewer opportunities. Largely (not entirely, but largely) it is the pretty girls are getting offers for the sex. Not the ugly ones.

    Since they aren’t getting as many opportunites, they are miserable. Misery likes company. So make sex out to be “rape” for the women who ARE getting laid (and laid regularly) and call that female empowerment or whatever and you secure some “in group” status among your female peers. In that sense (and that sense alone) people like Elspeth and SSM are the true enemies of feminism because these real women offer real alternatives to other women that are more sex positive where there is almost NO rape.

  254. Boxer says:

    jsr:

    Someone please help these poor, confused women understand what’s going on.

    One of those women is Sheila Gregoire. She’s a strange sort of Christian feminist. I was asked not to comment on her blog, years ago, and I intend to respect that. I would encourage you to comment there (respectfully) and give some alternative points of view. She’s attracts a lot of decent but hurting people, and she is pretty successful at selling a sort of feminism lite to them. In some cases, I’m sure this is an improvement, but in most, I think she does more harm than good to you Christian bros and sisters.

    Boxer

  255. HawkandRock says:

    From Jenny’s latest: http://thestir.cafemom.com/love_sex/168626/confessions_of_an_online_dating

    “Will I find true love on the Internet? I have no idea. But I’m sure having fun trying, and I’m collecting some great stories along the way.”

    You!
    Go!
    Girl!

    Your daughters are so lucky to have you setting an example for them!

  256. Tam the Bam says:

    AQ: “why oh why did you go to all the trouble to invoke me here?”
    I was merely struck by the alignment of your peculiar hectoring condescension over there, and that of the other joker. A mutual determination to blackguard anyone showing the mildest dissent from your ex cathedra authoritarian pronouncements as exhibiting “passive aggressive” behavior. In your case, quite obsessive. A strange charge, that I don’t come across on men’s websites. Did you go to school together?

    When I’m aggressive, I’m aggressive aggressive.
    But when I’m in disagreement, I’d require sound arguments, rather than attempted patronizing put-downs. Doesn’t work except with, and among, women.

  257. jf12 says:

    How men can make themselves useful to Jenny Erickson. Firstly, be handsome. Secondly, be attractive. Lastly, don’t be unattractive.

  258. deti says:

    jsr:

    Sheila left this gem at her site on that thread:

    “I think there’s a general trend to “grow up” later–that’s actually the subject of my column this week. It can be especially frustrating for a lot of teenage girls! And there’s much more of an emphasis on “hooking up” or having a physical relationship rather than saying, “I like you and I’d like to commit to being exclusive, at least for now.” It really leaves people in a very precarious emotional position.”

    Did you catch that?

    “I’d like to commit to being exclusive, at least for now.”

    Commit to what? Exclusively doing what? For as long as…. We both want to?

    Serial monogamy rides again. It’s easy to see how the culture has corrupted the church and those genuinely attempting to do monogamy and marriage “the right way” when someone like Sheila Gregoire tacitly approves serial monogamy.

  259. Boxer says:

    Your daughters are so lucky to have you setting an example for them!

    I definitely feel sorry for those girls. Their mother is doing all she can to humiliate them on the internet, embarrass their father, and generally make a mockery of the lives and dignities of all the people around her. Quite the mess that “dear old mom” is creating for everyone else, as she “finds herself” on the cock carousel.

  260. jsr says:

    IBB/Boxer,

    I know the score. My comment was mostly sarcastic, but hopeful that someone could make a useful comment that gets through their feminist shields. I, unfortunately, was banned from her blog. I did not have the appropriate feminist cloaking device for my comments to get through.

  261. greyghost says:

    MarcusD
    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/how-men-could-make-themselves-useful-to-katarina-kroslakova/#comment-110991
    I could kill those two guys guilt free may even have a feeling of pleasure if they experience audible death throws. I hate shit like that more than anything in this world.

  262. Boxer says:

    jsr writes:

    I, unfortunately, was banned from her blog

    I guess we’re riding the same wave then. LOL!

    Regards, Boxer

  263. jsr says:

    Deti,

    I missed the “at least for now.” But my view of dating has been one of either trying to find a spouse or just flirting with/indulging in fornication since I was 19, so I viewed the whole post as a form of wrongly endorsing serial monogamy/fornication. Maybe you can gently evade her shields and help those women see their serial monogamy is not moral.

  264. deti,

    Did you catch that?

    “I’d like to commit to being exclusive, at least for now.”

    Commit to what? Exclusively doing what? For as long as…. We both want to?

    I just replied to Sheila. Waiting moderation. Lets see if Sheila bans me too….

  265. Anyway, this is what I said to Sheila…

    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    If I may Sheila, I think (possibly) the main reason why her high school nieces aren’t being asked on dates is that our society has made things so toxic for older boys and younger men to approach girls socially. They don’t know what is and is not acceptable. So of course, these girls are NOT going to get asked out on dates. Will not happen.

    More to the point, we don’t know for sure if the Christian boys in their youth group, if her nieces are even interested in these boys. We just know that they would rather play video games. Perhaps these girls aren’t interested in them and the boys have picked up their disinterest and (as a result) don’t approach them? Perhpas these boys would rather spend their little money on video games than dates?

    Expecting a boy to say to a girl “I like you and I’d like to commit to being exclusive, at least for now.” is not something boys are going to do. Just will not happen. And it is increasling NOT going to happen for marriage either because marriage (thanks to no-fault-divorce) is like saying “I like you and I’d like to commit to being exclusive, at least for now.” You think Christian boys are going to go in for this?

    What are the odds she lets my post through? What are the odds I’ll be banned?

  266. “Gilbert Gottfried Reads Fifty Shades of Grey”

    That sounds awesome.

  267. deti says:

    Gentlemen:

    There’s really not much point in trying to comment at Sheila’s site. Her site’s geared to affirming and validating her commenters; and she approaches most issues from a “Christian feminist” worldview.

  268. Opus says:

    Every time I have been banned (or made unwelcome) on the internet – and that includes Susan Walsh – it has always been by a woman.

  269. UnicornHunter says:

    @jf12 How men can make themselves useful to Jenny Erickson. Firstly, be handsome. Secondly, be attractive. Lastly, don’t be unattractive.

    You forgot rich…and submissive when not being strong and in charge.

  270. Elspeth says:

    Commit to what? Exclusively doing what? For as long as…. We both want to?

    Sheila and I haven’t interacted in a couple of years now, since I realized and she confirmed to me that she doesn’t read wifely submission the way I read it when we look at Scripture. But…

    As far as I know and can remember, she is firmly and adamantly opposed to premarital/extramarital sex. Whatever disagreement I may have with her and there a quite a few, even I have to object -ever so gently- to the idea that she is tacitly endorsing premarital sex between teenagers or anyone else.

    More likely she is engaged in a fair amount of naivete about what happens in long term “exclusive” relationships that aren’t heading for marriage sooner rather than later.

  271. deti says:

    “More likely she is engaged in a fair amount of naivete about what happens in long term “exclusive” relationships that aren’t heading for marriage sooner rather than later.”

    Agreed, Elspeth. But the entire idea of “commit to be exclusive at least for now” is quite vague, admittedly. It sounds an awful lot like serial monogamy as Dalrock has explicated on here, including the idea of the boyfriend, the college boyfriend, etc.

    I hope it’s just naivete. Telling boyfriends to “be exclusive at least for now” is a long time to wait for sex. It’s of no benefit to men, really. And it’s really just satisfaction of the FI.

  272. Elspeth,

    As far as I know and can remember, she is firmly and adamantly opposed to premarital/extramarital sex. Whatever disagreement I may have with her and there a quite a few, even I have to object -ever so gently- to the idea that she is tacitly endorsing premarital sex between teenagers or anyone else.

    More likely she is engaged in a fair amount of naivete about what happens in long term “exclusive” relationships that aren’t heading for marriage sooner rather than later.

    I agree with all of this.

    Long term exclusive dating, for Christians its like… to what end? Assume there is no sex between the kids. (Unlike I know, but lets just assume for the moment.) Now, are we “dating” because we are (maybe) going to get married and if so, when do we plan that blessed event? Or are we “dating” because one of us likes to have free dinner at the expense of the other? If it’s the latter and not the former, you think many 16 year old Christian boys would like to sign up for that or would they rather play video games?

  273. jsr says:

    ‘I have to object -ever so gently- to the idea that she is tacitly endorsing premarital sex between teenagers or anyone else.’

    But if she is endorsing dating for “fun” or “because I like you” or “at least for now” and not dating with the purpose of finding a spouse only, then she is endorsing a premarital sex atmosphere.

    ‘There’s really not much point in trying to comment at Sheila’s site.’

    Not for Sheila, but maybe one of her readers. Saving one lurker (or lurker’s child) at a time, at the margins.

  274. ‘There’s really not much point in trying to comment at Sheila’s site.’

    Not for Sheila, but maybe one of her readers. Saving one lurker (or lurker’s child) at a time, at the margins.

    Exactly. You post for the lurkers so they can “stop to think.” It is not about Sheila.

  275. Anonymous Reader says:

    IBB
    Long term exclusive dating, for Christians its like… to what end?

    Why for the “experiences” until the women reach the age of 25, according to you…

  276. Anonymous Reader says:

    Elspeth
    More likely she is engaged in a fair amount of naivete about what happens in long term “exclusive” relationships that aren’t heading for marriage sooner rather than later.

    That’s not naivete. That’s digging a hole in the ground, sticking your head into it, and pulling all the dirt back around your neck. It’s not 1973, or 1983. Gregoire has to be willfully self-delusive.

    Anyone considering getting banned..er..posting there should simply look at the name of the blog. Ask yourself, “Self, what’s odd about this name? Is there a word missing?” and then perhaps the details of Gregoire will fall into place.

    HINT: She’s a feminist.

  277. jf12 says:

    @jsr “But if she is endorsing dating for “fun” or “because I like you” or “at least for now” and not dating with the purpose of finding a spouse only, then she is endorsing a premarital sex atmosphere.” Yes. As opposed to truly casual dating which is best done in group settings, any sort of seeing-if-we’re-really-attracted has to be for relationship-building i.e. for courtship only. Advising young people to practice acting as if married is advice that is designed to promote maximum sexual activity.

  278. MarcusD says:

    @Marissa

    I’m amazed that they were able to turn an apology into an attack piece on conservatives.

    They may have missed the Regnerus study:

    http://www.ionainstitute.eu/pdfs/1-s2.0-S0049089X12000610-main.pdf

    And follow-up: http://www.markregnerus.com/uploads/4/0/6/5/4065759/regnerus_response_to_critics_in_nov_2012_ssr.pdf

  279. MarcusD says:

    Regnerus was subjected to a lot of criticism (and attack), as he writes in a footnote in the response:

    The audit of the publication process of the original study—a rather uncommon and disturbing experience in social science research—appears elsewhere in this issue. While its author has long harbored negative sentiment about me, the audit nevertheless ought to dispel suspicions of malfeasance in the review process. It concluded that an ideologically-balanced pool of reviewers recommended publication. Concern has been also raised about the relationship of the author to the pair of funding agencies. As noted in the study, I have always operated without strings from either organization. No funding agency representatives were consulted about research design, survey contents, analyses, or conclusions. Any allegations that the funders might have improperly influenced me are simply false. Finally, Knowledge Networks is a premier online research organization, and their data collection efforts are featured in hundreds of published articles in the social sciences, public opinion, health, and other journals—including the August 2012 issue of the American Sociological Review (see Rosenfeld and Thomas, 2012)—and are utilized by the American National Election Studies. Simply put, the KnowledgePanel is a high-quality data source.

  280. Mark says:

    @Nobody

    “”Women are like little animals. They are evil so they need to be controlled. They were once in control. Then a group of MEN decided to give them freedom and we know how this has turned out””

    You know it my friend.You are better off taking your chances French kissing a King Cobra than getting involved with a Western Womyn!

  281. Mark says:

    @Boxer

    “”I had it all and it went away!! I was promised cash and prizes, but that bastard left the country!! I need tax handouts!! Someone needs to PAY!!””

    Yup!……great post……and thank you Michael for that link…GREAT!……He left the country?….Tsk…tsk…..that makes him a VERY smart bastard in my books!

    @Michael:
    Nice to see you again.Long time …no post! Hope all is going well with you!

  282. Oh I’m in! Sheila let me in to her blog, I am no longer moderated or banned. Time to start feeding them all red pills.

    I wonder how long that will last?

  283. jsr says:

    IBB,

    You’ve got to find a way to feed those pills with gentleness and kindness (GAK) to stay on there. I lost my GAK frame too often.

  284. Marissa says:

    MarcusD, I know of that guy and he’s a brave soul. I know a few people who know him personally and testify that he is a very decent person, not some angry “homophobe” or villain as he’s been portrayed. Good find — and Russia is very smart to forbid gay adoption.

  285. jsr,

    Okay everyone, so how am I doing?

    You’ve got to find a way to feed those pills with gentleness and kindness (GAK) to stay on there. I lost my GAK frame too often.

    http://tolovehonorandvacuum.com/2014/02/when-should-you-allow-your-teen-to-date/

    I don’t want to red pill myself right out of there but so far she’s letting me post.

  286. jsr says:

    IBB,

    Okay so far. Actually, I am surprised greyghost got through. However, IBB, you might be interpreted as attacking momma. Addressing her directly, telling her to be honest and stating that you know something deep down is getting close to attack mode as defined by Sheila.

  287. Boxer says:

    IBB: You’re doing a great job over there; though I agree with jsr. The ban is coming soon. Sheila doesn’t like people who diverge, even slightly, from her holy word! lol

  288. tacomaster2 says:

    @ Micha Elyi,
    “…Today the typical female is not even capable of behaving like a woman, much less as a lady. They’re just females now”

    Ya, I have no idea what term to use either. I honestly don’t know. Do I say lady, woman, female, girl, person with XX chromosomes, etc ? I was giving report at work a few years ago and I said “the older female patient in room X…” as part of my change-of-shift. Apparently the term FEMALE is sexist and derogatory. I had to get grilled by the manager along with a witness in the room. It was humiliating and a waste of time. I put in my two week notice shortly after that. I even asked what term I should use or are gender terms offensive? No reply from the feminazis. They just asked me what my intention was from using “female” to describe a patient.

  289. MarcusD says:

    I would point out, for those commenting on http://tolovehonorandvacuum.com/2014/02/when-should-you-allow-your-teen-to-date/, that feminists wanted men and women to share the approach aspect (of dating) – it seems some women haven’t gotten the memo (and, *gasp* maybe there’s a biological reason for it)

  290. Okay so far. Actually, I am surprised greyghost got through. However, IBB, you might be interpreted as attacking momma. Addressing her directly, telling her to be honest and stating that you know something deep down is getting close to attack mode as defined by Sheila.

    I suppose the only reason why greyghost go through is “gina” isn’t a flagged word that is is considered naughty. So the moderator (might not even be Sheila, may be a robot) just let it through. We’ll see if I can post there tomorrow but I would guess that even momma of four would pretty much agree with everything I was saying even if it initially runs contrary to the feminist imperative.

    Just little… tiny… red… pills. Eat them one at a time (and maybe I can ever so gradually feed them to Sheila?)

  291. MarcusD says:

    To quote the Jezebel feminists: “Wow. Just wow.”

    Yet the liberal obsession with “academic freedom” seems a bit misplaced to me. After all, no one ever has “full freedom” in research and publication. Which research proposals receive funding and what papers are accepted for publication are always contingent on political priorities. The words used to articulate a research question can have implications for its outcome. No academic question is ever “free” from political realities. If our university community opposes racism, sexism, and heterosexism, why should we put up with research that counters our goals simply in the name of “academic freedom”?

    Instead, I would like to propose a more rigorous standard: one of “academic justice.” When an academic community observes research promoting or justifying oppression, it should ensure that this research does not continue.

    The power to enforce academic justice comes from students, faculty, and workers organizing together to make our universities look as we want them to do. Two years ago, when former summer school instructor Subramanian Swamy published hateful commentary about Muslims in India, the Harvard community organized to ensure that he would not return to teach on campus. I consider that sort of organizing both appropriate and commendable. Perhaps it should even be applied more broadly….

    [...]

    People on the right opposed to boycotts can play the “freedom” game, calling for economic freedom to buy any product or academic freedom to associate with any institution. Only those who care about justice can take the moral upper hand.

    From: http://www.thecrimson.com/column/the-red-line/article/2014/2/18/academic-freedom-justice/?page=single#

  292. MarcusD says:

    After-Birth Abortion: The pro-choice case for infanticide.
    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2012/03/after_birth_abortion_the_pro_choice_case_for_infanticide_.html

    They support the adoption of new terminology – “after-birth abortion” – over the morally judgmental and politically difficult term “infanticide.”

  293. greyghost says:

    MarusD
    Another article with some wonderful people that won’t be missed. “After Birth Abortion” Those guys are evil.

  294. Mknzybsofh says:

    Did she wonder if the Engineer had a bad back? That would be a big reason for for him not helping her. Just love how she refers to all men in her article as peacocks, as if that’s not sexist either.

  295. Matamoros says:

    you harm the entire male gender,

    There is no male “gender”, only the male sex.

    Humanity has two sexes and no genders.You should lose the FemSpeak.

  296. MarcusD says:

    CAF, Ch. 32806:

    Not trying to blame but…
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=862297

    dating: Why do men become rude and mean after breakup?
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=862323

  297. Aquinas Dad says:

    Tam the Bam,
    You may have misunderstood my points. I am attempting to point out that a fair amount of “game” is predicated on passive-aggressive behavior. It is no surprise that a fair number of “game” followers are passive-aggressive.

  298. Aquinas Dad says:

    Deti,
    You wrote,
    “It’s easy to see how the culture has corrupted the church and those genuinely attempting to do monogamy and marriage “the right way” when someone like Sheila Gregoire tacitly approves serial monogamy.”
    Well said. This is exactly the sort of thing that causes young people to abandon their morals.

  299. Anonymous Reader says:

    AD, what is your definition of “passive-aggressive”?

  300. Marissa says:

    There is no male “gender”, only the male sex.

    Humanity has two sexes and no genders.You should lose the FemSpeak.

    fistpump.gif

  301. Marissa says:

    Thanks, MarcusD, for tempting me to violate my policy of not clicking on HuffPost, Slate, or Atlantic links. Ugh, the comments there make me want to hurl.

  302. jf12 says:

    Re: neonaticide. On our church’s prayer line is a baby who was born with malignant tumors, and at age 3 months is facing his second round of chemo.

    I suppose the medical ethics gray area is whether withholding aggressive treatment in favor of palliative treatments is the moral equivalent of infant exposure, although those quality- vs quantity-of-life concerns affect primarily elder care.

  303. MarcusD says:

    @Marissa

    HuffPost comments are usually annoying, as are Slate comments, but the Atlantic comments are a bit closer to being a mixed bag.

    I actually have CAF on the no-click list some days (when I need to get work done, or have faith in humanity).

  304. Aquinas Dad says:

    Anonymous,
    ” being, marked by, or displaying behavior characterized by the expression of negative feelings, resentment, and aggression in an unassertive passive way (as through procrastination and stubbornness)”
    “the indirect expression of hostility, such as through procrastination, sarcasm, hostile jokes, stubbornness, resentment, sullenness, or deliberate or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible.”

  305. Marissa says:

    I suppose the medical ethics gray area is whether withholding aggressive treatment in favor of palliative treatments is the moral equivalent of infant exposure, although those quality- vs quantity-of-life concerns affect primarily elder care.

    jf12, how do you apply Christian ethics to these kinds of situations? For instance, “assisted suicide”. I was discussing this topic after I read a news story about the recent law in Belgium allowing children to choose this option if they were terminally ill. Isn’t suicide and “mercy killing” wrong? How do you support these ethics in the face of really terrible circumstances, like a man whose body is almost completely blown away by an IED but who can still stay alive due to modern medicine? Or the recent story of the British soldier who killed a horribly wounded enemy.

    I’m curious because I don’t know how to answer these questions (I got in a discussion with someone else who supports these types of “mercy killings”). I have also not read a lot of the Bible so I don’t have a strong Scriptural understanding of this topic.

  306. jf12 says:

    Suicide is always wrong, and although this is not the space because this is not the topic, I could argue that euthanasia for any reasonably competent patient is also always wrong. However, I consider the Christian moral (as opposed to legal) right to refuse treatment as based on the moral obligation of our tenancy of our bodies (1 Cor 6:19). We must do all reasonable maintenance, but not extraordinary measures. That means, to be explicit about reasonableness, you are NOT required to rush out at 2:30 AM to find a hardware store that has washers to repair a slowly dripping bathroom faucet because there will be one open during your lunch break the next day, but you had better rush out at 2:30 AM to turn off the water if the faucet starts spewing gallons per minute on the bathroom floor and mop it up right then. On the other hand, if a burst water supply line under the foundation causes a huge sinkhole to swallow half the house, it is unreasonable to pay a house mover to save the remaining half. Again, a small grease fire obligates you to clean up the soot stains, but a fully engulfed house blaze does not require you to go back in to save or clean anything. Luckily for home repairs situations we have the usual fallback excuse/reasoning of economics. For our bodies there are more complications rationalizations to explain why we are not morally obligated to fully exert ourselves to be in the absolute peak condition, e.g. that ice cream is ok sometimes.

    The remarkable IED survival rate is primarily based on formerly-aggressive head trauma treatment. The skull is removed early, proactively, and the brain allowed to expand for some days. That is now considered standard treatment for soldiers especially over there. But it is still rare for civilians (e.g. in auto wrecks) here, because the treatment is withheld by the medical professionals.

  307. Marissa says:

    Thank you for the understandable explanation, jf12. Sorry for the derail, host. This place is so full of people with great knowledge, it’s hard to hold back questions!

  308. jf12 says:

    It’s not entirely off topic, since the concept revolves around perceptions of responsible levels of involvement with other peoples’ needs and/or wants.

    The military hemicraniectomy success rate is phenomenal.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/science/skull-surgery-offers-perils-and-potential.html
    Since 9/11, many extra thousands of lives of the hundreds of thousands of military tbi cases were saved by hemicraniectomy
    http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RS22452.pdf
    leading generally to many extra thousands of soldiers requiring long term medical treatment.

  309. Anonymous Reader says:

    Thanks AD for the cut and paste from some dictionary. Now, you claim that passive-aggressive behavior is typical of Game. Yet Game blogs would scorn the behaviors you have copied from a dictionary as counterproductive at the very least. How do you explain the discrepancy?

  310. deti says:

    I actually have a more topical question for Aquinas Dad.

    AD, you claim to be a teacher of men. You claim to write, teach and speak on matters of masculinity and theology. You claim that Game is not true masculinity; you claim that Game teaches nothing new; you claim that Game is immoral.

    Please post a Masculinity 101 lesson here for us to review. An outline, a syllabus, a paragraph or two, on what you would teach to a boy or man just starting out. Assume no knowledge of masculinity; but assume you’re instructing Christians. Where would you start? What would you start with?

    Please post your lesson.

  311. feeriker says:

    Mark said You are better off taking your chances French kissing a King Cobra than getting involved with a Western Womyn!

    Absolutely true. A lethal bite on the tongue from a king cobra results in near instantaneous and mostly painless death, whereas involvement with a Western woperson (especially of the North American Anglosphere variety) is death of the long, slow, drawn out, agonizing variety.

  312. Snowy says:

    feeriker: ‘Woperson’: I like it! They are full of woe.

  313. MarcusD says:

    ‘Woperson’: I like it! They are full of woe.

    It’s an alternative to “womyn,” that is, removing the “man” from “woman.”

  314. TFH says:

    Yawn…. Aquinas Dad is just another Game denialist, who just does not know what Game is.

    Central to their worldview is the insistence that :
    1) Game is of no use in LTRs
    2) Game is nothing new (yet they have to oppose it strenuously)
    3) Game cannot be learned from materials available for free online (yet, it is nothing new, as per point 2)). When married men like Dalrock, Deti, or Keoni Galt say Game is useful, they must be getting a cut from some seminar scam…

    At least we got ZippyCatholic to admit that Game works on 95% of attractive women in America (those who he terms as ‘sluts’, as in they had 2 or more sex partners before marriage)..

  315. TFH says:

    About Katarina Kroslakova :

    Her article says “Quit hitting on me and help me out”…

    But the engineer in his 50s did not hit on her either. I dare say she is just as angry about that.

    She demands that men not hit on her, but the man she is berating did not, in fact, hit on her…

    What we are seeing here is a woman who was attractive for 20 years, and thought that male attention and bag-lifting would go on forever, is now finding that after her Wile E. Coyote moment, this is no longer forthcoming. And the help/attention she got was like the air… she only notices it now that it is gone….

  316. An engineer in his mid-fifties didn’t help out? Is this an Empath sighting?

  317. princeasbel says:

    I commented on Sheila’s article on teen dating. Unsurprisingly, though several comments have been approved, she hasn’t approved mine. I think those familiar with Sheila and who have commented on her on this blog know why it hasn’t. Those same people (including Dalrock himself) have reported on the kind of antics that go on over at Sheila’s blog. Here’s my own personal confirmation that those reports are true. Since Dalrock’s blog is no stranger to this kind of phenomenon, I figure I’ll re-type my comment here so people have some proof of what goes on over there.

    “”The christian boys in their youth group don’t date at all. The christian boys at school are more interested in playing video games.”

    Doesn’t surprise me. Christian “boys” are routinely guilt-tripped for their sexual desires. Their prime reason for wanting to date in the first place is made sinful. Why pay anywhere from $20-$40 to go out with a girl whom he won’t marry for at LEAST another three or four years, is not allowed to think of sexually, and is expected to be a perfect gentleman to ensure he does well enough to “deserve” her? A good video game, on the other hand, is often cheaper, and a much better use of his time and money. I see zero benefits in that environment for “boys” to date. Give that boy a non-legalistic church environment and a trade that can bring home enough bacon to support himself and a wife by the time he and she turns 18, and THEN you can be confused as to why he’s more interested in video games.”

    I took a screenshot right after I posted the comment just in case. Here it is for any interested.
    http://imageshack.com/a/img836/5557/fmov.png

  318. @ princeasbel, Evangelical feminism, making eunuchs of the churchian boys while remaining substantially ignorant. Churchian culture is dying. Come out of her my people.

  319. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2014/02/26 | Free Northerner

  320. 5iver says:

    Off comment, but here is a female divorcee Mormon athlete’s desires for men now and for the future:

    http://www.smh.com.au/sport/winter-olympics/torah-bright-says-she-wants-a-big-man-in-bizarre-esquire-interview-20140221-337ty.html

  321. Snowy says:

    MarcusD:
    ‘Woperson’: I like it! They are full of woe.

    It’s an alternative to “womyn,” that is, removing the “man” from “woman.”

    Yes of course, but that’s to obvious, Marcus. I might start calling them woepeople and woeperson, because they cause men such woe; we can’t live with them, and we can’t live without them.

  322. craig says:

    Princeasbel, what you tried to post at Sheila’s site is not that far from mine which was approved — basically, what’s the point of dating at that age? Your crime was not in saying boys want sex (everyone knows), but in threatening the paradigm that girls should be treated as princesses by everyone, regardless of the lack of any pre-existing relational ties, and without incurring even any minor reciprocal obligations on their part. In short, they deserve free dinners and entertainment because Girl Power!

  323. Marissa says:

    It’s interesting how these types of parents want their boys to be interested in dating but don’t like when girls are interested. Reverse the sexes: the boys are interested but the girls want to play on Facebook. No one would really care, even if the boys voiced their complaint.

  324. Aquinas Dad says:

    Anonymous,
    You asked for a definition of passive-aggressive. Thank you for giving us all a *demonstration* of it.

  325. Aquinas Dad says:

    Deti,
    This? *Again*?!
    How many times are you going to ask for the same things voer and over while pretending to have never heard it before?
    let me guess – next you will be claiming ‘no one but “gamers” are teaching how to be confident, how to speak, etc?
    Again.
    Donal Graeme was kind enough to put my list of suggested books, seminars, etc. on his blog. I suggest you check it out.
    It should look familiar – it is largely a cut and paste of other times I answered this question for you.

  326. Micha Elyi says:

    I was giving report at work a few years ago and I said “the older female patient in room X…” as part of my change-of-shift. Apparently the term FEMALE is sexist and derogatory.
    tacomaster2

    Everything is “sexist and derogatory” if the FEMALE so declares. However, the word male is used with abandon by sexists of the gyno-American persuasion. The sexists shy away from saying men (and are even afraid to say boys). Just look around you. Check how often sexists use the word male versus the word man against how often they use woman and female. They just can’t stand saying man. And consider what’s different about a man and a mere male. Overusing the word male is one of the many ways sexists dehumanize men. I am dismayed by the number of females who are oblivious to this behavior by the more sexist members of Team Woman.

    I had to get grilled by the manager along with a witness in the room. It was humiliating and a waste of time. I put in my two week notice shortly after that. I even asked what term I should use or are gender terms offensive? No reply from the feminazis.

    No, you didn’t have to get grilled. The witch was just showing off what she could get away with by humiliating you. And of course the feminazi witches had no reply to your honest question. They’re dishonest and they know it. I’m confident they were quite free with the use of the word male both before and after the witches accused you of thoughtcrime and put you on trial. I myself had a similar experience with a feminazi who was very casual with calling men “guys” after I used the word “gals” (once) in a similar situation with the sexes reversed.

    By now some readers may be asking, “Hey Micha, you use female instead of woman a whole lot. What’s with that?” Heh. Turnabout is fair play. And when somebody mentions it, I get a chance to point out what the feminazis/femmunists have been doing all along.

  327. Aquinas Dad says:

    TFH,
    Why don’t you *ask* me what my objections to “game” are? I Should probably have it as a file to C&P. My main objections are;
    1) The hierarchy of ‘alpha/beta/gamma/etc.’ is obviously false
    2) The pseudo-psychology of female motivation espoused by “game” is obviously false.
    3) “Game” beliefs on sexual pairing (the 80/20 rule or 90/10 rule, depending) are obviously false
    4) The ancillary stuff (dress well, exercise, conversational skills, etc.) is done much better by other, older, tested methods that have nothing to do with 1,2, and 3
    5) PUAs admit that even under optimal conditions “game” just doesn’t work that well, meaning that its ‘success’ can be seen as equal or less than any other BCAYCDI system

    See? I don’t mention (or care about) LTRs.
    And I even bought several of the ebooks.

  328. Desiderius says:

    “Donal Graeme was kind enough to put my list of suggested books, seminars, etc. on his blog. I suggest you check it out.”

    Why is it, do you imagine, that such works are now so widely unknown, and if known, unread?*

    Surely, in exchange for the billions is tuition paid by the millions of Sandra Flukes (and through our ever-beneficent government, posterity such as it is likely to be) the fine institutions of higher learning established by the courageous and selfless toil of your forefathers in faith are taking care to provide a thorough grounding in biblical teaching and traditional doctrine.

    Right? Buehler?

    * – heh, finally found your list, I had expected something with a bit more heft. Ah Dale Carnegie, lion of the church. Well, you’re no GBFM. And Carnegie beats the PC crap. Barely.

    Nice Syllabus of Errors, btw. Good luck with that.

    Nonetheless, the Graeme link is well worth a look, lots of good stuff there.

  329. deti says:

    Aquinas Dad:

    Instead of ridiculing and mocking me, thereby opening yourself up to further mockery, why don’t you just answer the question?

    Masculinity 101. Post a syllabus, an outline, a paragraph or two. Don’t post a list of books and things to read. Post an outline.

    You fancy yourself a teacher. So teach, or consign yourself to irrelevance.

  330. Aquinas Dad says:

    Deti,
    What is this fascination with making it about me? And pointing out you keep asking the same questions over and over is not mockery, it is pointing out that you keep making refutable claims, being refuted, and repeating the process.
    No more. No less.
    You want to know what masculinity is? Read the Imitation of Christ. Follow the advice inside it.
    There. Done. Everything else is commentary.
    It is one of the most read books in the world, BTW; you should have no trouble finding a copy.

  331. HawkandRock says:

    “1) The hierarchy of ‘alpha/beta/gamma/etc.’ is obviously false”
    Hard to dispute. It is rank idiocy defended only by the simple minded and those who fancy themselves “natural alphas.” Lulz. It has, at this point, even ceased to be useful in non-literal shorthand discourse.

    “2) The pseudo-psychology of female motivation espoused by “game” is obviously false.”
    Disagree. Evolutionary psychology — on which a lot of “game” charlatans try to use as ‘scientific’ support for the seminars they peddle — is largely half-baked teleology. I’ll grant you that. However, I would not go so far as to say that all it’s observations are “obviously false.” On the contrary, some are so obviously true that you risk your credibility denying them — e.g., females are hardwired to be attracted to men with the ability to dominate; females are hardwired to deceive (even themselves) about a host of things including their own time of optimal fertility; females are repulsed by ‘inferior’ males more intensely than they are attracted to ‘superior’ males… etc.

    3) “Game” beliefs on sexual pairing (the 80/20 rule or 90/10 rule, depending) are obviously false

    Disagree. See the OKC analysis that found that women rated about 80% of males below average in looks.

    “4) The ancillary stuff (dress well, exercise, conversational skills, etc.) is done much better by other, older, tested methods that have nothing to do with 1,2, and 3″

    So what? I don’t understand the relevance of this disagreement.

    “5) PUAs admit that even under optimal conditions “game” just doesn’t work that well, meaning that its ‘success’ can be seen as equal or less than any other BCAYCDI system”

    Bottom line. It would be folly to discount all or even most of the body of knowledge that has grown up around the “game” community. There is much useful information there.

  332. deti says:

    @ Aquinas Dad:

    Thanks for demonstrating your irrelevance to this exercise.

  333. Casey says:

    @ 5iver
    @ Anon

    I read the articles that each of you posted.
    It is truly a wonder to watch the decline of women from a distance.

    The ONE substantial thing a woman can offer a man is her YOUTH.

    In one article, you have a ‘meh’ 30 something female author who has HIT head first into the WALL and she does not see it.

    In the other article, you have a divorced, pretty, 27 year old, olympic snowboarder….who has 8 to 13 good years left in her; but is intent on pissing them away by ‘having fun’.

    Although she does acknowlege when it come to marriage & family…..good old reliable Beta is best.

    Just don’t assume he is going to hang around for your sloppy seconds into his 30s. (as the female author found out)

  334. Random Angeleno says:

    The link put out by Desiderius to Donal’s blog somehow leads me to the wrong page. It’s okay, I found AD’s list. #1, though incomplete, it’s not bad, some interesting titles. #2, I object to that AD put his affiliate links in his post. If I’m interested in buying any of the books, I will not go there. He can put his affiliate links on his own blog or website. If he’s as good as he thinks he is in his own mind, then he can answer Deti’s challenge, set up his own site with that answer and drive traffic there.

    If nothing else, I think AD has his heart in the right place, but he can do a lot better than he has shown. A good start would be remembering that most of us live in the world, not in some traditionalist cocoon as he does. As a Catholic, I admire the particular types of Catholicism that he marches to though I can’t find any of them near me. But I live where I live and that is not changing any time soon so I have no choice but to be in the world even as I do my best to not be of it.

  335. Desiderius says:

    “You want to know what masculinity is? Read the Imitation of Christ. Follow the advice inside it.”

    Would you recommend it to your daughter? If not, why not? If so, what is distinctively masculine about it?

    Note: the church that raised me and gave me, at 16, a copy of the Imitation (that I’ve always cherished and read several times) is now afraid to say the word “Father”, to the extent that we’ve bowdlerized the doxology into God, Christ, and Holy Spirit.

    Are you willing to do likewise?

  336. TFH says:

    Aquinas Dad,

    Why don’t you *ask* me what my objections to “game” are?

    Because you and those like you, have too little grasp of the subject for that to even be useful. That was apparent both before and after your comment where you claim that visibly true facts are ‘obviously false’…….

    The pseudo-psychology of female motivation espoused by “game” is obviously false.

    Actually, it is obviously true. Or at least to anyone with a lot of direct experience in bedding women.

    “Game” beliefs on sexual pairing (the 80/20 rule or 90/10 rule, depending) are obviously false

    This is also obviously true. If it were in the nature of humans to form 1:1 pairs, then very few men would be single at any given time. Nevermind the mating structure of our closest relatives, chimpanzees and gorillas, where all the women mate with one of the top males, and the other males get nothing (but are still expected to die in fighting off leopards, etc. to keep the females safe)…

    You simply have no clue…

  337. TFH says:

    I notice how Aquinas Dad, and DeNihilist (denialist…..heh) before him come out and declare that something is ‘obviously false’, without providing any proof or logic of their own…

    It is ‘obviously false’………just…..because……

    Oh, and how did I miss this from Aquarius Dad :

    I don’t mention (or care about) LTRs.

    Proving my point. You believe Game is of no use in LTRs, which is central to the denialist worldview….

  338. Retrenched says:

    Funny how that works out. Women stop giving men credit, acknowledgement and gratitude for the million little things that men do for them every day, but then they’re outraged and appalled when men stop doing those things for them.

  339. TFH says:

    Retrenched,

    Women don’t understand cause and effect very well.

    I wish Mizz Kroslakova could read this article and the comments. Too many of the articles here are not (to our knowledge) ever reaching the subject. Jenny Erikson was one exception to that…

  340. MarcusD says:

    Donal has a good quote on his blog:

    “When people get used to preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination.”
    -Thomas Sowell

    Reminds me of the “two-factor theory” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-factor_theory) where the presence of something has no positive effect, but the absence has a negative effect.

  341. jf12 says:

    Ask not what you can do for Katarina Kroslakova, ask what she can do for you.

    “Excuse me miss, but we were sitting here gawking at you struggling with your heavy bag, and maybe you can help us out? Please tell us why you brought that thing on board.”

  342. Anonymous Reader says:

    Aquinas Dad
    Anonymous,
    You asked for a definition of passive-aggressive. Thank you for giving us all a *demonstration* of it.

    Please explain how my simple request for information fits your cut-and-paste definition.

    Then you can explain how Game, which you have claimed is passive-aggressive, fits your cut-and-paste definition.

    Or you can ask Zippy Catholic to bail you out.

  343. Anonymous Reader says:

    Aquinas Dad, you get asked the question by Deti repeatedly because you keep evading it.

    Consider this little hypothetical drama:

    Person A: “I am a master of Subject Z and teach it”
    Person B: “Ok, show me. Give me an example of Subject Z 101″
    Person A: “Huff! Puff! Why are you making this all about me? How dare you question my expertise! I have a list of books that I once posted!”
    Person B: “So, you can’t really teach this topic. Are you sure you are an expert?”
    Person A: “I don’t have to take this! I’m not answering you!”

    Question: Is anyone convinced that Person A is really an expert on Subject Z, or does it rather appear Person A is just a poseur?

    And Aquinas Dad, your objections to Game are ridiculous, for the simple reason that your objections do not match reality.

    Your lack of interest in long term relationships is interesting, because marriage is a “long term relationship”. Therefore, you are not interested in the promotion of marriage, right?

  344. Aquinas Dad says:

    TFH,
    You wrote,
    “Actually, it [the "game" idea of female psychology] is obviously true.”
    Then why are women less liley to cheat within marriage than men? This is a well documented fact and, if the hypergamy theory and the ‘tingles’ concept were correct it would not be.
    Further, as demonstrated by the actual logs of roosh, etc. “game” works less than 10% of the time under the best possible conditions *if it works at all*. If “game” gave actual insights into female psychology why does it get the desired results so seldom for the proclaimed masters and teachers?

    You also wrote,
    “This [that 20%/10% of the men sleep with 80%/90% of the women] is also obviously true.”
    Reality says you’re wrong. Analysis of sexual behavior that corrects for bias finds that the vast majority of women AND men has roughly equal numbers of sexual partners (and that number is low – 2 to 4), a small percentage has an N of 0, and another small percentage (about 12% of both men and women) have high partner counts.
    IN OTHER WORDS, science says that about 12% of men sleep with about 12% of women *a lot* while most people have a fling or three and settle down.
    Now, stating ‘ “game” is an attempt to act like the 12% that sleep with about 12% of the women’? Sure,that sounds accurate. It also reflects the tactics of PUAs (pre-selection of women, where to approach, etc) who admit, yes, that “game” doesn’t work on all women.

    I define “game” as ‘those things unique to “game”‘ which is, roughly, *the list I gave you*.

  345. Aquinas Dad says:

    Anonymous,
    Too bad that doesn’t apply to me.
    The actual sequence is more akin to this
    Deti: “No one but people who teach “game” are talking about this”
    Me: “That’s not true”
    Deti: “Oh, yeah? Who?”
    Me: “[provide a list of books and seminars]. I have personally worked with some of these groups so I know they exist”
    Deti: “I have never heard of those”
    Me: “Your ignorance is not my problem”
    the next day
    Deti: “No one but people who teach “game” are talking about this”
    Me: “That’s not true”
    Deti: “Oh, yeah? Who?”
    Me: “[provide a list of books and seminars]”
    Deti: “I have never heard of those”
    Me: “I told you about this yesterday”

    repeat several times.

    I have referred to myself *when directly asked about myself*.
    ‘Why were you working with some of those groups?’ = ‘I teach theology of engagement, courtship, marriage, masculinity, etc’
    ‘Why are you reading about “game” if you aren’t interested in promiscuity?’ = ‘I am writing a book on courtship and engagement and people asked me to address “game”‘

    Ask me about “game” and I talk about “game” and related topics. Ask me about ‘other resources on approaching women, etc.’ I provide them. My own stuff isn’t in there.

    And why should it be? I primarily teach priests, monks, and fellow theologians with classes for young teens on chastity and why they shouldn’t date as a sideline. Not exactly for this audience, is it?

    Random Angeleno – those are not my affiliate links.

  346. Anonymous Reader says:

    Aquinas Dad to TFH
    Then why are women less liley to cheat within marriage than men? This is a well documented fact and, if the hypergamy theory and the ‘tingles’ concept were correct it would not be.

    Two points:
    First, please provide a cite to support your claim that women are less likely to cheat within marriage than men.

    Second, please explain why women file 60% or more of divorce actions in the US, if hypergamy does not exist.

  347. MarcusD says:

    Reality says you’re wrong. Analysis of sexual behavior that corrects for bias finds that the vast majority of women AND men has roughly equal numbers of sexual partners (and that number is low – 2 to 4), a small percentage has an N of 0, and another small percentage (about 12% of both men and women) have high partner counts.

    I’d be interested in seeing a source for that. It’s also worth noting that standard deviation is important for understanding the mean.

  348. Aquinas Dad says:

    HawkandRock,
    for your point #2 – the “game” crowd and their supporters expand this to the point that women have no agency which is just silly.
    On #3 – see above – actual research shows that about 12% of men and 12% of women are sleeping with each other A LOT, not that 10-20% of the men are sleeping with 80% of the women.
    On #4 – the stuff that isn’t unique to “game” (see 1, 2, and 3) is stuff that “game” isn’t very good at
    On #5 – “game” is only a placebo, so why waste your time with it?

  349. MarcusD says:

    @AR

    re: divorce filing rates, an interesting look at historical rates: http://www.unc.edu/courses/2010fall/econ/586/001/Readings/Brinig.pdf

  350. Anonymous Reader says:

    Aquinas Dad on his seminars:
    I primarily teach priests, monks, and fellow theologians with classes for young teens on chastity and why they shouldn’t date as a sideline. Not exactly for this audience, is it?

    It is not exactly what you have been claiming in various fora, either. Few, or none, of the above are likely to have to deal with a rebellious wife, for example, which is definitely a topic that married men need to learn (excepting natural alphas, of course). Game can be applied in a marriage to at least manage a rebellious wife. There are men who have done this, and some post here on this forum. So when you claim on the one hand that there is no Game, that Game is bunk, etc. and then seem unable to have anything useful to offer married men who have lost leadership in their marriage, or who never even had it in the first place…why should any man take you seriously?

    “Sucks to be you” seems to be your position towards men who are in danger of being frivorced.

    You might consider thinking about why some men find that to be annoying…

  351. Anonymous Reader says:

    Aquinas Dad
    HawkandRock,
    for your point #2 – the “game” crowd and their supporters expand this to the point that women have no agency which is just silly.

    You are funny. IBB is the only individual I know who claims that women have no agency, and he/she/they don’t understand game either.

  352. Anonymous Reader says:

    MarcusD, if memory serves me, Dalrock has referenced this paper here on the site at least one time. It is indeed an interesting document, if one is interested in learning about the reality of divorce.

    It is facts such as those explored in that paper that have led me to refer to “no-fault” divorce by a more accurate term, “Men’s Fault” divorce.

  353. jf12 says:

    Re: historical divorce rates. Interesting indeed that no mention was made of the fact that many wives simply no longer wish to feel they ought to have sex with that man.

  354. Mark says:

    @MarcusD

    I received an email from a colleague of mine the other day.With the heading…”We are missing a great opportunity! …….https://www.lendgo.com/lag/mortgage/gt/14/?PHPSESSID=j07fdnqlrinoi42jr39ct57ua4

    Then I replied to his email that 70% of the “mortgage meltdown” in 2009 was “wimminz owned properties”….and that “short selling” those ‘debts’ was a thing of the past…..IMHO.

    ……he also backed up his argument from this link…. ………………….http://www.businessweek.com/1998/28/b3586044.htm……………which is 14 years old…..that is the clincher!(it is not getting any better)……..but,I also reminded him that there is no inflation in the economy(prices on the properties are not rising….or barely)

    ……..and the he replied once again with this link…….http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jun/03/opinion/la-oe-hymowitz-unmarried-mothers-20120603………..(I liked this article…….”The Modern Day Independent Woman”…….Translation:…….”We have created a dynasty of “Females Bums”….sucking the taxpayers dick…..cuz the world owes them a living.Ya Right!

    Note:I do not disregard my friend’s better judgement concerning economic trends.He is very insightful.My problem is that I see Single Wimminz as so much in debt that they cannot obtain a mortgage………and inflation is ‘nil’….at least in this area.

  355. deti says:

    @ AR:

    “Sucks to be you” seems to be your position towards men who are in danger of being frivorced.
    “You might consider thinking about why some men find that to be annoying…”

    Eh. I don’t find Aquinas Dad to be annoying so much as simply not relevant to the sexual and marital issues men face.

  356. feeriker says:

    It’s an alternative to “womyn,” that is, removing the “man” from “woman.”

    Actually, I was really asleep at the switch on that one. “Woperson” is an unsatisfactory alternative for the feministas, in that it contains the word “son,” a masculine [*shudder*] noun describing a male offspring. What I should have used was either “wobeing” or “wocreature.” Hopefully one of our more observant regulars will quickly correct me should I ever make such a grotesque error again in the future.

  357. Fred Flangeky, Order of Lennon says:

    One of the biggest larfs I ever had about this was at a super-serious NY Times Magazine article posted i the late 70′s by two gender-studies profs. Their thesis was we needed a new third-person pronoun that was not he or she, and did not contain that patriarchal construct “MAN” as in MANkind or woMAN or even Jimmy Carter’s not-bad approximation, huMANkind. “He or she” was too cumbersome; s/he had “he” in it. Deliberate misspellings like womYn or WOMON were insufficient; they still sounded too much like there was some oppressive MAN in there. Their solution: “genkind.” With “gen” instead of he or she to be completely neutral. Never took off. Stillborn, you might say. Hilarity ensued.

  358. feeriker says:

    In the other article, you have a divorced, pretty, 27 year old, olympic snowboarder….who has 8 to 13 good years left in her; but is intent on pissing them away by ‘having fun’.

    Is it just me, or were the females of Team USA, collectively, a particularly annoying and repulsive bunch, not to mention mostly mediocre athletes? (Maybe it is just me. This was, after all, my first “red pill” Winter Olympiad.)

  359. Anonymous Reader says:

    deti
    Eh. I don’t find Aquinas Dad to be annoying so much as simply not relevant to the sexual and marital issues men face.

    This is ironic, you are giving me the same advice I gave you at JustFourGuys on the “natural” thread. You are correct, he’s irrelevant. Sometimes the ankle-biting aspect of tradcons is annoying, but the best path forward is to ignore their ignorance and concentrate on helping men who need it.

    Speaking of which, my friend who last month announced the demolition of his 15+ year marriage seems to be calming down some. He recently observed that living alone again after a number of years is not nearly the trial he expected it to be, because he no longer has to walk on eggshells continuously in his own house. “You know, I really don’t miss her”, he said the last time we talked. He misses the child that his now ex has custody of, naturally. But the peace and quiet he is experiencing now apparently is very soothing to him. I’m trying to keep in touch with him (different town) because I want to be available if he starts slipping into depression.

    It’s still very sad, because I remember when he married, and some of the good and bad times since then. If he’d learned some Game back maybe 5 to 8 years ago, the situation might have been salvaged, to the benefit of all concerned.

  360. Anonymous Reader says:

    Fred
    Their solution: “genkind.” With “gen” instead of he or she to be completely neutral.

    It mutated in the 90′s or early 00′s, for some time I’ve been encountering “hir” in the singular and “zir” in the plural versions of unisex-talk. For some reason these letter collections often bring to mind a really ugly tranny…

  361. whatever says:


    Reality says you’re wrong. Analysis of sexual behavior that corrects for bias finds that the vast majority of women AND men has roughly equal numbers of sexual partners (and that number is low – 2 to 4), a small percentage has an N of 0, and another small percentage (about 12% of both men and women) have high partner counts.

    Reality indicates that these numbers are totally stupid lies.

    The vast majority of women and men have an N between 2 and 4? In America? Are you an f’ing retard or a pathological liar? It’s really hard to tell. I mean, sure, it would be somewhat difficult for even a slut to blast through an N of 4… from zero… in a month. But women are getting married “on the average” at around 27 years of age. That gives them roughly ELEVEN YEARS to have five sexual partners…. including their husband. So it’s pretty stupid to even claim an N of four AT FIRST MARRIAGE. Now once we have a divorce, and the woman goes back out on the market… still, 4 partners in eleven years is pretty chaste. If a woman managed that, then I’d be fairly impressed.

    Wait, I forgot you said an N of TWO TO FOUR. So two… counting husband…. would be ONE SINGLE OTHER RELATIONSHIP in ELEVEN YEARS. I think we’ve safely entered the territory of extreme self-control or frigidity.

    Now, America is a sexual desert, so the total amount of sex these people are having is quite small, but they are also treacherous vermin, so it’s with different people.

    You just try selling retarded nonsense to the saps, eh?

  362. Random Angeleno says:

    So AD, you’re essentially going to tell us that Keoni (blogs at Hawaiian Libertarian) is full of crap?

    The point being, in today’s society, marriage vows can no longer be considered sufficient to hold a woman to her place in her marriage and the home she makes with her husband. Not even a Catholic woman. 65% of divorces are initiated by women, doesn’t that tell you something? Maybe in your parish the vows are sufficient to the task and that’s why you’re having a hard time believing not all couples are like the ones in your parish. Go check out some of the marriage breakup threads in Catholic Answers for yourself. More input is required and it has to come from her husband. This is something you appear to be very obtuse to.

  363. jf12 says:

    Wopersyn still has a “p” in it, though.

  364. jf12 says:

    Woversyn … sounds feral … ooh, mayhap a bestial form aligned with a combo vampiric/gorgonic planeswalker.

  365. MarcusD says:

    Well, “vif” would work (where the word “wife” comes from). Just to make Old Norse words edgy, I recommend spelling it “vyf” (to be pronounced the same way as “vif”).

  366. TFH says:

    Why are people saying that just 60-65% of divorces are initiated by women.

    It is 70-90%. 70% of the time, the woman files, and the other 20% of the time, the woman cheats or otherwise leaves the man with no choice but to file. At any rate, the man is the wronged party about to be greatly harmed in 90% of the cases….

  367. TFH says:

    Look at the proof by assertion from Aquinas Dud :

    Reality says you’re wrong.
    This is obviously false

    He actually thinks that most single women, even if they are still single at 30, have had 2-4 sexual partners. In other words, he is extrapolating his own unfruitful single-guy days onto others, and he also believes women are truthful about their partner count.

    Krauser had sex with 27 different women in a year.

    My total is in the high teens, without me really trying to inflate that number.

    The typical urban woman in the US has sex on the second date. Some on the first, but the fat part of the bell curve does it on the second date…

    Oh, but, ‘reality says X’, and ‘Y is obviously false’ is sufficient proof for this Aquinas Dud person…

    If anything, he is proving how much of a filter Game awareness really is, for it would suck to be a Game denialist like this procession of characters…

  368. MarcusD says:

    The typical urban woman in the US has sex on the second date.

    I’m curious as to how you came to that conclusion. That is, what are your sources for that claim?

    I’ve yet to come across a study that details “nth date” statistics that has a large randomized sample.

  369. Minesweeper says:

    [i]“TFH says:
    February 27, 2014 at 1:14 am
    Why are people saying that just 60-65% of divorces are initiated by women.

    It is 70-90%. 70% of the time, the woman files, and the other 20% of the time, the woman cheats or otherwise leaves the man with no choice but to file. At any rate, the man is the wronged party about to be greatly harmed in 90% of the cases….[/i]
    You are correct that divorce is 90% female ordered – I can confirm also through dozens of divorces that I know about that ratio stays the same – in fact its actually quite a rarity to find a male initiated divorcee – shake his hand when you do, but I would say (as a divorced guy and know many others) that included in the 20% that you mention he [b]has[/b] to file to pay for the divorce as part of his settlement towards the poor obviously slighted dear that she is.

  370. TFH says:

    MarcusD,

    I’m curious as to how you came to that conclusion. That is, what are your sources for that claim?

    1) Personal experience
    2) Experience from other Game practitioners, those who chronicle these things accurately and without exaggeration. Plus, I doubt too many men here doubt the second-date threshold..
    3) Various surveys indicating that 30% of women have sex on the first date, meaning the majority have it by the second.
    4) The 7-hour rule in Game, which indicates that a woman will have sex 4-10 hours after meeting a man (also corroborated by countless field reports).

    I mean, sex by the second date is pretty much par for women who are casually dating in an urban setting. Remember, they expect to be courted for a decade or more before marriage to beta bucks… Surely that decade involves lots of carousel riding…

  371. Anonymous Reader says:

    TFH
    Why are people saying that just 60-65% of divorces are initiated by women.

    In order to avoid overstating the problem. If someone wished to study “number of divorces initiated by women” there is existing research in which actual filings (paper objects) were examined. It provides a number to hook to “most”, as in “most divorces are filed by women” or “the majority of divorces are filed by women”, because the point of making that statement is to buttress larger arguments, not as an end in and of itself.

    It is 70-90%. 70% of the time, the woman files, and the other 20% of the time, the woman cheats or otherwise leaves the man with no choice but to file. At any rate, the man is the wronged party about to be greatly harmed in 90% of the cases….

    This is, however, an extrapolation rather than a documentable fact. It may well be true that woman-caused divorce is over 80%, and that would be worth studying, but it is not citable.

    The fact that the majority of divorce actions are filed by women, and of those actions the vast majority are not filed for adultery or abandonment, or violent attacks, is the key fact to deploy against those who pedestalize women just because women’s promiscuity-style happens to look “better” than the style of men. Remember, women are promiscuous by choice with a series of men, like the rungs in a ladder, because of their hypergamy. This looks, to the ignorant, like a woman who just had repeated bad luck…”oh, dear, her first boyfriend wasn’t as manly as he should have been; oh, golly, her second boyfriend may have cheated on her… oh, her sixth boyfriend took a job far away from her family; oh, her first husband didn’t make as much money as he should have to support her and her children; oh, her second husband was a workaholic…too bad all those men let her down…”

    The facts, the cold facts, are plain enough, no need to gild the lily.

  372. Minesweeper says:

    MarcusD says:
    February 27, 2014 at 3:31 am
    As the aptly yclept divorce industry spake: http://www.divorce.usu.edu/files/uploads/Lesson3.pdf

    That link you provided is practically a feminists wet dream, standard man bad women good, constantly releasing material like this will only encourage men to never marry if they have any sense.

  373. MarcusD says:

    3) Various surveys indicating that 30% of women have sex on the first date, meaning the majority have it by the second.

    Not quite the source I was looking for, but better than anecdotes (still, there’s a lot of selection bias). Your second claim is not actually supported (even though, on its face, it seems reasonable given the first figure). “Game practitioners,” regardless of whether they are accurate in their reports or not, do not make up a randomized sample, and their “partners” are not a randomized sample either – it’s a biased sample. (1) and (4) follow from (2) – biased samples, again.

  374. MarcusD says:

    That link you provided is practically a feminists wet dream, standard man bad women good, constantly releasing material like this will only encourage men to never marry if they have any sense.

    Yes, it’s amazing people follow along with it. I can’t really be surprised that men are avoiding marriage is larger numbers now, especially when even the most minor things are considered abuse.

  375. MarcusD says:

    Re: abusive relationships: something amusing I came across: http://en.webfail.com/5440301c3cf

  376. Minesweeper says:

    MarcusD says:
    I can’t really be surprised that men are avoiding marriage is larger numbers now, especially when even the most minor things are considered abuse.

    Its quite clear from that article that even though its not explicitly explained, that any abuse occurring in the marriage will be done by the male, incredible.

  377. Minesweeper says:

    MarcusD, Interestingly when I put my ex through the table ‘A . Assessing Intimate Partner Terrorism’ she scores 36!

    Note how they label the offender table ‘My Spouse’ which is very a female derived notation. I often hear women say “My Husband\My Boyfriend\My Fiancée” etc.

    It should say ‘Your Spouse’ which seems like the way a male would describe your other partner. But I guess this is intentional.

  378. Aquinas Dad says:

    Random Angeleno,
    I have no idea what you are referring to about Keoni. And ‘just vows’ has never been enough for men or women, has it?
    There is no dichotomy of ‘either “game” or nothing’

  379. AD,

    And ‘just vows’ has never been enough for men or women, has it?

    Yes it has… at one time. It is not enough anymore but that is because we altered man’s law on marriage so much that it has corrupted what was once sacred about marriage from God’s perspective. Random Angeleno is right. People either don’t take the marriage vows seriously or (increasingly) they are writing their own vows (which is wrong) probably because they know they are either unwilling or incapable of honoring the traditional marriage vows. What they are doing is altering marriage to accomidate their own limitations as human beings, to enable them in their unwillingness to be a better spouse and putting God’s marriage first.

    AD, never say never.

  380. Aquinas Dad says:

    IBB,
    You wrote,
    “…we altered man’s law on marriage…”
    Exactly – law, not just vows. Once the law was divorced from the reality of the nature and importance of marriage then people were free to ignore their vows without legal penalty. By certain groups working hard to change perception there are no longer as many, if any, social and cultural penalties to breaking your vows, either.
    And yet even when there were social penalties, cultural disapproval, and strict divorce laws – people still got divorced, abandoned, etc.
    The key element has always been the intent, character, and will of the man and woman taking the vows.

  381. AD,

    Exactly – law, not just vows. Once the law was divorced from the reality of the nature and importance of marriage then people were free to ignore their vows without legal penalty. By certain groups working hard to change perception there are no longer as many, if any, social and cultural penalties to breaking your vows, either.

    Yes.

    And yet even when there were social penalties, cultural disapproval, and strict divorce laws – people still got divorced, abandoned, etc.

    Yes, but only a fraction of what we have now. What we had then, marriage (as an institution) mostly worked for all social classes. It does not today.

    The key element has always been the intent, character, and will of the man and woman taking the vows

    Yes but still, without no-fault-divorce law, neither spouse had to worry about the character of their spouse from a threatpoint standpoint because if they left, they weren’t going to get the cash and prizes. If they violated their vows, they get no reward on this planet from man’s law.

    That is the difference as I see it.

  382. Kari Hurtta says:

    tacomaster2:

    I overheard her talking that he is now dating a 19 year old (also said he’s 33) and that’s “practically statutory rape!”. I tried to hold in my laughter but was unsuccessful.

    So this nurse was saying that a 19 year old could not consent for dating.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s