Fragile Feminism

Senior Editor and cofounder of The Verge Chris Plante explains the extreme fragility of feminist progress.  One man wearing the wrong shirt can bring the whole system down:

This is the sort of casual misogyny that stops women from entering certain scientific fields. They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome.

Hat Tip Vox Day.

Update:  See also Instapundit’s take on shirtgate here.

Just to be clear, Rose Eveleth of The Atlantic is a horrible person, who took what should have been one of the best days of a man’s life, a day of doing something no human beings had ever done before, and ruined it in order to feel important. She should be apologizing, not taking Twitter victory laps.

This entry was posted in Feminist Territory Marking, Feminists, Foolishness, Instapundit, Social Justice Warriors. Bookmark the permalink.

185 Responses to Fragile Feminism

  1. A mentioned on my Twitter: it’s amazing how readily they overextend sexual objectification of women (actually a real thing and, when it happens, genuinely harmful to those concerned) yet ignore every other way a human can be objectified, or even condone and encourage it. It’s fine to treat a “mere” male barista as trash because he’s just a coffee server. It’s fine to attack and personally insult antifeminists because we’re just record-players for men. It’s fine to cheat on your partner because they’re just a paycheck and a sex toy. That doesn’t count as objectification, somehow. But it’s not OK to print an object (a cartoon) that resembles a woman (a human being) on a t-shirt (an object) in a manner that suggests it’s an object (a sex toy, display or prize). That counts as objectification. Because it offends /the feminist/ and feminists’ feelings are all that truly matter.

  2. earl says:

    “This is the sort of casual misogyny that stops women from entering certain scientific fields. They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome.”

    Right…it has nothing to do with the hard math and science that comes along with it. I saw more women drop out of those majors because of that.

  3. Blake says:

    I think the shirt was in poor taste, but misogynistic war on women? Seriously? Some people have way too much time on their hands.

    If the offended ladies had been making sammiches rather than watching tv, there wouldn’t be a problem.

  4. They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome.

    Another reason why I hate feminism, the constant needless creating of strawmen. This comment has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not a woman can do whatever a man can do. Since when was it required that a woman feel “welcome” in order to enter a field dominated by men?

  5. ZombieShame says:

    500 women at my university were preparing to graduate with STEM degrees this spring. They saw that shirt and 493 of them DROPPED OUT! This is scandalous!

  6. BradA says:

    See the whole #gamergate issue. Women and their supporters have had no trouble pushing their way into what the consider a quite sexist field. Complain and control is the tactic as the SJWs march on.

  7. Anonymous age 72 says:

    Cheap rationalization. “I’d a been a Ph.D. in nuclear physics but a man had a sexist slogan on his t-shirt.” Hee, hee. Yeah, right, and I’d be sleeping with Kim K. but a woman once insulted my masculinity. How funny!

    Way back in high school, a lad got all motivated to ask the hot cheerleader out on a date. She laughed very rudely, and ran around telling everyone. His comment, “It’s okay, I didn’t really want to date her, her butt is too fat.”

    As has been pointed out so eloquently, they don’t go into those fields because they involve too much work, period, end of debate.

  8. Anonymous age 72 says:

    And, um, of course, most women aren’t smart enough, JUST AS MOST MEN AREN’T SMART ENOUGH!

  9. Pingback: Fragile Feminism | Manosphere.com

  10. Alyosha says:

    Let the creators of the “starter husband” and “Boys are stupid. Throw rocks at them.” lecture me about the evils of objectification? Hahahahaha

    Nope.

  11. Anonymous age 72 says:

    TFH says:
    November 14, 2014 at 11:03 am

    Great idea. Let’s all get Girls of Gor shirts and wear them to work, thus killing in cold blood any of the strong independent women who see them.

    No, the stupid judges would award them billions in any law suit that came up on the topic.

  12. Anchorman says:

    “This is the sort of casual misogyny that stops women from entering certain scientific fields. They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome.”

    I’ll ask my stripper when I see her after I go to the bar and get a couple drinks from the hot little number slinging shots for Absolut.

  13. Anonymous age 72 says:

    TFH says:
    November 14, 2014 at 11:05 am

    Amen to that. I think it was in the old diaries of women in the 19th Century, when a woman commented on the then new lib movement, saying that when men worked with women they would lose all respect for women. No kidding!

  14. pjblue says:

    Feminist: I don’t care that you have cured every known disease, your shirt upsets me a little so I’m going to play my perpetual victim card and complain, and hopefully get you sacked.

  15. pavetack says:

    No, they see something like this and don’t feel welcome: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTYwMFgxMzIz/z/G84AAOxyVaBS-TeX/$_35.JPG

  16. elmer says:

    Thanks to the efforts of the “manosphere” the feminist structural edifice is crumbling, as revealed in the recent electoral results. The usual perps are dazed and confused. It’s no fun even laffing at their self-parody anymore. The thrill is gone. It’s as if losing an enemy is worse than losing a friend. In the vacuum I may take up a new hobby or start a business.

  17. No one objectifies women more than feminists. Feminists will flap their their tits around in public and then complain about a man wearing a shirt. The one thing feminists do really well is to destroy their own credibility.

  18. innocentbystanderboston says:
    November 14, 2014 at 10:52 am
    “…Since when was it required that a woman feel “welcome” in order to enter a field dominated by men?”

    Because…you know…PATRIARCHY!!!
    (sarcasm off)

  19. crowhill says:

    I was at a professional conference that had a “women’s leadership in the industry” section. The next morning I had the bad fortune of sitting at a table where people were discussing the session, and a woman mentioned she thought it was helpful because women in the industry need mentors. She would be too intimidated to ask a man a question, but she would be willing to ask a woman.

    Right. Exactly the type we need as leaders. People who are too intimidated to ask a question.

  20. Anonymous age 72 says:

    But, stats reportedly show that women don’t mentor other women.

  21. BradA says:

    I think Vox linked a study recently that women don’t want to work for female bosses. That puts an arrow through the idea we need more women in X field.

    My wife works in a pharmacy that is almost entirely female. She has said several times that they need much less estrogen there!

  22. earl says:

    “No, they see something like this and don’t feel welcome: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTYwMFgxMzIz/z/G84AAOxyVaBS-TeX/$_35.JPG

    That class still gives me nightmares. And that was only one of about 4 different Calc classes I had to take.

    And then there was Physics.

    If a woman goes through all that without a mental breakdown…I doubt a shirt will make her crumble.

  23. Martel says:

    @ Anonymous: “As has been pointed out so eloquently, they don’t go into those fields because they involve too much work, period, end of debate.”

    There is a bit more to it than that, like how they guys they’d spend all their time around in those fields tend to be socially awkward.

    And those ugly lab coats.

    @ Crowhill: “I wonder if there’s a trigger word or phrase that can be used against women to get them to quit this stuff.” (I tried posting this on Vox’s site but it won’t let me.)

    Both “grow up” and “get over yourself” work well IF you’ve got a strong frame, especially if people listening in are friendly to her views. If you’re intimidating enough to scare everybody into not responding you’re golden, or if you can handle it when all the White Knights jump to her defense.

    If it’s just you and her or you have a reasonable audience, both work great.

  24. Anonymous age 72 says:

    In the ole’ radio factory over 30 years ago, we got a new technician, a moderately obese Native American woman. She had been an unwed mother in OK. Ok does not like giving money to unwed mothers, at least not back then.

    So they signed her up in electronics school. Same sort of school most of our techs attended. She applied and passed our rather hard entry test, and was hired. Which meant she left OK forever. Success!

    She was in a section where the other men resented women techs. So, she would come over to my section when she needed help.

    One day she came over just ranting. I am not sure what her problem was, but she was whining that she was just a woman and couldn’t do it. Etcetera, blach, blah whine, belly ache.

    Usually, I was helpful and sympathetic, but in this case I did not show sympathy at all. I cussed her out big time. I told her, paraphrased, “Don’t give me that %^&#@. You went to the same %^&#@ schools we did. You passed the %^&#@ test same as we did. You can do it! Stop the %^&#@ whining. This work is hard. if it weren’t, they wouldn’t need us. Now get your %^&#@ ass back over there and stick to it. When I started here I had to go through the same %^&#@ stress you are having. The first four days I didn’t understand one word the trainer told me. I was just sick and assumed I’d be back shoveling grain at the feed mill. I stuck to it and now I am a senior technician. You will be too, but you gotta’ stop the %^&#@ whining and buckle down.”

    %^&#@ includes several consecutive F words, heh, heh.

    If I had said things like poor baby and similar shit, she’d have given up. She needed a boot in her butt at that moment and I gave it to her. She passed probation very well. She still considered me a friend last time I saw her in the 90’s.

  25. Will S. says:

    Reblogged this on Patriactionary and commented:
    From the prog rant:

    They see a poster of greased up women in a colleague’s office and they know they aren’t respected. They hear comments about “bitches” while out at a bar with fellow science students, and they decide to change majors.

    I know we shouldn’t make the mistake of thinking anecdotes are ultimate proof of anything, but I’ve never seen, in the sciences in either academia or in the workplace, pictures of ‘greased up women’. Nor can I recall any bar convos with fellow students or colleagues about ‘bitches’. (Not that a term used to describe specific individuals is an attack on all women the way progs hold it to be, but even so…)

    But if all it takes is a bowling shirt, a pin-up, or overhearing a word one finds unpleasant, to prevent one from entering a particular field, or changing majors, then one is probably not only not cut out for that field, but for life itself here on planet Earth where the rest of us live. Suck it up, already! Or go live in a plastic bubble.

  26. Toddy Cat says:

    Science exists to unlock they mysteries of the universe, provide useful benefits for humankind, and lead to a better understanding to the cosmos God has given to us. It does NOT exist to make women “feel welcome”, provide pretend careers for them, or give them opportunities to meet hawt guys. And yes, this is eminently fair, because it doesn’t exist to provide men with these things, either.

    Although I admit, going from Gene Krantz’s vest to that shirt doesn’t exactly look like progress…

  27. Anonymous age 72 says:

    I worked with a woman in the late 80’s who considered herself a feminist. But one day she did admit she would much rather work with men than women.She said women are fighting and bitching all the time about something. If men get mad at each other, they tend to holler a minute, then put it aside and keep on working. If a woman gets pissed at you, she will never leave you alone and no one can get anything done.

    She also said her daughter managed a beer place and admitted she found male employees much easier to work with then female employees.

  28. Martel says:

    I’ll admit they have a point about women not feeling particularly welcome among the men in STEM fields.

    After all, when you have a woman on your team you now have to be extra cognizant of how you word everything, her feelings, what kind of shirts you wear, and whether or not you’re able to sufficiently document all the reasons she might not get promoted (so as to protect yourself against discrimination lawsuits). Not to mention the soap operas that develop among the guys who want her all angling to be her White Knight and the internal debates among the guys concerning whether they should just ask her out and risk being reprimanded.

    Frankly, were I in STEM I wouldn’t want women around either. Yes, some can hack it, but there are risks inherent in having a competent female around that simply aren’t there when it’s a man.

  29. easttexasfatboy says:

    Ya’ll, who really cares if a feminist howls? And if they quit STEM fields, so what? Let them go their own way. Indifference is MGTOW ‘ S answer. Misandric behavior has a cost. Feminist-marxists control the courts, we withdraw. Shrugging is the rational response to hatred. We don’t have to protect women. We used to want to, but that was in the past. Average women stood by while these misandric laws and policies have been passed. They don’t protest, because they benefit from those laws and policies. Yes means Yes, right? Fragile feminism? What about young men whose lives are ruined by jealous liars? When men have no due process? When feminists swear that women wouldn’t lie. Men are slow to react, but a wave is building. Feral women are a genuine threat. Word is spreading. Slowly, sure, but it takes a bit to see that women in the US are misandric. So, let snowflake find out if she can fight off assault in that dark parking lot. Let nature take its course. Darwinian, right?

  30. Martel says:

    @ TFH: “No. Instead, those screeching the loudest about women in STEM have no STEM experience themselves.”

    Which is evidence that the sexes are different, that generally women simply aren’t as inclined to like technical stuff as men.

    A hilarious example of what you’re talking about is feminist writer (not STEM in the slightest) trying to get her nieces to play Pediatric Oncologist Barbie. The girls have no interest in the slightest in Jessica’s insistence that they want to grow up to be doctors, which is perfectly understandable considering Jessica obviously had no desire to be a doctor herself.

    http://www.thefrisky.com/2013-07-26/i-tried-to-play-feminist-barbies-with-my-nieces-and-kinda-failed/

    (P.S. I have a lot to say about this stuff because I’ve just written a chapter on it for the book I’m working on. I’ve read enough articles on women in STEM to last a lifetime.)

  31. easttexasfatboy says:

    I read a tech blog that mentioned innovative behavior happens best in the absence of feminist interference. That cutting edge work is being done in very small companies that can’t afford to hire women. The reason was that everyone has to produce. No EXCUSE. Women are simply too expensive. It was also mentioned that it was easier to get funded if the funds were actually used for development. That’s the future. No one wants to have to deal with a long term threat. Hiring a woman is actually counterproductive in many ways. Very disruptive for a team effort. So, stay small, and under the feminist radar. You see, misandrist behavior has a cost. Men will figure out ways to simply go around women. MGTOW in actual real life. Here’s the point…..fragile feminists are poisoning the well. When it is widely known that women cost too much to deal with, let the howling begin. This is just the beginning. Men adapt and overcome. Women backstab and complain. That’s the reason why large corporations can’t innovate like small companies. The feminist blight that kills innovative behavior.

  32. new anon says:

    The shirt looks to be something along the lines of a comic book, female super-hero theme.

    Whoever mentioned #GamerGate hit the nail on the head.

    The guy (and the woman who made the shirt for him as a present) is probably one of those geeky, nerdy types that likes to play video games. He probably decided to wear the shirt as a thumbs-up and thank you to the woman that made him the shirt as a present. I doubt he ever considered that it would be anymore offensive than they typical video game.

  33. Martel says:

    The upshot to all this is that the problem with there being so few women in STEM is that there are so few women in STEM yet STEM is still somehow valued (little complaint is heard about the lack of women sewer workers or coal miners). Is technological innovation stifled by the lack of a feminine presence? No. Do tech firms have a harder time making money from the products they develop because of a lack of women? No.

    This is but another variation of the female desire to invade male spaces. But they’re finding that unlike Country Clubs, despite all the social conditioning STEM is a male space that the vast majority of women still don’t want to invade.

    Yes, there’s glamor in coming up with some fantastic technological innovation. Feminist elites see this happening without feminine input and simply can’t let that stand.

    But most individual women simply don’t want to do what it takes to get that glory, despite the desire for recognition. I’m not a techie, but in college I saw the absurd amount of studying my “tech ween” friends did and the insane amount of dedication it took to pass their classes.

    If an individual woman truly has that sort of dedication, she’s not going to be dissuaded by an ugly shirt. Yet they’re dissuaded by ugly shirts. Which simply means they don’t have what it takes.

    But we can’t let it go because the lack of women in tech defies the feminist mantra that women are no different than men.

  34. new anon says:

    Does anyone know who the actual characters are on his shirt?

  35. new anon says:

    As far as discouraging women from entering STEM, the article below has a more likely explanation than shirts:

    Who is Discouraging Women From STEM Careers?

    Only about 25% of women have a personality type that is attracted to working in STEM at all, and only about about 5% of women fall into the 3 personality types most strongly attracted to working in STEM (INTP, INTJ, ENTP).

    The breakdown for men is 57% for overall STEM types and 12% strongly attracted to STEM types.

  36. Martel says:

    @ TFH: I think you have a point, but I’d say the comparison is more one of degree than either/or.

    There’s plenty of bitching out there about Hollywood (women can only succeed if they use their bodies, if they’re hot, or not too old, never enough good roles for women, etc.). However, there are some incredibly successful women, so their complaints are somewhat muted. Also, like you say they’re not going to rip on Hollywood heartthrobs.

    In STEM, they bitch more loudly not only because the guys who do so well at it do so despite their frequent inability to get a date, but also because the discrepancy is so much more obvious. Tom Cruise may get paid more than Halle Berry, but Halle Berry is still wildly successful. In tech, they guys are dorkier than Tom Cruise AND there’s no Halle Berry equivalent. The combination of what you cite and the objectively greater discrepancy combine to make “women in tech” the issue that puts the Hamster into overdrive.

  37. easttexas,

    I read a tech blog that mentioned innovative behavior happens best in the absence of feminist interference. That cutting edge work is being done in very small companies that can’t afford to hire women. The reason was that everyone has to produce. No EXCUSE. Women are simply too expensive. It was also mentioned that it was easier to get funded if the funds were actually used for development. That’s the future. No one wants to have to deal with a long term threat. Hiring a woman is actually counterproductive in many ways. Very disruptive for a team effort. So, stay small, and under the feminist radar. You see, misandrist behavior has a cost. Men will figure out ways to simply go around women.

    I had to staff a very small team of programmers to get 3 websites built in under 6 months. My budget was tiny (had to have 3 direct hires, couldn’t even afford to pay a headhunter commission) but I knew what I needed. So I put an ad on Craig’s list asking for primaries only. After hanging up on all the head hunters trying to place people, 6 primaries sent me resumes direct and I was able to schedule interviews for 6 programmers, 4 men, 2 women. Problem is, HR also had to interview them. The 2 women didn’t have a clue about anything technical (had to have been lyign about their experience on their resumes) BUT 3 of the 4 men did (plus the business understanding I needed from them because I couldn’t afford to hire any business analysts.) So I told HR I wanted to hire the 3 guys.

    HR said no. They didn’t like 2 of those 3 guys I picked. They wanted me to hire 1 of those guys plus both of the women. So I scheduled a meeting with the VP of HR and with the President of the company, listed the meeting as “urgent.”

    They took the meeting. It went down something like this:

    (me) “Why don’t I get to hire who I want to hire?”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “Because we don’t feel that 2 of those men are good fit for the company.”

    (me) “We being you.”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “Well the two young men didn’t do very well in the screening that I have for candidates.”

    (me) “I don’t care.” (turn and look at President) “I want to hire them. Veto her please.”

    (President) “Listen, we have to work together.”

    (me) “But you hired me to get 3 websites built in 6 months. I am responsible. I get fired if that doesn’t happen.”

    (President) “Ummmm… maybe, I don’t want you to get the feeling that… well…. we need to work together.”

    (me) “Those two girls don’t know anything. I can’t use them. They didn’t pass MY screening.”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “That is fine. You’ll just have to look for more candidates.”

    (me) “I can’t use head hunters as I have no budget to pay them sales comission. I have no budget for media advertising. We need directs. These 6 people were the only ones to respond to the Craig’s List ad in two weeks that were direct. I can’t wait another two weeks. We need to move. I need to hire all 3 guys.”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “I have already ruled them out in my screening.”

    (me turning to the President) “So that’s it? You don’t veto her?”

    (President now smiling at me) “Look we need to work together.”

    (me) “You said that before. You also said that you would let me run my team anyway I see fit, no interference. You said you would enable me.”

    (President) “I did.”

    (me pointing at her but not looking at him) “She is interfering. I’m done with her. Enable me by vetoing her.”

    (President) “That is not going to happen.” (I can see the girl smirking from the corner of my eye.)

    (me) “Okay.” (get up from the table) “You lied to me in the interview process. I quit. Build your own websites.”

    (President NOT expecting that) “You can’t just do that.”

    (me) “Of course I can.”

    (President now sweating) “I want you to think very carefully about what you are saying to me.”

    (me getting up from the table) “You forced my hand. You lied to me. I don’t blame her. She has an agenda of which I have no use for. I live in the world of reality and in reality I have 3 websites to build. You are not letting me do that. So… that’s it”

    (President) “So basically its your way or the highway?”

    (me) “Yes. Just like you said it would be when you offered me the job.”

    (President) “Okay just… don’t quit. I need to talk to her alone for a moment.”

    (me) “Just tell me… do I get my 3 programmers or not?”

    (President) “Yes.”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “I’ll have to report back to the board of directors who hand out the VC money that you went over my head and hired two people that failed my screening. They have empowered me.”

    (President) “Okay BOTH OF YOU, that is enough! I’m done fooling around here.”

    (me) “I’m not fooling around, I want my sites built. Give me my guys.”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “You can’t have them.”

    (me) “Why? Are they not US citizens?”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “Yes they are.”

    (me) “Did they fail the drug test? If so I want to see it.”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “No.”

    (me) “Then what?”

    (HR generalist girl VP) “I have a screening process.”

    (me) “And I’m beginning to think that you would have screened me out if you interviewed me.” (turn to the President) “This is stupid. Goodbye.”

    I left. The company was out of business inside of 6 months.

  38. new anon says:

    @Martel,

    There are plenty of successful women in STEM, but they tend to be just as socially awkward, unconventional, and well…dorky as the guys.

    And perhaps that’s part of the problem. The female role models in STEM aren’t the type of women other women look up to.

  39. Martel says:

    @ innocentbystander: YOU are the engine that makes this world work. God bless you.

  40. Fracture says:

    Hey Dalrock, I’m big fan.

    What are your thoughts on a “possibly” third-generation-broken-home young man raised without his bio’ father by his sometimes-single-sometimes-divorced mother. His grandmother was raised without her father, and his mother wasn’t either, and although he has (maternal) uncles he’s familiar with, neither are in a stable relationship (infact, one is divorced now after spending little more than a decade with his first wife). Now, he holds a cynical, yet respectful (for those who make it work, much like yourself) view about marriage and family. What would you say to him?

    [D: Welcome.]

  41. Martel says:

    @ new anon: I don’t know if “plenty” is the right word, but I take your point. Women are more into social status, who they associate with, etc. They’d all love to hang out with the drop dead gorgeous forensics expert on TV, but being associated with Clara with the split ends? Not so much.

  42. @ innocentbystander: YOU are the engine that makes this world work. God bless you.

    I didn’t want to go all John Galt on them but I didn’t have a choice. I had a family to think about and making those decisions would have jeapordized my credibility as the director of software development. When they don’t get stuff done, I get blamed because ultimately I hired them. I had to go find a job where I had real power.

  43. Martel says:

    @ innocentbystander: You were the voice of reality calling attention to the superfluous nonsense that ran that company. You called them on their lies and contradictions (you have power but you don’t). You were about competence, they were about bullshit. They were about protecting agendas and their own asses, you were about Truth and getting crap done.

    They didn’t deserve you and your competence, and they suffered when they lost it.

    I don’t want the competent men of the world to “go all John Galt” on the West, either (yet), for when that happens technologies, companies, nations, and societies will all die just like that company.

    But we’ve got to all make stands like you did. Sometimes, we’ll have to do what you did and walk out the door. Sometimes, we’ll actually wake some people up and make shit work. Either way, the competence and courage will be required. You had it, so I commend you.

  44. martel,

    In STEM, they bitch more loudly not only because the guys who do so well at it do so despite their frequent inability to get a date, but also because the discrepancy is so much more obvious.

    I think they bitch because that is where all the jobs are created. That is what is needed at offices because STEM jobs are not well formed. There is no process to follow the way there is with feminist centric jobs. Because there is no process and they aren’t well formed, they need bodies and these bodies are paid well. Feminists want the pay but they can’t do the work because if they could think outside the box enough to do work in STEM, they wouldn’t BE feminist.

  45. new anon says:

    There are way more women in tech than the stereotype. Are there nearly as many as men? No, but every shop I’ve worked in (including some small ones) had some. And generally they fit right in with the guys.

    Just as the typical tech guy is the type of guy most women view as invisible (because they aren’t attracted to him), they typical woman in tech is also viewed as invisible by most women.

    When feminist complain that they aren’t any women in tech, what they mean is there aren’t any women in tech that they would aspire to be.

    Same phenomenon is seen in #GamerGate. There are a significant number of female gamers (not as many as the men, but still a significant number), but they aren’t the type of women other women aspire to be. So, they are discounted as not being “real women” and ignored.

  46. martel,

    But we’ve got to all make stands like you did. Sometimes, we’ll have to do what you did and walk out the door. Sometimes, we’ll actually wake some people up and make shit work. Either way, the competence and courage will be required. You had it, so I commend you.

    Thank you very much. That was real nice of you to say that.

  47. PokeSalad says:

    The shirt was a gift from his wife. #irony

    The REALLY sad part was how this beta prostrated himself before the femtrolls and surrendered with tears and snivels. Disgusting. I have no sympathy for him at all.

    I wonder how his wife feels, knowing what a sniveling pile of goo she married.

  48. jbro1922 says:

    Speaking of reaching out to men, how about the president of Lincoln University of Pennsylvania who made what some consider sexist remarks about male/female interactions? https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/11/10/debate-over-university-presidents-comments-rape

  49. Anchorman says:

    That is a stretch. Remember, he is under threat of losing current and future employment.

    I agree. Left unsaid is the intensity of the blowback he likely received from email, in person, and from bosses who received similar blowback.

    I have sympathy for him because I know decent guys who get crushed by feminists. Heck, I was crushed by the family court system a few years ago and I’m sure I looked pretty pathetic before I found sites, like this and RM.

    I’m willing to cut him and others slack. It’s the ones that should clearly know better and are actively engaged in propagating feminism that I can’t muster sympathy.

  50. Ras al Ghul says:

    as garish as that shirt is, I’m tempt to buy one and wear it to work.

    It would kind of be funny if every guy in the west decided to wear one . . .

  51. zodak says:

    oh noes, more ebul shirts, stopping all the girls from living their dreams.

    on the plus side, they can’t stop his shirt from being sold because it was made by a girl, unlike the t-shirts that they got pulled from stores: http://zpatriarchy.blogspot.com/2014/10/muh-soh-juh-tees.html

  52. Opus says:

    I recall where I was when I heard the news: one small bounce for a lander, one giant leap for the European Space Agency. Naturally I have already tuned in to the conspiracy theories. They may be on to something. Why is there no ice on the comet; why is there no tail; and why spends billions of euros to go somewhere that doesn’t even have a decent coffee shop.

    There was some girl; a Professor of some sort; getting terribly upset that some people were dozing off at the great news. I was one of those: Space is, frankly, boring – unlike the shirt.

  53. Martel says:

    @ Ras al Ghul/TFH: Not quite the same, but… http://www.alohaland.com/pinup-girls-guys

  54. orion2 says:

    If that is a gift from his wife, I have no sympathy either, because then his wife is smoking hot.

    That and the fact that after this feat he will get a job doing satellite launching/maintenance which would probably get him more money, the groveling was completely unnecessary.

    Dude, go home, fuck your hot wife, double your salary and tell them to suck it.

    Well, maybe he likes his job.
    +

  55. Opus says:

    @TFH

    Do you realise that Britain still pays Aid (we are so generous – though not Tribute – even though we have yet to pay off the debt for WW1) to India – even though as you exlain, they have their own space programme.

  56. This incident only highlights the extreme fragility and self-centred opportunism of ignorant feminists who have absolutely nothing more important to do than scour every media release for an excuse to complain.

  57. Kyo says:

    IBB, what a story! I can envision this conversation taking place thousands of times over, in meeting rooms in every country where feminism reigns, and each time that country’s level of civilization declines just a bit.

    Any idea on what happened to the HR girl when the company went under?

  58. tweell says:

    It looks like this scientist needs a new shirt. He needs to not show women as vicious, so the shirt should not show any weaponry, especially in the women’s hands.
    The new shirt should also not objectify women with scanty clothes and provocative poses.

    Can someone make a shirt with pictures of women wearing burqas?

  59. IBB, what a story! I can envision this conversation taking place thousands of times over, in meeting rooms in every country where feminism reigns, and each time that country’s level of civilization declines just a bit.

    Any idea on what happened to the HR girl when the company went under?

    I have no idea what happened to any of those people. The Domain Name was the first thing I got/purchased the minute I got there. After I quit, I kept checking it to see if they could ever get the site (any site) up on that domain. Eventually, they just had godaddy build a vanilla basic-html site with no real personal interface just so the company could say they did something.

    They had enough money to roll for six months. After that, if they had everything working properly, they were supposed to get another round of VC cash to plunder. If I had to guess, they never hired anyone to replace me and never really got anything working and people just cashed paychecks for six months until they came in and turned out the lights.

  60. honeycomb says:

    Seems women just want to complain about work .. they rarely want to do any “work” .. and this makes them mad. Because they expect a man to do the work (on her terms). Which is becoming a problem with the men they hoped to marry. (ie discussed many times here.)

    http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/giving-up-40-women-28-men-39-youth-dont-want-a-job/article/2556177

    BTW now we know how to send the radical element over the edge (re: shirt). Even though no american has the constitutional right to not be offended .. europe seems devoid of such common sense. There goes casual friday’s ;@D

  61. S. Chan says:

    @ Alyosha

    I had not heard the term “starter husband” before. After reading your comment, I googled and found out more about this.

    One thing I found is that women can now buy special shoes for when they are starter-husband hunting! Such shoes are advertised by Nine West, for example:
    http://www.ninewest.com/shoes-for-women-starter-husband-hunting/15768059,default,sc.html

    The New York Times interviewed the vice president of marketing for Nine West, who said that “women are modern now and shop for a different reason”.

    If anyone still thinks that modern marriage is the same as marriage used to be, let them ponder that.

  62. Anonymous age 72 says:

    MarcusD says:
    November 14, 2014 at 12:06 pm

    >>“Feminist advise women to avoid feminist men”

    >>http://thewaterpipe.wordpress.com/2013/12/27/feminist-advise-women-to-avoid-feminist-men/

    This link leading to two videos of men actually, shudder, tremble, gasp, hitting back when hit by a woman.

    More proof of my belief that collectively American Woman are totally insane.

    In 1974, I worked in a section with a number of men and women. One day I walked by two women as one was saying, “A man should not hit a woman, ever.”

    I was still naive in those days, so after some thought I went back and asked, “What if she is hitting him?”

    They said, “No, we said no matter what.”

    I asked what is he to do if she is hitting him. Essentially he is supposed to run with fear or simply take his beating.

    After more thought I went back and asked, “What if she is breaking a little kid’s arms and legs with a baseball bat?”

    They said, rather angrily, “We said no matter what!”

    When I asked what he is supposed to do, they said, “He can call for help or try to take the baseball bat away without hitting her. We said no matter what!”

    These were somewhat traditional women, not wild eyed feminists. After some serious contemplation, right there, back in 1974, I realized American Woman are clinically insane. In the following 40 years, I have seen nothing to change my mind.

    In the early 90’s, I got a call from an official of the State DV center, about 30 miles from my home. I had written an op-ed stating that a study printed in JAMA late summer 1984 had shown that in a large city ER the number of men and women entering because of DV was approximately equal. We chatted.

    He said his DV program was having little success. When a family suffering from DV came in they isolated the dearie and kids, from the man and talked to him of hellfire and damnation. No luck.

    Finally, he suggested they screen for mutual violcnce, and found that a majority of such cases involved mutual violence. So, then they isolated the man and the woman alone, from the kids, and spoke to each of hellfire and damnation. When they told the man they realized it was mutual violence most men responded very well. Admitting, yes, I am bigger and stronger so I must not hit back even if she starts it.

    But they still had no gain with the women. All the women insisted, “If he makes me angry, I have the right to hit him.”

    Let me repeat that. THE RIGHT TO HIT HIM.

    To state this in simple terms, violence against men is hard wired into women.

    The DV center attempted to publish their findings in Social Worker journals, It was rejected because such an article would tend to belittle the seriousness of men’s violence against women.

  63. S Chan,

    http://www.amazon.com/Starter-Marriage-Future-Matrimony/dp/0812966767/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1416002937&sr=1-1&keywords=starter+marriage+in+books

    If anyone still thinks that modern marriage is the same as marriage used to be, let them ponder that.

    The concept of a starter marriage is interesting, deceptive, frightening, and unChristian, all at the same time. It is interesting in that the individuals entering it like the concept of a “starter-something” because it gives them the feel that you are here to make mistakes/break something for the purpose of learning from your mistakes and getting it right the next time. It is deceptive in that you have to bullsh-t your spouse into marrying you under those terms since KNOWING that your spouse is only marrying you for a “trial run” before he or she gets the lifetime marriage, is not something that anyone would sign up for (who wants to be traded in?) Both parties would have to be treating their spouse as nothing more than their own “starter.” It is frightening as to what it does to destroy something that we all here are supposed to hold sacred. And worst of all, it is plainly un-Christian as you are taking something that God has made as a gift to us and corrupting it.

    We could call it Marriage 3.0.

  64. Tam the Bam says:

    “There was some girl; a Professor of some sort; getting terribly upset “
    Would this be the champers-swigging one, same one I heard with my own final front-ears this arvo saying that one solution to Philae finding the ditch was to get all the Clangers to come up behind it and give it a push into a sunnier spot?
    She did giggle, I grant you, but in a slightly mad, not funny, way

  65. Maple Curtain says:

    TFH says:
    November 14, 2014 at 11:11 am
    Chris Plante?

    What type of mangina writes an article like this?

    Ha Ha – I thought you must have been mistaken, and that the article wasn’t written by a man.

    Well, it wasn’t written by a man, but a male-type-person-thingy.

    That Chris feller is as likely to be in that room where the real hard work gets done as any woman – maybe he’s scared of the shirt himself (or, as has been noted, the hard math and sciences).

  66. MarcusD says:

    “was rejected because such an article would tend to belittle the seriousness of men’s violence against women”

    I’ve heard many such stories. It seems the field likes to hide results:

    http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110223/full/470437a.html
    http://www.nature.com/news/social-sciences-suffer-from-severe-publication-bias-1.15787

  67. greyghost says:

    I laughed my ass off as soon as I saw the shirt. I would buy one and wear it too if it was available.

  68. Just Saying says:

    it’s not OK to print an object (a cartoon) that resembles a woman (a human being) on a t-shirt

    Bought a Tee-shirt at a computer con years ago, that said, “I rooted your girlfriend’s box and didn’t use a trojan!” – now anyone who knows anything about computers understands that, but it can obviously be taken two ways. Most young girls who saw me wearing it were laughing, and their mothers were incredibly POed by it. I love things like that – completely innocuous but people see what they WANT to see. Feminists always WANT to see something offensive – so they do. That is why I’m a firm believer that you DO NOT have the RIGHT to NOT BE OFFENDED. I think that everyone should go out of their way to offend people who are overly sensitive… Of course, that is most Liberals these days – who are anti-freedom of speech and expression… Now they (Liberals) are calling for the banning of books – l like Huckleberry Finn and other classics… When I was a kid it was religious groups calling for banning of some books, now it’s the Liberals… Of course, when I was young they were talking about the impending Ice Age – now it’s Global Warming…

    Just goes to show that nothing ever changes – there are always people that want to be offended, and will find a way… Or find something to scream about….

    Of course American women are all insane… Fun to use, but completely nutso… As long as you use them for their intended purpose, you’ll be fine… Just never take them seriously, or worry about their complaints… When they open their mouth – you have something that fits nicely in it, and shuts them up, while they do what they were meant to do… The fun thing is that is what they want – they just won’t admit it…

  69. Robert What? says:

    Of course it could also be that complainers with no accomplishments in life just feel shame when presented with people with … like … actual accomplishments… and lash out in the only way they know how: to try to shame others.

  70. retrophoebia says:

    Dalrock,

    O/T, but I assume you’ve seen this interesting turnabout from Mr Walsh:
    http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/11/11/ladies-time-take-responsibility-failed-relationships/

  71. Gunner Q says:

    Just Saying @ 5:06 pm:
    “That is why I’m a firm believer that you DO NOT have the RIGHT to NOT BE OFFENDED. I think that everyone should go out of their way to offend people who are overly sensitive…”

    I like it. Might result in a lot of pushback, though; people these days have no rhetorical skills beyond vulgarisms and volume.

  72. Opus says:

    @TFH

    Actually, India has asked us to stop donating so we have done as requested. Now it may well be true that India has a GDP three times greater than Britain but India has a population approx twenty five times greater.

    The barmaid in the pub this evening had no idea what I was talking about when I referred to the Comet.

  73. Opus says:

    @TFH

    I am no fan of Churchill.

    His blitzing of Berlin in 1940 was provocatively counter-productive and the raids on Dresden in 1944 certainly merit the term Genocide. The Miners in South Wales have no love for his behaviour in 1911, where he came close to using the troops on them and of course he was responsible in about 1930 for Gassing of Iraquis (or whatever we then called the people of Mesopotamia).

    Sorry about the shortage of food (the same complaint the Irish make) but please remember the English were themselves subject to rationing which rationing continued until the mid 1950s – but at least we were slim in those days so every silver cloud has a grey lining.

  74. honeycomb says:

    http://m.nydailynews.com/news/national/n-parents-pay-estranged-daughter-college-fees-court-article-1.2010796

    Huh .. and she wants to be a lawyer. Go figure.

    And to think I paid for my own college degree.

  75. Pirran says:

    As I posted over at Ed Driscolls’ page, this is the same outraged SJW whom on her Youtube channel boasted of one of her friends downing 5 “Irish Car Bombs” before trying to explain the concept of speciation (because….Science).

    Ordering this drink is considered so offensive in Ireland it can get you chucked out of the pub (or worse). Hardly surprising given the 150 or so who died in Ireland as a result.

    So much cultural sensitivity from one so sensitive.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/RoseEveleth/videos

    http://dailynexus.com/2007-03-06/history-of-irish-car-bombs-isnt-something-to-drink-to/

    http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/11069110.Nightclub_scraps____Irish_car_bomb____shots_poster/

  76. MV says:

    Tribute to Matt Walsh
    (also: history of feminism in a nutshell)

  77. Pirran says:

    @greyghost
    “I laughed my ass off as soon as I saw the shirt. I would buy one and wear it too if it was available.”

    It is. Show your support, folks.

    http://www.softgreenglow.com/wp/2014/11/time-to-buy-a-t-shirt/

    http://www.alohaland.com/whats-new/new-gunner-girls

  78. Anonymous Reader says:

    Opus, esq:
    The barmaid in the pub this evening had no idea what I was talking about when I referred to the Comet.

    Maybe she only knew of it as the Nimrod?

  79. JDG says:

    This is the sort of casual misogyny that stops women from entering certain scientific fields. They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome.

    In my case they aren’t welcome. We don’t need women in men’s spaces, and I don’t want them there. Yes I am saying that these are men’s spaces.

  80. JDG says:

    Blake says: November 14, 2014 at 10:45 am
    If the offended ladies had been making sammiches rather than watching tv, there wouldn’t be a problem.

    Yes, yes, a 1000 times yes. I love it when someone else gets it too.

  81. Boxer says:

    I think Vox linked a study recently that women don’t want to work for female bosses. That puts an arrow through the idea we need more women in X field.

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-10-16/women-dislike-having-female-bosses-more-than-men-do

  82. “oh noes, more ebul shirts”

    What language is that?

  83. I’m so sick of hearing about “objectification”. With all due respect, what a crock of shit. People are attracted to other people, not to things. If someone likes to look at images of sexy people that doesnt mean they think people aren’t human, it means they possess normal human sexuality. Animals only screw to reproduce, human beings have a deeper and more varied proclivity.

    Oh no, he makes women the objects of his sexual interests! Well how the hell else is the human race supposed to continue on?

  84. JDG says:

    Thanks to the efforts of the “manosphere” the feminist structural edifice is crumbling, as revealed in the recent electoral results

    I wouldn’t take any election results as a sign of anything other than the quality of the voters. This country elected Obama and keeps re-electing a string of other questionable characters. We are getting what we deserve.

    I do see a change in many comment sections on the internet that on the one hand is anti-feminist but on the other hand much of it is anti-Christian. I’m not so sure the change that’s coming is going to be that much of an improvement over the feminized misandric socialism lite that we have now. I strongly doubt it will be all that desirable for strong independent, sexually empowered women (except the very pretty ones of course).

  85. enrique432 says:

    The issue of women bitching about not being in STEM and actually being INTERESTED in STEM fields, has me developing a theory, which is consistently validated. It cuts across demographics, and is utilized by anyone on the left, and that is the perpetual victimhood status (and status seeking) simply to get attention and gain an upper hand to avoid true WORK in meritocracy. It has a bandwagoning aspect to it as well.

    Obama is the epitome of this. He is victim and bandwagoners writ large. I was hearing some soundbite today, where he was workin’ the crowd, talking about how he wanted to do something by executive order, but couldn’t…blah blah…complete with the pregnant pauses and verbal tricks good speakers do…(Whatwe gonna do? GIVE ‘EM HELL…How we gonna do it?…etc etc). And when I thought of this speech and all his others, how MUCH the crowd just wants to clap, nod and/or sigh, before he even finishes a thought, because they know what’s coming…it just really hit me, again…these people themselves, and what they see in him, are ALL things they are lacking in life. Like Bill Mahers “sheeple” who clap at ANYTHING a liberal says…these folks simply feel inadequate and their affirmations of Obama almost say more about them, than him–although it says a lot of how they think about him too. That he is the POSTER child for “unMerit”.

    So I think of these women I’ve seen in the Atheist and STEM world…their entire narrative is full of clichés and cutey-pie references to composite characters and stories that fit with that narrative (“But then my science prof said, ‘YOU CAN’T be an astronomer…why, you have tits?!’)…they almost NEVER seem to talk about doing the job. It’s to be the “first X” in whatever field…not to actually INVENT or CREATE something. They even reduce themselves to caricature status with their BIOs, “Known as the first women to run ACME company, and then moved on in 6 months to (wreck another business)”.

    The American meritocracy has created this entire culture of dimwits that want to get ahead via victimhood…folks like Eliz. Warren who will even, not only falsely, but unbelievably claim to be Native American. And now she will be the chief rabble rouser for that same group. it’s like a TITLE she won for being better at it, than them.

    shaking my head.

  86. Ooooo Ooooo wish i’d have said this:

    I do see a change in many comment sections on the internet that on the one hand is anti-feminist but on the other hand much of it is anti-Christian. I’m not so sure the change that’s coming is going to be that much of an improvement over the feminized misandric socialism lite that we have now

    When I tried not long ago I failed. This is a far simpler, more concise phraseology.

  87. tz2026 says:

    There should be a specific day that all supportive men should go “topless”. They can say “they gave a feminist the shirt off their back”, and explain that since wearing shirts offend feminists, they are taking the high ground.

  88. Prof. Woland says:

    In the cultural revolution back in the 1960’s and 1970’s the whole idea was to offend people. Now that women are the ‘conservatives’ trying to preserve their position and privileges they absolutely need to be taken down several pegs by having their noses rubbed in things they don’t want. Stop being nice. It won’t get you anything anyway.

  89. JDG says:

    When I tried not long ago I failed. This is a far simpler, more concise phraseology.

    I don’t recall ever reading anything you’ve written that I thought failed to get the message across.

  90. Bucho says:

    “They see a poster of greased up women in a colleague’s office and they know they aren’t respected.”

    But yet it seemed like everyone was more excited over a greased up, nearly naked, Kim Kardashian, or at least that’s what the internet kept obsessing over….

  91. Bluepillprofessor says:

    @Anonymous + @Marcus D: “was rejected because such an article would tend to belittle the seriousness of men’s violence against women” I’ve heard many such stories. It seems the field likes to hide results.”

    I can confirm this. I worked with the IRB (Institutional Review Board) which approves human subjects research. Trust me, if it doesn’t toe the party line or even if you are tending to disprove the international communist project, IRB will not approve it. You have to frame your research questions in their assumptions or else it doesn’t get approved to even be investigated much less getting results that are published. You guys think the cultural Marxists have impacted industry in the West? The lefties in big business are practically Adam Fracking Smith to these Academic cultural Marxists. They don’t even try to hide it and are not ashamed in the least, that is the amazing thing.

    On a related point, people complain that the Red Pill is not approved by social science and there is a reason why there are almost no studies about Red Pill ideas. Imagine trying to run the type of Red Pill experiments the PUA’s did to figure out the initial attraction, shit tests and all that other data they collected. What they did was NOT human subject approved nor in conformity with the Nuremburg protocols- and that is the point. I will take your peer reviewed journal hampered by decades of red tape and ridiculous oversight and assumptions- and in its place I will give you an internet blog.

  92. JF says:

    This is Isaiah 3:12 Syndrome.
    Societies that succumb to this kind of stuff don’t last long. As soon as their emasculated armies encounter an all-testosterone army of comparable size, the Isaiah 3:12 culture is conquered and erased from the roster of active civilizations..

  93. James K says:

    It’s worse than that, she’s brain-dead, Jim.

    “I don’t care if you {fill in stupendous achievement here}, your shirt is sexist and ostracizing!”

    Until today I didn’t believe the line that the USA was no longer capable of landing a man on the moon. Now I do.

  94. feeriker says:

    She would be too intimidated to ask a man a question, but she would be willing to ask a woman.

    Right. Exactly the type we need as leaders. People who are too intimidated to ask a question.

    So lemme get this straight: she won’t ask for mentoring advice from someone who can actually give it to her, but has no problem asking someone whose “advice” is going to be useless or worse. I’m assuming that this is a general trend among “professional” women based on those women in “management” I’ve suffered under.

    And no, generally speaking, most men won’t “mentor” women unless forced to at gunpoint. It’s usually wasted time and effort, to say nothing of the fact that you simply end up doing their work for them anyway once they prove that they can’t cope with the pressure.

  95. mrteebs says:

    Good thing women never objectify themselves…

    They’re so much more nuanced when they have something to say…

    Feminists work tirelessly to eradicate misandry…

    Because a man is not entitled to respect, but a woman is entitled to love…

  96. mrteebs says:

    And feminists work tirelessly to eradicate misandry…

  97. MarcusD says:

    8 Simple Rules for dating a Duggar Daughter
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=919805

    21 pages and counting…

  98. feeriker says:

    Of all the talk of ‘welcoming’ women into STEM, there is a conspicuous absence of any talk of the actual work being done, and whether women want to actually do that work.

    As one who works in the IT engineering field, I can say conclusively that this is because almost NONE of the token women in that field are capable of doing any actual technical work. Having done work for both the government and commercial sectors, I will assert without reservation that organizations that serve the former are overflowing with female albatrosses, hired solely to satisfy political considerations (a.k.a. Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity). The latter, while not totally free of the “Estrogen Tax,” out of necessity put up with less of that nonsense because they have paying customers to satisfy and can’t afford to be burdened with nugatory bodies that don’t earn their keep. That means almost no women doing actual technical work involving the hard sciences.

  99. MarcusD says:

    “I’m beginning to believe that women are just too fragile to handle a college environment. Perhaps they should be kept at home until they marry, or at most sent to single-sex finishing schools.”

    -Glenn Reynolds

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/198188/

    The ironic think is that such statements can be made because of what SJWs/feminists are pushing for.

  100. mrteebs says:

    I used to work for a very large conglomerate. There was a lot of emphasis on the “4 E’s of leadership” by the HR department, accompanied by some sort of clever alliteration that was supposed to help us remember the 4 primary attributes that the business looked for in its leaders. Interestingly, I can’t recall a single one of those four E’s anymore, but I do recall the so-called “5th E” that everyone knew was heavily weighted in middle to upper mgmt promotion decisions, but never spoken out loud for obvious reasons: Estrogen.

    For all this company’s talk about a “meritocracy,” extremely mediocre women rode the escalator while considerably more talented men took the stairs. But I will say that the company was only willing to do this up to a certain level of business leadership and P&L responsibility, at which point merit did trump affirmative action appeasement. The top women simply did not exhibit the same level of A-game as the top men, and the men consequently held the top jobs. Not because of some glass ceiling, but because the very best men could simply outperform the very best women. But that will never be satisfactory for the feminist narrative because if you lose, it cannot be because your fellow competitors were better – it must be because of institutional bias and societal patriarchy.

  101. The key, gentlemen, is not to listen to women at all. Look at what they do and not what they say.

    I have a policy. Listen to men and look at women. That’s what they’re there for, to be objectified.

  102. S. Chan says:

    @ innocentbystanderboston, November 14 at 4:18 pm

    About the book Starter Marriage, here is an extract from the blurb.

    Nobody goes into a starter marriage expecting to divorce and trade up to something better….
    Drawing on extensive research and interviews with starter-marriage vets, … [the book] shows how starter marriages can be avoided, and why lifelong marriage is still a desirable, achievable option….

    So the book is not an advocate of starter marriages: rather, the opposite.

    What makes Nine West so outrageous is that it is advocating for women to go into a starter marriage expecting to later divorce and trade up.

    And then they wonder why men are becoming wary of marriage.

  103. Dave says:

    Isn’t this an encouragement to the feminist lynch mob? As long as men allow themselves to be bullied by feminism, the sorry state will only get worse.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2014/11/14/scientist-apologizes-for-his-sexist-shirt-but-the-internet-still-wants-women-to-shut-up-and-die/

  104. MV says:

    TIME MACHINE ON

    One of the first high profile feminists in history was ancient Greek queen of Mycenae, Clytaimnestra, who became a “strong independent woman in position of power” by convincing her lover to murder her husband. But, as a single mother, she made a mistake of being too possessive and bossy towards her daughter, princess Electra. Electra, as a result, convinced her brother to murder their mother. And thus ended the era of Mycenian feminism.

    TIME MACHINE OFF AND BACK TO THE PRESENT

    Perhaps it is not very healthy for old feminists to treat young women like fragile, stupid children who need to be protected, controlled and brainwashed with feminist propaganda all the time. It might backfire again…

  105. Opus says:

    @Anon Reader

    I don’t think she knows anything about any type of Comet – even ones with square windows.

    Amazingly – headline in one of today’s papers – apparently we give foreign Aid to Argentina! – and to think we were once might have threatened them with Nuclear weapons (not that I am convinced they exist), but as even the dogs in the street around here bark ‘Las Malvinos soy Britannicos’.

  106. earl says:

    Props to the guy landing a spacecraft on a comet. That’s the main story here.

  107. IT Lady says:

    Good morning Gentleman, If you don’t mind me invading, I just wanted add perspective of a woman with 15 years of IT background. My father was a scientist and brothers are also in STEM, so I’ve been around the STEM culture all my life. This is *my* normal.

    I am not the least bit offended by the man’s shirt. To be honest, I didn’t really notice the pattern up close, other than it was wild and fun colored. I do think the colors are pretty cool. I was too busy focusing on the achievement, this was likely one of his crowing moments in his career. He seems like a brilliant guy and I bet he’s a great person to work with. It was only after the uproar that I zoomed in and didn’t see the big deal. It looks like a bunch of fantasy characters out of a comic book. Go to any comic book or gaming store and there’s tons of figurines of similar women. While it is not something in my closet or that I’d buy as a gift, it is not offensive, or unwelcoming. While I don’t want to speak for all STEM women, I doubt any of my peers (i.e. women that know there stuff) would have thought unwelcoming. Not there style, sure, but not oh no, must leave STEM now.

    I am surprised that there was likely a PR person on staff and this wasn’t fixed before it was an issue. All someone needed to do is ask the staff to dress up for TV or if unexpected, put on a jacket or hoodie and problem solved before it was a problem. Considering this was international TV, I’m surprised that no one provided any coaching in advance. PR people are use to speaking to public and handle the media interaction. They are used to seeing possible public perception issues. This might have been the guy’s first time on TV ever. It’s quite possible the man had no idea he was going to be on TV. Nor is it in his job description to be TV ready at a moment’s notice. Anyone, including the TV anchor, could have suggested that he fix his outfit for TV. Apparently it didn’t register to anyone else until some big mouth wanted to score media points. It is people like her (and her ilk like Adria Richards at that Python conference, remember?) that cause the most damage and make life difficult for competent STEM women.

    [D: Welcome IT Lady.]

  108. MV says:

    This pic from 4chan makes me feel pleasantly young again

  109. patriarchal landmine says:

    want to discredit feminism and women’s issues? just let them speak for themselves.

  110. enrique432 says:

    An interesting, modern “Turner Diaries” of sorts, referred to on Return of Kings today…I note the main culprits are women.

    http://eurocivilwar2017.wordpress.com/2014/11/

    Have no idea who the author is, but looks to be part of what will be an ongoing book.

  111. JDG says:

    How odd that feminists will parade themselves immodestly for all to see in their slut walks, but when a man where’s a shirt with images of women dressed similarly it suddenly becomes sexist.

    It’s okay to offend God and man, just make sure you never offend a woman.

  112. So the book is not an advocate of starter marriages: rather, the opposite.

    Okay that is good.

  113. Tam the Bam says:

    Not wishing to dig The Empire out of hole, and knowing full well that they had form for that sort of thing, An Gorta Mor and so on, but the “diversion of food” was almost entirely to feed troops fighting the Japs, although why they even bothered considering the later results, I do not know.

    Obviously the Brits/Aussies/Indians fault, for not fighting more suicidally against overwhelming numbers and allowing Burma to fall, thus cutting off the rice supply on which the Subcontinent (net of the Punjab), and Bengal in particular, had become dependent.

    Perhaps after a period of Shōwa rule by their caring Asian brothers, the Indian population would never again suffer from famine. As a result of overpopulation, that is. Banzai!

    After a series of natural disasters of the sort we are familiar with from that part of the world, and bad harvests,
    “by 1940 15% of India’s rice overall came from Burma, while in Bengal the proportion was slightly higher given the province’s proximity to Burma. After the Japanese occupation of Burma in March 1942, Bengal and the other parts of India and Ceylon normally supplied by Burma had to find food elsewhere. However, there were poor crops and famine situations in Cochin, Trivandrum and Bombay on the West coast and Madras, Orissa and Bengal in the East. It fell on the few surplus Provinces, mainly the Punjab, to supply the rest of India and Ceylon.

    India as a whole had a deficit, but still exported small quantities to meet the urgent needs of the British-Indian Army abroad, and those of Ceylon”

    But I wouldn’t let that get in the way of a tasty compo claim, eh? Next tack would be to sue me and Brother Opus for collective whiplash injuries caused to the great Indian people by the shock of reading my vile words. It’s one of the major industries amongst your people in this country. Compo, compo, compo.

  114. Maunalani says:

    The tattoos bother me more than the shirt does.

  115. Boxer says:

    Dear IT Lady:

    It is people like her (and her ilk like Adria Richards at that Python conference, remember?) that cause the most damage and make life difficult for competent STEM women.

    That’s my take on stuff like this, too. The average feminist can’t do math and natural science, not because “it’s too hard” but because she has a piss-poor work ethic.

    The average feminist isn’t a proficient writer, either, for the same reasons… just try and parse the travesty which is the average Jezebel rant, for example.

    The weak hate the strong, the mediocre hate the successful, and the lazy hate those who are motivated to approach competence. It is easier to blame “father” or “god” or “the patriarchy” than it is to get up and bust out the chemistry textbook, and that’s just what this all boils down to: the whining of the lazy about the success of the worker and the thinker.

    Boxer

  116. Snowy says:

    @ITLady

    It appears the scientist had purposefully donned the “offending” shirt over an undershirt/singlet of sorts. While it’s doubtful he put the shirt on specifically for the press release, I’m sure he would have given some thought to its appropriateness for the press release, and decided to push on with it. The PR “minders” were probably thinking similarly, if they were present at all. I think it was his way of paying homage to his wife. I think his wife is likely very supportive of him, especially his work. The theme of the shirt print (sci-fi type women heroines in space) indicates to me that it was his way of showing his wife (and ultimately the world) that his wife “was there with him” throughout all his hard work in contributing to this achievement. He probably had no idea (perhaps naively) that his shirt would cause such a stir.

  117. Tam the Bam says:

    “The weak hate the strong, the mediocre hate the successful, and the lazy hate those who are motivated to approach competence” and if all that fails, then blame the British Empire.

    Obviously not you personally, my old pugilistic m8. But not a few do, from the feeble and insignificant United States, through Israel, all Arabs, China, etc., to the mighty Republic of Zimbabwe.

    It’s dreadfully flattering, I must say, so do keep it up. Buoys us enormously through these rather straitened times and pauperised circumstances. Even if you can’t find Blighty on a globe, being so small and all that (clue; near Denmark, about the same size and shape).
    We’ll know it’s all over for us when the world takes the French attitude, and generally discounts any evidence of our mere existence as inconsequential tripe. But then they definitely don’t have any sort of inferiority complex. To anyone.
    They’re slightly jealous of course, of G.B. and ze Chermans, as nobody blames them for anything in History apart from garlic.

  118. Tam the Bam says:

    Pirran: the same outraged SJW whom on her Youtube channel boasted of one of her friends downing 5 “Irish Car Bombs” Omaghgawd. They really don’t know much about anything, do they?

    Perhaps for her next trick she should set fire to a shot of Bully Boy whiskey and lob a couple of peanuts into it. Call it the “Boston Marathon”

  119. Opus says:

    Well according to TFH between eight and ten per cent of British Tax is syphoned off from Indians. Clearly they are paying more than their fair share because even by my Xenophiliac calculations ten per cent of Britain is not Indian – there just aren’t that many corner shops, curry houses (can I say i don’t care for the stuff) or medical doctors. I suppose the only reason they emigrated from Mother India was because we stole the food supplies – so whatever happens they lose out.

    Disappointed (by the way) to observe that at the Armistice Day ceremony on Wednesday, out of about five hundred attendees I failed to see so much as one head from the Indian sub-continent.
    ‘They shall not grow old as we grow old.. etc’

  120. Opus says:

    Does America do Armistice Day – Canadians do I believe – it’s a big thing. You must first buy a Poppy and wear it on your left lapel. Failure to do so marks you out as an Irish or Islamic Terrorist and Anchor men who fail to don it are sacked for lese majesty. Then you attend before a War Memorial (every town has one) statue of a ‘Tommy’. The Mayor says a few words, perhaps a hymn, and two minutes silence marked by the firing of a Cannon. Very loud they are too, puffs of smoke in the sky.

    Last night I was told some woman who stopped her car dead on eleven (11 am on 11/11 you see) for those two minutes collected a parking ticket for her Patriotism. Our Patriotism (unlike yours) must always be seen as discreet and sombre.

  121. lavazza1891 says:

    So what efforts have women made to welcome men into women dominated fields?

  122. James K says:

    The barmaid in the pub this evening had no idea what I was talking about when I referred to the Comet.

    Yes, I find their eyes glaze over when I warn them not to fly in a plane with rectangular windows. Also never to get into a gentleman’s car if the curtains are drawn.

    The final straw is when I explain that we installed the government of every country around the Persian Gulf, except Saudi – though that wasn’t for want of trying. At that point they usually call for the psychiatric intervention unit, which is fine, because it saves me the price of a taxi home.

    Yes, we did divert wheat from India during WWII, and allow at least a million Indians to starve to death. This was to avoid rationing bread in Britain. After the war, the diversion could not be justified, and bread was rationed.

    We bombed Berlin in 1940 in retaliation after the Germans bombed London. A single German plane dropped its unused bombs over what they believed was countryside – but in fact it was London in blackout. This single error led to escalating carnage on both sides. The final stage was when we flattened Dresden, not because it was necessary for the war, but in order to impress the Soviets when they reached the city.

    Let’s be honest – for 200 years up to 1956 (Suez) we were the meanest bunch of pirates on the planet. 1956 was our national humiliation, and the total pussification of our country has taken place in less than 60 years. Now, the British counterparts of Oprah Winfrey are hoping that you and I will die soon, in order to improve the country’s “diversity”. They don’t even know what the word means.

  123. IT Lady says:

    You guys are awesome! I wanted to say I’ve enjoyed the posts and comments on this and a few other threads on gaming. Thanks Mr. Dalrock and friends for the Welcome and letting me contribute!

    Boxer: I agree with you. It’s much easier to whine how unfair, hard, wah wah than to actually do the work. Much of STEM undergrad IS hard in that it is time consuming and requires effort. Not a lot time for partying if one is has to study. There are plenty of other majors that don’t have labs and so many pre-requisites and lead to gainful employment. However, I can say it has been a great path and worth it. STEM folks are generally great people to work with and the work is interesting and meaningful.

    Snowy: I hadn’t thought of the idea of the shirt as a tribute but that makes sense. Much like I’d wear special earrings or scarf given to me as a little nod. Nothing more than a sweet sentiment with no harm intended. Very cool thought, I like that!

    It is really horrifying to read into something as a shirt (or a joke, comment, etc.) and raise such a fuss, more than an eye roll from a nobody. Or at least no one I had heard of; maybe I just live under a rock and ought to get out more often. It is truly horrifying that the person with the huge accomplishment is shamed by a loud mouth.

  124. MarcusD says:

    Feminists want this video banned:

    Talk about fragility.

  125. Lyn87 says:

    Opus,

    In the U.S. we started recognizing Armistice Day in 1919, but in 1954 it was changed to Veteran’s Day, mainly in response to the fact that WW2 happened in the interim. We continue to celebrate it on 11/11. It is one our holidays that always happens on the same day every year – many of them float so as to always fall on a Monday or Friday. We have a different holiday we call Memorial Day that falls on the last Monday in May for U.S. veterans who died while in service to their country. Memorial Day is generally thought of as the unofficial start of the Summer season, with Labor Day (the first Monday in September) being the end of it.

    Generally, veterans receive special recognition on both Memorial Day and Veteran’s Day (I suspect most Americans do not even realize the days commemorate different things)… in addition to the usual parades, a veteran can generally get discounted meals in any number of restaurants. That’s in addition to the usual discounts – a lot of U.S. restaurants and shops give discounts to soldiers and veterans every day of the year (generally in the 5-10% range). I save money by having my military retiree ID card in my wallet all the time… from cheeseburgers to roofing nails.

  126. Lyn87 says:

    While I’m thinking about it – when my wife and I were engaged I wanted to give her a personalized gift (same idea as the shirt). I used to have a Weatherby Mark V in .300 Weatherby Magnum – which was my prize possession. I took a couple of fired cases to a jeweler and had them made into earrings, which she wore at our wedding.

    Today that would cause shrieks of indignation by the huge hoplophobe contingent we have in this country, much like that emitted by feminists when they saw Matt Taylor’s shirt. There is a significant overlap between feminists and hoplophobes, by the way.

  127. Karl says:

    Thank you, Chris Plante – for teaching us how little we have to lose by starting an ACTUAL war on women. Because we’re already getting blamed for it.

  128. MV says:

    Some things change, some stay the same…

  129. Tam the Bam says:

    James “A single German plane dropped its unused bombs over what they believed was countryside – but in fact it was London in blackout. This single error led to escalating carnage”

    Indeed. We can frequently underestimate the *ahem*, resourcefulness of Offices of State continued in an unbroken chain of dusty old files since the days of the Spanish Armada, Walsingham and the Cecils.
    “The decision to wage a massive bombing campaign against London and other English cities would prove to be one of the most fateful of the war. Up to that point, the Luftwaffe had targeted Royal Air Force airfields and support installations and had nearly destroyed the entire British air defense system. Switching to an all-out attack on British cities gave RAF Fighter Command a desperately needed break and the opportunity to rebuild damaged airfields, train new pilots and repair aircraft. “It was,” Churchill later wrote, “therefore with a sense of relief that Fighter Command felt the German attack turn on to London…” “

    Exactly so, Minister. How remarkably fortunate for us all. Shall I be Mother? One finger, or two ..?

  130. Opus says:

    @James K

    Yes, but apart from ending the slave trade (no compensation paid) bringing peace (1857), the rule of law, education, medicine, railways and cricket to the Indian sub-continent what did the British ever do for India.

  131. Opus says:

    @Tam

    WW2 was a boon for women: until 1939 my mother who lived in S(ub)urbiton had to spend her nights in with her parents probably listening to Geraldo on the Light Programme and reading Woman’s Own, but after 1939 she was able to spend all night out in the dark (wo)manning a search-light looking for the Luftwaffe. This was incredibly exciting and probably safer than staying at home. I asked her ‘what was WW2 like?’ ‘Ooh’ she cooed ‘it was wonderful’.

  132. MV says:

    Conditioners will degenerate. The very words corrupt and degenerate imply a doctrine of value and are therefore meaningless in this context. My point is that those who stand outside all judgements of value cannot have any ground for preferring one of their own impulses to another except the emotional strength of that impulse.
    (C.S.Lewis, The Abolition of Man, 1943)

  133. earl says:

    Lived by hysteria…died from hysteria.

    Heh.

  134. LiveFearless says:

    @Boxer, @Earl, @Greyghost, @innocentbystanderboston and any other man that’s active here… your world view is being attacked by millions of people on twitter. Follow Mike Cernovich on twitter @playdangerously to understand. If you want to change the world, understand that the people see those with your world view as parasites – they are on twitter, and the most popular websites push another worldview most effectively on twitter. Get involved.

    And, here’s a gift: RSD has been unethical for years. Now its attorney has tried to bully a young paraplegic man with legal action. This is how to defend someone with your world view:

  135. LiveFearless says:

    @anon1

  136. Anonymous Reader says:

    MarcusD, the Princess Leia in Manhattan video is almost perfect. I would add one thing: Wookie comes up to her at the very end and bellows. She pauses, nods and gives her phone number to him.

  137. Just Saying says:

    They see a guy like that on TV and they don’t feel welcome.

    I gotta call BS… Wanna know why they are called “the HARD sciences”? You got it… They are HARD… THAT is what keeps women out of the science – they don’t like any hard work… The only thing they like that’s “HARD” is your c**k… Of course, a woman’s job is to take hard things and leave them soft when they are finished…🙂

  138. LiveFearless says:

    Jim Sterling gets a lot of money via a Patreon account from nearly 2,000 people that agree with him that all men…

  139. embracing reality says:

    Sex positive feminism supports the right of free sexual expression. This gentleman’s shirt celebrates the power of female sexual expression. Why is this woman oppressing the expression of female sexuality in an artistic form? Obviously she’s a self loathing female misogynist who hates female sexuality!

    Has she forgotten the ‘feminist sex wars’ of the 70′ and 80’s in which women, identifying themselves as sex positive feminist, fought for their ‘right’ to express themselves in exactly the manner in which the shirt depicts? This shirt is feminism.

    The man missed a golden opportunity here. His reply should have simply been “my shirt depicts a north american Slut Walk, I am supporting that feminist cause”. I’d like to hear what the stupid twit would have said to that.

  140. LiveFearless says:

    If you’re in or near Los Angeles, come to the meet up of men that think like you… today. It begins at noon. Details

  141. LiveFearless says:

    @embracingreality, @runsonmagic (his twitter account) has addressed your answer in a vivid way.

  142. “She would be too intimidated to ask a man a question, but she would be willing to ask a woman.”

    But wouldn’t that woman be too intimidated to ask a man???

  143. Tam the Bam says:

    “railways and cricket” “Britain did none of those things. They all existed in India before Britain”
    This is excellent news. There is some hope for humanity after all. I await the excavation reports with no little anticipation. After all, the Chinese reckon they invented football (soccerkickyball variety).

    “Indians are only 5% of Britain’s population, but since they have higher income than the British average (unlike, say, Bangladeshis)”
    So it’s a kind of Home Counties India, and any territorial arrangements prior to Partition don’t count? Ditch the embarrassing poor bits, from Sri Lanka to the North-West Fontier?

    Perhaps, just perhaps, although “India was 16% of world GDP in 1820, but 1% in 1947” the development of industrial capitalism and mass-production manufacturing (based on hard science and engineering) on an island made of coal and iron, surrounded by fish, when navigation was king (developed out of necessity by feeble-minded Brits e.g. Harrison and Symington) in the intervening period might have had something to do with it. Even the Belgians, lovely as they are, managed to become significant global players on that basis.

    And that blasted famine was fundamentally a result of two factors. Climatic disasters, combined with a humungous to-the-death world war between industrialised powers disrupting local supply lines. What course of action would you have dictated? Or do you think it was deliberate?

  144. Bluepillprofessor says:

    I rise in defense of my right honorable comrades across the pond on the issues of colonialism and oppression. Get over it. India did NOT have the top universities in the world when the British Empire unified the continent for the first time in history as you seem to suggest. India was a backwards, backwater region of minor fiefdoms practically living in the Stone Age with a non-existent or working legal system, and a barbaric human rights caste system. so spare me the catalogue of crimes committed by the British Empire which brought civilization and modern social systems and human rights to all there colonies. India is poised to become a prosperous world power and you think you would be further along without all that “strip mining.” Please.

  145. Camden22 says:

    @Bluepillprofessor – Well said!

    I’d also like to point out that the British did not use poison gas against anyone after WWI. Churchill suggested using tear-gas, but this was never acted upon. A number of people with an axe to grind have quoted him and cut out the bit where he referred to ‘lachrymatory’ gases. Unfortunately this has become what Josephine Tey referred to as ‘Tonypandy’ in her excellent novel ‘The Daughter of Time’.

  146. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    I should have posted this on your prior thread……Oh Well! I posted you on the last thread…”keep looking up here….you will find lots of great things to post about”

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2014/11/16/winnipeg-conference-to-examine-pornification-of-kids

    “”It’s been termed a social experiment — a whole generation growing up with free and easy access to online pornography.””

    Really?????

    “”A recent study suggested that 90% of children between the ages of eight and 16 have viewed porn online, many while doing homework.””

    Say…”It isn’t so”

    “”Organizers are concerned about what the continual consumption of online porn is doing to growing minds and interpersonal relationships at a time where social media use often trumps personal contact and many kids are first learning about sex through pornography.””

    Again……”Say it isn’t so”

  147. Mark says:

    @Opus

    “”Does America do Armistice Day – Canadians do I believe – it’s a big thing. You must first buy a Poppy and wear it on your left lapel. “”

    Yes!….Remembrance Day.I always assumed that we learned that from the British? My reasoning being that in WW 1 & 2…..we fought under the “Union Jack”…as did the Aussies & Kiwis.We did not even have a Flag until 1967.We flew the Union Jack(still do)…..Maybe we learned it from the Americans?….Not sure. A little Canadian trivia for you….and all the other posters here.Canada became a Nation on July 1,1867.On July 1,1967 we had our 100th birthday,or our “Centennial Birthday”.Do you know who our “”Centennial Baby”” is????……..*drum roll*……….Pamela Anderson!…..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pamela_Anderson….L*……..Our Canuck women might be tramps?….but,they are HAWT!….L*

  148. Tam the Bam says:

    I am most obliged to the Honourable Member for NorFlanden, Sir Camden22. It was most remiss of me not to censure our Noble Friend at the Bar over his innocent repetition of the “Let’s drop mustard gas on the Ayrabs” myth.

    Source? My old man, who was a Brylcreem Boy of the succeeding vintage i.e. his dad in the RFC ( I have pics of pater i.e Tam Snr. clambering into the jolly old biplane kite encumbered by the newly-issued “parachute”. “Damn’ awkward and a total waste of time, you’ve simply no idea who’s been monkeying about with it”).

    Make no mistake, they would have. The memories of the way the wogs behaved toward the prisoners on the Kut death march (yes, yes, including herds of Indian troops, fantastically brave lads and all that) were only a few years old.
    But I did have the excessively un-modern notion to ask him about it, a few years ago.

    “Harrumph. Well not that I ever heard, and I would have. Bloody deserved it though. I’d have bloody volunteered. Bloody gippoes ..” (his mother’s father, a 35-y-o father of five from New Zealand, had died relieving Kut. The idiot) “.. Did I ever tell you about the time we took the second three Canberras up after delivery? Bloody Yanks, couldn’t believe it. “[B-26s I think -Tam]. ” We’d pal them up to (n-thousand feet) and then floor the bugger .. used to give ’em a nice “royal wave” too, as we topped out at (n+5000) feet in (a few near-vertical seconds). “Never told ’em it was a dummy Bomb, mind .. chuffing bay doors. Wouldn’t close around the Real Thing we had at the time, to bloody fat and heavy .. Then there was this girl in Germany, me and Sailor (navigator/bomb-aimer oppo) .. “)

  149. earl says:

    Follow Mike Cernovich on twitter @playdangerously to understand.

    He’s blocked me…turns out my worldview was too much for him.

  150. LiveFearless says:

    @Earl Blocked? You’re a man. Add another account. You are needed.
    @TFH, @BradA, @new anon and others that read but do not comment:

    I see the title of this @Dalrock post. You want your world view to exist?

    Too many say “I don’t ‘get’ Twitter” … That’s ok. Just understand that it’s a thing that’s being used to censor your world view since you’re not there. Suddenly there’s an army of video game aficionados that are on your side. They weren’t before.

    That’s why you’re here, right? You want to your world view to affect the course of global events.

    That’s possible right now because, again, you’ve got an army of people that have caused the video game industry to have larger profits than all of ‘Hollywood’ combined. That army is on Twitter, not Facebook, not on these blogs.

    I know you’re serious about what you say you want. Here’s where it’s happening:

  151. Mark, that was an excellent link. TFH is right, granting women the right to vote eventually reduces a functioning Republic into a Godless police state. Ann Coulter is right. We need to repeal the 19th Amendment.

  152. IT Lady says:

    TFH great link, I’m glad you shared it. There was another link for a petition that now has over 8K in signatures (+1 more for mine). It is only a token gesture though, but I hope it does give some small measure of comfort and support to the ESA team that there are thousands of people that do care.

    DeNihilist, that is also a great article too. I especially like the point, the fuss over Kim K’s latest in ridiculous is far more offending than a few images of fantasy women on a shirt. Good comments there too. Unfortunately if anyone was thinking of buying the shirt, a link in that article’s comments show that it is sold out.

  153. James K says:

    @TFH:

    I’m all for exposing our historical misdeeds, as long as the purpose is to seek the truth, and not self-flagellation.

    The Indian universities established in the 5th Century were destroyed by Muslim invaders 500 years before the British arrived.

    They all existed in India before Britain, which conducted one of the most extensive strip-minings and lootings ever, onto India. India was 16% of world GDP in 1820, but 1% in 1947, after the British strip-mining was complete.

    If you think India had railways before the arrival of the British, you must be unaware that the railway had not even been invented then. Your comment would be laughable, except that the same joke was cracked in It Ain’t Half Hot, Mum 35 years ago.

    My historical knowledge may be inaccurate, but it is that India’s GDP and state of development had not changed much in the two hundred years of British rule before independence in 1947. Whatever “strip-mining” had taken place, the reduction of India’s share of world GDP can mostly be attributed to growth elsewhere, through a historical process that you might have heard of: the Industrial Revolution, which had led to a huge growth in the economies of Western Europe, North America, and Japan.

    Before Indian independence, there were 50,000 Britons in India, and 500,000,000 Indians. One Briton for every 10,000 Indians.

    Five years after independence, the Indian government decided it would conduct a survey in the villages to find out whether people outside the cities knew that the British had left. The survey was cancelled, with a little embarrassment, because people did not know that the British had previously arrived!

    @Tam the Bam:

    Regrettably, the famine was deliberate. There was another famine in 19th Century India which resulted from the abolition of the Corn Laws in Britain. British agriculture entered a depression because we could import food more cheaply from abroad; but our purchasing power made Indian wheat too expensive for the Indians who starved to death, even while it remained cheaper for us then growing our own.

    The British unfortunately were the first to use poison gas against Iraqis, in the 1920s. Gas had not yet been prohibited by the Geneva Protocol. We acquired Iraq through a League of Nations mandate, and we had the idea that we could put down any rebellions cheaply, by using aircraft to drop gas.

    It didn’t work very well, and eventually Britain had to send in ground troops to restore order. The force of 120,000 was similar in size to that used in the second Gulf War (pre-surge), but the population of Iraq was much smaller – 3 million rather than 24 million – hence the recent war was much tougher than the one in the 1920s.

  154. James K says:

    P.S. For a laugh at the expense of economic historians, have a look at this figure:

    Their estimates of historical GDP go back to 1 million years BC. Apart from the fact that our species had not yet evolved, the measurements are in 1990 dollars!

  155. Mark says:

    @TFH

    “”Your link is just the latest one to prove how full democracy, over time, devolves into a ‘feminist’ police state + goddess cult.
    When Republicans say they will produce more husbands, what the really mean is that they will expand the child-support model through expansions of police-state enforcement as well as expansion of the criteria under which a man can be trapped””

    I agree totally!…….I always vote Conservative here in Canada.If allowed I would vote Republican in your country.But,as you stated..”the expansion of the Police state”…….I would abhor this.Giving the already “useless government jag offs more power to enforce ‘poosey laws'”……..F**** that noise!

    @IBB

    “”Mark, that was an excellent link.””

    My brother sent me that and I bookmarked it.The reason that I did is that if you look at the URL….it is (dot.ca)……we rarely get useful “conservative minded” links here in the North.They are usually pro-woman,pro-gay,pro-abortion,pro-bestiality…….etc.etc.

  156. new anon says:

    @TFH,

    The article doesn’t say Republicans will force men to marry, it says Republican policies (like a focus on traditional marriage) will create an environment where more people will marry. Whether that is true is debatable, but that is their stance.

    The underlying issue is married women, regardless of age, are more likely to vote Republican than single women. So, it would benefit the Republican party if more women married (and stayed married).

    Conversely, it single women (never marrieds and divorced) are more likely to vote Democratic. So, it would benefit the Democratic party if fewer women married (and more women divorced).

    The same phenomenon is true for women who have children in wedlock and out of wedlock.

    The Democrats have (imho) have figured out this game of growing their voter base via social manipulation. The GOP hasn’t; they’ve yet to figure out that passing laws that discourage out of wedlock birth; that encourage marriage; and that discourage divorce would help grow their voter base. Or if they have, they are too afraid to implement them for fear of being call “mean” by the press.

    The GOP is the only group in history that believes words as well as sticks and stones will break their bones.

  157. TFH,

    When Republicans say they will produce more husbands, what the really mean is that they will expand the child-support model through expansions of police-state enforcement as well as expansion of the criteria under which a man can be trapped

    hmmmmmm…… no, I don’t think so. I don’t think the GOP (as it is currently constructed) is that clever or calculating.

    Instead, I think when they say they will produce more husbands, what they really mean is that they have absolutely no idea what they mean. I don’t think the GOP has the first clue what it takes to convince men to “man up” and marry “sluts.” I think that is all just rhetoric, political pandering/posturing to say that they empathyze with single women all the while, not having a clue as to what to do to fix the problem. It is just a talking point, nothing more.

    TFH, why do I say that? Well, the majority of our GOP are old men. And these men could never understand MGTOW or understand “threatpoint” or Marriage 2.0 or any of it. It goes way beyond their level of comprehension. It truly does. Either they have young trophy wives who they kept trading in old ones for (McCain, Gingrich, & Fred Thompson) or they have beautiful devoted lifelong wives who see their husbands as true great-looking charasmatic alphas that would never think of invoking the inferanal threatpoint (Romney and Santorum.) So they couldn’t even begin to figure out what must be done to get men to the altar. They have never had the problems the men here do…. nor do they understand how men can be victims.

  158. ballista74 says:

    Dalrock,

    O/T, but I assume you’ve seen this interesting turnabout from Mr Walsh:

    http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/11/11/ladies-time-take-responsibility-failed-relationships/

    Even more fun is a female author me-tooing this.

    http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/11/stupid-women-and-the-men-who-hate-them/

  159. ballista74 says:

    To begin with, I popped a comment on the original article:

    Ironically, this is one topic where their old tired worn out rhetoric would actually fix the problem. Yet they just don’t get it, and probably never will.

    The article doesn’t say Republicans will force men to marry, it says Republican policies (like a focus on traditional marriage) will create an environment where more people will marry. Whether that is true is debatable, but that is their stance.

    That’s what it will really amount to. You talk to the average Republican and you’ll find out pretty quickly they don’t have the foggiest clue of what’s going on and return hate when you even bring up that perhaps the reason people aren’t marrying is that conditions aren’t conducive for it. Mainly this is because they are highly solipsistic (and blue-pill)

    They just know that people aren’t marrying and they go to the typical traditional feminist stand-by that men just need to man-up and marry those sluts and stop being so selfish. Republicans are just as big-government as the Democrats, especially on social issues, so it will resort in onerous bachelor taxes or mandated marriage if it results in any actions at all. (Coincidentally, I’ve come to be believe the Marxist feminists have become culturally irrelevant and traditionalism in this form is now the biggest threat to men in society, but that’s another rant for another time and place).

  160. Opus says:

    I am indebted to TFH for correcting my Indian history, although I believe he will find that we kicked the Italians out in 409 A.D. and have not been troubled by them since, and most recently saw them off in 1943 having pushed them out of Ethiopia and Eritrea. There isn’t anyone we have not beaten, and thus I cannot refrain from observing that this month is the bi-centenary of our winning the war of 1814 – an away fixture for us- when we sailed up the Potomac and burned The White House. You have not troubled us since. The upstart Bonaparte might have taken notice and thus avoided his painfull defeat a year later (aided it must be admitted by the late arrival of the Germans). We last demolished the French in 1940 when we sank the French fleet at Toulouse.

  161. ballista,

    That’s what it will really amount to. You talk to the average Republican and you’ll find out pretty quickly they don’t have the foggiest clue of what’s going on and return hate when you even bring up that perhaps the reason people aren’t marrying is that conditions aren’t conducive for it. Mainly this is because they are highly solipsistic (and blue-pill)

    They just know that people aren’t marrying and they go to the typical traditional feminist stand-by that men just need to man-up and marry those sluts and stop being so selfish.

    Agree with all of this. Perfect. They have no idea what is going on, none at all….

    Republicans are just as big-government as the Democrats, especially on social issues, so it will resort in onerous bachelor taxes or mandated marriage if it results in any actions at all. (Coincidentally, I’ve come to be believe the Marxist feminists have become culturally irrelevant and traditionalism in this form is now the biggest threat to men in society, but that’s another rant for another time and place).

    I do not agree with this. They will not resort to bachelor taxes. 100% of Republicans votes against the only bachelor tax we have (the Affordable Care Act.)

    Instead, they have absolutely no idea what to do to fix the problem. You are never going to find any of these current Republicans advocate Amending the Constitution (at the Federal level) to take away unilateral divorce at the state level. That is pretty much what they would have to do to fix Marriage 2.0. (No the GOP can’t make women sane for men. But they can take away their cash and prizes by taking away threatpoint so the insane women are less likely to blow things up….)

  162. Opus,

    There isn’t anyone we have not beaten, and thus I cannot refrain from observing that this month is the bi-centenary of our winning the war of 1814 – an away fixture for us- when we sailed up the Potomac and burned The White House. You have not troubled us since.

    What did you “win” in the war of 1812 from us? Do you even know why we declared war on you? And do you know what we “won” from you?

  163. The reasons for GOP blue-pill obsession is ideological, and a function of betatude.

    I don’t dispute that. There has to be a reason why Santorum, Romney, McCain, Gingrich, Fred Thompson, Gov Christie, Ron and Rand Paul, are all blue pill. You might be right. But they ARE blue pill.

  164. ballista74 says:

    @TFH

    I do not agree with this. They will not resort to bachelor taxes. 100% of Republicans votes against the only bachelor tax we have (the Affordable Care Act.)

    They will. And you’ve seen how, too (I’m sure you’ve read the man up rants). They’ll look for everything that they perceive that’s keeping men from following their “rightful roles” (provider protector slave/trained lap dog leashed to a woman’s hand) and will tax those things in terms of “sin taxes”. Video games and consoles for instance. The precedent is there with many other things women have proclaimed to be “sinful” that men do.

    Besides, I disagree with your view of the ACA as a “bachelor tax”. They didn’t vote against it for that reason but for many others (mainly corporate business interests). In fact, if it were sold more as such (say a 25% surcharge for those that don’t prove marriage), the Republicans would sign on in a heartbeat. While not directly said, I’m sure they believe the reason that “big government” even exists is because “men aren’t stepping up” and being good little lap dogs. They would buy such a tax as “making men do their duty in society” very easily.

  165. ballista74 says:

    (er…that last part was addressed to IBB).

  166. Ballista,

    IBB

    I do not agree with this. They will not resort to bachelor taxes. 100% of Republicans voted against the only bachelor tax we have (the Affordable Care Act.)

    They will. And you’ve seen how, too (I’m sure you’ve read the man up rants).

    Yes I have. But they are just… rants. There is nothing concrete there. Its rhetoric, not political policy on the part of the GOP.

    They’ll look for everything that they perceive that’s keeping men from following their “rightful roles” (provider protector slave/trained lap dog leashed to a woman’s hand) and will tax those things in terms of “sin taxes”. Video games and consoles for instance.

    So? Sales tax. There are also sales tax on manicures, pedicures, tanning, clothes, shoes, make-up, lunch, print magazine subscriptions (that are still in business, which aren’t much), pretty much every single thing that women buy (that men don’t) is taxed like your video game. This is not bachelor-centric.

    The precedent is there with many other things women have proclaimed to be “sinful” that men do.

    You have mislabled “sin” tax. A tax on X-Box is a sales tax, (2-9%, varies by state.) That is not “sinful” but there ARE “sin” taxes. A tax on lottery tickets, liquor, and cigarettes, those are “sin” taxes, which is why they are so much higher than your X-Box bachelor-sales-tax. You could also call them “poor” people’s taxes since I don’t know too many wealthy or even middle class people buying scrtach tickets or packs of cigarettes.

    Besides, I disagree with your view of the ACA as a “bachelor tax”. They didn’t vote against it for that reason but for many others (mainly corporate business interests).

    ACA is a bachelor tax. That is exactly (precisely) what it is. The only reason why it is even Constitutional is because Justice Roberts on the Supreme Court correctly defined the ACA as a tax. It is a tax. It is a tax that only young male bachelors would pay (because only young single men have no need for health insurance.) Young single men do NOT go to the Doctor. Why should they pay $80 every other week out of their paychecks for an insurance policy that they will never use (and insurance policy they will never make a claim on?) Simple, they wouldn’t.

    So, make it manditory. That is the ACA, a tax on people who don’t buy the mandiated insurance. It is a bachelor tax.

    And you and I understand why it is that way. Life of Julia stipulates that she can rely on government for her healthcare needs. How can government pay for that? Well, they go after single men (with either a tax OR forcing them into Julia’s health insurance “risk pool”) so Julia can get birth control pills, abortions, pap smears, and breast exams covered.

    That said the GOP didn’t vote 100% against it because it was a bachelor tax. They voted 100% against it simply because it was a tax. The GOP is not looking out for bachelors. The GOP already KNOWS that they have the bachelor vote no matter what they do.

    In fact, if it were sold more as such (say a 25% surcharge for those that don’t prove marriage), the Republicans would sign on in a heartbeat. While not directly said, I’m sure they believe the reason that “big government” even exists is because “men aren’t stepping up” and being good little lap dogs. They would buy such a tax as “making men do their duty in society” very easily.

    True enough the GOP does not believe that men are “doing their duty.” But the GOP is completely clueless as to why that is. And they are not doing any research to figure out why that is. They are not about going after tax money (from youor any other bachelor) to rectify that situation. There will be no bachelor tax penalties imposed upon you (for not “manning up”) from the GOP.

    The only money the GOP goes after (from men) are the men who impregnate women out of wedlock. The GOP is lockstep with the Democrats in the concept of child support for men who get girls pregnant. So be careful who you f-ck (and be extra careful with your disposal of your condoms.) They are NOT interested in taxing the manosphere in anyway to give women resources. They just don’t care if single, childless women, struggle. That is a Democrat core principle, not a GOP one. The GOP would just tell her what they would tell you, get a job.

  167. Opus says:

    @TFH

    You have obviously never been to Rotherham, (and neither have I) but I am convinced that if those girls were to be opened up like a stick of rock they would be seen to have the word SLUT tattooed right through them.

    I am also entirely ignorant about the last Anglo-American War save that I am aware we lost the Battle of New Orleans, but the war was over by then and frankly wining a battle when a war has been concluded is a bit like kicking a ball in to the back of the net when the referee has already signaled the end of the match – always the mark of a bad loser.

    I think all our London railway terminii (I count eight) should be named after victories against the French – at present only one is so named – for no matter how many Terminii we build we will never run out of suitable names.

  168. TFH,

    The reason the GOP voted against Obamacare is because it was *not* marketed as a bachelor tax.

    It was marketed as socialized medicine. If the Dems marketed it as a bachelor tax, they actually WOULD have gotten at least partial GOP support, leading to a 75-25 vote in the Senate.

    The ACA was marketted perfectly. All the Democrats who wanted it cared about, was winning. They won, they got is passed (with a 52% majority or whatever it was) and just enough Senators. That is simply because there were too few Republican House and Senate members. They were just… outvoted.

    If the Democrats had marketed it truthfully (a bachelor tax) they would not have passed it. They would have lost every single GOP House/Senate vote (which they already did) PLUS they would have lost some key Democrat House/Senate members who promised their constituents at they would not raise taxes. They DID raise them. So they couldn’t be truthful.

    Justice Roberts got it exactly right. Its a tax. But it is bachelor centric (not that he cares about that.)

  169. ballista74 says:

    You have mislabled “sin” tax. A tax on X-Box is a sales tax, (2-9%, varies by state.) That is not “sinful” but there ARE “sin” taxes. A tax on lottery tickets, liquor, and cigarettes, those are “sin” taxes, which is why they are so much higher than your X-Box bachelor-sales-tax.

    Government can declare anything they want to be a “sin tax” if the so-called “moral guardians” feel it is. This is how the things you listed got that way. I’ve read too much evidence that they believe video game playing to be, so if they were to introduce a sin tax they would get cheers in return from the tradcons.

    The GOP is lockstep with the Democrats in the concept of child support for men who get girls pregnant. So be careful who you f-ck (and be extra careful with your disposal of your condoms.) They are NOT interested in taxing the manosphere in anyway to give women resources. They just don’t care if single, childless women, struggle. That is a Democrat core principle, not a GOP one. The GOP would just tell her what they would tell you, get a job.

    Have you ever given it a think on why this is? The goal of the government model of child support and custody is to preserve the traditional arrangement. Women aren’t supposed to work. They’re supposed to take care of the kids. Men are supposed to work for the sole benefit of the woman and her kids (and they are hers). They’re supposed to stay home and have a husband support her. This is the heart of the traditional feminist model. No one in the GOP would ever tell a woman to go get a job when they can make men work for them. Either with the government as an intermediary or more directly.

    And the ACA isn’t a bachelor tax. It’s the forcing of government to buy a good or service (insurance). It was only retroactively redefined as a “tax” by John Roberts to facilitate the government take-over of health care. Remember each party is just as big government as the other. They only talk differently in order to hoodwink the sheep at the polls.

    By your logic, every bit of insurance out there is a “bachelor tax”. My auto insurance is a bachelor tax – after all I pay more than a woman simply because I’m a man.

  170. James K says:

    This is a uniquely British backlash of Karma, since the perpetrators were Pakistani, a nation that itself would not have existed (and this not radicalized) without British agitation.

    More to the point, why did we even bother to conquer that god-forsaken territory?

    Britain gleefully encouraged the separation of [Pakistan]

    Please give chapter and verse – I’m not familiar with this.

    eventually radicalized from lack of supervision (with money from many British clients like Kuwait and the UAE), and produced people to come back and terrorize innocent British girls.

    So, we agree that colonialism is a Bad Thing, but you would like potentially deviant countries to remain “supervised” – how, exactly?

    The biggest source of Muslim radicalisation is Saudi Arabia. Since 1979 it has been Saudi foreign policy to radicalise Sunni Muslims everywhere in the world, and to encourage Sunni emigration to Western countries. After a mere 35 years, Saudi policy has been so successful that militant Muslims make the national news in Britain every fucking day. Far from being karma from our imperial past, there are two principal reasons for this sorry state of affairs. The first is our own self-abnegation, as promoted by Cultural Marxists – imbeciles who genuinely believed that if they could destroy our national will to live, they would take power in some kind of Leninist coup. Wrong. A different group of even more sinister people will fill the void.

    The second reason is that we have let the Saudis get away with exporting radicalism, because we need their oil. The USA has a Special Relationship – not with Britain, not even with Israel, but with Saudi Arabia. Not that the USA is the only offender, Western European countries are just as bad. We might as well be drug addicts in thrall to our dealers. They tell us what to do, and we don’t dare disobey.

  171. Opus says:

    I cannot but reflect that Prime Minister Attlee (whose daughter attended the same school as my mother – always rely on a Socialist to select Private Education) and Panjit Nehru were both members of The Inner Temple (my own Inn of Court) and doubtless when cutting up sub-continents that sort of connection greatly facilitates. Gandhi was also a one time member before he got kicked out for terrorism – though post-mortem he has been re-admitted.

    Attlee laid the foundation stone for the Royal Festival Hall and I always like to look at it (when I am there) – somewhat hidden under a lower stair-case – so TFH knows where to apply the graffiti.

  172. James K says:

    The Inner Temple – it sounds so esoteric. I used to peer over the fence and wonder whether there was anything left from the era of the Knights Templar. Alas, Google and Bing Maps have taken away the mystery – there are only some rather sad office buildings.

  173. ballista,

    And the ACA isn’t a bachelor tax.

    Of course it is.

    It’s the forcing of government to buy a good or service (insurance). It was only retroactively redefined as a “tax” by John Roberts to facilitate the government take-over of health care. Remember each party is just as big government as the other. They only talk differently in order to hoodwink the sheep at the polls.

    Its tax. If you don’t buy health insurance, at the end of the year you pay a tax no one else pays. That is the bachelor’s penalty. Because (pretty much) only bachelors would have no need for health insurance. Young single males don’t go to the doctor (and don’t put in claims.)

    By your logic, every bit of insurance out there is a “bachelor tax”. My auto insurance is a bachelor tax – after all I pay more than a woman simply because I’m a man.

    No.

    ACA makes health insurance compulsory. Because you are ALIVE you have to buy it. No other insurance is compulsory. The only choice you have is to not buy it and then you pay a tax.

    If you don’t own a car, you don’t have to buy auto insurance. And why? You buy auto insurance to protect the other guy. It is not about you. The 4000 pounds of steel and plastic you own and drive down the road at 75 miles an hour is a deadly dangerous thing. That is why you are forced to buy auto insurance. Don’t buy a car, you don’t buy auto insurance. It is not compulsory.

    That is the logic.

  174. Opus says:

    @James K

    Had you ventured in (no one would stop you – though they close the gates at night) you would find the 12th century Templar Church – which is quite unlike any other church I can recall visiting – to get an idea, they used the church when making The Da Vinci Code. Happily, Adolf instructed his Luftwaffe bombers to exclude the Church from his Bombing campaign (along with Middle Temple Hall where the thespian Shakespeare played his Midsummer Night’s Dream) but otherwise made a complete mess of the place – hence the largely, though not exclusively – modern chambers. I notice that they used the southern entrance in that Johnny Depp film about Jack the Ripper.

    Tomorrow I will explain why The Royal Courts of Justice (built circa 1870) almost opposite in The Strand looks like a medieval Cathedral and how it was so confusedly constructed that they will for a small fee provide you with a map so as to find your way around.

  175. KP says:

    Opus,

    Oh, please. The upstart Yanks — who had been a nation for barely 1/3 a century at that point — fought the World’s Greatest Empire to a draw and you call that a win?????

    And your quibble about the Battle of New Orleans is just pathetic. Do you not KNOW the state of communications at that time? You can’t reasonably conclude that the battle was fought after the end of the war when no participants on either side had any knowledge of that “ending”.

  176. MV says:

    ON TOPIC

    Gentlemen and gentlewomen, let’s put aside our petty earthly disagreements and all rise for our galactic anthem

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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